okay good evening everyone this is a regular meeting of the zoning board of adjustment for Wednesday March 19th 2025 notice has been given in accordance with the open public meetings act by posting a copy of the notice on the first floor of the municipal building and sending a
copy to the Montlair Times Star Ledger and Herald News this is a public hearing in which any members of the public are welcome to attend the meeting agenda is available on the Monontlair website as is a link to the township's YouTube channel where the hearing can be viewed live or after the fact a hearing is also
being televised on channel 34 i will call the role uh Chair Harrison here vice Chair McCulla here mr cfield is not present mr church here miss Harris here mr moore is here mr
simon is not present and Mr beer is not present miss Grant here mr griffith here mr cruz here and Mr sullivan here all right okay we have the minutes of the February
19th meeting i don't have any changes does anyone else have any changes uh Mr chairman just one on page five uh line 154 um the language doesn't seem to read
correctly i I'm I'm assuming that the second word that perhaps needs to be deleted to make the sentence complete yes yeah I'll change it to Mr justin stated
that the new carriage style doors match the existing siding of the Thank you any other changes to those minutes not someone want to move the minutes with that change i'll move the
change is there a second second all in favor say I i i any oppose any extensions we have the resolution for the 627 Valley Road property which
embarrassingly given the number of times I've revised these I have a number of changes um on the first page number three um after 9.3 it should be
was on page three the top of the page number two the second line it should be this location in the township rather than up the township And on page seven number 16 the
last full line delete center which I don't know how that's major one of embarrassing that I missed the brackets and then most embarrassingly there's a missing
whereas on page eight at the top before you get they meet the criteria of C2 we should add whereas the board based on the aforementioned findings concluded the applicant presented justification for for the
board to grant the density variance variance pursuant to NJAC's NJSA 405D-70D5 anyone else with any change other changes to the resolution um page three item
three uh second line retaining wall both two front windows parentheses coated with protective glaze and I say please make it a film not a glaze please that's all any other changes to that
resolution not someone want to move the resolution with those changes i'll move the resolution with uh the changes second all in favor say I i any opposed any abstensions
and then we have the resolution for the property on Argyle Road i have two changes last line on page one it should be West Circuit Drive not East Circuit Drive although that actually that entrance road doesn't have
a name but it connects to West Circuit Drive um and on page two number 10 uh put at the end if possible anyone else with any changes to that resolution if not someone just a
clarification Mr chairman where you had um on page one changing east to west would that west be a lowercase if it's not officially the name of the No the the so the county's map of the park it
has East Circuit Drive coming in at Wong Avenue and exiting on Belleview Avenue that actually that strip coming in off of Belleview isn't labeled and then but once it starts the circuit it's
west Circuit Drive Capital W and there is no label on coming in off of Grove Street but I think it needs a name and I think it should west should be since east and west are otherwise capitalized thank you
uh someone want to move the resolution with those changes i'll move the resolution with the changes Mr is there a second second um if all in favor say I i any opposed
any abstensions we have the resolution for the property on William Street i have no changes to that resolution does anyone else have any changes none so I'm going to move the resolution with as proposed
um second miss Green you be assertive i just speak up quickly all in favor say I i i any opposed any abstensions first application is that of Mercury is
a continuation of the public hearing of Mercury Monontlair LLC for property at 26 Orange Road mr trembleac are you ready to proceed good evening everyone uh Alan Tremulac appearing on behalf of the applicant Mercury Mercury Montlair LLC
uh this is a continuation of the of my client's application the hearing on my client's application for a use variance to convert the first floor of the building uh it's located at 26 Orange
Road from office use to a an additional residential dwelling unit properties located in the R2 two family zoning district the ex existing building as you'll recall is a nonconforming
mixeduse building with office space on the first floor and three apartments uh located on the upper two floors and again we're proposing to eliminate the office use from the first floor which
would make this building 100% residential um since the last uh time we were here in January we've submitted uh two things uh one a more detailed floor plan uh from the architect for the proposed
first floor and we've also submitted a revised site plan uh from uh William Stimmel our site engineer and planner uh which just shows some minor changes really and additional
information uh primarily in the rear of the property uh I'd like to call both of the uh experts for some I think fairly brief testimony i think I'd like to start with Mr stimmel
all right Mr stimmel you were previously sworn you understand you're still under oath i do yes all right um Mr stimmel you submitted a revised site plan i believe has a revision date of March 4 2025 is that correct that is correct all right can
you just discuss the uh revisions that are um depicted on that plan sure and as you had mentioned they're fairly minor in nature the first two revisions were comments from in response to comments from the board uh we changed the
notation for the landscaping at the back of the property uh from top soil and seed to sod and noted that it was going to be a slow growing drought tolerant kind of planting in that area uh the
other change is that we noted the location of the HVAC pad which had been under the covered area at the back of the building is now moved into the backyard to allow a place for the refuge containers in that covered area
okay um speaking of the um the refuge containers you've been to the property correct yes okay can you explain to the board um how trash is currently taken
from the rear of the building to the street on pickup days yes um looking at the the plan submitted by the architect sheet A101 is up on the screen if the board members look at the uh there's two
renderings of the of the floor plan the existing condition on the left the proposed condition on the right for the ground floor plan the the buildings are brought along the south side of the building they go in the door that's in the angled face where the projection
cuts back in to meet the uh setback face of the building they run along that hallway and go out the front door the left front door if you're looking at the building from the street and are brought out to the curb that way so it's basically a a straight shot if you will
from the rear through that um hallway on the easterly of southerntherly side of the building yeah to to my experience it's a bit of a strange setup but it's basically just a covered hallway to get from the back of the property to the front because the building there's no
room i mean the uh the building um there's no sideyards anywhere right so the only way to get trash to the front would be through the building the the building is built to the property lines on both sides at the street line as you
get further back it angles in but you can't get from back to front without while staying outside without going onto the neighboring properties okay um and so that's the way trash has historically been taken to the front and would
continue to be taken through that hallway yes that the the client has explained it to me that's how the trash operates now there's obviously apartments upstairs and that that's how it's going to operate in the future okay um there I think at the last meeting
there was a a question um as to um how do you get landscape materials like sod for example soil you know to the rear of the property right so there's two ways to do it one is to
take it through the same hallway as the trash containers or because of the fact that that ground floor unit is currently vacant and is going to be renovated to serve as apartment should the board look favorably uh you could take it right through that apartment future apartment
okay um All right i think that's all I have for Mr stimmel do you have any questions uh thank you Mrs demo um just uh staying on the landscaping question um so you've addressed in terms of initially how um
the landscaping will be prepared um uh and that uh access will be either through that corridor as you noted um or through the apartment until of course it's been renovated correct um but in
terms of the long term um is it is it anticipated that whoever will assume responsibility for landscaping will be utilizing that that corridor in order to be able to do this so again referring to the architect's plan and I'm going to
approach the screen there's a notation on the plan pointing to an area under the existing stairwell uh for landscape storage there's going to be a small electric mower brought in the back of the building parked under the steps and then
taken out to the backyard as needed anything beyond that would then have to use that same corridor regular mowing is going to be handled with the equipment on site anything additional that requires uh landscape contractor is
going to be uh brought through the trash corridor so in other words all of the all of the equipment that would be necessary for the upkeep of that area uh is anticipated as being parked in that in the rare correct uh area of the house
uh of the building uh and then um so that uh whoever is actually responsible to do the work um would be accessing through the corridor in order to go and to do the work and then to exit when it's done that's the plan that is my
understanding yes um I don't know if this is a good question for you or if it's for um another witness that Mr timberlac may have but uh would you uh speak to because I just want to understand from a
security point of view because obviously the person who is going to be doing this has to have access to this corridor and it's not obvious as to who provides it access but there is a I noticed that there seems to be a a doorway leading to
stair number two is that a locked door do you know or Uh I think the architect could probably answer that question better okay then we'll save that question for the architect thank you Mr
church no questions right now miss Harris I have questions miss Grant I don't have any questions either right now mr cruz um I just had one question about
the uh the landscaping equipment um could you just uh clarify again how the uh landscapers would get access to the equipment like they would be walking through the house they would uh they would have access to the house through the trash corridor and they would get the mower out of the rear
door um take it out from underneath the stairwell out the back door okay all right thank you Mr griffith um I have questions for the architect for that okay mr more
probably have questions for the architect um dealing with the doorway or when you first go in to the right side there was the last time you were here at an application you had talked about um there not being certain things on the
plans regarding what's on the other side um of the doorway would that be for yourself or the architect the the floor plans have been revised to hopefully address those questions but the architect is here to No I'm taking Mr trenulac's job the architect is here
to answer those questions i just um this is probably half for you and but since you were dealing with the landscaping and the access to the room where the electric
mower is through the back door which is going to the first floor apartment i'm just wondering who is going to have access because when once you're in there you're you're in the first floor
apartment and and is to deal with your part of this is is it envisioned that there will be a landscape or what will one of the first floor tenant be responsible for maintenance of the one area i don't know
that the the applicant has made that determination yet however it's done they'll they'll need some access to the building because you can't get to the back without going through the building but then you would also need access to get into the ground floor apartment so I don't know if it's
going to be well it's what one issue going down a hallway go and then going back that side of the building in the rear it's another literally walking into the apartment and I'll follow up with the architect
okay any other questions for members of the board are there any members of the audience who have questions for this witness actually Mr chair I had one more question um so with with regards to the access um was there any like internal discussion about uh getting an easement
for for access through the uh the neighbors uh the neighbor's sideyard uh there was no discussion to that effect that I'm aware of the the prop if you're looking at it from the street the property to the left the buildings almost meet it wouldn't be possible to
have any functional access to the left of the building it's possible you could do it through the property to the right but they have planting beds and fairly limited space anyway between the two so I I don't know that it would it would necessarily work there either um but
just uh but it would be possible to have you know like walking pedestrian access for the landscapers on on that side in theory yesor i don't believe it was something that was pursued by the client okay well it wasn't something discussed
okay thank you okay are there any members of the audience who have questions for this witness if not Mr trenak you want to call the architect yes i call the architect i'm going to do my best to pronounce or mispronounce his
name again shan Pang thank you yeah and and you you were sworn in previously you understand you're still under oath yes and for purposes of this hearing Zana you also you were previously sworn in you understand you're still under oath yes all right cool okay um I'm going to
call you Derek which is what I'm used to calling you you submitted the revised uh drawings um since the last meeting i think the revision date um is March 7 2025 is that correct that's correct all right so
um I'm going to ask you just really a few questions i mean I'd like you to uh because I think there was some um confusion um or lack of clarity if you will um in terms of the various entrances to the
first second and third floor y All right can you explain for the board sure and reference your drawing if if you need to um where the entrances are for each of the three floors yep so um I'm going to
walk through the drawing okay take you have to take a microphone hello you hear me cool thanks so um as we see from the left side it's the existing building um portfol i'm going to use the existing
one to explain the access to the buildings so we generally have two entrance from the front uh building one is on the left the other one is on the right hand side so let's talk about the right hand side first they have a door which is can be locked when you go into
the uh foyer if you go straight there's another door uh it's been locked by the second tenant if you go through the stair and make a left turn you will go to the second floor unit and in the standing in the foyer if you make a left
turn right away there's another entrance door which is um dedicated for the first floor unit so you get through here uh for the first floor building and if we talk about the entrance door from the left you take step up and then you go
through this public hallway and you have one door that's that can be locked and secured you have a second door here i believe this door is not locked and you can open it uh uh freely and then you go about I believe it's about 40 feet
around that 50 ft you will see a exterior door going to the side which will provide the access you can go to the rare yard and if you make a right turn this is the tricky part last time we we have some confusion so I go back to the site and try to measure it and
make sure it's ex as accurate as possible you make a right turn and you will see another staircase going upstairs to the second floor when you go up there you will be able to see there's another door going to the second floor unit so um generally that's the access
to the building and the unit on the second floor how about access to the third floor if you standing approximately this way you make another turn you will have another staircase going to the third floor so when you get up to the second floor there's another
staircase from that landing if you will that leads to the third floor yes okay so the occupants of the third floor when they're you know coming home at night or whatever they would enter the front door go down the hallway and work their way
up to the third floor yes that's correct yeah um are there all are there also entrances to each of the three floors from the rear of the building um if we
standing in the same uh staircase there will be a door from this area basically it's the same location as the uh first floor here you will be able to go out to the deck out there the same thing happened from the third floor okay
um so they can enter from the deck and you can uh go through the staircase here you can go hope I can save it yeah basically I've also extend uh this area this is um from the first
floor it's a concrete path and to the right hand side there's a wood staircase um turning about 180° and go all the way from the first floor second floor and third floor okay okay um and you made
some changes in that rear area um that you're just referring to with respect to the air conditioning yep yes um last time we talked about the uh garbage uh maintenance also the landscape maintenance and also the
opening um if we change this entrance to here um we have two HVAC unit P standing here it's going to block the way so what we are going to propose is move these two unit out there so we clear pathway it's easier for garbage management and
also uh provide access to the landscape landscaper um underneath here um the existing condition is underneath the staircase um we can get us through the first floor unit serving as a um shaft or storage area in the new
proposed plan we close this door and provide a exterior door that um the landscape can get the storage and equipment from the outside instead of going into the first floor unit so that's the two uh couple major changes
here so um I apologize do you say that the the landscape equipment lawn mower or whatever it's going to be can be accessed through outdoor does not have
to come in through the they don't need to come into the first floor unit if you see um this door is go uh opening in inward to the staircase okay
okay um were there any other re you know revisions of any kind that were made to the floor plan or is it just adding you know detail and showing the um the rest of the plan generally remain the same
okay yeah all right no further questions yes uh so Mr chang I' I'd like to revisit uh the question that I was posing um earlier and that is um so the the
corridor on the left side of the building yeah um leads to um where one can go outside and access the equipment and the backyard basically mhm correct okay um but then to the to
the right is stair number two which goes up to the second floor and the third floor is that correct yes okay so is there a door in front of that stairwell or is that just an open corridor as well
it's a open corridor so that means that the whoever comes in or the persons that come in to do the landscaping would then have access not only to go to the outside but also would have access going to the second floor
and to the third floor potentially is that correct yes okay is it possible to put a door a locked door um at the base of that stairwell so that that those persons do not have that
access i believe so all right i'd like to recommend that that be done sure um the other question I have is um in terms of the the entrance to the right uh where you have stair number one mhm
stair number one where does that lead again that's leading to the second floor so there are two stairwells that lead to the second floor yes um can you just help me understand why there are two stairwells leading to the second floor
i it's it's a existing condition so I won't be able to explain why but uh the side measurement tell me there's two ex uh staircase so would would from a design perspective would you anticipate the primary
entrance to the second floor apartment to be through stairwell one or stairwell two stairwell one one okay um so with that in mind can you speak to what the
door looks like leading into apartment two from stairwell one as opposed to the door that leads into into the same apartment from stairwell 2
from the appearance they looking similar they are solid wood door with lock um can open from one side it's a swing door i won't I I won't have access inside there so that's all I can see from the
public area just go ahead how many apartments are there on the second floor to my understanding it's only one units and on the third on the third we have two units okay uh quick question Mr chair
why don't we have a drawing of what's on the third floor or am I missing something why don't we have a joint why isn't something showing what's on the third floor and how that access is made from stair
two i don't see on this anything is Is there a reason for that or can you repeat your question the question is why isn't there something showing excuse me something showing on
this drawings mhm concerning the third floor that's my question i can answer that reason we didn't you we're only proposing to change the first floor and okay the second and third floors are
existing we're not making any changes whatsoever look it's an it's an unusual building for sure the way it's laid out but um this is the way it's functioned and been for many years and we're not looking to change anything on the upper
floors okay another question I have then is on this drawing here next to the bumpout before stair number two it's blank what is that that square is that anything or is
it just nothing right now that area cannot be uh accessed from the first floor and based on the measurement and um observation from the public hallway I believe that's a vertical shaft it was what excuse me vertical shaft for the
pipings oh okay okay thank you Miss Harris um I think last time you appeared um you stated that you were planning to install a sprinkler system in the building i just want to make sure that's still that's still the the case okay thank you
i couldn't hear what that what the sprinkler assistant sprinkler and will that be on all three floors that's the question will that be on all three floors pardon will you install the sprinkler on all three floors um I I think we only propose to alternate the
first floor that's the what we're proposing at this moment okay i'm not sure if that's if you sprinkler one floor i think you have to do building i would just check with the we at this moment we propose to do the sprinkler for first one okay i would
just you know check with I think you might have to actually if if required then yes yeah miss Grant no questions mr cruz i also have no questions mr griffith
hi hey how you um thank you for cleaning up the floor plans they're much more understandable my pleasure uh the stair to the right that's on the front facade I assume leads to the front apartment on the second floor on the second floor I assume you
have two apartments i don't have access to it it's not even necessary but it you're filing for a fourth apartment means there's three above three above and you have two stair landings on the second floor so I'm going to conclude you have two apartments there that's the logic just
saying and it's not really relevant i'm just trying to clarify our understanding it's important that the testimony is clarified i thought you testified that there's one apartment on the second floor and two on the third floor yes is that right yes yeah okay well my my misunderstanding i thought it made sense
there'd be two on the second floor since you were already there in any case um the basement there is no basement in this building is that correct you can get access to the basement through the exterior uh staircase from I can't hear
you i'm sorry there is an access through here going to the basement that's a outside stair it appears to be made out of wood you're saying it goes down it goes down yes it goes down not to the basement that's
That's my observation yes huh interesting okay um the on your floor plan you show a bedroom that doesn't have any windows in it yes we we've discussed that u previously
if we have a sprinkler system that should meet the code uh I so I it's not our purview but it seems like uh not acceptable to the building code the last time I had looked at it
um you have a parking issue there's nothing planned to do about that as I've heard okay um thank you thank you Mr moore
i'd like to also thank you for uh putting more detail into the drawings my pleasure um would you consider putting a window on the first floor i mean there's there's space there's opportunity for the bedroom
um on the let's see the bedroom is on the right side right on the left side actually if you're looking at the joint it's next to the public hallway so if we want to put a window there then that window is going through the public
hallway well that's okay uh on both sides there's stairways is there door number one and door number two right so let's try and clarif Okay let's try
and clarify this one you're talking about this bedroom right bedroom number two yes which is being in the middle of the building okay right if we want to have a window on this wall that's okay but that's only serving the visual
purpose if that's a requirement we can definitely add that and what about the living room the living room is right here we have a window along this faces but nothing on the side on this side yeah it i'm looking at picture number
five well figure number five picture of of the side of the building looking north that's from the planners memo mhm there are no ground floor windows on the side of the building i I prepared some elevation for
the part as well um if we take a look at this one um are you talking about this windows okay that's a tricky part right um from exterior yes we see some of
opening here but right now it's all being covered by uh plywood so you won't be able to get access from indoor access i'm just talking about windows windows we have two windows here natural light
your microphone it is one i'm just referring to natural light right here this area this area are you proposing any windows right here Jonathan talk closer to the Are you proposing any windows i'm not proposing
any window on that area if yes um if required that window is only going to be uh going through the public hallway right in that case it's not benefiting for the first one unit but public hallway we do not have a lot of people
staying a lot of time there right um I do not believe that's going to benefit the building a lot from my professional standpoint but if it's required I believe we can add that yeah i just wanted to mention remind the board since
we've been at this for a while the original plan that we submitted called for a bedroom in the front of the building where there would be window from the front facade and then the living room I guess would be behind that and the reason we changed that was
because of a comment in the planning memorandum that suggested that it might not be a good idea to have a a a bedroom window so close to the public sidewalk in the front of the building although the windows there I think are pretty
high the architect but but that was the reason we originally provided for a bedroom with a window but it would have to be in the very front of the building and we made the change because of the planner's comment suggestion that that might not be we'd be happy to go back to
the original plan if the board wanted it i'm referring to the side of the building not the front okay so yeah yes i I I I And you addressed it yes mhm okay appreciate that thank you and just
so understand the current opening that goes to the area under stairway number two you're closing that off from and then you're having a new door put in so it can be accessed from the that
little area under the stair can be accessed and then you're putting in a another new door next to it for access to the first floor apartment correct you're right yes okay and then I the I'm
a little confused by your west side elevation as to the heights you're showing on the openings as to are those all full are all three doors full I mean are are the two doors
full-size doors the one you're closing off correct the existing door to the first floor is being closed off is that correct that's by the stairway that goes up to the second and third floors at the rear of the building
so I believe we're talking about this door yes right um uh currently it's been blocked by the HVAC unit so it looks a little bit weird but I agree with you the door should be
uh aligned perfectly because they have the same level i will adjust it um in the next submission if if that's the issue for you okay i'm I'm trying to understand what you're showing at the rear of the building yes okay so starting off on the left hand side as
you're facing the building which you're showing where the existing door is and what's happening there is it possible so you're talking about this door yes that is the ex existing door um correct
what is is it I is that your your plan show that being now closed off yes yes uh I should make this plan clear this is existing elevation as well because at Yeah this
is um a thing I can revise so so what is going to fill that space what is it going to look like it's going to be matched with the existing uh brick finish okay um and then going
over to the right hand side as you're facing the rear of the building will those be two full-size doors one that going into the ground floor apartment and one going into this the little storage area if we look into the
plan they generally the same size about um 3T yes and the same height same height yes any other questions from members of the board i I I don't know if it's so much of a
question but I would like to see um a window on that left stairway just because it's a it's a busy area um what landscaper maybe coming in through
this way and exiting through into the backyard right we don't know if it's going to be the resident's responsibility or I I agree with you right you're right across the street from a hotel i think natural light Yeah is always a pleasant thing i agree with
you um so something to consider sure i would take that are there any members of the audience who have questions for this witness okay mr tremulac do you have any further witnesses nothing further okay sure okay are there any members of the audience
who have any testimony comments anything whatsoever you want to say about this application okay Mr tundle do you want to sum up sure so we're we're seeking two variances from the board um the use variance again to permit the first floor
to be converted from business office use to a residential a and then a parking variance it's obvious the this building has never had any on-site parking and um it it it's impossible to provide any so
um the question is what's better for this location you've got a non-conforming building with with again it's in an R2 zone you have non-conforming office space on the first floor three apartments on the upper floors
um we think it's better to get eliminate the office use and to provide an additional residential use in a residential zone so even though it's going to be non-conforming in terms of the number of units at least they're all
residential which is consistent with you know every other house that's on the west side of of Orange Road um and also by by changing the residential uh I'm sorry the office use to
residential you're also lowering the parking demand for the property uh fewer parking spaces are required meaning there's less of a deficiency um by converting from office to residential and you know and in addition
as a practical matter um any residential tenant who's going to rent space there knows they're going to have to you know find parking whether it's across the street in the parking deck or somewhere else they know that the apartments get comes without parking whereas if there
if it remains a first floor office use you know you theoretically if it's a busy office you got people coming and going every day and where are they going to park they're not going to know a tenant knows you know where his parking
space is somebody coming to the office space here unless you can you're lucky enough to find a a spot on on Orange Road um where do they park so you know converting this to a strictly
residential building in a residential zoning district is beneficial in and of itself and it's also beneficial in that it reduces the parking demand and um uh provides for a lower parking deficiency
than there currently is and again on a site where it's impossible to provide any parking so you know for those reasons um you know I think the variances should be approved uh we also require site plan approval and you know we've attempted to address all the site
plan concerns that the board has raised and there are some that have been expressed and would likely be conditions which you would certainly be acceptable to the applicant so thank you we'll start with Mr thank you Mr chairman uh I'm
supportive of the application um uh with the understanding that uh a new door will be installed leading up to stairwell number two thank you Mr church i am I'll be supportive of the application as it's presentable the
changes that were made at our request miss Harris um I'm in favor of the application um I don't agree with the request for the window on um on the side of the building um I just don't think it will be worth the the juice will be
worth the squeeze on this one so um I don't think that a condition miss Grant I'm in favor of the application mr cruz uh I'm also in favor of the application and I concur about having a door on the
first floor so the landscapers can't get to higher floors mr fish um I'm in favor uh though I with a caveat that the plans have to comply with the building code with with regard to light and air and windows and
bedrooms and living space thank you Mr moore i'm in favor of the application okay um I'm in favor of the application i'll repeat but otherwise behave myself it
would have been nice if we saw the third apartment unit like we should have and it might have helped deal with this application a lot more because we would have known much more about the stairs getting up there but um I I think you know I think um the property is in a
residential zone it's a building that is really oversized to be two apartment units um I think the applicant has justified um granting the variance as was indicated the uh switching from
commercial space to residential would reduce the parking demand and tenants will be aware uh of that i I don't think approving this will be a substantial detriment to the public good or a substantial impairment of the zone
plan um they're not changing the exterior of the building anyway it's still going to present itself the same as it um has always had i think there are a number of conditions you know start with the requirement that uh door
be provided in the hallway before you get to stair number two to proclude people otherwise using that hallway for other purposes not being who are not residents of the second or third
floor being able to access that um that um the existing door to the rear be closed off to match the existing building adjacent adjacent to that um
that um the only access to the storage area under stair 2 be from the exterior um of the building and debating whether to do this that the
um applicant the property owner is responsible for maintaining the lawn area to the rear so it appears much better than it did last summer to the properties to the rear on St luke's Place and to the adjacent properties um
and that this is a self-evident but um I'll just leave it as Mr griffith said is that the building be designed to code i think there are a number of issues and uh I am I'm not doing it specific so we
avoid your coming back here but I have this suspicion that when the sprinkler issue is explored that the costs of that are going to dictate that it not be done and that in turn is going to render the
onebedroom not usable as a bedroom and in turn result in it being moved to the front of the building is um a likely result but rather than dictating any of that just require you build it to code which you have to do anyway but I think
to make a message that sooner rather than later I would explore the sprinkler issue and what the cost involved will be um cuz you may end up before you start doing improvements to the first floor that you'll have to change because of
the code issues okay any other discussion or conditions from board members if not someone want to move the application with those conditions i make a motion to approve this
application uh given the uh consideration stated by the vice chair any chair second okay all in favor say I i i any opposed any abstensions
thank you very much the next application is that is Kelly and David Ferguson for property at 153 Montlair Avenue this is an application for variances required to replace the existing non-conforming detached garage the property is located in the R11
family zone district and is designated on the township tax maps as lot 29 and lot 4514 variance is requested from Monor code section 347-46A2A to permit a sideyard setback
of 3 ft for accessory structures where 6t is the required minimum are taxes paid and is the notice in order yes okay okay okay would you both raise your right hands do you swear to tell the truth in the matter pending before the board i do i do state your names and
addresses please courtney Courtney Rambo 141 Central A Monontlair david Ferguson 153 Monour Avenue hello you're good now you're both good okay
good 153 at Monair Avenue Montlair okay and Zenab for the remainder of these three applications do you swear to tell the truth in this matters pending before the board i do to state your name and position with the municipality zanab Gausny assistant planner thank you
proceed good evening i put together this additional PowerPoint presentation everything's from the drawings you have in front of you and I took a few additional images from the planning report miss Rambo just let me make sure you're you're you're a licensed
architect in the state of New Jersey your license is in good standing correct correct thank you my clients David and David and Kelly are proposing to demolish their existing onecar garage and replace it with a twocar garage their existing
garage this way their existing garage is very small and doesn't isn't able to house a current car in this day and age and it's in bad shape and it's currently 2.3 ft
from the south sideyard setback they'd like to build a twocar garage and make it 3 ft from the sideyard set back they have a few hardships the the current garage is in the current
setback the sideyard the garage is too small and Kelly has an elderly mother that has mobility issues so they need to make sure they can get the SUV in and out of the garage go to the next
page you'll see in this photo here they have a very big backyard that slopes down away from their neighbors so there won't be any drainage issue draining into their south neighbor's yard it'll drain into their own
yard we're adding 190 square ft from the old garage to the new garage and you'll see here this is a view from the street go back to this one there won't be any sight line issues because
it's built in the same we're proposing to build it in the same location that the current garage is in the new garage will improve the the value of the neighborhood and the house because everybody needs a garage that they can fit current cars
into and we're using the land efficiently without efficiently without disrupting too much of the yard you'll see down in this corner is a blown up version of what's on this site plan so you'll see the current garage is
in red here to be demolished it's 2.3 ft from the sideyard setback and we're proposing it to be 3 ft from the sideyard setback the rear of the existing garage is currently 10.33 feet and we're making it better by making it 12 feet from the rear
here are some views of the existing garage down here and then the proposed garage above we're keeping the same style of the existing garage the one difference is the propo
the existing garage has a hip roof and we're proposing a gable roof to match the house you'll see this is the gable roof on the front of the house here here's a few more photos showing how close it is to the setback and we'll be
making it better by pushing it further away and this is what it looks like from above um so we respectfully ask for you to grant us this variance to build a nice big safe garage for them
you have any questions thank you Mr chairman so Mr rambar um just a couple of questions for you yes um would you u share with us why um you're proposing for the setback to
be changed from 2.3 uh to 3T what is the rationale for richard Chiron told me we have Sorry richard Chiron told me it we'd have a good chance of getting it approved if we did three feet you'd have a chance to get it approved yeah
okay um All right we'll we'll we'll think about that thank you um so um from I think from what I understand the the scale of the driveway is remaining
as it currently exists that's correct okay um and then um the I I I guess you know one of the pictures that we have shows that the I guess the rear of the garage was damaged
is that because of tree limbs is that Mr ferguson can you speak to that how did your garage get damaged it's just old right it's just old it's just old so it wasn't because of that big tree that's No okay and you're not worried about that tree always worry about the tree
you always worry about the tree it's a big tree take good care you take good care of the tree okay um in terms of in terms of the garage um the uh just two questions for you um do I understand correctly that internally
um that you just have open rafters above where the cars will be parked so there's no storage anticipated uh above the vehicles that's correct it's a vated ceiling okay all right um and then the other the my last question is just uh
about the lighting that you've you proposed for the garage um I mean you talked about the architectural design of the garage being consistent with the house itself uh but the the lighting is that also consistent with the lighting on the external of the house itself
that's a good question we haven't selected a light fixture yet the light fixtures were going to be on the sides but through the HPC they asked us to add the corner boards to match the existing garage so we moved the lights on top of the garage but we have not yet selected
a light fixture but it's a good idea to match what's on the house you said to put the lights on top of the garage what is on top of the garage doors oh on over the over the doors okay yeah i I just would recommend that you look at uh consistency of the lighting
may not have to be exact but yeah it's a good idea but recommend that all right thank you Mr church do you have any questions i got one uh the garage doors Oops the garage doors on your proposed
garage are those overheads or are they barn doors they will be overheads so that just mimics a barn door correct okay uh and then that area to uh I'm looking at the proposed now the area as you're
looking at to the left is that new area or is that already there uh the Macadam top there looks like Macum you're looking at my drawings right i'm looking at the front page mhm
this the to the left as I'm looking at the garage the proposed to the left there's a area paved is that macadam or was that going to be something else to the right here yes that's just grass
okay okay it's all I have miss Harris um besides what uh Richard uh advised you I mean um you do have room on the site to comply with the setback the the sideyard setback
um is there a reason why you didn't attempt to to comply with the setback they want to keep the as much of their backyard grass as they can they're planning on having grandkids soon and want to be able to enjoy the entire backyard with their family
okay and then um the driveway uh surface itself that is existing you're not making any revisions to that is that correct okay thank you it's great
in the um back of the garage on the side there's a existing that's a stone retaining wall yes are you um are you doing any work to the retaining wall are you keeping the stones and just keeping the stones no we're ripping
out that whole retaining wall and building a new retaining wall like what you have here in the Yeah do I have this section i did that retaining wall i wouldn't trust it um this this is showing the beginning of the section before we developed it with
our structural engineer but it will come up above grade so the back half of the back of the sorry I'm looking at you half of the back of the garage will be the retaining wall holding Yeah you show it um in the rendering here so I can see
where it like comes up a little halfway next to that um next to the building section you're talking about oh so I can You're talking about the um No the rendering to the right uhhuh yeah you I can see where you say it comes up okay yeah mhm thank you i don't have any more
questions mr cruz I have no questions mr griffith uh questions right yes i I have no questions mr more i'm looking at the Montlair Historical uh Historic
Preservations recommendation or Sure yeah so I'm looking at the Historic Preservation Commission's um question in regards to um utilizing the existing garage door hinges that could preserve and perhaps utilize that
you can utilize on the new garage yes it says that you were going to explore that i see on your second page of the drawings right that's this is an illustration would it would this take place on both doors or just one
we're planning on saving those hinges and using them somewhere else on the property we're not going to try to use them on the new doors that are rollup doors okay they're roll up yes okay they're beautiful hinges so I hope we can use them somewhere mhm mhm
okay just continuing on the historic preservation um they also asked you about the feasibility of installing glass panes on the doors did you I did so do you see on your drawing right here
on the second page we explored that it didn't really work but I put it on there to show that we explored it okay just doesn't work with the four sections how do we know what I knew you were showing that I didn't know okay and then
you had prior discussion um have you decided on whether you're going to put lights above the the garage doors the lights will be above the garage door um then the their other um recommendation was reinstalling the corner boards to match the original
structure yep we put the note right there on the second page for that and drew them in um then storm water um on I know you indicated the neighbor to the south is
slightly higher elevation but how is the storm water being handled on that side we're only disrupting 190 square ft of grass so we don't meet the 250 that we need no I I but from the roof how is the water getting
from the roof to the ground and where is it where on the ground is it going okay so there's gutters and downspouts so the gutters and the downspouts are on either side okay and and the downspouts which direction are
they pointing when they reach the ground away from the building okay and I guess the concern there is that's towards the neighbor and I couldn't really tell looking at it this morning as
to whether I'm comfortable that that's never going to reach the neighbors property m so if we drain the gutters towards the back of their property and then have the down spouts come down on the back of their property and not towards their neighbors
you'd feel more comfortable with that yes okay okay any other questions for members of the board are there any members of the audience who have questions testimony comments anything whatsoever you want to say about the application this is your
opportunity your one and only opportunity anything further either of you want to say before we discuss on the application and this is your last chance to say something no thank you okay we'll start discussion
with Mr church yeah the uh the uh improvement is market uh by taking out the old garage and putting in the new one the new one's very nice the um the the setting of the garage the new
garage 3 ft from the uh uh drop line or the line um to me I think you've got enough room you could move it over more i would
suggest or I would recommend that it be moved at least 4 feet over because you have the room i don't think you're going to take up that much of the backyard or kill off that much of the grass by moving it over and
thereby uh any runoff from the roof for any reason that doesn't go into the gardens or go in to uh his property will uh be more likely to if you move it over so I
would recommend 4 feet over uh otherwise uh the uh the drawing uh the garage is nice it's and I I read the uh historical commission's comments and I
uh I see that they're making some comments that are just going to be impossible to do like the hinges and things like that with these type doors uh when you're mentioning the lights over the doors is it over each
set of doors or is it just one light for both sets one over each door one over each okay and I would recommend that that correct i I would approve it uh based on the fact that based on the uh condition
that you move it 4 feet over and don't leave it at three i think you're much healthier there mr church when you say move it four feet you're talking to provide a 4ft sideyard setback as opposed to the three-foot that's proposed that's correct sorry
clear Miss Harris um I agree with Mr church i think um you know the the garage as proposed is a vast improvement to what's there before um I still don't think that it's a hardship
for for you to comply with the sideyard setback here so I don't know that I would be um in favor of the application as it's presented today um the four feet is an improvement on three but there's plenty of room to comply with the six so I I think that
should be done in this case okay miss Grant I'm in favor of the application um I know it's hard to incorporate the hinges but they are nice so I agree with the um historic preservation commission on that on that point
mr cruz um I'm also in favor of the application and I concur with uh Mr church about uh improving the uh non-conformity from 3T to 4T mr griffith I'm in favor of the application
it's nicely designed clearly presented i appreciate the windows natural light's always good even in a garage mr more i'm in favor of the application i think that um it's a nice um presentation uh
with preserving the existing look um historic value and also I do see it being somewhat of a hardship where your existing garage is smaller and um doesn't really fit your family size
so um I'm in favor of the application i think that it will also enhance um your property mr mcculla yeah I'm I'm basically also supportive of the application i do have a I guess a
question about the 4 foot setback would that change the nature of the of the driveway i mean the pavement it's a good question yes that would offset it from the driveway it is the the the driveway what is the
material of the driveway currently asphalt it is asphalt and it's your intention was not to redo the driveway at this point so if you have to say words
no so if if if um I guess I don't know if if if Mr church is is is proposing the option of a 4ft setback as opposed to a requirement but if you had the option then that would be one thing if you were
required then it would mean that you would have to do something about the asphalt is that correct that's true um yeah I'm I'm I'm supportive of the application but would like clarification perhaps from the chair ultimately in
terms of how this should proceed so yeah I I meant to ask about the I mean I um you know I we we have this situation where um we've been what started out as a
minimum of three feet has suddenly become a minimum and maximum of three feet that you know I understand Richard giving the advice knowing to push people to the three feet knowing our reluctance to approve anything less than that um I
I guess my cons concern here is um you know I view it as being counterproductive if they have to widen the driveway to accommodate shifting the
garage over um one that's probably going to push them over the threshold that they need a formal storm water review which in the perverse way might be good but I not sure I want to inflict that on them um and you know I think the the
other part of this is um unlike many of the situations we've dealt with um they are keeping you know far you know twice the required rear yard setback so there there is um that
um factor of you know it it's not like many garages encroaching on both the rear and the sideyard setback requirement i I um you know if they had to redo the driveway anyway I would be in agreement with moving it over i might even be in
agreement with moving it over the six feet but I I just don't you know they I don't know why they widen the driveway at the end because it goes to nowhere other than you can now you can they can fit a second car without one being behind the
other so I mean my driveway does the exact same thing but it goes to a twocar 100-year-old garage but um but I I understand you whenever that was done that was done so you could have the second car without one car having to
move um to get the other car out so I I um you know I I don't have a problem with it as proposed well let me do the conditions and then we can discuss further um I think um as they testified they should adhere to number three and
number four of the historic preservation commission concerning the lighting and preserving the you reutilizing the corner boards and that the downspouts on the south side of the building be directed to the rear of the property rather than towards the neighbors
property um okay any further discussion since we were not of one mind as to what we want to do with placing the garage or someone can make a motion
yeah uh I propose we pass it as as proposed and as uh as you've noted with the three conditions with the preconditions noted yes okay is there a second to that motion second you you're not eligible
correct i second correct he's the bottom man on the to I was going to say alternate floor but okay so we need somebody else needs to make a second mr i I second
okay call the role on this so this is to a vote approving it with the three-foot setback to the sideyard and with the three conditions chair Harrison yes vice Chair McCulla
yes mr church no miss Harris no mr moore yes miss Grant yes yes mr griffin yes okay so that is um approved yeah
thank you thank you next application is that of Aaron Kissle and Magen for property located at 144 Union Street this is an application to construct an accessory dwelling unit to
be attached to an existing to to to a garage on the property um property is located in the RO mountainside zone district and is designated on township tax maps as lot six and blocked 1,23 the applicants
applied for variance for Monontlair code section 347 AD2 and 34734 A2A to permit a sideyard setback of 2.9 ft for the garage whereas the ordinance requires a minimum sideyard setback of 12 ft
variances from Encore code section 347 AT2 and 347-22F to permit the longest wall of the accessory dwelling unit to be 42 feet in length and the longest wall of the proposed garage to be 42.9 ft in length whereas the ordinance provides a
maximum building permit for footprint for accessory structures may not exceed 36 ft in any direction of variance from Montclair code section 34783 to permit an accessory dwelling unit with more than 840 square ft of living area whereas the ordinance
provides a maximum permitted floor area for a fully accessible accessory dwelling unit is 840 square ft the variance from Enclair code section 34782 and 34734A1 to permit the garage to be 18.03
ft high whereas the ordinance provides a maximum permitted height for accessory structures is 15 ft um are taxes paid the notice in order yes they are okay Mr okay good evening again uh Mr
chairman members of the board uh for the record Alan Tremulac appearing on behalf of the applicants Aaron uh Kle and Meg Manzel um my clients uh husband and wife the owners of uh property at 144 Union
Street um this application has been filed in order to construct an accessory dwelling unit or you know what's commonly referred to as an ADU in the rear of their property uh which is located in the RO mountainside zone
district the um intention is for the uh the ADU to be um attached to the existing uh detached garage in the rear of the property um and as part of this project um as
you'll hear um the the garage is to be expanded uh to make it a more functional garage according to today's uh standards and needs and also to provide uh space for
an additional third car uh in the garage um as I'm sure you all know almost two years Uh a little over two years ago the township council uh amended the zoning ordinance to permit accessory dwelling
units in all single family and two family zones uh in the township in order to provide opportunities for um people to age in place live independently without moving out of town provide you know
options uh um for um you know smaller dwelling units in town um I'm not sure but I'm thinking this may be the first application this board has considered involving an accessory no
we had one other that started but disappeared off the face of the earth after they started for maybe reasons unrelated to what the application was for right so um
um as you'll hear from my client in a few minutes um the applicants have a very specific purpose for wanting to create this accessory dwelling unit on their property and their intention is to do that in order to provide a home for
Miss Menzel's elderly parents who coincidentally are renters in Monontlair Monontlair residents at this time to provide an opportunity for them to age in place live semi-independently um
uh with their daughter her husband and their three children um that's the use that's the reason for creating the accessory dwelling unit dur you know and due to the uh parents advancing age and declining health the AD ADU has been
designed to be uh fully handicapped accessible which uh you know requires more room uh in the unit in order to uh move around and hence more square footage
um required to provide an accessible ADU um just preliminarily as I mentioned the project includes substantial renovations to the existing de detached garage um
the renovations in involve dem uh demolishing more than 50% of the existing garage structure which uh required that we appear before the historic preservation commission to obtain their approval
to demolish the garage um and their approval is required as you know by the anti-demolition ordinance that the town has enacted fortunately we we obtained unanimous approval from the HPC
um in February of this year to demolish uh the structure although it's not going to be totally demolished so the application we have before you this evening um requests four variances two of those variances are for pre-existing
nonconformities uh firstly the existing garage one of the walls that's not being removed from the garage is the existing wall to the um uh west which is currently located
2.9 ft from the property line not unusual for older garages in this town as this board knows um and um you know we're seeking to maint you know to to keep that wall and maintain the existing
non-conforming 2.9 ft setback the second nonconformity relates to the height of the garage building um it's currently uh 18 ft in height the maximum permitted is 15 ft
um the applicants actually were prepared to lower the roof bring it down to a conforming height that's what was presented to the HPC um HPC however felt strongly that the roof
height should remain the same um because they're trying to preserve the pitch of the roof um because of the historic significance of the of the building so um again we were prepared to pro provide for a conforming roof height
hpc wanted something different so we're now seeking a variance but again the roof height we're seeking is basically what the same roof height there is today so the two uh other variances relate to the size of the accessory dwelling unit
we need a variance to permit the uh accessory dwelling unit to contain approximately 1,243 square ft of area whereas the ordinance limits ADUs to a maximum of
800 square ft regardless of how large the property may be and we're dealing with a fairly large uh piece of property here in the RORO zoning district the ordinance does allow for an additional 40 ft of a square footage which would be
a maximum of 840 um where there the ADU is an adaptive reuse of an existing building to um to make it handicap accessible so ordinance is somewhat ambiguous but
whether it's 800 maximum or 840 we still still need a variance because we we need an ADU of 1243 ft um you know in order for it to be accessible and in order to provide for two bedrooms which are
required for the persons who are going to occupy this unit hopefully with the board's approval the second variance relating to the size of the AD view relates to the length of one of the walls of the accessory dwelling unit the
ordinance limits the length of any exterior wall of an ADU to a maximum of 36 ft and we're proposing one of the walls to be 42 feet in length so those
are the four variances that uh we're hoping to have approved this evening um I'm going to begin my presentation with some brief testimony from Mr kle and then following his testimony I have Francis Klene the project architect who
will testify and then following his testimony we have Peter Steck to provide professional planning testimony in support of the variances so uh having said that I'd like to ask that Aaron Kle be sworn mr kle would you raise your right hand do you swear to
tell the truth in the matter pending before the board i do state your name and address my name is Aaron Kle i live at 144 Union Street in Montlair New Jersey okay aaron you're one of the owners of the property at 144 Union Street i am okay and you you own that
property with your wife Meg Mensel i do okay and when did you purchase the property august of 21 okay do you have any children i have three they live with you in the house i did okay all right so you've uh filed this application uh in
order to construct an accessory dwelling unit on your property um do you have a specific reason that you're seeking to construct this ADU on your property and if so explain what I mean um uh when
Montlair changed the law to allow ADUs to be built to be allow people to age in place it was sort of a perfect match to where we are in our lives right now um Meg's parents um Shayla and Yorg who are here today um uh are looking to live
independently as long as they possibly can um and we as a family are committed to taking care of them as long as we possibly can and so the design of the ADU is really meant to provide that independent living for as long as they remain independent and also create
enough space for them um as they age to make sure that they can be cared for at home for as long as that's possible okay where do where do they currently live you're in law uh 36 Hawthorne please okay not too far away 3 months looking to bring them a little closer a
little closer okay um can you talk about their their age physical you know their health physical condition um both Shayla and Yorg are 85 will be 86 this summer um they both are still independent and active um but both of them have had
health issues over the last couple of years and um uh one uh with ambulatory and one more with um executive functioning and so we want to make sure that we are in a place that we can be there to care for them um but also give them the independence that they need
okay and is it envisioned that they will some point need handicap accessibility and the Yes current currently York um has handicap on his um car and has um issues walking and we anticipate that that will likely progress over the next
couple of years so the um wheelchair accessibility is a primary issue that we're trying to solve for that also includes accessibility from the garage to the dwelling that we can get someone in a wheelchair undercover from the garage into the home um so we anticipate
um that that is something that we need to plan for and and therefore we designed it that way so you've had your architect design a fully handicap accessible unit is that right particularly the bathroom was very important that we had shower accessibility and toilet accessibility
with room for aids or another person to help while they were in those spaces okay and the proposed unit also contains two bedrooms can you explain Yes why there's a need for two bedrooms yes currently today they live in a two-bedroom
apartment and have very different uh sleep and life schedules so today that's how they are i think the most important thing is that if one of them needs inhome care that we can have inhome care and be taken care of in a bedroom while the other one is sleeping so if we have
a one-bedroom uh design and the rooms are too small for a caregiver to be in the room it will basically mean that they would need to one of them would need to move out or not be able to live there so we wanted to create enough space so the bedrooms were big enough for a caregiver and anticipating that
they will have different needs as they do today that they need two bedrooms in terms of how they currently function okay you mentioned uh a minute ago the garage can you talk about the existing garage and why it is you you sought
permission to demolish it and to uh construct a uh an expanded or enlarged garage in addition to the ADU i mean our intention from the beginning was to um make this project as um fit in with the
neighborhood and with the house as much as we possibly can including the architect that we selected who that's a primary uh thing that's important to him so we've tried very hard to make the design match the house and match the neighborhood um in terms of the garage
um with Shayla and Yorg uh still do drive so we needed a a car for them um we also do have an electric car so we wanted room for charging we also wanted a little bit of extra space for bikes um and uh my daughter does do the watch on
bike bus so um the the family does do the bike uh elements as well okay um all right i think that's the that's all I have for Mr kle thank you mr do you have any questions
uh no questions at this moment mr church uh no questions miss Harris no questions miss Grant no question mr cruz no questions mr griffith no questions mr moore
none at the moment do have a question mr mccullik thank you i don't want to let you off that easy um would you um explain um just in terms of your your design uh elements um
I noticed that you uh have uh proposed a fireplace in the living area would you speak to that in terms of what kind of fireplace you're anticipating gas fireplace gas fireplace and is is that a large fireplace is that what that is that what we're seeing in terms of the
drawing or uh I think it's a relatively standard fireplace so I wouldn't say that it's large okay i was just wondering in comparison to I'm presuming that you might have a fireplace within the main building we do we do comparatively would
be around the same size and maybe a little smaller or whatever i don't know the answer to be honest i would estimate it's a little bit smaller given the size of our main house um but it would match the size of the fireplaces on the second second floor mhm and then in terms of
the the two bedrooms uh it appears as though you have uh again in terms of the design features have windows uh that look out to little garden areas the windows in the back are above would be placed above where the beds
would be so get natural light um but the beds would be against those and then there would be uh windows on both sides one would be uh towards the sideyard and one would be towards the main yard yeah so the the sideyard is is that is that
um behind the garage is that what that's that's what that is and that's that's I I see plantings and then what's that next to the plantings cuz there's a doorway that leads out out to that area i don't know what that it
could be the HVAC uh the condenser is uh back there i see and then Okay let me just find it yeah the Oh I see what you're saying so
we plan to have a door uh so you can access the garage from the back and then plantings uh plantings between the steps and the sidewall there right so it is anticipated that um
your your um in-laws would be able to uh enjoy patio time covered porch time um and you would see that is consistent with um sort of normative design features in
Montlair i was I I there's plenty of porches in Montlair absolutely um so yes and then we spend a lot of time in our backyard we have uh outdoor grill so their ability to be outside and for us to be outside together uh is the
design of that sorry all right thank you Mr any other questions from board members okay are there any members of the audience who have questions for this witness mr trim you want to call your All right we have somebody coming up
okay and this is just an opportunity for questions of this witness not to make statements that'll be later thank you i understand my name is Frank Rebecci i'm a resident of town um Mr rebecci can you give us your address please sure it's 398 Upper Mountain
Avenue um did you consider um building the ADU as part of the house uh no there was a reason is there any reason you want to share why well just
as we had stated that the goal for them and for us was for them to live independently as long as they can okay um and then is there any reason other than combine it with the garage
that the ADU best location was on the existing adjacency to the the garage yes because it's uh we can get them from uh they can be on one level and the a wheelchair can get down the garage and to the house thank you
okay any other members of the audience who have questions for this witness want to call your next witness francis Klein mr klein would you raise your right hand do you swear to tell the truth in the matter pending before the board i do state your name and address uh Francis
Klein architect 38 Park Street in Montlair mr klene uh I know you've been an architect in town for quite a long time i'm not sure when you last appeared before this board um so why don't you just begin by uh just um um providing
the board with your professional qualifications as an architect sure um licensed architect planner and interior designer in New Jersey and also New York from Georgia i remember chairman Harrison from the last time I was here
and I remember you um bachelor's uh degree from Harvard and uh architectural degree from Yale when were you licensed in New Jersey uh 1978 okay your license is still in good
standing yes it is okay how long have you been We'll we'll accept him thank you um All right um Mr mr client you engaged by Aaron Kissell and Meg Mensel to prepare the plans for the project
that's subject of this application yes okay since you'll be discussing the plans as part of your testimony just want to make it clear that the latest uh set of plans has a revision date of March 3 2025 correct that's correct okay
um and as Mr kell just mentioned in his testimony there are basically two related components of this project the expansion of the garage and the creation of the accessory dwelling unit um so what I'd like you to do first if you
could is to review for the board the plans starting with the plans for the garage sure um the garage at the moment doesn't work uh you can't get the cars in it's too
narrow uh we want to add uh with your permission another 5 ft to the width then the cars can get in and we need a third car bay there'll be another driver we put that in the back that's a
relatively unused corner of the property and uh that way we don't have a threecar garage that we would see from Union which uh is not typical of uh Union Street uh we did that for historical
preservation appropriate reasons also um and uh we by widening it we're able to get uh electric vehicle charging stations and we're able to get uh bike
racks uh and uh we I think we mentioned this once before the height is of the current garage is 15 ft um we lowered it to the ridge to 12 feet
because it's on a slope so you take the average so the average was then 15 ft 12 18 15 um historical preservation uh really wanted us to keep the garage
ridge height the same uh so that's where it is now is 15 it's still 15 ft that means that because the land slopes um it goes to an average of 18 feet uh at their request uh so that's one of the things that that that you had talked
about right um we want to keep the materials of the garage similar to the garage that's there now and similar to the tutor house it's stucco with half timbering and
brick uh so we're keeping all those uh all those materials that also was discussed with uh the historic preservation commission so that at the end of the day the expanded garage would you know from the street would look much like the garage looks today so exactly
if you look down the lawn driveway the garage ridge is right where it is now and the materials are similar too and I know historical preservation is important to you i I very much believe in personally in historic preservation i
think Montlair is a very special town uh I think that they're wonderful buildings here and I love working on them uh everyone is unique um it's a fantastic town all right and the those considerations enter into the design of the ADU that's going
to be attached to the garage as well yes the we pick windows that relate to the windows on the back of the main house uh and uh they're they're two over two windows uh they're good windows uh the last page of the application has
specifications from Marvin uh in terms of uh and Anderson in terms of which which type of windows uh that um we're planning on specifying okay um all right can you then now talk about
the plans for the accessory dwelling unit and I guess maybe starting with the you know the floor plans that you pro that you've designed sure um first I'd like to introduce my associate
architectural designer Chisel Bazelli you and uh I'd also like to say Oh go ahead is she gonna or you should be sworn if you're going to testify testify or what's her role going to be Mr trebullet uh she's going to help uh with
the uh digital presentation and if I have a question that she knows uh the answer to okay then I will swear you in would you raise your right hand do you swear to tell the truth in the matter pending before the board yes I do state your name and address please jazala Busali Five Lincoln Place Wehawk New
Jersey you want to qualify her Mr j and what what is your relationship to um Francis Klein's associates associate i'm an architecture designer yeah architectural you have what what is your educational background i have a bachelor's of architecture and a
master's on architectural design and a master's on construction management okay are you licensed as an architect no I'm not okay but you're an architectural designer with education and you assisted in the preparation of these plans and
you're familiar with them very familiar adequately to discuss them yes okay so all right so do you want to continue with Jazella's assistance and in describing the floor plan just so the record's clear at this point we're she
just going to be a fact witness if there's some intermediate category that's necessary we'll discuss that but at this point just fact yes absolutely um well first I'd like to say that this
family's application for an ADU presents a compelling rationale for intergener intergenerational living the grandparents are are here with with Aaron um all our long-term Monontlair residents uh as you heard the
grandparents live in a local apartment and because of some medical situations and conditions they need to change the way their living space is um in contrast to an assisted living facilities attributes this family wants to stay
together uh they want to have the grandparents live in an ADU uh in in the expanded garage so they can enjoy the closeness of the family uh the delights of dinners together game nights scrabble
and cards I believe uh sports on TV watching the children grow up aging in place and and having their medical needs attended to that's why we're that's why we want to do this um
the the plans are uh from the garage there's a foyer and uh you wind up in the main space which has a kitchen and a breakfast area and a seating area and
the two bedrooms in the back and then the spaces include uh ADA bathroom and a laundry area uh and the kitchen is also ADA um it's all fully handicapped
accessible uh I think we we passed out an a sheet which has square footages on it which I think you we're going to come to yeah have a separate exhibit which we haven't haven't handed to the board yet we'll
come to that um in a minute so just to understand the number of rooms as you've described them you have the two bedrooms and appears to me that they're both the similar in size similar one is a little bit bigger for site reasons you have
kitchen bathroom laundry laundry area and then you have what appears to be you know combined living room dining room breakfast area breakfast yeah yes okay and then you have the foyer in the to get from the garage into the Yeah and
that's to allow to go directly from the garage into the interior of the ADU without Right having to go outdoors correct okay protected undercover okay um and as I think you've already said
the ADU has been designed to be fully handicapped accessible correct yes and does it comply with the requirements of the New Jersey barrierfree sub code yes it does okay all right now let's talk about the size of the ADU as you've
designed it um you know what's the total square footage uh 1234 okay and you're aware that the Monontlair's Monontlair's ADU ordinance limits the size of an ADU to 800 square
ft maximum no matter how large the property might be you can't have an ADU greater than 800 square ft you know with the possibility of adding 40 additional feet um for handicap accessibility although the ordinance seems to limit
that to an adaptive reuse as opposed to a new building yeah yeah I'm aware of that you're aware of those limitations um I'm going to hand now I'd like to hand out um an exhibit i have copies for the board which I guess we'll mark
as A1 yes all right so I've handed out we've marked as exhibit A1 and I've handed out copies to the board um this onepage exhibit which has a heading down in the lower left
accessible design you have that accessible diagram yeah all right that's right so um before we come to this let me ask you this question you know when you designed this and saw that the square footage
amounted to over,200 square f feet did you explore consider the possibility of reducing the size of the ADU in order to more closely comply you know to the requirements of the ordinance we we tried very hard but with this particular
family's needs we need this kind of square footage okay so you were not able to reduce the size to comply with the ordinance and also meet the needs of the intended occupants of the unit is that what you're saying all right and then All right so explain to the board
um what you've shown here or attempted to shown on on exhibit A1 sure um well this family needs two bedrooms for the reasons that Aaron Kle was talking
about um so that's some of it and um the handicapped accessibility uh winds up if you look at the chart uh in the box on the left um we
need I'll round it off uh 165 square ft for the accessible bathroom 179 square ft for the accessible kitchen um 358 for the bedrooms uh and 541 for
the open plan living area uh I'd like to please take a look on the plan you see these the circles i think there's four of them um with a dimension 5T those are the
required 88 turning radiuses um so that's that's four of them and then the shaded areas uh which you see in the bathroom and the laundry and the kitchen
are all ADA requirements uh aisleways uh 40 in or 3'4 aisle way minimum and uh pull down in front of a dishwasher or uh
a washer dryer that's in the middle of the plan and getting to uh a sink in the bathroom so if you look at the second box additional floor area um and again I round them off we need another 45 ft in
the kitchen and 15 ft in the laundry closet and 48 ft in the bathroom and 4 1/2 ft in the shower so we need 112 ft to make these functional spaces
accessible so that's part of it so I think we need the other bedroom uh I I do want to say that um we need a bedroom that could handle as Aaron Kle said uh possibly a a home health aid or uh
that's helping to be in there we it's at some point we might need a hospital bed that's bigger too um so we need another bedroom uh and we need a slightly bigger bedroom and we need the additional space for the uh handicapped
accessibility and we want the the the unit to be livable if the grandkids come over and want to play Scrabble or cards we need a a breakfast table that you can play grandparents and
grandkids can play cards and games at and we need an area where if they watch uh Sunday Night Football on TV uh that that's possible too and there are windows on the um you see a bunch of windows on the left hand side of the
plan um those windows are for the grandparents to watch the grandkids play in the grass area which is uh the yard and back of the house so uh that's all thought about in terms of making this uh
a really good place for an extended family which we strongly feel is the intent of why Montlair has an approved an ADA u law and not every town is as forward thinking as Monontlair i think
Princeton is and some of the other ones but most of them don't have it so uh Monontlair is way ahead in terms of thinking of intergenerational uh uses of a suburban family um
just one final you know question regarding exhibit A1 um um you've indicated on there there are five hatched areas that are shown now they're shaded but the shading is a little bit light but they're identified separately
as hatched areas you know um and and that's where you calculate the numbers that are shown in the second correct that's again coming up with about almost 113 additional square feet needed just to provide accessibility
um in the kitchen laundry room bathroom and shower for instance you can't have a stackable washer dryer because you can't reach it in your wheelchair so they have to be side by side okay right but that takes space and you need you need space
in front of it to be able to access it that's typical of the kinds of things that you run into okay uh can you talk about the typical apartment sizes or room sizes for like a studio apartment onebedroom
twobedroom etc um and perhaps as you're discussing those um provide your opinion as to whether you know it's feasible to provide an accessory dwelling unit
suitable for for these occupants um and limiting it to 800 square ft or perhaps 840 square ft as the maximum allowed under the ordinance um sure the
Typical common apartment sizes for a studio for might be 300 to 600 square f feet a one-bedroom might be 500 to a,000 square ft a twobedroom is 800 to,200
square ft without the ADA uh additional requirements and um from a planning point of view a secondary dwelling with ADA accommodations needs to be somewhere between 1,200 and 1300 square ft
providing space for a family in a suburban setting like Monontlair okay um final question I believe um I just wanted to um direct your attention to
uh the final comment contained in the report or memorandum from the historic preservation commission uh to this board dated March 10 2025 and I'll read it and ask you to respond to it quote "The commissioners
recommended that the roof pitch of the accessory structure should match the pitch of the main house." Mhm um we could do that but it's a tutor so we started like this to try to get the 15
ft uh average they said "Uh-uh uh we want the ridge to be 15 feet where it is now." So that put us where the average is 18 if I go to a tutor that's going to happen so it'll be okay it'll be a tutor
it'll be it'll be steeper but it's going to be more than 18 for the average once once I start doing that so um I'm flexible but those are the issues wouldn't it the roof have to be significantly higher because you're also widening the roof the garage structure
so you know yeah it would be higher substantially substantially higher because it's it's wider 5t this way so it it'll be a big steep roof okay and your preference would be to match the existing garage i I think if you're
looking down the driveway from Union Street and it's 15 ft to the ridge now and we have it 15 ft to the ridge in the proposal if it's if it that's all right um when you're looking down it will be uh almost an imperceptible change from
terms of uh the 5T a little bit extra to the side so I think that's a reasonable to keep it at the same 15 ft high now okay the one thing I neglected to um ask you to discuss and perhaps just can pull
them up on the on the um screen is to just review the um exterior elevations for the ADU so top right uh that's the stucco with the uh
vertical half timbering that's typical of tutors and typical of this house two garage doors with uh some lights um we heard you talk about that earlier there's a row of glass in each one then
there's a a little porch so that the grandparents can sit there undercover if it's raining and and watch the kids uh and um there are windows as I mentioned uh
onto the from the living space and breakfast table area onto so you can see onto the uh the green grass play area and then in the back if we move over one that's that uh that's that
door we were talking about to get to the air conditioning equipment and then uh those are the two uh triple windows that Aaron Kle mentioned that are uh over the beds with the headboard um and then that's around the other side uh where
there's uh the the back bedroom has windows uh to the west and the garage uh has some windows there to get light into the garage which we also talked about um and
the exterior is going to be stuckco stucco and brick brick base and u half timbering where uh where appropriate right so was it your intention to try to match the the design the character the
feel of the of the main house as well as Exactly other houses in the neighborhood exactly it's three coat stucco okay all right um that's all I have for Mr klein thank you Mr mccull do you have any
questions thank you Mr klein i have a variety of questions for you and um I think they basically fall into the categories of ADA and and um and personal safety uh fire safety
okay so um but I'm going to begin with the with the garage um so first of all just to clarify a couple of things in terms of the the garage and you spoke to the pitch of the roof um will there be any
storage area over the vehicles i I don't think No I don't think so you'll have to come to the microphone if you're speaking please um the garage will be vated inside on the top so that they could have the the bikes hanging on the walls okay so
there'll be no storage all right thank you so um there I I noticed that uh there is a proposed sump pump uh uh towards the rear of the garage do you see that by
the parking okay can you speak to that in terms of the necessity of the sump pump is there some historical reality of water in that area well it's more like a precaution because I mean you you have a lot of flooding in
in in that has occurred through the town so it is always good in a new building that is close to grade in one side because of the slope that you may get some water that could potentially become an issue and if you have the sump pump you could resolve it i mean we're are
going to put perimeter um drainage that will be tied to the storm system that's going to be designed once the uh project goes through the the approvals and is that related only to the garage or would that be for the entire perimeter of the property uh that would be related to the
garage because the ADU has a crawl space so it really it's wouldn't have an issue and there's a floor drain in the crawl space that'll connect to the perimeter drainage and to sump up in the event that there was an issue thank you um you
mentioned um uh well actually Mr kessle did but I'll I think you can speak to this um that within the garage there are several EV uh uh EV stations charging stations uh I think I counted three um
four there are four okay um no no they the three the three i'm sorry okay that's the that's the meter um so um what's that i'm wondering if that is excessive or is is what what's the
rationale for having so many charging stations within that garage well the idea is that eventually if they move to three cars which are electrical you would need three plugs and in order to charge them overnight right for ease and
functionality and since they are pulling the the power to this new property on a new meter you know it's the perfect timing to upgrade for future um want to come back to circle back to this in just a second but uh just in
terms of the the the bike storage are we talking only about uh uh traditional bicycles are we talking also about uh uh electric uh electric uh bikes as well the potential of electric bikes
just regular bikes just regular bikes no potential no potential for electric bikes is that what you're saying yes okay all right okay um All right so
um the wall that Well I I'll come to the wall okay so as we move into the into the apartment itself um thank you for you know the explanation that you gave in terms of the design qualities and the importance
of um uh caring for uh disability uh uh needs uh but I I noticed that um on the wall that um connects the garage to the
to this unit um you have um the washer and dryer you have the gas range um and of course then there's there's the the uh other kitchen area uh I I
don't know if there's cooks cooktops or whatever in that area but um when it comes to putting the the hood the the the gas range and hood uh and the and I'm going going to assume that
the dryer maybe a gas dryer or I don't know if it's electric dryer it's a gas dryer it is a gas dryer so the question I'm I'm I'm wondering about is how do you anticipate ventilation it vents up through the roof
so okay cuz the and and goes where i'll show you one second on the roof straight straight up and out correct so you have these vents here this is the bathroom vent then there's the laundry
vent and there's the the uh kitchen vent mhm and this one is for the uh two for the garage itself and this is the fireplace and then we have the venting associated with the um the AC unit that is in the crawl space that's coming
through the walls in the bathroom and there's also the other vent that is associated with the uh hot water heater that is uh tankless it's all going through the roof okay all right good thank you so
um then the wall that exists between the garage and the unit itself um is a is fire rated 1 hour wall fire grade 1 hour okay yes and the door itself would also be fire rated okay
and that takes into consideration those um EV units that are two of them that are attached to that wall yes there's a lot of there's a lot of things going on in that wall well it's not in the wall because the
the in the roof the venting comes from the hood and it'll be ducted like the f the the kitchen hood so it will come in the wall straight up and then it'll be buried in in the in the rafters so it's never going into the garage nothing of
the side of the ADU okay but I think I think you can hear uh within my line of questioning it's there's a concern about Yeah if there is if there is a fire okay there's a lot of there's a lot of
activity along this wall on both sides of it well this is not one hour wall which is per the code and it's insulated and separated and we're blocking i it wouldn't be as any other apartment okay
so um that it I the question uh I guess the next question that I have which is not unrelated to this so um and that is um you have uh in terms of the presentation
um we've we have the two bedrooms that are to the rear of of of the um accessory unit um where where are the exits i know there's the one that goes into the garage i'm assuming that
there's one that goes to the covered porch are there other exits well there's sliding doors here yes and there's another door here yes and those are the only exits correct okay so now going back to to the concern that I'm
expressing around um the potential of fire and and we've heard the explanation that the the reason why this unit needs to be designed uh to the scope that it is is because we're dealing with
emerging handicapping situations okay so it seems to me that that um the individuals that would be occupying the two bedrooms if there were to be an emergency situation
um they would have to bypass all of the electrical um areas the cooking areas the fireplace areas in order to be able to make an exit from this unit can you speak to that please
um I mean use the mic all the all the windows are eressible windows just like it's required by code and the uh the travel distance from the back of the bedrooms to the two front doors meets the code
so I'm not following i guess I guess I guess one of the qu I guess the question I have is is have you considered the possibility of having um maybe patio doors and either side of
the fireplace for example so that so that the occupants of the bedrooms would not have to travel so far to exit um should there be a situation in which they needed to get out of there quickly and we've already heard that there's a possibility um that you're anticipating
um that there's a possibility of maybe a wheelchair or someone that might have to be in a hospital bed so the again my question and and I understand that they're that this is on the property that the other family members are are
living in a in a in the larger house but they still have to get there in order to help get them out of this space if this situation emerges so that's the question I'm really asking um have you considered the possibility of creating another exit
area where they would be able to get out of out of there should a situation require yes can I I think it's a great idea and we haven't thought of it so okay we would be very open to it okay so I would like for you
to to to consider that okay thank you very much we appreciate it would it would require another set of stairs i would like for you to consider it okay thank you um that's fine that's a good
point uh the other just I just wanted uh to be clear just in terms of the the the covered porch um it's looks like it's a I mean it's a pretty large um patio area and I'm assuming that
that's all flat so from the driveway it's a it's a flat area all the way to the sliding doors is that that that would be correct okay that's right and I think you've already said that the the the doorway from the garage into the
foyer is also flush is that correct yes okay thank you yeah I I just you know I think one of the reasons why I'm raising the questions the way that I am Mr chairman is because because this is a um this is the first opportunity that
we've had to really consider one of these accessory units and if there is any kind of a precedent for um more senior members of our community living in these spaces
um then I think we need to make sure that we set the president correctly at the beginning uh because I think it's for me it's not so much an issue of the size of square footage it's about making sure that the design um appropriately
accommodates um those persons that will be living in this space um so that um uh we have we have uh uh taken diligence to make sure um that uh um we have cared for for the
for their for their benefit i agree with you completely all right Mr jim that's all I have okay Mr church you have any questions i have yeah this is uh a great plan and I think it it shows
a lot of forethought my question is it's not a deep question just a question how is the plumbing electricity and all the accessory things
going to be brought into this uh ADU we're going to trench from the main house right correct yes there's not going to be a separate Well there's the separate meters the owners wanted to have meters independently for them so
you could see how we have a gas meter a water meter and an electrical meter in the back so it'll come through the driveway yep and be connected to this building there's an existing electrical panel already there that is connected to
the house so there is a conduit or a trench in there that's already exist there won't be an electrical panel solely for the ADU though yes but it will be in the garage in the garage and that's just for their use for their use
so if something happened in the main house where electricity went out they wouldn't necessarily No it it would have nothing to do with them okay and the same thing with the plumbing and water yes flow and all that other stuff yes it's all independent okay and it'll all
be independent to that unit so that the unit becomes like self-sufficient correct thank you miss Harris um just a few clarifications um so if you're coming from the main house um how would you I notice that
there's stairs up to the porch um assuming someone's coming in with on a wheelchair how would you get up to the porch from the house well the the people who are handicapped will be coming from the driveway and that is a a race platform so those steps are to connect
you to the yard okay so the the driveway and that patio are flush yes okay um and then on page A1 there's a note that says a half an inch step down is that correct from the garage to the
That's a requirement by the code because of the gas that's in the air and that's the minimal allow difference between one level to another for handicap because carbon monoxide falls got it okay
um and then on your elevation A3 um the proposed east elevation it looks like there's a set of sliding doors where does that exit on to that's a uh those are stationary doors the
grandparents wanted No it won't open okay the grandparents wanted to be able to sit in the dining room and look at the kids playing okay okay that's all I have thank you Miss Grant
are all the appliances full size no they are uh smaller so you they are 24 in um the range but uh because we need to be able to have a a ADA sink we need to
be able to have a work um a work surface area so it has to be open and in order to meet all the requirements we have to have smaller appliances except for the refrigerator which is we went with the smallest but not too small because it's
hard to find something that it's think 33 36 something like that okay thank you um did you consider going with an in suite bathroom well there's two of them and they they want to be able to you know use it um
and share it together so that's why the toilet room is has its own room so like they could have a little bit of privacy um and um I'm mention obviously the appliance size and an in suite bathroom
or even putting a fireplace um well I don't know about the fire inside the room but um because um I like the um the plan a lot i like the floor plan um it does exceed um you know um a lot it it
goes over the requirement a lot and I I think that um probably um if the goal was to try to reduce that um I do see um areas here where um I think there's a lot of when you went over um the there's
a lot of um family considerations that one by one increase the size increase the size and if none of if those are like non-negotiables um like the extra windows to look outside but there is room to you know
come a little closer to um you know the requirement and um that's it mr cruz um I just wanted to ask a question again for a clarification about the sump pumps you said that as of right now that the
sump pump is not used well it's new um Okay so so the garage doesn't have a history of like flooding at all no I mean what they had was a little bit of rotting because the the foundation is basically ungrade right but it's like it's a gray beam right and the plate
sits right on in the grade and they had a lot of rotting in the past right so by us raising the plate and putting that brick bottom it's going to resolve a lot of those problems but in most cases when we do new construction in a place that
is very close to one end is is sloping in this direction so in that corner there is a possibility that you could have some water retention in that area so that's what the sump is there in case of emergency okay but it's not new um and then my uh
my last question would be with respect to the the 18T height uh variance you need for the for the accessory dwelling unit that's a function of the topography yes yes yes sloping to the east so you
could see here this is 15 but in this side it's 18 and as it goes around it becomes less so let me show you the you see how this is going it's going from here it's 18 and then over here is
15 okay and that's the reason why we put the sump pump in that corner because that's where everything's beginning from the other property okay uh thank you thank you Mr griffith you have a very challenging topography
uh clearly the elevation illustrated the most uh make make it the most obvious uh so it seems like average elevation is 3 ft below first floor and then the code would your dimension from first floor to
the top of the roof pitch is 18 so your variance is really 21 ft not 18 feet correct i think it's the average you go every 10 feet and you take a spot so it's the average and that's what But and the 18 ft is the average is on the
average it's three feet below the first floor is that correct i thought that's what it said on your drawing but the uh the average grade around the property determs the 18 not not from every point is that the
average grade around the footprint of the ADU correct of the combine of them combined with the garage here because both accessories have to comply to the 15 oh also the garage so that's what rounding it up okay all right thank you thank you
um you have what appears to be a vestibule if it had a second door but it doesn't so there's one door that you open to go into the garage or to go into the
house and I would suggest you put a second door in because you don't want Everybody that goes into the garage is walking into the ADU there's a door right here let's look at the plan the plan yeah
there's a door here and there's a door there correct but there's no door between that what I would call a vestibule space and the ADU straight in front of you so if I want to come out and get in my car I'm going to open that door into what could be a vestibule and
then I'm going to open the door to the garage but when I walk in that first door I'm in the conditioned space and room of the ADU so I'm saying if you put a second door there you have a vestibule and you separate the circulation these two if you have a car that burns
gasoline then you park it in the garage you have a door that's directly bringing gas fumes into the house that's not good either it be to your advantage to have a vestibule and it would save energy but other than that you don't have to do it we could put a door we put a door there
that's a good I think it would be advantageous he wants one here yeah oh here okay yeah um that's fine that's a good idea those are my questions thank you thank you Mr
moore so going back to the sump pump that you have towards the back of the garage and that you're the the topography of I guess Yeah the current topography so tell me a little bit about the drainage
that you have um set up uh for within your plan to address potential flooding um and all that so we we are intending to do a storm retention that will be
designed right after we assumingly get an approval right that will be designed by a civil engineer so the idea is that it would have like a a tank that retains the storm that will take care of the entire property catch basin or um I
think what was described to me in the proposal that it would be like a concrete uh tank that it is buried and then it picks up all the perimeter drainage of the ADU and any other stuff that is coming because of the topography of the of the property in in the rear
yard and then where would the runoff go to uh I don't know that it hasn't been designed so we're waiting for the approval of the plan before we go too far with the decision where to put it and how to design it um and it according
to Richard it was something that we could table for now until the approval of the actual project so I wouldn't be able to answer you at this point but once we have it you know we could share it with you guys we we're definitely going to take care
of that it's important yes yeah yeah yeah it's important for the family too they don't want issues with the water runoff and they're also going to do some landscaping so that will all be addressed once we go into full construction documents sure okay um
right and of course you know our winters are are quite cold and it's a lot of freezing and uh since we're doing intergenerational housing um certainly something to take into consideration um especially since we're having a lot more
floods nowadays correct um and just being mindful of our neighbors that the runoff you know goes somewhere that's not intrusive or into the driveway um you know just so that it's conducive all right well we have a
French drain in front of the um the doors that's going to collect the water from the driveway and the sump pump and then we have perimeter drainage at the bottom of the footing that will eventually tie back to the storm retention system so that will alleviate
anything for the neighbor that we're at the closest to okay and is there any you so right this ADU it's something new uh that we're looking at correct
um my observation seeing how the roof extends over to uh over the garage so it almost can look like one property right as and when I say
that um are there any thoughts of eventually possibly turning the garage into a liv a livable space where it becomes enclosed i'm just thinking about how this structure will be even after
right long after um and its intended use no plans at all for that okay we really are designing it for for our family today and no plans for that whatsoever and they have three kids so I'm sure
they're going to have plenty of cars yeah um any lighting along the driveway up to the main house we will definitely need to do that we haven't done the lighting and the landscaping plans yet but I that will be important for us to get there and for
them to get back okay no more questions thank you just to follow up on what Mr moore was asking I guess I mean we received extensive comments from the board engineer and I'm assuming
Mr client is not really in a position based on the answers we got as to none of this has been designed to answer those those comments have you seen the engineers report well the engineers report was requesting
for a storm retention system most of the not all but many of the comments were Yeah we're going to we're going to we're going to address it once we start doing the design absolutely like like Shisella was saying definitely going to do that concern and you know I I mean I could
easily just say adhere to everything in the engineers report but I'm not sure once the you have the engineer design it he's going to say oh no we can't do that or we have to do it differently type things and okay but you're not you're not in a position to I can't go through
I'm sure we'll have a discussion with the civil engineer and we'll do it properly the Um my other question um or set of questions is going to be the you know you've testified in terms of calculation building height there's
difference in elevation there stairs that lead down from the existing driveway the contours on the survey show basically there's a 3-foot drop and but yet you indicated that the uh covered porch area is going to be at the same
level as the driveway and I guess given that by the time you get to the eastern edge of the covered porch you're 3 ft lower um how are you going to address that both in terms of the covered porch
but the whole first floor elevation is is that where is the craw crawl space going to be underneath it and you're going to keep the existing contours or let's look at the the elevations we have a crawl space because we have
the we're using the slope so we used the we kept the slope the same right and from the from the driveway you come to these terrace because they used to have retaining walls for with landscaping formally right so that platform where
the porches will be a retaining wall and after the retaining wall you have the stairs that you see here you see the stairs right here so these are retaining walls and the plants are retaining wall right so that's what's causing the
crawl space underneath which is going to be used for all the mechanical and the dock work and is that going underneath the entire ADU correct and so where the ADU is next to the garage it's it's on grade you're going
to be on grade and then it's going to slope down so there'll be a probably a three-foot difference but you're you're not changing the existing grade not very much i mean unless it's going to be done for landscaping purposes like when they put the planters or whatever and that
would be done with the landscaper which will be our next phase of the job okay then um the is there current for the wall and a half wall that you're retaining on the
garage is there an existing foundation for that i think it's the it will be a new foundation all these walls would be new okay so in reality the existing wall on the western side is going to be
removed it's going to be rebuilt it's going to be rebuilt it's going to be extending that rebuild to meet the new project so at some point it's going to be a low retaining wall and then as it meets the
new porch and the platform the paving area it's going to be higher but all that is new okay so what is the rationale for our keeping the existing setback um couple of reasons uh first three I think um historical when you're
looking down the driveway from Union the edge of the garage will in the future will be exactly where it is now that's the first one uh the second one is um it's it's the highest point so if if if
I start moving things all the height stuff gets worse because because of the slope is going this way um and uh that corner of the property is it's the least used by the family so
that uh it is uh the best part of the property for uh making improvements for for the intergenerational family okay and then you also testified about size of dwelling units and I
guess to just do the application we just approved which involved six twobedroom units which went in size from 707 753 757 812 816 and 809
square ft that were and I could point to any other number of projects we've approved which had two-bedroom apartments with that size and I'm struggling for the justification for having
something,40 square ft you know you're the ADU part gets that a little bit of the way there but certainly doesn't justify being 400 plus square feet larger than what the ordinance allows and I I want to understand the justification for that oh
sure um the bedrooms that this family uh needs are going to be bigger dimensions uh because of a couple of comments aaron mentioned possibly a caretaker and also the comment possibly hospital beds
they're larger than uh a apartment type condominium type bedroom that's for this family's needs and if you as you just said if you if you look at all the requirements for ADA
um that adds uh another 112 113 square ft uh to the to the requirements uh and that's what brings it up to something that is uh very appropriate for this
family okay other questions from members of the board um I just had one more and this one might be more so for Mr trembulac just on what the what the thoughts were behind um uh waiting until compliance for uh site
plans be it like landscaping lighting storm water etc um well I don't think we need site plan review for this approval for this application so well well Mr mr tremulac that in one sense is true but
since you're requesting variances and my guess is that Mr ste is going to at least partially rely on I mean on justifying the v variances on
you know the benefits whatever for this I think we're entitled to understand what are the potential negative impacts including storm water lighting you know it it's you know in the same way I'm sure he's going to testify as to what
the positive aspects of the we need to also consider the negative impacts okay all right so I mean the question was respect to lighting and landscaping and storm water uh correct yes okay well the
plans do provide for some light uh landscaping improvements don't they uh we were going to do that as after this phase after this phase we are showing the potential of the bushes that we want around the the ADU and just to hide the
height of the uh the heaviness of the crawl space you know so that it's more gentle so that's an intention but there will be landscaping that the family wants as far as um trees and uh small bushes and flowers that has been talked
about that we will be doing it in the next phase in conjunction to the storm retention mr griffith um are you aware that the size of the ADU is being reconsidered by the planning board and by city council right
now that was on the agenda the last agenda council meeting and therefore if you had uh opportunity I would suggest you meet with your councilman and or pe people you know on the planning board and make your case uh I find your case
very compelling though I find it a bit of a reach for uh what I feel we are entitled to make decisions on it's my personal opinion mhm so but uh act now
cuz you have an opportunity to influence how they define the the new ADU code thank you that's a good suggestion um coming back to the question is there any lighting that's proposed on the plan wall-mounted lighting we we haven't Yeah
there's sconces um in in between the the garage doors there's sconces left and right of the entry to the foyer and there's inner sconces in the uh inside the porch and then there's a fan that we're going to put on the vaulted
ceiling so that they could sit there you know during the hot weather comfortably okay thank you is there any current enlighting currently in the driveway uh so there's none currently and nothing
proposed at this time not at this time okay um I I can state on behalf of the my clients mr chair I I reviewed uh the engineers report his comments are fairly typical comments with certainly with respect to
storm water we have to satisfy um him and uh you know we would certainly you know commit to um comply with the comments and recommendations in in Mr hernandez's report or otherwise
resolve the issues to his satisfaction we weren't prepared to deal with engineering issues tonight but we certainly know we have to satisfy him anyway in order to get building permits absolutely we're planning on doing it
but on the other hand one of the things we need to consider is whether there'll be any impacts on the storm water and that's our role not to our engineers role to you know give us do
the technical part but um the actual impacts that'll have is our decision i mean I can certainly appreciate the you know the the cost of having to do soil testing in accordance with best management practices um but just at
first glance when it comes to placing like a storm tank in the backyard and having to traverse 250 ft without seeing any of the uh underground storm sewer systems in the in the survey it's it's tough to be certain that there's uh the
the clarity of what a storm water system could look like um and then with the sump pump in the garage as well there's no ascertation as to what the seasonal high water table is either and so these are just some some concerns um just on first glance yeah and and I don't think
and you know we you know the as you know we we will condition on a number of the recommendations i think it's the basics of knowing where how um and not needing every detail of the calculations that we
would normally have to feel comfortable that what's being proposed is feasible and not impacting the neighboring properties could that be review on like on a desk level like if we show you the the plan
have have you retained an engineer at this point yes we have um who is the engineer got it uh honestly right now I don't remember but but we do have an engineer that um Harrison is uh he that sounds
right yeah he he actually emailed us a week ago when asking us where we were with the approvals sorry so I I could get you his information and send it over to her okay i I think Mr treak I mean you know it's your choice
how you want to proceed if you want to proceed tonight with what you have and have Mr ste testify um and go to a vote that's you know that's one alternative if um you want
to you know have your engineer um discuss with our engineer the comments and do what I'll call a basic design this is where the drywall is going to go this is how the piping is going to get there you know this is how we're going to meet the green
infrastructure requirements and again not in detail but this is how that this can be met um you know and present that to us as part of the case we can proceed that way well I think I would like to do that Mr chairman of abundance of caution
um Um but I I would also like to put Mr st's testimony on tonight since he's here and available and I'm not so sure he's available at the next meeting someone else who wanted Mr ste tonight will be very upset if he doesn't testify
probably yes I know who that person might be yes um so but I got him first so uh so I've got to put him on tonight so um but I you know but it may make sense for Mr to
come back even with you know based on we'll see how that goes but if you want to put Mr ste on I think I'd like to yes anything further for well let let's do are there any members of the audience and I'm assuming Mr klein will come back
just so there may need to be followup based on what the engineer Sure Mr rubaki Frank Reachi again um I'm wondering
um why you're metering the ADU for the grandparents um could you hear it it just seemed like it was the right thing to do we didn't spend a lot of time thinking about it okay you you realize you don't have to
have separate service going into the ADU i checked with the building department the water utility and the planning department um thank you for No I just I was curious myself um that's what we thought we should do but Okay if we don't
Okay that may be fine also um you've made several comments your attorney made several comments at the HBC meeting about the HBC review um I don't believe the
referral referral notes from the HBC review were forwarded or published did you receive a referral we have a report from I think we have a report from Does the zoning board have the report yes okay because it's important
to my question um one of the major considerations was the original design called for a 15t average roof that was the presentation and and you that was your desire that's
correct and it's still your desire if the HPC hadn't insisted on in 18 correct okay um the HBC the applicant Mr trenlac all unanimously
agreed that this property was minimally visible from the street almost to the point where they wanted to disregard it it was it wasn't going to affect the character so my question is if you argue that it's minimally visible from the street won't affect the
neighborhood character what's the justification and it's not an historic building anymore because it's a total demolition it's new construction it's not adaptive reuse what's the justification for a variance to go to 18 ft
because historic was very very strong about keeping the rich height the same okay but that's still a referral to the zoning board that they don't have any any uh any authority to dictate that that's a legal thing okay i just wanted
to be clear on that um and we do agree this is not adaptive reuse in any way uh that sounds right okay thank you um these were the softball questions uh
actually thank you very much thank you appreciate it are there any other members in the audience who have questions for this witness okay call Mr sack okay thank you all
would you raise your right hand do you swear to tell the truth in the matter pending before the board i do state your name and address please uh Peter Stack St K 80 Maplewood Avenue Maplewood New Jersey okay
mr chair offering Mr stack as a expert professional planner board's well familiar with License is in good standing Mr stack yes glad to hear it we accept it thank you all right Mr stack uh you're familiar with the property and
the application that's before the board i am you prepared to discuss the variance relief that's being sought this evening yes okay and I see you have a an exhibit to hand out to the board i do okay this is exhibit A2
uh I'll just uh identified uh in more detail what A2 is uh it was prepared by me on uh March 16th of this year uh first page as a
2020 aerial photograph on the left with a portion of the tax maps with the zoning lines on the right uh the next page has pictures taken by me on March 15th of this year uh showing
the subject property uh as you see from uh the street and again this is winter time uh but you still can only see essentially a portion of the garage in the rear uh you have close-up pictures on the
lower right hand side you see the drop in elevation it's currently handled by a uh a a planter uh next page P3 uh is a perspective of both the garage and the
main house in the rear and the as you can see the grass slopes generally down away from the garage uh the bottom picture is a uh an an aerial view
probably 100 feet in the air uh what's not easily apparent is that there's a cluster of accessory buildings on the other uh properties uh that are near this so you know everyone that uh where
the property is a butt uh they have uh other buildings there that are non-residential uh P4 has kind of a cartoon version of the addition on the left hand side and uh an aerial view on
the right where I've outlined the existing garage in black uh the expanded garage in blue and the accessory dwelling unit in yellow uh the next page I'll talk about in a minute but it has some background uh
when the ordinance for ADUs was adopted as well as uh a memo from uh Janice Tally uh in in preparation for a new uh master plan or re-examination report and then I'll uh end up talking a little bit
about the last page which uh highlights the relief that we uh we need uh so just to lay some foundation um this uh property has a large lot it's
uh significantly larger than the minimum lot size it's 34,518 it's uh has 50 feet wider frontage than the minimum of a 100 um as you can see the garage is well back from the street so it's it's not
visible uh easily or part of the garage is visible but all of the new addition is really not visible from the street uh the application is to
uh demolish more than 50% of the garage and that includes the roof uh but reconstruct again greater than 50% of the garage uh to make it more usable uh to accommodate three cars uh with uh
charging stations um and to uh abudding that uh to put in the the new construction fully new construction which is the uh accessory dwelling unit uh you've already
uh your ordinance uh doesn't say that it has to be used for handicapped people uh or has to be used uh necessarily for a parent but that's uh that's the focus of this application as you heard um uh it's
to uh age in place um uh for family members that are already in Montlair uh but will be uh close to the uh younger family uh the surrounding area is all single family as you can see on the first page of
A2 uh there are a number of houses in the area that are fairly large um and this lot again is fairly deep more frontage more square footage than the minimum uh allowed in the
zone uh your master plan uh in 2023 you know recommended a uh the current zoning of the property and as you know it concentrated on uh circulation and the business areas
uh but uh the governing body is uh uh going further than what was in that document and if you'll turn to uh page P5 of A2 um uh the
ordinance was uh initially adopted a couple years ago it it has been revised and apparently it's currently be being considered and it's significant to me that the purpose of the ordinance is to kind of expand the a range of housing
uses us uses that you have in town rather than contract it if the if the story was you know we don't want garages more than 400 square ft uh and we were coming in with 500 square f feet I understand there's a lot of concern because we're going in the wrong
direction the direction here is uh Montlair wants to take a fairly leadership position in the state uh and actually my own town Maplewood has done that but uh uh you want to accommodate
uh smaller households uh again accessory units and if you look at the whereas purposes of the ordinance two of them are right on target whereas older residents living on fixed income are
especially at risk and face the possibility of having to leave the township taking with them a lifetime of experience that benefit the entire community again the parents are moving from Hawthorne Towers to here staying in the community the next one whereas people with disabilities face
considerable challenges when finding adaptive housing and risk having to live away from family and trusted support networks in order to find appropriate living environments so those are kind of pretty much on target what we're trying
to do this evening uh Janice Tally has prepared a memo dated May 16th of 2023 and I I excerpted uh and this is part of the study for a re-examination
report but um there's concern about the expense of housing etc etc and the response that uh Janice has drafted for the committee uh the township has addressed this by adopting new accessory dwelling unit ordinance in 2023 with more flexibility
for owners of one and two family homes to provide accessory dwelling units for and continuing to expand the inventory of affordable housing so again it's important to me that this is early in the process
um you're the municipality is going to have experience as applications come in and as uh variances are needed you're going to have your annual report uh to the governing body about variances and you may based on your experience recommend different changes and I know
they're being considered now uh we need uh four variances uh associated uh with this application um we have a sideyard where we're holding uh that wall which is 2.9 ft
away and it's supposed to be 12 ft away and uh that portion is going to stay a garage a as you can see in the um diagram on
uh I guess the best one is on on P6 the last page all of our totally new construction is beyond the 12T mark so from the point of view of the neighbor that's 2.9 ft away
first of all they have a two a twocar garage there with a very tall uh roof uh only uses a garage not for residential as far as they're concerned in terms of intrusion on the 12-oot
setback it's going to be the same uh we have a height issue uh and again this is not going to be apparent from the street um there were several considerations um uh the historic
committee wanted a more of a peak roof uh the applicant presumably would do it but that would be a significant change in the var uh increase in the variance
um we need a height variance uh largely because the land drops away significantly and so uh 18.04 ft is the defined height uh the actual height if you look at the garage and look at it
from the street is conforming it's it's 15 ft but the peculiarities of it is we want to keep the the front and side footprint of the garage uh and again we want to um accommodate what the ordinance is looking for but we do have
sloping land which is a little unusual it is beneficial in that any storm water runoff is going to go for the rest of the lawn there so there's certainly room to handle u storm water runoff but we don't have the engineering details
um the longest wall of the building is 42.9 ft and 36 ft is in the ordinance that's not part of this new ordinance that's generic to uh accessory buildings
um in the zone so when that standard was drafted it was before the municipality was considering uh whether to uh accommodate uh dwelling units the important thing to me is that the this
length in wall is uh toward the back of the lot and again it's not going to be apparent uh looking from the street it's in a in the other dimension and you know the final important issue is is the
issue of the square footage uh what I did on P6 of my A2 uh that little diagram in the middle uh if you cut off this building take the two bedrooms away that would be about
800 square ft and it's significant to me in that number one the overage is not to the side it's to the rear which is the least apparent uh part of this uh it preserves the open space
in the yard uh for three kids and I suppose the adults can play there allowed there to play also um but as you um um heard from the architect uh there's a reason why we're
doing this you know in theor in theory you could shrink the living area you know double up on spaces uh but um this applicant wants to uh because this is all new construction uh again were this
some conversion inside the house um you know inevitably there would be more limitations because of existing dimensions here there is the flexibility of new construction uh and the applicant is is uh doing everything uh for
handicapped accessibility uh which is a public purpose um and again I think that um because the additional square footage of 443.15 ft is essentially in a conforming
part of the backyard it's in the least visible part um it uh it has a purpose and that there are uh two occupants here and potentially a a caregiver um it is far from the
street it's near a cluster of nonresidential accessory buildings um that so other people are kind of using this as the their backends is as kind of the the back end of their properties again they have storage there
garages there there's no living there i also think it's important to consider that this is an oversized lot uh as I indicated on P6 uh our frontage is 33% over our lot area is 42.1% over uh your
ordinance didn't want an accessory building to be too big compared with the house and you said in the ordinance it shouldn't be more than 40% of the floor area of the house we're only 20% of the floor area of the house this house
excluding the basement is 6,088 square ft so it certainly is proportional uh to the size of the tutor house in front so uh with the condition that
um I suspect there's enough room uh to handle any storm water drainage because this is at being placed at the high end of the backyard you got all the rest of the backyard to work with in terms of of a seepage pit uh with that condition in
mind in my opinion um there are two reasons to justify this under a C1 we have an existing garage there's a row of tree substantial trees on the side of this we don't want
to uh completely do new construction we want to make sure we protect those trees um that is a potentially a a C1 argument because of the existing placement of the garage and
the alignment of the driveway that faces the garage uh in in addition I think there is a C2 benefits that substantially outweigh the detriments uh and again I read into the record the uh findings in the ordinance
uh this is to be encouraged uh and especially it's looked at as being beneficial to disabled individuals uh this is exactly one of the reasons the ordinance was drafted to keep people in town uh this has is in a historic
district and again there was some modifications of it um uh in con concert with what the recommendations were of the uh historic committee uh in terms of negative uh criteria
um this building is remote from the street it's hidden by the house it's next to nonresidential accessory buildings on the other lots um it this is a lot that is oversized
both in square footage and in frontage and again there's enough and because of the topography yes we get uh penalized a little bit on the the height but the reason we're staying high is we it first of all it saves the the rest of the rear
yard which is largely in grass but it provides a great area to disperse um any storm water runoff that's caused by the new construction so I I believe that there are uh positive criteria satisfied uh a certain
portion under a C1 but frankly the stronger portion is C2 the public benefits substantially outweigh the detriments and I believe this can be approved without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantial impairment uh to the zone
plan and zoning ordinance okay thank you no further questions any questions yes uh Mr stack i was looking at the um your
uh uh illustration on P3 um and it uh made me particularly conscious of the fact that there are three properties that touch this corner of of of this
uh application um and you made reference to the fact that that um you drew attention to the fact that there are buildings uh on those I looks like it's on all three of those properties that that border
this if you look at the uh first page that has the aerial photo and again where the circle is because it's hard to see because there are trees tree branches that overshadow the garage the circle is where the garage is now
mhm and so that that gives you a sense of where the other buildings are right and again the the bottom of page three is uh taken about 100 ft in the air cuz I cuz the the slate roof uh garage
that's on the adjacent lot five uh it's hard to see that because that sticks in up into the uh the evergreens yeah that's that's helpful i I guess the question that that I'm wondering is is there the
potential in your professional view that there could end up being a cluster of ADUs in this small area i mean there's nothing to prevent the homeowners of those in those three properties from
deciding that they also wanted to convert an existing structure into an ADU uh you know if they comply with the ordinance they're guaranteed to do it so the answer is it's a possibility and
would you would you see if there were to be such a cluster would you see that as potentially a having a negative impact or would you how would you sort of Well first of all the the part of our development that's
close to them is the garage and it's going to stay a garage so there's an insulating factor there and and part of your uh requirements in the code are the placement of windows you know they don't want windows facing the neighbors
so I mean uh right now I think we have more flexibility because there's no residential uses around if one of those neighbors wants to put in an ADU they're going to have to design it knowing that we're there yes and and I I
don't see frankly any negatives these are large lots um uh again if we didn't have our garage there this would meet all the setbacks right and but the setback that the garage is essentially a buffer to noise and anything else that would occur
in the new ADU okay thank you and then I guess the other question I have is is again just going back to you know a comment that I made earlier uh in our consideration of this application and that was around
precedent uh and uh looking at the size of of of this um uh project um and given the fact that that um
there currently is uh the ordinance does have a uh an expectation in terms of scope um do you think that that we might be putting ourselves in a position in
which we're um creating a situation in which um really all proposals are going to look at exceeding what is currently set by the time well as as you
know there are no technical precedents in these matters because every piece of property is unique right but again that's one one of the reasons I'm emphasizing that this is a lot with more frontage than normal uh more area and
the proposed ADU is only 20 only 20% of the floor area of the building there are there is a cluster of facts here that I suppose if someone came in with almost identical stuff in a historical you know they they would point to this but as you
know technically uh this doesn't justify any other application but I do think there are a fairly unique cluster of facts plus the motivation of this owner is you know to help parents that uh will
take advantage age of the special construction no I understand okay all right thank you mr church do you have any questions miss Harris do you have any questions um I would just like clarification um on
the existing wall because I think the previous testimony was that it was going to be rebuilt and you might have justified that i understood that the they're the dimensions are staying the same but the but and
and the client can correct me if I'm wrong but but according I I understand that the the wall that faces uh the neighbor the 2.9 ft is is staying that was my understanding but the roof
is going and because so much of that property is being demolished the garage uh we're not we're requesting a variance uh to keep it at 2.9 ft so the re I the
motivation is so that neighbor doesn't really have any change from what they're looking at you know the ADU is going to be more than 12 ft away which would be conforming now potentially the I may have the facts wrong but I thought that that wall was going to be retained yes
is it going to be retained or is a new wall going to be built in the same location because I think that's a different consideration on our part no the wall is remaining it's going to be underpinned to provide a new foundation and a new
brick base okay so the wall is staying okay thank you Miss Grant no questions Mr cruz um I just had one question or a couple questions about uh one of the comments
you mentioned was that the that there's no residential accessory buildings in the area no there are there are no residential it like of the of the cluster of buildings if you look at the bottom of
P3 those those those buildings are all utility buildings or garages there's no other dwelling unit that's next to this there's a cluster of accessory buildings but they're not residential including the neighbor correct wait wait so wait you're saying
um was not uh 146 but 142 that there's no accessory dwelling unit on 142 um correct that the So this so I see like two buildings so the So I see I see I
see um I guess the main building the tutor house i see what looks like a carriage house thing and then like a cottage in the back the the um the slate roof is on lot i'm looking at I'm looking at lot seven okay lot seven
that's way u on the That's across the lawn right that's not close to this and and I don't know uh I don't know uh that's it looks to be like a residential building i didn't consider that because that's way on the other side of the
property you know it's 180 feet away or something okay fair enough yeah I just wanted to just clarify that that one statement because I was um you're you're right if I expand it but I was looking at the ones that are most impacted by this certainly um just out of curiosity
then just to just to uh play on this um the size of this like rear uh uh building is the building coverage of this proposed accessory dwelling unit comparable to this uh neighboring what appears to be
an accessory dwelling unit that's on the other side of the property yeah i So this one you're talking about on lot seven yeah on lot seven it looks like there's a huge building dwelling unit
this one's this one i think the Yeah that one maybe more um yeah it's a separate house so they're rentals so there's two separate houses and it's at least two bedrooms um of that type of that house that you're talking about oh so then it's not So
it's not then technically an ADU it's it's there's there's two houses on the lot there's two houses on the lot correct okay that makes sense um but to your question it's about the same size of the AU
that one is big yeah just in terms of the first floor surface area that mean the first floor area okay um yeah that's the only question I have thank you Mr griffith
no questions mr moore no questions um so the the township recently adopted the ordinance and I guess um and we made a recommendation in
our last annual report cons that we discovered that due to in the R1 and the R2 zones you couldn't actually build to 800 square feet because of the and so we recommended to the governing body that they change that and that as Mr griffith
pointed out that ordinance is actually pending but given the recent history of this and very very precise limits on the
size of the unit how do we justify doing a unit that's 50% larger than what what is permitted and not say that's not having um a substantial impairment of the zone
plan i mean this is not an old ordinance that's you know outdated and whatever i mean the governing body gave a lot of thought to this um and said this is the maximum size we want to allow it said a
maximum and a minimum it didn't say just do what you want um I think it works two ways that uh number one the purpose of this ordinance was not to constrain
housing you know I I could see a town uh a lot of towns now you know are using FS on uh single family houses because they don't want to see oversized houses uh you know they redefined the height of
houses and if you want to constrain development uh you know and and an ordinance was just adopted adopted yesterday I think it's a harder burden to say we don't want to get we just wanted to stop it and here you are asking for an exception
this is the other side of the co coin that the municipality wants to encourage this and there's not a lot of experience around the state of New Jersey not many municipal ucipities do this so my point is the fact that the municipality wants to encourage this construction
uh is important uh you're going to be gathering information as as people come in and want variances or think they need variances but uh in in my opinion I think there is a foundation that's unique to this property you may never
grant another variance over 800 square feet but I think it you have to look at the circumstances and it may be that the governing body decides that one maximum size is not good for all four
zones or maybe it's proportional to the lot size that makes more sense to me you know if you look at Monontlair's history there are a lot of carriage houses that indeed had horses in the bottom and and grooms sitting you know living on the
second floor there's huge buildings on huge lots and that's part of the character of Montlair i don't think it is while you want to be cautious always of granting variances the fact that this is a recent ordinance you haven't had a lot of
experience with it but but doesn't that argument go the other way in terms of the town said we don't have a lot of experience there isn't a lot of experience statewide that we can point to so we want to be cautious limit the size put a variety of constraints on
what can be done and let's see what happens and let's get some experience before we start expanding what can be done well again the the one thing that doesn't make sense to me and again I don't know I wasn't part of the drafting of this is it's one size for all
zones and there are widely different lot sizes in your the four zones that are named so um again uh it would seem to me that on a smaller lot you want a smaller building then maybe they can't fit it
and maybe it becomes too close to all sides in the rear yard but the fact that it's again I I think it's an important fact looking at the purpose of the ordinance uh there uh but we I think we've
provided a sound basis for the additional square footage the location of that square footage in the back of the building um as well as meeting the negative criteria
though there the ordinance as it reads now actually does make a distinction on the sizes by the length of the sides it effectively limited in the R1 and the R2 zones to 500 and whatever it
was square feet you couldn't build in 800 square feet you can only do that in the RO and the ROA zones so it's it's maybe that was intentional we we recommended that was not a good idea that was unduly
restrictive in the R1 and the R2 zones but not sure that that necessarily leads to you know it you know it it'sn't that really as Mr griffith said before a legislative function not a
variance function as to my point is that if even if the ordinance is only 2 hours old it doesn't change the statutory proofs correct but you
are I you know I'm sure you have and I know we have had platters saying this ordinance was adopted a long time ago circumstances have changed and you need to look at the fact there changed circumstances and we can't do that here that's I mean you're nodding your head
and agreeing but the the the the other side of that coin is that there's just not a lot of experience around the state of New Jersey in my view that's a reason to be cautious but one one other question just in terms of you know there you know that
the historic preservation commission approved the demolition of the building and do you agree I understand your argument there it's been 2.9 ft away from the property line and you can use
that as a C1 basis for approving that variance but um given that that the demolition I think under any court case on demolition only having one and a half walls left is a demolition that
the reconstruction is now subject to the terms of the ordinance and hence the requirement of the variance they can't rely on I agree that's why we're asking for the variance any other questions for members of the board any members of the audience Mr
rubaki should get a head start um I just want to I want to address the part of the ordinance um 34722 which is about accessory buildings first um and my understanding is that this
project I didn't see the document until tonight but there's a new basically the total area of the garage in the ADU comes up to around 2130 ft 12,043 uh point something for the ADU
1,234 the combined the combined building because it's one roof yes so that's around 2100 yes and my understanding of the RORO zoning is that you can have two accessory
dwellings 36 by 36 ft uh I think it does allow two okay so that gives you roughly 2600 ft that you could build for accessory uses as long as they're in two different buildings correct if I'm if we're right well there are
other issues setbacks no no but assuming but this is a huge lot there's no impervious there's no setback issues there's Let's assume they're not i'm just saying what the ordinance allows in 34722 which is accessory buildings
so this combined building is less square footage than the sum of what you could build in two buildings is what I'm trying to ask the the math seems to be correct okay i'm working for you there by the
way uh I'm afraid I'm going to have to hug you after okay then switching gears a little bit and I forget which this falls under my understanding so the ADU is around 1,200
odd feet okay correct the garage is somewhere around 800 square ft correct ballpark so these could fit in separate buildings easily yes by by the code by the code they
could I'm I'm going through the options in my head and I just want to understand if I'm right the other option as we as I mentioned before is that you could incorporate this living space into the main house if they you know by a zoning
point of view probably would that's one of the options and then the third option but I'm not clear on this option is that they could have a portion of a detached dwelling of pretty much any
size within 4 ft of the principal structure and it would be counted against the principal structure and not accessory i don't recall the four feet but it typically ordinance says that we
don't want you to play games right no it came up because of some swimming pool thing or something up in the estate section uh and the zoning board recommended this ordinance as I understood it i don't know when it kind of dropped it but it was in one of your recommendations that hey we're not going
to let this happen so let's have any building accessory building within 4 ft of the primary one count against the main one assuming it has the space to do it so that if that's true then an option this option would be to somehow connect
the ADU within 4 ft of the main building or or attach it to the main building well if you didn't want to attach it say for some reason you want it structurally different right but you could have it within 4T it would
use up much a very available uh building coverage primary structure building coverage because that's underutilized and you could make it two stories so you could put a garage use underneath if you wanted to and an
accessory building which is not allowed now so effectively you could build a carriage house is what I'm saying is I mean that's to an extreme yes okay but it it the answer is it I don't think it would
do it would advance the purposes of historic preservation to start monkeying around with the main house yeah i I I I obviously would be somebody that generally agrees with you but our ordinance in Montlair as I understand it
applies here is only covers what's visible this is an historic resource it's not a landmark so regardless whatever is visible from the street from the public right away is covered under our ordinance whatever is not is we
could have one of the famous artists of the world had their studio in this garage and it would not be covered under the historic preservation ordinance they just proved that they just said it's
minimally visible it's not going to affect the neighborhood so you can demolish the garage so what I'm trying to do is can you can we dismiss the historic part of this whole application uh no okay i thought I'd ask thank you
um it you know the board has the right to comment on all of these things there's there's a No I know someone made a case in Milbour they were doing all the in the Short Hills area uh they were building something in the back of the house and they said you know
you can't deny me and the answer is the board denied it and stuck it stuck in court you can control that even though you couldn't see it from the street so my I want you to testify when Janice Tally introduces the new ordinance demolishing garages i really do it's
going to be great thank you there any other members of the public who have questions for this witness mr trimulac do you want to march on or do you want to We'd like to march on with an post an to carry the application
so that we can come back you know after engaging the engineer to provide okay and storm water um you represent the next applicant i do um we're just with respect to that I
mean we're prepared to proceed but certainly recognizing the hour okay okay that this is relevant for both mr sullivan I understand from your discussion with our secretary earlier
that you are not available for the first meeting in April no the first meeting in May in May okay so you are available correct okay so I'm assuming your next client would be ready to
go then i'm assuming this client will not be ready to go by the head i think that's and so what where are we with what else we have scheduled for April 2nd we have one application scheduled and we don't have anything scheduled for
the upcoming dates after that okay and that that application is it's a attached garage at 140 Chestnut Street okay but a bold variance a bolt variance yes
okay okay everyone here assuming I'm the only one who's willing to sit and I just have a 9:00 call tomorrow morning to um available for what is the April date april 2nd for April
2nd probably more relevantly are you available for April 16th because he needs preferably seven of the eight of us to resurface for the 16th second is on
second is on okay okay and is your client and witnesses ready for available for the second yes I think we discussed that earlier yes they are okay this is how many
announcements can I do at once and do it correctly okay so the um application for the Kizzle Mensel property at 144 Union Street is being carried until our meeting on April 16th
there will be no further notice do you give us an extension of time if we need it certainly yes okay and the The application for 52 Wildwood Avenue from VG Ashwood LLC is being carried
until our April 2nd meeting there will be no further notice of the application and um do you give us an extension of time of course necessary okay one question Mr tremulac on that have you ever had
discussions with the township about vacating Division Street or that portion of Division Street you know I had a conversation a while back shortly after around my time my client acquired this property about what's going on with Division
Street um and and the possibility of of perhaps acquiring it you know and I think at that time Janice Tally thought that well maybe you know it could be a site that the town might look
to for an affordable unit or something but that's for the division going the other way which the application says is a private road yours goes into the backyard that portion goes into the backyard of someone on What are we over
there mount Vern Chester yeah I know it It goes nowhere um Okay um I'm going to You know just Okay uh before the board runs away um I would like to do a business item
um we recommended in our annual report that we did we did two recommendations that were interrelated that applicants who are coming in with multiple applications that that be counted
towards building an affordable unit so when they got to their fifth unit they were had to do an affordable unit the second part of that was to require that LLC's reveal their owners so you don't
have different LLC's from separate properties which most applicants do um I looked at the application checklist which is an ordinance and that only specifies that the applicant and owner be revealed
doesn't specify how that's broken down my view and I believe Mr sullivan's view that the requirement in the municipal land use law even though it doesn't specify LLC's that that ownership should be required in the
same way that it is done for with the intent yes yes and and I've always done that he's always done that with applications we've handled when we're on the other side of the deis um so I what I'd like to do is make a motion that require going forward for this board and
we're entitled to a set separate additional application requirements that no application be deemed complete for any nonhuman being entity unless they reveal the ownership down to the 10% as
set forth in the municipal land use law if we you've already deemed them complete we'll march on but going forward um so is someone second that motion all in favor any discussion all in favor say I i okay now we can have a
motion to adjourn motion to adjourn second all in favor say I any opposed any abstensions see you in a couple of weeks everyone