All right. Good evening everyone. This is a regular meeting of the zoning board of adjustment for Wednesday, March 25th, 2026. 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 Montlair website as is the link to the township's YouTube channel where the hearing can be viewed live or after
the fact. The hearing is also being televised on channel 34 and I will now call the role. >> Chair McCull >> present. >> Vice Chair Simon >> here. >> Mr. Cfield >> here. >> Mr. Church
>> here. >> Miss Harris is excused. Mr. Moore >> present. >> Mr. Beer is excused. Miss Grant is excused. Mr. Griffith >> here. >> Mr. Cruz is also excused and Mr.
Sullivan is here. Um, I have one change to the agenda to announce tonight. The hearing for application number 2956 for address 6 to10 Erie Street applicant BDP610 Erie LLC has been postponed to
April 22nd, 2026 without the need for further public notice. Thank you. All right. Good evening. We'll uh begin with the uh minutes. And uh I did not see any uh corrections to be
made to the minutes. Did anyone else note any corrections to the minutes? No. >> All right. Is there a motion to approve the minutes as presented? >> I'll approve the minutes as presented. Mr. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. All in favor say I. >> I.
>> All opposed. >> Abstensions. I was here last time. I'm saying, right? >> Yes. >> Here. >> I was here. >> Yeah. The only extension is Mr. Moore. >> Thank you. All right, we're going to begin with uh
a new business item and then we'll circle back to old business. So, we're going to begin with uh application 2949 30 Club Road, uh Saturo Ogama,
uh located in the Aro Mountainside zone. Um on designated on the uh township map as block 4702 lot 92. Application uh is for variances of variance for from
Monontlair code section 347-39.D to allow building coverage of 22.31. >> Okay. All right. So, it seems as though we're not quite ready for this application. >> Okay. I thought you had been informed,
but that's okay. That's fine. All right. Okay. That's fine. No problem. All right. I'll forgive you this time. All right. So, instead, we're going to then uh move to
uh application 2932, which is 120 WON Avenue. Uh this is a continuation of the hearing from the March 4th meeting and we'll call on Mr. Tremulac to
uh yeah present. >> Good evening uh Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Alan Tremulac appearing on behalf of the applicants. Um this is a continuation of the site plan and variance application
uh for the gas station at watch plaza 120 watch Avenue with the hearing uh on this commenced 3 weeks ago. Um and we're prepared to uh proceed with additional testimony tonight. I I I
should tell the board up front um what I tend to do tonight is to have Mr. Schwitzer discuss the plan revisions um um that are reflected in the revised plans that were submitted uh I guess about 10 days or so ago. And then
following that I have our professional planner Peter Stack here to testify. At that point, uh, I'm going to ask the board to, uh, continue the hearing to a future date, hopefully your next meeting, for two reasons. Number one,
it's a devariance case, as you know, we need five affirmative votes. You only have six members, and you know, typically in those situations, we would ask uh not to uh proceed to a vote until we have seven members. And in addition
to that, um, we submitted a supplemental report from our traffic engineer addressing some issues, uh, that were discussed at the last meeting. Uh, one being to provide some counts on a weekend day. And there are also some
turning templates. And, um, unfortunately, Elizabeth Dolan, our expert, well, fortunately for her, unfortunately for us, she's on vacation this week. and we tried to get somebody else from her office. Um, and we're
unsuccessful. So, um, for for those two reasons, we're going to have to continue this after we complete, uh, hearing from the two witnesses we have tonight. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. Before you start, um, Zanna, would you raise your right hand? This is for all of the hearings this evening. Do you swear to
tell the truth in the matters pending before the board? >> I do. >> State your name and your, uh, title with Montlair. Uh, Zanab Gazmi, assistant planner, township of Montlair. >> Okay. Mr. Switzer, you were previously sworn in. You understand you're still
under oath. >> Yes, I do. >> All right. Um, Greg, you prepared some plan revisions um subsequent to the last hearing on March 4th. Correct. >> That is correct. >> Okay. Um, and what I'd like you to do
tonight is to review with, you know, with the board the re revisions that you made which were done in response to, you know, comments and recommendations that we heard from the board at the last meeting. >> Sure. >> You could review those changes.
>> Sure. >> Good evening, members of the board. I hope that you can hear me. Uh, is my mic working? Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Good. Um, we took into consideration a great deal of the comments that came back to us from the last meeting and uh, I'd like to walk
you through those that we were able to successfully adopt into our drawings. Um, I guess the best way to start would be to talk about uh, the package that you received and I will go through sheet by sheet uh, since I think that that would probably be the most practical way
of addressing a lot of these issues. Um if we would uh start with sheet A-003 in those drawings uh we prepared a new wooden fence to be added to the area uh enclosing the or surrounding the trash
enclosure at the rear. Uh this would be on the eastern elevation side of the building and adjacent to the uh parking lot that is there. We included uh dimensions into our drawings to address
the uh comments and the engineering drawings or the engineering comments 4.3. Uh so you should see dimensions in our site plan now which address those comments. Um we also included additional survey
points to clarify the existing driveway and the sidewalk slope in our drawings. We uh provided additional heights for the bottom and top of the retaining walls and we also keyed them into the plan so you'll know exactly where those
walls are located. We have placed a uh parapit wall along the rear of the building where the building was raised to match the adjacent parapits with the metal coping to continue. So, uh, previously the back
of the building, uh, if you recall, the parapit wall was not continuous. It only wrapped around three elevations. We've now closed it completely. So, anything that we place onto the roof would be virtually concealed. You would not be able to see uh that or the uh uh
concrete block masonry wall that is being built up to which the brick face would have been applied to. at the front of the building. We placed a new awning uh at the front of the building entrance
and we uh located a bicycle rack uh which is in the southeast corner of the property and it's just off of the sidewalk that brings you into the property uh from Wong Avenue. Turning to sheet A004,
we made adjustments with the trash enclosure. Uh we modified it from having a swinging door to a sliding door. Can you explain that again? >> Sure. On sheet A-004,
we modified the trash enclosure doors. Instead of having swinging doors, we provided sliding doors. And again, we provided a fence along the property line on top of the wall that we have separating our property and the property
just north of ours all the way up to the front corner of the building of where we've placed a uh swing gate and a door which locks uh access toward the uh trash enclosure. The key is to make sure that that area was concerned. I believe
one of you had uh addressed that in one of your comments. So, we've not only done that, but we've also placed additional lighting in that area to supplement that. The owner has, as stated in uh the previous meeting, uh agreed to supplying or providing security cameras around the site uh to
address those security concerns that were addressed on sheet A005, which is the next sheet. Um it's just uh literally showing you graphically that we've added that light fixture onto the north wall.
>> And the purpose of that was to provide um >> additional illumination for security purposes. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> That would be the area that would lead to the trash enclosure. >> That is correct. >> Okay. >> Okay. The next adjustment was made on
sheets A2-01. >> Okay. The uh next uh change was done on sheet A201. And uh again I'm just reiterating the fact that we have shown here where the
bicycle rack is um showing you how the uh trash enclosure in that area. If you see the bubbled area along the floor plan at the northern portion of the building there's a fence there with the swing gate at the top. Again that would be secured and this is the path of which
trash would be taken. Um, in mentioning that, I think it's also important to note that there was a request to place a door on the north elevation to uh perhaps go to the trash enclosure area uh direct from the
building. And we did look at that as an op as an option and found that uh because the northernmost portion of the building had a two-foot elevational change uh the property slopes at such a severe rate that it would have been very
difficult to provide a door without providing uh more hardscape and thus encroaching on our impervious numbers of which uh we have tried not to adjust at all. I think we're pretty close to where we need to be. there's a reduction of
probably four and a half feet or so in uh imperous uh space. So I think we did not want this to creep into uh being classified as a uh minor development project. So that was one of the reasons
why we maintained that. And by the way, we've increased a tremendous amount of uh green space and beautifification around the site. So, we thought it was more important to provide that as opposed to uh providing a door to the rear of the building just to uh provide
an access way for trash toward uh the uh trash containment area. Okay. Um >> yes, this here I can't
I'm I'm just looking following up on that. And I'm looking at actually sheet A uh A801 and I thought there we're shown a >> No, we've removed that. So you're you're probably looking at an older set of drawings because we've definitely
removed that door from our drawings. >> Okay. >> So just so we're clear, the plans that we're looking at have revision date of March 4, 2026. Correct. >> That should be correct. That is what I'm looking at.
See that? No door. >> I'm looking at Carlos's. >> No, that's that's when it was stamped received. Okay. But the title block on the plan says March 4, 2026. >> Okay. Well, it's still
>> I mean I mean >> it's fine if that's Yeah, that's okay. So, uh moving along. Um we uh also on sheet 8202 which is the next sheet
um it's just showing uh graphically the where the new parapit walls were uh placed to uh match the height of the existing parapit walls. >> I'm sorry Mr. Switzer but your your
voice has it has a tendency to drop. This keeps going off. Okay. How's that? >> That's a little bit better. >> Okay. >> So, maybe just repeat that. You were talking about the new parapit wall. >> Yes. Uh sheet A202. It just clarifies graphically where that
parapit wall is that uh I was discussing earlier. We also placed uh new windows uh into the uh area that we have where the stair is that leads up to the second floor.
And then uh that would be one on the north side of the building uh in that little addition area and one on the south side of the building uh providing a window uh to be located in the uh restroom uh that is being placed
upstairs. Okay. On sheet uh 801, A801, you'll see uh a profile and where the awning is located above the uh front door.
You'll also see the swing gate there that leads toward the trash containment area or the area that secures that area from the eastern elevation. Okay. Um with that being said, um that covers the primary um adjustments that
we've made. We've also uh addressed the issue that the engineer had uh spoken about with regard to uh water uh drainage uh onto the uh area in the rear of the property uh abuing the adjacent
neighbors property. And during the uh we've decided to place it into the uh the front portion of the building uh and traversing our property. Uh since he is breaking up a portion of the uh asphalt top there in order to build new curbs
and everything, we decided to run just a straight path down which actually drops that point right in front of the uh the main um point of connection where he wanted us to drop the box on on watch avenues. So uh I think that we are
pretty clear there. What I've done just for purposes of clarification, I've created a little diagram just to show you exactly where that is. Um, and it also shows the uh actual uh impervious
area analysis and um I think that our information should be spot on when it comes to that. We've gone through and reme-measured and it's all documented here in our impervious numbers. um were actually improved and not um made less.
>> Okay. The board hasn't seen that. Has not. Yes. Okay. So, we should mark that and distribute it um with the next exhibit. We are up to exhibit A4. >> Okay. And just describe what we're marking as A4.
>> It is called SK2. It is a supplemental site. It's SK3 and it's called a site plan. And on it is a site plan showing the uh point of connection of the uh or
how the water is being diverted from the roof to the catch basin uh at W Chung Avenue. >> And is there that was prepared by your office? >> It was indeed. >> And is there a date on it? >> The date of this document is March 25th, 2026.
>> Okay. You've got How many copies you have? >> How many do you need? I have Lindsy. Any more? >> Perfect. Mr. Trimulac is passing that over to you now. Charlie. Charlie.
>> And was that prepared in response to the comments from the board engineer? >> It was. >> Okay. Okay. >> So, with that, that would be the end of uh the adjustments and uh testimony that we've prepared for this evening. Thank
>> no further questions. All right. Thank you. >> All right. Mr. Simon, do you have do you have questions? >> Yeah. Good evening. >> Hi. Um starting with this um >> what is this >> the the last previous coverage?
>> Mhm. >> You said this it was improved. The area says 94.7 proposed whereas before it was 6 but the isn't that going in the wrong direction?
>> Pardon? >> The impervious area percentage >> by >> you said it was improved but it seems like it went up. Oh yeah, but it was it was a little it was a little off before. This is definitely an improvement from where it was. >> Oh, the previous proposed. >> That is correct.
>> Do do you remember what that was? Okay. >> I do not. I apologize. >> All right. I thought it was I was comparing to the exist existing. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Uh so it's closer to the existing state versus what was originally proposed. Got it. Um last week last time we had one of the suggestions proposed was a door to
the rear trash en enclosure from the staircase. Um what was the result of that? >> We we looked into that. Um but the north side of the building the elevation of the earth is approximately 18 to 2 feet higher than the other side.
So it doesn't align with the floor level inside of the facility. Oh, >> so you'd be stepping down. >> So you would be Yeah, it would be actually you'll be doing a pretty good climb. You go have to go up at least four or five steps just to get out the door. >> Out the door. >> So it would it made it very difficult if
you had a trash container with wheels on it even to get it up the stairs without hauling it upstairs. So, it's best to go through the front door, along the sidewalk, and through that pathway that we've secured on both ends now to where they can store it into the trash containment area.
>> Okay. Um, and the other minor suggestion was on the roof terms getting access to the mechanicals. >> I believe you said uh they were just going to go out the window. >> Yeah. Or with the use of a ladder. Um, we're talking approximately 15 ft. Um,
and what we're basically placing up there are just condenser units. Um, there isn't anything incredibly uh large or heavy. In fact, most the type system that we're looking at, it's something that one can carry up the stairs. Um, so it's easy to get up there.
>> Okay. So, no changes there. >> Yeah. >> Um, in regard to lighting, I know the owner had testified that they expect business to run about 9:30, 10:00 at the latest, but what happens after hours? Is there going to be any kind of any
lighting? Cuz the area seems to be uh pretty dark, especially in that trashy enclosed area. I don't know what the lighting situation is on the adjacent lot that might illuminate it, but any plans to keep any kind of lighting at >> That's a great question. Yeah, along the
perimeter of the building, there's always some lighting that is attached to the face of the building and it's illuminating the pathway around the building. And we've also based on uh these comments from our last testimony included additional lighting in that
alleyway or that space between our property and the hardware store that's adjacent to us. So that area would be uh illuminated as well and >> all night >> pretty much. Yeah. This is again um this is controlled focus lighting. Um it
meets the town requirements between the two foot candles. No greater than five. It's it's it's it's all there. It's all compliant >> and it doesn't spill across onto the property. >> No, I'm more concerned of of when it cuts off because it'll be very dark back there. >> Oh, okay. Yeah, we can certainly have
controls on it to make sure that it goes off, you know, maybe uh light sensor, daylight sensor. >> No, I'm trying to keep them on. That's what I'm saying. I don't want >> That's what I'm saying. keeping it on and then triggers off and turns on when it
>> No, I'm talking about like maybe like at 2 in the morning there's a there's a dark spot in that alley. That's what I'm concerned about. So, actually leaving some kind of dim lighting >> uh through the night. >> Yeah. Um >> that might be a question for the owner,
maybe not you, but just in terms of the time. >> Well, we we do know that we're placing illumination back there and that will be on throughout the night. >> So, there is >> there is Yeah. Okay. >> There is lighting back there that is being provided that will be on throughout the night, but it would turn
off during the day. >> Got it. Got it. >> That's what I was suggesting earlier. Yeah. >> All right. Uh thank you. And uh the the bike rack, how how many bikes is it expected to hold? >> We're suspecting somewhere maybe two or three.
>> Just two or three >> at a time. Yeah. I mean, you know, I'm sure that that could be revisited uh if there is a greater load or demand for bike uh parking, but >> is there space for larger one? >> Um
it would take some adjusting. Um I don't know. Um we just put what we thought was appropriate with the space that was there at present. Okay. Um that's all I have. Mhm.
Mr. Church. >> Yeah. I have no questions. Mr. Cfield um in the back of the building where the trash enclosure is, you're putting a tree back there.
>> Uh yes. Um we are putting a uh more like incremental sort of tree. It's not like a very large uh tree. Uh we tried to present landscaping that would provide some seasonal interest and um not make it
just a brick building there without anything to tie it into you know the the surroundings or the whole idea is to make the whole site beautiful. So we took every opportunity that we could to incorporate uh plantings and uh in this
case a uh smaller ornamental type tree to create you know some some interest uh just visual interest. Someone had made a comment that that elevation is highly visible from Wong Avenue and uh the last
thing they wanted to see was just a brick wall. So for us, this is a good way of creating just subtle uh environmentally uh prudent um adjustments or enhancements that could do both. Make it a little bit more interesting and um not
necessarily be something that would be uh you know an eyesore >> to the trash enclosure comes and there's a there's a fence that is from the trash enclosure to the building. Yeah, the trash enclosure that the enclosure that
separates the trash area uh from the building is from the face of the trash area to the building which is approximately maybe a three or 4 foot wide. Uh >> is that a gate there to get in? >> There is no gate. It's inoperable. >> Okay. >> The only way to get there is through the
front of the building. >> Gotcha. I mean obviously um I don't know if that's >> um I don't know. It's like you can't get in there. you plant a tree and you know it's if you wanted to go and do any type of work that you have to go on the neighbor's property to get that. I don't know if that's necessarily you know um
we could maybe save money in other directions. Uh can you tell me about the the where the bike rack is? Is it on the property or is it on the side? Okay, >> it is on the property and it is on the Wong side of the >> Oh, okay. Yeah, near the uh
planting/garden area near the um accessible parking space that's there. >> Okay. And uh if with the bikes parked there, you can still use the walkway and have no problem through that. And then the >> car's like a little bend or an L there. The uh and it's and it's right there.
>> Gotcha. >> Mhm. >> Um uh this has been a gas station for I don't know since the 30s. Um I imagine. Right. What I understand it's almost 100 years. >> 100 years. It's been here a long time. 31.
>> I mean, if you go through Watch on Plaza, I mean, there's a lot of monitoring wells. I imagine in reality it all came from the site somehow. >> Um, we're digging uh for this uh storm water retention tank. Is is that what we're digging? >> No, we're not. No,
>> we're just diverting water from the roof underground on our side and then have a covert that goes right into the uh the uh the going into the covert there. >> Okay. So, that's just all above ground. Yeah. >> Okay.
>> Um >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Yeah. You're welcome. Thank you, >> Mr. Moore. So, just to add to that regard regarding the drainage, >> so will will there be additional
drainage throughout the parking lot, um the driveway area? >> Um yeah, I mean, we're not changing any of that at all. Um everything that is there today will remain. Um we're not
resurfacing the driveway area. We're not adding anything to perhaps contain or collect water or create uh water diversions in a way that's different than what's historically been on the site.
>> Is there existing drainage? >> Um >> so I'm looking at the topography and I'm thinking about the winter. >> Yeah. >> And when it snows. >> Yeah. >> And lately we've been getting hit with a lot >> uh >> more snow than usual. Mhm.
>> If this converts into a convenience store, the Wong Plaza area, it's very heavily walked, >> right? A lot of kids. So, I'm thinking about slipping. So, um just taking into account
>> appropriate drainage to respond to that foot traffic. >> Mhm. Well, um that's a great question and um we considered that in our design to the point to where we created a sidewalk which does not exist currently on the site and the sidewalk connects
park to the site along the property line uh bordering the hardware store. Then it turns it comes across the face of the store. Then it wraps along the side of the store and then it has an outlet that is separate from the vehicular traffic coming in and off of the site that puts
you right off at Wong. So we're we've planned for pedestrian um traffic onto the site by providing physical hard walking sidewalk surfaces for them. So um and those surfaces are also
illuminated uh in the evening. So for a security point of view, um it should be safe to traverse. Those are uh elevated approximately 4 in. So it has a curb. Um so it would literally elevate a pedestrian away from the lower
depression which may have slippery surfaces for example in mal weather. though. Um I'm do not believe that um what we've designed is um a situation that would create harm to any pedestrians entering upon and leaving
the site. >> Uh no we haven't. But they're pretty common. These aren't um commercial grade um you know 10 ton, 15 ton, 20 ton units. We're talking about uh things that are considered like heat pumps or
very small uh HVAC units. People attach them to their houses all the time. They're slim in profile. Um and they're not that loud at all. In fact, uh very quiet operation. I can't uh tell you off
the top of my head what the uh the ratings would be, STC ratings would be for them, but we could certainly provide that to you if that's something you request. >> Okay, >> okay, >> Mr. Griffith.
Um, so I wanted to say thank you for the improvements that you've made to the plans. In particular, as you know, I like the windows. Two out of three ain't bad. >> And uh, in particular, the parapit edition is a significant improvement.
And, uh, uh, I think a good move for the neighborhood. And, uh, thank you. Um, I don't know why you're reluctant to put a door on the from the upstairs placed to provide access to the roof so you
could clean the drains and access the equipment and that you prefer to use a ladder or climb through a window. I baffled by that, but it doesn't have anything to do with our review, I don't think. Um I'm there are two things that I'll go to
the easier one. On the back of the site because of the site has this odd angle and where the building is located there are these slivers of space there and do you have some sort of uh plan to put
in a and maybe it's on the drawings I apologize. a plan to put in a very robust uh ground cover or >> Yes. >> I mean, because if it doesn't if it doesn't have something that's
hardy native, um it'll just go to dirt and collect trash and not be nice. Uh is there a plan for that? >> There there there is planting along that whole back area. Yeah. Um, all of it is
native planting and um, we I can probably tell you in just a moment if I can get to my landscape plan uh, and give you some clear indication of what the plants are, but I do know that that was a consideration and not choice. >> If you tell me it's a ground cover, I'm satisfied.
>> It's a ground cover. >> Okay, fine. I don't need to know what >> Yeah, we're not putting in shrubs or uh uh perennials or annuals or anything like that. >> Okay, good. Thank you. Um, my biggest issue at this point gets down to the accessory structure that's built
basically on the property line now. And by, you know, it's supposed to be 20 ft away from the back. Uh, and I I have very mixed feelings about this. Um,
I don't want to set a bad precedent cuz it looks okay here, but if I say okay here, then what about the next time I see it in a different situation in a different circumstance? So, I'm going to ask some questions
relative to this that may help make it more amenable. Um, I worry about odor, which would come from organics, food. I worry about rodents.
What can you do to eliminate those worries? >> Okay. Um, well, I think the first thing is, um, the obvious. uh we have to make sure that the property owner has a uh
plan in place to manage um that in you know just in case that should occur to start. But most of the uh material that is placed into the uh refuse area would be dry goods um things like paper and
cardboard boxes and things of that nature. The bulk of these stores typically have uh food products, but they're typically candies and candy wrappers. Yeah. Uh chips in sealed cans. Um bottled drinks that are in
refrigerated. Uh he may put hot dogs or something out there. Um that's probably the sort of uh trash or rubbish you're talking about, but um the quantity is so small. Um I I don't foresee it being
like large bags of garbage of that sort stored in the area. Also um if required um we can make sure that the uh pickup schedule is frequented to frequently enough to where um it satisfy that to
where there's never anything sitting around more than a day or so in that area. um with with the pest that you're talking about. I think having food sources just sitting around is when they really discover and learn and they keep revisiting. But if it's something that's
moved frequently, um it pulls away that ability to um >> double-edged sword, >> pardon, >> it's a double-edged sword more frequent, right? Exactly. Just increasing traffic, which is the other problem. >> Yeah.
um is I mean there there will be some organics that will go into the trash no matter how hard you try. Somebody will buy a sandwich and eat half of it and throw the other half in the trash. >> Um do you is uh do you traditionally sort uh recyclables?
Is that part of the thing or is it picked up by the trash company and sorted on a remote site? I wish I could answer that particular question and unfortunately Alan I think that that's one that the owner would have to um answer. >> Um
>> is it okay if we call upon him to ask that question answer that question now or is it something you'd like to ask him later? >> I' I'd like to know if that's possible. >> So this is Janelle Singh who testified. You're still under oath. Yes. >> Okay. Can you come to the podium?
>> Yeah, you can go over there. >> Mr. Singh, just just give us your name and address again, please. >> Yes, my name is Jarnell Singh. J R N A I L. Last name Singh, S I N G H. And my address, home address is 5100 Northern Boulevard, Glenn, New York. Uh, my
property address is 120 Watching Avenue, Monontlair. >> Okay. Mr. Singh, you were sworn in at the last meeting. You understand you're still under oath? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. So, Mr. Mr. Griffin had a question regarding do you separate tra you know in the other locations they have
convenience stores you separate trash from recyclables? >> Yes we do that >> is our myself we do that >> and you plan to do that here as well. >> Yes we not a plant we can separate like a you have a tie up rope when they come to pick up separate the cardboard is
separate the garbage separate our guy do that >> so he sorts it. >> Yes. I'm sorry. I didn't I couldn't >> I I sourced that one to put a separate tie up with the cardboard separate and it got to be separate
>> and but general trash is all in a bag. So my halfeaten sandwich and the wrapper that came with it and >> actually is not that much. It's not not really candy store is not that much. Whatever we do we do proper way with it. Do do you separate glass and aluminum
from cardboard or >> aluminum never comes like usually come as cardboard is most >> Okay. All right. Mr. Griffin also uh just be aware that we're not placing plastic bags into this room. Uh most of the garbage would be in these
>> containers, >> little containers with wheels to where it's easy for them to transport it from that room >> to the uh curb where it could be uh collected by the uh >> garbage collection company. And these these uh containers have tops on them as
well. So it's contained within the the containment room. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> You're good. Don't go too far >> unless anybody has any questions with regard to Mr. Singh's testimony.
>> One other thing to um respond to that is that the doors in the front are louvered so there's some air flow in circulation in the area. It would be detrimental not to have that and have a very hot day and there happens to be some of this bio um
or organic uh waste there. it would just decay and that's when it really smells awful. So there is some ventilation inside the uh the spaces where to keep a constant air flow um which we think is important. >> I'll just note for the record that Mr.
Cruz has arrived. >> Okay. Thank you. Um >> uh just a couple of questions for you. So, um, thank you again, uh, as Mr. uh, Griffith has, uh, indicated, appreciation for, uh, the revisions, uh,
and for your providing the board with, uh, an updated, uh, display of all of the changes, um, that, uh, you have brought, uh, to our attention tonight. Uh, I just wanted to make sure that um
the the uh pedestrian uh walkway that um uh lines the the the property. Um I know we had some conversation about whether or not uh there was any anything that really sort of differentiated that from the from the tarmac where cars would be
parked. It sounded from your presentation that there is some differentiation. So >> yes, there is. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. Uh the other thing I other another question was uh the gate that leads to the area where the trash enclosure uh is um is that
gate locked? >> We certainly can make it locked. >> I'd like it to be locked. Um and so um obviously after hours I think is probably so whenever the facility is closing down for the night that that gate should be locked
>> so we can have assurance that no one uh will be in that area. All right. Um uh now I just want to uh ask um and maybe uh this may be a question to you Mr. Switzer also could
be to Mr. Trombulac just looking at the um engineers report um uh uh there were uh in the area of site comments as well as grading drainage and utility comments um there were a number of items that um
the engineer had identified as still um uh uh requiring attention. Um are are all of these satisfied uh already to your understanding or are some of them remaining? >> I think there's a few remaining comments
in the latest report, you know, which we only got midday today. So, >> okay. >> Um and I think we can address the um additional comments that he makes in here. And there's also some um issues or questions he had regarding turning
templates, which again is the reason why I have to bring the traffic >> sure expert back. >> But the other comments, you know, regarding um the site comments, um >> we've we've covered all of those things. We have we've we've covered most all of these things, >> including what's in the report that we received today.
>> Yes. For example, uh >> nobody's got comments. >> This is site. Okay. drainage and grading site utilities. We've covered all of these. >> What about his two comments at the top
of page three, which I had actually marked um >> uh 4.1 regarding the architectural plans not updated to reflect the impervious sidewalk areas. It is >> Oh, so that was what your exhibit >> of course. Yes.
>> Okay. Addressed is tech comment 4.8. Um, and what about the comment above that um about uh asphalt walkway detail? >> Yeah, there is no asphalt walkway. >> Oh, >> so I believe there's a misunderstanding there. We have concrete walkways.
>> Okay. All right. And then 5.2 I think talks about the discharge points for the uh roof leaders. >> We've diverted them toward the front of the property as opposed to the rear of the property. >> Did you speak that into the microphone? We diverted them toward the front of the property as opposed to the rear of the property.
>> So, they're going to be connected to the catch basin located uh in front of the watching Avenue driveway as per his >> correct >> comment. Okay. >> It's on this exhibit, right? >> It's on that. Yeah. Yeah. >> Right. So, I think we have addressed everything, Mr. Chairman, and I can
represent that. If we haven't, we will. It's a condition of approval. And what what about uh I was going to save the traffic obviously for Miss Dolan is with us but in in terms of the landscaping and lighting comments >> similarly those have been addressed as well.
>> Yes. >> Yes. Go ahead. Um, I noticed that you have a fence on the roof uh to >> I'm sorry, I'm having >> I noticed you had a fence on the roof to maybe it's a louver to block the view of the rooftop equipment.
>> Uh, yeah, just in case, you know, it's it's something that the town has always been asking us to do whenever we put mechanical equipment on a roof to provide a fence. So, if one is required, we have it covered. >> Understood. Is the equipment that tall? >> It is not.
>> It isn't. Right. It isn't. It's a compressor. It's like 3 ft high. It's hidden by the parapit >> pretty much. Yes. >> You don't need the fence. >> You don't need it, but we've been asked to place them on. So, we >> Well, normally only when it's visible from the street here.
>> Well, it was originally, >> so it isn't now, I guess. >> I tell them how high the equipment is and say the parapit does it, but not put a fence up there if you don't need it. Uh, but I >> removed the fence from our drawing. It's no problem. >> I I appreciate why you did it. I
appreciate the thought. >> All right. Um, I don't have any additional questions. Um, so um, are there members of the public that would have questions or comments that they would like to >> just questions at this point?
>> Okay. I think we can do both so we can move it along. you. >> We'll try. Let's give it a try. Okay. Please. >> Yeah. I mean, we still have additional witnesses and what we typically do is we limit it to questions of each individual
witness and then when the case is concluded, we'll then give the public an opportunity to make comments. >> All right. Okay. >> Okay. We we sometimes open it up for questions and comments when there's been >> like one witness or you know we we do we finish it in the single night but okay
since there's going to be carryover the public comments I would recommend that you hold them. All right. So, questions, not comments. You have questions, >> please. You're welcome. >> State your name and address, please. >> Claire Silata, 279 Park Street,
Montlair, New Jersey. My first question is um regarding the lights at night and what is going to happen? What uh are they going to be dimmed at night? Are they the neon lights going to be on all
night? How is that going to work for the apartment across the street and people walking in the neighborhood? How do you maintain safety but not have super bright lights on? Um the lighting that we're providing is
for pedestrian way walkways and everything. I'm assuming you're speaking of >> the existing lighting that's on the canopy. >> Yes. >> Um I think it would probably be best if Mr. Singh answers um the question because I don't know his hours of uh
operation with respect to those particular lights. He could probably best answer that. >> Okay. Um, and shall I ask the second question just in case he might have the answer to that one, too? >> Um, my the second question is, how wide
is that sidewalk going around? Because, um, it needs to be pretty wide to accommodate baby carriages, bicycles, extra children. Um, and I I just in looking at the design, I couldn't tell
the width of it. And it would seem to me that would be an important safety feature to make sure it's wide enough to accommodate a family walking, not just one or two people. >> Well, it's not a pedestrian walkway as in an access way around the property
like this. The sidewalks you find >> on park and watch. >> No, I understand that. But >> okay, it the sidewalks are measured at approximately three and a half feet wide, >> which a yard a yard wide >> roughly. Yes. Okay. >> Okay. Well, mas.
>> Yeah. >> Um, and I just question whether that is going to work. Uh, because when you I live on Park Street, when I walk up and down, there are usually groups of people, families walking. And I'm just
curious about that with baby carriages and a child next to you, whether 3 feet, 3 and 1/2 ft is wide enough. And I'm not sure that you can do anything about that, but it would seem to me that you'd have if if there is a division or a
height difference, then that creates its own problem if it's not wide enough. So, I wanted to ask about that and um I I don't know how whether this is the right question to ask right now, but um
I think I'll save it for the driving part of it, the in-n-out part, because that's another question. >> The traffic expert. >> Yes. >> Okay. That's they're coming back next meeting. >> Okay. And but could we uh know what the hours of operation are? Yeah, the
applicant indicated at the last meeting that the hours of operation were going to be uh >> of each unit of the store and of the gas station. >> They said 6:00 to 9:30 for the gasoline pumps and 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. for the convenience store and that's 7 days
a week. >> Um so, um well, I'll save my comments, but I really think 10 o'clock is a little bit too late. Thank you. Uh before you before you come up, uh Mr. Singh, did you want to respond to the
question? >> Did you did you hear the question regarding the night lighting? Yeah. Can you address that? >> In the night light going to be dimable light, very dimmable light. Uh after after hours is going to be dimmer light. We're going to go very slow night and
very comfortable light. We I install it two three places. I can give you specification of that light. >> They call dimable light. Dim. You could do the dimmer after after patient hour. You could dim the light. >> I would they be different than they are
now. >> Huh? >> Would they be different than they are now? >> Yes. It's going to be more dim. It's going to be more dimmer. >> Yes. Okay. Is that is that the standard that you have of with your other >> facilities? Yes.
>> Thank you. >> May I? >> Yes. >> Um, so looking at the light fixtures themselves in the illustrations, they appear to be uh the type of light that restricts the view of the light source
from off the site, which is very appropriate. And I think what uh uh residents are interested in that they don't you don't want to they don't want light from your facility in their yard or you know on their house
>> and I think you have those light fixtures. Is that not correct? >> That is correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Can't agree. Are there other members of the I'm sorry. Mr. Moore had a further question. >> Yes. Um Mr. Singh, can you return please?
Stay. >> Okay. >> Sit up here. >> Thank you. If if there's activity at night while the lights are dim, >> talk a little loudly. >> Is there a motion detector in the lights? >> Yes. >> So, if there's more activity during the evening,
>> when it's currently just dim, it will light up more so that >> some residents and folks can see that >> some will try to come and rob the light. It's going to go more light. >> Okay. >> Go and face all the camera with the with the light also. Mhm. Okay. All right.
Yeah. >> Vision light. Yes. >> All right. Now, I'm sure you know, but it's, you know, it's a very uh busy area. Um, Wang Plaza. >> Yes. >> So, it's very walkable. >> Yes. >> A lot of families, kids, getting pizza.
Now, they'll be coming to get candy. So, yeah. All right. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. Are there other members of the public that would like to ask questions? >> Yes. You're welcome. >> Hello. How are you this evening? My name
is >> State your name and address, please. >> Donna Picket, 255 Park Street. Um, have a couple questions. >> Um, I didn't see you want to pull up that your design. Where's the air pump in the the vacuum going to be? Um
>> the air pump in the vacuum is currently at the corner at the intersection of Wong and Park and it is being relocated to be adjacent to one of the uh parking
spaces on the opposite side adjacent to uh >> here. Let me make this easy for you right away. >> A lot of people stop there for air. >> Right there. >> Where is that? Um, >> this hardware store is here. >> Oh, okay. >> The hardware store building is here.
>> So, it's going to be close to the hardware store >> right there. >> So, cars will be going down Park Street >> right next to the hardware cars will be going down Park Street right next to the hardware store getting >> they'll be parking onto the property
>> if they can get in >> and uh they will actuate the equipment or the only way that they can get to that equipment is being on the property. It's not at the intersection or on the pedestrian walkway. >> Okay. >> Nor is it near such.
>> Okay. That might be an issue. But um Okay. So I have a question about according to our um the master plan. Um >> okay. This is this is not the planner, >> right? >> Maybe the question would be more appropriately addressed to the planner
who's testifying next. >> Yeah. But can I ask you a question then? Um, so does an architect and the engineer when they're designing and making their doing their plans, don't they ever take >> I think consistency with the master plan
is more appropriate to the planner who's testifying next. >> Okay. Sure. Um, did let me ask you this question. Did you have a conversation with the traffic expert when you were doing your design of the building and
taking into consideration since it's going to be more in andout cars? Um did you talk to her about the walkability and safety of the pedestrians like we had mentioned? um that's a heavily um as you know
condensed area for people walking to school and the train and I just was wondering when you were doing your design for the sidewalks, the bike rack, um the air pump, the vacuum, did you have that conversation with the traffic
expert? Miss Picket, you must know that as an architect, it is our responsibility in our fiduciary to our customers and the communities that we live in to consult with professionals to provide professional service and opinions to the things that they design
are perturuant to our projects. In this case, we engaged a traffic consultant as part of our team. That traffic consultant consult us throughout this entire process and we provide them information. They provide us information and the design is derived based on their
best professional opinion and practice. >> Okay. >> So to answer your question, yes, we did. >> Okay. Because when she testified, she only did AM and PM and she didn't do weekends. Um, so I guess >> I believe that those are two very different issues. Timing of what her she did her studies on and the fact that she
consulted with us on the project. I believe your question to me was whether or not if we consulted with the traffic expert and we did. Yes, that was my question. But it all goes hand in hand. Uh and she didn't do weekends. She just did AM and PM.
>> Again, I think in in our in our next hearing, uh we'll be uh in a position to have more discussion about the traffic study. >> Okay. Um I think I have another question here. Uh, I talked about this
um air pump. Um, oh, here it is. So, where is that sign? Um, that's right turn only coming out of the gas station on Wong Plaza. Is that the uh on the
county property or is that on the 120 property? It's on both. The county has its own sign, but what we've done is we've marked our site on the ground. Oops.
Right here in big white writing and painting on the asphalt. So, you cannot make a mistake in understanding the direction of traffic. The same happens over here. Tells you to stop before you approach the sidewalk. So, there is a concern with pedestrian safety in this
direction and in this direction. So yours is yours is painted on the on the ground. >> It's painted and there's also a sign that is here. >> That's the counties. >> That's like I said there's two signs. There's also a sign there. >> Okay. So now there we have two signs
that say is it right turn only that they have to do coming out of there. >> Okay. Um let's see. Let me just check if I have one more question. Um might be for the planner. Oh, I did. But Mr. You're saying I wrote
down, can we check our minutes? I heard that he was going to have the convenience store open until 9:00 at the latest 9:30 when it was busy and now I heard 10:00. Can we go back and look at the minutes from the last meeting? I wrote down 9:00 latest um 9:30
and now I heard 10:00. So I want to look at the minutes. >> All right. Thank you. We'll we'll get clarification on that. >> All right. All right. Thank you. >> That's it. Is there anyone else? Any other members of the public? Yes, please. Jay Turner, 274 Park Street.
I can't believe it's Mr. Trimmilac and Mr. Schwitzer again. You guys are involved in all the projects on our street. Um going to be persona nangrada when this is done. There's only two. >> Um, question. When I was looking at your
drawing, it looked like the um I don't know what you call it, but the gas pumps in front with the uh roof over it, it looked like that was going to stay the existing one from the structure that's there now. Is that correct or is that going to get knocked down? >> We're not altering anything except the
building of which the surface bays are located currently. >> So, the old beat up bay in front is going to stay. the you're if let's make sure we're talking about the same >> where the gas attendant would where the gas attendant would stay. >> This right here. >> Yes.
>> We're not touching that. >> So that's going to stay. >> It is staying. >> Okay. That's disappointing. And then I have a question. You were talking about the time before it at the end of the day whatever said in here if that time alters later that I mean there's nothing that would prevent the owner from
deciding later to stay open past 9:30, is there? >> No. That's that's not accurate. Okay. If the applicant stipulates, as I think they did the last time, and we'll get clarification from Mr. Tremulac, but my recollection is the applicant stimulated stipulated to those hours of operation.
So, if that's the case, there would be a condition in the event this application's approved and they would have to comply with that. Okay. >> But what we're going to we're going to clarify that once and for all if we can, M. >> All right, that's it. Thank you. But
that you rais a good point though is that the hours you and the other member of the public >> I just my recollection just to deal with that and I just confirm with my client that in the weekdays 9 9:30 at the latest and if weekends if
it's busy he would stay open till till 10. >> That's the that's the convenience store. >> The convenience store. >> So So Monday through Friday it's going to close at 9:30. Well, let's ask the witness what he intends. First of all, >> why don't you come up Janelle and
clarify the hours. >> So, let's start with the convenience store. Mr. Singh, >> Monday to Thursday, we going to uh close like a 9 to 9:30 and the Friday, Saturday or Sunday, not Sunday, Friday or Saturday might we going to go 10
might is not sure and it depend on traffic. Sometimes the people >> What about Sunday? >> Yes sir. >> What about Sunday? >> Sunday is I Sunday is very quiet after >> what what time will you close? >> 9:00 Sunday. >> Okay. So So what I'm hearing is the
convenience store is going to be open 6:00 a.m. to no later than 9:30 p.m. Monday through Thursday. No later than 10 p.m. on Friday and Saturday and no later than nine on Sunday. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. And the just so we're clear the gasolation gasoline station uh hours of
operation are 6 am to 9:30 p.m. Seven days a week. >> 7 days a week but same as depend with the store. >> I I need a no later then. >> No no no later than 9:30. >> Okay. Thank you. Good. Thank you. All right.
>> Yes sir. Do you have to state my name again? >> Yes. >> Jay Turner, 274 Park Street. So, what I just heard was the gas station will be closing at 9:30. Okay. It's currently open till 10:00. So, you're going to be closing at 30 minutes earlier than it is
right now? >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. >> Yes, please. One more question, >> please. >> Claire Silata, 279 Park Street. What concerns me is when somebody says between 9 9 and 9:30, >> that's a no later than 9:30. That's how
the condition >> no later than 9:30. If that is not held to who is responsible and what happens if those times are not as the question. >> Yeah. So that would be um you can either
report that to court enforcement or let the planning department know that the conditions of the resolution are not being upheld and we will uh enforce a violations process with the code enforcement. >> Thank you. >> All right. Are there any other questions
from the public? If not, Mr. Trevol, we'll move on to your next witness, please. >> Okay. Next witness is Peter Stack. >> Mr. Ste, would you raise your right hand? Do you swear to tell the truth in the matter pending before the board? >> Yes. >> State your name and your business
address, please. Uh Peter Steck K uh ad Maplewood Avenue, Maplewood, New Jersey. Okay, >> chairman. Uh Mr. Ste has appeared before this board uh numerous occasions. However, I think for the benefit of some of the newer members, uh Peter, why
don't you just provide a summary of your qualifications and your experience as a professional planner? Uh by way of education, I have a uh bachelor's degree in civil engineering and a master's in city and
regional planning. Uh I was licensed in New Jersey in 1976 and that license is still in effect. Um I at one time was the planning director for the township of Montlair some 20 years ago. Um, I
served with uh two consulting firms in New Jersey and for the last 20 some odd years I've been self-employed as a community planning consultant uh representing neighborhood groups uh developers and and occasionally
municipalities. >> Okay. And testifying before planning boards and zoning boards throughout the state of New Jersey. appeared in I think about 230 municipalities as well as in superior court in tax court and been accepted as an expert planning witness
in those jurisdictions >> and your license is in good standing. >> It is. >> Okay. Offer him as an expert. >> All right. Welcome, Mrs. Deck. We look forward to your presentation. >> Okay. Uh Peter, uh why don't you be begin by you know discussing the uh the
property that's the subject of this application and then >> I have uh because I'm old school uh hard copies of my exhibit >> and I have a few for the um audience.
>> Okay. So we're going to mark this as A5 and what how would you describe this Mr. Ste? uh >> planning exhibit. >> Uh sure. >> Five pages I think I have right.
>> Yes. So, I'll just uh briefly uh describe it and then I'll potentially refer to it when I testify. So, the this uh was prepared by me. It's dated December 16th of last year. It consists of five pages.
And did we give it a number? >> Yes, A5. >> Thank you. Uh so the first page is zoning map is on the left hand side and you see we're uh we're in the NC zone but outside of the historic district. Uh you see a more
regional look on the right hand side from u uh Google maps. Second page are photographs taken by me on December 13th of last year. uh and they depict uh the
existing conditions at that time. Uh since the canopy was new uh that that bunting has been uh removed. Uh the next page, third page is a aerial photograph that I took also on uh December 13th and
I believe it accurately depicts the existing conditions there and that's a a view from about 400 ft up. Uh the next page are additional photographs taken by me um uh on the 13th and uh show some of
the surrounding area. I note that uh on the upper photograph you get a sense of the ar range of architecture uh and there is a bike rack uh right across uh the intersection on Wong there at the corner but that's that's in the
public right ofway and then the uh end page is I simply kind of colorcoded the uh the site plan that's being proposed. So, uh, back to the beginning, uh, in preparation, I reviewed the application
materials. Uh, I had the pleasure of, u 4-hour hearing on March, uh, 4th. Um, so I'm aware of the prior testimony and the comments of the board. Uh, and I'm going to repeat some of the
obvious things. This is a uh, a service station. Technically, uh the definition that we comply with, uh in your zoning ordinance is a motor vehicle service station because we both uh do fuel um as
well as repairs and there are three repair bays. Um this was first approved um by a variance in 1931 and then there were seven instances since that that the applicant was
altering or expanding it and had to go to the board of adjustment and they were approved seven times um in it the course of its history. uh it's not that the in the early days the board of adjustment was not rogue in the
sense that they only had the power uh in the 50s like to recommend to the governing body. So in those early days the the governing body had to endorse the recommendation that the the board of adjustment uh granted. These days you
have the final say on it. Um this has been uh a part of the community for a long time. we have a new owner, a family that u wants to upgrade uh the facility having uh purchased it not too
long ago. Um and you know the simplest way to uh describe the application is the applicant wants to remove uh one of the non-conforming components meaning the repair bays uh and replace it with a
use that is a permitted use. Um there right now the uh required amount of parking is 14 spaces according to the code because it's so many spaces per
repair bay and uh and per two for the uh for the four I guess fueling locations. So, uh, technically, uh, I think the parking requirement is going down from
14 to 13 spaces. Um, but we, that's one of the items of relief that we need. Uh a as the board is well aware uh there are a lot of uh improvements to this application in terms of the aesthetics
um in terms of uh pedestrian traffic um and uh the operation in terms of where the refuge is going to be located. Uh this is in um the watching plaza area
which is described in the master plan as a smallcale dense village. Um the master plan recognizes that there were a variety of styles and in fact on this side of Wung Avenue it's it it
recognized that there's a different pattern here. You have open parking lots. you have buildings that are not necessarily historic in design. Um there is obviously the focus on the uh Wong train station. So everyone recognizes
that that this is a very successful little downtown village. There's a lot of action here. Um I looked at the um uh master plan March uh 2023
I believe uh there were a number of amendments but townshipwide uh the goals were to support economic viability uh maintain the scale and character um in the diverse areas of the town. Uh
in terms of objectives, it wanted to provide convenient access for all residents for essential dayto-day goods and services. Uh it wanted to encourage a wider mix of commercial uses through both zoning and
redevelopment. It wanted to strengthen a neighborhood commercial center, and that's what uh I think we're doing here. Um and it wanted to encourage multiple stops. It used the phrase uh it wanted
to facilitate travel once uh shop thrice behavior. So stop and do se you know drive your car, park and do several things at a time. And indeed that's kind of part partly what this uh proposal is.
Uh in the master plan this was recommended to be in a C4 uh village area that was eventually translated into the neighborhood commercial. uh district. Um it characterized the area as having uh you know buildings
right up at the front uh property line. Um it noted that most of the parking um is behind the buildings and again that's pretty much characteristic of the other side of Wung Avenue rather than the side that that we are on. Um it did talk
about the gas station. and it said that, you know, this doesn't fit that pattern that's there. Um, and it's obvious that uh the nature of a gas station is you have the parking and the car activity in the front rather than in the back. If
this were just a retail use um like the other retail uses or restaurants, uh many cases there's no parking on site uh or the you know the parking is not in the front. Um in terms of the uh
proposals uh it said that they would accommodate uh up buildings up to three stories first floor commercial two residential above it. Uh fairly healthy density uh
28 residential units per acre. Um it's said that um uh that the uses that are prohibited now should could be continued to be prohibited. So we're we're a a
prohibited uh use. Um there was a lot of discussion about parking and it recognized that requiring suburban parking standards where everyone parks on their own site uh is not appropriate
for this area. It says it's hindering if you required anyone to come in to provide the code amount of parking on the property, you wouldn't have this business district because it'd be so spread out. Uh you couldn't walk from one building to the other. So it suggested that on smaller lots to
eliminate the need to provide on-site parking. So that was a a master plan recommendation to not make this like a suburban area where each lot has the full amount of parking. it recognized that there are public parking lots and
parking on the street. Uh so the items of um relief that we need this this zone does allow mixeduse buildings. It allows retail stores. Uh it does not allow uh automobile service stations. They're
specifically referenced as a a prohibited use. Um and uh if if this were a vacant lot and the applicant would come in um with a conforming use, uh the new building
would have to be 20 ft back, uh but it could be three stories tall and and what I want to emphasize about this is right now, uh while this is a very active use, uh it's open. You know, when you're at the intersection, you can see a lot of
areas because the canopy obviously is is is is raised high and the building is in back. Uh you know, if someone came in uh with a building just 20 ft back from the property line, uh that would block a lot
of the open sense of this intersection. And as the board is aware, um it this is a new light fixture. Uh it's only been around whatever six months. So I think people are still adjusting to it. Um and it's recognized that the this is not a
traditional just cross roads area. It's a complicated intersection. Uh as I mentioned that the uh if you read just the parking standards today um um I you either need 13 or 14 spaces.
Um, I guess Oh, you need not uh let's see. You would need uh 12 spaces for the three bays and you would need one space I I'll correct myself for the two pumps.
So, right now the parking requirement is 13 spaces for the current use. For the proposed use, it happens to be the same. although we obviously don't have that full amount of parking. Uh, one subtlety
uh is that while this is generically referred to as a non-conforming use, it's not the classic non-conforming use that was here before there was a zoning ordinance or that they changed it. Uh this is a use that doesn't conform, but
it it it's there because of a variance that was granted back in 1931 and seven instances after that the board of adjustment either approved or um recommended approval uh to at that time
I guess it would be the town uh commissioners who because we changed a form of government uh the parent variance that we need and why before you is the Dvariance. We're talking about a use uh we're modifying a
use that uh is not permitted. Uh I'm going to argue uh that we meet the standards for the D1 variance. That's the so-called Medici case where we have to show that there's some public purposes advanced uh where there has to
be particular suitability uh and we have to meet the negative criteria under the enhanced burden of proof. This is not the classic Medici case. This is not a site that is either vacant
that we're introducing a prohibited use or that we're tearing down a permitted use and putting in a prohibited use. There's already an impact from the fact that this is a gas station. So, it's it's not the classic
Medici case, but I'm going to uh hopefully uh provide an argument that we would meet that high medi medi standard. So, service stations are not permitted anywhere in the municipality.
And I don't think you should necessarily uh uh conclude that that means that it would be great for the public to remove all gas stations from Montlair. Uh the answer is it it was it is not a permitted use. You
can do auto repair in the C2 zone uh along whatever Walnut Street, but there there are gas stations that are not permitted in any zone in the municipality. Um because this has been approved by
variances uh the property owner has a right to continue uh not expand but the applicant has the right to continue this use um and uh and that's just one of his property rights as he purchased the
property. Uh the applicant wants to adjust um to uh modern service stations and as already indicated uh you know new cars go to the dealership. They're more sophisticated in repairs. It's hard to
find repairmen. Cars are more reliable than they were in the past. Uh they're more electric cars. uh it there is an established trend to have this composite use of a a gas station and a convenience
store and as Betsy Dolan mentioned last time uh the Institute of Traffic Engineers has developed categories where they've because so many of these are around they've measured the traffic uh activity that's generated and actually
they have two tiers of uh combination centers. There's now a special tier where there are 10 or more fueling locations. So that's your classic Waw Wa or um uh quick check. So uh we are
removing and the repair use which in my opinion is the most um inappropriate use for the area. Uh it means that there are overhead doors that are open, there's noise, they use hazardous materials, you know, liquids
associated with cars and lubrication. There's noise involved. Uh there are cars that are waiting for repair sitting on the property. While that's historically been part of this business from a land use point of view, especially in an area that is a high
pedestrian activity area, that's the most obnoxious part of the business in my uh opinion. Um, we're removing that, which is a good thing. Um I I uh I'm going to argue that this
meets the Medici standard although again there's already an impact from a gas station use there and we're simp we're adding a permitted use. So I find that there are um several purposes of the municipal land use law that are advanced
and these are purposes A uh C, G and I. So A talks about uh encouraging the most appropriate use or development of lands in a manner that promotes the public health, safety, morals and
general welfare. I think this is an appropriate use because it's a con both uses are convenience uses. There's a convenience retail store and there is a gas station. And what I'm want to emphasize by the word convenience is this is not like a
hair salon where I have an appointment at 3:00 and I'm going to be there for an hour and a half and regardless of how busy it is, I'm going there. This is a convenience use where if you happen to approach the the uh gas station and
there are a lot of people there that are lined up at the pumps, you simply bypass it. You're not obligated to go in. And and I think that's a a characteristic on this small site that's important because most people are going here because they're going in that direction. they're
doing multiple stops um and they're not obligated to approach the property uh at a time that it might be very busy. Uh the second issue is to provide light air and open space. Again, if you look at what the uh zoning ordinance anticipated
potentially threetory buildings there. Uh yes, you have a canopy that's close to the front, but it's open so that a truck could drive underneath it. Uh that's an that that's one of the more open corridor corners except for the
park area. And if you can imagine if there was a a building right up to the corner, um that would I think be detrimental to the operation of this busy intersection. Purpose G talks about uh providing sufficient space in an
appropriate location. And here it's clearly a corner lot. it happens to now be a signalized intersection. So there is some control uh spacing uh of traffic as a result of that signalization. Um and again the applicants making
changes that acknowledge uh the amount of uh both pedestrian and bicycle traffic in the area. Purpose A talks about promoting a desirable visual environment, dressing up the building, dressing up
the site. Um, these are all important considerations and and I think anybody looking at the plans um and the renderings would conclude that this is clearly a significant um visual improvement.
The use is particularly suited to the site because this has always been a gas station and this is the modification of gas stations all around this uh the country that that that again um because
of the sophistication of cars you go to the dealer um the dealers have rec the gas stations have recognized that it's basically a retail use I'm I have to bring my car to get it filled, but they're selling
products there and it dovetales with the convenience. And again, along the highways, it's it's hard to see someone that just does a gas station without any retail component. All the major uh retailers in New Jersey. One of
the most potent land uses are the are the, you know, the quick checks. Um uh the Wawaas uh there's royal stations in South Jersey where they have I guess very good chicken apparently. So they're expanding. We're not doing the chicken
here. Um in terms of the negative criteria, we're removing the most obnoxious component of this use. And from a land use point of view, it's the repair use.
They use hazardous fluids. Um, uh, it produces noise. There are safety concerns when you're working on an automobile. Um, there are cars that are waiting for repairs sitting on the property. That's not the type of use
that ought to be in. In fact, the only zone that you permit that in is your C2 zone, which is was the old manufacturing zone. Um again the master plan um you know wanted things in scale. Uh again this is a one
and twostory building. It's very typical of the nature of development in the area. There's no real architectural theme as already testified if you walk the area. Uh what what's amazing to me is it's turned into a restaurant heaven.
You know, there's no other convenience store in the in the area now, but the majority of stores happen to be restaurants there. And I I hadn't walked it uh recently, but I walked it again and I was just astounded at the number
of restaurants here. Um the master plan recognizes that suburban parking standards are not appropriate. they they impinge upon uh a developer in terms of discourage improvements to the property if you require the full complement of
parking on the site. Um so there are a number of conditions that have evolved in the discussion. Um the applicant indicates uh the hours of operation. Um
this indeed is a busy area, but I think the improvements that have been proposed, some of them coached by the board, um are is a significant benefit to the municipality
and uh in my opinion, they uh can be approved without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantial impairment of both the zone plan and the zoning ordinance. Okay. Do you Okay, you covered the Dvarian
the >> Now we have parking in the front yard. >> Uh and that's the nature of a gas station. It's always been there. Uh it's it's it's the very nature of the use to have parking in front of the building.
Um their issues. Um let me think the other I think the parking now has been pulled back from Wong. So, we meet the 4ft setback. Uh there's the issue of the trash enclosure that's supposed to be 20 ft back. I invite Now, first of all, this
this is you uh I think Mr. Sullivan would agree with me. You never set a precedent by approving a variance because each property is unique. That's that's kind of hornbook law in in the planning
business. uh someone said you granted it to them so I want my trash bin you know at the property line that's not a reason uh because every piece of property is unique. Uh here we have a situation where it's very active in front. Uh this
is a hidden area with with the uh trash and provided it's managed appropriate it's in one of the best places. Where else would you put it with a 20-oot setback? You would lose parking. you would have it close to a a a traveling
aisle, it would be in the view of the public. So, uh while it's it's a tight location, uh if it's well managed, in my opinion, um it is can be justified in that location. Um and again, the zoning regulations
were didn't anticipate a gas station here. It's not permitted. These were intended um for retail on the first floor, offices, residential on the second floor. Clearly not designed to apply to a gas station. Um they don't
fit gas stations. That's not the nature of a gas station. >> Okay. So with respect to those C variances, would it be your opinion that those would be justified under section C2? Well, I would say if if you look at
it separately, yes, under C2 because but part of it is it's it's integrated into the nature of the use. I've never seen a gas station that didn't have parking in front of it, uh access to the aisles and to the store. That's just the nature of
the beast. So, the C variances, except for the the refu area, is really part of the use variance. uh it's inherent with use variance but I think you can also look at it as that the public benefits substantially outweigh the detriments.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Um no further questions. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Simon, >> no questions. All right, Mr. Church. >> No questions. >> Mr. Cfield
>> um you um you went through for the uh the D variants A, C, G and I. >> Yes. >> Um I I heard A and G. What is C and I? >> Uh G talks about providing sufficient space in an appropriate location for a
variety of different types of uses. and I talks about to promote a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good civic design and arrangement. >> Okay. Without the repair shop and just the gas
station, would there be any parking need? Um if if the applicant closed the repair station, we would meet the parking requirement. Okay. Because actually we would because there
are two pumps. If we close the repair station, your code says we would need one parking space. >> Okay. Um so your your are your discussion is um that the you know the gas station came
and then um he is putting a convenience store and then we have to revisit this again in the sense that since history has happened the conven the gas stations happened. Um, and that's just the way it
is about. But now we're have to all kind of like red flags come up when we're wanting to expand that use. Is that correct? >> Well, again, the your review memo classifies this as a D1 variance. You know, that that we're proposing a use
that's not permitted in the zone. And the the more accurate review of this, it's a modification of the gas station use because we're removing one of the prohibited uses
>> and we're replacing it with a use that's permitted. I think from a practical point of view, this is a D2 variance, kind of a modification of a non-conforming use. But I'm taking the worst case scenario because I think we can justify it under
the Medici case. >> Let me ask you a question about that. Okay. So, a D2 variance is the expansion of a pre-existing non-conforming use which is a defined term which you already said it doesn't comply because the use is created by variance. So, isn't it
there's no question it's a D1 use variance. I'm ass I'm I'm agreeing that it's a D1 variance, but it's not My point is it's not a classic D1 variance >> that I would agree with. Yes. Okay.
>> Okay. I I agree with that. Um so um gas stations um 20 years ago would have gas station and repair shop. That has all changed. Now we're moving into a situation that gas stations will have convenience
stores without the repair. So in in some sense there are kind of like two uses that are being continued u in the modern day of what gas stations are correct that >> Yeah. There's a a rec well things evolve.
>> Yes. Exactly. And and this is an and this is an evolution because the nature of automobiles um you know both electric and sophistication of repairs uh the you know ability to secure good mechanics
um and um it has become an established land use. There's some municip not Montlair but there's some municipalities that recognize this composite as a separate use and there are few court cases out there that that characterize
it as a new use. Now, from a traffic point of view, as Betsy Dolan mentioned, it's clearly now for, you know, probably 10 years a separate uh land use category that they measure simply because um it's
such a common use today. You know, I don't know anyone that's creating I'm trying to think over the last 20 years. Can you remember anyone that simply built a auto repair garage? I
mean, I've seen the only specialty is uh you know, auto body shops. You know, they someone will have an auto body shop, but that's a whole separate thing. You need state licensing and the whole bit. But this is simply a common use and
um it's an evolution of uh the gas station industry. >> Okay. Thank you so much, >> Mr. Moore. >> What stays on on my mind is just, you know, safety. Uh we've got
um a gas station on one hand and then a convenient convenience uh a retail space on the other. Right. >> Um >> what safety measures have gone into place with this? And is
there a sprinkler system? And this may be just a random question, but is there a sprinkler system inside of the >> I don't know if the building is large enough to require a sprinkler? >> It's not not required. And being that it's >> because of the size of the building. >> Okay. Even though it's connected to the gas
station. >> Now the this is the other thing. You know there are many municipalities that say gas stations got to be a thousand ft apart. >> Mhm. >> And that's been around for you know 80 years. And the reason is uh
gas stations occasionally had fires. That's a somewhat rare occasion nowadays. uh and especially with um the reason for separation is largely a traffic issue. You don't want one station right next to another station or
you don't like four at the four corners of the intersection. >> Um but the the reason for separating gas stations in terms of you know fire safety are not there anymore because these are it's been so
improved now. You know, there are automatic shut offs on the pumps. Uh, you know, people are trained. Uh, you can drive away, you know, with the nozzle still in your car and it it won't, you know, keep on flowing.
>> So, it's not like, uh, the movie The Birds with Hitchcock. Um, >> that that is a rare occurrence. >> Okay. >> And when will the gas stations uh be refilled?
What do you mean the the tanker trucks? >> Yes. >> It was mentioned I think at at uh typically at two times uh a week if I recall >> and that and and during the low peak hours. Okay. Mentioned. >> Thank you,
>> Mr. Cruz. >> Thank you, Chairman. Uh good evening. Um, I'm I'm trying to get a sense of the the evolution of this lot because looking at the planners report, it seems like it's been through like I wouldn't even imagine that, you know, less than 100 years ago there that they would prohibit blacksmithing and
and horseshoeing. And so, um, I see that one of the prohibited uses was a motor vehicle service station. And looking at the history in alignment with that 1931 decision, they denied the sale of motor
vehicles, but they allowed the rental and leasing of motor vehicles. So I'm not sure when in the in the history they started uh servicing vehicles. >> Well, um I suspect that this was always
an issue of servicing because that's was gas stations at the time. you know, you could you could always buy products uh you know, can of oil, uh you know, you could always buy products uh you know, what gas station didn't have a cigarette vending machine, you know, back then or a soda machine.
>> So, there was always a retail component, but again, it's a reflection of u evolution of the industry. Um some gas stations would repair their own cars and then want to sell them. So, you needed a a state motor vehicle license
to do that. uh you know there's a large industry in terms of renting cars and uh your ordinance still now allows uh let me give you the section even though this is not a permitted use.
Um your ordinance uh 34715 allows as a conditional use um the um rental of automobiles, vans, and trailers. >> Mhm. >> So that's a recognition that this was
coming up. We're not doing that. >> But again, there it was uh it's a reflection of how the industry has evolved over time. >> Certainly. And I I can certainly appreciate the evolution of of the gas station um from
when it was installed. I was just trying to get a sense of because it specifically said that motor vehicle servicing was prohibited and somewhere along the timeline uh vehicles were serviced at that location. I was just trying to figure out that piece of the
>> well when the when in the definition you have two definitions in your ordinance. Um, let me You have a motor vehicle repair station. So, that was primarily repairs, but as
an accessory use, you could dispense gasoline. >> Mhm. Um, but you have a definition, and I'm guessing this might not have might not have existed in 1931, but you have a specific definition of a motor vehicle service station, which focuses on the
retail dispensing of vehicular fuel fuels and it says because this has been updated or charging of electric vehicles and includes as an accessory use minor repairs. >> Okay, that's the piece. So the the focus
shifted, >> right? >> Uh repair means you repair but you could pump a little gas. >> Mhm. >> Um the motor vehicle service station which I would classify this as is primarily dispensing of fuels but there is an accessory component of repairs.
>> Okay. Yeah. And I was I was just trying to make sense of how um there was the they prohibited the sale of vehicles, but they allowed the the selling of of >> I when I was the planner here, I got in a fight with uh Mr. Zeus
>> who owned the place because he was wanted to sell vehicles from it and I I was the zoning officer then and I said he couldn't do it >> and he got angry. >> He got angry at me too. So
any comfort. >> Um, >> still comfort. >> And then I guess just um if you if you could just offer one more time your uh your strongman argument for why the the convenience store fits with the uh evolution of this property. >> Well, uh first of all, it it is a strong
trend in the industry. If you want to continue to pump gas, uh you can't that's not a good business model. Uh it happens to be a permitted use in the zone. So, it's a good thing to have a convenience store there. Uh, again, if
this applicant came in with just a convenience store, we would be before the planning board. We wouldn't need a a devariance. Um, and there is no other convenience store in that area. Now, it will be used. It's going to generate
interest from, you know, kids, but the answer is it makes this gas station a viable use. and and there's been a tremendous amount of discussion of morphing the site plan to try to accomplish all these goals. In any site
plan, there is a compromise of principles. If you ask the the refuge truck driver, what's the best site plan? He would say something I can drive around the building and not get out of my truck to pick up the trash. That might be a good goal, but a site plan is
always a compromise and this is a small site. So as you can sense from the struggle uh some of goals have to be compromised for other goals >> right. Um and then just two more questions. Um one uh I know watch plaza
is a very unique type of commercial district. Um I was wondering if you could perhaps think of any I guess comparable. Um, my town, Maplewood, the Maplewood Village is uh a hot place. Every people are now complaining about
parking. Why? >> Cuz it's very successful. And that's even with a closed movie theater. >> There's, you know, it's it's a very vibrant uh downtown. >> Mhm. >> And again, because there it's not a county road. Um it's it's on a a bend on
a street so there's a sense of enclosure much like Church Street in Montlair here. >> Um you know it's it's a it's a it's a wonderful little business district. Very successful. >> Yeah. And then um I guess my last question would be um I I appreciate the
the practicality of the uh gas servicing stalls to be in effect parking stalls. It's very very common for people to park, get gas, go to the convenience store, right back into their car. But um in terms of the I guess like the planning or like the zoning of that type
of space, uh how is the the zoning aspect of a gas stall parking space characterized? >> Well, it it's the nature of the beast. You know, again, you you would you want to have an easy connection from the street to the fueling location.
Uh there are only two pumps here, but again both sides of the pump get the fuel, >> right? >> Um it's it's simply the nature, you know, you I suppose you could require people to go into this into the building and purchase gallons of gas, but the answer is that's not the way it
works, >> right? >> So it it's simply the nature of a gas station use. Uh you know, you recall old photos where there was a convenience store and then a little pump sitting out in front. So that's historically been the nature of it simply because you got to bring your car close to the pump.
Yeah. >> Well, well, I guess what I meant more so is I guess I guess more so maybe like in like an ADA like handicap sense or whatever that because it's not a technically regulated stall per se even though the use is >> well but the convenience is you get to sit in your car
and and you know tell the person to fill your tank. Now the the the sidewalk that is pre-proposed is an ADA accessible sidewalk. So the applicant is paying attention to that. But um it it's again one of the things the themes in your
master plan is I want to it's good to stop and do multiple things with your car in that location. >> So the master plan endorses that kind of activity. Now you're right person gets out of the car. They're now exposed to something else going on. But it's a
short walk from there. Um, and again, um, it's simply the nature of the beast. Anybody that that goes to a gas station knows that phenomenon. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah, for sure. I do it all the time. Thank you. >> Mr. Griffith,
>> I have no questions. >> I have one quick question. >> Yes, Mr. Simon. >> Um, as of today, the the it's currently repairs are allowed at the location. This is a three bay gas station, >> right? So, in the event that this would
not be approved and they chose to do some other kind of uh automotive automotive service, like in my thoughts, I'm thinking not a repair shop, but maybe something customized like where they put the final wraps on the car.
Would that be considered a repair? >> Um, I haven't thought about that. Um that's debatable whether it's I mean you know some someone could come into a gas station and uh you know change the nature of their headlights for style
reasons as opposed to just safety. So it's uh you know if they exclusively did I'm not sure that that would be permitted. It would not be. >> Yeah, it's a it's a little bit outside of the repair and and because there are
uh businesses that specialize like in rewrapping size there's a I testified years ago I think in the south end of Montlair that uh someone does this you know the logo wrapping of vehicles
not not a repair that's a special area if someone did like uh >> you know upholstery of cars that probably is not is a different use than simple automo automobile repair. So, I I haven't thought about it, but my
5-second analysis is it may not be part of in the category of repairs >> because because my question, this is probably for Mr. Singh. Um, if this wasn't approved, what would you do with the space? >> Well, he's going to it's it's clearly designed to repair vehicles. I'm
guessing he would continue to repair B vehicles as best he can. And again, as you know, uh, you know, bay doors are open, the cars are waiting there for repairs. They, you know, got to wait for the insurance company to say they'll
cover it. It's the worst part. We all need repairs to our cars, but from a land use point of view, it's the worst part of the business. >> Right. Thank you. >> I have an additional question. >> Yes. Go ahead, please. So, the proposal to convert the existing automobile
repair and service station to a retail convenience store. Um, is this structure going to be demoed completely? >> Could it be pardoned? >> No, this they're keeping the structure. The only thing it's adding is the partial second story and the stairway in
the back. Everything else is the same. >> And but they're proposing to expand the existing one-story structure slightly. Right. >> Right. And again, that's the >> the office for one of the members of the family that will be occasionally used,
but it it's an office just for this use. It's it's not like a regional office. >> Sure. Sure. >> And it's not separate from the gas station. It's it's not going to be rented as a separate office. >> I'm just I'm thinking about like if there's any disturbance of ground, right? So like
are you doing a perk test, a hazardous material test? Well, the site is already uh no the there's groundwater contamination on the site and it's already being remedied and and okay >> modernized as indicated there is no
they're not going to dig down for like a storm water detention basin. Okay. >> Uh because they're keeping the amount of impervious coverage the same or less. They don't have to do detention. So they don't have to go dig it into the ground. >> Okay. All right. Thank you.
>> All right. Just uh again a couple of questions. Um this would not be the first um gas station convenience store uh in Montlair as I understand it. >> No, the only actually the one that's permitted I guess is the Shell station
um in the redevelopment area >> on on Bloomfield Avenue. Yes. Yeah. >> So based on your experience uh uh not to not the argument for but their argument against I mean has has it been proven that there's anything
particularly problematic about having um such gas station convenience stores in a community like Monontlair or particularly in a small uh area like Wong Plaza.
>> I'm not sure I understood your question. Is there anything in your experience that would speak to what would be sort of a negative impact that uh a convenience store gas station would have in a in a area like Wong Plaza?
>> Well, the best way I can say if this were a vacant if this were a vacant lot, I don't think there would be a justification for putting a gas station there. But what what you have to keep in mind is that the current use is legal. And it's not legal because it predated
the ordinance. It's legal because seven times this board said you not only can put a gas station there, but you can put a canopy on it. You can change this, you can change that. So there's there's, you know, a recognition that it's a it's a valuable part of the community.
>> Okay. So it I think the the question is perhaps leans more towards the convenience store aspect of it as opposed to the gas station which is because that would be the new feature here. >> It's the new feature but it's the permitted use. You would think the
public policy is we want that. >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, I just want to be clear in terms of whether or not there's any history that says that, you know, when you put uh a convenience store uh to what is already established as a gas
station, um does it is there any history that lends to uh sort of a negative activity or negative experience um that we should be aware of? Well, there there more customers that will come because there's a use, you know, again, at the
moment, there's no competition for convenience goods in the watching Plaza area. It's an astounding amount of restaurants there. And and you know, when you need reservations to go eat, uh that's not a convenience use. >> It's a planned use.
>> Yeah. I mean, I've heard you mention a a couple of times in this hearing that there is no other convenience store located in this area and and technically, I mean, I guess based on the the actual design of of what's before us, that would be true. But in
terms of the type of items that would be for sale within this convenience store, uh would those items not be available in other establishments in within that area? Well, I I ate a bagel today, you know, down the street. So, the answer is
I bought food there, but that's a different type of use because they don't, you know, I can go there and buy water and soda and other things. So that's an example of where you and there's a pizza place >> so you can go in and buy soda but um to
buy half gallon of milk you know paper towels you know th those kind of uh convenience items uh are not to be found uh right now in this area. >> Okay. Uh what about uh in the case of u
uh fuse shortage for example if we were to I mean we've had times uh in you know within the last 10 to 15 years in which there have been uh fuel shortages uh which has translated into long lines of
cars uh waiting uh to be serviced. Um, I mean you you that you know it's it's possible and uh I I was working in town when there was that major fuels shortage and the problem is not the problem. You
don't plan uh that's not how you do a site plan. Uh, for an example, no one would build a shopping center for the amount of parking you need on Black Friday because that paved area would be
worthless for most of the year. So, the typical is you designed for the 85 85th percentile knowing that there's some times, you know, when you're not going to have enough parking. uh you know if my daughter gets married at my house I'm
not going to have enough parking for people at my house that those rare events um you don't design a site plan for it because it's not efficient. >> Okay. And then the last question I have is um we in the in the last in the previous hearing we had raised a
question about um architectural fit given the sort of the neighborhood and is it your assessment that what is being proposed uh fits uh uh this neighborhood or >> the answer is I think fitting is largely a of personal taste.
Number one, across the street is where the historic district is. And there is there are a few tutoresque buildings, but not a real dominant style there. You look on our side of the street, um, you know, the
vet hospital, the the the post office, there is no theme at all. So what is good aesthetic to me is dressing up the building to look like it was a new building. You know to to have uh a
wellthoughtout uh color pattern and style that tells the public this is a nice clean well-maintained station. That's that's the aesthetic improvement because I don't think I think for as many architects there are they would you
could propose a variety of styles and someone could say it's there just isn't a dominant pattern there. So it it gets a little bit into personal taste as opposed to in a historic district you can write rules.
It would be hard to write rules for that side of the street. >> All right. Thank you. So, let's uh now turn to uh members of the public if you have questions. Uh please, you're welcome, sir. Please. >> You're also welcome to like form a line behind him if um other people want to
>> a whole line. >> No. Scared you, didn't it? >> I did. Uh Jay Turner, 274 Park Street. Um there were several things I wanted to ask you about. You had mentioned, I think, the
benefit of a convenience store to the community. >> Yes. >> Uh, were you aware that there was a convenience store across the street within 75 ft of the proposed location >> that that went out of business? >> Um, I had heard that there was a store there u gone by the time I studied the
area, but I had heard that that there is no longer convenience store in the neighborhood. >> So, maybe it's fair to say that it went out of business because the need wasn't there. I I would disagree with that because this this is a use that would be a much more convenient use to use
because there's on-site parking for this convenience store. >> Yeah, that's there was parking in the back. >> But again, it's if it's in view, it's much more accessible. So, I don't know why that store closed, but but this
combination is known to be a better business model. >> Okay. So, you're saying maybe if it was a better business model, it could have survived. >> I don't know the reason they closed. Maybe the owner didn't have a, you know, a relative that wanted to care. I don't know why it closed.
>> Okay. So, going with that same theme, are you aware that there's currently an auto repair shop directly across the street from Mr. Singh's gas station called Monontlair Motors? >> Yes. >> Okay. They have a very vibrant business. I just had to wait 4 days for them to
fix my car. I guess I'm um so if you're going to apply that same logic, maybe if Mr. Singh did a better job, he could have more customers to work on their cars. Maybe it's not a dying industry. Maybe he just needs to refine his approach. Would that be fair based on
your >> That's not fair. No, because that's not the trend of the gas station industry. And uh I think it's generically hard to uh have an auto repair business um with
a loyal following following. It's it's a business that you know people go to different auto repair shops because they're not confident of the repairs they get. The if if if this application is isn't approved, I'm presuming that
the automobile repair business will continue there. And I think that would be the wrong direction. I see. Um, you had mentioned when you were giving your presentation,
you called the intersection of Park Street and Wa Chung to be a complicated intersection. Was that a eupheanism for dangerous? >> Um, no. It's it's it's a complicated intersection that's been recently improved
>> and again um it takes a while to um for the public to adjust to the system. It's it's not um >> Well, do you know how many wrecks were there last year? >> I don't know how many wrecks there were. That's not my job.
>> Well, there were 10. Do you know how many people were Mr. Turner? >> Do you know how many people were hit? He's referring to the intersection. I'm just asking. Let Mr. Ste answer the question, then you can answer your next question. >> All right. >> I don't know how many accidents were there. Uh, it is a complicated
intersection. It was uh >> What do you mean by complicated? >> It's not a straight crossroads where the streets are 90 degrees from one another. It's there are five streets that come together here. They're not in perfect
alignment. So, it's it's a complicated intersection. Would it be fair to say that the exit from the gas station would be another point of entry? So maybe instead of five, you would say six. >> No. >> Well, I noticed on your plan and thank
you very much. This was great. I really appreciate it. But if you go to page two of the plan, do you guys have one? >> You're referring to what we marked as exhibit the most recent exhibit. >> Yes, sir. I am. Um, I noticed on page two there's an omission of the picture of the gas
station. When you are in the gas station, top picture. When you're in the gas station and you would be exiting towards Wa Chung, there is now a sign put up by either the county or the town that's telling you that you can only make a
right-hand turn out of that gas station. >> That's cuz it was put in after December 13th of last year. >> Yes, sir. I'm I'm not suggesting that you are doing anything nefarious. I'm just pointing out that it's not in your picture. And I think it's important because it's kind of the canary in the coal mine. Just like the traffic lights,
it indicates there's a problem. You don't put up a sign unless there's a problem, do you? >> Well, you put up a sign to better direct traffic and and one of the major things that's happening here is the driveway aprons are being narrowed so that there
was a more of a regulated flow. The county is in charge of this intersection. Uh, you know, they had a Lee Klein studied it. Uh, they adopted that study. Uh, the the county, at least for the moment, is is uh believes that
this is a better alternative the way they've done it. >> Well, making it better than before isn't necessarily a high bar, is it? >> Mr. Can I just make a comment, Mr. Chair? Aren't these questions more appropriate for our traffic expert who
previously testified and will testify again? >> Mr. Trimmilac, I'm just I'm just asking him questions off of his comments and I'm making >> He's the one that made the comment. I'm asking him a question on what he said. Excuse me. And I'm >> How could the traffic expert respond to what he said?
>> Speaking with you. I was speaking to the chair. I made a comment. >> Yes. I think that the the questions that you're you're asking are appropriate questions. But in the next hearing, we will have the traffic expert returning here to respond to these types of
questions. >> Respect, that's fine, sir. I'll stop. But respectfully, I'm just asking him questions about what he said in his presentation. >> I understand. I >> and the document that he provided. >> Yes, I understand. >> Thank you. So, uh, Gerald Fierce, 259 Park Street.
Um, so it was, uh, interesting. I, too, knew Mr. Zeus and his wife of blessed memory. She was a nice lady. Uh, and, uh, now, can you help me if if I assume
you had to deal with all of this also? I remember them telling me um that they wanted to put in a convenience store and then um >> who's them? >> The owners of the gas station. >> All right.
>> Um but that it wasn't going to be allowed. So then they were going to I thought sell it, but that it was going to become a drive-in bank and that was turned down by this board. That that change of usage was turned down. Am I correct in that?
>> And that was Do you know the reason for that? >> Uh I presume it was in the resolution. >> Okay. Because what I was told was traffic. >> Well, in in in as you know um
banking has changed significantly. It used to be that when you studied banks, you looked at the line on Friday afternoon when everyone was cashing their check. That doesn't exist anymore. uh whatever the board turned it down. The applicant uh the owner uh wanted to
put in a a bank with a driveth through component and it was turned down and I presume traffic was one of the issues >> and you would make a distinction between that kind of traffic and the traffic on mornings when business is busiest and
people are picking up coffee on the way to the to um work and stuff. The difference is that this applicant is entitled to keep the current gas station use because of past variances. I >> if and that was a that was an
opportunity to erase the gas station use but the the the the board made a decision at that time that it didn't meet the statutory criteria. >> Right. But make sure I'm understanding what you had testified to that um the gas station use
they permitted was what had been grandfathered with the v various variances but but the convenience store use is not something in D1 I believe it was categorized
that is permitted. Well, I I don't believe a I would I my recollection is a a bank with a Well, first of all, they don't permit offices on the first floor in this zone, and that was a prohibited use. We're putting it with a drive-thru.
We're putting in we're adding a use that happens to be a permitted use in the zone. So, that's a big difference. Even though it's not a permitted use for that that >> convenience stores are permitted in this zone. The problem is that this is in combination with a gas station.
>> Right. So it's not permitted with that combination. Okay. in that particular location. Um, and um, okay. Uh, the other questions I have because I'll wait for the traffic coordinator h have to do with the testimony of Paul the tra the
crossing guard >> who has something to say. >> All right. Thank you, sir. Okay. >> Okay. >> I hope I can Claire Silata, 279 Park Street. I hope I can phrase this uh accurately. So my question, we keep
using the word convenience store and frankly I have no idea what that really means in regard to this convenience store because I have been in many convenience stores in my life associated with gas stations and they all have some
similar products but some very different. So my concern is that right now if you go to CVS after school, there's 900 book bags dropped and a swarm of kids in CVS after school every
day buying candy. Okay. My concern again is that that will be transferred to this convenience store if that is one of the major things that it is selling, candy, soda, stuff like that. So that means that you're going to
have a tribe of children because every time I go to CVS at that time there are >> 15 20 kids. >> Is there is there what's the >> Yes. So my question is what is you keep using the word convenience. I have no idea what is being sold in this
convenience store and that would be germanine to some of my questions. I can't ask questions if I don't know. >> Okay. Thank you. Mr. News, you respond to that please. Um the applicant can correct me but coni first of all it the category is retail. They're they're selling things by retail. Yes. Uh
they're not selling exercise machines. They're not selling furniture. It's things that people use almost on a daily ba basis. Milk, candy, uh paper plates, >> cigarettes, >> uh cigarettes, >> vaping.
>> I don't I don't know if that's what I'm asking. But that's a different issue if if it if it's permitted. >> The applicant may >> want to volunteer, you know, certain limitations, but convenience goods that
are legal to sell, the applicant proposes to sell them. >> Okay. Uh again, uh I think it's gerine, but if the law says it doesn't matter, then it doesn't matter, but I think it should. >> Right. Thank you. All right. Yes. Thank
you. >> We got a lot of questions. Donna Picket, 255 Park Street. >> Okay. I think I'm going to ask about this D1 and D2. Just so I understand and you you're an expert. You've worked here and
>> do you mind just raising them? >> Oh, I'm sorry. Um and I I appreciate that. Um, I appreciate your details on, you know, the quoting the master plan and your experience, but I do have a question because we're going back and forth and I just wanted to understand
the difference between D1 and D2. What is this a D1? Um, since 1931, it's a prohibited use. >> Is that these are sections of the state law? Yeah, >> they're different paragraphs
and and D1 is someone that is proposing a use that is prohibited in the district, either a use or a principal structure that's prohibited in the district. That's a D1 use. >> And in 1931, this became a D1. Is that correct?
>> Well, the the regulations uh in even the more later later decisions didn't say what type of a Dvariance it was. It said it was a use that wasn't permitted it. And u there might but but the current law says that
if you have a if you're proposing a use that isn't permitted in the zone and it's not there, it's a D1 variance. If you have a legal non-conforming use that might have predated the ordinance or and the ordinance change, maybe it was
permitted at one time and the ordinance changed to prohibit it. When you're modifying a legal non-conforming use by intensifying it or expanding it, that's a D2 variance and the proofs are not as strict.
>> Easier to get >> for the D2. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, I think I'm saying this right in chapter uh 347-112 where it states when it's non-conforming uses shall not be expanded or increased
or enlarged. the case here. >> Okay. Well, >> they need a D1 use variance, >> right? Well, I'm asking because I want to make sure that I understand this. >> This is a use that's approved for starters. This is approved use that was approved by variance. So, that's a little bit of a different category, but
I'm acknowledging that this is a D1 uh and the lead case is called the Medici case. That's the standard that the board has to uh >> so this doesn't apply. So, we're not expanding or increasing. Okay.
Okay. Um, so you had mentioned before you you used the word uh detrimental that you didn't feel like this design and proposal of this use of this convenience store would be detrimental. And I, you know, I have the town plan
here and I've I've read it and um, they don't put weight on that town plan. I know you've been a town planner for a long time. you know, it it's nice that we've done this beautifification and um it's improvements to the area, but um I
think the weight >> is is there a question? >> Yeah, the question is when you said you don't feel that it's detrimental, you meant to the safety of of the pedestrians. What did you mean by that? I meant in all aspects that that
uh because this is a use that can continue and it has detrimental effects in terms of in my opinion repairing automobiles there that um
that there is no substantial detriment to either the master plan uh the zoning ordinance or >> but can I I'm sorry just to interrupt you But yeah, I'm glad you said that because I I have to differ with you because I in the master plan, it does talk about the walkability
um and the safety of our pedestrians. And I think that this project is detrimental for that neighborhood. And by the way, there's there's six points of in ingress and egress, not five. Just for the record, at one point. >> Can you can you frame that as a question, please?
>> Um so here's the next question. Um, what are the seven variances? I mean, you you emphasize that a couple times, so it must be significant. So, since 1931, what are the seven variances? >> Oh, there I don't know if you you read
the review memo. >> No. >> Okay. There there's a review memo um that lists the varants. So, >> Okay. I can if you could tell me where that is. Is it on the portal? >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay, I can
>> it's the the latest is March 18th and uh on the second page it lists all of the actions. Uh there are seven approvals and they're three >> they have to be minor. I've lived there and owned a house there since 1996 and I
would think they're kind of minor. >> Well, it wasn't minor in 1931 because there wasn't a gas station there. >> I wasn't born then. I don't think I >> and uh they was it modified the building in 1932. Uh it allowed the construction of an
addition to the building in 35. Uh in 1951 it allowed the installation of a new gasoline storage tank. Uh in 55 it replaced the existing building with a new one-story buildings. That's a
wholesale replacement. And in 1970 um it permitted it granted a use or at that time a special exception to permit uh the rental of passenger motor vehicles. >> Okay, that's minor. Okay, so I have
another question. Um >> and then the canopy was approved in 1989. >> Yeah, it's just a little minor. I just want to make sure they weren't major. Uh so everyone >> I would consider replacing the building pretty major. >> Well, this one is. Yes, this this is
major. So, a question. Let's let's not argue back and forth. Try and keep your comments to yourself and ask a question. >> Yeah. Here's the next question. Um, so why wouldn't when um I can't see that far cuz I have my glasses on. Mr.
Makulla asked the question or maybe you asked the question >> about um if this did not get approved and they did repairs um for cars for the upholstery that would be I mean that would be acceptable wouldn't it because that's a
>> I haven't studied that I I've looked at the current application I can tell you that what what has historically gone on the property which is automobile repairs can continue odd infant item Okay, let me just see if I have any other questions.
Um, your comment about the aesthetics, um, you know, and there and they are mixed. Um, but I I know you said that they're mixed, but um looking at this historic uh area and
you being involved in the town, uh wouldn't you consider that um we should adhere more to um the tutorish type of design? >> Number one, this is not an
Okay. that you know it's hard to I suppose you could um I'm not an architect but to the tutor architecture was intended to be a residential style. This happens to be a gas station and it seems to be kind of
forcing an architectural style on a use that was never tutor in its its style. A tutor is a residential. >> Well, the plaza, you know, watch plaza and upper Montlair, the design years ago, what is the tutor style? And this
looks smack dab at the train station across the street. >> I think Mr. Stuck has has answered your question. >> Okay, let me I had some more questions. Um, we talked about beautifification. Let's just see what else you said. Hold on. So now, is this appropriate? This is my
last question that I wanted to ask um the architect, but um >> Oh, this is the planner. >> Yeah, I know. And so you said I have to ask the planner. So um I you know want to talk about
>> just ask the question please just go ahead and ask the question. >> Yes so I can. Okay. >> So do you really think that um with the amount of pedestrians that are in that area that this really adheres to our town plan?
>> Yes. Yes. The way that and tell me the reason why >> I that's what I've been talking about for the last 45 minutes because th this it's a it's a heavily pedestrian area. The applicant is um managing pedestrian traffic through the site. The applicant
is shrinking the uh driveway aprons. The a the applicant is defining the edge of the site with landscaping. All of those in my opinion are pedestrian improvements. >> But you did mention with that said, you did mention that this is a car centric
gas station. People are coming in getting gas in at a convenience store. So that does in intensify more cars and >> the the traffic expert indicated that there's going to be more traffic because of the these improvements. So we we will
be um I think your question uh is appropriate for the next hearing um and so uh we'll be able to dedicate uh I think sufficient time for the traffic study and related questions. So uh thank you. >> Okay. That was my last question. >> Thank you so much. Appreciate it. So Mr.
Trimulac, how would you like to proceed? >> Ask a question. I'm sorry. >> You want to ask quickly? Um did you Mr. Stack quickly? Um did you go through the resolution in 2009? Did you read that? >> I at one time I did. Yes. Okay. Um Um and we're at the same juncture here
today. It's the same case technically. Um did you get that? >> It's not It's not the same. >> It's not the same case. Why? Because it's grandfathered. >> No, because that was for a bank application. This >> This is 2009. That was 2006. >> Oh, you said first you said the bank case. Did you look at the bank? >> I did not say bank case. I mean, did you
look at the 2009 case? >> I'm sorry. >> No words. So that that was a it well from the memo it says that was a certification. >> Yeah. Grandfather >> that it was not a grandfather use. So it
it it's was approved by variance different category. >> Gotcha. Alan if it I'm going to ask a question if it if it goes over. Um I know Mr. Ste is always so busy. If he can just read that case and or just and maybe write a letter or something that I can just see because it doesn't necessarily talk about grandfather. to
something later on down the case if that makes sense to you. >> I I'm not sure a letter without my presence is gonna be evidence, but >> Okay. It's not a Okay. I mean, it's just that it's it's a different type of it's talking about the non-conforming use. >> I'm very familiar with that case. Um
because I was sort of involved with it as well as Mr. Sullivan was, but that was sort of matter that came before the board almost for an interpretation. Um it wasn't an actually an application for site plan approval. It was determination.
>> Yeah. And they also determination was like to go through ordinance instead of variances as well was part of their deter like in >> I think I think at that time the the property owner was taking a position that they had the right to come in and do something without board approval and the determination was no you had to come
before the board. >> Okay. >> And they never actually made a formal application >> like we have that was reviewed and processed. It was it was a legal issue and you know >> okay >> I can discuss that further and I know
Mr. Sullivan can as well. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Yeah. Just just so we're clear on that. What happened was they did make an application. We came before the board. I think you were the township attorney at the time. Uh and they wanted the board to certify that the gasoline service
station was a grandfathered non-conforming use. Okay. And then the board said no, it was permitted by use variance. That's a different animal. And that's >> okay. >> All right. >> I just said when it's grandfathered,
it's a different I don't see that in that case, but okay. >> Grandfathered is >> it's not it's not in that, >> right? It was either before the ordinance was adopted or it was legal at one time and they changed the ordinance to not permit it. >> Okay. All right. Mr. Tolac, how would
you like to uh proceed? Well, as I you know, for the reasons I mentioned at the beginning of tonight's hearing, Mr. Chair, I'd like to request that the application be uh continued to hopefully the board's April meeting, which is
>> it's April 22nd at 7 p.m. >> Yes. >> So, Mr. Trebulac, will you consent to an extension of time for the board to act through that date? >> Yes. >> So, I would suggest we get a motion to carry that without further notice to that date. >> Is there a motion to that effect? >> I make a motion. Is there a second?
>> Second. >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> All opposed. >> Abstensions. >> All right. Is approved. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. >> Thank you, everyone. >> Uh do you want to take a quick break? >> Five minutes. Yeah.
>> Okay. So, let's uh if we can just take a quick uh five minute break >> and uh we have uh we'll move on to the next application. Five minutes. Five minutes. Strictly five minutes. I promise. Turn to application 2949
30 Club Road Suru Ogama. Uh and this application uh is for uh a variance from Monontlair code section 347-39D uh to allow building coverage of 22.31% whereas the ordinance permits a maximum
building coverage of 20%. uh and a variance from Monontlair code section 347-20B to allow impervious coverage of 49.98% whereas the ordinance permits a maximum
imperous coverage of 47%. The application the applica applicant also requests any other variances that may be required. >> All right, >> taxes are paid and notice is in order. >> All right, thank you so much Mr. Charmulac. >> Yeah, Mr. Chairman. Uh, yeah. Alan
Charmulac appearing on behalf of the applicant, uh, Satro Agama. It's a residential application. Um, we filed the application seeking two coverage variances, one for building coverage and one for lot coverage. But as you'll hear
from our witness, um uh my client has decided to eliminate the pergola that had been proposed as part of these uh exterior improvements in the rear yard of the property. I mean, as you can see, the intention is to uh put in an
ingground pool um and make various other hardscaping and other uh improvements in the rear yard. um you know by eliminating the pergola that was originally uh approved we comply with building coverage and so the only
variance we need is for the impervious so um I I've got two witnesses I think would be fairly brief and where did he go oh there he is first witness is um >> Frank throp >> yes
>> Mr. Throp get near a microphone first of all. >> Yes. >> Would you raise your right hand? Do you swear to tell the truth in the matter pending before the board? >> Yes. >> State your name and address. >> Uh Frank Throp Summit, New Jersey. >> What is your um occupation?
>> Uh I'm a landscape designer for CLC landscape design. >> Okay. And your relationship to this project? >> Uh I have been the designer. >> Okay. All right. So, do you want to um just walk the board through what's
proposed and >> the there are two principal aims in this uh in this site plan. >> Oh, thank you already. >> Mr. if you want to uh walk through
those. >> Very good. >> So the two principal design intentions here were to accommodate >> it were to accommodate a modestly sized
pool. Not something for swimming laps or any kind of major athletic purpose. something that was scaled to the site such that we would be able to preserve an certain amount of lawn on this small
backyard. The other intention was to consolidate some of the existing hardscape spaces so that we could create a patio area that was more livable that had more flexible
usage than a number of the smaller areas that were scattered throughout the other portions of the site. So, the idea here was to install a naturalistic
20ft by 18 ft pool. And we're pushing that as close to the side property set back as possible and then creating a waterfall on top of that
which would have a drop of only about 2 to 3 ft. But just to add some aesthetic interest there. Again, the intention was something modestly sized, not for athletic use. In this upper right hand corner of the
site, there are a number of existing areas there where there are actually two small patios about 10 by 14 at the most which
are not exactly connected to each other. They're separated by a small strip of lawn. And our idea there was to take some of those patios and just consolidate that area so that we're actually reducing the
amount of imperous coverage there and being able to provide dining, a area for an outdoor kitchen and then eliminate some areas where for instance
between the house in this wall. There's a continuous continuous walk. So, we're scaling that back and just installing some blue stone stepping stones. The site is going to maintain
lawn area in the center. The uh have small children. So, that was important. And I want to mention that both sides already have very very heavy existing buffers. That's the neutral green that
I'm showing on both sides of the property here. And also that is raised on the terrace above Brookdale Park. So it's not agreed with the park.
>> Okay. Um can talk about the pergola. um it was originally proposed and is no longer proposed. >> So in this corner of the patio where we are still showing an outdoor kitchen
that was an area where we had originally proposed a pergola uh of about 10 by 15 square 10 by 15 ft. Now that's been removed from the application. Uh so that we are not going
to be asking for any variance for building coverage on that. Um and the owners will be content with using the existing trees around there for partial shade and
umbrellas as necessary. >> Okay. And then can you just review the the um imperous coverage variance that's required in terms of how much the percentages are that shown on your
>> yes drawing. Um the lot is going to be increasing coverage under this plan by 207 uh 207 square ft of imperous coverage
and most of that coverage is associated with the pool itself. the water area being uh the water area being 245 square ft of it and we're also counting the coping and a very very small seating
area associated with the pool steps. Okay, other than that we're actually reducing the amount of coverage in the right hand side of this backyard. So what's the percentage of imperous
coverage that are being sought? >> Uh we are seeking 23 I'm sorry 49.98 with the maximum impervious coverage by code being 47%. >> Okay. And what's the existing imperous
coverage? The existing imperous coverage is 48.44% which is to say the site is already 193 square ft over the maximum. >> Okay. So you're
the increase over the existing imperous coverage is about 1 and a half%. 48.44 you're going to 49.98. >> Yes. roughly >> and that's the only variance that's required. >> That is correct.
>> Okay. And as you said, the pool is considered to be impervious coverage. >> Yes. >> Although well, we'll let the planner deal with that. Well, although although one some towns have argued or have
interpreted that as not being covered being that the water is going to not be is going to be retained there from any storm event, right? Of course, that's not the u that's not the letter of the code here,
but it is an arguable point in some townships. >> Okay. I I have nothing further, Mr. Chair. >> We'll turn to Mr. Church for questions. >> No, I don't have
Mr. Cfield. >> So, um the variance uh 34739D that's out. >> We're just doing the one the variance of the coverage. Okay. Thank you. >> For imper uh lot coverage or impervious coverage, not building coverage.
>> Gotcha. Gotcha. The 20B. Um did you in your plans uh try to conform to that and what did that look like? It's a 10x10 piece. Is that what you is the >> being as we were already over the lot
coverage with existing conditions to have brought the whole site into compliance. Even adding a very small pool would have entailed essentially getting rid of uh well
reducing patio spaces to a size that would be far less than existing uh which was already uh quite uncomfortable or removing part of a driveway which
really was a non-starter with the clients because they already have only a very narrow area to back out of their garage in. >> I mean, the driveway does make like a kind of a loop in the middle there. Did you look at maybe exploring that aspect
of it? >> Um, that is generally used for parking. It was suggested, but >> I don't know if you can park in that lot in the front there, but yeah, I mean in that in it's a code thing. Um,
okay. Thank you, Mr. Moore. >> No questions. >> Mr. Cruz, >> I have no questions. Mr. Griffith, >> um, you said 48.44 is the existing lot coverage
percentage. >> Yes, that's correct. >> And how many feet is your current proposal that's at 49.9? How many more square feet is that? Uh that is adding 207. >> 207 square feet.
>> Yes. So we're adding 207 to what's already existing. >> And uh do you propose to provide um storm water retention to the equivalent of the 207 that you're not taking? Uh
typically we defer to the town engineer to make the determination of what needs to be accommodated and to assign volumes. >> You would defer for the engineer to tell you. I'm sorry. >> Yes.
>> Okay. That means you would accept doing it. Correct. >> Yes, of course. >> Okay. Um thank you. >> Uh Mr. the throp. Uh I noticed uh on the plan that um this calls for the removal of trees.
>> Um it does approximately seven trees to be removed. Would you speak to those please? >> Um those seven trees of those seven trees, five of them are lining the driveway. They're marked in the plan with large
X's here. >> Yes. And those are all purple plums that are infested with a blight and would probably be succumbing to it in the next couple of years. So of those
seven trees, five are already diseased. The two there are two that are being shown to be removed. And the largest of those is a crepe mural that's about 18
ft high. It is not a shade tree and or not a canopy tree at least. And that was proposed to be removed in order that we could consolidate that patio area. take these two
two small areas that are existing, make them something, make them one area that would be more usable, right? And then the final tree is just a very spindly uh evergreen tree on the borders that's been crowded out by all the other very
healthy evergreen trees around it. >> Right. So, um the the the five that line um the border there, what's the landscaping plan uh to replace those trees or what?
>> Uh we hadn't anticipated that. >> So, you're not at this point you haven't you don't have a plan to put new trees in there or or some other kind of landscaping? Um, my recommendation would be to replace the trees that are along
the driveway with shrubs that are more compact because throughout this site we have a lot of plantings that are probably I guess uh 20 25 years old that are growing into each other and I think it
was overplanted initially. So I would not want to repeat the same mistake and I would plant with something more like a shrub that would be let's say any place in the 4T to 6t
range as opposed to a tree. >> Mhm. And those those five trees that um are going to be removed, would you say that those have provided um privacy screening for the neighbor or
or not? Um, I think that at one time they might have formed part of the privacy screening, but at this stage of their maturity and also with other plantings that are
not shown here on the neighbor's site, I think they're redundant now. >> All right. >> And and they're dying, too. >> Okay. Uh and then uh the other question I have is about the the fence uh that um uh circles the the the backyard uh which
is is to code but there's a there's a gate that leads out to the park area in the back which is uh uh uh the height is shorter than the fence itself. Um
would you speak to that? Because obviously if you're talking about putting in a swimming pool here, the issue becomes um how do you make sure that it's a secure area so that uh uh others can't get in there, youngsters in particular.
Well, the fence that runs along the rear of the property for the most part uh is on top of a wall >> that's already over 5t tall and unclimbable.
>> So, our interpret >> talking about specifically about the gate lower, >> we have no issues with raising that. >> Okay. But thank you. Thank you. Unless you want to be sworn in. That's okay. >> Yes, Pete. Go ahead. >> Uh I think
>> Why don't you just repeat what he said? >> Yes. Um there is one gate here that is at grade with Brookdale Park and that one is only 3 and 1/2 ft high and we are anticipating raising it so that it be at
code. >> Okay. All right. So, I' I'd like for that to be a condition uh for the approval of this application. Um I don't have any other questions. Uh are there members of the public that I'm sorry, you have another question?
>> Um to your knowledge, are there any materials that can be used on the patio that would allow for permeability? I was not aware that Montlair Township accepted any kind of credit for what are
known as permeable or grass pavers. Per perhaps I'm mistaken. >> There there is um I don't know the specifics, but there's a form that the engineering um the township engineer hands out that um explains what percentage of voids are needed. I
believe it's greater than 40. I'm not sure. So, I will I'll send that over to you. >> Um, my experience with permeable pavers is that even where towns have accepted them for purposes of
putting out furniture, tables, chairs, uh, shayes. They are very very uh impractical. >> Why? in in the sense that uh the leg of a the leg the voids need to be so large
that the leg of a table will start sinking into that void as opposed to the other three that are on something more solid. Um so we had not explored the possibility of using any kind of permeable pa in this
area because of those issues with practicality. Would you be willing to explore that and to avoid a variance alto together? >> Um, yes, we could explore that.
>> Okay, thank you. Other members of the public that have questions? >> All right. Mr. >> I I have uh one additional witness brief testimony from a professional planner.
>> Thank you. >> William Stimmel. I do. >> State your name and business address. >> William Stimmel, S T I Mel. My professional address is PO Box 280 Rutherford, New Jersey. Mr. >> Chair, Mr. Stimmel's testified before
the board as professional planner and presenting. >> Your license is a good standing. >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> Welcome back, Mr. >> Thank you. >> Still, you've reviewed this application. You've heard the testimony. Can you you know just discuss the variance that's being requested and your you know
analysis and opinion as to whether the variance is appropriate? >> Sure. Um going off of the November 20th, 2025 review letter from the planning department, there were two C variances noted in conjunction with this application. The first was for maximum
pvious coverage ordinance section 347-20B parentheses 3 where 47% coverage is permitted, 48.44 is existing, 49.98 is proposed.
So the existing condition is 193 square ft over what's permitted. The proposed condition is 400 square feet over what's proposed for a net increase of 27 square feet. That 207 square ft increase is less than
the surf the water surface area of the pool which is 245 square ft. So that's the first variance that was mentioned in the planning review. The second was for building coverage which is no longer applicable because the pergola has been removed from the application. So there's
no change in the building coverage. So that 1 C variance comes under the heading of a C2, a flexible C variance where the purposes of zoning are advanced and the benefits in granting the variance outweigh any detriments. As
the board I'm sure understands, this is a fairly minor request for relief. The total area in question is a little over 200 square ft. So, if you can imagine a generouslysized 10x20 parking space, that's about what we're talking about here. Uh, the applicant is proposing to
install a pool and additional PA patio area in his rear yard to enhance the aesthetics and the functionality of the space. I think it's important to consider the township's concerns in establishing the impervious coverage
requirement when thinking about this application. Uh the first and and most obvious I would say is the storm water runoff. As we've spoken about the total area of the impervious the building and the pavement is going to be reduced. The
increase here just become comes from the fact that the pool is included as imperous coverage in spite of the fact that it will generate no runoff itself. Uh the second issue is the impact on neighbors. The area in question where these improvements are being made is
only potentially visible to the two neighbors on either side. It's fully blocked from Club Road by the location of the existing residents. It's invisible to the people in the park to the rear because of the change in elevation and the landscape screening and it's screened from the neighbors on
both sides by landscaping as well. The third point is the aesthetic concerns and uh the board has seen the the photos in the planners review letter. They've seen the exhibit prepared by the landscape expert. And I I think I would
hope that we would agree that the area in question is an attractive and well-maintained residential rear yard now and will be improved upon with this application. And then finally, the green space or or open space uh concern. And I
would say that again this is a relatively minor variance. Adequate green space is provided and outdoor space is provided for the residents of this house with the rear yard as it's proposed and of course the presence of the large park to the rear of the property. As far as the negative
criteria, we have to demonstrate the variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and that it will not impair the intent and purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance. Based on my review of the submitted materials, my visit to the site, I see no substantial detriment to
the public good. There's no additional runoff, no visibility from uh joining lots or rights of way. Uh in response to comments from some of the board members, the applicant has agreed to uh obtain a tree removal permit, plant shrubs along
the driveway to mitigate the loss of some of the existing plantings. And in addition to whatever agreements have been made based on board comments about the fence and the gate at the rear, we will obviously have to comply with building code requirements for the pool enclosure and that would be addressed
when plans are filed for permits. In terms of the substantial detriment to the zone plan and zoning ordinance, very limited variance relief. This does not set a precedent. Every case is judged on its own merits and it's it's simply one variance for imperous coverage which is
mitigated by landscaping, screening, topography and the positioning of the building on site. >> Thank you. No, no further questions from me. >> Mr. Cfield. >> Um,
is there a um, so the the the um is it a benefit for this property being behind a park? >> Is it a Sure. Sure. I I think being close to a park is certainly a benefit
>> for storm runoff in that sense. Like there's no neighbors in the back. Is that >> No, there there's no neighbors in the back. Uh the as you get to the back of the property, there's landscaping and a fence and then a retaining wall. The the height of the retaining wall is about eye height for me. So 5 1/2 ft or
something like that. Um I I've I've seen these um these these uh I think these dunk pools is what they're calling them these days. They're like rectangle ones in that sense that I've seen come up um that people have
done. this might not necessarily be that type of shape in that way. Um, but you know, other people that have done that have taken, you know, their driveways and put gravel and stuff like that just to mediate the storm water water runoff. This is a little bit different in the
sense that, you know, the driveway is very well done and the sidewalk is very well done and that, you know, I I could see the client not wanting to do that aspect of it. Um the waterfall, how close is that waterfall from the the property line? Do
we know? >> Uh meets all the setback requirements. They're noted on the plan. >> Is that waterfall built into that? Uh I'll talk to I should have left that to the architect. That's not you. >> It's a 15 foot setback to the pool. The waterfall is a little bit less, maybe 10
ft. >> Okay. All right. Thank you, Mr. Moore. No questions, >> Mr. Cruz. >> Um, I have no questions. >> Mr. Griffith, I have no questions. Mr. Simon,
>> one question. Um, as far as the pool, I understand the rationale for the pool being used to absorb whatever storm water. What about when it's out of season and the pool, I assume, will be covered. What happens to the runoff then? >> Um,
there's a moderate increase. uh you know obviously with the snowfall in the wintertime the uh melts over a period of time and there's less of a sudden spike in runoff from the property in the shoulder season. I guess it would potentially be an issue but that assumes
that it's a that it's a rigid cover that it's fully covered in the offse and that it doesn't permit any u permit any retention on the property. >> So where would the water go if it's not going to drain down into the pool? Where would it go off to? >> The the general pattern of the
topography there is that it drains to the rear of the site and then it would go over the top of the wall um and down to the park if it wasn't absorbed in the the the grass and the landscape beds to the rear of the property. >> Okay. Thank you,
>> Mr. Church. >> I have members of the public that have questions for this witness. I think we could do questions or comments. This is the last witness. >> Yep. >> Comments. >> All right, Mr. Trump Lock. >> Mr. Chair, I mean, you I will only
repeat what Mr. Simmel said. I mean, I think the most important thing to me is that the, you know, I mean, the pool's considered impervious, but as a reality, there not being any additional runoff most times of the year associated with
the pool. You know, we're only 200 ft. um variety of of uh improvements being made. Properties in good condition uh um doesn't really create any detriment to
the neighbors. I think it's a it's a minor variance and I would hope the board would approve it. And obviously to as has already been pointed out um there would likely be an engineering review of this and we'd have to comply with any um
requirements of the engineer related to storm water or drainage issues. So >> great. Thank you. All right. We'll move to a final discussion by the board. Uh we'll begin with Mr. Moore. >> I'm generally in favor of the
application. I don't see it being a detriment uh to the uh community in which it resides and um I think it will be a nice enhancement. >> Mr. Cruz. >> Um, I'm generally in favor, although I I
question and whether according to our ordinance with uh respect to tree removal whether or not there's been sufficient information provided to consider the uh blighted quote unquote trees as as not required to be replaced.
>> Well, I I would just if I could we have to comply with the tree removal ordinance. So, uh either by replacing or by paying into a fund. So, um, >> okay. >> So, in the event the application is approved, that would be a condition of approval. Okay. I would expect that.
>> Very good. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Griffith. >> Uh, I'm in favor and I don't I don't buy the pool issue. I think the winner point is uh spoton as to why I don't agree with a swimming pool rationalization.
Um, and I think a condition of approval should be that the storm water retention for whatever amount is over the code which was 400 ft should be addressed. >> Mr. Simon, >> uh, I'm in favor,
>> Mr. Church. Yeah, I am in favor with the proviso or the additions that that gate in the back be uh raised to a uh to code.
I'm in favor, Mr. Cfield. >> I'm not in favor. >> All right. Um yeah, I'm generally uh supportive of the application as well. Um I'm not uh I
think uh as Mr. Cruz has said u a bit skeptical about the uh the tree removal uh but um uh that will be handled uh when it uh uh goes to final approval. Um
the uh I'm sorry Mr. um Griffith what was the uh comment that you were making? Um I was I was suggesting that storm water retention or something of an equivalent
basis be done in a tank or uh a well that would gather the water and slowly disseminate into the ground so that we you know you're basically taking care of the delta. So, we look on pros and cons on these, right? It's
>> variance. >> And I'm looking for a pro. And the pro is that I'm taking care of the storm water. If you if you're shedding more storm water and you're just saying it's okay, that's not a pro. That's a con. So, I need a pro. This is the pro that I'm looking for.
>> So, you would be looking for that to be a condition. I think I think the condition would be that the applicant would be required to install storm water management measures to the extent the impervious coverage is exceeded over what is allowed by the ordinance um as
required by the township of engineer. >> Fair. Okay. All right. All right. Um, so I think if I could if there if there was a motion to approve as there was a majority in that effect, it would be that condition. They would have to comply with the tree removal ordinance.
Uh I think there was a comment about they were going to raise the gate um and our standard conditions about the applicants bound by all representations made on his behalf during the course of the public hearing and that the applicants responsible for inspection fees incurred under Montlair code section 202-27
as well as the escro fees incurred in connection with review of this matter. >> All right. So would someone make a motion to that effect? >> I make a motion to approve. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. All those in favor say I. >> I. All opposed. >> One one opposite. One opposed. Oh, any
abstensions. All right. It is approved. >> All right. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Okay. Our next application will be application 2955, 340 Orange Road, Monontlair Senior
Housing Corporation, block 2904, lot 71. Um, And this will be for an expanding and non-conforming use adding rear screen patio. >> All right, Mr. Tulac. >> Good evening again. Uh trifecta for me tonight. Alan Tremulac appearing on
behalf of Monontlair Senior Housing Corporation. You know, this is, I think, a very simple, straightforward uh site plan application with no variances. Um, you know, the uh Moner Senior Housing Corporation owns the South End Gardens
Senior Living Center and multifamily um uh housing complex located at 340 Orange Road. Um what they're looking to do is to simply replace an existing concrete patio in the rear of the uh multif
family building. Um replace it with a a new concrete patio which would be screened in. I believe there's a roof uh as part of that and uh the plan also contemplates some additional landscaping as well as a a new paved ADA walkway in
the rear. Um, again, there are no variances involved. It's a pretty simple, straightforward application. And I have uh uh one witness to present, which is Gregory Schwitzer, who I assume the board would accept his qualifications. >> Would you raise your right hand? Do you
swear to tell the truth of the matter pending before the board? >> Yes. >> Name and address, please. >> Gregory Schwitzer, 7 Oak, please clear, New Jersey. >> I assume we can accept him as an expert architect.
Your office prepared the plans for this application. Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> Okay. Can you just review what's proposed with the board? >> Sure. >> Um I think the best thing to do is to go through the drawings uh just kind of briefly here and I'll try and keep this
short and sweet. Um the map that you see at the lower portion there really just shows the surrounding neighborhood and as you can see the site is pretty wellestablished residential setting characterized by a mix of very mature
landscaping and um you know it's it's a very defined neighborhood pattern that's in place. So, um, we thought that this was important to show because it it really starts to, uh, set the tone of what is there currently.
Um, let me just move this to the next slide. Uh, okay. So, this is a site plan, and here we're showing the existing conditions of the property. Um, the site is currently improved with a three-story brick
building and uh asphalt parking area with walkways and other site elements to really provide enhancement to the site. Um, the existing patio is aging and underutilized and it does not provide adequate weather protection or
functional outdoor space for it. It's located in the northwestern portion of the site illustrated here. This is the parking area and then there's a series of walking paths that of which one actually terminates here
currently. And then this is just an enlargement showing the actual location and how it is situated and attaches to building. We'll get into greater detail as we move forward. Um the elevations that you see here show kind of what is there now.
There's a concrete slab. Um there's galvanized pipe uh that is used to support what has traditionally been a tensile structure or tent for tent or canopy over the area to provide shade for the residents. Um presently um all
that is there is just the concrete slab and the pipe and there is no covering on top of it. Um, the whole purpose of this project is really to put something in that's a little bit more permanent and usable and uh let's see here.
Okay, so as we look at this uh you'll see that the actual um site itself takes uh an area of approximately 30 ft by 25 ft which is 30 ft in this direction, 25 ft here. There's an existing path that
comes up to this point. And what we've done is we've created a uh series of doors from the screened porch area that connects to the path. Again, all three exposed walls of this are screened. The prior concrete slab and the canopy went
all the way from this point to the edge of the building. So, what we're doing is actually opening some of this space up and we've created a landscape buffer in between this exit door which currently exists and the windows along these residents
here. So, there's a landscape buffer here to kind of create some separation between the two. the roof um because it's providing shade, it's great, but we also wanted to make sure that the roof was uh permeable enough to allow some natural light to
enter the area below. So, what we have is a series of eight skylights. That's also part of that. That's the plan that you see here from the exterior of the roof. The lower shows a somewhat of a reflected ceiling plan that shows the roof. It shows some integrated lighting
and it shows a series of ceiling fans that'll be placed at the underside of the ridge that runs from the building to the front entry of the space. Here is uh the first of a series of elevations that show the building. Let's
pull this up over here. And um you could see the lower portion of this is predominantly brick which is here. And then we have a series of frames to support the uh screen
structure that or the screening that we'd like to place around it. These are screen doors and then screening even up to this point. And then there's just a solid roof that's supported by these columns that are part an integral part of this whole structure. This would be a
side view of that same uh structure. And this is the other side showing the landscape buffer between the walkway from the exit doors that lead out into the uh pathway that I pointed out earlier.
The lower portion of this is a section through the space and it really gives you just a quick indication of how this interacts with the building itself. There is a door um egress door that comes through here or a door actually
connecting a uh common uh space within this uh building allows the residents to come into this space enjoy the inner indoor outdoor experience and then there's a series of doors forward uh as you walk forward
toward for example where I'm seated from that point uh to allow egress to the past that or Right at the foot of the door, we provided a whole bunch of planting, not only just for the screening purposes
here to block views from this into the resident dwelling units here, but there's also some uh tiered and multi-layered uh plantings moving from lower to slightly higher as you get toward the structure. And again, all of these are native species and uh the
whole purpose of the planting is really to help provide some visual interest year round. um around the structure. So um the plants were chosen to allow seasonal activity. >> What's the total amount of number of new
plantings? >> Um I can get that to you in just a moment here. I just cannot see my notes here. >> Okay. Um, okay. We're talking roughly
50 plants that would be planted around the structure. It's a big improvement. Currently, there's some evergreens that are overgrown and unmanaged and clumping together. And our goal is to remove that and put in something that would be
easier to maintain and something that's a lot more attractive. Okay, that is pretty much the end of this presentation. Um I don't have anything else. >> Is there any improvements to the to the walkway or the path? Um
>> there is. The planner planning report refers to a new paved ADA compliant walkway that connects to existing pathways. Can you just point out where that is? >> Sure. Um, this is one point of exit and this whole pathway has been created and
it's all at grade. Uh there's no dip or a lip here to enter this. And certainly the same here from the building down to the path. And then it connects to an existing what I call a nature walk or path throughout the rear of the property.
>> Okay. You won't see any of the structure from the street. Um it is completely um surrounded by a very densely landscaped area separating it from the neighbors bounding the property on the sides. >> And there are no variances required in
connection with this? >> No. In fact, we're looking at this as a just a simple accessory use to the structure and no variances required. >> Okay. No further questions. >> All right. Thank you, >> Mr. Cruz.
>> I have no questions. >> Mr. Griffith, >> there are no variances required. >> No. >> Then why are we here? >> So, this project was initially approved by use variance by the board of adjustment. So as a expansion of the use
variance or similar to what we had with the gas station where it's a use variance that's now being changed. It has to be approved by the board. >> Okay. Thank you. I have no questions. >> Mr. Simon, >> no questions. >> Mr. Church,
>> is there is there a ex an entrance from the building >> to this new addition? >> There is. >> Without going outside? Yeah. >> Yes, there is. >> Okay. >> Yes. Uh >> I'm going to show you two views of it.
This is a section through it. And this is an exit right here from the building into this space. >> Okay. >> And then there's another one here that leads straight to the outside without having to traverse through this space.
>> So they can enter that addition from the building without having to go outside. That is correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> It's It has It's controlled access though. >> Is there heating or air conditioning to this unit? >> No. >> Okay.
>> Just ceiling fans in the ceiling. >> And do we anticipate like in the winter like this space being I mean I know you probably will use it, but if it's a cold, you will not use this space. >> Um that conversation never came up with the uh owner. They gave a very
particular uh requirement and it was basically to remove what was seen as a temporary structure. >> Yeah. >> And create something that's more permanent requiring less, you know, prepping every season to getting a tarp and stretching it across
the top and >> that sort of stuff. >> Gotcha. Thank you so much, >> Mr. Moore. >> No question. So just uh finally uh uh is this facility something that can be utilized during the evening as well as during the daytime hours?
>> Uh it is very possible. Yes. >> Is there lighting inside? You mentioned ceiling fans. >> Yes, there is some lighting. >> All right. Uh but there is no landscape lighting outside of this structure. >> Uh there's landscape lighting all around the facility along the walking paths
that connect the parking lot to multiple areas around the building. All right. And this and and uh would that include uh along the pathway that's on the side of this structure? >> Uh yes, there's already lighting on the
exterior of the building. Okay. >> Um which adequately covers that. >> I think I see it looks like a hood or something like that. Is that >> Yeah, there's something literally directly above the door here. >> Yes. Okay. I did see. >> And then there's one here. And those are
pre-existing. All right. Thank you. All right. I have no uh other questions. Are there uh members of the public that have any questions or comments about this application? >> All right. Mr. Chair,
>> that's all we have, Mr. Chairman. We And I would submit to the board. >> All right. So, we'll move to discussion. Mr. Griffith, >> I have no discussion. I'm in favor. >> Okay. Okay. Mr. Simon.
>> Uh, I'm in favor. >> Mr. Church, >> I'm in favor. >> Mr. Two in favor. >> Okay. Mr. Moore, >> I'm in favor. >> Mr. Cruz, >> I'm in favor. >> I'm also in favor of this application. So if there is an if there is a motion
to approve this minor site plan application be subject to our standard conditions that the applicants bound by all representations made on its behalf during the course of the public hearing and also that the applicants responsible for all inspection fees incurred as well as escro fees in connection with the review
of this matter. >> All right. Is there a motion to that effect? >> Motion to as stated. >> All right. All in favor say I. I all opposed extensions. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Good night. >> Good night.
>> All right. Okay. We're going to move to application 2957 31 Oakwood Avenue, Cecilia and Michael Street. Hope I pronounced that correctly. Um,
and this applicant requests, this is uh on the township tax mats map says lot 14 in block 1808. Um, the applicant requests a use variance from Monontlair code 347-112 as the proposed construction is
considered an expansion of the nonconforming use of the property. The applicant also seeks any other variances that may be required. >> Yes. >> Would you raise your right hand? >> You have to put something down. Okay. Do you swear to tell the truth in a matter
pending before the board? >> Yes, I do. >> State your name and address. >> My name is Marcus with I'm Marcus Tong with Tungsten Architects. Uh my office is in uh 28 Valo in Montlair. I'm a registered architect in the state of New Jersey and my license is in good
standing. here. And and your your clients, the property owners are present, correct? >> Yes. Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. Proceed. And I will accept him as a >> Yes. What' you say your last name again? >> Tong. T U N G. >> Thank you. Thank you very much.
>> Yep. So for experience, our office has uh obtained 11 out of 16 ADU zoning permit approval to date since the ordinance was in effect. Um the uh subject property located at 31 Oakwood Avenue currently consists of a lawful non-conforming two family principal
structure in an R1 single family residential zone. The owners occupy the first and second floors enter from Oakwood Avenue while tenants occupy the third floor with a separate entry from Norwood Avenue. This is a corn corner
lot. The proposed uh 900 foot detach ADU will be located west of the existing garage and north of the principal building. The ADU is intended to function as a retirement home for aging parents. So in full plan
um the main living space consists of a open kitchen and dining area uh connects to a half bathroom and provide direct access to the backyard. The um it includes a primary bedroom and a caregiver bedroom with a full bathroom
accessible from both bedrooms. The proposed ADU does not impact any existing non-conforming conditions other than expanding the permitted principal use of the lot. As such, we are requesting a variance from the
Montlair's code section 347-112 to permit the expansion of a non-conforming use of the lawful two family principal building. The proposed ADU otherwise complies with all ADU zoning requirements.
Do do we want to get into the exterior design or is that something we can discuss later? Yeah. Why don't you just give us an overview of what you're uh wanting to accomplish here? >> Sounds good. So, the exterior design of the ADU is intended to harmonize with
the existing principal building through consistent architectural details, material, proportions, and color while adapting elements to create an cohesive aesthetic rather than an identical structure. So image uh shown here are the principal building
uh both facades and this is the proposed ADU in reference to the um specific elements of the main building. uh features such as painted wood clapboard siding, um wood side wood shingles above first
floor, two over one double hung windows with upperable shutters and one lit over two panel exterior wood doors will align in scale, style and finish with the principal building. For site hierarchy, the scale of the ADU and its gable roof are designed to harmonize with the
existing detach garage rather than the hip roof of the principal building. reinforcing the ADU as a secondary structure. Um the ADU will not result in any detriment to the public good nor impair the intent of the zoning plant as
it introduce no change to site access maintain adequate on-site management of storm water. The last two pages here we have the civil engineer design for the storm water storm water management. Uh, in conclusion, the proposed ADU is
designed to meet the owner's need while respecting the property's historic character and the zoning codes. The requested variance is limited solely to the expansion of the non-conforming use with minimal impact to the neighborhood. >> All right. Thank you. >> That will conclude my Can I ask a
question? >> Yes, please. >> Did you get a copy of the um Historic Preservation Commission report dated March 18, 2026? >> Yes. There were three recommendations made. Is the applicant willing to comply with those three recommendations?
>> Yes. So the >> That's all you need to say. >> All right. >> Thank you. >> All right. Um let's then move to uh questions. We'll begin with you, Mr. Griffith. We having given you a chance
to be the lead off. >> I have no questions. >> Okay, that was easy. Okay, Mr. Simon. Uh, no questions. All right, >> Mr. Church. Okay, >> Mr. Cfield. >> Uh, there's some oak trees in the side
there. Is the ADU going to be close to those? >> We are being we we're keeping the big one next to the existing garage. We're not removing this. >> How close is that uh big one to the new ADU? >> New ADU. Let's see. Do you know?
>> Yes, I have it here. Um, at minimum 20 ft. >> Okay. Uh, planner question. Uh, what is the front yard here? Is it O Oak Oakwood or Norwood? >> They're both front yards. >> Okay. The parking is in the front yard in Norwood. Is that allowed?
that is existing non-conforming. >> Okay. >> Since we're not expanding the parking, >> are we going to be using any of these parking spots for the new ADU? >> Yes. So, there are five that is required and then we have five. >> So, the garage will be this the space
for the new ADU um people, the tenants >> in as shown in A1, the site plan here, there's a barrier free dedicated for ADU that's closest to the ADU. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Moore.
>> How many feet is the ADU from the property line? >> It's uh 6 ft from the side yard and about 56 ft from the rear yard. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Cruz. Yes.
>> I just had a a quick question for uh you, sir. Um, so I see that in terms of your calculation for the ADU, you differentiate between, I guess, the living area and the footprint. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Um, in terms of the uh uh our
current ordinance, could you just correct me if I'm I'm mistaken? Um, the the size of the ADU, is that with respect to the footprint or the the living area? >> The size meaning the 800 ft. >> Yes. So the 800 square ft is the
habitable area and that was last changed in the August 2025 ordinance revision for the ADU section. And so that then limited um habitable area to 800 square ft which gave a little bit more room for bathroom
storage closet type of spaces. >> Okay. >> So it can be larger than 800 ft. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh >> no further question. Thank you. >> Okay. Um, so couple of questions. So,
uh, this ADU is how how many feet is it from the shed? >> About 8t. Sorry, exactly 8t. >> 8t. Is that what you said? 8t. >> Yes, 8t. >> Okay. Um, so this ADU will be while it
will not be visible to the public on Norwood, it will be visible on Oakwood. Is that correct? >> That's correct. Portion of it. >> Okay. Half about half of it. Okay. Um, so I want to ask about this
who is who is the in What's what's the intent for the use of this ADU? >> Aging parents. >> Aging parents. >> Correct. >> Okay. Uh so that would be the immediate uh intent. >> Correct. >> Um and it would not be available for um
rental purposes beyond uh family um beyond the aging parents. Is that correct? >> For the current intent is for aging parents. Um I can't predict the future but if if that's a requirement for the approval of the variance then that can
be um achieved. >> Yeah. Well they have to be in compliance with the with the uh >> but the the ADU zoning code does allow for minimal rental for six months. >> Correct. >> Yeah.
Um I I had one just one uh question um about the design of the the interior uh and that was uh you sorry on page
Yeah. What page is that? Page A3. >> A3. So the question I have, Mr. Tong, is is uh is uh is really a it's it's really a safety question. Mhm. >> Um so in terms of the design uh of this
uh the the two bedrooms uh the primary and the caregiver bedrooms. So the caregiver is located uh towards the foyer um or the front of this structure. Is that correct? >> Yes.
>> Uh whereas the primary is located uh towards the back uh by the kitchen area. >> Correct. Uh I'm assuming that because of the way in which you did the design that one of the aging parents is currently or you anticipate or it is anticipated that
they will be um utilizing um assistance. >> Correct. >> Wheelchair or or something of that nature. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Regardless of that um it's required to to be designed as barrierfree. >> Yes. Yes. Well, the the the question I have is that while I can see that
there's a clear path between the primary and the caregiver in terms of the the un the the the bathroom facilities, >> um, nonetheless, if there if there was to be a situation in which uh the person
in the primary bedroom needed to be able needed to be able to escape um this structure, let's say because of a fire or something like that. um they may uh be somewhat encumbered by the fact that they're next to the kitchen area.
>> Mhm. >> And so the question I have is would it not make sense since the the dimensions of both the primary and the care caregiver bedrooms, would it not make sense for the primary bedroom to be in the front of the property as opposed to
in the back? Also, I think if I if I'm if I'm understanding the design properly, um the the the kitchen area and the primary bedroom are up against a fence. Is that correct? >> No, it's not up against any fence.
>> That's not That's not correct. Where is Where's the neighbor? Where's the neighbor? >> The plan East side. It's the um fence. So, six feet away from it. Okay. So, that's the the side that runs
along the the the bedrooms and the bathroom is what you're saying. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> So, I believe the the location of the primary bedroom, it's really the the view and the direct access to the backyard.
>> The primary has the view of the backyard. Correct. >> Okay. That makes most >> and then to your point of entrance is is by the shed is between is between the ADU and the shed.
>> Correct. >> So, um I see that you have egress by the I guess the are these like sliding doors? Is that what it is in the primary bedroom? >> No, those are double hunk windows. So, what about the possibility of having um
sliding doors um instead of double hung windows in terms of emergency? >> Yes. >> Mhm. We can consider that. Um so the code does allow double hung window at certain height to be egress windows.
>> So that will allow someone to you know fit between the the windows and certain height you can even uh with a wheelchair you can push yourself out of the window. >> Yeah I these comply with the building code is that correct? >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> So in this scenario you actually have
three or four points of egress out of this room here. One is the do the main door. two is do the bathroom and then we have two egress windows. >> Yeah. I mean I I just think that the egress windows may not be particularly practical for someone who's bound to a
wheelchair. >> Got a >> Yes. Go ahead. Um, I see in the perspective to the right, uh, what appears to be a door to me and it's identified as a 36x 84 in
>> window. That is a sliding door from the kitchen to the back. >> So, that's a door. Okay. >> So, that's that's the second egress. Okay. So they do have egress to the back which is sliding door in the exterior is unusual but uh >> although it still would require if there
was a fire it still would require stepping into that area where >> Yeah. Yeah. I think the doors the door is a good thing to have. I'm not so sure about a sliding door as an exterior door, but that's a different issue. >> Right.
>> All right. Well, I just would suggest just taking another look at that. Just again, it's it's a safety precaution given the fact that you've identified or the owner has identified that uh they anticipate that a person uh their mobility might be somewhat impaired.
>> Understood. >> Right. Well, to your point, force well to the discussion. It was it was more comic though like for like when you have a patio or when you have a sliding door out to the deck and it's the same
effect. >> Sliding glass door. Yeah, very common. I agree. But that's a pocket door that he's drawn where it goes into into the wall and that's not that's not common. >> Okay. >> Sliding doors are designed and they casket up really nice and tight. The
glass ones. So you're just saying because it's a pocket door that is >> the pocket door traditionally just you know it's they're not put on the exterior and they're hard to they're hard to gasket it up and make it tight >> just for ceiling purp there members of the public that have
any questions statements comments Okay. Then uh we'll move towards discussion. We'll begin with Mr. Simon. >> I'm in favor. >> Mr. Church. >> I'm in favor. >> Mr. Cfield.
>> Uh I'm not in favor. >> Mr. Moore. >> I'm in favor. >> Mr. Cruz. >> Uh I'm in favor. >> Mr. Griffith. >> I'm in favor.
>> Yeah. I'm I'm also in favor. Um can I make a suggestion of what the conditions would be? >> Okay. >> Um if there's a motion to approve this uh D2 variance, it should be that the applicant shall comply with and satisfy
comments one and three contained in the Montlair historical reservation for dated March 18, 2026 uh to the applicant shall comply with requirements and procedures contained in section 347-8. That's the ADU ordinance. Uh three, the
applicant shall be found by all representations made close to public hearing. And four, the applicant shall be responsible for all inspection fees incurred under code section 202-27 as well as escro fees incurred in connection with review of
the >> um excuse me, Mr. Sullivan. Uh I I would perhaps also want to include just on on the chance that there's any like uh damage or issue done to the tree that the in the advent of any uh >> well the condition one of the HPC report
talks about retention of the short trees to put the tree removal against compliance with there also. >> Yeah, that was that was it just to add that to the to the motion. We can do that. >> Thank you sir. So just to clarify that we we are removing three trees behind the the garage
that are >> is that shown on the plan? >> It's shown in the civil drawings. >> Um site plan one of two the fifth page under site preparation plan
>> under where So, there are three smaller trees in the back of the um lean to garage. Okay. But the the um HPC noted uh item number
one is the one next directly next to the frame garage. >> Mhm. >> Uh T36. That's the one that uh HBC is noting. Okay. >> All right. Is there a motion uh to uh with the conditions? >> I'll make the motion.
>> Is there a second? >> That's a motion to approve. >> A motion to approve as Mr. Sullivan stated earlier with the conditions. >> Yes. >> Second. >> I move. >> Second. All right. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed? >> I >> uh abstensions.
Um it is approved. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Just want to uh test the waters here. We're closing in on 11:00. Uh and uh >> we have one more. >> We have one more. >> Yeah.
>> We Okay, huh? What do you think? looks at the back. >> Yeah. >> Right. Okay, we have uh another application that's going to be application 2958 84 Clinton Avenue. Steven and Jennifer
Grin. Um and this uh is for property on the township tax map as lot 10 block 1202. Variances are requested from Monontlair code 347-33C1
to permit a southerntherly sideyard setback of 5.33 ft where 12 ft is the required minimum from Monlet code 347-34A uh 2A to permit the installation of an HVAC condenser with a sideyard setback
of 3.75 ft where 12 ft is the required minimum and from Monontlair code 347-20B3 to permit 51.6% impervious coverage where 50% is the permitted maximum. The applicant also
seeks any other variances that may be required. >> And uh the notice is in order and taxes are paid. >> All right. Thank you. >> Would you raise your right hand? Do you swear to tell the truth in the matter pending before the board? >> Yes. >> State your name and address. Um, Ying
Lee Y I N G L I from Yingi Architect. I'm located in Milbour, New Jersey. I'm licensed in New Jersey and my license is in good standing. >> Um, >> and your client is present, correct? >> Yes. >> All right. Thank you. You're welcome.
>> Thank you. Um basically the project narrative is in the application but in short the summary is um um the lot is uh basically small irregular lot in a largely um stately in the neighborhood
largely mostly stately large houses. It's irregular with undersized with corner missing. So the uh the three of the variances were two of them are the result of non existing
non-conforming conditions. Um should I go through maybe go straight to the each of the ordinance that we are seeking? >> Sure. Um, for example, the sideyard a min minimum sideyard setback. Um, because the addition involves extending
the existing side den on the left side of the street um toward the back. Um the existing sideyard setback is already at 5 foot five 5.56 ft. So we because the
um irregular irregularity of the lot the lot is veered to um toward um to toward the right on the back. So we are making that 5.56 worse basically that become five um 5
foot and 4 in. It's the result of extending the the ge geometry of the building line but the lot is irregular. So that is the reason for them and um but at the back of the house actually I
guess go back to the house the house the existing house has two parts the front part is a side that's the original house the side gable colonial revival house and um the previous owner did addition at the back one-story edition that is
showing on the side plan the existing onetory so our addition in a way can be perceived as two parts. One part is to the side gable colonial revival. That's that's the one that caused that um make
the existing non-conforming sideyard setback worse. At the back of the house, we are um we actually try not to exabate the situation. We set back two foot away from the property line for the twotory
addition. uh for the one-story back edition that onetory back edition does not exceed the outermost boundary of the existing one-story edition. Um the second variance we are seeking it's
basically the it's out of necessities for the HVC condensers required is um 12 ft. There's no way we can meet that. And um now we're going to move on to the third imperous coverage.
Um it's the result of the added building square footage and the necessary patio and the necessary walkway. Um as um as stated and as in the application, we are basically 1.7 over the maximum allowed.
Um we're seeking 51 we're we're at proposal will be at a 51.6% where 49.9 is allowed. So that's the three variances we're seeking
and um well also um we have adopted suggestions made by the HPC in March. Um one is uh to lower the left part of addition
um the part that is um part of the side gable colonial revival and the second one is to maintain the existing chimney. So even though we are moving the masonry structure but the chimney will be rest reconstructed on top of the roof with
wood framing we will salvage the existing brick and um basically do the restoration and put existing brick on the a woodframed chimney. And the third suggestion is
the third suggestion is to keep the existing against I think uh the the porch the porch columns to maintain the character of the colonial revival cell to maintain the character
of the neighborhood. I think that's the three right? Yes. >> What what are we looking at? Guess I'm looking at the HPC report of March 18 and there are seven recommendations in there. >> The HPC is March. There are three recommendations, right?
>> I'm looking at seven. >> There are seven uh bullet points in >> seven bullet points but three areas. Yes, >> I think I'm I'm the three are talking about the basically they are the three objections and then it came into seven
bullet points. Yes, >> I I'll just add the main three comments that the HPC had were the front porch columns, the >> stepping down of the addition, and the chimney, and those were maintained. They reviewed it again and were satisfied
with the >> So, so those are one, one, two, and three >> in there. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> What about four, four, five, six, seven? Those were um also satisfied in the second review. The hope they weren't.
>> So they were incorporated in the current plan. >> Yes. >> So the so I'm not saying it's going to get approved, but if the application were approved, 1, two, and three would need to be conditions. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> They're conditions, but they do
accurately reflect their current plans. >> Oh, so they're already in there. Everything's already in there. Correct. >> I would say the HPC memo is is is done. >> Yeah, >> it's late. >> Sorry. I think the the last page of the packet
has the basically before and after renderings shows the it's a side by side visual of the before the existing and the proposed. That's probably a better
picture to visualize the addition. Um this is the left side >> sheet R1. sheet one the last page of the packet it's uh the visual um of the proposed addition and as see in the first row from the front the view from
the perspective from the front basically it's the the last page of the packet titled R1 it's the three dimen um 3D 3D massing study um the first row shows
the second um basically addition on top of the existing den on the left and the HPC's comment is to lower the bridge of the addition to maintain the the major the the main and the the secondary
massing and um the yeah as you can basically second row is from the other angle from the street and um the third row shows the back addition the existing um actually has sloped the roof. In
terms of a massing, I would say volumewise. We are not increasing the back edition. It's a flat roof. We're trying to basically to maintain the natural light into the existing second story. So,
we're not um increasing the roof heights of the back edition. I guess um to look at this slot at another one. It's a I always say it's Italian picture is if you look at the second page titled E1 base information
um number two figure number two of the base info E1 you can see the highlighted yellow is the subject property >> second page titled base info basic
information titled E1 and number two figure number two is the location map bas Basically, it's um I believe the actually the HPC consultant did a study that used to be part of adjacent property. So, it was
subdivided. You can see it's it's a tiny lot wedged into into a neighborhood composing of large large home and large lot. Um it's basically anything you want do you
you you want to do will trigger variance and um and then say another in plain languages there's nowhere to go if you want to do anything. And um the the the left left
corner behind existing story den um one-story den currently is used as um um outdoor patio with some furniture and it's um it's it's a small area and also if anything I think it's very close to
the neighbor just because the way it is. If anything I I think that's more a privacy issue. If I use this is sort of like a dead corner to be used at the back patio in the way I'm directing the family you know by design the family
will use the back patio and that that corner in the way any noise will be contented that will become inside of the house in instead the the any activity will be directed more toward the backyard of the house instead of between wedged between two buildings.
If if any of the members have to the side, you probably notice this um this corner. It's uh it's it's hardly usable. They have overgrown plants and um the furnitureures. It it it's it's hard to use that area.
And um notes on the third variances um yes basically following like you know the case from other um the previous cases uh in terms of the impervious um area increase. I understand we understand that we will comply with the
ordinance um in terms of the storm water management and that will be dealt with by the engineer review when we apply for permit. I understand that's the process. I believe the cut of line Montlair is 250 square foot. The building itself
already exceed that. So uh the grading plan is required anyway. questions. >> Are you going to have any witnesses or >> um I think that's it. >> That's the presentation. >> Um are there questions?
Um my question is more can you explain again why for the rear elevation. Um the existing has a little bit more style or character in my opinion. So uh but you went from a slope roof. Why go
to the squared flat roof? >> Um >> square design with a flat roof. >> Uh there I think one is uh there are two reasons. One is technical. If we look at I think now okay this board member is talking about the exterior elevation. So
we're looking at um a uh p a200 and a2001 >> correct. Um the reason is because we do the ex the extension is 18 we extending back 18 feet and then to have the roof
um sloped that means I will lose um to to have it sloped and then to have enough slope we will lose the will sacrifice the height of the window and then >> the windows on the second floor.
>> Yes. Window on the second Yeah. on the second floor and then one and then I will ended up something between 3 to uh 3 to2 or lower. So it it became um a borderline between a flat roof structure
is more construction or a sloped roof. So when it's a borderline um I my eyes go membrane. Uh otherwise I ended up um I think it it's it's it's a geometry. That's one reason is geometry and the
other reason is this is I guess it's my view of existing addition at the back. It seems to me it has the time stamp of 1980s. I can't really say it's colonial. I can't really say it's historical. It's basically putting together
um it's putting together is like in the 1980s or 19 early 1990s and then in this case I think the the wish of the owner is to bring a natural light in and then create like um entertaining place and um our way my
under basically my approach is I mean like what 21st century now I do not have to I keep the front of the character historic character at the back. It's not contradictory to do to give people a modern
a modern a modern addition that satisfy the use and also I believe it's basically enhance the neighborhood. So I I don't think it's contradictory. This is more like architectural philosophy thing. So >> from a from a practical standpoint, especially with this year's snow, you're not concerned about a flat roof
containing, you know, a significant amount of snow and adding weight and other problems, >> this is yes, but definitely this is thought through. I mean, you've seen flat proof everywhere and the commercial buildings, they are all flat roof. So we will have a membrane um TPO roofing
membrane is basically proven and has has been has been used for over TPO or versus or or basically it it's a technical thing and that that would be dealt with in technical detail and then
we definitely thought about it from the very beginning and we have I have I have done basically flat roof or closed left roof with similar membrane roofing and and adequate insulation. Um, yes, this is more a technical. Yeah.
>> Okay. And, uh, lastly, in regards to this to the rear step, um, since it's more than two steps, don't you need a rail or something? >> Um, I think it's, uh, the it's 30. It's 30 in. So, um, yes, we could we could put a railing or not. It really depends
when we further do the grading plan. If uh it's above 30 uh 30 in, we would need railing. Uh but if it's below, my thinking is actually can act as a bench because it's such a small yard. They don't have anything. It I mean if it's
like 20 in, it's perfect. That's a bench. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Mr. Church, >> no. He didn't ask question. >> Okay. Mr. Callville,
>> uh, did you explore putting the, uh, addition on the one story in the in the in your early processes? >> Uh, you mean the the addition, the back edition? Currently, it's already one story. >> Yeah. Did you explore putting your this edition, the second story edition on top
of that? Did you discuss or did you explore that aspect? >> Then because this house, even though it's small, actually, it's rather deep. It's 35. If I Yes, we did. Then none of the room will have any natural light. >> The stair will be total dark. Yes. If if
you look at the let's say second floor would be the most telling. Um we have um a second floor basis page A102. >> Mhm. >> You see the um it's actually have a very nice typical center colonial layout with
the stairway with with light coming from the back. Any addition at the back will basically make all the rooms dark and especially losing light to the stairway. >> Okay. Um, can you tell me about the fake chimney that you're putting up? Are you going to notch out the roof to have that
chimney put in there? >> Um, yes. That we can easily build it by 2x6 or 2x4. We frame it >> and then basically apply the salvaged brick on it. Yes. >> Oh, salvaged brick. >> Yes, we actually Yeah, we discussed with contract on that. Yes.
>> Okay. Um uh I I I see for the uh for the um the AC blower the HAV H uh for the blowers um you know at 12 ft is aggressive. I agree with that. But you know 395 is >> kind of aggressive on the other side. Is that the only place that you can put
these things >> the condensers? Um >> really that's the only side actually that is the reason I set back the addition further more toward because the other side's driveway is already very narrow. The driveway is like 13 feet.
>> Is the onetory addition to the left, is that like an add-on to the history of this house? Do you know? >> Yes. You mean the existing one story? Yeah, >> that's that's something that been added on to this. >> That's correct. Like you can see that in page E1, the second page.
>> So technically, this house probably did have those offsets 12 on one side and yeah, 10 12 on the other side, whatever the RO is, I guess, at the one time. Um, you mean I I'm I'm I don't know when the addition was >> Okay.
>> Yeah. was done, but um yeah. >> Um Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Mr. Moore, >> are there any plans to Oh, I guess looking at R1, the proposed back right,
>> um down the line, is the applicant thinking about making this like an accessible roof the way that it's flat? Oh. Um, is there any like um I think they open a window from one of the bedroom that will become accessible
for maintenance reason >> but it will be like a balcony. >> Oh no, it's not any attention because actually no it's not. No. >> Okay. Then do you have a diagram that shows
um how this will how the proposed diagram will fit on the site? >> You mean >> I mean I see I see a 102 but it's not like on the parcel you know or I guess
the first page look 100 on the left side >> shaded like shaded red pinkish that's the addition. Okay. Um, >> so it's going further in depth. >> Yes. Basically, >> as opposed to the width. Yes. >> Keeping the same width. >> Yes. The same width. Yes. Correct.
>> The same width at the at the basically the side gable colonial revival massing part at the back. We further set back two feet to accommodate. >> And did you increase any of like your drainage?
Obviously this has leaders right? >> Oh yes yes there will be leaders yes and then I believe uh the the engineer definitely will guide the leaders to necessary driveway or catch basing that's basic will be regulated by the
engineering application. Yeah engineering civil engineering application yeah >> for right for an appropriate runoff so it's not for storm water management going into the the driveway or >> I don't know maybe the neighbors yard to the right or to the left or
something like that. >> I mean, whatever they do, they have to do it on the side. Then they're not going to do it anywhere outside the property. >> Okay. Are Oh, go ahead. >> Yes. >> Are any trees being removed for this? >> No, no trees will be removed.
>> Thank you, >> Mr. Cruz. Um yeah, I was just uh curious um for the uh for the building height. Um did you measure the building height from the bottom from bottom of grade? Was it
provided to you by a surveyor? >> Um I I think it's by survey we had as build a survey done by radar. So that is the building height established by my consultant who is used the radar to uh establish the building heights.
>> Okay. Uh and then um how many uh uh uh steps are there in the um uh in the front >> um we are not changing the front at the back we're not changing the uh finish
the first floor grade so at the back current existing has three steps from the backyard to the existing finish grade we are doing the same thing uh three steps Okay. Um,
yeah, that's my only question. Thank you, >> Mr. Griffith. >> Uh, I'm good with the first, uh, variance with a odd shaped lot. Um,
I assume that the 51.6% 6% 1.7% increase in imperished coverage. Um you'll address some way, shape or form through the >> Yes. >> complying with the the ordinance. >> Correct. >> As uh
as previously stated and the condensers um in the sideyard I find troubling. I mean, basically they're noisy and so you've got them on the sideyard and it's like sharing it with your neighbor and
it's not really something you want to share with your neighbor or should share with your neighbor. That's one of the reasons why there is the 12T requirement. Um, I don't have any bright ideas as to a great place to put it in the backyard. I
can understand why you put it there. I I get it. Um, uh, you can build in order to reduce the noise that would come from these, you could build a masonry wall
around them. That would tend for the noise to go up. It wouldn't eliminate it, of course, but it would, you know, redirect most of it up. But wouldn't that be considered as a accessory structure again? >> Sorry.
>> Wouldn't the masonry wall between the condenser and the neighbor be considered as accessory structure again? >> Yeah, it's problematic. I agree. Yeah, it's not that too that too is also like
the condensers like the like the condensers. It too is not uh complying with the with the setback rule. Can can >> the right thing to do is put it in the backyard, but you got to you have to you have to work it into your design such
that you can walk around it and not be upset by it. It's needs to have some kind of enclosure that makes it feel right. Um can I propose I mean that's one suggestion. Can I also propose evergreen
um evergreen bush screening? I mean actually I have some there for privacy. Um the green the green maybe I can you can >> I think that could work in the backyard. I don't think it works in the sideyard because the sideyard issue is about the noise. The evergreen isn't going to
solve the noise. You got a fence there already. So it's not about looking at it. It's about the noise. Um I I don't have answers. And that's my reservation. Thank you.
>> Yeah, there there certainly have been um times in which we've uh encouraged uh uh plantings around condensers as you've suggested. >> Yes. >> That would help to curtail some of that
sound. Um, so I I mean I I would suggest, you know, looking at what might be the possibilities. I I can understand you're indicating that there really isn't another location
uh in which um these could be placed. So um I had a question about the uh this the new secondary ridge. Mhm. >> Um what's what was the rationale for for creating a lower ridge as opposed to
just continuing the existing main ridge? >> That's the HPC's um comment. Uh basically a typical uh yes because if you look at existing it has a main structure >> and then the the the
and then the the side then as one story. Um I think the HPC consultant considered it as a typical uh colonial revival style with the relationship of um majority and the
sovereign ordinance structure. >> So he they suggest that we keep that relationship. So we made a revision following that suggestion >> to accommodate the >> Okay. And then uh on the uh I think it's this
the the southern edge again where we're talking about the contenders but there's this uh um in between the existing brick um that will remain and the and the new
extension. Um there is this new cedar clapboard siding to match with existing. Now that area currently is is brick. Is that not >> um yes I think um this um we're talking about a I'm just trying to make
everybody say A201 >> particularly number two it's the left side >> um >> I don't think so actually currently the the part is if you look at the um then the page in front of it 200 is the
existing it's clapboard next to brick oh the one actually will be demolished They are not on the same plane. So, um, if you look at the the the the before is in the same spot, A200
number two. >> Yeah, there's there's brick by that. >> Yeah, the brick. They will be demolished. Uh, the brick that started um that's the brick that would be demolished. They're actually set back. It's not on the same plane with the brick on the side then.
>> Yes. So, >> so I mean had there been any consideration of of just with the new with the with that new bump out I guess you would might call it. >> Yes. >> Just just continuing the brick putting the brick
back in. >> I think here is architecturally I read that part more because it's on the same plane with the top with the massing >> above. So they are the same massing the same geometry geometry shape.
>> Mhm. >> So that's that's the reason instead of having brick I'm basically using the clabboard cedar clab. >> Yeah. It's just it just seems uh a little odd that that on that side of the
house you're >> you have different >> I I understand. Yes. I think um um my take from the HPC's comments is they would like to keep the look of this side then of this um there's a little gable
um so it's kept and I kept that the brick as well because that wraps around to the front. >> I agree with that. Yeah. Okay. All right. I don't have any other questions. Okay. Um,
is there any uh thing else that you'd like to Are you part of this? >> I'm opposing council for for the neighbor. >> Oh, I see. Okay. So, >> are you ready for questions? >> We'll be waiting just a second. Okay. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. So, is there is there anything else that you want to say
before we turn to the public? >> No. Okay. >> Thanks. >> All right. So, uh, this is an opportunity then for members of the public to ask questions or to offer comments. >> Yeah, that's um, >> please come to the microphone. >> I think how you, uh, normally handle
>> this, but um, I'm >> So, just enter your appearance and then you can ask questions of the witness. >> Yeah. >> And, um, I I assume you're not calling any witnesses. >> Well, I want to I mean, my my client, the neighbor, would like to uh would like to speak as as a member of the public, but would also
>> Yeah. Normally when we have an attorney representing the member of the public that that you speak for that I could certainly do that but you could call them as a witness. >> No, that's okay. I didn't know if it was more, you know, if the board wanted to hear, you know, from somebody that lives in the house as opposed to >> So, why don't you ask your questions to this witness and then we'll see where we are.
>> Thank you. Well, I appreciate it for hearing. Sounds like a lot, the board had a lot of the same questions we had. Um, we have a client with, you know, big grave concerns about >> Just to give us your appearance also, please. >> Sure. Uh Ben Lindamman from Murphy Schiller and Wilks on behalf of Bitta
Amary and Ahmad Noir of 185 Gates Avenue which is the um if you're facing the applicant's home it's the house to the left which um I know this isn't I won't start with the question but I mean if it's looking at the area it's um
>> it's not on >> it's on >> okay >> the um it was part of the lot that which was which was previously subdivided. So the our client's house is, you know, abudding the that left side
yard where the um addition is being added. So I just had some questions about concerns especially, you know, specifically being on that side of the house, but also about the impervious coverage um changes. Um, first of all, Miss Miss Lee, the um gi
square footage of the area of wall space that's being added to that left side. So, I understand that the additions just going it's going up and out. >> Mhm. >> But I just I I'd like the board to be able to hear about the, you know, the
amount of space being added to that side of the house if if possible or something. This is not part of the zoning exercise but I can do the calculation now if um I'm just trying to explain the expansion of the nonconformity
>> um if you look at the site plan on the left side from your client side right the first um the back existing one story it added about because the height actually is the same we're talking basically there are two parts of
addition right one part is the one story. You're talking about how much wall space I'm adding, right? And then the the back part of existing onetory now is still a onetory addition. It's basically about the five feet um behind
5T times 9 by the height 59 45. That's the back part. And then the the other part is the gable part. And um I I think I just have to um to give you a quick calculation
probably like a 10. 10 is the back and going up that would be two story like 250 >> square. Yeah. Square feet or so of wall space >> of wall space compared to what's there presently which is also non-conforming.
No, actually you're you're sorry I was wrong. I were talking about two story because we're adding another story. So it's half of that and of course those are rough calculation in my mind. Yes. >> Okay. Um and what's the approximate square footage of livable space that's being added by this?
>> Um >> I think it was 400. Is that accurate? I think if you look at um yes adding 400 yeah 414 square foot on the first floor on the second floor we are adding
adding 3008 308 square foot. Yes. >> So total of around 700 ft 7 ft. Mhm. >> And so you said you didn't necessarily explore adding to the back because it would affect the light of your >> We did. That's the first thing is to add
to the back, but um we said that u if we add to the back, they will lose light to most rooms because it's a small house, but actually it's quite deep for colonial. >> Was there a concern there to the light of the neighboring houses? >> Um >> the shadowing just curiosity if that was
contemplated in your decision. I think you are casting shadow on them. You're on the south. They're in the north. There no way for them to cast shadow on you. >> Casting shadow. So there's no blocking of you're saying there's no blocking of light by adding this >> correct because you are due south of us. >> So the the view though will be affected
by >> I think if anything your neighbor is looking at a yard overgrown yard and sometimes if they use the the corner the that corner. >> No, it's okay. We have we have photographs to show that that's not that's not the case. >> Basically you Yes. I guess I I
understand that it's a privacy, right? Whether they use that corner as um patio. >> Well, that's >> for outdoor. We're I'm talking about what >> behind the wall >> when it becomes if this were to be built, >> those you know, the windows along that
wall are going to be 5t from the property line all the way to the back obviously because that's that's what's proposed. Let's to uh let's take a look at um join 2011 exterior elevation particularly on the left side facing your neighbor. The windows are
intentionally kept high for privacy. Do >> you have a copy of Mr. Lman? Do you have a copy of that plan that >> Yeah, I don't have it. I wasn't able to get print out a full size set. Do >> we have >> But if we have it on It was on the wall before. >> We have We have an We have an extra one we're going to give you. I think it's Hold on. Hold on. Hold on.
>> Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. I didn't >> Mr. Lman, we're going to give him a copy of the plan. Then you Why don't you go back? I think it's going to be easier for you to follow with the plan right in front of you. So, why don't you continue to ask your questions? >> I think it's toward the back.
This is the plan. So, the back Yes. 2011 number two. That's the left side of renovation. The four windows in the revival colonial revival house, they're existing on the right. They are the way they are. And um >> well, they're being brought they're being brought to the five foot.
>> No, they they they're existing. They're existing. Nothing has been done to them. We're not bring that thing. Those windows, they stay where they are. We're not even changing them. >> And new windows, they are kept
intentionally kept high above eye level. >> Okay, hold on. So the >> correct. >> This is the new proposed. >> Yeah. Lower lower left corner. >> This is lower left corner. So this
New window in the middle and new attic window. How many feet are they from the property line? >> The new >> if they were to be drawn to the Yeah. Where it says I I'm just trying to >> the new attic window there the the one very top they at the existing plan they
were not brought back um brought uh closer >> closer. The second is small one adding window. They are bought closer but they are storage space. They were kept there really just for the look of the house. So you don't look at the blank wall. >> So but this these ones will be about
>> the same distance to the property line as the current den >> correct. >> So this entire area right just Yeah. Okay. So this is the entire area is going to be 5 ft from the >> Yes. out there for the visual. >> Presently there's this small area is 5 ft from the property line and now this
whole twostory area >> is going up and out is all I was saying. So that's >> correct. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Let's see being added. Um, and you were said you said in your
testimony you did not know when the den was added. >> The den the den I believe is part of the revival colonial revival house was part of the house original house >> original house you believe. >> Yes. Yes. And then HPC would like to keep it the way it is and then
>> wasn't was an oper request done to check to see if this has been added to the house or would that have come up in your planning report? HBC consultant did come up with um he did present the original photo of the house the dam was there since 1970s. Yeah.
>> Um okay. Was there any concern? Was there any I I'm not sure if this is something that you you would answer or if you would have to hire an outside, but a um a landscape plan to try and get an idea for I don't see any screenage added for
the addition. And um you know, it's a big it's a it's a major concern of the of my client that the um you know, this new area this close to the house without any screening, you know, could be an issue. I'm not sure if that would ameliate
their problems with it, but it's it's certainly something that um could have been added with this. Have did you did you look into that? >> Um I mean this basically goes back to one of the board members question is actually even though I mean this is u we
are not taking down any trees and right now it's grass nothing else. So um it is in the back of my mind to basic pro provide privacy screening. So that's basically the related to the condenser issue. So I
I think it reasonable to add evergreen um in addition to the existing fence between this property and your client's property. >> Okay. Um
now the measurements on the property you did those consulting the survey that was >> it was done professional survey and then the board members has a official copy of the survey >> and the the survey was I guess the one online was not signed and sealed but I guess the one we have is >> yes the board members yeah correct the
sign and seal the official copy >> and it was done about 11 years ago I guess is that right? No, it's not. It was recent, I believe. Yeah, the board member has it because it's not >> it's it's legally I'm not allowed to show their title block >> on my joint. But the board members has
>> Oh, so there's a survey surveys that was not from 20 The one that from 2015 is not it was done within six month >> within six months. Correct. Correct. >> By license survey. >> We updated it. Yes. In town. >> Okay. And that was >> Richard Richard Ringo. Mr. Richard Ringo. >> Yeah. So, it was just dated the one that
I I saw. >> Yes. In 2025. >> Oh, it said Oh, I thought it said 2015, didn't it? >> So, Miss Lee, the one that was submitted to us as a document was dated August 31st, 2015. >> Oh, they but they did update it. Yeah, they did update in 2020. Yes, we
actually had had him go back. >> Were there any um differences from the existing survey that was submitted? >> Um I think he had the chimney. Yeah, his Yeah, actually we had even go back because he had his he had the chimney smaller. Actually, the chimney
was bigger than what he originally had. So, it was Yeah, it's that's that's that's the difference. >> Okay. >> If necessary, we can have him. >> No, I understand. I mean, I know that the just the numbers are very, you know, with with the impervious coverage issue,
it's just, you know, want to make sure that we have the the right numbers. It was my, you know, my reading of it was that it was an older survey and I wanted to make sure nothing was drawn since. But if >> yes, I think that's going to be it's reasonable to ask the Mr. Richard Ringo Ringo to >> Yes.
>> to date um I guess that would be um yeah, I'm not sure how to handle since there's no counsel for the the owner, you know, just the assumption that the owner purchased this knowing that it had the non-conforming condition. You have anything to to state
to that >> screen. >> Was this was the non-conforming condition on the left side >> known >> beforehand >> before the design? Yes. >> Yeah. and council. I'm not sure I'm not sure how best to handle, but I just want to know
if the owner had asked the neighbors to purchase any properties around in order to make >> it's not it's not uh I mean it's not this is not a substandard isolated lot that's vacant that we're trying to put a house on initially. So the Nash case is not going to apply. Um and and my
understanding is the homes on either side have been developed so they're not required to do that. Okay. It was not Yeah, I wasn't sure. I was I mean I've >> I guess I wasn't sure if it was a persuasive to show that >> they tried to make it up to code, but that's that's >> I don't know. Is your client willing to
offer p some portion of their property for sale? >> They are not, but they were. >> So, I think we answered that question. >> That's fine for sure. I'm just saying I was just, you know, I just wanted to make sure I checked on I know >> it's not required in this instance. Yes. >> Okay. And then
All right. Um I I heard during your testimony I didn't hear anything to support these uh variances being um granted. Was the master plan reviewed in in preparation
for this application? >> You mean the site plan? >> No, the master plan for the for Monontlair to to support why we're >> the the planning board adopts a master plan. Okay. And it's a planning document. It was last revised March of
>> 2023. >> 23. It's got, if you were here sitting for the first application, you heard the planner go over the objectives and goals contained in the master plan. >> Positive and negative. >> As part of the variance proofs, um, the
applicant has to meet the negative criteria. That is that it would not cause substantial detriment to the public good. that's the impact on area properties and will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance and I think that includes the master plan and
the zoning ordinance. So that's the negative criteria that needs to be met in order to grant the variances. Um yes I understand basically you're talking about the negative um and the positive criteria that is to be met and um I'm not a planner but in my judgment
and um this it's a modest addition to a modest home on a modest lot >> and I do not see um the the addition will cause detriment to the to the neighborhood.
So, Miss Miss Lee, I'm I'm wondering if if you and your client would be um just given the the number of questions that are uh being generated and have to be resolved, whether or not you'd be
interested in continuing this hearing at a at a uh future meeting. um and perhaps come back with some alternatives to some of the um in in response to some of the
questions that have been generated. >> Okay. Yes. Yes. That's my kind to answer the landscape. >> Yes. >> So the the uh my uh board member was also asked if you would uh take a look at the landscaping plan. >> Correct. as a part of that process to
mention the back end of my mind. >> Could I have a like two minutes maybe just to just go through real quick what my concerns were in case that would be helpful so we don't get >> I think that would be good. Thank you. >> So you know with the condensers I I believe right now there's one condenser
>> in where that patio area is. There is two now. Sorry. Sorry. So there's two right now by the patio. There's going to be two now by the three feet mark. I understand I have we have the same concerns as Mr. Griffith. Um, you know, we just have, you know, major concerns.
Once we show the photographs of how close this is to the to our my client's property, you know, I think you'll see that it's going to be, you know, very disruptive. We understand they don't want to be disrupted either, but um, we're not, you know, we're not here for asking for relief. Um, and then I
understand that storm water management is not required at this time. Um, but we have, you know, serious questions about the water. It's going from around 44% impervious coverage to about 51.6% impervious coverage. I understand that's
only a one. It's only going to be over this the ordinance by 1.6. However, it's a big change in an area that has a lot of houses very close to each other and we understand that they're willing to comply with everything once it gets to the engineer, you know, but um we would just like to see that before it gets to
that point if if possible. Mhm. >> Those are those are our main concerns right now, but we look forward to >> and and you know, communication is a good thing also. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Between the two parties. >> Understood. >> It was you know we get them you get the
notice 10 days ago and you you you know it's a it's >> understood. Yes. >> Yeah. And it wasn't the we my clients weren't approached about it for my knowledge. So >> well the applicant's not required to do that but >> and the neighbor's not required to. What's Well, I'm just suggesting that that might be a good idea. Um, the
meeting date again is what? April >> Yeah. Our next meeting is April 22nd at 7 p.m. >> Okay. So, the applica, you're requesting that this matter be carried to April 22nd, 700 p.m. There would be no further notice. Is that your request?
>> Yes. >> Okay. So, if I think if the board could make a motion carrying it with no further notice to that date and time. >> All right. Make the motion. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All right. All in favor say I. >> I. >> All opposed. Abstensions. Voted. Thank
you. >> Thanks. >> We'll see you in April. >> Uh we have we have we have one additional item and that is related to the uh annual report. Uh can that uh be postponed until the next meeting? >> Yes, definitely.
>> All right. All right. So, um, we'll then, uh, receive a motion to adjurnn. Motion to >> second. >> All right. I don't think I have to ask all in favor, but I will. All right. >> Okay. Thank you very much for your indulgences.
>> Thank you.