Call to order the council um regular meeting until March 23rd uh 2026. Real notice required in accordance with the open public meetings act has been satisfied and a statement certifying same will be executed. Please
join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
>> Uh, roll call, please. >> Mr. Goldberg, >> here. >> Mr. Trackenberg, >> here. >> Mr. Williams, >> here. >> Mr. Schustster, >> here. >> Mr. Ben Wong, >> here. >> Mr. Kramer >> here. >> Miss Simmons >> here. >> Uh, we have our new board member that
will be joining us tonight, Mr. Evanel. >> And Mr. Mr. Woodford >> here and >> and our uh professional expert, our engineer consultant, Mr. V. >> Our first order of business would be swearing in our new alternate. >> Yes.
>> Chris, if you would uh come up, please >> swear you in. Would you raise your right hand and repeat after me, please? I do solemnly swear >> I do solemnly swear >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey. >> The Constitution of the State of New
Jersey >> and I will bear faith and allegiance to the same. >> faith and allegiance to the same >> and to the governments established in the United States >> to the government established in the United States >> and in this state >> and in this state >> under the authority of the people >> under the authority of the people. >> So help me God. Also, I do solemnly
swear >> I do solemnly swear >> that I will faithfully >> that I will faithfully >> impartially >> impartially >> and justly perform >> and justly perform >> all the duties of the office >> all the duties of the office >> of the board of adjustment >> the board of adjustment >> um according to the best of my ability
>> according to the best of my ability congratulations welcome aboard Okay. Next matter will be um resolution for BA23-25. Uh Mr. Roller.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a memorializing resolution with respect to the application filed by Shan and Nicole Freeman uh for property at 15 Nicholls Road. Uh the applicants applied for permission to modify an existing
non-conforming dwelling by constructing a one-story addition over an existing singlestory um requiring variance relief uh for front yard setback of 52.8 ft where 60 ft is required and also to expand a non-conforming structure. That
application was conditionally granted by the board with our uh standard conditions. Thank you board members. Any comments on the resolution? Any objections? If not, I'll entertain a motion. >> I'll move that.
>> I have a second. >> Second. >> Thank you, Mr. Cop. Roll. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Goldberg. >> Yes. >> Mr. Trackenberg. >> Yes. >> Mr. Williams? >> Yes. >> Mr. Schustster? >> Yes. >> Mr. Benis? >> Yes. >> Mr. Kramer?
>> Yes. >> Motion carries. >> And Mr. Woodford? Yes. Apologies. >> Okay. Um, next we'll go to the public hearings. The first public hearing is BA-24-25
for um block 6004, lot 39, Nordwood Court in the RA25 zone, section C. Uh, Andrew and Kelly Gibbons. That matter has been uh put off until approximately the end of July. Is that correct, Mr. Roller?
>> Yes. uh the applicants redoing their plans. We do not have a new date yet. So once we have new plans, a new date will be assigned and the applicant will uh need to renotice. >> Right. We have an extension through the end of August. >> August.
>> All right. Uh so anybody here on that application that will not be heard tonight? Next we go to um BA-26-25 286 Mendum Road >> the big fat plans. The applicant proposes construction of a
one-story addition at the right side of the existing house and a covered portion uh addition at the rear of the house with a pre-existing front yard setback of 19 ft where 100 ft is required. So would you both please stand? You're both going to testify, I gather.
>> Yep. We stand. Raise your right hands, Joe. Yes. Everyone raise your right hands. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So, help you God. >> And my left to right, would you uh all state your names for the record, please?
>> Daniel N. >> Thank you. Okay. Uh, who's going to be testifying first? So, this is a new experience for me. So, if I mistake something, I apologize. >> Mr. Master, can you turn the microphone
on? There's a button. Perfect. Thank you. >> The green light will be on. >> Yeah, >> it was green. Yeah. >> So, several years ago, I purchased the
house at 28 26 men road uh and I put it in my son's name for various state purposes. And uh we purchased the house. That's the smaller of the two houses.
There's 42 in the back, a large house, >> right? And in the front here is a carriage house 286. So when I purchased it, I realized there was significant work that had to be done because it has not been
for several years. So end up putting a new septic system, a new electric system, putting a new air conditioning system, uh redoing all the walls, etc. Um,
and I did everything according to the code and permits and work closely with your construction department to make sure that everything done properly. No shortcuts taken.
Um then basically the size the house really should be a little bigger and make it more common. redone and um
probably added to make it more more current and I asked how much is involved in this where do I start the first county board
adjustment I can tell you now that you're going to the first letter you're going to get rejection because you're going to need a variance. So, um why don't we just skip that part and
store it to to you know, you know, you have to do it this way. So, this is not something you just can't write on piece of paper. You have to go and do a proper thing. I met the
architect here in Men. He came over the house. uh what we looked at the house, took all the measurements that ran inside when we encountered a bear his first visit and um
discussed what we'd like to do and we worked very closely for several months to get it done and then proceeded to make the appropriate filings. >> Okay. where we are and there's no
there's no way to and protect himself that better than me. There's no real no way to bring life to make it so and also fit within the law.
>> Okay. Anything else? We going to pass it on to the R. Yeah, he's here. >> Uh, yep. Board members, any questions? Any members of the public wish to ask a question of this applicant? Seeing none, hearing none, close the public portion. You're up.
>> So, before you do that, are you testifying as an architect? >> I am. Yes. >> Would you then describe uh just go tell the board about your uh professional background, please, and educational background. I have a professional bachelor of architecture degree from New Jersey Institute of Technology. I've
been a licensed architect since 2007. Uh I'm the principal and owner of Men and Design Architects. I presenting in front of this board in all the municipalities. >> And your license is in New Jersey. >> It is. >> And it's current. >> It is. >> Thank you.
>> Uh the property is 286 Menum Road. Uh it's uh located in the OSG zone uh zoning requirements. Uh the the house was constructed approximately 1900. Uh so it's an old carriage house. It's a
some historic structure. It has some nice old stone and foundation and materials. Uh it is uh it's constructed kind of high up on the hill. The road.4 is down below. Uh you can see running along and everything uh on these
drawings is consistent with what's in the application package. changes. Uh the uh so as a result of the zone that's in and being a structure that predates the zoning uh the current uh
edge of the housing portion that is there is 19 ft uh off the uh the property line and in the zone required setbacks are 100 ft. Uh so looking at the site plan the you can see the
building envelope and all of the related setbacks um coming into this kind of central area. Uh the entire house gets required. So any work proposed on the house to any degree will require uh this setback uh
variance. Uh looking at what we have, uh the goal was to uh add some additional living space to the house, constructing a one-story addition onto the house as well as a covered entry on the rear side. Uh which is the way you enter the
property driveway actually enter from the vehicle. Uh and so the proposed shape and size of the limited just to the size that's needed in order to gain the building space and the the shape of
the addition the way that it's set back is done specifically so we do not extend or do not intensify the existing non-conforming condition of the setback. The current house is at 19 ft off the property line and the jogs and and uh angles that are proposed here with the
new addition also place that at its closest point to 19 ft from that line. Uh so we're not proposing to go any closer uh to the property or to the property. uh based on you know looking at at this
the rest of the house again form of rear and sideyard setbacks. Um but the entire house and footprint of the house sit within that required front yard. Um there are also uh significant uh areas and wet areas in the back here. Uh there
is a a wetland uh delineation and as part of the work um you're going for and are working with um uh with John Peele to uh looking at >> John Peele being >> uh John Peele being the uh environmental consultant looking at the uh
requirements for a standard general permit for doing any kind of disturbance within a uh the general permit for disturbance within a wetland transition area. And that under that permit, the maximum disturbance that's allowed is 750 square
ft of overall soil disturbance. Uh and this project that was proposed here is is significantly less than that. Two are the uh existing and proposed floor plans. to the changes to the house involve uh currently there are three
rather small bedrooms um taking the existing dining room space converting one of those uh to be a a larger primary bedroom suite leaving the other two bedrooms so it so remains a three-bedroom house uh but it uh you know getting a larger primary bedroom uh
and then in the living space of the house the proposed addition is enclosing and building within an existing covered porch and constructing an addition which essentially allows for a kitchen space. So there can be a a reasonable living area for current living standards uh
with kitchen, dining area and a uh living room with a small office and powder room off to the side of the house. So still relatively small um consistent with the scale of the house. None of the rooms that are being proposed are uh large u but just what's
necessary in order to kind of have those necessary living spaces. Sheet A3 is the lower level plan. The way this house, you can see from the photos that are attached in the application, uh the house sits the main level of the house. It's
it's essentially a one-story house on the side that faces towards U24. Uh the grade is very high. The house sits up high. Um, and it's kind of a a low slung house and you only see the one story exposed. As you move towards the back of the house and further into the property,
the grade drops and it has a daylight basement or exposed lower level in the back. That's where the proposed uh covered entry porch is because that's when you pull into the property into the driveway. That's the level at which you're at and you have to enter into the house and then move upward from that
into the main level of the living space of the house. Uh so there's uh basement space proposed as the foundation for that uh that addition and uh and then the existing portions uh within the house are proposed to be renovated uh to
create entryway and mud room and a reasonable staircase and access up into that main living area from that lower level. So as you come around the rear and you approach the house, uh we have the current body of the house. Uh the grade steps up significantly along the one
side uh and uh and going up to to kind of the the main grade around. Uh this is the kind of existing face of the house. Uh there are some window openings and other things here. Uh proposed door opening where a window was. Uh and they created this entry course with the the
style and character of the house with the hipped roof and the materials you know stand the seam of copper uh metal roof uh and uh and columns that are detailed and consistent with the character and the uh the age of the house. So it looks like an original portion of the house as opposed to something that's been added onto it.
Uh and then the proposed addition when you're looking from uh let's call it the the front, it doesn't really present as a front and you can't see it from the street because of how high it is above Route 24 and it's also concealed with intrudes. Um it's heavily wooded along
that area. Um so we have the front which somewhat appears like the back. Uh and then the existing porch element which is being infilled. uh the first portion of addition which is the office and then we've created a piece here with a slightly differing roof line um to look
a little bit more like you would see with an accessory structure or something not creating we don't want to take and change the scale of the building. We're trying to create something that's consistent with that smaller scale the lower roof lines. Uh so we gave this kind of its own separate roof line
piece, but the same uh shingled uh painted shingle material uh asphalt roofing shingles um that are all consistent with and blending with the uh the character of the existing house. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh there's a series of
uh photographs in your packet. Uh could you go over those and explain them to us? And I'm not going to mark these since they're part of the package. >> Right. Okay. >> Uh the first image is uh is the
essentially the front side of the house. Um so where you can see here where as the grade comes up, it's really kind of a singlestory appearance of house. Uh, and this level of brown here sits well over a story above route 24 down below.
So, so this face sits behind a heavy tree line and it's not really visible from the road. The second image is stepping further back. So you kind of see that whole front face of the house as well as the left side of the house. And that left
side is currently where the grade drops down. Uh and you see some carriage house doors there with the own carriage house. Uh that is the garage entrance to the house. There's no proposed changes anywhere um along this front left corner
or along the left side of the house. Third image is a head-on full-on view of that of that left side. Fourth image is uh is now going around what is technically the rear of the house uh but is what presents as the front as you come around and park in
that driveway. Um it has a nice two-hole uh lower stone foundation uh with some doors and large window openings in it. And the proposed uh covered entry porch is being proposed. Uh the roof would go along here uh stone exposed and then putting the
porch column sitting in front of that. So you enter kind of into that portion up against the the stone base of that. This image is continuing around the house in that same direction. This is a head-on view of that rear elevation. The door that is currently shown on the
left, that door will remain uh but the secondary uh the window that's directly next to it, the bottom of that stone will be removed and that will actually become the main entry door into the the mud room space down below. Uh, sixth image is a uh is the right
side elevation of the house. This is where along the side there's a large stone retaining wall. Um, the great steps up here and it goes back to being kind of a single story along that side. Um, and this is the existing covered porch. This is the location uh of the
proposed addition. this porch being filled in, the smaller piece of addition uh going in this location, and then the the somewhat more detached looking piece uh of the addition uh with the kitchen coming out along this right side blending into the existing roof lines.
But again, you can see from the heavy tree line that kind of wraps around that bend. Um this raised area is not visible from down at 24. Thank you board members. Any questions? >> I just have one question on the um
>> there's a stone ice house depicted on the on the drawings. >> That wasn't It almost looks like it's attached to the the structure itself. >> The the stone ice house piece is separate. It's underground. that last photo we looked at where the ground
comes up high and I'm talking about the retaining wall >> that all of this when you stand up here it it's just a patio there's there's nothing there and that railing that you see in that image is the edge of that >> you can see there's a small door and it
mostly it's built into the stone of that retaining wall and it's set into the side of the grave so it's not visible as a structure up above >> okay thank you for clarifying Any other questions by board members? Any members of the public with any questions of this witness?
Seeing none, hearing none, close the public portion. Any closing comments? >> Uh, just that the existing home predates any zoning regulations. It's a beautiful old house that was, you know, a high level of disrepair after not being
occupied for many years. Um, so it's it's a a great structure. has old material to it. Um, and that the proposed work that's being done here will make it viable to be used in in how
it was meant to be used uh for this. And that uh if there's really anything that would be done to this or any kind of expansion to gain additional living space would require the same uh front yard setback variance. uh and that there really automotive detriments to what's
being proposed and that the benefits of bringing this up to a more current usable living standard. Uh you know benefits of that far outweigh any detriments. >> Thank you. Um yes Joe clarification for the board
um is discussion regarding environmental concerns constraints on the site right >> u geo web dev's geo web database >> right >> show any wetlands on the subject property does show them across the
street within the whip river flood plane the flood plane of the whip river is across the street is not on the subject property current for the current maps Um, but the the water by small pond area that's on the property is connected to
the Whippony River as part of a tributary that comes across. So we would expect that there's riparian on the property and the improvements that they're showing to the home relatively modest initiative from D's perspective
those would be most likely under permit by rule number 10 which authorizes general construction activities small additions and work outside the flood hazard area and inside the riparian when working on a single home. We didn't I would expect that they won't need the D
permit for anything but rather tracking permit by rule which is basically as of right within. >> So they would have to submit something to D saying here's what you want to do and they'll write back and say you're good to go. >> Actually less basically track by permit
by rule they they track that their work is within the confines of permit by rule number 10. >> Okay. and then they would uh keep that in their recordkeeping and um provide essentially a copy to us as part of the prior approvals to get the construction permit. >> Okay. >> Do we have to include that in any
resolution or >> we'll track it in our office? But I just wanted the board to understand there wouldn't be a specific outside agency permit they need to obtain. >> Okay, great. Thank you. >> Do you concur? >> Mhm. >> Yes. Okay.
Well, to me, this is a pretty much an openandshot case. You can't do anything on this property without a variance. The house is very small. It needs a little modernization, little expansion, and you've done uh designed it so it has a minimum
impact uh on the surrounding area. I'd be all in favor of approving this application. Anybody else have any comments? If not, I'll entertain them. >> I'll just comment that you came no closer to the road, >> right? Mhm. >> Yes. It's very close to the road, but no closer. And you stepped it so that it
doesn't come any closer. >> Correct. >> Uh do I have a motion on this uh application? >> I'll make the motion, Mr. Chair, that we approve this uh application based on its merit. >> Second.
>> Thank you. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Goldberg, >> yes. >> Mr. Trackenberg, >> yes. >> Mr. Mr. Williams, >> yes. >> Mr. Schuster, >> yes. >> Mr. Benwis, >> yes. >> Mr. Kramer, >> yes. >> Mr. Woodford, >> yes. >> Motion cars. >> I will have a resolution for at the next
meeting. Okay. >> Thank you. >> The next I think I'll skip to David. Uh >> Glen David, right? Uh, we're going to skip ahead to BA-27-25. Uh, block 8901, lot 5, 9, Westminster
Place in RA35 zone, section C variance. Uh, Mr. David applicant proposes to build a second story edition, side garage edition, rear edition, and deck edition where the variance request is for a pre-existing
sideyard setback of 18.96 ft where 30 ft is required to reduce the combined side yard setback to 66.67 ft where 75 ft is required and a pre-existing front yard setback of 52.81 ft where 75 ft is required. Can I have
your appearances, please? Yes. Thank you and thank you for hearing us. My name is John David. I live in Three Spring Hall Lane in Marstown. As you mentioned, I'm plan on moving to 9 Westminster after the renovations. And my engineer and architect will most of the talk.
>> Okay. So, would you uh please stand and raise your right hands, Joe, as well, please? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you'll give to this board be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you got >> and your names for the record, please. >> Steven L. Kesner, S E Ven K O E S T N E
R 61 Hudson Street, Hackin Sack, New Jersey, a professional engineer and land surveyor. Licensed as a land surveyor since 1983. We're going to get to that. >> We'll get there. And just for the record,
>> thank you. Okay. Perfect. All right. Now, we're going to get to that. There you go. Dan, your background, please. Yes. Professional engineer. Lancer since 1983 and a professional
engineer since 1988. Graduate of Clarkson College of Technology 1974 in civil and environmental engineering. I've been practicing ever since with Kesner Associates based in Hackinack. testified before many boards. Bourbon
Hudson Essics to the state >> and your license is current. >> It is >> in New Jersey. >> It is in New Jersey. Yes. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Okay. I may
property known as 9 Westminster Township and it's located at the end of Westminster Place about 440 ft east of Overwood Road. It has a 152 ft of depth of 170 ft. that area
26,450 the proposal meets most of the requirements we have the uh we met the height of the building at 38 3500 ft per minute we're at 33 and a2
and we covered allowed at 35% we're at 21.71 building coverage at 15% we're 120 about 5% even though the lot technically is under size in this home 35,000 ft
required for existing positions were 26,450 square ft. We are asking for big variances as enumerated on the agenda. The
pre-existing sideyard variance that is on the western side of the property that will not change. existed 18.96 ft and that was main 75 ft is required. We'll have 66.67 with the addition of the garage on the
east side and there's a pre-existing front yard set back where 75 ft is required. The existing house 52.81 81C might change. I should mention the property is surrounded by the lands of Lyola House of Retreats both on the
easterly side and on the northern side as well. And my feeling is that these barren could be granted being that it is mostly open space from the north to the east. Um we do have uh we do have a
slight increase in in per in aggressive. Let me just say briefly though that the increase is small because presently the lot slopes from the street towards the rear and it drops
about 18 ft from south to north and presently the driveway is on the east side and it wraps around the rear of the house and garages below. So with this addition and a garage placed on the side, the garage will be placed about
half a story below the first floor which will be much more accessible for the future residents of the property. Another hel driveway will be removed in the back that le coverage there. We're going to add
some lock coverage on the side to access the new garage. All in all, the increase is rather slight in per in Marlo. 24 cubic feet on the 10-minute 25ear storm and 72 cubic
feet on the 60minut 25ear storm. We've addressed that with the addition of two dry wells into the rear of the house to capture the run off from the roof. And we've
also added a dry well at the base of the driveway to capture the runoff from that driveway coming down towards the uh back of the property. Uh all in all, we're capturing, let me see, we have a total capacity of
635 cubic feet for the seage pits for the home and 317 ft for the seage pit for the driveway. and they will more than cover any increase in runoff. As I said,
it's only about 60 some cubic feet or 72 cubic feet increase in run up. So, we've more than captured that increase in low with the installation of these driveways. There's some slight grade change as the contours indicate and that's mostly in the area of the driveway.
And I think I covered about it. We had some construction details, but they might be self-explanatory, but Welcome. Any questions? Board members, any questions? Any members of the public with any
questions of this witness? Seeing none, hearing none, close the public portion. Next witness in the story. >> Yes. Would you raise your right hand, please? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth? So, help you God. Your name, please. >> Joseph Bonado. D at located at 144 West River, New Jersey. >> And Mr. Donado, would you uh just give the board the pleasure of knowing your background, please?
>> I hold a bachelor of architecture from New York Institute of Technology, graduated 1985, received my license to practice architecture in New Jersey in 1992, and I've held my own practice uh since 1995 throughout New Jersey. Uh I'm
also a planning board member for 10 years in our combined zoning and planning board. So I I know your time and commitment to your burough is greatly appreciated. >> Is your license still current in New Jersey? >> Yes, it is.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. And some of my testimony will probably repeat some of the items that our engineer has spoke about, but the existing property at 9 Westminster is unique in several ways. Uh it's currently a ranch, one story. It has uh
a screened in porch uh onto the right side and the property is pretty much flat in front. It drops uh to the side, to the right, and then the back. Uh, and then the garages are d your driveway goes from Westminster around the
property and into the back underneath the screened in porch and the existing basement. Our proposal is to remove the roof and uh remove that screened in porch. It's really a branch that's in need of repair. Uh so the main principal
structure we want to keep and we want to expand uh up and out. However, knowing that and besides uh the uniqueness of the property, it's surrounded by one single family house to the left and rear
and and right side, it's the temple and uh uh I think it's the Leola retreat center. So, open space other than the uh single family house to the left of us where our engineer said I believe the
sideyard which is existing is 18.96. uh there's a buffer between our property that uh we want to keep except that it will be cleaned up with this proposal. So um that was our first variance that we're asking for the existing
uh left wall from the ranch to the property is 18.96 and with our proposal when I go through the plans we've kept our additions minimal on that side not to affect that neighbor. Most of the additions that were bumped out are further to the uh
middle of the house that meet the sideyard requirements and it's uh to the right of the property where it's it's more to the open space. The only addition that we are proposing to that left side neighbor is taking that that
existing structure and adding to the second floor. We didn't bump it out uh any portion to uh close to that neighbor. The other uh unique uh item with this property is Westminster. The road does not travel for the entire
width of this uh non-conforming lot. It actually turns I can just go back to our engineer uh layout. West Place actually turns before you reach the the end of the property. So no no cars or no people will ever continue
on. uh it's not an interior lot for you know as it was laid out from the original subdivision. So the when we're asking for the combined side yards because we have a side loaded garage uh the combined side we're asking for a
variance but that perception of a person or a car will never really be seen. You're not really driving past this property and noticing what that sideard is. you're basically before you reach 3/4 of property, you're turning 90 degrees and heading the other way. Uh so
it's atypical of of a typical interior lot that's uh the width of the property. Uh so with that being said, uh what we're proposing uh for Mr. Glenn David is besides also removing the driveways that were in the backyard just giving
him the opportunity for open space uh possibly a pool later on. But uh our proposal is to add out go up and put the side load in garages. Uh the uh the plans I have are on the on
the uh are the plans that we submitted to the board. No changes. Uh, sheet A1, which I'll get to, is the views, the elevation of the property. Sheet A2 is our basement. So, you can see that
for the most part, the existing footprint is going to say, we're asking for the 18 96 sideyard. That's the left side. That's the uh single family structure that we're facing. We're going to keep that wall. And uh I'll show you
the additions of the other uh variance that we're asking for is the front yard setback which is existing. I believe that number was 55.43. Our proposal will not increase that at
all. In fact, any additions that we do, especially to the garage, we're going to set that back 3 and 1/2 ft. So that 55.43 still stays as a non-conforming uh setback. Uh then the other variance that we're asking for is the total side judge
and again uh this is a non-conforming width of a property. So uh where 75 ft is required for the total side. We're at 66.67 and it's because like I said we left the right side of the of the structure. We
removed the open porch and we added a threecar side loaded garage and that's what kind of triggered the the total sideyard for that's a third variance. However, we felt that again because of the uh the shape of the road and because
this is located in an open space it really has zero effect to any neighbors uh or anyone in the public. So basically basically an open space it we are proposing instead of stairs to an open space with a bedroom a bathroom and a
utility room and this this is currently a walkout basement and will remain a walk out basement and that's basically because of the topography of the building the way from front to back. So I have sheet A3 which is the first
floor plan. Um I'll touch on again this this is the wall that remains uh at 18 uh 8.98 ft. We're not expanding the front or the back of that structure. We want to keep this as minimal so it
doesn't affect our neighbor. The addition starts further back which is uh it would be about 34 ft. So we do meet the sideyard setback for any projections out to the rear. Uh what we're proposing on this floor is you got your foyer
that's opened up to a great room, opened up to a kitchen, a dining room, a living room, an office, a full bath, a little mud room, and then the the addition of the threecar garage to the right of the uh building. So the width of the
building basically the main structure starts from where the existing is to the main structure of the house. Then the addition of the 3/4 up. Then we have a set of stairs that go to the top floor which are the bedroom
level. This is sheet A4. So we have that go upstairs. We have open floor. We have a total of four bedrooms up here. Each bedroom has their own walk-in closet and bathroom. And
again, I'm just going to touch on the right the right sorry, the left side of the structure. The smallest portion of the of the building is all the way to the right. That's the area that's closest to the only single family house that that's adjacent to us. So, we try
not to make that any worse than it really is other than the second floor edition. Uh we continue down to a hallway. We have a laundry room, another bedroom with a closet and the bathroom. And then we have the entire master suite which is a walk-in closet, master bedroom, and a
master uh bedroom. So all in all on this floor is four bedrooms. We have a bedroom and a basement. So it will be a five bedroomedroom house. Uh I'll move on to sheet A1 which is the view of the house. Uh so we got the
front elevation. Again, we're adding a second floor uh to the existing structure and the addition of the garage to the uh right side. We propose a stuckco house with uh windows, kind of
more of a modern feel to it. And I just want, you know, when we worked on these plans with Mr. David, we we realize that, you know, we're asking for a variance uh especially uh on the left side. This is where the minimal effect
as far as the efficient. We didn't go out on this side of the house. We also dropped the roof down lower so we have less of an effect to the neighbor to the left of us. Um as far as the twotory structure, we meet
the height. We're from the average grade we're at 33.55 ft where 35 ft is required. So we felt that this is this fits within the guidelines of the zoning ordinance even though we're asking for three variances. Again
one sideyard uh total sideyard and the uh front yard. And again the sideyard is existing the front yard existing. We're not making it any worse than it is. And we felt that uh the combined saw yard really again has no uh detriment to the
public because of the the open space we have and because of the way uh Westminster uh road turns away from the property that you really don't get a sense of that that uh sideyard. Uh so you got the elevation to the rear again
will be stuckco that's a walk out basement with windows open out the backyard. With this proposal, we'll have more open space in the rear yard where uh the only neighbor, even though it's preferred originally stored cars and driveway in the backyard, we're going to
eliminate that and we'll have the cars uh all the way toward the open space on the on the right. U so that would be it. So again, we're asking for three variances, two of which are existing, and we're not making that any worse.
Um, do you also have to apply to the town of Marstown on this? >> I don't think we do. Well, we applied for our uh notice, >> right? >> But when I called and said any variances, they said no, we we were dealing with specifically here.
>> Okay. So, they'll >> Okay. So, you don't have to go to go to Marstown Board to get any approval. >> All right. I think before the town's going to issue a permit, we'll need a letter from Morristown that says that. Okay.
>> I mean, they do know >> because otherwise I would think you have to do that. >> Oh, really? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. The improvement of the home is split >> Yeah. >> by by the the municipal boundary and then the address >> is it cuts right through it diagonally.
Right. >> Yeah. >> But yeah, it's uh >> it's up in the corner. >> When I when we first started, I called the T. I called uh Morristown. They said, "Yeah, >> apply for here." And >> Okay. Well, most of your proposed
garages in Morristown. So, I I would think normally you have to get that from Morristown, but if they're going to wave it, it's that's fine. They just have to get a letter so that they can issue the permit. contact them and absolutely whatever I guess whatever the process >> do you know what their zone is on the
other side of the line >> I'm sorry >> do you know what their >> setbacks are >> what their setbacks are on the other side >> they don't because when they told us no they don't really have anything to to review or we kind of just came straight here >> h did you submit the plans to Marstown
or just call them >> I called them personally and they said they don't >> Yeah I'm just wondering >> I'm just wondering if they had seen the plan, they might have answered differently because they didn't know exactly where you were putting things. >> We could send it to them, right? I mean, I thought same thing. I thought we'd
have to go through both >> Mhm. >> uh plan boards just because the majority of the property is there. >> Right. The majority of where the improvement is going to be. >> Correct. >> We should call them and submit a plan and see what
>> their call. >> Right. >> And if not, it's going to be conditional letter. They just need to know that. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Uh board members, any questions? >> Just quick clarification because it
looks to me like the existing rear wall. >> Yes. >> Comes from the where the bedroom is proposed in the basement. Straight over. >> So this is the corner of the existing basement, >> right?
>> It's straight over. We do have overhangs in the back holding up a structure, but they start about >> so the the addition the first floor then we'll have a separate exterior wall. >> Yes. >> That will run parallel to this wall.
>> Correct. So this is the first floor. This is the corner of the existing. If I follow the existing is there, but we we extended the kitchen and family room further back about five. >> Can't leave further back. So you'll
can the lever over the existing wall >> come over with supports. Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. >> And again, but but this extension meets the >> Sure. >> side yard and total side. >> Sure. So really the the biggest difference in the volume of the house is
the height. You're not going back very far. >> Correct. >> You have the garage and nothing on the >> garage. Even though we're out 24 ft, there's a 10ft sun room that has a garage under it, >> right? >> We're taking that out. So, we're another 14 ft.
>> Okay. >> To the to the right. >> All right. Thank you. >> Okay. >> But even when you're extending that out, it's just the combined sideyard. You need the variance for not the single side for that that part of the house.
>> Correct. >> You're at 49. What's 30 minimum? >> Uh side yard. >> Yes. >> 30 is required just under 19. >> Right. But yeah on the other side you're at 49.42 where 30 is required.
>> Right. Correct. So we do have the 30 but we don't have the combined of 75 and also we're a non-conforming uh width lot. So >> right. Any other questions from board members? Any members of the public with any
questions of this witness? Seeing none, hearing none, close the public portion. Any further comments? No, I think our proposal uh like I said, it really has no negative impact to in public. We're keeping the addition to
the left as modest as possible. We are going to keep puffers. We're going to clean it up. The property gets cleaned up. I think it's a positive uh for the for the street and the and the streetscape. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So, your real problem started with
the uh house being so close to the uh other side >> of the side in front. >> Right. Right. So, that triggered all these variances. >> Correct. So, um I would be in favor of this especially given the fact that there uh we have Lyola and the uh temple
uh being your neighbors and there's no plans to develop anywhere near that >> right >> and there's so much buffering. >> I'd also make it conditioned on uh a letter or an approval from Martown. Any other comments?
If not, I'll entertain a >> I think my contractor is trying to say that we're going >> there's a letter. >> That's fine. You're just going to have to give get it. >> We're just going to have to get it >> and give it to our engineer. Okay. Any if no comments from the board
members, I'll entertain a motion. >> Move that we approve. >> Okay. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Thank you. Roll call. >> Mr. Goldberg? >> Yes. >> Mr. Trackenberg? >> Yes. >> Mr. Williams? >> Yes. >> Mr. Schustster? >> Yes. >> Mr. Ben?
>> Yes. >> Mr. Kramer? >> Yes. >> And Mr. Woodford? >> Yes. >> Thank you. You're welcome. >> Okay, we're going to take a 5m minute break and then we're going to start with uh BA 25-25 uh Nollet Holding Company. But before we
adjourn, uh I have to recuse myself on that application because I live within the 200 feet and I have to recuse myself also on the application. Okay. So, we're take a five minute break and then we'll reconvene.
>> Like to uh recall to order the uh March 23rd, 2026 uh meeting of the Mars Township Zoning Board Board of Adjustment. Um roll call, please. >> Sure. We have Mr. Evangel >> here. >> Miss Simmons >> here, >> Mr. Williams here,
>> Mr. Schustster here, >> Mr. Benois here, >> Mr. Kramer here, and Mr. Goldberg >> here. All right. Next up on the agenda is BA2525, uh, block 2906, lot 11. It is, uh, Nwood
Holdings LLC. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Steve Crystal. I'm an attorney for the state of New Jersey here by representing for uh Nalwood Holding LLC and its soul member owner and manager
Mr. Michael Milof. Also with us today is the architect Mr. Jeffrey Cohen. And without further ado, I would like to offer the podium to the architecture. >> Sure. >> Steve, can I just could you spell your
last name for me, please? K R I S H T U L. >> Okay, got it. Thank you. >> Okay. Sorry, I'm just having a little trouble getting sharing my screen here. I hope I'll be able to do it in a
second. Okay. Okay. >> Okay. Mr. Golden, would you stand and raise your right hand, please? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So, help you God. I do.
>> And your full name for the record, please. Uh, >> Jeffrey El Goen, architect and planner. Okay. Are you gonna do that or >> Michael? We would like to offer uh to you the
owner, Michael, Mr. Michael Millow, who will be testifying here. >> All right. Elsewhere, you went to Inojo. Would you two please stand to raise your right hand? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, help you God. >> Okay. And just for the record,
>> engineer Joe and >> Michael, >> can you spell your last name, please? >> M I L O V as in >> M I L O V. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. And you're a member of Nwood Holding. >> Yes.
>> Okay. >> Soul member. >> Soul member. >> Soul member. >> Okay. member >> single member of LLC. >> I did that. I just did that before. Yeah, Mr. Govin's under oath. And so,
who's going first? >> Um, I can I just want to introduce myself and uh uh just explain the situation. Um my wife and I uh bought this house a couple of years ago like
almost 3 years ago with the intent to move into the area. Uh we sold our house in Livingston just kind of uh out which is too big for us and we wanted to be in we always like uh Morristown Morris
Township area. Um, so we wanted to to be in close proximity to all the restaurants and culinary scenes and uh the theater um also all the parks and
just all like the the attraction of being in kind of like a suburban setting and also like the city environment. Um, so this house that I'm planning to renovate is uh, you know, it's a little
bit dated and uh, I went through multiple renovation in my previous home and always regretted not doing things like just the way I wanted. So, this is kind of like my last place where I want to
live. And I wanted to bring the house into like 21st century with higher ceilings and better finishes interior and exterior um without like disturbing uh the look
of the neighborhood. So, so not the house. I didn't want the house to kind of stand out from uh the look of the neighborhood. And I think uh Jeff did a very good job of
keeping it like very traditional. Uh, so and one of the reasons that one of the reasons we're here is like I wanted to have like a nice spacious house with higher ceilings and
uh nice big kitchen cuz um I love to cook and uh we have a pretty tight you know family that is I'm hoping that will grow. My daughter just
got married a few years ago. My son, we hope they settle down. >> Can you speak? >> Okay. Okay. Speak a little. You can pull the microphone over by you. You can sit down. Might be easier. >> So, um
um what else can I say? So, I mean that's I guess that's about it. Um, and we're hoping, you know, to build a nice home that will be uh a good addition to the neighborhood.
>> Uh, board members, any questions for the applicant? >> Not yet. >> No. Any members of the public? Uh, any questions for this applicant? Just questions for the applicant. Please come up to the the podium. State your name and address.
>> Uh, good evening. Jason Church, C H E R C H I A. I live and at and own 31 Nwood Drive. Um, a couple just a couple questions. You said you've bought the property about 3 years ago? >> Yes. >> Have you ever lived in it? >> No. >> You've been renting it out?
>> Yeah. >> Okay. And um the proposal actually has two kitchens in it, correct? >> Um, yeah. >> Yeah. That's all I have at the moment. Thank you. >> Hi. Uh, my name is Shook Naran. Uh, I
live on Black Watch Trail. >> Excuse me, sir. Could you spell your name, please? >> Yeah. Ashoke Narayan. N A R A I N. Uh, I live on Black Watch Trail. Uh, essentially diagonally behind the the house in question. And u the
concern I I make my concern it's an environmental concern that we already have. >> So we're not doing any comments now or concerns only questions to what he testified to >> questions for.
>> So he just testified. Do you have questions for the owner for what he testified to? >> I mean the plan is already there. So I know it's going to be an expansion. So there's really no question as such because >> Okay. There will be a time at the end of the at the end of the application for comments. >> Okay.
>> So this is just for questions for for the You're >> welcome. >> Hello. Uh Brian Millio 16. >> Okay. Would you spell your last name, please? >> Mio question for you. >> Uh just question for the owner. You mentioned you're moving out of Livingston because your house is too
small. >> No. No. It's too big. Your house is too big. Can you tell us the square footage of your home in Livingston? >> Uh, close to 5,000. >> Close to 5,000 square feet. >> Okay. And the architect will reveal the square footage of the new house that's
being renovated. Talk to Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh, good evening, members of the board. Timothy Dixon at 14 Lane. Uh you mentioned that your children are older and recently were married. >> My daughter got married.
>> Who who else would be living in the house with you? >> Just my wife and I. >> Just your wife and I. Thank you. >> My name is Frank Zuper. I live at 23 Canterbury Way, which is a couple of blocks away from this house. And you said you needed more space.
>> You said >> I wanted a spacious >> more spacious house. >> No, no. Spacious feeling house with higher ceilings. >> But the house that you're proposing >> has in excess of 5,000 square ft. >> No, it doesn't.
>> I've looked at the plans. Your architect can answer that question. >> Time comes. But with regard to why do you need four rooms with locks and separate bathrooms? That has nothing to do with what you said.
>> Well, when my family comes and stays with me, I like them to be comfortable >> and each one should have their own bathroom and a locked door. >> Well, what's wrong with that? I mean, it's it's about comfort and uh you know, privacy, people.
>> Okay. And then the second kitchen is called a baker's kitchen. >> Well, I like I'm I'm a amateur uh baker. I like to make, you know, one of my hobbies is uh I like to bake sourdough
bread, you know, for my friends. I give it away. I, you know, this is what I for my family. >> Okay. Well, I'll reserve the other questions for the other test. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other members of the public with any questions for the
applicant? Hearing none. Seeing none, close the public portion introduce the architects for the proposed renovation of the house. Mr. Jeffrey Goen. >> Mr. Goen.
>> Thank you. Uh I I feel uh a little out of place sitting down, but I hope that's okay. I'm going to look at my screen, which should exactly agree with what's on the large display. >> So before we do that, can we go over credentials, please, for the board?
>> Uh Jeffrey Goen, architect. I'm at 35 Pine Street in Morristown. I've been in Morristown uh working as an architect and planner since 1984 and I uh graduated NGIT in 1978, became
licensed in 1980 uh 1983 and um I've been to testifying before many boards in in this whole area and North Jersey including this board um for many years. >> And do you have a license in New Jersey as an architect? Yes, I'm licensed as an
architect and a professional planner. >> And um both licenses are current. >> Yes, they are. >> Thank you. >> They proceed. We'll accept your credentials. >> All right. So, um I'll try to um quickly
go through this. Um essentially, I'm just going to zoom in here if I can. Let's see. >> So, what's on the screen? Is that the plan that the board has in its packet? >> Yes. So, I actually logged onto the website uh with your display with your
uh exhibits um that you're sharing with me. >> So, nothing's different than what we have, right? >> No. No, it isn't. >> Okay. >> Um there was another exhibit that is on the site that I don't have up here, but I I might have to try to um click on it
as I I um I don't have I didn't bring them on my uh computer. Um so, um yeah, we're we're here because um uh the existing house is, you know, it's not too bad, but it's it is uh a case
where there were some situations in the house in the building that were not uh ideal for for one. Um actually, you know what I think I'll do? I'll scroll down. Well, let let me just summarize while I'm on this sheet. We're here for three
variances. Um, and I think you can see the uh pointer on the display, right? Can you? Yeah, you can see my my mouse pointer uh on the display. So, I'm pointing at this existing right side yard of 17.1 ft to
the corner of the house and um so so that is remaining. Uh however, we are planning to raise that uh roof in that same corner. So that it triggers a variance because we're actually um
projecting the second floor further up than it is now. Okay. So that that is a variance. And then um uh oh, battery running low. Know why that would be I just charged it. Um,
that's a fairly new computer, but it's running low. And I do have a charger. Is there a uh receptacle here? >> Okay. Yeah, we could just uh I'll just put right here. Just walk around. Hopefully it'll come right back.
That's amazing. Uh, you know, maybe the IT guy can bring it up from his end and then I I can just ask him to scroll if I have to. Well, it's it's not coming right back on here. Maybe maybe I'll have it now. Let's see. But I'll have to
see if it still has it all. You can get on the website together as sorry. Okay. Uh I think I'm see if it's it's not sharing. Is it? I don't know if I'm still Okay, I think I think back now. >> All right. So, uh,
I was just about to explain that, um, another variance is the in the left sideyard where it's currently 29.7 ft to that front left corner of the garage. They want to bump out a little bit in the front of that garage
um to for to create like a a pedestrian door there as well as a little area for recycling bins and so on where it's convenient to take it out. uh during the pickups and uh we wanted to align that this this sidewall right
here. We we wanted to align it with the existing sidewall of the house so that it would look normal. It wouldn't look like it was cut in on that corner just to maintain that left sideyard. So, um we're asking for a proposed sideyard of
29.2. So, it's only half a foot less than what it is now. It's it's quite a bit more than the um single sideyard requirement, but the reason it's it affects us is because of the combined sideyards requirement. So,
because we're short on the right side, it required that we actually have more on the left side. So, um and I'll I'll go to those numbers in a second. So, those are the only two uh variances in plan. But we we we're fine with the rear
yard, the front yard, um all the coverages. So the the third variance has to do with the height of the building. And in that case, we are looking to raise the the the pitch of the roof for architectural reasons and but also to raise the
ceiling height of the first floor and the second floor. And uh so the the uh ridge of the roof which you know in Morris Township we measure from the average grade which is a function of the topography 20 ft away from the footprint of the house. So this happens to be
quite a hilly site. So our average grade is a little lower than normal uh lower than it would be if it was a flatter site. And we have to measure to the ridge of the roof in Morris Township. So uh we're brings us up to 38.4T 4 feet or
35 ft is permitted. Uh and so Mr. Goen, I have a couple questions on the variance list, right? So, um one of them I just want to point out with respect to height, you're
literally about one inch away from a required D variance for height, right? And I want to point out to you that if if this board were to approve 38.4 4 at the
conclusion of construction before a CO can be issued, they need to do um an asbuilt survey that's going to show the height. So, if the height is just one inch, 1.2 roughly inches higher than
what this says, you're going to have to come back here for a use variance before a CO can issue. And if it's not granted, you're going to have to cut the roof. >> Yes. So, I mean, you're the point is you're bringing this awfully close. It is close, >> and you're relying on your contractors
to be exact in an industry that's not always so exact, >> right? We we are aware of that. Uh, in fact, um, the town engineer um and their staff were were the ones who pointed out how we were just an inch or so over that
that that 10% limit. Mhm. >> So we actually revised the application before submitting it and uh dropped it down under the 3 and 1/2 ft um allowed under a C variance. >> Mhm. >> And so we we we know how critical it is and we are going to have a surveyor
before we even frame the whole roof. He's going to come out and check the first two raptors and we'll have them certify the height of the ridge of the roof. Okay. And we realize how important that is. We aren't going to build it and then wonder if we're okay or not, you know. So >> yeah. Well, you know, most people don't
usually bring it to within an inch, right? So, and I'm pointing that out because I just want to be very clear that if this moves forward at that proposed height and if there's an approval and if you go over 38.4,
>> I understand that >> you're back here with the possibility of cutting the roof. I understand that and we we we are fully aware of that and um are very serious about >> right >> then then okay I just want to be sure the applicant is aware of
>> yes we've talked about it and um we'll make sure that we have that ridge certified before we go too far along >> if I may then >> the discussion of the as it would be appropriate to certify that
ridge height during when when it's beamed up and not after it's been fully rocked out and weathered. >> Sooner the better, right? With the foundation permits. >> Yeah. >> Right. Establishing that roof and shooting and and submitting that asphalt there.
>> Uh and then as a followup to that, do you have within your tool set as an architect other roof slope options that would still work with the habitable space that you can work with? playing with the pitch of the roof to address an
injury. >> Yes. uh we we we can um if if we have that survey done and we find that for some reason something didn't work out uh we we can lower the pitch at that time and we may even do that as a precaution uh before
>> at time of framing is that >> yeah time of framing okay >> or for the certific roof elevation I has been. Okay. >> And then, you know, Joe, let me ask you, I'm not sure if you had a chance to look
at the square footage of the lot itself. >> Yes. So, um I was just trying to pull up the deed. I was able to find tax records. >> Okay. through a um njpropyfax.com
search of last year's tax records that shows the land description at 362 acres which would be just under 16,000 square ft in size. Um the it appears there's
likely a typo on the Lakeland survey. It's sheet two of the set. Um that indicates 31,000 square ft for for the lot. Um block 2906 lot 11.
It's roughly 130 by 135 in dimensions. Um, so what's shown on your on the zoning map would appear to be incorrect because it's based off of a survey that
is carrying I believe a typo on the call on the plan. I'm just looking to pull the deed booking page to see this the description that's in title and see if that gives a square footage. I'll do that and then we can follow back to me.
>> Okay. So, we're going to come back to that thought because it impacts other things like coverage, right? >> This the first I've heard that. Um, it's interesting. Uh, but I did rely on that survey square footage. So, right
>> I I was not aware that there might be a mistake on it. And I don't I was just looking to see if maybe I picked the um the area of the lot myself, but I'm not seeing it. >> No, it says 31,000 on the survey.
>> Yeah. So, I think I relied on that. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, uh should I keep going here? >> Yeah, we'll come back to that issue. I think >> in a second. Yeah. Go ahead. >> Okay. So on the cover sheet um you know
I have my my coverage calculations here and then below that I have the schedule of zoning requirements where I highlighted the uh the height of 38.4 where 35 is permitted and then uh the one side on the left 29.2 where we have
29.7 but 20 is required for a single sideyard but more was required because of the shortage on the right side for the combined sideyard. So, uh, for combined sides, um, it's required to have 50.
So, typically for a house, for example, if you have 20 on one side, you'd have to have 30 on the other side. And we are we are at uh, 46.8 right now, and we will be at 46.3 feet. Okay. So, um, those are the variances.
And then I'm just going to let me see if I can back up here. And then I'm just going to skip over this is the survey Joseph was just talking about and that's the area he was just talking about on the surveyor uh which which we
do rely on. And um you can see here on the survey I have it on my site plan too that the slope is quite severe um with these the topographic lines. There's a hill going down in this direction. And then when we calculated the height of the building,
we had to measure the topography all the way over in this area off of our site because it's 20 ft from the footprint of the house. And that brought our average grade lower and is one of the reasons we we triggered a variance. These sheets I'm going to scroll through
are the um the ones for the paving and hardscape plan which are really just they they have the storm a storm water system which I'll I'll talk about. We are proposing a good size dry well to pick up more than the required amount of water being a runoff coming
from the roof. Um, and this so this will all be reviewed by the township engineer as part of the process as soon as the variance is complete. But they have this uh already ready to be reviewed. And essentially it's just keeping most
of the existing grading um and a few changes in the rear around the rear edition. And then the next sheet is the um it's really more more about the storm runoff. It shows the uh proposed
perimeter drains leading from the roof leaders over to the drywall. And they'll review all of that, of course. And then some drywall details and calculations for the volume. And then um some more details of the site
and uh any pavers or patio work or anything. some plantings and then um some trenching and al so this is the first architectural plan is the um the basement or foundation plan. So I'll just back out here again.
And um so the existing uh basement is this rectangle right here. It has a little recreation room, a little uh closet area, a rear unfinished area with
mechanical equipment, and it has some basement windows. Um, and then the the left side of the drawing is all slab on grade where the garage is. This this rear portion here, if you can see, I'm going to zoom in a little bit
here. This this dotted line which I'm pointing to is where the there's an existing sun room we called it uh over a deck. It was built on top of a deck which is not ideal obviously. It was only it only had
three uh sono tubes under it. So we decided to rebuild it. And then while we were doing that we we decided to u expand it a little bit in to the right and to the rear >> to create a little bit nicer usable family room.
And um but it it was all respecting all the the uh setbacks. And then um you can see also that we're we're proposing a uh a little under 5 ft bumpout along the back of the house, which is two stories.
And that will allow more room for a mud room and for a kitchen, a nicer kitchen. And also it helped us in the second floor with the which I'll show you. And this is the foundation for the uh front bumpout of the garage. I I mentioned
earlier uh where there's just a pedestrian door and a little bit of extra room there because the two uh the the space in the garage is pretty much adequate just for the two cars with a little bit of extra storage on the back wall. Um
the the ceiling height is quite low in this basement. So we are also proposing to step down into this larger room which will become more functional useful room with a better normal ceiling not you know probably closer to 8 ft or still a
little under 8 ft. Uh, and then there's a there's a a walkout sliding door proposed right here to a lower patio which will then step up a little bit and have a little area with for u barbecuing or or smoker or or some some
little bit of outdoor uh barbecue type equipment. And then the the patio will step up along the back of the addition to an existing patio which is up in this upper left side of the drawing. And that that is um that is being expanded very
slightly just to align with this walkway. This is the line proposed for the patio right here. And you you can see some of the regrading um just uh filling a little bit here and and um creating a very low
uh retaining wall here to cut into there for the to allow this walk out basement. Um right right now it's not a walk out. And I'll go down to the U first floor back out of here a second again. And um
and here you can see the front bump out with the pedestrian door and a little bit of area for bins uh for recycling and such. There's an existing portico on the front of the house which is going to remain. We're just going to redo the columns and the
detailing of it. And then um here are the two garages they're staying. And uh we're proposing this mud room on the back um with a toilet and sink, a little powder room and some closets and a
pantry and a little area with a back door and a garage uh a door from the garage. And then you walk through a hallway over to the kitchen um which is kind of an open breakfast room kitchen area. And then uh there's a door to this
back uh family area. And then we we still have this existing family room with with a fireplace uh pretty much as it is. The dining room is still there as it is. And the living room is is there, but we're making a little smaller to be able to add a front
powder room and uh a hall closet. And then this this front foyer is a twotory. And that's that's um that's remaining, but we're we're putting replacing the stairwell. Um and then the basement stairs go down under
this under that same stair. Now, let's scroll down to the second floor. Um just back a little bit here. So, here's that same stairwell and the the open foyer. U this is an existing bedroom. This is
an existing bedroom, but we are carving out a little space from this bedroom uh to create an end suite bathroom with a with a walk-in closet. And I I heard the question earlier about why so many end suite bathrooms. And um
it is something we see quite often now in in upper scale houses where people want to allow a guest or um a family member to have their own bathroom right off the bedroom when they can. They they do it. If they can't, you know, of course, you have hall bath. We still
have a hall bathroom, but we even put a door into that from this bedroom to allow somebody to use it in that way. Um I mentioned the 4ft bumpout on the back. It's actually a little over 4T, closer to five, I think. Let me just
see. Um, make sure I tell you exactly. That's 4'8. Uh, so this whole section is is new along the back here. And that allows us to expand to have a
nicer family room. U, we expanded this existing hall bathroom. That that's that's what's there now. All we did was uh take a part of the addition for a toilet room so that it's a little bit more private. And then um
there's an existing bedroom on this area which is remaining and then u there's a bedroom in this corner which is now becoming part of the master suite. Uh it's becoming a big walk-in closet dressing area and you
walk through there into a new addition over the garage. So, this whole section here is is um is a new bump out over the garage. This whole section and it goes it goes over the bump out on the front and it
goes over the bump out on the back. So, basically, it has u uh a couple of walk-in closets and a decent uh master bath with two lavatories, private toilet, a tub and a
shower, and then uh a sleeping room. And there's another little bathroom off of this bed bedroom. And in this hallway, um, normally you might see, and right now there's there's a pull down stair to the attic,
but we, um, we decided to try to make the most of the attic with a what we call a habitable attic, which means that you, we raised the pitch of the roof and put a compliant everyday stair, not a full pull down stair, up to the attic.
So, I'm going to scroll down to the attic plan. So you can walk up that stair to kind of like a bonus room uh where the grandkids could
crash if they're visiting there. There it is a legal sleeping area if you somebody wanted to sleep up there. Although it isn't a bedroom it does right now we don't even have a door to it. We could put a door at the bottom of the stairs but um we have an eress window. We have dormers in the front. So, we wanted to raise the pitch to to
get I'll show you the elevation to to get a more traditional uh steeper roof over the dormers and we're going to put a new HVAC system up there for the u second floor and the attic. But basically, you come up the stair. It's
just an open uh dormatory feeling for an office or for people who need to work at home and need a quiet area where the kids and the pets aren't running around. I'm I'm sure everybody after CO has experienced that problem where you want to have a little bit of extra elbow room, a little private area where you
can uh either have an office or have a play area or um uh another little section for whatever. So that's called a habitable attic. It's it's limited uh by the square footage of the second
floor. So the the the rule is that any area that has more than seven feet of headroom h can't exceed um 33% of the second floor area. So that that is a code issue and any uh
it's considered actually one way to think of it is like a mezzanine of the second floor. It's technically considered part of the second floor uh for under the international residential code, but it but it is an upper level of the second floor. It's called a
habitable attic. So now I'll just uh look at the elevations. So before you jump off the attic, what's what's the ceiling height again in the attic? uh the
let me see if I can the uh the area that you count for that that 33% rule is any area that's higher than 7 ft 7 ft or higher. So you see this this dashed line right
here goes around um like this. This is the 7 foot line. So it follows the dormer around because it partially in the dormer. Really hard to see your cursor, but is that the one that's kind of in the middle? >> Let me look right there. >> Y So, for example, right there, you see that 7 foot ceiling?
>> That dash line can be used all the way around to you'll see that that's where the 7T line is. >> Yeah. >> I'll just move it slow here. >> And then you you can see it. Um, so basically, you know, you see the same
the same 7T ceiling line right here. Uh, so the these parts are sloped. Um, you probably seen these attics with dormers and you have slope ceiling going down next to the dormer and that that's what you would see here
>> and as well as in the backside. And so part of it has uh, you know, the this this rear area is a shed dormer that's facing the rear yard and that does have a 7 foot ceiling. Okay. Um,
the front elevation. Actually, I think I'm going to go to the uh the left side first because it show here. You can see where the existing roof is. And this dash line is if if you can see my cursor is is where the existing roof
line is. And so the proposed main roof which is beyond this uh garage roof is this line here that goes off and then you see it appear up here. So that's the main triangle of the roof over that dormer over that attic I just talked about.
This is the rear shed dormer over that attic. And these are the front gable dormers in front of the attic. And then we have three similar dormers along the left side um for the master suite with a a cathedral ceiling, the
two existing garage doors, the u pedestrian door that we're proposing. And so again, this is all an addition right here. This this whole portion in front of the existing garages. And then um this is that 4 foot 8 inch
addition in the rear this whole section. Um and then this is the sun room beyond. And again that was uh that was just to here before. And this was the roof, the top of the roof. So it's gotten larger in both directions.
And the roof got steeper. Um so now go back to the front. And you can see here u basically the window pattern is the same although these are taller windows because they're they're proposing to raise this second floor up to to the 10t
ceiling and the 9 ft ceiling on the second floor. So the all the windows are nicer, taller, more traditional with transoms. Um the same thing with the portico, taller, slender columns with a new roof over it. That's the existing chimney on the right that you see beyond
in that family room area in the back right corner. And then these are the three dormers in the front with the steeper roof, which wouldn't be possible if the roof was kept at a lower level. And then we have this similar um gable on the uh over the uh garage with a with
a connecting roof here. And these are those dormers on the side, the left side. >> So those three dormers at the uppermost level, right? That's um those are serving the attic. Yes. Right. >> Yeah. Did you consider just reducing the height of the attic so that you could
comply with the height requirement? >> You know, we we we were close to that before, but um really the what what drives it is pushing the second floor up 2 feet. Right now it's at 8 at 8t ceiling becoming a 10ft ceiling and
another foot for the second floor. So that's 3 ft higher that the attic floor would have to go up to to get those two uh floors where where they were hoping to get them. >> So you have a 10ft ceiling on the first floor, a 9 ft ceiling on the second
floor, >> 7 foot ceiling in the attic. Is that right? >> Yes, that's correct. Nothing higher than seven feet. Uh, so >> yeah, but see I'm just really focused on the height of this house. So, and I just
want to know what your thinking was as to why you think you need to exceed the height. >> All right. To what's driving the height of this house? Why can't you comply? I I I will I would like to of course explain
that and um I'll uh I'll go ahead and uh um get into that uh while we're here. So, um, essentially it's a combination of of the the desire for the 10ft ceiling in the
first floor, the 9 ft on the second floor, and then having a roof that's steep enough. This is only a 9 pitch roof. It's it's not even a 10 or 12, which is what we would have liked. This is a 12. These are 12 pitch roofs here.
These over the dormers only. The main roof is only a nine pitch roof. The ones facing the street we made 12. Um, but uh I'm sorry. Let me go back over here. >> I'm sorry. Could you explain the 9 and 12 for those?
>> I'm sorry. >> One. Could you explain what you mean by a 12 roof or a nine roof? >> Yes. Um, if I can gesture um, a 45 degree angle would be 12 ft horizontally and 12 ft vertically. So that would be a 12 on 12 roof. But if you drop it down
to a nine on 12, it's only 9 ft vertically to 12 feet horizontally. So it's like a right triangle. But that's how we call it, a nine pitch or eight pitch or seven pitch. And it it drops like that. >> Thank you. Um,
so I I just go back to this uh existing pattern here and and um you can see vaguely right here where the gutter line is where where the sophet is right now right there. So for that that sophet has to go up
three feet and then if if we uh if we did that and then we tried to comply with the 35 it would be almost it would be a very low pitch roof to so really the the right thing to do is to raise the pitch of the roof and to raise the whole roof up but the the reason that we
>> would be a low pitch roof if you wanted to maintain the 7ft attic right >> well this the 7 foot is um I'll just see if I have it drawn here. Yeah. You see this dash line right here? That's the 7 foot line right there.
So, e even if we dropped this ridge down, let's say it would come down to just a little under 7 ft, right? And you wouldn't have any flat ceiling at 7 ft. The ridge itself would be at seven or less. Um it's it's probably possible,
but um I just think it's really appropriate and and I'll explain why. I think we have some hardships here that that justify that few extra feet. And the other thing I want to point out is is that I I know in Morris Township, you know, we do measure from what's called the average grade line, which is which
is right here up to the ridge of the roof. When in a lot of municipalities, you know, we don't measure to the ridge. We measure to the what's called the mean rafter height, which is the >> Yeah, but here we measure to the top. No, you you do measure to the top,
>> but I I only mention it because um as you drive around this house, if it was in uh any other town around Morris Township that measures to the mean rafter like most towns, it would look normal. It it wouldn't look like it was too high or anything. Can >> Can you compare it to the houses in the
neighborhood then? >> Make the comparison to the houses in other towns and definitions in other towns. Let's please. >> Right. I I don't I don't mean to say yeah I I realize in that whole neighborhood and zone uh everybody's house is measured the same way from the
average grade to the ridge but um and in relative scale to the other homes in the neighborhood what is what is the average height of surrounding homes compared to the proposed request for height varies
>> right um actually I must see I'm having trouble scrolling here for some Oh, maybe maybe um Ryan might have split the exhibits. Uh I had them all rolled up, but I think he made them separate. Right, Ryan? You made um I I I think I have to go in and
find that that other exhibit. I I had another exhibit where I showed the neighborhood topography and some photos, but I believe they were posted separately. I I could try to find that in just a second. I'm sorry. I didn't realize they were separated.
>> Um, but I I'll just say it. Let me just explain it from the standpoint of the front elevation where I think you can see that the the slope of the property starts up quite let's say 3 or 4 ft
higher on the left side of it. It comes down the hill across the driveway and then across the house and then down another few feet down to here and then it it it continues downhill. And so we
actually had to start the 20 foot topography measurement um around the perimeter of the house all the way out here. I'll go back to the site plan I where I have it. Um and I'll have I'll try to go back and and log on to that um that exhibit with
the topography. But you you can see here how it is quite a steep slope. The the entire road kind of slopes down in that area. So you have the high side of the house. The high side is is way up here. So that's at 404t
above sea level. And then um the low the low area where we had to measure to was was closer to 394. So it's about a 10ft drop. um
from what from one side to the other and that forced our average grade down. I'm going to show you that again on the front elevation. So perhaps just pull to that front elevation and let's walk through your
average gate count real quick. or sorry, not the the front elevation, the the site plane layout. >> So that that that brought our average grade all the way down to under um 399.1. >> Yeah. So just pull back your site plan
so we can >> Okay. >> We can discuss how we get to the change in that average grade. You want to see the whole front elevation? >> Uh to the site plan layout. >> Oh, the site plan. Okay. >> So, the the existing home
has an outer footprint of the foundation and then our grade calculation is done 20 feet off to the outside. So the grade the average grade calculation if the property isn't modified only changes by
in the locations where the foundation is relocated by by additions. Right? So, so the change in your average grade comes from the additions to the side and to the rear of the home that put the 20
foot buffer out outward further in either direction. So, on the side of the driveway, uh, things remain relatively consistent with the addition above. And then to the rear is where the
foundation line moves out significantly towards towards the rear of the property which is generally sloping to the west. So it's that western corner of the property where we see that regrading happening around the side of the building to try to pull the grade back up because we're going into a lower
portion with the the footprint of the foundation. >> Right. So I I'll just try to uh say the same thing that we're pointing at it. This corner is is an addition as I mentioned the 4.4T 8 in and so we have to measure 20 ft off of that corner and
that gives us our highest point over here somewhere and then because we're expanding this addition in the rear here we had to measure 20 ft out this way which is a little lower out here than than what it is today which is which is off this this corner. See where here's
the existing corner. So now we're up here. So we have to measure further out, >> right? >> And then um the same thing is true over here, this corner, but that didn't really make too much difference. But the the biggest thing is over here in this corner where there's 17.1. So we had to
come another 3 ft over and the the the average height was factored on this area over here, which drops off quite a bit. And in that corner, the existing average height grade is the proposed average height grade. >> Yes. We're leaving the existing grades
as they are in that corner. >> And and the foundation is the same corner. >> Yes. Foundation's the same. So it's it's really this it's really the same all the way around here. We're not changing any of those grades. Um, so I I I really think, you know,
it's a case of that's why we, you know, we have variances and so on to see when something is appropriate and it's not going to look too out of scale. I really don't believe it will because there are a lot of houses built with these types of ceiling heights and um and steeper
roofs and it looks very nice, you know, it's it doesn't look uh mon it's not a monstrosity, you know. Um, >> can I ask a question? >> Yes. >> Maybe I can focus this a little bit. Is
what you're telling us that if you were in the same current footprint, but at the proposed height, you would be compliant. Is that what you're telling us? That you're going to a a DATM that's lower because of the expansion back. Is
that what I'm hearing? >> Correct. >> That that's partially right. Yes. to the rear is going into land lower, >> right? So that's driving that's driving that number up. >> So what would the number be? I'm not suggesting that you don't do the
expansion backward, but what would be the number on the current footprint to your proposed height >> without without the 20 foot rule? Is that what you mean? >> If you go with with the current Without
the additions, >> the additions backward, but to the slope that the peak that you're proposing, >> it wouldn't be 38.4 ft. What would it be? >> On the plan, it's listed as 38 31.8.
>> That's the existing um that's the existing I know what you're asking. >> This is going to be higher. >> But yeah, >> because we I saw the shadow. How much higher is it? So how so architecturally how much higher are you going from the existing roof at 318? >> That's a question a lot of people will have.
>> I think that's that's the way to look at it. So if we know that the existing height calculates at 31.8 ft, >> right? >> How high architecturally from that existing ridge is the proposed ridge? >> Exactly. >> And that difference is the difference of perceived height to the application.
>> Exactly. which I I I think is probably going to be important to a lot of us here. >> I I think you could you could derive that from the elevation view, >> right? I don't >> I'm asking for help from the experts here.
>> Can we derive that now? Yeah, >> I meant for them to extract it from their plan and testify it to direct on direct. >> Mr. Goldber, do you understand why I'm asking this question? >> Correct. >> Okay. >> I'll try to I'll try to address it. I I I I know what you're asking. Like if if
we didn't expand that rear family room and that rear left corner and have to measure further out the 20 foot line went further out enlarging the difference between the lowest and the highest point essentially what would it be if right that's
basically what you're saying >> right >> and all I can say is my I am saying here that our existing height is at 31.8 eight. But um >> I don't know that that was carefully calculated with the 20 foot rule.
Honestly, I I think it was. But >> then your architectural is calling 323 existing ridge from the average grade. So 32 street the proposed right
>> 375 >> no 384 >> 384 looking at a I believe a 6.1 ft recent >> from the 31 >> the proposal >> from from what's current to what would be
>> I don't want to speak for his architecture but >> from from A5 in the left side elevation of Is this is this the one you want to see? >> Yeah. So, you're on that right side of
the There's on the right side right above left side elevation straight up. You have your average grade at 3991, right? 399.1 which is matching your your cover sheet. >> Yes. >> Average gate elevation. And then your
um pulling up from that 32.3 to existing roof ridge. It's that first dimension right there. >> Yes, this is 32.3. >> 323 instead of 318, right? What we were looking on the other sheet. So we'll we'll for
architecturally we'll go off 323. >> Okay. compared to um you have either listing 375 or max approved 384 on the
next dimension over. Right. So, we're we're asking for the approval at 38 point, but we're probably for all practical reasons which which was discussed earlier going to build a little lower just to play it safe, but we we'll have a little margin of error
there, right? But the dimension is also is calling at 375 on one side of that line. 375 average grade to ridge and then below it max approved by board 384. So that's what we're trying to get to is which of those
two numbers is the height >> to compare to the 323 >> to determine the height increase of the structure just architecturally the height increase. >> Right. >> And then then we could discuss
the actual variance and the perceived height based on the average grade. >> Exactly. I I I um yeah I'm I'm not sure I'm if I am getting the question ab absolutely clear in my mind but I I just want to point out that um if again if you look
at this left elevation that Joseph was just pointing at um the average grade is is down almost 3 ft from the apron of the garage from from the grade here we have to measure I understand >> quite a bit lower but we're we're we're measuring ing off the same average grade
point to both of those call outs, >> right? >> Existing 32.3 ft existing ridge. And then as you slide over a little bit, plan right above the V and elevation. There's two numbers on that same call out.
>> Right. Right. And that's the question just to clarify which is the architectural height as proposed 375 or 384 dimensioned on the plans. Right. I I know the the application is
38.4 but uh I honestly don't know that I can answer very authoritatively on why that's 375 doesn't agree with it. I I I think when I was making a last minute change after the height calculation was questioned by
the engineer, I did drop the pitch and um so we might be able to accept a lower height than 38.4. Maybe we maybe you could just approve it at some point higher than 375 just to leave leave a little leeway there. But
um to to demonstrate the height variance, you're going to have to know so that they can quantify the mitigation that they would consider in any form of an approval, >> right? What's probably most important to this discussion of the variance on the
height, >> a C or a D, but we're a C right now. We'll agree that we're a C. That's the way it's been noticed. That's the way it's been presented. is the difference in height from the existing structure to the new ridge height.
And so it's either 318 or 323 as the existing from that based on the two plan references and then to this 375 or 384. So if we take the 384
well 37.5 so it's either 5.2 ft or 6 >> okay I'm sorry that there is a little uh discrepancy there I I just spoke to my client and um we're agreeable to the 37 uh foot uh 37.5
uh height um and we can amend the application accordingly if and we'll make it work. We'll just drop the pitch and make it work somehow. >> Okay. >> So, you would make the adjustment based upon changing the pitch of the roof, not the height of the floors. >> I'm sorry.
>> You would change the height of the roof line based upon the pitch of the roof, not the height of the floors. Yeah. >> Yeah. We we we'll just drop the pitch a little bit if we have to make it we'll make sure that we we adhere to that maximum height.
>> But can you speak to and I think this was a question that Mr. Oler started this conversation with the justification for the height of each of the floors. So the 10 on the first floor, the nine on the second floor and the seven because that's adding to the overall height of
the building which causes that pitch. So, can can you speak to why do those floors have to be I understand the applicants wish for a more spacious interior? Get that, but does it have to be so spacious that it really pushes the
height of the building up over the code? >> Yes. Um, I'll I'll I'll I'll say um what I could say to that is that um a lot a lot of these houses along that street and in that neighborhood were built with 8ft ceilings on both floors, you know, which is
pretty typical for these suburban houses. And um in a lot of these projects that we see, we we're being asked to remove walls and make rooms larger like like right now there's you can see dashed in here
there's a there's a bathroom right here and there's a um that's and there's a wall here separating this little breakfast area from the family room. So now that's all being opened up into a big entertaining area with a kitchen, a dining, you know,
a breakfast area and a sitting area where everybody can talk to each other while they're preparing food and so on. And that's kind of like the great room effect that people seek today. And and when you make a room larger horizontally, it can feel quite flat if
it's only eight feet high. So So you you tend to want to raise the height. um along with the width and the depth to make it feel proportional and not feel like a flat space. That's basically why we do it. uh when when we do it. In this
case, the owner really has been building, you know, he he's been out looking at other houses and he has a daughter who's been looking at other houses and they walk through a lot of these newer houses which have 10ft ceilings and 9 foot ceilings and they just realized how nice it felt and
how it would be ideal if they could do it. If if the board is is having a problem with it, we could talk about it and see if there's something we could do. We probably could, you know, but um you know, if if if we can justify basic
basically because of the hardship of the the topog topography, which is which is an accepted hardship in the municipal land use law, you know, we it it's it's about a 20% grade, I think, u on that one section of the street. And I do have another exhibit that I can show for
that. I have to just get into the uh website and look for it just um just really quick. Yep. I'm just going to advise that the consideration for hardship for Steve Slope be very narrowly banded in a C1
argument as it relates to the nature of the existing land. And typically that would be something you might address towards steep slope variances as opposed to a height variance to the home where you're
inflicting that yourself to put the new foundation into those locations. Yeah. >> So, I think you're going to want to use a C2 variance proof on the height rather than a C1 hardship >> to demonstrate your proofs on record. >> Yeah. And I was going to say that before. I don't see a C1 reason here.
Honestly, I think the only shot you have is a C2. And I'm I'm really hardressed to understand, you know, what's the public benefit to you exceeding the height. I I do have some C2 um proofs in my letter that I attach the application and
I'll go through that and and see if that helps cuz I really think the streetscape will be improved with the uh with this slenderness and the the proportion of the windows and the the the height. I think it'll it'll look better than it
does today. And I I have I have a photo of the >> Are there any other homes in a neighborhood that exceed the height? >> I have uh I I did drive around and I I didn't study, you know, through topography through the
>> I I didn't have a a surveyor check that, you know, >> but I I did drive around and there are quite a few where the garages are in the basement. you will come up the driveway and turn into their basement. >> And I have pictures of those in in the
other exhibit which originally was attached, but it's just it's been listed separately, I believe. So, um uh that that alone tells you that the height on those houses, if you had to measure those, you would be measuring 20 ft from that basement slab where the apron of
the garage was, 20 ft away, and then 20 ft on the other side of the house, which is which is hilly, you know. So, I I hazard a guess. I I would say that their average grade is probably lower than ours is relative to the first floor,
but I I don't know. I know most of those houses probably do have 8 foot ceilings. So, that their their roof and is like ours is 8 foot 8 foot and then a typical roof. Because one of the things that we're
looking at, what we generally look at is is is the modification in relation to the neighborhood, >> right? So, we're all thinking this as you're talking and and obviously one of our concerns is the height overall,
but there really aren't any homes with 10 foot ceilings. I love a 10- foot first ceiling, but does it me with the character? You're gonna have a higher house >> and a 10 foot first floor, 9 foot second
floor, and are we opening this up to changing all the homes in the neighborhood? The character part of the master plan is maintaining character. We approve a lot of changes all over the the township all the time. and we have no problem doing that, but it's always
in relation to what else is going on. So, you know, we're listening to what you're having to say, but we do have a concern. I have a concern with the height in relation the height of the the the home and the height of the the
floors in relation to the character of the existing neighborhood. And I think that it will be really obvious. All right. Well, um, I appreciate what you're saying and it's definitely something that um,
we don't take it for granted, you know, and we we are here to talk about it and and maybe we could lower >> because we love improvements. >> Yeah, >> we love home improvements. We really do. >> Just get rid of that.
the owner's willing to to drop the first floor for ceiling height to 9 ft if that's more acceptable to the board. So that'll lower the whole thing a foot, >> right? >> And um >> you know if if that if that would be more acceptable, we could do that.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> So what does that get your height to then? Are you at 36? >> Uh on on that dimension, we were at 37.5. So it would be 36.5. You did also indicate that the the basement was going to be raised a foot as well. The ceiling in the basement. Is
that correct? >> No. Uh down >> right now. What I was saying was the rear edition steps down. The new slab in that rear edition basement. It will step down from the existing basement. So it'll be taller. Just that back space. >> Just that back space.
>> Yeah. Okay. I'm going to take a second and um try to log on to the I don't normally use this computer and I I would have to just see if I have the um
Additional visual documentation. Okay. >> So, we've agreed that the 38.4 is not an accurate >> 38. >> The 384 that's on the plan. >> 384 is I think the
height as as defined in our code from the average grade to the top roof. The 30 I think the 375 is the architectural height essentially. >> Okay. So ideally if we could if we could ask
for um the approval at 37.4 drop it down a foot that it'll give us some some leeway because I'm not um sure about that 375 but >> okay >> you know it. So I'm I'm going to try to
share uh new share the uh home tab additional um and this there is another one that I don't see here but um this okay so I just wanted to show a
couple of pictures of what the existing house looks like >> and just for the record these are pictures that we have in our packet correct >> yes they're they're on the site um listic for the documents. So, uh the existing house is is here. Pretty
typical uh brick front with the clapboard and smaller windows. This is this is the rear basement which was used just for a little exercise, but pretty much unfinished space. You can see the the uh chimney area over there with the mechanical equipment. And the back of
the house has the small room, basically just a deck enclosure on top of a deck, the two-car garage, and then um the existing deck with that enclosure. You can actually see the decking still there. This just shows the overall texture of
the neighborhood. Uh and um the house is pointed out here and the slope goes down this way. Uh so the high the high side is over here, the low side is over here. But um some closer view. And this is just a
location plan that uh was was part of the checklist to show where in the township we're located. And then the um the tax tax map showing the house in the context of the other houses right around
it and the location uh on the uh zoning map to show the zone the partial zoning map. But there was another one that I don't know if it was uh posted u
maybe let me see if I could find it. Can I explain a green form? I don't think I don't think it got posted and I don't think I have it with me. All All it was was I I did a closer look at the topography of the whole neighborhood. Um
uh let me just go back to uh Okay. Okay. Sorry. Take a second to uh Okay. So, so basically it was um it was a neighborhood topog topographic study
which just showed what I was explaining before about how these top these this this hillside continues way up in that direction and continues down in this direction and that there's a I think it's a it's an existing topographic change of of over 10 ft from one side of
the site to the other which drops the average plane down and forces everything else all the other dimensions down with it but just kind of an abstract thing because from the street you don't see that average grade like that.
So um that's that's why I felt that it was relevant and I I realize that u you know there are other ways to justify variances which I'll I'll get into at uh I guess I'm I'm about ready to go into that part of it and I'll just uh
summarize the planning end of this um unless there's anything you want to stop and talk about the architectural end of it uh before I do that. I could use a little water. You mind if I just want to get a little >> Take five. >> Take five minute.
>> Take a five minute break. >> Five minute break. >> It's a recall to order the uh March 23rd, 2026 Morris Township Board of Adjustment uh meeting. Turn >> your volume down. It's
>> on your computer. the computer. >> Okay, >> Mr. Koopa, roll call. >> Mr. Ev uh Evangel >> here. >> Miss Simmons >> here. >> Mr. Williams >> here. >> Mr. Schustster >> present. >> Mr. Venois >> here. >> Mr. Kramer
>> here. >> And Mr. Goldberg >> here. >> Okay. >> Okay. So during the break, we talked a little bit about some things that'll be needed for the next uh next hearing, but Joe, why don't you just for the record
clarify a few things? >> So some of the testimony we heard in discussion of the plans, there was um various discrepancies on some of the heights architecturally, how it translated to the bulk standards, including the lot area from the survey that they trusted. That was clearly a
typo. So it would be my recommendation we clean those items up in revisions submission so that uh we can firm up those numbers specifically to the variances and specifically the height of the structure. Um so that supplemental
architectural testimony can be provided to clean up the revised plan sets next time. and then we get into planning testimony on the revised only as opposed to starting planning testimony on what we now know has certain discrepancies in it. So to take out the gray area from
the planning testimony and keep the planning testimony preserved to the record after a revision. Um, with that, I would also say we could hear the public after we go through our questions on the current testimony so that we can
um summarize tonight with the conclusion on the testimony that's on record and take the balance of that architectural discussion here. >> Sounds like a plan logical approach. Um, so for the purposes uh we'll we'll conclude the architectural piece tonight and then move on to the planning.
>> Yes. So essentially an architectural supplement next time to clarify the revisions to the plan that clear up all these discrepancies and then I would recommend then that proposal in that revision go from architectural heights of an existing first floor elevation of
the home and then you can show the existing average grade elevation calculated and the proposed average grade elevation calculated because the footprint changes and so you the board and the public will Understand the the extent that number changes that works
against the height calculation and then understand the portion that is purely architectural to the elevation change in the height architecturally going up. >> How much from the point in space which is the top of the house now >> exactly >> vertical distance to the proposed top
>> exactly let's assume the the datims are the same. Yes. >> What is that vertical distance? I think everybody wants to know that. >> So, I think it'd be to the benefit of the record if that's all clearly revised
and represented so that we're not discussing it twice and we don't have anything misconstrued now in this testimony. Correct. >> Before the next testimony. >> Correct, >> Mr. Goan. >> I I I agree with that and I think it's
uh the right approach. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. Any other comments as you conclude your architectural testimony or >> No, I I think uh basically um going back to the site plan, I don't hear too much concern about the sideyards. Um you
know, they are pretty much pre-existing. We're that front bump out is um on the of the garage is reducing that just half a foot, but it won't be that perceptible from the street. It's essentially, you know, you got plenty of space there
because the neighbor's driveway is also on that same side. So, it's quite a bit of space between the buildings. So, I I I think this the real issue here is the height. And um we we we should just amend the application and nail down that
those numbers, correct the uh get get the surveyor to correct the lot area and recalculate all the coverages and make sure we're okay. And then um but for um for the tonight at before we start the any questions about the testimony tonight, right? You you you want to do
that get that finished. >> Correct. We'd like to get that the board questions. >> I'll just say that you know we are agreeable to lowering the height on the first floor 1 foot. Uh um and and we we are probably also agreeable because of
the smaller rooms on the second floor to going back to 8 ft on the second floor. So that's two feet less than what we're we came in with today. >> And if you know if that's significant enough to to to overcome it, u I think still there's some questions that need
to be nailed down in terms of the numbers. So all right, >> you know, but okay, we could do that through signature set. So if you if you feel comfortable with that approach, you could approve it and then we we could just have the >> Okay. Well, we're going to not we're not going to finish tonight regardless. So,
um, so with that, um, if you're done, I'll turn it over, uh, to the board for any questions and board members. No questions. Okay. Um, I'll now open the, uh, public portion of the meeting for, uh,
questions of, uh, Mr. Goen just based on his architectural testimony here this evening. Again, there'll be time at the end for comments and uh just questions on the architecture. >> Uh time at the end is probably next, >> correct?
>> Just uh Jason Church again, 31 Nolanwood. Um just a point of clarification on how this is going to work. Are the revised plans going to be made available like 10 days in advance? >> They have to be submitted at least 10 days prior to the next hearing date. I don't know what that date is yet. We'll
figure it out before we leave. And just to be clear, we're just asking questions now about the architecturals and not any of the planning components. >> Yeah, we haven't gotten really to the planning components yet. He'll testify to that next time. >> I'm only going to ask questions about the architectural then I'm going to reserve whatever.
>> And understanding that with respect to the architectural plan, it's going to change in terms of the right. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Uh so can you clarify what the square footage of the proposed home is going to be? Okay. Um
2615 let me see if I have that handy here. >> 2615. >> Well, I I just off top my head. I don't want to just throw a number out. I I have the footage. I have of course the footprint the proposed ground floor we
have um proposed is um the h I'm just asking about the habitable square footage what what is the total habitable square footage of the home >> the proposed home >> so the the ground floor uh including the garage is 2615
>> right there >> and um >> that's what flooring >> let me just see if I have the second floor handy here on the cover sheet. I don't think it's here, but let me check the um second floor plan and see if I have
Yeah, I'd have to um calculate with the second four edition 960 8 I think 916.8 I'm sorry let me just make sure I'm reading it correctly 916.8 8.
And I I just have to run the numbers, but all in all, you you know, the the the um the second floor is following the first four walls all the way around except for the sun room. So, it's probably very close to that ground floor area
um >> minus the um sun room area, which which I believe I have on the cover sheet. Um are you including the habitable attic? Uh, no, that's that's I'm I didn't count that in yet, but uh so that you you the
habitable attic. Um I'll just go back up here a second. Sorry. >> Yeah. So we we have the existing um sun room 275 and the addition of the sun room is three
398.8 eight. But then there's a portion I I I I I'd have to run the numbers, but essentially, let's just let's just say it's roughly um the same as the first floor minus uh the second floor is the
same as the first minus uh 275 398 and that's it. 275 and 398. Do you have that? So it's 46 the first floor times 2 - 275 - 398. Yeah. >> Plus the attic. >> So that brings it to about 4500 ft.
>> Does that include the attic? >> No, that's without the attic. >> So how how many square feet is the attic? The inhabitable attic. >> I I believe I believe it's around 830. Um >> so we're talking number. It's safe to say the house the proposed home is
greater than 5,000 ft of habitable space. >> Yes. Yes. including the garage. >> Including the garage, but does that include the basement? >> No. >> Okay. >> You You have a kitchen in the basement, though. But that's But the basement's
not habitable. Is that why you're not including the basement? Oh, let me ask that again. You're not including the basement because it's not habitable. It's under the code. Is that right? >> No. I mean, it is habitable. It's not a sleeping area, but uh I mean, theoretically, somebody could. You have
we have a walk out now for egress, but um It's it the only reason for the kitchen shown down there is for it's more like a summer kitchen for baking. It's it's just for his hobby of uh sourdough bread making. And uh it's probably it's really
it's it's not a second kitchen like for apartment or anything like that. >> Well, it has an oven or double oven, right? >> Has an oven and a sink and refrigerator >> and some storage space as well. >> Yes. >> Okay. Does it have a stove?
You would call it a stove range. Okay. >> Is there anything in in the the basement that in the Is there anything in the basement kitchen? >> A little too much going on. >> Can't hear you. Thank you. >> Is there anything in the basement
kitchen that is proposed for this house that is un is missing from what you would commonly refer to as a kitchen in any of our homes? For all intents and purposes, it's it's going to have cabinets, counters, uh a range, refrigerator, and an oven. So,
it's similar to >> another kitchen. But I I I will note that doing work all throughout Morris Township over the years, there there are quite a few homes where a second kitchen is is not uh a problem as long as you the owner signs
an affidavit saying that it's only for his family to use. like if they're visiting or you have a mother daughter type of situation or um somebody is uh handicapped and has trouble using the stair. Okay, >> that's not that uncommon. We just did a
new house uh where we >> So the owner's agreeing he's not going to rent out any space to third parties. >> There's no intention to rent. This is just for his his own. >> Um, is it if this is approved, would you would the applicant have to
come back to the board to put a b excuse me to put a bathroom in the habitable act? >> I don't think so. That's building department issue as far as I know. But, uh, right now there's no plan to put a bathroom up there.
>> Okay. >> And by the way, there's no bathroom in the basement either. >> Understood. Um, you were talking about average grade. Uh, the average grade measures up the to the left side of the house too up the slope to the extent that that's within 20 ft of the house as well, right?
>> Yes, that's right. >> And so the average grade of the house I think in your application is 399.3 ft. Does that sound right? >> Yes. >> And so if you look at the topography of the of the on the survey, that line for 399 ft runs through the footprint of the house. Is
that right? It runs through the basement, if you will. Uh, it's it's it's >> Well, my question was, it runs through the footprint of the house, correct? >> Yeah, it's actually underground on the garage side. >> Sure. And
I I was a little confused by your testimony. Is the slope of this property similar to the slopes found throughout the neighborhood? In the immediate neighborhood, it's fairly consistent that whole street goes down and I don't know if it levels out a
little bit. I think it does level out down toward the bottom of the hill. Um, and he's fairly close to the top. So, you know, it is a hilly part of town. Yeah. >> That but it's fair to say that that's for the that slopes the slopes of this property are characteristic of the
neighborhood at large. Is that is that fair to say? >> Yes. And maybe since we have to come back, I I'll see if I can gather more precise information about the um heights in the area of some of those houses. >> Sure. Um you've driven through the neighborhood, I presume. >> Yes.
>> Yeah. Um would you say that the proposed height of the home is >> Let me ask it differently. Is the existing home is the height of the existing home characteristic of the homes in the neighborhood? It's a it's characteristic of about at
least half of them, but a good number of them have these basement garages, so I I really think that this house presents from the street as uh lower than a lot of the other houses in the area. >> Well, do you think Well, I live in one of those houses that has the basement
garage. Do you think that the reason that those houses have basement garages is due to this a steeper slope for those properties? >> I think so. Yes. So are how many roughly if you know how many homes in the neighborhood have habitable attics?
>> I really don't know. I I I have no way of knowing if someone has put like a habitable section. >> Most of the roofs are lower slope like the ones that's existing. And I would say if they have a habitable attic, there's probably a very limited area. That's
>> I mean, you can investigate that from the exterior because a habitable attic has to have a window, doesn't it? You'd see that from the exterior of the home. >> It would have to have a window for light and ventilation, but not necessarily egress. So, it could be a smaller window, but essentially just a window.
Yes. So, natural light. >> You don't know. You can't say sitting here tonight whether a habitable attic is characteristic of the neighborhood or not. Then, is that right? Yes, but I I think you you have to also distinguish between features of a building that are controlled by zoning
and and those that are not because any any of those houses could put a habitable attic in without a variance. It's it's an allowed feature of a single family house. as long as you respect the height, you know, that you're not
triggering any variances, uh, I don't see any reason that a zoning permit couldn't be issued in a building permit, >> right? But as the homes exist today, again, you don't know if they're they have habitable habitable attics or not. >> I I have not gone around and surveyed
it. Okay. >> Um, do you know what the square footage of the ex the habitable square footage of the existing home is? Um well I h I have the existing footprint shown here. Um I'd have to do the arithmetic again and
basically it would be without the master suite over the garage and without the back sun room. >> That's 22 >> I don't know off hand. >> Is it 20 about 2500 ft? Is that fair? your answer. >> Uh let me see if I have that if I can
give it to you. >> So the existing house is 1974. Uh it's 2249 with the porch with the rear um addition >> and is that >> sun room? >> So let's say 20. We can round it up. We
can round it down to 2200 square feet. We can round it however you want. Is the existing square footage consistent with this the neighborhood? >> It is consistent. >> And earlier you testified that the proposed habitable square footage of the
home exceeded 5,000 square ft. Are is that larger than the homes in the neighborhood? Uh well, first of all, you're you're you're comparing a first floor footprint, which which is different.
>> Well, no, my my first question was what was the habitable square footage of the house? And we weren't sure, but we said it was safe to say it was greater than 5,000 ft. You you remember that? >> Yes. >> Okay. So my question now is, is the 5,000 square foot, let's call
that the minimum, is the minimum size of 5,000 square feet greater than the general size of the homes in the neighborhood. >> I'll just answer this way. If if you take the 22 2250 roughly existing
footprint of the house which includes the garage and you apply that to other houses around the neighborhood where the garage is in the basement and the second floor extends all the way over the garage. The entire footprint of the house is covered by the second floor.
>> It's very possible that you you're close to 5,000 on a lot of those. How big is the How big is this? please. >> How how big is the garage? >> Yeah. Uh
it's it's like maybe uh 24 by some. >> So your testimony is that some houses have an additional 500 square ft that this house doesn't have because of the garage. I mean, I'm just I'm obviously I'm thinking out loud here from from driving around where you do see houses that have
the garage under the house, not next to the house, and that the entire first floor and second floor are aligned already. So, I I don't think it's that far a stretch that everyone has to, you know, have a big joke about it. I it just seems to me logical that if if you
have a house with a 22 22 250 footprint and the garage is not next to the first floor, it's under it and the you have two stories above. It's not that impossible to imagine. Maybe it's not 5,000, maybe it's 45 >> photo.
>> Yeah, we're not going there. No, we're not doing that right now. That's for later. >> I would like an opportunity to do that. >> Absolutely. You will have that opportunity. But this is just questions of his testimony. We're already past our our lifetime. >> Show why that testimony is wrong. >> So I have a photo array that will do
that. >> Come back. He's going to give us new um architectural plans. We're going to we may do that first so that you can then question the new architectural plan. I we'll just really then conclude all the architectural testimony. We'll come back
to you to continue with your questions and then everyone else who has questions will have an opportunity and then we'll go into the planning testimony. When all of that testimony is over and all the questions for that is over, then you and everyone else will have an opportunity
to offer any kind of testimony that you might want to offer. >> Okay. Um I would like to be able to do that at the next hearing. So I don't have any other questions. >> Okay. But I would like to come back to that when the next hearing comes. >> We hopefully we will get to that at the next hearing. >> All right. Thank you.
>> And I'd like to just say something. Um you said that testimony is wrong. I think it's it should be clarified that I did say I don't know. I have not surveyed all of those conditions throughout the neighborhood. I'm just speculating based on the overall comparability of footprints of in the
neighborhood that it's not that much of a stretch, but I'm I'm just speculating. So you the answer to my question then was a 5,000 ft square foot home consistent with the neighborhood. Your answer is you don't know. >> I don't know 5,000 but I would say if it
isn't 5,000 it's not that far. >> It could be 45. You know >> in the interm right when we when we come back again there's a few things that they're going to present in addition to the revised plans. I'd suggest that you
um maybe see if you can get some heights on homes in the neighborhood. Uh I think photographs of other homes that you're going to compare to would be helpful. Not just this property, but other properties on the street. Um you know, maybe what this the property line, is there a buffer between this um you know,
what you're going to be building on and the house to the right, which is the most impacted home. What's that property line look like? Are you going to offer a buffer if there isn't one? Um and you can verify what the square footage is for this property and average square footages in the homes in the
neighborhood which are you know that information is easily accessible through uh assessor's cards which you can Oprah >> so I can do that analys >> and that really goes more towards the plan anyway. >> Fair enough. >> I don't have any other questions then
with the caveat that I would like to >> you will have that chance. Yes. >> So what do we got for next? Should we the public? Are we going to >> We're going to get to the public at the next meeting. Again, as I just said, >> I waited all night. I'll be brief. You can't shut us down. Nobody in this room
wants to shut us down. I'll be brief. Bullets. >> Is it one question? >> It's It's bullet. Yes. Well, there's several questions, but they're quick and I won't >> I won't go back and forth. >> So, what's the next date? >> April 27th. >> April 27th. Okay. So, this meeting is being adjourned at this point. Um,
>> God's doing the service here. >> Come on. the process. >> It's It's going to take forever because that's just what happens. We may not even conclude at the next hearing, right? So, >> be prepared. It's It's not a one night thing. >> Incorporated.
>> How about you hear the questions without answers so they can answer next time? >> You represent the town that live here. >> You're welcome. You're welcome to contact the applicant and tell them what your thoughts are and they can be ready to address those questions at the next hearing. Right. This hearing is being
concluded now. Uh the next is will continue on April 27th at 7 o'clock in this room. There'll be no further notices from the >> not process sir >> for 54 years it's been a process that neighborhood
>> they're asking you to repeat the date. April 27th 7 p.m. Um, any other business? >> I got everything. >> Should I gaffle them again? Ask them to please clear the room.
>> Uh, we still have other business to tend to the meeting. So um please uh >> that hearing >> that hearing is adjourned. >> Thank you. >> So you do have to get your plans in 10
days ahead of time, right? >> And if they don't, then it's going to be a different day. >> Or carry, >> right? >> Do you want to? Um, >> any other matters on the agenda or Paul,
you want to take your seat back? In fact, >> are there any are there any other matters uh for the board to discuss? >> Yes, Mr. Chair, have we confirmed that April 15th hearing? >> Um, I street property. >> Yes, we have confirmed it. We have sufficient board members. Uh, the
objectors are available, the applicants available. >> Thank you. Any other any other board issues or questions? No. Okay. I have a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Second.
>> All in favor? I