meeting of the township of Mars Board of adjustment for March 24th 2025 the legal 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 alance 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 We R call yes Mr chair Mr Goldberg here Mr tractenberg here Mr Williams here Mr
Schuster here Mr benois here Mr Kramer here miss Simmons here miss POA here Mr wooder here Mr oler here Mr Hansen here and Santiago here okay now we have have
Mr Kramer of Allegiance for Mr KR corner here a little room after me I do solemly swear swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States and I will support the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of New Jersey constitution of state of New
Jersey and I will bear faith and allegiance to the same and I will be faith and allegiance to the sa and to the governments established in the United States and the governments established in the United States and in this state and in this state under the authority of the people the authority of the people so help me God so help me God I do solemly swear I do solemly swear
that I will Faithfully that I will faithfully and partially partially and justly perform and justly perform all the duties of the office all the duties of the office of the board of adjustment of the board of adjustment regular member regular member according to the best of my ability according to the best of my ability so help me God so help me
God right congratulations welcome back for you all right so we next we have a couple of uh resolutions uh to be approved uh the first being uh for ba-
1-25 uh Anthony deita yes Mr chairman this is a memorializing resolution with respect to the application filed by Anthony deito um for property at 145 Lake Valley Road uh in order to construct the
two-story addition to the rear inside of his dwelling um which and new driveway which uh would result in new variances for front yard sidey yard combined sidey yard and building coverage um and for
the reasons that are set forth in the resolution the application was conditionally granted with our standard conditions as well as a condition indicating that the applicant shall relocate the shed to a conforming location and prior to any
construction the applicant shall apply for and receive a grading permit all right board members any questions or comments on the resolution if not I'll entertain a motion to approve second all right M
Santiago roll call Mr Goldberg yes Mr tractenberg yes Mr Williams yes Mr Schuster yes yes Mr benoa yes Miss Simmons yes and Mr Woodford yes so moved
okay and the next resolution again a memorializing resolution with respect to the application filed by Kelly and Brandon uh carry um to apply to the board for permission to modify an existing non-conforming dwelling by constructing a one and a half story
Edition to the rear of their dwelling a portico a rear deck uh all of which requ re ired the following variance relief uh there was front yard setback side yard combined sidey yard building coverage and of course an expansion of the non-conforming structure that property
is at 15 watn Road and for the reasons that are set forth in the resolution that application was conditionally granted with our standard conditions all right board members any comments questions if not entertain a motion I'll move that Mr chair thank you
second Santiago roll call Mr TR Mr goldber yes Mr track Dumber yes Mr Williams yes Mr Schuster yes Mr benois yes Miss Simmons yes Mr
wer yes some move all right moving on to the public hearings we're going to not take of them in the ex exact order that uh they are on the um on the agenda uh we're going to do first is
ba-5 d25 that's uh 40 Midland Drive chairman yes um I'm within the 200 foot okay so I need to recuse myself all right recused Simmons come on up
do not mess with my chair chairs are what are adjustable what no told me this thing go straight up behind this house okay we got to wait we
pardon it is Morris with a capital m TW WP 19 I'm sorry 1776 I think s right isn't it over there on the wall
yeah it work oh yeah 1777 I don't [Applause] wasn't aware that there was connection apologies I didn't not aware of the process that's all right
for [Applause] [Applause] right okay what's a required combined side yard in the ra [Applause] 14 the chart says
20 yeah on the and so that should be 3020 right yeah 31 sides 20 the other side total of 50 they got 71 and 71 right
okay want into the record sure are you in are you ready yes well just want to make sure he's ready before we go all right
go ahead okay our next application is ba-5 d25 Ban basan did I say that right this is block 3910 lot 2540 Midland Drive in the ra15 zone for
section c applicant proposes the construction of a second story Edition creating a s setback of 7.1 ft where 20 ft is required a combined side yard setback of 14.2 feet where 50 feet is required and a front yard setback of
24.4 feet where 50 feet is required applicant will also seek a variance relief for the expansion of a non-conforming structure all right now who's going to be testifying I'll be testifying as the architect and the home owner will be
testifying as well well then would you both raise your right hands please you Solly s that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you got and just for the record would you state your names please Tina vas t i i n a and Victor
a who's gonna testify first I'll go first all right very good okay keep your voice up so everybody now I'm soft spoken there we go okay if you would just describe your uh professional background and education
for the board please a licensed architect graduated from calpal worked in New Jersey area for 30 years primarily in residential and testified in multiple municipalities and similar uh variances your license is current in correct okay thank you you may proceed
very good uh um we'll pull up the um first the construction documents there sheet A1 and we'll start by looking at the survey uh good evening uh this is a proposal for 125q foot addition a second floor Edition over at existing first
floor which would require three C variances due to the hardships presented by the existing conditions I'd like to review the request the existing uh conditions The Proposal objectives the considerations for the neighborhood and the request for variance releas with you
so we'll start with the survey on top of the top right hand corner of she A1 to review the variance requests uh the property is an ra15 Zone single family we're seeking the three variances for three conditions sidey yard combined
side yard front yard all which is resulting in expansion of non-conforming structure on the existing Western right side it's 7 fo1 uh from um property line to Dell where by ordinance 952 20 ft is required
and we will save maintain that 7.1 with the second floor Edition the existing combined side yard is 14.2 feet whereby ordinance 9528 50 ft is required and we also will maintain that 14.2 feet also the
existing structure is 24.4 feet from the front yard property line where 50 ft is required that will also be maintained overall we're seeking to expand these non-conforming uses and require variances for 244 29 A2 so that is the survey let's stay with
that for a second and look at the existing conditions the um prop the house is 1500 square feet currently twostory three-bedroom one bath built in 1928 and is very similar to the other homes in the area the lot is narrow
undersized and sloped from the street up to the rear the house is modest quite small relative the small lot area so the building coverage is only 12.56% with 20% is allowed then privious coverage comes to 14.8% or 45% would be
allowed however the minimum required lot width is 100 feet the property is only 50 feet wide half of what is required the minimum required lot area 15,000 square ft and we have 9,741 square fet which is just 65% of
the required lot size thus we are seeking variances due to the hardships created by the undersized lot and location of the existing dwelling with respect to the three setback requirements I'm going draw your attention over to the floor plan just to
see what the proposed objectives were and how those laid out uh the objective of this project is to add a 8 by 16 second floor addition over an existing sun room on the right side of the house so we can see that dish is in the dark dark lines uh in the front we have a
bath second bathroom that's proposed to be attached to bedroom number two and then on the back of the addition we' like to add a little bit of space to bedroom number three uh the reason for the project is that V and Divia have just moved into 40 Midland it's their first home and during the purchase they
discovered that they're expecting a child and we have two weeks to go so uh with anticipated growing family and with grandparents moving in to provide child care vad and D reli that was just one small addition housing a second full bath an additional bedroom
space would be enough to provide the additional space for the multigenerational living so locating this addition over the existing first floor sunro is a logical location given the layout of the existing second floor it's next to the
bedrooms one and two and four two one and two and the fact that minimize construction cost would it would not require constructing a foundation and it would not require constru a first floor they don't need a first floor addition let's consider other locations um if you
look at the elevation just to the bottom of the backyard elevation below the second floor uh we can see that there's a a kitchen bump out it's 4x4 so we could build over that and can't leave out a little bit to get the 125 Square fet however when you look back at the
second floor plan you see that that would be right next to the uh steps and the bathroom so there' be no access to the second floor um also adding a full second floor addition to the right of that kitchen bump out it's not logic because we don't
need a first floor space at this time um let's look at the current and proposed street views and that would be on the um exhibit a that you also receive those with a colored sheet that has a renderings and photographs on it
um so there we go so this is ideal looking at the middle shot just let me stop you there for a second we don't have that right I sent exhibit a last week first page only right so we you have the
construction documents that are the um two sheets and there was an additional exhibit a sent which I received an email response to but that was sent to me only it didn't go to the board okay so we'll get it marked all right I would had the
board so that's okay let's just Mark that A1 if you would do that and put today's date on it as well very good and then I'll have you describe what that is for the record all right my apologies again for that this a one all right all right so we'll start with that
view that vet is showing us the blue house is their home and on the far right side a little bit you can see the M the yellow sun room that's right to the right of it and what we're proposing to do is add right on top of that um and there we go I like that view on the
right of it because we can see what the view is coming up the road and that's that yellow sun room that we currently have and we're going to build that 125 square foot um uh addition right above that and if we scroll up a little bit we
can see what the proposed views would be for the front and for the right side view so from the front um so from the front we can see we're just filling out that top right hand corner and then um to the right image
there we can now see what that image looks like from the street as we just built out that 125ot addition over the existing sun room so that is the objective that is what we proposed to do um and in doing so we certainly
considered Vena and Divia um um solution but we also want to be respectful to the neighbors and the and and the intent of the zoning um ordinances so as noted the located desire for the 125ot Edition is above the sun room because it works out
for venin and Divia but it's also the least intrusive location for the Neighbors the only other real location would have been for example above um let's go here again um if you look back at the existing like above the entry area or something like that that's
certainly would have been more obtrusive and more present in the street um so I also want to discuss the distance between let's look at these here scroll down between the properties especially the one to the right which is
um 42 Midland since that's the property that will be impacted the most so we're that 7.1 feet from the property line and 42 Midland is at about 15 feet so we have a total of a net about 22 feet
between those two buildings there on the other side we also have 7.1 feet from our house to the property line and then the neighbor at 38 Midland they're at about 11 feet so that's a little bit closer that comes in at 18 feet um so
this does impact 42 Midland the most we're very grateful that the neighbor Austin is here tonight in support of the the pro project and then one last consideration for the neighborhood is the size of the addition it's certainly proportionate to the home itself and
certainly proportionate to the neighborhood um and that brings me to the last topic which is the request for the variance relief uh if we can just go back to the survey because that's where we're seeing all those um
setbacks thank you uh the low building coverage and low impervious coverage were certainly allowed for sizable addition but unfortunately because of the exist conditions it would possible to add anything into onto the house without the set without setback variances so we are seeking a VAR
seeking the variances for this project because the property falls under njsa 40 55d 70 C1 requirement whereby strict application of any regulation would result in Practical difficulties and
hardship when try to add a small 125 s foot second floor Edition due to the undersized lot the narrowness of the lot and the location that giving dwelling on the dwelling within the property The Proposal seeks to be aligned with effort
to provide a design that satisfies the homeowner's needs and also does so in a manner that does not cause substantial detriment to the public good and will not substantially impair the intent and the purpose of the zoning plan and zoning ordinances with that we thank the board
for the opportunity for the for the opportunity to present the request and thank you for the consideration of this proposed addition thank you board members any questions uh this property slopes steeply up the back so it's basically
impractical to go up the hill without digging well into it well if we could build over the kitchen bump Pad but if we were do the addition to the side but that would be going right into the stairwell yeah and all that so it' be practic practically it would be
impossible or not be convenient not convenient expensive and okay members of the public any sorry I just have one yeah question um on the rendered uh for the the rendering for the to be completed proposed addition I noticed there was no chimney is the chimney
coming down or that has come down in the process there will be a event yes oh so that's okay thank you yes okay thank you um any members of the public with any questions seeing none hearing none close
the public portion oh no does any member of the public wish to testify regarding this application not seeing none hearing none close the public portion board members any comments
questions if not I'll entertain a motion perfect example of hardship they could build straight back and it would still be a sidey yard setback because of the existing conditions right this is this is going
no further into the setbacks this is with regard to setbacks exactly the same as it is now and it's very modest the Improvement great yes so do I have a motion I move that the that the uh uh
application be approved with our normal conditions there should also be one other condition that notice we noticed before that uh on the zone chart the required conditions the um setbacks aren't correct so I realized that I had
put 10 and it's it's 20 I realized that from the report one side should be 30 another's 20 and then the combined is 50 so it just oh so apply the 20 the 30 to 50 right very good okay not 10 10 20 okay thank you
so do I have a second on the motion with that condition I second thank you m Simmons Santiago roll call Mr Goldberg yes Mr tackenberg yes Mr Williams yes M Simmons yes Mr benois yes Mr Kramer yes Mr Woodford yes some
more we'll have a resolution at the next meeting for you okay good luck that's okay oh no that's fine that's fine no don't don't apologize we go or should we go [Music]
to okay okay next we're going to do ba- 3-25 12 westmin place next application is ba ba3 d25 aan Wilson block 5903 Lot 4 12 Westminster
placed in the r835 s for section c applicant proposes construction of an inground pool creating a rear yard setback of 26.5 ft where 50 ft is required you are you will you be the only witness I I
will I apologize my engineer has the flu apparently today um I'm gonna ask you to stand and raise your right hand you somly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth so help you got and for the record would you state your name please Evan Shan
Wilson thank you Mr Wilson okay ready tell us what you want to do yeah I just um we're looking to put uh inground pool behind our house we live on just about an acre but our house is tucked into the back of the property
property um so we're good on either side for the variance but to The Back Fence um we're just over 55t so we would need a 10 foot patio 16 foot pool about
a 26 foot variance to the back neighbor um that is essentially we have a lot of impervious area even with the proposed Pool and Patio I think we're still 10% under our impervious um need um the drainage really isn't an
issue it all goes around my house is familiar with my property but there's a vacant lot of a couple acres just south of me I believe where all the water drains off to um so really aside from
this property line behind us um you we did have parameter so we're just asking for that variance um we already have plans to build trees and put everything around us to help with the absorption but to block out all the neighbors um what is this uh brick dwelling that's
shown on the survey um all right so my property used there's there used to be five acres up there my property owned that brick dwelling was in a different location previously and was also on the property
18 years ago was subdivided into two properties and sold when you say so which slot did was subdivided it was that property used to be somewhere else that that building was moved onto my property by the previous owner um I can clarify this sure okay there's three
more houses down going towards Overlook Road there was a subdivision done about 15 years ago by a builder by name of senica that brick house was on the property the owner the former owner of
this property bought the house and had it moved and put on this property with a grading permit and a zoning permit because that was her second that was going to be an accessory structure um she never closed out those
permits which is not an issue right now because it's changed ownership um but it is a little bit over the setback line according to the survey about 6 in to a foot which very well
could just be the way the surveyor uh had measured it um one thing with regard to the variances he's not only looking for rear yard variance I missed in the review uh he also needs a combined side
yard variance because you're going to go by 30 foot to the swimming pool on the right side 40.4 F feet to the brick dwelling on the left
side it's uh 4.6 feet shy of combined side yard requirements for the stone okay so without any issue could we move it over you can move it over but then you might be getting closer to the rear line yeah the way because the way it's
angles yeah it probably about a foot closer to the rear line the The Back Fence kind of in the house sits not parallel so they shift is that um second that brick structure is that occupied at all or it's not occupied currently what's
uh what's there a shell um I'd love to finish it off eventually I have to deal with it came with the property um we have plans to remodel it after this um but it is uh a beautiful old brick building that is sitting there in a a
very well built foundation and it's just waiting for something to happen to it is that allowed in this Zone well it's considered an accessory structure till he fixes it up to the point of turning it into a house right at that point it would be a second
primary structure on the property and the variance would be required right I mean it could be a pool house it could be I I I met with Albert a lot when I was trying to buy the house he was very concerned about it she didn't close out the permits um
it could be knocked down it could be a pool house there was a lot of money had be put into fixing up the house after we bought it that wasn't expected we were hoping to be able to redo that um I know it's supposed to be connected to the house the original plans that she had done 15 years ago sorry 18 years ago we're supposed to just connect it so I guess it shouldn't have been this year I
think if we did that right um and that is the the grand plan is just to it's about four feet from my garage just connect them and then build a passage way through would be my grand she had plans to put a breeze way across the front of the brick house into the garage
so it' be a continuation of the single family right cor and it never it never materialized okay and that would be allowable yeah that would be allowable all right so uh what is the Landscaping backfire where the proposed pool is
right now uh it's very wooded um just trees and dirt okay uh is a level back there or is it slope up it's slightly sloped
um it's got a slight pitch of a slope and it just comes and goes around my property um what about the property behind you is that behind me is there we're at the top of a hill so there I mean all their mitigation should
go that way and our should come down this way well when you say this way that way it doesn't well everything we're at the very top of a hill so kind of where the fence is their water goes down there probably that way ours goes this way okay so you're almost at the crest of the hill we are at the absolutely the crest H the
road comes up the crest so either house on either side of the road the water mitigates that direction okay and then just just to the it's not South but just the lot in front of me there is virtually there's nothing there's 650 feet of wooded area that
goes and all my water goes into that area that's that's green space around right right it's the green space so all all of my water goes into that area okay and there's nothing there um how many trees are going to have to
be removed because of this we've got get this happens I'm taking down a number of trees because my insurance has been canceled twice um I had a tree fall last week um I've had two trees fall in the last year um so I'm going to take down I think regardless about five six trees at
least um that are hanging over my house that have you look at all the other houses in my neighborhood they've been developed after the fact and they've taken down all the trees and they're all well maintained my house has not been the case with that and there are trees everywhere that are just unsafe and need
to be taken down to regardless can this uh pool be moved over closer to where the um that secondary structure is it get to move it further away from this rear yard rear it's possible but the more you move it that way the the fence goes crooked you're not getting any
you're still staying that same distance you're not you're not going to get any further away it does by the map it looks like you would be much further away I could try um my concern is that it pushes it to a section of the house I don't have a view on for my children um it's not
outside my kitchen window it's you know where we're proposing it is the safest location um uh there's no um and I I understand you're saying and we did look at that I don't think it's I it's a difference of a matter of
few feet if it is anymore just because the house turns and the property fence goes like that um you know from its closest point I think it was 55 feet and then it you know by the other side of the pool it would be like 58 just because of the
angle and what kind of landscaping in uh are you going to put behind the pool between AR giant AR around we already have it on one side that they put in when they built the neighbor's house next door um and we like to continue that down the other side of the property and just kind of block it all out for
the Neighbors okay and uh so with the uh Arbor right uh when they're initially going in how tall are they going to be uh I at least I'd like to try to get them 8 feet i' like so it starts off at a point where it's pretty much there and just
takes a little bit of time to fill in and when they're fully grown how tall will they be oh God they get to 50 feet 30 30 feet at least okay and how many you planning on put back there um you got to put every
eight feet or so so there's going to be you could be close to 20 [Music] maybe okay have you spoken with your neighbor about this project I have spoken with my one direct neighbor your one direct neighbor being which direct
neighbor well I guess if you're if you're looking at your house have you talked to a person in the rear I have not talked to them now okay people to the right I have talked to yes all
right and people to the left there's nobody to my left nobody to your left okay no and uh I guess there's technically two people kind of behind me one of them just moved in I don't know they are okay so you haven't talked to anybody behind you I have not no all
right board members any questions yes can you describe the fence that is shown on this survey along the rear yard line yes it's a wooden six foot fence um that runs the length of the property without
any gaps or anything is it yours I would venture to say it is not my fence I'd venture to say it's a couple different people senses okay what are you proposing along the left side yard the note says full
compliant fence uh the left hand side would just be the whatever the compliant fence would be that is needed there um and actually probably some more Arbor VTE well you'll need a fence yeah have the fence for sure whatever the I think it's a 4 foot compin I have a three foot there I'm going to take it down and
we'll re the four foot does there need to be any fencing between the two dwellings at this point there's a little Gap there like even if putting a gate in there there is I have that I'll blocked off already well how uh I have fencing around the whole thing
four foot fencing around it h wired fencing so you can't get within four feet of it I'm saying for people going trying to get in the backyard if somebody wandered through there I can build a a permanent structure sure absolutely um I me right now it's I have a fence that wraps for
you wouldn't be able to get through but um okay I could put one easily I have dogs and stuff that I don't want to get out so we've got everything locked up nobody's getting my back by code you you would have to fence off the ABS 100% yes correct yes yes board members questions are you
planning on any lighting or outdoor music or any kind of no I have no plans for anything like that um probably like in the pool there would be a light but um no nothing of that nature okay any other board
members with questions any members of the public with questions questions only seeing none hearing none close the public portion does any member of the public wish to speak about this
application so come up to the microphone state your name address [Music] thank you board name is Rob Shephard you spell your last name please s h p a r d okay Mr Shephard what do you wish to
say uh I'm here on behalf of the homeowners uh at the back of the property my parents and um I've got a power of attorney your you have a power attorne and your parents names please Susan Bud bu UDD David
Bud okay what do you wish to say um if it's all right I'd like to read a statement that I that they've each prepared sure so happy to provide for the record after after you're done testimony can you give that power of attorney to Mr please sure when you're
done um the first is uh Susan Bud's statement as follows our new neighbors the GM Papa Wilson family may not realize the importance of privacy in the Westminster Place Overlook Road neighborhood privacy is a high priority
here it affects the value of our homes staying within the existing setback requirements ensures all families in the area of decent privacy by its nature a pool is very noisy this variance puts a pool outside
the existing setback people would be sitting around the pool on the proposed patio the patio is about 3 to four steps to the Donald Bud fence this is not the kind of privacy people want when they come to live in our neighborhood we are not opposed to a
pool within the property setbacks we are opposed to this variance which puts the pool outside of the setbacks this variance would decrease our privacy and lower the value of not just our home but the GM Papa Wilson's
as well they would create a precedent for other requested variances thereby degrading the value of the entire neighborhood we believe the town's setback requirements were created for a reason and object strongly to the proposed
variants that's Susan Bud's statement with a couple notes to follow one um mention of the arbor VY in the back the proposal it's an awfully Shady property so it's unlikely that the arbor V that's proposed would also be would
also grow there so that was just for the record um Mr Bud's statement is as follows it's a little longer but thank you for your patience for Mr Bud first I wish to State for the record that I have no objection to our neighbors at 12
Westminster Place citing a swimming pool entirely within the allowed building envelope of their property I object however to the Board of adjustment granting any kind of variance allowing the pool or any part of it to be cited outside of the building
envelope I serve for nearly a decade on the planning board of Harding Township and have a few questions and comments that I would like to share with the bo board first I am curious to learn why we were not ever informed about the previous application filed by the
applicant and denied by the planning board on August 30th 2024 secondly I would like to point out that the letter informing us about this hearing was received by us on Thursday March 20th this strikes me as a very short
notice for such a hearing I suggest not using the United States posal service for such hearing as it has become unreliable in the extreme third because this hearing is before the planning board of adjustment a variance of some kind has been requested the previous denial of the
applicant makes it clear that the current application does not conform to the rear yard setback regulations finally I must ask it if it would be possible for the applicant to site their proposed pool Elsewhere on their property so that it conforms to
the existing rear and side yard setback regulations thus rendering a variance unnecessary the site plan unhelpfully does not delineate the building envelope for the entire lot but a cursory examination suggests to me that the same
sized pool could probably be cited in at least two other locations on the property while conforming to the existing ordinance I would suggest considering the side yard on the Southeast corner of the lot it is my understanding that the building envelope and rear and side yard setback
regulations are enacted by the local governing entity to control and guide building activity on a given property in a fair and consistent manner granting variances of granting of variances should generally be minimized and in
most instance instances limited to cases in which a specific hardship has been encountered having a private pool is a privilege not a right and certainly not a necessity consequently I can see no basis for finding a hardship in this case I therefore object to the granting
of the requested variant particularly in the event that my conjecture that the pool could be cited Elsewhere on the lot without requiring a variance is correct thank you m par I have a question how do you determine what is the front
yard side yard and rear yard on this property the paper Street of Westminster is the front y okay so that's been has that been abandoned or uh no it just hasn't been when the previous owner owned this she did not want her gravel
driveway to be part of a roadway so we stopped at a culde saac on the uh the right property line okay um but that's still the uh that's still right away yes okay yes still it
could be active right away and it continues down and would actually come out uh either on Logwood or uh that may be Overlook um they're still active right away down there between the two houses
okay just not improv like I just mentioned I was just putting the scale on this there's nowhere behind the house that the uh the pool could go I can't put a pool in the front yard right because they said Southeast cour
that's why I was asking yeah and and Dave can you comment on whether or not there was some other application before the planning board that didn't make sense to me no no I think she's just referring to how I
had to apply and get denied so I think yeah there was a zoning submitt back in uh it was submitted in on August 24th wrot the den letter on September
5th and uh Mr Wilson is now in here with uh the application okay all right but it's but it's your opinion Dave that the pool wouldn't fit any place in the rear yard no without variance relief is that right there still be rear yard variance
how how what's the furthest they can get it away from the uh approximately maybe 5T 5T further in yeah if you held it at 26 and a half maybe at one point yeah four feet
so it' be about a little over 30 just about okay but like Mr Wilson said it's not where the activity center rear of the houses right
so is that bump out on the back of the kitchen or is that a family room it's a shame because it's just the kitchen it's the bump out that pushes me back another and it's just about 15 feet long and it's just the kitchen um but we've gone through this over and over we've tried everywhere and there's nowhere else that
really does work um and I do in respect understand the need for the private y but that's what we're going to do is we're going to make the property private and we're going to put up trees and everybody will get a bunch of like there I've got 13 of them on the property already that are 40 feet
tall and uh we're going to make it private because that's exactly what we want Dave do you have an opinion if he plants new Arbor VY along that rear yard line would they grow I would say so I would say so give them enough space so they don't start
off growing into each other they could grow to a substantial size what about a double row would that make sense St yeah it it appears to me looking at the directional arrow on the plot plant Southern
facing the sun coming from the south is coming over the house towards the pool so up towards the corner will be only shaded by the house itself and whatever trees you have so you're putting shade onto the neighbor
but not I don't know that that corner is in shade in all honesty I'm not we have to take out some huge rotted trees that are going to allow more light to come in um I'm kind of agreeing with you okay I know than right any other board members with
comments any man any members of the public with comments on this application or do you want to testify I just I I you can do that in second I just want to get back to your comment about the certified mail being un you know delivered later whatever we did we checked when they
were mailed they were mailed timely so um all the applicant has to do by law is mail them at least 10 days prior to the meeting okay he doesn't have to prove you even got it that's just okay that's just what the law is and so if it takes a week and you got it three days ago
whatever that's it's compliant with the law understood board members any other question to this witness okay any other member of the public wish to testify coming up to the mic does this
one work that one works also we have your name please David Addis address Dave and I'm sorry spell your last name first okay and your address 82 over Road we comments
I well he was he got the power of attorney as his he this is comment so let me swear them right first I'm gonna swear you kind of like uh in backwards fashion but would you raise your right hand you somly swear that the statements um that you gave to this board were the
truth the whole truth a't nothing but the truth so help you that I do and would you raise your right hand you Solly swear that the statement you will GI to his board would be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so you got thank you okay okay so um so just relative to the comment on
the um maybe you could use the microphone that's on the table then while that one's yeah so relative to the comment about the trees and the the the growth of the arbites our property which is directly
behind the we're not the property directly behind the house that's the shepherd's uh or the buds property we're when you're looking back we're to the left and we we have a number of trees on our property that I do think would ultimately impact the the there's a lot
of shade that I think that comes from our property which would not necessarily be affected by the removal of trees um from the Williams property um and I mean the main reason that I'm here is just because you know we are concerned about the Privacy aspect too and that we live in a neighborhood that is intentionally
quiet and um we are not again OPP post the idea of a pool just as it gets as as close to our property as it is is something that we um think that certainly should be uh considered we happen to be directly behind the brick
structure which um which I probably should have been to the planning Bo meeing for that because they've never that's never your prior owner never did anything with that but um so we are uh Express the the the same concerns as
expressed by uh the buds okay thank you okay any other member of the public wish to Tes please come up to the microphone you could use that microphone on the yeah how are you James Cassidy uh 78
Overlook Road your new neighbors behind you guys did you spell your last name please c a SS i d y and I'm sorry the address again was 70 78 overl okay I to swear you would you raise your right hand you somly swear that the testimony you will give to this
board be the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth so hope you got I do okay so I just want to uh first say get a pool I think it's great but I would just Echo uh the buds comments what they said you can make sure it's like within the boundaries anyway
possible but um yeah I think maintaining the Privacy within the the neighborhood and the community we're brand new so we're un new neighbors but um that definitely was a big draw for us to come into that neighborhood just the the property lines everyone has their own privacy within their boundaries uh and
as long as that maintains it helps with the property values going down the road so um that's it thank you any other member of the public Mo have to close the public portion um
so where are we at now board members comments do you have any other Witnesses right right so we should have a discussion about conditions uh if we're going to Grant an
approval on this um as far as buffering I would like to see actually a plan uh as landcape plan a landscape plan I think it would help the neighbors to know what's going in there and just
not lift up to H this is what I want to do this I'll get to this later you know we want to know that that's F I'm as concerned as them if not more so our property happy to do that and and I think you should focus on
like double row of Arbor not only across the back but you've heard the the few people that are back there to you know maybe it has to turn up towards that brick structure a little bit to buffer that corner somehow yeah one things yes absolutely that makes sure you're getting further further down way past
this pool but like I absolutely run the whole entire thing um and I wasn't trying to crowd the pool area that's why say the structure is pretty far off from the pool but um they put in the GI body where they built that original um house next to me and they put them in and they
put him too close and they didn't do the double row so I've put a couple more in since then and I've spread them out properly I'm happy to put in the double rows because I don't want to see pass so um you know I don't want helpful that you're at the peak of the hill to for that right the hill we're on an acre
where we're just kind of tucked in the back the road ends in my driveway um but the last thing I want is my with me as well so I'm happy to do whatever yeah I think you should uh I think we should get a landscape plan and I think
it would be very helpful if you uh share with your neighbors okay prior to the next meeting so they have a chance to review it absorb it if they have questions about it they can comment intelligently as opposed to like on the Fly absolutely that's good for
you thank you that would be helpful also to to reconfirm that the location of the pool is can only be placed in this location rather than considered other sounds like there were some considerations that they might possibly be able to move the pool but nothing
nothing definitive I there isn't there's a variance any which way you want to look at it this is the best safest one and this is where it does work um any El I'm trying to PR for something else so I I well respectfully I think
maybe well the variance for in a different part of the property affects the homeowners and the rear property differently so right you know so there are other options right and you know it might be helpful
if we had an overhead view when you come back sure you know there's there's plenty of sites out there where you can grab like Google Earth absolutely right then you know just kind of show an overhead of where where all these houses are relation that would be helpful okay
did I miss my window can I still ask something or no uh sort of M to window okay I have a question for Mr Hansen if that's okay sure sure um Mr Hansen is there is there any distance requirements from a pool to the actual structure of
the house like for example I see there's a slate patio back there against that bump out I mean is there a requirement could they there is no State requirement there is no ordinance requirement what would end up happening here is the uh
building official would get in touch with the pool designer and ask for the design calculations for the pool to make sure that there's no hydroa pressure against the foundation I've seen them closer you've
seen them closer yeah so conceivably it could be maybe I mean because again with the the setback even if you gain a couple of feet pulling you closer towards the house would increase considerably the Privacy for the neighbor yeah if you took if you took the patio
on that side of the uh pool away 2 and 1/2 ft 2 and 1/2 ft that's measurable when you're at there mhm okay thank you so when when can we
uh hear this again [Applause] I could put it on the April me okay so do we know though the date of that April meeting like the actual meeting date right now because it's bouncing around a
little bit yes is if it right now the April meeting the normal April meeting is April 28th 28th could be moved up to April 21st we're waiting that's a planning board night if the planning board
doesn't have anything on the 21st we may move that meeting up to the 21st but that impacts notices here right so yes I mean we could announce the 28th and if it does move to the 21st you'd have to re notice to the
21st right is that send out again I could put it on the 19th of May or go to May oh go to may they give you more more time for your Landscaping plans and
stuff oh I think okay so you realize that if the mo meeting gets moved up you'll have to re notice that's that would be a condition if you want to stay in the April meeting if I just sent them out early enough would it be okay or well we don't have the date yet right if not we'd
announce it right now just say right right now it's still the 28th I'm not sure we even have board members available to do that on the 21st so it's still lot of things up in the air May is the 19th May the 19th why would we why would we move our meeting
date why we what why would we move our meeting date we were moving it so that it was Dave's last meeting he's not here the 28th let's make this the last meeting yeah like I said we haven't even had that discussion at this level yet to
determine why don't we just notice you for the 28th okay and see where that goes I'm not sure we even have board members available for that or a real thing so right yes okay you're not here I'm not here you're not here sure I'm
not here I but that's this so okay so so that's the date right yesil 28 okay so for members of the public this meeting is being adjourned right now it will continue on April 28th uh at 7 p.m. in this room with no further notices from
the applicant okay okay and at that next meeting we're expecting that you'll have a landscape plan and an overhead Google Earth shot or something or more than one that kind of shows us the relationship of the houses okay and you'll get it to the two neighbors that are here yes okay
yes three 78 80 and 82 three yes 788 right okay sure just bring it over here yeah I'll pass it down could you pass that
down please you does anybody need a break before we go the next anybody need a break before we go the next application okay so it'll be April you made the announcement so it'll be April 28th
April yeah April 28th and just for the record I'm going to mark this uh limited power of attorney 01 with today's date which is 24 give you that thank you okay you're good we see the next one thank
you okay okay main are are you are are you en as a public member
okay are we doing five minutes five minutes are we just ask if we are no said five minutes okay take a five minute recess and then we'll get started on we call again please yes Mr chairman
Mr goldber here Mr tractor ber here Mr Williams here Mr Schuster here Mr Beno here Mr Kramer here Mr Woodford here Mr oler I'm here Mr Hansen here and is Santiago here
two uh Miss POA and Miss Simmons here all right Mr Brady yes good evening Mr chairman David Brady BR and coral on behalf of Michael Ying regarding a 40 Spring Brook um I think we're here
tonight to finish up hopefully uh last time we were here as I recall Mr ersen had two witnesses an appraiser and a tree guy to put it Cally and we presented an appraiser questions
were asked of those Witnesses I don't think however any comments were entertained by the public on the comments of those Witnesses I think tonight we have that then Mr Ur and then myself suing up right so why don't we proceed in that yes
agree you agree yes you agree okay so last meeting we had several witnesses that um had testified post comments from the public so tonight if any members of the public have questions
or comments concerning those Witnesses please come up and present them at this time after that we will have closing statements from councel the uh for those in opposition for the applicant and then
board discussion so does everybody understand what the procedure is tonight any questions so if you have any comments as far as the testimony from the last meeting please come up to the microphone seeing none hearing none
just so it's limited to the the witnesses that we heard so we had we had previously opened to the public right everyone had an opportunity to make statements we heard from three additional Witnesses since then there
was a tree expert and two appraisers so if you have comments regarding the tree expert or the appraisal testimony then you're welcome to make those comments no one
yes your name please Gloria carsten k a r s t n okay Miss Carston would you sprill Lane sorry your address again nine Spring Hill Lane and again I'm I'm sorry hold on
would you raise your right hand please do you Solly swear that the testimony you'll give to this board will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God correct thank you now I guess my and I should apologize that I don't really recall exact I don't recall seeing a summary of
the statements by the appraisers uh so I'm there were no written summaries they testified okay and I apologize that my memory is not perfect as I imagine the memory of all these people in the room is not perfect
but my takeaway from those statements was that there seemed to be an insufficient number of comps that were being included or relevant comps that were being included in the appraisals by by maybe both parties that
there really is no comp for this situation to put a house of 6,900 square feet on a property that's less than half an acre so there really is no comp that I'm aware of have the appraisers been
able to find is my question any addition any additional and or more relevant comps that we should be considering at this time no they've testified as to what what they had um what they had found okay well I think that may be an
inherent error in our thought thought process if there's no logical rational come to be considered there was an appraiser offered by one of the objectors a a appraiser offered by the applicant and their testimonies is part
of the record and it seemed as if those appraisals did not have complete Integrity or thoroughness I think both of those appraisers would probably disagree okay any other comments from the audience on that or I thought there was a common sentiment okay all right
thank you thank you we got one more okay any other members of the public if not I'll close the public portion up first two chapters okay Mr ERS so first thing in this application that's uh surprised me
how quick it moved so all right I hear that that's what [Music] happens when I Was preparing uh to come and speak to you tonight I was thinking about the application and uh I was
pretty surprised of course that we we started this in 2023 and here we are in 2025 now it's also important for the board members to hear and remember I do not speak for the neighborhood I don't
speak for all the neighborhoods uh the all the Neighbors in the neighborhood I speak for Maggie sellers who lives next door so some of my comments may not reflect some of the things that the neighbors have raised uh regarding this application I think that the board has
had a steady diet of people who believe that this house is too big on not a big enough lot and out of character for the neighborhood and uh there's been lots of testimony offered regarding uh the neighborhood the
character of the neighborhood the historical development of the neighborhood and the houses that exist in the neighborhood now but that won't be my focus because I'm going to focus on this application as it impacts Maggie sellers I was thinking
about why this application got so complicated right so we've been here perhaps five or six meetings and had various amounts of testimony in all of the meetings and I I kept thinking to myself how did we keep talking about so
many different topics and one of the reasons obviously is that the neighborhood is upset about the project and so that they're really digging into all the details and trying to EXP explain to the board every piece of the application uh and the the rationale for the application and the presentation of
the application that bothers them but my comments tonight are really going to be focused on a much simpler message and it really came to me in your first application tonight one of the board members I think it was Mr Benoy I
think uh in the application it was a house that was going to be expanded on a lot where there was already a variance situation and the comment was made they didn't make the sidey guard variances any worse and then you proceeded to vote
pretty quickly right and and and that struck me because uh you've all been doing this for a while and nothing I say is going to be legal advice to the board but you really have a dual role you have a role to interpret and enforce the
zoning regulations and make exceptions where appropriate but the the second part of your dual role is to uh take your regulations and enforce them in a uniform way and the uniform
way is very important because it guides applicants when someone wants to come and make an application they can come and listen to the board they could watch you on TV they could see the way you handle applications and they could see what's important to you as board members and you as a board collectively and what
types of variances you will allow and under what circumstances you will allow variances but equally when you're enforcing the regulations you have a role in protecting the neighbors Maggie sers has owned her house for over 20
years she's knowledgeable in real estate she obviously you heard her testimony she believes very deeply in the character of this neighborhood the idea that these are not maximum houses on every single lot the idea that it's Treeline streets that there's HED RS
between the trees between the I'm sorry hedge RS between the uh the Lots uh and that that's been the character of this neighborhood for quite a long time so when you're protecting the neighborhood when you're protecting neighbors by enforcing the regulations
you're really focusing on types of uses so that there's not an offensive use close by noise size and how close they come to the neighbors so when you come to your board meeting and you're here as a member of
your board you're here to interpret hear the testimony interpret the application and your analysis is on your existing constraints and importantly on the efforts to comply and again I'm not
giving you the law Mr oler will give you the law but in each application you get to the heart of it by analyzing what the applicant is proposing and in every single case you ask
questions and you make analysis on how much the applicant try to comply why are they here why do they need a variance why do they need to break one of your rules and if they're going to break the rule how much are they breaking the rule
that is the heart of every single application that you do and in invariably that leads the questioning for me in this case when we're talking about compliance this case comes down to one witness and one witness alone Peter
Dorne testified he was the architect I know he's well known here I know him well I've seen him in lots of other towns I've worked with him he testified specifically and he was proud of it he he designs very large
elaborate houses um that's his specialty it's what he's known for and and he was very proud to tell you about how he programmed the house about how he comes and looks at the house and and then he listens to the wants of his client the
the wishlist and he said that it was a program of design from there and he during his testimony he went on and on about that uh quite elaborately and when I got up I didn't ask him that many questions but I asked him some important
questions and one of the questions I asked him is as part of your program of of your of trying to fulfill your client's wish list do you start with the town's zoning regulations and the
constraints on the lot and he said no he starts with the client's wants and then I asked him a couple times during his testimony I said did you ever stop and say to the client in this case uh could we do something different
to comply better with the zoning regulations and you know to his credit very honestly he said no he said he didn't see that as his role he focused on what the client wanted the wish list that's how we got
here that's how we got to this five or six meetings because the applicant Mr ying and I I don't mean any disrespect by it um he's entitled to want what he wants and he's entitled to like what he likes but he here you have one existing
smaller 2 Bay garage Mr y wants four Baye of garage and there was testimony that there aren't other houses in the neighborhood that have even three Bay but Mr Ying wants four
Bays Mr Ying wants a very large octagon dining room with really neat hallways that lead in and out of it it's a neat room but that's what he wants he wanted an upgraded office he wants all the bedrooms to be on Suite he
wants an elaborate pool Cabana that's not just a space inside and a bathroom but a sitting area and a kitchen and and uh uh little eating area so the in Mr Dorn's testimony he
tried to start to justify why this would be relevant to your board and and he he started saying things like well the rooms were laid out in an awkward Manner and the rooms were less than an ideal
size one of the things uh that you have to measure is a little bit of The credibility in someone coming to you and asking for these things because you're trying to analyze whether there's a good justification to violate your zoning code or whether
uh there's a poor reason for violating your zoning code when Miss sers testified she testified about selling this house either two or three times and how quickly it sold and how there were multiple bids and how it had been upgraded and how there had been
additions but Mr Dorne testified about awkward awkward rooms laid out in an awkward Manner and rooms less than an ideal size I think I think that the board should be very focused on The credibility of Mr doran's testimony and
I'm not going to I'm going to try not to take up too much time tonight but I'm going to give you one very easy and very Stark example when we were here for the first night of Mr doran's testimony he said that the office in this house was completely unusable and it threw the
symmetry of the house off completely it couldn't be saved it was impossible it was a nonstarter when you heard the testimony from Miss sellers you got to see the flyer when the house had been sold and then you got to see that it had built in
radiant heat and built-in woodwork uh uh builtins and uh that it was you know the pictures show it as as a as a very nice office and of course when the applicant came back the next time they said oh yeah all that testimony about how the
the the office was Obsolete and it couldn't be used and it ruined the house H forget all that the office is fine now right and when when an architect does that when an architect tells you that it's impossible to keep that office that it's that it's that it couldn't be part
of the house that it's obsolete and it ruins the Symmetry and then the next meeting they tell you it's fine we'll leave it there I think you have to ask questions about the rationale when uh when I pushed him uh the architect as to why the house had to
have four uh Bays of garage you know his answer was uh that it that that's what Mr a yui wanted and then he also said that it was very important to be able to walk with an inside door from the garage
into the house that's nice but that's not a rationale that's not that's not any type of of extraordinary circumstance for violating your rules it's just a want all of these things are just wants Mr Dorne even testified that he had to
search for someplace in the house to find a fourth bedroom and that justified one of the additions but then you saw the flyer for the house in the past that there were four bedrooms they just weren't all on Suite right want want
want it's not that you don't have four bedrooms it's that you want four bedrooms with on Suite bathrooms and even in the one flyer in the the floor plane that you have it shows that there was a a fifth bedroom SL office in the basement that that uh was used at some
time so when I pushed Mr Dorne and I you know we went back and forth a little bit and I I I really pushed him and I said well why didn't you ever make any suggestions to make this house more compliant with the zoning and he said I give him credit uh
he's uh he's got some backbone he he specifically came out and said this is a beautiful house and the neighbors will love it and they'll learn to live with it that's what he said and he turned around and he smiled at them and he said it's a it's going to be a a palace a
work of art um you know Mr Toby when he testified called it world-class architecture and that may be true but obviously the neighbors weren't too happy with it and obviously it's not justification for uh us being here and
seeking to create these variances four Bays of garages are not necessary it's a want the Second Story above the existing garage is not necessary it's a want the pool amenities are not necessary their wants the Octagon dining room is not
necessary it's a want when uh Miss sellers testified we gave you this this book and uh I hope hope you folks still have it and can take a look at it but what I thought was something so
simple was the two photographs that I'm going to just make reference to in this book that we passed out are O2 and then 03 and they're very simple shots they're backyard shots of this
house and in 02 it's a little bit of a closeup but it shows you that there's nothing in the back of this house there's not a tree there's not a slope there's not a rock there's not anything any addition you wanted could have certainly pushed into the backyard
03 shows it even better 03 shows you that you have almost I won't say unlimited I'll say a very substantial amount of room to go straight back in the house and there's no reason to go any wider towards any of the
neighbors so why invade the side yard even further and and the the answer is uh I'm sorry and say this very politely but I don't believe that the plan here or the applicant has any regard for your code
or the neighbors um Mr toia testifies very well um he really can take anything and make the best case out of it um but in his testimony I I really if you look at his report or you remember his
testimony he says a number of things that I think should be challenged a little bit he says hey this lot is only 100 ft wide and therefore there's very little building envelope uh in fact I think it's number six on page three of his report where he
says enforcement of the zoning code would leave virtually no building envelope exact words and it's just not correct because if you look at the way the house could extend into the backyard there's plenty of building envelope
available that would be compliant Mr toia used a lot of generalizations uh and he and he referenced I already mentioned one he referenced that a good reason for the to approve this application was to get the worldclass architecture right and you know I
understand he likes the way the house looks he's making his argument but then on page six he really focuses uh you know on three things specifically number four of his reasons he says that there was a need to upgrade
and and modernize um the board can make its own decisions about that but we provided in 04 we provided one of the listings with with the complete pictures and you heard that the house sold over over Market Mr
Toby's number five reason was that the existing garage was Antiquated and nonfunctioning and maybe you could make that argument and say I only have one and a half garage Bays I really want two but four you need four to fix an anate
situation for garage bays and then the one I've already mentioned number six where he says that if you enforce the side yard setbacks there' be virtually no building envelope the most important thing um that Mr toia said and it was in response
to one of my questions and I credit him he's a very credible witness uh and I asked him something very specific I said that when you're encroaching into a sidey guard is a lower building or a higher building
more of an impact on the neighbors and exact quote he said the lower the building gets the less impact on the neighbors so when you look at that addition B is a singl story garage that
is encroaching towards Maggie sellers property already so it's not just that the applicant is here asking to take that garage and bring a closer to Maggie seller's property it's that it's now going two stories with Windows facing
her property with living space each of these encroachments into the sidey yard I would ask the board really don't lose the fact that it's not just three or five or seven feet it's also the entire Second Story with beautiful panel of
Windows that now looks out onto Maggie seller's property um and ex addition a is the garage and pool addition B is the uh the area over over the existing garage so what should have happened in this
application is someone should have separated wants and needs and a and a coherent respectful plan the sidey setback is 20 ft when uh this application started uh
you had uh you had the single story garage 17.78 ft from Maggie sellers property single story garage 17.78 ft the first application that came to you was to
reduce the 17.78 to 14 and in the back for uh addition a 5T 20 feet to 5 feet this is new
construction not 20 ft to 5T single story 20t to 5T two stories powering over a lower property next to it with a full panel of Windows in living space now the applicant's going to get up
because Mr Brady is a very good lawyer and he's going to say that the that the applicant has tried to comply with uh the zoning and that they reduced the encroachment from the five fet back to I think about
14t but it never should have been 5T in the first place it it's it's it shows a complete disrespect for the the rules and for uh the neighbors and if it had been designed right in the first place we wouldn't have been here five or six
meetings going over this and over this and over this in closing I would say this if you approve this applic as is tonight then you will change the standards for encroaching on a side yard
and the standard will simply be wants and stubbornness and that's it if you come here and just keep pounding against the wall with your wants in a stubborn manner asking for absolutely everything you can get then that will be the new
standard If you deny it Mr Ying is still going to build this addition and he should if that's what he wants he should but they will slightly redesign it they will slightly redesign it so that it moves back no further than the current
encroachment and hopefully compliant and certainly not with a twostory tower of wall as the encroachment Maggie sers has lived here 21 years she's a big fan of this
neighborhood she deserves the board's consideration of enforcing the sidey setbacks to protect her home the value of her home her privacy and and what she and I think the other neighbors believe
is the character of the neighborhood thank you very much for all of your time Su me no clapping Mr Brady yes thank you Mr chairman uh I want to start off by talking about what this application is
about this is about renovating upgrading and adding heading to a house from the 1930s not quite 100 years old but we're getting it up there and this is what people do people buy old houses to fix them up they buy them to fix
rearrange modernize modernize the layout modernize the Mechanicals change the style uh expand it uh make it more modern make it theirs happens all the time I've done it twice for my house
houses uh house that may have been fine years ago and maybe not so many years ago maybe only 10 or 15 years ago uh and it may have been fine for the prior owners and it may have fit the the past Styles uh but the current owners once
they buy it have a right to change it and to make it into theirs has a right to optimize the room layout optimize the room size uh great to accommodate their lifestyle we're not making a claim here
that the property is not sellable as is Mr Ying bought it somebody obviously could buy it but when people buy a piece of property they like to upgrade it and make it theirs in fact if you look at your agenda tonight I would say that every one of the applications including
the extension which the last matter on the agenda was all about buying a house and then upgrading it and modernizing it and making it per personal to that uh our original proposal was to widen the existing
garage at a second story um excuse me construct a dining room behind the existing house construct a patio with a veranda and a pool and then a new garage that had bedroom at the top two bays
below um and had pool related activities pool equipment and pool uh activities in the very bottom and we were going to remove a lean to sort of structure on the right hand side which served as an office and
then construct a new modern architecturally stunning frankly office um we heard Bo comments from the board we heard comments from the public we went back and we revised the plans we removed the office you didn't say as Mr
ERS argued that no the office is fine now no we removed it we would like to have replaced it but we heard what people were concerned about and we decided if all the things that were involved in this project that was the one perhaps we could live with or
perhaps just modify in the interior not changing the footb back the footprint or the setback the dining room was changed it was lessened in size and shifted uh new retaining wall was design
was trigged out with two walls and with kind of a wire type fence on the top not a solid fence so that it would be more transparent less uh noticeable um the the rear garage which
Mr Ur says the 2 Bay garage was rotated so the Gable was no longer facing the neighbor so there was less height facing the neighbor and it really became a one Bay garage with stacked parking and in doing that we were able to pull that back further than the
5T which admittedly was close to the sideline and we're now back at 14t so we're intruding by six feet into that Seline um and most importantly maybe perhaps uh Mr Huff came in with a landscape plan
that is the saying that would knock your socks off um all of these uses all of these structures are permitted in the ra15 zone and a single family house it allows garages it allows pools and pettings so
what we're dealing here with are these dimensional bulk what we call in the in the land use field C variances um all of those have been reduced compared to the initial plan and it's what this board is designed to do
to make adjustments where the board finds that the uh condition of the property present a hardship or exceptional practical difficulty for building or where the uh purposes of zoning are going to be Advanced we've
got really three categories of variances tonight we've got a front yard setback we've got sidey yard setback although it relates to two different buildings two different setback numbers and then we have the combined sidey yard setback before I talk about each I just want to
kind of set the table and remind we're in an RA 15 Zone that requires a 15,000 sqt lot it also requires a front yard setb of 50 feet side yard setback of 20 feet
and a combined side yard setback adding up both setbacks on each property or each side of the property of 50 fet going to this lot as it currently exist it's oversized at 20,000 Square F
feet it hits the minimum required in that zone of 100 wide foot lot but the problem is getting of our problems are we've got an existing 100y old house
that's 67 feet wide so the house itself is has existing non-conformities as sidey setback um it also because the current side yard setback I'll call it on the
right side is 15.44% back is 17.78 and that is to the existing garage both side yards total 33.2 two we also have one other setback which last time I
was here i' forgotten about frankly and that is that one corner of the existing garage is 49.89 Ft from the street it's supposed to be 50 so now I want to go and kind of go through these variances one by one but start with what I think
is the simplest for the board to address which is that front yard setb for the existing garage it's a front yard setback that's existing but we are going from a one-story garage to a twostory garage so a vault variance is needed for that
additional height but as I said where 50 ft is required we have 49.89 ft that's a deviation if my math is correct of 1 and 38 Ines that's not the definition of a
dominous variance that affects nobody frankly I don't know what is uh secondly for the existing garage we we need a sidey yard setback we're currently at 17 .78 ft we're moving to
14t so that's a 3.7 something uh increase into the sidey we're also adding living space above that why are we doing that you've heard from
several witnesses about the nonfunctioning of this garage might have been okay when it was built in the 1930s and when everybody had a different lifestyle and the cars were different doesn't work now you can't fit two cars
into that comfortably you have some odd geometry trying to squeeze in along the side of the house if you look at the back of the house and then once you're in the house or excuse me once you're in the garage there's no way to access the interior of the house without going back
outside and either walking around to the back door or walking to the front door it's not how modernday Americans new jerseyans live and want their garages to be as I say people buy old houses they want to
update them um we also are looking to add a second story above that uh that garage it is an on Suite bedroom but it's not like we're going to some astronomical number of bedroom chair we
have a quality house upscale house we like the bedroom to be on suite and and we're going up the basis for this we've got a hardship the building is sitting there as it is the garage is sitting there as it is uh to make it functional we need
additional space an additional 3.7 some feet and um we can do that without significantly affecting the neighbor and without significantly affecting the Zone
IND total of both side yards with guard to that addition leads us to 29.4 we're currently at 3322 so we're less than 4 feet
additional uh into that deficient on that total number on both sides and again the house is already there to make that garage work that's basically what we need to do it's a type of hardship andac
that leaves us with a new garage to address again 20 ft is required proposal now is that we set the garage back 14.25 ft so just about uh six Ines or
excuse me six feet further into the setback than it is required because 20 is a setback so we're about 6 feet too close to the line yes yes Mr Ur said we want the Gage obviously we wouldn't be here wouldn't be asking for it wouldn't have spent
money on designing if we didn't want it but in terms of where it's placed it's the logical place given that you need to access it from the driveway you got it doesn't go on the right hand side of this building it goes on the left hand side where the driveway comes down it
goes where there's going to be a parking and turnaround area between the two garages it's going to be related to the pool you want it towards the back so that the pool can be accessed to it you just can't take it and shove it another six
feet to the right deeper into the interior of the property doesn't function then in terms of access turnaround entry to the space as I said in the beginning we heard neighbors concerns about this modified that we
rotated that so there was less height on that side we squeezed it so now we have inconvenient but workable uh stacking inside the garage of of the cars um Mr Toby had testified Mr Toby is well
respected and very articulate with regard to the Plenty concerns he talked about the hardships that I've touched on briefly with the house being where it is um he also spoke about the fact that the proposal advances several purposes of
the ml is found in 4055 d-2 um you'll find that subsection a which seeks to have appropriate uses of land is Advanced by this subsection C which provides for adequate light air in
open space subsection D which is space and appropriate locations for a variety of uses subsection I promoting a desirable visal environment and M the efficient use of land further uh he testified and I don't
think there's anything to refute this that there's no substantial detriment to the public good or substantial impairment of the Zone plan or the Zone scheme and I I'd like to reiterate something that he pointed out name namely that with regard to these
variances we have an abundant and um detailed landscape plan that mitigates and some of the impacts that might otherwise be felt he pointed out that most of the addition will be
behind the house so in terms of impact visual impact from Spring Brook Road that will not be a factor he also pointed out I think this is important to remember that 35 feet 35 ft
height is permitted in the zone both garages are below that height one is at 23.49% increased by less than four feet and the other one by six and whether uh those cause a substantial problem
here um the objectiv seem to have three concerns the first is that well the building's too big we don't think that building of that size belongs on that lot or in this neighborhood size is regulated by the bulk standards in the
ordinance some towns have a Flor area ratio standard to regulate size Mars Township does not but it gets regulated in another fashion indirectly that's by the impervious coverage limit and by the
building coverage liit as to the impervious coverage limit 45% is allowed in the ra5 zone The Proposal we have comes in at 42.1812513 with regard to the building coverage 20%
is allowed in sou this proposal comes in at 19.9 for so how much of this lot is being taken up by this house is not outsized for this Zone it's within the
standards that the township has decided to use to regulate the size of houses and again I go back to something that I mentioned before about mr's notes when he was speaking the height is also
compli 35 ft were at 33.5 for the entire project not just the new garage and and the addition to the existing grage but for the entire building is measured it's 33.5 underneath the maximum uh and there's a
maximum I don't know how to describe it exactly one spot measurement to grade the maximum is 46.67 in this case with this building we're at 40.5 so we're under the height we're within the the coverage limits all
it is that is that we're a little close to setback the sidey setback varing this board deals with all the time and like I said this is the board of adjustment where appropriate this board's function is to consider the proofs and adjust it
if if you feel it is appropr the other the second concern seems to be we'll see the building and that's either because there's a concern over whether on the left hand side near my sellers an existing row of vegetation will be
removed or because the building will be in the setback now first I want to start by pointing out this is a 15,000 square foot block Zone it requires 20 foot setbacks the zone is designed to see
houses in that setting where you're 20 feet to the sideline from any uh from two houses you have 40 feet you're going to see your neighbor I would say that going any house on this street you're liable to see maybe half a dozen other
houses there's no right not to see your neighbor and there's nothing wrong with seeing your neighbor um it's not a detriment to seah houses nearby and I think to use Mr toi is phrased by world
class architecture is certainly not a detriment when you have a house nearby that is of the architectural quality that this house is going to be of and with the Landscaping that is proposed with regard to the strip of
vegetation first of all I have to note that it's it's just a strip of vegetation there's no rhyme there's no reason it's an area that for all intensive purposes just hasn't been maintained that is start out by pointing out too also there is no requirement for
a strip of Education between two ad joining houses this is not a commercial zone or commercial use a putting up against a residential use where you require screening uh by way of a fence or something of that nature or buffering
by way of Greener uh these are two residential houses next to each other many residential houses when they come together it's just a lawn that's what I have on two sides of my house um fact that there's EAS that there's
vegetation there now doesn't mean it has to stay you're entitled to do what you want with the vegetation on your property easement on the on a neighbor's property or no right uh to claim that certain vegetation be maintained on a
neighbor's property just because uh you like that view or you don't want to see a view and there's no right to have the view that have now in the future as I say people come in buy old houses upgrade their properties all the time last concern seems to
be a feared effect on property values you heard the testimony of both appraisers here I would suggest to you that Mr mackoff uh was credible and that his
testimony was more persuasive than that of the objective he said something that really is just almost common sense but but as an expert he's to give that opinion which is essentially Rising tide
lifts all boats when you're next to a valuable expensive house your value goes up when you're in the neighborhood and a house that's here about 100 years old uh that needs a bunch of work as Mr uh
you and testify to and that is going to be made really quite a beautiful house that helps property values in the ne neighborhood it doesn't hurt property values so I submit to the board that we have met our burden for the granting of all the
variances and before the board retires to consider about that I wanted to place on the record a couple stipulations in speaking what our client board might want to consider some of which I think we agree toing meetings the bedroom above the new garage will
not be an important it's designed to be a bedroom associated with this house but I know it's some concerns ofo I think by the neighbors real agree to that um two we will revise plans to clean up some of the details there was some
concern about some AC units I think that were supposedly shown that weren't there we'll fix that I think there was a concern about a prop signature line uh on one of the sheets so we'll go through all those small details of course three we agree that no flood lights over the pool we're talking lowlevel low voltage
type lighting around pool four we are putting in a extensive landscape plan we'll agree to make sure that we have a one-year guarantee on the survivability of those plants uh
five I know there's concern expressed by the sellers and by uh the tree expert that you brought in about the impact on the larger Norway maple our client is willing to stipulate that should that Maple die within two years after the
completion of the project they'll pay for the replacement of that tree with a tree up to but not exceeding 6 in caliber lastly again going back to that that tree issue I know there was some concern
about whether uh putting in the retaining walls and digging down might impact the roots um we had originally come in with a plan that had a single retaining wall we changed that to a tiered retaining wall which allowed for extra planting
and also meant that we did not need a variance for the height of the wall but if there's a concern by the board if the board uh believes that the the tree could be affected um we agree that we would do one of two things one we would
explore whether there's a way I'm going to use non-engineering term to like canle leaper that first wall so that we're not digging down so deep to get a footing that's somehow supported without having to get uh do a extensive digging
in the tree line or excuse me drip line or two in the area of the drip line will go back to a one a singular one that of course would trigger another variance that was one of the reasons we moved away from that but if the board is was
willing to Grant the variance and and require that we in that drip wine area go back to a single wall so that there would be less disruption of the roots my client would beable to that
okay Mr R is there any other done Dave thank you yes I am thank you um attorneys did a really nice job I just want to spend a couple minutes just to as we heard I'll just outline a few things for the board um there are four variances in the case is the sidey yard
on the left side at the existing um garage for that expansion would go from the 17.7 feet to 14 feet there um another sidey yard at the proposed rear Edition um where the plan labels The
Carriage SL poool house that's at 14.25 FT again 20 FTS required the combined sidey yard would be reduced to 2944 feet where it's 33.2 two now and 50 FTS required and the front yard and I I
agree the front yard is a very dominous um but it is a you know small variance um because it's just a vertical extension over the top of that front of the garage it's 49.89 ft where 50 is required so as the as the board knows
you know um well let me remind you it seems like this is a use variance case but it's not right it's a it's a pretty hate to use the word simple but it's a c bulk variance case which means that it's a simple majority vote by the board okay
um Mr do we have everybody eligible well son is everyone sitting up here as eligible to vote Yes okay those up up here are eligible okay so um so I remind the board and I know you know this but the applicant has the
burden of proof to prove both the positive and the negative criteria for this application and there's two ways they can prove the positive criteria as a C1 application which is a hardship application um for things such as the
shape or the narrowness of the property uh exceptional topography uh or some other exceptional situ situation that's unique to the property right or they can prove it by the C2 criteria which as we've heard
from uh from Mr Brady it would you prove the C2 by proving that the application would satisfy any of the purposes of zoning right and we heard testimony on on both sides of that the also what's important here is even if the positive
is satisfied the negative criteria also needs to be satisfied there's two PRS to the negative criteria as well so um an a variance can't be granted um without a showing that there's no substantial uh
detriment to the public good I.E the neighbors or the neighborhood all right they also would have to prove that um the granting the Vance would not substantially impair The Zone plan again the master plan by that um and the or
the zoning ordinance um now if the board were to vote in favor of this application in addition to the stipulations just mentioned by Mr Brady there were a few other conditions let me just outline those if there's a a vote to approve
this um okay there would be no elevated lighting at the stair risers uh there would you could only use low voltage lighting at that think that was on the right side of the plan um if the wall is taller and again we'll discuss if there
there's a single wall or a double but if it's taller than 30 in I'm sorry the wall at the stairs if the wall at the stairs is over 30 in it requires a a railing uh the pool equipment is to be housed within the pool house um you may
not vent the pool equipment towards the neighbor uh there would be no closets installed within the office believe you agree to omit the generator from the plans um no flood lights shall be permitted but low voltage foot lighting
would be acceptable uh no apartment in the rear building right um correct the plan to show proper location of the AC pads maintain and replace the landscape buffer plan and record a deed notice indicating that the
owner must maintain and replace the landscape buffer um to the to my satisfaction and to the township engineers and planners satisfaction as well and I know you just said something about um a twoyear warranty one year Guaranty
on the landscape plan yeah one year on the landscaping and two years if the that large Maple dies right but I think during the process we talked about a deed restriction to maintain the land I think we did and if we're going to do that rich then I think the prohibition
on an apartment in the new garage should go right in that deed restriction so everybody going forward goes right I'd agree okay um oh and then we also discuss as you mentioned Dave the modify the wall at the left side yard to a single wall to
preserve the large Norway maple tree um and that redesign would be to the township Engineers satisfaction okay so I think those were the conditions if there's an approval and I would just remind the board as you vote to be um specific in in your
rationale on the record as to why you're voting however you vote have your reasons okay all right first of all I want to thank Council both Council and I also want to thank the members of the public
uh who are very patient uh well behaved and uh their input is very important to all of us on the board uh and I'm glad you're all showing up uh this application as Council has said
is for property located in an R15 Zone which has a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet now the application you heard earlier tonight was in an ra15 and was less than 10,000 square F feet and the existing house was was within 7.1
feet of the sidey and there was no expansion of that um of that uh encroachment on The sidey Yards this lot is 2ou 20,000 Square ft it's a 100 by 200 lot which slopes
towards the rear of the property as left the left rear of the property is one is looking for the street and has an approximate elevation drop of about 20 feet if I recall um the initial application had five
separate improvements uh addition a included the proposed Carriage House and pool house consisting of pool equipment a small kitchenet and bathroom on the ground floor a two-car garage and a bedroom suite on I'm going to say the third level uh originally the building
would have been 5T from the property line it was subsequently uh the rotated in its U orientation and instead of being 5 feet was is now set to be 14.25 feers that's correct uh this would be an
expansion of the existing dwelling as the addition would be connected uh to the proposed rearward expans rearward expansion of the house that includes the octagonal dining room connected to the first floor of the existing structure and a sitting room coming off the
basement of the existing structure and connecting to the lower floor of the proposed C uh Carriage House so this is not a separate unit this is one contiguous uh residence although the sloping of the
property would allow the roof line in this addition to be an ordance with the height ordinance the structure at its left rear would appear to be a three-story building to the adjacent landowner because of the sloping and would
uh at the rear of the building the roof would be I believe the testimony would be 40.5 feet above the ground that's what I have in my notes and that's what I pulled out of my notes because of the sloping even though it's
in Conformity it would be about 4 3.5 ft above the ground it would also appear higher because that sloping of the property means that the adjacent neighbor would be looking up at a structure even perceived to be higher than that 40.5
ft um addition B would be an extension of the existing garage which is presently 17.78 ft from the property line and does not have direct access to the house um the proposed improvements would be to
expand the garage to within 14 feet of the property line to make it more accommodative to to being a two-car garage and would have a bedroom with a walk-in closet above the garage uh the and it would be within 14
feet of the property line the existing garage is also 14.89% back line so a bulk variance would be required for for the expansion of a non the non-conformity uh the addition C is the
front Portico which no variance is needed addition D was a proposed office off the right of the dwelling that would have been 9 feet from the property line but that was abandoned so uh that's not necessary to comment on uh the also uh
those was also included a pool and covered Cabana in the originally submitted plans which would have triggered a set yard a sidey yard setback but was amended to be uh beat the 20 foot uh minimum setback is that correct that's correct
okay uh so there's no need for a variance as to the pool with the proposed addition the left side uh setback at the garage would be uh 14 feet and the setback for addition
a would be 14.25 ft uh the right yard setback would remain at 15 .19 and the combined side yard setbacks would be 29.4 four is that correct yes I think that's correct
y44 yes okay and originally there was also a variance for the walls but that was uh taken out because of the wall in the fence with a transparent cable railing system to the wall would eliminate the call for that variance all right now Mr
toia listed the variance criteria and reason for granting a variance uh as um C1 or C2 variance um but while it was in his report he I
didn't hear any testimony concerning a C1 variance and it doesn't seem like there would be any because of the ability of the applicant to put in a to propose putting in an addition that would go back towards the steepest part
of the property this the left rear uh so I don't really don't find any kind of C1 variance because of the uh Contours or the shape of the property um C2 variants is where an
application for the property would Advance the purposes of the municipal land use Act and the deviation and and would um that the purposes of the land use act would be advanced by a deviation from the zoning ordinance
requirements and the benefits of the deviation would substantially outweigh any detriment the variance should should the variance be granted um Mr toia cited several
uh reasons why this proposal meets the uh goals of the municipal land use act including a appropriate use or development of all lands in a manner that would promote public health safety morals and general welfare well that's a general
planning uh and could really is for an overall plan not really to promote a specific piece of property uh also along that line is the preservation of the character of the neighborhood and conservation of the
neighborhood values are a proper purpose of zoning uh under the general welfare purpose um I do not believe that the uh improvements proposed on this application would preserve the character of the neighborhood in fact it would
completely wreck the uh character of the neighborhood it would change everything that neighborhood looks like uh Mr toia it would
also as to uh Miss sellers would have a great impact on her property as she would be looking up at this huge addition going up within five steps of her property line or maybe six steps depends upon how
large um he also cited u a zoning is C to provide adequate light air light and open space well I think that also is a general zoning
proposition and is not really applicable to this application um he also CED I believe G is that correct Mr toia yeah and that's to provide sufficient space and appropriate
location for a variety of uses including agricultural residential recreational commercial and Industrial so that is really applied to a general zoning plan overall to the master plan almost to provide adequate
areas for the use of all these different purposes now it's also L to promote a des l or I promote a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques good Civic
design now this go entails more than just beautification which this plan is spectacular it just I don't think it's appropriate for this size property in this location um and since the character uh of the
neighborhood is a promotion of the general welfare this goal does not apply um to m is to encourage coordination of the various public and private procedures shaping Land Development uh this application to um
expand a residence and use of the property just does not meet the criteria for M as that the negative effects as I indicated I believe it would destroy the character of the neighborhood and have an adverse effect
on the enjoyment and use of neighbor's property uh also there was testimony about property values and that a rising Tide Rises All Ships well it wouldn't raise Miss seller's
property I don't believe it would raise it as far because anybody coming in there'd be many buyers who would look at that structure next door and just say this isn't what I'm signing on for uh I think it would greatly red the number of buyers who would even consider this
house so I think that would have a negative effect on a neighborhood and uh basically I would be opposed to approving this application but I'm welcome to hear comments from other
members of the board chairman I'd be happy to chime in because this is a very difficult one and I really want to thank the members of the public for for coming in um you really Enlighten us you're there every
day or not um you know the the project or the neighbors some of your comments don't really relate to what the board can opine on whether Mr Ying is a good neighbor or a bad neighbor isn't
something that we can really rate um one person complain he needs to fix his house well that's what he's here for um he really tried to do a good job of of shielding the property um from the
neighbors um it's beautiful architecture I think he's done a lot with the walls and with the design of the home um I do think that the garage issue the front garage is a valid issue because there's
no access from that garage into the house and to put it into the dining room would not be a modern convenience so there's a lot of purpose in this application and many applications we see to update and
modernize a uh property for for for modern usage um that would require further a lesser setback into the sidey that would require what's being proposed here 24 by
24 rather than um 22 by whatever um that to me in my mind that's sort of a valid purpose I do share the the uh the Chairman's concern about the garage in the back it's it's
huge um my concern and I thought that Mr ersing did a good job of of relaying this because lots of things go back and forth um what is next the zone
wants to respect the the privacy and the quality and as the chairman said the um the character of the neighborhood and when I think about not so much the front garage but the rear garage and and what could be next and
it's true there's lots of room in the back um where things could be could be um placed even that one garage you don't need I don't think you need to have the four feet going toward the dining room um maybe that could be shifted over that
would only be four feet rather than six um but so I I I am concerned about the Zone concerns because it's a it's a big visual um a big
visual obstacle maybe it was a wrong word to to the neighborhood looking at that huge thing so I have that concern too and I don't know what can be done about it at this point um I'm sure something can be done about it but I'm I'm leaning toward respecting The Zone
plan um which is there for the reason of maintaining the privacy and maintaining the character of the neighborhood yes this is an old neighborhood I don't have that much concern about the neighborhoods changing because every neighborhood changes especially over 85
or 90 years um that in itself doesn't swe me that much because it would be a normal process of changing the character of neighborhood somewhat over the years this looks like a very sudden and sharp and potentially
longterm um change that could really damage the character be afraid of a continuing one through the next house and the next house and the next house I think Mr IGN's characteristic of the plan of the architectural work that was done says a
lot which is yeah we all want to design our homes to what our needs are we all want to design our homes to what our homes are but at some point you have to say what the Zone what does the Zone require what does the Zone look for what is it that the Zone says because that
should be restricting what it is or at least limiting what it is that I'm going to do and if I can't then I'm going to have to go to the zoning board which we see a lot a lot of projects come to us because there really isn't a lot that they can do without I'm doing what it is
they proposing to do in this case we're not worrying about the Zone we'll go to the zoning board and see what happens and I I think that that was a spot observation um by the the architectural work that was done so I appreciate that Insight
um I guess that's all I have for H any other board members with comments none yeah I'll go okay so I I always think of two elements uh when when I'm uh
addressing any of uh any items that come before this board one um how flexible can we be with the existing uh rules uh uh provided and uh whether or not I would want this built next to my house
um starting with the second one I would love this bu next to my house because I know the value of my house would go up substantially um how flexible we can
be I'm okay with everything except for that Carriage House um because of the slope you're talking about a three-story structure that's overlooking the neighbor I don't think there's enough
space between the property line and that structure in order to adequately uh Shield that structure from the neighbor given the size of that structure and how big the trees would have to be I just don't think there's
enough room uh for the roots to grow to make those trees high enough to make it palatable um if there's a way to shrink that if there's a way to move it over a little I would absolutely consider it um but that's the reason why I would
probably vote no on this any other board members with comments okay no more members i' entertain a motion Mr chairman before you take a motion having heard some of the concerns
of the board I have five minutes to have a discussion with my client sure appreciate okay the record minute recess we're back on the record sanago Rollo Mr Goldberg here Mr tractenberg
here Mr Williams here Mr Schuster here Mr Beno here Mr Kramer here miss Simmons here miss POA here Mr Woodford here Mr oler here Mr Hansen here and sanago here Mr chairman thank you for accommodating
me for a chance to uh to consult with my client I mean what we're hearing tonight from every member of the board that's spoken is that while the existing garage and the expansion of that to make it functional is just somewhat
understandable the new garage in the rear of the property is a significant problem we've changed our plans before in response to comments from the board and the public and what we would ask is that we have the chance give us 30 days
and decide whether we want to change them again I would not like to have to reapply again have raised jata issue have a re notice issue Etc got to go back and take a look at this I hear what everybody has said
about you have some significant open space behind this house maybe there's a way to design to revise this design to either get that new garage closer or at the 20 feet or
perhaps because I heard a lot of members talk about the height because of the slope that gives way there uh to deal somehow with the height of it request that the board give us that opportunity to come back submit revised plans U for
I guess board meeting at the end of April I think somebody was saying April 28th or something like that yeah um I except I'm not going to be at the April meeting and um and you don't want may not I may I not with this one and I may not be at the May meeting because the
our as you know Dave we we normally meet on the fourth Monday in May we're meeting on the third Monday and it's going to impact scheduling I think so I may not be here in May either so that might push you to June if the boards agree well frankly I was concerned about
whether we could accomplish the redesign in 30 days right um I would suggest that we put it on I'd like to pick the M or the April meeting and then as it comes up address what we're going to do with it I don't want
to have to Ren notice if possible you can just announce it at the meeting we end up either May or maybe even possibly June it gives us a little more time to play with this this is not cookie cutter is custom designing here with this house so a little more time I don't think is
particular AGG just we've gone this long yeah I I you know I'll listen to let's hear what the board thinks about putting that off and um I think that uh if that's an agreement we probably would
have to push it to June I I think I need to be here for it you know and I want to hear what Mr ersen is going to say right now okay yeah uh thank you Mr all Mr chairman uh we would strong ly request that the
board either Vote or this applicant withdraw the application to to Simply stand up and say after all this time that now we finally heard what the neighbors have said now we finally realized the mistake we've made now we realize how far we've pushed it on the
you closed testimony you had summations you deliberated among the board these neighbors have been attending this application was filed somewhere near the end of December of 23 our first meeting here was in December of 23 to Simply say that we're going to
drag this out at the neighbors expense at the inconvenience to their time because this applicant in a year and a half didn't hear what the neighbors were saying or see the writing on the wall and now is coming forward and and and suggesting compromise and and Amendment
of the plan the inconvenience should be to the applicant not to the neighbors there should be withdrawal or there should be no more talking the board should deliberate and there should be a vote so I don't see how that's an inconvenience to the neighbors but I want to hear what the board has to say
for sure I agree either way they're going to have to come back yeah and I do think that the board has a lot of leeway in terms of uh you know reopening testimony if they wanted to based on what you you know halfway through a vote anytime any any two votes against then
we're just going to reopen testimony and start over there hasn't even been a motion there has been a motion call for a motion but there's been deliberation only so there has been no no motion made right yeah um I
understand what Mr Brady's saying is that you know he wants the time to revise the whole plan but then we'd be like starting from scratch again B essentially uh well just it's got
to I think if you're uh not going to vote on one particular part we're going to do the whole thing I agree um but in terms of something different the board to look at it's going to be that I know but then we're gonna have Engineers we're gonna have Architects we're gonna
have different landscape plan we're gonna have um uh different testimony from professional planners uh uh the objectors are still going to have to bring in probably bringing in expert Witnesses is
um so I'm sort of leaning towards like I know what Mr oler is saying I take that into account but I would be leaning towards either withdrawing it or let us vote on it um I don't know what the other board members
think I'll just comment in one area what we're voting on if we vote now is not what came be forc in 2023 right this has been heavily amended it's not that adjustments
haven't been made before okay and some of that was put in a bad light during some of the summations that you know it was said to be this and then I I think all of it was wanted and then adjustments were made in accordance
with what the how the hearings went I yeah it's going to call for end up hearing a lot of uh Landscaping etc etc are going to have to be modified
but I don't know that we should treat this as a new application okay I I think uh I guess that's that's my view this is this won't be a new application I don't think we should treat it as
such any other I tend to agree with Mr ker so do I and there's also a risk that it could pass that's that's true I did get the feeling there were some yes votes on on this application
right now so I don't know where there was a lot of Silence on that part okay I don't know so I guess just so can you just clarify what Mr Kramer is actually proposing I'm proposing that we do exactly what was
asked so you're proposing that we give the applicant time to amend the plan and come back and present an amended plan well I think what they're saying right now is they'd like 30 days or so to come back and tell us if they want to amend the plan is that correct is that
correct that would be my preference actually Mr Kramer because I'm not sure we can get the revisions done in 30 days I kind of like that Mr Aller isn't available for a little while well that's why I think we should just if if that's the board's reference here to give you that opportunity to amend the plan I
would push it out to June I would just go to June I mean why are we messing around I know it's not going to be heard in April I could I could certainly along Mr Kramer's line we could give you an indication I think by the uh April meeting are we amending or are we either
going to withdraw or or let the board vote you could withdraw at any time okay right but I will say this if an applicant requests to withdraw an application the board has to consent to the withdrawal you don't have have to let them withdraw it okay that's a
discussion if the day comes but um but I would just say we if the board's preference is to give you time to amend or withdraw um we should just schedule it for June you can withdraw at
any point before that or send us a letter to withdraw and the board can schedule that maybe sooner to have that discussion but but it'll probably be be in June okay that's fine yeah sorry but um I'm definitely not here in April and I'm
this way about May right now so would be fine Mr chairman I'm not clear on one thing if if they agree that they want to amend the application do something with the rear building do we listen to testimony only in regard to that or do
we need to listen to testimony about the rest of the property I to the extent I guess that it impacts the rest of the uh impacts the rest of the property the extent to which may impact okay that be I don't even know what that change is but I mean if they
changed it so everything was compliant in the rear then the only thing would be the front garage right and you'd hear some testimony on the front garage right I'm fine with that yeah
okay so how do we proceed on this just voice at the board yeah voice are we going to say it so if you want a motion I move that we carry it as discussed to June to June June Mee
second okay who second I did okay Mr chairman can we know the date yeah I'm looking it up sorry June 23rd what if we can't be here we might be moving our daughter into the Air
Force Academy so I can't change that date you know then I mean we are directly impacted well you could have you can do it in may I may be here I don't really know I'm okay for you are you okay if if
it was in May would you be okay for May May what May 19th 19th wait all is not going to be here there's a possibility there's a possibility you know what if we put it on for that day and it's possible and we can do it that's great and it becomes
impossible we deal with it then okay yeah all right so we've got a motion to carry it until uh June June to let the applicant decide whether they want to withdraw go to a vote or modify June or
May Mr are we GNA do motion is for June motion for June we want June or May I'd suggest May because as I said if Mr is available great if not we'll put it off we'll we'll deal so yeah I just don't know the
answer to that right now so why don't we go to May 19th with no further notice and we can change it at the May 19th meeting to some future meeting and just to clarify one of the potential outcomes is the applicant come back and say we're leaving the plan is is we're ready to go to a that is that
is they'll just say okay we're ready to go to a vote or we have a new plan and we want to present testimony on some revisions or we withdraw and then we'll have a discussion about what withdraw would be okay so that's the present motion Mr
krer needs to amend his motion amend the motion to May instead of June May 19th second all in favor I right so no so for the public this matter is being carried to May 19th at 7
o'clock in this room with no further notice from the applicant thank you thank you everyone I appreciate thank you okay thank you thank you okay we have one other matter that we got to discuss that is ba-
18-22 uh Mar Maria and Timothy Clifford uh you've seen their letter they want an extension of time for another year Mr rer can you tell us one second okay so this was an
application um by the Cliffords which was originally approved by the board on May 27th of 2023 properties at 222 West Anover Avenue is an addition for partial Second Story to serve as an in-law suite to maintain the existing side yard and
there was a some impact to the front yard for some new stairway um that was involved and they're asking for um for an extension they didn't really ask for how long one of the I guess one of the in-laws passed away so just rethinking
maybe some of what they need to do or how to do it and when to do it so I would suggest we just give him a one-year extension that would bring him out to March of 26 March 26 I'm okay okay March 26 and there's been no changes in the zone
really no modifications in the neighborhood it' be the same application anyway is that a motion Mo yes so is your okay a motion yeah second okay all in FA I okay you got say I for one for one
year okay anything else controller um there no no okay April's meeting is still the regular meeting date question mark question mark 28 I'm
not gonna be here okay same for me right and we don't know if that would work because we're waiting for the to know the planning board schedule right now there's nothing on the planning board for that day which would free up the room right is that
right is it can everybody make it on yeah that we need board members more than uh I would have been at the planning board so I guess I could be here I don't think I'm in town on the 21st uh it's April 20 April yeah I'm not
here how come I have the same seat both boards it's the view it's the view it's the view so are there are there is everybody else anybody else have a problem no good no problem no problem are there
applications on that April 21st for um for here for here the well I have two right now let me see hold on I haven't given them notice so if I'm move to the 21st I have to send notice like
quick G ask you question about that he's been the engineer on this project and then that Wilson would have to re I don't think it matters an engineer right okay so I have two one is an inground pool and an
addition and and Wilson that we carried so that was three applications all right so just if we move the meeting to the 21st now we're going to require that guy to Ren notice his application or just keep it on the
28th sorry I feel like I'm causing that problem keep it on the 20 keep keep it on the 28th right seems unfair to make him Reen notice have to okay but Rich I just have a resource question like for the May meeting if we hear the um revised
application or whatever is coming from you know Dave won't be here like the town the township has to provide a engineering resource to be in attendance or there'll be somebody here end of this week oh there will be okay all right good so been told he's going to take
care of the boards oh both yeah oh okay to meeting him yeah and this is an in-house no consultant consult who is it Joe V oh
not Joe not works for he works for vanle engineering okay and he currently has like three other towns that he's responsible for he did apply here for the in-house
position Town couldn't come to a conclusion with his his salary then he must have got a talking to at work and now he doesn't want to leave his other job but they're willing to pick him up uh or they're willing to give him
this down as uh as a Consulting engineer okay we currently have a lot of projects going on with Van Clee in the design phases so continuity stays there at least he knows a lot of people in the
office already so does that prevent present any kind of conflict when he's dealing with his own firm I think okay yeah no it's van CLE that would be appointed him part of Van
CLE yeah yeah yeah okay yeah and he is he's good he's good I dealt with him up in Still Water that's one of his towns I dealt with him up in Still Water he's good it's been a long time since I've been in Still Water I had an application
in Still Water wasn't sure I was going to find my way out it's easier during this day it sure is it was pretty dark so right now we have um Ying for the 19th Ying for the 19th
May okay of May okay just come back April 28 meeting so we keeping April 28th meeting yes yes okay all right and there's gonna be three things on three things okay okay Steve will cover for me or somebody from his firm
okay I'm gonna close this one just in case I'll close that one all right so I need a motion to adjourn motion to adjourn that a second all in favor meeting adjourned