Good evening and welcome to the April 13, 2026 meeting of the Nutley Zoning Board of Adjustment. Please stand for the flag salute to the flag of America. Republic stands for one indivisible
liberty and justice for all the secretary take attendance and read the compliance with open public meeting. >> Robin Lra. >> Mark Cigio here. Uh Lorraine,
Patricia Dy, Avette Wallace, Terresa Duva, John Kafone, Greg Tolby, Daniel Tolby, Chairman Graziano, Diana McGovern. Pursuant to requirement of section 13 of
the open public meetings act, notice of this meeting was included on the annual notice of regular meetings for the year 2026. It was advertised in the Nelly Sun with a copy posted on the township of Nelly bulletin board first floor 1 Kenny Drive Township of Nelly, New Jersey with a copy sent to the Herald News Nutly Sun
Star ledger and tap into Nelly.net. A copy is filed in the office of the township clerk and copies are made available to all persons requesting same. All persons address the zoning board of adjustment regarding their community concerns should approach the microphone and provide their name and address for the record unless further time is granted by the board. Each
person should limit their address to three minutes. All remarks of the board and his individual members must be addressed to the chairman. The chairman chairman may defer citizen comments to the appropriate member of the board. Dialogue between citizens and others addressing the board shall be allowed unless the chairman or presiding officer or the majority of the membership of the
board shall determine that the interest of the decorum and/or expeditious conduct of the board's business are being adversely affected by such dialogue. >> Report your address out. Please let us know that you're here. Uh 165 Franklin Avenue, 198 Park Avenue. That's off.
>> That's off. I'm sorry. Right. 55 Highfield Lane. >> Oh, >> here. >> Okay. I couldn't see you behind a poll. Uh 104 Stanley Avenue. >> Feel like I'm at the polo grounds. >> 72 Woodford Avenue here
>> and 24 Jorg Avenue. >> Okay. >> First up is 165 Franklin Avenue. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the record, Tom Tom Debiazi representing Scarity
regarding the ground floor studio apartment one for continued non-conforming use to a use variance for 165 Franklin Avenue block plots 7604/21.
Dear Mr. Diazi and Mr. Correino, your request for a permit at the above reference address to apply to the board of adjustment for a certificate of continued non-conforming use and or apply for a use variance for a ground floor studio apartment at the rear of
the building in a B-3A zone zoning district as shown on the plans prepared by architect Sal Corvino dated March 27th, 2026 is disapproved for the following reasons. This property
is located in a B-3A district as shown on the Nutley zoning map. The court enforcement code enforcement department has not issued any zoning permits or certificates for the proposed use of the property nor has any records to verify
to certify the use as a studio apartment. Chapter 700 section 700-7A of the codes of Nutley states, "No building shall hereafter be erected, and no existing building shall be moved, altered, added to, or enlarged, or shall
any land or building be used, designed, or arranged to be used for any purpose other than is included among the uses listed in this article as permitted in the district in which the building or land is located, nor in any entirely any
manners contrary to The requirements specified in this article, chapter 700, article 5, check chap section 700-1A of the codes of Nutley, lists the permitted uses in the B-3 zoning district residential uses pres
prohibited. Chapter 700, Article 8, Section 700-91A of the Codes of Nutley states, "No building nor or premises shall be used, nor shall any building be erected, nor shall any building be altered so as to expand its usable usable floor space,
unless there is provided parking spaces upon the same premises upon which the use or building is located or as provided for in 700-4511 in accordance with the following schedule required uses in the building.
One, second floor, two-bedroom apartment, two parking spaces. Two, ground floor real estate office/vacant office. One parking space for 300 square ft retail service, no parking required. Three, studio rear building, one parking
space. The building has a driveway at the rear which can park four vehicles if tandem parked. >> Thank you, Mr. Mr. Diaz again. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The framework for why we're here this evening revolves
around a contract of purchase and sale and our clients are selling the building to investors. And as we were going through the process of having inspections, it was brought to our attention that
there is no paperwork on this building whatsoever. The building goes back to the early 1900s. Our client's family purchased the building 1977 1976.
When this building was purchased back then in the 70s, the building looked exactly the same as it does today. Two brothers inherited the building when mom and dad passed. And I have them here this evening, Michael and Steven. And
Michael will testify that this building has always been exactly the way it is. Nothing has changed. It's always been a fourunit building. So, as we were going through the process, the first thing we had to do is see whether or not the
sellers would change the closing date in order for us to come in front of this board and clarify this issue. One of the suggestions we had to do this administratively was to have two affidavit, one signed by each brother saying that
since 1977, nothing has been changed in this building. But a decision was made that that would not be sufficient. And in order to clear this up once and for all, we're in front of the board. I do have Salino that will give testimony
regarding a use variance. And this hearing is conditioned upon whether or not a closing takes place. So with your permission, Mr. Chairman, may I call my first witness? >> Yes, please. >> Thank you. Michael Mascara. >> Hi everyone.
>> Raise your hand, please. You swear the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> Would you give us your full name, spell your last name, and give us your address? >> Okay. Michael Mascara. M O S C A R A. You want my home address or the building address? >> Your home address.
>> 213 Highfield Lane, Nutley. >> Mr. Mscar, you heard my opening remarks. >> Uh, and I'm going to take you through it, but basically what I stated is what you and I have been going through with this transaction. Is that correct? >> Exactly. >> And you actually called during the time
period to have a zoning inspection, a fire inspection. All the inspections that were required, you had done. Is that correct? >> Completed and passed. >> Right. And it was during that time that this issue came up that there's been no paperwork in town hall regarding your building.
>> Correct. >> And you were pretty surprised to say the least about that. >> Absolutely. >> The building goes back to the early 1900s. Is that correct? >> Around 1912, I believe. >> And your family has owned the building since 1977. >> 1977 >> specifically. And then there came a time
when mom and dad passed and you and your brother Stevened the building. >> Correct. From 1977 until today, did you change anything about the footprint of that building? >> Nothing at all. Same as it was when we uh purchased it in 77. >> So when you purchased it in 77, you I
call them four units, >> right? >> Is that cor is that correct? >> Mhm. >> In fact, uh we inherited a tenant in the studio apartment and we inherited a tenant in the second floor apartment. >> And you've been there forever running your business. >> Exactly. >> Correct. >> Is there anything else you'd like to
tell the board? uh as of uh 2022, I guess was during the last tax reevaluation, the town does have it on record as four units. The issue, I guess, that they were dealing with was prior to that, it was down as
three units, but as of 2022, they uh confirmed with me and verified that they do have it down as four units. >> Right. And in our contract of sale, it's very clear that we're selling four units. So, we were not able to get a CO for four units. Obviously, the buyer
said, "Go clear this up." And that's why we're here. Once again, your witness for Cross, >> you have a state inspections required in your property there for the tenants for the uh >> Oh, just the standard CO inspections,
fire inspection, which was done. Everything was done >> by state inspector saying that you have closing doors, you have uh >> Yeah. Yeah. Everything's >> Everything's been done and it's been done. Yep. >> Since then, yeah, it's always been the same >> throughout. >> Mhm. >> Any questions?
>> Questions? >> Nobody's got >> no. Hold on. Go ahead. So you stated that when re-evaluable properties, they were there
and um you weren't aware of any problems at the time. >> Exactly. >> And you paying taxes on it as the reevaluation shows that you have four units, >> right? As of 2022, it shows four units. >> Yeah. Oh, I'm sorry. You were taxed on three
of the units and it was you were missing one in one of the revals that that came up. Is that what it was? >> The most recent reval has us taxed as four units for that. Were you taxed on just three? >> Uh, no. I believe we were always under the impression we were taxed on four because
there always four units there. Yeah. You were taxes for >> four units, two commercial, >> correct? Right. Yeah, the bottom line is that this issue came up just because of the closing.
Now, I do have Steve Msgar that would come up, Mr. Chairman, and corroborate the testimony that Michael has given. May I skip that and go right to I appreciate that. All right, you're done. Now, with your permission, may I call up
the very talented Salino? >> Absolutely. I'll just leave this here. >> Yeah. >> Okay. You raise your right hand, please. You swear the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth. >> Yes. >> And of course, give us your full name, spell your last name, and give us your address. >> Salvatore Corbino, architect and planner, 111 Brookfield Avenue, Nutley, New Jersey. >> Mr. Mr. Garbino has been before us many many times. So, >> right. And he's here this evening, Mr.
Chairman, for the record, not only as an architect, but also as a professional planner. So, Mr. Cavina, you were retained by um Stephen Michael Mascara in order to present your testimony this evening. Is that correct, sir?
>> Correct. >> And you also did a floor plan in order to make this application complete. Is that correct? >> Yes. Would you take the board through the floor plan? >> Sure. >> And Bendad, maybe I could just get closer. >> Can you hear me?
>> Yes. >> You had an updated plan. >> Yes. So I um >> you have to submit those. Yeah. Make a >> Yeah, the updated one, not >> so this been different board members have in the package. So S, you're going to work off of the new one
>> and I'll tell you what the what the updates were. There were just some typos in the zoning chart. of council. We actually have planned, but >> I I definitely need one go with the resolution.
>> What are the date of these plans? Uh the the uh date of the plans are 3:27 2026. >> Okay. These aren't the ones where we should be using to work for you, >> right? >> There's no reason.
>> Yeah. Really, there was just a title on the second page or first page. It's really just the zoning chart. I had uh maximum height uh 25 feet, but in the zoning chart it's actually the require the allowed is 40 feet. So I fixed that.
We had a typo. We had 25 there instead of 40. And uh I had the inverted the rear yard and the front yard set back. Um the
uh 30foot rear yard. That's correct. It's the sideyard and the front yard. Um I had 29 and it should have been 0.04.
>> What? The sideyard or the front yard? >> The uh one of the sideyards. Well, the the sideyard because I'm sorry. 04 is what we should have for the front. The side street of the There's two front yards. We're on a corner lot. I apologize. So, the side street.
>> Yes, I had it at 2930. Uh, it should be 004 and it's on that way on the survey. They just inverted it. And the uh >> I don't know. and the and the front and the sideyard is 0.39. It was just
inverted. >> I have the right numbers on there now. So, >> yeah. So, the the the lot the lot uh with my apologies, the setback on the front yard should be 4.37
on Stagger and 04 on Franklin. And the sideyard should be uh over the over the setback which is a minus number 35.
So it's 0.35 over >> and then correct. And then of course the uh the required height allowed height is is 40 not 25. That was the other change. I think the board would likely jump in on the news.
>> Nothing's changing since >> changing. So what we have here is an existing building. Uh you heard the years I mean early 1900s. It's been a mixeduse commercial with uh apartments.
It's been used since they purchased the building. The parents purchased the building in the mid late 70s. um existed that way. When they purchased it, they inherited the two tenants, two two residential tenants. Uh they actually occupy one of the commercial spaces and
they now have a vacant space in the other commercial space where uh they had various tenants occupy. Uh so they uh they haven't changed anything in the building. They haven't changed the the
occupancies of those spaces. one one of the residential tenants is on the second floor. The second one is on the first floor is a studio apartment behind the commercial space uh adjacent to the parking lot. Um
the tax records show going back that there are four units and currently they show us four units. However, you know, Dave says I can't use the tax records. You can discuss that at the hearing that they've been paying taxes on four units since they purchased the property. And
uh it existed when uh my my understanding is you know when the zoning came in in the in the early 60s7s they probably could have applied back then whoever the owner was to do exactly
what we're doing now continued non-conforming use if you didn't do that within a year. Dave says I have to send you to the zoning board to do that. So, uh, so prior owner didn't do it. It it got sold that way. The sale went through and that's how we occupy the building
since then. Um, I would say because of a use variance, uh, the, uh, we could talk about positive criteria here. You can see, uh, he's has an empty space. He's had a hard time renting the commercial space. He
hasn't have a hard time renting the residential. Residential isn't allowed use in this zone. um albeit on the second floor, but the studio apartment probably was something there from a mom and pop store that always occupied as residential. Um and
that's how it stayed. It is separated from the uh commercial space which is their rent or their office and uh the adjacent office and it has a firewall. Everything is separated. It meets fire separation if there's any concern about
that. It's a totally separated and fire rated um separation between the commercial and residential both for the second floor and the first floor unit. Um I would say that from a standpoint of positive criteria, we meet sections uh E
and G related to finding appropriate uh uh situations for different types of uses. The residential use is an allowed use in the zone and it it does meet the requirement
uh of a variety of different uses for different zones. In particular, this zone, it does meet the the zone requirements. It's not a non-conforming uh uh type of use. It's just the records don't show that it existed before and um
the use was always an allowed use in that zone. And uh from a negative criteria, we're not changing anything. So there's no change to what's existed since they purchased it in 77. There hasn't been a real issue with parking. Uh in fact, uh
Mr. Mscar said that even parking uh there's always a space there for him to put his car. So his two tenants use up three spaces and he gets to use one. And so it's existed that way since uh since they've owned it. Uh the catchall phrase
for the way in the framework of sound planning principles. Do you believe that this board can grant a use barriers for that without negatively impacting on his own plan or the master plan in the township? No. >> Yes, I do. >> And you're doing that for the poor
stated reasons of your testimony? >> Yes. >> Is there anything else you'd like to say? >> Nothing. >> The answer should be no. >> No. >> Please submit chairman. Um uh that that um that door on stagger
street that's a also entry for that >> I apologize the >> door on stagger street >> yes >> for that >> it's for that apartment separate entrance yeah >> any other questions from the board audience anybody in the audience have
questions I do have one question >> um so are the two up Is someone occupied, right? Yes. >> Yes. >> I I'm just I'm looking at the the
property floor. I mean, going back to 1968, they were getting comments without needing variances. And the testimony is there were apartments there. So it's appearing that at least as of the early 60s residential is going on there.
>> Yes. >> As per the property card. >> Correct. >> The the board should take note of that that if >> it's your it's your decision when you whether you want to say look I've lived here you've lived here a long time. Everybody's lived here many years. Um,
but what we're seeing from the building department record is that it there's nothing for there's nothing saying no, they can't do it. If and you've got the testimony. >> Yeah. So, >> well, that's why I included them to show the just the history of it.
>> Suggest to the board if you first want to consider the request that this is pre-existing non-conforming. What they're describing is two residential units, one up, one down, and then two commercial units, and that you
believe that it existed for such a long time that it existed precode, then that's your then that's your first consideration. If you don't feel as though there's enough for you to establish that, then we move into the use variance where you've had Mr.
Corbino as planner testify there's been no negative effects. Um the positive uh sat criteria is satisfied here because it provides uh residential for v provides uses for various uh population
densities. And then what was the what's g I don't remember that off the top of my head. So >> first one was e I'll just read it off. Promote establish appropriate population densities. That was the one you discussed. indeed provide sufficient space for appropriate locations for a
variety of agricultural, residential, recreational, commercial, industrial uses and open space. We're not changing anything. So, >> yeah, but for apartment um on a main street that has bus traffic, it's one of those things that I think more and more
people are looking to have so they can get pushed on the main on that main bridge. So, board members, that's what I suggest. start with the first and if you're not 100% sure um you can one of you can make a motion about the other
one that and see whether that establish no further questions for Mr. Anybody in the audience have question saying no? >> We'll submit to the board and we agree with council's um analysis. Okay. Is
>> there anybody in the audience that has anything to say at all about this uh application? Well, seeing none, can I have a motion, please? >> Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to grant the use the use of non
continued non-conforming use. The hardship on this property is that it's an old building, approximately 100 years old, and they're really and the building department doesn't have any paperwork documenting these units. However, the tax records indicate that
this has always been used as a mixeduse building with two residential units and two commercial units. Um, they've also been paying taxes on two res on this building as is with two residential and two commercials. Um, the varian should
be granted as it was purchased this way and it's been as a family since the 70s and nothing has changed. Um, no footprint has changed. Um, no uses have changed for these and any other reasons as Mrs. McGovern mentioned before.
Okay. So, what you're voting on this is for a certificate of pre-existing non-conforming use. We don't even have we're not going into the use variance part of it. We're just voting on the certificate of pre-existing non-conforming use. This only needs a majority. It doesn't need a
super majority. Um, Secretary, please pull the board. >> Good job. Thank you. >> Mark Kichio, >> yes. >> Shisha Dy, >> Evette Walls, >> Terresa Duba, Daniel Tolley, Chair
Graziano. >> Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Appreciate it. I'll take them. I'll take you. Do you >> Do you want plans? >> Do you want plans? Do they need them for
anything? >> Did Can I ask a question? Did you give those plans to the code office? Do they have them or do I need to bring them a set? >> Send them. >> All right. I'm Can I have two? I'm going to take one of yours to just make sure when I go in there tomorrow that they have Okay. All right.
>> Is that the right one? >> Mr. Chairman, >> for purposes of time, the resolution will be adopted next. >> Yes. >> May 20th, the third Monday. >> That will be May. >> What's our May 18th?
>> May 18th. >> May 18th. Thank you. >> Just for my knowledge, what was there before Mascara Reality? >> Uh, AP's Lounge, I believe. >> Right. Yeah, there's something in the tax record, but it talks about like a tavern
>> AP AP's lounge. >> I've never been to the reality of office, >> right? >> 10. >> Thank you. >> I hear a lot 76 would have been in a high
>> 18. >> Yes. All right. Uh 55 Highfield Lane. >> Would the secretary of state read the letter of denial >> regarding the pool attached to a dwelling 55 Highfield Lane, block lot
38023. Dear Mr. Silva, your request for a construction permit at the above reference address to install a 12tx 20tx 54 in above ground pool which will be attached to a deck that is attached to
the main dwelling as shown on the plans proposed by architect Christopher uh Jerknik Jucknik >> sorry uh RA dated July 18th 2025 is disapproved for the following reason.
This property is located in a NAR-1 district is shown on the Nutley zoning map. Chapter 700, article 11, section 700-67D of the codes of Nutley states, "An attached accessory structure or accessories use shall be considered to
be part of the main building. The property is located in an R-1 zoning district. The rear yard setback for a dwelling is 30 feet. The attached pool will have an 8-foot rear yard setback. >> Thank you. Would you raise your right
hand, please? Yes. >> You swear the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> Yes. >> You give us your full name, spell your last name, and your address, please. >> Uh, first name is Ruy, R UI. Last name Silva, S I L Va. I'm at 55 High Lane, Nutley, New Jersey.
>> Thank you to tell the board. Uh, basically I I've been in Nutle for over 20 years and I have two girls and we uh needed more space. So, we did we expanded our house. We did additions uh last year. We got them approved and now
we want to renovate our backyard and we wanted to do a deck that is attached to the house that comes out of our family room through a slor and then also a pool that would be um I guess attached to the deck also. Um because you know my we
spend time at home and my daughters also spend a lot of time in the backyard and they like to have fun in the backyard. So and I said why not just go for it? Get a deck and a pool. Thank you. >> I have I have a question
attaching the pool to the deck but according to the to the drawing your deck is 1 foot 11 off the ground. Uh, I I guess that's what the architect Yeah. Uh, I think there's a step going down. Is it showing? Is it a step going
down? And then >> I'm talking about the actual height of your deck. >> It's going to be lower than the height of the pool. So, it's kind of weird. Yeah, I know. Cuz then I got to put like a railing or something around it. So, >> um, honestly, I was just I thought the
pool was going to be even with the deck. I was thinking but >> digging the pool into the ground. >> Oh, no. We're not going to dig. No, it's not going to go below ground. We're not digging. It's It's an above ground pool. Um they might have to level the ground a little to even out the pool. I get that.
>> Yeah. And then but the deck is going to be like probably half of the pool. >> The the pool's going to be higher than the deck. >> It's a four foot high pool. Four foot. >> It's about Yeah. Four. Four. Five. Yeah. About four and a half. Five. >> Four and a half feet. >> Yeah. Four and a half feet high. Yeah. at two and a half feet to get into the
pool. >> Yeah, you have to >> Yeah, probably have to put a ladder on the deck to go to the >> Yeah, I just realized that last night when I was back there like >> I was like, "Yeah, cuz I'm thinking I'm telling my wife. I'm thinking I thought it was evened out, but it's not >> door the uh
>> Right. It's like when I come out of the sliding door." Yeah, it's going to be even with that sliding door. Or you might even get a step. I think I don't even know if the plant is showing a step going down. Actually, >> no. You have you have uh one, two, three steps now.
>> And your drawing showed three steps. So, it's the same. >> But yeah, the pool's going to be higher than the deck level. Yeah, the pool's going to be higher because the pool's going to be four and a half. It's an above ground pool. Honestly, I think I'm just gonna put
like a ladder from the deck and into the pool and that's it because >> be a custom ladder. How you going to do this? >> Uh, good question. I guess I have to figure that out when the It's just I
I mean I'm not concerned about honestly I haven't thought about it because I'm not concerned that my daughters are going to you know go up there and drown or anything but I'm just but I'm just kind of weird how it looks. >> Mhm. >> Should you decide next year to sell your house? Somebody else going to move in.
They might have younger children that can do this. >> Right. Right. Exactly. Absolutely. Absolutely. Yeah. Absolutely. >> So I'm assuming have to have a fence. I could put a gate around the deck or a Yeah, I could put a Yeah, gate. >> Okay. So, condition. What are we doing
as a condition? >> It'll be a locking gate. >> Locking gate around. >> And I believe you'll need a an alarm. >> Locking gate. >> Not around the pool. Not around the pool. At the uh deck to the >> deck to the pool. >> Yeah. And then they're going to need to
have an alarm. >> Some people put up an alarm. >> Oh, wow. >> Which is a floating alarm. >> Okay. >> Somebody goes in and starts. >> Oh, wow. >> So,
and the gate The gate Oh, the gate's going to have to open. It's not going to be able to open out because the pool >> alarm must be installed >> when they're even. We'd like to make the gates open in because the child is going
to push. So, >> but you're going to have a pool right next to it. So, >> may I ask you a question, sir? Now, if I decide to just do the deck, put the gate all around the deck and then just push the pool out one foot and just put a
ladder out there. Could I do that? Like do I really have to get do I have to have the pool connected to the >> I'm put away from your deck. >> Right. Right. Right. Right. >> It's going to be the same situation with the with the locking g >> and you move the pool there'd be a
different variance. >> Right. Right. >> The measurements right. Yep. I think the conditions as I understand them are locking gate at the deck and some type of pool alarm must be installed. >> Your children are
>> 12 and 20 or you know you'll have to enter and you'll be happy that you have >> Oh, don't say that. Thank you. Thank you. Yes. old kid. No, that's not >> No, no.
>> Other questions from the board. >> Are there any questions from anyone in the audience? >> Seeing none. Have some question. >> Good. Um, can I have a motion, please? >> Mr. Chairman, with regard to 55
Highfield Lane, lot 382, lot 3, I would like to make a motion to grant Lar homeowner to install a 12x 20 x 54 above ground pool be attached to a deck attached dwelling as shown up tonight. The homeowner deck pool the condition
being a locking gate at the entrance to the deck pool with an alarm as well. He's raising us any other >> Marco. >> Yes. >> Trisha Dy. Avette Walls. Theresa Duva.
Daniel Dolby. Chairman Graciano. >> Okay. Thank you so much. Thank you. Have a good evening. 104 Stanley Avenue. And would the secretary please read the letter of denial >> regarding adding a level addition for
104 Stanley Avenue block lot 51047. Dear Mr. Bernard, your request for a permit at the above reference address to construct a new twostory edition at the rear and to construct a new second floor
add a level addition having a 4.3 in 4 foot excuse me 4.3 in >> yes 4T 4T 3 in
Yes, exactly. As as shown on the plans prepared by DASA Hayne stated, June 2nd, 2025 is disapproved for the following reasons. This property is located in an RA-1 district as shown on the Nutley
zoning map. Chapter 700, article 7 section 700-46A of the codes of Nutley states the schedule of regulations requires a six-foot sideyard setback. Chapter 700, Article 7, Section 700-46B8
of the Codes of Nutley states, "The required minimum side, front and rear yard dimensions for the alteration of or addition to a one family or two family dwelling, provided that the same do not increase the existing lot coverage
and/or footprint of the existing building outline, shall not apply to the extent that said side, front, and rear yard dimension ions meet or exceed the requirements for side, front, and rear yards set forth in the schedule of
regulations prior to July 25th, 1987 shall be no less than 80% of the required minimum set minimum set forth in the schedule of regulations. The proposed second floor add a level addition is not increasing the existing
footprint. The required sideyard setback is 4T 10 in. The proposed is on the right side is 4 foot 3 in. Chapter 700 article 11 section 700-67E3
of the codes of Nutley states decks and patios must meet meet the following minimum setback requirements of table one. Table one decks and patio setbacks. Setback requirements. Sideyard decks and patios less than 30 in in height, 3
feet. Decks and patios greater than 30 in in height. Principal building setback. Sideyard required 6 ft. Proposed 4'3 in. >> Thank you. Would you raise your right
hand, please? You the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> Yes. >> Could you give us your full name, spell your last name, and give us your ID, please? Thomas Bernard, Ber N A R D 104 Stanley Avenue, Nutley, New Jersey. >> Hey, what would you like to teleport? >> Um, we're trying to renovate. Uh,
family's growing. Mother-in-law is getting old. She needs to move in. U, we need some more space. Uh, we're putting on the second floor. Um, we're just going straight up over the existing footprint. Um, house was built in 1955. Apparently, too close. Uh, but this is an existing condition.
>> And I noticed on the on the one side you stepped it back. I guess that was to get the uh the air conditioners to fit or >> Oh, that was a is a threeseason porch there. So, >> step back, right? >> And he Well, he stepped it back. So, that that little setback will be uh to
code. It's just the existing structure, >> right? >> I mean, it's it's pretty much uh it's matching the house. It's not affecting the footprint. So, there's no coverage.
That's >> Yeah, we're going to ask that now. >> So, what are you going to do with the siding? I'm assuming it's to their level. So, it be all new uh siding. Are you taking all the siding off and putting all new siding? >> Yes. >> All right. So, new windows and whatever. >> New windows all around. Yeah. Um there's
a fire where we have a fire rating requirement because of the um proximity. So, we're going to have extra fire rating on that side. >> Everything's there's nothing that's going to need to match existing because it will all be level. All right. So, I don't even need to do that as condition.
>> No question. Um, questions from the board. >> How much taller is this house going to be than the neighbors? Is it going to be a lot taller or
>> Right. It's a It's a semisplit. Yeah. It'll be two stories plus a roof. Yeah, it's within the code height. >> Yeah, >> it's a good question. Yeah. >> So, so the only question that we should
be clear is in the first part of the letter it has the 4.3 in, but the rest of the letter says 4T 3 in. So, I'm assuming we're going with 4T 3.
>> 4T 3 in is the proper according to what I'm reading. Yes. >> On the uh survey, that's where it says. So that's the official 4 foot three >> 4 foot >> 3 in 4T 3 in >> 3 in 4.3.
>> All right. Uh no other questions. Anybody in the audience that would like to be heard with regard to this application? All hearing none. Can I have a motion, please? >> Mr. Chairman, with regard to 104 Stanley Avenue, lot 5104, lot 7, I would like to
make a motion to grant the barianings to allow the homeowner to construct a new twotory addition at the rear and to construct a new second floor addition having 48 side door setback as the plans presented tonight. The property is an
existing non-performing lot. It's also very narrow. The homeowners building on the existing footprint. This addition will also be very exciting for the reasons of uh no conditions. Any other addition by council
second. >> Secretary please call the board. >> Markio. >> Yes. >> Treasure dy. >> Yes. >> Ross. Theresa da. Daniel. Chairiano. >> Yes. Hold on.
Okay. 72 72 Woodford Avenue. >> Secretary, please leave and read the letter of denial for 72. >> Okay. >> How do you pronounce your last name? >> Jowski. >> Thank you.
Yeah, fanatic >> regarding corner property fence for 72 Whitford Avenue, block lot 4101. Dear Mr. Azaskki. >> Azajowski >> ask you that >> you're required you request for a permit
at the above reference address to install a 3-FFT aluminum openstyle fence located in the front yard and sideyard along other along Grant Avenue as shown on the property survey prepared by
Richard J. Hingo Inc. dated November 3rd, 2025 is disapproved for the following reason. This property is located in R-1A district as shown on the Nutley zoning map. Chapter 700, article 11, section
700-71A of the codes of Nutley states, "No fences of any type shall be permitted in any front yard. Chapter 700, article 11, section 700-71D of the codes of Nutley states, "A fence
erected on any corner lot shall conform to the fence requirements for the adjoining properties. The proposed fence location the proposed fence location other is in the front yard of the adjoining property.
>> Thank you. You raise your right hand, please. You'll be the only one testifying tonight." Uh, >> yeah. You swear the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> That's right. >> Uh, give us your full name, spell your last name, and give us your address. >> Dylan Aajowski. Uh, spelled Oz Y O W S K
I 72 Whitford F. >> He said it fine. >> Oh, what would you like to tell us? >> Yes. So, we moved into this property about December. Uh, I was born and raised in Dutley. We moved back in to uh have my daughter closer to her
grandparents who are still in Nutley. Um but the property, majority of the yard is in front yard, a lot of it. Um and it's on Grant and Witford, which are busy streets both with car and pedestrian traffic. Uh so we'd like to be able to utilize a lot of the front
yard for gardening. I've heard my daughter out in the garden with us, have my pets out in the garden, and not really have to worry about street traffic or pedestrian traffic um coming into the yard. What kind of fence are we looking at here? >> The yellow line you see is going to be
an aluminum picket fence. Um, so a lot of open space. It's more just uh the blocker to have somebody walking out onto the sidewalk. The pink that you see on there is a cedar privacy fence for the backyard to truly be more of um of a private area that we can we can utilize.
>> How high is this fence? >> The aluminum fence. Um, >> four foot. >> We originally asked for four foot. I think in the variance it's saying three foot. >> You want three feet? >> Uh we would accept three. Yes. >> That length across the street >> similar to very similar to across the street. I'm not sure if that's three or
four feet, but we would want to match the aesthetics of the across the street. >> I did I did across the street. >> Yeah. >> Is it going to be black? >> Yes. >> So it'll be black. >> Yes.
>> This is basically to stop children. >> Children, dogs. Yeah. Yeah. >> So it's more than this will be more than 50% open. >> Yeah. >> If you look at the style that way >> it >> Yes. That's the very similar style.
>> Mark identification. >> I did not send this to you but >> that would be just to be clear the yellow area would be that. Yeah. >> Square spindle, round spindle. >> Uh, square.
>> I think square is what they have in probably what they're looking at. Yeah. >> Reason I ask around like >> Okay. >> Yeah. I'd have to see what's available material wise, but I mean I think square
would be the ideal. >> I'm showing you Google map. We marked it A1. This is across this directly across straight from you. And that um is the approximate height, the three foot height that you were asking for. >> Yeah. >> This is a lot more open than 50% I think on this. >> Yeah.
>> So, and that would be acceptable as well. >> Yes. That that's very similar to what we're looking for and a similar setback as well. >> Is there a reason why you just said thank you? >> Um I will be honest. We asked for four on um the original plan and the variance
came back with three. Not sure. Maybe we wrote three in there somewhere. If four is acceptable, we would like to answer that. If you want me to swear in >> Allison Ozowski right here. >> Sure. >> Do you test? >> I do.
>> Give us your phone. Spell your last name and give us your address. >> Alison Ozowski. Ozy JKI 72 Whitford. Sorry, I went to the town. I did I talked with um I think her name is Jen um and she just recommended that three-foot would be what the board would
find acceptable. So, we modified it because we didn't want to be problematic. >> No, no, SHE WAS GIVING SHE WAS GIVING feedback and she want you know. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> It's much more than 50% open. >> Yeah.
>> And being a black uh uh woman You know your visions look right. >> Yes. >> I think four would be >> you do what you want. >> I just think for your children. >> Yeah. I I agree.
>> You do what you want. >> So what it is what is the board giving them up to four feet? >> I would say unless the board has an objection. And then the cedar, >> you've got six foot high solid cedar in
the rear. >> Yeah. >> Do they need permission? >> No. Because >> did you get permission from your your neighbors for that six week? >> Yes. Yes. Okay.
>> And uh so there's two sections with six and the two green areas are four foot higher. That's a gate. >> Actually, I have a question for clarification. >> Um,
so on your survey, there is pink that bisects your backyard. >> Yes. >> And so you're not asking for that to be cedar as well. >> The paint will be cedar and it does bisect the backyard for privacy. So, um
you'll see where you are along that line is a sidewalk on um Grant A. So, it's a busy busy street, busy sidewalk. The cedar fence will give us some privacy along the hedge in front. >> So, you're you're actually asking for
two different fences in your backyard. >> Yes. >> Why is it two different fences? I see the I see the reason for lot two next to lot two to have the the six foot >> Yes. and next to your garage. >> Mhm. >> But then it turns, it comes all the way
up your property and turns again. >> The one that turns adjacent to the garage, um that really will just abut the garage. It doesn't need to uh turn, >> but then it turns again and comes up in the middle of your property. >> Yeah, it turns into the middle. That'll be in line with the enclosed porch. We'll have another gate there to walk
into the sideyard. And that's really to give privacy into the backyard area. And that's six foot solid cedar. >> What's there currently is um trees and hedges, but we'd like to have a a solid barrier there.
>> Are you putting any shrubbery next to that? >> We're going to maintain some of the trees and hedges that are there, and we're going to put a few hedges and trees in front as well. Yes. >> There's a lot. There's a whole hedge line on Frant Avenue. Are you keeping that? >> We cut down some of the pieces that are
on depending on how old the pieces because they were too close to the house. Um, but we're going to keep a lot of that hedge. Yes. >> No, they're asking about the privets along the actual sidewalk which will be maintained >> on the sidewalk keeping. Yes. The fence will be inside of that. Sorry.
>> There's mainten your house. >> Yes. >> So, the bushes will be facing the street. That's fence. >> Sorry. >> We're making that a condition that the bushes must be maintained inside the hedes. >> Well, that he maintains hedges there.
>> Yeah. Maintains sight. inside existing. >> Yes. On Grand Avenue. So he's got two fences on Grand Avenue. just being a >> dispatch. The house here in America.
>> No, >> the house the the uh six foot seater stops even with back the back porch, right? The back of the house. >> Yes. >> Okay. And what about the little section between the house and the fence? >> Uh where the green area is or Oh. Um
>> right next to the stairs on the enclosed porch. >> There's nothing like a blue line that went through it. Was that >> Oh, that was just a mark from uh >> No, but I'm talking about this area right here. Right here. >> Right next to the stair.
>> Come look. Sure. >> Coming here. He's got rid here. This comes up here. Turns goes over to here. What's here? >> Porch the house. >> So that's all this is being porch. And that's done. >> A fence and then another fence.
>> Yeah. But this is going to be privacy fence in the backyard. >> Okay. >> This is just around the house. >> Well, your property's only. But we don't have some >> black aluminum. >> Yes. >> All right. So, just to be clear, you're
also does is the board asking for a condition that fences be placed on the outside of the fence that's going to be on the Witford Avenue or is right now there's already existing hedges that the fence will be behind.
You want something similar as it goes onto Winford Avenue. >> There's nothing here now, >> right? >> Okay. Just checking. Yeah, I think >> Yeah, we're trying to figure that like
where is that on show you on the pictures? >> Yeah, it's easier to look. >> When you read the letter of denial, it's only ask for the um front yard mention still. No, because they don't need a
parent. >> So, they have permission. So, they don't need it. So, it's just >> what >> the yellow on this on this survey. That's not that line is as a is a random line. >> Yeah. But he's got pink.
>> Okay. >> They don't need it. >> Okay. >> Only the yellow line is what they need to know fencing. Oh, >> I know exactly where I'm putting my fence. We just want to get >> I understand
everybody got all the questions. Anybody in the audience would like to be heard? >> Um, can I have a motion, please? >> Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to grant the variance uh for the corner property fence at 72 Woodford A block
410 0 block one. The hardship box property is that it is a corner property. It's also um a busy intersection and the the variance would be to grants up to a 4 foot aluminum
open style base fence um along the front and sideyard along Grand Avenue. One of the conditions is to maintain the hedges on the Grant Avenue side of >> for these reasons and any other
>> edges still be maintained >> and the hedges I'm sorry that's to be placed inside the existing hedges on grand hedges must be maintained by a second. Will the secretary please pull the board
>> yes dardy? >> Yes. >> Walls Terresa Duva Daniel Tolby. Chairman Graciano. >> Thank you. Thank you for your time. He's taking a break or >> let's finish it up in the right
first and last. >> Feel like a book end. Okay. Um, secretary, please read the letter of denial >> regarding the garage addition for 24
Avenue, block 25503. Dear Mr. Fino and Mr. Lancado. Your request for a permit at the above reference address to add to add an addition to the existing garage at the rear having a 3ft sideyard setback as
shown on the plans by architect Sal. Corvino dated February 23rd, 2024 is disapproved for the following reasons. This property is located in an R-1 district as shown on the Nutley zoning map. Chapter 700, article 11,
section 700-67B1 of the codes of Nley states, "No detached accessory building or accessories used shall be located one nearer than 3 feet or 1/2 the height of such building up to the distance of 6
feet, whichever is greater, to a side or rear lot line. The mean height of the garage is 10 ft. The required sideyard setback is five feet. The proposed is three feet. >> Okay. Um Oh, you
>> I don't need to drink. >> You swear the testimony you're about to get. You give us your full name and your address. Bill Blanc, 24 Avenue, Nutley, New Jersey. BL ancest
you want to just >> Sure. I just >> uh I've got an existing garage set back. Uh the way the house was built, it's actually you look at it where the driveway ends. It's not a straight shot into the garage. I keep a classic car in the garage. So around the car, I'm
trying to free up some space. So I'm taking the existing structure and just adding back 15 feet of garage space to the back of it. Uh not really changing anything whatsoever. Just taking the exact same formation, exact same wall width, exact same height, and just going straight back.
>> You're not going to use the park bar, but it looks right. >> No. Yeah. I'm going to leave the car exactly where it is. Take all the stuff around the car, which the car's >> put in the back >> and put it in the back. Trying to protect the car from a shed. You don't have a shed. >> I do not. No. I actually tried to was
going to go shed at first, but because where the garage is built and the angle of the house, I couldn't get it through the opening and to the back. So, it was just easier to add on. I see you're putting electric in there. >> I am has electric already in the existing garage. I would just add to the existing service. >> Is there work? So you got all those
sinks and stuff going in. >> We always said that. But >> we I mean we would talked about that. >> Probably not. Now I think >> do it there. You're going to have water in the gazos. >> Um heat I would consider adding where the car is. The car could use in the winter. You don't want it like winter's
like this. It's hard on the old rubber and that kind of thing. So, I'd probably put a small one of those uh sep separate units in there just to heat it, but that's down the road. I don't know if I do that initially. >> Your garage will not be used for any living. >> No, no, no, no, no, no. Just to protect the car. >> We got a lot of applications you can
hardly ever have. Anybody want to take it down? Nobody wants car's going to live in there. That car go back 35 years. It's an old 69 Firebird convertible. It's fully restored. So, try
Who else? Anybody else have questions? >> It will not be used as debate. >> No, not leg space. >> Any other any other questions from the board? >> The um Mr. Uh, the only question I have for you is
uh with the existing uh 3 foot setback, do you have any issues at all with maintaining that space? Uh, in terms of maintaining the crew to the side of your garage that I
plan to fully maintain, you mean to the right between the fence and the garage? Yeah. I mean, right now I have white stone. I would extend that white stone so it looks very decorative. In fact, part of the reason I want to do this, if you notice, I have some ladders on the side which look terrible. I'm going to now be able to put those in the garage. So, it'll improve the site. It'll clean
>> essentially the making the uh extending the space uh and the gravel or whatever you >> Yeah. >> surface cover that you had and extending it back and then removing the ladder. So, >> Exactly. Exactly. A beautifification aspect of it as well.
>> Now, all the uh siding on there, you're going to make sure you're putting new leaf on. Luckily the building is cement on the side stucco so it's very easy to exact to match it exactly. There is no side fact. >> Is it a brown stuck or is it a painted stuck? >> It's a painted stuckco. >> So you'll paint it to match. >> Exactly. >> And the roof imaginary.
>> Mhm. Yep. >> Any other questions from the board? There's nobody in the audience. So I guess I'll look for a motion. I said better. >> Mr. Mr. Chairman, with regard to 24 Avenue block 253
block, I would like to make a homeowner. As an addition to the existing garage at the rear, having a three-foot sideyard setback plans presented this evening. This addition will not be used as living space and will not diminish the sideyard any more
than the existing structure. Uh condition being the addition will match the existing structure as of now. These reasons may be by council. Thank you. >> Markio. >> Yes. >> Patricia Dy. >> Yes. >> Wallace. Terresa Tuba.
>> Daniel Tolley. Chair Graciano. >> Thank you very much. Have a nice >> easier to know. >> Yeah, I know. Thanks guys everybody. >> Thank you. >> All right.
>> Miles We have Paul's uh fee for $150. We have a motion to approve that. >> Favor. >> I then have minutes from March 16th, 2026.
Are there any additions, corrections, or deletions? >> No. Have a motion to approve the minutes as >> second. All in favor? I >> And then uh two resolutions 51 Kingland Street block 601 Lock 18.
And the board members who were voting on that were Mr. Graziano, Mr. for Tolby, Miss Duba, Miss Wallace, and Miss Dy. If I could have a motion approving that resolution.
All in favor? >> And then the last one is Carol Baron. 28 may place. Same board members were voting in a in a as I noted earlier, a motion to approve that resolution. All in favor?
I have no other miss except for next week or next month on May 18th, we will be moving to the municipal court so that um people can use an elevator.
>> I think that's fair to hear. >> This was much I go.