##VIDEO ID:XaXmXcLBh30## there she do a little test so what say Wednesday September 11 2024 planning B PAN test equipment in compliance with the open public meetings law notification of this meeting has been sent to our official newspapers and other Publications circulated in the borrow of ultan and notice has been posted on the bullton board at B Hall please note fire exits located at the main entrance to the council chambers and in the rear of the council chambers everybody please stand to salute the flag algi to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for it stands Nation indivisible liberty and justice for all and just before we get started let's please have a moment of silence uh to remember those lives that were lost on September 11th of 2001 okay so before we get started we are waiting for one more planning board member we should be able to get through for about 15 or 20 minutes we could do our administrated yeah so let's see how that goes all right yep [Applause] here here here councilwoman Maro here Council boy here Mr M ludus Mr SCA Mr ban here Mr aaran Mr ker here all right um we're going to open the the meeting to the public for any opportunity to speak on the non-agenda item can I have a motion motion second all in favor anybody have anything to discussed it's not on the agenda for this evening seeing none motion second all in favor I great uh environmental commission report Mr ke is not here Mr Keel is not here Council liaison report I know we have two councilmen so we should be able to get something it's my turn so okay thank you chairman so um we'd like to uh thank the um all those who participate in setting up the annual Town day here in alapan it was switched from last Saturday to Sunday uh very prudent move because the weather definitely cooperated on Sunday our own mayor mayor Gallagher donated a copious amount of hot dogs and hamburgers and the fire department was nice enough to grill them all up for Town residents I think that was almost the Highlight but the highlight of the whole day was actually the tug of war for me you two won I didn't win I didn't participate okay but the DPW the old DPW has bragging rights and they have the trophy for this year congratulations very impressive yes yes oh yeah on the sign nice um not as exciting but uh maybe for some the northern Valley oldan High School is looking to install a large Synthetic Turf field where there's currently a soccer field which is soil and grass so as we probably know on this St um that will create possibly an additional runoff situation and uh we've asked our burrow engineer to look at those plans so we don't just you allow that to happen uh there are adjacent residences and we want to make sure that they're safe from additional storm water and uh we're actually I was talking to the building um our building inspector Bob Rush uh over the last couple weeks and we're looking to possibly clarify the definition of impervious coverage for our town um and possibly use the moscit land use definitions uh you know basically because there are no Provisions in our land use law that address that specifically maybe Tom could speak more about that but right now we just say improved lot coverage but we don't have we haven't really in included impervious coverage and what's driving that that idea uh which is by not a bad idea but I'm just yeah actually decks um you know we have a number of decks in town that people are taking the decks out and putting in raised patios instead and and right now decks are I believe considered as if they're not an improved or impervious but the water you know the their spaces between the boards the water falls through and goes into the ground whereas a patio patio would all sheet flow off of that right so we just want to get it right and not negatively incre you know increase more storm water so when the time comes I'm sure we'll discuss it with Tom you have any thoughts Tom or no I think it's a good idea also um that is the case because our definition of improved lot coverage includes a deck right and if you're replacing it you've only got to do storm water management if you exceed a certain threshold of increased coverage so you can replace a 500 a deck with a patio and not have to put storm order in storm order Management in so it's definitely an issue um the only thing I would say is we should make sure we stay consistent with the state definitions just because if something is large enough that it becomes a major development we would want our definitions to match theirs or we'd have to create a separate set of definitions for things that are not major developments which just complicates it so what's the process for us to do this if we wanted to do it is there something that the planning board would vote on and then you would you you would write it for us amendment to zoning ORD definition would be so we will come before the board as um for any comments basically your blessing on it uh and then the mayor and council could act on it well does anybody on the board object to us asking Tom to draft something up for review no seeing none the mind doing that no okay so we'll review that at the next meeting if you want to send it out beforehand we can we can review it before the meeting and then be able to vote sounds good good plan yeah thanks anything else bill that's about it for tonight excellent okay construction official report was included in your package uh burrow engineer report back to you I don't have anything new if there are any questions from board members I'll try to answer them you did some Paving recently right I remember seeing there was like a lot the burrow Paving program is is complete um went pretty much without a hitch um we also just started I should mention Fred Street drainage a contractor was there today for the first time just kind of getting situated clearing the site a little bit uh so the next couple weeks that project we'll be moving forward and what what are they doing it's really just upsizing infrastructure um we got a grant from dot for it and there's an issue at the low point in Fred when you go around that first 90 degree Bend as you're heading toward the culdesac um where the the system just couldn't handle the amount of water was getting so you get flooding there it it almost goes into or sometimes it does go into one particular resident's garage um so this was something that we were able to get funded and um we will be increasing pipe size and adding storm water structures nice where is that the where yeah it's basically from the river to Fred street through an existing easement okay so there's pipe there now we're just improving it okay anything else not for me thank you Financial secretary report no substitutes this month I listened to the tape from last month so out of budget we've got $881 125 out of escrow we've got $7 77326 for a total of $1,654 51 anybody have a motion think that a motion a second I guess all in favor I'll probably I'm going to try to steer it for all right meeting minutes we have the meeting minutes from August 14th that was all delivered to everybody anybody have any comments about them do we have a motion motion second all in favor okay any new business to discuss no there's not there's just kind of some ongoing with all the applications but I don't think tonight theight discussive because we're listen to many people but be the addition of the one yeah so we had talked about that a couple of meetings ago about the potential of having to add something so at some point I don't know when we're going to have that conversation but um we probably need to discuss it soon I need something that works for everybody anybody have any thoughts on that is that a special meeting or have to be we just have how many applications like nine or something just keep coming in um somebody has decided to leave us but um to make it even more complicated 10 applications and they're not they're not fences or sheds there some yeah we so we're going to have to maybe we just do it offline but I'll have to figure out how to how to determine that meetings yeah at least for a month or two I have a program that I can use that can create a link where it offers different time blocks and instead of everyone doing a reply all email I can I can I can I can't it you block off which you can and then it gives you the consensus of what the best we should do that do you mind taking a lead on that a problem all right great we're going to do that anything else in terms of new business I'm just going to call it a doodle pole um any old business Communications y uh we do have a resolution though this is a resolution involving application by George gladman BL 20688 oal Road at the August meeting the board approved a far variance to permit the construction of a cover over an existing patio here adman actually reached out the beginning of this week and just said he'd like to see the resolution to make sure that we're on the same page so that was sent over to him and I got no theal so I guess we're on the same page yeah it would it wouldn't matter if he didn't have any comments back to us by today so uh anything specific you want to remind us about on that or he had a few things he had to uh well there were some conditions yeah um let me just find the ones that were most relevant um The Patio area should only be covered may not be primally enclosed you have no permanent walls although a tractable screen is permitted um additional floor to be covered in the patio shall not exce 620 ft those are the most relevant condition okay roll call CH maio yes Mr John yes Mr ell here uh mran yes Mr yes and that's okay that we only have four approvals on that that's fine because you had five votes at August okay this is just memorialization okie dokie all right applications so we're going to do s sir first I believe my understanding is the notices are in order um since this is a D4 variance Mr voice council members voice and misso are ineligible to participate and we will have we have a forum we have six members yes and as you we have six members yes he VAR you need five votes yes still want to proceed yeah we' like to proceed proceed present the application and see how it goes very good thank you chairman members of the board Dean Samos of Theo and Samos on behalf of the applicant Mr sang sir actually and his wife as well who's here uh and they are the owners of five Parker place the property is block 1302 lot 5.01 uh they used to reside in the home they unfortunately had a a fire which destroyed a large portion of the home requiring it to be reconstructed this happened back in believe November of 2022 and obviously they've been um displaced from their home unfortunately they've been treking their kids back and forth to kind of make maintain their normal life in school and they're hoping to uh get back to constructing this home their forever home and uh you know resuming back to normal life uh the home that was existing was uh already was previously uh 6,554 Square ft it had already uh exceeded the F requirement uh they are proposed closing a new home this is an unfortunate situation of a fire but to build kind of their uh ideal and optimal home for their home family they'll also be having their uh the in-laws move in because they're a little older they were here the last meeting but unfortunately um the husband had a call and unable to be here but they will be residing with them so they care for their parents uh the future home would be 7,167 Square ft for a floor area ratio of 22.6 one uh but reality is it's actually decre kind of decreasing in some sense the square footage or the sight line of the home on the side uh real shutout is uh being eliminated and the additions that are creating that additional square footage are really squaring off of the existing uh footprint which I think you'll see from the plan and the testimony really is kind of the Minimus additions but when you add it all up we're we are an exceedence of the F all right and I have our two witnesses uh are Mr uh zakone who's our licensed architect who will describe the building and then I have uh Mr Vince Jo Vince who's been actually filling in for Mr Mark Martins who had a conflict today on just some engineering that we have and also he's a professional planner to discuss the variance and I do have our my client here if the board has some questions see how the testimony go okay and just a quick question Diane how much time are we allocating for this said about an hour he knows that he you mentioned about an hour and a half but we'll try and be as we can get like an hour and hour and we're going to swear Mr also swearing the B engineer Mr scra gentlem SAR our firm the testimonial like the rec that Mr tone has SW is the applicant's architect he's been here before previously qualified in the field of architecture and B planner and B both thank you I'm sorry you said and Mr Zone has been here before you or someone under your employee had prepared the drawings you're fully familiar with the subject property the existing home and the proposed home that's cor okay and you have your uh drawings actually this is a separate okay the reference we're going to Mark something Mr yeah we're going to Mark uh we we have a copy of Mr Martin's U sighting site grading and drainage plan that the board has before it's uh dated March 1st 2024 with that's been colored if I can mark that A1 with today's dat so as Mr Samos had mentioned um this is a instruction that was uh experienced a fire uh two three years ago and uh walking through it uh I realized that the existing framing that it's currently in place is no longer viable and can be considered structurally viable so what it means is that we're going to have to demolish the structure incling the exterior down to the existing Foundation um we also mentioned that we're going to be keeping a majority of the foundation in place and utilizing the foundation but we are going to be making construction more simplified if we provide a squaring off of some of the areas that we are marking here in blue please note that the area in red is an existing one story structure that we you're going to demolish it's no longer going to be used so we're going to demolish that and in order to make that edge and that facade on a North elevation viable we're going to square off this appendage to make it part of Rec construction we're going to be doing the same thing in the rear yard we have an angle uh that is U kind of difficult to frame out so what we're doing is going to be adding a new exterior wall that is flush with the existing wall so that we can utilize simplified framing for that area uh also we're going to be as the board may know we're going to be adding a third car garage onto the structure and is going to be remedial minor Work Foundation wise in order to achieve that garage profile and so the the part that's being demolished is actually Mock and red yeah so that's certainly will add to the I guess appeal of it of of reducing uh the setback or actually increasing the setback from that and Visually it it it reduces the bulk image of the building from the uh U the street level Park Lan reduces the bulk makes it less linear and uh what compos Compact and and that addition in the front is kind of L kind of a minor visual increase or actually that well we're squaring off that corner instead of going in and out we're making a flush uh exterior wall on that North elevation and we're going to be doing framing that is not only utilizing the existing but New Foundation as well and there's also so I guess from the existing obviously we could see that we're not really use expanding much at all the the footprint of the home uh but there is an increase in the yes floor area can you describe what that's attributable to well in increase we're lining up the exterior rear elevations on a foundation uh that happens to be coinciding with the uh plan of the kitchen that's existing that's located in position and uh minor work where the second floor area is front foundation for the same reason we're going to make the foundation simplified anding simplified that and the proposed construction will comply with all applicable setback requirements absolutely and so from a volume standpoint uh um whether we have some of this livable space that we uh are you know calculate into the floor area ratio uh we could have basically a room that had a huge great room with the bed healing and we still have that cubic volume but satisfy the F technically exactly yes okay now this had a a component of that previously right the existing home I believe the um on the left side did it not more specific on that question no I think I think I'm sorry I think I'm thinking of it differently but um yeah I think we we uh did submit architectural plans previously we have a couple of spaces that have twostory spaces in a lobby area uh and that certainly does not add to the F that uh is we're here in front of the board this evening for that does add to the bul though it's the bulk a two-story space is going to add double the amount of bulk right wouldn't that well yeah story space okay if you could just uh maybe describe you have your your plan um mounted I do not have it mounted but maybe we can do something to mount it yes [Applause] yeah just so that the board can see it's the same submitted plan but not part of A1 I guess right well A1 is s plan side plan that was U kind of marked up with the colors this is this is the con plan Mark that as Mark as A2 yeah and what are we calling it uh it's just the architectural first FL plan first FL plan A2 shows the additional garage it shows Living Spaces prepared by Mr tone yes you can see that this plan is indicating all new construction of the perimeter the New Foundation as well as the existing Foundation that we utilize it we're squaring off in the northwest corner of the building and we are squaring off uh parts of the rear elevation um to uh ease the construction in that area and the I guess the part of the kitchen I think you were saying well the kitchen's in the rear okay we bumped that out and made that uh a projection uh uh at the rear elevation and it sort of breaks up the facade as you look at it so we have it's not it's not flat it's in ins and out that make it more interesting and that same type of device is being utilized and occurs on the existing front elevation orth Par Street and you would mentioned we're we're adding a third car garage they're they already have two cars and have children Coming of Age just directly driving and that's located in this area previously was I believe it was know what it was the can can maybe aest that let's go to A3 and A3 shows calling a call that A3 it is entitled a two is the first four second second four okay that makes sense obviously and then we have um uh two two story spaces unoccupied not built we have a master bedroom suite on the North side if you can relate to that and we have one to three bedrooms on the south elevation secondary means of regress there located in that corner as well as um a feature I'll call it a Monumental stare right off the entry going to the second floor can you point out is any part of that new space um from what was exist thing within the footprint well uh with the exception of that add-on on the North elevation all of that is existing space we are building over the garage for that third bedroom in that position so there wasn't any space above the garage before there was no space and you had the twostory spaces before yeah uh not on the original we have it we we have a on a second floor over the uh one of the bedrooms on the first floor we have a Terrace that is a feature so you have all in all uh our architectural drawing a the proposed call that 84 84 yes is the proposed front elevation West front elevation this is virtually following the existing foundation of the structure Rick facade and selected shingle Thunder Ro and just to give the board kind of the concept this area I guess I call it to the left facing the home that one story bump out that's eliminated that's that's [Music] correct maybe we have one or two more sheets so we have to a 12 is that a five is proposed East rear elevation propose what East Elevation and has rear that's a12 right drawing 8122 sheet 812 yes and you can see that there are certain elements here that um we want to add roof lines to over the garages um where we have a twostory space Dru structure we have um uh lots of glass to U appreciate the light coming through and uh you broke it up so that it's uh more appealing same materials face brick and selected shingle again from a kind of width of the house in the back is it remaining the same it's remaining the same see what else is here maybe [Applause] it AR working here got it than um side elevations A6 does it entitled proposed now North elevation and proposed South elevation this is the elevation for the three car garage and this is your North elevation that side elevation where previously we are um demolishing and removing that appendage that was there so we have a clean elevation on that side and steps at on grade in order to serve the basement Bel all right so just to kind of summarize the uh the existing or the additional square footage over what was existing uh is 6113 Square ft approximately correct plan and we're uh which was already a little over which ends up with a total of about 830 ft over what technical per it under door and just to go back to Mr Martin's color rendering there it is so it's an Essence attributable to the additional livable space that's um those colored areas and then also over the garage yes kitchen uh living space on the North elevation red reflects the demolition area and the blue is the additional adjustment that we need to make in order to accommodate the third very good right one one other thing actually there was and in terms of calculating the um the F there was on the drawing here a uh 400 square foot or reference to a 400 square foot accessory building the applicant is willing to reduce it to 150 square ft that's allowed or eliminate it in total what is the building sorry what's the accessory building it was going to be like a shed I believe and shed Mr Zabo accurately pointed out that any accessory structure over 150 square ft counts towards the f existing or is that you're proposing that you're going to do that no that was originally thought of but is no longer being considered yeah not only does it add to the uh but also there is in my opinion a substantial adjustment in the grade know to have access to it from the driveway and from the rear yard so it's uh so if you eliminate that or reduce it down to 150 square ft what would that do to the overage on the square footage actually if I I that brings us to the calculations we're discussing Mr Zeo like I said accurately stated that it would have added another 4 it's 8:30 with that no no no just without it it would have been 12:30 with that oh so I just want to point out that Mr Z was correct and we're going to eliminate 150 is included and that's it no you no basically 15 15 is exempt and does not get calculated into the f if you have a 400t structure you have 250 in yeah it gets it gets yeah okay so so the number include the uh the um the shed we we need to flag that now because when the applicant should they get approval and that's up to the board goes to get a building permit for that shed it's be right back okay yeah deal reduce the L correct or or eliminated but we we agree that no shed over 50 square ft will be uh [Applause] constructed okay and again I we had noted that we meet all the other building setbacks same thing for lot coverage uh maximum coverage lot coverage height everything else is com we need to know other respect and I think if we're not if I'm not mistaken the lot depth is not yeah there was a reference to that's that's correct just so that right for for the record what's happening is because the entire structure was damaged by fire uh they lose all the pat that's the non-conforming rights associated with that property which would include the lot Dimensions as well so obviously the technical application of the code you know it is what it is um the applicant is going to be unable to to do anything about that but we have to recognize it and and memorialize it that includes lot depth and correct it's the lot depth that should be 175 um and I believe that they have 130 it's in my report I would think again this lot was again being a lot 5.01 under the S was created via subdivision so that was I think that lot depth was granted with that prior approval obviously I understand orally constr it's a fair point that's a fair point the um app the board can take notice of that okay question if the board has any questions of mrone I have a quick question um the stories is it two and a half stories or is it a three story house well we have um we do have an attic and the height is indicated and we are within the height that's committ is it an occupied the height is it's not an occupied it sorry the height is permitted but just the stories I think it's a I would think it's a three story only because it's a 9t high ceiling I think the code says 7 ft so I just I don't know if that's a little technicality but I don't know if that needs to be updated on the drawing will it have a floor or will it be just Rafters we'll leave it have a floor okay the floor the subfloor as for the structure of the ceilings above okay [Applause] and then my second question had to do with the elevator I'm not sure if you mentioned that before does that elevator have any projection over the roof line like a bulk head or it's a residential type elevator we have talked about it as being uh sort of like a glass enclosed elevator nice feature it helps when uh people at home are somewhat disabled and has it's great accessibility it's yes the machine for that is located where within the attic is within it and I would have to defer to the manufacturer as to where they wish to put the Machinery okay thank you that's all I had we want to start down at the end we'll do that are you done with your testimony yes okay Tom just a couple things and some of these might be better answered by the engineer but I'll just throw them out there and then they can decide who would be best to answer the question um we mentioned the existing non-conforming lot depth I just want to highlight that again because it is a far request and when the lot is less deep I think the visual impact is then greater not really my expertise but just something for the board to think about um was there any thought given to combining the circular driveway and the sideload garage so that you didn't have to have three curb Cuts I think that also adds to the the large massive look of the overall development that you have three curb cuts on a residential lot that's only you know a couple hundred feet wide yeah I think that um the the circular Drive in the front is existing so that's maintained and certainly the new driveway for the garages is a required space and that's you're right is be curb in order to re eliminate that one curve cut in my opinion you'd have to have access from that circular drive and make a hard turn into that garage and that might be a little bit of a hardship well that's my point I don't think it is a hardship I think there's plenty of room there I mean your your backup area is over 50 ft deep um and it's not a major issue in my opinion but would it lessen the impact on the streetcape somewhat by eliminating the third curb cut yes but that's for you to consider um with regard to the basement entry on a North elevation I believe yeah I mean our height measurement goes from lowest finished grade and I know this is a bit of a unique situation but if you've got a basement entry that's open even though it's a set of stairs or aren't you measuring your building height from there from the point below the basement floor where you're walking in our height definition is average natural grade so the pre-existing preconstruction average grade around the perimeter to the highest point and from the lowest finish grade to the highest point think finish grade is at the low level of the spare would be at the basement entry If This Were a walk out basement clearly that would be the case the fact that it's it's in a very defined location within a wal off area that's a set of stairs I'm not sure that that's the right way to interpret it but I think it requires interpretation otherwise it would be another variant so how do we determine that Tom it's the proper way for us to determine that that would be it's a pretty significant issue if that's the case I think it is an interpretation um all the definition says is lowest finished grade probably either inferred or in included in the definition is that that is at along the perimeter of the foundation so in this case you do have a point that is you know 910 ft lower than probably where they're measuring from even if that area lowest finished grade is of such a minor percentage Yeah it's just not addressed in the definition so I I think the board would need to address that [Applause] somehow my interpretation would be that it's not a walk out basement and from a fire standpoint it's a mean of egress and I'd rather interpret it as that and and lightning doesn't strike twice hopefully so I will interpret it as to have it from the grade at the top of the stairs not the bottom of the stairs yeah I'm not saying what they're asking for is is a bad thing I'm just saying that someone could interpret it as a variance and we should address that somehow If This Were an old school Bill Cod door for example and it was covered we measure from the outside right because it's covered this is not covered it's open to the air so should you be measuring from that point I'm I'm it out there how so back to my question before so what's the process to getting that interpreted like how how would we do that have we had any prior applications where this issue was implicated I've had some in my not even application I don't know know we've had any I don't remember I don't either I've had it interpreted both ways actually in my career adding a bill code door to the stays proposed would that interpretation change from grade even though yes it's structurally we have to clear the Headroom the St going down yeah I think it's because the area that you're walking down is not the lowest point so the the area that's covered could be the lowest point that would create a variance issue for height uh and I'm not suggesting that's necessary I don't want it to look ridiculous in order to eliminate what may or may not be a variance I I just think we need to address it and we can come back to that I have one other comment which was in a memo I sent or email I sent a while ago in May um about the storm water management um the applicant is collecting the new roof area into two seage pits that's all good um I would just like to see a comparison of what was being collected previously as compared to what is being collected now so that we can show that what you're the storage you're providing is more than the net increase the calculations just show the net increase in impervious area it doesn't talk about the impervious area that was previously being collected versus what is now being collected so for example if it was all being collected before including the patios and the driveway and now you're just collecting the roof even though you're collecting in the net difference in area you're not collecting the net difference in area that was previously being collected does that sense email of May 20th believe I made that way more complicated than it needed to be sense to MEK Tom's email one okay agreed fin me ask like if the what's proposed is sufficient or appropriate for this size development would that not well basically what our ordinance says is it's based on the net new impervious area I have always interpreted that as um especially when you're doing redevelopments that you have to take into account what was being collected before so if if you have an older house where no no roof area was being collected the the roof leaders were just splashing on the ground and you're adding an addition clearly you only have to collect that addition because nothing was being collected before if you had a relatively modern house where everything was being collected prior um now you're going to change that and only collect the addition in my opinion you don't meet the net impervious area requirement and in this particular case what I think because you have so much driveway so much patio I don't expect that those were being collected previously but if they were and now they're not again I don't think you meet the intent of the ordinance the engineer can address the issue of what was originally our our engineer collect that's why I'm raising it and I don't know that somebody's going to have that answer tonight necessarily and we know that in the CAC there is a storm water basin that I suspect is collecting currently some of the drainage in the front the driveways are so that's doing something in the um west elevation see that time yes and I I I agree that's probably the case I'm just looking for Testimony to confirm it okay that's all I had uh just a couple questions um in terms of your reiteration in designing the site to fit the property post fire were there any U designs or considerations given to a conforming structure in terms of f we we went through a number of generations and um not only program requirements but eases of um construction led us to this particular solution we did a number of schematics that uh were discussed and uh we felt that from a design as well as a programmatic space point of view what we have here is the best solution but there was no option no design that could suit those parameters in a conforming Manner and why this is important testimony for the board to build your case well we have a we have a plan floor plans first and second floor plans that illustrate uh program requirements and they also illustrate the construction extent that is on a perimeter and based on those two requirements uh this was our solution and what drove the requirements requirements I I think both aspects um have equal weight I mean the pr program as well as e of construction okay also the desires and that's what I'm the client drives the program the program and you designed it based on the client's program as well as ease of construction that's correct okay all right and yes there were um considerations and schemes generated that [Music] um did not extend beyond the F but um conflicted with the program requirements understood uh to Nikki's point on the the story uh we I reread the um definition of story and it's limited to seven so we have to consider the story so technically uh that should be added to the list of relief just to cover it so that we don't have an issue later uh should the board be in variance as a variance because what it states here under definition is um and I'll get to it no such are should be consider a story if if it has an average height of less than 7t any such area having an average height of less than 70 shall be considered a half story so there is a limitation so technically we would have to uh determine that that is in fact a story uh not by much two feet so you know the applicant has the option of trying to make that conform or if it you know or uh include that as or or include that as part of your request uh for relief for the two feet and what that does to the site and that's up to to you I'm just pointing it out again trying to avoid a comeback should the board be inclined to approve this we want to resolve these now absolutely uh should the board go that way but you know I wanted to support what Nikki observed because she's correct technically so thank you for that I have no nothing else Mr chairman Tom uh just just one question the elevator you have here that's only running between the first and second floor that's correct okay it's not going up to I was more concerned going down to the basement okay is that it yeah it's yeah I do have a few things um so in the event that we vote tonight I'm not sure that's going to happen but in the event that we vote tonight um we'd want to make sure that we add a few things to the resolution right making sure that the shed is either going to be eliminated or reduced to 150 square fet this issue about the uh attic floor right we would have to add that in as a variance or probably the smarter thing to do would be to reduce it to 7 ft or less and I would probably want to see some language in there where the client commits to the fact that they'll never occupy the space I'd want to make sure that all that happens um so that's a couple of things that just popped into my head um we do also need to resolve this lowest finished grade issue I don't know what the process is for that b and and and maybe it's something that you can get back to us with maybe it's get an interpret and get back to us with that because um it's it's a fair question um it's a technicality but we still need to be able to at least address it because that could set precedent for future applications there is a dilemma in terms of it also serving as a means of eess for the lower level the basement right and that's understood but it's not a required means of now granted I know they went through a fire respect that completely um but it's not a required by building code right so so that's just something to to consider so I from me Mr chair when you say get an interpretation I don't know what the process is for that I don't know what the process is but but Mr SC official not sure I don't know if it's owning official well I'll defer I'll defer to Mr Regan but the board uh acting as a board of adjustment can interpret the code as a result of this application and make make a decision based on the testimony we of course is this a precedent no there never a precedent no no no it would be based on the testimony and the particular conditions that are affecting the property in the application so it it's well again I I I defer to to Mr rean but I've seen boards even planning boards render their interpretations because you have to do your job and you got to figure out what what you're going to apply and not apply for better or worse and it's it's better to cover these things as Mr scrael is pointing out than to deal with them later um as an issue my only concern with that is that there's no member of the board who's qualified to make that interpretation so we would probably look to our professionals to advise us in terms of um the building height as a part of the natural grade and the grade that all the issues that Mr yeah I'll take a look at that issue at Mr scra okay and it just says the I'm reading the definition now the building height is the vertical distance measured from the lowest finished grade y has defined here in immediately adjacent to the building wall or from the average natural grade so you got to meet both of those criteria and and again um given the gring in the characteristics of the site it could very well be that you know a variance may be appropriate but that that's for the applicant to to present to the board right now my my gut feeling is that it should be added as as another layer of relief but but I'll take a look at that Mr we will so so Mr Mr Zabo is going to look at that part of it for us um okay so a couple of other things I I mentioned something while you were testifying about the two-story space so I think I hope you understand my point about that in addition to the 804 squ F feet in addition to the 250 square fet you also have two areas of the second floor that are two story spaces now that don't count as floor area but have added to the bulk of the building they didn't exist before so it's you didn't add 6 or 700 additional square feet but it's the equivalent of adding 6 or 700 Square fet so that that that's now we're talking about something that when you look at it from the street it looks like it's I don't know, 1500 square feet greater let's just remember that as part of what we're doing here we're making we're making something very big and that that leads to the question that was asked earlier by Mr Zabo which is um what are the hardships that you're encountering because you have to demonstrate a hardship um what is the public benefit of doing this I'm not seeing any of that here well again we haven't gotten to engineering and planning testimony and for the F that's not the standard right it's the Coventry Square standard uh as cited correctly in Mr zos Rand Rand and that uh just to show that it me can accommodate the problems associated with the but but but there's the other side of that coin is the negative Criterion that's what you're that's the negative criteria the of zoning corre so the negative criteria enumerated in my report talks about um the impact on the Zone plan which is the master plan and the zoning wordss and the neighborhood I think one way of satisfying negative criteria to show promotion of some of the purposes of the ML and njsa 40c 55 d-2 correct so your your uh planner is going to be prepared to have that conversation with us yes okay uh to the Chairman's Point um bear in mind that um the original front um elevation image that's there now does not reflect a bulk a two-story space that this is proposing so I don't get that bul feeling on the existing elevations but on the propose it's there but it's not brended in as such right of course yeah right and I understand that but it's but it's the equivalent of that when you when you view the building from the street the building is 6t taller 5 to 6 feet taller it's got another 15,600 ft of what's equivalent bulk it's it's a much much larger building much much larger building and that gets to Mr zabo's questions about the program I mean I understand what you said and I trust that was that it was correct that efforts were made to try to make it comply um you may want to reconsider that again we want to consider seeing if this building could be made to fit Within our F requirements that's just coming from me let's see what else talked about the sh curb Cuts also was concerned about uh Mr scrabble's comments about the curb Cuts I think it is worth exploring to see whether or not that that could be corrected Mr scrable feels it wasn't too much of a hardship so I would suggest taking a look at that and for now that's it that's all my comments I'll save my other comments for the [Applause] plan thank you thank you I I also have a concern about the curb cuts um what if the circular driveway is eliminated I I don't even know what the purpose of the circular driveway well it's it's it's existing and uh we didn't want to lose it however uh Council and I uh may have a solution uh with the owner commission and the engineer commission rather than three maybe there's a consideration for two okay cuz I just wanted you bringing in all sorts of demolition equipment I'm not a demolition guy there don't know why you can't just you know shovel it up and put a dumpster and eliminate the two curb cuts and you know that that is you there so if you want to take a look at that and then number two along the uh the back of the house I know you said you're putting the little bump outs for aesthetic views to me the only people it's going to be aesthetically pleasing to would be the occupants of the house um unless they invite me over for a pool party but then um I wouldn't be there what if you just square that off does that drop the F tremendously I mean can you get those calculations back for next meeting well we we again if that's the case then we need to revisit not but also program I understand what when you say which part are you I think that's back yeah yeah the back right where he was just dra just go straight across yeah to the garage we we eliminate those ins and outs that make it the elevation interesting however all right right yeah again I understand it but that's when we're talking bump outs and who it's appealing to it's can say that about every house right like but they're not going for variances that's it questions Micky um I do have one more I know I took jumped in earlier um just want to ask the F does that include the attic area no it does not okay that's consistent with the definition of floor area as long as it's non as long as it's not habitable it is it does not get count okay because it says non inhabitable in our ordinance just little typo there but am thank you I just wanted to confirm that uh in connection to the arig area actually I had few questions but most were you know uh answered already why you have one 2 3 four five six windows for the attic area on the west elevation probably the architect like that look and that's only like the look yeah just the only the west elevation right I don't see anything on the other elevation get like natural lights you know take a look at the plan again I would say probably matching the windows on the second floor with the doggy d up on the roof so Vick and you're saying it's not in the rear it's only in the front yeah the front elevation which is the the west elevation not shown on 812 a a11 it's not shown on a12 which is the east elev or the North and South elevation that's 8T yeah we uh certainly the rest elevation if you want tol windows and express the entrance I think personally think that's a it's a very compatible elevation if I look at the East Elevation we have Windows that uh reflect the functions inside uh we are expressing uh windows that are uh represented two story spaces on a one area we're talking Aesthetics here this is a single understand the concern right we a nine foot floor yeah finished and it's got windows in it you would understand why we would be concerned about that and we have Windows only on the attic level only on the the front or yes just the front yeah this is west elevation right stipulate that it's not intended to habitable and we can make it 7 ft too not inhabitable that would change the notable yeah so you would make it s I'm not saying saying that would change the the elevations of the whole building architect I think he can come it's 9 ft is that what you're saying I have a followup yes he is sorry sorry windows are there vertical wind windows or they they slant it they go with vertical you're referencing the attic yes the attic they're vertical so those Dormers come out there is a dorm Dormers come out on that for yes anything else I'm good what portion of the 830 sare ft is comprised of the the garage the third garage uh I think the entire garage is facted into that uh requirement for f as it I think the order says that it exceeds uh two cars and 400 square F feet you're allowed two car garage 400 square ft could be Exempted right and we went through this with other applications so because it's a three card attached and you can't the whole the additional square footage of that third car is it was accurately right so if you left it as a two-car garage you eliminate 650 sare ft of f no you eliminate the whole number right correct yeah yes no I thought the four the first 400 doesn't count it's exempt except garages and I I had that se once you go over the four then you include it all that's my point that's so it's a big difference that's how we interpret that yes okay interesting it's worth as long right right as long as we're on this under the definition section um I'll get right to it except is provided here and below the computation of Flor ratio does not include basement sellers garage garages Bren with maximum capacity of two cars not exceeding an area of 400 square fet whether attached or detached well here's the catch that are or at below basement level is it at or below basement level it's upgrade then it counts all right basically what they're talking about are garages that go under right we tried yeah it's slightly above it's 3et above basement so if it was below then it would not count [Music] correct would [Applause] anything else uh the only other question is with regards to the depth what's what's uh behind this building question sorry bra with with regards to the uh to the depth what's behind this building what AR good question all right that's again we would discuss that with the planner but uh the way this property is loated it's you know Parker is that short um culdesac and behind it is the the Foxwoods that's the that was the development as well we have an area he know yeah at the end of the cuac oh he had Nick Pap's house then you have Parker and it used to be cavell's house see he knows with the big stone walls so cavell's side property is the proper line for the backyard backyard of this property okay that's all our historian Arch okay anybody else on the board have any questions going to open the meeting to the public uh for questions only to the architect anybody make a motion motion second all in favor I I okay anybody from the public have any questions for the architect regarding his uh testimony thank you thanks for finishing you retire seeing none motion to close all in favor I all righty so I don't know what you want to do Dean if we want to start the planning because we're we're in yeah we're in deep now all right what I yeah we I'm not I think we started around 7:30 keep take yeah so I would like to have uh Mr Vince come up okay I think again we'll go through some of the answered the engineering question Dr curb cut he's engineer right yeah he's the engineer and also the Planner yeah okay he's going to do both engineering and planning correct yeah that won't be you have any exhibits before we swear this board will Ser yeah he's going to use that and then I believe I have an aerial photograph that I will it's Mark that as we were up to 87 is next [Applause] What's the title of A7 being A7 is a I'm prepared aerial photograph Google dated say 2024 I think it just shows the property in the surrounding area anything else aside from A7 um yeah I got a pH exhibit A8 photo boards or photo one exhibit are multiple yeah there's multiple photographs so it's one exhibit with multiple photographs all right that's yes so this is a a second more um uh zoomed in areial so second aial photograph uh we'll just make that A9 and looks like you have copies for the board yes great [Music] it's such a good t a good [Applause] thank you that's nine well problem it's not as you swear or affirm their testimony give yes for the for please last name Joseph Vince v i n c we can qualify Mr Vince as a professional engineer planner I've seen him in other local locals and I think we don't need any offal testimony great thank you Mr time all right uh Vince we start first with the engineering you're a li professional engineer yes all right you're you didn't prepare the plans Mr Martin who's the applicant uh engineer prepared the plans he did yes and but again as part of the project team you're familiar with the plan and the uh yes I reviewed the plans I made a site visit I reviewed the ordinances and uh I discussed the project with Mr Martins so if you could I guess first let's talk about the U the driveway and the curb Cuts uh do you see it as a feasible uh opportunity to combine maybe combine those two curb cuts into one if it's reoriented a bit uh yeah potentially um basically uh what's being proposed is um that the little sight improvements at all um the house was damaged by a fire it is an oversized lot in the r25 zone um the lot is fully conforming to the Zone except for the lot depth whereas there's only 130 ft existing and 175 ft is proposed um the existing uh house that burned down um it is uh below a lot of the uh uh requirements of the Zone um it's at about 145% where 20% is permitted for lock coverage uh improved lot coverage it's currently at 34% where uh 40% is allowed and the floor area ratio is at about 20.7% where 20% is allowed um the lot the the current development is also under in um terms of the uh setbacks the front yard setback is about 40.4 ft where 40 is required uh the depth is at about 44t where 40 ft is required and in terms of the sidey yard each side yard is permitted to be 10 ft uh 20 21 ft exist on the uh Northerly side and about um 86 1/2 ft uh ex this on the southernly side and the combined side yard the requirements 35 ft and about 107 exist uh the proposal really is to try to rebuild the house that was there uh with some slight modifications to the footprint itself um we weren't really trying to uh do any extensive grading or any real sight improvements um really what was being proposed was to try to maintain that existing driveway the existing curb Cuts uh the existing driveway footprint even on the southernly side uh is more or less in the same exact location as where it existed today uh there was just some slight grading being redone to uh try to accommodate the new garage floor elevation and at the rear the uh the patio is being constructed slightly larger than uh what was there um but there other any grading that was being proposed is really just uh daylight grading to accommodate the uh the driveway but as far as sight improvements uh very little proposed uh there was a question about the storm water management that's being proposed um currently I did not notice any uh drains or inlets on the site when I did make my site visit I do believe that the existing roof leaders went underground but I'm not sure where they went uh however the applicant uh Mr Martins did propose 2,000g seepage pits uh the capacity of those seage pit is just about 6,500 gallons um the calculations were B based on the increase where a required storage amount of 500 Gall was required however 6,500 Gall is being proposed um while I was listening in the audience I did uh calculate that backwards and um the entire house the entire roof area 2in rainfall will be able to be stored in those pits so um I would say based on my observations on the site it is at least equal to what's there or greater depending on where those existing roof d go um but the entire house is able to be stored in the pitch for a 2- in rainfall um I'm sure if Mr scrael required something else um I believe that the applicant would be willing to work with Mr scrable um that's really it in terms of The Proposal uh as far as the house footprint itself uh we are proposing a uh about a 200 square foot increase in the footprint 211 Square ft um real purpose of it was uh there is the this wing on the Northerly side of the house in red uh that is proposed to be removed um and we were narrowing up the footprint uh and then as you heard from The Architects there was a uh in the blue area as highlights the expansion area uh there were a few to more or less try to square off the house and uh create some more usable space inside uh you could see like the one in the rear there's an angle um you know in terms of interior space planting it's not really efficient and um they were trying to make the interior more modern I know there's this minor increase uh area for to accommodate a three-car garage currently there's a two-car garage um and uh we are proposing to uh make it three so as far as the engineering I I think that's really uh the plan in a nutshell unless there's really questions as to what's being proposed um could the circular Drive be a common ated maybe I guess but um I guess if we look at the photographs and the aerial um I think in my opinion it really is a planner that it really wouldn't serve a huge benefit to the community given uh the amount of houses on Parker Place and what's really around so if we look at the photographs uh the first photograph in the top left corner you can see a view of the existing house uh that is the house that's there now it's a uh a brick house um and it has some features on the corners uh with a roof and um you can see the the PA driveway um the photograph to the right of it you can see the garage so that's the other curb cut you can see the inlet so it's almost those are the two curb Cuts side by side the bottom left is the left side of the house you can see there the uh the wing that we're proposing to remove um and then um the photograph at the bottom right that's looking uh South easterly uh along the adjacent property line uh you can see the grade drops off significantly there just just for Iden purposes you're looking at and referring to what we marked as exhibit A8 right I'll take your word for it I I marked that a um see what while you were talking about the Cur just to look at the aerial exhibit that we I I marked as n three curve Cuts I was trying to understand currently exist right yes that's what I that's what I saw too yeah it looked like they already exist yes they currently exist that's why you could see um in the gray on the plan that's existing and there's no there's no change there the only real change to the driveway in fact the uh the front of the driveway on the uh the southernly most curb cut that was the remain too and right where it's hatched is really where it was only a portion of the driveway that was proposed to be regraded um I'll get into a little with the planning later I know it's a personal hardship but it the house did burn down in a fire so you know we trying to uh kind of work with what's here and um you know avoid uh any real unnecessary uh um changes um so you could see here on the area what's actually on the street we do have a uh a house to the um the North and then where uh the southernway house on the cue saac there is a house to the South uh right just uh right down exactly down the end of the um the cue saac and there's a little bit of vegetation between those two houses and due to the uh shape of the property they they have these larger side yards because they're the pie-shaped locks um and then across the street you could see that there's one house that fronts on Parker place and you know it's again uh right there but you can see the regular shape of the Lots how large the sidey yards are and then there's a house on the Northerly side and that house actually fronts on Central Avenue um as terms of the size of the house I would say that the footprint that's there today when you you look from the sky that's more or less what's going to be there uh under this proposed condition you can see the wing that's being removed is that darker box uh but the rest of the house in terms of the footprint itself uh getting back to the photographs you can just see the rest of the property um this is looking around you it's kind of self-explanatory you can see the patio area the driveway to the existing garage again it's it's going to kind of look the same where you see that the door next to the two garages it's just going to be another garage Bay um on page three I think what's notable on here is you see this white vinyl fence that's an existing vinyl fence that exists along the rear property line that's proposed to remain and then on the opposite side of it is very large evergreen trees which screen it and then the grade drops down very significantly to the rear so uh those trees are on the other side and then back behind it is part of the condominium property you can see back on the aerial uh it's a vacant area wooded area that's um not develop [Applause] while you're discussing the um the differences and the the area again Kramer did bring up a good point the with adding that third garage right we now lose that exemption of the 400 square ft and we now count the entirety of the three call garage right so which is looking at it which is approximately 600 square ft um I think we only took a 400t credit but we lose that we lose that counted the whole 600 because we have we count it but yeah we were proposing a 613 sqt uh increase in the floor area but we're not you don't add in the whole garage we would add 400 to that because we only took a credit of the 400 not the entire that's different than what we discussed before yeah that's not how the boards interpreted it so we would want to see a calculation of how the square footage is done somebody could prepare that for us yeah well there's a table on the plan it could it could be updated we could update [Applause] that so I mean in terms of we'll get the numbers but what numbers aside of what's really being proposed here is uh we're proposing to eliminate this Wing we're proposing to square the house off um and then from a planning perspective um we are seeking a uh floor area ratio variance uh appears that we're seeking a height variance for a number of stories uh it's questionable as to whether or not the um there is a uh height variance because of the way the um the basement entrance is calculated uh and then I guess the procedure for interpreting that is the board can literally read the definition or hear the definition and then take a vote and vote okay how is a calculator then that would be the procedure um acting as a zoning board um but I do read it and it's kind of unclear cu the vertical distance measured from the lowest finished grade is defined here in immediately station the building wall or from the average natural grade is defin here into the highest point of the roof of any build it doesn't really say it gives you an or so I guess that's uh for the board to wrestle with but um when you read the natural grade you know it's really around the perimeter of the building I would I would say that what's being proposed here is sort of like a window well it's an artificial entrance into a basement and it's at a very wellow Point probably a 4x4 Landing that's at that lowest point uh it's in the rear yard well in the side yard but towards the rear um it's fully enclosed if you look at it from the street you would never see it you're just going to see the ground and and you go down so um I I would think you know the most regardless of how the board uh votes to interpret it I would think that that wasn't really the intent of the ordinance I think it was more of a walk out basement or some other sort of situation whereas um you know if you had a window well in any other residence then you're going to now you're going to start counting the building height based on every window well and uh is it intended for the basement to be finished how big does it have to be before I believe the basement is actually I don't know no at this time the basement is problem what we getting into this time what it is um cuz you going make the argument now what we're hearing is it's a four story building which is silly right I mean that's right I uh doesn't make any sense but on the other hand we well the basement's underground though right but based on the interpretation we heard before we we we need to determine whether it counts or not yeah I mean you know and I'm not just saying this because I'm here for this application I don't believe that that was the intent of the ordinance no but but it's a but it's a fair point and and it only exacerbates the size of the building already I get it so um so then uh as terms of the height regarding the attic uh I do agree that that would count as a story so we would go from a two and a half story to a three story um however in terms of the the feet uh we do meet the ordinance in terms of feet um but if that became a story which one if that if here's my question this is for everybody if that became a third story and we got a variance for that then wouldn't that technically count as floor area good question I would agree with that and by the way the ordinance says less than seven because seven feet s feet is the threshold I believe under the international building code for habitable space so de facto this is habitable space whether they stipulate it won't or not technically but it's an average area correct yeah I mean if you have a sloping Grove right you can you take the areas that are 7t within that are so maybe it's not the entire footprint but it's still going to add something for the applicant to that and determine but I think let's say you just had a peaked roof that went from nine to zero your average is four and a half yeah right the the other the other way we that I've seen it handled in codes in build in zoning codes is certain percentage of the the attic cannot exceed that seven that seven foot that takes into account that that Peak so if there's an excess it gets counted if not then not right if not it doesn't but that's not how our code is written no it is not like that it would be just easier to deal with it in correct okay what about non-habitable areas that doesn't count right it doesn't but the problem is that if it counts as a story and it's over s feet we don't know well I did uh confirm with the architect uh the stairs there are no stairs proposed to the attic area it's a pull down it's a ladder okay so that um no propos no no stairs yet well I would think we could probably stipulate that the the resolution yeah certainly becomes an Enforcement issue at that point we can have the architect just drop at this 6' 11 in you could really really resolve a lot of problems resolve a lot of problems think this application is more complicated than it needs to be yes yeah it really is it really do size the square footage the the height of the building um all right yes all right anything else Mr Vin well I need go through uh the planning stuff so as far as the floor area ratio um we are exceeding the floor area ratio um I do believe that that variance could be granted uh we are subject to the um the stand to show that uh the any problems associated with the increased FL area ratio um are dealt with on the property uh in this particular case I don't see excuse me are we getting into planning testimony at this point okay can we do both at the same time sure of course you can I'm just we're segueing I just want to make sure I thought they were going to adjourn but that's fine so how much longer do you think you'd be five minutes okay I'm going to hold you to that no so uh so the standard is to show that the the site can uh accommodate any problems associated with the increased flare area ratio in this particular case uh I really don't see any problems with it um I think one thing to note is that the existing house was a seven bedroom house it's going down to a five-bedroom house so the uh the number of uh size of the family that it can accommodate uh is being reduced um we are adding a but we're adding a lot more square footage and a lot more bulk a lot more building volume well uh we are are um we are reducing the width of the home so I think from the street the house is going to appear to be narrower um much taller well it it is a 2 and 1 half story house now it is going to increase in height by uh 6 ft 6 fet um that's the peak um it's still within the height limitations it is within the height limitations of the Zone um as far as uh we are in adding a third car garage so we are uh increasing the amount of parking within the uh home and the courts have found that that is a benefit um to have uh garages uh versus cars parked outside um we are again reducing the bedrooms um I think the Aesthetics of this home even though uh it is being increased in height when you look at the existing facade versus the proposed facade uh I think that there's a lot of architectural features that are making the home more interesting such as um well I know there's a comment about the windows in the Attic but I do think that that is a benefit versus the uh the roof that's there uh they're putting some Curves in with the roof lines uh they've added some trim and variations in the brick so as a whole I do feel that this house is a uh more attractive looking house than the one that's there um so that would be a uh a benefit advancing the purpose of the missal land use law and then in terms of the problems too getting back to the rest of the Z Zone uh we're substantially less than what the Zone allows so um again we're allowed a coverage of 20% we're only at 15.2 uh the improved lock coverage is allowed to be 40% the house is only at 35.4 so it's substantially less uh the floor area ratio is increased over uh but the front dep where are the front yard we're maintaining what was there so there would be uh little impact from the street terms of that uh the rear depth we 2T about greater than what's required the side yards 10 FTS allowed we're at 35 and 86 uh so we're substantially larger from there to the sidey yards the neighbor's house is over on the uh end of Parker CL so there's a very large distance um this house drops off so when you're here in this yard you can't even see this house you you stand here you're almost looking at that roof so I don't think and we're actually increasing the side yard setback to that home so I don't see any uh detriment to that neighbor at all uh to the rear of us is vacant land associated with a condo and uh we are exceeding that setback so um I don't I don't think that there are any problems on this site due to the result of the increased floor area ratio um and I think for the reasons I said too uh regarding the setbacks I think that goes to the negative criteria is whether there's a substantial detriment to the public good again I don't see1 because we've exceeded by far uh the Zone requirements except for that floor area ratio um as far as the uh intent of the goal of the master plan um I don't see any substantial detriment I did read your master plan 2016 and uh I didn't see that we were really in any substantial conflict with the goals of the master plan um and as far as the ordinance um I think that we are meeting the general intent of the ordinance because um yes we're over the floor area ratio but we are meeting all the setbacks and all the other requirements of his Zone um except for the height which uh um you know I I think that to with the height I know uh the board is talking want the height reduced used but I think by reducing that height you're also going to change the scale of uh the facade from the front because the height of the other floors um that that extra distance in the Attic is uh kind of making the architectural look at that house and that is the style of that house um and I I think for those reasons I think we've satisfied the uh the requirements of the Flor area ratio variants uh regarding the problems um do think we've satisfied the negative criteria that there's no substantial detriments here I think we have furthered purposes of the municipal land use law um we we're creating a visual desirable visual environment um we've uh providing adequate airl open space we're well under the setback requirements um we're meeting the population densities of fully conforming residential use um so I think that we've uh satisfied the burden and um the Varian is be granted and just kind of just to add a little bit in terms of looking at A7 which is the other aerial photograph right again this is far per place that it only has two three five homes on it little short CAC yeah as you mentioned directly to the rear is the one condominium complex right yeah I I I know we're exceeding the height and we're exceeding the floor there's really nothing around here there's the way we are in the culdesac on the left page of exhibit A8 our uh second to last page the two houses at the bottom those are the houses across the street and I think we look like them that the architectural uh look of this house is very compatible with the neighborhood and I I think it's one of those things that if you drove up Parker Place after this house is built it it's not going to really look out of scale it it meets the height requirement in terms of the height itself you've made the building narrower most of the additions into the rear there's nothing behind us no one there's a fence there there's big Evergreens nobody's going to see this um and I really do think it's uh it's not going to be a big intrusion into this neighborh um and I know again I it's a personal hardship for in terms of we're trying to reuse a lot of this this foundation and but you know the house burned down there's obviously expenses with rebuilding it they're trying to use the foundation trying to modify it and work with what's there uh the best that they really can um so to go and you know to really move these walls in uh they'd have to build New Foundations and they're they're going to incur more expense it's and again it's a personal thing but they did have a uh an unfortunate circumstance that they're trying to you know trying to rebuild the home with in basically the same foot print and the same garage or same driveways and work with what they can that's still there and save it and just to touch on uh we talked about it briefly at the opening about the lot with um obviously oh the dep yeah it's a lot pre-existing non-conforming condition and um which one sorry the lot yeah shallow lot that was but that would have to be approved again they have to be added to the I don't again I I think from a legal standpoint these Lots were created if you look at uh the tax list it's lot lot 1302 which with lot 5 5.01 5.02 four and 4.01 so that was a subdivision created that approved these lots for the resident that's not our real concern okay I'm not concerned yeah yeah I have no problem we have to look Mr Mr it was important to get that all on the record so that at some point down the road we know why a it wasn't an issue and be whether or not the board we're just trying to address it right and that's why it's it's good to have it on the record that's all yeah all right so you more than five minutes but anything else any other testimony I think well I think we'd like to be able to maybe hear the questions of uh well we'll try to do it quickly because we're we're deep into this now we want to give uh Colonial Manor the opportunity to present so let's just jump into it Tom yeah real quick the pictures are very helpful thank you so I'm good from a stor order perspective um just to clarify if you add the 400 foot back for the garage we're at 23.9% so is that the request say that again Tom I want to hear that we add the 400 square ft back for the garage that appears was taken out of their number they're at 23.9 not 22.6 for whatever it is so that's what we're asking for right 23.9 I just confirmed with the architect he only deducted 400 square ft from the proposed floor area so if you take that floor area 17 7167 67 + 400 that's 7567 ided 31689 23.9 2387 23.9 so that's the request I just want everybody to be aware of that right so we're going to need that resubmitted to us okay well I think I would just state that we'd amend the application uh to have that as the requested variance 23.9 okay right yes 7567 that's it for me John I just have a quick question um I'm looking at the aerial exhibit and I'm looking at that street Parker place and the homes that are there and the existing structure is shown there prior to the fire and it looks like it was already larger than the rest of the homes in the neighborhood uh and that was that's confirmed by your own calculations did you um in to put context to your requested F did you look at the fs of the homes on Parker Place as a comparison to to further illustrate how this fits into the neighborhood because f is a major issue it has been for years it's one that's been expressed in every master plan that I've read for the community so it's not just you know um that there's nothing around you there's a neighborhood there's a concern about MC Mansions I just want to know did you look at uh the fs for the the homes on Parker just to see how this fits in in relation not really honestly because um of the way it's calculated I can't really tell what's going on inside well basically we use tax dat find out what sare footage we use tax data it's and it's public property record cards it's public property record cards it's what I typically use but I do these no I I looked at it more just in terms of visually looking at at the house what this house how it looks with the other houses and then I know we're taking that Wing off and it's just kind of I I more or less just visually looked at the house how it fits in how it's there today how it looks with the other houses and um you we were we were going up a little but the other houses were you know two story two and a half story homes we don't we don't know how they compare to this home and what that impact of this house would be on those homes because they are they appear to be smaller so I I just think that that's something you might want to look into or something for the board to consider in analyzing this I mean I have no I take no exception to any of the other the testimony at all I mean you know proofs that have been presented are what the board would expect it's just up to the board now to to digest that and just my observation and anything else John no sir Tom I have nothing yeah my my just question goes back to what I had said before which I think you testified about but I'm just having a hard time understanding why the building couldn't be designed to a square footage that complied with f it's a big house yeah that's the kind of the kneejerk uh I mean they were already over so now are we asking to be further punished from surviving the fire to now reduce to build it small right right it could at least been designed to the size of the original has mid no no effort was done I understand I think you always when you have an opportunity and I won't call it blank slate because that's not what it is we we're dealing with the foundations we find an opportunity to make it optimal something we have requirements for a reason right we're trying to John describe it very well you understand the concerns right you can counter this in every in every Township you go to you understand um it's a concern at ours okay and and I haven't heard as as my as my friend Mr alesi said I haven't heard any concessions any agreement to concede on anything on the height of the building on the on the on the floor area on anything and so you know I I think if you're expecting a vote tonight I I don't think I think you should you should consider whether that's a good idea correct I think I'm gonna let's hear the rest of the comments and I think I'm goingon to ask for a very short okay uh break to speak to my client and then we'll wrap got it okay uh going back to my concern actually all your your pictures kind of prove my point the house directly across the street is a three car garage with you know a mirrored driveway and you have a picture of the front of across the street with no circular driveway I I I don't get the circular driveway I I I just don't understand it I don't get it I I want a better answer answer than Aesthetics I would like a better answer than Aesthetics and then building within the the footprint and you were saying you're trying to maintain and so we you know we're adding the blue and Council had said you know the reasons why again you work with this a little bit and say okay we'll take a look at going straight across instead of put in the back oh um I understand the left corner SC that off but yeah know come back with an answer and the third one the property behind them is not the condos it's the people that live on Central Avenue the big backyard yeah a big backyard look like a BX cour or something back there those were all the same lots that the council was contained to 501 502 they were all [Music] stuff Nikky it was just my question on the um the attic you know being a story I think it's you know it looks like a mcmansion which we are trying to avoid um I'd like to see you know if there's anything that can be done with the floor to ceiling height I think you have 12 ft on the first floor and 11 on the second so if that were to kind of you know be reduced to some equal proportionate scale you can reduce the size of the attic as well and try to get more in conformance with the f um that's it no questions have a quick one looking at the pictures [Music] ex8 uh the cut cut out in the curve if you combine the two there is a catch Basin there so you need to be aware of you can't do it yeah so so you try to solve one problem you may get into another that it that that it that's it nothing much to add uh I agree with many of the comments that have been made uh I think it is approaching the mcmansion if it's not already there thank you for saying all right let's open the meeting to the public we'll do that quickly motion second all in favor I anybody in the public have any questions for the engineer and planner both of them um regarding his testimony seeing none motion close second all in favor I all right Mr Stamos just one quick thing to comment and then I'm going to ask for a little short break in terms of the circular driveway I don't yeah there's there's no relief associated with our driveway it's there's no lot coverage or anything and I mean we're at the end of cesac so oh you just keep throwing Aesthetics at me so I just no no I'm just I'm understanding yeah like you're saying that it's not aesthetically pleasing I'm just I wasn't and the proof is across the street so double back CS all right so again if I may just unless it was two to three minutes to and we'll and then we'll why don't we all take a break then and then as soon as they're done assuming that they'll be done we will jump right into uh old pan Manor okay right chairman thank you for the opportunity uh we doly we heard the comments we would like the opportunity to revisit our plan maybe make some alterations that addresses some of the concerns and uh get to something that would be acceptable so I'm assuming you've taken copious notes right we've talked about the adakite talked about the this unresolved issue about the basement we talked about F in general but we also talked about making sure the calculations are clear for us so that we see them okay um we talked about the shed and there's probably a few other I know Mr Alie is really hot on the curb cut issue uh so um so we would ask yeah I think we're going to meet tomorrow to discuss this we again we were off from J June I believe it was so we would hope that we could be on for next month's meeting we'll submit within time I'll even submit directly to the to the board's professionals as well I I prefer digital I I prefer digital plan digital okay hang on what be the next available hearing n October 14th it says October 9th not 15th October 9th this application will continue to October 9 without notice okay Mr chairman I'm not here at that meeting but I don't think that yeah all right thank you very all right thank you Mr appreciate it and then um Diane I'm going to recuse myself but uh at the end of the meeting what's that Mr alessie is taking over this is a moment this occasion so we looking forward to it we have a minimum of five members minimum before we start the chairman has to wear a sport coat so maybe you want to I can do that he also has to wear shoes too he's Barefoot it's like with the title comes a certain amount of formality that's you think I want to wear this suit and then I just want us to at the end of the meeting if we can spend a couple more minutes on the uh potential of having the two meetings a month so we're gonna need to talk about that let's do it now I want to get these guys going do that she can reach out to everybody you're missing a lot of people chair I'll talk to [Music] okay welcome everybody good evening Mr chairman members of the board Matthew capisi on behalf of the applicant this is the continued application on behalf of the old toan Manor we were last before the board on August 14th of this year uh for essentially a brief session where we discuss some procedural concerns relative to the applicant's notice and the application cont contents uh Mr Levi pool who's seated behind will come up in a moment had uh made the board aware of some concerns he had relative to the contents of the notice and application we had a brief conversation with the board about whether uh the board found those comments to be meritorious or otherwise and out of abundance de caution the applicant opted to modif carry its application without taking any testimony modify its notice and application a which it has done and then proceed again this evening I did prepare a amended notice that went to a bit more in depth relative to our request for a modification of the condition relative to allowing outdoor ceremonies at the property um Mr Cole was of the opinion that if the board were to grant that relief or entertain a modification of that condition that a D1 variance would be triggered the applicant was of the opinion that such a variance would not be required but nonetheless out of abundance of caution we modify the notice to incorporate that additional variance should twofold the board entertain a modification of the condition and secondarily find that the allowance of the uh outdoor events triggered a D1 variance relief so that the board would have jurisdiction to make that variance Grant should have deemed necessary and similar edits were made to the application packet to incorporate the modified language in the notice other than that the were not any new submittal uh in the August meeting I had given a brief synopsis of the submittal we had made uh earlier in the year uh precisely on August 1st we had submitted revised engineering and architecture plans that really made just slight refinements based upon testimony provided to the board during the June 12th meeting as part of an earlier submission we had an acoustical engineering report that will be the topic of conversation at a later hearing not this evening and what was also filed in August was a traffic report from Burge talaki and who will be giving testimony this evening there was some slight modifications to the Landscaping plan as a result of the changes made to the engineering plan so we had a revised Landscaping plan provided in August again for discussion at a later evening a later hearing uh given the amount of time that we had anticipated being slotted tonight we just have three Witnesses Mr tuell who was seated to my right who's going to go through the revisions plan set that were noted in in the August submission Mr Lazarus our architect who in kind go through the revisions to his plans and then Verge tomaki will discuss his traffic report Mr Co I'm going to give him an opportunity just to enter renew his appearance yeah good evening members of the board thank you um I do want to enter my appearance um I do represent a uh a couple homeowners I I want to put their names on the record for the board to uh here it's Richard and Katherine rousa R AA located at 26 Dearborn Drive Brett and Christine Levy at 6 Karen Court Dennis and Christie long at 10 Dearborn Drive John Stephanie timoo at 20 Dearborn Drive uh we do represent I represent these uh these Property Owners they're objecting uh to this application and I'll just get to the point here the the Crux of what they're objecting to is what they believe is an expansion of a non-conforming use that does constitute a new use and that's where you know the D1 uh criteria in the question came up in that in that regards where we're bringing a indoor event facility outdoors and there have been a number of resolutions that this board has passed historically that reiterated that condition time and time again so we'll save that argument for a later day um but I'll uh just leave my appearance at that and thank you um if I can ask are there any issues with respect to the notice that Mr Capi Prov no we uh worked through that Mr kesi sent a copy to me I record yeah so we're we're agreeing that the notice was adequate the application was adequate as amended and uh we do appreciate the applicant for that what about the prior testimony I was provided a copy of the transcript i p reviewed that so um you know I I did reserve and will reserve the opportunity to call the applicant uh himself uh for a cross-examination but other than that I I did is there any issue with the documents that have been mocked into evidence previously no issue okay we have A1 A2 several others okay all right I I have a question so the only complaint if I could use that word from your clients is the ceremony noise uh I don't want to limit to that based upon the testimony that may be elicited today and a subsequent hearings um but that I I'm not going to again truncate their arguments and limit that to them based on what else is elicited but that is the majority of it and you know to be fully transparent to this board that's what the neighbors deal with it's the sound it's the outdoor ceremonies that started in 2019 during the pandemic when there was a legal construction of an outdoor patio and then the ultimate conducting of Ceremonies out there um which has been actively marketed and pushed out to the uh potential clients of of the applicant and it's you know their position that prior to the construction of the a these ceremonies didn't exist there was some noise spillage of course parties happen and people are loud um but it was not the con the comprehensive noise and the continu noise on every Friday Saturday Sunday that they've experienced uh since this expansion occur okay and the client Mr kzy is going to have later on a sound guy correct or whatever they're legally called I sound acoustical engineer acoustical engineer thank you it's like the concrete fil polls but no okay yes you know chairman that's that's really to drive to the point of that that's the biggest issue and again I don't want to limit my clients because we haven't heard the full Testament of what they're proposing um but I do recognize that the applicant has made a lot of efforts to alleviate light Village to alleviate certain things by providing additional um Landscaping barriers and buffers the problem is going to be the noise um in regardless of how much and will allow the testimony to take its place but I believe that regardless of how much work they put in to restrict that noise it's still going to be loud and still not permitted based on the past resolutions of this board going back almost 50 years now so okay well prior to the outdoor patio I don't know how long the man has been there back to edell but they didn't make noise so your clients kind of knew that when they moved in but as I said I have a 1985 ordinance where they went and applied to this board to have outdoor ceremonies and they were denied based upon the Imp in the impediment that it would put to the neighboring properties and agreed it was well cited and well flushed out by Bo and the reasons were well articulated that it's going to be a substantial detriment to their um enjoyment of their peace and the property for a non-conforming use understand agreed yeah thank you chairman Mr chairman if I can I'll right write to Mr tuell iFly been sworn and qualifi sworn he would sworn I believe I was yes yeah yeah add we had two exhibits from I think a want and two have any more exhibits from Mr T we have his revised plan set Mr ran this was filed with the board but if you'd like I don't think it's been marked though it has not been marked the only ones we marked June here we're going to call 85 I think is Mr toell 85 is the last Revis as of what date please uh July 22nd and how many sheets does that consist of seven sheets Mr devel can you take us through the revisions that you made to the plan set yes uh we uh with regard I I have a colorized version mounted here on the easel this evening and U we can mark that as uh this is the one we're marking as A5 as A5 okay and U so this is a colorized version of the plans that you have before you uh this is sheet three of seven it's the uh site and grading plan plan revised U July 22nd rision number nine uh going through the changes that we've made from the previous plan uh it involves u a uh an increase in the area of the U of the circular driveway where we essentially squared off the U the Northerly portion of it in order to accommodate uh two uh Ada handicap parking spaces in the uh Northwest uh Corner which would provide access to the uh uh to the front of of the building via a walkway uh the um the next area area that we next change that we made was that we added a walkway in front of the addition to the cocktail area uh the additional of the addition the proposed addition of 700 Square ft uh the board requested that we add a walkway U along the front of that uh addition the U we um made a minor change to the uh proposed um ceremony area in the rear so that it has the exact same offset from the property line that it has that currently that currently exists uh also as a request to U uh minimize uh any noise coming from the main ball Ballroom uh two vestibules were added at the Northern end of the building uh at the two existing uh doors that exit to the that portion uh out to the the area where the waterfall is located so there are now two vestibules U added uh to at that portion of the building and we shifted uh the walkway uh further that was previously there that we shifted that walkway um to be in front of the uh vesal areas um in in in conjunction um working with the traffic engineer and based on his recommendations we've also added a directional signage along the circular driveway to make uh vehicle movements uh as safe as safe as possible um and uh U lastly um we we have we that previously we we also revised the uh breakdown of coverage uh table to uh accom to account for the additional area uh of uh the circular driveway and lastly uh and is that we provided a updated drainage report uh which now has um because the uh drainage basically the newer storm water regulations uh basically turn the clock back 20 years and have you account for all impervious coverage that you've added to a site so now this uh development as proposed is classified as a major development by D regulations and our revised drainage report reflects that the modifications you made to the circular driveway the vest view locks the walkways and such the building coverage and impervious coverage numbers were updated to reflect those modifications yes they were thank you uh the Ada spaces can you just quickly discuss how a Ada Patron would park in that stall as far as the circulation Park and then entrance into the building sure the uh they would they would come in uh the C the circulation is counterclockwise uh in this in this configuration the uh as I indicated the parking spaces are located in this corner they would they would park they all there are van accessible spaces uh there's a common um drop drop area where the vehicles would uh discharge and they then they would get on right onto the walkway and then uh proceed to the entrance of uh the building this is only by the way in in those cases where valet parking would not be uh in effect normally during during an event where Valley parking would be used the a handicap person would be dropped off at the main entrance thank you Mr Tel I don't have any further questions Mr chairman do we do the public First St now board and professionals public all right uh Tom yeah I had submitted a memo email memo for the last meeting discussing the stormw management um I didn't get into it in a lot of detail the as Mr Tel mentioned um major development requirements are pretty significant um so that we can save that for a later day it doesn't affect um the variances that are being requested that's August 13th yes um I'll mark that later or now you can mark that now sure okay yeah one I think I think one of the comments in there that should be addressed now is the soil testing that's required um the applicat is proposing infiltration systems um the DP regs have specific testing that's required in order to support those types of systems so that should be done sooner rather than later so we know that what they're proposing is viable and then we can work at the details of the design later um the other item that I think needs to be addressed now from an engineering standpoint is the handicap accessible route um the handicap spaces are shown I think it's a reasonable spot I don't have a problem with that but you need more detail on the route from the spaces to the entrance to the building I think some of the slopes are a little bit too much for it to be considered a an accessible route so so that would need to be addressed nothing major it's not going to again affect the variant is being requested or in any material way the grading that's being proposed but there is more detail that needs to be provided and that's all I have for now okay thank you Tom John uh no no questions no questions Tom questions okay my concrete ballards ballards are they included on that for like safety precautions so they don't strike the building yes are there concrete Ballers opposite the Ada spaces Mr Dell you mean at at the rear of the Ada spaces no at the PTO cochet oh that has that's going to be engineered into the construction of the architect he'll handle that but his testimony prior was the column that will okay be part that will be structurally engineered to support a an impact that's cuz it's very expensive to fix a fire truck as it scrapes the side of the building right Mr Mayor okay Mr chairman can I say one more thing before you move on because I'll I'll forget it sorry I just noticed tonight the signs that are shown where the new walkway goes in front of the cocktail room it's only a 4ot walkway there and we're showing multiple signs I think we need to move that Mr tomakin will speak to the signage location and how it'll function okay it's it looks like it's right in the middle of a 4 foot walkway which is if there's a conflict there we'll resolve that sorry thank you no problem thanck you the only question I have is on the number of ada8 spaces I forget if there are spaces in the back but just want to confirm you're proposing 100 spaces total for parking correct so essentially what we're doing is replacing in kind there are two Ada stalls in the parking field in front of the building today that are going to be deleted as part of converting that area into the circular driveway so we're picking that those two spaces up in a modified location are there others in the back there are two in the rear there are two in the rear thanks for confirming thank you question John to the public the council for the objector and then anyone else oh um we have a motion to open the meeting to the public for any questions concerning this testimony second motion second John made motion all favor I I have no questions for Mr thank you a gentleman in the back had questions please CL state your name uh Sebastian Bon at 12 Moser Place uh directly behind fildan Manor I have a question for the attorney on his side I'm not sure if that's appropriate or not really isn't there should be question should be from okay no questions then apologize okay any other questions motion to close motion to close second second all in favor I Mr Lazarus next witness Mr La Lazarus was previously sworn back thank you we just have Mr lazarus's plan set so we can mark that pror plan I'm sorry prior plan well this is a revised plan that was submitted in August so this would be oh we didn't mark it yet so up to A6 I guess right yes A6 Mr date yes if you can tell us the revision date please yes it's uh 62524 and how many sheets there uh there is four we have a set from July yes July 3rd of 24 do you have locks on on August 1st we had filed 15 copies of this plan set look like it yeah this has vestibules but this is a later this is even more recent yeah yeah well I mean that's what it is the latest drawing the latest drawing should be re Rises of July 3rdd July 3rd okay I thought I thought I heard June 23 got it okay I may have hand the July date you have on your plan is that handwritten or is that typed no it's typed okay it's in cat [Music] Mr Lazarus can you take us to the revisions please sure based on what testimony we had heard from Mr pool and some of the neighbors we decided to put on air locks on the edge of end of the building which are 79 by 99 and they're double doors so the noise will not come out of the building in case they have any the people are partying and we have two doors sets of doors so the noise should stay within the building so no noise will come out of the building the second thing that we proposed to do was to the roof plan with the AC which is she a2.1 we have a roof plan here we put a parit above the bar area which is 36 in high and we proposed to put an AC unit on the roof which we put in the center which is 36 in high so no one should really see this unit and it's protected by a parit that goes all the way around the bar roof do you have modified elevations of the Northerly portion of the building that shows the VES locks Right Here Right Above It is a side elevation you're showing the two air locks we tried to keep the same windows and the same vocabulary the building when creating these air locks thank you Mr Lazarus the the port crocher can you just walk us through again how that uh will be your preliminary thoughts about how that'll be constructed to withstand a vehicle impact if that would happened yes um as you can see by the elevation here colored rendering we have a protal share that we had created which is 14' 6 high fire trucks can get underneath it but a ladder truck can't put the ladder up underneath it but they can get underneath I believe and we've created you know four columns and drive under it it's made for two cars to go side by side and they get out during inclement weather or good weather but mostly inclement weather that they can get out and get into the uh Building without getting wet and as far as is there a means and methods available to construct a port cocher so as to withstand some sort of a vehicle impacts uh the thing that we could do is what we probably would would be steel columns in fact there was a container store I don't know if you've heard the story up in panis where a lady with a range overover right through it but she didn't hit the column so she went right into the building and destroyed quite a bit anyways we probably put steel columns and if you want ballards we can put Ballers up there not a problem we were trying to avoid the Ballers for Aesthetics I assume it's right is correct right thank you I don't have anything further Mr chairman Tom no questions chob oh sir no questions Tom no questions all right thank you for the ballards only because you can't trust drunk people can't trust anybody um people make a mistake piing gas as a on the original plan you had up there where you wrote A6 what is the distance from the corner of the proposed cocktail hour edition across to the grass straight down like that yeah well I don't have a dimension but it's probably about 25 ft okay and will be Ballard by I think a good idea of that corner yes I hear what you're saying yes and they also protect the pedestrians as they're walking okay uh I have no questions viikki I have no questions VI I'm good John I'm good we have a motion to open to the public hi hi anybody have any questions for Mr lus alone oh sorry come on yeah I I just have um two quick questions and might be able to clarify this for so you made the statement that the air locks on the end of the building that noise will not come out of the building should not should not have doors if both doors are open though it would still still no they won't be open at the same time it's impossible for them to be open at the same time unless they hold them open okay so that it should not but it it's just like somebody stepping on the gas and think it's the break okay I don't see the anal things Happ but we're making our best effort Mr no I I appreciate that no I I I'm just asking the question I I'm wondering how these operate if there is a mechanism that you can't open one the other time I'm fire or do to do that but um all right my next question was um you mentioned an AC unit on the roof well where is that located [Music] exactly right there okay and where is that in relation to the right there just for purposes of record can you indicate the sheet and what you're indicating it's on sheet a 2.1 and we're talking about the the [Music] RO the roof plan right over here and if you want to see it in elevation going back to a 2.0 where it is is with it parit that's right here m i don't if you can see it yep it's behind that okay and how large are those AC units 36 in 3 build be any noise Village when those operating at night or during the day are no [Applause] because studies or any our acoustical engineer will speak to that okay that's all I have thank you [Applause] yes any member of the public any member of the public like come up and speak any questions any questions only seeing that motion to close motion to close thank all in favor I I next witness Mr to is making his way [Music] up you have any exhibits the exhibit yeah I don't think so we have this traffic report that was part of the filing but we probably Mark that yeah we didn't mark it I want to mark that A7 we're just going to take a moment to mount another plane please think he lose anyway you want his plan I'm sorry you want plan well this is going to be part of the engineering plan set it was part previously marked as A5 I have a traffic evaluation yes that one Mark is A7 A7 I swear Mr tomak in and you swear or affirm that the testimonial is PR shall be true I do and for the rec State your full name spell your last name uh be Toman last name spell t o m b a l a k i a n Mr chairman Mr Tom loing has been qualified as a civil engineer and a traffic engineer elsewhere in my experience I recommended you so qualify make mrol you have any questions regarding qualifications I have no questions I STI thank you Mr T can can you tell the board your involvement with the application uh I was engaged by the applicant to do an evaluation of the existing site and the proposed uh circular Drive way improvements and parking improvements on site and offer my suggestions as to what could be done to better organize uh the traffic flow uh with the proposed application and did you prepare a report that summarizes those an that analysis yes I did is that the report that's stated July 31st of this year yes it is thank you uh can you take us through your analysis please sure I'm going to go to the board uh in front of me is uh the existing conditions of demolition plan sheet 2 of7 uh last Revis July 22nd uh shows the existing parking lot in the front the major parking lot in the rear of the building and currently um the drop off and pickup operation here as I'm sure most of the board members know is a little bit um I'll call it hectic but I'm thinking I can't think of the better one right now uh where especially during periods of inclement weather you have uh patrons attempting to get in get as close to the building as they can so they're not out in the rain especially you're dressed up for an event uh and also it pro it creates congestion in this area where uh motorists are trying to get into this spot or drop off and it's very unorganized and it's not really safe so the applicants proposing the circular driveway which uh where the I'm sorry Mr tlock the sheet you referring to this is now chat 3 of7 uh the site and grading plan also revised July 22nd of this year uh showing a for cusher and oval driveway or circular driveway which allows for a more organized and orderly uh pickup and drop off pattern for uh patrons at the event that the the the the plan is for people at during the drop off phase or coming to this property would come loop around the oval driveway and then discharge guests into the main entrance as shown under the Portico then leave the site either under valet or under their own uh guidance and then drive and go into the back parking lot on the reverse uh during at the end of the evening uh the valet can bring Vehicles out to the front loop around the circular driveway and then provide a Quee of vehicles for patrons to pick up their vehicles under cover and then exit the site we evaluated this and we offered some suggestions uh which are depicted on the site PL to provide more organized operational scheme mainly in the large paper area to the nor on the south side of the oval as the as patrons would exit the port cocher is we we're suggesting uh stop sign control at two locations at the main Drive aisle uh exiting the rear parking field and also as you pull away from the four a so that there's uh some more iness is a multi-way stop condition for motorists to then decide who's first to go out otherwise it would just be a wide open uh area with no control also we're proposing some guide signage for patrons entering toci set out where to go whether they want to go into the P CER oval driveway or go straight to the back as they're uh however they want to go so and also some signage on the island again more standard highway sign or roadway sign saying keep right and then do not enter it in into the wrong way of the oval dve we it's our opinion that this will provide for a more orderly uh scheme and the safest way to enter and exit the property for patrons especially during periods of inclement weather uh so that the if a valet is employed that they can then operate the valet system in a more orderly manner and there could be a space to Quee vehicles uh for people that are picking up or dropping them as far as the Turning template that's Illustrated there can you walk us through that please yes um uh the autoturn program was employed using a 40t long stretch limo and it shows that the stretch limo can make these turns around the oval driveway uh in the maneuver around the to access for p and an exit if you can compare the existing condition versus proposed and tell us if there's an improvement from a safety and efficiency standpoint and why that may be I I believe this is more efficient operation as motorists are most ban facilities have some sort of circular drop off that's uh method uh patrons are accustomed to sort of facility uh approach that they'll know okay we're going to loop around the oval driveway drop off and then you know go to the back and park usually with the valet this way the also motor know not in the as opposed to the existing condition they don't know where to go they go into the existing dead end parking lot they can't find the space they're trying to back out other vehicles are coming behind them it's raining people are getting their hair messed up or what have your clothes messed up and it's just chaos this provides a more orderly means for Motors to enter patrons to enter the property Circle and go to undercover discharge their passengers or pick up and then go to the back parking with the guide signage and the and the stop sign controls and the paper markings then uh patrons know how to operate based on what they see the other cars doing and again it's more in line with what a Patron's expectation this type of facility would would be uh looking to see under the existing condition the valet station is at the southeast corner of the building and then a q line builds towards the east can you tell us how the proposal would impact that que that's impacts the properties to the South would that que still remain or would that be eliminated [Music] than in the in the current condition the valet would set up at this corner of the building the southeast corner and now you have queuing vehicles coming into the property attempting to drop off the queue that builds up also some Vehicles not wanting to go um wait for the valet will try and pass which then you have you know possible conflict of vehicles exiting the site and then also entering at the valet or passing around the valet line you also have the existing parking lot when someone may attempt to drop someone off here cuz it's close then they get stuck cuz there's no spell to parque and there's nowhere to do a c CU somebody immediately creeps up behind them and blocks them in so it provides a number of instances where conflicts can exist between vehicles and it's not efficient flow and you have pedestrians you know dressed up and also trying to work the way around the cars CU then people get impatient they're no longer queued up F down the driveway they don't want to wait they'll get out of the car and try to walk in and they see your vehicles here and it's not a good condition for pedestrians to be in so the proposed scheme provides a more orderly approach where an organized queue can form everybody sees okay I'll get up to the cover covered entrance I discharge my passengers or in Reverse case pick off and it's something a little safer where the motorist know where to go CU right now this is the Sea of unknown what happens right now they see the valet everybody crashes the valet position and it's just not you know an orderly way to process Pati thank you Mr Tom I don't have any further questions Mr chairman board members okay just just a couple um I agree this is obviously a better situation traffic circulation wise for the site um Bears can you speak to traffic lights and how they may or may not have impact on primarily the residents to the the north because currently that doesn't happen as often as it's going to happen well we have prepared Mr scrable another professional speak to landscape architect has a BM it's opposite the circular driveway to the north that's fine that will provide that uh that will address your question so my other comments are real minor uh I think the the keep right sign is labeled as a stop sign that should be changed it's a one it should be a three and just can you please confirm that the limo maneuver is going to use both lanes so there has to be some coordination if the limo is going to use the the turnaround that other cars can't be in it at the same time well the LI that's a that's a very good question I think the limo presumably it'll be one okay you know unless it's a major wedding but that actually that creates other complications um the when the limo is in the queue here then it would only be a single vehicle you know turning on the North End of the oval because of the swing and the size of the V but for other passenger for other regular Passenger cars or SUVs two cars could queue up in this area right you know during a pickup or drop off in where the where stress levels involved it would take up the whole and I don't see it as a real problem I just wanted it to be clear because there was testimony that it was two vehicles wide for yeah for regular most cases it is but in the limo case it would not be I would agree with that yeah okay that's all I have thank you and your comment uh about the stop sign location near the the the building bump out we'll evaluate where to put that to maintain the 4 foot side of a foood thank you thanks to I just have one quick question um how I I may have missed it how are buses handled a lot of the facilities now a lot of weddings use buses to bring people in at one time how does that fit into here I was just that up my niece's wedding and we were all bust over to the site um I guess I would ask what size bus would it be a one a custom this was a this was it could be it could be both I've been in weddings where it's both but the wedding I just recently was at um was a full-sized bus okay how would that be handled here so we know I would have to review that with uh my client but I would think the New Jersey Transit or fullsize passenger bus would have to park at the corner of the building but the the port the driveway is not designed to accommodate nor the height right um clearance it's border line yeah it's not an issue I just was curious how it was handled I think some of the smaller size buses that would fall probably in the 40 foot uh wheelbase or overall vehicle length would probably be able to make that turn uh but anything larger you know commuter bus size or you know uh would have to they'd have to make alternate arrangements with the facility and schedule it ording well that's important me if that kind of coordination is going on then it just helps with the with the um efficiency and the safety and the control that you're looking to create there but that's that's fine I have no other questions I just looked it up quick a a school bus is maxed out at 45 ft so it's it's going to be very similar to the template you see here not a not a luxury bus yeah but a school a school bus size would work yeah it's it was uh yeah I get it but I I I was just in a wedding and it was a huge it was a conventional bus which was surprising but that's what they opted for but the issue thank you I I think Mr zel that the valet would probably assist in that event if a vehicle like that comes to the site you know and I this is a small venue have and I know that there's a lot of coordination goes between the facility and the the bride and groom and they'll know ahead of time that the bus is coming just coordinated ballet right it just came to my mind because I was just in that situation thanks nothing um the existing gazebo in the front is that like is that where a ceremony will be held like what would go on there because I don't see any crosswalks I don't know who would be there and would they go into the cocktail room or they go into the front room it's sure an opportunity for the briding room to take photographs Al there's not going to be massive peoples trying to cross as cars in no there's no ceremonies there at all even the only place where we have had and are seeking to have is in the northwest corner which is in the top left of the page that that gazebo was just for an opportunity for photographs and is there some kind of crosswalk designation I don't know the particular so will cars be coming in as the bride and groom are going back in I'm just looking again as a safety point B as far as safety from people going to and coming from the Gazebo area and having to cross the circular driveway I I would I would have to check with my client but I would imagine that during a wedding type event the bride and groom would then go offer pictures during the cocktail hour so it's it's sort of offset from when vehicles are entering the site you know they would go out take their pictures everybody in cocktail all the the par essentially empty with the exception of maybe the limo or something and then it would work in that manner all right thank you thank you I just have one question has an autoturn template been done for a vehicle leaving the valet where that first stop bar is going around the building addition to the back and could that interfere with somebody driving out who's now at the Stop Bar along the property line so you're talking about leaving the the covered entrance and around to the yep uh that can be looked at and uh I don't know if that El we can that about that yeah that that concerns me a little bit I don't know if you'd need specific striping just to you know lead the car to go a certain way cuz I could see at that bottom right corner you know somebody trying to leave somebody trying to turn and you've also got a walkway there now people you know walking along that walkway it looks a little like it might be congested that's just that's my only concern we we can run that analysis and adjust the Stop Bar location as needed thank you can I follow up on that Nikki because that's I think that's a good point and it might be I think we've got excess space right in front of the new addition you could almost you know put a radius on that which would force the car further away from the building before it then made a right to go behind the building so you're in you're talking tom you're talking about in here correct because right now somebody could come out and they would immediately be on top of one another if you force them away and make a wider turn they would have the ability to see each other and I guess that would also provide better guidance for the vehicle an exi we we'll definitely look into that as as a see how that how that falls in addition with the other comment about the rages thank you Tom real I mean a follow-up question actually I didn't follow the bus you know the size of the bus if it's less than 45 ft it can make the turn if it's more than 45 it has to park the driveway uhor if the bus overall length is more than 45 ft it won't be able to make the turn it would have to uh around the this oval driveway it would have to discharge at the corner of the building nice questions John no questions Mr republ you yeah thank you so I do have a couple questions as you enter the turnaround um as you're coming off of the the main driveway and you take that right hand turn is that enough space for two cars to sit parallel there or is that a single Lane it's there a single Lane in each Direction it would be envisioned that it would only be two lanes in the immediate area of the covered entrance okay how many cars can queue up there between the Portico and let's say the the main entrance Drive Portico and the main I did not Tom you a scale on you by any chance cuz I do not do you want restant how do you know you have engineers in the room wheel mine's more accurate than Harry you might want still have my SCS scaling about 240 ft roughly and using about say 25 ft per vehicle and that includes space in between so you're looking at roughly eight to nine vehicles and again that's going to change everybody's tolerance for some people going to be right on their bumper or some people going to be way back so using 25 footer an average you know eight vehicles or so is there any signage as you come around that turn to separate a lane for valet versus to just drop off in Park cell Park um not on the plan I imagine the valet would uh maybe bring some cones and try to organize that as the Val SE fit have you done any analysis in terms of as you make that corner if let's say it's could Peak drop off time they had a ceremony someplace else everyone's coming to The Venue have you made any analysis of how long it'll take for those patrons to drop off and sit iding looking at the North property no we do not do any c now all right as uh as a your position as civil engineer did you do any analysis on my Village he's not being offer as an expert civil engineer okay that's I thought his testimony was that he was a civil engineer and a traffic engineer those was his liur but just providing traffic testimony no problem appreciate that all right yeah I think that that takes care of um the questions I have thank you thank you any other member of the public questions what he said I guess we have Mo motion close the hearing to the public on questions of the traffic engineer motion to close next witness motion second second all in favor we don't have any further Witnesses tonight Mr chair try to try to keep it moving you're welcome um and your acoustical engineer is going to come at a different meeting for our next meeting depending on his availability it'll be our acoustical engineer our landscape architect and our are the three remaining Witnesses okay now on previous testimony it was going to be a wall some kind of acoustical wall on the north side of the property would along Cameron Court the acoustical wall is along the north west and east of that ceremony that's the ceremony area I'm sorry ceremon yes is there any way we can get an actual acoustical meter maybe a section of wall to get the actual reading of a ceremony and the airlock comings and goings the air locks are not constructed yet okay so we would not be able to do that um but let still pick up the regular noise coming in right correct okay is there any way we can possibly get that so we got firm numbers uh we can seek we can between now and the next meeting we have an event and the acoustical engineer is available to take those sound Rings we can see what the sound level is when the door opens okay like on the property line because I I think that's what Mr Co was one of his claims was yeah that's as as IT addresses that door um that has been a historical loud Point as it opens and closes it's a it's a direct access into the ceremon or the The Event Hall where they have the DJ and the lab music so it has been a historical point of uh noise dissemination um and that's you know again my my clients and they appreciate the consideration of adding those to I don't know how much sound they actually um remediate how much they take care of something the engineer I'm sure we'll speak to in we don't have we can eliminate the gbly L it's not my intention to give a gift and have to explain why I'm giving it so if we're going to if we're going to make me play a game of hopscotch to prove out that these V locks are going to have an appreciable benefit we'll just take them off the plan so oh no I was I ask that I'm just seeing if we can get a meter yeah no because again this is an existing condition that that main dining air hall is an allowable portion of the building that's where the main celebration takes place we acknowledge that as a natural consequence of this type of business there are things that happen here that do not happen in single family homes and we're trying to mitigate as we can but again if we're going to examine the acoustical engineer on the net benefit of the VX only because I want to get my application done with I'll just take them off the plane so it depends again I'm I'm happy to be neighborly about it but to say is it really good enough I'll just take them off well the around enough standards in the ordinance on is kind of a use again there are certain noise ordinances that have to be complied with the noise ordinance only regulates Amplified sound so we can seek to capture what is there today and how it's going to be reduced under the post build scenario is something I can't replicate because in order to do that I'd have to again the quality of the structure that's going to be built is not something I could bu up in a temporary settings so um certainly happy to capture the noise that's generating today but I'm not sure what we do with that information because I can't show you how it's going to be muted as a result of the best of your lives with regard to this element which is the sound attenuation Walls by the ceremony area I have presented that evidence in the acoustical Engineers report because the materials that are being utilized have been studied and that [Music] it certainly won't be a one for one is is my thought but we can inquire what the acoustical engineering see what he says all right thank you I'm just trying to be a little proactive in case you know no I understand was an acoustical report submitted yes the acoustical report was provided to the board early on um can I get a copy D do you have that I'm I'm happy to submit If You Like It by PDF I can please send the PDF but it was filed yes I like to have that's the good friend rep right yes January of 2024 that's when it was d uh prepared and I think it was filed never SE I've never seen March it was provided March 1 of this year updated January this is still good it has not been updated yeah for some reason I don't have it Mr chairman was anything else you wanted me to look at before the next meeting no that's fine okay I thank you I appreciate it as I said just trying to be a little proactive because the report comes in maybe somebody says well how do we know the report the actual sound so try to make Mr CO's job easier Plus on trial in front of the mayor so yeah I got no in Old in Old series we we are trying to do what we can to take this commercial use that's surrounded by Residential Properties and see what we can do to keep it as a going entity without impacting the neighbors and if possible improve what the neighbors experiencing by way of reducing some of the uh impact flow from the commercial development so we'll continue to uh prosecute the application with that in mind and and see where we can end up and we appreciate all your work are you done for tonight yes Mr read Diane do we want to set a date for them to return will you be ready for the answer of our meeting I unfortunately have another matter that night so I'm not available as far as the board possibly meeting twice a month is that something that is lated to happen in 2024 if we do that though we don't tell the public tonight when it's continued understood you've got to do notes I well that's why if we can table if we can carry it to October 7th with the with the thought that perhaps the board May Institute a second meeting October 9th October 9th I'm sorry why don't we carry to October 9th and either you'll be here at that meeting or you'll ask it to Carri to another date right I just don't want the the expectation would be that I won't be here on October 9th but we're carrying it to that date to see if the board is going to meet twice a month and if so perhaps that second date is something that myself and my team is available for okay so I'll make an announcement that this application hearing will be continued through October 9th without any further Nots thank you all have a good night I all right public opportunity to speak a non-agenda item motion motion motion I still move second second all favor anybody from the audience that would like the opportunity to speak on a non-agenda item please step forward seeing that motion to close not agenda item not agenda not agenda gentleman here he's getting up oh sir was it about a none aggenda item no is not okay close Okay motion to close motion to close motion to close second all in favor I now we have to bring Mr Mel up to close the meeting [Music] I'm very impressed Mr Ley what you didn't know is you were auditioning for a permanent job the expain to everybody here tonight exp to them the I want thank you [Music] sir first there a motion to adjourn I guess a motion to just pick two names okay all favor right turn thank you people doing I'm good