We are on record. >> Good evening and welcome to the meeting of the Township of Precipany Troy Hills Board of Adjustment. It is Wednesday, February 11th, 2026 and is 7:30 p.m. Adequate notice of this I'm sorry, announcement is made that adequate
notice of this meeting has been given and that is being conducted in accordance with NJSA 10:4-6 at effect of the New Jersey Open Public Meetings Act. Roll call. Mr. Kros
>> here. >> Mr. Joshu >> here. >> Mr. Maserella >> present. Miss Neglia, >> present. >> Mr. Ready, >> present. >> Chairwoman Grani, >> present. >> We also have our board planner, Mr. Chadwick, >> present. >> Our board engineer, Mr. Lmanoit, >> here.
>> And our board attorney, Mr. Johnson, >> present. >> Meeting is open to the public. If you have anything that you would like to speak of other than what is on our agenda for this evening, I see none.
Would you please stand and join us for the pledge of >> allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all
smell good. Miss Jolie, our correspondence, please. >> We have correspondence uh received from Mr. Trim Bidia request an application 2546 be carried from February 11th to
March 18, 2026 without further notice and with all necessary extensions. Is there a motion? >> Motion. Second. >> All in favor? I >> I have correspondence from >> 46 or 45
>> 2546. >> We have uh correspondence regarding application 2545 uh that be carried from this evening's agenda to April 8, 2026 without further notice and all required extensions. Is there a motion? >> Motion second.
>> All in favor? I >> I >> And we have resolutions. Um resolution 2539 Muhammad Hassan. Uh this was an a resolution uh for dismissal of
the application. Uh those who can vote are Joshu Neglia Ready and Grani. Can I have the motion? >> Motion. Second. >> Josit. >> Yes. >> Neglia. >> Yes. >> Ready. >> Yes. >> Grani. >> Yes. >> Okay. And we're going to do application
2553 and 2580 together. Um those who can vote are Joshitz, Nagalia, Ready, and Grani. >> Motion second. >> Um Josit, >> yes. >> Mozzarella,
>> I'm on that. >> I'm sorry. Neglia, >> yes. >> Ready? >> Yes. >> Giani, >> yes. >> And our last one, application 2569. and Danny D Sanchez. Uh, those who can vote are mozzarella, neglia, ready and grani.
>> Move. >> Second. >> Mozzarella. >> Yes. >> Neglia. >> Yes. >> Ready? >> Yes. >> And that is it. Application 25. 254 >> application 25 col 64 Maria M's and
Elizabeth cover 170 Rambo Rainbow Trail block 109 lot 25 zone R3 a C variance to legalize front driveway pia pavers PA patio and pa walks contrary to 430-2
275X and section 430-35 column 13. This application was carried from the November 5th, 2025 up to date. >> Can you raise your right hands, please? You swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give should be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth. You can put your hands down and sit down. Just make sure you use the microphones. We need to be close to you. >> And just starting over here, state your name, spell your last name. >> Elizabeth Parki. C A R F I O L I. >> Okay.
>> Marie M's E MS. >> And you both live at the location, correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, my recollection is the last time you were here, you asked that the matter be carried because there was a letter that came from the township engineer and you were advised to have some discussions with the township
engineer. Have you had those discussions? >> Yes, I did. >> What's happened with respect to that? So I um I followed up with a letter providing more detail on exactly what we had done and what we wanted to do. Um I spoke with uh Mr. Paul Nihoff um last
month to really kind of um outline the plans that we had. Um we shared um prior surveys that had also been conducted on the property and Mr. Nihof sent a letter on January 20th saying that storm water
management is not required due to the um the when he'd reviewed the surveys and that he was happy with what we were doing. >> Yeah, I I have a copy of that memo. It's dated January 20th, 2026. It appears as though he made a determination that all
the improvements were done prior to March of 2020 2021. Is that your understanding as well? were done before then. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> And that he indicated that no additional
storm water management is required. >> That's our understanding. Yes. >> Yes. Is there anyone in the audience that has anything to say the testimony from previous and from
this evening on this application? Anyone in favor of it? Is there anyone in the audience that is opposed to this application? I see none. Would someone one of our members
question? >> No. No. We heard the whole case. The last thing we were waiting on was the engineers letter. The engineer's good. We're good. >> Yes. Okay. >> Frame a resolution, please. One of my members. >> I will report. Did she hear me?
>> Yep, she did. >> Okay. In the matter of um Marie M and Elizabeth Carel Carfell >> Carfield of Carfield uh 170 Rainbow Trail block 109 lot 25 sonar 3. Uh we
should grant a C variance to legalize the front driveway pavers the pavers patio and paper walkways contrary to 4 430-275 10 >> is it 10x10
>> and section 430 to35 columns 13 >> second Josh >> yes >> Joshitz yes mozzarella >> yes >> nglia >> yes Ready? >> Yes. >> Gani. >> Yes. Ladies, your application is approved. Good luck. You'll be getting a
letter from the township and at that time you can apply for your permits. >> Great. Thank you so much. Thank you everyone. Enjoy. Application 25 colon 10 Lee Dong 50 James Street block 147 lot 3 zone R3 a C
variance to construct a two-story edition left side twotory edition right side covered front porch second story open deck with stairs landing and stairs over patio all under proposed
secondstory deck contrary to section 430 30-35 columns 4 and 10. This application was carried from the November the 5th, 2025 application. >> Does not appear that Mr. Dwang is here. >> Have you heard from Mr. Dwong, Nora?
>> Nope. >> But I I suggest that we that the board carries this until the end of the meeting and see if Mr. Dwang makes sense. >> Motion. >> I don't think you need a motion. >> Revisit the issue at the end of the meeting. Not safely. Right.
Application 2570, Linda Curio, 25 Canton Road, block 265, lot 4, zone R4, a C variance to legalize a plastic shed, a built doors and
concrete, paved driveways, paved walk and pavers, propane tanks, location only, and purposes a pave walk contrary to section 430-275X, sections 430-35,
columns 8, 10, and 13, section 430-101. >> Can you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? You can sit down. Just make sure you're close to the microphone. >> Okay.
>> And can you state your name? Spell your last name. >> My name is Linda Picuro. P I C C I U R R O. >> And where do you live? >> 21 Canton Road. >> And you're the applicant, correct? >> Yes. >> Um I I take it that you're here because there were some improvements made.
>> No, there was repairs. >> Repairs made. Okay. So, why don't you tell the board what happened? >> Okay. What originally happened is that um I our driveway was very broken up and our walk sidewalk never it's at least 20 years old and the walk is since we b own
the house which is 34 years ago and I have no idea how old the walk was before it was all crumbling and cracked and the perimeter of both driveways was cracked. My husband is dis is disabled and since we've been going through this um darian
he broke his wrist. He fell outside and broke his wrist. And so I had to have my property safe for my husband. So it had to be repaired. Okay. I didn't realize that we needed a permit just to cut out part of the perimeter of my driveway and
put pavers. So when the engineer um representative did come, she told us we needed one. I went with our contract, the fella that was doing our pavers to the town hall and they told me that I didn't have a permit for the second driveway. Well, I don't understand that
because in 20 years ago in 2006, we had put a second floor on our home. The driveway was put in at the same time and my contractor went and got the permits. When I went to the town hall to get the permit that they said we need now, they
went to their microfilm and told me that they only had a permit for um the second floor. And we also added a porch, which we got an a variance for. Mhm. The driveway was done at the same time. I don't know why he didn't get a drive permit for the driveway. Then when I
went home, I realized that in 2018, we put an all house generator in the house. We did get a permit. I have a copy of it from the town. They didn't have it on microfilm. So maybe there was a mistake in copying, you know, from paper to the microfilm, which is possible. I worked
in an office for over 30 years. I I worked with microfilm. It is possible that the telephone rings, you walk away, you come back. Oh, I did that. So, maybe there was a um permit for the driveway. Now, as far as getting back to this
bearing, the plastic shed, we have no um no garage. My property is smaller than most properties that surround us. I need the shed to put the bicycles, the two snow blowers, the lawn mower, and in the winter, I have to take the furniture off my deck because there's no trees in our
backyard or our neighbor's backyard. The wind blows my chairs off my deck. So, I needed the shed to put the stuff in. As far as the fill go doors, as far they're telling me that I have too much various coverage in my life. We didn't The stairwell was there. The stairwell
didn't have a drain. I had to put a cap on it which is like a trap door >> to so the water wouldn't go into leak into my basement. Again, it's there for over 20 years. So I I don't understand. >> All right. So I have a couple questions. >> Yes, sir. >> Is any as of your knowledge, do any of
your neighbors have any issues with water now? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> The lady behind I have we had French drains put in a few years and I don't have many years ago. and everything. And my neighbors have
them. I know that the woman across the street, she gets water in her basement when it rains heavy. She's worried about all the snow melting and it's going to happen again. >> But what about the neighbor? Do you have a neighbor on both sides and behind you? >> Yes. >> Did they get water? >> They did. >> What does that mean? It's not >> They fixed it so they don't
>> So they're not getting any water from you? >> No, absolutely. And I have pavers and the driveway was not dug up. All we did is the perimeter of the driveway >> with the pavers. So it was safe for my husband. >> Okay. Well, I just there's a there's like five variants, five issues here
that we're looking to go through. I'd like to go through them one by one. So the driveway was existing. >> Yes. And >> made up of what? >> I'm sorry. >> What was it made of originally? >> It's paved in the middle. >> It was black top. >> The whole thing was black top. And but it was like I said, we we going to fix
the perimeter of it cuz it broke. >> So the middle is still black top. >> Yes. Middle is still black top. >> And you took out the rim a rim around it. small amounts of the rim around me >> and you're putting in pavers which theoretically reduces the coverage a little bit >> depending on what they're setting. >> Right.
>> Right. As long as they're not set in concrete. No, >> it's sand. >> Sand. It's sand. I I watched them do it. They put sand into >> um and that that was no wider than the original drive. >> No, it's the same size.
>> And what about the shed? This this shed is like I said it was needed for to put my stuff because I don't have a garage and over the years we we bought a snow plow and all so it didn't fit in the small shed that we already have. >> So you had a shed. >> We have we had a frame shed
>> and that's wood you know. Okay. It's you know it's still there. It's still there. >> So now you added another shed. >> I needed an additional one to put I have two snow blowers. I have a thing. I have patio furniture. The other one wasn't bigger >> and therefore that shed creates more
coverage. >> Exactly. But it's plastic and I'll get rid of it if I have to. >> Okay. >> Don't know what I'm going to do with the stuff, but >> Okay. And again, I didn't realize you need a permit to put a plastic shed on. I put it together myself though, so it
wasn't, you know, hard to construct. There's two propane tanks. >> Yeah. Okay. The propane propane tanks. We got a a permit for the generator. The inspector came twice. Once when the hole was dug and once when everything was
finished. He saw the propane tanks. Why didn't he tell me they're not in the right place or they where they should be located? I don't know. >> Why are they at that particular location? >> Because we have we have we don't have gas to our house. So to run the generator, I need a propane. >> But why did you put them where you put them? Between the two sheds.
>> Okay. I put them between the two sheds so they were one, out of sight, and two, they weren't where the kids could get to them. I have grandchildren that come over a lot. So we punched them in. I put gates in front of the the the the front and the back of the shed so they can't get in there. We also had a dog who
passed away. I didn't want the dog in there. So, you have pipes running from those propane tanks over to the generator. >> It's not close to the house, but they're running from the pipes. I I have a um >> Are they sitting on concrete or
something of that order or >> the generators on concrete? >> No, no, the the propane >> propanes are on gravel. >> Just sitting on gravel. >> Yeah, they put gravel on >> and the connection from the propane >> underground. >> Underground. >> Mhm. Did you talk to the engineer, the
town engineer at all? >> Yes. >> Okay. Did you discuss the way you could deal with the coverage issue by putting in some kind of system for mitigation of the water? >> We have a French drain. I don't get water anymore. So, I don't understand.
>> But he So, he is saying that there will be an increase in impervious cutage which could make a make the problem worse. But their papers with sand. Does the water go through sand? >> It does. But he is still saying that and the shed in theory is causing more
impervious coverage. Therefore, it could be more problem. When he spoke to him, he didn't bring you didn't talk to him about that. >> No. >> Cuz in his report, he's saying, you know, something should be done to mitigate the increase. >> How do I do that? Well, you would normally you'd have a conversation with
the engineer and discuss kind of what needs to be done where he would be satisfied that it would not >> I get rid of the shed. >> Well, it's going to decrease the uh coverage. I don't I don't have the math in front of me, but it will decrease it. >> Decrease.
>> John, is that a doesn't look like >> this is enlarge. It just fits. >> Did you meet you met with the engineer? >> Yes. Okay. >> Adjust. And then did he give you an idea of the report that he was going to write? >> No, he did. He in fact he he told us
that we had to agree with me that I had to make the the place safe for my husband. He mentioned nothing about any kind of changing. >> I think you ought to meet with Doesn't hurt to carry this because you don't have to renotice and go back and talk to
the engineer about the issue. >> You have to wait longer. >> Well, it doesn't affect you. >> Yeah, it does. >> What you mean? Do you do you have a copy of the November 21st, 2025 memo from the engineer? >> No, the only thing I have from the
engineer is that we were in the process of doing this. Like I said, I didn't know I needed a permit and I asked him if I could just finish just the walk just so that when my husband got out of the car, he didn't fall until he gave he told me that he wrote me an email telling me that I can make the thing
safe for my husband and that's all we did. So, what's showing on the sketch? All the papers are in place now. >> Yeah, because we were >> everything else is in place. >> No, that it's not completely finished. He's got to come back and straighten some out and put more sand in it to hold
it down. He just did it just that it was safe for my husband to walk on. >> Oh, okay. >> The problem is he told you one thing >> or he didn't tell you some of what he's telling us. doesn't tell me anything about issued a report that's setting off flags
that make us concerned. So I think what what John Mr. Chowick is saying is get a meeting with him discuss it that if he really thinks we need to if you need to do something about the water if he doesn't >> that can you tell me what would I have
to do about >> like a pit sometimes they do a drainage pit that allows the water to go into the ground at a pace that is environmentally sensitive. >> I don't understand if the if we left it the same size as the driveway. the driveway was covering where the bricks
are >> and everything. >> It's been there for 20 years. >> And I agree with you. I hear where you're coming from. >> You might want to pro you might want to tell the engineer about that. Provide him with whatever
>> documentation you have that shows that >> and and also tell them about the choose sheds and the propane tank and the gates that you put up. Tell them all those things and the reason why you did that. Yeah, the shed goes into the coverage as well. So that that's the water
mitigation. The shed is part of that, too. >> It's on grass and it's on underneath it. There's a platform that it's not sitting directly. >> And what you're telling us, I think you just have to tell him so that he could then rewrite a letter to us >> saying what you did is not going to
really uh increase >> uh the the environment with the water, >> right? >> He's sending us a different notice that he told you. So, we have to act on what he we have to act on what he wrote us, not what he told you. >> You understand where we're coming from? >> We don't have to discuss the other
things that I'm trying to legalize. >> We have a letter from the engineering department dated November >> 21st. >> 21st and I have a copy >> for you. >> Is everything on that bill? >> Yeah. Everything that she's asking for.
So, >> did you just check that to make sure everything is on that that you >> I don't know. >> I think we never get where they said they said I don't think that >> the other issue in the report appears to
be that some of the work was done in the right way. >> Yes. Because they Okay. When the curves were put in with the town, the town dug up whatever my driveway we had at the time, they did a lousy job fixing it and
that cracked. So, I had to have that effect. So, he just brought the papers down as far as the street, you know, as far as the curb and looks nice. But, um, like I said that when they fixed it, they they left it a bump that went up.
In fact, the one driveway is still there. We had the other driveway coated so far a while ago, so you you don't see it. But on the other one, you could see the tiny little lip, but the ends that made it the curb cracked and came up.
And like I said, he he's he's a fall. He's also a cancer patient. So his cancer treatments and everything, he's out of it. And I I got to make my pro. And also my husband and I, I might not look at the people say we're in our 70s and everything. I plan to live in that
house as long as we can. It has to be safe for us. >> And and he might have appropriately said, "Make it safe." >> He did, >> right? I totally understand. So that's what I did. We finished the part where my husband will walk from >> And he might and he was 100% right in telling you that. But when he writes us
this, we really just have to go through the process and make sure everything is >> No, he he never mentioned anything that we would have to >> Yeah. >> I think the suggestion of Mr. Chadwick, let's carry this case. You speak with the engineering department and go over
what the letter states. And >> are we go to him first and then you give me a date? >> We'll give you a date. We'll give you a date tonight. You speak to the engineering department and then you come back to us at the date that we will be giving you this evening. >> No further notice >> and without further notice.
>> Right. But it's about the coverage issues. >> Right. >> Right. And what about the 6 with the curve cut? I I would suggest that you talk to him about the >> the right of way issue as well. That's number six on the letter that I gave you. >> I think that's just a driveway permit
>> pro probably. But okay, now the the the driveway. See, I I still have a problem with that because they're saying it's not legalized. They didn't have a copy of it, but they didn't have a copy of their permit I got after that either with the microfilm. >> So maybe it did exist.
>> No, just ask them for a driveway permit. It's there. Oh, no. I plan on getting a permit for every all the work that was done. In fact, by contract the winter, apply for it and that's when we found out that we had a cover. >> Just explain to them the situation and we'll we'll hear the rest. We just need to know about the impervious coverage is really I think the only thing holding us
up. >> I don't want to speak for anybody other than me, but >> you have a date to carry this please. >> Uh, April 8th. >> April 8th. Okay. Will I be notified or just show up? >> You'll be notified right now. Just make sure you speak to him in
advance of that and have everything clean up and something in writing. >> Whatever you have that shows you were permitted. You asked for permits in the past. Make sure you take it with you and show that. >> Well, I I have no proof that it wasn't carried that we have it 20 years ago
when we had the permits for the house. I don't >> Well, that's why you're going to be coming back to us. >> Okay. And like I just want to let you know is that we tried to get hold of the original contractor. He was older than my husband and I. We're in our 70s. I couldn't find. He could be dead full. I
know. You know, >> just talk talk to the engineer. Tell him about the two issues. Tell him to write something about his response so that when you come back, we have a letter hopefully stating from him that it's not an issue and you don't need to do any
mitigation to the water. >> Okay. And the date again? April 8. >> April 8. And you're going to give the board time to make its decision until then. Correct. >> Okay. Thank you very much, >> Mrs. Spicuro. >> Yeah. >> Do you happen to have a survey when you bought the house? >> Yes, I have. >> Okay. Bring that with you to the engineering department. >> Okay. I think I did the first time I
talked to you. >> Okay. Well, just cuz that shows what was there 20 years ago. >> Oh, everything except the the driveway, the second floor, and we all got a variance in 20. >> All I'm saying is he's going to write once he realizes, you know, when what it looked like when you bought that, that
may affect his decision. >> Yeah. And I another thing I don't understand why they're saying that I'm over the river variance for the the the Billcro door over the stairwell. The stairwell was there all the concrete together and again that show on your survey.
>> You know we didn't add any more concrete. We just put a cap on it >> right and again >> so that so the water doesn't go down anymore. >> There's no drain at the bottom of it. So when it snowed and it rained the water seep through the door and into our vegetable. >> So the the impervious coverage is not necessarily for your house. It's your
neighbors. That's what that's why we try to keep they don't want you going over that that amount you're allowed because it's your neighbors. It's not you guys. Like if you fix it for yourself, that's great, but your neighbors are the ones affected negatively by the more you cover. >> A lot of between houses. >> I'm just saying that's what it's based
on whether it's right or wrong. >> No, no. I I looking out for the neighborhood and and and around you. So, >> you know, my my main interest was that they don't have a copy of the permit for the driveway and I >> that's why we're you're illegal. >> I couldn't understand why.
>> Go see him. It'll work out. >> Thank you for your time. >> We'll see you straightened out. >> Thank you. Application 25 col 72 COP 115 Lawrence Road block 268 lot one zone R4 a C
variance to construct a pigota with closing mechanical roof patio with outdoor kitchen under pagota and rear landing and stairs contrary to section 430-35 columns 4 and 10. raise your right hand,
please swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give should be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> Identify. >> Say your name. >> Thomas Waller. >> Gotcha. >> And Jason Copc. >> Great. Have a seat. And what's your address, Mr. Copek?
>> It's 115 Lawrence Road, Parney. >> And you have a contractor with you? >> Uh, yes. Mr. Tom Wall. >> Gotcha. Um, so do you have a copy of the November 24th, 2025 letter from the township engineer?
>> I do not. >> Why don't you take a look here? >> That problem seems to be getting worse. >> Yeah, I I I agree. >> Okay. Okay. Yeah, this is this is news to me. >> Yep. Understood. >> Yeah. Cuz uh when I I did talk to him as
we're going through the application process um and he said as long as we were not over the impervious coverage of 40%, there shouldn't be any issue. And so when I received the uh application file from uh the zoning department here, it was
showing uh coverage of 26.7 there. And >> yeah, your building coverage. >> Yeah, that was and then the on the um on what the town had calculated here, it showed 38.69%
for lot coverage, which is under the 40%. >> Yeah, but your building coverage is over though. That's you need two variants. >> Yes. Yes, understood about the building coverage and that's caused by the pergola. >> Yeah. >> Understood. >> But the set, if I understand it
correctly, the setback variance is an existing condition. >> That's for the house. >> Yes. So, our our h when we constructed the house in 2008, uh we were before the board here for variances as well because our our
property is a triangle lot. Um, and so it just it's hard to fit a rectangle inside of a in a in a in a triangle. Um, and so we we end up and we have and because we're on Kingston is on the back side of our house and Lawrence is our front front yard, we have basically two
front yard setbacks which cause um, you know, difficulty whenever we're trying to do something because of the 25 ft setback on on the on the rear as well. >> Well, I see where the five the 5.4 is the pergola. >> Yeah, that's correct. road. That's the issue for access to
use. >> Yeah, we have an existing deck that that is already there, an elevated deck that was part of the original plans that was approved by the board of size of 15 by 20 or 20 by 20 by 25 or 15 x 25, sorry.
And we are looking to propose uh removing that deck uh with a paper patio that would be 20 by 30. So that that there's a slight increase um on the setback uh by approximately 5 ft but everything else is the same footprint of
what exists. >> I also I also want to make note as a contractor we do have a storm water management plan in place for the work that's taking place all of the roof leaders on the house as well as the pergula that's going to be getting installed are all going to be ran
underneath into a drywall system. Did you want that to be >> that that was not submitted because it was not was not asked. We were not aware of but there is a storm water mitigation. >> I think you need to go to the engineer
>> and get that cleared up. Same same situation we had just before. >> Sure. and as opposed to uh question I have is that patio that comes to the side of the proposed pongola it's got a
walkway around the house that >> is that all there >> yes that's existing >> so the photographs with the photo sims of the burglar constructed >> Mhm. that p all the patio area is there.
>> No, the so underneath the underneath the proposed pergola right now there's >> that was coming out. It's getting >> right now. Yeah, there's an existing deck and so the deck >> a little bigger. >> That's correct. >> So that deck probably before the board
discussed whether water would go through it and you said yes. And now we've got a patio that looks to be >> well the existing patio to my understanding terms and when I was talking with my surveyor um and and the
engineer again while we're going through the process was the deck is already included in impervious coverage. Um it's the you know there's again there's a slight additional >> right there would have been but from a practical standpoint water went through it. the the new patio doesn't look like
it's going to be pvious. Cor >> um yeah, I I suppose >> what's the patio stone set in? What are they what are they proposed to be set in? Just sand. >> Well, sand gravel and sand, >> but not not concrete. >> No concrete. No, >> but
>> and underneath the deck now is gravel. >> Mhm. >> So, it's basically the same thing. >> Yeah. >> So, when underneath >> It's not quite the same. Yeah, you're right. As long as that patio is is not uh uh grouded
>> in any way, then you your argument is the same. >> I think I think as you said, you have a drainage plan all set up. Show it to the engineer and I think we'll >> Yeah. And I will have to talk to the engineer because different >> Yeah. I don't know that he's accurate when he says the impervious coverage is
increasing by 668 square ft because as I mentioned the impervious coverage calculation that's already included includes the deck which is in which because the the way I understand it in talking with everyone is the impervious coverage from the deck is already included in the coverage numbers and so
therefore we're just replacing the same with the same even though it looks different it's still the deck is still considered impervious. Didn't you say you had 5 foot? Is that >> Yeah, only 5 foot on the one side. >> But the building coverage issue is that
also the impervious coverage is considered in that number. >> Uh no, that's a different calculation. >> So my question is he's saying >> it's not over by impervious, it's over by building. But when the engineer says that is proposing to increase impervious coverage by 668 ft, but if he doesn't
need a variance for it, why is it even being an issue for us? >> Right. >> And the other thing I want to mention is the pergulous system that's going to be installed is going to have a gutter system on it. Zero runoff. >> Right. Right. >> There's no there's less runoff with this plan. >> Yeah. But this is not over on impervious
less. I think the issue is this pora has a mechanical roof that closes >> that that causes the issue on the building coverage is my understanding. Uh when I was talking to the zoning officer, it was because of the mechanical nature
>> that when you close it, it has the gutter system around >> the Yeah, there's an integrated gutter system. So the water runs into the gutter system that goes into the >> that's going into your drain. >> I'm not sure we really have to go back to the engineer. He's bringing up 0.1. >> Yeah.
>> Right. 668 feet is increasing pvious coverage. They're not here for a variance for that. So that comment is really null null boy. >> Yeah. Right. I agree. >> I agree. >> And I'm confident as the contractor local contractor from town that the
drainage on this property is going to be better after this than before. >> Just with that with regards to that number two there. It's a drywall proposed test pit to determine soil conditions. I don't know if that's something I've never seen. >> I don't think we need to discuss it
because he's not asking for variance for that reason. >> Well, he's indicating that he's he's got it. >> Storm water management system as well. >> So, I think it's a >> I mean, you could >> if you wanted to approve the application with a condition that he satisfy the the
>> I think that if they would agree to that, I think that's more reasonable instead of having to come back. >> Then then he doesn't have to worry about somebody arguing with him, >> right? I agree. I think you also want to have when he goes for his building permit that the
drainage system reference is made a part of that. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. We plan we plan to include that on the on the building permit application. >> Yeah. Yeah. We have to explicitly explain what we discussed. >> Okay. >> Okay.
>> Scott, you want to make sure just one moment please do her business? >> Yes, please. Is there anyone in the audience that has any objections to this application and the testimony that we've just heard?
I see none. Anyone in favor of this application and the testimony that we've just heard? I see none. Would someone now like to take >> Sure. Application 25 Poland 72 Jason and Violeta Copek 115 Lawrence Road block
268 lot one zone R-4 recommend granting a C bearings to construct a pergola with closing mechanical roof patio with outdoor kitchen under pergola and rear landing and stairs contrary section 430-35
columns 4 and 10 with agreeing >> to theations of the >> water mitigations uh with the town approval >> and that the drainage storm water management system will be approved prior to the issuance of building what Mr. Johnson said.
>> Yeah. Second, >> yes. >> Joshua, >> yes. >> Maserella, >> yes. >> Nlia, >> yes. >> Ready? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Applications approved. We'll be receiving a letter from the township and at that time we could receive building.
>> Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Application 25 col32 T-Mobile 1280 Route 46 block 712 lots 43.1 zone V2 a minor site plan with CD
variance to construct a permanent wireless facility. This application was carried from October 29th, 2025. Good evening. Good afternoon, gentlemen. Madam Chair, ladies, >> welcome back. >> Thank you. I'm going to sit up. That's
okay. So, I'm closer to the mic. April 8. >> Good evening, Madam Chair, ladies and gentlemen, board. Jennifer Kak from Price Me Showman and Dino on behalf of the applicant T-Mobile. Um, it's been a while, so I'm going to refresh the board's memory as to what the application is before I get into my
witnesses. So, T-Mo will file an application to your board for site plan approval with associated use bulk variance relief and is proposing to deploy a permanent facility at block 729 lot 6.01 as shown on the T township map, commonly known as
1280 US Route 46 East. This proposed facility is the replacement site for the wireless installation that was located at 1269 Route 46 East across the highway. T-Mobile is proposing to deploy a permanent wireless facility consisting of nine panel antennas on the rooftop of
the existing three-story building with a center line of 36 ft. Installation of a 14 ft x 7 ft equipment gated compound to be located on the ground in the rear of the property behind the building which will also contain a total of two equipment cabinets with associated
wireless equipment. When we appeared last before your board back on October 29, there was a recommendation made by the board to reduce the visibility of the antenna array sector in the rear of the building and to look into other viable alternatives for that location of that array sector. We have since done
that and my witnesses will testify to the only viable location option available in order to continue adequate wireless coverage in the area. to refresh the board's memory on the relief requested. Are we good? >> Yeah, we're good. >> Okay. I saw you shaking your head, so
question. >> No problem. Also, we're seeking site plan approval for the wireless rooftop installation in the B2 district where the property is located where such facilities are not permitted. As such, we require devariance. Um, it is respectfully submitted that the location
chosen for the rooftop wireless in partic in installation is still particularly suited along Route 46 highway and that the height is required to provide reasonably comparable service in the vicinity. Additional variance relief required is minimum sideyard setback where 24 ft is required and the
equipment compound is proposed at 5.2. We also require variance relief due to alteration of a nonconforming structure as a result of the existing height of the building. And lastly, we have proposed certain deviations from the township wireless code which my planner addressed at during his testimony at the
prior hearing. And without further ado, I can bring up my first witness. >> Please don't do swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give should be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing. >> I do. >> State your name by your last name.
>> Sure. Joshua Katrol. C O T T R E L L. And have your credentials changed since the last time you were here? >> They have not. >> Okay. So, I'm just going to um present this new exhibit. So, we'll have to mark that. >> I think the last one. Um
>> I got A10. >> As do I. >> You do? Okay. So, A1. >> A1. >> Josh. Is that today's date? Uh I'm marking this A11 with today's date February 11, 2026. Um
this is a alternate alpha sector location sketch uh which basically is a plan of the rooftop. Um and it's got two uh locations of possible antennas for alpha sector. We have option A which is on the
uh northeastern corner of the building closest to the highway. And then we have option B which is more towards the west um but further away from the northwest corner. >> Just remind the board where the proposed
originally. >> So the so our initial application had the alpha sector antennas at the northwest corner of the building. The residential area is is northwest of that. Right. >> Um we then amended the location to be 10
ft back from the building. Um and we pres presented that at our second hearing and there were still some concerns about its visibility um relative to the uh residential area. So we went back um we spoke with the radio
frequency engineers at T-Mobile um and we presented them with two options. Option A, like I said, is the antenna sector closest to Route 46. >> So that's furthest away from the residential room. that that's furthest away from the residential area,
>> right? >> Um and then we presented them with option B, which um is further away from the residential zone, but still towards the rear of the building. Uh we eventually ruled out option B only
because uh if you remember last time we talked about antenna shadowing, >> where the antennas would have to clear uh over 40t of the rooftop. So we would have to raise the antennas uh so high that the top of the antenna would be 19
ft above the roof >> at that location. So essentially we would have to build a cell tower on the roof to accommodate the sector. >> So we ruled that out. Uh we looked at option A here. Um this
is a good option because we are closer to the edge of the roof. So we won't have to raise the antennas. We could still we would be top of the antenna would be 11 ft above the parapit height and it would still get the coverage that T-Mobile needs.
>> That you it means you would eliminate the one towards the resident and put it up. >> Correct. So we would elim so all three sectors are now in the front of the building. >> Right. Right. Okay.
>> And we're calling the Route 46 frontage to Right. >> Correct. Yes. >> Yep. And how about the reflectors on it? You know, you were going to put the filming. Yep. >> Uh, that's still an option. Agreed. We You agreed to that? Yes.
>> What is it called? >> That it's not a paint, right? It's >> No, I have my planner. He can describe it. >> The reflectors. >> Yeah. >> Are there any questions? >> No. >> Of this gentleman? >> No. Please proceed.
>> Okay. My next is my planner. He's just going to present the >> Excuse me. >> Oh, you got to open it up from the audience. >> This testimony just given >> I see that. >> Okay, good. >> All right. U my planner is going to address the vis visibility of the new location of the
antennas. >> Raise your right hand, please. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give should be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. State your name, spell your last name, >> and prompt. They are of any type >> and your credentials have not changed since the last time. >> Same as last year. >> Great. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. Um I will follow up on on Josh's testimony regarding the proposed relocation of the uh alpha sector to the front of the building, the route 46 frontage. Um I have taken the same photo
locations that I used to present last time and uh show you what the uh visibility would be. Uh these would be the the proposed changes. Now um >> so start with A12. >> Yes, >> A12 and I already have today's date on
the board. >> And I have a lot of exhibits at the end of the swamp. >> Okay. So what I did here, >> you need to grab the microphone. >> Oh yeah, microphone. Okay. Exhibit A12 with today's date uh
has two photographs on it. Um this is the same photo location that uh was presented last time as photo location number one at the intersection Route 46 and Summit Street uh looking towards the subject property. The photo on the left is the simulation that we presented last
time with the film on the antennas. What I've done in um uh photo 1C on the right hand side is I have shown what would be visible from the same location with the one alpha sector relocated to the front of the building. And as you'll see from
this location, there was nothing visible in the rear of the building from this location under the new uh proposed option. So, if I remember this case right, you came in, you had maybe one objector at the time. I remember that I didn't even
think it was that big a deal, but the board asked you to go back, do your best to make it where even better. >> Correct. >> This plan looks like you did a very good job and that they really shouldn't be able to see it and that you corrected any problem that could arise with people
complaining about being seen. Correct. >> Correct. Right. Okay. >> Yeah. I concur with your testimony. >> Let's go. >> We're done. >> Uh what's the next? Has it 123? >> 813. Sorry, >> Tim. You can be very quick. >> Okay. Okay. Uh
>> you have a view from those neighbors? >> Yep. >> Sure. I can skip right to that if you want. >> Sure. Why don't we mark that one A13? >> Okay. A13. That'll be the view from 182 Hawkins Avenue. That was number um >> it's going to be A13 now.
>> A13. Yes. Uh that is the photo location uh in front of the resident uh that was the objector. And on the left hand side we have photo 4B. I lost my flashlight. There it is. Uh
4B. Uh this is the photo simulation that was presented last time that had the antenna with the reflective film from that location which certainly was an improvement over the original. But now if you look at 4C on the right hand side uh we have relocated the alpha sector the to the uh front of the building on
the route 46 frontage and there um the antennas are no longer there. There's a small section of the railing which still needs to be at the top of the uh the ladder service ladder but that's the only thing that's visible from that location. >> Looks good. >> Okay. Don't want to see any more?
>> No. >> Okay. Are there any questions? the board of his testimony. >> I just want to see a picture. >> Madam Chair, I >> think you've uh you've helped us greatly.
>> I think your board engineer just general comments before we wrap up, >> please. >> Okay. >> Um my June letter of last year pointed out that we didn't have a signed and sealed survey. Uh my October 6th letter
said I got a survey, but it wasn't signed and sealed. I still don't have the survey. Um they also there was also discussion at the October 8th that we were going to get a calculation of the building height based
upon the survey which would have given us topography. Do we have any of that? >> Uh can we let the engineer testify? Yes. He was the one that was subcontracting the surveyor. >> Yes. So we sub uh sub subcontracted with Morgan Surveying who had prepared the
original survey that we used for the site plan. Uh they had gone out um they had prepared an updated survey, boundary survey. However, when they first went out, they failed to get the topography needed to calculate the building height. Sent them back out. They got topography,
but not on all four sides. They only got it in the rear where the equipment was going. So, they just went back out, I think maybe uh end of last week, and they couldn't get the shots they needed because because of the the ice buildup around the building. So, they still have to go back and get uh the shots on the
three sides. >> So, that is forthcoming. Um hopefully as soon as this ice melts, we can get that and get that submitted. >> Will that impact your height variance? It won't impact the antenna height above the roof level because um
but right but we will it impact was there another variance >> it speaks to you can't modify a non-conforming building we don't know if that building or how much non-conforming that building is >> without the building height right >> so we was we amended our application to
see the variance for that >> right >> can we approve it without knowing the exact heights >> could we could do it under the that they submit it and complies. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> We can do it that way. >> You agree with that? >> Well, we know they don't. >> We know they don't comply. We know they don't. >> We're seeking for it. They will,
>> but they will. >> We just don't know the exact mention. >> No, the building is >> the the building right now as it exists is non-conforming as to height. So, we're seeking that variance anyway. >> Um, it's just a matter of >> how much Yeah.
>> Exactly. >> So, how do you how do you write that in a resolution? >> I can. >> You could do it. >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah, >> great. >> You're that good. >> That good. >> Wow. >> Of course. I have complete trust in Mr. Johnson. >> We do too. >> I mean, obviously, you're going to provide a survey. You're going to
provide it to >> Mr. and he's got to review it for resolution. >> Yes. >> Right. And the other thing is we haven't received a site plan since September of last year. So, I really can't advise the board as far as what this is compared to
my initial review as far as nonconformities and dimensions and all that stuff. >> And now that we know the board likes this auction, we will have the uh the drawings revised and submitted to you for review. >> Okay. Well, if the board is okay with making that decision, making a decision
without getting that information, that's the board's perfect long enough. >> We can we can put a condition. >> Yeah, absolutely. Right. >> We were planning on we wanted to show this to you first rather than revise the plan and then have to revise it again
for a fourth time. >> Benefit of doubt not to postpone the case as a condition. >> Yes. >> Agreed. >> Right. >> Yes. >> We could close the public portion of the meeting approval subject to final review
by Mr. Leandowitz. Is that what you're going to do? Yep. The practical thing is the hold up to the call center is moving this antenna. >> Correct. >> And that isn't going to be able to be accomplished unless we have a vote tonight on
approving. Correct. >> Yes, that's correct. So, how quickly do you think you can get these materials back to >> because we need to have them in order to put you on the agenda and approve it. >> That's not what he just said. >> Approve the resolution. We just need
resolution. >> The resolution. >> Yeah. Not for them to come back, >> right? >> Just to approve the final language in a resolution, >> right? >> So, >> so we could vote approve, let's just say. >> Yes. >> And then the paperwork has to be done without us. Correct. Right.
>> Do so as expeditiously as possible. >> Okay. Mr. Lmanowitz, >> I have no further questions. >> You agree with that? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. Any other questions from the board? >> John, the ball's in your court. >> Okay. Um, I can do a quick summation unless the Okay.
>> I take cues from the board. >> Is there any job easy job? >> Anyone in the >> questions for the audience? >> Yes. Are there any questions in the audience for the testimony that was just given? I see none >> comments for or against.
>> Are there any comments for or against? >> I see none. >> Would someone like to uh form a resolution? >> Okay. in uh the matter of uh T-Mobile 1280 route 46 block 7 712 lots 43.1
zone B2 minor site plan with C D variances to construct a permanent wireless facility and Mr. Johnson you want to take it from there >> well you're I take it you're authorizing me to draft a resolution of approval
>> subject to the review by Mr. Le Manowitz and um and subject to Mr. Le Manowitz's review of the additional items that he's going to receive. >> Second, Jos Gross. >> Yes. And I'd like to make a statement. I I just want to thank T-Mobile. Your
patience with all of this has been tremendous and you did accommodate the residents and you should be, you know, we should say good job for T-Mobile, but thank you very much and I'm sorry it took so long. >> Thank you. Appreciate it. Jositz,
>> yes. >> Yes. >> Neglia, >> yes. >> Ready? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Thank you very much, everybody. Have a good >> lots of luck. >> Before we uh tomorrow, >> it doesn't look like our uh >> you guys get to work. >> The golf ball's in your court.
>> That's right. Get to work. >> It doesn't look like our uh >> Mr. L showed up. >> Yeah. >> You haven't heard. So you need a motion to dismiss the application without prejudice. >> Okay, I make that motion. >> Second.
>> Can we in favor? >> I >> I got a question here. >> Question. >> No question. >> Is that Is there any way that we can notify them to come back up? >> He's going to have to follow his application >> all over again. >> Not all here.
>> Perfect. Thank you. >> Fired. Too bad. >> Fired. >> Motion to adjoin the meeting. >> Second. >> Moved. Sandy. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.