##VIDEO ID:oSzWLQQiE3I## all righty um board memb since tonight is reorganization I will read the opening statement we'll take roll call and then we will take nominations for chair of the board for this year uh this is a regular meeting of the Princeton Zoning Board of adjustment being held electronically via zoom on January 22nd 2025 at 7:30 p.m. pursuing to section 13 of the open public meetings act adequate notice of the time and place of this meeting has been given by prominently posting the sunshine notice of the Princeton Zoning Board of adjustment such notice has been placed on the official bulletin board at the Princeton Municipal complex and by transmitting a copy of the notice to the Princeton packet town topics the times Trentonian and by filing a copy with the clerk of Princeton on January 17 2025 and it has been posted to the municipal website pursuing to the extension of the ongoing state of emergency by executive order 292 in accordance with the emergency remote public meeting protocol for local public bodies to conduct a public meeting without physical attendance by the members of the public notice that during this extension of State emergency all regular and special meetings of the Princeton zoning Board of adjustment will be held electronically via via Zoom was trans okay I'm repeating myself uh such notices have been placed on the official bulletin board at the Princeton Municipal complex and on the Princeton website and will be maintained throughout the year by transmitting a copy of same to the Princeton packet town topics the times Trenton and by fining a copy thereof with the clerk of Princeton notices have also been placed on all window doors of the municipal complex uh Claud if you could take the roll call please miss Chen here Coulson here Mr Floy here Mr Shriver here Mr tenom here Mr Cohen here Mr Stein here Miss Donna yes thank you board members now uh we are moving into reorganization of the board and I would ask for uh nominations for chair I would like to nominate step Cohen for another year second and do we have a second second second all right and do uh do we have a motion to close nominations so moved and second all right clay if you take a roll call vote please miss Chen yes Miss Coulson yes Mr Floy yes Mr Shriver yes Mr Tenon Bal yes Mr Cohen yes I guess Mr Stein yes Miss Donna yes thank you all right Steve I turn the meeting over to you as chair thank you well thank you all I appreciate your vot of confidence um happy New Year okay um we have two resolutions this evening and three application Steve we're not done with oh I'm sorry we have to reorganization so the next thing would be nomination for vice chair I'll name nominate Steve shriber for Vice chair okay and do we have a second yes and do we have a motion to close nominations Mo so moved I'll and second I'll second all now if the board wishes I think we could hold the roll call vote also take care of the next two matters appoint of attorney and secretari and do all three of them then with one roll call vote if that works for everyone yes so moved I'm comfortable with it yes okay so then the next two matters are my reappointment um as your attorney for this year and the appointment of uh our reappointment of our board secretary Claudia so moved who is that Stephen shriber and second I'll second it all right now Claudia let's take a roll call vote to cover these uh three items please miss Chen yes Miss Coulson yes Mr Floy yes Mr schriver yes Mr tenom yes Mr Stein yes Miss Donna yes chairman Cohen yes thank you you okay now I believe we can move on to the resolutions right all right there were two resolutions that are in your packet the first is uh case number Z24 d338 195 South Harrison block 11001 lot 26 in the R5 and the R5 s r5t Zone so are there any comments on the resolution clarifications questions comments or motions I'm move approval Floyd thank you second anyone second thanks laia can you call the r laia you're muted Miss Chen yes Miss Coulson yes Mr Floy yes Mr Shriver yes Mr tenom yes Mr Stein yes kman Cohen yes thank you you're welcome okay the next hearing or the next resolution is case number Z24 d563 uh 95 Library Place block 1201 Lot 8 in the R4 Zone r48 doesn't make sense in the R1 SLB Zone okay same thing resolutions are in your packet questions comments or a motion um I I think the uh the height to setback ratio is shown correctly in the in the table but within the body of the text it's not quite right I think it needs to be a colon so on page four and five the 1.5 it's supposed to be colon 0.38 got it thank you so that appears twice yep any other comments someone would like to make a motion I'll love to approve thank you do we have a second thank you okay cloria Miss Chen yes Miss Coulson yes Mr Floy yes Mr Shriver yes Mr tenom yes Mr Stein yes chairman Cohen yes thank you okay we have three applications this evening FL I assume there are people waiting to be admitted um yes give me one one second I just um got to move people over Ryan we can't hear you ah sorry about that uh good evening everyone what do you need me to bring over uh for 13 Prospect uh this is the one that we requested to be carried so I I I actually don't have anyone else uh for for this one to bring over okay all right okay well first of all um Karen are the notices in order for this uh yes the applicant Reen noticed for this application uh and the noticing is in order the board has jurisdiction tonight um I gather though the applicant is asking to carry it yeah um thank you Karen Mr chairman um so uh we did uh were able to get notices out uh it was a little challenging uh to to to do so on this one uh but uh ultimately our Engineers H has a little bit more work to do uh when we came from our recommendation from HPC and as you saw in uh uh the memos from your professionals there are a few details that we'd like to be able to show you uh particularly about the trash enclosure uh and the uh revised uh program along the left side of the property uh there's currently a a recessed driveway that's going to be uh leveled out and the recommendation from both from professionals and from HPC uh was to to have some details to show about that unfortunately they're just not completed yet um ideally would like to carry without notice we did Grant an extension to the ml deadline through uh through March um but I certainly understand your discretion but that that would be our request tonight and Mr Kenny you're not the plans that you will be submitting don't seek uh any additional variances than uh I think what was reviewed by Mr Bridger December that that is correct in fact the original application uh had variances for front yard parking um we've actually removed those from the plan the really only variances will will be related to the the elevator tower that that ultimately we believe the board in HBC uh really liked U but in removing the parking spaces or reducing it down to one Ada space um what was a recess driveway kind of uh headed below ground at a at a kind of steep angle has been lifted up to be level uh with the street for better Ada access but there's it changes what the view of the trash enclosure would be on the recommendation from HPC would be to to be able to show that in some more detail than we did conceptually and uh that is not yet complete no will you be will we be hearing this in March or are you going you carrying it till March would you be able to submit it for the February hearing we believe we would be able to submit it for February uh the and particularly that we I believe the nature of what we'll be revising would be not revised plans so much as exhibits but we'll in either event should have all of that to your Professionals in time for the February meeting if if that fits your schedule well certainly understand um if it doesn't we would we would yield to um what works for for uh the board and and what the schedule is uh for other applications but we would be able to have that in time for February er do we have you're mut you're muted sorry excuse me um yeah this is you know no uh offense intended this is the second time this has happened in two months so uh I have other applications that I'm not going to hold up uh I'm going to place them on the February application date and then we could hear this case on the the 26th of March if that's agreeable um then you won't have to notice but um next month but I didn't want to it might not get heard and get bumped and I don't understod understood so for the benefit of anybody in the uh audience who may have been here tonight for the application it's being carried to March 26 and the applicant will not be required to do further noticing regarding that application okay thank you Mr kened right thank you all okay ran for the next one who do you need to all right um looking down the list if it's in the same order that uh that I see uh the first two cherish Joseph and David Schmidt uh and then James mcnight and Matt Flynn the first one is Joseph and yes the next one that's uh that's case Z24 d535 874 Kingston Road yes the noticing is in order and the board has J diction tonight to hear the application okay um okay let's uh begin all right this is as I said KZ 24- 535 874 Kingston Road Block 4703 lot 35 and the r5t Zone uh Karen as you said everything is all the papay for workor is in order the notice correct okay all right um Mr Burger can you give us just a summary your memo yes and Derek let me just swear you in for the evening do you swear firm your testimony this evening will be truthful yes ma'am I do thank you thank you uh Sheriff Joseph and devia pulo are the owners and applicants of 874 Kingston Road it's located in the r5t zone They are seeking a uh C2 variants to permit the construction of a new home and acception to the required front yard setback and lot area um the property's non-complying with regard to the required 21,780 ft lot area the existing is 20787 square ft and the existing single family home is not complying with respect to the required front yard setback along Shadybrook the required is 38 a half feet and the existing is 3.08 feet the applicant is proposing to demolish uh the existing one-story house and construct a new approximately uh 4,300 ft home Fe feur in living room dining room family room kitchen four bedrooms four and a half bath and an attached twocc car garage um it appears they will use some of the existing Foundation the project requires variances for lot area requirements 21780 existing is 20787 and the setback on uh Shadybrook uh the required front yard setback is 38 and a half feet in Pro proposed will be 30.01 feet um the applicant should it advise if they have approached any of the joining uh land owners um to see if uh excuse me there's anybody willing to sell a portion of our lot to Cur the deficiency or purchase the subject lot um they've requested consideration under the C2 criteria if you have any questions I'd be glad to try to answer them thank you board members any questions okay um Mr Kennedy M chairman C thank you so much members of the board happy New Year um my name is Ryan Kennedy from Stevens and Lee I'm here on behalf of the new homeowners here who are on tonight uh cherish and uh uh Diva we'll hear from them in a moment uh and I'll don't let the the size of the team we brought uh fo you ultimately we're here about a uh lot siiz Varian as an existing lot with the existing home will show that the lot next door unfortunately is also undersized and not a source for uh acquiring any additional property uh the second lot U possibly they will show you uh that it likely would create a sidey setback uh situation with them but we've approached them and there has not been interest in in selling that piece of property um we'll also talk about uh the second front yard setback uh the existing home as Mr Bridger said uh is about 30 ft from uh this Second Street and we're proposing to reuse the foundation and essentially uh have the home in that same location though as you'll see um altering the garage currently there is a sidef facing non-complying essentially front-facing garage um we're going to rebuild that and set it back 8 ft to comply uh so the amount of home uh that be to be reused from a foundation perspective is um actually quite limited compared to what is there now so we pulling uh a big piece of the new home back from the current location and you'll we'll also show you the um adjacent properties though it is an interesting street from a prevailing setback perspective uh it it is a corner uh so there's not many examples and it's a curved Street and the homes you know immediately next door have actually a shorter setback so it's an interesting situation from a prevailing setback perspective but we are both honoring the existing home location but pulling it back slightly and with less Frontage along the street than there is currently fixing uh the non-conforming garage situation and uh we hope you'll see in a way that makes sense with the rest of the street uh in addition to our property owners uh for their home tonight who will introduce themselves in a second uh we've got David Schmidt our uh civil engineer James mcnight our architect uh and Matt Flynn are planner to provide testimony out of if it makes sense to have them all sworn in up front could do that or or as as they speak uh Karen mure what's what's easier on your we can I think we can swear every everyone in um let's see Mr Flynn Mr Schmidt you're muted at the moment also Mr Joseph and Miss paloo so if you would all and Mr mcnight if you would all raise your right hand do you swear or affirm your testimony this evening will be truthful I do I do yes thank you all right thank you so much uh with that uh uh chish if you want to uh unmute yourself and if you guys want to introduce yourself uh to the board uh and uh you know your connection to Princeton and your your uh soon to be new home sure happy New Year and good evening everyone I'm chish and I'm here with my wife Divia uh Divia say hello hello everyone happy New Year we have two Austin and Brian TW and and one thing unique about them is they share the same birthday we had a our it was like last week uh but anyway so first of all we' like to thank you all for taking the time to consider our matter tonight it's truly been a a journey to get here we little bit about uh us we sold our property in 2022 and we moved from Bridgewater to Princeton you know the the market was after losing out to several bits we were fortunate to finally secure this home and we are really excited about this place and hopeful that we'll be able to move forward with the next steps um thank you again uh for your time and attention do may you want add anything yeah pretty much uh Church covered everything um you know investing in a house in Princeton is not just about owning a property it's about creating um foundation for our an educational success for my two kids um you know in this current market we had been struggling to get a house and um you know we are fortunate to you know lock one in Princeton um you know safe and suring environment and you know uh children's growth is the priority for us so there's a lot thought a lot of thoughts uh put in uh before we signed up uh for this um kids jobs safe environment uh and we couldn't come up with a better better place and we consider ourselves lucky and thank you so much and back to you Ryan thank you so much um and uh don't don't go uh anywhere too uh yet if it's all right with the Mr chairman um we have one set of exhibits we'd like to to Mark U this evening slideshow I believe it's 18 slides we intend to show sure please all right if I remember where the share button is I will do that now so uh uh terish um if we could just the first few slides here I believe this is the Princeton zoning map showing Mr Bridger said the uh Zone um it's not I don't see don't see it apologies I uh you know that is the second time I did that today so let's try it again there we go there we go apologies there's an extra button that uh Zoom has introduced that I've uh failed to uh to bastter so apologies um cherish uh if you could um on slide two here I know Mr Bridger said this was at the your your property is in the R5 former Township zone is that Arrow Point uh to uh to where your house is going to be that's right and and across the street though that's the that's the uh uh uh the lake that you're excited to be near yes of course uh then as we usually do uh slide three this is an aerial photo of the neighborhood so we're kind of zoomed in here you can see that's uh um your your street and the the green pin is where your house will be that's right zooming in a little bit further I guess uh uh the blue box is your property that's right and um and then as we get into the uh neighborhood view here um uh on the top side um that's uh a neighbor that you know quite well because he's going to help you with your your home uh above uh and the other lot that is uh undersized in the neighborhood and then the other houses kind of surrounding you is that correct with your your house in blue yeah that's right all right uh so uh I'm they're not certainly not going anywhere but obviously before I switch to our um engineer if there are any questions for the homeowner applicant happy to to take them now Mr Kennedy I just have one uh question or clarification you'd indicated that your client did contact the owner I'm assuming yes uh and appreciate we have a a future slide on that but might as well you do okay that's fine we get and I'll just I'll note for the record that we have a a picture of the letter with the you know the details of the neighbor name and address kind of blocked out uh but we'll submit separately as a uh you know for for for your file the actual letter and and postal information and I'm and your clients is it their testimony then that they got no response to that letter I I'll cherish is it is it correct that um uh we on your behalf uh reached out to uh uh the neighbor and this picture to the left um who may have some property and that there was no no response or interested in the purchase that is correct okay thank you um so with that uh our next witness uh will be our engineer uh David Schmidt uh David if you could briefly uh give the board the benefit of your uh background in credential so I could have you accept it as an expert here tonight sure um I'm a professional engineer um state of New Jersey uh got my license in 1996 and I've been practicing ever since uh well David you've testified for us before we'll accept your credentials many things uh so uh David I guess we're we start on uh slide six here this is the uh existing conditions of the property maybe we just want to quickly take the board through uh what's what's there now and particularly I guess we have Set uh circled that one setback in question that we'll we'll be talking about tonight okay well as you said we're at 874 Princeton Kingston Road which is a corner lot it's block as we said 4703 lot 35 so if you looking at the scan or at the picture right here uh to the bottom you have Shady Brook Lane and on the other side we have um New Jersey Kingston Princeton Kingston Road um since we have a corner lot you have two setbacks um two prevailing setbacks to to handle So currently the house is AIS from Shady Brook Lane there's a ranch house on the property um and we are going to the next slide but basically we're just going to demolish this existing house and utilize the uh the footprint for it um as we said the property is 27 is 2,787 it's 0.47 0.472 Acres um per the ordinance the lot areas should be 20 21,780 or 0.5 we're currently 900 93 Square ft short we're also seeking a front yard prevailing setback uh as we see on the plans you have the typical 25e setback in the front along Shady Brook Lane and then what we do is we request from the township um they they go up with the prevailing setback which is a number of houses down the street and they give me the answer and the answer they said for the prevailing setback is 38 f.5 so when we it's it's not clear on here but the prevailing setback I don't know if you could point it out it's basically where we indented the property so this is what Ryan's saying we're holding the foundation in the front point and then we're notching it back and then we're holding the 30.5 as we extend the garage and have a side entry garage um the applicant is proposing a 2 and a half story 43 46 foot house single family home uh the the proposed new dwelling will have a two-car garage um a storm management report and plan is required as we're proposing over 400 square ft of new impervious surface coverage the increase in pervy surface coverage is 1,958 square feet um which gives me a lock coverage of 25.6 and the ordinance allows 36% so we're not asking for any lock coverage of varant and we're not even close to exceeding the maximum lock coverage that is allowed on the property um but we do need to have storm Water Management we will address the increase in impervious surface coverage from storm water management per the Princeton small projects ordinance uh section T1 uh t10b 33 1.1 what we're going to do here is we're going to propose the perious driveway pavement and perious walks to meet the regulation requirements so after we utilize the house put the house and we have a detached or a garage we have a new access point for the driver driveway as we come in and get into the driveway that is going to be all porest pavement and then the walks around the house will also be all pores pavement and uh we provided uh a calculations a operation and maintenance manual and demonstrating that we comply with your ordinance um so that's how we're going to handle the stormw management it it does meet the RS it was submitted as part of this documentation uh we got no comments with I don't think we get comments during the zoning but uh We believe We comply with the ordinance and the intent of the ordinance um as part of this development we're knocking down uh 10 existing trees uh per the Princeton tree replacement ordinance 18 trees are required and we're proposing 20 trees um we're providing screening along the uh Westerly property line and we're also screening along the Northerly property line and we're also scattering trees throughout the property um we're proposing um Leland Cyprus and green giant araris along the property lines for screening and we're providing American Red Bud throughout the property and we meet the ordinance requirement for that um as far as the drainage patterns and uh in impacts to adjacent Property Owners we're basically putting the house exactly where it was before we're not changing any of the grading around it there is no drainage impacts to the adjacent properties um the prop the property lot 34 which is the property closest to the driveway it has the poorest pavement I pitched the driveway from the property line toward our house and then it shoots down the roadway so no increase or impacts to the adjacent properties uh due to the increase in perious surface coverage for the driveway um all the other adjacent properties which is the two roadways and then lot um I guess it's lot 34 uh do not have any increas in impacts um uh the engineering plot and Architectural ples I I believe uh fit into this property seamlessly it's it's not a major um grading or or disturbance um the proposed dwelling is located in the same location as the previous dwelling thus no ecological environmental change to the property um the existing property is currently served by public sewer public water Gas and Electric and local telephone and the proposed Welling will access utilities uh utilizing the same connections where as possible and the local garbage will be collected on a daily on a weekly basis so I mean we spent a lot of time on the the design of this the storm water manage with this and the storm water management which we had to do we did uh soil testing um to make sure that we had the right separation um and come up with the best of means practicable design design that would fit for this property and and I I think we came up with a a nice nice plan this was the third iteration that we went through before we were in front of this board so this is what we finally came up with which I think is the best fit couple more uh things David uh in this next slide you know we we do need that lot area variance I think on the right here um if we have our lot the one to the right of that um that we touch is also undersized unfortunately uh so not a source of uh of of additional land uh then the the lot above us while not undiz that's the one we reached out we've got a little picture of the letter with the names blacked out of our attempt to uh purchase part of it but also um we tried to show uh you know to to get that thousand square feet with about a hundred feet of uh common lot line you know we're looking at about 10 feet into their property with the 15 foot setback requirement it's it seems likely that even if they were interested uh that we wouldn't be able to handle things without perhaps uh uh creating a you're right it comes exactly it's 110 FT Property Line you have 99 993 square feet 110 divided by 9993 comes up to be 9 ft you have 19 ft you're going to create a a setback variance so you're you're either alleviating one one for us but then you're creating a variance on the adjacent line yeah so we while we think it would create a variance condition for them we we did ask anyway because I I suppose it would also be a variance to have a not straight lot line between the properties but uh just wanted to cross all RTS and and RIS uh there um uh D the next next piece I guess we've got the existing house and the the revised house existing left revised on the right so you could see while we are using some of the foundation to basically keep the part of it in the same location it is now I guess you can you can also see where the garage which currently is we'll say front facing or second front facing in a in a way that the neighborhood character does not permit uh is now notched into the conforming location and complying with the uh with the neighborhood character rules is that uh do I have that right with this one you have exactly right and that's that's the third iteration that we came up with to to comply with Derek bridger's comments and and going around and this actually came out to be uh a very nice design architecturally as as far as engineering comes we have a nice design that that fits seamlessly but then when you look at the architecture which you're going to get to uh the the elevations have just really came out even better from what we had originally um I think just one last thing for you just to point out you know that the garage location with rear facing and recessed from the front line of the home by 8 ft complies with the um neighborhood character rules for corner lot garages uh whereas the the current home definitely does not so not only are we pulling part part of that uh current house that's in the front yard set back back but we're we're turning the a non-compliant garage situation into a to a compliant one correct and then uh we've got the next slide I guess 11 shows the neighborhood view um the interesting you know there there's no different rules for prevailing setback when a road is not straight but it is kind of hard to to visualize the the patterns when it's curved on a on a corner like this so the I guess we we're trying to show that the the two homes next door um that create the prevailing setback actually are uh closer at least the one next door is closer to the street than than we propose to be and both have um uh protruding garages where we will be uh not only further back from the street but also having the garage re uh recess further back even than the part that we're measuring from uh the the house next door for example has a uh a front-facing garage that protrudes um and creates a setback situation will be further back from that entirely and then the Garage further back than that um so with that before we move to our architect um I guess I'll ask if uh David if you think you've missed anything and if not uh uh if if uh board or your professionals have any questions for our engineer I have a question it would be both the engineer and the architect but I'll just the you don't have to mention it now the architect can answer it but it's a new house why could you why couldn't you comply with the setback why do you need a variance in a new house so keep that in mind as you move through your presentation okay right thank you I guess we'll we'll we'll do it combination of uh uh answers of that with uh you know a lot of it is to reuse I think parts of the home that that exist including the foundation uh but have a good reason to uh introduce our architect next uh so uh James if you could may I ask a question though before you move on I think it fits in here sure um I I think I'm just am I am I right that the new house I I drove by today and I was looking at the trees partly because I saw two sentences that didn't quite seem to make sense to me one was the second paragraph the proposed dwelling is being located in the same vicinity as the existing dwelling thus no ecological Andor environmental change to the property um I always kind of keep an eye out for what's going on with the trees um so and I don't think these are legal terms so the sentence that starts the next paragraph which says 10 existing trees will be removed seems to be in conflict with that previous sentence I worried I'm less worried now because I was worried about those large trees um amazingly tall trees like I I the pine trees that are at the corner uh I don't know which corner I to call it but um it's the rear of the of the existing house okay yeah yes and um it looks to me am I right it looks like the new house even though you you say it's on the same footprint it looks like it's it's pulled back so it's not going to be as close is that correct I don't think that's correct hold on I believe they're both AB budding the property uh they they're both abing the 15 foot yard setback no but I'm I'm talking about where they it looks to me in this existing conditions drawing yeah I mean do you it looks like those three they look like spiders but those represent the trees are right are touching practically touching the house and in the in the SEC in the picture that you're pointing putting the arrow on right now it's as though the ones that are I now I'm trying to look at Point with my finger but it does no good um there are two that are like towards the Lakeside that actually seem like there's a little bit of breathing room there right there must be a notch that would be more for the architect but yeah he might have notched the okay sorry but those those trees are concerned for for our you know our our house as well as the the adjacent house they're they're they're they got to be 40 feet tall I mean they're getting to the their their end of their um life Span in my opinion because they're getting so big um and there'll be a detriment to our house as well as the adjacent house so you are gonna be removing those trees yes oh I don't see where that's marked um if you looked at the plans there my plans I mean as opposed to these slides my plans do have uh a next through them um I guess maybe I did see that earlier which concerned me and then when I was looking at these I thought oh I was wrong no they're they're slated to be moved because I think they're too big I mean obviously we're not putting we're not going to affect the the RO you're you're an engineer have you consulted with an arborist by any uh I did not consult with an arborist no so I would I guess I would go back to my original statement which is I'm not sure what is meant by the sentence there no ecological Andor environmental change those are pretty significant changes um I I think we're we're mitigating the same trees with with more amount of trees um and we're me yeah you you know that there's a big difference unless you're planning to T plant not I'm not gonna argue I meanes we're not changing the grading we're not changing the you know most you know 65% of the lot we're just to changing the V of the vicinity around the building it's an ecological or environmental change unless there's some legal term a definition of that that I don't know but I don't think there is um I would just I don't know that this is within our purview but I would I would encourage checking with I know it's not convenient to build near trees and might be hard to keep them alive when they're that close but I would encourage you to check with somebody whose business it is to know about whether a tree is going to have a longer life than I mean there trees that live 100 years so I don't know how old those are but I don't know if you do either that's that's a a bare comment and and and definitely we can look into that you know there's some was some thought into pulling the house back a bit to that just to avoid them a bit I think our thinking was that that might not be enough but we'll happy to work with both the towns are s and and our team to see you ultimately these are essentially up against the existing home and I think it was approached with the concern that they were already at end of life and very close to the existing home even without altering the home uh but excellent you know very good point and again happy to work both with the municipal arborist and our own team to see what can be done uh with those absent you know not having you know certainly a house there but uh But ultimately that there um some effort was made uh for for different reasons it sounds like to to notch the front of the revised home at least in that corner away from two of those trees uh so there may be a little bit more room in the after condition than there is currently for them uh but that's something we can look at and and work with the the town's arborist and our own our own team uh on to see what um whether they should be and then and how they could be um maintained good thanks so with that if there's something else for our engineer um happy to uh ask our architect uh James Knight to uh um introduce himself and uh give the board the benefit of of his credentials so I can have you entered as an expert this evening thank you thank you um I appeared in front of this board uh a number of years ago for the adjacent property uh but uh to remind you uh I'm a graduate of Cooper Union in New York City in 1977 Bachelor of architecture I was licensed in New York state in 81 and in New Jersey in 83 I've been operating my own business since 1984 so we're 40 years into uh uh my own business you're currently licensed in New Jersey yes I am okay I think unless any of the board members have any question I think we would accept you as an expert right you thank you James um uh a couple of things that questions kind of load up in advance here but I guess you know we we've got a couple slides of your of the uh um uh elevations of the front and in this case the side two things kind of want to talk about one um you know at the bottom left with the front elevation uh and just just notes to make sure you get to I think that front right corner where there's you know an existing uh part of the current home that will remain essentially a one story part that is closest to the tree that we were just talking about with Miss Coulson um and so the you know design choices and kind of reuse of that part of the building uh I think is of particular interest then um uh the top right is that side profile facing the side street where uh part of uh part of the existing home and Foundation I guess would be reused and kept in place uh but the other parts stepped back so if we you know as you're take us through design uh I know the board was interested in those those two uh those two pieces of things all right uh as Mr Kennedy said these are the two streets views the primary one on the lower part of the page is what's facing the lake across the street um as you can see it has uh lots of Windows for the view of the lake it has two external balconies on the second level uh so that you can come outside and look across the street at the water uh it has a uh a covered porch in the center between the two uh Gable Bays that come forward and then the main entrance is to the right uh looking on the side uh the corner of the building has yet even more windows for the obvious purpose of looking at the lake across the street and uh as you can see by the shadows of what's projected there that that whole rear wing of the building is pushed back to conform to the uh the the side street uh requirements but the the reason the other thing is where it is is because we're trying to reuse the existing Foundation underneath there these are the other two uh elevations uh the larger one is the rear of the building that shows the uh two-car garage door facing the rear yard not facing the street uh there's uh big sliding glass doors that come out to a a deck a rear deck in the back of the house uh the other elevation is the uh the north side facing the neighbor where the big trees are at currently uh you can see the one-story part uh on the lower section and then the house steps back uh to to rise up to its uh full 34 feet height now um on on the left side this is the one story section that is uh closest to the those trees that Miss Coulson was was asking about before will will uh parts of this Foundation be reused or uh in that area yeah that that's part of the way the the building is now correct so ultimately um would you expect there to be significant additional you know disturbance to the root area that I suppose is either already Disturbed or already encumbered with basement and and house there uh no it's you know it's they're up against the same uh they'll be up against the same wall uh but obviously the bigger the tree the bigger the root system so okay um but in that area there's not significant expansion or no found being done okay correct uh and I guess the same question on on the right side um the intention is to reuse at least a portion of the existing foundation in uh that location where the home is now correct and uh from a design perspective that if you were to abandon that essentially um what would there be other design impacts to that particularly with the garage that would have to be even further uh pulled into the uh you know challenges in designing a neighborhood character compliant Garage on a corner lot at that point uh I'm I'm I'm missing your question if if we made the whole house conform to the setback is that what you're asking yes but the um would that have implications in the way you've designed the garage would that have to be further um pulled back um in order to be compliant this this garage is set back 8 ft from that front line yeah no if we you know I mean the whole design would have to be altered if if we lost that part of the floor plan it would it would shake up you know everything the way the building is designed at the moment so it's it's hard for me to just say you know slice off that piece of salami but you know it it would you'd have to come up with a whole new design basically um any other details about the uh Home Design I know you're obviously you're saying trying to maximize the uh view of the uh of the lake certainly from right I think the house the way it's designed takes full advantage of the corner site and the you know spectacular view that it has of the nice Lake and the the uh you know boats going by um before I open up the questions any other uh pieces from an architecture perspective you'd like to share uh no all right um so uh certainly to know we we tried to answer some of the previewed questions but certainly happy to uh answer any other questions to the board or your professionals behalf Mr chairman can you show the front ele any questions of the can you show the front elevation again there it is what is the design feature in those Gables is that vertical oh it's it's a Hardy a hard product that's like you know that imitates Bor and batten okay thank you yeah and then you know the horizontal sighting is other Hardy Products that come in a variety of nice colors and everything okay thank you you're welcome I do well let's finish and then I'll ask my question all right do you Mr Kennedy any other Witnesses uh yes um our uh next witness would be our uh planner uh Matt if you could uh Matt fln could U unmute yourself and and intoduce yourself to the board sorry about that sorry about the delay there uh good evening mat if you could briefly give the board uh the benefit of your background and and credentials as a planner sure uh my education comes from Rucker University I have my master's degree in planning and public policy I have my professional planner license in the state of New Jersey as well as the national licenser which is the aicp license um I've testified before over a 100 boards across the state I think this is my uh first time to have the privilege to testify here though okay I uh I'm comfortable with your credal IAL if any unless any of other board members have a concern so thank you Mr chairman um and before I guess your planning testimony I know you uh your team has uh some drone uh uh capabilities so we have a couple of photos that you guys are responsible for but perhaps as let me know which what you'd like me to show as you're uh taking us through the uh the variant testimony but I believe this slide 14 is a aerial photo that uh your team was able to to get correct and I think uh just before I go through those if we could go back to the um I think it was what two slides three slides uh hold on a second right before the uh elevations the aerial map with the with the parcels shown could we just go back to that I don't know there we go one here yeah yeah and am I zoomed in okay yeah so I just wanted to leave this on the screen just by way of background while I go over sort of the um the the overview of the parcel real quick here again we are talking about one tax slot that is very slightly undersized per zoning um we're talking about a lot that's 20787 Square ft we're just about 1,000 square ft short of the uh zoning minimum of 21,780 square ft it's not a noticeable um it's not a noticeable difference on the ground again this is a corner lot it's a highly visible lot uh and by way of this being a corner lot there is exaggerated Frontage um both along Shady Brook and and Princeton Princeton Kingston Road there um we are in the r R5 Zone we are talking about a permitted use it's an existing permitted use again it's a replacement in kind from a use perspective replacing a uh an existing permitted use with a proposed uh permitted use in the zone uh as was mentioned we are requesting two variances both are existing conditions uh lot area like I mentioned that's an existing condition we're not changing the lot lines um we're simply uh redeveloping the home and then front setback we're proposing 30.1 feet whereas 38.5 ft is required again it's a it's a prevailing requirement there we have to look at the other homes uh along the street here but again it is an improvement over the 30.8 Ft that's existing so we are actually pulling that that front setback uh further back albeit slightly but again not exacerbating any existing uh non-conforming conditions uh so with that I guess we can go through those drone shots yeah so here we're looking at obviously the property on the corner of Shady Brook and Princeton Kingston the front yard that we see in the front of the screen here is Princeton Kingston uh Road Frontage uh right across the street from from from Lake Carnegie there uh the front setback you're looking at here is 89.7 ft which is essentially what we have right next door so we have nice compatibility there um which obviously is nice and and it meets the intent of the zoning to have this uh setbacks that meet the the prevailing neighborhood uh so if we could just go to the next one there we get the view of the lake right across the street as was noted by the architect uh one of the nice improvements of this home is that we do get these nice uh Windows along the front of the property to give the residents a nice view of that Lake uh I'll go to the next slide this is just a simple aerial image top down we see that non-conforming front setback along Shady Brook um but as was noted this is not going to necessarily stand out in the context of what we see elsewhere along Shady Brook in fact the home directly next to us is uh slightly closer to the street uh so again it's not going to stand out in terms of being too close and we do have that 89 ft along uh Princeton Kingston so in terms of light air open space um this is not this doesn't really constitute overdevelopment it's not going to appear crammed in in the context of everything that's around it we do have some nice space uh built in um and Matt just from from this view um the back portion of this property that is currently in l-shape uh in the new configuration that part will actually be pulled back uh into a compliant location whereas now it's not compliant is that uh the case correct yes yeah as was noted by uh by the prior Witnesses that's that's correct um eliminating that non-conforming condition of the front-facing garage um which is another uh positive which I'll get into the positive criteria in just a moment uh so I think there's one more or am I no that's it okay so just to tie all that into the statutory criteria again we're not requesting any D variances um this is two existing C variances I think we can look to both the C2 test as well as the C1 test um so just to start with the C2 test it's a balancing test we look at the benefits of the application as a whole um and whether they outweigh the any potential detriments caused by these uh variances so to do so we look at the municipal land use law which sets forth some nice uh criteria in terms of the purposes of zoning that that all all good zoning is is meant to um uh promote so purpose a promotion of the general welfare again this is replacement in kind from a use perspective we're not proposing anything that's going to stand out uh we're not proposing any non-permitted uses we're not exacerbating any uh setback requirements in fact like uh C just noted it is actually an improvement in some respects purpose G variety of uses in appropriate locations um again permitted use in the zone making it more comfortable more attractive uh more desirable again without triggering any new variants relief I think that's really at the core of of good planning um getting a nice Improvement of the site while uh while keeping it within the confines of of what's there and within the and respecting the the zoning purpose ey is desirable visual environment again this is going to be an attractive upgrade we do have some nice Landscaping which we can uh see on the screen here that's proposed we are keeping the dwelling in the uh sa excuse me uh the same vicinity as the existing dwelling uh really respecting that existing Foundation um increasing that front setback and eliminating that front-facing garage condition which is uh in line with that neighborhood characteristic uh requirement of the of the the zoning code and finally purpose M of the ml is efficient use of land I'll get to this in a moment but we are substantially compliant in all those other respects that that the zoning code um uh sets forth in terms of coverage height F and setbacks so with that the negative criteria we look to whether these variances are going to have a substantial detriment to the public or to the Zone uh I think by virtue of all that testimony on the record in terms of public impacts this really is not going to stand out as being inappropriate uh in terms of the neighborhood context in terms of what we would expect here per zoning um in terms of the The Zone impacts again we comply with all of the dimensional requirements aside from lot area we have the lot width depth as well as frontages like I said the front setback to Princeton Kingston Road is compliant at 89.7 ft the rear setback is 39.3 Ft we only are required to have 15 ft so that's over double that rear rear setback requirement compliant in terms of side setback Building height um there's even a requirement of Building height to setback ratio F uh parking setbacks and finally impervious coverage we're at about 70% of what we would be allowed in terms of coverage so like I said this is not going to constitute overdevelopment of the site even though we do have have this this uh relatively minor front setback condition I think by virtue of compliance with all these other uh requirements this really does meet the intent of of zoning to have a nice spacious lot without a excessively large building or excessive coverage or things of that nature uh so with that I would say the C2 balancing test is met here I think we can also look to the C1 hardship test where the relief relates to uh the unique conditions of the land itself uh and the development lawfully existing thereon and not the development per se um the building position is driven by the existing foundations we heard testimony that the applicant has made an offer to uh to acquire some additional land but we also did hear how that might not be the most uh practical or desirable uh option anyway and again the front setback does basically match the existing setback on the property and it's not going to stand out when we look at the front setback next door on on uh Shady Brook so with that I would say from a massing standpoint a scale standpoint a use standpoint this really is an appropriate application I keep saying it's not going to stand out when you walk past this site uh it's not going to look as if it's uh overdevelopment or or things of that nature so with that I think we satisfi both the C1 test and the C2 test the applicant really needs to only meet one of those but this application does have the benefit of of meeting both so all said this is a uh a positive application a positive Redevelopment of the site and it's going to contribute to the Aesthetics of the neighborhood as a whole um of course we do have that Lake across the street and I think that this uh proposed home is going to be a nice amenity um and it's it's going to be a more desirable home in consideration of that Lake right across the street uh so unless there's any questions that's or any redirect that's really all I have from the uh planning testimony thank you mat um certainly happy to have our planner answer any uh questions and um just following that I'll note I'd like to bring back our our our owner back one more time because there there's a little bit more about the trees than uh I realized uh when we were answering that question and I'd like to return to that subject but uh Mr chairman if uh if anyone has any you uh your board members or profess have any questions for our planner happy to entertain board members is there are there anyone is there anyone who would like to question the uh yeah I just have a question about the I noticed that there's essentially a TR what looks like a triangular chunk at the corner it was shaved off and I'm wondering if that wasn't there how much would it add to the area would that make it compliant uh I I'll let our engineer regroup on that but the the lot directly next door um uh is essentially the same size minus that corner triangle and is also non-compliant uh so I believe that uh um uh at least in our trying to figure out where we could borrow property from or or beg or or buy it um that was not a an option um and they're essentially the same size minus that corner so they're undersized even with squared off okay David do I do I think I got correct yes yeah that's correct thank you uh if there's no other question I would like to bring our homeowner back uh uh chish uh briefly if it's right for a for a follow-up question because it it turns out there had been some uh discussions with the arborist about those trees uh and I'd like to let him speak to that if if that's all right uh cherish um if you could uh I know um both you and uh your your soon to be neighbor had some concerns about that tree over the years and and you you you have been talking with the Taylor the the town's arborist uh on that yeah that's right I think right now it's leaning and if a good storm comes it's it could be a very good chance that he can actually fall on this house or that house depending on whichever way the wind blows but that's definitely a concern um because it's it doesn't look really healthy it's actually leaning already and we did we did consult with uh the town Harvest on that and he told you that it was um a danger yeah sorry so one of them is I think there are two of them together if I'm not mistaken yeah they're both leaning yeah so he told you that both of them are a danger of danger falling that's right but you continue to work with him to find the best solution for for these trees in the house and if you look at the aerial photo you can see that how it's actually slanted a little bit the aial photo has some idea you can see that how it set up the tree you see like it's already you see the line of the tree yeah you see that yeah it's I you know I I can't see it from this picture honestly oh okay thank notice it today but I didn't walk around the I didn't walk around I just noticed how big they were yeah I can't say one way the other based on what I saw today yeah I mean we we would also love to keep it uh it's a beautiful it's just that there's a risk with the the wind and it's always a threat that's that's where like you have to make the decisions it's a beautiful F it's matter you won't get another one like that for a number of years that's for sure oh that's with that that's all we have at our our case and chief unless there's any other questions uh for any of our Witnesses happy to provide a quick summary but make everybody available uh for any any questions that uh the board may have I still didn't get an answer on the uh why why the variance is was requested when in fact this is a new home the sideart setback variants well you are at least and again I I I'm not um totally against the 30 feet but I guess the question is you are changing the foundation so the argument that you're keeping the foundation the same isn't really applicable I guess I'll I'll ask our architect to explain again what what I had heard was that the we are reusing that Foundation um I guess it would it is is it physically impossible to uh abandon it entirely and and build something completely different uh no I don't know that's the standard either but but ultimately the desire is to reuse um at the current location uh some of the existing foundation and then to mitigate from the current condition by pulling uh much of that line of the existing house back uh particularly so that the a compliant garage could be constructed where currently uh it is both in the setback uh and because it is flush with the front line of the house um non-compliant so by pulling that 8 ft back not only are we taking some of the existing house out of the setback but creating a u removing a variance condition on how the garage was uh arranged uh James anything you want to add to that particularly about the you know benefit of the ReUse of the foundation or maybe better explain how then than I can understand how you know the the difference between you know using what's there and and um reconstructing something well we are going to reconstruct it because the existing garage notches into uh what becomes our floor plan of the house so that you know a new foundation wall have to be installed there um at at the garage location though right at the at that garage location right but and then you know there obviously there's more uh New Foundations being installed so uh like I said if it's it it just seemed at the at the the way we designed it that that the asking for a variance uh as the planner just testified really is uh you know negligible given the context of the curved neighborhood and the existing buildings next to us and the existing buildings across the street uh I I to me uh the variance uh is is uh Not a Bad Thing given given the looks and what this house could look like if if you uh diminish the width of the house it it would affect the proportions entirely like I said I'd have to redesign the entire building if if that was the case and perhaps Matt if you could just remind the board you know that for the C2 variants it is a balancing of of positives and negatives and I'm not asking you to Rego through that but uh uh it's it's not necessarily is it impossible to do but you know what what's the benefit versus the the the downside from a from The Zone plan perspective maybe correct I ask briefly yeah you correct yeah and we do have a case law out there it's known as the Poland casee establishes that we need not look at each individual variance and say is this variance a benefit is this it's really we look at the application as a whole and determine whether the the overall project constitutes an improvement over the existing and and by lessening the existing variance condition both from the garage location and orientation and lack of setback and the lesser amount of non-conforming setback from the revised house that that meets that test absolutely yeah and then obviously all that everything I said about the negative criteria it's not going to be substantially uh detrimental either so that's the other side thank you man okay thank you um so uh just in summary you know I thank the board uh uh for your time here tonight this family is very excited to uh um you know move forward uh with their with their revised home here and know from a um traditional hardship perspective of the uh lot area there's really not much more to say there we did our you know we we've asked um and there's not interest and we also think that we might not have needed to ask because it might likely would create a a variance condition and then on the other lot it's it's just not an option to get in property without making them more non-conforming uh uh I think you've heard um what we're attempting to do on on uh the existing sidey yard setback Lessing the amount and of Frontage that's non-conforming from what's existing uh uh pulling the garage the current front-facing garage back uh uh to conform both with the setback and with the additional 8ot requirement behind the front line of the house that's required under Princeton's code um to redes design it in a different way would likely bring it closer to the the neighbor uh eat up more of the the backyard um and because that 8ot additional requirement from the front uh from that uh side of of the home um you know that to to have a garage that's not on a corner lot going to eat up the entire back yard um with driveway and garage uh does have some additional limitations so the design chosen uh we feel has positives from the existing condition uh considerably uh but uh benefits from not essentially going all the way to conforming because of the Alternatives that would would have to happen with the garage location and you know then likely the lack of backyard and a lot that's shaped uh this way with such a large front um setback and the way that the corner lot garage requirements uh require um further setback so U with that uh much appreciated your your your time here tonight and and consideration okay so board members um are there any questions of the owners the owners Witnesses Mr Kennedy before we open this up to public comment okay hearing none we'll open the uh hearing up to the public Claudia has anyone indicated that uh they'd like to speak on this application one second I see a hand okay he's on DJ yeah hi we can't see you we can't see you sir oh I don't have my video on I just need a minute okay can you guys see me now we can sir if you're comfortable can you give us your address yeah I'm the neighbor for this property my name is Vijay Ki the property address is 884 Princeton Kingston Road thank you very much and we're just going to swear you in do you swear or firm any testimony you give this evening will be truthful yes thank you okay um I heard somebody talking about the trees uh um I previously I requested the old owner because like there are three trees in the corner of that property one tree is leaning towards their property and two trees are leaning towards my property and I requested the old owner a couple of times they said they would take them down but um they could not do it actually so now I'm requesting the new owner also like to consider to take them down uh they're like too dangerous because like they're too close to the property and they're leaning towards my house also is that it yeah that's it okay thank you thank you thank you okay uh Claudia anyone else indicated they'd like to speak on behalf of the application I see no more hands okay give it a second here see if anybody else decides they'd like to speak all right I guess we don't have anyone else so we'll close the hearing to the public Mr Kennedy before we go into executive session would you like to comment further oh again uh thank you so much um and and actually very much appreciate uh the the thoughts about the trees I know that's something we looked into but uh we wasn't on the tip of our tongue and uh again certainly we want to do what's best you heard from the owner that they're they'd love to keep these if they can but they have some concerns and we'll certainly comply with and work with the the arbor to make sure the the right thing happens here uh if they can be saved uh but if not the compliance with the ordinance U certainly again you heard about the the classic we wish we could do something but we can't about the lot area uh and uh you heard uh you know unusually to to have a a planner here but we wanted to cross all our teas and do our eyes make sure that uh the C2 uh uh balancing standard uh was met for our plan to to reuse part of the foundation and and lessen the existing non-conform uh for the setback both uh by reducing the Frontage that is applicable to that and fixing the garage situation you know as well as a testimony about uh the adjacent houses which are well uh prevailing is prevailing the immediately adjacent and and and closer houses on a curved Street um uh are uh quite are closer essentially uh than than we propose uh to be so our our impact uh both to what what the I sees on this stretch of street is what the eyes is used to see um though less so because we are are lessening the existing non-conformity but also in keeping with what the other neighboring houses have with the exception that we will be um the two immediately adjacent houses have the non-conforming front protruding garages will be um eliminating that problem that non-conformity from from this house as it's as it's rebuilt so again um thank you so much for your time tonight and very much appreciate your your consideration thank you okay um board members let's discuss this um comments questions Steve I guess I'd like to know what you think about the answer about why they're not going to um have new construction within the zoning code well okay I um in my opinion they didn't answer it um but not withstanding that quite frankly I feel that the 30 foot setback looking at the placement of the house the adjacent house I think it's although it doesn't conform I think it provides a a good amount of open space between the house and the street and um I do think that the design of the house will present nicely on the street and proportionately it does look good but but I don't think the uh I don't think in this they didn't I in my opinion they didn't answer the question okay does that does that answer your question yeah yeah yeah I just wanted to make sure that I wasn't the only one who thought that yeah you were correct yeah okay board members any other questions or comments I remember when we approved the house next door a couple years ago I I remember when we approved the house next door when they came before us and I think this house compliments that house very nicely I I agree with you Steve I think it's you know setback is what it is but it's not not a detriment to the neighborhood and I think U you know I I approve yeah I agree it's the fact that they've turned the garage um is is a greater positive than a you know a setback deviation yeah so having heard more about the concerns about the trees I'm wondering if it might be nonetheless wise for us to you like add to the motion I'm not quite sure how to word it um just a a a firm requirement to have something a statement from the arborist because once if those trees are taken down there won't really be any way to in the future when somebody else says well this tree's leaning um we won't really be able to say that you know we won't be able to prove that the arbor has said know this this is a danger I don't know if we're putting him on a spot that he's not going to be willing to be put on but um I'm just thinking I don't always think in terms of precedent but I think this keeps it does keep coming up and it's easy to say that looks you know it's I what we first heard was that it was the end of life now it's cleaning and um but you know um I could that one could be say that that's related but I'm just saying it might be good to have something on the record if that's I don't I don't disagree with you I'm trying to figure out how we would do that um because we don't have it now uh yes Derek um just for the board's uh education any application like this um requires engineering review and in part of that review um Dan Weissman min Banus engineer goes out with the Taylor suput the arborist and uh they look at the site so um part of his review is you know he's not trying to get rid of healthy trees so um if he's he's out on maternity leave I believe to the end of the month but there is uh a replacement arborist in so depending on when that happens somebody's going to look at these trees um and review that the the rationale for taking them down and uh so there is some but that'll be in the record some somehow it would be and in in any case is that usual correct yeah it's it's uh it happens a lot like with the the drip lines of trees and stuff so that we're constantly going back and forth with the the applicants to to keep as much canopy as we can but at the same time people have a right to to build the house but it's you know it's an excellent point that you raised and it's uh they are mature trees and um they will be looked at by uh the engineering in the arborist as part of that process but excellent ER so your thought is that there's no need to create a condition in the approval for consultation with the arborist to confirm that um I mean you could put the they're going to do it anyway it doesn't hurt to to put it in there they um it's part of the process it can be spelled out it's going to happen anyway so it doesn't it doesn't hurt if you put it in there that as part of the review process the arborist will look at the trees to be removed D and to determine if they're healthy or whether it's appropriate to and I mean also he's going to look in you know if if the development's going to kill the tree in three four years then he's going to put that out there but uh so yeah I mean whatever the board's pleasure is I think it's it's fine to put something in there to that effect are you comforable with that Eve yes okay good okay so that will be included in our resolution so um well if somebody'd like to make if there aren't any more questions if someone would like to make a motion one way or the other I'll move approval of it as a C2 please thank you uh what about the condition of and the condition that uh the arborus reviews this um I'm not feel strong about how much we have to specify what the arborist looks at no but the arborist opinion will be in the decision whether the trees stay or go yeah within the power of the arborus yes exactly and the and the existing code right yeah I second it okay Karen are you comfortable putting words to that uh yes okay good okay um okay if there are no other comments Claudia can you please call the rooll Miss Chen yes Miss Coulson yes Mr Floyd yes Mr stver yes Mr Tenon bom yes Mr Stein yes chairman Don chairman Cohen sorry thank you yes good luck with your house thank you thank you so much you're welcome okay um thank you so much you're welcome can we take five yes we can Brian who do I need to bring over uh person named Jason uh and Katherine knight uh just two people okay it's 9 o'clock we'll reconvene at 9:05 friend e e for all e for jeez okay it's uh 9:05 um we're back in session okay um our next case is um case Z24 d573 58 Cleveland lane block 5.01 lot 11 in the r1b zone uh Karen is the noticing in order yes the notices are in order the board has jurisdiction tonight okay Claudia you're muted Claudia yes I'm here are we recording Again by the way yes okay good um Mr Burger can you summarize your memo for us yes sir thank you you're welcome uh Peter Khan and Karen house are the owners and the applicants um they own 58 Cleveland Lane they are seeking C1 and C2 variances to permit construction of a second floor accessory dwelling unit addition to a one and a half story detached four car garage with an existing in apartment in exception to the required setback for an Adu located on a corner subjects located in the R1 Zone in the former Princeton burrow um subjects non-complying with the respect to the maximum perious coverage on site the uh maximum amount for this lot area is 19 A5 and the existing is 27.5 and it's non compliant with the required accessory structure setback uh which is uh 71 .83 ft um and the existing is 26.75 the applicant is proposing to remove the half story of the existing fourcc car garage apartment um the existing apartment will be removed in a new Second Story of approximately a 1900 foot Adu will be which will be comprised of three habitable rooms will be constructed two covered porches are proposed with the Adu a new storage room not associated with the Adu will be constructed and an old Department kitchen located adjacent to the garage will be converted to storage the Adu requires one parking space which will be located in the parking area in front of the garage the size of the Adu is less than the maximum permitted 25% F of the principal dwelling um uh section 10B 266.00 facing set Street or the minimum required side yard setback whichever is greater the required side yard setback in this case is 20 feet where as the required setback 5T from the facade of the principal building is 71.8 3 feet um the variants requested in this case um the requirement 71.8 three for that side yard and the proposal is 26.75 and they've requested criteria or consideration under both the C1 and the C2 criteria you have any questions I'd be glad to try to answer them any questions of Mr Bridger okay thank you thank you okay Mr Kennedy right um thank you uh Mr Bridger and uh chairman uh again Ryan Kennedy from Stevens and Lee here for the homeowner applicants uh Peter Khan and Karen house uh and their son Jason actually uh we'll have that hear from them in a second uh ultimately this is a very unique and very large lot with a quite a significant home on it as you'll see this could almost be four conforming Lots with significant houses and and adus on them uh there's a lot of um uh things that this could be uh but really what what you'll hear is that this is a an existing garage uh with an existing apartment uh the caretaker for the house actually retired recently um and and moved on and the time has come to kind of modernize it uh to uh keep it in its existing condition but uh uh I'll say expanded a bit but what's a half story turned into kind of a a full story uh above the garage and and set it up for uh the couple's son to live uh and and set up uh kind of turning us over for the to the Next Generation allowing uh Peter and Karen to to stay on the property uh longer with some help from from family um and uh set up the next part of their lives uh uh technically uh a variance is needed because the existing garage and apartment building um is within this unusually large setback and as Mr briter said that is set by the uh a function of where the house is plus 5 ft uh so uh if a new home were built or a new Adu or a lot of different things happening here you know it's not the prevailing setback which is much closer uh to to the street and we'll show you these things but ultimately this very is needed because they want to reuse the existing apartment uh and um and carriage house or garage uh as as an Adu uh the house is uh non-conforming as to um coverage as well but as part of the project we'll be removing quite a bit so that will be a net reduction in coverage as part of this project um I I see uh Jason on I don't have see your camera on so if you can hear me uh Peter Jason oh there we are now I see you um uh we'll have two uh Witnesses tonight our our architect Kathy Knight and then uh uh uh Peter Khan uh possibly Jason so perhaps if we could have them all sworn in uh at once now we could we could start our presentation one second please um FL Harland harland's not visible nor is his mic on there you go okay you're there I didn't know if you were there muted har okay I apologize I I didn't turn myself back on when I got back from break sorry that's fine it's okay I just wanted to make sure you were well okay uh please continue all right so if we could I guess uh swearing uh Kathy uh Peter and and Jason all right you're all muted so if you could unmute yourselves thank you so Mr Khan and Jason Khan and Miss Knight do you swear affirm your testimony this evening will be truthful I do I do thank you right uh so uh Peter if you could introduce yourself to the board and uh you know let them know what uh what your needs are with this project and and allowing it to be uh converted for your family's use thank you Ryan um so I am Peter Khan um my wife and I are the owners at this point of the property she is in California at a funeral uh but Jason and our son is sitting next to me um I grew up in Princeton um I have lived most of my life here I went through the public school system and my wife and I have lived at this 58 Cleveland Lane property for 35 years now we are very fortunate to live in as Ryan kind of described it in in a very large and lovely property fairly near the center of Princeton and we are very intent on retaining its unique character So the plan as as Ryan touched on is to convert a dark and pretty dingy apartment over the garage into a much brighter and somewhat more modern Adu consistent with the look of the overall property the current garage apartment was occupied by 30 or 30 years uh by a caretaker a bachelor um he retired recently and moved so that gives us the opportunity to improve and modernize the structure for Jason and his wife and four-year-old son again Ryan kind of touched on this but I mean as my wife moves further into her 70s and I move further into my 80s it will obviously be helpful and comforting to have Jason and his family close to us helping with everything from taking out the recycling to helping me manage a computer above all providing companionship so this Adu plan of ours is very much All in the Family and we hope you will appreciate that and we thank you for your consideration Peter thank you so much um uh a couple of just follow-up questions I know you've uh met with many of your neighbors and um uh you know because this is your project for you and your family took some Extra Care to make sure they all knew what you were doing um and and took some extra effort to talk with them any concerns raised by anyone that you uh talked with or um or approached about the project uh no not at all thank you um and uh don't have a few follow-up questions but uh uh perhaps we could start our presentation if it's all right to we've got one uh slideshow I believe it's going to be 18 slides that we'd like to Mark as our our one exhibit this evening if that's all right sure and hopefully I'll push the right combination of buttons this time and not start uh talking without actually sharing my screen hopefully that uh uh that worked um uh Peter uh first couple slides I I'll ask you about uh uh just to orient uh the board though I know they're all familiar with what part of prin we're talking about uh this is a zoning map and that uh red arrow is is pointing to your uh your property is that right uh yes all right uh next we'll kind of zoom in a little bit uh uh from from space satellite view to to kind of find where you are in Princeton again blue outline green pin and red arrow is uh your your property yes sir all right uh next uh slide four shows the the neighborhood view so that's your home uh in Blue uh with uh Cleveland Lane uh curving around from kind of left to right and then Library Place bottom right to to top Center showing your corner is that right yes and I I'll just note that the kind of pattern here uh your lot is uh considerably larger than than most of your neighbors uh and quite unique uh I'm sure in in that regard uh um is that is that your your take on the neighborhood uh yes and it has a a large number of trees and bushes and uh Greenery of all sorts and uh are you looking to alter that in any way I think the proposal would require us to take down two fairly small trees but that is two among I would guess 100 trees on the property and not particularly big ones um so with that before we go to our next slide obviously our homeowner is not going anywhere but uh certainly like to uh invite uh any any questions before we uh move on to our Architects testimony board members any questions of uh the owner on Mr Kennedy thank you so much uh Peter Jason uh I'll say don't go far but I'm sure you weren't looking to to to leave anywhere uh while we're doing this um uh Miss Knight if you could uh give the board uh briefly the benefit of your credentials and I'll have you accepted as a an expert here this evening I actually think uh Miss Knight has testified before so we would accept happy to short step that thank you so much Mr CH thank you all right so Kathy I'm going to step to the next slide which is really the same as slide four but with a couple notes on it you know we talked about this lot being uh unusually sized uh uh this Zone requires 20,000 square fet and we've got almost four times that and just to put things into perspective you know in terms of floor area while there is a quite a large house here that could be more than 18,000 Square ft of of buildable space and you know lots of different ways that could be whacked up you know including if it were subdivided uh or or excuse me with a new home of 15,000 F feet and a and a 3700 ft Adu possibly uh three 5,000 foot homes that would probably match quite the neighborhood well uh but much more intense each with a 1250t Adu but but here um we're using the 25% rule of been able to to put together uh an Adu on this property using the existing uh garage Kathy maybe on slide six um we'll kind of take the board a little bit through some of the the photos around the site um I guess this is this is a kind of a side view of the small piece of the existing carriage house that is actually visible uh from the street uh but you can really see the the screening and and trees that are that are surrounding it yeah thank you very much yes this is um this is the view from library place I love this view but here's what you see of the carriage house um where it is now um at at the 20 um 26 ft from from the road so you can see it's a difficult to see and the the next view shows down the edge of the property line the back of the property line that isn't actually a on the left that isn't a um Road it's a driveway to the uh Jason home at first it looked like a road and so you're looking down the property there's quite a nice little um like open area in the back of the property there which you can see and that's actually originally they they uh brought me to their um site and we talked about whether we could build a house on that and um but right next to it was this beautiful carriage house and we immediately morphed into well wait what's happening with the carriage house and there was somebody living in there at the time and it just seemed like a very logical approach to consider um upgrading what is there and keeping that beautiful stone Carriage House which you which we'll share you with you instead of trying to build a new structure on the site so here on slide eight we've got uh kind of a zoomed in version of the site plan showing you know what's there now and isn't going to change and and the location of the existing garage maybe want to take the board briefly through you know what's on the site now yeah briefly um it is hard to see uh particularly the main home from the um from the the road but at the bottom of your screen would be Cleveland and on the left side is Library place so you're looking at at the bottom is the is the existing um Stone dwelling it's kind of tutor style and um just just beautiful and then the back is the complimentary Carriage House uh what you're seeing existing is in blue um and there's a greenhouse on the end of it which you'll see on the right side which we're not um changing at all and then uh the proposal is to add to the back of it with a great room and a new screened porch area um the entry to the unit will be um they'll come in and they'll park in the front where the parking lot is yep and then they'll head up a walkway along the side of it and enter to the backside and that's required for an Adu they don't want you having the entrance um on the same side of the principal dwellings entrance so we couldn't enter from um from the kind of the Cleveland side so we're entering from the from the rear of the property I think this pretty much shows the same thing if if if it wasn't um for this corner rule which we're going to talk about in the next slide you could see where the setback line would be on the left in in Black yep that's what it would be but because of this unusual requirement for the corner um the red line is the is the existing requirement for for the side yard set back and this here this is the spot that will be designated uh for for the Adu since it has three habitable rooms technically it gets its own parking spot and that's where it would be yes that's right so this is the uh elevations of the existing structure um the bottom right is is what you see from the from the um interior of the lot um that's the entrance into the carriage house and then you see the uh space for the caretaker above a fairly modest um structure above It's a combination of a stone and stucco building and we're replicating that with the um with a new addition um The View on the on the left of it is the cute little view you just saw um from the photograph with the with the ivy colored covered uh wall That's the view from Cleveland that you just see a little little bit of it um sorry from library where you just see a little bit of the um of the facade um the the one above that is the greenhouse which we're not um changing the greenhouse aspect and then uh the one to the right is The View kind of what the backyard which will have the new great room and the new porch on on on on that so here's some more the existing conditions you're seeing the side with the doors and you're seeing the kind of the backs side where we're going to be adding the uh the great room and that's the um flat open area on the site where it was originally they they came to me said can we build a building here well well we could but we think this is a much more sensitive approach to the site and to the um to the architecture there what we're what we're now proposing so these are the views um of the elevations um you're they're in the same order of what we were just looking at um on the last one so you're seeing the uh second floor added above the carriage doors with the doors remaining the same the bottom level with the stone is the same it's just that we're just taking off the roof and and raising it up with a with a stucco wall which will be complimentary we think to the stone um the um you're to the left you see this the view from library place and above that you see the greenhouse and you see what we've done is the the peak of the roof is coming up six feet from what's there now and uh as a little aside um this view with the greenhouse we wanted to extend that stone wall up and um the contract feels he's going to be able to capture enough of the stone of the existing house during the demolition to be able to use that again in the new construction so probably not a detail you need to hear now but it's going to be a very sensitive um um renovation that will um we really think will complement the house and a lot of attention to detail is being paid um and then the last is the South elevation which will be um really an opportunity for the the family there they'll have kind of a private side yard there well away from the main house so it's really a um very nice sighting possibility for them and and location are there any questions on the plans or elevations that we've gone through I don't have any board members any questions I guess the only question I have so you walk around the side of the uh existing garage and then you walk up the St steps to that second level entry away that's right yes because we we really couldn't put the door on the lower level because of the um the it can't be on the same side of the main of the entry to the principal dwelling I understand so it also provides more privacy for the Adu which was kind of appealing to all of us as well sure so um so here's the layout on the up the new upper level um you'll be coming in by um mud room laundry room area um you'll then come into the the great room which is the kitchen dining living space um there's there's a hallway there which takes you down to uh the two bedrooms and and the two bathrooms so the the Adu does have um the three um habitable rooms two bedrooms and and a great room um and it also has a a screen porch off the off the back um corner to really enjoy the beauty of the site and the lower level um the car the caretaker's house did did utilize the lower level the room on the left side was was their kitchen and their stair going up but we are turning that back into the main house to provide kind of one floor living for the um for the current occupant uh there's also a room that just gets created below that great room that we're just giving over to storage as well so not really a lot of changes on this this floor that affect the Adu just just some things that affect from from building above it so here so the z y go ahead did you want to get into this Ryan I was just gonna say here this is the zoning chart um uh of what is changing and really literally nothing the only thing that's changing is the amount of coverage that is there and it's being reduced um uh but ultimately the one variance that we need is the uh existing distance here of uh 26.75 ft between the lot line and the existing Carriage House location there's no change there but by converting into an Adu we are I'll suppose intensifying it requiring us to come back for the variants for the existing um condition but uh Kathy if you want to maybe just talk through the the size of of things and and the the height um you know looks like we're you're going up about six feet you said right yep yep we're going up up six feet we are we are maintaining the requirement for the ad for the average grade so it's it's less than 25 ft above the average grade um we're uh we were allowed the 1922 so we're doing a 1917 squ foot Adu it's a nice size for for a family um the F we're we're well below what the allowable is um as we mentioned the impervious coverage was already over but we are able to reduce it by um I think the next slide goes into that in a little bit more detail um so yeah so the big the big situation really is the uh the library Place uh setback so here's here's the description of that so I think we've already touched on this but because the lot is so large and the principal dwelling unit sets in the in the center of the lot uh we have this unusual requirement which works for most properties but in this case it it it causes kind of an unusual situation in that they require us to be 5T back from the principal dwelling unit and the existing carriage house is not set there and we feel it would be a shame not to not to utilize that that building um and just another comment that 26 foot setback that that the carriage house has that is not unlike um many of the other houses along um a library they're um they they're many of them are around 30 or 35 ft so not so different from the 26 feet there's one that's uh 16 ft uh setback um the one that's on the opposite corner of uh and the opposite side of the street so it it it doesn't feel you know from our estimation to be inappropriate to have this setback it's just that we have this unusual requirement for such a large lot requiring it to be 5et behind the principal uh dwelling unit I think this this is the slide you're talking about that shows where a lot of the impervious is being removed is that uh is that right y we just balanced out the impervious and removed some some things we're not needed around the site to um to make sure that we didn't increase the amount of impervious when we put up the the great room and the new the new porch so uh with that if they certainly any any questions for our architect before we summarize happy to to entertain them any questions of uh the architect I have a question oh please George go back to the floor plan showed the great room oh Stephen I'm sorry yeah that's all right uh the laundry room and the mud room don't count as rooms in an Adu no they're not c as as habitable space no thank you the other I have another question what's the difference between an Adu in a garage apartment well I'll I'll I'll going to try and and see then I'll have Derek correct me but Adu is kind of the modern version that is in the code now the garage apartment is is kind of a uh uh an older artifact from prior zoning that uh whether this was a pre-existing non-conforming that's being kind of expanded uh would have been an option for us to pursue but really the to change it into a way that fit the the Adu ordinance which has some uh positives to it and some kind of quirks to it uh as well particularly with the side entrance but ultimately we we struggled with that one but ultimately put it in a place that both complies and we think makes sense but uh uh the garage apartment feature is something that uh I don't believe is is any longer in the in the code AS is being allowed is that right Derek yeah it's a it's a good description of it they were there was an earlier version of accessory dwelling unit units they weren't as large as they are now but um they were pretty common in this section of town in um you know detached out buildings so okay thank you yes sir Miss Knight just for clarification do you know when the house was built um I think Peter could help us with that I thought it was the early 1900s I think it was the late 1800s around around around 1900 thank you okay board members any other questions yeah I have one question um the kitchen the old kitchen on the first floor do you had talked about it being converted to storage I think you said is that for the Adu storage and do all the kitchen type of appliance and everything and and connections come out of the kitchen yes the former kitchen was down in this lower room and um it was VE it's very modest so um we were going to and there was a stair going up so we were going to um remove that and just turn it back to a storage room for the um for the main house it it it made more sense for us to put all our square footage on one level um just for the for the ease of the family um Family using it so you don't go up and down the stairs any any longer so there won't be any staircase connection between the Adu and the old kitchen that's correct right there there'll be it's an outside entrance to the new Adu and it's all on the upper level and then there's an outside entrance to the the old kitchen for anyone to use a storage yeah it's just now a storage room y yep great place for bicycles and things like that so for the for the um right off the garage base and it's not going to be used as a kitchen anymore no no we're removing it all the uh C all Cabinetry and the appliances yeah it it will all be removed and turned into just a storage room yeah okay yeah we they wouldn't it really wouldn't be worked for us to keep a second Kitchen in the in the facility there just that wouldn't that would that wouldn't be uh allowed I mean are you going to keep a refrigerator in there or anything like that well I think a refrigerator would be a choice to to the um for the homeowner if they wanted to plug in a refrigerator but we we're not keeping a um a kitchen with appliances a working kitchen with a range and appliances in it at that at that location okay thank you so I have a question about the storage room also sure so that's that's not part of the Adu that's part of the big house that's right okay yeah any other questions okay um Mr Kennedy would you like to sum up before we go into it to open it up to the public absolutely um first again thank you all for for your time uh this evening uh again this is the story of a conversion of an existing apartment dwelling modernizing it under the new rules uh the only variance that we need is related to its existing non-conforming location um we we believe both under either a C1 because it's the hardship to physically move something uh or C2 uh that it's just better planning to reutilize the uh existing structure just note of of the the benefit or excuse me of the uh uh reasons for zoning uh we think a c e uh i j and and L are all benefited by this I'm sure you hear from the testimony that there were no detriments uh to this it allows uh a family to continue to utilize this this property um uh well into the future uh to have some additional assistance and multigenerational living uh you also have the ReUse of an existing historic structure and on an unusually large lot where essentially four quite large houses could be built yes there is one uh large historic home here uh but ultimately what could be built is almost twice what is proposed both in number so in terms of density from floor area or number of units uh uh quite a bit else could be happening on this lot and by keeping with the existing pattern of the historic Carriage House apartment modernized under Princeton's new Adu rules uh we think we're we're absolutely hitting uh what Princeton is I say what's looking for but what what the ordinance uh seeks uh what your master plan is uh interested in seeing in the ReUse of these buildings and Crea these housing opportunities uh without adding uh density uh that the neighborhood is not not only not prepared to see but has already been in this neighborhood and is what a small fraction of what could be done on this site again the one variance is just the cost of using the existing building in existing space you saw photos it is quite well screened uh from neighboring properties and the street but even so uh the the design was done uh very Tastefully in a way to complement the house and the history of this structure to allow it to to essentially be used used uh into the future in a more modern way uh again uh thank you so much for um for your consideration here tonight and if there are any other questions certainly happy to address them best we can okay board members any questions Steve I I do have a question um I was wondering if um if he could be a bit more specific on how he sees a C1 being applicable um I've been bouncing back and forth and you know given as H C1 is is worded so I I I I guess I'll I'll agree with you Mr floa I think we we asked for essentially a C2 we did Mark both on the form because there is uh while it's not related to the narrowness or small size of this lot because it is not narrow or small by any respect U but there is a hardship element to rebuilding demolishing uh this historic structure or and and moving in Adu further into the lot uh uh so from a C1 perspective I think it's uh less much less applicable than C2 and my suggestion I guess would be that C2 would be the appropriate analysis but I did want to mention uh normally you're not speaking of of hardship uh and the existing configuration of the lot with the historic structure uh is similar to the type of hardship you'd look like at a C1 but I I I agree with you that C2 would be the appropriate way to look at this okay thank you any other questions okay Mr Kennedy you you summed up already so we'll open it up to the public uh Claudia has anybody indicated they'd like to speak on behalf of this application there are no hands okay so we'll close it to the close the public for of the hearing um once again Mr Kennedy before we go into executive session I I'll just uh uh since so little time is passed by just thank you again for for your time tonight and uh and your continuing willingness to to serve it's much appreciated I'm glad we can get a little earlier tonight than you might normally but uh much appreciated that you guys are are excellent choice okay cut you off there um okay um board members we're in executive session questions comments motions I move we approve this of the C it be C1 C2 C C2 I move that we approve it we have a second I'll second it okay do we have any questions on the motion or discussion okay I'd like to say I think it's a very well done application and I did have some concerns initially about its proximity of the street with a second story on it but I think this is a very well done solution I think uh I think it's a great situation okay um Claudia can we call it all please ten yes Miss Coulson yes Mr Floy yes Mr Shriver yes Mr Ten bom yes Mr Stein yes chairman Cohen yes thank you thank you you very much enjoy the house it it's great thank you thanks so much for your time you're welcome okay um I don't think Karen we don't have anything else to discuss do no okay so um that's it it's we're adjourned until our next hearing next month thank you Steve night for choosing me as chairman I appreciate it job good night everyone