Okay. Good evening. >> Good evening. This is a regular meeting of the Princeton Zoning Board of Adjustment being held electronically via Zoom on April 22nd, 2026 at 7:30 p.m. Adequate
notice of the time and place of this meeting has been given by prominently posting um a a prominently posting can't read it um notice of this meeting on the official
bulletin board at the Princeton Municipal Complex and by filing a copy of S with the clerk of Princeton on April 17, 2026 and by posting a copy on the municipal
website homepage is a public page as a public notice and then it's www.princeton.gov us uh public notice. Okay,
Claudia, can you call the role please? Miss Chen >> here. >> Miss Coulson >> here. >> Mr. Floyd >> here. >> Mrs. Shrivever >> here. >> Mr. Tanov. >> Mr. Stein >> here.
>> Miss Donna. >> Yes. >> Mr. Doppkin >> here. >> Chairman Cohen >> here. >> Thank you. >> Okay. We have, and I just lost it,
um, a resolution of commendation this evening to Derek W. Bridger, zoning officer. Karen, would you like to read it? Of >> course.
Whereas Derek Bridger served as assistant zoning officer and then zoning officer from December 3, 2001 to April 30, 2026 for Princeton, New Jersey. And whereas during Mr. Richard's service. He guided the Princeton zoning board
through challenging applications, both large and small, ranging from large projects such as the development of various areas of the Princeton downtown to small projects involving single family owners and residential neighborhoods. And whereas Mr. Bridger
became known as a steadfast advocate for honest, thorough, and reliable applications of the municipal zoning standards and was an invaluable resource for the Princeton zoning board. Whereas Mr. Bridger's knowledge, integrity, and dedication have greatly benefited
benefited the development of Princeton. And whereas his sense of humor, kindness, and graciousness have enriched those who know him and worked with him. Now therefore, be it resolved that the Princeton Zoning Board of Adjustment
hereby commends and thanks Derek Bridger for his exemplary service as zoning officer. Be it further resolved that this resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. It's
been an honor and pleasure. >> Yep. Derek, you deserved it. >> You really did. >> It's been a pleasure working with you. >> Absolutely. You guys have made it easy. >> So moved. >> So moved. >> And if we have a second and then a roll call.
>> I'll second. >> I'll second. Everybody will second it. >> Great. >> Miss Ten. >> Yes. Thank you, Derek. >> Okay, >> Miss Coulson. >> Absolutely. Yes, >> Mr. Floyd. >> Yes,
>> Mr. Shrivever. Uh, yes, >> Mr. Stein. >> Yes, Derek. It's been a pleasure, >> Miss Donna. >> Yes, Derek. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Dubkin. >> Yes, >> Chairman Cohen.
>> Definitely. Yes. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Thank you everyone. >> Thanks again, Derek. >> Thank you. It's been a pleasure and an honor. Thank you. >> Golf clap. Okay, >> off to the races.
>> Off to the races. Meanwhile, back at the ranch. Okay, we have one resolution this evening. It's case number Z25-66710 Hbert Road, lot 25.02, excuse me, block 25.02, lot 77 in the RB
zone. The resolution has been distributed. Um I believe it's been modified. We got a modified copy of it. Um if there are any questions about it or comments or if not if someone would
like to make a motion. >> I move approval. >> I'll second it. >> Thank you. Okay. Claudia, please call the role. Miss Chen, >> yes. >> Miss Coulson,
>> yes. >> Mr. Floyd, >> yes. >> Mr. Shrivever, >> yes. >> Mr. Stein, >> yes. >> Miss Donna, >> yes. >> Chairman Cohen. >> Yes. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. Um, we have four hearings this evening. Uh, it's going to be a busy evening. Our first case is case Z24-515, 347, 355, 369, and 371 Ridge View Road, block 4.01, lots 13 and
14. Karen, the notice is in order. >> It is, and the board has jurisdiction tonight. >> Okay. Um, Derek, would you like to summarize your memo? >> Yes, sir. >> Thank you. Do I need to be sworn, Karen, or
>> I do. I'm sorry. Do you swear from your testimony this evening? We'll be truthful. >> Yes, ma'am. I do. >> Thank you. >> Good evening. Uh the applicant has requested a time extension. Um it's the uh estate of Lefern Keller. Uh they were granted use variance and subdivision
approval on August 16th, 2025. New Jersey municipal land use law requires that minor subdivision deeds be filed within 190 days of the date of approval. The approval required that the applicant comply with the conditions of approval prior to filing of the approved
subdivision deeds. The applicant has not been able to satisfy all the conditions of approval and is requesting a time extension during which time the remaining compliance items will be addressed. The applicant should advise exactly what the remaining compliance items are. Uh the extension request does
not indicate how much time is being requested and advises that the amount of time needed for an extension will be determined at the time of the board hearing as the applicant is still addressing the conditions and some of them may have been completed prior to the meeting date. Copy of the resolution and approval is attached to this
memorandum. It's noted that condition two required the applicant to postperformance bonds to ensure timely demolition of 369 and 371 Ridge View um road. the de de uh the demolition to occur no later than 190 days after the date of publication of notice of
adoption of the resolution of memorialization. The form of these bonds shall be reviewed and approved by the land use and municipal attorney. Um no performance bond has been submitted. The applicant indicates that the demolition permits for have been applied for but there is no record uh of them at this
point in the construction. Now, that was a month ago, so I'm or 20 days ago, so I'm not sure what's what's transpired since then, but that's uh the memo. And if you have any questions, be glad to address them. >> Board members, any questions of Mr. Burgger?
Okay. Um, who's going to represent this? Is that you, Mr. Shotsman? You're muted. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Before I get going, just very briefly, uh if I were on the board of
adjustment, I certainly would have voted for the uh voted for for the uh uh resolution for Derek. Uh I've been doing this for 58 years going on 59 years. And from a
lawyer who's primarily an adversary applicant, I must say it was a pleasure who admitted it with him. That's all. So now to the more mundane. We have Mr. Jean Keller Jr. and Patricia Keller to
be sworn in. Uh and we'll go over what's been done, what needs to be done, why things have been delayed, including the uh the demolition permit. it was a mixup. They'll go into it because they have firsthand knowledge and hopefully
uh we're looking basically I asked them for another six months to complete everything. Okay. So, Miss Casey, would you please swear in Mr. Keller and Miss Keller, please? >> I will. Uh Miss Keller, Mr. Keller, do
you both swear or affirm your testimony this evening will be truthful? Yes. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Okay. Okay. So, please let us know what's going on. >> Okay. So, we've made some progress and
we're moving along. So, uh we are ex the driveway has been excavated but due to the weather um terrible winter uh that it has not been paved. We spoke to uh PA and he plans to be out early next week. So, that will be taken off list. Um
we're working on the demolition. We had to have all the utilities disconnected. I believe we have one more left to do. Correct. Yeah, there there was uh there was some miscommunication as far as how the sewer was going to be disconnected because it wasn't installed the way it
normally is uh with hip projects today. And we're actually excavating on Friday morning and Dominic is coming out Friday afternoon or one of his representatives to see that it's cap and that will cross off the last item so that the demolition
permit can move forward. >> Okay. >> Okay. I'm sorry. >> Is that Is that it? >> No. >> Yeah. >> No. >> Okay. >> Uh the performance bond is being provided by the uh by the person doing
the demo uh John Casar and he had told me that he was going to try and get a hold of Derek to find out exactly what needed to be done with that because as soon as the application is approved, he's ready to take the houses down. Both of those rentals are vacant. So he
can go once that permit has been processing has been. >> Okay. right? They had to be displaced or or or find a new home. So, >> so we have one so we have one tenant left and he just reached out to me today
and he said he signed a lease and so we are anticipating that he will be out by the end of the month. So then all the tenants will be out. So at that point then we can convert the 355 property back into the single family residence and that will take care of that as well >> and and actually the second floor
apartment is already done. the uh the stove, the s the sink and the refrigerator and everything that was in the kitchen area has all been removed. >> Okay. Mr. Schzman, we can't hear you if you're speaking. >> I'm sorry. I All right, I'll go over
again. The uh the uh uh Mercer County Planning Board, it was a mixup and they said uh that uh uh I applied for a approval. They said, "No, it's an administrative uh approval. They we
don't have to go before the board." And they granted administrative approval since it was a lot line change. It wasn't on a county road and no new lots were created. So, they said it's an exemption. And I submitted that letter to Derek and Claudia uh about a week or
so ago. I submitted the deeds with the covenant uh regarding uh Jean uh to Karen Casey. She was kind enough to point out a uh typo which I corrected and I said it to her. I sent the deeds
to Mr. P for sale on March 23rd uh and for description and I believe uh he's still looking at him but the uh surveyor had a turnaround and I've asked him a million times he finally fixed up
the plans. They wanted Mr. Purcell or Mr. Wiseman wanted the big points uh with the New Jersey plane coordinate system and that took a while because the surveyor was busy but he did
that and Mr. Purcell is still looking at the descriptions. I looked at the descriptions they seem okay to me but Mr. Purcell is the last is the person who has to approve it and uh and that's that's where we are. And so we'll need
since the tenant is now going out, we started on the conversion uh and the demolition assuming the weather's okay and we get a de we get a demo permit. We need so we don't have to come back and burden the board with
extensions. We we need about six months if that's okay with the board. And that's the presentation. >> So what would the new expiration date be? Well, you have to relate back to the expiration date. Karen Casey will tell
you the statute provides that you have to relate back. So, uh I think it would be April 5th to um six months from April 5th, whatever it is. Am I right, Taran, or not? >> Yeah, that's right. >> October 5th.
>> Relate back. It's not from today. It's relating back. >> No, then it would be October 5th. Is that right? Right. >> Okay. All right. So, that's it. Any questions? I sent noticed everybody. Is there anybody here
say anything? Somebody called me up and I explained him what what it was. I forgot the neighbor's name. He said, "Oh, I don't care." So, that was the end of that. >> Okay. All right. Is that it, Mr. Shhatzman?
>> That's it. I mean, short and simple. I mean, we've tried, but the weather doesn't the tenant. And the only other comment I might make, Chairman Con, is that getting a tenant out is not easy in the state in New Jersey under 218 hyphen
61.1, which is the tenant bill of rights. And we, you know, we the one tenant, we got the two tenants out right away, but the one tenant, you know, he will be homeless. So,
gentlemen. >> Okay. Board members, do you have any questions of Mr. Shatsman or the witnesses? >> No, >> I do. >> Okay. Please. >> So, when is the demo scheduled for?
>> You have to wait to get the demo permit. >> Demo permits are supposed to be done under the New Jersey Administrative Code in 20 business days. But if I had a nickel for every time a demo permit was not issued, uh, I'd be a millionaire
today. I wouldn't be here before the So, if the New Jersey administrative code is not filed, is not followed. Period. All right. So, I can't tell you. So, as soon as we get the demo permit and the weather clears, we're going to knock
down the houses because the quicker we knock down the houses, the quicker we get a subdivision deed signed and the quicker we can sell uh one of the lots. Okay. >> So, when is the demo permit application going to be submitted?
>> It was >> okay. Donna, are you clear? It was submitted and then there's inspections by like the sewer uh official has to look at the connections and the utilities need to be dis disconnected. So, um
>> yeah, you know, my only concern is I remember this case and I remember us talking about how certain structures were supposed to be removed years ago and were never removed. and I don't want the board to
get into that situation again. >> Well, we're trying to be compliant. Um, that was done by my parents. They're dead. So, when my brother and I found out that we were not compliant, you probably remember that we said we want to be compliant and we will knock them down. And that's what we said because we
said the one house did not need to be knocked down, but we would knock them both down because that's what the board wanted. So, we are definitely trying to be compliant. and we are as soon as we get that demo permit demolition guy um you probably know Nicholas Anthony Builders John Casar he's ready to go. So
I'm anticipating that once we get that it will just be a matter of I don't I don't know how long it takes to demo but I can't imagine more than a week or two and then it'll be done. >> So is six months really needed?
>> We can't hear you. No one knew that the that the houses were illegal until Derek did a good research job and at the time of the hearing back in May of last year, that's when we found out. Okay.
>> No, basically what what uh what Donna asked is is six months necessary given what the applicant has just said. >> Is it necessary? I want to I don't want to be back here as I said and I don't want to I don't want to spend your time
my time and their time. So we're we're giving six at least six months. It'll probably be done before but you always try to get a little bit more time. All right. I agree with that. Donna, is that okay?
>> I understand what everyone's saying. >> Okay. Good. >> Thanks. >> All right. Any other questions, board members? Okay, Mr. Shhatzman, we're going to open this up to the public. Do you want to say anything before we do that? >> No. >> Okay. All right. Um, we're going to open
up this meeting to the public. If there's anyone in the audience who would like to comment on this application, please indicate that by raising your hands. There's a button on the screen. Claudia, has anyone indicated they'd like to speak on behalf of this
application? No, there are no hands, Mr. Chairman. >> Okay, I'll wait just a second here. Okay, hearing no one from the public. I'll close the public portion of the
hearing. Mr. Chzman, I'll let you sum up and then we'll go into executive session. Uh the uh the big problem was the delay is the weather and the other delay is
getting a tenant out. Two out of three got out, but one was an old elderly man as Miss Kelly Miss Keller said. Uh, and we had to find a new home for him and you just can't throw him out on the
street in. So, okay, >> that's the delay. Now that he signed the lease, we're ready to roll. Weather's going to get better, we hope, and we're ready to roll everything done because again, the quicker we can get this done,
better all for the estate of Lefern Keller. And so, we want to move as fast as we can. Uh we should have uh if the weather was better and the de the uh uh the tenant the third tenant was out, we would have we not we would not be here
tonight. Okay, that's my summation. Okay. Thank you very much. Board members, any final questions of the applicant, the attorney, or the witnesses? >> George, are you >> No. >> Are you raising your hand? >> No. No. No.
>> Okay. All right. No questions. Okay. We're going to go into executive session. Um, any questions, comments, or someone would like to make a motion? This seems to be a pretty straightforward application.
Um, the weather of course I can understand the weather obviously we all can and uh and getting a tenant out is a very difficult proposition. So, someone like to
comment or >> I'll move to approve. >> Move to approve. >> Okay. >> Second. >> Okay. Any comments on the resolution on the uh motion? Okay. Claudia, can you call the role, please?
>> Miss Ten, >> yes. >> Miss Coulson, >> yes. >> Mr. Floyd, >> yes. >> Mr. Striber, >> yes. Mr. Stein, >> yes. >> Miss Donna, >> no. >> Chairman Cohen, >> yes.
>> Thank you. It's approved. >> Okay. Our next application is um case Z25-680 64 Valley Road, block 701, lot 258 in
the R6T zone. Karen, are the notices in order? >> They are, and the board has jurisdiction tonight to hear it. >> Okay. Uh Derek or Taylor, someone going to summarize a memo?
>> Yeah, I will. Um I just have to pull it up. Excuse me. I'm having a hard time finding my memo. Um, excuse me. Actually, I think I'll just wing it. Um, there was
a slight encroachment into the rear property line. I believe it was four or five inches with a setback. Should have been 25 ft. Um, there was a slight encroachment into that. And there was also a slight encroachment on the southern uh side lot line. Uh again
about a foot into it was a tiny 1 foot by one foot. Um they appear to be errors uh or or somebody uh missed a mark. Um and they're seeking uh an amendment of a site plan to uh close this out, get through compliance review and get their
cos and and get this project uh on the road. So that's kind of uh my memo. And if you have any questions, I'd be be glad to ask them. >> Any questions of Mr. Excuse me. >> Okay. No questions. Um, all right. Who's
going to represent this application? >> Mr. Chair, what um address did you give? Um, I was a little >> um >> is it John? >> Sorry, it's John Street. It's 166-168. >> Okay. Okay. >> John Street. >> That's what I thought we were talking. I
got >> I actually put the I actually just realized I read the long the wrong property description in here. This is Let me modify that. It's cases Z26-727 1668
John Street block 17.05 lot 16 in the Witherspoon Jackson Historic District in the zone R4B. Sorry about that. >> Thank you. I appreciate that. Um, I have
um a couple of people in the audience. I don't know what they're listed as, but it would be Robert Benadetto. He's our planner and um my client Mina Dam. I don't know what they look like on
the uh email or Oh, let me see if I could see the list now. M Dam has her hand up on the attendees. That's the applicant, I believe. >> Yes, that's correct.
And I see Rob there, too. Okay, great. Um, uh, for the record, my name is Christopher Degreesia from the law firm of Fagory, Drinker, Bidd, and Wreath. here on behalf of the applicant 1661
168 John Street LLC. Um as Derek mentioned, um we're here this evening on an amended final site plan application with a variance request. Um you may
recall we were here uh in 2020 at the end of 2020 and received approval for an adaptive reuse project. Uh we uh there was a a very large lot which was at one time owned by a water company and
instead of dividing up the lot uh we proposed a project that kept the the original structure which was a two family house and um allowed uh multif family use in two buildings. Um the back
building um was constructed. So we got the approval in uh by resolution adopted November 4th, 2020. The um everything went well. We went through compliance. We got all the permits. We built the structure. We got a a temporary
certificate of occupancy. And to close things out, we put together an asbuilt plan that shows where things were built. And it was found out at that time that um there a quarter of the building uh
went into the setback by a few inches. I think it was 4 in. So, in the rear of the property, that's the new building that was built, there is a 25- ft setback. And if you remember, part of um
I'm not sure which entity and maybe the zoning board, but they asked us to push back the building as far as possible from the street to keep, you know, kind of separate it. So when we did that, we brought it all the way back to the rear property line, which I said was, as I
said, was 25 ft. We did get a variance approved by this board for the deck that was 16 ft from the property line. So we got a variance for the deck for 16 ft. And the building was supposed to be built at the 25 ft. So in the one corner
of the building it was, but because the the building's not perfectly parallel, the other corner deviated a little. So instead of 25 ft, we're at 24.7 ft, which equates to about I think 4 in.
Um, in the original building as part of an adaptive reuse, there's usually a lot of variances that are triggered. In that particular case, it was a setback variance um where the building was um
existent which was 9.5. We took that measurement at the time from the flat surface of the building, not from the roof overhang. And as part of the approval, there was a design element um and the measurement wasn't
taken from the design element. So, there's nothing new shown in the plan or nothing new was added to the plan. It's the exact same uh structure that this board reviewed and approved. But if you take the measurement from the architectural feature that you'll see in a couple
minutes, um it's actually a 8.5 foot variance rather than a 9.5 foot variance. Um, and uh, unless you have any questions, um, I'd like to pull up our um, professional planner.
>> I have one question. >> Did the parking configuration in front of the back building change from that approved by our board? >> No, not that I'm aware of. I haven't been to the site, but let me
look at the ASBO plan. I'm not I don't believe it did. It's one two. It's hard for me to tell. >> You have seven spots and that was approved. Actually, 11 were approved. >> Ma'am, well, uh, Mr. Degretzy, if your
witnesses are going to testify, just like their names for the record again and swear them in. So, >> sure, that makes sense. We'll start with Robert. >> All right. Mr. Benetto, do you swear from your testimony this evening will be truthful?
>> I do. >> Thank you. >> And Mina. >> And uh ma'am, your full name is Nina. Madame >> Mina. >> Mina. And do you swear affirm your testimony this evening will be truthful?
>> Yes. >> Thank you. Okay. Um, Mina, can you uh just again state for the record the the parking spaces? They were asking if it was built as originally proposed. >> Yes, we have seven spots and that was
approved. >> What I was asking was the configuration. Are they are they in place what the way they were shown on the original plan? >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Okay. So, um, Robert, uh, we we will I need to get you qualified. Can you give us a little bit about your education, background, and licensing? >> Sure. Uh, graduated from the University of Delaware, uh, bachelor's of environmental engineering, uh, been a
licensed, uh, professional engineer, uh, for about seven or eight years. I've been practicing for about 12 years. Uh licensed professional planner for a little over a year. Um I've given engineering testimony in uh dozens of boards across the states. I've given
planning testimony in in uh about a half a dozen as well. Um >> are you a licensed professional planner in New Jersey? >> Yes. >> Okay. We'll accept your qualifications. >> Thank you. And we've prepared a an
exhibit that um is and we sent it in. Um it is uh one 12 pages and we can mark that as A1. And Rob, do you want to share your screen? Do you have it available there or do you need me to?
>> Nope. I can pull it right up. >> Okay. >> Okay. Can everybody see? >> Yes. >> Yep. And we'll mark this like I said, A1. And if you could describe the page as you go through that would be helpful.
>> Um, yeah. Before I dive into the planning testimony, I can uh just flip through kind of show everybody what this is each sheet. So obviously sheet one is the site plan modification and variance plan that shows the deviations that I'm going to discuss. Um sheet two is the
asbuilt survey uh post construction. Again, it's going to show a lot of the similar uh dimensions from the the initial sheet. Sheet three, just an aerial exhibit um with white boxes for the uh the structures showing you know where the
dimensions in question are, where the variances are. Um sheet four is a rendering from JZA the architect and then the rest of the the sheets are uh site photos. This one is uh from the rear showing the uh
deviation. Um so in this corner is where it uh it encroaches by a few inches. No, this is the uh that's the the front one, not the back. >> Apologies. >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Um this is just a view from the front. Um so this uh right here is is uh the jut in the building that's uh that we're here for the variance for. You'll see another another view of that right here. Um just an architectural feature for
building equipment and aesthetics. Um just a side view of the uh the yard. Again, there's the feature and then the rear yard. You can see the um the deviation is going to be over here.
And again, just a picture from a little further away. >> So those are those are the exhibits. >> Yeah, just uh slow down. If we're This is from the neighboring property. The blue building in the distance is the the
structure. The right side of it is um in compliance with the setback. The left side is the corner that goes uh 4 in over. >> Correct. >> There was another picture of the he went through quickly the yard um that shows
uh Yeah, that's the corn that's the corner of the property. Um that's the side right there, the back section. Yeah, that's the corner that is actually um uh that we're requesting the variance for. Okay, so just to go back to the first
sheet, well, the variance plan here. Um so we're here because a C2 variance is requested for construction within a sideyard setback. We'll start with uh the sideyard along the south property line here. um where 15 feet required, 8 and 1/2 ft is proposed. And I could zoom
in a little bit right here. Um it was previously approved under the application uh uh to the zoning board for a setback of 9 1/2 ft. Um the portion of the building within the previously approved setback this so this dimension here is only 16 in wide. Um,
as I mentioned, it's an architectural feature for additional building equipment reasons while also considering aesthetics with the intention of modernizing the building facade and sort of breaking up this long um, building face. Um, in addition to that, going
back over to the rear that we had talked about, um, another C2 variant was requested for construction within a rear yard setback where 25 ft required, 24.7 ft proposed. The project was originally approved under that previous zoning
board application uh with the rear yard setback of 25.2 feet. Uh as um our attorney had mentioned previously, the uh building face was not constructed fully parallel with the property line resulting in the deviation
um for granting. >> I'm sorry, just interrupt for a second. And that also shows the deck. The board granted a variance uh a rear yard setback variance allowing that deck which is only 16 ft from the uh property
line. Uh so were the municipal land use law for granting a C2 variance the purposes would have to be advanced by the deviation from the zoning ordinance requirements and the benefits of the deviation would substantially outweigh any detriments. Um we believe the the
purpose of zoning uh is furthered through the application by supporting specifically purpose eye to promote a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good civic design arrangement. Um, basically the jut in the building, we'll start with this one again. The jut in the
building within the setback serves to create a positive visual impact by modernizing the aesthetics of the building. Um, it also maintains uh I'm sorry, it minimizes the nonconformity from the approval to only 16 in. So, we're not asking for a ton of relief. It's just a small little section here.
Um, it also creates a positive architectural nuance by breaking up the long facade wall in that area. Um and then as far as the 168 John Street building goes down here, um the construction was a rectangular building
and while not entirely um perpendicular to or I'm sorry, parallel with the property line, the location and orientation of the construction was selected uh in parallel to neighboring buildings to create a more positive visual environment. Uh obviously, we have to look at the negative impacts. We
don't believe there's any substantial detriment to the surrounding properties as the setback deviations are so minimal. Um we've included the site photographs as we talked about uh of the non-conforming areas to prove that the deviations create no negative impacts aesthetically from neighboring
properties. Uh in fact, the deviations we feel create a positive visual impact by breaking up the long facade wall up here uh and on on the south side of the property and maintaining a parallel building face with neighboring properties. Uh furthermore, as the site uh the site is constructed has adequate
light, air and open space consistent with purpose C uh none of which will create uh a negative impact from the deviations. To conclude, I believe the requested deviations will create a more desirable visual environment than the prior approval, demonstrating that the
benefit of this application far exceeds any potential detriments. >> That it. Um, yes. Unless you have questions. >> I have a question. Can you bring up the picture of the back of the side of the
house? This architectural feature you're talking about? >> Sure. >> Yeah. You just went by it, I think. >> Yeah. There. So this this feature is the the buildout
the horizontal buildout and the and the vertical element that comes down. >> Yep. >> It's it's So what are you saying is 16 in to me? To me that buildout looks like it's 6
feet 8t long horizontally. >> Sure. The Yeah. Yeah, the 16 inches I'm referring to is is just along the the the ground level >> when the ground I don't understand. It's
>> I I think I get what he's saying. Um when we're looking at the plan, we're looking at it at two dimensions and it comes down and it's it's >> Yeah, it's uh it does snake around. So, you are correct, Mr. Cohen that it does sneak around as an architectural feature
and we we assume that it's all that element is within the setback. >> So it it's the it's the piece in the back then it turns horizontal and goes towards the street and then it goes vertical again and then it turns back
again parallel to the element below it and goes towards the back of the building. >> Yeah. Yeah. as as shown in the original um renderings. >> Yeah. >> So, that's a heck of a deviation. I mean, it's it's
>> it it it's it's it's actually not a deviation from the plan. It was a incorrect measurement from the beginning. So, when when we talked about the setback, we talked about it as a five 8.5 foot from the building. We
didn't measure the the roof line or that line. Um, and so it was incorrect from the beginning. >> It's it's not even the roof, it's the facade. That whole wall essentially, I mean, it's fine. There's obviously nothing you
can do about it at this point, but that whole section is built out from the facade. >> It is. It is. >> Yeah. So, >> but but I was saying from the front even, we got that dimension wrong because it was measured to the It didn't measure from the roof line. It measured from the >> Okay. >> Yeah.
>> All right. I just wanted to clarify that because it's a lot different than uh than quite frankly I think you just explained. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Thank you board members. Any other questions of this uh witness?
>> Okay. All right. Mr. Dreszi, you can continue. >> So we have the the property owner here too. if you have any questions. I um I don't think she has any specific to say. She's uh not in the business of being a
developer and she relied heavily on her construction team and um her professionals. So uh the rear setback was just unfortunate error. Um and this was also a measurement error from the
the beginning which it should have been um you know not measured from the flat surface but from the uh elements that stuck out. >> I think I think if the board approves this I think you need to correct the drawing to show the extent of this
deviation. It's not just 16 in at the ground level. It comes all the way almost to the back door to the side door. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> All right. That you can discuss with Mr. PCEL. >> Mr. Dretz. Yeah. So, um, Miss Madame,
she's uh the principal owner of the applicant. >> Yes. Okay. A member. Okay. Do you have any other witnesses, Mr. Degresia?
>> Nope. Not unless you have specific questions. >> No. Board members, any other questions of the attorney, the applicant, or the planner? Okay. Thank you. Um, we're going to go. We're going to open this to the public. So, if you'd like to
say anything else, Mr. Degresia, before we do that, please do. Um I I don't have anything at this point. >> Well said. Okay. Um Claudia, um well, first we're going to open this up to the public portion of the hearing.
If there's anyone in the audience who'd like to speak on behalf of this application, please indicate that by pushing the raise your hand button at the bottom of the screen. Um if you can take take this picture down, please. And
um Claudia, is there anyone indicated they'd like to speak on behalf of this application? >> Yes, I have one hand. One second. >> Okay. Okay. >> All right. Can you hear me? >> We can. Ma'am, can we have your full
name first? >> Yes. I'm Kathleen Carol. I'm the neighbor directly across the street at 167 John Street. >> All righty. And ma'am, do you swear affirm any testimony you give this evening will be truthful? >> Yes.
>> Thank you. >> So, I have uh three uh points or questions. First, I the letter I got referred to a 30 yard 30 foot setback that ended up
at 13 1/2 ft. And I was a little confused. I didn't hear that clarified. >> Oh. Um there's also a um combined yard setback under the code and because this would be eight and a half feet on this
side and the newer building in the back received a setback with something like three feet um five feet I can't remember but ultimately it's the combined yard setback that would typically be two 15
foot yards which would be 30 feet >> right >> and instead instead of the combined yard, it's when you just add both sides. Um, >> so this 30 foot isn't what I mean, you already had a variance approved for less
than that, correct? >> Yes, we had a variance approved for 9.5 on the one side on the left side of the property and on the right side it was um
five feet. Wait, no. Um, I'm sorry. Let me just find >> Mr. Bridger. Did Did you want to speak to that? Because it's my understanding you didn't think they needed a variance. Is that correct? >> Yeah. I mean, I the way I looked at it, it's it's the combined it's the setbacks
on the each side of each building. So, >> okay. >> I didn't interpret it that way. That's why I didn't put it in my memo. Um, so really, Miss Carol, what they've done is they should have been 9 and 1/2 ft on the the house in the front and that bump
out that we saw the photo of was 8 and 1/2 ft. So, it was a foot further into the setback. Um, but nothing else has changed on the plan. >> Okay. So my question my second question is um since they didn't do what was in
the approved variances is there any kind of penalty for them or do you just approve it and and which seems to incentivize deliberate or careless violation of approved variances.
Well, they because they because they changed what was approved, they're back here this evening and they they're actually asking us to modify our approval to what was done. So, that's what we're going to discuss
>> after we hear from you. We heard from the attorney and the witnesses and then we'll then the board will discuss it and determine what we feel is the appropriate action. Well, I guess I'm asking if there's any penalties. I mean,
clearly to ask them to change the construction would be major at at this point, and that's not likely to happen. So, are there small, you know, more proportionate penalties for going a foot over, for example? Um,
>> I'll just say that, >> yeah, >> it's cost them three or four, five months of time. Um, numerous surveys, um, >> and fees associated with this. So, um, it, you know, there's two ways I could go with this. I issued a violation and
typically if there's a violation and the applicant comes in and says, I want to correct it in any way I can, seek a variance, we do that. if I went to the judge and you know the fines are start at $200, but the judge would probably say why don't you go back to the board
because that's really the best jur you know body to deal with this type of situation. So >> yeah, it just seems like a fine or something might be in order, but it sounds like you have to go to the judge to get to that. But so that was just my question. And then the other question is
really not related to this application. I'm just I have a question about the lighting which is on all night and is very bright. I don't know who to address that to. >> Are you talking about porch lighting? >> Yeah, the porch lights and the lights
over the parking are on all night long and they're directly across from uh our front bedrooms from me and my uh attached neighbor. Did we in our original approval discuss
the site lighting, Derek? >> I'm checking now. Let me check. >> I did raise it um before the end of construction. It clearly didn't make any difference.
So, may I answer that? Sure. >> Um, so I can I can um make sure the timers are set so they are not on late night. >> Okay, that would be great. >> So they they are there for safety
purpose. >> Mhm. Yeah. I just think that the ones on the side of the building in particular, it seems to me they could be lowered so that they uh >> this was not brought to my attention, but now that you have done so, I will
take care of them. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. And we'll put that in resolution. >> Okay. So, that was all for me. >> Okay. Thank you very much for your comments. >> Okay. Claudia, is there anyone else who would like to speak?
Ammeris, you're next. >> Okay. >> Ma'am, could you first have your full name for the record? >> Amaris Rodriguez. >> All righty. And if you're comfortable, could you tell us where you reside? >> I reside on the property. I'm one of the
uh tenants. >> Okay, great. Thank you. >> Okay. Please speak. I am joining this meeting uh just to you know I've been a tenant here for several months and I understand what's going on
now. I have a son he's young and he plays in the yard and it's you know it's beneficial for the families that are living here. So, I'm just here just to say that it has been um
uh conducive to our children playing in the yard and that space is very useful to us to the families that are here on the property. >> Okay. Thank you. >> No problem.
>> Okay. All right. Claudia, anyone else indicated they'd like to speak? There are no more hands. >> Okay. Hearing no more people willing wanting to speak, I'll close the public portion of the hearing. Mr. Degresia,
would you like to sum up before we go into executive session? >> Sure. Yeah, we appreciate your time. Again, um this was just something that was an honest mistake. Clearly, there's no real benefit in the back to adjust it
to get three inches over it. It doesn't make any sense. It would it would have been better if the line was just, you know, parallel and built exactly the way it was on the side. Um that was um that was a architectural feature. It was
shown on all the plans. um it separated the historic building that was preserved and the back portion which was the newer portion. All of the positive things that were discussed at the original meeting, you know, how the adaptive reuse of the
structure rather than demolishing it, that all led to um the the current design and it sort of put us on a track where we needed a sideyard setback there. I know the architectural element increased it a little bit, but it's
visually very nice and there's really um not a huge impact to the the the use of the yard from the the eight and a half to the you know because you know there's a lot of open space. It doesn't bump out
that whole new section. It's just a design element that's I would say like an S. And that's on both sides of the building too. So when you looked at the plans and you saw the uh the uh renderings from the other side, it's the
same modern element um and part of the design. So we thank you for your time and we believe that um that it it makes a lot of sense having us to kind of relocate or to demo would result in a
lot of waste. Um, and like I said, this was just an an honest mistake. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Okay. Board members, um, questions, comments?
>> I I have a question. I just wanted to understand there's nothing related to the rear deck that we separately have to approve. It's it's only that corner. Okay. >> Yeah, the deck was already approved. It's kind of funny because the
resolution reads that you have a rear yard setback variance of 16 ft. >> Yeah, that's what I'm saying. >> Yeah. So, we have a a setback that allows the deck where it is. You granted a 16 foot setback, but we never
discussed, you know, the corner of the building, which, you know, tilts into the setback at 24.7 ft. >> Okay. Like I said, it was it was just a error on the construction team's part.
>> Dar, how is this found? >> Uh, the applicant did a um asbuilt survey and then it was discovered then. So, it was after it was completely built, they put together as vote survey, sent it in, and and then all of a
sudden, um, we realized the corner was not as it should have been. >> Are you referring to the setback or you referring to the house, the main house? So the first one was um
was okay. So the house in the rear was the one that first came to our attention and I believe Derek Bridger or somebody um in in the town said, "Hey, your asbuilt
shows it at 24.7 ft. The corner should have been at 25." So that was that's how that came up. And then when I um had a discussion with Derek, I was the one actually that built that that referenced the other side the ar where the
architectural element was. And I said, "Well, if this architectural element you're if we're measuring from that, it's actually a 0.5 point an 8.5, I'm sorry, 8.5 foot setback and not a 9.5." And and that's why we Derek agreed and
added to So no one tried to hide anything here. In fact, we were the ones that discovered and brought it up, and Derek can attest to that as well. >> Well, Derek was correct, but that that is essentially a wall element that
protrudes into the sideyard setback. It it's not just the 16 in obviously at the ground. Okay. Any other questions or does someone want to make a motion
or does someone want to discuss anybody want to discuss this? I think the rear yard, the rear building setback was just a mistake. I mean, I can understand, you know, the surveyor, whoever staked it
out, dismissed it by a few inches. the line wasn't parallel. So that that quite frankly happens. As Mr. Degresia says, it's only a few inches and I don't think it really affects the the function of the backyard or quite frankly even the
setback itself. The sideyard um was a wall element and the the architect should have really known that when he when he actually put it on the drawings. So it should have been an 8 and 1/2t sideyard as opposed to nine nine and a
half ft. So but I don't think materially it has a a major effect on the uh on the setback issue at all. >> I move we approve it. >> I'll second it.
>> I'm sorry. I'll second it. >> Okay. Thank you. Is there any discussion of the motion? >> Okay. Claudia, can you call the role, please? >> Miss Chen, >> yes. >> Miss Coulson, >> yes.
>> Mr. Floyd, >> yes. >> Mr. Shrivever, >> yes. >> Mr. Stein, >> yes. >> Miss Donna, >> yes. German Cohen. >> Yes. >> Thank you.
>> You're welcome. Okay. >> Thank you very much. I I also want to thank Derek for the 30 or whatever the years he put in here. It has been a pleasure working um you know uh working with him even when he didn't agree with
me. Um, I've worked with about 150 other towns and he's the only zoning officer that I I wouldn't get mad at even when he disagreed. So, he's a he's a he's an amazing person. Thank you,
Derek, for the many years. >> Thank you, Christopher. Very nice. >> I want to say thank you to all of you. >> You're welcome. It was 5hour long meeting five years ago during COVID when we got
the plans approved and here we are back again. So thank you again. >> You're welcome. >> Thank you. Have a nice evening. >> Thank you. You too. Okay. Our next case
is case number Z25-680 64 Valley Road block 701 lot 258 in the R6T zone. Um Karen is are the noticing in order? >> It is. You'll remember this application
was carried several times. Um so yes, the noticing is in order for tonight. >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. Um, Derek Taylor, someone said, "Please summarize your memo." >> Yeah, I'm going to do it tonight, but I have to be sworn in first.
>> Oh, I'm sorry, Taylor. Do you swear from your testimony this evening will be truthful? >> I do. >> Thank you. >> That Thank you. Um, good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Um, tonight you're going to hear testimony from the owners and applicants and their
professionals, uh, Miss Me Min and Mr. Chan. um on their proposal to demolish an existing one-story dwelling uh as well as a carport to construct a new single family two-story dwelling and an ADU in the rear yard. The parking for
the principal dwelling, which is two spots, is located in the front yard of the principal dwelling and behind the required 25 ft setback. The parking for the ADU is comprised of a singlecar garage attached to the ADU.
Uh the subject property is not located within a locally designated historic district. Um the subject lot is not compliant with the following bulk regul requirements of the R6T zone and therefore require
variances. Uh the lot width at the building the required is 85 ft and the proposed is 75 ft. And the lot frontage, the required is 85 feet and the proposed is 75 feet. Um, if there are any questions, I'd be
happy to uh answer them. >> Board members, any questions? >> Okay. Thanks. Uh, >> members, I just want to correct the noticing indeed is in order, but I was uh thinking of another application when
I said that it had been carried several times. um this application was not carried uh and their noticing uh is correct for tonight. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Okay. Who's going to present this
application this evening? >> Hi, good evening. Uh my name is Chris Chen and I am the owner applicant for 64 Valley. Um good evening, >> Mr. Ch. We're just going to swear you in. You swear or affirm your testimony this evening will be truthful.
>> Yes. Thank you. >> Uh yeah, so um we purchased this property uh over in the community park neighborhood. Um as Taylor mentioned, um the lot is 75 ft wide um at the midpoint
and 75 ft uh wide where it meets the street on the frontage. Um and so based on where it sits in the zoning, uh it does not meet the 85 ft bulk requirement uh for the zone. and we are therefore
seeking a C1 variance. Um we did try to cure the requirement uh by approaching the neighbors on both sides of the property. Uh so on the right hand side um our neighbor actually has the same sized lot. So they are already
non-conforming and on the other side they are currently conforming. Their lot is 90 ft wide. uh if they were to sell us 10 feet of their lot in order to make ours conforming, they would no longer be conforming. So, in either case, um we spoke to both neighbors uh several times
and uh neither of them are interested in selling um and so therefore we are coming to you guys asking for that variance. >> Okay. All right. Can we are you are you uh is that it or we going to hear from
anyone else? Uh I do have Marina Rubina, our architect on the line. Uh if you guys have any questions about the projects in more details, but I think that was it. >> I think you should just we should just see a site plan if you can bring it up on the screen so all the board members
can see it. >> I would be happy to bring that up. I assume I would need to be sworn in. Karen, is that correct? >> You do. Uh Mr. Beina, do you swear or affirm your testimony this evening will be truthful? >> I do. Would you like to qualify me? I am
a a licensed >> You've testified before us before. We'll accept you as an >> Marina. You are the architect of record for the project, correct? >> Yes. Correct. >> Um, so I would like to quickly uh this is
part of our submission, but this is a enlarged version of what Chris just described. You could see this is their lot right here. It is. Can everybody see? I'm going to try to zoom in a little bit. Um, it is 75 ft. The
neighboring lot is 90 and all of the other adjacent lots on the other side are 75 ft wide. Therefore, as um Chris described, they're not able to uh get to conformity based on
discussions with their neighbors. And um would you like me to share the um the proposed site plan? >> Yes. Let me see where did that go? Here we are.
Zoom share. Here we are. Yes, hopefully everybody could see. So, this right here is the excerpt of that exact same plan that I was just showing. And below we have the site plan where we
are conforming to all of the other bulk requirements and all the other zone requirements and um front setbacks, side yard setbacks, um parking, everything else apart from the width of the lot is conforming.
>> Point out the main house and the ADU. >> So all the yellow demonstrates impervious coverage. So this is the main house right here up in front and ADU and garage is one kind of garage edu object
right here and it's right exactly you drive drive drive drive into the garage and here it is. >> Is the house are the house and the ADU connected? >> No, they're not 5 ft apart >> as you can right here. >> Okay.
And the ADU parking, they've got to back out straight back to the street >> or turn around right here in this spot here >> if there's no one there. >> Correct. Which is similar to the current arrangement on the property where um
there is a spot up front and a carport right now, not a garage, but a carport at this location. Um except currently this portion is located closer um if you'd like I can share the current survey. It's located closer to the
street itself. So that is being moved to a conforming location. >> Okay. >> Mr. Do you want this to be an exhibit? >> Uh absolutely. This is the submitted um plans that were um included in our
submission and this is sheet A1. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. >> And the uh current survey was also submitted part of the application. >> All right. >> What is the red blocks on the uh left
hand upper corner? Uh this guy right here, the zoning map indicates different zones. So this is the R6T is the yellow. Um and then when it switches to a different zone, this is
I'm blinking what zones those are, but those are business zones. B something or BB B something. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So this is not our our color indication. And this is straight excerpt from the zoning map.
>> Okay. All right. Board members, any questions so far? >> Okay. >> Yeah, I I have a quick question. Um, for the F it's right at the max, but I
see that uh it doesn't look like utility room and bikes counted towards or it it it looks like it did count towards it. Is that correct? Or is isn't that supposed to be excluded or um am I wrong?
>> Good question. Let me refresh my memory. >> I'm on a Z. Uh >> because it looks like attic was excluded. >> Attic is excluded. Uh
utility and bike room I believe were excluded as well, but I could double check. Did we accidentally include them?
X30 + 148 um minus >> Derek Taylor. Are they the utility and >> are they supposed to speak to that? >> It's uh there's no basement. It's a slab. So the uh F allows you to deduct
up to 100 square ft for a utility room and 48 square ft for a bike storage space that has to be accessible from the outside of the building. >> Okay. Thank you. >> However, the garage exemption was not
applicable in this case if I'm remembering correctly. So the garage had to be contributing towards F. >> Is that correct, Derek? >> Yes, sir. >> Thank you. Okay,
>> Mr. Vino, please continue. Um we are presenting a project that has um the actual proposed building has no um variances requests of any kind. the
unfortunate mismatch between the existing width of the property and the current requirement of zoning as Chris described we were not able to correct and that is the variance that um we're
asking for today and um we believe that because of the new construction on this property a lot of existing non-confirmities that the existing building um extends into all sorts of sideyard problems will be rectified. And
um we really truly hope that um Chris and Rosie and their two young kids will be able to enjoy their new house and walk and bike and um be part of this exciting neighborhood. >> Thank you. Okay. Um board members, any
questions of the owner or the architect? Okay. Uh, Mr. Chen, do you want to sum up before we go into I open the hearing up to the public? >> Uh, sure. I'd be happy to. Uh, so basically, we are trying to build a uh new home at 64 Valley. Uh, because of
the narrow width of the lot uh at the midpoint and at the frontage where it meets the street. Uh basically we are non-conforming with the bulk requirements for uh the zone where we are located. Uh and so we are seeking a hardship variance in order to be able to
build uh a single family home carport and ADU sorry garage and ADU uh on the property and uh the building doesn't require any other variances other than for the uh the width and frontage of the lot.
>> Okay. Thank you. Thank you. >> Okay. At this point, um, I'd like to open the hearing up to the public. If there's anyone in the audience who'd like to comment on behalf of this application, please indicate that by
pressing the raise your hand button on the screen. Karen, have we gotten anyone who's indicated they'd like to speak? >> Let's see. Yes. I see two hands raised. Um,
we have Gail Lambert and Dennis Shell. And I think Claudia brought them over. >> Yeah, I I should have said instead of Karen, I should have said Claudia is muted. So,
>> all right. Well, Miss Lambert or Mr. Michelle. >> Oh. >> Uh, we can't see you or hear you, so you need to get your video on and unmute. >> How's that? >> Okay, Mr. Sh,
>> excuse me. >> I'm sorry. Um, there's smoke and we have to evacuate the building. Um, so if we could take a 15minute break, we're going to bring a laptop >> and try to find a place to place to continue the meeting.
be safe. We'll wait. >> Derek, if you would like to go over to Tiger Labs, I can meet you there in 15 minutes. Would that be helpful? >> Um, >> that sounds like a good plan, Derek. >> Yep. Thank you, Mary. >> Okay, I'll be right there. See you in a
little bit. I'll I'll I'll log in again. Apologies for that. I need to get down there. >> Just let us know when you're there and we'll reconvene. >> Okay. Thank you. >> See you in a little bit. >> Thanks. >> Okay. All right. those uh >> people in the audience, we're going to
take a 15minute break and board members, we're going to take a 15minute plus or minus break. So stay close. >> You could have gone to the fire department. It's right across the street. >> That's a good point.
But I thought they were going to go to Kantis while they're at it and have a beer and a pizza. Okay. Okay. Naive. Hi, George. Hey, I'm back. I'm back. Yeah. How are
you? Good. Good. Derek's requiring the end of the month and I have another month after that month. April, May. No, two months after that. Wait, Steve, did you I don't quite understand what you just said.
>> Oh, I'm going to retire. Not from the board. I'm retiring from my job. >> Ah, >> the end of June. >> Okay. All right. Looking forward to it. >> Good. >> How many years, Steve?
>> How many years have I been doing what I'm doing? >> Yeah. >> 60 something. >> That's amazing. That's great. >> Yeah. I've had it. >> Sounds like you'll probably get one of those re uh recognitions, too. Just like
Derek got. >> No. From the people who work with me. >> Yeah. They want me to stay. >> Travel plans, hobbies. >> Yeah. I think >> read books. >> Read books. Spend more time with my
family. The usual. No, but I um we'll do some we've traveled a lot over the years and um I've worked out of the country several times and um yeah, we're going to do some traveling. I mean, just you
know, we we uh my kids uh my son and daughter-in-law and grandchildren live in California. My daughter is in Jersey, so we'll go to California. We have family in Florida, so we'll go down there. You know, we we have, you know,
we'll do some we'll do some traveling. I want to go to Nova Scotia, actually. >> Ah, >> yeah. I just want to see how it's going to be not working every day. >> Yeah, that that actually I find
daunting. >> When did you retire or did you retire? >> I'm still still at it, Steve. >> And do you work in New York? >> I used to. Um, you know, I run a small executive search firm focused on commodities. >> Uhhuh.
>> And I stopped going during co eventually gave up the office. So ran out of the living room right now. >> I know. I'm I'm I've been offered two jobs already and uh
>> by two of my clients. So, but I'm not going to do it. >> Okay. I told him I was unemployable. >> I s I sold my business. So, you know, I had uh So, the business is still there and um
Yeah. I'm just not going to run it anymore. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Well, my daughter joined the business a couple years ago. >> Oh, that's nice. >> It is. She's wonderful to work with. Very smart. very smart. Took right to it.
>> She had a good teacher. >> No, she was um involved in arts, you know, author books, off Broadway plays, films, >> textiles, present in >> performances, exhibits.
>> Now she's a recruiter. >> That's good. You taught her well. I assume >> she amazingly how fast she she picked it up. >> Really? That's nice. >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean cuz you know the world
world of commodities intertwined with finance and a lot of business savvy geopolitics a lot of the time and uh it all comes into play. Mhm.
H. Yeah, that's good. She'll carry on. She might. She might. That's going to be up to her. Good. So, and my wife retired a few years ago. So,
I was I was I waited as long as I could, maybe a little beyond where I should have. >> Interesting. Hey Gail, can you hear any fire trucks over by the municipal building? >> Yeah, I hear all kinds of them, honestly. Yeah.
>> Oh, really? >> That's probably bad news for Derek. >> Yeah. I don't know what's going on, but you would think they're right across the street. I don't know if they're bringing more in from around town, but >> really? Wow.
>> Yeah. I mean, I'm only uh Yeah, I'm across from the soccer field, so I'm right around the corner from it. Yeah. >> And you hear trucks. H >> Mhm. >> Yep. Yep. So, I wonder what's going on. >> Yeah. >> He saw smoke, so it wasn't just the
alarm. >> Yeah. Let me look and see if there's any flames. >> Oh my gosh. Steve, do we know how many people this affected? Is it just is it is it just Derek and Claudia
>> and Taylor? I would imagine she >> Taylor Karen wasn't there >> and Jim was online for a while, too. Oh, >> so how what what happened, Derek? >> We're here. >> We don't know. >> Well, how bad is the building?
building. >> Oh, we're gonna have to >> Hi there. >> I'm gonna mute you. >> How bad is the building, Derek? >> Oh, yeah. >> Okay. Thanks. >> You got >> All right.
>> Okay. >> Well, we All right. We don't have everyone back yet. Oh yeah. Wait. >> So where we left off, I think Mr. Shy was about to um make comment and I think I was
>> turn your volume. >> Going to swear him in. Do you swear affirm your testimony this evening will be truthful. Mr. Shy, >> I do. >> And uh if you're comfortable, would you uh give us your address? >> Sure. I'm at 8 Turner Court.
>> Okay. right within that magic radius. >> Okay. >> Excuse me one second. Sorry. Is Claudia okay? I don't see I see her name twice on the screen. Is she >> She's with us. She's with us. She's
>> okay. Good. Okay. I'm sorry. Please. >> I'm missing a couple zoning board members. >> Oh, yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. Bernice and Bernice is not here and Donna. Oh, Donna. I see you. Let's give Bernice a minute here.
>> Yeah, >> there she is. >> Okay, there we go. Great. >> Okay, so I'm sorry, Mr. Shell. Please continue. >> Okay, so I I got the notice, took a look at the plans, uh marveled at how the architects
managed to put so much into that space. uh my particular lot is pies-shaped so nonconforming is is an understatement so I sympathize with people who have to deal with narrow lots
setbacks etc. But as I was looking through the plan, um, I noticed that if you if you go to I don't know what the document is called A3 A3.3, it's the one that was shown earlier um
that had the the the site plan and things in it. >> Y >> um if you look at the upper right hand corner of this document for the floor area ratio calculations, um it the there was a discussion that
came really close. If you look at the ADU on this particular corner of the plan, it mentions the ground floor at 630 ft, the utility room and bikes at 148. And then the attic, which is considered
not contributing to par because of the 1/3 rule, uses a calculation that combines both the ground floor and the utility room in bikes in order to come in uh square foot less.
But I don't think that is correct. Um, if the utility room and bikes is excluded from FAR, I don't think it's included in the one-third rule.
>> Derek Taylor, >> it's part of the ground floor. Um, and we've included it in the ground floor to make the one-/3 exemption. Um, it's a good question, but that's the way we've interpreted it. Okay. I mean, it it seems if you exclude it,
it's it's excluded. But again, I'm not >> I I understand what you're saying. Yeah. >> A zoning officer or a a lawyer. So, I'll let I'll brought it up and if that's that's fine. Um yeah, I mean otherwise the as far as
the width it is currently the the the current property or the design is >> has more act has more compliant setbacks. So welcome to the neighborhood. >> Well, thank you Mr. Shell for your
comment. That was a good comment. >> Okay. Is there anything else Mr. Shell before we go on to the next person? >> Nope. Okay. Um, Claudia Karen, is there anyone else who'd like to speak? >> Um, Miss Gail Lambert. Miss Lambert, um,
do you swear affirm your testimony this evening will be truthful? >> Yes. >> And if you're comfortable, would you give us your address? >> Sure. I'm at 58 Valley Road. I believe Mr. Michelle is my backyard neighbor.
>> All right. Thank you. >> Um, yeah. So, um, as as Marina pointed out, it is a very lovely neighborhood. Um, the reason we chose to move here and and also raise our family. Um, but, um, while I understand the proposal, it
complies with zoning, um, given that this is a nonconforming lot, my concern is really about how much intensity is being pushed to the edge, particularly with the ADU. So, I'm not
here to stop it. I I just um wonder how we can just sort of pause and not ignore the impact >> turning her into an attendee. >> Hello, >> Mr. Lber. We can't see you anymore. You're >> No, we can't.
>> No, we can see her. >> I had to switch to my phone. Yes. So, now we can see >> now you're back. >> Oh, okay. Yeah, somebody said something. So um anyway um I understand the intent behind ADUs
um but in this case the way it's being built has a direct impact u primarily on me as an adjacent um property. So I haven't seen the full plans. Tonight was the first time that I saw very quickly
what Marina had shared. So, I'm just trying to understand, you know, in this neighborhood, we have very, you know, our lots are not very large. We have close neighbors and I consider myself a really good neighbor.
Um, so, you know, Chris and Rosie are lovely. Um, it's it's nothing about that. I'm just really trying to get a sense of the scope of it. Um, as I understand, the ADU is roughly 20 feet high or about one and a half
stories high. So that that might be the garage. Um but only five feet from the property line and a lots this tight uh just feels like it creates a real impact on our backyard in terms of of course
privacy um overall usability. I mean um I think Chris knows that me and the other neighbor Trish on the other side are the two who are always outside gardening and enjoying our backyards. So, it does feel a bit um like the design is really
maximizing that buildable space right up against um particularly my property line. Um and then that concentration of mass is what's really creating the issue. My house is a two-story traditional 60s home only 1,800 square
ft. Um, so it feels like the ADU, if I did my math right, is, you know, over 40% of what my home whole house would be, including my garage. So I just, again, I'm not an architect. I'm not a builder. I'm just, you know, a
homeowner and a family, you know, living here as well. trying to understand again I'm not opposed to the project but I I'm really trying to understand the placement the height um of the ADU specifically um you know what buffering
can be done um knowing that this 5-ft setback I don't know how you could even do screening with that um what kind of lighting is there my understanding Chris shared is that the ADU door is actually going to face my property and again we
don't have big backyards Um, so I don't know what the solution is. Um, it just feels like it's going to fall more to me as the homeowner who's really being impacted by this. So I, yeah, I just, um, again wanted to try to
understand more about this and share. I don't know how many of the the folks on this phone have experience with an ADU being built next to you. I I mean, I certainly didn't um until I realized like, oh wow, five feet is very very
close. And not wanting to sell 10 feet of my property, of course, you know, not only putting me out of um being non-conforming would have you even closer to me. So, um yeah, Chris, you seem lovely. I just
don't know that I want to be that close to you. So I I guess I'm trying to understand you know about the impact and scale and placement of all of this um you know thoughts from from the board.
What can what can be done? >> Well I think the um the ADU from a standpoint of placement is conforming. Uh Derek Taylor, do you want to comment on that? Um I mean yeah according to um what was
some yeah according to the plans um yeah it's 6.3 feet versus 5T um to the ADU. >> Right. Right. But the garage is one piece. on top of that is that attic and then there's going to be another
>> Oh, she looked at the plan >> um onestory attachment to that. So, it's all one building and then beyond that is going to be now I think a patio of some kind going to the back fence. So, essentially it's my really most of the side of the
yard that with a 6ft fence I don't even know that that's going to really make much of a difference. um again on a tight lot. Um just the real impact that it creates for neighboring properties is just a learning curve for me. Um and
trying to understand, you know, neighbor impact when things like this are taking place. >> Yeah, absolutely. I uh I understand where you're coming from. Um it it complies with the the zoning ordinance for an accessory dwelling
unit. >> Well, maybe um and that's you're correct. Maybe uh the applicant or the architect can comment and maybe uh maybe suggest some additional screening if you'd like to do that
possibly. Well, it feels like it's going to fall to me to try to do that. I mean, with six feet even, I don't know what kind of screening can be done. And we talked briefly over the weekend. Um, so yeah, I just I don't really know what what can be done, but between windows
and lighting and um you know, >> Gail and I and the other neighbor were actually supposed to sit down on Monday to go over the plans in more details. And uh I think Gail had also mentioned that she is delaying landscaping along that
>> side of her property until we have that conversation so she can plan accordingly and we can talk about what landscaping can be done on our side too. >> Yeah. It just I I don't know. I never I didn't understand how ADUs worked and all of that. And um again, for the folks
on the phone, you might not you might see it on paper, but living next to it, I think, is an entirely different experience. So, yeah, I I do feel like it's going to fall more to me as a as a neighbor to figure this out. Um
>> well, I mean, we we as a board um can't really uh require anything in excess of the code. All we can do is suggest that uh you know you and the applicant get together and see if you
can come to some balance on uh on what could make uh your concerns uh a little less problematic. >> Yeah. No, I I understand. I again I don't I don't think I can stop anything. And again, I, you know, having lived
next to Alfred for many years and when he passed away, you know, it was lovely to know that the home would sort of get a new life. Um, yeah, I love that. I do a lot of work to my home as well to do a lot of upkeep. So, I'm just sort of I
guess bracing myself trying to understand again um sort of the neighborhood impact because this is definitely changing um the landscape of our our neighborhood um in addition to me as a neighbor and my property. So,
that's that's pretty much I think where where I can leave it. I don't think there's anything else I can do. Is it is it allowed to to make a quick comment while you can in public session? >> Yes, you can.
>> Oh, thank you so much. Um, so Gail, pleasure to meet you. Um, the you're correct in describing that the garage portion of the building is located um 6'3 or maybe it was um Taylor that stated that 6'3 ft away from the
property line. And then the living room part steps um further away from the property line an additional if I'm remembering correctly 2 ft. Um at that point we did try to minimize the location of windows facing your side. Um
there is a requirement for a percentage of windows on the facade and we were actually required to put additional openings on that site which was interesting but it is the the ordinance that we had to comply with and um I
think Chris was correct in um mentioning that he's reaching out to you and we'd be happy if you guys would like me to join the meeting and walk everybody through and um see if we could um locate
screening or landscaping. Again, the living portion is set back further than the garage portion. If we can minimize um windows looking at each other's yards, I think we would be happy to do that. Unfortunately, there is an exact
requirement for windows that um we had to balance. So, um, within the allowable requirements, um, I'm sure Chris wants to make as neighborly as moves as possible and work on buffers that will allow
everybody to continue living together as a great neighborhood. Eric and Taylor, just for the board's clarification, um your uh response to Miss um Lambert's
question was that the ADU is in a compliant location, but of course the lot still needs variance relief. Correct. >> If in if in fact the house is going to be totally demolished, which I gather is
what the applicant would like to do. Correct. >> Yes. I believe it needs variance relief regardless of if the ADU is there or not. But yes. >> No. No. Under No, understood. I'm just I'm just I wanted to actually just
clarify it because uh and right now do you have a ranch or a um twotory? Right now >> currently it's a ranch. >> It's a onestory home that violates both sideyard variances.
And it's located at a kind of unusual angle to everything. >> It's a cottage. It's just like a little >> Correct. >> with an attached
garage carport thing. Mhm. >> Carport. Yeah. But I believe the the windows you're referring to, Marina, are a bedroom window. I assume
you're required to have glass in it. >> There is a um percentage of windows that is required and a um on in the neighborhood what's it called? neighborhood character
ordinance requires, am I correct? Um, a certain number of windows and they have to be a certain distance from the edge of the building. So, there's actual in order to activate facade so it doesn't look boring, you're required to have
windows and doors. So, one of the plan check comments that we have received was to add additional windows. >> Is that something that uh given the concerns of the neighbors can be a
variance request to eliminate those or minimize them? Well, we don't want to be going back for additional variances if if we you know, we've waited for this meeting for an incredibly long time. We have come up
with a compliant application. um and to um be asking for additional variances that are uh going to delay this application. I'm not sure that's a um something that
that seems how how would that go? Would that have to be a separate meeting? >> I don't I don't know. Um Derek, if if um Taylor, if they wanted to eliminate a
window which would create a variance, can that be done at this hearing if they choose to do that? >> I don't believe it was noticed and I don't know if it would fall under the catchall in any other waivers or variances that the board deems
necessary. Um I mean, I think >> Karen, what do you think? Well, I I I think it might fall into that catchall. Um, so I
>> mean there's a dimminimous action, but it would be a variance. And and Derek, uh, just for for additional clarification, there's no other spot on the property
where the ADU could go in a compliant location. >> I think that's applicant's question. Mhm. >> Well, in order to locate a garage, >> right, we need to align
the the ADU is as a garage cottage combination. So, in order for that cottage combination to exist, it needs to have a driveway. This is where the existing driveway is located right now. It's actually moving away from the
neighboring property to be more in conformance. So, it is at the location of the existing driveway and it is remaining at that location moving the current nonconformity away from the property line.
>> How far back? Excuse me, one second. Uh, uh, Denise Bernice, um, how deep is the How long is the garage? the depth >> the garage itself is I believe
approximately 20 feet and >> and the overall >> and then it has an entrance that's an additional little bit and then it sets back further from the property line >> the the living portion
>> is set back further after >> that's set back further okay thank you >> how long is the living portion >> the garage 20 plus. >> So the the um garage and the entrance are 31 ft combined. So 20 of that is the
garage and the entrance all in line. And then 17 ft for the 17t 6 in for the living space that is set back further away from the property line. Correct. >> And >> all right. And then the planned
porch behind that living unit. So that's further that's set in even further from that uh if I'm reading upside down here another six feet >> I'm sorry.
>> Yeah to the back the back of the lot. So it's 31 ft plus 18t >> plus >> right. So then the the porch is also set keep on going set away from the property
line. So it's 6 + 2 plus another six. So the location from the the the end of the porch or the edge of the porch which would be closest to Gail's property is approximately a little over 14 ft. Was 14 ft. So it's essentially
the current carport through my entire backyard. Um, we don't have big backyards. That's all I I'm just trying to get a sense of it. Um, again, that's, you know, we're it's a small, you know, community park. This is a small little neighborhood
home. So, yeah, it it does feel um again, I understand your your assignment is to maximize the buildable space. So, I know that um again, just I'm not trying to stop it. I'm really just trying to have people understand just the
impact of of it. So, um it's yeah, I think until you're understanding this I and next to it, I didn't realize ADUs were approved during CO, you know, we were all busy doing a lot. So
yeah, th this is um definitely changing the fabric of of you know my yard, my neighborhood um as I know it and I've been here 25 years. Um and I had lived over in Riverside for 10 years. So I
mean there bigger lots over there. I don't know where else these are sort of impacting neighbors but you know that's nothing I can change here. I understand all of that. I just, you know, it's it's something that um you know, if there is
anything that we can do, again, Chris and Rosie have been lovely. Um it's just, you know, for me, I'm trying to realize, you know, this is and I think for them probably also the biggest thing they're ever going to own in their life.
How this might impact anything when I go to sell it. It's very different backyard that's going to be here in a year or two than we currently have. So I yeah, I'm just trying to figure out um you know what could success look like with
whatever we have to work with. So I appreciate all all of you just sort of you know brainstorming a little bit here um and and listening. Thank you. >> You're welcome. It's it's actually uh up to the owner and uh to make a decision
on how he wants to proceed, >> right? >> So, but I appreciate your comments. Um >> thank you. >> You're welcome. Claudia, is there anyone else that would like to speak on behalf of this application?
>> Karen, uh I'm I'm watching now because Claudia is not on and I don't see any hands raised. Okay. So, we'll end the public portion of the hearing and um
Mr. Chen, uh if you'd like to say anything before we go into executive session, we're going to discuss this amongst ourselves and come to a resolution. >> Uh no further comment for me. >> Okay. Thank you. All right, board
members. Um questions, comments, motions, discussion. expert. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> So, I hesitate to uh ask the applicant to
eliminate a compliant I I mean they're they're complying with the facade design with the window. And it doesn't seem um like asking them then to remove it and then need a variance makes much
sense um in my mind. And I I don't know what that then causes for, you know, other u applicants that come forward with compliant designs and then we ask them to change it for some um other reason.
>> We can we can only suggest we can't >> we can't require they change it, but I think the applicant can recognize the comments and make a decision on what how they want to handle this. And >> yes, Donna,
>> can we require some type of buffering um as part of the application that um would alleviate some of the um sort of encroachment that the neighbor feels? >> I think we can I don't know if we can
require it. We can suggest it. >> Well, well, all right. I mean, >> I guess for for the board, >> this is not a fully compliant application because they need variance
relief and they've argued that it's a hardship that uh they can't u acquire additional land and from one neighbor it would make that neighbor's property non-conforming and on the other side
it's already non-conforming. So, it's uh would be very complicated to get additional land. Um I'm not sure if this maybe this is the first time that the board has heard from
a neighbor about the impacts of an ADU and how they think that's going to uh affect them. uh even though the ADU is proposed as I understand it in a compliant location but the lot is not
compliant. >> So that's a long answer to your question which is yeah I think you could require buffering >> where it's going to go I don't know. Um >> as the neighbor pointed out it's a pretty narrow distance there. Um but I
think you could Yeah. >> Yeah. I think as you explained it, I I can see that since they are asking for variance relief, then we probably can at least suggest some buffering in there or require it.
Board members, do you have any comments on that? >> Yeah, I think we should require something. >> Okay, >> that seems reasonable. Okay, >> I think that's
a good idea. I I'm not persuaded that that solves all the concerns that were raised. And it's a seems like a real dilemma because it's kind of like both sides have good points, you know, both of these
neighbors have reasonable points and we can just go by I I think we can go by what's allowed. I mean, I think this is one of the this is one of those times where we have a real
um dilemma to sort out actually. >> I think you're right, Eve, but as Karen said, um the fact that uh they are asking for variance relief, which in a sense somehow would be proform like
this. Um, we can't ask for it. And it it uh it probably makes sense. >> What? For the buffering? >> For the buffering. >> Oh, of course. I that I'm not >> Oh, no. No. I'm just saying that. Yes, you're right. You know, it's uh But I
think the uh I think some sort of buffering that um is there is there a fence that's going to go up or it's up? There's an existing fence and uh it will probably be replaced with a new fence.
>> Okay. And the fence the fence height is limited to six feet. Um so maybe some planting buffers um along that fence line would uh something
that would grow up taller than six feet would be appropriate. >> I have a question, Steve. >> Yes, Stephen. I'm I'm trying I'm looking at playing A1 and I see the sideyard setback of 63,
but then I also see 33. And when I'm looking at the the plan, it's obvious that the front door to this ADU is on that side. >> Mhm. Mhm.
>> And the the door from the garage is on that side. So, it's obvious you park and then you walk down the side of the house to get into the house. So, there has to be a walkway. Is that what the difference between a 6.5 and a
3.5 is, Marina? >> Yes. >> So, that leaves three feet for buffering. And if it grows out at all and grows dense, then it's going to cover the walkway, too. I mean, if you
put something like arbor variety arborite in there, it would eventually hit the house. So, what kind of buffering can you put in there that's going to be 10, 12, 15 feet high that's going to make any difference?
I mean, I'm just curious. But I'm right about the walkway. Is that correct? That that that is a walkway. >> Yes. The architect is indicating you are correct. >> And it's three feet and it's right down the side of the house.
>> Okay. >> And what is the square footage of the existing house? >> Square footage of the what car? existing house versus the new house. >> I I don't have that information on me.
>> Uh neither. >> The existing house is approximately 24 by 32. >> It's about >> right. Sorry. No, the existing house without the carport
is around 770 ft. It's a one story. >> And the new house >> slightly smaller than the proposed ADU then. The new house is uh 2282 2282 ft
>> and with the exception of lot width conforms. >> Yes. >> As as does the >> and frontage. Lot width and frontage. >> Lot width and frontage. Um well I guess the question I have is
there's discussion of buffering. Um from the board uh I guess uh I'd like to know what the applicant thinks about the possibility
of doing that. Uh if if we're talking about landscaping. >> Yes. >> Yeah. I'm not up to date with all the uh zoning talk. Um yes. Uh I think we're we're interested in doing some sort of landscaping.
We haven't of course obviously created a landscaping plan yet um associated with this application of course. But I think we're we're you heard from Gail, right? I mean, I we're we're committed to being good neighbors on both sides of the the fence.
>> Okay. Um, is it possible to, if you're willing to do landscaping, um, to allow you, and this is a question I have for Derek and Taylor and Karen,
can we ask so we can possibly deal with this application this evening, can we ask uh, either you, Derek, or Taylor, or I see Jim Purcell is not here anymore. more to work with the applicant.
>> No, is there How could I miss you? >> Sorry, you blend in. Um, can we ask you to work with the applicant to come up with a solution that would meet the intent of what we're trying to get to
and what he's willing to do? >> Yeah, I would just say that, you know, the sidewalk is permitted to be 3 feet away from the property line when it's 3' 3 in. So there's a there is a stockade fence. I think it's pretty old and battered now, but I don't know what
realistic buffering you can do in 3 ft. Um >> can't do anything in 3 ft, but beyond the three feet where the thing steps back, you can do something there. >> Yeah, sure. >> So Jim, is that something that you could work with the applicant on?
>> Sure. >> Okay. Is that Mr. Chen? Is that okay with you? >> Sounds good to me. Okay. All right. So, board members, any more discussion of this or does someone like to Yes.
You >> It's really a technical question about fences. If you have a six foot on a fence, could you have a trellis on which vines and so forth could be buffering
without exceeding the 6-ft limit? other words, a trellis higher than the six foot. I don't would that still constitute a fence? >> I don't know. >> I would think it would. >> I mean, the maximum height is 6'6 in in
the former township, but that's a good suggestion, but it would would require a variance. >> Okay. Well, I if I'm allowed to jump in something like a tree where it would have a trunk and then the the canopy
would be above. That's something that would work, right? That could be planted closer. It wouldn't impede on the walkway. Um, and if the two neighbors agree it being located close to the fence and the property line, then um, we've done that
before where the trunk is where you walk and then the canopy is above and creates the separation >> seven feet, >> but you you can't do anything in the three foot three portion. >> Well, you know, the um, sidewalk trees
often grow in three foot strips. It's true. >> True. >> Well, I would think, look, I would think rather than trying to design this at the meeting >> that the applicant knows the intent of what we're talking about. And Jim, I
think, can can work with them to come up with something that meets the intent of what we're trying to do. That reasonable, Jim? >> Yes. >> Okay. Yeah.
Okay. So, how can we move forward here? Does someone want to make a motion or is there more discussion? >> Yes, George. I will move to prove subject to the condition that the applicant confer with the city
administration to come up with a reasonable um buffering plan possibly using um tree plantings but to be decided by mutual consent. >> Okay, that sound reasonable.
>> And if there isn't mutual consent, George, then what? If Mr. Purcell suggests a certain kind of buffering and Mr. Chance says no, it's too expensive. I I don't want to do that. >> Yeah, that is a point.
>> What I'm what I'm trying to say is conditions in this case, it's difficult to call it mutual. You're either imposing a condition on Mr. Chan that says he's got to confer with Mr. Purcell, Mr. Purcell.
And I don't know if you want to include confer with the neighbor um because it's the impact on her that you're trying to lessen. But um Mr. Chan says, "Well, it was supposed to be with my consent and I don't I don't want to do that. That's
all. You know, I'm willing to plant a shrub. I'm not willing to plant all these things." And it said mutual consent, so I'm not doing it. And you know he would be within his right to say that. If it
says everyone has to agree. >> Well, if we leave >> everyone can't agree then what? >> So if we leave out the phrase by mutual consent then I think you're left with where the applicant confers with the city and then does essentially
what he feels he must do without the consent of the city if he wants to do something different. Well, then I I guess I can't figure out then what are you accomplishing with the condition >> if the per if the purpose is, you know
what I mean? If the purpose is >> to require the applicant to plant buffer, >> but tonight is a difficult form to do that. So you've suggested that the applicant and I'm I'm encouraging you to
also include the neighbor confer with Mr. Purcell and ultimately though it's Mr. Purscel who says well you know this seems reasonable so this is what I this is what I strongly would advise you do and
you can include the municipal arborists you include everybody you want in this conference but ultimately if it has to be mutual consent then uh I don't want the board to think that they're going to drive by nine months
from now and they'll see nothing and they'll say oh what happened Oh, well, they couldn't agree, so they didn't plant anything. >> Karen, I agree with you, but I think we're asking Mr. Purcell to be the uh the judge in this. He to make the
decision because we're doing this we're doing this this evening at the um just so we basically don't have to delay this hearing further. So the owner and the neighbor
and Mr. Purscell could come to an agreement and then come back to us. So those are the two choices I think. Either we do it and allow Mr. Purscell to be the final determination on this or
we we let it go for another month so the owner and Mr. Purcell and the and the neighbor can resolve it. Well, what's the board's pleasure? Because we've got a motion on the floor, George. It's your motion.
>> Yeah. Well, I'm wondering I'm wondering if if it would be possible to amend it in a way that essentially says um you know tree plantings as if there had been trees taken down
and has subject to the replacement in the a tree ordinance which I think is 6 feet. Um, in other words, if if we could require that and that's acceptable to the applicant, then that makes it a very
definitive uh requirement without the necessity of as as chairman Cohen said, Mr. Purcell becoming judge and jury. >> Well, let's let's ask Mr. Purscell, do
you have an issue with that? Can we can you work with the applicant to come up with a reasonable plan and make a determination? >> I think I can. I've been pretty good at that throughout my career here. >> Okay. So, I mean, that's that's the way
I would approach it. I think that would be the simplest thing. >> George, so you're comfortable with your motion being amended that Mr. Purcell will work with the applicant and the neighbor to create a reasonable buffering plan to lessen
the impact on the neighbor. But ultimately, it's Mr. Purcell's uh call on this. >> Well, let me ask the applicant if he's ac would accept that. >> Uh so, Mr. Purcell is the judge, jury,
and executioner. I don't know if we want to put it that way, but >> I would rather call myself an arbiter, >> right? >> Yeah. >> I mean, Mr. can I'm not trying to force
your hand but if if we can't do it this way then basically it would mean delaying it so you can work it out because it is a uh as as uh
Bernice pointed out um you know it's a variance situation and we have the ability to to make a request so as a uh as a condition of the variance. >> I don't mean to make this more
complicated, but given that there are already trees along that fence, then Mr. Stein, isn't what you were proposing exactly that replacing the existing trees that are there >> plus other trees, >> more trees that would be conforming
them? >> Yeah. >> You know, Mr. Chen, I think the issue is tonight the board seems to be trying to get you your approval. >> Yes. >> And your neighbor has and your neighbor has expressed um concerns.
>> I >> regarding the impact on her because it will only be five feet away and I guess at one point some of the development is three feet away from her property line. So I think
it's Mr. Stein's motion, but I I think perhaps it's beneficial to you to agree to this. Um, but this is up to you. The other question I was going to raise and I might I might might as well phrase it now is there was discussion about the
existing fence which I believe the comment was it was in poor condition and Mr. Chan you said well you know you you thought you might or you were thinking about replacing it. I don't know if that's a condition of
approval as well because six feet is still six feet. It's some kind of um a buffer unless the expectation is is that the neighbor if she was unhappy she would install a 6 foot or six is it 6'6
fence Derek? Is that right? That's the max. 6'6. So, um, since we've got a motion that is being debated and amended, um, I think it would be, um, helpful to let
the board look at that and decide whether you don't want that to be a condition where you do. >> Is that a question to me or to Mr. Stein? >> No, I uh, >> it's actually it's actually to Mr. Stein.
The question to me is I'm sorry if you wouldn't mind rephrasing it. >> Sure. Well, George, you have a motion on the floor right now. You want to approve the application. >> Yeah. >> We gone off on a discussion of how will
the buffering be um handled or not handled? And then I also raised since you're talking about conditions, is it going to be a condition to replace the um existing fence?
>> Um that was not part of my >> Okay. >> my motion. No. >> Okay. So then we are back with the um the buffering.
>> Yeah. And I'm essentially suggesting that there be tree plantings along that property line. Um, and that the criteria be that which the shade tree ordinance requires when you cut down a tree, which
I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, is a six-foot replanting. Um, >> I'm not sure. I don't I I don't know that. Perhaps Taylor or Derek or Jim knows that off the top of their head, but I'm not sure
it's six feet. I don't know >> what I'm >> I wouldn't I wouldn't necessarily assume that that it's >> well I mean it's based on my memory not my assumption but the the uh the point of it was to make a concrete requirement
as opposed to one subject to you know discussion that might or might not lead to agreement. Uh it it's it's your motion. So it is um >> All right. Well, then I'll make that as
I'll make that I'll amend the motion to say, you know, with tree planting AC along the rear um property line uh subject to the requirement for replacement trees in the
shade tree ordinance. >> And then I'm just going to I'm going to ask one more. >> Is it the rear? isn't in the side. >> The side property line. >> Oh, it's I'm sorry. Side property line. Yes. >> I have a question.
>> And one more one more clarification which since George it's your motion. Um I'm going to direct it to you. Um, I guess I'll say unlike other applications where the board has not heard
um serious concerns about the uh ADU and and the rest of the the house being so close to their property line even if it is compliant. Um, and since this
applicant does require variances and I'm the one drafting the resolution, I just want a clarification of how the board's balancing this. It do you feel the stronger um the stronger consideration is that the applicant has
a very small house now. they want to replace it and they can't do anything unless they get these variances for a lot width and frontage and that whatever impact is happening to the neighbor
should we say it's the lesser impact or that you know you there you you find that that uh these bulk variances are um compliant I think you can say that the lot configuration
uh and the necessity to get both a house and an ADU on the property pushes the and I just you can modify the wording that causes the house to be house and the ADU to be closer to the property
line than then would be ideal for a separation and then to buffer that a combin to that effect that the design of the
house and the ADU and given the lot with forcy maybe force is the wrong word. >> Well, I I think it is Steve because I mean this is what the applicant would like to do. and the and their position is an ADU is
allowed. So, it's not just the scale of their house, but they're allowed to add an ADU. And I what I'm asking is because this is the first time I believe the board is hearing now
issues from an adjacent neighbor with the closeness of both the house and the ADU. It's it's it's even the fact that it's it's the ADU in a sense is just minimal in a
sense the idea is a buffer between the house and the and the adjacent property >> and so one thing George I just my concern and I don't know the tree replacement ordinance but the the idea
of screening would come all the way down to the ground, you know, not zero inches, but you know, to a few inches. So, that wouldn't necessarily be a tree. It would be a shrub
or a I hate to call them funeral palms or something to that effect that grow very high. They're not a big diameter and they could be an effective buffer. So, I I don't know how to word that. I'm just concerned about planting a tree
there is going to be a 4-in trunk that's going to be 6t high and then the tree above that which isn't going to give you this the buffering you're looking for. I think it's I think in my my feeling is
that we I think Mr. Purscell knows what the board is looking for. I think the applicant knows what we're trying to achieve and I think the two of them should work together to come up with something that's reasonable.
But I think Karen's bringing up a point which is that the ADU is something that wasn't there before that's allowed but is a big
is a big factor. It's It's not, you know, there's there's a house there now and there's um a carport. So, now there'll be a larger house and a garage and an ADU. And
I mean, that's I think that's the dilemma. And I'm very favorable about adus, but it's it does feel and it's hard for and I'm not and it I'm I'm just saying I think that's that's sort of the elephant in the room or whatever to me
in a way. It's it's um cuz that will that will extend much further back and be taller than if it were just the garage. So that's what we're that's what we were
hearing from the neighbor to the ex I I believe you know that that's an issue that can't be that's a that can't be really mitigated by a
shrub or 17 trees or whatever it or a brand new fence that makes that makes a big impact. Karen, are you are you trying to figure out how to describe this in the ordinance in the approval?
>> Well, I mean, at this point, Steve, you know, whatever you end up deciding, I usually just play the tape back and listen to it and uh go through ultimately uh you know what, uh what your decision is. So,
>> Steve Marina has her hand up. Okay. I'm sorry. Who had their hand up? >> My knee. Okay. Please. >> Would Would it be okay to say something at this point? Um, so the next step
should >> Wait a minute. He didn't answer the question. Is it okay for her to >> Yeah, I think this Let's keep it brief. >> Yes. So if um the board were to grant the variance, the next step would be for
the applicant to develop a fully engineered site plan um that will include um planting. It will include storm water management. It would include connection to utilities that would go to the engineering department and be
reviewed by >> whatever is we're not asking for. We're not asking for any >> more documentation. That's that's I understand >> is required by excuse me then is required by the town. If the town is
asking for fully engineered drawings with storm water management and everything else so be it. We're we're discussing the the buffering right now. >> Correct. And it seemed that as part of that process of developing that plan,
our engineer with landscape abilities will be able to include this um buffering as part of the site plan design is what I'm suggesting. >> Okay. So, >> Jim Purcell would be the person to review it. Anyway,
>> I don't know what your point is, but I mean, everything you're saying we're going to need if it if the town requires it. What the board is saying is we need we're we're concerned about the buffering. >> So, I mean, the proposing >> Jim Purcell is going to be the one
that's going to review it. Yes. and we will have a professional who will be able to um work with the um homeowners to help create um the buffering that's appropriate for that location.
>> Okay. >> Okay. Well, I know you have another application on tonight which have they have a number of witnesses. So, let me ask again, >> what is the motion at this point? The motion is to approve the the application
and I'm not sure that buffering is a requirement for building a single family home. So, you know, this this is up to the board, but I'm not sure that the applicant has to do that. Yeah, they have to provide a
building plan and storm water management. I don't know that they have to provide buffering. >> Yeah, I agree with you on that. I don't think they do. So, um, George, the last version of your motion, I believe, was you want to Okay. Approve the
application >> and that tree should be planted along the side, >> of the the common boundary between these two properties in accordance with the same standard you
would have to follow with a tree under the tree replacement ordinance. Is that what your motion was? >> That's that's where I left it. Um >> Okay. >> I I guess I would be I would welcome a comment from Mr. PCEL
as and the applicant and the uh the neighbor as to whether that has any chance of having folks finding common mind on it. Let me just Jim, before you answer that,
I was sure I swore you in this evening, but in the event I haven't, I swear in again. You did not. Okay. Well, >> next time you can mention that, um, do you swear from your testimony this evening is truthful? >> I do. Thank you. And if I may suggest
that the uh the condition just simply be that the applicant in in filing its application with the with the engineering office and the zoning board at zoning office include a buffering
that is acceptable to the municipality. >> Perfect. >> I'll accept that as a friendly amendment. >> Yes, I think that's excellent. So is there a discussion on that? I guess. >> Well, board members, any discussion on
that? Okay, so we have a we have a motion. Uh, we have conditions. And do we have a second? Okay, Donna. Thank you. Um, is there any disc you want to just Karen, do you want
to summarize this or we have a motion? >> I don't think I don't think after I mean there's been so much discussion, but actually the motion is quite brief. It's to approve the application and the condition of approval is that uh
the applicant uh will need to include a buffering plan uh with their uh building submission, the engineering department and that buffering plan needs to be acceptable to the municipality. >> Yes.
>> In the form of Mr. Purcell reviewing and approving. >> Okay. I think that's it. Yeah, George. >> Yeah, that that that's exactly right. >> Perfect. I think it's good. Okay, so we have a motion. We have a
second. We've had discussion. I think it's appropriate. Um Claudia Karen, call the role, please. I'm not sure Claudia is on. >> She is. She's with Derek and >> J. She had to step into another room. Um
>> Oh, okay. >> because of feedback. So, >> okay. Um Dererick's checking. She's not with you, Marina. Right. Okay. >> I hope she's not in the town hall.
>> Well, we have been given permission to uh return to the municipal building. >> Oh, good. >> You got the all clear. >> Okay. If you are planning on taking a break, >> well, we can do that. We have >> Hi, I'm here. Can you hear me?
>> Yes, you can. >> Okay, Miss Chen. >> Yes, >> Miss Coulson. >> Yes, >> Mr. Floyd. >> Good luck. Yes. >> Yes. >> No. >> No.
Mr. Stein. >> Yes. >> Mana. >> Yes. >> Chairman Cohen. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Is approved. >> Okay. All right. Um, thank you all. >> Thank you everyone. Congratulations,
Derek. Have a good night. >> Thank you, Mr. Chen. Appreciate it. Um, Derek, Jim, Taylor, do you want to go back to the burrow hall now? >> Do you guys want to stay or you want to go back? >> No, we've been back so much. Yeah, we're heading back.
>> Okay. So, you'll let us know when you're there. Okay. So, we're taking another break. So, uh Okay. Thank you. Sorry for the uh five minute minimum,
>> I guess. Five minute minimum. Yes. So, it's 10:04. So it'll be 10:09 minimum or until we hear back from our traveling members. >> Amazing. >> Well, I mean, what whatever.
>> Nothing. I just kept my mouth shut on this one. >> I know. I mean it. Yes. Well, >> I mean that's as you know the ADU ordinance is in place
and as someone who tried or thought I would gave suggestions years ago on how to approve it before it was approved. >> Mhm. You know, it is what it is, >> right? >> For better, for better or worse,
>> if the lot was a complying lot on with that, we'll be able to build a bigger ADU and a bigger house and place it exactly with the same >> in the same location. You're exactly right. >> So, I mean, it's it's great to,
you know, try to help out the neighbor. It is. It It really is. But, you know, apples and oranges got kind of mixed. >> Yeah. No, you're right. I mean, it could be if the lot were 10 ft wider, wouldn't
have been a discussion. >> Yep. Yeah. It wouldn't even be here. Number one, but number two, >> right? Wouldn't even have been here and we couldn't do anything about it anyway. >> Yeah, >> you're right. And and if it was 9 ft wider and they were here, hey, they'd
still only do a five yard set back. >> Yeah. No, you're right. I mean, you know, >> they comply, >> but you know, maybe maybe >> But that's fine. >> But maybe the setback is too tight. >> Well, I kept my mouth shut on that
because the place to discuss that is for Miss Lambert to go to council. Exactly. >> You know, uh it won't it wouldn't have helped her because, you know, >> maybe helped the next person, but maybe that's >> it helped the next person.
>> Maybe that's something in our endofyear analysis we should suggest to the governing body >> and it may it may be something that the governing body is looking at. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Oh, there >> a a question for I guess for Steve as an
architect. Could they not have moved something further back on that property? >> Well, the trouble is that that the driveway, you need a certain distance. That driveway needs to be a certain width and obviously then it has to align
with the garage. So that sets it up and and they could have redesigned the house. So it could have been a narrower house and maybe something a little deeper, you know? I mean, we can't get into the whole redesign, but they could have
redesigned it so it's not as wide and created, you know, the ability to move it over a little bit. >> Excuse me, Steve. This is still being recorded. I know we're we're not we already finished the discussion. You're right.
>> No, I'm I'm just want to make sure. >> Yeah. No, you're right. I understand that. I'm sorry. >> But I don't I don't I don't know whether they can cut breaks out of it or not. But >> yeah,
>> I didn't mean to end the discussion. We just have a unfortunately we have a pause here while our while our team disembarks and goes back to Burough Hall or the township building or the
municipal building, excuse me. It's 10:09. They're not back yet. So, the as soon as we get notified, they're back. We'll reconvene. Your call has been Hey David, is that a picture in the
background or is that your real study? You're muted. This is reality. This is my study. Good. >> It's It's set up to look like a college professor's study. >> Good job. Yeah.
And you make decisions with a dart board, I assume. >> Yeah. But I don't I don't do what you think. I don't turn around and throw darts. I make a decision and then I walk to the dart board and place the dart in the right place
to validate your decision. >> To validate my decision. >> Right. You should work for the government. Oh gosh. >> David, what what do you do as a You're not a >> I I'm retired. I was a professor.
>> Oh, okay. So, that makes sense. >> Yeah. And uh now I'm a consultant but uh and I mean this I've lived in this study for 30 years. So these are all the accumulated books of that time.
>> But in my consulting it's good to have a background that looks like I was a professor once >> and you were so >> And I was Yeah. Yeah, it's also good to have a gray beard.
>> They kind of fit together. >> What were you professor of? >> Computer science. >> Good. You're back. You drive faster than the others. >> We all power walked.
Everybody's signing into our computers now. >> Where'd you go to Kis? >> We talked about it to Tiger Labs. You didn't walk up to Tiger. Where is Tiger Labs? Isn't it on Nassau Street? >> No. 300 Witherspoon.
>> Oh, it's on Witherspoon now. Okay. >> Just the other side of the school. The community park school. >> Okay. I remember when it was on Nassau Street. That would be a hustle. >> Yeah. Um, Steve, I think I need to bring over
the people who are going to be talking about the next >> I'm back. >> Oh, are you back? Okay. >> Yes, sir. >> He's still here. >> Okay. Well, um, are we waiting for Derek or Oh, there
you are, Derek. Okay. All right. >> Um, ju just a question. I we seem to have people still on the screen. I don't if they want to be um attending that's per but we still have people who are participants who are not part of the
application on the screen. >> I can remove them. >> Okay. >> Okay. Okay. Um, our next Well, first of all, it's 10:14. Uh, we will stop at 11:00,
but we will start and, um, go as far as we can. So, our next application is case number Z25-72 11128 Great Road, block 301,
lot 4.01 in the RA and RB zone. Karen of the noticing in order. >> It is and the board has jurisdiction tonight. >> Okay. All right. Um Derek Taylor, can you summarize your memos on this project?
>> Yeah, thank you. Um I'm going to do uh a little summary and I'm going to hand off to Jim Pel and then uh Nathan Foot will our assistant director of planning will uh hit on the planning testimony. Uh good evening again. Sorry about the interruptions. Um, application has been
filed with the Princeton zoning board of adjustment by the Princeton Academy of Sacred Heart seeking preliminary and final minor subdivision of approval of 1128 Great Road. Purpose of the subdivision is allow the applicant to sell one lot to a nonprofit organization for conservation, environmental
education, and passive recreation including trails for public use. Um, there are numerous bulk variances and two use variances. The uh subject light lot is site, excuse me, is identified as lot 4.01 and block 301 and it's located
in the RA and RB zoning districts. Um, formerly lot 3, block 301 and lot 41 was created by subdivision in 2024 is presently encumbered on the western portion of the property by a conservation easement and subject to utility easements in the eastern portion
of the property. The Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart pash occupies the subject property under a conditional use as a school in a residential zone. Um the site is bounded on all sides by single family residential uses. Heather
Lane to the north, Great Road to the east, Drake corner, road to the south, and a dwelling to the west. um access to the uh pashes via a main driveway off of Great Road approximately 200 feet north of Drake's Corner Road. A secondary access off Drake's Corner Road traverses
lot 4.05 through a variable width easement access. In addition, lot 4.02 adjoining the property to the east is subject to an easement for pass for use as a portion of their baseball facility. Um they're seeking to subdivide lot 4.01
into creating two lots. Somebody's echoing. Sorry. >> Wait a second. We have some echo in here. >> Yeah, that was Carlos. >> Thank you. Um, one will serve as a school identified uh
as a school lot on the plan and the other become the property of the Woods and Wayside International. identified as the by the applicant as the MA manor house lot for the purposes of providing environmental education, public trail access and land conservation. The school lot will be 12.468
acres and the manor house lot will be 22.881 acres. The applicant seeks uh bulk variances for lot frontage, building and parking setbacks floor area ratio and pvious coverage on the school lot and a use variance on the manor lot.
Um, the applicant has requested waiverss from the minor site subdivision checklist. Uh, and staff has no objection to them being granted. A4, the fire protection plan. B12, the master plan designation. C2, steep slope
locations. Um, C4, contours of site. C8, location of tree masses. C10, location of stream ponds, etc. And C13, percolation and soil log tests. Um, I'm not going to go through all the variances. Um, they're they're somewhat
a function of the I would call it a zigzag line that um encompasses the school lot. Um, it's just a kind of a result of the existing conditions on the site. Um, to subdivide that lot off from the uh
the main lot. Um, there are numerous setback variances. Um, and there's some use variances that I will touch upon. It's a D1 use for the manor house. Um, as an office space and a meeting convening center for woods and wayside
international's forest and climate training initiative. Um, this is not a use that is contemplated within the RA zone, nor is it within any of the uh permitted conditional uses. A use variance pursuant to NJSA 405-70D1
is required to permit a use that is not permitted. A variance under these the above section shall be granted only by the affirmative vote of at least five members. No variance or other relief may be granted under the terms of this condition unless such variance or other relief can be granted without
substantial detriment to the public good and will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance. The applicant should address special reasons to justify the granting of the relief requested as required by statute. Um the reasons must
be shown to be unique or peculiar to the property for which variance is requested and not generally applicable to neighboring properties. reason why the strict application of the zoning prohibition of the requested use or development would deprive the applicant of reasonable use of the land or buildings being involved in evidence
that the requested relief may be granted without detriment to the public good or impairment of the intent of the zoning plan. Um they also need a D4 uh variance for um F that results from uh separating the
manor house from the Princeton Academy. It reduces the lot area for uh proposed lot 4.07 07 and creates a variance pursuant to NJSA 40 7 uh col 55-d4 maximum F in the RA zone is 6.5 whereas
the proposed is 12.3 um brings requested there are no uh improvements uh proposed other than the subdivision um I'm going to hand off at this point to Jim Purcell um just to go over some of the unique uh easement issues with the
property and some of the uh engineering concerns. >> Thank you, Derek. Um I I do want to just touch on something about the bulk variances the applicant has uh determined in their site plan um uh
sideyard, front yard, and rear yard setbacks that staff doesn't particularly agree with. So all of the bulk variance uh uh information in the memos uh has to do with a reasonable determination that we made of the front, rear, and side lot lines. Um and we think that those should
be determined. Um we recommend that the southerntherly line be considered the front lot line, the northerly line be considered the rear lot line, and the easterly and westerly lines be considered the side lot lines. Um this is a recommendation based on logical
consideration that the school lot will be accessed from the driveway which under other circumstances such as a residential subdivision might constitute a road. So the front should be uh adjacent to where that access is coming
off of uh the road. Um, the subdivision plat was reviewed by the municipality's professional land survey consultant, Greg Sanduski, and his findings are made part of this report. Uh, in summary, there are some discrepancies. Uh,
there's a a a slight closure error. Um, and if you all know, Greg Sanduski is very meticulous. Um, and a 02 foot error is still an error. Um, there's a discrepancy between the computed clo closure and the tie distances on the
plan for lot 4.07. A meets and bounds description of the proposed easement for maintenance and access should be shown on the plan and a meets and bounds description of the proposed easement for use of the existing lawn area should be shown on the plan as well.
The boundary and topographic survey that was submitted that we reviewed um to present the existing conditions is not current. Uh existing lot 4.01 is depicted as lot three which was the designation prior to the earlier subdivisions of this property.
Furthermore, lots 4.02, 4.03 4.04, and 4.05 are depicted, but lots 4.02 and 4.44 404 not labeled. Not all existing easements are shown and we are requesting that a
revised corrected boundary and topographic survey be submitted. The prior subdivision which resulted in uh which created lots 4.01, 4.02, and 4.05 and adjusted the boundaries of lots 4.03
and 4.04 was recorded in October 2024. A condition approval of approval was that pins shall be set at all new property corners and con concrete monuments shall be set at the outbound tracked limits. The setting of these shall be certified
by the surveyor of record and bonded until installed. The proposed monuments and iron pins shall be shown in the legend as monument to be set and kept iron pin to be set. We do not have any record of the corners being set nor of a
bond being received. The submitted proposed subdivision plaque continues to indicate them as proposed iron pins and monuments. These corners should be set prior to approval of the subject subdivision. Similarly, pin pins shall be set at all
new property corners created by this subdivision. Staff recommend that they be set and not bonded prior to recording. A further condition of the prior subdivision was regarding the access drive off Drake's Corner Road. the access road and utilities in quotes um
from that uh prior uh condition. The access road and utility shall remain on lot 4.05 unless it is sold for purposes of development. A note shall be added to the plan so providing. If it is sold for development, the access road and utility
shall be relocated to the area west of lot 4.05. Its location in such case shall minimize tree clearing and it shall be subject to the review and approval of the municipal arborist and landscape committee. In testimony, I suggest that the
applicant should address how this access road and utilities will be considered under this application as no easements have been proposed to allow for the relocation of these elements. Furthermore, there exists a conservation easement on the land where these features would be relocated to in the
case of lot 4.0. 005 being sold and the applicant should address the restrictions that the conservation easement imposes. Um so that was just in reference to uh the subdivision and surveying in and of itself. Um reviewing in accordance with
the criteria set forth in section 10B226 and I won't go through um a lot of it. I'll just touch on the comments that we have. Um the driveway connections to public streets. Uh, the applicant proposes to continue utilizing the existing driveway off Great Road to
access both lots. This driveway will be solely contained within the new lot 4.06, known as the manor lot, and the school lot will no longer have direct frontage on Great Road. An access easement for use of the driveway to access lot 4.07,
the school lot, is proposed. As noted above in section 3.0, Z. The school currently has an additional access off Drake's Corner Road, but it appears that this driveway will only serve the manor house lot 4.06 since no easements are proposed for use
by lot 4.07. Um, so as stated earlier in section 3, the access drive was to be utilized by pass under the prior subdivision. The applicant should address how the condition of approval of the prior subdivision is being applied and drive
is being utilized. Bless you. Uh, under traffic effects, um, section 10B 168B requires subdivision applica applications to reconstruct existing roadways contiguous to the property to
the center line of the road. This requirement was addressed in the prior subdivision findings of fact and the planning board found that these requirements were intended to apply to subdivisions where significant improvements were being proposed. And in the case of the roadway reconstruction
when the pavement needed to be resurfaced because of the use of the roadway during construction, they would therefore not apply to the application before the board. Staff concurs with this opinion in this application. Um there are no changes to pedestrian or
bicycle circulation being proposed. Also in sections 10B160 I and J of the Princeton code, there are requirements for sidewalks and bicycle paths for final subdivision applicants applications to be constructed installed and installed in a conformance with the
master plan. I won't read the entire section but again this requirement was addressed uh in the prior subdivision findings and the planning board found the same that that kind of a condition uh or requirement were intended to apply
to subdivisions where improvements were being proposed and in this case no room improvements are being proposed and therefore would not apply to this application. staff also concurs with that opinion and on-site parking in circulation.
Um the applicant should address how the existing again I'm repeating myself uh existing access from Drake's Corner Road is being used and how it affects current operations and traffic circulation. Will it be for the sole use of lot 4.06 or
will an easement be granted for use by lot 4.07 07 and the parking for the entire site is now being divided as a result of the subdivision. The applicant should address how many parking spaces are required for both the manor house and school lots and determine whether
there is sufficient parking on site. The applicant should address the need for parking cross access agreements if one use one use requires parking from the other use in accordance with section 10 T10B 282.
um utility services. There are easements shown for some of the um the utilities, for example, for sanitary sewers across lot 4.06 um and other services crossing lots 4.05
and 4.06 that will serve lot 4.07. However, easements for the utilities um uh have to be acquired. Um the the there are no changes being presented regarding disposal of solid
waste or recycling and it's anticipated that no additional waste will be generated from the use of the properties. However, the applicant should address how waste collection will operate for both properties. Um and that is it. There is a summary at
the on the last page of our memo of all of those conditions in shortened form. Any questions? >> Yeah. In light of what you said towards the beginning of your memo about things that were unresolved from the last
application, do you feel that you can properly you have enough information to review the applicant's current request? um not without testimony this evening or or uh if this is carried. I'll need to
I'll need I'll need some answers to some of the questions about how those conditions are being satisfied uh and whether or not they need to be satisfied. >> Okay, fair enough. Okay. Uh board members, any questions of Mr. Purscell,
Mr. Burgger? Okay. Um >> um Nathan Foot, the uh assistant director of planning, uh has provided a memo as well. >> Oh, we just need to swear you in. Do you swear or affirm your testimony this evening will be truthful?
>> Yes, I do. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Karen. Uh and uh good evening, members of the board, uh and uh everyone else. Um, so like uh like Jim said, uh I did prepare a memo uh dated
April 17th, 2026. Uh Karen, does that need to be entered as an exhibit? >> Well, I don't I don't think so, Nathan. We haven't didn't submit the other review memo, so I think we're okay. >> Okay. Um All right. So, what I'm going to do is just very quickly uh summarize
it. Um, however, I did want to also very quickly uh share share my screen and just uh sometimes the visual orientation uh does wonders uh especially at 10:30 at uh in the evening. Um and it also helps us uh
contextualize the current subdivision compared to the last um subdivision. So, uh, the site of the, uh, Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart is here centered on the screen. And I guess this one doesn't need to be entered as an exhibit. >> Yeah, that one does. So, that's an
aerial. Okay. >> An aerial uh, provided by the NJ Parcel Explorer website uh, prepared by Rowan University. >> Okay. Uh and so the the subject site um is uh centered uh Princeton Academy of the
Sacred Heart uh is in the center. This uh is actually pre 2024. This was before the uh most recent subdivision in October uh or was recorded in October 20 uh 2024. Um, so the
parcels that were subdivided in that 2024 uh uh subdivision uh approval um are located here along Great Road. Uh so this portion that kind of cuts directly through the baseball field and then uh
uh over to Great Road and then down here along Drake's Corner Road uh cutting through this access drive. Uh that's where that uh subdivision uh occurred. And then there were some lot line adjustments of these lots along Drake's Corner. Um and then as as uh Derek
talked about earlier, uh it's mostly residential uses, although there is also open space uh uses to the uh west uh northwest of the uh the property. Um the and and I don't want to get too into the weeds into what they are
proposing now uh but essentially they are proposing a uh subdivision of the remainder of that larger lot where the Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart is located uh into two. One northerly that does not have any frontage and the other
uh to the south that has front the remaining frontage uh along Great Road and Drake's Corner Road. Uh and then importantly, the applicant has indicated that the manor house lot, what is the uh the southerntherly lot on this uh overhead
um is proposed to be sold to an organization called Woods and Wayside International Incorporated so that it can be used to provide environmental education, public trail access, and land conservation. Uh they also state that the uh that uh woods and wayside uh
intend to maintain the property in its current state and uh will provide public access to open space to that open space to the west that I uh pointed out uh just a moment ago. One thing that I do want to uh bring up uh is uh that um the relationship of
that organization uh Woods and Wayside to this application. Um and and the reason I want to bring it up is because many of the positive positive criteria that the applicant identifies in their application materials uh to meet their burden to justify the variances include
what amount to uh promises made on behalf of that organization of to on behalf of Woods and Wayside. Um the concern is really if this is approved, if it if the subdivision is recorded, um what happens if uh that purchase does
not happen? Um uh and and what uh agreements that Wood and Wayside has made uh in regards to protecting land given that they do not appear uh to be applicants on this uh as parties to this application.
Um the applicant does did indicate in their uh narrative statement uh that the uh they will pursue a formal preservation. Um what I what what I've done in the memo and what I'm asking for at this point uh is during their
testimony to um describe how that formal preservation process how they foresee that process uh taking place. Uh turning now to the other planning comments. Uh planning comments one through three simply identify how the proposed subdivision of the property
relates to the master plan. Uh one thing uh so I'm not going to go into detail on those uh right now. One thing to note is that the subject property is not located with any within any designated local, state or national historical districts. Uh the site was designated as eligible
for state historic district designation uh by the state historic preservation office in 2020. uh based on the school structures in the northwest area of the lot. The Princeton master plan does include the manor house uh building as an
additional site that should be studied uh and may be appropriate for historic designation. Um and none of these structures I should note uh are slated to be changed by this application. Again, all of this application is at this point is a subdivision of that uh remaining lot uh what is now lot 4.01.
Uh for comment four of the planning report, the applicant should discuss justifications for not using right angles or radial lines for the subdivision. Um section T10B-182 of the Princeton Code regarding subdivision design standards require sidelot lines to be at right angles or
radial to street lines in so far as practicable uh which the proposed subdivision subdivision does not do. Additionally, an existing lawn area that's located uh right about here on um you know, I have my cursor uh hovering just about where that lawn area uh is.
Um is proposed to be on the manor house lot. That's the southerntherly lot of the the subdivision. Um but with an easement for use of that area, presumably favoring uh the school lot, the the lot that Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart will still be using. Uh applicants should discuss why this
arrangement was chosen instead of having uh that lawn area be on the school lot. Um uh importantly, the school lot uh will lack any frontage uh should the subdivision be approved and recorded. Uh section 4055D-35
of the municipal land use law or MLUL requires that quote no permit for the erection of any building or structure shall be issued unless the lot abuts a streak giving access to such proposed building or structure. Uh however, the following structure of the uh following section of the MLUL states that uh
quote, "The board of adjustment may upon application or appeal vary the application of that section and direct the issuance of a permit subject to conditions that will provide adequate access for emergency uh response vehicles and that will protect any future street layout shown on this official map or on a general circulation
uh plan element of the municipal master plan. Uh while the current application does not include any new building, future permits for construction on the school lot may be affected should the subdivision be approved and recorded. Uh this should be discussed and applicant should provide proof of adequate
emergency access uh to the uh the school lot. Um, next, the narrative statement included with the application package indicates that the manor house uh, quote, will be used as office space and as a meeting convening center for woods and wayside internationals forest and
climate training uh, or a fact uh, initiative. Uh, I did raise several issues in the uh, memo. Um, I'm not going to go over each one um, in detail at this point. Um, they are on page three of the planning report memo. And I
believe that a lot of those uh issues that I did bring up in those um uh in that uh section also relate to things that uh Mr. PCEL have has already uh requested further information about the uh parking um and the uh uh the use of
the the manor house lot. Um however, I will bring up other issues if uh I don't hear those issues addressed uh during the applicant's testimony. Uh there are several issues related to the school lot that are brought up uh in uh the planning report.
Uh there's currently a sign for uh the academy located at the great road entrance. Applicants should clarify if that sign is proposed to remain. If so, an easement may be needed. Also, applicant shall clarify how um well reiterating what uh Mr. Purcell also identified earlier uh how traffic uh
vehicle traffic will enter and exit uh both lots but especially the academy lot. Uh applicants shall clarify if any other academy operations will be affected by the subdivision and sale of the proposed manor house lot. Uh there are multiple walking trails on the properties. Applicants should advise if
these uh if uh any of these trails will be rerouted especially if the previously subdivided lots intended for residential purposes are indeed developed for such uses. And I'll stop sharing. Um and then finally in regards to proofs uh the applicant must address proofs for the
board to grant the D1 use and D4 uh F variances. Um Derek already uh discussed those uh in uh in in some detail. What I will um bring up right now is that uh the narrative does include uh the reasons uh for uh granting the
variances. Um they should be provided during the testimony as well. And the uh uh I would also add that the applicant should demonstrate how the purposes of planning noted on pages three to four of their narrative are advanced. Applicant must also show evidence that the relief can be granted without impairing the
public good and the intent of the zoning plan. Uh the applicant appear and finally the applicant appears to be requesting bulk variances under the C2 benefits versus detriment standard. uh applicants should provide proof that the benefits outweigh the detriments during testimony and how the proposal is uh in
keeping with the RA zone and Princeton's master plan as they state in their narrative. Uh and that is uh all I have at this point. Uh Derek or uh uh Chairman Cohen, uh I turn it back over to you. >> Thank you. Um
okay. Um I just have one question. If we're we're just doing the subdivision this evening, um are we to assume that that uh the end user uh Woods and Wayside
is assuming you get the subdivision is going to be the user in this or is there a possibility that they may not? >> I can I can speak to that if you if you like. I mean, >> well, you can I guess
>> there'll be testimony that talks about all of us, obviously. >> Okay. All right. I'm just Okay, we can talk about it as we go ahead then. Okay. So, um >> but it would be like any other application, right? That the idea is that it their purchase of the property
is contingent upon getting this approval, right? So, if they don't if we don't get the approval, they're not going to buy it. If we get the approval and they reig and don't get it, then we have a property that has a use variance granted on it in a subdivision that we
could then potentially go and shop to another use similar to Woods and Wayside. So >> that was my question. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. So there sure there's a possibility that that can happen but
it it would just the use would still run with the property and it's a really good use frankly and it would then allow us to market it to someone else who's going to do something similar to what Woods and Wayside would have done. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yep. >> All right. So um
we you've heard the memos and the comments. Um so please begin. Now I I guess the one question well I have of the board u we're not required to go beyond 11:00. Obviously this application
is going to go much further than that. Do you want to continue beyond 11 or do you want to cut it at 11 board members? If it if it goes beyond 11 it's going to go way beyond 11. So, I say cut it at 11. >> Agreed.
>> Agreed. >> Perhaps per I I'll leave that Mr. Casey may want to make a comment on this, but I don't know how long each witness is going to take for your testimony. So, I
don't know at 11 where you're going to be and I don't know if it makes sense to adjourn now because it's going to end up seems to me it's going to end up being carried either way. So, >> I mean, I would like to at least get a
witness in perhaps or I mean I I won't be as long as those review memos. I can assure you that. >> Okay. Well, look, it's it's 10:44. Let's go and at 11:00 we'll figure it out. Okay. >> I I I appreciate that. Um >> Okay. Yes.
>> I think one one more comment about the 11. You know, we discussed 11 a long time ago. Part of the consideration is the fact that Derek and Claudia have to drive a bit of distance,
whereas many of us are home and we were going to be considerate of them, too. >> Very important. You're right. All right. So that's probably going to, you know, mean we're going to cut it at
11, but please at this point start >> gladly. Mr. Chairman, members of the zoning board, I'm Bob Casey. I'm here and thank you for your time. Um, I'm here tonight on behalf of uh Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart in
partnership with Woods and Wayside International. Before I go any further, Derek, thank you so much for everything over the years. My father and I appreciate you. you're really good at your job. Answered all of our questions all the time. So, best of luck to you. >> Thank you. >> Um,
we're here tonight for a minor subdivision for 1128 Great Road. We're going to carve out this existing lot and make a manor house lot that's going to hopefully be sold to Woods and Wayside. The school is going to remain the same with a new lot line. All of the variances and bulk variances are just
created by the new lot line, so no improvements are going to happen. Um, it's actually a really exciting project that is is going to maintain the integrity of this beautiful property
indefinitely, we hope. So, all those memos made it sound like we were uh requesting millions of, you know, pieces of relief, but in reality, no construction. We'll speak to the easements. We'll speak to the parking.
We'll speak to the use. all of those things. And um hopefully you guys will all agree that it is a a terrific plan and we'll grant our application tonight. Um first of all, I would like to call the head of school, current head of
Princeton Academy, the Sacred Heart, Kathy Humora, to testify. If you could swear him her in, CH Karen, that would be great. >> I will. Miss Humora, do you swear or affirm your testimony this evening will be truthful? >> Yes, I do. >> Thank you. Hi Kathy, could you state your name for
the record, please? >> Yes, my name is Kathleen Hamura. >> And what do you do? >> Uh, I am the head of school of Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart. >> And how long have you been the head of school? >> I have been the head of school since
July of 2024. I am completing my second year in this role. >> But before that, you were with this wonderful school for how long? >> I was. So I was um a member of the Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart Community from 2000 to 2020 as a teacher
as well as an administrator. I was the head of the middle school from 2005 to 2020. I reported directly to the head of school. >> Okay. So really no one in the Princeton area knows the school better than you. Wouldn't you agree? >> I know Princeton Academy quite well.
Yes. >> And how is the school doing? Could you give us a little update on the on the school? The school is doing quite well. We have an amazing student body. I don't know if uh the zoning board uh members know, but we are an all boys school uh junior
kindergarten through grade 8. Uh we are also a sacred heart school. Uh a values-based school, very important. And we are a Catholic school. We are an independent school. The school is doing well. Uh we have uh currently 70 students and we have an amazing faculty
and staff of about 35. um individuals and I would say to you that the day-to-day operation as well as the year-long operation um everything that goes with the running of the school is uh moving along well well financially uh
personnel um admissions marketing um community relations very important um it's doing well >> how did you get to know Woods and Wayside and Chris Bar >> well I met um Patricia Shanley and Chris
Bar on a warm day, maybe even a hot day back in July of 2024 when I first arrived back at Princeton Academy. And I was very excited to engage in conversation with them about Princeton Academy in Woods and Wayside and of course Ridge View Conservancy uh to
partner um in a very special program for Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart. It is the forest program and Dr. Shanley has been instrumental in helping me move this program forward to the point where even today our students were outside in
their prayer buddies uh planting bulbs, cleaning up the campus. Uh they go on trail walks. Uh next year we'll be moving into uh an even better uh forest program because we're going to have a teacher dedicated to the program who
will work closely with Dr. Shanley. Um, and the purpose of it is to integrate it into our now curriculum, of course. But what we want to do is we want to take care of our beautiful home, planet Earth, but we also want to take care of our boys, our children actually across the world when you think about it, how
important it is to get them out in nature because nature is so good for them. So that's how I met both Christopher and Patricia. >> Nice. Nice. And in in terms of the the application itself, there was talk
earlier about access to this what will now be the school campus, which will not be the manor house lot, but the school lot. Um, and it's your understanding, correct, that we'll still have the same access off of Great Road and we'll have an access easement um with Woods and
Wayside to allow us to keep the status quo in terms of access to the campus. Correct. >> Yes. >> Okay. And are you do you know if um on the Drake's Corner side of things um the the side access I call it off of Drake's
Corner that still remains in place, right? >> Yes, it does. >> And do you know who owns that lot that it goes across lot 4.05 >> currently? >> Yes. If I told you it was a Ridge View Conservancy, would you believe me?
>> Yes. >> Okay, good. So I would Yes. >> So that lot that lot is is owned by a a company that Chris Bar is familiar with and um we'll speak to that in a little bit. So, so that lot as well is is I think as Chris will testify to is going
to remain unchanged. And in the event it needs to be changed, then we'll have an access agreement potentially with Woods and Wayside and the Ridge View Conservancy for that side Drakes Corner ex uh entrance. Correct.
>> Yes. Yes. >> Okay. Awesome. Is there anything else you want to tell um the Princeton Planning Board about Princeton Academy and this project? >> I think that this is an amazing opportunity for Princeton Academy as well as for Ridge View Conservancy and
Woods and Wayside. We will do many things together um as time passes. So, I'm very excited about it and I know they are too. >> In in its current configuration, well, in this new configuration, is there sufficient parking for for staff? Can
you talk to that a little bit about >> like where staff parks that type of thing? >> Surely there definitely sufficient parking. I can tell you that right now. Uh most of the staff parks in the back of the building. That would be uh the side of the building facing the um
athletic fields where the soccer and baseball fields are. So most of your faculty's pack parking back there as well as behind um our MAC, our um athletic and convocation center. Plenty ample parking back there. Um, overflow parking is in the front of the school
building and then there's more parking in front of the manor house. And I'm I'm here every day. So, I'm here right now actually. I'm in a small house off of Drake at the bottom of the campus and there's no problem with parking at all. >> And what about pickups and drop offs?
How how is that happen? And is that planned to change at all with this new subdivision? >> Not at all. So the way we do it, uh, we have all of our pickups both for the little ones as well as for the older ones. And by that I mean lower school, which is K to 4, JK to 4, as well as middle school 5 through 8. Everybody
gets dropped off in the front of the school building, and everybody gets picked up in the front of the school building. And there's there are always administrators at the doors to make sure the boys move uh safely from the U vehicles into the school building.
And as I recall when my son was there, there's one or two buses a day. >> Uh, currently we only have one bus from Trenton with four uh 10 boys uh on the bus. >> All right. Exa, uh, thank you very much. Um,
>> you're welcome. >> I have no further questions for the head of school of Princeton Academy, Kathleen Humea. Thank you very much, Kathleen. >> You're welcome. Okay. I think we'll wait for questions from
the board unless somebody has one of the director now. We can wait until all the testimony is done and then we can ask our questions. That works for me. >> Okay. >> Can I Can we get one more in? 1053.
>> Go for it. >> What do we say? >> No. Go ahead. >> Right. Um, I'd like to swear in Christopher Bar, please. >> Mr. Bar, do you swear or affirm your testimony this evening will be truthful? >> I do.
>> Thank you, >> Christopher. Um, thank you for your time tonight. Can you um tell me what you do for a living? >> Uh, I manage a nonprofit named uh Woods and Wayside
International. It's a 501c3 uh nonprofit that's been operating since 2007. >> Where do you live? >> I live on Ridge View Road. >> Okay. Which is right across from the campus, correct? >> It's about half mile from the campus.
>> Okay. Um could you tell us what Woods and Wayside International does, please? >> Yes. So, Woods and Wayside International is a nonprofit organization that conducts scientific research,
um, uh, policy analysis, environmental education, and strategic communications to, uh, promote, uh, more equitable and accountable, uh, decisions related to forests. Um, it's co-managed by myself
and as, uh, Kathy Humora mentioned by my wife, Dr. Patricia Shanley. We've both worked in forest conservation for over 40 years. Um we work with partners um uh
uh focusing on uh uh forest uh conservation and sustainable use of forests and uh community forest community well-being in the Brazilian Amazon as well as in Indonesia. Uh we work locally very closely with a second
uh nonprofit that the two of us also are involved in co-managing uh Ridgeview Conservancy and uh I think Ridge View Conservancy is familiar to the members of the zoning board. We've uh provided testimony on behalf of the conservancy
in in uh recent weeks. >> Why 1128 Great Road and the Manor House? Uh, that might be easiest to answer if I could show an image. Um, uh, >> if you can let me share my screen, I can
pull that up. Whoever has the ability to do that, >> I don't know if I got the Got it. Make sure I don't put something wrong up here. Um, all right. Can everyone see that?
>> Yes. >> Perfect. >> So, >> what are we there, Chris? >> So, we're looking at an image that uh has been adapted from the same source as the image that Mr. Foot uh presented a few minutes ago. Um so uh the labeled
site uh there in uh circled in yellow is the Princeton Academy uh campus and then what we see extending west from the campus um marked the parcels that are marked in blue uh that's uh 187 acres or
uh there's 187 acres of conting contiguous uh conserved open space and uh Rididge View Conservancy worked very closely with a consortium that included Princeton Municipality, um, Friends of Princeton Open Space, the Watershed Institute, New Jersey
Conservation Foundation for several years to conserve these properties. This, uh, until four years ago was the largest unprotected forest in Princeton. And collectively um uh we raised uh over
$11 million to conserve uh this forested track that you see as well as a 6acre conservation easement along the western edge of of the Princeton Academy campus. And um
uh our motivation to um conserve uh portions of the Princeton Academy campus uh is um I think inspired very much by recognizing the uh
proximity uh to this large uh area of mature forest that's been preserved. Um but we've also seen over the years that uh there have been a number of alternate uh development plans for the campus. Um
you know commercial development um uh there was at one point a plan for a CCRC uh to come in before Princeton Academy occupied the campus. Um, we know that there was in in recent years also a plan uh by a potential investor that wanted
to build high-rise dorms and triple capacity or double capacity um at the campus. Our interest is to really see the the campus as it currently exists um preserved and for uh public access for
walking trails to be granted. And through Ridge View Conservancy, we've been able to do that through the purchase of the Drake's Corner lot that Mr. Foot showed uh as well as the 6acre conservation easement uh along the western boundary of the Princeton Academy campus. And and those um uh
together provide public access trail head that that uh connects to this large area of mature forest that you see. in their trails that go all the way out to Promisedland Road. >> Terrific. I think that's 11 o'clock everybody, so I don't want to offend
anyone or upset anyone. We're happy to stop there. I I'll pick up with Mr. Bar the next session um if I can get on an agenda. >> Mr. Casey, one question. Is this uh something you want marked as an exhibit? This aerial view.
>> Thank you, Miss Miss Casey. So this would be exhibit A-R1. And I'm also advised by staff that we will need an extension of time from your client since we have to carry this application now.
>> Yes. Uh we consent. >> Okay. Um, >> I don't know what more formally you need from me than to say that >> uh an extension to when
>> um until we can be heard, voted on. I don't know when the I mean 60day I don't know what the the agendas look like coming up, so it's tough for me to say. >> Are we going to hear Karen? Um
Claudia, are we going to hear this application next month or when's our next availability to continue this? I think um Taylor should speak or Derek about this. Uh May 13, you already have
three applications scheduled. On June 24, you have two. On July 22nd, you have one. Can you stop sharing your screen, please? Thank you. >> So, Derek, what do you think?
>> I think I'm retiring. Um, >> that's what you think. I got to hand off to Taylor here. Um, >> Taylor, what do you think? >> Um, I'd say July 22nd.
>> Okay. June 24th or July 22nd. >> All right. I mean would would and I I don't think it's going to make a difference, but this has gone on for a really long time and I know staffing issues have been have been a problem and
but this also is really important timing wise for us to sell this and get this approval and sustain the feasibility of the school. So, um, but we're at the mercy of your schedules obviously, but any sort of courtesy in bumping that baby up would
be fantastic. >> Can we consider a special meeting, >> Taylor? >> Uh, yeah, if you guys are available for one. Yeah, absolutely. >> Maybe we can circulate a note or something and see what might be
available, >> but then they have to renotice. I'm sorry. >> If you could take jurisdiction tonight, then they don't need to renotice, >> right? >> Okay. >> Maybe another Wednesday or >> Yeah, I would I would ask that you
retain jurisdiction, please. >> Sure. >> Thank you. >> Right. But but the problem is that uh if we don't know the date tonight, >> we need to establish a date tonight. >> Then we we won't know where it's being when it's being carried to. Uh, and the
public won't know what when it's being carried to. >> Okay. And get a notice out fast, I guess. >> Didn't Didn't uh Who said that there was a date that we just had one?
>> That's July 22nd. >> Oh, right. Okay. Sorry. Yep. It's late. And So Claudia, you said June 24th. Is that what you said? Uh was one possibility. >> June 24 is uh the next right. You only
have two applications on that date. Unless you want to have a meeting earlier in June. >> Yeah. I mean that's what >> I want to look at your calendar and see what throw some Wednesdays out there because those are usually days when there's no other meetings. Um, >> can you all check your calendars for
June 3rd or June 10th? >> What about May 20th? >> No. >> No. Okay. >> I'm good for the third or 10th. >> I'm okay for either. >> I'm good for the third.
>> I'm good for the 10th. I'm good for the third, not the 10th. >> All right. They both look okay. >> I'm good for both dates. >> Yeah, I'm okay for both.
So, is it just one person who can't make the the 10th? I >> think it was Mr. Dokin. Is that correct? >> Yeah, I I can't make the 10th. >> I can't either. >> Oh, you can't. That's two. And what about the third? Who can't make the
third? >> Yeah. >> Donna. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, I think probably it's going to be the 10th. >> No, the third. >> Yeah, the third. There's only one person that can't make it, I believe. Right.
>> Third. Yeah. >> That still gives you enough. You need You want to go with seven, right? >> Yes, please. >> Yes. >> Just one more time. Steve Shriber, you okay for the third? >> Yes. Yes. >> Eve? >> Yes.
>> Mr. Cohen. >> Yes. >> George for the third. >> Yes, sir. >> George, >> you muted, George. >> Yes. Yes.
>> And Michael, you're good. Third for the third. >> Thank you. And that gives us seven, right? Did I count that correctly? >> Robert Coulson, you're good for the seven. >> I'm good for the third.
>> I'm sorry. >> Seven. >> Yep. >> That's really great, everybody. Thank you so much. Really great. Okay. So, the extension is still one. >> You have to give it to at least let's say June 4th, you know, see what
happens. >> Thank you. >> I don't want to speak for you, but >> Yeah. No, that that's right. >> And then, Mr. Foot, if you could send me your memo, that would be great. Uh, >> yes, we can. I'll uh get that sent to
you. >> Thank you, sir. Good night. Uh, >> so May 3rd, everybody in the public, we're going to be back here on May 3rd. >> June June 3rd. June June 3rd. June 3rd. June 3rd. June 3rd. June 3rd. >> May 3rd is next week.
>> Nice. Nice try, Mr. >> God. It's a Sunday. >> Thank you all very much. >> Karen, you're muted. >> Karen, you're muted. You're muted. Got it. Thank you. >> Announce for the public that have
anybody in the public. >> Okay. This hearing is going to be continued on June 3rd. >> It will be at 7:30 and you will be able to look on the agenda for the instructions to participate via Zoom.
>> And there's no notice in the choir. Correct. >> Okay. >> Good night. >> Thank you. >> Thank you all. >> Derek, thank you. >> Thank you. Been a >> pleasure.
Thanks a lot.