All right. So, we can just We're back on the record at 7:50 p.m. >> All members present. We had audio difficulties. The only things that we took care of were the roll call, pledge of allegiance, reading of the open
public meetings act statement, minutes for approval from March 11th and April 8th, and the memorialization of the powers resolution, all of which were approved. >> Okay. So that puts us back on our agenda
under memorializations for IAT Services LLC 41 Grand Avenue block 1405 lot 4 application for variance relief for the proposed installation of a static hillboard. Uh at this time we have a draft of the resolution comments
questions from the board. Um, I just have a handful of u typographical edits that I will just read into the record as this resolution was prepared by our conflict council Mark Leeman. Um,
so with that in mind, uh, page four, um, in the third and fourth whereas clauses on that page, strike the word 'the' before Charles Sarlo's name. Uh the top of page five, the add an s at
the end of the word hearing. On page 11, on the second line, add the word 'the' between that and permit. uh on page 14 uh under John Mcdana's uh summary of John Mcdana's testimony the sixth line
there reference to Dvarianes the reference just be devariance And I believe on on page 15 on the second line, the word the phrase transportation ordering I think is the word ordering
should probably be corridor. Uh the only other changes to be made are at the end of the resolution. There's reference to uh our previous alternate member of the board, Mr. Busted. Uh that
should be >> I fixed that on my version. Yeah. >> All right. So all references to Mr. Busty should be removed and Miss Lavine should be substituted and the certification should also be from Mr. Gibbons as secretary. Does >> that as well?
All right. So, with those with those edits, I will ask the board to for a motion to approve. >> So moved. >> Thank you, Mr. Given. There a second. >> Second. >> Thank you, Modier. >> All right. Uh, Mr. Kaslin,
>> yes. >> Mr. Craig, >> yes. >> Miss Boland, >> yes. >> Mr. Gibbons, >> yes. >> Mr. Kos. Mr. Sa. Yes, >> Mr. Gochi. >> Yes, >> Miss Lavine. >> Yes. >> Okay, the motion passes. >> Okay, thank you everyone. We're going
now to move along under completeness review on our agenda. Application is for DNL Delisandro. Property is 292 Woodland Avenue, block 112, lot 15. application seeking
variance approval for uh an addition alteration on renovation to a single family home. >> M is Brown. >> All right. For completeness purposes, I reviewed the proofs and they are sufficient to for the board to proceed
um on that hearing the application tonight. >> Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Dupkin. >> Uh yes, I could see it deemed complete and be heard tonight. Okay, thank you very much. We still don't have an engineer yet. >> No.
>> All right. U questions from the board on the application with regard to completeness. Okay. At this time, there being none, I'll look for a uh motion to deem the application complete. So second
>> I think I've got a first Mr. Craig and a second Modier. >> All right, Mr. Klin. >> Yes. >> Mr. Craig. >> Yes. >> Miss Bolan. >> Yes. >> Mr. Gibbons. >> Yes. >> Mr. Salva. >> Yes. >> Mr. Gotier. >> Yes. >> Miss Leavine.
>> Yes. >> The motion passes. >> Okay. It's just quick recess for green. >> Okay. >> Uh at this time we're going to uh take a brief recess. Uh it's 7:55 p.m.
>> Uh motion from the board. >> So moved. >> Thank you, Mr. Given. Thank you, Mr. Cray. All in favor? >> I. Any opposing? Same. >> Okay, we are in recess at 7:55. All >> right, Steve, can you hear us?
>> Yes, I can hear you now. Okay, just make sure your microphones are on. We're going to call the meeting back to order. It is 8:06 p.m. Um, >> all members are >> all members are in attendance
>> at this time. Uh, on our agenda at at this moment, we are going to proceed under new business. The applicant is DNL Dallasro. Property is 292 Woodland Avenue, block 112, lot 15. application seeking variance relief for
the addition alteration renovations to a single family residence. I believe the applicant's architect is present this evening. Mr. Bruno, good evening. >> All right, I can if you turn on that microphone. >> Uh there we go.
>> You please both raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm that the testimony that you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes. >> Okay. And then just state your name and spell your last name for the record. >> David de Alexandro. D apostrophe A L E S
A N D R O. >> Lauren De Allesandro. D apostrophe A L E S A N D R O. >> And you reside at 292 Woodland. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Do you want
Yeah, maybe we could if you wouldn't mind grabbing the micro the additional handheld microphone right there so Mr. Bruno could have a microphone if you just have to press the light. >> If you could please raise your right
hand. You swear affirm that the testimony that you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I do. >> And Mr. Bruno just restate your name and lensure for the board. >> Yes. Joseph J. Bruno 29 Pastor in the state of New Jersey since 1988
and license is at this point still in good standing. >> Okay. Welcome back Mr. Bruno. I assume board has no comments questions on Mr. Bruno's qualifications. >> Yeah. >> Good to be here again. Um, >> before I start, I'd like to hand out a
photo exhibit that I prepared to each of the board members. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Before I start, welcome to the for.
>> Yes, if you could just >> Excuse me. Can you make sure his mic is on? >> Can you hear me now? >> Yes. Okay, sorry about that. >> Where are these exhibits? >> This will be marked as exhibit A1. It's
a photo exhibit prepared by your office um consisting of seven photos and a cover sheet. Correct. >> Yes, I prepared it myself. So, that was >> Yeah, it's still it's going on and off. >> You'll just have to share the that microphone. I'm sorry.
>> Okay. So, um I'll walk the board if I may through the photo exhibit to get started. Uh photograph um all of these pictures were taken by by myself yesterday. Okay. The uh photograph number one is the south or front elevation view of the
subject brick residence. Photograph number two is the north or the rear elevation view of the subject brick residence. Photograph number three is the west elevation view of the subject residence.
Photograph number four is the south or the front elevation view of the residence to the east of the subject residence. You'll see the left hand side of the photo is the um the delisandro's house. Uh photograph number five is a
view looking northward from the existing patio. Um note the um the dense he evergreens uh that are planted along the um property line. Photograph number six is a view looking eastward from the area
of the proposed addition. The patio that you see is proposed to be uh removed and replaced with a smaller one. And photograph number seven is view north elevation view of the residence across the street. I uh took these photographs to um give the board a little bit of
context uh to the to the application. Now the um I'll I'll describe the the project and then then I can go into the the numerical um attributes. So right now
the um the uh house the property has a lot of pavement in the backyard that is proposed to be removed and replaced with lesser pavement. The uh house as it exists if you turn to drawing sheet
number two of three. The first floor uh will be uh is proposed to be expanded around the rear and to the left or the west side to increase the um the living space for the glowing family. Um in the front we have
an entrance foyer with a closet, a mudroom and drop zone for backpacks and things of that nature. um create a um convert some living space for storage on the first floor. Dining space, family room and kitchen to the rear. At the
second floor, the uh the existing bedrooms will will remain um a home office will be created at the um which will be the southwest corner or the lower leftand corner of the of the drawing. And uh then in the rear will be
um an expansion of the master bedroom suite which is essentially for to create a um a master bath and some additional closet space. The uh drawing number three you'll see the south elevation or the
elevation facing the street. we would um mimic the ar the architecture of the existing house which is also in keeping with the predominant style of architecture within the neighborhood itself. It's a very very American traditional type of architecture there
and and we want to we want to extend and enhance that with some stone veneer clapper style siding and um little portico roof above the entrance as well as some shake style siding to give the um the the uh the house a bit more
texture than it has now. If you look at the photographs, it's really just monochromatic siding. And we'd like to to um as I mentioned give the um the house some some additional texture. So I'll go through the vital statistics
of the um of the variance application. Um let me just get to my Bear with me. I had something out of order. Trying to get it back in order.
So, the variances requested are um lot coverage 25% is permitted, 26.07% 07% is um existing already. So we're over the proposal is 29%.
Um improve lot coverage ex excluding the yard amenities 30% is permitted. We are existing at 26.49 we are at 37.2. Um it is to be noted that on the um believe the letter of denial and the
notice that was prepared by the um the board staff that uh they had a lesser number um for that uh the the improved lot coverage. Um I would say respectfully that our number at 37.2% 2%
is the is the actual number because there seems to be um a lesser number because um maybe when that um calculation was done not as much of the the driveway pavement was was counted. We counted all of the the building plus
the um you know including roof overhangs as well as the um the driveway pavement. um improve lot coverage uh with including uh of the for the amenities reserve 5% is permitted as existing
because of all of that pavement in the back and AC around the side we're at 20 we're at present we're at 23 23%. Which is a ridiculous amount over of course and that is being reduced to 7%.
It's still it's still over. There is still a variance condition but we're bringing it down significantly. Then the >> sorry what could you repeat? What is the total um lot coverage including
including the not just the not just the difference but what is the total including yard amenities >> improve lot coverage excluding the yard amenities >> including >> excluding I have is 26.49 49. That's the existing. What is the existing lot
coverage including yard amenities? The total >> Oh, that would be uh Well, the >> you said it's 23.23%. >> 23.23 is existing um amenities reserved.
The lot coverage, the amenities reserve only, the the patio and the um walkways around the back. Okay, >> you have two different numbers. We have the the improved lot coverage which excludes the yard amenities and then we
have the amenities reserve >> and the way the bureau calculates it is lot coverage excluding yard amenities is 30%. >> Correct. >> And then the lot coverage including the yard amenities is 35%. >> 35%. So I just want to know what the
existing total is because in our engineers report it says maybe this is correct. The existing number is 49.73%. >> That sounds like it would be correct. >> That's correct. 2,611 square ft.
>> Okay. >> That's the existing. >> So existing existing it's 49ish%. >> Yes. >> Right. It's the addition of the two numbers that are there under improved lot coverage. >> Okay. So that's >> and then with the amenity reserve
>> 23.23% of the lot area >> is the amenities reserve >> at present >> is the diff Yeah. Okay. Right. >> Yeah. That's at present. >> That's the difference between 2,611 ft and 1,391
square ft. >> Yeah. >> That's the the calcul. Okay. >> Yeah. >> I see. Then uh we have an an existing front yard setback deficiency 30 ft is required 25.7 feet is existing and we
are maintaining that. Then the >> I'm sorry to go back one. >> Yeah sure. >> So the we got the lot coverage including yard amenities existing is 49.73% and then the proposed is 44.2%.
>> Yes. If you add if if you add those numbers together. Yes. All right. And then you have the existing non-conforming front yard, >> right? Existing non-conforming front yard will remain at 25.7 or 25 ft 9 in.
Then sideyard set back to the east uh required is 7.5. Existing is 5.8 and we are existing at 5.8. So that will not change. Now for the uh just just for the record on the east
side uh there is um the distance between the subject house and the house on the property to the east we have 13.83 ft or 13 ft 10 in >> that's on the combined sideyard. That's
the uh that's the difference between the um or that's the distance between the easterly elevation of the subject house and the westerly side of the house to the to the east. >> What was that number? >> The the distance is 13. >> What was the number?
>> 13 ft 10 in. >> Okay. >> Or 13.83. That's the same number. >> And the requirement is 15. Correct. >> 12 >> I believe. So >> to the property line >> 12 >> 12 >> is it 12? I believe >> the sideyard total sideyard >> total sideyard is 12. Yeah.
>> No, excuse me. This is a different section of the code. Um it's because the uh sideyard setbacks are narrow. The uh minimum between the uh the house and the
adjoining neighbor can be 12 feet. >> Right. With 13.83 >> and Yes. So they're compliant. Yeah. Right. We don't take the um the two seven and a half ft values.
>> That's just the distance between the house and the neighbor. >> Correct. Correct. >> But that's not one of our bulk requirements. Correct, Steve. >> Correct. Well, we we need uh we're uh we're requesting variance relief because
for the the R setback, the 5.8 8 ft versus the the 7.5, but we comply with the distance between the two structures. >> It's conforming at 5T. One one side is allowed to be 5T,
>> right? We're at 5. >> You're at 5.8. >> 5.8, right? >> So, you are compliant. >> Excuse me. >> You are complant. Okay. Uh for the record, our engineer Jason Flores has joined us on this on the
Zoom. >> Good evening um board members. Good evening uh uh professionals in general. Um I'm sorry. I apologize I'm late. Mr. Costa was supposed to be here today. Hopefully nothing happens to him. I cannot get in touch with him but I'm here to you know I've been I've been
listening for the p past 15 minutes uh you know uh um the testimony from the professional >> thank you Mr. Flores and welcome Mr. over. Continue. >> Okay. So, I just like to um just a few more numbers I would like to go through
with the board ju uh just for ju just for context and I'm happy to answer all the questions that you all will have for me. Um this is an undersized lot. Uh 7500 square ft is required and we're at 5,250.
Um if this were a conforming lot, our um building coverage would be 20.30%. 30% 2 20.3 when where 25 is permitted. Um improved lot coverage excluding yard amenities would be at 26% where 38% is
permitted. Improved lot coverage uh for yard amenities would be 4.9% and again that would be conforming. Um and and as I mentioned we have 13 ft 10 in between the our our house and the house to the
east. I would uh respectfully suggest to the board that the that although we're asking for these these variances, the architecture of the house as I've as I've designed it is not a um not a um a
big monolithic box. It um it has um has variations in wall and roof lines as well as building materials. Uh varied materials. We've got uh we've got stone, we've got clapper style siding, we've got um shake style siding and um the uh
style of the architecture is um compatible with the neighborhood. It's of an American colonial or American traditional style which is which is of course as you know very predominant in River Edge um which hearkens back to the
um your um the the history of this of of this community. We have seen a number of houses springing up that have a very modern um modern feel. Uh you'll see a lot of houses with white siding and black window frames. This is not that.
Although we're we're requesting the variances, um the architecture is very compatible and respectful to the to the neighborhood fabric in which it exists. So um with that, I'm happy to uh answer all the board's questions.
Okay. Thank you, Mr. Bruno. Let me start with our professionals. Mr. Deepkin. >> Uh yes, thank you. Um yeah, everything was complete uh in the coverages. As far as the lot coverages, I don't know. I mean, they were over uh the existing coverages were over quite a bit. Um I
doubt they had any permits or approvals for uh all that all that coverage. Um you know, it's still a large number that they're over. Um but uh as far as the building um that's uh I I think within
line of the surrounding area. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Debkin. Uh Mr. Flores. >> Um again, um they uh just to uh piggyback on um our signing uh official, yes, they had a significant amount of
love lot coverage. Now all that is being removed. They're reducing the lot coverage even though they're increasing the building coverage because they are adding an addition to it. Uh you know it's an improvement to the uh impervious whether they have permit or not. That's uh Mr. uh Debkin's uh perview. Uh the
only thing I will just add to it is that any storm water management that needs to be addressed on on on the addition. We always encourage uh um uh residents to install seage speed uh just to collect uh the roof litters even though it's a small addition. even though you're decreasing the you know the lat coverage
is something to always consider. Um and that's that's that's all that's all I have for the application. >> Okay. To follow that if I may just make a a comment. Um you'll see on on drawing sheet number one um I do have a storm water chamber detail. Um we will be
handling all of the runoff from the um from from from the development um underground with the storm water chamber seage pit whatever you want to call it. It's all the same thing. And um so there will be no additional runoff from the um
from the um uh the development the all of the roof uh drainage will will be handled and we are reducing the the pavements particularly in the back s to a significant amount. >> Can you speak to the topography right
now? Is there a drainage situation on site? >> None that I was um I was able to notice. you know, there um you know, we don't just look for standing water. We look for signs of of perhaps vegetation that's that's not a vibrant green color. You know, sometimes when there's excess
moisture, excess water, you see um we you see yellowing of of of vegetation that's supposed to be green, but but I I didn't notice anything of that nature. The the site itself is relatively flat. Uh very little topographical change. And
um and as I mentioned the um with the the increase in the footprint area and the roof area, we'll be capturing all of that storm water and and going to the chamber and um a significant decrease in the amount of pavement in the backyard, which will also which which goes
handinhand with with an increase in lawn area and any flower gardens they may uh they they may choose to do. >> Okay. >> Excuse me, chairman. Can I make another question? >> Um, in regards to the um coverage um
would they consider um permeable pavers um in some manner to eliminate the overages and the lot coverage, >> the amenities? >> Yeah, I think we we can do that. One of the um one one of the hesitations that I
have is that in the winter when everything is frozen solid, it doesn't doesn't really um doesn't really work that well, but we could explore that. Um >> better than nothing. >> Yeah, we we can explore that.
>> Um excuse me, chairman. Um just just just to put the record, uh you're proposing four uh chambers, correct? >> I believe that's uh Yeah. Yes. >> Are they are where are they being
proposed at which you know where exactly are you proposing them because the plan that we have not >> show it would probably be somewhere in the middle of the backyard. Um we will um because at the time of excavation we'll see where the where the best soil conditions are because the soil conditions in within a given lot can can
change. So um while the contractor is excavating we we can explore that >> you'll you'll get location approved by the burough engineer. >> Yes of course because we we will need to do a perk test um so um and the um the
excavation and the installation of the pit will need to be inspected and approved by the burough engineer prior to back filling. >> Anything further, Mr. Flores? >> No, that's all I had. Uh um that's all I have for for the application. Thank you.
>> Okay. Thank you. Uh like to go around to the board at this time. Miss Lavine, start with you. >> I don't have any questions. >> Okay. Thank you, Miss Bolan. >> Just a a couple of questions from from our engineers uh review letter. Uh under the deck, do you is it do you have patio
under the deck? No, that will be um we we typically detail that with um with um a loose stone of some sort so that any any um any any water that that um goes through the open joints of of the deck will go
will get absorbed in into the the underlying ground. >> Okay. >> So, so it won't be shed over the um o over the the rest of the lot. Um he also mentions that the the walkway is slightly less than two feet and that
can you make that two set back two feet so it's conforming? Is that 1.85 according to >> Oh yeah. Yeah. From from the line you mean? >> Yes. >> Yeah. We can do that. >> Um and then he just has a a statement for the architectural plan about keeping
the the roadway clean during construction. that will be that that will all be a condition of the um of the issuance of the permit and the the um the contractor that's selected to work on the project will have to adhere to all of the um the uh municipal
requirements for coming and going. We have um we have fil there'll be a silt fence uh around the property to to contain soil and that's that's typical soil movement uh precautions. That's >> it for me. >> Okay. Thank you, M.
Mr. Gibbons, >> uh, I'm looking at the I guess the same sheet you have up here. I'm just trying to figure out exactly what is happening with the backyard amenities. Can you just show on the drawing what is going where is it? Is it patio and deck or is it No, there's patio and deck.
>> Yeah, there's a um there's patio here that's being removed. There's a stair with a platform coming out of the patio doors next to the kitchen. And then we have a um a stone patio a
paper patio on grade here where I'm circling with with my pen which is smaller in footprint than the than the existing which is shown on my drawing to be dash lines. >> So when this is done it'll just be that patio that you just >> correct. >> Okay.
>> Correct. And the and the walkway between that patio and the the garage in front of the house. >> Okay. Was there any thought to doing that as a deck since you get more credit for doing that? >> We had looked at it, but um also it was um a matter of keeping the backyard as
visually open as possible, >> keeping it all flat. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um Okay. I think that was it for now. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. G. Mr. >> Yeah. I uh want to make sure that all
these things. So obviously you agreed to the storm order process and and review. Um the new pavers you said you will include the permeable pavers. >> Yes. >> Okay. So I'm thinking that the the new
pavers are this is new pavement for patio, new paper driveway and front walkway total about 630 square feet. Well, the uh the driveway will be macadam um because they that is m it's
much more um much more amanable to uh to plowing than um than than pavers. >> Okay. Because on your data is showing a new paver driveway and front walkway. >> Oh, I'm sorry. No, no, that should be that should be madam and that was
factored into the the coverage. >> Okay. Okay. So, at this point, you haven't taken any credit for permeable pavers, >> correct? >> So, what would it apply to here? Just the new PA patio. >> Just the PA patio. Yeah. >> Okay. So, it's 200. Is it 75% credit? >> 75%.
>> Okay. So, you be down to 50 feet of coverage there. >> Yeah. Because we have two the patio itself is 200 square feet, >> right? So, if you're getting 75% credit on a permeable paper, >> it'd be 50 feet. >> You cut down 50. So, you'd be picking up
150 square feet of beverage. >> Is that 50% or 70? >> I think it's 50 for 50% >> deck. >> It's 50% for the deck. I think 75% for the deck. >> So, it's 51. >> It's 50%. Okay. >> So, we're 100 You saying 100 ft?
>> Yep. >> 100 feet. Okay. And then the walkway you adjusted to two feet. And then um the under deck area you talked about having completely permeable surface.
>> Okay. Those were the concerns I had as well. So I'm good. Okay. >> Go to you. >> Uh no questions. >> Mr. Salva. >> Uh no question. Okay. Um,
the engineers letter spoke about the covered front porch and the awnings projecting not more than six feet into the front yard setback. Um, and that the existing covered porch is non-conforming and would require
variance relief. >> Yeah, it's not. Yeah, the uh existing that that is existing to remain. >> Okay, we cover the stormware. Okay. Um I have nothing further at this time either. So
uh with that we can uh move to open to the public. >> I did have one question based on uh Mr. Costa's report. There was a question about whether the wood existing wood fence would be replaced. >> You have any
>> Okay. Um if it is being replaced, we'll just need the detail. But if you're not >> If you're not, you're not just >> Yeah. >> Yeah. If if >> planting the side, >> we would of course switch out for a
permit. >> Okay. >> Right. Because that's that's required to to be permitted. So, >> right. >> Yep. >> Okay. That was it. >> Okay. Um do we have anybody in the public? >> Uh no, not on Zoom. Okay. >> And
>> and we have nobody here. >> We can we can wave with the >> the kids. We'll wave the formality of both to the public. At this time, I will ask for any final questions or comments from either the board or our professionals.
Mr. Deepkin, Mr. Flores, >> I'm good. >> All good. >> All good. >> Okay. Board members, all set. Miss Brown. >> Um, just wanted to go over things that were agreed to that the applicant will
coordinate with the burough engineer regarding storm water management. um getting the loca and the locations um for the seabage pit approved by the burough engineer. You're going to update the drawings with
the correct numbers or and designations for like the MacAdam driveway like that. Um, if you do get offense, you'll have to comply with the permit requirements and then just general compliance with the
comments and recommendations in the board engineers report. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> And you are not doing the PA patty the the permeable pavers or you are committing to doing that? >> We will do that. >> Okay.
>> Yeah. I think Mr. Craig has one more. >> Yeah, there's also the adjustment of the walkway to two feet. >> Yes. >> And the area under the deck was going to be completely >> It's not a a full deck. It's just um a
platform stair case, right? It's just a Yeah, it's just stairs with the with the required platform because you can't have stairs just coming right out of the house and that that will have open joints with
um with per pvious surface below. Okay. So, I just want to get the c the numbers right now. How how what was the area for that um platform and stairs
>> in the back? >> Yeah, >> that's 48 square ft. >> 48 So that would bring the total of a lot improved lot coverage with yard amenities to 2,173
square ft. If we're deducting 100 for the patio and 48 for oh well 48 divided by 75. So that's what is said 36. Okay. Then so it's 2185.
Then you take that you're so the new improved lot coverage including the discount for the platform and for the permeable pavers would be would get to a total of 41.6%
give or take 41.2 or 41.62. >> That's >> does that sound right? Yeah. So, the total square footage with the discount is 2,185 instead of which is down from 2,321.
>> Yes. >> Okay. So, you're good with that? >> Okay. >> Yeah. So, we'll do well, we're cutting back the the walkway to be 24 in off the property line. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> And then we've got the um permeable
paver. So that takes our patio from 200 square feet to 100 square feet. Correct. >> What is the reduction for the Do we want to calculate a reduction for the walkway or >> I think it's the minimum. It's only a couple inches of more than length.
>> So if you just keep it within 2,185 square feet if you have to make an adjustment one way or the other. Yeah, that seems to make sense. So the relief would be for a building coverage of 29% lot coverage including or excluding yard
amenities of 37.2% and then a lot coverage including yard amenities of 41.62%. >> That's what the number comes to. Yeah, >> if my math is right. I don't know if Jason if you were doing the calc calculations as well.
I'm getting like around 41%. I just got lost on the uh on one of the numbers, but it's around the 41%. Okay. >> Yeah. >> You'll you'll revise your drawings accordingly. >> Yes. Great.
>> Okay. Okay. >> All right. With that, all that in mind, >> I'll make a motion uh to approve the project with the variances stated for building coverage, lot coverage,
and front yard setback to approve as noted for block 112, lot 15, 292 Woodland Avenue. Second, there are some stipulations read and the record. Second if second, Mr.
Correct. >> All right. Mr. Kaslin, >> yes. >> Mr. Craig, >> yes. >> Miss Bolan, >> yes. >> Mr. Gibbons, >> yes. >> Mr. Sava, >> yes. >> Mr. Goautier, >> yes. >> And Miss Levine, >> yes. >> Okay, the motion passes. >> Right.
>> Congratulations. Good luck to you. >> Now, go to bed. >> Yes. Uh >> at this time we've reached the end of our agenda for the evening. If uh there's no further business or comments from the board of professionals, I'll
look for a motion to >> move first. M second go. All in favor? >> I thanks and good night. >> Good evening. Good night. Good night. Everybodyable.