e e e e e e e e e e
e e e e e e e I is yeah e
e e e e e e e e e e to the flag of the United States of
America and to the repu for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all Beth has this meeting been ad advertised according with the open public meeting act yes chairman it has right can I have
a roll call please Mr kandell here miss lman here Mr Müller here Mr Shaw here miss sataka here Mr vosen Mr Williams here councilman sabrowski here chairman Ty here we have a quorum you very much
um memorialization of resolutions there are none I need to uh to accept the minutes from last month meeting do I have a motion motion for the February 19 2025 meeting motion to accept minutes I
have a second second all in favor I opposed having none communication agenda um we have a memo from the municipal clerk dated uh February 25th 2025 regarding two resolutions the first
resolution is number 202- 68 referring to the planning board various properties within the burrow study as areas in need need of Redevelopment your pleasure so chairman for the record it's
uh 16 properties identified as block 246 Lots one 1.02 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 2.02 2.04 2.11 block 247 1.03 block
247.203704 all located on either side of North and South Crossman Road inclusive of any and all streets paper streets private drives and rways as shown as the map of St study area number one on exhibit a we need a motion to accept
yes what's your pleasure make a motion to accept I have a second I have a motion and made second anybody opposed hearing none I'll take a roll call vote all in favor okay Mr candell yes Miss lman yes Mr Müller yes Mr
yes Mr taka Mr ven Mr Williams councilman zabowski yes chairman Tha yes he the second resolution from the clerk um that she was referring to us was resolution number 2025
69 for the record former jcpnl power plant site identified as block 174 lot 1.01 formally block 174 lot one and the following additional blocks and lots block 174 lot 1.02 and block 176 lot
2.06 inclusive of any and all streets paper streets private drives and rways and as shown on the map of study area attached to exhibit a it's your pleasure on this matter make a motion to accept I have a second
second having the motion made and seconded are there any that oppose hearing none a roll call vote Mr kandal yes Miss lman yes Mr Müller yes Mr Shaw yes missaka yes Mr vosen Mr Williams
councilman zabowski chairman Tai yes thank you thank you very much for all of that now we'll get into the substance of tonight um site plan subdivision Mr saak you're up yes thank you Mr chairman members of the board board professionals Lawrence
Sachs on behalf of the applicant uh Thomas Fallon uh this property is located at 16 Charlotte Street uh it's also known as block 125 it is Lots 6 6.01 7 7.01 8 and N uh
the property is located in the R7 Zone uh this property is on the corner of Charlotte Street and uh and Waterworks Road or Water Tower Road I'm sorry uh and the total lot area is roughly 15,000
uh 493 square feet uh there is a single family residence on the corner of Charlotte and Water Tower and we're here this evening uh seeking approval uh to consolidate and subdivide these lots to create two separate larger residential
lots uh it does require some bulk variance relief uh it requires relief for uh minimum lot area for the corner lot uh lot depth a a front yard setback a rear yard setback and lot coverage uh all of them are somewhat di Minimus
variances uh they don't involve a lot uh I do have my engineer and planner here who will uh describe those variance the variances that we're seeking uh we're also seeking some design waivers uh for pavement width of water tower which is an existing roadway uh for sidewalk uh
and for curbing um we have two reports uh that we received from your professionals uh one was dated February 24th uh from Morgan engineering and the second one was uh dated February 26th uh from your planner and uh we're prepared
to address both of those reports as well uh Mr chairman I do have one witness here this evening I do have Mr Fallon here but I don't unless there's any questions of him uh he's he's here but uh my primary witness is Mr Mark lever from East Point engineering uh he's a
licensed professional engineer and planner and he will go over all of the an testimony bring him up now I can bring him up you raise your right hand you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but truth in this matter so help you God yes I do you are uh Mr Liber if
you can give the board the benefit of your professional qualifications and background hi good evening my name is Mark with the c Liber lb R I'm with East Point engineering our office is in Marboro I graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree in civil engineering from
drexell University and completed the MBA program at Ruckers graduate school I was licensed in 2003 as a professional engineer in 2005 as a planner and in 2006 I had completed the certified Municipal engineering certificate
program I am a former member of the how Township planning board and I worked on both public and private side of this business presently only doing private work and you've testified before this board in the past Mr lever yes I have okay and your license is still in good standing it is okay Mr chairman can we
make a motion that we accept the uh cred I have a second to accept the credentials second all in favor I all right thank you very much sir thank you Mr lever if you can uh give the board the benefit of your analysis of this and what's being proposed with respect to
this property sure uh I want to hand out a couple photos that I took at the property today that's I guess we'll mark Mr fer I guess we'll mark that A1 A1 okay thank you it's uh four pages total eight
photos well that's being passed out uh just to reiterate the background here it's a block 125 you heard earlier it's slot 6 6.01 7 7.01 8 and9 Corner wood Tower and Charlotte Street total
Frontage on Charlotte's 94 ft and then the lot has 165 ft along Water Tower Zone here is r s uh at the corner there's an existing dwelling it's a single family home surrounding the property are all single family homes
except to the north where there's Cemetery there and uh water tower does provide access to the cemetery there's a gate there um I presume that the gate remains closed until there's a maintenance uh vehicle that has to exit
to uh the street anyway so if we look at the photos the top photo is taken from Charlotte and I'm looking toward the cemetery the property in questions on the right uh you'll see the chimney in
the foreground there that's the existing house going to the bottom photo uh it's just a closeup of the house that's there on the property that house would remain only to got to page two now I'm actually on water tower and
I'm looking at the house which is top of the photo again the cemeter is up at the left corner there uh next photo on the bottom is further down water tower again looking in at this house you can see there's steps there that provide access to a
service walk to the door this property by the way uh the grade of the land falls off from the northeast corner toward both streets uh and you'll notice there's a retaining wall along the front edge that's the
hold back the grade is a small hill there about uh 3 feet but the water runs off toward both streets Charlotte and water tower all right I'm on the third page a top photo here so this is the area where
the house is proposed right now there's a shed back there uh you could see where the wall ends and the bottom photo is the back door of the existing house and then on the last
page I just wanted to get you know typical photo of the neighborhood you can see it's single family there's a photo on Charlotte Street and then the bottom one is looking up the hill with water tower on my left and the house that's on the property would be you know
beyond that dead end sign on the left there was a question about where is there a fire hydrant there's actually a fire hydrant directly across Charlotte Street from this property um in case that issue does come up
so what's proposed is to divide the lot into two the corner lot would retain the existing home and the lot would be 94 by 85 again the 94 ft is along Charlotte and the total lot area would be 7990 ft
the balance of the property which is down water tower would be about 80 by 94 and that square footage is 753 Square ft where there's a new single family home proposed with a driveway a garage and four
bedrooms I uh had reviewed the planning report dated February 26th and there are a few items I do to point out with regard to zoning again we're in R7 Zone the minimum lot area
for an interior lot is 7500 Square fet however the lot area requirement for a corner lot is 8,500 Square F feet so as you heard that corner lot would be 7990 so we're slightly deficient uh about 510 Square ft on the
corner so that's a variance the next item is lot depth the minimum required is 100 ft the way that this block was created for whatever reason the depth of these Lots is only 94 so I would say that's an existing
non-conformity but since we're subdividing he has it noted as a variance for each of those two lots the yard sorry what are you missing that variance um on the if it's not 100 foot what what do you what do you have oh I'm
at 94 94 okay the front yard requirement in the zone is 20 ft uh if you look at sheet two of the plan set the distance uh on water tower because that lot technically
has two front yards is 19.7 feet to the existing home so that's noted as an existing non-conformity um interestingly enough the right side yard of that lot
is 24.1 feet um but it no longer becomes a side yard once we subdivide it's now becoming a rear yard uh in which case 25 ft's required and we have 24.1 so again that relates to the
existing dwelling on the property which is to remain so it's a rather technical variance that a side yard you only need 8 feet but now it becomes a rear yard so it doesn't meet the uh minimum 25 feet but it's only short by one it's
short by 0 n feet which uh I don't think that's really perceptible uh and it is an existing condition someone driving by would not even notice because really nothing's changing over there the only that's changing is we're creating a new lot
line you know up the street anyway so the last item I want to point out is maximum loot coverage for building principal building coverage is limited to 20% once this property is divided our proposed lot 6.02
which encompasses the new house we're asking for 26.67% and the building coverage for the existing house which would become the corner lot is 20.1% that's 0.1% over I do want to note that even though we are
slightly over on the building coverage we are still under on total lot coverage The Zone allows 45% and we have 33.3% proposed where the new house is and 40 .4% proposed with existing
houses so we still comply with the total lot coverage um any questions so far okay now Mr lber you have another handout because I think we did an analysis of this neighborhood just
determ size of these LS and also uh the size of the other Corner line so we're going to pass that out as well that would be A2 I have one you have one yeah get just make sure they're all the same2 thank
all right so Mr Liber I know we now have passed out A2 which is a tax map of this particular neighborhood but you could give the board the benefit of your analysis with respect to a lot sizes of the Interior Lots yeah and also the corner
Lots so what you're looking at is a you know uh arts and crafts of three different tax map sheets that I all pasted together to create this neighborhood the property in question is pink and uh what I did is only in the r
seven Zone Lots because there is a piece at the bottom right that's B1 on Washington I took a look just in this neighborhood at corner Lots because again in the R7 Zone you need 8,500 square feet for a corner lot I could only find one Corner Lot in
this neighborhood that actually complies and that's the lot on the corner of Washington and Outlook that's at the bottom of your paper all the other Lots I wrote In Blue what that square footage is and none of them are 8,500 square feet um in fact what I found which is
most interesting is that the lot that we're creating is $79.90 is going to be one of the biggest Corner Lots in this whole area um the other thing I also want to point out is along Water Tower Lane for whatever reason
those blocks uh 127 and 126 are only 94t in depth where the Zone requires 100 there isn't any reasonable way that I could correct that unless someone else's lot became even more non-conforming so you know I would say the lot depth variance is certainly a
hardship um and there's really no practical way to correct that now regarding the interior Lots we're not asking for a variance from the minimum lot area of 7500 square feet for the new lot but I did want to point out
on this map that most of the Lots in this area are either 40 or 80 foot wide lots that they themselves don't comply with what the R7 Zone standard is today so I don't think that what we're doing here is add a character at all at the neighborhood I don't even think it's
perceptible I can't imagine how anyone would know that our corner lot was 510 ft under on the square foot especially given what this map shows as far as our research on the neighborhood all right Mr lber I guess at this point we did receive uh reports
from the engineer and from the planner uh let's briefly go over the uh the engineers report Mr chairman should we do that at this point right okay perfect all right so I'm referring again to the report dated February 24th 2025 uh from Morgan Municipal engineer
in um and I believe the uh the first several Pages page two of six just talks about the variances which which you just summarized um talks about some waivers here um we are asking for uh a few
design waivers is that correct that's on page three yeah all right one of them is uh require pavement width and I we're obviously talking about Water Tower Lane of 30 feet uh we're proposing 28 that's an existing condition is that correct yeah the the left edge of pavement is a
little erratic on that street so uh we discussed with the staff about making a consistent width and we could do 28 feet okay uh second is a sidewalk along a water tower Lane now we're asking for a
waiver of that and there's a a good reason for that if you can explain if you want to just go back to A1 again if you look at the pictures of that retaining wall you due to the height of that wall and its location it just there's no room for
sidewalk on that side of the street um the other thing I want to point out is that while there is sidewalk on Charlotte there's really two houses on water tower um well the proposed house would be one then across the street directly across the street is another
house uh then there's a house on the corner across the street as well so this is not a very heavily traveled Street I don't think that waving sidewalk is a critical uh failure so and we frankly don't have the room for it all right and
then the last waiver was for curbing uh which I think is further addressed in the report of uh the engineer correct yeah we had proposed to put curb on one side of the street which is Al the retaining wall but not the other
side all right uh let's go now to page four uh which I think is a substance of the report um paragraph one just talks that uh we are in compliance with uh off street parking calculations um let's talk about
paragraph two where there's a qu I guess a comment about how emergency vehicles will uh will access the street if you can provide some testimony as to that yeah I mean there's no change to what goes on now if there was to be a vehicle that goes down this street it is a dead
end um whether or not this house ever gets built it's the same situation there's no room to build a turnaround but there's no requirement to build a turnaround either um Frank Frankly when emergency vehicles respond to a dead end Street they will just be directed to
back up under the assistance of other you know firemen or police and there's a hydrant on on Water Tower Lane correct it's across Charlotte um I number three is just a general comment of course we'll we will post the necessary performance guarantees number four was a question
about whether there'll be a basement I don't think the architectural plan showed a basement but we do propose to have a basement that's right we'll show that on the revised architectural plans uh number five deals with tree preservation again I think it's just a general comment stating that we've
complied with the uh um with the requirements of that certainly if there's any trees that need to be removed we'll we'll note that uh further on the plan um and we'll obviously obtain a tree removal permit uh number six is a survey comment uh
we'll make that revision that that's easy enough to do number seven was a question of how we're going to perfect the subdivision uh we prefer to do it by deed so we'll we'll make sure that that's compliant um now number eight deals with or number 8A deals with water
um I think you've addressed 8A the fact that there's there is a hydro within 400 feet uh Mr Liber how how do we plan on dealing with the service to this property and what are we willing to do with respect to the water department I I don't have a final water design but I would work that out with
the burrow water department okay so whatever the water department requires will yeah you have you have one water hook up to the house you just need another water hook up that's all okay uh number
five I think it might be misnumbered but that's okay went from eight to five number five on page five uh deals with sewer uh just B1 was just a takes no exception uh to the what we're proposing
with respect to sewer uh 5c will comply with the paragraph one with requires additional spot grades uh number two um I think it's just a comment we'll certainly as as I said before we'll comply with any tree removal
requirements um number three we deal with that with the surveyor as well Mr lever yeah we have to get additional topographic information across the street that's not a problem okay and finally the miscellaneous comments All right so number one deals with milling
and overlaying Charlotte Street to the northern limits of the property um we would prefer to just restore and repair what's necessary I know your engineer has spoken to us about this and he may he probably wants to weigh in on this but uh this is at the end of the day not
a travel Street at a dead end Street uh so we would prefer not to Mill and overlay the whole thing if necessary but I'll defer to your engineer on that point okay um let's see uh number
two yes we'll revise whatever plans whatever uh revisions are necessary showing existing utilities uh number three detail of the proposed concrete curb We'll add to that to the plan Mr lever yeah all right uh
number four will comply with uh number five number five is really a just testimony regarding the lighting is there any Lighting on the street now Mr Liber if you go to A1 uh actually the very first photo the last pole on the street on the
left you could see in there there's a light fixture so required uh number six deals with an ADA Compliant handicap ramp we can comply with that yeah right okay and number
seven uh yes we'll put the street number for the proposed two-story dwelling on the plans and certainly number eight the bond estimate will provide so I think that addresses the engineering letter uh with respect to the planner's letter Mr
ven Coy's letter um Mr Liber I believe you covered the variance relief and I believe your testimony is uh probably can be granted under both the C1 hardship variants and under a C2 as well
yeah and just to supplement what I said earlier this type of lot is totally consistent with this neighborhood um we're not asking to construct a new sense we're not creating traffic situation we're not you know dealing
with Wetlands or flood Hazard areas or things of that nature I mean to me it's just a fill in or you know fill in project so to say it's the use is permitted it's single family home um you know the land use law provides for the appropriate replacement
of certain types of uses in certain areas and this is a completely conforming use uh on a very quiet street so I don't see any real detriment and someone's going to get a new neighbor I don't know if that's a detriment I guess depends on who your neighbor is but I
don't see any planning issues with that okay all right on page three of the planner report uh we're seeking a waiver of the requirement for Street Crees yes if you look at A1 uh the top photo we're keeping the
trees that are in that photo the trees that are coming out are the ones on the new lot all right and also the sidewalk I think you covered already testimony um let's see on the miscellaneous comments uh the retaining
will obviously is going to stay is that correct yeah okay um and finally there was a question about um I guess requiring a three a minimum offset of three feet on the entry face of the garage that can be accommodated
is that correct yeah the architect can modify the front of the house so that there's more um Variety in this in the face you know all right jumping to page four of the planers report um applicant should address if screening is proposed between
the subject site and the cemetery um I can say that it's a quiet neighbor uh so I don't think we're proposing any screening and I don't think they've requested it quite frankly the cemetery so uh whatever's there we'll we'll try to keep there but uh there's no no uh
screening that's proposed at this point um Mr Liber par sub paragraph four North Arrow we can correct that yeah actually the rest of these are all just uh Corrections right uh we'll adjust the zoning schedule um oh all right tree
plant trees or plantings on the easterly property line uh is there any U any opportunity to add any supplemental plantings there yeah we have space to add if uh if needed I just want to show you that there's a fence over there if you go to the picture with the
shed where's [Music] that don't if you can see behind the shed there's a white fence that's the property line that's being referred to all right certainly if uh if the board is inclined if you if you'd like us to add some supplemental
plannings we certainly can do that on that property line uh that's really the only property line that we border on with uh with any residents and then lastly uh comment about affordable housing development fees uh will certainly comply with
that all right anything further Mr lever just if you have questions okay any questions from the board planner or the engineer I have a couple of questions go ahead um first dealing with the traffic circulation um while I
acknowledge that you're not changing the way a an emergency vehicle would service this area you are adding another house um so curently you're putting a greater demand for the fire department um in fact that the road is gated does create
some concern for me um it's not ideal for the vehicle to be backing out down water have into Charlotte regarding the uh road the road didn't really rough condition um my recommendation that the entirety of the road should be M and repaved there's
already trench repairs that have been done widening the road on the west side we don't do a Mill and repave it's going to just look worse so my recommendation is that the entirety of the road be M if paved um then the question for the board
would be Rel to to the utilities um they're currently showing a water main extension in Water Tower Lane and a Sewer Lateral na a sewerman extension to service the new dwelling um the road is going to be Mill
and repaved in its entirety um it's not a terrible idea to also extend the sewer man um possibly just so you don't have to rip it up at some point if somebody else wanted to extend it how far would we have to stand that so right now the
Sewer Lateral that's being run is 172 feet which is a 4 inch line and the question would be if some point the cemetery or wanted to extend that sewer line they wouldn't be able to tap into that 4inch line so if this applicant ran an 8 inch line the
cemetery if they want at to pull service would need to run another 50 or so feet from that line and they could bring a line into their Pro is it the applicant's responsibility to make a line bigger for future applications not necessarily I only
bring it up because if we're going to repair the road I would hate to see them come in and rip Road up if they need the utility I mean water is technically an outside agency approval they need to coordinate with the appropriate agency um I just bring it up as a as a question
okay um to see if it's why would you go from four to six or 4 to8 rather than four to six uh 8 in would be the minimum size for a water main extension for the state regulations okay that answered that question and the S could remain the same at
four the the lateral if the lateral was approved I I take no issue with their design you could serve this home with a 4in lateral that goes to char so it's the water um so with that Mr chairman I have no additional questions Mr saaks yeah I was just going
to respond to the sewer comment um I would think if there had been other development on that Cemetery property it might be in order but this is a cemetery I'm not even sure if there's even any bathroom facilities in there I don't think there'll ever even be any uh you
know so I I just think it might be a little bit of Overkill I I recognize the point but uh I I think it's where do you stand now with the Milling I think the Milling will accommodate I mean we understand that the uh the road is probably in not in the best shape
um I mean I list two ain't bad okay thank you Mr chairman all right what else um the planner you want to jump in just something real yeah real quick it's uh not not a real complex application from a planning perspective so I really just have more of a of a comment than
anything else um so each of the variances that are requested are in my opinion relatively minor nature in terms of them being yeah relatively diminic Miss they they generally are less than a 10% deviation from what the standard is the only one that's a it's still minor but
it's a little bit more than 10% is the for lot 6.02 the um essentially the uh me just uh be sure I get everything right on the record here um the maximum building coverage uh where 20% is required and uh uh
26.67% is uh requested which I I still think is relatively minor in nature that's really the basis of my comment where the um the screening you know question came from as far as the the Eastern side of lot 6.02 um there is a fence there so I defer to the board as
to whether that's sufficient to mitigate it it may be looks like a six foot high white fence on the other hand if if you wanted some plantings there that's a way that's another option as well so I just wanted to put the rationale out there as far as that goes public has okay thank you Mr chairman nothing further Mr
chairman any questions to any of the professionals are we're going to open this up the public not so much a question but a comment because um I the the hypothetical that you raised Mr Sax was actually somewhat incorrect um you don't
know actually what the church has intended for that and particularly there is a building there and it is in fact it's hard to say it's active but it is an active um cemetery and in fact that
that road is used routinely for ex and entry into there so the issue that a fire fire apparatus could possibly not access the hydrant on Charlotte is a very real
problem and a very real uh realistic issue because if you do have vehicles parked on both sides on a road that you're not widening and I'm not suggesting you widen it because I don't want to take property away from any Property Owners the only access they may have is actually through the cemetery
which means means they wouldn't be able to run a line from Charlotte they'd have to run a line directly from where the hydrant should be which which should be at the end of um water tower um and as far as the sewer and water the sewer
line is concerned again since it is an active Cemetery if in fact they decided that they the church decided that they wanted to have facilities which would make sense and who knows if the state would want us to do that at some point it would be much more expensive for this for the church because we didn't extend
it when we should have so um again not a question but more to kind of explain my thinking as far as this application is concerned on those issues we're gonna open up to the public can I have a motion to open to the
public second all in favor any opposed we'll now open to the public if you want to speak you can come up your name and tell me where you live spell your name too come on up good evening good evening Walters pull that down and there you go
Walter starik Jr I live at 10 Charlotte Street which is the house on the corner of Charlotte and water tower okay born and raised there for 60 years it's in our anywhere right it's a lane it's a water tower Lane so the width of it I
don't know how wide why you think plus you say the access to In and Out of the cemetery it's always been and as the cemetery is grown obviously there's been more activity and with the caretakers and all
in the uh Cemetery garage and uh with the retaining wall that's on the opposite side of me which will be on that property it's Lord knows how old and if they're not totally knocking it down and
place in it and what the plan is and other key point is the existing house at 16 that's never had a legal driveway or a garage and I would recommend to sell the
property with a nice backyard have a driveway a garage have room for a pool being and I lived there 60 years there's not a better quier neighborhood than a cemetery and we want to keep it that that way and and also there's no curring
or drainage all our water drains all the way down to the corner of palasi and uh Washington so that's another possible factor to consider okay that's it okay all right thank you very much anybody else like to
speak good evening good evening name and rank and serial number uh Nicholas BD 21 Charlotte Street I I am also a volunteer fireman right over here at engine company and coincidentally enough I was a former fireman in how Township with sanom
so uh thank you for your service you're welcome uh to follow up with Walt uh I do agree when we have a lot of rain there is a lot of drainage if we are putting a second single family story uh single story family house there that's
going to cause there to be less land to soak up the water if if we're not putting in any drain if we're not opening up putting a main line in uh for the sewer that's going to cause even more uh of an issue uh as far as with heavy rains especially come April and
May uh does anybody have um water in the basements account of this I do not because we are on the top of the hill okay I I know I used to walk my dog up in that area I live on Harrison Street okay uh I know that area
real well um I mean when it rains I have a river in front of my so so do I I live on the hill and it all goes down to Washington Road your yours goes to blasy right so wouldn't having uh a sewer line to have the water drain in be better than having it just all over the place I
mean we see what happens on Washington Road when it RS too much because there are no sewers there well there are I mean but when it rains you know with the weather that we've been having it's not uncommon for the the seers to be overflowing correct you know and and I
understand that um but there's also no exit way for them we're talking about sanitary sewer versus Storm water storm water I think the question maybe for the applicant is are they willing to buy a dry well or some sort of storm water improvements for
attenuation yes that's exactly what I was asking our engineering yes we obviously will provide dry Wells whatever storm water attenuation obviously we can't we can't have water draining off of a we got to be able to contain it there yes we'll do that okay uh and I think the sewer be we're
dealing with the sanitary sewer comment so right okay okay so my mistake when it between storm water that's all right there's yeah um and also regarding the fire hydrant issue yes uh we have I've been two fires where
either the hydrant is inaccessible because cars like to park in front of it or it's just a dead hydrant and we have to go down further so it would be if we are going to have a second building there to actually have a hydrant that could work additionally if we're going
to be putting in a curb and we have parking on the on the road that's going to be hard for some of the apparatus to even get through they are very wide apparatus and if we're going to be eliminating how much feet square or how much footage we have with the road
that's going to uh inhibit fire suppression I don't have an answer I'm well I I I think that's something I need to talk to my client about Mr chairman okay maybe after the public portion if we could take a short do that we can do that thank you is that all you have that's
all I have okay thank you very much for your input anybody else like to speak on this matter Timothy CA 17 Charlotte Street you two gentlemen brought up very good points about the the
sewer there is no uh bathrooms up there at St Stan cemetery and it would be very wise to extend that now the second issue uh what about the waterline how big of a water line is
proposed to be brought in it is it be okay now but what about the street middle in the street cuz I was born and raised there lived there 73 years and back in the day you know how they did the
roads it was all gravel they put hot t on top of it and the truck came behind and shoveled 38 Blue Stone so there is no 6in stabilized base underneath that road at all so if you want to rip it all up and go
through all that cost that's the proper way of doing it is that up to their engineer to make sure that that that happens so in order to do a Mill and repay if there's base failure or anything like that um they would have that would be a full depth repair and we can ask them to do core
samples if we suspect that the the road has a deficient uh profile and if the core sample result in efficient subbase um the the answer is a full depth reconstruction of the entire Road all right Mr Sax the question to you is will you do the corings I have to talked to
my point about that we we'll address that after the uh thank you very much I no I have one more question okay uh when you tap into the sewer is there going to be a manhole right now the applicant is not proposing a sewer man extension they're
proposing a 4in lateral which doesn't typically require a manhole um I would defer to engineer their engineer to determine if if there's an existing manhole they are connected to or just going to connect with a y f there is no manhole out in the street so they don't even know how deep the sewer
is I I would defer that question to Mr L yeah I spok with stand up please take on the phone I did speak to the burough Sewer Department he had provided me the mapping for that area at that intersection it's a deep
line um based upon this plan it's around 13 feet down it's a deep connection right yeah so you need a manhole there's no requirement for a manhole they have a something called a deep house connection which you can
connect to a main that's deep there's there's no technical requirement for a manle so this this lateral would only be for the new house that's right the other house is 13 feet down and that that lateral is going to stay I mean I have to imagine all the
houses on the street are they they all have to be down around they all have to be deep you know I don't know how old the line is but uh they're all connected so all right Mr K you have anything else no that's it thank you thank you very much for your input very
insightful anybody else like to speak on this all right yes Steve smarinsky 26 pki Avenue very well thank you I'm on the corner of palasi and Charlotte all the
water yes after every rainstorm you drive by like after today tomorrow you'll see just sand on that corner come down come down to Harrison Street and I'll show you the same sand yeah and um anyway that part up down just drains all
you know Deerfield your way my way well regarding this this subdivision I'd have to admit I have a bias against this because um you know I lived here my whole life and you know this was a beautiful town and I think one of the problems is the population density in
this town it adds traffic it adds parking problems now I did hear the engineer describe the new property and he said that there's a driveway going in how about for the original property that's there right
now there's another dve two driveways but that driveway is on Charlotte that's sh on sheet3 where does that go on charlet it's uh on the right side of the house the existing house has a driveway are you going to approve
that I guess there is no existing driveway in a new house opening in the back but that opening that he's referring to is where he's planning to put the new property yeah so if you're standing in Charlotte looking at the existing home there is no driveway proposing one on
the right side of there'll be a new driveway well that's just for the existing house for the existing house the new house is going to have a garage with a driveway that enters in the front so anyway like I said if I have to accept the subdivision I would I wish
you would make sure that there's ample parking because you know this house has been vacant for about a year I think that's what I gathered when I walked by there the other day when people were living there though they had at least four vehicles and the people end up parking Charlotte
Street and I mean we we're about four years removed from people that were living on pki Avenue at 36 paloski and I think they were they had occupants there you know that were beyond the zoning laws because they would had at least
sometimes you would count 10 vehicles and they would fill up pki Avenue and Charlotte Street so anyway that's my my concern that's all working parking okay thank you Mr chair one more I don't know if there's anybody else anybody else like to speak and two people that
haven't gotten up maam you in the back would you like to speak you're good you're good well that's fine I just want to make sure I didn't Mr Sachs you're up yeah just quickly to respond to the parking uh we do comply with the rsis so we provide enough was street parking uh
based on the residential site Improvement standards which are right mandatory throughout the state so um so Mr chairman if there's no more public maybe we could take a brief five minute recess I just want to talk to my client about some of the concerns
ra yeah no we and then come back yeah I'll come you have to open back up public portion no all right make I'll take a motion to close the public por motion Mo all in favor I any opposed all right
I'm going to take a a 10 minutes uh recess and we'll be back at 8:30 and we'll uh go over this matter some more thank you okay everybody good know where we stand here e
e e e e e e e e e e
e e e e e e e e e e okay thank you Mr chairman um so I had
an opportunity to speak to my client and I to my B okay great so I think let me just go over what I think some of this some of the issues that we needed to discuss and I think our response to that um you know with respect to the uh
roadway we we will agree to to Mill and and pave as recommended by your by your engineer I mean obviously is you know I appreciate the comments from Mr cooka they're probably more anecdotal I mean I don't know if they're accurate or not but I he's been there I know he has been
and I know him a long time so I I trust him but again I think our requirement is to provide you with a roadway that's uh serviceable for emergency vehicles and for passenger vehicles uh and it's again a I mean I can't even think of a lower
classification roadway it's a deadend roadway but for the fact that it connects to the cemetery so we will agree to Mill and repay but we're not looking to reconstruct a roadway uh and this and again I want to just remind the board that this is a minor subdivision application it's not a major uh with
respect to the um to the water all right um we are willing to do the water main extension I mean it's going to be at Great expense uh but we're willing to do that and if the installation of a hydrant and additional hydrant even
though there's one right across the street but if the if the if the installation of an additional hydrant will facilitate uh easier service for uh your fire company then we're willing to do that also Mr chairman all right um
with respect to the Sewer uh again we we go with what we proposed I understand councilman zabi's uh comments um but again we're not this is not a major subdivision application it is a minor
um the cemetery is controlled by outside agencies Believe It or Not cemeteries are not even controlled by this planning board or by a zoning board it's controlled by a state agency so if even if they wanted to do an expansion they have to go to uh they have to go to that
state board so you don't even have jurisdiction over that um so I I understand the concern but again we're talking about one house uh on a minor subdivision application um and we are agreeing to really spruce
up that roadway we're going to Mill and repave it uh we're going to provide that water line but I think unfortunately the cost to do to run a sewer extension would just be totally cost prohibitive for us to proceed I I know that's not a consideration for this board but again
if it was if it was a vacant Farmland probably well within your rights to insist upon it but since it's a cemetery that's not under not subject to control by this board uh don't think we we would have that obligation so those are my comments Mr chairman I hopefully I think
we've addressed a lot of the concerns of the neighbors uh particularly with respect to the water particularly with respect to uh um this access by emergency uh vehicles um and we are going to put drywells on this property we are willing to add supplemental
Landscaping on that easterly property line um and we'll work with your staff on that any other questions yeah anything you're to do on the retaining wall question yeah the retaining wall is going to have to stay because if we take
it down I don't know what's going to happen to the to the soil on the other side of that retaining wall because there is an existing house there so retaining wall decent shape yeah I mean it's you know not gonna fold down tomorrow no it's not
gonna fall okay it was built properly there's plenty of wheat PS for the water to get out so F uh is that that's it want to close Mr chairman nothing further I uh yeah I'll just a one 30 second close I believe
we've uh We've addressed the uh the concerns of your engineering staff I believe we have addressed the concerns of your planning staff the variance relief that we're seeking really is di Minimus uh there is no additional land for us to get to aate to make that corner a lot even larger you know we we
could obviously shave a little bit off of the Interior lot but then you're going to have two lots that are non-conforming because right now the interior lot would be conforming the one adjacent to the semetery so I'd request that the board uh factor that in um I believe we've uh satisfied the proofs
under both the C1 and C2 analysis under hardship and under flexible C so we'd request that the board uh Grant this application with the conditions that we've represented uh on the record what's your PL
i' like to make a motion to approve the application with all stipulations W I have we have a motion made to accept the application with the waivers and the variances that have been presented
before us tonight what's your pleasure to have a second second having a second a roll call vote we have anybody opposed we'll take a roll call vote Mr kandal
yes Miss lman yes Mr Muller yes Mr Shaw Yesa yes Mr ven Mr Williams yes councilman zabowski yes chairman Tai yes thank you res that came out thank you thank you Mr chairman thank you members
of the board okay on the agenda old business new business administrative matters our next meeting is on March 19th open second all in favor post anyone
from the public anybody from the public that like to speak anybody from the public like to speak hearing none I'll take a motion to close the public motion to close a second all in favor say I I all opposed I'll take a motion to adjourn
motion toj all in favor I HST