91. >> Oh, it's on. It's on. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. The zoning board of adjustment regular meeting for May 27, 2026 is now in session. Will everyone please stand for a salute to the flag?
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Roll call.
>> Mr. Green here. >> Mr. Kazinski here. >> Mr. Maza >> here. >> Mr. Scott >> here. >> Mr. Grant >> here. >> Mr. >> Here. >> Notice of the meeting has been satisfied
in accordance with chapter 231 PL1975 by advertising in the home news Tribune, notifying the Sentinel Policy Company and also the Star Ledger and putting on the bulletin board and filing with the burrow clerk.
The first announcement that I have to make before we start, if there's anyone here in reference to Billboard down in Melrose 25-21, that
hearing will not be heard tonight. That application is incomplete and it will be heard at next month's meeting on June 24th, 2026. So if there's anyone here in reference
that billboard in Melrose, it will be next month's meeting. Our first application is 23-07 which is 117 Scott Avenue. Uh where the application is an extension of time.
>> Good evening, Mr. Chairman. uh David Himl professionals. Uh as you recall, I represent one of the properties LLC. This approval was granted resolution October 23.
Anyway, uh we're here on an extension request 4052. Mr. Chairman, we made diligent stride resolant related in
approval. The reason for the request primarily is the applicant was considering a redesign of the project but after reviewing this complication with our engineer and architect the applicant
decides no stick plan. So we're still pending county planning board approval uh but we were we were working on the final cost estimate for the uh for the improvements that uh would uh go into
the bond amount. So we think now we've resolved that issue. So we need to post the performance guarantee with county. Once we do that, the county will then issue an unconditional approval and then we can move forward with the with the
project. Uh based on your prior your professional method, professional on the engineering and planning side. I think we satisfied most of the condition but the county approval remains outstanding and I think memorandum
uh going back to June 24 I think obviously lays out all the outside agency approvals which would be county uh burville and the NJ store I believe we have we have the preservation permit
but we don't have for approval, but we need that in order for Cornell to basically give us final. So that's really the basis of the plan. >> Mr. Chairman, that's correct. The
applicant had a number of conditions when this originally was approved. He addressed the majority. There's only a few that are outstanding. So he's just looking for some time to complete the remaining items. Is is this the last application that needs approval? >> Yes, I believe so. Last outside. Yes,
correct. Yes. Yes. >> How long do you estimate before you'll get it? >> Uh I would suspect now that the um the uh improvements are be have been quantified and can now come to terms with the county post a performance
guarantee. So I would we have to go to a bonding company get that. I would suspect um you know that can happen in the next 45 days that will be extended but then what happens once I get the
county to provide that J's office and then you have to go back resolution sign off and then we can file our building plans for the project. >> So, how long of an extension do you
want? >> Well, >> you want the statutory one year. >> I was hoping to get the statuto amount one year. >> That'll be that'll be enough. One year will be enough. >> So, I believe that would be Yeah. I mean, obviously additional time come back, but I don't
suspect it would. >> Yeah. So that's unfortunately the as I've learned in my 35 40 year the resolution compliance take a lot longer than I wish the statute actually address that
but it technically doesn't >> but this is my first rodeo I appeared before you reality is I think now we're at the we're 85% Okay. Any other questions from the
board? >> Hearing no other questions. What's the pleasure of the board concerning the extension of time which will be one year? >> I move that the extension be granted. >> Second.
>> I have a motion and a second for an extension of time for one year. Roll call vote. >> Mr. Green. >> Yes. >> Mr. Kazinski. >> Yes. >> Mr. Espazito.
>> Yes. >> Mrs. Scotty. >> Yes. >> Mr. Castle Grant. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Thank you very much chairman of the next. Thank you. We'll keep the board obviously professional. Thank you
for your consideration. Have a great night. The next application will be 2613 uh one Nimtt's place. Please raise your right hand. Both of you, you swear to tell the truth, the
whole truth, nothing but the truth. So help you God. >> Okay. If you could give each of your names for the record and uh what your relationship is to this matter. If you if you could just make sure that's on. Um >> you got to >> Ah, there we go. Okay. Okay.
>> Uh one more time. >> Say it again. >> Oh, yes. Um my name is Paul Graham Jr. Uh you let Miss You let Steuart Graham's son. >> I'm Garfield Nemard. Her boyfriend >> Garfield.
>> Garfield Nemard. NB H A R D. Would you please tell the board exactly what you want to put in? I I understand it's a shed in the backyard, correct? >> Correct. >> Can you explain that to us? >> Yes. is a plastic uh 10 by 12 shed. Uh
just put um essentially um just to put it in toward the back back end of the uh back end of the yard. Um I believe you want to put it two 5 ft. Okay. The 10 by 12 shed. Um the only
space due to the the the property set up Nemits and MacArthur, the only place that she can really put the shed and still love playing here for the grandchildren is the back um about 2 feet I think away from the back fence. Um the adjoining properties have
experienced the same problem. the shed is in the same proximity about two I think it's four feet is normal but they're all within a two feet give and take from the fence and that's basically just appreciate um the ability to get um you guys approval because there's no
place the property is very configuration is MacArthur here neit here and the house is there and there we need a shed to put in the lawn equipment and so forth and it's again it's 10 x 12 >> what kind of property are you going to
put into that shed? >> Um >> um >> small riding lawnmowers, snow throwers and other sorry other um weed whackers, other things basically. I'm sorry. Yes, just a typical um
maintenance yard maintenance equipment and to put it any place else because we have um the we call it um the the sprinkler system already existing there. If you move it anywhere that's destroy all that. We would have to we would have to uh dig up the sprinkler system and
essentially relocate any existing sprinklers if we were if we were to put it anywhere else. >> The vinyl fence that's there in the backyard now, is that owned by you or is that owned by the other property owner? >> Believe other property >> and is that Mr. Sislo?
>> Yes, he is. >> Yes. >> Any other questions from the board concerning this application? Jay, >> is that a sixoot fence? So the majority of the shed would be hidden anyway. >> It doesn't I don't >> dimensions. It appears to be a six foot
high. >> Yeah. And a fence is approximately 1 foot on the neighbor's property. >> Yeah. >> And on on your neighbor's property, it appears like he has a shed or a garage or something right in that same place, right? >> Yes. >> So they're gonna kind of be butting
against each other. >> Yeah. So you >> you're not going to be blocking anything because something's already there. Something's already Yeah. there. >> Okay. >> And the reason you need it for two foot is because of your sprinkler system that's already there. Correct.
>> Yes. Sprink uh sprinkler system plus there's not really adequate room anywhere else on the on the yard. >> Okay. Any other questions from the board? >> Yeah. going to open this application to the public. Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak in reference
this application? Hearing no one, I'm going to close the public portion. What's the pleasure of the board concerning this application? >> Just for the record, apply for setback. >> Yes. So, there's only one variance. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> Okay. Thank you, >> Mr. Chairman. I move that the application be approved as presented. >> Second. I have a motion and a second to approve this application. Roll call. >> Mr. Green. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Kazinski? >> Yes. >> Mr. Espazito? >> Yes. >> Mrs. Boxy? >> Yes. >> Mr. Cass? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. Your application's been approved. We'll memorialize it at next meeting. You do not have to come to that next
meeting for that approval. But after that, you can go to the and and get it uh at the zoning office. Thank you very much. >> My my next application is 2616. I'm gonna have a hard time pronouncing
your last name, so I'll call you Mr. Joe, that's okay with you. >> Tell the truth the whole truth. Nothing but the truth. So help you. >> I do. >> All right. If you could give your name for the record and your relationship to this application. >> Sure. Uh my name is Joe Stannis Swavechek. I am the owner of Three
Milican Road in Saraveville. Um, I'm looking to do to do an upper addition on my house and turn a closet into a bedroom for my daughter. So, because of the size of the closet, I need to do a twoft canal lever uh on the
upper half of the house to make that a bedroom, a feasible size bedroom that we could be used. Um and because of that two foot that pushes me out of the allowed um
setback. Jeremy, can I ask a question? Yes. All right. On your drawing, it looks like you're only coming forward on one half of the house. >> Yes. Okay. >> Okay. So between sort of the porch and the one side on the left if you're looking at it and that's the two feet
that we're talking about. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> And it's only on the second floor, >> right? >> So is the roof going to change? >> The roof will change. I actually have a drawing of how it will kind of look if if that helps in any way.
>> Let's just mark that A1. Mark it. So it would be the left side of the instead of having slanted the roof would still be slanted but at a different pitch and then there would be also an
ast copy if you'd like. So really your your addition is uh we have a 20 foot minimum you want 17.7 correct? >> Yes. Yes. >> And the lower part of the house won't change. >> No, that'll stay the same.
Any other questions from the board concerning this application? >> Justice section. >> Pleasure to the board concerning this application. >> Oh, forgot to open it to the public. Is there anyone from the public who wishes
to speak and reference this application? Hearing no one from the public, I close the public portion. What's the pleasure of the board concerning this application? >> Motion to approve the application. >> Second. >> I have a motion and a second to approve
this application. Roll call. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Mr. >> Yes. Mr. Yes. >> Okay. Your application has been approved. We'll memorialize it at our
next meeting in June. >> After which you can go to the zoning office and get your permits and start your >> Great. Thank you. I appreciate it. >> Thank you very much. Thank you very
application is 2612 147 Madison Street. Please write in your right m where I tell the truth the whole truth. Nothing but the truth will help you God. >> I do. >> Yes. >> Each give your name and your relationship the application. Make sure
to speak in my >> name is Daryl Davis. My wife Christina. >> My name is Christina Figueroa Davis. We're married. We're >> owners of 147 Madison Street. So >> would you tell the board
exactly what you want to do at your residence on Madison Street? >> So we have a unique property where our house is set all the way back most all the other uh properties on the block or in actually in the neighborhood and we have no backyard. So there when we
purchased the home, there was a fence in the front in the driveway area where they use us for privacy. So what we want to do is we want to repair that fence and we want to extend it up uh about was it 20 ft 20 ft up only in the driveway
portion of uh the property. I was down at your property yesterday. You have a very a very unique situation there. You have no backyard. It's all front yard. Correct. >> Correct. >> And the fence that you have there that
is damaged and you want to take that down completely and put a new one up. Am I correct? >> Correct. In the front area. >> And you also want to extend it to the front uh up to the dogwood tree that's that's there. >> Correct. >> Okay.
Any questions at the board concerning this application? >> Mr. Chair, chairman, just so it's on the record. So if the fence is put in the way you proposed, there'll still be 30 feet between the front property line and the fence.
>> Correct. I believe it was 37 feet that that remains. That's that's from the curb but 30 >> so it was about 34 >> 30 from the from the property line which is which is not that's okay. >> Uh what are the variances?
>> Varian is not really setback issue fact that the ordinance doesn't allow a fence between property line playing in front of the building. In this instance the house is set back 72 ft and the property line and
no So front yard area without being >> set back 30 ft. The house would be set back much as little as 20 ft. This in 70 72 ft. So it's barren says having a
fence between the front property line front plan and building setback 30 ft from the front property line could be set back 20 ft illegal if the house is set back 20t set back. Can I ask a question, please? Uh, it's
if it's for counselor, while the 37 34 feet uh away from the curb is is pretty good. I mean, that's fine. If it's an ordinance and we grant this tonight, do we set a precedent for other people to put these in the front of their yards? Each
>> case is judged on its own unique circumstances. Uh, for instance, as you can tell, this is a unique lot itself, so there is no precedent for that. Yeah, just to get it on the record, there's there's like one foot or less between the house and the and the rear
property line. So there's there's nothing in the backyard. Zero. >> Yeah, that's right. >> The front yard is really the space. >> And it's not the Again, for the record, it's not all the way across the front.
It's only about half way across the front. >> Yeah, it's basically in the portion where the driveway is. Um, I have a picture on my phone if you want to see. >> So, your pool and everything would be in your front yard. Everything would be in your front yard because you don't have a backyard.
>> Correct. We don't want a polo. >> It's pleasure to board. >> Oh, second. going to open this to the public. Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak in reference this application? Hearing none, I close the public
portion. Pleasure to board concerning this application. >> Mr. Chairman, I move that the application be approved. >> Second. >> I have a motion and a second to approve this application.
Roll call. Mr. Green. >> Yes. >> Mr. Yes. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Blackstein. >> Yes. Mr. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Your application has been approved.
We will moralize it at our next meeting. I must say that you have a very unique situation down there. I have I This was the first one I've ever seen that was like that. that you don't have a backyard. >> Yeah, it's awkward.
>> The property line is a zigzag. >> Yeah, >> it's weird. >> Very weird. >> You looked it up. >> Yeah. >> I wish I had a backyard, but >> So, we'll approve it at our next meeting and then you can proceed to do what you
want to do. Good luck down there. >> Thank you, M. Thank you, Lauren. the next morning. Our next application is 26-15 30 BMst Avenue.
>> Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. My name is Charles D. The third, I am the attorney for the applicant, Giovani Alba. Um, who is a Saraveville resident um he's looking to replace an existing single family home
on this property with a new single family home that would be a residence for his wife's parents. And I'm going to ask you in advance to kindly consider this in the interest of marital harmony. But we will get into the That's a joke.
Um, but u we will get into it in a moment. Um, I have Mr. Albo with me. Um, he's really a secondary witness. Um, the principal witness is, um, Mr. Robert Larson, who is an architect and a planner. But before we get started, I
want to make sure that the board does have jurisdiction over this application. And by that, I mean that the um, ma proof of mailing and the proof of publication that we submitted to Joan, I'm not sure if Joan's here tonight. I don't know Joan. Okay. Hi, Joan. Thank
you for your help, by the way. um is is in order because the board can't have jurisdiction unless everything's complete. >> This is good. The board has jurisdiction. >> Okay. >> So, I I'm going to introduce uh Mr.
Larson. And uh Mr. Larson is a New Jersey licensed uh architect and a New Jersey licensed planner. And I can ask him some questions so that you can >> have him sworn in first. >> Okay. >> Swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. help you
God. >> I do. >> You are sworn to go ahead. Counseling. >> Okay. M Mr. Lson, where's your um what company do you work for? >> Uh Mid-Atlantic Architecture and Design. >> And what's the principal address of that company? >> 1971 Highway 34 in Wall, New Jersey. >> Okay. And you are a New Jersey licensed
architect? >> I am. >> And where did when did you get your architect's license? >> Um well, I got my degree from NGIT. Uh and I got my license from the state and it's in good standing right now. >> Okay. And uh you're also a New Jersey licensed professional planner.
>> I am. >> And when did you obtain that license? >> Uh 2011. So past 19 years. >> So have you ever appeared before a zoning or planning board in the state of New Jersey? >> I have. I've appeared in front of many zoning and planning boards as well as the superior court of state New Jersey. I've appeared in front of this board
before. Uh >> council, we accept his credentials. >> Thank you. All right. Mr. Lson, why don't you just tell the board a little bit about what Mr. Alba is proposing? Sure. Let's go. >> Okay. Uh, good evening everyone and um,
as Mr. Well already mentioned, my client is proposing um to build a single family house on an undersized ex existing lot that currently has a single family house on it. Um, it's over on Beamehurst Avenue. Um, and it is in the R seven
zone. The, um, the existing lot uh, currently has a very small home in the neighborhood. I would estimate about 5 to 600 square ft. That existing home sits all the way to the rear. Much of the lot is covered by a front driveway.
Um, and that existing home has been there for some I'm not quite sure how long, but I'm quite sure it's been there for a while. Um, and Mr. Albbe is seeking to build a three-bedroom single family house um on this um existing
non-conforming 25- ft lot. Um I can just get into my testimony if if that's okay. But the the the proposal um is again we we are proposing a single family home where um the zone calls for a 75 ft lot,
7,500 square foot lot. So um 75 ft wide, 100 foot deep typically. Um this area, this neighborhood um I've noticed just in driving around and I happen to be born and raised in Sarable, so I know the area very very well. Um and you have homes of all different sizes, different
lots of different sizes. And uh this particular lot is incredibly unique because a lot of the homes uh seem to be sitting on 50ft lots. Um this one sits on a 25 ft lot. Um so the non-conformance uh brings us to a very a very thin lot. But um what we're seeking
to do is take this um sort of old very small I would call it a cottage um and build a compliant uh in terms of height and permitted use a single family house um roughly 1,900 square ft² um three-bedroom with a single car driveway
and a single car garage. Um with this comes uh a variety of variances due to existing nonconformities as well as part of the proposed home I want to turn it a little bit. Um, is there a microphone you could give, Mr.
Larson? >> So, this is not um anything different than what was submitted. I I'm happy to mark it, but Oh, thank you. Oh, it's the same. You don't need to mark it. Okay. So, now that I'm mobile, um it may be a little bit difficult to read, but
it is what was submitted. You can see it's a uh a single family home. Um it's compliant rear and front setbacks. Uh we are proposing uh three-foot sideyards where 8 foot is uh required and we are in excess of coverage. I'll go over each
and every variance. Um our effort here, it's a thin lot. This is unique. The home that we're proposing is 19 ft wide. Um, in terms of options for this lot, um, to seek land from either of our neighbors would create further
nonconformities for those neighbors on either side. He has a 25 ft lot. Um, you know, we will I'll bring up this has exceptional narrowness as might be considered under a C1 criteria, but he's trying to make a new home on a lot in an
existing single family neighborhood that we think is going to improve uh, the area. I having just been down there, I see there's been some investment in this neighborhood. Um, and he's looking to do the same. Again, he has an opportunity to build a home for his uh his wife's parents. He owns this land and he's
seeking to build um a home that we think is appropriate for just a standard home. Again, it's 19 ft wide. It's already u rather thin. Um it's only three bedrooms. The uh first floor will consist of a garage as well as um
living, dining, and kitchen. And uh the second floor will be three bedrooms. >> Does it does the board want that exhibit marked? >> It's already submitted as part of back. >> Um and I also I believe that uh what
I've just put up here which is A1.1. >> Um so I am a licensed architect. Uh I was not the architect who prepared these plans, but this is uh provided as an example of um the home. And as you can see, it's um just a clean line pitch
roof modern home um with a onecar garage, one car driveway, and three bedrooms. You know, fairly simple in terms of its proposal, but uh fresh and new. Uh, I do believe even though the architecture is a little bit um more modern in terms of material, I actually
see that's what's happening in that neighborhood right now is that there's some new materials and some color. So, we see this home as a um definitely an improvement to the little cottage that's sort of sitting there now and and hopefully a reasonably sized home for uh
the existing lot. and and the proposed house um is more consistent with the existing setbacks of the houses on either side of it. It it's uh much like your previous
application, the existing cottage sits all the way to the back. So, this is coming to I believe 29 ft where it's a some of the homes next door are like in the 20 foot range. So definitely closer to the frontages of other homes on the street >> and it would would create more of a um
standard and pleasant streetscape, right? >> I I would agree and I'm going to talk about it creating a desirable visual environment, but um he got ahead of me. So um hopefully the board understands that our approach is to um put a a clean, modern single family home where
an existing um sort of outofdate cottage a single family exists. um on a lot that that is again an an existing condition that we really uh he as an owner cannot really change. Um so he's trying to get the best home we can out of this. Um
we just for the record and to be very very clear and clean. Um the existing non-conformities in terms of lot area uh 7500 is required 3125 is existing 75 ft width is required where
I'm probably messing up your uh your sound. Uh 75T width is required where 25 foot exists um as part of the proposed home. Um the front yard and rear yard will be compliant. The sideyard um the sideyards
proposed currently are three foot on each side where eight foot on each side is required. The existing home actually sits 1.1 ft uh from one side. The uh additional variances include the uh maximum principal building coverage. The
permissible uh well what's allowed in the zone is 20%. Um the o is 39.5% uh where 15% is what currently exists and while I appreciate that seems like a significant increase over the
permissible this lot is 1/3 uh that was envisioned in the zone um and it does relate to the maximum total impervious. So the maximum total impervious um required is 45%. Existing is 45%.
We're proposing 53.5%. Um and again we feel that this is a modestly inappropriately sized home that creates these um what seemed like um maybe larger deviations. But when you look at the deviation from total, we're
uh we're going from 45 to 53.5%. So, we're asking for 8.5% of relief. Uh, one of the things that I just confirmed and and I do think will be a huge advantage is currently this lot is largely covered by a a small home and a big driveway.
Um, as part of the proposed home, we would be mostly clean roof, right? Um, so in large part, what's dirty is now being replaced by clean and we're able to hook directly into the storm sewer. So we're able to I think do a better job
for with the water that's coming down on the site. So though we are asking for relief um we actually think we're creating a better situation um for the water. Um we are compliant by and um yeah that's uh I believe that's it for
our required variances. Um if I may um obviously we have a lot that's exceptionally narrow. I already mentioned that. So, um I do believe we would be considered under a C1 criteria. However, uh just for suspenders and a belt, I did consider would see C2
criteria apply. Um and I believe they do. Um and when we consider that balance, I I ask are any of the purposes of the municipal land you saw furthered? Um I would say yes. Uh including purpose A, which speaks to municipal action guiding
uh appropriate use of lands. This is a single family house. It's under size. we're bringing a new single family home. I believe it's contextual with the size and scale of the homes around it. Um, and so I believe this is appropriate municipal action and in purpose I uh if
you've been out there um again there's a variety of homes, a variety of types of homes around this one sort of sits unique. I don't see any other 25 foot lots. I don't see any other cottages. Um, I believe that this home, um, again, is designed to be attractive, uh, clean
and modern, and also, um, will improve the entire street. Um, and I think I can see again, having just been down there that this neighborhood appears to be an area where people are improving their homes. Um, in terms of negative impact, um, we have to look at would this
negatively impact your zone plan. Uh, while I do understand that this is an R7 7500T lot, this is an existing condition. Uh, it does not set a precedent. It is not going against what is already um, a very unique and mixed
portion of your R seven zone. Um, and in terms of your master plan, having spent some time in there, um, I believe this is very much something that is wanted in several is to keep the residential texture, scale, and mix, uh, and to bring up existing single family neighborhoods. And I think this is doing
that very much. Um, and in terms of the public good, I do I do believe we're able to by providing parking, by improving storm and improving the look of the entire neighborhood, we're actually improving the property in terms of its impact on the public good because
we're able to control um I think the uh the storm impacts as well as uh improve the visual impact uh on the neighbors. Um so on balance, I believe and hope that this board would consider granting these variances and and for Mr. but to
build um let's this single family home. That's it. >> I have a question. Uh the home that's there now, is that being occupied by anyone or is that vacant? >> I believe it's currently vacant. >> That's correct. >> It's vacant.
>> Yes. >> How long has it been vacant? We got we got to swear you in if we're going to do this testify. Yeah. >> Yeah. Since September of last year. >> Raise your right hand. You swear. Tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. So help me God. >> I do. >> All right. Can you give your name for
the record and your relationship to the application? >> Giovani Alva, the owner of the property, 30 Boys. >> Where do you live? >> 13th Tuscat Avenue here in Sarville. >> Now, the property is vacant now. >> Yes. >> And do you know how long it's been
vacant? Since September last year. >> How long have you owned that property? >> Since 200 22. Yes. 22. >> Just to follow up. Was has that you bought it in February 2022, I believe.
Has it been vacant since then or was it just vacant since this past September? >> It's vacant. It was vacant the first year when I bought it from 22 to 23. Then I fixed it because it was really bad shape. I tried to rent it. I had a tenant for like 9 months. They were too
small. It wasn't comfortable. They moved out and that's when it's been since September. There was just one other variance I don't believe was noted that the combined sideyard setback at a minimum is 20 ft wired and 8 ft is proposed. I'm
sorry, six feet is proposed. >> I I'll agree. I apologize for omitting that. >> Mr. Alva also has a couple of photographs he'd like to share with the board if that's okay. Or do you want to ask Mr. Larson questions first and then
have me present? Mr. Al's part is very smooth. What's your pleasure? >> Um, you can proceed with him asking more questions. >> Okay. So, M Mr. Alba. Um, you did go out
and take photographs of the property and you've got a few of them to pass around. This could be marked, I guess. >> Let's mark it as a packet of photographs. Exhibit 81.
>> It one photograph. Thank you. one photograph of the front of the house and then um a print of the uh a print of the uh rendering that the I
guess that's a A2 a print of the rendering that the architect prepared just so the board have a little bit of a comparison between what's there now and what is being proposed by the applicant. A modular home. Is it modular or you building it? You frame it.
>> It's framing. Going to frame it. >> Yeah. >> And uh I noticed on the plan that the garage is in the basement. It's below grade. Is that true? >> It is not true. Oh, it's >> so there I believe there had been an
earlier version of the plan that had shown sort of pitching down to a basement. The current plan, >> if I may. >> So, we're looking at again a 1.1 which hopefully was submitted in your packet. Um, this definitely was submitted. Um,
you can see you have the onecar driveway with the garage on the same floor. It's obviously it's set a few steps below normally. Um, and then the rest of the the first floor it is not in the basement. >> Is there a basement? >> There is a basement. Yes.
>> What's the flood condition in this area? >> Flood zone or >> I to my knowledge, not being an engineer, although my office did prepare this. Uh, that did not come up that this was in a flood zone, but I I'd be happy to verify. >> Mr. Alba, do you have flood insurance on
the house? No, >> sorry. It's not required flood insurance. Approximately how large would the backyard be? Approximately how large would the backyard be? Is there >> So the rear yard um is 29 ft. So the lot
is 25 ft wide and the rear yard is currently proposed to be 29 ft. So, there is a uh access to the basement from the rear yard as well. >> Mr. How many variances
are required here? >> Proposing six variants, Mr. Chairman. >> Six variants. Yes. Two are pre-existing. for our as a result of creation of the new home. Mr. Chairman, a question. Uh the three-foot sideyard, you have three foot on each side. Is that sufficient to
allow you to maintain washing the windows on the outside of the house, cleaning gutters, things like that? >> Yes, should be. You can put a ladder in at three foot and be able to get up to the >> Yes, the property on this right side actually has a lot which is the property
has like 25 ft away from the my property the one on the right hand side so there should be enough space there to clean the windows and everything there's nothing >> but that's not your property >> correct but I'm seeing nothing blocking it >> now is there enough room on your if you build this house with 3ft setback is the
3T sufficient to be able to put a ladder up against the house to watch the >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. Chairman, also I guess for for the architect, is there a code requirement concerning >> There is and and you you bring up a good point and this is something that again
once again um uh being provided this as an example home in support of my planning testimony. Um there are several windows that would need to be uh inset in order to be there. Um they are not required windows. There's only one window on the proposed home that would
be of issue which is to the second floor middle bedroom. Um normally in in this case I would just inset that into a well so we can comply with building code. Uh the exterior walls here because of their proximity to the uh property line will
be virated from the exterior. Um, but you bring up a good point and um any windows that will be um any penetrations that will be on either side will either need to be inset or removed. >> Mr. Cornell, can you explain that a
little bit when as was indicated there's code requirements concerning uh the proximity of the house and the dwelling to the to the property line. Here you only have three feet and you have a two-story buildings. I I think what the architect is saying is that he would inset the
window to allow you access for for maintenance purposes. >> Yeah. And and also for so just to elaborate um the building code says that when you are within 0 to 5 ft you cannot put windows. So 3 ft is insufficient for
the the penetrations to be there. Um so that is an error that's shown on these plans. we would need to insert them to 5T so that it would be a permissible penetration and at 5T you're permitted a certain percentage of that facade by building code. Um in other words, even
if we propose this, the building department would stop us. So we would need to inset this in order to comply with the penetration within uh proximity to the property line. >> Not going to have any windows on the side. In order for us to have that third
bedroom, the we will need to um if you look the um the second floor has a bedroom that depends on a window here. Now, you can do mechanical light in there, but we would not propose that. So, we could actually inset the entire bedroom wall. it's already uh
well it's it's it it can lose the two feet to be able to have that window be providing light and air to that uh to that bedroom. But the other windows shown on the sides um are not required. Light and air is still gotten from the front of the home
and the rear end of the home. All that bedroom that you're talking about is actually not going to be in line with the wall towards the front and towards the back. >> Correct. >> At least on the second floor.
>> Mr. Chairman, a question. Instead of three feet, if you had five foot setback on each side, would that code comply? >> So five foot on each side would um would comply with code in terms of providing windows, but unfortunately it would leave us with a 15 foot wide home. Um,
I've designed lots of homes. 15's a little thin. Um, I I do think we'd be willing to um maybe increase one of the sideyards, which would allow us to have, you know, the clean windows on one side. Uh, but I have looked and, you know, 15t
wide house is is pretty skinny um in terms of just a realistic living condition. So >> if you look at this picture here, that's pretty tight. Three foot on that one side >> to the existing home. >> Yes.
>> Yeah. >> I think existing homes 1.1 ft, right? >> Um he's referring to the neighboring home. >> Neighboring home. Yes. >> What about the grading problems? What kind of grading problems are you going to have here?
>> In terms of grading, I believe the site again having just been there um is relatively flat. We have a uh an elevation um it slopes towards the front just under 2 ft. So the rear um appears to
have a spot elevation of 20 and the front here has a spot elevation of 18.2. So again, the drainage would be caught by the gutter lines and the driveway would have minimal uh that would I guess would
is currently already leaving the site. It would it would just do the same. >> So the gutters would go out to the street. >> Um what we would do is pipe the gutters into the ground and directly connect them to the storm sewer that's in the
street. >> Mr. I'm just looking at the grading. It appears as indicated it's very flat and I'm not sure that you can create the swale that that's shown without doing work on the adjacent property. Understood. Understood. And perhaps if
we did increase that to 5t um on the one side, it would assist with that. or or as indicated, you may need to have your gunners at least take majority of the water out to the street directly without having that swale area. But I think the grading as proposed is it's it's flat
and it it may require a retaining wall to be built if you don't have permission work on your neighbor's property. >> Understood. >> Well, I think the applicant's intention is take the runoff from the gutters, drop it into the leaders, run the leaders out to the storm. >> Understood. But you still need to have
positive drainage around on the ground around your property. And it doesn't appear that you can get it based on the existing conditions. I'm very concerned about the three foot on each side and the graining issues that Mr. Cornell
just mentioned. That's the safety the safety factors here. The fire situation. You have a fire. I mean, we're talking three feet on each side. That is a very big concern to us.
>> Well, Mr. Green, I I would also suggest that, you know, the current situation is worse. This is an improvement of the existing situation. I realize it's not 5T. that's required, but you're going
from 1.1 feet to three feet. So, it is an improvement. It doesn't obviously we're asking for the variance because it doesn't meet the code, but I would just respectfully ask the board to consider that because, you know, what you had now is an older house. You know, not very
attractive. And you know, the applicant is is is suggesting, for example, to more center the new house on the lot instead of having it all the way to the back. I mean, I think that there's improvements that the burrow will be
getting as to the streetscape. Um, driving down the road and seeing this house somewhat consistent with the setback of the other houses instead of having pushed all the way to the back and actually have a usable backyard. you know, just like the gentleman before
with the prior application doesn't have a usable backyard and somebody was saying, "Is he going to have a swimming pool in the front yard?" Well, I think this is better for, you know, the um the people that are going to own and use the the property. I I can't create any more
room for the board, but it is an improvement over what's there now. I agree with with part of your your conversation here. The house is a nicel looking house and it fits the
neighborhood. What I'm concerned about is the three-foot side setbacks on each side. That creates a problem and so does the the uh the grading problems, too. I agree that the house is nice and would
fit the neighborhood, but there's other issues that we we have to consider here, too. In addition to that, is >> is there any way that there could be like a pump that could pump the water from a point by the leaders into the street?
Obviously pumps are permissible but I you know are usable but I don't know that I I believe the question is overground drainage and overground drainage is separate from what's the roof. Um just in in
consulting with my client if if it would help the board again we are trying to get you know um what I think is a good thing to happen on this lot so he hears your your concerns. Um, I guess we could, you know, thin the house and have five feet on one side. Um, that would
leave us with a 17 foot home. Um, which we can we can make work. Uh, we if we chose to put that set back of 5T closest to the existing neighbor, which is closer, it would assist with the distance from that existing home, and it would allow within 5 ft, I believe,
you'd have more ability to deal with the overground drainage on that side of the home. um if if that would assist with the board's understanding of of sort of putting a home there that we all agree is going to improve it but also allay your concerns.
Um I believe we were able we are able to thin that house up. Um and what we're trying to do is balance a viable home with um the concerns of the board. And ju just so I'm clear, if I'm looking at the front of the new
house, are you talking about the five feet being on the left or the right? >> On the right, which would be adjacent to the existing home that >> So to our left for that conversation, it's the driveway of the the home next door. Um, right. So the picture that we
provided, the home on the right um is more proximal to our shared property line. Any other questions from the board? >> The plans we have in our packet show the basement garage version of the house. The plans that you show there, do they
change the setback by any means at the front? >> They do not. And and I apologize. These were, I believe, delivered um you you delivered these uh Okay. that we're first going to update >> the the the size of this home is what's
the rectangle on the plot plan. Um it somewhere along the way it got updated the same as your other board member mentioned but this is the proposed um onecar garage LDK first floor threebedroom second sort of this unique
one-story feature um up in the front just for clarification the only update was basically I didn't like the the garage going under I wanted a flat that was the only change but nothing on the Yes, >> chairman. I just want to make a comment.
If the applicant is willing to move and and provide a a slightly or move to the five feet, I wouldn't be against lengthening the house for a little bit extra space. Uh that's practical.
just to just to let you know that's quite that anything that you have to add here I'm really clear is the applicant considering submitting revised plans to the board with the five foot setback on the one side dwelling and updated architecturals
>> yes it was required yes >> so >> so would that would that be a condition or would you like to see him come back. Mr. >> Chair, would you like them to come back to the board? Yes. 5 foot setback. >> Yes. >> And anything else I guess you may be able to show on the plan related to the
drainage. >> Then just um with the 5-ft setback then is there any restriction on the size of the openings on the right side of the house or the south side of the house? >> I believe it's 25% of the total facade.
Um, but I will be armed with exactly what that code. >> So you can accommodate at least the I guess a 300 window you need for the bedroom is >> so uh the 5.7 square foot egress window. It's about a 3ft x 5 foot window which is well within the bounds of that entire facade. So
>> then well the kitchen's on the other side but any other windows then that you might need to make it a little more light inside the house on the first floor you may be able to provide also. So we yes we would able to be able to keep good window on that side and comply with code.
>> Thank you. >> So just to clarify the board would like the applet can to come back the end of next month with revised plans or is it going to be handled through the professional staff? As far as I
understand, the chairman would like uh the board would like the applicant to come back with a revised plan showing a five- foot setback on the uh side adjacent to the existing welling and um
uh I guess also showing you need to update architectural slightly, right? Um and uh you know then board can hear the rest of the application at the June 24th
>> and it won't be necessary for us to revertise or renotice. >> No additional notice will be required. The board will retain jurisdiction. All public comments will be heard at that meeting as well. >> Okay. Before we do that, I want to open this to the public first. Is there
anyone from the public who wishes to speak in reference to this application? Please come forward. >> Please tell the truth. Nothing but the truth. So I hope you got >> Yes. >> Yes. Can you each give your name and
your relationship? >> Carol Seraniano, 28 Burst. So neighbor house. >> Say that again. Your last name. Seriana. >> Sir, >> uh Chance Seriana 28 Beamer Beamer Avenue.
>> You live You live to the right or the left of this? >> To the right. So, >> this is your house here, >> correct? >> I really wanted to see the pictures if I can. I haven't had a chance to see anything. Is that okay if I take a look?
>> Yes. Probably to the public. >> So, this is where it would how it would look once. I'm just trying to get an idea of how far how far back the house is going to be next to my house. You know what I mean?
What I'm talking >> Mr. Chairman, your your house is approximately 2 and 1/2 ft off the property line, right? So, with the new proposal, it's going to be an extra They're showing three feet, which would be five and a half. Now, they're going to add another two. >> Okay.
>> And it's set back approximately half the distance of your house. >> Okay. >> From the the the road. >> So, that would be the driveway and then the house. >> The driveway will run to approximately the middle of your house. And that's where the front of their house. It's approximately 29 ft.
That's as proposed. Uh I don't have a dimension on yours but I said it's approximately what we'll >> okay and we can come to the next meeting to just finalize everything. Okay no >> it may be for the benefit of the applicant to provide uh them with some
discussing >> right here. Can you pass it back so you can provide them with your >> Sure. Can I get this? >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So, take a look at that and >> uh open it up. Open it up.
>> Okay. So main part of the drawing is the house that's proposed on the left there's there's like sorry on the right on the right that's your house >> sort of see that your house is closer to the street
>> right >> and there's a little bit so I think that was your question right >> but also your house this house is going to extend back further but it goes a lot further back than your house does Okay. >> Um,
Mr. Chairman, if I >> may. >> Yes. Sorry. >> To the applicant, I guess, and also to the homeowner. As um, our engineer had stated, this home is set back 29 ft from
the front property line. Looks like your home is set back about 19 ft. So about half your home will be b of this house and not adjacent to it. Also the the front of the house is only one story high. So you'd have a one-story portion
of the dwelling next to your two stories. So which would impose a little bit less on your home. I don't not sure. Can you tell me this is a Larsson how far back the house is just at one story before it goes to two? I have an old architectural so it's kind of hard for me to tell.
>> Okay. It's approximately 20 ft. 20 ft. >> So, so it may be that the dwelling will be >> as it sits next to your property that's the two the twostory portion of it may be beyond your home or the very
end of your home. So, when you look out your second story, part of it would be you'll be looking into the front yard, part you'd be looking over their garage. So, that may be something that you want to clarify a little bit if you could. >> Sure. And if if I may, um again on on
the plot plan as filed, if you guys I can maybe help. Um so this this box right here, that's your house. And as was just being described, so the beginning of the proposed home is about halfway, a little less, but then until
about here, and I'm sketching at approximate scale, which is near the rear of your home, is one story. Okay. and then the rest of it. Um, and we're proposing to move it over so it's 5 foot from this line. Um, and 30 29 ft from
the rear yard. So, this is this is your home and this is the proposed home. >> Thank you. >> Does that help? >> Yeah, that helps a lot. >> It seems to scale out at about 4 feet of the existing the neighbor's dwelling is
going to be equal where your two story is. So the rest of the house again the 20 foot of one story and then about 20 foot of nothing at all. So again most of your dwelling you'd be looking over from
your second story their yard area and then a one-story building. Again if you if if they do share the drawings with you maybe that could be explained to be more clear. Yeah, I believe my client also agreed that once we fix the architecture per
the comments and I will make sure you guys see it as well. >> Thank you. >> Another question that I have that has to be brought up your lot coverage.
We have an ordinance here. It's 20% and your plans are showing 40%. Can you revise that? >> So, um while I under I actually appreciate um the board members comment
on reducing uh when we reduce the width of the home, we can lengthen it. Um if we were not to lengthen it, we would improve our proposed by approximately 4% less. So, we would we we we do admit and we do ask of the board that this is a
very small lot. Um we are going to need a coverage variance but we my answer I guess is we can improve the proposed down when we improve the sideyard setback it will come down. >> How much?
>> Uh approximately 4%. >> So you're saying it would be down at 36. Well, so the um the proposed man, I wish I had my glasses. Um >> I need to look here.
>> 39.5 is proposed. >> Yeah. So 39.5 principal structure is proposed. It would come down to uh 35.5 approximately. If I estimate the depth of my home times 2 feet aggregate to the total lot,
um it's my profession professional estimation, it would come down to approximately just over 35%. >> Is that the the limit that you can get? Can you get it down to 30? Um,
I can tell you we can try, but we're going to get um against a taking what is an odd home and replacing it with another odd home. So, I want to find that sweet spot. So, I believe we can explore bringing it down as close to
30 as possible while still maintaining, you know, what a what a a normal family would want, you know, in terms of living space, kitchen space, garage, and bedrooms. >> I think you could also probably provide, you know, sheet A and sheet B showing,
you know, what Mr. Chairman is looking for, um, as opposed to what the applicant might want. And then the board will be able to choose. But again, you might be creating something that's so narrow that it's a detriment to the streetscape. So,
>> well, when when you come back next month or if you need more time to come back a month past that, we understand that. But our our main concerns are the setbacks and
and the lot coverage and degrading problems. And those are the things that we would like you to address so we have a better understanding with it. And the safety issues are are a
big thing to to this board. uh fires, you know, a fire that develops when you're when you first mentioned the 3 ft and now you're going to five. This is our concerns and
we're asking you to please address this and and so we hear you and we definitely take very seriously your your concerns and and um we'll work together to listen and come back with something that's improved.
Is there anyone else from the public that wishes to speak in reference this? >> Just so you know, there will be another opportunity after they come back to speak. You want to come back next month or
whatever when the plans are revised and and speak back then at that time. >> Okay. You'll be notified. >> Well, you won't get No, there won't be additional notice. >> There won't be. >> No, it'll be carried without further
notice, which means >> you're notified right now here that >> next time it will be heard is on the 24th of June at 7:30. uh PM right here. If they need more time, then at that meeting we will
announce a further date. >> Any other questions from the board concerning this? >> Let's have a motion to carry. >> She could she can call you, Joan, right? Because she nobody's going to know until you get here if they want to push it forward. Only they don't see the agenda. >> Calling the date of of the meeting.
>> I can let you know if it's going to be Ching or If necessary, July, it's okay. >> Motion to carry it to the June 24th meeting without further notice. >> So moved,
>> second call. >> Uh, all in favor? >> Everyone in favor? All right. >> Hi. >> Hi. >> I I want you to understand that, you know, we're looking at the pictures and
it is a nice thing for the neighborhood, but the the other issues that we have is what we need to address and get straightened out. We hear you loud and clear and we appreciate your time and your focus on
this and we will try to do our best to address the board's concerns next month. >> Okay. John, >> thank you. Thank you. Are there any other issues
not relating to the present or pending applications that anyone from the public wishes to address. Hearing none, I close the public comments on any issues not relating to this application or any applications
tonight. Has everyone had the opportunity to review and read the resolution concerning 16 Ridge Avenue? >> Yes.
What's the pleasure of the board concerning the resolution at 16 Ridge Avenue, which is case number 2609? >> I move it be approved as written. >> Second. >> I have a motion and a second to approve
the resolution at 16 Ridge Avenue, 2609. Roll call. >> Mr. Green. >> Yes. >> Mr. Kazinski. Yes. Mr. Espazing. Yes, >> Mr. Castlebrand. >> Yes, >> Mrs. Scott. Yes, >> Mr. >> Yes.
>> Has everyone had the opportunity to read the regular minutes meeting of April 22nd, 2026? >> Yes. >> So, I just have one correction. On one of the uh applications, it said
that I said that the house was was vacant because there was a fire in the lot. I think it was on Ridge, the one on Ridge. I I asked the question, but the applicant is actually the one that provided the information. I didn't
provide information. >> We can change that part of it, Joe. Okay. The >> pleasure of the board concerning that with the correction being made. >> I move that be approved. >> Second.
>> Motion and a second to approve the regular regular minutes meeting of April 22nd, 2026. Is there anything else that the board wishes to discuss before the adjournment? >> All in favor for those who are here.
Right. for the minutes. >> Okay. Everyone all in favor? >> Yes. >> Yes. All right. >> And anyone who was not there. >> Anyone else wish to speak in reference anything?
Make a motion to adjourn the meeting. >> Second. >> Meeting's adjourned.