we're better now that's one of the biggest complaints people are are talking about when they're watching us on YouTube that we forget to turn our mics on mostly the council and planning board not us
okay um if you're here for Bell Avenue that's not going to be heard tonight and if you're here for Gaston Avenue that's not going to be heard tonight that'll probably be pushed off sometime around July unless they want to have a special meeting so if you're here for Bell Avenue that will not be heard or VMR on
um North Gaston AV to Shell station good evening the meeting will please come to order adequate notice of this meeting as required by the open public meeting in act has been that on January 15 2025 a copy of the notice specifying the
datetime and location was posted on a Bolton W outside of burough Hall given to the clerk administrator mailed fax or emailed to the carer news placed on the burrow website these proceedings are also being televised
um these proceedings are of a Judicial nature proper judicial decorum will be maintained only those items on the agenda agenda will be heard if any as I said if any member believes this meeting is being held in violation of the open public meeting act
please State your views at this time none roll call please chairman Adair here Ed allet here Roberto carpinet here Morgan mlin here Rich O'Neal here Brian Vimy here John Flores here Eric Alvarez
here and steuart Daniels is excused all right um are there any conflicts tonight nobody has to recuse themselves okay fine next item Pledge of
Allegiance Pledge flag United States ofer okay you uh someone like to uh move for the approval of the minutes for um uh January and February meetings so
moved second mov and second it all in favor oos carried chairman Adair yes Ed allet yes Roberto carpinet okay I'm abstaining from January 15th because I wasn't present but I'm voting yes for
February 5th understood Morgan mclin yes Rich O'Neal yes Brian vinsky yes John Flores yes Eric Alvarez I believe vote for the January meeting but not the February meeting so yes
okay carried with those notations okay uh we have no resolutions applications um I had mentioned that um Bell Avenue was not on our agenda tonight and we don't know when it's
going to be and um G gon Avenue 131 Gaston Avenue is not going to be heard tonight and we're not sure when that's going to be so if you're here for those two applications they won't be heard okay we have
um 281 North Bridge Street good evening good evening please enter your appearance uh Joseph R address 281 Northbridge Street Somerville New Jersey spell your last
name please RI CC a r di I Mr ricardi you appearing Pro site or do you have other uh people that are going to be here no I am appearing prosay okay i' like to would you please stand and raise your right
hand you saw we swear the testimony you're about to give in this matter will be the truth so help you gu yes please state your name spell your last name for the record Joseph ricardi r i CC a r d i thank you sir
welcome Mr ricardi tell us what you want to do uh so my wife and I have lived in Somerville for a little over seven years now uh and we really love the town and we want to stay so in doing so we have
felt that our best option is to expand our current home we currently have a one and a half story uh on North Bridge Street consisting of two bedrooms one bathroom a kitchen a living room uh an unfinished
basement with a crawl space as well as a a walkup attic uh we would like to expand the house by adding a second floor to the house that would allow us to had three bedrooms as well as two
full baths upstairs uh and a laundry room as well as a another living space on the front of the home and also in the process we would like to renovate the first floor so that we would convert the existing
single uh two-bedroom single bath with the kitchen living room into a one bedroom with a full bath a kitchen living room and dining room downstairs and a mud room and enclos the porch right addition on the front yeah the addition uh the added
living space on the front would come over the front porch the second floor had the family room above the porch right yes correct so which variances are you seeking uh we are currently seeking a c
variance as the house is existing nonconforming with the uh front yard setback on Wilmer AV okay is that correct Mr uh yeah it's it's correct uh I follow up that the first floor is an open floor plan is what the applicant is proposing the
dining room living room kitchen's open yep and um it looks like it's a full facade renovation the windows are going to be redone yep we would do a full renovation of the facade to match uh this way we would redo the siding bring
all of the uh current insulation up to current code we would update all of that to make sure it matches from the first floor second floor Attic So that that is all up to the current state code as well as the windows and as I said
siding I just want to mention to the board that I reviewed the notice provided by the applicant and it was sufficient as the form and content therefore the board can exercise jurisdiction over the application uh the basement is that going to be
finished or late no the basement uh if you look at the plan the uh the existing floor plan the basement is only under the front living room and is currently unfinished and is only about 6 feet high so it will remain unfinished and as
basically to house utilities and the attic will be the attic um on the plans in the hallway upstairs there's a pull down uh so the attic will remain unfinished and just be used for storage the
dwellings pretty far off 150 feet 100 feet or off North Bridge it set sets back yeah it sets back pretty far and it's uh in my opinion it's well done the sidewalks are in good shape it's mature trees in the front um I had some
comments about the side street Wilmer doesn't have sidewalks but it dead end right I don't think it's ever had sidewalks I don't so there's a waiver for sidewalks and obviously if the side the road doesn't go anywhere I think that's the should the board Grant approval that' be one of the
bases for not putting the sidewalk in hey why don't we curtail this conversation because it's a it's a an idiotic thing I mean this is a perfect plan in the street that nobody goes to nobody even knows the house is there I
mean you know it's plan is a real Improvement I think we do have to give him the opportunity to say everything in case somebody wants to appeal it yeah let him say it but why don't we just listen because if I could I'd go for it right
now is that it sir uh yes anyone in the audience have any comments on Mr ricard's application or would you just anybody from the board yeah I'm familiar with with a lot because back in my fire chief days I dumped a Bo load of
burning garbage on that street and I caught a lot of nonsense so I know right where he is anybody else anyone have any comments anybody from the board have any comments yeah I like
it easy and he's a newcomer a newcomer to so um keep them coming yeah with the do you have a garage on your property anywhere uh there's a three car garage that's detached uh it's detailed
on the I think on Z1 uh at the very back of the lot oh there is I'm sorry uh yes I see it yeah at the very back of the lot W hey moving on up got to mat the house with the
garage Mr chairman yes may I make a suggestion that the uh that whatever the board might decide that compliance with Mr Cole's report be a condition of approval yes well
definitely would someone like to close the public portion of this application I'll move move second all in favor I board what's your pleasure ch Adair oh no it's just comments though somebody's got a move that we approve it
I'll move that we approve it because it makes a lot of sense which most of the world today doesn't I mean this guy is doing it right let's get out of his way yes really second all in favor I iOS I'm sorry that has to be a Voice
vote I'm sorry chairman Adair yes Ed allet yes Roberto carpinet Morgan m yes Rich O'Neal yes Brian Vimy yes John Flores yes Eric Alvarez yes car thank you Mr congratulations thank you all
very much I'll prepare a resolution for uh adoption by the board and we'll I anticipate that this will be at the next meeting okay thank you very much thank you sir have a good evening well it's been a really
good okay next one 188 right nice High Street good evening good evening Mr chairman uh Michael salvaji from LA svaj and Cohen uh on behalf of the applicant uh
188 uh West High LLC uh um this is a an application that you have jurisdiction over uh to hear appeals from decisions rendered by administrative officers in the town um
this is a property I think you all know where it is 188 West High uh name kind of gives it away um but it was purchased by the same group I've been before you before uh the group that uh builds and develops properties for for group homes
uh now the two prior applications we were here uh were commercial buildings that were going to be U returned back to residential uh dwellings for group homes um this one was purchased and it was
being used and by all public records it it appears it's been used as a residence uh for for many years uh the structure itself was built in 1892 according to according to uh public records that are available uh property lot n and block
132 um so after it was purchased the applicant uh applied for a building permit to renovate one of the bathrooms and importantly the property when it was listed for sale was listed as having five bedrooms and two
baths the applicant under and it's licensed the applicant is licensed by the Vision um of development of disabilities uh and the licensing there only goes for four bedrooms so they bought five uh all five were located on
the second floor and they were going to decommission one of the bedrooms and make it an office uh and then the four remain on the second floor uh the bathroom on the second floor the idea was to remodel it make it a little more
um usable for this population and you know that led to um the filing of a building permit which was done and then the U as part of that process the zoning officer um gets involved as well
and the zoning officer in December came out and said that you know it needed a a change of use um and we had argued that under Section 66 6.1 of the New Jersey
municipal Andie law group homes for people with developmental disabilities as well as people with head injuries and there's a whole list of of other special groups um are to be treated uh the equivalent or the same as the the word
that's used in the statute that's not me that's not me I I was I was hoping it was maybe for a little effect but it it didn't come off that way [Laughter] so um that they're to be treated the the
same as uh as a single family residence provided that single family residences are allowed in the zone it just so happens that this property is in the p uh R zone uh where single family uh residences are allowed
so the the idea behind the statute which was first promulgated in 1978 was an effort to uh minimize or eliminate uh discrimination for group homes with um
you know people with developmental disabilities and I can I'm old enough to say I remember that back then that you know uh people with uh developmental disabilities I mean there was you know uh you know I mean we think back on it
and they were called and now that word is looked at with disdain and rightly so um so so the ordinance or the statute uh back in in 78 was allowed group homes if you received a
conditional permit for it um and that seemed to kind of help a little bit but then eventually the federal government got involved and they um adopted it and I think it was in the in the 90s um there
was um the fair housing uh Amendment Act and the idea that the federal legislation was to really eliminate any distinction between a group home and a single family home because even though New Jersey had a conditional permit that
was required it's still you know mandated you go in front of a public hearing um and you you'd have to make your presentation and um you know I I kind of cut my teeth early enough and again I'm old enough to say that when you still
had the conditional permit um and you know there was I mean some of it was just public misinformation or misconceptions about this population um and it was still very
difficult to get it and um I I I've served on the arc board in Warren County for years abilities I've coached Special Olympics so this population um has been always kind of close to my heart because I've worked with them for
for years in different capacities So what had happened was after the fair housing Amendment went into effect there were a couple of lawsuits that were brought in New Jersey uh in the federal courts and the federal court
struck the requirement that there be a conditional permit and the idea behind that was again to level the playing field and treat a group home no differently than you would a single family again provided that the single
family home was allowed in that zone so we push back knowing that kind of history and that legislative uh history uh we had pushed back and the zoning officer um at that point in mid December
um had agreed so then the building permit uh I presumably was to be processed and then sometime in January there was a site inspection and at the site inspection there were issues raised
about the number of stories in the building um and you know whether it was two and a half Story three story um and It ultimately led to another denial of the zoning permit and um you know there
were issues raised that we needed to go out and get these variances now we appealed it and the basis for the appeal is again kind of goes back to what we had talked about before that this is to be treated as a
single family if any of you purchased this property and let's assume you purchased it for an investment property you were going to lease it out to you know a family or or you know four college kids that go to to ruter you would not have gone through the same
process you may need a building permit to fix the bathroom but but that would not have necessarily triggered uh a a variance application particularly because Somerville had the the bright sense in
in I think it was 2015 to adopt an ordinance that said you know a structure that lawfully existed at the time of the ordinance um you more or less had some of those conditions that were grandfathered in um so we're here tonight you know really on
the issue that the zoning officer decision we believe um should should be rescinded because we are a single family home albeit it's a group home but it is
a u it's a use under Section 66.1 that is to be treated the same same requirements as single family and I know Mr Cole had said in in his report and I apologize we submitted something and and
Mr Cole I didn't get your report until late yesterday so um so I I would have much preferred if I had gotten been able to get it to you ahead of time so I apologize for that um that um you know we're we again we're not asking to get
away with not having to get a building permit we're just saying that the change of use and that application process that would be triggered from that uh because I know Mr Co had also raised about an f and these other things um we are uh
exempt not because we're a group home but a single family would be exempt um and that's what we're the equivalent of and it it all makes sense I hope if you you
appreciate why this section 66.1 was put in to the first place and it was designed to you know absent a compelling government interest that the burrow could point to that says hey look you're a group home you really we need to give
this additional layer of scrutiny absent that the whole reason for the statute was to not discriminate and I don't I don't mean that maliciously discriminating I'm just mean a disparate treatment between a group home and a
single family um so that uh the zoning officer's decision should be rescinded the the building permit continued to be processed and um you know God willing they get the building permit and they do the work uh for individuals with
developmental disabilities can move in there very important too and again I I you may not have had a chance to look at it DD has already conducted its site inspection and has signed off on this as
being a group home um I included their um their evalu ation there's some things that we have to do internally but the structure itself is uh in compliance with the applicable DDD regulations so
um you know with the interior work being done uh this will be able to provide a home for for individuals with developmental disabilities and as some of you know who've been there it's it's a supervised uh Arrangement they're
they're not living independ they're living independently but there are somebody there uh 247 to maintain uh you know and help the residents and understanding further that these are in this population it's a higher
functioning you know individual they're they're going to have jobs uh and um they're going to be living much more independently than uh some people may think of of folks with developmental dis disabilities so that's where we are now
I have we certainly have I've got three Representatives uh for the the um company that will be operating the home here um and you know I think it's we can certainly get into you had questions about the house
and things like that but I think it's probably more of almost like a it's almost like a legal argument a factual ISS I mean excuse me a legal argument uh but again we're not afraid to answer questions specifically related to the home uh for those board members or even members of the public who may have have
questions I have a few questions so you didn't go for a change of use this is like a UCC R5 right it's not an R3 or an i4 or anything like that so you're simply an R5 the max residence you're looking at not including staff you said four or five four just four so you're still
under the you still have one more you could put in there correct while we can't because the DDD won't allow to have five residents that's why that fifth bedroom on the second floor will be converted to an office so the DDD is that Department of Health underscore or is that something else d the division is
it DHS DHS yeah right now they are they making you put sprinklers or alarms in there or yes okay yeah end yeah the the report yeah so the report um has and and again I don't know if Ryan you had a chance to distribute
this to everybody I I emailed M that uh you know what um I made some copies if you guys want the sprinkler requirement comes out of the the states yeah so so it's not that's not a code thing that's just something they do yeah they they give stays very helpful they give you a renovation estimate it's
$128,000 ballpark can't help you there yeah but uh it's a new sprinkler system um a fire alarm system with pool uh pool stations at H door um the the sprinkler piping uh must be in sofits in all
living areas railings on the stairs on each side uh the exterior railing must be uh 42 in high or higher um you have to remove the radiators or put covers because they created you know for this
population a possibility of burns um the front sidewalk will be leveled they don't want tripping hazards on the front um they there's if you guys are familiar with the home there's that stained glass window um that needs to be insulated or
laminated um then the um the bathroom on the second floor uh runs into an existing bedroom that has to be closed off obviously because if you're going to have four um people living there you
don't want somebody just to walk right in through a side door so uh that one more question I'm a little confused do the DDD requireed to get a zoning permit no no so how do we end up how did he end up with well so just so you know so what
what happens is and the process was handled I mean so when you f file for a building permit it's also reviewed by your zoning officer not your okay I mean bathroom doesn't get zoning review but the building permit process Mr Cole can
certainly expand upon it uh and maybe he can explain it better than I uh but you're it's triggered and I think it's it's kind of a a stop that measure to make sure that this application that's being presented for a building permit you know hasn't slipped through the
cracks and it's you know it's an actual permitted use there's no other outstanding zoning violations related to the property so that's what it does and that's true here or in any municipality to answer your question and I think there was a they were doing work without a permit and that's what triggered the
zoning officers involvement I could be wrong on that did you say you had copies of your memoranda yeah I just I I would like to get a hard copy one of those old school guys who likes to read paper I got this electronically earlier
today so thank you that's quite a b yeah a lot of it is is the exhibit like the um uh the review and the report issued by the uh DD is uh seven pages by
itself and you know the last two pages goes into um what are the required uh renovations to meet their standards and candidly um you know I I mean not only does it help
the residents it also uh you know helps this this dwelling going forward I mean the radiators probably should be covered um you know the the sidewalk should be leveled so um you know there is some some benefit not only to the homeowners
themselves but even to the neighborhood you know for instance one of the other things they ask for is a whole house generator gas generator nice which means the power will never go off hasn't gone since I got mine no no you know what you're absolutely right my wife and my wife hounded me after
Sandy super Sandy and because after that and then finally I bought it you know $3,000 later I just bought a a portal I mean I wasn't doing a whole house I figured the whole house I could stay at the Short Hills Hilton you know for for about a month's worth of power
outages so um but you'll see in there and then we also included um what triggered the review or the inspection by U DDD was the owner has to
submit a sear a site search request and that's the first exhibit and um in there they briefly describe the project and it was noted purchase five five bedroom two full bath home and use it for a four
bedroom group home um this is a two they noted is a twostory home unfinished uh attic uh and and basement uh not to be firm so neither the attic or the basement um will will be used uh in fact
you'll see in the report uh there's some concerns potentially about asbest so that has to be done as well in these older homes it's not that unusual um really good fire stop so um so that was that's what triggered it
and ultimately if you're in this business that's how you start because obviously you're not going to put down the money to buy this place only to have the DDD come out after you own it and say now this place stinks we're not going to let you use it for a group home uh so it's part of almost like the due
diligence process um and and what's really interesting you know and I wish the D acted as quickly um so this request went in in June 6 of 2024 and the inspection was done on July 2nd and
part of the reason why is and and if you if you have any family members that have people with developmental disabilities not only is there a shortage of housing for uh you know low and moderate income families but this population uh as well uh because um you
know it's tough and when parents pass away and they have adult children with de developmental disabilities it's it's very overwhelming for them thinking at when they go what happens to their their sons or daughters so uh New Jersey has
been has been very active in trying to create opportunities for um these group homes the sideline to it too is and and I don't know what your overall numbers are you also get some credits for this for affordable um although there is I
think Mike I think there's a limit on that now they you still get credits I mean I you know that everything is changing about every two days yeah the problem is the affordability controls that's always the problem yeah which is a fancy way of seeing DED
restriction yeah right correct yeah you talking about color round four right yes yeah yeah but you know that I mean for you know 20 years ago a lot of homes and again I think the state did it to try to encourage municipalities to creade it because you were getting one bedroom
would equal one unit now that that that has that changed but yeah but that was you know some people the same thing when they did with age restricted you know give us 55 and older no school kids we'll we'll take as many of those as we can have um but but but I don't want to
put down that col Rabbit Hole up Mr Sai do you know how many group homes we have in town now how many overall um I don't know overall I know this this organization this will be their third so
we had 25 West High this one 8787 West End so that would be the three you I I I suspect Mr chairman you probably have others uh scattered throughout the uh I think we
do between 12 between 12 and 18 were able when mayor holl was in the mayor seat were able to make an arrang with the state of New Jersey for the record would you please I
was gonna say could you come forward and put your name on the record please yes Dennis suiv 8 South Richards Avenue former mayor Dennis former mayor thank you mayor we were able to have a representative from the state of New Jersey come to a council meeting and
attest to the fact that they agreed with us that we had more than our fair share of group homs that was between 1995 and 2003 and I believe at that time we had 12 and what triggered that was an
application for a property on Court of Cornell Boulevard and um near our line big ranch house was proposed for aou we were able to have the state at that time agree that there
would be no more groups and to my knowledge a few have open since then but it it has has slowed down but obviously people and groups want to be here well Dennis one of the things is we get caught up in the term inherently
beneficial use and it falls under this okay it's inherently beneficial use the use is already um it's approved now you got to work on the ca variances um I think that's why we're here yeah I mean the the one thing too
and and I don't disagree with your former mayor one unique thing about this organization is they're are not they're not a 501c3 a lot of municipalities get very upset when they come in because they're run by the the arcs or Norwest cap and
they can U apply for tax exempt status because they're 501c3 this organization will pay taxes just like you know it's a single family home so um and and and I know that is not to be a consideration
when it comes into zoning but that's the Practical side of it um you know so um was oh will there be uh veterans in this in this
place I know Wendy mandam has been before you and she's testifying the let me let me swear uh do you saw me SAR the testimony you're about to give in this matter will be the truth so help you God yes please state your name and spell your last name
for the record sure Wendy Mound m d l p u m thank you very much welcome back I don't know oh okay sorry um Wendy uh what's your position with uh I'm the executive director for Hudson Hill and
Hudson Hill is what's its relationship to 188 so we we will provide services to our group homes and um we we run the group homes we provide services for our residents so each one of your properties
is purchased under a different LLC okay correct but there will not be any veterans you speak into the microphone I'm sorry because I can't hear you there will not be any veterans particular reason why because we serve individuals
with developmental disabilities only okay there'll be no firemen either then okay I'm just thinking of all those veterans out there who suffered injuries in what's going on right now
and they need homes they do they do every yeah so do individuals with disabilities yeah yeah because the VA is well never mind don't get me started yeah it's that
we at our firm we have a situation and it's it is terrible but the unfortunately there's not as much emphasis on BA housing as there is people with developmental disabilities both both are needed both are worthy
causes but we really need to do more for just the opposite of the meeting I was in on Saturday or the Symposium I was in on Saturday on uh veteran housing and suicide but the one good thing is suicide number is down from 22 a day to
17 a day we still need housing well I think we all concur that housing is an issue development disable is an issue you're going to have supervision on site correct correct one person per
shift or what how does that work it generally in our other home we have two people on per shift to 247 well during the day if they're home yes but generally they're not home during the day they either go to day programs or work or they're out of the house but if they're in the house it's
staffed provide transportation correct and we provide transportation correct okay good so nobody would have a car no yeah so anything that comes and goes a visitor or it's arrange transportation or an
employee correct or a parent or Guardian I came to visit yeah yeah okay anybody else for the board have any questions of this respond moment Mr chairman I did have an opportunity earlier today to read uh the material
set forth uh by Mr salvaji in his letter and in earlier correspondence I I do want to say that you know I I I do concur with his recitation of the law and ter terms of both Federal and the ml section
66.1 the legislative history of 66.1 he's correct on so I I mean this is it's an argument that uh you know the the the the foundation The Legal Foundation of the argument is is
appropriate and strong I just thought the board ought to know that so basically what we're saying is the use is approved well under under the under the federal statute I believe we have uh I
believe we are under the well under the supremacy clause yes uh you know the federal government has occupied the field with respect to this issue uh and has determined that this that this is
essentially approve it's not approvable it is approved so it's a it's a case I I been mention this to Mr Cole it's really a case of Federal preemption I mean I I welcome the uh applicants attorney to uh correct me if he thinks I'm
misstating anything but uh you know my my duty to the board is to make sure the law the law is recited accurately and properly so uh I believe his recitation is correct yeah I I think the federal government in response to
situations where people you know still were reluctant if you will to allow U this type of housing um the federal government with those fair housing Amendment acts Bic said
look this is the way it's going to be and a group home uh for people with developmental disabilities and head injuries and now it's expand Alzheimer's and everything else is the same as you know again if if any of you had purchased this property and we're going
to lease it out for an investment it would still be treated for purposes of zoning and everything else is a single family residence and that's what I think the federal government and in turn the state is trying achieve here so
that these group homes are not treated differently in in the building permit process or or you know the zoning process uh to make it more cumbersome and and I think as the
chairman said you know it's behind all of this is and they don't use it in section 66 but it's an inherently beneficial use and we need to make sure as a society we do what we can uh to
allow this type of arrangement to happen and that's why I think I don't disagree with Mr coms anybody from the board have any more comments or mean questions of Mr
salaj or Miss melom yeah just real quickly and I think I know the answer I'm going to just put it on the record so to speak lawn mowing garbage snow plowing all that's obviously done by you guys or somebody yes we hire yes
yeah it's on a routine basis you know that kind thing everything is taken care of yes yes anybody else anybody from the audience have any comments or questions of the testimony given by the
applicate don't don't you just stay here then 8 South Richard Avenue just several operational questions and I'll preface my questions by reminding the board I have a 38-year career in special education so this population is
extremely important to me um ages of the clients 21 and over 20 And1 and over is there an upper age limit no okay uh gender um it depend we're we're not a co-ed house that 188 is most likely
going to be all female house so it would be one gender only correct right and then how would the clients be identified how would you how would you market and how would you choose the people living there would they be referred through another agency they're referred we already have people selected
for the house they're they're all females and they yeah I don't know what your question is no in other words how how how would you choose how would you select the so how we select our residents is is very very person
centered and we try and get a good mix of people that get along well and have similar interests so that's that's how we choose and then in in terms of once a resident moves in are there yearly evaluations to make sure that that site is appropriate
for them so so there's a support coordin support coordination agency through DDD that so every resident has a support coordinator so we work we we have a a team an interdisciplinary team that's um
comprised of us the the provider the support coordinator and the um guardian and we meet every year um to go over the plan to ensure that our residents have everything that they need to live a full
life so we have yes we so if the site was not appropriate at any given time correct there would be an OP wouldn't allow it DDD wouldn't allow it we're we're a licensed group home so we are really you know heavily regulated okay and then the last comment I would advise
The Operators if this application is approved approv to have an open house once it's open to let the community feel that that you know they're welcomed because years ago on the other one years
ago the group homes that I was involved in opening were hidden in Anonymous and it's only recently that you know organizations want to be part of the community so I would just recommend that
you not cloer yourself away we want to be part of the community I we have in our other house 87 West End AB we have a beautiful garden in the backyard that um you know we have zucchini and you know all summer long so we have barbecues and
you know we're not we want to be part of the community and that's the the essence of the whole reason to have a single family home is to be in the community you know part of the community so you know we would welcome the community
support okay I thank the board and the applicant for your time and and Dennis hey Dennis mayor just so you know it's not an application it's not it's approved the use is the use is approv so it's they're not here as an application there's no proofs or anything to go on
the record so it's just it's a denial they were denied for something here for an appeal an appeal for an appeal okay then again I just I just want to make sure that they open their doors to everybody I think they made that clear with the last two applications that there would be an open
house anyone else I'm March Sullivan at South Richards Avenue in Somerville um first a question because I I think I'm a little confused now um with that last uh comment so the denial was for the use
not for variances there's there's no variances applied for okay will there be variances applied for no they're conforming couple they're conforming they have a couple minor things inside the house as he said going from five to
four bedrooms and a few other things but so there's no um uh setback changes no anything like that okay um changes all right um I have um a letter from on behalf of the Somerville
historic advisory committee that I would like to submit to the members of the zoning board and uh basically uh to cut to the chase it's uh a statement uh that says uh we are not
objecting to the use uh we are we are not objecting uh to Adaptive reuse of any property our interest is in the preservation of the areas of Somerville that have
wonderful iconic historic homes and uh we would like the zoning board uh to be aware that this is in an area where some very unique and historic uh architecture is located and whatever deliver uh comes
before this board and Andor any planning board where you would submit designs and things uh we would we would like the historic Integrity uh of the property and the architecture to be ex uh respected and uh for you to consider the
impact on the overall neighborhood approving any of those changes and and it's an excellent comment Wendy are any exterior um changes proposed no uh there's no ramps or anything like that no and and just to
add I told totally I I completely understand and our property at 87 West End has you know we we try to keep as much as possible the Integrity of the house and the same with this house like the the stained glass windows and everything we we put um we want to put a
plexiglass over them so that to keep that because they're so beautiful so I'm glad to hear that U and then my final question is once this is approved as a group home um should the time ever come
when it's no longer to be used as a group home nothing in this um uh approval process uh would grandfather that as a use uh for multif family or individual apartments or anything like
that no that would have to come before this board correct that would really be a real change of use okay variances would be required the board would still have jurisdiction okay um so can I leave my letter on behalf of the committee sure could you give this to the um board
secretary please and uh it'll be considered part of the record of this appeal thank you very much thank you anyone else appreciate your taking the time to participate yes ma'am um Kate Patridge uh 192 West High
it's the uh historic home next door um my mom's house um I've listened you know I'm not opposed to group homes um but I I think there is an issue and I
I get you know the the legal history um could you speak up please sure sure I heard the lawyer say how you know according to the legal history this should be treated as a single family home that in inherently beneficial
use um but the reality of the usage is not that okay as he said if you're in this business it's the business okay and so my mom has lived there 30 years you know her house is was built in 1870
takes a lot of love and care to take care of a historic building um the gens you know the uh the materials that a building like that's made of my mom myself as a family we have put a tremendous amount of effort love and care into that
house um when they purchased the building I mean that's a what 140 year old house it's been a single family residence that whole time uh when they purchased the building um the family they bought it from had been there for 50 years so there's a lot of historic details in the building it was a shed
Back Garden I hear what they're saying but let me tell you my experience and my mom's experience they came in they started cutting down trees on the far side of yes their property but that's the green Veil between these two residential homes and
a business and they just came in started cutting the trees down um they started tearing things out of the building I I think without building permits is my is my understanding um and I'm really I've put a lot of love into this house myself my mom you know
is at an age where like I put that love house also for my mom so she can have her beautiful place to live as she gets older and I'm really concerned honestly I'm concerned about how this will affect
my family and my mom and um I think that's sort of the the the the dissonance in this let me keep it simple you know they're saying treat this as a single family home the law says this is like a single family home but it's investors it's a business and
they don't necessarily have the I don't think they have the same care the neighbors you know put it on the market at below what it was worth and there was a bidding war and my understanding is a lot of young families bid on this beautiful old house and they
were out bid significantly by these investors um and I think you know that that is not great for the neighborhood that is not great for the neighbors that is not great for the town I mean if that happens over and over
again you know where's the limit you guys say well the state says you can't say no to this this is inherently beneficial use but I think you know enough of that and it changes the neighborhood it changes
the town um anyways uh so I am conc about my mom is out of the country uh we're originally from Australia she's in Australia so she's not able to be here today that's why I'm here representing
my family you know we have concerns about the carers are they going to be coming and going at night there's a motion detect a light there you know um how much would they be changing things on the exterior my my thought is
you know I'm not opposed to group homes but this site that has been a single family residence for 140 years um yes it's mixed usage professional and residential but if you take another
residential property off the the the block then it's you know because there's less residence actually has more impact than if it was all residences actually um I'm also in terms of this building
being appropriate for this usage it's a historic building in front of the house there are the large slate Stones it's a slate sidewalk they've already said we're going to level the sidewalk so you're destroying the historic nature of the street my understanding of even the
Landscaping is historic the way it's set back I believe relates to the landscape design as the same style of Central Park the Olstead you know there's a lot of historic stuff going on with this and it's like okay you say you can't say no
but what about other historic buildings you know where's the the line is I guess is my question thank you thank you anyone else from the audience have any comments or
questions anyone from the board yeah just one since the issue came up you said you're going to level the front sidewalks the Slate sidewalks you're not going to tear them out and pour concrete you're going to level what's existing blue stone blue stones I I can't speak yeah I don't think you're doing it it
has to stay yeah that's what we're going to do so it's not it'll it'll be a safer sidewalk because it'll be leveled with the BL yeah I get it I got the same problem we always thinking but but you're not it's not going to be concrete it's just going to be reuse of what's
there okay yeah those that expensive I do have a question about this you said this is your third LLC in the town of Somerville as a group home correct I'm looking I don't think you're the owner but it sounds like you're the
owners back there for the record your name yeah please of the agency please raise your right hand you saw me S the testimony you're about to give in this matter will be the truth so you God yes please state your name and spell your last name for the record
Jonathan Schwarz s c w a r TZ thank you Mr Schwarz um why don't you just start with your connection so I'm I'm the speaking of the microphone please okay so I uh I'm on the agency side so I I provide I'm the head of the agency so we're I'm part of the people that
provide the support but I'm more of um on the on the business end of it than the day-to-day operations who owns who owns the llc's so uh we have a real estate partner pagio properties is the name of that and
that's the attorney so I represent okay do you own all three of those properties not me person okay then then he should come forward and be sworn I why don't you explain the ownership of
this specific property that's in let me let me let me sweare them in please you saw me swear the testimony you're about to give this matter will be the truth so I hope you guide I do please state your name and spell your last name for the record Alexander Casey c a e y okay Mr
saage you have any other Witnesses no I think I was no I want them all sworn this is this is it um so Alex um the question bagio sure so I work for
Bellagio Property Management who owns the llc's all three of them all three of them so it's the same owner for all three corre okay so one of the things in When Miss mandle bound was here before West End Avenue that really was not
handled well once you got the approval the construction took a long time the grass was very very high it was almost a foot and a half two feet and I said that when you came in here for the Cooper approval you're not going to do the same thing and take that amount of time
because it really was a detriment to the neighborhood it's an eyesore so are are we still on the same page here with this property uh so 87 West uh 87 West End Avenue you're referring to that was a a complete gut renovation that was an an
extensive job whereas this is just very minor renovation on the Interior right so during that process though the look the visual of the property should remain unchanged correct yes I think the question also is you're going to you're
going to have the same care of the property that will address any concerns such as those by the board member yeah yes all right you know no no uh two feet high grass or any High grass or anything
like this correct yes we hope to have this uh fully done and operational within a few months so it should so where are you with the other property on High Street because it doesn't look like there's much going on over there uh we hopefully just satisfied the resolution liance for that today so we have been
unable to do anything there yet Morgan I just submitted the performance guarantee today for that okay by the way Wesson Avenue looks beautiful and as Mr Sullivan said if you do invite the neighborhood in and let them see it because that fence blocks everything we
have no idea what's going on behind the scenes there all right so Cliff I have a question for you if tonight our our job here is to either support the denial or Grant the appeal or Grant the
appeal if we if we do not support or if we do support the denial they're still going to come back in a month or two and then they would go through the same scenario as what we looked at before well
conceivably yes I mean depending on I mean I can't step into the shoes of Mr salvaji uh it's conceivable that it would be preferable that they would file an application and there would be something to go on but what
they could do is go to court right there's there's some significant case law on this and they could go to federal court but but at the end of the day though they would get it because it's an improved use correct yes sir yes sir
that that's what I was saying previously and I took the I took the time even though this was came in kind of late I reviewed the law and I did my own independent review of the decisional law and our mlul and of course the federal
law and I concur with the conclusions made in that letter memorandum uh it would be a uh essentially it's a it's a question of uh you know under the Constitution it's a supremacy clause issue if the federal
government has occupied the field there therefore that is the that is the existing law and and certainly New Jersey has also Advanced that issue very significantly with section 66.1 of the
ML and also other decisions that that have uh uh interpreted the ml in terms of you had discussed inherently beneficial use that is correct but more importantly the federal government has kind of occupied
the field right so so the question is uh on the other properties that you have are they all four bedrooms they are yes so if the if the law would change down the road and maybe it will that says now you can have five
or now you can have six or now you can convert the attic would they need to come back in in front of our board to get that approval in my opinion yes because it would be a change over what is original approved uh I you know I'll ask Mr
savaji to either concur or not concur I mean I don't think that you essentially would get an amendment of your approval via statutory enactment okay all right thank you I think we would they would have to come back
in are you planning on doing that Mr Sal the the Wendy the rules have been no more than four bedrooms for a while while now correct yeah and correct I I think adding a fifth or a sixth bedroom just probably logistically creates
problems in terms of an operational supervision correct correct we're only approved for four bedrooms and then you have the paperwork no no no I saw the paperwork the question was let's assume that Congress or our legislature and its
Infinite Wisdom decides that they change the law to make it EAS easier for you to make five or six bedrooms um you know would you essentially assume that that you were approved de facto for a fifth or a sixth bedroom I don't know that I agree with
that I think you'd have to come in here again we certainly you know it's interesting you have to come back in and get a building per the first two applications because there were commercial uses that were converted to a group home and Mr gibbons's
resolutions said that you were granting an approval for four bedrooms right this one's a little bit different because what we're saying is it been used as uh one of the residents uh neighbors had said uh for at least 50 years as a single family we're just continuing that
same uh that same use um so if somehow you went to more it'd be no different than if we were all living there as you know as a family unit and this office that we've set aside and created as an
office we said hey you know what you know we need another bedroom I don't know if you would or you wouldn't I I think practically speaking it's it's it's an interesting hypothetical I Wendy I mean I don't see the state going
to I mean I don't see the state going to one of four but for more than four but if they did I if I'm just saying hypothetically I don't have any I'm not thinking that this is going to go that way but it's a five bedroom if it's if we're a single family house what are you going
to tell people that they can't have another child because you've already agreed to have four well that's a private home I'm thinking about a group home no I know but this is considered a a I think I single family home DCA has put out a lot of guidance on this
especially the code Community oh no I know I was reviewing some of it today they they said it's supposed to be looked as a single family home just like any other single family home I mean the I I I I know I'm just trying to be I'm trying to uh I'm trying to you know respond to Morgan's question as much as
possible I mean clearly you you know first of all the DDD and and this information is public record right all of the the DD licensing you'd have to get building permits I mean this could not happen in the dead of night without
you know you guys knowing about it you'd have to get I was going to say you'd have to get administrative approval you guys just couldn't one day just just add another thing in there because frankly we'd be calling we'd be calling the DCA or the DDD so we're so we're a licensed
group home we right so we're licensed when they give us the approval they come out every year to ensure that everything is appropriate everything is exactly the way it's supposed to be what we were approved for so you know we are we have to live up to that expectation of DDD or
they could take our license so we can't just do whatever we want to do we can't just let the property go to nothing and we we're not allowed to do that because and they come out every single year no no no Morgan are you was that response
satisfactory you okay I I I just I want to make sure that we're all on the same page with thisat yeah we did yes please come forward and address the microphone sit down if you gentlemen may need to answer
question stick around please go ahead hi I'm Chris Cutler at 64 Mountain Avenue um my first comment is I'm actually you know pleased to hear a group home actually paying taxes that's you know I think that all all the group homes in town should pay taxes and that that's
really good I would just strongly recommend you have much better management of your relationships with your relationships with your neighbors and you've had some pretty um adversarial contacts with your neighbors not you personally but shouting matches plowing through Gardens just and and
when that sort of thing happens people think you're going to wreck the house you're going to turn it into some ugly place and and the people's fears take over and you get a turnout like this and and I would just say that you you should work on that so how can I ask you a question sure I don't know what you're
talking about obviously you don't cuz if you knew you would never let happen I was over there I was over there every time that there was a disagreement Jonathan and I would go over there because we work at 87 West and AV so we there was no plowing through so I I'm I don't confused with that you're safe
you're safe then okay anyway I I I also very much want to see the home uh home's historical character preserved um and I would like you to be welcome to the neighborhood if you're approved so thank you you know um so those are my comments thank you thank you sir anyone else in
the audience have any question comments one gentleman and one lady did you sneak in Mr Willard earlier better these days that's good I mean physical therapy all right um my
name is Harold Ward I'm at 44 North Bor street I'm a disabled veteran and I live in some of v um I've met you before ma'am when you were building the West in Avenue place and my question is this is that I see I just found out the day that
you were big Corporation here you have you are I'd like to know are you are you planning on building more homes in some of like this I mean I like to know that because I think it might be like um important for us to
realize whether not you planing on expanding besides this one on a uh m i me we are we are considering you know other houses definitely I don't know about in Somerville but
possibly yes just for the record this isn't an application yeah no this is an appeal okay so there's no there's no if it's approved or not approved this is an appeal of a decision by the zoning officer so there isn't any proofs or
anything there won't be any conditions of else yes she was right no she was wrong hi krid 192 West High again I'll try to make it brief um please speak
into the mic okay is that good you he that's better it just seems like a bit of a shell game like I I get the law that would that goes back in terms of making facilities like this available people I'm totally I'm not opposed to
that at all but again I my concern is about uh the site the building where this is happening inherent beneficial use okay I think I I I get the idea of that
but on this location I don't think that's true actually um here here's the problem we don't have any say in that right well you this isn't appeal this an appeal of a decision the zoning officer made on certain aspects of their
application they're they're approved they're going to be there there's some things that we need to work out and we um the resoning officer um denied it denied some of the things that has to come and they've come before us to
overrule or sustain I understand that but I still think there's an application we can put conditions on an application but this is an application I I I understand that but I still think in you know just letting the light shine in in this process I think the context is still important
um to me it is like a shell game because and I think this also relates to some of the difficult interactions my mom has had with some the people here um because who are the owners here okay so
there's the organization that runs the group home um and then there's bagio properties right and then there's some llc's who is actually the owner who brought the money to this equation and bought this property I don't think we
even know that I would like to know who's the owner owner of bagio properties it's actually not something for us to really find out past this point I think it is significant as context because if it is more about
investment it affects the motivation okay it affects the motivation if you come in and start getting a historic property or how you treat the Neighbors in an interaction sure we want beneficial use
but I think that is part of the problem you know that if you have investors and we don't really know who the investors are how do you interact it's different if it really was a single family home and a family had bought the property and we were having difficulty working something out with where the fence line
is or whatever you'd interact with that person but it's not that simple that information would be on file and bur wall right it's not that simple um and I think that there's a conflict
there between the law that says this is a single family home treat it this way and business people who are making money and they're motivated by the investment nature of it so I like the Slate side works I things like that I'm concerned
they threw down rock salt like that's not good for 150y Old Stone things like that if some of these families that tried to get this house you know it takes a lot of love to take care of a 140y old house in fact my mom told me that there's a property at the other end
of Somerville that was converted like this and that business found that it was too expensive to do all the maintenance and the things you have to do for 140 year old house or whatever and they they abandoned it I believe it's still sitting there empty okay so I I I just
add this as context all right thank you thank you if I can just make a comment I think that you're first hearing that there's some abrasiveness in the neighborhood just rumor we're all we all live in town we all hear different
things it's your contractors that we're very abrasive so if you can smooth that over with the neighbors I think that would go a long way and they probably would doing a lot of construction and a lot of things without
permits uh as you know rumors circulate very very quickly so that's what you're up against in my opinion sitting up here over the last several years is that the inherently beneficial
use is used too much we have no say on how many group homes or cell towers or others uh that we can put in and the F 564 municipalities in the state I think we all have that problem where they just
come in and say it's inherently beneficial use I can put these cell towers anywhere I want and we've got we've had it here the mayor and other members how many group homes do we have well this is approved but how many going forward how
many more are will the state allow because it does have we are the county seat we do offer a lot of services in in this uh County and in this state but how many is too many and that's a question that uh I guess the
league of municipalities and njpo going to have to deal with over in the future long after I'm gone um so that you don't misunderstand this is going through it's already approved we have no choice but we wanted
to get this out here because of uh her the appeal we have two choices we can override the appeal or sustain the appeal and that's where we're about we're at what does that what does that actually G give us I mean if we over you
know we deny it or overrided what's what's the benefits they'll go to Superior Court and it'll be overturned I mean we're we're tired there's nothing that's it well at least we got the stuff out here for the for the public so that they
know and as Dennis said have an open house get out there and and get to know who the people are who are living there we had that situation Rich remember years ago on Grant Avenue okay and of all the uh the houses
in town group homes in town that's the only one I've heard of any problems with yes manag I think that's back in private hands and and by the way just I mean so if the zoning officer decisions overturned I mean the building permit
process will continue to play itself out there's you know the work that would be done would be inspected I mean it's not like we're able to you know exempt ourselves from any burrow control that's quite Quite Contrary so you you guys
will still have uh you know to play in this uh in the interior work that's going to be done and and if there's any other work that would come along later on you know you still have to go through the building permit process inherently
beneficial use doesn't give you a get out of jail free card for everything well I think the I think the problem is with the residents and me included is um they're tired of seeing the old homes go away and and it
might look the same but a business is does not care about that house doesn't he cares about the business and they just come into these towns they look for the biggest homes which happen to be these beautiful
old homes so it's a business like like she said they don't care about that house they don't and it's like not the same way so if someone bought that house and and raised a family in that house house they love that house this business
is just looking for a big house I would ask you to come look come to our 87 Westend Avenue house I live behind it and and what do you think it's beautiful thank you and you know what we take care of our res what I'm saying it's changed it's not it's not the same house it's
three floor GL it's not the same house it's beautiful it wasn't beautiful no longer historical it was falling down I'm just saying that's what's that's why the residents get upset because it's like they don't they live next to these
houses the business owners don't they don't live in the town they don't live on that street they do so they get upset when they see they think they I'm just saying that's why they get you have to understand that they live in this you know they're like they
think they're being oh man that's why should just I mean there's nothing we can do it's going to happen but I understand we just have to you know let them know that I get it I get it all right yeah Mr chairman someone raise their hand yes I saw that
come on up hi um Margaret Phillips 64 Mountain Avenue um I just want to this is a business and as a resident of the town I'm very upset that they were able
to come in and outbid Families that could live there and I worry about the future of the town if that's going to happen over and over and over again they have more resources than a family who could have paid full price for the house
but got out bid by a business so just this I just want to let you know what the residents are thinking okay thank you can I say something to that so so you know what when DDD does a site Sur
they they they do not we can't have too many houses in one area they they do not allow that so think about you know I just wanted to throw that out there they don't they won't just approve everything anywhere just because we feel like
it and it's more than just a business it's we're people they're people and that's what we created a home for these people and that's what we do and I can't speak to other companies that you know let people live in squalor we don't do that and we've
proven that by 87 West End AV we have pride sorry but yall can understand that there's there are other businesses in that neighborhood it's just that this is a different type of business you've got
funeral homes you got doctor's office uh dentist dentist um as Silo used to be there engineering but it's a different type of of business and it's a 24hour business as far as them outbidding a a
family it happens all the time all yeah Bri I think we're yeah Wandering Way off a skate here but I now kind of have to talk about something I live pretty close to that neighborhood and I'm one of the owners of one of these 1890 houses and
trust me you probably know you spend your life life and soul trying to keep the thing from falling down there nothing but a big pile of wood looking to fall that's that's all you do you you finish on the back door the front door falls off I mean that's just the nature of these places if they have the wherewith all to keep this thing
together and keep the facade and probably the interior looking appropriately to preserve it we're kind of a winner particularly if the home is run the way I I see your other ones being run so I don't I there is a downside because we won't have a family
there but but a lot of families today can't afford or don't want to tackle a large Victorian or prev Victorian house because it's a they're a bear we talked about the sidewalks out front I've been fighting my front sidewalk it's trying to go to China you know and and I'm
keeping the suin and business just coming to level of thing so you know it's you don't want a certain person with the initial PD right exactly how he feels about the so I think I think in a lot of ways this may preserve that building
I would hope it would and preserve the facade of the neighborhood and when Memorial Day parade and when the bike races go it's a family you know I think that is what we can hope for we can't we can't say no we don't want to get into an appealed process but this might just be a good deal right now and I think we
should try to make it work okay is that it anybody else okay somebody want to close the public portion or move again Kate Patridge 192 West High um I wanted to make this comment because you guys are the zoning board and I I just
think this is a good discussion also besides how it affects my family um it wasn't one family that tried to bid on this house it was a bunch of families is my understanding maybe six is is my memory okay and they outbid them vastly
which I mean the the neighbors that lived there before had promised us we'll get you good neighbors and and we believed that it was just oral you know um but if investors come in and out bid by I don't know $100,000 or something
it's pretty hard to say no to that okay and my understanding of High Street is you know I know that when the mall was built and the town went through tough times especially Main Street a lot of those big old Victorian houses were not being maintained well and I believe that
is when the zoning changed it became professional residential and at that time that was a good way to preserve those old buildings and it does take a lot of work and love and care and money to preserve a 100 150 year old building but times have
changed Main Street is doing very well in fact the mall is not doing so well these days so inherent beneficial use this is a thing there's a lot of young families trying to move to Sommerville right now
they snap up these old houses and they fix them up they make them beautiful they fix up the guns it's a different time being able to be in a house one block from the Main Street which is now vibrant it makes a lot of sense very
attractive so I also question I mean besides whether this was the best change in use for this property okay and its historic nature and and it's been a residence for I think 140 years is what I said um I question actually the zoning
of High Street to me it would make more sense for those business the the victorians that be were converted into professional spots back in the 80s or whenever it was maybe it made sense then but today so much is online and then
with the pandemic people don't need office space so there's a lot of vacancies in those businesses in fact there's a property across the street from my mom's house that was I believe supposed to become a dental office it sat there vacant since the pandemic you
know and I think it's more about investment it would make more sense to me if those vacant business properties were being converted back into residential instead of taking this beautiful 140-year-old residential house and converting it it is a business I
mean yes people living it is a residence and it is a business it's a residence though it's a residence where people wonderful people live and Thrive as a family I have I've have total respect for that but as your lawyer said when you're in this business far as who buys it this board has no
control over it the mayor and Council have no control the planning board has no control I I get that we see it and this board several years ago recognized the fact that the uh business model and the p or Zone has changed and we jumped
on that allowing conversions from offices to uh residential because of the glut of office space I think that would make more sense at this point already done it yeah because we're in a Forefront good good because I think maybe in the past you were in danger of
those properties deteriorating I don't think that's the case anymore when you have six families trying to get into that place and maybe they're historic preservationists and they would have l L taken care of it you know I I think it's about Investments honestly and and I I
get the Humane nature of the organization I respect that but my my fear is about what is beneath that thank Youk you is that it nobody else yes my final word on
this people I keep hearing I mean I got a little age on myself okay and I'm just say mahara Willard 44 North Mador Street okay my question is I keep hearing that oh it's
a family it's a family but you mean to tell me that there not profit being made off of this of course okay that's all I want to know so it is a profit driven organization and entity am I correct
so John Soo it's business and we're in a situation of nimi not in my backyard and it's Universal but 564 municipalities are going to have to get together at either the njpo meetings or at the league of
municipalities and talk with their representatives and say inherently beneficial youth needs to have a cap and that cap will be predicated on the individuals I know belmare was going through a thing
with um cell towers yeah inherently beneficial right on the main drag and we've had how many application for cell towers half a dozen that we voted on over the years how many so but it's going through
it's up to this board to say whether or not we're gonna override uh the zoning officer or sustain what the zoning officer did and it would be on them from there and that's where we're at someone like to close the public move in second all in favor I I
what you favor yeah I think it's to make a motion to overturn the zoning officer second Mo move the second so an affirmative vote would be to overturn U zoning officer decision okay any
discussion roll call please chairman Adair yes Ed allet yes Roberto carpinet yes Morgan McLaughlin yes Rich O'Neal yes Brian vsky yes John Flores yes Eric Alvarez yes thank you very much guys we
appreciate it thank I will prepare a resolution memorializing the board's decision uh Mr salvaji I'll coordinate that with your office that's fine thank you okay what do we have out uh special meeting special
meeting talk about special meeting yeah Mike have they updated their their plans yet no no so how can we I just uh they reached out to me I believe on Monday or Tuesday saying that they'll have plans for me on Friday which if they're submitted by Friday
we'll give them the 10 days before the special meeting for them to be reviewed by the board well wait a minut can mik get him done in 10 days no I think no I my understanding was it was a special meeting to to talk have the
architect come in and go over affordable housing the LIC AR not the revised right the licensed architect not the revised plans is that correct yeah that was when uh Mr ognik reached out to me that was his original request was to have the architect um testify and then also speak
about affordable housing wait a yeah but that's borderline bif foration because they want to deal with the use and they don't want to to do with deal with the site plan and we have a bifurcated an application we hav't approved the bation Mr chairman excuse me I we haven't
approved the bifurcation so I don't I don't think we should approve a special meeting till we have the application back in yeah give me the full packet if they want to bring their architect in to complete their prior application for whatever purpose that's different but if they're bringing it in to talk about that and something else that's that's a
waste waste of time that would be the limitation of their presentation would simply be to uh have a qualified New Jersey architect uh testify as to what their plans are the existing plan that we
already have yes yeah the person who was disqualified at the last meeting necessitated this but we're not interested in having them lard on uh other things under the application that that can be done at a regular
meeting after we get the application that is correct no they talking about the Gran is building gr is building that's all over the place and honestly the Gran building how many times that's been on our agenda been pulled four it's been different two
to my knowledge well they had as long as I've we had the apartments and the planning board had a a conceptual for tow houses to tear it all down and a fifth floor sitting right now so
no no they U the applicant's attorney requested a continuance on the grants building and I think the email or correspondent said they were going to re-evaluate ref first the ground floor
use so if they're going to re-evaluate becomes a permitted use it's not in front of this board right I think if they are before a board that we should we warn them next time they pull the application we're tossing it well that's they keep they keep making let them pull it with prejudice yeah because
it's they keep putting it on the agenda and they keep pulling and there's other people waiting to get before the board right it's pushing things way out yeah so I think they should be warned that if you come if you're going to put it back on the agenda then if you don't show up it's getting toss and that we're not and that we're not going to entertain any kind of
automatic approval I mean they're they're subject to the rules and if push comes to shove we can deny it simply deny it with without prejudice yeah who's the attorney on Grant again I'm sorry
okay not like we're not going to see him anytime soon no no I know but he's got he's got to play by he's got to play by the rules too I do believe ogrodnik Michael has given uh the board the time to act through April for
both applications is that right Ryan I'd have to double check but I believe so yes okay so either he grants the extension or the board's going to have to dismiss this at the next meeting or both for one or both because that's the
next meeting is one one meeting before the end of April we have to check that date uh so I think it's back to the question of does the board want to continue applications for years that's what's happening with Gran at at some point in Cliff Chim because
it it keeps jumping the line and then there's people waiting to get before theard right the is the issue is if it's screwing up everything screwing up well it's blocking our agendas because we've had we've got a lot of these things right now where right you know we're
holding off for them and and and you know 20 days they tell us like two days before right right so the board would dismiss the applications view without prejudice so he come back that it's dismiss without prejudice but the the challenge I'm having is keeping up with
the wavers act this fear of a default approval this is going so long that I'm losing track of what a lot of applicants do that that's what I'm worried about well that's why I'm saying if we're if they want to have a special meeting to
complete their prior testimony to finish their case that way we okay game over that one's done I don't think they want to do that that's that's spell Avenue that's not it's it's Bell Avenue but it it both of them are in the same boat same boat
both have two applications that have been in the board's schedule for over a year both of them I'm talking almost two years on granates I think uh the former Attorney Peter Lanford I think he had
his health condition it was October or September of 0303 202 well we're in pending litigation with Bell Avenue too so that's a little bit of a different animal I don't want to to explain like the new M so falls through the cracks it gets this
default approval I know what yeah and we don't want that to happen because they keep playing this game of hey we're getting on the agenda and then we pull it off and get on the agenda oh we're not ready yeah generally speaking it's like this game that hey no more generally speaking the board has 120 days to act and in if once the
application is deemed complete and if they don't board doesn't act it's approved yeah so normally you say what's the big deal Cole you got to schedule we're good the problem we having is not control here the day of the meeting like
131 they ask for a continuance now now I'm thinking clock because all of a sudden we're good yeah well as long as they grant us extension of time we don't get the extension the problem is that we meet once a month so is that
time fall before the next meeting they maybe Grant should be scheduled for dismissal I think that's what I think yeah sounds good to me it's the board would have to vote on whether to dismiss right I you can't just do it
on my Fiat it would have to be to notice that we're going to do that right no no I don't think so I think it's just I think it's a roll call on that for exactly it would be it would be a roll call for dismissal put on our agenda have to put on the agenda yes it has to be agendized I think that should be on
the next agenda yeah please and I'll follow up with Ryan to make sure that we have the extension say and if you're having trouble ran well I think tonight uh just reinforced the position
we've been taking for the last couple years that the zoning officers should be at these meetings it's a shame we did an appeal when she wasn't here that without a pasture who's the winner in this we are my friend okay so we will not be meeting
April 2 April all right good and we'll get the agenda for dismissal on the agenda for granits the sh is actually called and and I we'll check the time frames on all
the applications and if you don't get an extension or NG grodnik for Bell then we're going to have to discuss what we're doing right what I'm I'm saying is yeah I don't want to listen listen right now they understand they're in litigation
too so that guy should come and offer his testimony I mean they're the ones who have they're they're the ones that screwed up so I mean I hate to say it so bluntly but you know let them say it for you no no it's all right rich I usually
don't get this annoyed but I I was annoyed with the way they handled that by bringing in an uncertified at of State architect knowing what the rules were but they should complete their case so you know tell them to put their case in yeah we
have a full agenda for the next meeting so we're gonna we have next I'm thinking out loud we have the 106 vets finally yes and the question is uh we're going to act if we don't get the extension then we're going to have to act on both
of them in some regard too because my understanding is the extension for Bell runs out April I I think it's the end of April and if for some reason as I said there's any issue with that please let me know because uh dismissal of that application would certainly not look
good in the eyes of the court and not not necessarily because of us but you know this matter this matter has really gone on and on and on then why don't we just go ahead and schedule them to complete their case even if it's a special meeting he come in finish your
case wasn't that the idea of the special meeting now but I'm not sure but that's what I think it was but I think they're changing their application saying right yeah they want to complete their case for 38 now they're going to come to force with 35 I don't know I don't know either but that's that's that's the
thing we're not the planning board we can't deal with conceptuals we should just blow a whistle here the date finish your case and and and bar bargaining in the course of the meeting is certainly not the board's uh it's not the board's Duty I and I know we do it once in a
while but and I don't mean I don't even want to say that on the record but because we don't but the thing is is that if an applicant if an applicant has dragged its feet enough you know the the
the the the rules do provide us with uh with with with recourse um and I am a little concerned about the attorney for the uh for Bell Avenue I mean you know there is certainly a uh you know a duty
on then to prosecute the application with due diligence um we should call them on that without you know they want to pull that out put another application in that's their business but let's finish what's here or let them withdraw
it for the next meeting yeah finish it um6 FS that's the abandoned houses down we have which is the two family ofos family on that that lot is very small there and I think we have the we have a
50 Division variz and cell tower for an appeal on the cell towers for co mingling co whatever it is called yeah it's it's another it's another federal statute issue uh so we have those two right now but I I agree there's there's
confusion exactly what bell is going to be proposing they have showing Concepts that we don't have any plans we're not confused they didn't finish their case they should come in and finish it or they should withdraw it we don't have to think about anything else I I agree with
you I mean finish up or go away you know let's let's get this done so who conveys that to put a little I'll check dat I can certainly I
you can bring me in on as I just you can bring me in on because this is silly this been going on for over two and a half years no you shouldn't be doing it should be the planner or Ryan so the question is so the question is you go Ryan tomorrow
man if they're going to is rich said they're going to finish their case the boorder entertain a special meeting in first of May aprils book be the first Wednesday of May if anybody's available compl the case should at least unless they right
unless they issued a Time extension the board wants to push this to June July August to finish the case whatever it is based on the agenda but they should not come in with another application while this thing is still going on right they should come they should prosecute the
existing application withraw which is what they withdraw all right so we'll have Direction at the next meeting on what exactly is happening there in terms of B are they going to withdraw it what exactly clear direction of what they're asking for especially meeting for
exactly what let's get it done or we'll see about the timelines on these applications in next meeting and let me say something if they don't want to PR continue to prosecute the initial application they should be advised that they should dismiss it and file a new
application I mean it's plain and simple I mean I've seen litigation where applicants this especially happens with residential developers hard say it but you know they file two and three applications pending at the same time
and why judges judges certainly don't like it but why boards tolerate it is beyond so C why don't you do it let's let's Mo yeah let's just let them finish Prosecuting this
application they want to prosecute a different they want to file a different application that dismiss this one Curry the bottom Lin we get closure or on this by next either we're going to act on dismissing and the plan is for Sheriff I
know I'm just you know I I I you know how I feel about these things I I I I I most applicants are better better uh you know I don't want to say this is bad
intention but just we've had issues with this applicant going back to 20123 let's just P it down let's just do it because this is wasting our time yeah they sure are the direction is we're going to put on the agenda to dismiss
shus that's the gr the next meeting okay and then we're going to get definitive direction for the next meeting for the board to considerer what the applicant is propos are they going to B are they going to finish the case are they going to drop
the case submit something else and Cliff are you going another letter to tell us they're going to sue us and they would you able to sue us because they're the ones that would not withdrew it I know but you know they they have
had a succession of I mean at a certain point I mean I knew some of the attorneys who handled this most of them are pretty reputable think applicant well let's just I'll finish up and move on
okay make motion for German but we'll take some action one way or another we'll take action next meeting on these two applications sounds good to me so mooving second all in favor went Morgan
uh Morgan