##VIDEO ID:FYl0Ucm8SSk## the New Jersey Harold also posted on the township website and its bulletin board in accordance to all provisions of the open public meetings act also there's no new testimony or applications to be heard after 9:30 p.m. and we always adjourn the meetings at 10m sharp it's practice of this board to salute the flag please rise and join us pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for also like to welcome our new alternate number two member Jennifer Paha which was sworn in tonight and to congratulate Landon teneri that was elevated to alternate one [Applause] Marissa please call the role John FY President Michael jic here Richard larua here Michael Leoni here Richard robacker here Mark Scott here L taneri here Jennifer Paha here chairman Kenneth Larry here Glenn keing here thank you and we have some minutes to be approved first set of minutes are from April 10th 2024 the chair will entertain a motion so moved second please second any discussion Marissa please call the role John fley yes yes yes Michael jic Yes Richard larua yes Mark Scott yes L tener yes chairman Kenneth Larry yes we also have minutes for May 8 2024 to be approved cherl entertain a motion so moved second please second any discussion Marissa please call the rooll Michael jic Yes Richard larua yes Michael leandi yes Mark Scott yes chairman kenth Lowry yes we have a few resolutions to be memorialized the first one is application 4-24 Nancy noes and lar Johnson perceive variance relief decided on July 10th 2024 to Chanel take a motion so move second please second any discussion Marissa please call the role I apologize this is for Nancy novz excuse me it Nancy Noz the resolution okay Richard larua yes Michael Leoni yes and chairman Cellar yes the next one to be memorialized is Eric Fraser Ellen Stewart application number 9-24 decided on September 11th for see variance relief the chent detain a motion so move second please second any discussion R please call the rooll John fley yes Michael josic Yes Richard larua yes Richard robacker yes Mark Scott yes lanon teneri yes yes and chairman K Larry yes the last one is the Richard Allen application 7-23 decided on January 10th for C variance relief and this is original resolution rescinded by this current one tonight and Glenn could you possibly just update the board on what it actually is sure if you don't mind because we read it but it's a little confusing Mr Simmons in his reports always recommends that additional rights of way in are dedicated as part of applications before the board so that you get roads that are conforming to file Maps or whatever and a lot of times what's happened is the roads were put in and they were only put in at a 33 and a3d or something else and we didn't get the 50 foot wide R of we that you try and get so routinely and the applicants don't have to do it but routinely we request additional right of way routinely it isn't a problem routinely David also if possible if there's a sight triangle on a corner or coming out of something he'll request site triangle easements the problem that the Allens ran into was that their Bank said um we would like you to do some additional work we want you to come up with um a title report we want you to go out and do lots of other things that were going to cost lots and lots of money so Council for the applicants wrote a letter to I guess the governing body originally right Dave yes and um uh Angela Bato looked at it uh the three of us had a conversation and we decided that we could accomplish pretty much the same goal without putting these people through enormous hoops and a lot of additional expense by just changing the condition around the condition still get gets the RightWay remaining open it's just it does not go into title to Sparta it also gets the site triangle easements that David called out just doesn't go into title uh that resulted in basically not basically I don't know why I say that it resulted in three changes to the resolution and the changes excuse me were pretty simple and pretty straightforward the one is on page four where I added a sentence uh that says further the applicant has agreed to ensure areas on the site will remain open and not built upon which will benefit the surrounding area and therefore the negative criteria is satisfied which is really what the goal is when David makes those suggestions so that was a that was a conclusion but then what we needed to do was change conditions two and three in the resolution uh to allow them to amend the plan to show an additional open space area uh but it's not going to be dedicated it's just going to remain open that'll be on the plan and it's the same thing with the site triangle easements we thought this was a fair Equitable solution to a problem and kind of goes a long way in helping residents of Sparta so I I I don't think we we discussed it we didn't argue about it we just came up with a solution once we put a couple of heads together right correct so that's the change in my opinion as you're attorney this didn't require any notice ask about that yeah Mr chairman it didn't require a notice or a new hearing because as far as I'm concerned if you look at the language in the municipal land use law these are di Minimus items that do not trigger any public comment and uh I think the board can actually do this it's it's clearly within your jurisdiction because it doesn't at the end of the day it doesn't change anything you're still getting that open space it's just spart is not getting the land right all right that's as fast as I could summarize oh thank you Glen are those are those notations then actually on the uh the site plan on they'll be on the filed map or something map and that'll it'll be in a revised map okay now'll have to pass David's muster Rich all right thank you so the chair will entertain a motion so moved can we ask questions okay yeah so so the map is going to say that that the the the this these pieces of land these Parcels are going to are be going to be mowed or or or taken care of so that the site triangles is maintained yes okay and and when you say dedicated you said they weren't dedicated because they weren't being dedicated to the to the town they will not be dedicated to the town not going to be dedicated to that's correct so they're going to be owned by the the Allens yes sir okay okay and will this have like a easement or what kind of condition will travel with the land it's on a filed map it'll be called out that they have to keep it open notorious and hostile they'll not be an easement as I Envision it Dave do you pardon me I don't Envision an easement here no just just keeping it open Mark okay thanks just want to understand it I don't know the LW quite frankly just between just between all of us this is really consist this is a more consistent way of doing it under the law because there is case law that says we'll go into that some other time okay all right now Mery who did someone make the original motion I made the motion the original one no second right no I don't know who made the original motion no no just the motion on this this resolution I made the motion all right the second please second um Isa please call the rooll John FY yes Michael josic Yes Richard larua yes Michael Lei yes Mark Scott yes Lena taneri yes chairman Kenneth Larry yes I wasn't here that night never mind I'm sorry never mind now before we start the public hearing I also serve on the master plan subcommittee for the township and the subcommittee has just made active the survey and it's open until November 15th for people to go on to the site and give us their opinions on certain elements in the town be uh including the viewpoints on what a master plan should look like and you can access that just go to the sparta Township website and you'll see the links on there so I appreciate it if people take that into consideration now for the public hearing we have a few applications that are going to be carried to November 13th I believe M says the date in November thank you the first one uh application 12-24 susus County Charter School tech for D variance will be carried to November 13th with no further notice required then application 24- 2395 perona realy Corporation for C and D variances that will also be carried to November 13th but no further notice required and the last one application 13-23 to Anderson for D variant will also be carried to November 13th with no further notice required so the only application we have left here tonight is application 1424 Richard shenik for C variance relief and also one note after all the after the application is heard and completed I'll open the hearing to the public on comments and questions they may have not here tonight on this application okay good evening ladies and gentlemen Daniel Bor from the law firm of ask and hooker representing the applicant tonight Richard shenik um I have three Witnesses here tonight we might want to just swear them in now and get their names and the spellings of their last names uh before I proceed with my summarization of the application good idea so they can come forward please stand Glen if you're so kind absolutely gentlemen do you all swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth in the proceedings before the board tonight so help you God yes I do oh yeah I have that down all right let's start with this side you can put your hand down what's your name Sir Richard shinik you're the applicant Richard right yes okay how about the young guy next to you Tyler vandervalk v n d r v l k uh civilized engineering Tyler and how about the moso y okay let's qualify Let's see we we've qualified the engineer on previous occasions correct I don't think before this board but uh many look the same in other towns buddy all right so by whom are you employed uh I I own civilized engineering and what kind of work do they do land devel vment applications uh from small residential to commercial projects uh licensed as a professional engineer in state of New Jersey licenses current and a good standing bachelor's degree in civil engineering from the New Jersey Institute of Technology okay and you regular appear before boards yes I do and you sir I own okos architecture it's a architect over in white Plaza uh we uh do small anywhere between small residential additions the commercial work as well um I was I'm licensed in New Jersey in Pennsylvania good standing in New Jersey and uh went to got my bachelors at NGIT as well is that satisfactory gentlemen and Lady great thank you Glenn I apologize your name again I'm always used to see Mr asking Dan beckendorf beckendorf you were right and Dan after you present your case for your applicant we'll then open it to our professional and board members for our comments and questions and then I'll open it to the public after we're finished understood thank you okay how can we help you all right um so we're here tonight to discuss you guys oh and just one thing it's a Lake Mohawk application do you object to any members hearing the application that reside in Lake Mohawk no okay thank you thank you uh 193 East Shore Trail uh block 3041 lot two um it's a 8,752 ft lot in the R3 uh single family residential Zone uh presently there is a single family three-bedroom residential home on the lot and we intend to keep it that way uh we're before this board this evening seeking two variances bulk variance C variances one is a sidey guard setback um 8 feet is required and ex uh 5.9 fet is proposed um it's going to I'm going to explain but it's essentially a pre-existing non-conform in uh variants but I will go through how we were here to this evening um and then additionally there is an impervious coverage uh variance requested 25% is is is uh required and um there's a 28.9% proposed um again I'll explain all of that um so the home itself uh that sits on this lot was purchased back in 2021 after the purchase the applicant allowed his daughters to reside there for a short time maybe about 6 to 9 months and while they were residing there they noticed that uh the home was damp and uh when it started to get colder out it was very difficult to keep warm in the house um they pulled up some of the floor blows to check out the crawl space underneath the house and upon doing so they recognized there was no insulation under the home uh nor was there a vapor barrier uh so they found that they needed to do some Renovations on the home uh they filed their permits they started doing renovations they connected to uh the natural gas line they removed uh an oil tank although it's still on the property it has been evacuated um they uh went through the process of getting a new furnace and things like that and as they were doing renovations and pulling permits um they started to recognize that the home all the way up needed to be insulated so if you're looking at the home from the road on the right hand side uh they recognize that um when they started to pull down the ceiling that that wasn't insulated properly either so while they had everything apart they consulted with an architect they decided that they would do some renovations to the home they pulled the permits uh and they got the permit so they started to do the renovations unfortunately one of the or the work that they were doing on the second floor of the home um increased the height of one of the walls which resulted in a new need for a sidey yard setback variance because of that they Enlisted the help of Tyler vandervalk an engineer because they needed an engineer to come and provide the testimony to meet the standards for variance requirements even though the home the the essentially the uh sidey guard setback didn't change from what was there because they were extending the wall up and building something new they needed to come back before the board for the C variants for the second floor wall now because it was being extended a little bit so as a result they Enlisted the help of Tyler vandervalk Tyler vandervalk started doing the calculations and recognized that in addition to uh the sidey setback variance that was required there was a miscalculation and impervious coverage for the renovations that were done to the home and uh so now we're here requesting two bulk variances one for sidey setback and one for impervious coverage and here to discuss the standards required to Warrant the variance relief that we're seeking uh is Tyler vandervalk now before I get to Tyler Richard you've heard my summarization of the application is that an accurate representation and do you want that to be your testimony this evening yes all right thank you Tyler you'll come up Tyler and Dan let's let's keep this simple and straightforward did you hear the propers that Dan just made buddy yes I did did he screw up at all no so he he hit all the central points right yes all right so that was as if you were testifying right all right what else she got okay so yeah obviously the history has just been laid out so we're not going to uh bother to to go back through that um as you know we are in the Lo Lake Mohawk uh area as far as the existing conditions on the plan that was submitted and that's what I have on the board here this is August 13 of this year uh prepared by my office that's the plan that was submitted as part of the application is that correct correct thank you uh so what you can see is that the footprint of the building that is unshaded that was what previously existed before any of the renovations began and on the right hand side which is the Westerly side you can see a setback of 5.9 feet existed previously and that's the variant that's being requested today for the vertical expansion the area that's shaded on the uh easterly side or the left hand side of the building that is the addition which was approved by permit uh as part of the renovations uh previously and that actually if you went to the site see is largely actually uh constructed at this time and the survey utilized to prepare this map is actually an asilt survey of those conditions uh so we know that that's exactly where that addition takes place there are a number of other improvements such as the deck has not been constructed yet uh and the driveway has not been finalized uh so as was mentioned when we started doing the calculations um it was noted that we had an existing non-conforming coverage uh impervious coverage you can see that in our bolt table at 26 and % where 25% is permitted so already in the and I should say pre-existing condition this is before the addition was constructed it was already over by a percent and a half and by nature of doing the addition uh that further put us over on the impervious coverage now we've done a number of things to try to mitigate that um there was previously a concrete pad along uh the entire Westerly side that's the side that's closest to the property line 5.9 ft um and the as agreed we're going to remove that entire concrete pad in order to further reduce impervious that's the area where the oil tank was previously located the other thing that we're going to do is while the intent was initially to pull additional driveway space alongside the garage Edition for additional parking we're going to limit it uh to the front of the garage wall again to try to cut back on the impervious so uh we feel we've done what we can as far as removal of impervious coverage on the property in order to get back down um and this is where we find oursel at 28.9% uh where 25% is required uh I would point out uh one thing that was mentioned in the opening was the lot area of 8752 that's actually the lot area within the first 100 fet of lot which is regulated by the zoning the lot total lot area is actually close to 11,000 square feet uh 1098 and that's what's used to to determine the percent percent coverage although that area is not Reg only the area within the first 100 um the other items as far as lot geometry are all compliant for the Zone uh with room to spare and all the setbacks other than that Westerly setback are conforming as well uh as far as the variances again the side yard this is an existing uh footprint we're not decreasing that setback it's at 5.9 today will continue to be so you'll see in the architect's drawings that the the roof line of the original home uh essentially connects almost to the to the start of that second floor so it's uh not a lot of head space in there so the idea was we're already having to take down these walls to do insulation and there was rot discovered Etc if we're rebuilding It Anyway let's try to give ourselves a little bit more headro in that space and also the architect will testify how that this brings some good symmetry to the structure with the addition that's being done on the left hand side uh so we feel like this is an improvement aesthetically it maintains the same setback uh to the property line although there's vertical increase and the other thing I would say that the zoning envisions two eight yard two eight side yard 8 foot side yard setbacks excuse me between you and your neighbor for a total of 16 feet you'll see that we've approximately located the house on the drawing with to the West at about 15 feet plus our 5.9 uh so we're we're over 20 ft between the two houses so that envisions separ is still being maintained despite the encroachment as far as the covering coverage as I said uh we were removing where we could unfortunately the addition was already built uh under a prior permit and that's really the source of the extra coverage from the pre-existing condition uh and that's really the extent of my testimony uh unless there there's any more interest in detail we have public utility other than the septic system uh which was built a few years ago bedroom count is unchanged by this application do you see any other negative impacts as a result of the impervious coverage uh overage I I don't believe so we're only increasing uh by uh a couple hundred square feet overall on the site uh and there are a number of catch basins directly in front of the property where all the runoff runs to uh so I don't anticipate any negative impact okay and essentially the the fact that the uh um sidey yard setback we believe it to be di Minimus because of the fact that it already existed under the current circumstances prior to any work being done to the house it was exactly the same that's correct okay no further questions for my witness thank you will if we have any comments or questions after you you're through with the application next gentleman okay actually if I could ask him just one question did you see Dave Simmons report I did you didn't have any you you did not okay we'll deal with that later then okay go ahead Michael these were not submitted as part of the application is that correct uh the floor plans no well the yes the floor plans have remained the same I just added pictures next to them all right so Dan I'm going to Mark each sheet A1 two three and four just for identification okay I think we only a to beon Second FL that's the first floor so so how you going to identify A1 buddy uh Mike uh what is A1 A1 uh is the second floor plan with say some interior uh images of that renderings of that what's the date of it all right so we're GNA that today yeah and did you these are your renderings correct okay you took the pictures uh those are rendering yeah the computer generated and what other exhibit you going to Mark let's mark them both at the same time computer rendering that'll be A2 thank you all right uh Mike uh you heard Tyler uh discuss the purpose for increasing the height uh on the right side of the home um for the purposes of symmetry can you explain that yes so originally the house uh on the right side had a very very uh shallow Loft space so you uh could stand up maybe in the center of the roof but it dropped off very quickly on either side because there was no vertical wall um the the space that we're uh proposing to increase is on the the right side of the house so if you look at the images here we can see that the the sides are essentially mirrored so it creates nice visual uh symmetry on both sides something akin to maybe the uh the Lake Mohawk Country Club that that uh that symmetry that that resonates throughout the lake um the U some of the issues that this to happen was the the rotting and no insulation and just uh bad state of the roof um once that was discovered we uh looked at creating a more visually pleasing and usable space in that area uh a lot of the the rot and uh I guess bad condition of the roof was caused by uh there was four very very close and small Dormers together uh no insulation so a lot of the heat was just melting and causing snow and uh I used to kind of penetrate that area um and uh and what what happened with the uh impervious calculation do you know why there was a miscalculation or was it just an oversight I I believe it was an oversight uh as far as my original drawings had a uh an error on it and then that kind of that got carried through um and then upon you know reviewing it with Tyler we found that you know we we saw that and we brought it forward forward to uh make sure that we were uh up to up to board on that and covering it through variance relief correct cor the board looks kindly on the application okay excellent um all right uh and can you show the board the second floor of the uh home just so that they have an idea of what how what the layout is so when you come up the stairs y so as you come up the stairs uh they're in the same area uh that they are now or originally were uh this area all existed on that side um we're just simply increasing the space that it's usable uh you'll be able to see in in this image now that you have full height this this area is now able to be used as you come around to the new edition of the house and looking back we also have an image where you can see more of the space we have the image here where you can either access the master bedom through a of it or you can also gain access through the bathroom Jack and Jill because the second bedroom is located upstairs as well okay what are the total number of bedrooms in the homeall the total number is two or three sorry yeah okay two upstairs two upstairs one downstairs okay and that's how many bedrooms were in the home prior to any of the renovations being completed correct it was a three-bedroom home okay all right no further questions for this thank you is that it for your testimony and it is yes Mr David if you're so kind to go over your report now certainly Mr chairman uh referring to the report I prepared on this application dated August 26 2004 uh basically on page one we summarized what the applicants professionals just summarized the application as on page two uh we've got the zoning table and as pointed out we've got the right yard side yard setback of 5.9 ft proposed 8T required minimum and 28.9% impervious for the whole lot 25% maximum on page three with regards to the variance plan I indicated plans toote any new HVAC systems proposed that are exterior to the dwelling any uh no but they will be if they're not okay uh number two or Item B I'm sorry I note a small portion of a concrete pad on adjacent lot one encroaches onto the subject property by about 1.3 ft that was shown on the survey prepared by Christopher lantman um and it basically is an encroachment from the neighbor onto the subject property it's in the back corner I just noted that and then I pointed out the areas of the gravel driveway that will not be paved should be top soiled seated fertilized and mulched to return to lawn area again I pointed that out because based on the impervious coverage just so we know once the driveway is fully paved the limits will go back to grass and impervious or perious rather with regards to utilities again this particular lot is connected to the Township's water system so there's no well to be concerned about on this lot with regards to the septic system U I agree with what the applicants testified as that there's three-bedroom dwelling it's a three-bedroom dwelling afterwards and the three-bedroom is the key component to discussing what the size of the septic system would have to be and it's served with aerial utilities off the pole on eastshore trail item number six with regards to storm drainage the township does have their ordinance number 21-2 that basically says if there's an increase of more than 500 square feet of impervious that in fact they have to provide mitigation I do have uh an error to correct in this report on the second paragraph and item number six it should say the proposed plan increases the overall net impervious coverage of the new dwelling by approximately 381 Square ft therefore storm water mitigation is not required in other words that's under 500 square feet as it is and overall when you take into consideration as the applicants indicated the removal of the concrete uh there's an overall net increase of 150 square ft I agree with the 28.9% calculation uh we talked about with the architectural plans if there's any HVAC system still the show and we confirmed once again that three bedrooms exist three bedrooms are proposed when the renovations are done there wasn't a separate environmental impact statement provided for this particular application I didn't note anything of wetlands or anything of significance that would warrant that in in my opinion and under under item number nine I have the standard recommendations for uh confirming approval by the health department the constru ruction official the water department to make sure there's nothing changing on the Water Service and also the county as far as their access Drive which is proposed to remain as is and I agree that uh with Mr vandervalk that in fact there are inlets down in the county right away on eastshore trail where water coming off that driveway can get to those inlets and be conveyed to the County's drainage system and finally I would recommend as I usually do that an asilt plan be prepared by the applicants land surveyor just just to make sure any variance relief that the board grants is in fact adhered to and and complied with that's it Mr chairman thank you David Marissa could you call on each board member for their comments and questions please John pickley no comment Michael jik no comments oh excuse me Mike would you like to bring up mik Mohawk situation to both Glenn and oh yeah public yes so we are in um I guess a a receipt of a a letter email um on behalf of Lake mohw Country Club asking that um you know any approval of the application tonight be conditioned on the applicant obtaining necessary approval and our waivers from the lake mocha Country Club um so I'm questioning why I guess first off the legality behind that right because I mean it's not a isn't that a private kind kind of uh organization or can is the letter from Lake Mohawk or is it from an attorney yes so Lake B it's not from Lake Mohawk attorney is it it's he's their attorney he's their attorney okay I didn't I read the letter I didn't realize that so yeah so I'm just trying to understand that I mean first off shouldn't it be that I mean why would we impose a condition to you know make that first of off why would we make that a condition if if you know like mw's a like a HOA private um entity well is it just be the goodness out of our heart to you I have been confused by that what's Lake Mohawk got to do with this David other than the fact that it's in the reservation my understanding is that Lake Mohawk may have some their own bylaws and standards that they have and they want to make sure that the application complies with those standards that are set up by their organization I know we've had other applications and usually what happens uh by the time the applicant gets the application before this board they usually as part of their application package have a letter uh signed by their engineer sine Watson and you've seen that that basically we don't object to this it agrees with our standards and way you go this particular application didn't have that uh so my assumption is that's why uh Mr Dash uh the attorney for the Lake Mohawk Country Club wrote that letter to ask that that be a condition Dan you do a lot of work in the Lake mohw Preserve I do um I've also had questions with these letters that come from Lake Mohawk I understand that Lake Mohawk country club might have a say in whether or not you're permitted to access the the things that Lake mwk CL provides if they don't get approval through Lake Mohawk Country Club um but I have to be honest that I also understand their position because I live on a smaller Lake uh you know Lake aasa and we also uh have been communicating with the local board uh regarding seeing if we can make it a condition of approval that they get approval from the local zoning board so I'm my point is this this is a something that's started to come up over the course of the last couple of years and we've encountered it and generally it's not conditioned on their approval um but if my client wants to be able to use the lake Lake Mohawk um they're going to have to get their own approval so I don't think it should be a condition of approval uh but I I think this one goes beyond that though and I think you're asking the right question this has nothing nothing right to do with Lake m i mean there are applications that you sometimes have that you can see that it's going to put water into the oh whatever it doesn't make any difference this one is just pure land use 101 and I'd hate to hold your clients up although he's either want us to say something or he's got to go to the restroom I'm not sure come forward say something I have an approval letter from that group we and that's what I was going to Dan we're done just submit that as part of the that answers it but I think but yeah but it's more of a broader question for future I think if they're not affecting the lake mhm and they're not impacting it with drainage or other things that David would pick up when he's actually doing the review when you guys go out and do a site and do a site inspection I don't I don't quite get that and they shouldn't be held up for doing something but Dan just submit it to okay yeah pretty sure we did submit it but it it goes back to April it was April 11th of 202 education excise deade all right Michael M go ahead wait wait I I respectfully disagree here no we'll get to you mark but just going down each person then you could follow up with okay go ahead go ahead Miss Richard larua yeah just to complete the record uh the architectural drawings we had the plans and the site plans and everything that you presented tonight these were all part of a previous application for a building permit that was approved uh there were there were multiple levels of permits okay and you received the permits based on these architectural drawings did yes and these site plans and how long ago was that are we talking um it was got to be a year no it was within I mean because this house has been kind of under construction for quite some time fast a year ago two years ago um but essentially they started doing work on it back when after they purchased it 2021 so it's been under construction and they've been receiving permit slowly as they have you know the ability to work on the property since 2021 okay so I can't give you exact dates of the permits okay but these are the drawings and and the work that's been done to date has all been done in accordance with the permits that have been approved and are in effect it was until they started work on that second level uh and it was determined that we needed the variants reliefed on that second level because it was new construction and so therefore the pre-existing non-conforming sidey setback needed to be reaffirmed through the board and it was at that time they the engineer involved who determined that they were also over an impervious coverage but that was already shown on the plans correct they were already got the permits and approvals for that yes that's what I want I just want that for the record and that was you're saying how long ago that was approximately yeah about a year ago a yearo okay so it's it's it's been around for a while and it's not something that just come up and cropped up out of the dirt okay thank you yeah my Le on D no questions thanks Richard R backer no questions at this time Mark Scott Char hi um you're saying that that you I'm unclear on this Lake Mohawk issue sure all right it's their HOA this home is within the HOA of Lake Bok they're asking that this approval be conditioned upon their approval right I believe so yes okay I haven't seen the letter though just so you know that that they recently got that that was news to me to today's letter right that was emailed to us right yes yeah when I walked through the door this evening honestly Mr Simmons told me about this letter okay I haven't even had a chance no no I understand it's dated October 4th so just a few days old right okay can somebody so give Mr so the pl the the applicant's um lawyer a copy of this letter I I don't have thank you okay just so we can get this yep I mean it's pretty clear what they're asking for right right right sure I understand okay that's I'm fine with you know everything else I I just think that you know they ask for that it's it's their it's their reservation their property they're they're the you know that that we respect ECT and and Grant them this condition that they have that the applicant has to go and get this approval from Lake Mohawk understood okay he has it right he has it what what's in the letter that Lake moh sent what's it say Dan y so uh this letter says that it does not uh preclude any permitting required by spart town that's the end of the goes through what the application is for and it says it does not preclude any permitting required by Sparta Township that got to do with like what does that mean Glenn I was asking from Lake Mohawk Country Club saying that they've reviewed the application and it precludes uh it does not excuse me it does not preclude any permitting required by Sparta Township does not preclude they need you need an English teacher here so basically you're read you're reading the the letter that you got from Lake Mohawk previously you're not reading the attorney book it's from April 11th 2024 yeah this is the origin this is the lettera he's saying they got approving the plans from Lake mohw saying you doesn't preclude you have to get all the permits you required to get right from Sparta from Sparta that's all it's saying so they're just saying we're gone we're we're out of we're out of it you go and and visit visit the gang at night yeah it it goes on to say that both the roof height increase and deck are conforming to the club plan agreement and approved by this office I guess I should have started I apologize that's helpful all right so perhaps they just didn't have a record maybe their experts didn't talk right so I mean who signed that letter excuse me who signed that letter Zine Watson okay she's the engineer yep she's the Lake Mohawk Country Club engineer okay okay Mark okay any other questions uh my questions are just you know I I my comment is that we should respect what Lake Mohawk is saying and they want they want the last rer refusal it sounds like right is that am I correct on that do we have the right to to Trump that excuse me Glenn I'm sorry talking to our newest member could you respond to Mr Scott no I don't know what he said okay Mark so so Lake Mohawk issued this letter yes sir today or three days ago and they said we we'd like we'd like one more look at this we would like the final approval on it that's what they're saying correct I don't think so I didn't understand that to be said Dan you got the letter in front of you the letter we're talking about the letter orally sent April 11th or the new letter the new letter new letter the new letter the new letter I I think they're asking that any approval be conditioned upon their review and approval but it looks like we already have their approval based on the letter that I have so even if you did condition it upon their approval we already got it so the left hand wasn't talking to the just a miscommunication that's all exactly all right let's all right but it is something we normally ask during the course of a hearing when an application comes before us and we usually either get a report from sine Watson or you know a letter saying that they've reviewed and have no objection so and they already have that so it's just a question of It's Already Done Right we respect it we always ask him for that on every application within the lake great Frank not to not to Puff him up a little bit but council is right there in Lake Mall his office probably does more work in and around the lake than anybody so these guys between Bill and Todd and Dan they know what's going on so if there's any problem again Mohawk's always there's always been some issues as as a couple of you know over the past 25 years0 40 all right all right Marissa you could continue please L Tiner I have no questions Jennifer Paha no questions chairman C lar no questions is all right thank you I'll now open the hearing to the public if anyone is in the public and has questions or comments on this application please come forward come forward we just we're just you yes to the microphone please just give your name and address to the SEC how's it going everybody my name is Ryan Shrek and I'm a resident at 189 East Shore Trail next door Glen would you like to swear them in Ryan raise your right hand please you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth the proceedings before the board tonight's help you got I do Shrek is uh r e CK I know that guy kind of like the movie never heard that go go ahead Ryan um so Richard first of all nice and formally meet you sorry to hear about the unpleasantries with the construction uh guess the one concern that I do have is uh with regard to a retaining rock wall that I believe is on my property um I think that over the course of the the construction um that that has caused the wall to fall into a state of disrepair um so my one concern is you know if we can ensure that by the end of the construction efforts understand it's going to be a long time and you know you got to do some repaving uh but if we could get that repaired to its original state to prevent any any erosion on my property are you left has no obje to reping Dam where where is he left right left or right of the house left I'm on the left side so it would be this one I don't know ifot three two here three thanks Dave that's kind of what I wanted to compare is the two surveys but I guess it would be this one you could speak a little louder Ryan into the microphone we have to have recordings I it would be this one but if you could confirm that it's also you know the same one that I'm putting at uh so first this would be this yep okay so you'd be over there so this one is this is a bush so this would be the raw the wall right yeah these are like three perennial bushes yeah and I was wondering if we could compare the surveys to see if there was you know anything we needed to reconcile with that all right I tried to go into the office to see it's tough it's tough I mean because my Cent so uh so the board has an idea this this was the uh this was What U Mr vandervalk had addressed before um but uh there's a retaining wall that exists here and a retaining wall that exists here on um first name or last last name last name Mr Shrek pointed out that one of the two retaining walls is starting to deteriorate my client has no objection to any approval if the board looks kindly upon his application f the wall That's starting to deteriorate on his property but if it's determined that the wall That's deteriorating on Mr Shrek's property is the result of the construction happening on my client's property he'll also be willing to fix that but we'll have to look closer at that in order to determine thank you okay Ryan yep sounds good do we have to do anything about the surveys not matching exactly you should talk to your surveyor okay and maybe you can my office tomorrow we can discuss that okay sounds good anyone else any uh audience have any questions or comments in regards to this application see no one else was there were there any changes to the plan since the Sabine Watson letter have there been zero changes or have there been any changes that I don't know I can't answer the question Mr Vander can you answer that question well I can't answer for the architect I didn't prepare my plans till after that so they didn't have a site plan because they were only doing building improvements plus plus the deck Rel I think you can speak on your PL and just one moment let me close the hearing to the public and back into the hearing for you for you and the applicant go ahead yeah so we got approvals from Lake Mohawk uh after every uh submission of plans so this was after the submission and that no changes happened after that approval okay so Sabine Watson in on April 4th was weighing in on on the last the last version of of and and what's the the what's being built correct is that what you're saying yeah okay thanks okay if there's no other questions from the board or comments the chair entertain a motion approving this application Richard senic for C variant relief sure Mr chairman I'll make a motion to have the board attorney draft a resolution approving application number 14-24 for Richard shenik block 3041 lot two at 193 eastshore Trail seeking C variances for impervious coverage of 28.9% where a maximum of 25% is allowed um existing non-conforming right side right side setback of uh 5.9 ft or 8ot minimum uh is required with a condition of repairing the retaining walls at 189 short trail that have been or may be displaced during construction in the future and adherence to all stipulations laid out in Mr Simmons report do I have a second please second any discussion Marissa please call the role John fley yes Michael jic Yes Richard larua yes Michael Lei yes Richard ragger yes Mark Scott yes and chairman kth Larry yes congratulations the application's been approved would you also like to wave your right or written yes please chair will entertain a motion for that so moved second please seconda please call the rooll John fley yes Michael jic Yes richer larua yes Michael Leoni yes Richard robacker yes Mark Scott yes chairman Kenneth Larry yes and good luck thank you Mr thank you everyone appreciate it thanks guys I'll open the hearing now to the public for any questions or comments they may have in regards to issues not discussed here tonight Senor no one is now closed to the public CH entertain a motion for make that motion all in favor all right thank you all thank you all right