I I did it. Okay. Uh good evening everyone. This is the Township of Springfield's Board of Adjustment meeting for May 20th, 2025. The time is 609. Um adequate notice has been given of this meeting in accordance with the
Sunshine Law. notice was published on January 2nd in the local source, one of the official newspapers for the township of Springfield for the year 2024 and 2025 and posted in the annex building on January 2nd, 2025. Can we stand to salute the flag, please? May we please have a roll call.
Mr. Steven Hawkstein here. Mr. Michael Wex here. Mr. Steven Fenbound present. Miss Marlon Apparano. Mr. Peter Shiitz here. Miss Anica Dodson. Mr. Randy Pearlman here. Vice Chair Mark
Cunningham here. And Chairwoman Jodie Cohen here. We have a quorum. Excellent. Uh we're going to start with our resolutions that are up for memorialization. The first resolution that is up is application 2025-4 79 Skyllock Road block 2602 lot
19. Has every board member had an opportunity to review the resolution? Are there any comments or questions? If there are none, is there a motion? I'll move. Second. Chair Cohen. Yes. Mr. Wex, yes. Mr.
Hawkstein, yes. Mr. Fersenbound, yes. Mr. Sheitz, yes. Mr. Pearlman, yes. Vice Chair Cuttingham, resolution. Motion passes. Second resolution up is for application 2025-6 48 Evergreen Avenue, block 30004,
lot 16. Has everyone had an Mr. Hawkstein, yes. Vice Chair Cunningham, yes. Mr. Wex, yes. Mr. Fersenbound, yes. Mr. Sheitz, yes. Mr. Pearlman, yes. And Chair Cohen, yes. Motion passes.
Okay, we're going to move on to the applications this evening. The first application we are going to call is a carry from our last meeting which is application 2025-5 for 250 Miltown Road block 20001 lot 16. Good evening. How are you?
Hi. Good evening. Hi. How are you? Good. I don't think that we saw you last time. No. Okay. Okay. Excellent. So, you're the architect. All right. Excellent. Um, so let's start with swearing in. Do you swear or affirm to tell the
truth? I do. Please state your full name. Don Brower. B R O W E R. And give us your business address. Uh 24 Egan Avenue, Fords, New Jersey. Thank you. Okay. You're here as an expert
witness. Yes, expert witness for the uh Minirect Group project. Um okay, Mr. Brower, can you just provide the board the benefit of your background and your credentials and your licensing and whether it is in good standing? Yep. Uh licensed architect in the state of New
Jersey since 1998. Principal partner in the firm of Dasenber Architects for the past 27 years. I am the architect of record on this project and my license is current New Jersey. Excellent. Thank you. Any members of the board have any objections to qualify Mr. Brower as an
expert in architecture? Great. You may proceed. Great. Um, as you stated, this was a continuation from last month's meeting. Uh, there was a discrepancy in terms of uh the project was showing a onecar garage and the two-car garage was required. So, we have
made the modifications to the floor plan to allow for the two-car garage. Um, those updates have been issued to you uh for review. The upshot is is that there's a a net increase in the building coverage and lot coverage compared to
what the original application was for. The slight increase in the proposed variances would be for building coverage. Um, the coverage will increase to 1,838 square feet, which is a net increase of 71 square feet and the lot coverage will increase to
2,890 ft, which is a net increase of 88 square ft. Uh, that was due to the fact that we needed to um have a little bit more width in that garage to allow for the two cars. Um, just for your reference, the the proposed location for the rear wall of the garage is
essentially in the exact same location where the existing garage wall is now. It's being reconstructed just because of the poor quality of the construction right now. But the uh upshot is is that that wall is going to essentially same remain in the same location where it
currently is. What is the building percentage wise? Uh the percentage would go to 26.2%. And the original application had it at 25.2%. And similarly the lot coverage is going
to 41.2 square or sorry 41.2% and the previous application is for 40%. Where is the difference in the um footprint from the existing structure?
I'm sorry. I'm Where is the difference in placement in the footprint compared to last month's in the original application? Essentially, the garage is in the same location. We took if you if you're looking at the garage the front wall of the garage uh we eliminated the
hallway refer can you reference this thing this document the site plan which is the Andrew Woo survey of January 9th just describe for me where it is where the changes are.
Yeah. Right now there's there's currently an existing twocar garage that's that exists on the property. the original application uh we were trying to lessen the intensity of the coverage on the property. So we had we had basically went down to a oversized onecar garage and we pulled that back
wall forward about 2 and 1/2 ft. So with this change uh for the requirement of maintaining a twocar garage the the shifting of the wall essentially just went back to where the existing location of the garage wall is now. So, the only change is really to the first floor
plan, garage, the the most of the square footage change was within the proposed kitchen space. Uh, there was a hallway that was proposed. We eliminated that so we could grab some more floor area for the garage and then we had to shift that back wall back 2 feet in order to
accommodate the two cars. Thank you. I just have two quick questions. Sure. Is is there enough room for somebody to back out of the garage that they can go forward down the driveway and out onto the road? Yes, there is a uh a sweep on
the garage that that leads you to the back of the property. So, you could pull out head first to the street. One of our at least my concern last month, it's it's a valid concern. you know, it's it's a long one one car or one car width driveway. And and another question from uh for our engineer, do they have to do
any different water management because now it's more coverage? There's still uh only a nominal increase in the coverage on the project. Any other questions from the board? Turn my mic off. I think I'm I'm just having a hard time
um envisioning how the cars are mo man maneuvering in and out of the garage. So where you said there's a space to pull through. Yeah. Essentially what the board member is asking is that if you're parked in the garage, there's a way to
back up and have the back end of the car pointed to the rear of the property. So that way your head of your car, you drive out of your driveway as opposed to backing out of your driveway. I see that space. Okay. Thank you. I have a couple questions. Sure. I'm looking at this
diagram and I see the garage. Uh you're looking at sheet T2, I'm imagining. It's on the lower right corner of the Okay. And it says if you look at the garage
say yes that width of that driveway area back there. Uh no the driveway is the 7.8 is on the right side of the property that goes to the gutter line from the right side property. So there's no driveway on that
side. The left side has a dimension of 7.4 that would be to the gutter. That's the existing width of the driveway as it stands now. Um, essentially that back end of the driveway is really sort of left untouched. That's already existing driveway. Um, if you see the before and
after comparison, um, between the, uh, for the driveway. All right. So, when you get to the back, the the width is probably going to widen out to about 18 feet between the about 18 ft or so from the property line to the face of the
garage. Also on the survey it says pers note says it's going to be removed that's old grass back there. Uh yes that's just a yard back there. Yes. There's just this little paved area that's that's on the driveway. Yeah.
It's just going to be removed. Um it's actually on a downhill slope the back of that property. It's not away from the house. Away from the house. Yep. From front to back. It's sort of a gentle slope all the way down. My my question is if it's sloped this
way towards the back of the property and coverage is 41.2%. That water is going to go to the property behind the house. It's going to go towards the back of the property. Yes. Is
that my my my concern? Is that going to like the water factory going to accumulate? It's a possibility, I would assume. Yes. There is no proposed change to the grade. So, whatever the grade is now is essentially what it's going to be uh proposed.
What steps have been taken or proposed to be taken to mitigate against that possibilities as described by Mr. Shu? Well, if it's a concern with the engineering department, we could always propose a drywall or something in the back to but nothing in the works. Not in
the drawings as they stand right now. That would really be really an engineering uh permit um situation rather than a zoning um concern, so to speak. What's your thoughts on that? So, the net increase is 102 square
feet. It's not required, but they're asking for a variance. So the board has the purview to request that if you want to add it as a condition understand could go onto the property behind I understand I'm not sure if the if there's an existing problem on the property but Your question is still
valid. Are you proposing that as a condition? Yeah, I think so because I'm I'm not comfortable with the water draining down to property behind the house to the neighbor's property in the back. Um, are
there bushes there, Dino, or Yeah, it's pretty open for the most part. There's there's vegetation at the far back of that property, but where that say that paved area is that we're showing being eliminated, that's pretty much an open area. I think um some sort of water
mitigation should be added to this or considered to be to put there to avoid any water runoff going to a neighbor's property since it is it is graded to away from the house, right? We could certainly have a drywall put in in the
backyard so that we the the new leaders could have someplace to terminate at the point where the driveway is 7.4. Does that actually fit like a standard size vehicle to back down the driveway
or is the driveway shared? There is a neighboring property. I don't recall the driveway is like just existing fit. Not ideal but
There is a there's a Belgian block curb that separates the two parallel driveways. So there is sort of physical space, but the property line is where the property line is. Any other questions from the board?
Okay, we'll start with any members of the public have any questions for Mr. Brower? None. Any members of the public wish to speak on this application? None. Um, I would be in favor of granting it. I appreciate that you took
the time to listen to what our concerns were and to go back and rework the drawings um so that we could accommodate the two parking spaces um and to allow for the maneuvering out. Um I think that the condition um as long as you're in
agreement, we're going to put the condition on the resolution um to mitigate the water with some type of dry well and work with the engineering department to make sure that that is done. Um, so if members of the board are in agreement and there's a motion, um,
with the amendment, uh, as you proposed, I'll move it. Yes, I'll second it. Mr. Fenbound, yes. Mr. Hawkstein, yes. Mr. Wex, yes. She, yes,
Miss Dodson, yes. Vice Chair Cunningham, yes. Yes. Thank you very much. Have a good evening. Okay. The next application that we're going to call is application 2025-8.
This is for 54 country club lane block 1807 lot 7 a request for a rear yard setback and lot coverage variance for installation of a deck and patio. Good evening. How are you? Good. Will you both be speaking? Okay. So, we're going
to swear you in. Please raise your right hands. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth? Please state your full name. Spell your last name. Give your home address. going to testify also. Okay. You swear
affirm to tell the truth. Please uh state your full name. Spell your last name. Thank you. Okay. Uh why don't you start with telling us a little bit about what you're looking to do on your property
and the relief that you're seeking? together to rebuild. Thank you. Questions from the board. So, the new deck is essentially in the same place as the old deck. So do does anybody know if there had
been previous 1993 1993 they got a permit for the deck the previous homeowners we found that permit whether the zoning was different at the time or whether it happened and shouldn't have you're essentially replacing
as is same dimensions The deck board members does not count as lock coverage as long as there is a permeable surface under it, grass or gravel. The only lock coverage increase on this application for 0.2% 2% is just basically taking the rounding of the
corners of patio and squaring it off. Did I summarize that correctly? And the patio is just basic papers or if I might just just for the record your the zoning chart that you submitted
um has not set forth a proposed rear yard setback. What is that going to be just for the record? It's 15.5 ft. Thank you. Just want that to be in the record. Are you keeping the patio the same
[Music] size? Any other questions from the board? Okay. Um, any members of the public have any questions for the Yes. I'm sorry. I just wanted to a little bit
of clarification because I'm looking at the survey on the front. I see like some kind of some red crossout. Are you removing that or Oh, you're putting papers there. Okay. Okay.
That's all. Just to clarify, the red markings on this survey, the red uh stripes are what is proposed or what is to be deleted or
the black is what's present. The red is what you want. [Music] Okay. Um, any other questions? I just I just want to say that the only increase you're doing is towards the middle of the property, in my opinion, you're not
adversely affecting. Thank you. Before we get to that though, sorry, it's okay. Any members of the public wish to speak on this application? No. Okay. None. Um I am in
agreement. So I would be in favor of granting the relief that's being requested this evening. If there are members of the board that feel the same and wish to make a motion. I'll make a motion. I'll second. Mr. Sheitz. Yes. Miss Dodson. Yes. Mr.
Hawkstein. Yes. Mr. Wex. Yes. Mr. Yes. Vice Chair Cunningham. Yes. And Chair. Yes. Thank you very much. Good luck. Good luck. The next application we're going to call is application
2025-94 Hamshshire Court block 3201 lot 18 request for rear yard setback and lot coverage variances. Hi, how are you? Okay. No apologies necessary.
Yes. You swear or affirm to tell the truth? Please state your full name. Spell your last name. Give us your home address. Can you just both of you need to speak into the mic? Thank you. They're
We did that. When we did add allow broken contractor. And then also the pool area. We're just trying to make the a lot better access.
Yes. While we were doing that, we were als However, there may Absolutely. water. Is there anything question. Thank you. Is there any property to your
rear? Is there any like houses? Are there any residents in the rear or is it just all reservations? Right. Okay. Um and do we know what the um existing because I didn't see it in the application. Maybe it was on one of the
previous surveys, but do we know what the existing coverage was? What is the 800 square feet like? What kind of increase are we looking at in percentages? We'll figure that out. Okay. Thank you. Hello. What accounts for the what caused the
mud that you were looking to get rid of? in our backyard. Thank you. But still there had to be water coming from somewhere to create the mud situation. There is current
I'm sorry. Say again. You're not sure. right now. Is it worse during any particular climatological situation? I have a several questions. Um, one right before your question. Just Madam
Chair, so it's a 3.3% increase. So 39.1% to 42.4%. The permitted is 27%. Uh 27 or 20 22.5 in the S120, sorry.
So it's 22.5 22.5 percent permitted in that zone. Yes. But the existing was the the existing was approved. The existing goes back um quite some time. The survey they provide they
provided an earlier survey I guess when you purchased the home. Yeah. There's been no change up until recently. I did Google Earth from 2002 forward. It looks like and I'll give it to the board members. It looks like as you scroll through, it was only in the most recent
year, year and a half that the lot coverage changes came. So either the house was approved prior to 2002 with the coverages there or when the this is a recent street development for Springfield purposes. It's not even shown on the
1975 too. So again, don't know how it got to be so coverage heavy, but it is. Thank you. Okay. Board member. Yeah. Um, first question. Is there is a pool
going to be used? Is there a fence around the pool? There needs, if I'm correct, there needs to be a fence around the pool. I think there still needs to be a fence around the pool. Am I correct? I guess
if they're making changes now. Yeah. So if the pool pool again the pool may have predated the barrier requirement separate from the barrier requirement which is the perimeter fencing. Uh it depends what the changes are to the pool if any. The building
department has to make the call on that. Well, personally, I I know I I don't know if we can um force this, but personally, for extra safety reasons, I would strongly urge you put a fence around that pool uh to avoid any
possible issues in the future. Um now, around the pool, it's is that all concrete around the pool? It does say and that's imper that's pvious and that will and that's going through
excuse me right and on here I'm looking We have a section here. It's labeled gravel. Yeah. What? It's a black top. It's black top. All right.
It's labeled gravel. It's going to be all black top. All right. And the deck um that's going to be surrounded by the papers also. All right. I have a question. Um I see a
proposed seepage pit design. Um but I'm looking at the survey. I don't see where that would be located. Can you tell us where that would be located? Because I would imagine with that increased lot uh coverage
Yeah, I'm looking at Oh, I see. I just have two questions. Um, one is you didn't mention it, but you need a variance for the deck as well. So, I assume that's still part of the variance application. The deck is over.
So, looks like the point of the deck is over. Yeah, the rear is is included, right? So, I just want to make sure that you go on record as you're asking for that. The other thing is um our engineer wood decks aren't counted, but underneath there is all paper. So, was
that included in your coverage underneath the deck? Because it is okay. because you know you know what I'm saying deck area is included in the tally to get to 42.4
so I would I would suggest that whatever is underneath is being included those are my questions Mike are there concerns with flooding with the increase of black Well, there yeah, there's always concerns when you
increase lot coverage. So, the mitigation when we exceed 200 square feet for the mayor's council railway river is we the recommendation is to mitigate that. So, this is 3.3% of about 800
square feet. So, they are providing a dry well or a seage pit to to mitigate that. They've got the engineer who designed it has volume then route a roof area on it. I
wouldn't agree with that methodology how they did it, but nonetheless you bottom line is they're giving us the volume that we Okay, they're picking up the um the drainage plan seems to pick up the front um gutters of the house into the
pit. As the applicant mentioned, it located the front left corner of the pit. There was a concern that the um the rear yard was draining somewhere. I would probably rather collect the gutters from the rear, but we can listen
to what how the testimony evolves the volume. So the um additional uh water mitigation is that just for the difference what's over now till the difference or they doing going back to what's to the net of the 800 square
feet. Yeah. So we could potentially ask for extra mitigation because they are so far over. They're requesting a variance. You can ask for whatever you would like. Would you object to going more
because it is And it sounds like there was a drainage issue when it already exceeded right with the mud, right? I would suggest that we ask for some extra not like Mr. Disco said maybe at the
rear near where you're adding all that impervious coverage maybe pick up the rear gutters as well. I think and the applicant can confirm. I think the street elevation's higher than the predominance of the property. So most of the water is going to run to the
rear. Um so I think that's what you want to protect any adjacent property owner to the rear. The reservation obviously is silent on this, but um that water is going to go somewhere too, but I think there is a neighbor uh based upon the uh
information to the rear right. So they may or may not be receiving the runoff from this property. Members of the board, any other questions? Okay, I'm going to open it up to the public. Are there members of the
public who have questions for the applicant before commenting on the Yes. Okay. Come on up. Please state your name and address for the record. I will. Oh, be before you
get to approaching and and giving us your documentation, we're gonna we're gonna square you in and then we'll you'll approach. What? I was just asking questions, right? We're gonna state your name for the record. Sorry. Okay. Um, what do you have for the board
and are you asking questions at this time? Just I'm I'm sorry, sir. Just to be clear, do you have questions for the witness? Your statement will come later. Do you have any questions to ask her?
I'm sorry. I can do that. You don't have to, but if you have any questions, ask them now. We'll get to your statement later. both of you. You got this, Bruce. I I think the question is are you going
to do anything to cut down on runoff in the front yard? Is that the concern? Okay. We have the water management management design that has been done by the engineer will be putting the tank in front of our home that will prevent drainage
ple please no statements you can do that later just to ask questions. Okay. engineer just confirmed that it is enough to cover my yard and then the other did ask for to review it again to
see if we need to add anything else to our backyard so that both areas are covered and we are willing to do front yard that's where it's going according to our design. Excuse I'm sorry. We can't have a debate here. You have to ask questions. You can
make statements later. as well. We will do what the town will it is in the front yard. It is another survey. There is another Yeah. So it is it is currently in the front yard. You want to see it, Mr. Camp? You want to
see it? No, thanks. But that's the program. So you don't have any ailating engine. Sir, the the the board has determined that as a condition if they vote yes on
this application that there will be a condition that runoff will be examined by the town engineer and he will approve it. So if if it is determined by the municipal engineer that it's needed in the backyard, the applicant will have to
do that. So the current design provides the volume for the net increase in lot coverage which is the 800 square f feet doesn't do anything beyond what the net increase is. So it doesn't recapture anything that's over the permitted
22.5%. What I said is because the focus of the new lock coverage is at the rear that there should also be something at the rear. I was not just thinking that we would tie the rear gutters into the front, although that would be helpful,
although that could also that's more roof area that could exceed the the pit, but I was looking for more supplemental volume at the rear. And I don't want to speak for the board, but I think that we were in agreement with that. Correct. That's what we were requesting as a condition. Correct. And and the overflow
for the drywall, is that going to the rear? If if that drywall overflows, is there a way to make it so that it it would not go to the neighbor's property? Well, you can certainly foster an overflow device that directs the water to where you desire. Can't go uphill
perhaps, but you could direct it towards the reservation, say, or whatever. Away from the neighbor. Yes. Uh when you typically collect roof drainage, the the most obvious overflow is at the base of the downspout. If the pit fills up, it
backs up and releases there at the foundation and then follows the topography around the perimeter, goes to wherever it's going. Now, thank you. Do I do I understand, Mr. M that you
um would pre that your recommendation would be different than what the applicants uh engineer has uh has told us. If if you're going to question him, I do have to swear I'm in. I'm talking about I'm talking to the uh Oh, I'm
sorry. I thought you were talking to the witness. I'm talking to Michael. I'm talking to Michael. I'm sorry. I apologize again. um referring to the drainage plan by Omland and Auststerorn not familiar with
them. They've provided the required volume the they're collecting it by collecting the front half of the roof putting it into a dry well or seepage pit located at the front left corner of the house. forgetting about uh whether
it meets whether the uh water mitigation is sufficient by number is the area where it is going the water is going to be an area
that you would you would have done it that way I think it's very common to collect roof area as a substitute for collecting an acrade um lot coverage element. What I had indicated because the new lot coverage
elements are at the rear of the property and as I understand it they pitch to the rear that I would also supplement that and collect from the rear. It's good to have it taking away the roof area and putting it underground but as long as
you capture where the focus of the the negative impact could be that's what you want to do. As I recall, Hampshire Court is right off of Summit Road. Yes. Which is a fairly steep um incline heading
toward as you go toward overlook hospital. Yes. Um will this will the what is described and which I haven't seen on this paperwork
uh as the proposed resolution of the problem sufficient to uh keep the keep the water away from the neighbors? Well, um, again, it's only collecting and providing volume for the net 800
square f foot increase. It does nothing to the historic uh runoff of the site. So, if problems are evident, it's not going to help in a significant rainfall for that. I I that's the best I could offer. You know,
I'm not sure what how specific to answer the question. It's only the the the mitigation is only for the net increase as proposed in this application. Well, considering that this proper uh that this is
already over uh I'll say overdeveloped. I don't mean to uh it's overlock coverage. Thank you. Yeah. Uh will this cover I mean since they're going for a variance will this cover the problem forgetting about whether it's only 3
feet or 4 feet uh of area of uh of water. This is the storm water is only going to get you to the position where in the event of a very heavy rainfall, you're not going to have more runoff to the site. It on a
heavy rainfall, it's not going to make anything better because it's going to exceed the capacity of what you build. But on lesser storms, it's going to give it a chance to go into the ground. If you're asking me, can you do more? Sure. And you can do more where
the lock coverage elements are, which is in the rear of the property. What is more? What would you suggest is more? It's a sliding scale at this point. If you if somebody tells me a number, I can then tell you how big it is. They're providing mitigation for 800
square ft right now. However, the uh as Miss Dodson indicated earlier, you're at 42.4% 4% when 22.5% is permitted. So the site presumably unfettered has run off that's
significant now. So what would be the requirements based on the fact that what the existing required lot coverage is is versus what it will be with this additional what would be sufficient storm water management capacity. Sure
it's easy pretty easy to answer that. So it's 3.3% now which is the net increase that they're designing but they're about 20% over the permitted. So about six times I guess the question is from 25 to 42 what would happen 22.5 to 42 is 20 it
would be six times as big as what's been designed. Yes that's I think what you're asking. That's right. Yeah. We want to get back properly. Correct. Right. For it to be mitigated at a level of what is what where it needs to be. Right. Just
to circle back to the applicant, what was the reason again that it was that you made the patio 800 square ft? I just joined um the pool and the patio that's right under the deck
together. Okay. Um just added 800 so that there's no falls and just easier access and the pool area just another decade.
Is it possible to decrease but still have that connection between the pool and the deck? Like does it already in the backyard? They're all set up.
Would you be willing to put in drainage management that would accommodate it down to that? that well I think if you look at the drainage plan that was previously referred to and you see the the scope of the um square there could you put six of
those on the property you could sure you could physically find room to do it maybe more to the rear of the property at that point but yeah or just one big one well sure so the question is a reasonable amount
to ask for. Since they're asking for a variance, you can determine what's reasonable. What is the volume that it will hold th this this proposed drywall? Thank you, Mike.
300 373 cubic feet of rain. So the design that the applicant did, if you took the front half of the roof, that took two and a half inches. 100year storm is 8.7 in. If you listen to Governor Murphy, it's 35%
higher than that. So since that's our new um standard. Mhm. So, going back to Mr. Fersenbomb's question, um the when you when it rains, the pit's going to hold the net increase. Anything
above that rainfall amount is then distributed to where it previously went to, right? So, you're not on a heavy rain, you're not making anything better, but you're not making anything worse. And on lesser rains, a lot of that water is going to go into a seepage pit
restore groundwater and not run off. So there's a great benefit on the lesser rains, but less so on the intense rains. It's just going to make it even at that point. No worse. It's the best way I can answer it. Thank you.
Um, we could I I think I I think we should still hear from the public and then we could we can recommend maybe that. Okay. Do you have any further questions at this time? Just questions.
Yes. Okay. He He's not here as an expert in engineering. He He's here representing her as as the attorney. He I understand that. So that's not a question that he's able to answer. Thank you very much.
questions, please come up. Hi, how are you? Please provide your name and address and keep your voice up. Thank you. If you have any questions for the witness. a little conting
So the drainage floor back of the ar like What is it? What is the Sorry. What is it? It's like a like outside when they have sewer drainage.
Okay. It's the same way that was existing. We didn't ask question. What are the plans for any landscaping?
potentially the water. But we are going to be adding that area, 202. the right area. She's located in the house right here. I'm assuming you're in the house on this area. This is the pool. Closer by the
pool. Yeah, I'm I'm house right here. House there. Right here. So, where you put the landscape? So, the landscaping is going to be along this area where So, so my So, my property actually goes right here. We have an
angled property. So, I'm all of that. Okay. Yeah. I mean, there's there's going to be we're adding stuff there. Are you doing anything to the left the fence of this area? Probably just adding like mulch around that area and maybe like something, but it was
previously like that um when we when we got there. So, I mean, it's just what we're looking for to do is add She's indicating the area right
26166. She's also indicated to the right of the property 164.7. The witness asked her she plans on shrubs in the area to the left rearated
by 246. Yes. Thank you. trees. So, do you know we're going to have them already trees? I mean, it's not going to be along the fence area, but definitely on this area
to cover that side. I know that this area has a bunch of bamboo, but like I said, the metal fence that corner, we do plan on doing that. And then the rest hopefully gardening. I We're going to have grass. It's going to look a lot more pleasant than what it did previously
to the previous you discuss it. Would you consider planting more water absorbing? This is all of me and it sounds like you're only
planting. This is the reservation. That's the reservation. Yeah, this is the reservation. So, this is our neighbor. This is report. This is a reservation. This is your area. You're by the pool like Oh, so I am that. Yes. Okay. So, we are
covering that. Okay. Okay. So, that that part is Sorry, it's a little confusing. Yeah, it's a little confusing. This side. Okay. So, we're covering that area. Correct. That whole corner area we're covering. Okay. So, she's putting the plants exactly on my right. Um Well,
exactly where you want. Um I don't know. I don't know. That would be ideal for me. Those are my questions for Thank you very much. Any other members of the public have any questions for the witness?
None. Okay, we're going to open up to public comment. So, members of the public for public comment, come on up and we're going to now swear you in. Yes, please. You have to be sworn in first. Please raise your right hand. you swear or
affirm to tell the truth. Please again state your name. Thank you. Um so my only comment is that when you're calculating how
to consider um you know we are experiencing standing water and not directly I can't exactly tell what's
going on. So I'm not saying that's like I said solely to what's going on but anything additional to me and my family are so that just naturally
lowered but there's anything that could be discussed or come at a compromise to divert it more than it is. I have a question. So, how much water are you getting in your yard from that
property? I has it been I don't I guess I don't know how to measure it, but like when we have a hard day, it didn't dry up for a couple days and kids just can't use it. And it's
not this neighbor. We have another neighbor that also did unfortunately a lot of vegetation was removed. only grow so fast. So, we're kind of battling here. This is my bite of the apple and
so as much as possible. Thank you. So once the retaining wall drops, there's um that's where we did a swale. We spent about $20,000 to do a
drain. We haven't done the trees. We did a lot of expensive drainage. And um to be honest, trees in front of the um tried the swale first.
Miss Michelle, did did I meet you and your husband about a year and a half ago and Okay. Okay. Yes, you did. We called the township to try to figure it out, but And you suggested the So, here we are. Thank you. They are lower than the
applicant's property and um there's only so much you can do when that's the situation. Correct. Yes. But first you have to be sworn in. You were not. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth?
Absolutely. State your full name. Spell your last name. Thank you. They have now. Thank you. Any other members of the public
here wish to speak on this application? None. Yes, please do. That's my house. I needed to sign a document and I did not tell my insurance.
I also as they would come by and take a look what was going on today and my representation with that There is
No, there was nothing. And now we're taking Yeah. So, but you do have So, here's the thing. Here's where we are. You do have neighbors that are concerned, of course,
um about the drainage and landscaping. Um, and I think that what the board would like to see since there is a um recommendation to increase the volume um of of water of mitigation, right, of of
runoff. Um that maybe we can see um an engineering plan that um extends beyond what is what is pres being presented was presented to us now. um where we could see that um as you mentioned it may we
may not be able to fit it. We'd like to see if you can something extra um as discussed definitely um some sort of um mitigating factor drywall in the back in the rear um maybe um also showing us
that we could direct the water um off towards away from the neighboring properties. Um I think the other thing that we would probably like to see because um you did um you did represent that there was going to be some landscaping there. I would like to see that the board I think would like to see
what type of landscaping, what species you plan on putting and where exactly you plan on putting it. So um did I miss is there anything else from the board? So, um I don't know if
that's something that you would be able to do for our next hearing. If you believe that there is, we would be carrying to that hearing. And that hearing date is June. June 17th. Um excellent. What's going I also as
opposed to representations from a layman as to what an engineer says to hear from the engineer or the uh the expert that she is citing. So that that respectfully that's up to you
to decide. decided who to bring in. You've heard the opinion of one of the board members. Take that under advisement and do what you desire. Thank you. Okay. With that, I think that we are going
to make a motion to motion to adjourn to June 17th 17th. If the matter goes forward on that day, then no further notice will need to be provided. If it's adjourned from that date, the new notice will be given.
Presumably that's 6 pm in this courtroom. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Uh we need a motion. I'll make a motion. Second. Okay. Mr. Shitz was number one. Was that? Yes. And who was number two?
Mr. Shuititz. Yes. Mr. Hawkstein. Yes. Mr. Wax. Yes. Mr. Fersbomb. Yes, Miss Dodson. Yes, Vice Chair Cunningham. Yes, Chair Cohen. Yes, thank you very much. We will see you
June 17th. Um, can I ask for We are minute break. So, we are off the record. Thank you. Okay. Am I? Yep. I'm here. Okay. So, the time is 7:37. We are back on the record for the
board of adjustment meeting for May 20th. And um we are now going to call upon application 2022-23 Springfield Holdings New Jersey Springfield New Jersey Holdings LLC 8995 and 109 Victory Road block 301 lots 5
and 7. This is a request for an amendment to a 2023 approval for site plan, preliminary and final site plan on the um self storage. How are you? Good.
We over the last started soil. doing that. So, we're actually However, there will 13 building. So we're really here. So we're here to explain
why it's not even Okay, great. That would be great. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth? Please state your full name. Spell your last name. Give us your business
address. Please talk into that mic. You just Any objections by any of the board members? You may Council, just for the record, was this submitted to the board? And
let's do that. This is the exhibit exhibit prep22. So the site is located 67,8.54 acres located The south is resite located as well
asvenue. There's currently three different site. All three driveways are driveway buildings previous exhibit. He marked it a Bruce. He marked it A2. The main
reason that was done well of required along the east, north and west. Another plan that was made around the site based off
property. In addition, we are proposing along the front of the site to the right access to Victory Road that locations. side of the propert.
25. As mentioned building now 21s In addition to that height of building 21 from the
previous noted building as well as measured roof instead of So based off our calculations we are proposing building 42.9.
of the building and we are raising around the building on the east and north of the property. So those elevations found because of that we need to property.
In addition, we want to provide safe access. There was a com entry lettering properties. Westing up against there is portion of the property
that is going on property. So, we're not there's actually property. So, we're noting any west side of the And then along the east side our
existing property is mostly higher than the property around 93. So under existing condition you're on the record. Just letter. I said it.
Thank you board members. Any questions for Mr. Wire? I do. I have a few. You want to go first? Oh, go ahead. Okay. Um, do we Is the retaining wall right on the property line? Is the retaining wall right at the property line? I'm just curious, how do
you build it without impacting the neighbors with footings and stuff? My question, do we do we require any kind of buffer between the neighbors in this property? No. Um, when we measure our grade for the
town, is it the natural grade or the artificial grade for height? Are you asking? So, it's the artificial grade. So, the reality is you are raising everything up, but just by definition, it's you're not. But the reality is you're moving in some areas
you're raising the building 3.9 ft off the ground now as as it would be perceived by by the because you have this wall that's going around. It's going to be the whole thing is going to be like on a plinth. The whole building is going to be the whole property is now elevated. Correct. Yeah. I think the
testimony was it the the first floor went up 21 in and then the above grade four floors were reduced by 2 in each. So I think the net was 13 in as the peak of the the building will be up 13 in
from the artificial grade from the from the original peak the original I remember that I said to your point I said it from the beginning about that he said look the
change but we want to be clear this is We knew the board explain um this height uh was it uh because of the D change in the flood levels or because of your studies or both? So
we believe building I'm almost done. Um, there are areas where you have a 3.9 foot high retaining wall around the property. What are you doing as far as safety for vehicles going around and driving off the edge or somebody falling
off an edge uh and possibly crashing or getting injured? Do you have you have guard rails or what what's going on around the edges? So, it is just very But somebody could potentially walk back there and fall off a 4 foot high wall.
We do have a fence. Is that fence um heightwise okay as far as what's allowed? I think it was a sixoot fence if I believe that would make it 9.9 ft at the worst case the 395 and the six. Yeah.
Yes. Thank you. Any other questions from the board? So, we're adding relief for the fence height. Is that correct? We're adding relief for the fence height. Really a
combination wall fence height from the um adjacent property. We'll see upwards of eight nine feet. Okay. No other questions from the board. Okay. I'm going to turn to
Thank you. Um our professionals, Mr. D, anything I um I appreciated the testimony. Again, my one concern is the uh by elevating the property with retaining walls. Water that was adjacent
to it or free flowed between the properties now has a has a dam. So I would love to see at least one or two catch basins that were previously at grade return to there maybe at the corners where the emergency fire access turns and there's a little play in the
where the wall could I will be happy to work that out with the engineer though I don't think as long as they're cooperative on that. Um I did go look at the drain that was referred to. It's actually behind the old um mozzarella
factory if you remember that. And I'm not sure it connects to any system. It could be just a local dry well or seepage pit that maybe was built collectively. Who knows? It's slightly on the mozzarella property or the former
Mozerella property, probably about 10 ft from this property line. Um when I looked in it, it was dry. That's always a good sign. But I I don't know the the um how that was designed who knows decades ago. So that's why I'd be very
the only my only concern would be as the walls go up, water would be trapped. It can't distribute. If the flood zone does come up that high, there should be a, you know, an ability for the water to go into an area drain and then get out to Victory
Road. I think we can work cooperatively on that. Yes, you'll work to satisfy that condition. Great. Thank you. meeting. Okay. Actually, I did have one more. How steep is the driveway now?
Just a ramp to get from the driveway into the building, right? like when now there's a ramp that's a little bit steeper. There's no concern about people bumpers hitting racing going in. Any other questions on from the board?
Okay. Any members of the public have any questions for Miss McGuire? None. Thank you very much. We can call the next witness. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth? Yes. Please state your full name. Spell your last name. Give us your
business address. Yes, you have. Is your license current in good standing? Sorry. Uh just no objections. Right. Okay. We're proceed. I think you mentioned before sometimes groundwater
eristics. So that's exactly what issue is 13 satisfaction building against negative criteria. Two really big factors
25 yard 66. essentially another building. I think that also any residential properties other industrial properties. Thank you very much. Any questions for
planner? None. Excellent. Any members of the public have any questions for this witness? None. Thank you very much. Great. Um, before we take any action, is there any member of the public that wishes to speak on this
application? None. Excellent. I believe that the relief that is being um sought tonight can be granted without any detriment for the reasons that the planner put forward. If anyone's in agreement, we have a motion to approve. I'll move. Thank you.
Mr. Hawkstein, yes. Mr. Sheitz, yes. Mr. Wex, yes. Mr. Fenbound, yes. Miss Dodson, yes. Vice Chair Cunningham, yes. And yes, thank you, Mr. Have a great night. Uh any other business? Motion to
adjurnn. Move. Second. All in favor. Thank you.