All right, great. So, the time is now 6:05 p.m. This is the Township of Springfield Board of Adjustment meeting for May 19th, 2026. Adequate notice of the meeting has been given in accordance with the Sunshine Law. notice was published on January 1st in the local
source, one of the official papers for the township of Springfield for the year 2026 and posted in the annex building on January 2nd, 2026. Can we please stand to salute the pledge to the stands one nation
liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you. May we please have the roll call. >> Mr. Steven Hawkstein >> here. >> Mr. Michael Wex >> here. >> Mr. Steven Fersbound >> present. >> Miss Marlon Apparano,
>> Mr. Peter Shiitz >> here, >> Miss Anica Dodson, Mr. Randy Pearlman >> here, >> Chair Mark Cunningham, >> and Chairwoman Jodie Cohen >> here. >> We have a quorum. Thank you.
All right. So, there are no resolutions up for this evening, so we're going to get right into the application. The first application that we're going to call is application 2026-3. This is for Tulin Drive, block 3603, lot 12. And this was carried from April
21st, 2026. A request for a variance in the rear yard for um the deck. And so this is the updated survey that we're going to mark. Thank you. See that?
Okay. So, we're going to mark this exhibit, which is by Scott Lee and dated 510 2026 as a >> Hi, good evening. How are you? Good. I think we're just going to rewear you in.
>> Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth? Please keep your voice up. Give us your full name. Spell your last name and your address. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay. So, we had asked, I
guess, for an update on the survey to mark out exactly where you were proposing to put the deck and where the stairwell would come down. So, if you want to maybe just describe um with this updated survey now, what you're presenting as your plan. Um and I think there was a question with respect that
it seems like you resolved with respect to the um easement area. Yes. So also And do we know what that calculation is from a rear yard setback?
Is it the original version of the deck was 20 ft. Looks like this dimensionally has changed a little bit. So um previously was 16 feet wide. Now it's 10. So I would add six feet. probably 26
feet instead of the 30. >> Can you explain what the variance you're going for is now >> or or I'd be happy to do that. >> Okay. >> It's it's rear yard setback. It's it's a it's a corner lot, so you have to assign sideyard and rear yard. And where the
deck is is technically the rear yard, and it requires a 30 foot setback. It's looks like it's going to be at 26. So four feet into the setback. There's no coverage issue. Decks don't count as coverage. There's no mitigation required.
So that's as succinct a case as you got. >> Perfect. Thank you. Do any other board members have any other questions? >> None. Uh any members of the public have any questions for the applicant? Are there any members of the public that
are present that wish to speak on the application? All right, there are none. Um, I think that the updated survey and the change in the size of the deck satisfies all of the questions that we had as a board and I don't think that the variance granted
would be any detriment um to the surrounding properties. I'd be in favor of approving this. >> I'll move to approve. I'll second. Chairwoman Cohen. >> Yes. Did >> we just have this thing officially marked into evidence? >> We did. A1.
>> Oh, I didn't hear that. >> Yes. Sorry. I I think I probably was speaking to Bruce instead of everyone. So, yes, we marked it as A1. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Hawkstein. >> Yes. >> Mr. Wex. >> Yes. >> Mr. Gersonbound. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Coleman. >> Thank you. Uh, Vice Chair Cunningham. >> Yes. >> And Chair, >> yes. >> Thank you. Have a good evening. Okay, the next application we're going to call is application 2026-2.
This is for 121 Edgewood Road, block 3505, lot 12. This is a request for front rear yard setbacks, lot coverage, depth, and area valances for an addition to a
dwelling. Hi, good evening. How are you, Mr. Yeah, appreciate ago. Again, a very attractive home and it's unique in a bit that it's a it's a corner. Oh, thank you. Now you can it's a it's a
corner lot, but it it the house actually uh you know front where fronts and what's the front yard. So our our planner will take us through that but in essence the uh it it even though the address is on one street it's actually the front yard when you look at it and
again we'll explain that in the plans and how it fits in nicely. The other issue is with respect to the garage. The garage, and I did have a chance to speak to Mr. Disco, technically um there are no dimension requirements for a garage in Springfield, but as a practical
matter, it's so narrow that you really can't use it and open the doors. So, uh and really isn't the street parking. So, uh, this now provides the ability by adding on to the garage that you have a usable garage that people can actually
park in the garage and park the cars on the street. Um, again, if you pulled into this garage, I think it's only if you couldn't in essence really open the door. So, the benefit here is that it it brings it into compliance because each of the homes is supposed for each, you
know, you're supposed to have a a a usable garage. So that's an overview of of the application. What I'd like to do is to call upon Mr. Livermore to take us through and he has we have a a plan that shows the layout of the property where the garage is proposed. Another factor
and everyone's concerned about storm water and detention. At the present time there is no storm water management on the property. everything sheet flows off the property. And as part of this plan, there is subsurface detention proposed to capture any additional runoff in
particular with respect to the increase in the size of the driveway. So, so first you're going to be sworn, please raise your right hand. You swear or affirm to tell the truth. >> I do. >> Please state your full name, spell your
last name, and give us your home address. Kevin James Livermore, L I V E R M O R E 61 Coleman Avenue, Chattam, New Jersey. >> Thank you. >> And Mr. Livermore, I explained again that unfortunately your architect wasn't available to come this evening, and
you'll take us through the plans. So, first just briefly give a little overview of your you now own the property, your vision for the improvement of the property, and then we can take the board through the plan and the and the survey. >> Yep. Thanks, Steve. And uh yeah, just put a couple of words down, but yeah,
good evening to the board and uh thanks for reviewing my application. Kevin Livermore, as we said, and I'm the owner of 121 Edgewood. Uh I'm here tonight to provide background on the request and answer any questions along with the team. Um I think that what I would say is background to the property. 1952 Cape
Cod style home. It's a cute little house. Um but it's probably in need of a little modernizing these days. Um, I'm proposing to alter the home, uh, but maintain the same look and feel as the existing neighborhood. Um, the proposed arch architectural style, as we'll show you in a second, um, is in keeping with
the neighborhood. It's very tasteful and, uh, I think it just pro provides a refreshed look to what is a 74 year old home. Um, I'm confident that it represents an aesthetic improvement to that to that existence. Um, with it being a Cape Cod style home, uh, the up the upper level, the second floor, uh,
is essentially a half story. Uh, and as a 6' one, uh, tall person, uh, it's a little challenging to stand up given the slopage of some of the ceilings up there, um, which is apparent in both of the two rooms on the upper floor. Um, I think that, as Steve mentioned as well, uh, whilst today it does have an
attached garage to the home, uh, the garage size hasn't been able to keep up with with the vehicles of today. Um, and so really I'm seeking approval to make the following modifications to the existing home. Um, add a covered front portico uh to provide overhead coverage
during any inclement weather that we may have. Um, the addition of the second garage at the left side of the property uh with bedrooms that sit above the above the garage area. And in other words, remove the existing second floor which is 473 square ft and replace it
with a 1511 second uh second floor. Um, I'm looking to convert the existing partially finished basement into a finished basement. Um, and add a slight extension to the existing kitchen area by adding some living space uh at the rear of the property, which is an area that's currently paved. Um, overall
hoping to convert this into a beautiful four-bedroom home that has ample parking uh with the addition of landscaping, the addition of trees, um, sprinklers and shrubs. And, uh, welcome any questions that you may have. And also, as we mentioned, and I know Matt will touch on it further, storm water detention.
>> Yes, that's right. So, the plan is to, and you'll see that in the plans, but the plan would be to install a dry well uh to to retain water um which would be an enhancement to the existing warm-up situation today. >> Okay. And if you could take the board through I know your architect was kind enough to prepare a board with plans.
These are uh Bruce, I believe, mounted versions, although the rendering may be a new exhibit, but if what we can mark it anyway. >> Yes. We'll mark that as A1 and describe what that is. right now. And then terms of the
garage. Take care. No, Matt will cover it in more detail during planning. We're hoping to do something like >> And when we talk about the second
garage, I think you're uh so it's usable the the existing exterior walls being removed because right now that impedes the ability to open the garage uh car doors. >> That's right. Yeah, you could fit a car door. >> And the the style will be uh generally
in accordance, you know, uh muted colors and the like and and uh what's shown on this plan. I have no further questions of Mr. Livermore at this time, but again, we do have Mr. Well in here to take us a little bit more through the layout
drainage and address any variances. >> Wait, you can't leave that. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> The board of the public may have questions. >> I do have a question. >> Um, you have the stairs to the new new entry into the kitchen. >> What is going to be at the bottom of the
stairs? Just grass. You can have a patio >> at at the at the rear of the at the rear of the property. >> When you come down the stairs from the kitchen, is there a patio or something there? >> Yes. at the moment that that area is is has pavers >> if that makes sense.
>> Yeah, I'm just looking at at your site plan trying to figure out >> like it doesn't show anything at the bottom of the stairs on your site plan. >> I think we would actually um jackhammer a lot of that out and and and replace it with turf instead. But there is there is a little walkway you'll see behind the
the back of the garage uh to to provide access to the house. >> I I I see. I'm just wondering if when you designed this if you're considering any kind of additional coverage at the bottom of the stairway or a patio or something that in your calculations >> nothing in addition to the
>> because you're not showing that's why I'm saying you're not showing anything on your site plan >> on the plan the steps are going down >> the plan has a note that the patio and walkway will be removed >> y okay so that would be would be grassar >> and then that would be a walkway over to
the I'm confused because it says it's going to be removed, but then you're saying there's going to be a walkway around to the So, I'm just concerned that you didn't calculate extra coverage where the walkway to the stairs and around will be because right
now it's showing just that the stairs are going down the grass. >> You mean from the to the left here? >> To the left of the stairway. It looks like it's just going down the grass. A good question. And so is there so I'm wondering if there's additional coverage
that you need to accommodate >> I'm not sure if anything else >> all right so you're seeing here >> so that concrete pate there is going to be replaced that's going to be removed that's what we say I think what the gentleman's saying is here where the stairs are going down this section here
um is that is that included in the in the paving >> maybe your engineer or >> could Mr. only only because in doing your calculations for coverage, >> it's probably going to be offset by the removal of the patio anyway, but we'll
we'll confirm that. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions for this witness from the board? No. Um, any members of the public have any questions for the witness? Questions?
>> You have to come up. Sorry. Yes. >> Marie Milano. Uh, I'm the next door neighbor, 115 Edgewood Avenue. I just have one question. I looked at the plans and I think they look nice to be honest with you. I don't have an issue. I just want to clarify that there's with this
addition to the uh garage that's coming closer to my property line that there's going to be 19.6 ft because that's what I was told. I just want to get clarification on that. That's the only question I have.
>> That's great. All right. Matt when he comes and testifies >> question >> comments at the end >> for this property. >> Yes, for this property at the end of the full application. It's only questions for the witness. Then we'll have questions for the next witness and then you can comment on the application at
the end. >> Actually, I do have one more question. Are you going to be living there yourself? Is this a house for your >> I'm seeing it as an investment. Um, as I like progress in my career and in life, I'm just trying to set myself up for retirement. So, there is a question. >> So, it's a it's an investment property.
>> Any other questions from any members of the public for this witness? >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. So, thanks to >> Yeah, you can sit right here. You know, >> you swear a or affirm to tell the truth.
>> I do. >> Please state your full name, spell your last. Give us your business address. is Matthew Wellinger, W L I N Ger of EKA Associates, 328 Park Avenue, Scotch Point. >> Thank you.
>> All right. And Mr. Wellinger, uh, I know your firm is an engineering firm. I know you're well familiar with that, but you'll be wearing the your planning hat this evening, >> correct? >> Okay. Just confirm, uh, license in full force in effect as a professional planner. >> Yes. >> And you're also familiar enough to
address Mr. Hawk's question with respect to coverage and also the neighbor's question with respect to this this setback. >> Correct. >> Okay. Great. >> Have you appeared before boards in the state of New Jersey before? >> I have. Most recently, I was in front of
Elizabeth just a month ago and other boards in Union County and Somerset County. >> Thank you. Do any members of the board have any objections to qualifying Mr. Wellinger is a professional planner, expert in planning? Good. Let me proceed.
>> Thank you very much. All right. So, swelling, if you could take us through uh you want to touch on the plan, the layout and the justification for any release sought in connection with this project. >> Yes. So, let's let's start with I guess the two questions that we had so I can answer your question before we get too
too deep into the planning uh portion of it. So, they are requesting to remove the patio and stuff in the backyard. Um, according to the engineers calculation, uh, the project still has 281 square feet left to do walkways and patios in
the future and still be under the maximum impervious coverage value. >> So, as part of this application, we're not seeking any relief from >> we are not and we have ample left to do something in the future.
Um the sideyard setback as the neighbor had asked for the actually rear yard setback, excuse me, um for the garage is 19.6 ft and it's stated on the plans that you have in your packet. So that she is correct. >> So 19.6 is the number that is the
measurement. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Answering. Yes. >> Okay. So um we'll go through the variances here. So essentially we're looking for three uh non existing non-formities and three uh proposed bulk
variances. The existing non-formmities are a undersized lot. 7500 square feet are required and this lot is 7,35 square ft. Uh the depth is also substant proposed or existing excuse me. Uh front
yard setback along Irwin is 30 feet required and 26.9 is existing. Uh the three new variances we have for the project. Uh the front yard setback along Edgewood Avenue, 30 is required along that road as well and
that is 24.6 um is existing and it's going down to 19.7 proposed. The rear yard setback uh as we've stated 30 is required and 19.6 is proposed. The maximum building coverage of 25% is
required and we're proposing 25.45%. Um all the ordinance relief for this can be granted under C1 hardship and the flexible C2 criteria uh for the deviations from the zoning ordinance for the C1 or the existing variances can all be granted under the
C1 hardship uh because the existing lot is already there in place as well as the existing setbacks. Um there's no opportunity for us to gain any property from any of the lots around us. The lot 11 along Urban Street is already
substandard on lot area and the neighboring lot on Edgewood Avenue is already at 7,500 square feet. So there's no opportunity to to gain square footage on this lot to satisfied any of the existing. Um so they're not self-created.
Um, as far as the C the flexible C2, um, we need to promote the purposes of zoning and I think we comply with the to encourage municipal action to guided appropriate uses for development for all
lands in the state in manner which promotes public health, safety, morals and general welfare. So purpose A and this comes to our driveway, right? our driveway garage and the rear yard setback. The
RSIS requires for this property to have 2.5 parking spaces. Current property, as we've heard already, the garage is substandard size. So essentially, it has basically one parking space. And with your ordinance of not being able to park
overnight on a street, the current property is already struggling for parking as it is. This whole development provides for additional parking, indoor parking, which goes to the whole neighborhood, gets vehicles off the
street, out of the driveways inside the building. Um, as well as complying with the RSIS requirement. The RSIS requires 2.5 spaces for a four-bedroom home. Um, and this two-car garage and driveway
combination provides 3.5 for the RSIs. Um I also think we uh item C to promote adequate light air and open space. This also goes towards our rear yard and our coverage varants. Um if you look at
I think we also comply with E to promote established app appropriate population densities and concentrations that will contribute to the well-being of persons, neighborhoods, communities, and regions. Preserve preservation of the environment. This goes to your streetscape. And I would like to share
this photo with the board. That's right. So, this photo was taken today by myself at the property. Um, you can see with the streetscape along Edgewood, how between our property and lot uh 13,
which is to the left of us, there's a huge gap there. And this property with its front door facing on Edgewood wants to be part of the Edgewood community. Okay, that street and this large gap there really does break up the rest of
the the block being that the sideyard setback in this zone is only 8 ft. So, typically you're used to buildings being uh 16 feet apart where this one is substantially more the way it is. Now, we are reducing that to try to fill that in a little bit and make it more
cohesive with the rest of uh Edgewood Avenue. Um as well as we are the for the front yard setback we're not changing the actual location of the facade of the building. That setback is being created by a um open porch covered landing to
provide uh cover for when you're coming into the building. It is small in size and it is open on three sides. Um so we you know with this we also have to look at the negatives as part of this
whole application and I don't really see many many negatives with granting these deviations from the ordinance. Um if I were to look at some of them traffic we're adding one bedroom and parking. Um that brings us back to the RSIS of
increasing the number of parking spaces required for the application. Um but we are satisfying that without a problem with this with putting this application forth. Um you know noise would be another thing. Um it's already
a single family dwelling. It's going to be a single family dwelling. One bedroom does not add significantly more. And then if you look at the setbacks uh of the building and where it is, they are existing non-conformities. However, if you also look
Um, and then the lot coverage. We're only over by 32 square feet. >> Building, >> excuse, thank you. >> Building coverage. We're only over by 32 square feet when you do the math. um that is primarily pushed over by the eaves of the dwelling. Uh if you took the eaves out of that calculation, you
would conform with the building coverage and the part that you actually see touch the ground. Um it's also being mitigated by a substantial storm water system comprising plan which did provide two dry wells um
in the front left corner of the property that was is designed to collect the entire roof. As Mr. Hail had mentioned, there is no storm water management on property now. Uh the roof leaders go out to splash blocks. Um this will greatly improve the neighborhood by managing
that storm water and keeping it on site. Uh furthermore, if the project is denied, what are the alternatives? Um the the dwelling remains largely the same. Um it does not continue the trend along Edgewood and the surrounding
neighborhood of modernizing and updating these dwellings as I saw when I wrote through the neighborhood today. Um and then the other thing of of taking the entire dwelling and basically putting it in the dumpster. That would be the only way to make it conform and starting completely over again. And you know that's not great for the environment. It
just creates more waste in landfills. And I don't think that's a good way to go. So it's my opinion that the proposed development advances its purpose of the mal land use law. The master plan by modernizing the home for the next generation to move into the neighborhood and is compatible with the surrounding
properties and will not substantially impair the intent or the purpose of the township of Springfield's municipal land use law or master plan. >> Thank you, Mr. I'd like to add one other item. Uh you'll see on the photo that A2
there's that brown spot. There was a a tree there that uh Mr. Livermore removed with proper permits and approvals and it's part of the tree replacement plan. He will be replacing with six new trees on
on the site. So I think department, but it is six new trees that are >> Thank you. >> I have no further questions at this time. >> Thank you. I will turn it over to the board if
there's any questions for Mr. Wellinger. None. Okay. Members of the public, do you have any questions for the witness? >> Sorry, you're good. >> I have no questions. >> Okay, thank you. Um, all right. Uh, Mr. Hail, anything additional?
>> Second. >> Anything additional on the >> No, we have no further witnesses and I I can briefly sum up, but there's no public comment. >> All right, I'm going to open it up for public comment. Are there any comments that you'd like to make on this application? Please come forward.
>> You got to come up. Give your name. I'm sorry. >> Tom Milano. >> The only comment I have it's Ed. >> I'm sorry. >> I'm sorry. First, you need to be sworn in. >> Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth? >> Yes. >> Please state your full name. Your last
>> give us your home address. >> 115 Edgewood Avenue. >> Okay. The name again, please. Thomas Milano. >> Thank you. >> The floor is yours. >> You're talking about Edgewood Avenue, not Edgewood Road.
>> Okay. >> In the beginning, you said the applications for Edgewood Road. >> Thank you. Thank you for the clarification. So, we are speaking to Edgewood Avenue. Again, just briefly, and again, as always, thank the board for their hard
work and board staff and and always appreciate comments from the public and neighbors, especially when they're they're positive. Again, it's older home. Uh I think that the improvements, it's a beautifully designed home. Unfortunately, again, the architect couldn't be here this evening, but welldesigned. think the addition of
storm water management, having a driveway that actually functions. it gets cars off the street. a a garage that functions. And uh and again the unique con configuration of the of the lot in that uh Edgewood is actually
sideyard and yet it functions as front yard and that's what triggers the the setback back because they're treating the lefthand side where we have the 19 feet or 19 plus feet as a quote unquote rear yard when in fact it really
functions as a sideyard. uh and that the even that again the removal of the the tree which apparently was a bit of a nuisance in the area um in replacement with uh trees and it's nice to see that again uh when too often we hear people remove a tree without permits and
approvals and this was done properly and he's committed to provide those trees. So I think that the variance relief as Mr. Wellinger testified is justified and look forward to the board approving this new beautiful uh addition to this home. Thank you again. >> Thank you very much.
>> Members of the board, thoughts, comments? >> Um, if we approve this, I'd like to uh put a condition that any additional coverage documented on the site plan if you could do a patio or a walkway so that they maintain the coverage that's
required. >> No problem. >> I'll add for the record that the storm order design is overdesigned and I did a calculation here tonight. Even if they've got up to the legal lot coverage, the drywall that's been proposed will handle that flow, the
required flow. >> Thank you, Mr. >> I think it would be unusual to come down a stairway just to grasp. >> Yeah. No, I get it. >> Good point. >> Any other members of the board? >> Okay. I think it's an overall improvement to
the site. I think the house is uh ultimately the rendering looks great. I think for all the reasons that the planner stated um this would uh be a benefit without any detriment and you have neighbors who came out and don't seem to have any real concern. So I'd be in favor of granting the application and
the variance requested with the one condition that Mr. Oxine has put on the record. >> Is there a motion to approve? >> I'll move that motion. All chair, just if I might so the record
will reflect um that um Miss Napirano and Vice Chair Cunningham did come in at the beginning of the uh presentation and did hear the uh the application. >> Thank you. >> Okay, we have a first. We have a second.
>> Okay, Mr. Fers. >> Yes. >> Mr. Hawkstein, >> yes. >> Mr. Wex, >> yes. >> Miss Naperano, >> yes. Mr. Shuititz, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Cunningham, >> yes. >> And Chair Cohen, >> yes.
>> Thank you very much. Have a great night and again, appreciate as always your help. >> Have a good evening. >> Take care. >> Okay. The next application we're going to call is application 2025-15. This is 147 New Lane, block 30001, lot
23. This is a request for lot coverage variance for front yard patio steps and rear yard patio. >> Mr. Schwarz, welcome back. >> Yes. >> How are you? >> Good. How are you? >> Good. Thank you. >> Good afternoon, everybody. >> Yes. We're going to swear you in. >> Sure.
>> Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth? >> Yes. >> Please state your full name. Spell your last name. Give your home address. >> Steven Schwarz. S W A R TZ. 147 New Lane. Thank you.
>> So, been here a few times. >> Yes. >> Uh, finally, Michael and I uh have agreed to uh where we're going to place the drywall uh for the pvious versus impervious uh for everything that we're doing on the property, including the the front
steps and the patio, etc. So, we marked it over here. It'll be in the front front area of the lot. I don't know if you want me to bring this up. It's on the second survey that you provided. >> Uh, it could be.
>> Yeah, sure. Come on up. Let me see. >> Uh, no. So, we're going to have to mark this. I don't I'm mistaken. >> Okay. I I don't remember where we were if we had previous numbers.
>> It's not here. It's right here. >> So, Michael and I went over uh the numbers together as far as looking at the manufacturer for the dry well and making sure that there was coverage. And >> Michael Michael agreed, but I don't want
to speak for him. >> Great. >> Yeah. And I think there was a survey that came in that identified the rear patio. There's actually a a perforated pipe in a trench there or a trench there which also supplements some volume. And so um the design which is these round uh
units which will create volume is cited on the I think the right front of the property there identified on that one plan sheet you had. Are you satisfied with the water management on the property? >> Yeah, conceptually it's good. We can tinker with the numbers, but I think the
numbers were pretty good. So, I'd have no problem at this point with the uh storm water mitigation. You have to still decide the front yard um setback for the patio for the steps going into the house. >> Right. So, there is a patio that is
extending um a few feet closer to the street, but there are boulders uh stone, large large stone um that are like three feet in front of that to the street. So, we're behind it. We're closer to the
home as far as the patio goes. And that's what we were trying to file a variance for, but we couldn't get to that stage until we agreed to the drywall. Think you have some renderings in there of the front in the packets,
some schematics perhaps? I think there was uh you had wood wood steps or going. >> Yeah, it was rotted wood steps in uh in the front when we the whole house was rotting when we when we bought it. So, if we were to grant this, I think
just for accuracy on the record because I'm having a difficult time. What is the uh measurement for the front yard, please? I put that on one of the >> measurement of distance
>> set back. >> The setback >> you're requesting. >> Okay. >> No, go ahead. So it the uh current set back to the house is 31 ft and the depth of the front uh landing is 13 ft.
So 31 minus 13 would be 18 at the nearest. >> Does the stone boulder wall count for anything in our ordinance? But it's in front of and it's like feet.
>> I just didn't know if that counted. >> Okay. And >> Michael, I could put in an extra dry well for future, right? You certainly could. We would note it and you get credit for that if future.
Yeah. >> Great. >> There's a uh I don't know if you have this one. It's a green one with the steps. >> Yes. >> Because there's a slight indent. It's dimensioned as about uh about 19 ft. 18 ft 9 in is the setback.
The ordinance permits a 5- foot encroachment, but again, the house is at 31. So, >> yes, >> Mr. Disco, just to be clear, talk about the front yard setback required is 30 feet, the existing is 31 ft and proposed
is 18 ft. 31 is to the existing house, right? There was obviously a landing before, but the landing as proposed, which is a little bit bigger, is at 19 ft. >> 189 18 ft 9 in
>> I think on the survey on the right front corner, it's 30.9, right? >> Okay. Yeah. Front right where the where the landing came out, I was using the 31 as the guide to back into it. And okay, so it
are the patio dimensions on this updated second survey here that has 15,5 266 24. um the same as the ones that were proposed
by Arc Design. The numbers are I think just a little off. I guess my question is then do you have the lot coverage accurately reflected as to what we would be granting if we were to approve? I have the lot coverage on this zoning table
from ARC design back in July as 27% required, 31.7% existing and 37.5% proposed. >> Yes, >> that's accurate. >> That's accurate.
>> Okay. And then the rear yard comes to the patio at 168 or 175, sorry, on the new survey. >> Well, an at grade patio would not count >> not count towards it. So, it's to the house. So, that's not going to be an
issue. Not >> not an issue under Thank you. Sorry. >> So you're the the two the two the relief sought is the front yard setback for the landing slashsteps
and the lot coverage. >> Thank you. >> And the lot coverage was previously requested to have the storm water and the applicant. >> Okay. Any of any questions from the board?
None. Any questions from any member of the public? None. Any member of the public here wish to speak on this application? None. Okay. Um I think the biggest concern that we had
was obviously the detention of the storm water and you've satisfied that um with the engineer and so um I believe that this could be granted um
without any detriment to any neighboring properties now that you have made that mitigation effort and I would be in favor of granting the relief that's been requested. If any member of the board agrees and wants to make a motion,
>> I'll make a motion. >> Thank you. >> I'll second. >> Mr. Shuititz, >> yes. >> Mr. Wex, >> yes. >> Mr. Hawkstein, >> yes. >> Mr. Fishbound, >> no. >> Miss Naperano,
>> yes. >> Vice Chair Cunningham, >> yes. >> Chair Cohen, >> yes. Motion's approved. >> Congratulations. >> Thank you. >> Appreciate you. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Thank you. Does anybody >> Okay. The next application we're going to call is application 2026-453 Meek Street, block 2903, lot 14, lot coverage, rear and sideyard for pool equipment and patio pool patio setback
pool and patio. >> Good evening. How are you? >> Hi. Good evening. My name is Nances. >> We're going to swear you in. Yes. >> Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> Please keep your voice up. Spell your uh
name. Give us your name. Spell your last name and your home address. >> So, my name is Lim Banses. Uh uh the last name is BSM boy. A N CES. Property address is 53 Mix Street in Springfield. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. Um why don't you give the board a little overview of what you're looking Okay to do. >> Very good. Thank you so much for this opportunity. I really appreciate you taking the time uh to hear um the um you know the issue that we have with our poll. So we're looking to apply for a
variance on um for the lock coverage rear and side setbacks as well as the put bull equipment. Additional we kindly request a wave a waiver for offense requirement around the pole as we will be installing alarm system on the back
of of the door as an alternative safety measurement. I request I I requestly um I'm sorry this is my first time. I respectly request an approval
for these varants related to my pool location of my property. The original intention was for the pole to be installed installed towards the real middle section of the property. Unfortunately unfortunately during construction the contractor make
an error and place the pool on the wrong side of the property. This was not intentional and once we realize the issue we immediately follow the proper township pro process because we respect the
spring spring regulations and want to do everything correctly. So what we have right now is the front yard setback requires a 30 ft and what we have is 30.5. The jar the rear jar setback require 30
feet and existing we have 39 feet. The left side jar set back require 8t and what we have existing is 8.5. The right side setback require 8 ft and
we have existing 12.5. The the building height allow 35 feet and what we have right now is 25 feet. The lot itself is an existing condition at 6565 square foot while the suning
required at 75 square ft. The proposed lo.4% where we um have a 36 that is permitted. Regarding the pool location, the required setback is 15 feet. The current condition is approximately eight
feet. The pool equipment is approximately 2 feet, which is why we respectfully requesting a relief. The placement of the pool does not negative impact the traffic, visibility, drainage, safety, neighboring
properties, or any character of the neighborhood. Moving the pool will create a significant financial hardship and require a major construction cost for something that it was honestly was a contractor mistake. We
respectfully ask for a consideration for their approval. So, we've been going back and forth. It's been two years now that we've been dealing with uh legal issues with the contractors and now we in front of you because we respectfully ask for for your approval.
Um that's all I have to say. >> Thank you. Okay, let's go slow. Um >> the waiver sounds like because they're putting an alarm
>> that would not Yeah, >> that's not something that we'd be able to grant >> the board purview. That is a mechanism that the building department can deal with separately. >> Okay. Yeah. >> So I think don't even consider that issue. >> Perfect. So do understand that is not within our jurisdiction to grant. So
that is off the table. We can't make a decision on that. Right. >> Yes. Would >> madam chair the uh I mean the background is there. There there was a zoning the pool was originally cited properly
meeting all the setbacks and went to the building department and then subsequently it was discovered that the pool was built put in the wrong location. Okay. >> So we're playing catchup here if the board feels relief is warranted. Uh the
applicant just said you're you're you're having a lawsuit against your contractor. >> Who is the lawsuit against? What's the contractor? The contractor >> um is Mr. Martinez. His name is Ariel Martinez.
Um LLC contract. >> Okay. And who is he still the contractor of record? >> Oh no. >> Who is the contractor of record? >> So right now since that is being a financial issue right now, we're just trying to get approved by for the bearings and look for somebody else to
do the job. Is it ground or both? >> In ground there. >> It is there. So I could show you pictures because right now since that this is going going on for two years, we cannot take our dogs out. So it's basically it's a lot of dirt and it's a
big hole in our backyard. >> Yes. >> So this this site this aerial view is is not a current view with the round pool. This is This has been changed. >> Yes. Can I can I show you pictures of how it is right now?
>> Can I ask though? >> I think you'd have to enter it into evidence. >> The the coverage that was is now there that obviously wasn't approved because they would have needed relief. >> Right. And the pool was going to remove
most of that coverage walkway and and outdoor kitchen that was in the center of the property. And now it remains. >> Now the pool miraculously shifted to salvage all of those existing coverages. >> Got it. >> So
either the contractor did that of his own valition or the contractor was guided by the applicant. We have to find that out. What? >> No, but what's but what is proposed on this is what I'm assuming is there. This
is what they're asking for now because this is what they >> Yes. >> put in. And you have also um an aerial from >> you have an aerial that shows that uh above ground pool with that uh equipment there.
Uh the equipment was installed the the lock coverage elements were installed 2018ish because the 2016 aerial shows them not there. Can I add something? Sure. >> So, um I don't think uh it was done on
purposely because we applied for the proper permits and we have an approval for the um plumbing, electrical, structural. So, we do have copies of that. If you want me to bring evidence, I could do that. That's the reason that
we thought that the contractor and since that the town came and inspect the property, it was done correctly, we didn't have to worry about anything. But then we found out by the uh inspector um Robert
Bob and um he mentioned that the the the the pool was built in the wrong way on the Roy side of of the property. So that's why we started the process of applying for for the proper bearings so we could follow follow the guidelines.
But we do have proof that the town approved the location of uh of of the pool. >> What's the 165 square foot pad? >> And I'm looking at the I'm looking at
the deck plot. one on the right there's a pad that says 165. What is that? >> Um >> is that the before survey? >> Yeah, that's before the pool was placed there.
>> Okay. So this is the before but every >> the left side is the proposed the right side is the ex was the pre-existing. >> Can I ask permission to show p pictures? >> Can you explain more precisely? So the the pool that's being shown in this
survey is what you wanted to do and it wasn't put that way. So where is the pool that was installed? What's wrong with it that you're asking for a problem? >> Originally the pool supposed to be in the middle as soon as you walk out of the uh sliding door on the family room
is supposed to be in the middle but the contractor put it in the if I'm facing um he put it on the left side of the of the property. So that's why I would love to show you some pictures so we could understand better. >> So it was going to be closer to the outdoor kitchen and
>> No, on the other side >> where the big patio and everything is. You were going to take all the patio out and make a pool there. >> No, no, on the other side of the patio because we used to have an above ground pool. So if you saw the pictures of the aerial,
we had a pool but it was above ground. It was not underground. the picture that I have now >> the inground pool is there. If if I could clarify maybe if you're looking at the Guariello and deck plan, the lower right title block,
>> right? That that on the left side that shows where the pool has been constructed and accurately depicts the the current condition. If you go previous to
plans that were prepared by construct, >> this one here, >> yes, that shows where the pool was proposed in the center of the property. That's what was reviewed and went to the building department. >> So all those patios were going to come out that that drive all all the PA
patios according to this survey. All those PA patios were going to be removed. >> That's how they met. >> Yeah, they're showing they're showing over here the exist the pre-existing with the patios and the pool replacing where the outdoor kitchen was and presumably most of those patios.
>> That's how they pass lot because they're patio. >> Yeah. And the pool counts as zero lot coverage. So there was a net removal of lot coverage until they decided to or somebody decided to keep all those lock coverage elements. Yes. >> Where's the pool now on that? pool now is if you look at the Guariello and deck
plan the left side of that it shows the rectangular pool. So that pool requires relief for setbacks to the sideyard and rear yard because you need 15 feet and there's only nine ft. The pool equipment is two
feet away from the property line. It needs the 15 ft. And now the lock coverage is back up in a variance condition because we're catching up to 2016 when the lock coverage was compliant prior to the creation of all those pavers.
>> The pavers still exist and the outdoor kitchen still exists because the pool got shifted. >> I'm sorry. >> This page on this >> Yep. Look on the left, the upper left, there's a rectangle in the backyard. >> Says,
>> you want me to help you? >> This is what they proposed. They were going to put the pool in the middle. >> Where is it? >> And they ended up >> Where's the pool? >> It says 375 foot pool. I'm sorry if this is confusing. I'm trying to help. It's backwards from this one. So where where this big patio was, they were going to take this all out.
Oh, over. >> And so >> they flipped it 90 degrees and they moved it over. What's going on here? >> Well, since that we pass all the inspections because we pass all the inspections from the town
>> and >> we we had and we had I think it was the building or the structural who came who look at the plans and didn't say anything >> I mean we couldn't know because >> right >> would appear to be okay because you're
meeting all the setbacks, >> right? >> But what was actually done is something totally different. Correct. >> So what I'm saying is as they started nobody's removing the existing patio which perceives that that's what needed to be done. >> Well the idea >> it's not being removed
>> that that's that would be a concern that what's going why this is not not going in the right place. You haven't removed anything. >> To be honest with you we trust our contractor because he was going to redone all the the patio for us. Um, we
do have the understand that he was going to remove the patio. I mean, we didn't know that he was going to do before or after the pool was done, but we have we I'm sorry. >> Yes. Yes. So, we have the confidence since that we pass all the permits.
>> Yeah. >> Maybe I thought that they were going to do it later. >> Okay. Then more importantly, I guess my question is when the pool ended up being vertical and not horizontal to the house, >> you didn't raise a question to the contractor
>> because I never saw the plants. He just >> when you looked out your window, you saw a pool that was vertical, right, from the rear to your house rather than the horizontal plan that >> this nice plan that went into the town.
>> Yeah. Originally, I didn't I didn't see the plans. I didn't know where the pool was going to be. >> Got it. >> So, did you when they put these plans in for the approval, were you aware that they were taking the patio out to put the pool in?
>> Yes. Mhm. >> So, so why can't you take the patio out now? And >> I could take it out. >> You can? >> Yes, of course. >> So, so all these coverage calculations could change. >> Of course. I mean, I'm willing to do what it takes because I I I want to
follow your guidelines. >> No, you do have new plan, new set of plans with the where the pool is at right now. >> Well, it would be a lot better for us to leave it there because it's going to cost a lot of money for us to put it in
the middle. So where the pole the can can I >> here >> this is >> the problem is >> we need to turn this one up. >> No no but now it's a rectangle. They actually installed a pool. >> It's to the right. It's to the right
corner. >> Right. Right. Right. >> Yeah. >> But they put the pool in the wrong place. >> It would reduce some of the coverage issues. >> And so the setback issues, >> you got the pool. So if
>> Madam Chair, just so the board understands, you know, when the building department gets a plan review, it comes from zoning as permitted. So the pool's in the center of the property and it's permitted. They do their plan review. Months may go by, who knows how long. I
think it was March of 2025 when the permit was issued. Construction may start, who knows how long. Then you have your different subcodes go out to look at their specific piece of the puzzle, electrical, plumbing, etc. So if a plumbing guy looks at plumbing stuff and
it's okay, he's not necessarily thinking, did the pool move? That's not, you know, they're expecting the pool to be in the right spot, >> right? >> So, um, I want everybody to understand what plan review is. When it's permitted, you get a permit, it's in the right spot, but
when they go out to do inspections, it's field inspections. They're not repermitting anything when that happens. So, it may have been a misunderstanding on the applicant contractor part, but that they the building department when they go to do an inspection, and they're not final inspections. I know that
because I asked and I checked this today. Things can change, but they don't realize that they're not they didn't get a new plan that said it was changed to a new thing. So, they're going out to do their specific inspections. So, that's why you get down a road and somebody may
have alerted Mr. Herbert or a neighbor Mr. alert m alerted Mr. Herbert, but when code enforcement then found out about it and went out there, that's when the project stopped and they filed for the variance relief as we're discussing. >> The issue still remains even if they
resolve the lot coverage by taking up the patio portions. >> You have to deal with >> you still have the setback issues. >> Yes. >> To leave the pool where it is, you're still dealing with the setback issues, >> right? The setback required is 15 feet. You got nine feet to the side, nine to
the rear, and the pool equipment is two feet away. Presumably, that's because the equipment does have a noise to it. It's an engine running. It's not It's like an AC unit or, you know, as comparable. So,
>> yes. Can I ask permission to show the pictures? >> You don't have any prints of the pictures? >> No, I don't. enter your phone pictures. >> You'd have I mean >> you can email them to the board secretary if you want to put them into
evidence. >> So I just want to show it so I so you could understand better and Yeah, I do understand. So that's why um we were asking for a variance, >> right?
>> There be movement of any of the uh assemblage ancillary to the swimming pool at the new location or no? Are you to are you speaking about the filter equipment? I'm sorry
>> that and anything else that might uh that might be ancillary to the to the pool itself. >> So again on the Guaral and deck plan the filter equipment is shown the bottom right of the proposed condition. It's
really an asbuilt condition. So it's quite quite distant from the pool. Uh presumably it was put there because that was open area when the patio and the outdoor kitchen were still there. >> Well, would any of the uh apparatus have to move to make to make the pool
okay in its >> Yes. >> proposed new location? >> Yes. There's underground piping, underground electric, and the pool equipment themselves. If the pool's moving, you may want to have the pool equipment to So, something would have to
move. Yes. And if that is the case, those um the uh that construction that's already there that's in a place that might have to be moved, does that have to show on the new set of
maps so we have an idea of um what the property or what the uh what this is all to look like once once it's proposed to to be in its proper place.
I mean, we already have a pool that's that's misplaced. >> Yes. >> So, what I'm curious about is what else is misplaced or proposed will be have will have to be replaced.
>> So, um the applicant is seeking relief of sideyard and rear yard setback of the pool and lock coverage in the pool equipment. Can that be done to remain in uh to become or to
to uh stay in a place within within all the various sidelines or backlines and setbacks? >> No, I mean alternatively the applicant can relocate things and be variance free and not need to appear before this.
Well, we don't know that at this point. >> It can be because originally as as originally proposed it was it went through zoning went to the building department but it was only when the construction of the pool construction of the pool equipment and the remaining
condition of all the existing lot coverage elements of the pavers that were originally going to be removed or or shown were in conflict with the pool. They are still there. So everything right now is pure speculation.
>> Well, again, you can grant the relief. She's asking for the relief. >> I understand. >> That's an option. You can you can deny the relief and she could then provide a compliant ordinance compliant plan. >> What I'm suggesting is that everything
is not laid out as projected. >> Well, the the Guariello and deck plan shows where everything is currently. accurately >> including the pool, including the pavers, the lock coverage elements, and including the pool equipment.
>> That's kind of represented here. >> You just have to turn it upside down. >> So, we have the uh previous plans and we have the the plans with the new position of the pole. Yes,
>> that was the one that was approved. >> The the construct upper right that title bar construct there's at least one, two, three, four.
It's like five or six plans. There that was in a compliant position and variance free. >> Was the company that did this? Were they a pool company? >> They do have a pool company. >> This the first pool they ever did.
>> Well, this is the first time that I'm building a pool. So, >> I'm talking about the company. when when we find out about this and uh he mentioned that we wouldn't have any problems because he done it before and uh we were completely in shock. But you know that's why we're here is it's been
two years already because this is something new for us and we're trying to do whatever it takes or for to be in compliance right >> is >> I'm sorry >> yes anything that can be done to
mitigate the >> as it is right now anything else that could be done to mitigate in the design to make the variances less encroaching on the property lines. >> Well, the the lot coverage elements can
be removed and satisfy >> not only right but but it was still looking at the >> you physically have to relocate where the pool has been placed andor the equipment you'd have to relocate them >> with trimming out >> can't just make the pool smaller. >> No, but can you trim out the outside of
the pool like the the the walkound of the pool? I that's a question actually that I was going to ask is are there is there actually a walkway around is there like and what is the dimension on that >> is if I'm not mistaken it's eight
>> that would go right up to the f the property line if you had a >> okay now I need to see a picture >> they have to put a fence around it >> she's asking that too >> if they have to put a fence around Mhm.
But I guess the question is with the pool as it is right now, how the measurement is 8.74 ft, but is that including a walkway? Is there is there
like pavers proposed around the pool? >> Okay. >> And and and just I'm looking at that photo and that's not the same as this because this shows a complete rectangle and that is not
>> that's different than what the survey is. >> Yeah. There's a there's a It's not a rectangle. This shows as a rectangle. >> Yep. It's not shown any >> to Mr. Disco. >> Did we do that?
>> Sorry. Let's do There's two pictures that are being shown. So, let's mark those first. >> I mean, this plan is dated February 12th, 2026. So, it's supposed to reflect the asbuilt condition. >> There's the pool is not rectangular. Got
a little bump out for the stairs. >> Yes. >> You take photos. >> I'm looking. >> Okay. She has them to show you. >> Is this what you want to see? >> Yeah. I We were out there. But >> before we continue, can I just ask, is there any member of the public that is
here to speak on this application? >> Thank you. >> Yes. Thank you. >> You know what I didn't see in the filter? >> No, no, they did. They did. That's what he's saying. The filter is in this little They put money in all the way
over here. >> Can't see it. >> Well, because it's the other side. It's It's behind the patio that exists. It's all the way on the other side. >> No, never mind. >> I have pictures from May 5th. Uh
>> but they're similar to her pictures. It looks like it's rectangular, but there's probably where the stairs are going to be. That's that indent. Uh the L as you call it. With all the respect, I would love for you to grant the variance. And um like I
said, it's been two years already. I cannot put my dogs outside and um it's been a hardship not only financially but also mentally because my kids cannot go outside to to play in the backyard. Um
this is something new for us. If we weren't um aware in the beginning, we would have done differently or we could hire a different company. So right now we paid this guy now we need to pay another company to finish the poll and
all the legal um fees that we have to pay because we have a litigation going on with this guy is is we're investing a lot of money on this. So with all the due respect I would love for you to consider the bearings
I I I'm not going to speak for anyone else. Um before we say before I say anything though, our attorney has a question for Mike. >> Yes. Uh Mike, if you look at the zoning information sheet and the application,
the lot coverage numbers don't appear to be the same as on the February 12 26 lot plan. Just trying to make sure we have the correct
numbers that's up and above that. Apparently, there may be an apron around the pool that's not even included. >> The the the chart was done when the application was originally filed.
Best estimate at the time. The obviously the the February 2026 is more accurate in a sense that that's a an asbuilt as that date. >> Okay. So >> I would defer to those numbers which says 38.25
right for lock coverage. >> Uh actually then it says 40.2 someone >> that's my handwriting. >> Oh so is that actually that's what I had. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> But now she's also going to be putting a walkway around it.
>> Yes. So I don't want to speak for anyone else. I'm going to speak for myself here. I am not going to be in favor of approving this this evening. That is not to say that if you were to come back with a proposal, maybe with some suggestions that the board has regarding
how to become more compliant and recommendations on maybe where the equipment could go. We can then consider an application. But as it sits before me right now, I'm I would not be moving
forward with granting the relief that you're requesting this evening. So if you want the board to discuss that further or if there's any member of the board that feels differently and wants to speak but um I would I understand
where you are with respect to the pool and I could consider potentially the setbacks but something to me would have to be done with where the placement of the equipment is. I would have to see the
plan with the pavers in place to understand exactly the setback that you're would be requesting because as it stands I don't believe that this would be accurately reflected because you don't have any of the walkway around the pool and I would not want to see the
amount of coverage with the existing patio. >> Okay. >> So that's just me. Well, >> I don't does does any matter >> so I I think you're better off tableling
and coming back with a suggestion that us moving forward because I can tell you that I do stand by it doesn't work. >> Um I I have a technical question. If you have a book in 1.6 from the property line and there's a vent something, are
there servicing issues? Are there safety issues? Are there fire issues >> could be heat would up against a vinyl fence too? >> We can ask the building department if that aspect of it was looked at. >> Again on the plan review it wasn't an issue but when somebody as an issue
>> when I asked today electrical rough electrical is rough electrical first electrical was to be inspected at the end of May of this month. So I don't think that's been looked at yet. So Mike, for the applicant, what would
be her best foot forward to come back to us in front of the plan as far as should she be hiring another architect to look at this and to to look at where she's at? >> Somebody's got to present it a plan with the what whatever the envisioned coverages are or whatever coverages that
we currently have are going to be removed. And to answer your question, is there going to be pavers or walkway between the pool and the sideyard fence? doesn't have to be. They could have it just, you know, >> trimmed down. >> They could just have coverages where the
steps are going to be on that side of it. >> So, I don't know if it's guaranteed that there's going to be steps around it. Could just be grass on that edge. >> It's not a big pool in the sense that it's not 40t long by 20 feet and you need access around everything.
>> Do Do you understand the concerns of the board? >> Not really. I think there are a couple things they want to address. >> The apron on the pool. They want to know yes, there will be one it where where and what size it'll be. No, there won't
be one. They need a final determination on that to be presented so they can include that in the approval if there is one. Um, second thing is a concern about the placement of the filter house and that it's so close to the sideyard and I
think some of the board members would be looking for that to be remedied in some way. Um, the third thing is the overall lot coverage because you're exceeding it and you have a big patio. So, I think
some of the board members are asking for you to consider presenting a plan that has less lot coverage. Uh, overall, >> meaning removing the the patio because we're willing to to remove the >> I'm sorry. >> Mean meaning removing the patio because
we were willing to remove the patio. >> How you want to do it would be up to you, but certainly removing or reducing the patio would be one way, >> right? Because remember, you're you're you have you can go up to 36%. And as presented, it looks like you're
somewhere between 38 and 40. So, it's not necessarily a full removal, but maybe a proposed plan that comes down that is compliant with the amount that you're permitted. And just so you know, anything you add
around the pool would also have to be considered as well in your total coverage. I would also suggest um as far as your request of a waiver for the fence, this board does not have the authority over that, but you may want to get that
determined in advance before you move forward as to whether you're going to have to put up a fence or not. So that that doesn't come as a surprise after >> you have a fence around your yard. >> Yes. >> Yeah. National pool codes do allow for
alarms. Uh, unfortunately, Springfield had an unfortunate incident about about a dozen years ago and they put a stipulation in for a barrier. Um, again, I'll defer to the code official whether the alarm
seems reasonable. If an alarm goes off, you know, uh, that that would serve, but that that's not for the board to >> it's not a zoning issue. It's a code issue. I do have a question on that. Let's just say they say they have to put the fence in. >> Okay.
>> Is there distance between the one fence and the other fence? >> Because if there's only six feet, how does a fence fit in there? >> Well, you could put a fence just around the pool and tie it into the existing fence on the side. You don't have to put a fence, >> but they have a property fence.
>> Yeah. >> Right. Right. But they could tie the the they could make a three three-sided fence that ties into >> the property line fence. >> The pool fence just has to be pool fence compliant, which there's a height limitation, but I think the existing fence would satisfy that. And then the
gates have to be self-latching, self closing. That's really the limitation on pool fence. Can't have a three-ft tall fence though. But it it uh I I think it's a minimum of four and a half feet tall, but you could be up to six feet tall. So, there's an existing fence on
the property line which I believe was a vinyl 6 foot white as I recall. So, that could be part of the barrier around one side of the pool. Totally deep. >> Well, if we decide not to do anything, I'm sorry. >> Four feet high.
>> Four feet high. Thank you. >> We decide not to do anything just to put everything the way it was before. Do you think it would be a lot better? If you want to do that, >> well, I mean, right now we up to $150,000. So,
>> if you're compliant with this zoning, then you don't need a variance. >> But again, that's your decision >> to make on how you want to proceed. What I'm trying to help you do is understand where this board is at if you want to
try and bring this plan closer to what they might approve. So, so what you're saying you're going to do, it's hard for us to make a a determination. If you showed us what you would do, >> we we're just tired. I mean, it's been
two years, so we just trying to find a solution here. >> But if you went to this engineer and you talked to them about it and had them update this plan to show us what you're telling us, it would help us a lot. >> Do you want to table this for now? I'm sorry.
>> Do you do you want to hold on to the application for now? >> No, no, no. I'm just gonna do whatever you guys suggest. >> So, the option is you can either say to hold at this time and you're going to update the necessary items or we would
vote on moving forward a yes or no. >> I mean, I would love for you to vote. >> Okay. But >> um if if we deny it now, it would be a problem. Sorry. >> What she's offering you is to >> go on the record that you're going to come back with some changes.
>> I would love to come back. Thank you. >> I think that's your best >> I'd too if if they could relocate the the equipment. >> That would that would help a lot. >> Okay. >> Okay. That unfortunately it's probably going to cost you money to move that piece, but I
think that's a cheaper alternative than having to move the whole thing. And it might be better for >> remove the equipment and also remove the patio because >> not remove the equipment, just move the equipment. >> Remove the equipment. >> Yeah, it's got to be it can't be that close to the
>> right the the rear yard set back. >> So, >> and if you already have the lines in there to move it closer to the pool is probably not as big a deal as you think. It just be shortening up the connections. So if we were to carry this for you to
go back to um your go your surveyor surveyor um engineer thank you engineer um if we were if we if we were
to do that um and we were to carry it We would, in order for you to not have to re-notice, send out all the notices and do it as the return receipt and post the notice, we would have to announce the date on the record today for anybody that was here on the application so they
know when you'd be coming back and it would be announced today. So the question is, do you think that you would be going back to your engineer to update the plan for our next meeting, which would be in June, >> or do you do you think that that's
enough time for him to rework this plan to come back to us with something to present? >> June 16th. >> June 16th. Thank you. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> You believe that he could put that together for the June 16th meeting? Yes.
>> Okay. So, we are going to move someone will move >> I'll make the motion to next month >> to the June 16th meeting. >> Thank you. >> Is there a second? >> Right here. >> Mr. Sheitz. >> Yes.
>> Misso. >> Mr. Hawkstein. >> Yes. >> Mr. Wex. >> Yes. >> Mr. Fenbomb. >> Yes. >> Vice Chair Cunningham. >> Yes. >> And Chair Cohen. >> Yes. For any member of the public who is present for this application, it will be
carried to June 16th in the same location. There will be no further publication or notice. You don't have to send notice again. >> Thank you so much. >> The the motion at this meeting serves as notice. >> I really appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you for your time. >> Look, >> do you understand what needs to happen
for the next one, though? I just want to make sure you >> She can talk. >> Okay. >> Yes. I I think she should come in and talk to Bob and me and the building department. >> Perfect. >> We'll try to get it down a path that can succeed. >> Thank you. Um, the final application on this
evening is application 2026-5 79 Beverly Road, block 2901, lot 21, a request for lot coverage and driveway setback variances for driveway expansion. >> Hi, how are you? >> Hi, good. How are you?
>> Good, thank you. Where are you in? >> Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth? >> Yes. >> Please state your full name. >> Maria. >> Spell your last name and give us your home address. >> Maria Alla A. Vas in Victor. E L L A 79
Beverly Road, Springfield, New Jersey. >> Thank you. And I don't have to tell you to keep your voice up. >> Okay. I work in a school. I'm used to it. So, my husband and I purchased the home two years ago. We gave the inside a lot of TLC with all the necessary
permits. We have now ventured out to fixing up the outdoors. So, our driveway is a single width driveway. So, we park one behind the other. So, we are seeking a variance for a twoft setback instead
of a 5ft. We do have the space if you're looking at the home on the leftand side that the old property owners had plants, shrubbery, rocks, something along those lines. and it is going to be over the allotted lot coverage. So our
existing is 26.2% we're proposing 30.5. Mr. Disco and Jen Law were fabulous in helping me throughout. Um so shout out to them. They suggested because it's over they needed storm water mitigation. So we did have an engineer design a
drywall for us and we are not allowed to park on the street overnight. So, and as you see, we have a large Italian family in the back, so we're always parking on the street. So, it would definitely help the extra parking in the driveway. >> Great.
>> Any questions from the board? >> I just have a a quick question. >> Is it possible to have the driveway, the cutting street be same width and then have the driveway widen so you can have a little grass or something in front of the uh the driveways? How wide is that
driveway that you're proposing? >> That we're proposing would be 20 ft. >> Okay. So, the plan. >> Yeah. >> Looks worse than the plan. >> Any other questions? Any members of the public any questions? any members of
>> would the u would the proposal encompass getting rid of some of the shrubbery that's on the side? Is that the idea? >> Yes, but we're leaving two feet. So, there would be new shrubbery because the shrubbery that currently exists is smack in the middle. So, we would put new along the lines and the ne we've spoken
to the neighbors on that side. They're supportive. >> They told you they don't care. >> Yeah. No, they're like, "Yes, good." What? What is the water mitigation again? I >> dry >> drywall. >> Yes, drywall. >> Mr.
>> There should be a a plan from Manta Design within a packet. >> Miss Mr. You've seen what? >> There's a dry well. It's in the front of the house. It's tying in. It looks like the roof drains from the front of the house that it's been sized appropriately
for the volume. The only condition I would throw on there, uh, Madam Chair and and Bruce, is it it's shown on the plan, but because you're so close to a neighbor, we would want a curb along the edge of the driveway. They're showing a block curb. We don't want that to disappear and the
water to shed to the neighbor. We want it to be directed to the street. And it's incorporated in the design already. So, we just don't want that to disappear. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions? Any
member of the public wish to speak on the application? >> Great. I'm in favor of granting relief that's being requested. Everyone in agreement or anyone's in agreement wants to make a motion. >> I'll move to approve. I'll second. >> Um, Mr. Hawkstein.
>> Yes. >> Mr. Wex. >> Yes. >> Mr. Fersenbound. >> Yes. >> Miss Napano. >> Yes. >> Mr. Sheitz. >> Yes. Uh, vice chair. >> Yes. >> And >> yes, >> thank you.
>> Any other business this evening? >> Is there a motion to adjurnn? >> I make a motion. >> Second. >> Second. All in favor? >> I.