[Music] Good evening and welcome to the May 19, 2025 meeting of the city summit zoning board of adjustment. My name is Scott Ly and I am the chair of the zoning board. Please rise and join us in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. In accordance with New Jersey statute 10
col4-10, adequate notice of this special meeting has been provided to a newspaper of record and has been posted here in city hall. This meeting is a judicial proceeding. Any questions or comments must be limited to the issues that are relevant to what the board may legally consider in reaching a decision and
decorum appropriate to a judicial hearing must be maintained at all times. For the benefit of the interested public, this meeting is being livereamed on the city's YouTube page. Also broadcast on Summit's government channel, which is Comcast channel 34,
Verizon channel 30. Transcript of this meeting is also being taken, which using by using video and audio. So, we need all speakers to utilize one of the microphones in the room. Please note that the fire exits are to my right, your left, and at the back of the room
where you entered. City has a listening system to assist the hearing impaired. Anyone needs hearing assistance, please obtain the system of the deis. Return it after. Nicole, could you please call the role of members? Mr. Kieran here. Mr.
Malay here. Mr. Nelson here. Mr. Steiner is excused. Mr. Yuko is excused. Miss Chief here. Mr. Fes is excused. Mr. Tantuli here. Mr. Nearing here. Vice Chair Zhan is excused. Chairman Lyus here. You have a quorum. You may
proceed. Thank you, Nicole. Uh Andy Ball is typically our zoning board's attorney, but he's being uh aptly represented by Zack Stazinski tonight. Welcome back, Zack. We're happy to have you.
Um Zach or Andy advises the board on matters of law and is the key interface with the applicant's attorney. Uh normally the attorney does not vote, not normally, never does the attorney vote on the applications. Nicole Kotiga is a city employee and is acting the zoning
board secretary although for one more meeting. Correct. Last one. That's right. Our board secretary works with the applicants on preparing applications, planning our agendas, and keeping our meeting minutes. Board secretary also does not vote on applications. Also present are experts
who are hired annually by the board to provide input to the board. Tonight we have Marie Rafé from Collier's Engineering. Also present is Tom Barren from Burgess Associates. Um, and he is our uh board planner. These experts are
seated at table to the right of the board, the public's left. They also do not vote on applications. Our board consists of seven regular members and up to four alternates. All members can participate in the hearing tonight, but only a maximum of seven can vote. Most applications require a simple majority
to be approved. Before we enter into executive session to vote on the application, you'll be advised of how many votes are required for approval. Each case will begin with the applicants or their attorney giving an overview of the application process to
date, the variants that are required. We then hear from any additional expert witnesses the applicant may have to help explain the application and why the variances are needed. The board experts, followed by the board members, then may ask questions of the applicant, their attorney, and their expert witnesses.
Due to recent cases running excessively long, we strongly encourage applicants and their experts to give brief and concise testimony so we may get to as many cases as possible in a given evening. Once the board members and the board professionals have completed their questioning, the public will have an
opportunity to ask questions. This is not the time to tell us what you think about this case. That opportunity comes at the end of the hearing. Please be careful as you how you phrase your questions. They should not be proceeded with a statement about the case, but should be a direct question to the witness. Also, before you ask your
questions, please clearly state your name, spell your last name, and provide your address. It's important that a court reporter be able to keep a clear and accurate public record. After all witnesses have been heard, members of the audience have their second opportunity to speak, and at that time,
you may express your opinion, positive or negative, about the application. Then the public hearing is closed and we enter into executive session. This is where the board members discuss the case and then vote. You'll be able to listen to our executive session, but you will not be able to participate in our
discussion. I ask now that each applicant and their attorney, if present, come up and give a brief synopsis of their anticipated testimony tonight, including the number of witnesses and whether or not they think they can finish within 30 minutes. Everyone says they can, but it's not always the case. Uh we will begin this
evening with 20 Van Dyke please. Thank you. Hi everybody. Welcome. I'm Tim Clie. I'm the architect. Yes sir. Don't have a engineer. My name is Christine Skelecotus. I'm res and I'm Demetrius
Scalcotus. Okay. And we think we're under half an hour. Perfect. Great. Thank you so much. Be with you shortly. Uh can we hear from representatives for 11 Plain Street, please? Good evening. Caric Jron, the applicant for 11 Plain Street. Uh I have one
witness, Alex Rodriguez. Um we should be done by 30 minutes. All right, great. Thank you so much. And then next we have 45 Franklin Place. Um Hillary Als and Amanda Wolf from Dempsey Dempsey and Sheen representing Williams Family Trust 45 Franklin Place.
We have um the owners and three professionals. I would say 45 minutes to an hour. Thanks Hillary. Y and then finally nine Stony Hill Court. Good evening. Hey, I'm Jonas Carr. I'm Hope Carr.
I'm John Chinocchio, the architect. Okay, great. Is he your only witness tonight? Yes. Okay, perfect. Do you think you'll finish in 30 minutes or for sure? All right. Thank you guys. All right, we'll let us begin then with
20 van Dyke, please. Great. Our attorney is going to swear you in and can tell us a little bit about your case and then you can let your architect go through the details. Okay. Please raise your hand. Raise my hands. Uh, can you just state your name and spell your last name, please? Oh
yeah, we have the spelling. You just state your name. Christine Scalcotus. Demetrius Scalcotus. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth? Yes. Thank you. Great. Tell us a little bit about your project. Um we have um refurbished the
property 20 Vend Place and um we wanted to make sure that it beautified the neighborhood. We have two tenants in this dwelling. Um, we had a chicken wire fence around the property and it was actually, no offense, ugly. We wanted to
beautify the property again. So, for safety reasons, the second floor tenant has a six-year-old son. Um, and as we were uh fixing the property, we noticed there was a lot of children on that um corner of the um road. So, we thought
that the best thing to do was replace the fence, not understanding that we actually violated any compliance issues. We just were trying to res respect the property and the aesthetics of it. So, the first important thing for us all to know is there's children in this neighborhood. There's at least 10
children that I see every time I go to the property. So, we're very concerned that a three-foot um concrete retaining wall and a child jumping off it could easily break their arm, their wrist, what have you. And that would be in horror for us personally that that would
happen. Um second thing second item the safety and residence of the tenants themselves. Um it right now there's only a second floor that has a very young child. Um we wanted to improve obviously the design of the property. Um and
that's why we chose the slotted approach rather than obviously a solid approach. Um and then we were concerned obviously for the visibility of going through that area. It's seems to be a cutth through property um road um and obviously to the
to the neighbors we didn't want to we wanted to make sure that people are slowing down as well. Um and um and overall on the project that we've been doing, the neighborhood has been um approaching our contractor and saying they really appreciated the improvements
that we've made to the property and to that neighborhood. So lastly, again on the good faith effort, we did not know we were not in compliance. Um, and we wanted to just retain, you know, the fence and not make it a chicken wire fence. Great. Thank you so much. Tom
Marie, do you have any questions for this witness? Okay, great. Questions from the board for these witnesses? I just have a quick one. Sure. How long have you owned the property? You bought it in uh 20 during CO. Was there a fence there? There was a
fence. Was there a solid fence there or just what you It was really ugly chicken wire fence with like metal. The reason why I asked is I remember my best friends grew up next door and I remember there being a fence there. Yeah, it was there was a solid fence there prior to us. It was an estate
sale, right? the apparently the gentleman and daughter passed away and the ex-wife was selling the property and um yeah we just bought it as is and it yeah my recollection is there's always been a fence there yeah there's always been there but it was a very ugly
chicken any other questions I do have a question in the comments from the sorry comments from the uh planner it said it was 25% % openings. I looked at it looked like it
was a lot more than 25%. So I I can provide clarification as far as what the ordinance allows and what seems to be there. Right. So So to your point, the fence that exists is a 4ft high picket fence. Looks like it's about 50% open. I'm estimating based on the
images. That's what I estimated as well, which means there's a panel and a space of about the same amount that are altered. And then right up it said 25%. That's why um well the ordinance allows up to 25% open u opening or closing rather um
when it's along the property in the front yard. Okay. So that that would be like a post and rail style fence or raw iron. I understand. Okay. Skinny you have more space between. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Let's see
anything else. Do we have any questions? Questions only from the audience for these witnesses. Right. Seeing none. All right. Great. You're you're up. Yes. We'll get you
sworn in. Come see. Oh, I don't know. Thank you. Just state your name. Uh, spell your last name. It's Timothy Klesie. K L E S E. You swear affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth. Yes. Thank you. if you could just give a brief qualifications of your
I'm a degree in architecture and actually in interior design and uh I'm licensed in New Jersey and New York. I've been licensed for I guess about 30 years now. I'm getting kind of old and um and my license is in good standing. I appear
we've seen you a couple of times here. Yeah. All right. Okay. Want to accept this expert? We will. Thank you. Welcome. Thank you. Nice. So, um I there's a neighbor here and I just spoke to the neighbor and the neighbor has some comment. So, I'll try to go quickly
so get the neighbor if you just microphone out and then there's like a little switch you can just on the side. You have to sing a little bit and I'll let I'll let this guy do that. Yeah. Okay.
Okay. So, um I assembled the owner built the fence without a permit, right? That's what we're here. The fence was installed illegally, right? They didn't realize it, but it was installed illegally. And the fence um in the front yard should be
75% open, right? 25% closed. And it is I think about 5050. I think that's what is going on. It looks like we're only 50% open. Um, but what was what's going on? This
drawing is exactly the same as the drawing that you have in your packet. Okay. And I went back in the upper leftand corner here and I found the old chicken wire fence. And the old chicken wire fence is I I got it off of an old
Google map. And the um the chicken wire fence looks bad, but it actually is pretty good in some ways because it lets a lot of light through. You know, it lets the light to pass through. But that is the chicken wire
fence that they were replacing. It's these actual four pictures that are also within your packet. And then what they did is they came and they built this 4 foot high I'm going to say 50% open PVC
fence. And if you look at the site plan in the middle they ran they removed the picket fence from the upper corner came all the way down around Van Dyke came to the corner where the hydrant is and then they went to the
right and they went up to where the sidewalk is. And then from the sidewalk to the driveway, they added fence. There was no fence there previously. Okay. So, this section that's to the left of the walkway before the driveway was
added. And uh I think the fence itself, well, I guess I I'll go on just a little bit, but I'll do it quick. The second exhibit is just one that I went back over there on Tuesday just to take a look at last Tuesday to take a look at everything just to see what it looked
like as it kind of weathered in a little bit. And this is really an exhibit I need to mark for you. I guess they call it A1. Yes. And I'll just describe it. It's four photos of the existing site and I labeled them A, B, C, and D. And really
they look exactly the same as the previous photos. There's been no change at all except it's kind of grown in a little. And on the left side of the walkway in my photo B, you can see that area, the fence and the wall that was added. Um, now there there's a neighbor
a neighbor that lives up the street who's worried about the traffic on the street. And it appears that this street is a little bit of a cutthroat. And also within both of the reports there's comment about sort
of protecting the sight triangle of the corner you know and I think with that in mind we would like to propose to cut the corner on a 45 you know
from yeah maybe I'm saying about 15 feet in on each side and that would allow that the site to still be visible in the corner. And we could just use the pieces of fence we have and swing them around and do it. And
um I don't know the the neighbors here and I'm sure they'll have comment and um that's the only comment that I can see that came out of the reports that came. But both reports from both of the professionals both were asking related
to the sight triangle and I was hoping this could address that problem. And I guess with that in mind, I'd like to close for now so we can move this along a little bit. Okay. Thank you. Questions, Tom? I I think we understand
the gist of the application. I would just ask, and you guys have alluded to it a bit. Um, if the board were to grant the variance relief, can you help them understand specifically, I guess, the hardships impacting the property andor public benefits? Again, you kind of touched on a few, and I think the client
may whether it's from an aesthetic standpoint. um functional some of the considerations you guys offer. Can I? Yeah. Yeah, please. Well, you can respond to I guess
I guess from um to answer your question, it was um safety on my part. Um, and also, you know, they parked their vehicles in the back and I just get really concerned with the snow and everything that if they didn't see like a fence in front of them that they might
go too close. So, that was another safety issue that um that's why we did the Belgium blocks too to stop the car. And we on purpose put the Belgium blocks in front. We spend a lot of time there and that kids are in the street all the time playing which is awesome to see.
Yes. But as kids, you know, oh, let's go jump off the retaining wall and you know, and uh and that's what worried us a lot, especially with the young young adult, the young little kid that's up there with the young family that's upstairs. You just want to be as safe as
possibly can. We thought the slats, you know, didn't hinder that visibility too too much. And again, we we're replacing an existing fence that we thought was already kind of grandfathered in or approved. So, but we also think that the fence is aesthetically pleasing. Yeah.
More aesthetically pleasing than the chicken wine. Yeah. We wanted to beautify the neighborhood. That was our objective as well. The house was a lime green broken paneling and um you know, we wanted to come in and have a quality product. I guess and it's a corner lot.
I really don't have a rear yard for no the children. So the front yard in in the sense of a corner lot becomes the rear yard in this case. Okay, great. Thank you. Questions for this one? Oh, go ahead, Marie. Sorry.
Could you clarify how tall the retaining wall is, the landscape wall and the fence on top of it? The highest point of the ret the highest point of the retaining wall is 2 foot six high and the fence is four feet high. I Yeah, I believe. Sorry. Yeah, four. The
retaining wall definitely folks. So 6'6 total at the highest at the corner. That's where it Well, you can point if you want to. I thought it was highest here. Yes. This is the highest point. The corner. The corner should be the the
corner where I'm talking about adding the sight triangle. Yeah, I think that's where the retaining wall is. That looked like it was more than 30 in though. That wall. I No, I measured it. I was there 3. This is 3 ft. I didn't measure it, but it looked tired. And 3 ft. Was that retaining wall always
there or did you put the retaining wall? The retaining wall. We just painted and we Well, we retrofitted it and then we Well, the retaining wall was here. Yeah. Yeah. To this point. Yeah. But this section, if I got this correct. No,
correct. This between the walkway and the driveway, that portion of the retaining walls. We did have a reduction. I mean, I I'm a little concerned about it because I was there today and I I drove around the block both ways and it it it does interfere
with sight on that corner and to me that's a little more dangerous if kids are playing in the street and whatnot rather than a kid climbing on the wall and jumping off. It's um this is I mean this I see this a lot with not only just
with fence but bushes and you know people have um you know there's there I thought it was three feet was the limit on the on the on the corner triangle. I thought it was three feet. You can have up to 30 in. So 2 and 1/2 ft where it's kind of solid whether it's a fence or
hedge or wall and then you have you can install a fence along the property line that has that openness of 75% or more. But I mean you you can't see coming either way. You can't can't see. Yeah. Well, that that's why we're talk about cutting the How far back are you going
to put? I was thinking 20 feet each way. TW 20T like each section is 8 feet. So I'm saying to where it is now. I I went corner. How
far back are you going to go with it? When I did that I I went off from the corner right where the hydrant is. Right. I'm saying back. So 16 and 16. Well I I was saying if it's 8 foot section that would probably
be easier. 16. Okay. All right. That probably makes more sense. Mr. Cle, if if your uh site plans to scale, could you just tell us what the approximate distance is from the curb to um the retaining wall on either corner?
From the curb. Yeah. It's 8 ft. 8 ft. Okay. Thank you. And it's 8t approximately 8 ft in both directions. It's 8 feet. Mhm. on the horizontal side of Van Dyke and it's seven feet when I go
um up the sheet the longer side. Perfect. Thank you so much. Any other questions for this witness from the board? Seeing none questions from the audience for this
witness. See none. Okay. Um, in that case, would you like to say anything in conclusion before we go into an executive session? I guess what we're saying is that we're obviously again we didn't realize the compliance issue and we're willing to
modify the design to support obviously the neighborhood support of the neighborhood as well as the visibility. Great. Just a question for point of clarity. Um, I heard 20 feet, 15 feet, and then 16 feet. Are we Yeah, I think
we settled at 16. I think the slats are 8 feet in each. So, if you Yeah, if you did it within eight, you wouldn't have to customize the fence. You could just Yeah. slide it out. Yeah. 16. 16 takes me actually where I drew it is exactly 16.
Thanks. Okay, great. And now um this is the point where the audience can make general comments. Yes, please. Please state your name, spell your last name, and give us your address. Sure. My
name is Jesse Gala. Last name Gala G A L A. And I live at uh 16 Van Dyke Place. Oh, you swear from the testimony you're about to give us the truth. I do. Thank you. Um bear with me. I I wrote down my
thoughts and it's all encompassed here. First off, you've done a wonderful job with the house. Thank you. House is great. Um but let me let me go through this uh quickly. Uh the new fence creates a blind corner. Oncoming cars are not
visible till you start to enter the turn, giving little time to avoid a head-on collision, pedestrians in the road, or cars parked directly on or around the corner. I don't have the right to say where people do in their
front yards. It's not my business. Uh I don't care where people park in on my street. You can park wherever you want, but combine the two, what happens is uh you have a threelane or a three car wide
road and it gets down to a blind pinch point of only one car wide uh that people cannot see as they uh approach it. Anyway, uh the fence that uh the fence and the
wall that it sits on top of at the corner have a combined height of about six feet tall. I know this because I am six feet tall and when I stand next to it, uh it's the at least the main post is taller than me. So,
uh, at about 50% open when you are driving next to it, the the fence that's next to you and the fence around the corner as you're moving, they kind of cancel each other out. Kind of like a polarized lens. So, even if you're
looking around the corner, you can't see it while doing anything above 5 miles an hour, it might as well be solid. Um, and Uh, okay. This creates problems. Kids play on the section of the street. I
agree with you. There always little kids there. And that means if somebody's shooting down the street and they cut that corner, they'll have seconds to miss the kid or hit a parked car. Um, uh, in the 20 years I have lived there,
I have noticed, uh, when people reach this corner, they actually cut to the inside. Say if you're driving down the hill, people tend to favor the inside of the corner to get around faster. So, they're actually crossing into the
opposing lane. And if you can't see until you enter the corner, that makes it worse. That's nothing to do with you. That's just human nature. All right. Uh let's see. When uh let's
see. with just two to three foot uh tall wall you could see what was coming. Now you can't uh at night it's worse. I mean during the daytime you can kind of see what's going on but when it's dark you can't.
Um and again this is only the front of the house. This is only as you clear the front facade of the house are about to go around the corner to the right or as you're coming down and clear the side of the house. So, we're just talking about where your maple tree is, basically.
Um, and I agree the kids should be kept from jumping off of that, but it's maybe a little too high. So, I don't want to just throw shade, you know, and curse through darkness. I'd rather offer you some light. All right. Um, the previous
fence, I'm not saying it was good luck, but it's a post and wire or post and cable fence, right? that's more than 80% open. It's every six feet there's a post and there's cable horizontal cable going across that could keep a little kid from
going through. I don't know. Uh if not that no one even when when two cars come to the intersection, they both think they have right away and they don't think they should stop. Now, if you've got three car lengths wide, it's not a problem. We make it around. But when
there's only one car wide, I've already done it a few times where we're both kind of playing chicken on the opening. Um, let's see. If we added stop signs at the at that corner, it's a really quiet street. It seems dumb, but stop signs
would at least make people slow down as they reached it, look around, and see the other guy. Uh, the other thing you could do is you could paint double yellows through the curve on the street. that's done here in town in a couple of spots. That'll make people stay in lane
a little better. Also, as is mentioned and is shown on that picture, there's a fire hydrant on the corner and people will literally now you should have the right to park in front of your house and that's all they want to do on this. But I've come around that corner at night
and because of the fence, I don't even see a full SUV parked in front of the house until I'm about to hit it and then have to adjust. Right. Sorry. Um, so, uh, let's see. If since there's a
hydrant there, maybe you could paint the curbs yellow. I don't know what the ordinance is for how far away you have to park from a fire hydrant, but I bet it ain't a foot and I bet it ain't three. And if we had a car length on either side that was yellowed out,
people wouldn't park right there. And it might get better. So, we've done a lovely job with the house. I'm only worried about somebody having to choose between hitting an oncoming car, a kid, or a parked car. Um, and it's the geometry of the
intersection. I just wanted to say my piece. Thank you. Thank you very much. Can I ask that? Sure. Public s. I'm sorry. What do you think of their proposal to cut the corner on fence? Does you think that would um That's a
start. I mean, um I don't know which posts you're planning on if if it was all the way up to where the entrance is, the walkway maybe because again, it's the two acting
in concert at the corner going like this right as you're as you're in motion. Um I don't know how much would have to be removed. [Music] Um, but I'm assuming that somebody smarter
than me who's done this a couple of times could drive around the corner and go, "Yeah, I'm looking starting, right?" I mean, I have video. I shot it the other day of what it looks like coming around the corner. Uh, I'm assuming a car length is about 20 feet, 18 ft. 18
is a parking spot. There you go. So at least one of those if not on on the It's weird. Van Dyke places an L. Yes. So on the short face of the L if you if you might need to
remove more because as you're coming up that and you're trying to see by the house, it's not you might start looking at 60° rather than 45. But I don't know. Uh at least and and like I say, the the hydrant's right on the corner. If there
was no parking there um for at least a car length, then you wouldn't also have a vehicle that's driving you out and making you not see the corner. I don't know. I would say a car length, if not a car length and a half if you want to
be safe about it. Um I do know historically, again, people use this street as a cutthrough years ago. um decade ago, a car actually on a Saturday night thought that they could cut around um and they didn't see the street
turned, so they plowed right into the house at the bottom of the street. They literally were going so fast they couldn't stop before they hit the uh before they hit the house. So again, the painted little yellow lines might have indicated that or a stop sign might have
stopped that. Look, it's tiny, small, relatively unused street. I get this, but we might be able to fix it with paint. That's it. Okay. Thank you, sir. Just one more question. Has the neighborhood ever approached the police department about the traffic issue or
safety issues on that corner? I don't know, but I bet they were approached a couple times when there have been accidents there. Yeah, for sure. Because if if you're familiar with Franklin Place where it turns left onto HomeArt, we're deal they're dealing with kind of the same thing. Yeah. And Okay. So,
again, I don't want to make enemies out of my neighbors, but it's a short it's a it's a capital letter L, right? And really, you can go off to the side. So, it's almost a T. And there happens to be a house at the base of the street. And the people who live there like to park
their car in front, which already gets you down to like maybe two. And then if somebody parks around the corner on your next to your uh property, not your fault. That gets it down to one and you
can't see. So uh I'm just trying to help. I'm not trying to cost you money and I'm sorry about that. Okay. Thank you, sir. No, I think we're good. Thank you. Thank you.
Okay. And with that, we're going to go into executive session. Zach, can you please tell us how many votes we need for the C variance? There's going to be a simple majority. Okay, great. Thank you. With that, I will open it up. Who
would like to begin? Mr. Chilly, please. I I I think the proposal would work, but we kind of got to know how much they're going to cut back.
We just can't say you don't don't want them to start and do something and it doesn't work out right. Sounded like they said 16 in each direction. Yeah, but I don't know. I don't know what that number should be, but it I mean it is you you can't see coming around that
corner because I I drove both ways today and you you can't see coming around the corner. Okay. So, uh Sure. But please, a car is about 16'
6. The driver sits maybe about 8 foot. No, I'm just saying I'm okay with that. I I think that'll work, but I just think 16 ft. I think we have a pretty good triangle to see through. That's all I'm saying now. Okay. Sitting in the car up
at about four 4 and 1/2 ft your eye level. So you can see over everything. Thank you, Mr. Quie. Um I So the issue here is the type of fence. It's not It's not where the fence
is, right? I mean the fence is okay where it is on the property line. Correct. Well, not necessarily. It's it can be where it is if it's 30 in or if it's 75% open. So it's partially an issue of placement given the style of
fence. They could have that style fence if it was 5t in from the property line. Okay. Which is but if they had a fence that had 75 it could be in the spot where it is now. So you could have style fence, right? That was okay. The idea being that it's a little more open and
you know visible or less or greater visible, but um Okay, thank you. I know I just think that I mean there was a better fence option whether or not you knew the the ordinance or not. I think just obviously you see that you know it's this is this
is going to be um affect traffic and I just think that you know it's a poor choice offense. So I'm can't I can't support this. That's that's fine. And so we have an option right as a board. We can either say we approve this if the
the style of fence changes in order to meet the ordinance or we can approve their change, right, which cuts back according to them 16 feet in both directions. So it's up to you guys if
you feel strongly enough to you. I think if even the fence style, if it was cut back far enough, I I think that would work. Okay. You wouldn't necessarily have to change the style of the fence, but it has to be, you know, it has to open that corner up so you can visually,
which is what they're proposing, right? That that defeats one of the other objectives of this. And now you got a triangular play area that still has a three-foot drop that kids will certainly play in just because it's there. Yes. So, I think a better style fence would
be the way to go in my opinion. Okay, Don. Yeah, this is this is kind of tough. This um I have a history there, but um I think there's a combination of ways we can get things done. Maybe they're cutting back the fence. Uh maybe um
meeting with the police department and seeing if there's a way for them to come up with some traffic solutions down there that will I mean, unfortunately, that property has been there forever. It's always, you know, I remember when Glennside didn't have that island there and people used to cut down our street
all the time both ways, not just one way now. So, um, there's a I think there's a couple of solutions here. Um, I have a concern that for the tent for the o owners, uh, and lawn maintenance now, the guy's got to lift, you know, either you put they put a gate, which kind of
defeats the purpose of a of a fence, or you lift the lawn mower up three feet to cut the grass, or you put rocks or whatever it might I don't, you know, it's like a it's a grarian. Okay. So, there's all kinds of things going on. Um unad you consulted before this probably
would solve all these solutions. I think we have to settle on direction. Um I'm kind of torn. I mean, I I I kind of want them to have the fence. I'm happy with the 16oot setback on each side, you know, with the two two uh sections being removed. Uh, but I think that just needs
to be approved by um, whoever approves the sight triangle. What if they changed the style of fence to be conforming, which would take the the the sight visibility issue. Yeah, that would be good, too. Then then here's my concern with the wider opening
fence. Now you can have kids, you know, when we build a staircase, it's only supposed to be so wide so kids heads don't fit through, right? Now we're encouraging a wider open fence so kids can crawl through it or whatever the case may be. That's am I am I overthinking it too much? A little bit.
So yes, Marie, please. Monkey mention this. Why not? Sorry. Um when I'm looking at the street view and I'm I'm just trying to, you know, Tom and I were both trying to eyeball where that would be pulled back to, right? Like let's
pull it back 16 feet on on both approaches. Um the problem is is that when you take and connect those those two corners um because right through the tree the tree and the tree is not like you know just you know one of those
maple trees that sticks up. It's got branches that come out from the bottom. So um even if it's skirted around the tree um the height of the fence is going to hit those branches that are coming in. I um just not convinced that that's going to work. They might have to they
might have to go in jog it around. And we've had we've had the tree trimmed a bit and we've taken it up a bit in the canopy. So because we were concerned about that very visibility because it was it was cutting this. It was too low. So I had them Yeah. We cut we cut we
raised it up so you can see um through it because it was it was overhanging on I'm talking about like the the trunks that are down the bottom like they they're significant. I I think we're at the point now where
um the board's going to consider replacing the fence. I don't hear enough support for the cut back and the practicality of it and the safety issues that still persist, right? If we have a three-foot retaining wall that doesn't
have a fence adjacent or on top of it. So, at that point, um I I believe that's your best path forward. One more comment. Could they replace a section of the fence around that corner?
I don't know that we want to Okay. blend fences at this point. All right. Um so, it's up to you. If you want us to vote on your proposal as is, where you take two sections out on each side at 16 feet each, we'll certainly do that. But I
think I know how that's going to go. So, we're giving you a second alternative to replace the fence to make it conforming. Um, and then just increase the visibility through a more open fence. Um, but in obviously a
decorative style of your choosing, but that's that's I would think open the fence to 75%. Right. Yes. Or greater. Or greater and lower it to Two foot six high. It has to be six feet, right? Total.
Total. Is that right? Well, right now that's what it measures. Um, the ordinance isn't perfectly clear about such situations. Really talks about the fence height being 4 feet, but it also considers the combination of height. I I think regardless, you're
probably ending up with some type of variance, but the key is solving any perceived public safety issue. I mean, that's the key, right? I I just wonder if maybe there's a third option, which would be potentially taking away basically having the fence
come back to the corner of the house, if that makes any. So, you wouldn't solve the problem of people falling off the wall, but as far as I understand it, fall protection is not required for a wall that high. You would kind of open it up there. There's no perfect solution to this, right? So, I'm just as far as
options go, are I was going to say is a 4ft compliant fence an existing location like acceptable? Like, is that or are we saying they need to have it a lower than 4 foot fence? No, I I think that's
acceptable as long as they increase the visibility due to the concerns of the public about the abil ability of traffic or or passengers and car or drivers being able to see through the fence. Right. I can support that. Problem is the the wall is already 30 almost 3t
high. Yes. And that's not going to change. Yes. That's fine. Yeah. I think please if I understand confirm what this is what you suggested it's to find this corner and come straight to
the right and remove this section of fence entirely. Is that what you're saying? I think that's what you're saying. Is that what you're saying from the corner? I mean that was me talking out loud. I you may not find that thinking out loud really. I I think it I
just think it may really solve the problem. Well, that would solve the problem of the sight training. Yeah, because that would bring me that's about 20 ft back off the face of Mhm. and then we we could get the containment of the
fence back into that. Okay. Is is the board willing to vote on that solution? Yeah. So, what's the height then along this side? Is that so the the wall gets smaller?
I'm just gonna guess that this wall at this point is probably just under two feet and the fence is 4T. So sort of six. Okay. It's going from like 2 foot six to
zero. It's just on the side of the house. Yep. Not the front of the house. No, I I think that's that's something that we can consider. And with that, Nicole, can I get a call? I need a motion. Oh, can I get a
motion in a second? Make a motion we vote on this application with the changes as presented. Perfect. Can I get a second? Second. Right. Mr. Kieran? Yes. Mr. Malay? Yes. Mr. Nelson? Yes, Miss Chief. Yes, Mr.
Chanuli. Yes, Mr. Nearing. Yes, Chairman Lucas. Yes. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just for the purposes of of the resolution, just acknowledge that it's fence on top of wall. Just so Yes. Thank you.
Zach's got us covered. He's got Zach's. All right. Thank you. Thank you. And if you could just for the purpose of clarity for the resolution you said cut the corner. How so? Tim. No, you was your suggestion.
Basically perpendicular. We need Yeah, we need his exhibits. Perfect. Thank you very much. Oh, right. Oh, actually well 20 ft from here. You're almost there.
[Music] comes a good solution. Afraid we're gonna have to kick away. Thank you, Nicole. Next we have 11 Plain Street. Good evening. Um we're gonna swear you
in. Perfect. State your first name, please. Caric Jron. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth? I do. Thank you. Please proceed. Okay. Good evening. Um so, uh my name is Caric. I'm the applicant for U 11 Main Street. Uh the
application we have in front of the board is uh for a variances for sideyard setback and combined sideyard setback. This is to support a uh second story addition we plan to uh do on the property. So currently the house is a a
Cape Cod style house. Um we believe we are the third or fourth owners of this house. It was built in the 50s. Uh when we bought it, it was a Cape Cart, but there was a kitchen at the back of um the house that the previous owners had added. Um we wanted to um add a full
second story because right now there is a uh two bedrooms and a single bathroom on each levels, which makes it a little bit of a less um um easy layout for us. Uh we have young children. Um so it's kind of like a fight with the children with the
bedrooms and so on. So what we are proposing is a um a second story edition like I said which will have all of the uh bedrooms on the second floor as well as um two bathrooms. Um the and we wanted to build something that is flush
with the existing um property. So on the right side um there is the requirement for the sideyard setback because we have an existing pro um property that is 5 ft from the property line. Uh we're also proposing to um uh do some improvements
as part of that which is also to um remove a uh a deck that is in a currently a non-conforming um condition. Uh as well as um add a front porch to the u to the building. Happy to take any questions
from the board. Um if not, we have a we'll check in with our board experts first. see if they have any questions questions for this witness. Yes, that I'll reserve my question. Great. My questions. Thank you. Board have any questions for this witness? Yes. Uh I
recall we had a resolution in the year 2022. Um why why weren't these uh points included in that uh application at that time? Um so this um the same a similar application was submitted in front of
the board in 2022 for the sideyard and combined sideyard setbacks. Uh it was approved but uh we were not able to initiate the project in due time and uh not knowing like you know when we would be able to start the project. We didn't want to come back to the board for extension. So we wanted to do this when
we were in a position to actually uh initiate the project. Thank you. With that, I'll see if there's any questions, questions only from the audience for this witness. Seeing none, please introduce
your expert. Right. Um, Alex Rodriguez. He's our architect for the project. Welcome, sir. We're going to swear you in. State your name, please. Alexander Rodriguez. Do you swear for him? The testimony you're about to give is the truth. I do. Thank you. If you could
just give a brief uh statement of your qualifications. Sure. I'm a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey. Been licensed since 2005. Um, I've appeared before this board uh back in 2002 with the original application and most recently I've appeared before uh
Long Hill and Burrow of Bernardsville. The board accept this next. We will. Welcome. Thank you. Thank you. Um so just step over here where the drawings this is on. Yes. Okay. Wonderful. Um just kind of pretty much
just kind of go through the variances and just indicate some of the projects some of the things that we're looking to do. Um, you know, first thing that uh the main uh variances that we're looking to get are this is a sideyard setback on the right side of the property which we are continuing that existing
non-conforming that's there now and we're just adding the second floor up along that exterior wall. Uh that existing uh setback is 5T and we're just going to continue that existing non-conforming. Um and then that um in turn also uh plays in with the sideyard
combined. Um whereas uh 33% is required and we um are going to be at 31 um uh I think I had 31.8 but I thought I saw 31.6 six. Um,
uh, 31.6 is the percentage that we're looking for for the sideyard combined. Um, there is a hardship in regards to the zone. Uh, this is in an R six zone. Uh, for the R six zone, as far as the lot width is concerned, um, they require
a 60 foot, uh, lot width we're at 50. So that um comes into as far as the hardship we're 10 feet short of what's required. Um obviously it's an existing uh Cape Cod house that's there. Um and on one side
the property is 10.9 again going back to the 5- foot sideyard setback which we're just continuing uh to go up. we are conforming uh with the building coverage uh lot coverage and also the floor area percentages so those aren't um any
issues that come up with uh the properties. Um just quickly running through the floor plans um we are adding a billo door entrance just as far as easy access to be able to bring things down into the basement.
There will be a drainage at the bottom of that Bilco entrance. Um they are looking to finish some of that basement uh for future use on the first floor. Um we are we are changing some of
the the entrances um as far as there is an existing deck which we are removing. We're making a new um exterior um entrance um from the back of the property with a smaller deck leading down to a code conforming property. And
then the other things that we're looking to do is we're looking to add a front porch just to be able to enjoy uh the streetscape and trying to enhance the front facade. Um as well as far as the first floor is concerned. Um on the
second floor as Cartik had mentioned uh we are looking to have three bedrooms and two bathrooms. Um just to make that second floor without the sloping ceilings and be able to have the 8ft ceilings throughout throughout that
whole second floor which as you know a Cape Cod house has those sloping ceilings and you really can't get furniture up into those eve spaces. Um the front facade, we are again looking to have
that front porch go from side to side. That front porch um will also need that sideyard setback variance in regards to that. But again, that's just kind of in line with everything else. And again, we are looking to go up um on that property
line. Um this is that right side u that we're proposing to do. We are adding some windows along that side. This is an existing window. We are replacing the dining room window and we are adding a window up above the closet area and some
um egress windows for the bedrooms on the side. And then on the rear elevation, we are creating a gable popping up over the kitchen area to create the master suite with some vated ceilings. Um again a gabled area um with with uh you know
some triple windows um a slider and a deck coming out towards the back and then on the side we are creating some windows for the bedroom and a side entrance as well. Um we do believe that this is um you know conforming with the
neighborhood. The house to the left um at one point I believe was um was it Gabe? Were those torn down at all or those? Yeah, I think the houses on both sides were torn down. So, the houses on either side to the left and to the right were torn down. Um, I believe there were capes and now they're twotory
structures. So, we're just trying to stay within with the rest of the neighborhood. Great. Thank you. Board experts questions for a couple ones. Uh, you're pretty thorough in your your overview. Um, just as a technical matter, I
believe you a variance for not having a garage just as a technical matter, just the board's identification. Um, you answered my question about basement access. Any proposed storm water management improvements? Uh, no, not at this time. Nope. Yep. Was not necessary.
That's all. Great. Um, how about the uh drainage? Are you changing any of the downspout locations and where they're directed to? Um, as far as the the downspouts, um, so I'm not exactly sure where the
the existing drain uh leaders are, the downspouts are, but my thought would be is that they would just stay in the existing locations. Um, and you you don't anticipate directing them towards the neighbors property at all? No. Um, and again, because they're they're
not adding more than 300 square ft of additional coverage. They're not required to add any storm water mitigation. Do you have any um proposed lighting that you're adding to the back of the house? Maybe that's higher than what was there before. I we would probably add some sconces on
either side of the that exterior um the exterior uh rear entrance. Um but other than that, that's we're not going to add any high um flood lights up above 16 ft. That's all I have. Thank you.
Warren, questions for this witness. [Music] How how deep is the front porch? 8 ft. [Music] I believe if you go to page three, uh there's a dimension on the left side of
the first floor and it indicates 8 ft for that front porch to come out. So does that that's brings you closer to the street than the average of the houses around you. I I can explain that provision. Right.
So it in such cases where you remove say most of the house and technically more than 50% of the front wall you're supposed to then basically reconstructing the house at that point. You're supposed to bring it in in line with the the neighboring houses. So you in that situation you would consider the
setbacks of adjacent properties three to the right, three to the left. In this case um based on the demo plan they're keeping the front wall. So, it's not a factor as far as the front the average front yard setback. And it seems like the front porch complies with the minimum front yard setback of 25 ft. So,
if they were not if they were taking that front wall down, then they would have to consider uh or do calculations for the the neighborhood front yard setback calculation. It's your testimony. Well, not your testimony, but do you agree that keeping the first floor
Mr. Were any any conversations with neighbors, specifically the one on your right, about just having windows on the side on the second floor and any concerns? Yeah, so I did um discuss the plans with my uh neighbor who is closest to that um
side of the house. Um and one of the things we've done in the design is like right above the kitchen is where our uh master suite's going to be. Uh, one thing we've done is we've not added windows on that side of the wall just so because it's not going to be looking into um like their private quarters. So,
um, they were appreciative of the fact that we did that uh as part of the design. Thank you. Great. Okay. Uh, are there any questions for this witness from the public? Seeing none. Do you have anything to say in
conclusion? Um, no. I think um just wanted to round up by saying thanks for your time. Um, you know, with this application, we've certainly taken into consideration that um, you know, we do things that are um, you know, kind of aligns with what the the neighborhood aesthetics is. We've stuck to a very
classical design for the house. Um, you know, we've taken into consideration like the impact that it could have on the neighbors like especially not adding any windows to the um the master bedroom that might look into them. Um, so we also don't see any public detriment from it. We are making uh you know a lot of
improvements that will um be aligning with the neighborhood. Great. Thank you very much. Now that the testimony is closed, are there any comments from the public? Seeing none, I think we can go
into executive session. Zach, can you read us uh the variances and votes required? Sure. We're going to need uh sideyard uh variances, both regular and combined, and a variance for the fact that there is no garage andor
other uh accessory building to be used as a garage. Uh the only conditions we have are compliance with the board engineers memo with the standard. Okay, great. With that, I'll open it up. who would like to begin? I'll start. Mr. Current, please.
Um, so I think it's a a thoughtful addition. Um, and then considering, you know, the u existing hardship, right? The 50 um 50 foot lot width versus a 60 for the R six zone and pre-existing non-conformity on the sideyard. Um, you
know, I can support this. Great. Yeah, I can support it, too. Um, uh, certainly the houses on e either side of him are considerably larger and that street has a pretty good mix of all
kinds of stuff. So I and I think the plan is really good, so I can support it. Great, Don. Yeah, for the life of me, I can't figure out why they changed the zoning to R six in that neighborhood. Really can't, but that's a different story. Uh, I can support this uh application. I too had to go through
similar stuff when I did my house. So I can I can kind of feel your pain. So I can support this application. Great. Uh I can also support this. I believe that you spoke well about the hardship and the positive criteria and uh I agree
with HBC and uh I believe environmental uh the forester. Everyone was in agreement that um this project works and they have no issues with it. So uh with that, can I get a motion to approve? So
moved to move this application forward. Second. Second. Thank you. Alison Nicole, can I get a roll call, please? Mr. Kieran? Yes. Mr. Malay? Yes. Mr. Nelson? Yes. Miss Chief? Yes. Mr. Chantuli? Yes. Mr. Nearing? Yes.
Chairman Lickets? Yes. Congratulations. Good luck. All right, we are rolling right along here, folks. Uh, yeah, we already have them. Thank you. Can we uh get the team for 45 Franklin,
please, please? Please begin. Hi, my name is Amanda Wolf of Dempsey Dempsey and Shehan and tonight I'm representing the owners of 45 Franklin Place which is block 2613 lot 2. I will note that in the review memorandum, it did say that this is a
two family dwelling. It is not. It is only a single family dwelling and the lot size is 6,999 square ft. It is in the R5 residential single and two family zone. We do have four variances for you tonight. One for F. The proposed is
39.4% whereas the required is 35%. We have a combined sideyard setback. The proposed is 30.6% 6% whereas the required is 33%. We are actually reducing the lot coverage from a proposed 52.2% to it's already at
55.4%. And then we also have building coverage which is proposed at 25.3 and the required is 20%. And we would like to note that there are some non-conforming um conditions with the fence, the shed and the driveway. We are going to be
relocating the shed and the fence and shortening the driveway so it won't go right up to the property line. So with that, we will be eliminating the parking area in the rear yard that has a zero foot setback, but we will have more than a 5-ft setback. There's a pre-existing non-conforming fence location that it's
on the adjacent property. We will correct that. Same with the shed. We will correct that. There's also a lack of a garage that's a pre-existing condition. We're not sure. We don't think that the F triggers it, but we can discuss that at some point. And the driveway setback
will remain. We are not touching the driveway. We are paving it, but we will remove it from the rear property line. Description of the project. This is a very wellscreened piece of property. It's well screened by landscaping. There's also a very large significant tree in the front that will actually end up screening the proposed porch. But the
applicant is proposing to modify the existing rear pa patio, side pavel patio, side pa walkway, and side deck. The applicant is also proposing to relocate the existing HVAC condensers. The proposal results in a 112 square foot increase in building coverage and a
225 ft reduction in lot coverage. The applicant is not proposing to modify any other portions of the property in the front facade of the dwelling will remain unchanged. The proposed porch will be open but screened. It will not have air conditioning or heating. Really, this is a place for the applicants and their children so that they have a place for
recreation that's not subject to bugs and heat and weather. And the porch can be accessed from the existing front porch, from the stairs to the rear, or internally from the living room. The rear of the proposed porch connects to a proposed paver walk and a proposed outdoor kitchen area that features a gas
grill, sink, and mounted television. We reviewed the comments from the board professionals and have no objections to any of the comments we received. And with that, I will let you know that we do have four witnesses tonight. We have the Williams family. We have Andrew Clark who is our engineer. Dan Alaka who is our architect and Kate Keller who is
our planner. And with that, I would like to call Mr. and Mrs. Williams. Thank you. We're going to swear you in. Just raise your right hands. State your names for the record, please. Rachel Williams. Benjamin Williams. Do
you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth? Yes. Yes. Thank you. Great. Thank you. So, if you could just tell us how long have you lived in Summit? Uh, we bought the house and moved here two years ago. Perfect. And how you lived in this dwelling for the past two years? Yes. Gotcha. And do
you have any involvement in the community? Uh, yeah. So, we have two sons, three years, three years old and one years old. Uh, they're both in school here at uh the JCC. Uh, we try to make an effort to attend all the community events. The Easter egg hunt is our son's favorite. Um, very active boys, I'm guessing. Very active boys.
So, yes, generally mostly kid-based. Okay. So then that's kind of one of the reasons that you're looking for this improvement. Yes, absolutely. Your children's because I know you have a patio in the back, but why is that not sufficient for them? Yeah. So, right now we have a very small grass area in the back because there's a large patio there. And we'd really like to make that
a larger grass area for running around, soccer, etc., and then have more of the place where we might eat dinner outside on the side, which is where that porch is. So, one of the questions I was going to ask you is why put the porch in the front instead of the back? But I guess you could tell me that it's so that your kids have a little bit of running around
space. Exactly. We want that kind of continuous grassy area for them to run and play sports. Awesome. Okay. And what is immediately adjacent to the proposed screen porch on lot four? Um to propose screen porch, the neighbor has a garage
that is uh not connected to their house. So it's a neighbor's garage and then there's a driveway and then their house is on the other side of the lot. Gotcha. Okay. And you're also looking for a patio, correct? Why do you need both the porch and the patio? Yeah. So, the patio is specifically in the area where where we would add that outdoor kitchen. Um,
so it's specifically just literally walking from the porch to the kitchen, and it pretty much allows us to cook and have direct flow to that outdoor dining area. And I know one of the questions the board may want to know is, have you considered reducing the size of either of the improvements? Uh, yes, we did consider that. Our architect pointed out
during the planning phase that uh the size that we have it right now has the columns from the front of the house all very evenly spaced. So, we thought that was the most aesthetically pleasing. Also, from a utility perspective, um having plenty of space for a dining area, you know, being able to actually host host a dinner there would be really
nice. So, those are the two considerations. And are you proposing any lighting outside at all? Uh I don't expect any additional lighting, just kind of recessed ceiling lights. Okay. And with the patio in the back, you'll be converting into grass, correct? Okay. And then why are you paving the
driveway? Um two reasons. One is it's really hard to maintain. There's constantly weeds coming up. It's currently like rocks and gravel. Um, and the other is it's I think it's more utilitarian for the kids to play like for example basketball or something. Right now it's kind of you have to put shoes on and you can't really play out
there. Want it to be more of a play area. Understood. And just to confirm, you're okay with reducing the size of the driveway? Yes, we're okay with that. Okay. And same with the with the fence in the shed. You're okay with moving it back onto your property? Yes. Correct. Okay. And have you spoken to your
neighbors about the project? Yeah. So, we went and knocked on the house of the neighbor directly next to the porch because they're the most affected. Um, they had no concerns. They were very happy with the project. Um, so that's good. I also briefly spoke to the neighbor in the back. Uh, I believe she's here today. Um, so maybe we'll
hear from her later. I'm not actually sure whether or not she has anything on her mind, so we'll find out. Okay. And is this the house that you plan on growing old in? Yes, that's that's the idea is we specifically bought this house and wanted to wait a couple years, figure out is this where we want to stay, and we're in love with it. I mean,
you guys know the area. It's right next to downtown. It's super walkable. We love it. So, the goal is to raise our kids here, send them to the school system, like really nest in this home. Excellent. And you think that these improvements will help you enjoy the space much better? Absolutely. I think the missing piece for us is like a
really enjoyable outdoor area with no bugs. They're painting out there. So, this is this is I think what we want to to be able to be there through, you know, 20 years at least through the kids graduating. Excellent. That's all I have for you. if the board has any questions or members of the public. Thank you,
Miss Wolf. Uh board experts, any questions or saving them for the expert? I save mine for the experts. I guess I'll just ask one question. It's kind of a choice for you guys. So, let's say hypothetically the board approves the application. Would you agree to a
condition that the screen porch remain a screen porch? Maybe in the future it couldn't, you know, be walled and become part of the house. Uh yeah, we had no intention of having anything but screen. So, that's fine. All right, great. Thank you, Tom. Appreciate that. Questions
from the board for these witnesses. Seeing none questions. Questions only from the public for these witnesses. Hi. Yes. Please come up, state your name, spell your last name, and give us your address. Hi, Nancy Amster. Cool.
Um, 16 Ruth Place. That's a mic. Is that it? Um, so my question was I came to the Department of Community Service and read all the paperwork or um and what I thought I had
seen was that the paving of the driveway was going to come all the way back to the property line and it said they were pro proposing zero setback. You're 100%. That's what the it did say. We decided that we were going to reduce it just in
case the board had concerns about the coverage. We were preemptively deciding we would reduce that coverage. So am I right in assuming then that you were abiding by the five minute five foot setback from the actual property line not where the fence is now because the
fence is already on my property and it runs almost 70 feet on my property over a foot. Yes. Yes. And we will be removing that fence onto our property so it's no longer on your property. And and Miss Wolf, you're going to have Mr. Clark testify to site improvements. Yes, of course. Okay, great. So, there's
going to be an expert witness who's going to speak to these points. Yes. Okay, that's perfect. Thank you. Great. Thank you so much. All right, Miss Wolf, next witness. I would call Andrew Clark. What timing? That's perfect. Right.
And Mr. Clark, you'll have to raise your hand. Thank you. It's already on. Thank you. Can you state your name, please? Andrew Clark. Do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth? I do. And can you please give a brief description of your credentials? Sure. I'm a licensed uh professional
engineer and land surveyor in the state of New Jersey um for quite a long time. Uh my license is in good standing. I've appeared before this board many times almost monthly. Um and I've appeared before Chattam Burough, Chattam Township,
Madison um some frequency zoning and planning. Thank you. Will the board accept this witness? Absolutely. Welcome back, Mr. Clark. Please proceed. With that, I'll let you describe the existing and proposed conditions. Sure. I um seem to
have misplaced my eagle. So, um no worries. I'm going to wing it this time. Okay. Um the property's been fairly described, but I'll go in a little more detail. It's located in the um R5 zones. It's on
Franklin Place and um not far about 70 ft and a little bit farther in the other direction from the uh side side streets. Um, existing on the site is a two and a half story dwelling with a front porch.
And on the left side of the house, uh, the west or left side of the house, there's like a peak gravel patio that's there with some connecting walks to the larger patio that's in the rear of the house. Um, stone driveway in the back as was described. um reaching a little bit
beyond the boundaries as is the shed that's in the back left corner and the fence that's running along that rear line. Um in terms of drainage patterns and topography, there isn't much um it's
very flat um to the point where if you look at the survey, most of the topography such as it is is spot grades because there's really not even like a foot foot and a half of grade change across the entire property. Um so there there really isn't uh much
to discuss in that sense. The existing uh storm water such as it is is is from the roof leaders. They're generally just discharged at grade very close to the house and the planting beds and proximate to the dwelling. So there's
nothing discharging at the neighboring properties. Um I think it's helpful to understand what's around us as well. Um, on the on the left side, the west side of the property, as was described, there's a a detached garage that the neighbor has with the driveway that accesses Franklin and then their house
fronts on the on the side street. Right above that on just north of that on lot four, it I have it labeled as adjacent stone parking area. The entire area sort of between the detached garages and all the way up to our fence is like a gravel parking area.
I presume that it's a multif family house that's that's there. The front's on the side street. And then uh behind us is uh single family. I believe it's single family residential. I the neighbor was just here speaking. I believe that's her property that extends
all the way along behind us and fronts on Ruthin, another side street. And then on the corner is, you know, it may be a nonprofit all classified as a commercial property. So, it's it's a business use that's in there rather than a residential use. And then behind it and
sort of along our side of the property is all paved and there's a parking area in the back about six to eight cars um fit back there. So, that sort of puts the context together. And I do have the board, but I'll just uh stand it up on the table
here for the proposed conditions. So I'm now making reference to my uh variance plan dated October 28, 2024, last revised January 30th, 2025. And so what was described uh what
we're doing in the back that we're putting a porch, the screen porch is shaded, shown on the left side. There's a piece of the deck that's behind the existing porch to be removed in order to um constitute the the screen porch. Uh the outdoor spaces
that exist are the pearavevel area that's in the vicinity of where that porch is going to go. So that'll be removed completely. And then there's the connecting walk that'll be partially removed. The patio in the back is being substantially reduced so that it's
basically uh more of a sidewalk than a patio at the back coming off the deck there and then giving you access to the area. And then the proposed patio is going to be tucked within the the corner of the house and the porch that'll be constructed. So what this does
is sort of pull in all those outdoor spaces much closer to the house and farther from the neighbors, which I think is a valuable and important aspect to this. and in doing so creates that grass area that the Williams are are seeking in the backyard where that existing patio that's there now will be
removed and turned into more of a lawn. Um the important aspect that we discussed a moment ago and just to highlight the fence that's encroaching on the north line is going to be relocated so that it's on our property. It's it varies between a foot and about
1.2 feet or say 14 in the back left. So that's going to come onto our property. The shed will be relocated to a conforming location, which means it'll be at least 4 feet off of both the rear and the sideline. Um that's the minimum requirement for an accessory structure.
Um so so the sheds coming onto our property in a conforming location and as mentioned in one of the review memos, there's a 5-ft setback required to any parking areas. So we're going to pull from the fence line now where the stone is. We're going to um pave the driveway
and set the edge of pavement at least 5 ft in from the boundary line. So that's um also changes slightly the lot coverage numbers from what's on my uh presented drawing. Um we have those
numbers as for the lot coverage is 3,753 square ft which is 53.6 that reduces down to 53 or 52.2% 2% which is
3,654 square ft. Um so it takes about 99 square feet, not quite 100 square feet when we pull that in 5T. If it's a little more than five will be a little more than 99 square feet that we reduce. Um so in reducing the lot coverage um
we're actually that in itself is a slight improvement with regards to the storm water. But aside from that, one of the questions was what's happening with the roof leaders on the porch. I think the best thing to do with those is to just connect the roof leaders to the
existing roof leader system that discharges at grade and and probably part of it will go to the back where they discharge and part to the front. Um, you could run it out to the street, but there's not much pitch there and once you dig down, you're almost below
the pavement. And also we have, as indicated in uh John Lintson's review memo, there's a very large, very nice tree in the front and the back. And I don't think it's really probably going to be helpful to excavate out for the
roof leaders. So, we're probably better off just letting them do what they're do and uh go to the planting beds that are around the house right now. Um that covers the proposed conditions. I can feel questions or or jump into the
memos for a moment if we need to. I think we can start with questions from our port experts. Sure. I don't think I have much for engineering. Um I I think I've just specified that the condition proposing with regard to the driveway is that it's
5T from the rear lot line because you know if you read that it's from lot line that could be uh viewed as from the side lot line side. It's from the rear only. Correct. That's correct. Because yeah, there's none in conforming condition on the side and we were going
to maintain that same position on the sideline, but in the rear, you know, basically in part because the encroachment, but also just to respect, you know, the the intent of uh of the ordinance coming 5T from the rear law.
Great. July noted. Thank you, Marie. What do you Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Tom. engineers. Yeah, I don't I I think you covered everything that I was going to ask. You um Let me just clarify. You're further reducing the um impervious
coverage on the property beyond what was in the application. Is that correct? An additional 99 square ft. Okay. So, you're you're reducing it by 225 square feet, right? Something like that, right? Okay. All right. So, again, as since
that's less than 300 square feet of additional coverage, required to put in a um dome each month. So, um and you already talked about the roof leaders and you know not bringing them out to the street which I think is better just keep it on your property. Um
but I don't have any other question. Yeah, I mean I think that the comment from Mr. Linton is certainly well taken and duly noted in terms of the uh care to be taken in the construction of the porch and using sauna tubes and um constructing the way that's least
impactful to those trees. Great questions from the board for this witness. Seeing none. Okay, great. Uh questions from the public for this witness, please.
Yeah, back up. So, just wanted to confirm that you were then abiding by the planting of the shrubbery in that buffer zone. Yes. The comments that were made. Yes. Thank you so much. All right. Great.
Miss Wolf, you want to call your next witness, please? Yes. So, Mr. Alaka is my next witness. He'll give you the pretty pictures. Fantastic. We're going to swear you in, sir. Okay. Please state your name. Daniela. And do you swear from the testimony you're about to give? I do. And do you
give brief qualification to the records? Sure. Oh, okay. Thank you. Um, so I earned my Bachelor of Architecture degree from NGIT in 2014. I gained experience working at several local architecture firms before becoming
a licensed New Jersey architect in 2021. Uh, since then I've operated my own practice in East Hanover with a focus on residential and smallcale commercial design. Great. Can you name a couple of boards that you've testified in front of
recent? Uh, this is actually my first. All right. Congratulations. Thank you. Um, in good standing. It is in good standing. All right. Great. We will accept you as a expert witness. So, please proceed. Thank you. Thank you.
And with that, could you describe this proposal for us? Sure. Um, so 45 Franklin Place uh was construct constructed around 1884. Uh, and it's located in Franklin Place historic district. Uh, the two and a half story single family dwelling embodies some of
the vernacular Victorian style, blending traditional Queen Anne features with a more restrained use of ornamentation. Its asymmetrical front facade is highlighted by a canal levered tower extending from the second floor and it features a covered wraparound porch with
evenly spaced columns and simplified ornate detailing all of which contribute to its unique character. Uh as for the scope of work, we are proposing to remove 150 square ft of the existing covered porch uh attached along the west side of the residence. Uh as part of
this project, we are hoping to enlarge the existing porch area 132 square ft. bringing the new total screen and porch area to 282 square ft. The the existing porch structure along the west facade is showing signs
of deterioration, including an area of weakened deck framing. Uh reconstructing this section will address the structural issues and help bring the existing covered porch into compliance with current building codes. Uh improving both its safety and functionality.
As for the design intent and historical considerations, uh the proposed covered porch has been been designed to mimic the existing structure by maintaining the architectural style proportions and existing roof line of and details of the original
home. Likewise, the screen and section align with the front facade, creating a smooth transition of depth, making the added porch area feel like part of the original design. Uh, one key point I I'd like to address uh is the reason for the
1.65 foot encroachment into the side setback. Uh, and this was a deliberate design choice uh to preserve the original spacing and rhythm of the porch columns as seen from the front elevation. The existing porch has evenly spaced columns that create a balanced
look. Shifting the porch back uh to meet the setback shrinks the last column bay. um as you can see in the front elevation of A2.1. Um and that that will disrupt disrupt the rhythm in my opinion. Uh
since the wraparound porch is one of the home's most defining features, maintaining consistent column spacing helps create a smooth transition between the existing propo proposed structure while preserving the architectural character and overall appearance of this of the streetscape. So, in your opinion,
would it be a better planning alternative to have the expanded porch? I believe so. Um, I think if we were to pull the the edge of that that last column two feet in, I think it it really
could throw off how it's going to look from the front, which is the most important elevation um in terms of definitely, you know, for the historical preservation as well. Um, additionally, similar screen and wraparound porches can be seen on nearby historic homes, especially one block
north on Fernwood Road, uh, supporting the design's appropriateness with the within the existing fabric of the historical district. As for the materials and construction details, the framing, we're going to be using all pressure treated 2x8 joist, triple 2x8 gutters, Simpson galvanized connectors.
The foundation, uh, we'll be using 14inch diameter tube footings. Are those the footings that were recommended to avoid disturbance? Yes. Perfect. And uh for the decking, we're going to be kind of just matching uh everything to we're going to be using composite
boards to match the front porch area. The trim work, we we're deciding either painted composite or treated wood to match existing as well. And the roofing, we're going to be using a low slope roof with a hot mopped fiberglass membrane. And uh getting to the porch features, um
the main feature is going to be the gas fireplace. Uh the existing gas fireplace currently opens up to the entry foyer slash it could be they're using it's basically just an entry foyer, but it could be like a living room as well. Um but so
basically they found the location. It's just unnecessary to have a fireplace there. They were actually considering even removing it at one point. Um, but rather than removing it entirely, we're proposing to modify the fireplace to allow operation and access from the exterior side. This approach enhances
its usability and ambience while preserving an original feature of the home in a more purposeful way for the homeowners. Uh, and then another feature would be the large sitting and dining area. Uh, one of the primary reasons for extending the existing covered porch was
to create sufficient space to accommodate a dining table for family gatherings while also giving enough clearance for the the fireplace. Um, and uh then just get just touching on some of the lighting. Um my plans I I
was uh con considering uh putting you know we were going to have a downward facing sconce lightings around the stairs uh for safety reasons as well as um a couple uh around the barbecue and kitchen. Um though I think I have let's
see it's just four uh four along the back the rear um the rear steps leading to the backyard and two at the uh barbecue and those lights will be downward directed so they don't affect the addition. Yep. Thank you.
And then for the porch lighting, um, we will be using, uh, LED high hats, recessed high hats. Um, and we were also going to put those on a dimmer switch, um, to create a flexible, more like, uh,
ambient atmosphere. Uh and then all exterior bulbs we we would like to use uh you know LEDs within the Kelvin range of 2700 to 3,000 to ensure a warming inviting uh light. Uh and the access to the porch um I believe Amanda already
talked about but I'll just briefly mention uh it it it'll basically remain unchanged um with entry points in the existing front steps, the existing side side steps and the uh reconstructed rear steps leading to the backyard. We're we're also proposing the installation of
a new door that will provide direct access to the covered porch by repurposing the location of an existing window. Um and then getting to the patio and barbecue, we are proposing the construction of 130 square foot outdoor
barbecue uh kitchen area in the location of an existing oversized concrete slab uh which is current currently accommodating a condenser unit. The slab occupies a large portion of space directly adjacent to the home and will
be pro proposing to be removed to make for a functional and appropriate outdoor feature. Placing the barbecue area in this location location allows the kitchen to privately uh be tucked away out of sight from the street while also offering the practical benefit of close
proximity to the kitchen's drain line for efficient plumbing connections. Uh, and then just a couple features of the patio, we have a built-in gas grill for convenient and efficient outdoor cooking, an integrated sink, uh,
providing access to water for food preparation and cleanup, and a large island, um, to accommodate both food prep and bar style seating. Uh, and in summary, I believe this project honors the architectural heritage of both the existing home and the surrounding
district while introducing thoughtful exterior improvements that enhance overall safety, functionality, and family living. By balancing historic preservation with practical updates, the design reinforces the home long-term value and continued re relevance. It it
respects the past without compromising present- day needs, ensuring the Williams family enjoy a home that is both enduring and livable. Thank you. And in your opinion, this will be consistent with the neighborhood, correct? Yes. And the architectural style of the building
itself? I do. Understood. And we talked about making it smaller. We discussed that. And with the HVAC condensers, where is that going to be moved to? Yeah. So, we were there wasn't a whole lot of other spaces that made a lot of
sense. Um but trying to remove them from that location where the bar was did make sense. Um and I think the the most the best place is where we're proposing along the west side of the edge of the
the the porch. Um, in this location, uh, the condensers are going to be, um, directly adjacent to backside of a garage, a detached garage, uh, which, you know, there's has no occupancy, um, or people living in there. Um, do you
think any part of this project will have a negative impact on the neighbors? I don't. How about the master plan or the zoning plan? No. Okay. Thank you. And with that, I don't have anything further. Great. Thank you, Miss board experts.
Questions for the architects? Questions for I guess a few observations and maybe question. So, um the increase in floor area ratio is attributable only to the screen in porch. Is that accurate? Yes. So, the addition is
primarily for the porch area. No interior living space. That's correct. And the entirety of the addition is one story in height. Yes. Okay. And then finally, I I know you explained why the the uh porch as observed from the front of the house has a certain width. Did
you offer an explanation for the depth as well, meaning front to back? Front to back. Uh as far as again justifying the size, I know you kind of touched on it, but Sure. Just help us out. Oh, gotcha. Yep. Um yeah, so basically
um basically being able to fit uh the table um within uh are you I'm sorry. Are you talking from like the uh uh so like if you're looking at it from the side so from the front you talking about trying to maintain the rhythm and the spacing of
the post. Um again I don't know if there's any architectural not reasons I guess for you know as it relates to the existing house why you would want it of a certain depth. Gotcha. Yeah. So basically um if if you're looking at the existing
floor plan we we really didn't want it to touch uh too much of this up. We kind of wanted to leave those existing stairs on the the side stairs I guess we could call them. Um, so we're, you know, we're hoping to keep
as much of that framing as possible. Um, so with that being said, the plan was always to keep, uh, the porch from north to south distance aligned with the existing building footprint. Um, mainly because
also to to be able to control the rainwater, the roof, the roof slope and that kind of thing as well. But, um, I would Yeah, we didn't want to we didn't want to come too we want to keep the keep the face of the uh screen and
porch aligned with the existing exterior wall. I think that helps keep the depth which is also translates to the other side the other elevation I think which is what you're asking like balance is that a word yep the existing porch is
also the same size it's just exactly the length of the existing porch yes the existing porch is the same size if you're going to testify please just speak into a microphone thank you so the existing porch extends that length Yep.
So you're aligning with the the first set back of the house, right? There's a on that side the house uh steps at that point and goes back further away from the lot line and you're trying to align with that first.
That's correct. Set. Okay, great. I'm trying to bust your chops. Just trying to look for justification for the building. No, absolutely. I understand. That's it for me. Thanks. All right. Thank you, Tom. questions from the board for this witness.
Sorry. Um just if you look at the combined sideyard understanding column width and keeping you know that balance but if you're looking at from the front you have a pretty sizable tree that's like right in front of that. Yeah. Like are you actually going to see that? And
how do you think about that extra foot and a half? I have looked at I was looking at it for a while a lot of photos from the front and I did contemplate that as well but I really do think it is going to be quite noticeable. The tree does block a lot of the view but um you can still get a
pretty good understanding of that. It just kind of like it naturally would I think will draw your eye to it and not in a good way almost like a an eyesore to the really nice like you know balanced uh this uh the language of the
dwelling. Um but I I think that's a good question. I definitely did think about that as well. Okay. And that tree will be preserved. Correct. Yes. Those are pretty unbelievable trees those too. So it's pretty cool being underneath them too. Yeah. Mr. Nelson.
Um, just a couple of silly questions. What is a GFIWR? I know what GFI is. Like like weather resistant uh within a box on the floor or in the ceiling? On the floor. Uh, or potentially
attached to the columns or because I see them in the center of the screened in. Oh, you know, that's for the lighting. So, you're gonna So, there's going to be more than a table in there. It's just for the the recess light. I included the uh the the uh ceiling lighting on that
floor plan as well. Yeah. And has there been any consideration about the is the proposed outdoor kitchen covered? No, there's no there's no intention of covering that. No. Okay. Okay. And then I'm a little curious is about the um how
close is how close is the wall-mounted TV to the person the house behind the property? Um um uh a little over 30 ft to the property line. Good. Great.
Okay. Uh questions from the audience for this witness, please. So, am I right in in hearing that one of the um hopes from the family
is that the grass area was going to be extended for the children, but yet I'm also hearing there's this 30 square foot uh barbecue area. So, how does that then? Yes, I
understand. So, that the barbecue is going to be is not going to be located in the in the rear yard. It's going to be um and I know you probably don't have a drawing to look at, but it's um next to the porch. It's directly next to the
porch. Yeah. Oh, thanks. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Got it. Got it. Got it. Got it. And I had a fence question, but is that not not appropriate for the architect?
You could ask. So I think it's more of a Mr. Clark, but I just wanted to ensure would I'd be right in assuming that the style of fence is going to be replicated when you are replacing it. I believe it'll be the same fence just moved back. Yeah, we hadn't really
discussed that, but it would make sense if the if the panels are intact to try to reuse as many of those panels, but should they not be in good enough shape, would it be then you would replace in kind. So, let's say in in good shape and
then the other few that weren't they would it would it would match yes the fence. That's what I'm asking. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Just real quick again, Mr. Chairman. So, Mr. Clark pointed to where the barbecue patio was. Is is that different than what's on our
plan? Is it alongside the in the to the right of the rear steps? No. So the Yeah. The plan I have is the plan you have. Okay. And and so it's it's it's in this Okay. I'm sorry. You made a big circle. So I was It's like an L shape. You see there? That's the That's the outdoor kitchen part. Yep.
So no more questions from the public. Oh, you have one more, please. Yeah. So sorry. Just do me a favor. State your Nancy Amster cool 16 Ruth in place right around the corner. So the other thing was I noticed that one of the city summit staff comments was that the um
construction of the porch would greatly reduce the water absorption and availability. So is anything being done um because of the additional um coverage now to help with the rainwater absorption? Who's addressing
that? That's a good question for Mr. Clark. I think that the comment you're referring to was in Mr. Lynson's report, the Forers's report, and his his the context for his commentary was that because of where the porch is and it's going to be a little bigger than the
existing porch that some of the rainwater won't hit the root structure the same way and also that we need to be careful with the construction. So he's he's mainly concerned with preserving the tree, but we're going to um continue the runoff situation. So I think the
tree is going to get plenty of water from the discharge of the roof area that's going to go to the planting beds at the base of the tree. Um I I don't think I don't think it's going to cause a deterioration of the tree itself. No, I'm not speaking to the tree. I'm speaking to the fact that the
neighborhood in general has a high water table and that the property as you mentioned 43 Franklin Place already has a large percent of that property paved because it is now used as a afterchool facility. So that my concern with the uh
additional patio porch that the rainwater absorption would be um adversely well actually we're we're reducing the hard imperous surfaces on the property though. So so normally that type of
concern arises when you're increasing the coverage when you're increasing the lot coverage and the hard surfaces. We're reducing that slightly by about 226 square feet with the additional paving of the driveway and the addition of the barbecue patio. Yeah. So, we're the the the reduction comes from the the
restructuring in the patio in the back, removing most of that patio and turning that back to grass. Mhm. And then there's sort of a trade-off on the porch because some of it is existing porch and deck that's there. We're just going to reconstruct with this porch. Pearavevel patios coming out, some of the walkways
coming out. So in total and then pulling the five feet in from the on the driveway. All those things together have a a bit of a reduction of the of the hard coverage. Even paving from the street to the five foot buffer. Yeah. I mean the the the driveways are already
considered coverage. So that's already lot coverage, but it's gravel at the moment and you're paving. So you're it's a different surface. Have some curbing on the back and then reduce the length of the driveway. So that's being reduced a
bit, right? But the surface formatting is now being altered. Gravel is much different than a paved surface. Yeah. I mean it it it it can be depending on how long the stone has been there. Um and how compacted it is. Um that's actually
an issue in the ordinance. They but they switched to treating stone the same as as pavement as lock coverage some time ago. Who who is they? They the city of summit and the engineering and okay planning mechanisms.
All right. Thank you. That was my question. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Well, do you have a summation? I actually one more witness color. Hi everybody. Hi chairman, members of the board. Thank you.
Please state your name. Kate Keller. Do you swear affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth? Yes. Thank you. And if you could just give a brief record of your qualifications. Sure. Hi, my name is Kate Keller. I'm a principal at the firm of Phillips Price Galaney Keller LLC based in Hoboken, New Jersey. I'm a
licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey. My license is valid and I have been licensed since about oh about 11 years now. Um, and I've testified before about a hundred boards across the state, including this board several years ago.
Great. Welcome back. Thank you. Thank you. Um, yes. So, I will I will be brief, you know, but I just want to make sure we get some planning testimony on the record because we do have a DVA here tonight. Um, so, you know, I think that you've heard excellent testimony from our other witnesses already. So, I'm not
going to reiterate too much, but essentially, we are here because we are seeking um to proposing a new um porch expansion that triggers a D4 floor area ratio variance. Um this is because how
the ordinance in summit is specifically defines that. Um to quote it, enclosed or screened in porches shall be included in the residential floor area calculation. So, obviously that's how we are here tonight. Um, this is a site that is developed with, as you heard, an existing single family home that was
built circa 1880. Um, it was previously two family at some point. It's been one family for a while, and the applicant, as you've heard, is intending to keep it as such. It's located on Franklin Place. It's located in what's really it's a it's a residential area, but there's a v mix of uses, a mix of different
typologies in the vicinity. Um, and this is, um, you know, just has frontage on Franklin, Franklin Place, excuse me, and is, um, you know, really nice looking home, if I may say so myself. Um, so, you know, we're here tonight for that. And this, this board is aware the board
is allowed to grant variances to permit increase in permitted floor area ratio per the MLUL at section 4055D74. Um this is um less of a burden of proof than a D1 variance. Essentially per the Randolph Town Center case, the applicant
has to demonstrate that the site can accommodate the greater amount of floor area that's permitted by ordinance. Um we also have to address the negative criteria. Variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good, substantial impairment to the zone plan and zoning ordinance. Um in addition, we also do have a few C
variances that are here that we're here for. um most of those have been have been addressed already. So I won't spend too much time on any of this and I think a lot of these are actually all related. Um so in terms of the D4 varants we are out of this is a zone the R5 zone where
35% is permitted 38% is currently existing and 39.4% is proposed. This is really a difference of about 112 square feet. Um and in my opinion you know the site can accommodate this proposed minimal additional floor area ratio. It's not changing the use of the
property. It's the location of the improvements are such that there will not be a there'll actually be a positive visual impact as you've heard from our architect. Um, and I think in the context of the surrounding use, especially with the with the type of properties in that vicinity, this makes
sense. Um, I would also note, you know, in this this was specifically designed, as you heard from our architect, to keep it in the historic context of the house. And in the staff reports, we did have a letter from your HPC that um, you know,
stated that this was an appropriate um, and contextual addition to the property. And so I think that that is um, you know, that that's something that was important to the homeowner, important to the architect and the team. And so it's nice to see that your HBC agrees with that. Um, but you know, basically, you
know, we look at floor ratio. You want to make sure that the house doesn't get too massive. It doesn't get too bulky in volume. And I think just as as part of the definition of what this is, it's a screened in porch. You're going to avoid a lot of those um situations. It's going to its appearance and its use are going
to be more similar to an open porch than an enclosed interior room. Um, and as um Mr. Baron's asked the applicant before that's their intention is to only keep it as a screened in porch. It's not going to have HVAC. It's just going to have um you know electric service as was
testified to. Um so yeah, so it's really intended to be part of the flow of the overall indooroutdoor use of the house. just really keeping in, you know, what's what families want in a modern lifestyle and taking this home that was, you know,und almost 150 years old and really
adapting it thoughtfully to um to meet the needs of a modern family. Um so, you know, in that context, you know, I think that this is this site can absolutely accommodate the proposed floor area ratio. You heard about how we're reducing the impervious coverage. We are
slightly increasing the building coverage but again I think that the fact that we can increase the impervious coverage at the same time shows that the site can accommodate the proposed increase. Um and you know just to address some of the before I move on to the negative criteria just to address
briefly the C variances we do require a C variance for the um sideyard setback. Um that is the required is 33% it will now be 30.6% 6% and this is a function of the fact that you know the this is really the only side of the property
that that has the porch on it. The size was was chosen to accommodate the um to match the width of the property and to to make sure that it it it keeps the existing architectural patterns from the outside. Um I think that the the the width that will be remaining in the
sideyard is appropriate especially given the fact that it's next to only the side of a garage with no windows. because it's not a living space um and will maintain light air and open space. Um so the only other non the only other non-conforming uh pre-existing non-conformities we have talked about in
our we have we had identified were the shed and the fence which will be eliminated. Those will all be moved to be conforming. Um and the we still have an existing nonconformity for the location of the driveway along the sideyard. Um we are we are going to
reduce remove the pavement in the back to make that conforming at five feet and install landscaping as required by ordinance. So you know this is really an existing condition. It's a function of this being an older home and with a narrow driveway on that side and so
nothing is proposed to change there. Um so just in terms of um advancing the purposes of zoning I think that what we're proposing here promotes the general welfare um their applicant is going to improve the property. They're going to make a keep maintain and
enhance the streetscape and really make it more functional for their family and for their enjoyment of the site. It also will eliminate these existing nonconformities as I mentioned while decreasing impervious coverage and managing to balance all the storm water needs. Um uh we're going to have
appropriate light air and open space for the reasons that I mentioned. Um, this screened in porch is a lot less ma the massing of it is not the same in my opinion visually or feel as it would be if this were a um fully enclosed room. And finally, purpose I promotes a
desirable visual environment. Um, and I think our architect gave wonderful testimony on that. So I will I will take that into my record as well. So yeah, I think that overall this is a very thoughtful design. Um, and just to briefly address the negative criteria for both the D and the C variances. In
my opinion, this would not result in a substantial detriment to the public good surrounding area or the city. It's a modest expansion of an existing residential home. Um, and just to quote that in the historic context, just to quote what the HPC letter said, proposed
plan matches the architectural elements of the existing home and extends the porch with a consistent aesthetic. So, they're taking they're doing that. They're taking this as an opportunity to decrease impervious coverage and rectify non-conforming conditions. I think the bottom line here is that there will be no negative impact on neighboring
properties particularly due to um the small change the changes that we've addressed tonight that the board has accepted. And similarly, I don't see any substantial impairment of the intent and purpose of the zone plan. This is an R5 zone where the single family use is permitted and the goal of this zone is
to maintain this type of property just as is being proposed here. So, you know, there's one more variance, I think. The lack of a garage. I was just going to bring that up. Okay. Thank you. I did see that. Yes. Thank you. Um, and that's pre-existing. Yes. So, that's pre-existing. So, essentially, the city
of Summit requires every residential dwelling to have an enclosed garage space. This house, due to its age, was not constructed with one and one was not built in the interim. um you know and I I the the rationale here is that um for why it's required the variance is
required is because the F is being slightly extended. However, what's what's being proposed here won't increase the parking needs of the site. Um even with the small changes to the driveway that are being proposed, there's ample room in there for parking, for movement, for turning. Um and I
think that continuing this existing condition especially given the historic character of the site uh will not have any negative impact on at anyone compared to what is there today. So that is um that's about it. So, you know, in uh in my opinion, I
think that this is a wellthoughtout project that takes a dwelling that um has um you know, it's located in a great location right off of the in the walkable right off of the downtown area and this family is looking to invest in this for the long term. So, thank you.
Great. Thank you, Tom. Yeah, just a couple. Um good to see you again. I feel like we've been seeing each other a lot lately. Yes. Hey, Tom. regarding the the garage. So, it's existing uh existing condition, but in in addition, the the floor increase in floor area is not
really living space, right? Exactly. Bedrooms. Exactly. It's Yes. And and also I know that the that there was some comments in the letters that this previously was a sing a two family house, which obviously it's not anymore. I don't know how I came up with that. It was too electric. It was it was until
about uh 2014. It was a two family house. So, um, you're not not totally off. Um, but so, you know, I think it's still going to be single family and just no no real increase in living space. I I think technically you need variances for the driveway setbacks still. So, on the
side on the sides. Yes. Just want to make sure that's part of the record. And that that that's not being changed because the majority of the driveway is already fairly narrow. So, we're trying to keep it for safety purposes. And as far as the C variance relief, are you bundling these as C2 benefits? Yes.
everything. All of these are C2. There's no existing hardship on the property except obviously, you know, if you look at the existing home, which does have some non-conformities, but the lot itself, there's no hardships. These are all C2 and in my opinion, the benefits as stated outweigh any detriments associated with them. All right. Thank
you. And just a comment for the reason why the enclosed porch is considered F. Historically, I know Chris Anderson used to allow for screening porches to be fully enclosed. The idea being that they're kind of enclosed already. So just to formalize that in the ordinance so when somebody does do that that
eventually over time that sort of creeps and becomes enclosed. Yes. So when an applicant does that the board recognizes what they're proposing and and again they're proposing only a screened porch. Fully appreciate that. But that's the reason why it's that way in the code. Okay. Just historical context. I have no
further that helps. Thanks Tom. Anything for this? Okay. Just some thank you planner on planner conversation. to open it to the public. All right. So, um, questions from the board for this witness.
Seeing none questions from the public. All right. With that, I will wave my closing because I think the board heard some very in-depth testimony. So, with that, I would turn it over to the board and request that you grant approval for our requested relief. Perfect. And before we do that, I'll just ask if there's any comments
from the public. Seeing none. Okay, we'll now go into executive session. Who wants to begin? I will. Alison, please. Um, I really like this application. Um, I think it's very modest. I think it's adding all things
just to make more family space. A lot of the stuff makes so much sense. um to bring the everything everything the whole thing um just enhancing the beauty of the house um and making it more livable and I just you know I I like
that you're not you know trying to add bedrooms, bathrooms, etc. which a lot of people do. But thank you. This is uh this is great. I think it's just adding more family space so I can support it. Thank you. Excellent.
Yeah. um listening to test to everybody testify here or testimony, whatever you want to call it. Um the positives definitely outweigh the negatives. Uh it is going to beautify the house, make it look a lot lot better. That you want to use beautify as a word, that's fine. Um uh and I like the fact that you're working with the neighbor that you know
resolving an issue. Um so that's that to me that's kind of important. The only the only downside that I think can think about and this was we had this earlier is is no garage and um you know when when the kids get older and the toys end up in the yard and sleds and bicycles
and now electric scooters and all other kind of stuff wind up in the yard, you you'll you're going to wish you had a garage, but that's neither here nor there. So, I can support this application. Great. Thank you, Mr. Kurt. Anything? No. Yeah, I I mean I I can support this. I I
think I'm always happy to see when these older homes are preserved and maintained. So, um I I I I can support this. Um I too can support this. I know
building off for your comments that trying to do any work to a historic home can be challenging to say the least. And I think you've approached this in a very sensitive and um impactful way and uh I would agree completely with your
planners testimony. Um and it seems as though you you you've satisfied all our planning criteria and um sort of met the standard so to speak in order for us to grant variances. So
with that, I'll ask Zach to tell us um any conditions and variances and then uh number of votes required. Okay. So the variances here are the floor area ratio, the combined sideyard, uh lot coverage,
the building coverage, the driveway sideyard, and the garage variance. And then the conditions uh standard uh conditions compliance with the board engineers memo screening on the porch will be maintained uh that will be maintained uh the shed and the fence
will be made conforming. Uh the driveway will be made conforming at least 5 feet from the rear property line uh and paved and then as well as compliance with Mr. Linson's comments. Do we also have it's not going to be converted to living space indoor living space? I I think
that's I had that under uh the screening porch will be maintained. I'll I'll include that as Yeah, maybe just more specific. Okay. Thank you, Zach. Appreciate that. Can I get a motion to approve? Motion to approve. A second. Second.
Nicole, can you call the role, please? Mr. Karen? Yes. Mr. Malay? Yes. Mr. Nelson? Yes. Miss Chief? Yes. Mr. Chenuli? Yes. Mr. Nearing? Yes. Chairman Lickicket? Yes. All right. Thank you. Good luck,
guys. So, with that, uh, we're going to take a fivem minute break and then we'll finish up the last case of the evening. strong. Okay. As soon as we get out. Perfect. Our
last case of the evening, nine Stony Hill Court. All right, we're going to swear you in. Please state your names. Jonas Carr, Jacqueline Hope Carr. Do you swear or affirm that testimony you're about to give will be the truth? Yes. Thank you.
Please tell us a little bit about your Sure. Uh so I'm born and raised in Summit, moved back five years ago. Uh moved to Stony Hill Court. Uh moved here originally as a family of two. We're now a family of five. Um and we were looking
to add on some space. Uh and so um not changing the footprint of our house, we were looking to add over existing roof. And so what we're looking to do is add a small office on the first floor. Um and then outside of that a small balcony and then to the second floor uh just extend
the size of the master closet uh and add a bathroom off of what's currently a guest room but will become our son's room. Okay, that's kind of the gist of it. Great. Um any questions from our
experts for these witnesses? No. the board. Any questions? None. Okay. Any questions from the public for this witness? Yeah, if you want to wait for the
architect, that's fine. Right. Please please state your name. Hi, I'm John Jinocchio. Do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth? I do. And can you give us a brief record of your qualifications? Yeah. So, I'm a professional architect. I've been
practicing for 20 years. I've testified in numerous planning and zoning boards across New Jersey and the Northeast as well. Great. Thank you. Well, please begin your testimony.
I I'd just like to take this opportunity to thank the members of the city of Summit zoning board as well as members of the public for hearing our request for relief as it relates to the required variances for nine Stony Hill Court to
permit our clients Hope and Jonas to build an addition to their home for their growing family. We appreciate Mr. Sneakus and Mr. Baron's description of the variances we require in their May 12th memorandum.
A a D variance for floor area ratio as the R15 zones maximum floor area ratio is 25% and we are respectfully requesting consideration for 30.28% an increase of 5.28%.
And then B for a C variance for the minimum sideyard setback for the balcony over the existing garage where we currently along the western edge of the property have 10.2 ft and the current zone's minimum setback is 150.
The primary hardship that demonstrates how this subject lot compares to the surrounding lots is the fact that this existing 9,400 ft lot is situated in a zone
district with a typical and minimum lot size of 15,000 square ft. This increase of 5.28% 28% of floor area ratio in a typical um zoned lot in this district would be
792 square ft. Whereas for this lot, we're only asking for 295 square feet of floor area so that our client can build for their family's future in the as described. Um first floor office and
balcony and second floor increase to the to the bedroom to have a an additional in suite bath. Um, I can further go over the details of the plans if you would like or I could
just receive questions at this point. [Music] If you want Yeah, if you want to walk us through the plans. Sure. So I have here in front of me the same drawings that you have. They are
basically the A 100, A200 and A300 sheets. on the A100 sheet, we have the the um architectural site plan as
well as the floor plans. And as Jonas had pointed out for the first floor plan, we're increasing uh over top of the existing uh roof over the
garage to include a balcony and a and a new office. And then as that addition goes up, then above at the upper level, we would be extending the um the the rear yard facing bedroom over
top of the existing family room. And then on top of part of that, on top of the new office, we would have a new bath with a shower and a laboratory and a toilet.
Um and then on the A200 you can see in our elevations how that how that would conclude basically in keeping with the nature of the house is a hip roof house.
the addition would um just conclude in a very contained organic way. [Applause] Um so those are the main main drawings
as it relates to you know the the the addition. We also have the a 300 sheet which is more of the details related to how that addition
frames. Um there were some comments in the you know in the u uh obviously some of the clients I'd like to speak to obviously uh once we we do
have the permission to build this we'll be definitely in compliance with the requirements for smoke detectors and um fire rating at the garage verifying that it's got the the rated separation and I
think our details already called that out too. [Music] Um is there anything else that Yep. Oh, that's great. Uh board professionals, do you have any questions for this witness?
I guess just a few observations maybe a couple comments. Um so I think you mentioned that the increase in floor area ratio is increase in area is 295 square ft which amounts to 55t on the
first floor and 155t on second floor. Correct. The space is distributed between two floors. Correct. Um and the sideyard setbacks that we flag Again, I was kind of unsure whether or not to apply it. Basically amounts to
a balcony uh taking place of the garage roof where it sort of overhangs. I thought that it technically might require variance. It's within the footprint of the existing building, but because it's occupiable space, again, it's outdoors. It really is just instead of a roof, there's a ramp. That's that's
um and and so the the statuto test, as you heard from the previous application with respect to the for ratio varianes, whether or not site can accommodate the additional bulk that results from the additions of your testimony that the site
can within keeping of the existing character of the house surrounding neighborhood. Exactly. feel free to elaborate but uh yeah I don't have much um I'll just again acknowledge that the addition is above existing portions as
well board members questions for this witness seeing none right Mr. Jafar, do you have question for this witness? No, just overall comments. Oh, just comments only. Okay, no problem. Any other questions from the
audience then? Seeing none. Um, is there anything that you would like to say in summation? I don't think so. Yeah, I'm not sure what to add without any questions that I might be qualified
to answer, which I'm not many, but um I I hope it makes sense. Okay, no worries. Thank you so much. Y All right. Now, we will allow for comments from the general public. Yeah.
Hi. And my name is uh Martaza Jafar, J A F A R. And I live next door at seven Stony Hill Court. Oh, I'm sorry. Oh, problem. Uh, do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth? I do. Thank you.
Um, yeah, I live next door at Stony Hill Court, which is adjacent to N Stony Hill Court. And, you know, first I want to say I appreciate the notice and the opportunity to comment and I understand the applicants have been working on this project for quite some time. And, you know, I'm not opposing the application
overall. Um, our home at 7 Stony Hill Court is a one-story ranch and uh the applicant's house is already two stories with the garage at grade level if you compare to the level of our property. Um, I don't know the exact uh
terminology, but it their garage entrance and our our first floor is the same level. Um, with the proposed additions to to the first floor and the second floor, especially over the garage and the family room, we're just concerned about increased visibility and
a potential loss of privacy along the shared boundary. And um, you know, our hope is that some modest privacy screening like some evergreen trees or similar landscaping, it could be considered to help maintain a reasonable buffer. Um
you know we've reached out to the applicants to suggest this and you know we're open to working it out directly without without uh you know bringing it to um outside of this process and uh you know I just want to thought respectfully
raise this concern source on the record and you know to ask whether the board might consider encouraging a small privacy mitigation as part of the proposal. Is that something you'd be open to? We're not changing the footprint of our house. I mean, we're
we're not touching any landscaping. Our house has a ton of landscaping around it already. Not saying we haven't thought about doing anything different, but it's not changing what we currently have, right? I mean, we are we currently already have side windows on the top
floor that our children's bedroom is. We're not adding like a window or anything on a second floor there. So, I I don't I respect the request. I don't really understand it. I I think you're suggesting that you get together at some
point and see if there's maybe an opportunity. You're standing on the property shared property line. You take a look and you see maybe there's an opportunity to introduce some taller landscaping that maybe provides privacy to both sides. I don't know. I I I think
that's what's being suggested here. Yeah. I don't I don't think we're opposed to the conversation. I think for us, we've been taking this in steps. So, we've been working toward this for a while. And so, I think obviously we've tried to get together, but haven't been able to over the last week and a half. But, I mean, ultimately, like we taking
it one step at a time without knowing what the work entails. I think the only thing that I think Hulk's trying to express is we have windows on that first floor that look out which are similar to exactly where the balcony would be and then we also have windows on the second floor that also look out the same direction. so understand it, not opposed
to it, but also don't know what the result of this ultimately will be that would differ from the existing um basically view of I guess inside the house. Well, I I think that's just perhaps a conversation worth having with your neighbor on site looking to see if
there's any solutions there that you both can live with. Yep. And and we did agree to have a conversation with him. Jonas was just traveling. He actually just flew back right before the meeting. No worries. That's fine. Totally fine. Mr. Javar, is that Yeah.
work for you? Okay. I'd be looking up for them. Okay. Great. Thank you. Excellent. Thank you so much. Any other comments from the public? No. [Laughter] Els we'll get you there soon. It's still serve dinner, Mr. Jeremy, is there any
screening there now? Are there any trees or anything? Yeah, there there trees all around the whole property. I I I got back into the town late, too, so I wasn't able to drive by. We did um appreciate your staff comments that we received and we did the early review
when the forester was out and they approved their landscaping also. So, I'm just a little little unclear. Are you willing to work with your neighbor and put in screening if that's a difference here? I I think
transparently like I don't know the cost of what we're talking about or what we're entailing. So I think similar to before I'm definitely not opposed to any conversation but I also don't know what the result of this differs from that and then what we're talking about in terms of what the investment would be to do that at this point. Well I I think your
willingness to have that conversation is appreciated by the Sure. Yeah. Definitely not opposed to it whatsoever. Okay. Great. Uh so with that, before we go into executive session, I'll ask Zach to let us know conditions, variances,
and votes needed. Uh well, with the exception of the potential conversation uh between the neighbor, yourselves, uh not sure if there was any other We're not going to condition it. Yeah, I think we were going to condition it, but okay. So then
there were no other introduced uh you know, the standard compliance with the board engineers memo. Uh because there is a D variance here with the floor area ratio, it requires five votes. Okay, great. So um let's go into executive session.
Mr. Ble, what do you got for us? Uh I'm very familiar with this uh property and I know the hardship you have with the uh topography and the steep slopes you have and I think you will be doing a good favor for the
Ashland Road with the nice and new uh uh balcony and uh uh and I think the um uh historic uh the the commission
said commented on on that feature as well. Uh I think I I do support your application. I think it's a good idea. Great. Thank you,
Mr. Curry. Yeah. Um I do think it's a it's a thoughtful application also considering you know the existing lot size is um undersized for for the zone and uh you know if you took that into consideration may not be sitting here um
and also appreciate the fact that you're willing to sit down and have a a conversation with your neighbor. I can support it. I can support it as well. I know dealing with the property and this the slopes and all the other things you have to
work around. I think uh what you thought is a very thoughtful application will enhance the value of the house and enhance the value of the neighborhood. I can support that. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. No, I can too. At first, I I didn't understand the balcony, but then I guess it kind of makes sense if you want to
look to see who's coming in and out of the driveway. I guess that it's a way to look out that um that direction, but um yeah, no, I can support it. Great. I too can support your application. Uh I I agree that there is a real hardship here
uh considering the undersized uh lot within the R15 zone. Uh the fact that you're willing to be constrained by your existing footprint and just build up from there, certainly appreciate that. and uh understood no
promises being made, but the fact that you're willing to have a conversation with your neighbor, as I said before, that's something that this board always looks for and certainly appreciates. Uh so with that, can I get a motion to approve?
So move. Can I get a second? Hearing. Thank you. Nicole, can you call the role, please? Mr. Kieran? Yes. Mr. Malay? Yes. Mr. Nelson? Yes. Miss Chief? Yes. Yes. Mr. Tanchuli. Yes. Mr. Nearing. Yes. Chairman Ly. Yes.
Congratulations. Good luck. Thank you. [Applause] Do we have Oh, yeah. Do we have Oh, we have Everyone's packing up. I'm like, "No, no, no. We got paperwork." Nicole, I got this for you, too. Thank you. All
right. Thank you. All right, don't go anywhere yet. Homemaker, you got you got to turn it over. Okay, so resolutions for memorialization. We have zoning board application 242272, which is 15 Greenbryer Drive.
The applicant requested C variances for steep slope to regrade their rear yard. The members that can vote are Mr. Kieran, Mr. Malay, Mr. Steiner, Mr. Yuko, Miss Chief, Mr. ing vice chair Zan. Um, out of those members, can I get
a motion to approve? Second. Second. Um, Mr. Kieran, yes. Mr. Malay, yes. Miss Chief, yes. Mr. Nearing, yes.
Approved. Okay, great. Perfect. Uh, next we have zoning board application 242256. This is 47 Oakland Place. Uh the members that can vote on this one are Mr. Kieran, Mr. Malay, Mr. Steiner, Mr.
Yuko, Miss Chief, Mr. Nearing, and Vice Chair Zan. Can I get a motion to approve this resolution? Someone moved. Second. Anyone? Someone second. Second. Thank you. I bet
you don't want to leave. Um, okay. Motion second. So, Mr. Kieran, yes. Mr. Malay, yes. Uh, Miss Chief, yes. Mr. Nearing, yes. Approved. Um, minutes for memorialization. We have the
February 20th, 2025 zoning board meeting minutes. Uh, the members that can vote are Mr. Nelson, Mr. Steiner, Mr. Feskins, Miss Chief, Mr. Kieran, Mr. Nearing, Mr. Yuko, Vice Chair Zon, and Chairman Loy. Uh, can I get a motion to
approve from one of those members? Second. Second. All in favor? I opposed. Perfect. Then we have the meeting minutes for April 21st, 2025. The members at convo are Mr. Kira, Mr.
Malay, Mr. Steiner, Mr. Yugo, Miss Chief, Mr. Nearing, and Vice Chair Zan. Out of those members, can I get a motion? So moved. Second. Thank you. Um, Mr. Karen, yes. Mr. Malay, yes.
Uh, Miss Chief, yes. Mr. Nearing, yes. All approved. Perfect. Um, May 5th, 2025 zoning board meeting minutes. We have Mr. Malay, Mr. Nelson, Mr. Steiner, Mr. Yugo, Miss Chief, Mr. Feskins, Mr. Chantuli, Mr. Nering, and
Vice Chair Zan. Out of those members, can I get a motion? Sure. Second. Thank you. Um, all in favor? Opposed? Perfect. Are we good to adjourn? We're good. Can
I get a motion to adjurnn? Before we adjourn. Yes, sir. June 5th, we have a meeting. Is that correct? That's what that was the I said I could make it, but I can't. I I cannot make it either. We'll have to
discuss. Do you have a quorum? Do you want to at least with who's here? I I think we're going to try and figure out um who can really make it. Yeah, that's for
the church, right? Yeah, because we kind of That's okay. Yeah, I just had a conflict pop up. Yeah. Okay. Um I guess we will discuss that tomorrow with Mr. Ball and
I think we're also meeting on the 9th too. Yes sir. Yeah guys got quite a week coming. Okay. Um anything else? Motion motion to second. Second. All right. Thank you.