Good evening and welcome to the Monday, March 16, 2026 meeting of the city of Summit Zoning Board of Adjustment. My name is Scott Blake. I'm the zoning board chair. 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 stands one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you all. >> In accordance with New Jersey statute 10 col4-10,
adequate notice of the special meeting has been provided to a newspaper record. It's 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 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 live streamed on the city's YouTube page. It's also being broadcast on Summit's government channel, which is Comcast channel 34, Verizon channel 30. Transcript of this meeting is also being
taken 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. The city has a listening system to assist the hearing impaired. If anyone needs hearing assistance, please take the system of
the day and then return it thereafter. Miss Sans, can you please call the role of members? >> Vice Chair Zan is excused. Mr. Yuko >> here. >> Mr. Malay is excused. Mr. Mullen >> here. >> Mr. Nelson >> here. >> Mr. Curran >> here. Miss Chief >> here.
>> Mr. Feskins is excused. Mr. Chantuli >> here. >> Mr. Bell is excused. Chairman Lyz >> here. >> You have a quorum. You may proceed. >> Thank you. Miss Sans Andy Ball is the zoning board's attorney. Mr. Ball advises the board members on matters of law and is the key interface with the applicant's attorney. Mr. Ball does not
vote on these applications. Jessica Sans, who you just heard from, is a city employee and is the zoning board secretary. Board secretary works with applicants on preparing their applications, planning our agendas, and keeping our meeting minutes. The board secretary also does not vote on these applications. Also present tonight are
experts who are hired annually by the board to provide input to us. Tonight we have Marie Rafé from Collier's Engineering. Also present is Ed Snikis from Burgess Associates and he's our board planner. These experts are seated at the table to the right of the board, the public's left. They also do not
vote. Our board consists of up to seven regular members and four alternates. All members can participate in the hearings tonight, but 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 their applicants or their attorney giving an overview of the application process to date and what variances are required. We then hear from any additional expert witnesses the applicant may have to help explain the application, why those variances are needed. Board experts,
followed then by the board members, 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 one given
evening. Once the board members and the board professionals have completed their questioning, the public will have an opportunity to ask questions. It's not the time to tell us what you think about the the case. That opportunity comes at the end of the hearing. Please be careful as 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 our court reporter be able to keep a clear and accurate public record. After all the witnesses have been heard, members of the audience then have a second
opportunity to speak. This is the time where you can 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 we vote. You'll be able to listen to our executive session, but you will not be
able to participate in our discussion. I ask that each applicant and their attorney, if present, come up and give a brief synopsis of their anticipated testimony tonight, including how many witnesses you have, whether or not you can finish your entire presentation within 30 minutes. So, tonight we have
four cases on the docket, but two of them, I believe, are going to be carried. So, if do we have a representative from 19 Ridge Road? >> Good evening, Mr. Chairman. James Weber of Alfonso and Weber. On behalf of the applicants, we're requesting that this
be carried. There has been the opportunity uh in the review of the plans to reduce the lot coverage almost to eliminating it as well as to eliminate several other variances so that we're not going to be presenting to the board an application that had nine
or so variances but trying to get that down to a more reasonable number. The uh uh plans were finalized this weekend and as a result they have not been incorporated into the civil engineering nor have your experts had an opportunity
to review them nor have the board members themselves received those revised plans. So we're asking that this be carried without the need for further notice to May 4th 2020 2026 >> and waving the time frame to act.
>> Yes. Thank you. Can I get a motion to carry this application? >> Motion to carry. >> Can I get a second? >> Second. >> Miss Sans, can you call the role, please? >> Mr. Yuko? >> Yes. >> Mr. Mullen? >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson? >> Yes.
>> Mr. Curran? >> Yes. >> Miss Chief? >> Yes. >> Mr. Chantuli? >> Yes. >> Chairman Litz? >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Weber. We'll see you on the fourth. Well, we'll see you later tonight, too. >> All right. Do we have representatives from 55 Tulip?
Yeah, just a quick synopsis is all we need. >> Hi, uh my name is Eric Stabler, uh resident at 55 Tulip Street, Summit, New Jersey. I've been a resident since 1996. Um we're presenting uh before you a need
for a variance to put a small very small bathroom up in our third floor attic. Um we've lived in that house for to discuss projects. >> So, how many witnesses will you have to >> just the two of us? All right. Perfect.
>> Probably be 15 20 minutes max. Okay. >> I'll I'll have my timer going. >> Okay. >> All right. Great. We'll see you in a few minutes. Thank you so much. All right. Next. Do we have representatives from 35 Bedau? I believe not. >> Is that right? >> Right. And we did receive uh an email
request from council uh asking to carry this also to May 4th without further notice. Uh they're similarly revising their plans in response to staff comments. >> Thank you, Mr. Wall. Can I get a motion to carry that application as well? >> So moved. >> So moved.
>> Tit. >> Can I get a second? Second. >> Mr. Yuko. >> Yes, >> Mr. Mollin, >> yes. >> Mr. Nelson, >> yes. >> Mr. Curran, >> yes. >> Miss Chief, >> yes. >> Mr. Chantuli, >> yes.
>> Chairman Lett, >> yes. All right. So, we'll hear 35 Bedau on the 4th of May as well. >> And finally, do we have someone from 46 Colt who can just give us a summary? Mr. Weber. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, James Weber
on behalf of the applicants, Bobby and Emily Kennedy. Uh, two witnesses. We should be able to be done in 30 minutes. Excellent. Great. All right. So, Mr. Stabler, you're back
up. >> All right. Mr. Ball is going to swear you both in. >> All right. So, we'll start. I guess we'll go with Mr. Stler first. If you could raise your right hand. Yes. Do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matter, the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth? >> Yes. >> And please state your name. Spell your last name. >> Eric Stabler. S T A B L E R 55 Tulip Street. >> Thank you. Um and I assume we'll if you could just uh tell us briefly about the
application, then we'll swear your architect in after. >> Yes, no problem. So, as I was said earlier, um I'm resident at 55 Tulip Street and we're uh the application is to put a small bathroom up in the third floor attic space. Uh we have a bedroom
up there and uh that would make currently we have two bathrooms on the second floor and a half bathroom on the first floor. We're uh going to be experiencing quite a bit of traffic through our house over the next few years given that um I'm a recent
grandfather as of yesterday and we're going to have >> Congratulations. >> Thank you. family, friends, and uh family coming and visiting and have another grandchild coming uh in August. So, I expect a lot of traffic. We just felt that uh getting a bathroom up there will help service and people come and
visit. It's again, it's not a big ask. It's just there's a nice space up there for it. uh something that we probably should have done a long time ago with our four kids, but we survived without it, but I think now it's time to do it. So, >> great. So, >> thank you. Um board experts, do you have
any questions for this witness or do you want to wait for his architect? >> I have no questions. >> I was going to wait. >> Perfect. Uh board members, do you have any questions for this witness? >> Seeing none. Uh public, any questions? No. Seeing none, please, sir. Welcome. >> All right. If you could raise your right
hand, do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matter, is the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> And please state your name, spell your last name. >> Yeah. Nick Benley. I'm principal of East West Architecture based in Marstown. And last spelling is Benley Bisenboy. Ensl.
>> Thank you. And can you briefly describe your background and experience for the board? >> Yeah, I've been licensed in New Jersey. I have my own practice since well, licensed in 91, practiced since 93. I've been in front of this board in the same area that we're doing the stablers project on Oakland um Ashland as well as
on um Tulip Street the last seven eight years. >> Any questions from the board or would you like to accept his credentials? >> We would welcome. Please proceed. >> Um I apologize if I need to follow a little bit of script here. It's going to keep me simpler. Um I'm a little under
the weather and I just got back from a wonderful trip to Patagonia. So my memory and is not serving me quite as well. I'm thinking more about Patagonia, but uh bear with me here. We'll keep this short, hopefully to the point. Uh Stabler's House is a 1930s Dutch
colonial. Uh it's on a corner lot, and we're proposing as as uh Eric stated, a modest attic level dormer edition to provide them with a small bathroom um to service a bedroom that's existing up on
the attic level. Uh we are here only for um relief to the floor area and also part of the proposed design is to um try to increase storage space in the existing attic for the stablers um as
everyone needs more storage these days. uh property is a corner lot currently conforming with non-conforming with respect to lot size 7500 square ft where the R10 zone requires 10,000 square ft
ratio is currently 32.67 where 25% is permitted um impervious coverage 35.3% where 35% is permitted building coverage 22.64% 64% where 18% is permitted. Both
front and sideyard sets setbacks 28.6 ft where 30 ft is required on one side, 11.9 ft where 12 ft is required. Fortunately, we're only here asking for relief for floor area coverage. Um
there was a previous variance that Stablers got to expand their kitchen and their master bedroom suite um along Oakland Place and a little bigger terrace off the kitchen. Uh that was um 1999 I think. Yeah. And was built in
2000. Um obviously approved. Um so that's where a lot of these numbers that are in excess are being driven by. Um, the neighborhood, just to put a little context on it, I'm sure you're familiar, is mostly traditional colonial style architecture. Um,
your packets, I just want to indicate house is right here. >> Sir, make sure you're talking to the microphone. That's all. >> Yep. Otherwise, you're good. >> Yeah. Most of the properties right along
the side where the stablers are are undersized lots. Most of the properties coming along Oakland Street are conforming lots or larger lots than what's required. If you want to just look briefly at the
plans, I'll walk you through what our proposed proposed design is. the you know the drawings are organized so that you have an existing and a proposed you have existing elevations proposed modifications are the rendered
ones um basically what we're doing is you see in the existing drawing this is the existing bedroom as it is now slope ceilings 7'4 ceiling height at the flat portion of a basically a tray ceiling we're proposing to add on a bath off the
back here and also a small dormer to provide better storage. The height in that storage area at the ridge is 7 ft. The low point is 4T 4 1/2 ft to give them a little better storage. So none of that applies to
floor area ratio which is 7 ft or greater. Only the bathroom where we're looking to maintain the 7'4 ceiling height that's in the existing bedroom. um elevations. This is really a very minimal impact visually from both Tulip and Oakland. As you can see, let me just
get my bearings here for one second. Uh you've got the existing front elevation, which really has no change for this dormer. The existing side elevation, all you're going to see is just a little shed dormer off the back that rises up off
that existing attic. Um the side elevation which is basically I call it the backyard or the uh the side elevation the right elevation has the bathroom addition with a small window here. That little shed dormer right there is for the storage area. And from
the back again you only see the proposed addition for the bathroom and the shed off the back. Materials are all going to be consistent with the existing house which is shingle style. um really pretty minimal impact visually on anything in the neighborhood.
So our proposed addict dormer addition um which only increases the floor area ratio from 32.67 to 34% where 25% is required. We're basically adding 100 square ft for this bathroom to add that
onto the floor area ratio. Um the hardship obviously it's an undersized lot 7500 square feet where 10,000 feet is required. Um the addition is dimminative as to the additional floor area ratio of 100 square ft. Effectively
it was a normal size lot or floor area ratio would be 25.5% where 25% is the required. So, it would be slightly over it, but really nominally. Uh, and as I mentioned before, the dormer edition is at the back of the house on a corner lot and not readily visible from either of the
two main streets that go by it. Um, I think I have to address the C variance, although I'm always confused with what is a C variance versus a D variance, but I was looking at the planners report. >> Yeah, I believe the only variance you have is a D4 for D4 area ratio. Yes.
>> I don't have to talk about the benefits and detriments or anything else. >> I'm happy. >> It's still part of the proof. So, if you could just talk about >> Yeah. Um, you know, we're seeking the physical features test obviously with a undersized lot. Um, that imposes a
burden on keeping those percentages conforming. Um and the negative criterion of the floor is only slightly exceeds a normal F AR in the R10 zone. Um the attic edition has minimal visibility as I've
mentioned. Um, I think it maintains the scale scale and the character of the not only the neighborhood but some of the larger houses along Oakland but also the character of the uh of the um Stapler's house. Um, and I will just quote one of
the staff members comments on everything that was I looked at yesterday. Um, I thought was very appropriate and I'd like to just end with that. It's a modest addition that will increase the functionality of the property. >> Do you believe this will increase the
intensity of use of the property? Do you >> No, I think that intensity. >> Yeah, it's going to handle the intensity. It's not going to increase it. >> All right. Um, board experts, do you have any questions for this witness?
So there's um since the increase in impervious coverage is not exceeding um 300 they're not required to do any storm water mitigation. Um so beyond that I have no other c questions from >> Thank you. Murray Ed. >> Yes Mr. Chairman in addition to the the
question you received from the board with with regard to the intensification the proposed addition is primarily along the back corner of the building. Is that correct? >> Correct. And so as you had mentioned, it's not as uh readily apparent to the
public way, but is it apparent to the neighboring properties um in this relationship or there mitigating features as a result? >> Um I think it's only really visible from the adjacent house on that side of the property. Um
>> and your setback on that side >> is 11.9 I believe. It's a little under 12. And then also towards the uh the other adjacent property, it's about 28.75 ft. >> Yeah. And it's pretty screen. There's a
cover in a stream that runs adjacent, I believe, to that uh detached garage and some pretty high existing trees that are there. So, there's already a pretty natural buffer that exists at that edge. >> And then also the materials that are going to be used on the addition.
>> Yeah, as I mentioned, they're going to be consistent with the shingles that are currently on the house. It will all be painted white um so that it will blend in, not stand out. Same roofing material. >> What is the roof pitch of your hat off the back? >> Uh the minimum required for asphalt
asphalt shingles which is on the existing roofs 312. Um >> okay. Want to keep it as flat as possible and I wanted to spring that from the existing ridge line of the attic as well as provide them with a 7'4 ceiling. So that actually worked out
pretty pretty nicely. existing >> other than just that little bit of shed that appears you see in that one drawing second to the left. Um just a tiny little portion of that shed for the bathroom primarily the door going off
the attic has no visibility from Oakland at all. >> Thank you. >> Great board members. What other questions do we have for this witness? just so the um excuse me the existing
um sideyards was that a result of the variance from 19 >> 99 >> 99 or was that built the house was built with those? No, they they um added on to their existing kitchen for little
breakfast area and also a little more space for a master bedroom suite above and then also added a terrace as part of the walkway coming in from the >> drive and that's the terrace or the >> I'm sorry I got a sore throat. >> Yeah, I do too. So, >> you want one? >> I've got one too. >> The patio is um covered in the lot
coverage. >> It is in the lot coverage. Correct. >> Good. Thank you. >> Anyone else? >> Actually, it's a related question. I noticed Ed in your report you you suggest or you say the applicant shall provide a copy of the 1999 resolution which I think would have might have addressed some of Mr. Nelson's issues.
Should we be concerned about that or >> I did hear testimony from direct with regard to the prior resolution of approval. So it seemed to be addressing that issue already where it was. I just wanted the board to be informed of that information. >> Yeah. And we actually before we started this project, we we requested to get a
copy of what was submitted for that and they had nothing available other than a handwritten note of zoning chart. >> I unfortunately wasn't involved in that that project. >> That was back in 1991. >> 1999. >> That that that bedroom that's up there
now that's been using been used as a bedroom for how for how long? uh when my one of my when my third kid was born probably back in n uh 1998 1999. >> Do do you know what size the window is
in that bedroom? >> Uh the windows there small windows that face u >> Can you talk into the microphone please? Thanks. >> Yeah, it's a there are small windows up in the attic. There are just two windows and there's an air conditioner unit that uh faces Oakland Street.
because I'm I'm um I mean Mr. Nelson would probably know, but usually a bedroom requires a an egress sized window if it's being used as a bedroom. >> I can address it if you'd like, >> please.
>> Yeah, we're uh code requires an egress window in a renovation project. If you're changing any of the windows, if they're already there and they're non-conforming, it's not required by code to change them. Um, we chatted
briefly about that and there didn't seem to be a desire to get into doing any work in that existing bedroom. Um, typically if we do double hungs, they have to be really large would be really awkward scale-wise on the house. for us to do casements
possibility we could change those windows but again I don't have enough height to conform so again they would change the proportions of what's existing there and again I'll repeat that they're not required by code if we're not changing any of the windows in that room >> my I kind of thought they were required
by code >> to my knowledge over 30 years of practice if you're not if you're renovating the room and changing windows you have to bring it up to to code if you're not doing any work in a room, you don't have to come in and replace windows.
>> Uh I've I've done plenty projects where um bedrooms had to have at least a um typical 3046 size window at a minimum. >> If it's being used as a bedroom, we also have that window. But that's that's
building code. Doesn't really >> existing if it I'm just asking how long it's been if it qualified as a bedroom. How did it qualify with small windows like that? >> When we bu when we purchased the house in 1996 that that bedroom was already up
there. It was attic space, but it was set up like a bedroom. Um and and I just want to clarify there was there's another window at the top of the stairs that's part of the attic. But but when the bedroom was added, was it done as a renovation?
>> No, it was already there. It had wood floors. They were in bad shape. But the um and there was >> I I just think it something that you should consider. >> Okay. >> You know, for safety. >> It is a safety issue. >> Yeah. No, that's fair. >> But it's not required by code for the renovation we're doing.
>> That's good. >> Any other questions? No. Any questions from the public? Seeing none. All right. Is there anything you want to say in summation? >> Uh, well, I just want to say thank you
for your time and consideration and look forward to hopefully an approval to this uh project. So, thank you. >> Thank you. So, Mr. Ball, can you go over conditions and number of votes? >> Uh, so I do not have any particular conditions noted. There is no
engineering report on this one that we would usually require compliance with. Um there is a Dvariance. The only variance involved is a Dvarian. So five votes are required to approve the application. >> Okay, great. Um any public comments?
Seeing none, let's go into executive session. Who'd like to begin? >> Yes, please. Um, first of all, I want to say I think it's very admirable of you to, you know, that you've been in town for so long and you want to add on to
the house to you're growing instead of um, you know, to so that your family can come and stay here instead of, you know, looking someplace else and moving away. Um, so, you know, I think that's I think that's nice. It says a lot about Summit. We want we want to keep our residents
here. Um, so whatever we could do to help that and help your family so that they come visit and that's what you want. That's what houses are for. Um, also I was I was I'm actually surprised, not surprised, but I don't know when they made the zoning map that that your street I walk by it all the time that
you are R10. It's like so that little strip should probably be R six, but that's just a side note. And you know, finishing the extra storage in your attic because we have a finished attic and I have the same thing. There is no storage. That is your storage. So, you need the extra storage space. So, I fully support this. I think your ask is
is, you know, like I said, a great reason why you need this. Um, like I said, and that, you know, normally I'd be like, why do you need storage? But knowing, you know, when you have a finished attic and there's no extra place. Um, I think that's and then having um a bathroom for a guest is um something a nice to have. Well, pretty
much a need also with a big family. So, I fully support this. I think it's um I think it's great. I think you, you know, should make it so that it's you can welcome family. >> Thank you, Alison. Uh Tom, >> yeah, I mean I agree. I think the undersized lot, as we've noted,
exacerbates the F, the need for the F. The the work is in the rear of the house. Um the corner lot makes it visible from two streets, so the visibility is minimal. Um the forester noted no need for additional screening, so I don't think it's going to impact
the uh the neighbors. Um, I think it can be granted without any substantial decrement to the public good and without substantially impairing the tenant purpose of the master plan and our ordinance. It's in keeping with the neighborhood. So therefore, you know, it's not going to be it's not going to stand out and have a negative impact
from that point of view. Um, and I think I think that's it. It's a relatively modest increase in F, so I can support it. >> Um, I can support this application. my I'm I don't like third four bedrooms, but um I'm surprised it wasn't caught,
but that's not our perview here. Um but I can support the project the way it is. Again, it's a modest addition. Doesn't affect, you know, the neighborhood. Um and you have a smaller than than required lot. So, I agree with my board members. I can support this application.
I too uh completely agree with my colleagues that I don't need to reiterate. They said it better than I ever could. So certainly can support this application with that. Can I get a motion to approve? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Miss Sans.
>> Mr. Yuko. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mullen. >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson. >> Yes. >> Mr. Curran. >> Yes. >> Miss Chief. >> Yes. >> Mr. Chantuli. >> Yes. >> Chairman Ly. >> Yes. >> Bless you. >> Good luck. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Colt Ro. I've got lazy. Not that lazy anymore. Use it again. It's like the Oscars all over. >> Thank you, Mr. Barkas. Got you. >> Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. James Weber of Alfonso and Weber. on behalf of the applicants,
Bobby and Emily Kennedy, with regard to a property located at 46 Colt Road. The application is best summarized by the review of the perspective that's shown up on the screen at this point. This has not been part of the package. We did
have the front elevation as part of the package, but this is a colorized version. >> So, we'll just mark the entire electronic submission as A1. >> Thank you. The uh proposal is to retain the Georgian style
and the Georgian style of the home will be retained. Uh the proposal is to add a second story addition over on the left wing. There's a single story back there now. And they're going to add a 388
square f foot addition to that portion that will increase the lot coverage by 8 square ft. We'll increase the building coverage by 8 square ft and I believe we will increase the F by that 388 ft uh
number. Uh the Kenn Kennedys have found that uh they love this uh charming home. But with any home that is approximately 85 years old, built according to HPC in
and around 1938, it comes with its uh inconsistencies, inefficiencies. I think that when you look at the second uh floor, the two bedrooms are in the railroad style. So, in other words, there's no hallway that uh separates the
uh rooms. You have to go through one room to get to the other room and vice versa. Likewise, there was a stairwell, a second stairwell that served the upstairs uh and provided the staff that access. Uh it's a narrow stairway. Uh
it's not functional and that's going to be removed. Likewise, there will be a renovation and reinvigoration of the first floor family room and kitchen. And as a result, we'll be taking this home, longstanding uh significant contributor
to the Colt Road and modernizing it. Unless the board has any questions of me, I'll call the Kennedys to the uh stand to give testimony in this matter. >> Great. I'm going to try I don't know whether I should move the computer at this point and or just stay with it. All
right, >> let's not tempt Mr. Weber. >> Yeah. Where is Sam? Okay, we have to go to the other plans. This is Mr. Barkhouse, Andrew Barkhouse. and he is the uh design architect on
this project. Thank you. In terms of the witnesses, I should uh interrupt for a second. We also have Andrew Clark here. Even though the addition in building coverage and lot coverage is only 8 square ft, he's here to provide any uh responses that may be
necessary that arise from a civil engineering standpoint. >> Thank you, Mr. Weber. >> All right, I'll swear both of you in if you could each raise your right hand. >> Do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matters, the truth, the little truth, nothing but the truth?
>> Yes. >> And one at a time, please state your name, spell your last name. Emily Kennedy, keen ny. >> Robert Kennedy, keen ny. >> Thank you. Thank you.
>> Hey folks, you uh own the property at 46 Colt Road. >> Yes. >> And you brought an application before this board with regard to that property? >> Yes. >> And what's the purpose of that application? >> So, yes, we've lived in Summit for about eight years. We were renting for a few
years. Bought our first home 5 years ago. 46 Colt Road. Um we have three kids there attending the public schools in town, walking down to Franklin. Um and we have four bedrooms on the second floor. Um as you heard, um one of the
bedrooms in the back and one of the bathrooms is only accessible from the second floor by walking through one of the other bedrooms. Our children are getting older. They're needing privacy. Um we need to be able to accommodate them for that. Um so that's the main
reason for um the work that we're going to do. Um and then again, yes, as the the fir on the first floor, that will allow us to get rid of the old staircase that's very narrow. Um which is pretty much right in the middle of the kitchen.
Um which will also help us to, you know, expand the kitchen and modernize the kitchen. Um and allow for some more storage on the first floor, which in an 85year-old home is definitely necessary. Um, but yeah, we love the home. We love the neighborhood. Um, want to want to be
able to stay there and continue to have our kids grow into the space. Um, and don't want to the the facade we we love. We just want to make some updates to actually bring it up to what we think the rest of the homes in our street uh the curb appeal that they have. We'd
like to sort of match and be more in keeping with the neighborhood. Um, and most of the added square square feet is actually in the back corner of the home. So, really from the front, as you saw, it's a very small change in terms of the
the the um added square footage. Um, >> I would I would just emphasize that preserving um the historic home is really important to us. It's one of the main reasons why uh we brought in Period Architecture. Um Joe and his firm really
specialize in um bringing historic homes up to more modern standards, preserving the character, um making sure that they stay within sort of the context uh of when the home was designed uh the neighborhood. Um and we sought out experts uh in this field. We weren't
interested in tearing the home down and building uh something new. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but what we loved about this home when we bought it um now almost six years ago uh was really the historic nature, the the charm uh of the home. And we believe
that these plans are very much in keeping uh with all of that. Uh I would just also add that that uh bedroom that has to be walked through to access the uh the back uh bedroom uh and the back um bathroom is my daughter's
room. uh she's now 12 years old and so uh she doesn't like anymore opening that door and when we do have guests, they do share uh that that bathroom and that back room. Um and so there's um not real safety concerns, but there's certainly
privacy concerns and we'd like to uh to manage that and rectify it if if possible. >> Great. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Uh board experts, I assume you're going to wait for their expert witnesses. >> Perfect. Just one question I have with with regard to parliament getting ready
addresses the issue of the prior approval and how it's evolved. That's all. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Ed. >> The uh >> I just want to see if the board has any questions for this witness. >> I had that same question. So, >> anyone? No. All right. Good. Any uh
questions from the public? Seeing none. All right. Sorry. Go ahead, Mr. Weber. >> Did you speak to your neighbors? >> We did. >> Yes. >> Okay. And what uh response without repeating what they said did they have with regard to your application? >> They're all supportive.
>> And are you going to end up uh in terms of putting in landscaping in the future? You had a chance to talk with your neighbors. They would like to speak with you with regard to that and you'll confer with your neighbors as to uh landscaping in the future. >> Yes. >> And you've had a chance to review the
staff report comments and you do you agree to be bound by them subject to the testimony of your experts? >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Great. >> I do have one question. I figured I might as well ask the homeowners. One of the um comments from Historic Preservation Commission, and I actually was thinking the same thing. You're
removing the portico. So So you're not So there's not going to be any covering over your front door when you walk out. >> We're actually replacing the portico um with more of a uh a vestibule that is actually closer in line with the historic Georgian architecture of the home. The portico, our understanding, is
actually not original to the home. Um, so there will be uh coverage. >> So that's so that the door that you see is doesn't go right into the H. There is a Okay, >> correct. That's actually the eight square feet of additional lot coverage is actually 8 ft beyond what the portico is currently covering. >> Okay. Okay. Does it look like flat from
the pictures? Okay. Thank you. >> Great. Thanks, Alison. All right, Mr. Weber, next witness. >> If I can, let's take this opportunity just to talk about the 2006 approval. >> Sure. >> So that there's the opportunity
to address that. And we have available that the board can take judicial notice of the plan. I would suggest it be marked A2. >> Absolutely. Thank you.
>> And what this shows from 2006, this was the engineering plan and the addition would be shown in gray from 2006. And that would be the sun room that's on the right hand side, the two-story edition
that they did in 2006. >> So, can I distribute this, >> please? Pass it around. >> Pass that down. So what I brought up in A1 when you look at the proposal and looking on the right
hand side that would have been the 2006 edition where they added a second story over the sun room that was on the right hand side. It also brings up I'll hold my question till the plan comes around. Mr. Weber, in your electronic packet, do
you have any photos of the existing facade as it >> Yes. >> condition is exists today? If I could ask Mr. Barkhouse to rejoin us.
And why don't we swear him in if I can, Mr. Chairman. >> Absolutely. You >> raise your right hand. Do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matters, the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> And please state your name, spell your last name. >> Andrew Barkhouse. B A R K H O U S E.
>> Thank you. Can you briefly describe your background and experience for the board? >> Yep. I'm a registered architect in the state of New York. I've been licensed for seven years. Um I currently practice with period architecture that's based in Pennsylvania. Uh Joseph Macken has joined me today as well. he will be the stamping architect on this application.
>> Okay, great. >> You can see that electronically I'm attempting to bring up the elevation. I got you. And they're looking for the chairman's looking for the existing elevation. >> Oh, fantastic. Thank you so much. Yep.
And would you be able to uh Emily or Bobby describe what's uh shown here as part of the package that's been submitted to the board already? >> Explain the the existing. >> Yep. Explain the existing. >> Yeah. So, this is the existing home.
It's a It's a red brick home um full surround um with an um circular >> portico >> portico um with a balcony on top, but that is not accessible from that second floor window. So, it's sort of like a
faux Juliet balcony, if you will. Um and yeah, so on the right was the it used to be a sun porch, which they converted into the previous homeowner converted into that twotory. And then off to the left is where we're just looking to make the addition on top of that existing
first floor structure. And it's set back um farther from the front of the house. >> It's harder to see from this perspective, but if you were to stand to the left of the street and look up the house or in the driveway um you'll see uh quite a um mishmash, if you will, of
uh of different roof lines. And so one of the other benefits I think to the neighborhood um is that really from any perspective of the home um those roof lines will be uh cleaned up. They'll be elevated. Um it'll look uh much less disjointed than it currently is. Well,
there you go. Thank you, Andrew. And this is as the result of, you know, many families uh enjoying this home and making improvements to it uh in the last 88 years. uh and we are just trying to um rethink that uh as you know one
singular project um but without you know really um exceeding the envelope uh much further than we are today. This is really not about um getting more bulk. This is about improving the functionality on the second floor. >> Great. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Board questions.
>> Yeah. Question. Maybe I missed this. I was maybe I was looking at something else. How how did we get from the 2006 approved numbers for F building coverage and max lot to what is the current >> is or did you address it? I apologize if I missed it.
>> No, I did not. Okay. Uh that is a a little bit of a conundrum. the uh at the time that the approval came through, there was a credit for the
greenhouse that was attached at the back of the property where it was 7 ft or less. And as a result, that was not counted in floor area ratio. It is now counted in floor area ratio. And as a result, the numbers did go up. We're
talking about a difference of around 119 square feet. That back portion of the uh 2006 uh greenhouse they gave a credit of 3 32.6 square ft
and uh I can submit this architectural plan uh at this point which would be A3. >> Yes, it would. So, so in essence, you're saying it's it's the change in how the city measures things or counts things that there was no extra work done.
>> A change how Okay, >> thank you. >> Thanks. There is still something from 2006 where the condition of approval was the removal of 2 ft of length of the
driveway in front of the garage. The Heckleman's did not remove that twoft strip and so that has remained. So, we're asking for a variance to allow it to remain. It provides What's the
benefit of having that additional 2 ft? >> It improves the maneuverability of our driveway significantly. I would say we have a twocar garage. One that's sort of tucked behind the house, half of the garage, which as with three kids, we use mostly for storage. So, we get one car
in one half of the garage and the other car is always parked in the driveway. Um, and so that we use that those couple extra feet to help us get the car that's in the in the U garage out of the driveway without having to move the other car. So, it really helps
functionally quite a bit and also getting the bikes in and out with a car in the driveway as well. >> I've asked uh Mr. Bark House if he could bring up the uh civil engineering plan by Andrew Clark so that we can see exactly what this two feet uh is uh
addressing. Well, if you're going to do that, let's hear from Mr. Clark. >> Okay. So, that was required. >> The removal of the two feet was required for previous barri.
>> It was never caught. Never. >> It was not. I mean that also the uh the front portico was uh going to be removed which also was another factor in the reduction of the F because at that point Mr. you
go, you may recall the definition for floor area uh residential calculation included uh if you had a deck or a porch that was framed on several planes not counting
the plane of the principal building then he counted in floor area ratio. So that was uh later cleaned up and then we believe it would have been cleaned up afterwards which allowed that port to go to stay and the adjustment went on because when they started talking about
the planes they said well the floor of your porch is a plane the roof is a plane and as a result you're counted in F and obviously uh it didn't make any sense and so became a problem for the uh
enforcement >> and all these discrepies You're talking about predate by years the current applicant. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Yes. When they what you what you see is what they bought. Yeah. >> So we have the survey from when they purchased it in 2020. Uh that may have
even been included as part of the application uh memo to the board members. So, >> one question for the applicant. In terms of the driveway utilization, when you're using it for maneuvering, are you more using it towards the back of the
driveway or the front of the driveway? >> The back of the driveway. That that two feet is all is always right by the back. Um it it doesn't even come all the way down to the front of the house. It starts like maybe midway through the house. >> Yeah. If you take a look at the screen here,
>> Oh, yeah. You can see that. You can see how the driveway actually bends out toward the property line. >> And it's that extra strip that was supposed to have been removed. Um that is where we use um that extra space where it exists um to be able to
maneuver a car around, you know, another car um or even for the kids to be able to get bikes in and out of the driveway uh sorry, in and out of the garage easily. Um it would be very difficult um you know if not impossible without that um extra two feet.
>> Can can you park a car there and still maneuver in and out of the garage? >> Barely. >> Okay. >> How how wide is the driveway? It's maybe it's more question for Mr. Clark. >> Yes. If I can at this point uh should I
bring Mr. Clark up? >> Sure. >> Have a seat here. All right. Do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matters, the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> And can you please state your name? Spell your last name. >> Andrew Clark. C L A R K E.
>> Thank you. And you have appeared before us a number of times, including very recently. Any changes to your credentials since the last time you were here? >> Not in the last month. >> I imagine we'll accept you back once again. >> Welcome back. >> Thank you. Yeah, I'll just indicate on the on the screen up here since I don't
have a board, but I think the area we're talking about is right in here. >> And so like at this wider point, it's about not quite 18 ft. I mean, it's 20.8 to the building. So it's a little bit less than that's about 18. I think it
comes down in this area to about 13. Um, so the two foot would come in there. it would probably reduce about 54 square feet of lock coverage. But on the flip side of it, um it doesn't really get you much. Yes, it gets into compliance with
a twoft setback that's required for the driveway, but as a practical matter, the two foot in there doesn't really give you much in terms of like a landscaping opportunity. It's not quite enough room to really get any meaningful landscaping other than ground cover. And in dialogue with their neighbor, they don't seem to
have any concerns. and there's a lot of uh passage along there with the uh the neighbors uh across the property. So, I I don't think leaving it really causes any detriment and there's a bit of a benefit in terms of what uh the Kennedys were just discussing in terms of its
functionality that it brings to that part of the driveway in terms of the entirety of the driveway. Maybe is there a way to remove let's say I don't know eight square ft of lot coverage and not impair the use and functionality of the driveway.
>> I mean I I suppose with some considerable work effort you could probably reduce the I mean you rebuild part of the driveway um you know take out the curb and move it in a foot or six inches or a foot. um you could
potentially get to that 8 square ft. Um I'm I'm not sure it gains a lot of benefit in terms of the functionality or or the 8 square ft in terms of the coverage either. Um cuz the driveway it's about 12 ft wide for the bulk of
it. Um which is pretty common, but you know, could you make it 11 ft? You probably could and you make up that 8 square ft. The eight square feet I think was pointed out before is the difference between the existing circular portico and the rectangular portico that's being proposed.
>> One of the other points if I can sure the prior approval had granted a variance for 39.3% uh what they built was 39% and what is being proposed is 39.1% >> in terms of lot coverage. Right. In terms of lock coverage,
>> existing and proposed conditions are within what the previous variance for lock coverage that was granted. >> That's right. >> Lot to unpack there. >> So, they're actually asking for a little bit less than was previously approved.
>> Yeah, that's right. >> Terms of lock coverage. >> Correct. >> In terms of lock. >> Correct. Correct. >> And Mr. Clark, there's no other um site additions, no other AC pad or generator pad or uh additional um imperous
landscaping in the back. That's correct. That's all correct in terms of the actual work. It's focused primarily u almost entirely in this area of the building on the existing footprint. So that's really another reason why I
didn't want to necessarily open the can of worms of site work >> on this job because it's not really warranted for any other reason. >> Um so yeah, that's correct. There's there's no other um site work that's proposed. Great. >> Thank you. Board experts, what questions
do you have for this witness? >> So I don't know if this is a question for you or for the architect. Do you know where the roof leaders are going to go from the addition? Well, they're going to they're going to go in the same place they are now, which uh there's I think two locations. I drove by again
recently. I saw your comment and um there's there's one discharge point at the curb coming sort of more from the right side and then there's another one that's sort of opposite where this uh this left side of it is. And that appears to be where all the roof leaders come out from the dwelling. I didn't
trace them out, but they they go into the ground. And then there's those two discharge points that I didn't observe any sort of um problematic condition and I think Mr. Shreger had not indicated any sort of problem that had been
observed um in in his review. So I'm not aware of any issues. Obviously if they did come up they'd be addressed but um yeah they they discharge at the curb and would continue to do so. >> Okay. And Miss Refé, just to re-educate
us there, due to the nature of this type of work, there is no storm water. >> That is correct. >> Requirement, right? Right. There's it's only um eight square feet of additional impervious coverage. So, they're not required to install any storm water mitigation on this.
>> Excellent. Thank you so much. >> Ed, do you have questions from M? >> Probably not for Mr. Clark, but just in general. It seems like the prior approval replaced a sun room that was on the right hand side or I guess that's the westerly side of the existing building. Correct. >> That's correct. Yeah. And I did confirm
that with the architect. >> We were looking right at the sun room depicted on your survey in the back. >> I understood the confusion when I saw the comment immediately. And when I saw the resolution, I reached out for uh Rosen's office who did the original plans for that 2006 um variance and they
sent along I think one of the exhibits was uh um introduced >> and confirmed that it was the sun room that was a sun room on the right side that was converted to the twotory addition on the right side. >> Okay. And then further, I guess I don't know if they were going to have the
architect provide any comments, but yeah, it looks like the roof lines are proposed to match the existing of what's it's even more matching >> more consistent it looks like on the on the left side. Yeah, >> but certainly that would be something they would touch on.
>> Okay. Thank you. Excellent. Board, what questions do you have for Mr. Clark? >> I have a question. So, those are three AC units. >> Yes. >> No generators. They screened. >> I mean, there's some >> I mean, I'm just >> there's some landscaping. It's kind of
hard to see, but there's I think it's like a river birch. There's the four little circles that are right there that aren't very clearly labeled, but there's a a little a little bit of landscaping that's immediately adjacent to it and and some ordinary like foundation planning >> type landscaping. I don't recall when I
was there, but I mean just from the picture online there I could see the ACC unit right from the you know the photograph. So it looks like the front is there any screening right in front? >> So from it stands on the street can you see those that acqu
>> that? I don't recall offhand. Um but they they are planning to do some landscaping as part of the project. So I'm sure uh adding a little bit of screening in that wouldn't be a problem. >> Yeah, I can address it too. We we have English laurels. I'm pretty sure they are um around uh that part of the
driveway. We did lose a couple of them. So now I believe it's not as full. So you can see a little bit, but we want that covered. That's part of our landscaping plan when we finish the work. >> Great. >> Thank you. Any other questions? Just real quick. >> So the area where the driveway hits the
property line, no drainage issues or anything with the neighbor? >> No, actually um the the in this case the storm water Thank you. Uh the storm water pitches towards the street from the garage all the way down. And since there is a curb line there, any any rain
that does fall in the driveway uh carries down that driveway all the way and doesn't flow on to the neighbor. >> So if the neighbor were to ever sell their house and the new neighbor said, "I don't want that there." If we memorialize this variance, is there anything the new person can do?
>> Well, it's not encroaching. It's not encroaching, right? >> It's not okay. >> Yeah. It's if we grant the condition to absolve them of that prior condition to remove that portion of the driveway, then it it's done.
>> Thank you. >> All right. Uh any questions from the public for Mr. Clark? Seeing none. All right. What else you got for us, Mr. Weber? >> We have the architects available. Should the board have any questions of the architects? >> Would the board like to hear from the architect? >> I just have a question.
>> Okay. I would ask that the two architects be called to the stand to be sworn in to give testimony in this matter. >> You sworn in, right? Yes. It's your turn to get sworn in. >> So, Mr. Barkhouse was previously sworn. We'll swear you in as well. If you could raise your right hand, do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in
this matter? The truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> Yes. >> And please state your name. Spell your last name. >> Joseph Macken. M A C K I N. Great. >> And can you briefly describe your background and experience for the board? uh registered architect for over 20 years and licensed in the state of New
Jersey. >> All right. Any questions or would you like to accept his credentials? >> We would. >> Okay. >> Go ahead. >> I we just have questions. Would you >> Yeah, go ahead. Yeah. >> Um so for I mean we heard the um owner's
testimony on why they're looking to do this whole this renovation. It makes a lot of sense with the extra staircase and and the past the railroad um bedrooms. What is the purpose of the two dormers on the in the attic level? Um, and just back to what the um home owners
said that they wanted to keep the Georgian style of the house that doesn't seem like it really fits in those two, you know, they seem like two small dormers facing the front. So, it does change the look. What is the purpose of that? >> Yeah. >> Respond to bring up the uh perspective
so that the board has the >> benefit of seeing that. So the real goal here was that as we took away that faux Juliet balcony, we started to look at the proportions of what that front elevation looked like and we just saw nothing but roof line.
And so as we bring up those two that roof line on the left side, we started to see just a mass of shingles, right? And so the way that we would classically disrupt that shingle pattern is through a dormer. Uh that attic is just for storage. So, it's not really trying to bring in extra light or air to that
area, but just to add curb appeal to the actual massing of the house. >> Are there other examples of houses on the street with similar dormer configuration? >> Yeah, so one of the things that we looked at immediately was we walked up and down the street and looked at other homes that are in keeping with either
the brick Georgian or other brick traditional homes and we basically took different elements from each of those that does feel in keeping. that circle window that you see just above the uh closed porch area is matching one that is directly to the right of them. Uh the two dormers match a house that is a
level uh down from it. So it really was trying to make sure that this feels in keeping with the neighborhood and improve it so that it feels even more elevated than it currently feels today. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. What other questions do we have for this witness?
>> What's the height in that area? What's the height in that storage area? Uh I believe it's like uh 66 at the absolute ridge line >> and it goes down to zero. >> Sorry, I I went in reverse order. >> That was pretty much the question I was
going to be asking. And also the roof lines themselves are all going to be matching the pitches. Yes, the roof lines. >> Yep. It actually simplifies it quite a bit from what it is today. >> Okay. Thank you. Any other questions from the board? >> Seeing none, any questions from the
public for these witnesses? Seeing none. >> And I'll just note, Mr. Mackin, as you're the licensed architect in New Jersey, I assume you agree with all your colleagues testimony. >> I do. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Well done. Um, all right. Do we have any
comments from the public? Seeing none, Mr. Weber, would you like to wrap it up? >> Nothing further, Mr. Chairman. We submit the application to the approval of the board. >> Excellent. I love it. >> Uh so we're going to enter into executive session. Who would like to be?
>> So were there conditions? I >> sorry. Yeah, please >> jump the gun. >> That's what I'm here for. >> So I I just have our one usual condition noted lines with the conditions noted in the board engineers memorandum. So, I know there were a few points raised about potentially removing certain
coverage or some concern about the driveway. Does the board see any need for additional conditions on that point? >> I just have a question. If we're going to approve the plan, do we have to grant a variance for the driveway as well?
>> Yes, that's included. So it would be both um removing the prior condition that they remove that portion of the driveway from the prior resolution which we have that authority to do as well as granting them a variance for the uh you know the two-ft setback the driveway
located within that setback. >> Okay. >> And just this nitpicky question. I know the applicants said they want to put in the screening. Should we add that that they said that as a condition or >> we could if you would like to see that as a condition. I'm sure they will have
no objection to including it. >> Well, it's required. I mean screen. >> It is required. >> It is required. So if it's, you know, currently lacking, we'll we'll note that as a condition as well. They will screen the existing air conditioning unit. Okay.
>> Uh in compliance with the code. All right. Now, who wants to begin? >> And just noting uh five votes are required to approve because there is the uh F varian. >> Thank you, Andy, for that. >> Sure,
>> Tom. >> Okay, I see I have a lot of unorganized notes here. I'm trying to put them mentally in the in the right order. Um I think well, I'll start off by saying I can support this application. Um you know, I I I think it's I think it's a reasonable application. And I don't
think there's anything that has um ne any substantial certainly no substantial negative detriments on the neighborhood with the neighbors or the neighborhood. Um I don't see anything that is is contradictory of the interests and purpose of the municipal land use law. Um I think it'll improve the look of the
house which you know has a benefit for does have a benefit for everybody as well as the property owner. So I I can support it. >> I I would agree with my colleague here. Um the contemplated project improves the use and functionality of the of the
home. Actually, really does improve the use and functionality of the home. So, not just saying that. Um, also the uh additional F does not add any intensification of the use of the property. So, uh I see no negative impacts. If anything, there's a positive
impact to the neighborhood. Uh I was at the house yesterday and the point about the massing of shingles was not lost upon me. I think the uh visual interest generated by the dormers is a nice touch. >> I will say there's one unique thing I don't think I've ever heard before. Having to go through one bedroom to get
to another. >> I don't think I've ever heard that before. >> There's a lot of houses in like that. Yeah, because that staircase. >> I guess it's never come up. >> Half the pre-war buildings in New York City, Tom. >> Okay. Well, I Hey, what do I know? >> It's great for hide and seek plan.
>> Okay. Are you current? I too can support the plan. I think it's a it's a smart architectural drawing plan. Um definitely improves the functionality of the home and uh I see no detriment to to the public here.
>> I I agree with all my patriots. Uh if you drive up and down Colt Road, I think you can see that there's a great temptation to rip down rip tear down some beautiful homes and replace them with something much larger and much less
beautiful. And I applaud you both for resisting that temptation and taking what is already a beautiful house and making it better. Right. Uh, and the fact that the substantial amount of work is being done to the back of the house and everything in the front is merely
cosmetic. I think it it's definitely in keeping with the DRRO, uh, that you're improving the usability and and probably the safety and functionality of the house is something that this board is always appreciative of. And, um, I I
think it's a it's a very responsible, very thoughtful, very beautiful project. So, uh, I could absolutely support it. All right. So, with that, can I get a motion to approve, please? >> So, second. >> Excellent. Jessica, can we call the
role, please? >> Mr. Yuko? >> Yes. >> Mr. Mullen? >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson? >> Yes. >> Mr. Currant? >> Yes. >> Miss Chief? >> Yes. >> Mr. Chantuli? >> Yes. >> Chairman Leage? >> Yes. Good luck with your project. Thank you. >> All right.
That's a record. >> It's a miracle. >> Thank you. >> All right. So, we have some resolutions and some meeting minutes. Oo, three sets of meeting minutes. >> Okay. So, we have two resolutions for
memorialization. Up first is 71 Hillrest Avenue, zoning board application number ZB-25-2315. The eligible voting members are Mr. Mullen, Mr. Nelson, Miss Chief, and Chairman Lickets. We get a motion to approve. >> So moved. >> And a second.
>> Second. >> Mr. Mullen? >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson? >> Yes. >> Miss Chief? >> Yes. >> Chairman Licks? >> Yes. Up next we have 32 Lennox Road, zoning board application number ZB-25-2311. The eligible voting members are Mr. Men,
Mr. Nelson, Miss Chief, and Chairman Lyets. Could we get a motion to approve? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Mr. Mullen? >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson? >> Yes. >> Miss Chief? >> Yes. >> Chairman Ly. >> Yes. >> Thank you.
Up next, we have three sets of minutes for memorialization. Up first is January 8th, 2026. The eligible voting members are Chairman Lyz, Mr. Mullen, Mr. Nelson, Mr. Yuko, and Mr. Chantuli. Could we get a motion to approve? >> Moved. >> Second. >> I'll second.
>> All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Next, we have January 21st, 2026. The eligible voting members are Chairman Loyets, Mr. Nelson, Miss Chief, Mr. Chantuli, and Mr. Mullen. Could we get a motion? So move
>> a second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? >> And then lastly, we have the minutes from February 2nd, 2026. The eligible voting members are Mr. Yuko, Mr. Nelson, Mr. Curran, Miss Chief, Mr. Chantuli,
and Chairman Licketts. Could we get a motion to approve? >> So moved. >> And a second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I. >> Any opposed? Thank you. Thank you so much, Jessica. I really appreciate it. Um, and with that, can I
get a motion? >> You need this. This was >> Oh, yes. >> Yes. >> Can't throw out exhibits. Good save. >> But we never do. >> But Jessica would hunt you down and find you where you sleep. >> Um, can I get a motion to adjurnn?
>> Motion. >> Second. >> All those in favor? Hi. >> Hi. >> All right. Thank you all. Appreciate it.