good evening and welcome to the February 5th meeting of the city of summit Zoning Board of adjustment my name is Joe Steiner and I am the chair of the zoning Board of adjustment please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge to the FL of the United States of America and to the for stands na indivisible andice all thank you in accordance with New Jersey statute 10 colon 4-10 adequate notice of this meeting has been provided to a newspaper of record and has been posted here at 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 live streamed to the city's YouTube page and also being broadcast on summit's governmental Channel which is Comcast channel 34 and Verizon channel 30 a transcript of the meeting is also being taken using video and audio so we do ask that everyone when they speak come to a microphone and those are the ones up here in the middle of the room so even though you think we can hear you um if you talk right from your seat the folks at home cannot please note that the fire ex exits are to my right and your left and to 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 obtain the system at the Das and return it thereafter Miss sulos would you please call the role of the members sure chairman Steiner here Vice chairman lit is excused Mr Yuko here Mr Nelson here miss Zan here Mr Kieran here Mr Malay here miss to here miss chfo here Mr feskin is excused Mr Chuli here you have a quarum you may proceed thank you Andy ball is the city's zoning board attorney sits next to me here on my right your left he will advise the board members on matters of Law and is the key interface with the applicants attorney he does not vote on the applications the delightful young lady you just met Stephanie suio as a city employee and as a zoning board secretary she works with applicants on preparing their applications planning our agendas and keeping meeting minutes uh Miss sulos also does not vote on the applications uh also present is Marie rafy our board engineer who is seated at the table to our right over here uh the audience left uh also seated uh well not seated at that table are our our our board planners uh because none of the applications tonight require that expertise uh they provide input to the board they also do not vote on the applications our board consists of seven regular members and up to 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 but others require a super majority before we enter executive session to vote on the application you will be advised how many votes are required for your application each case begins with the applicant or their attorney giving an overview of the application and what has happened so far and what the variances are 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 members may ask questions of the applicant their attorney and the expert Witnesses once the board members and the board professionals have completed their questioning the public has an opportunity to ask questions this is not the time to tell us what you think about this case that opportunity comes a little bit later before you ask your questions please clearly state your name spell your last name and provide your address it is important that our court reporter who takes the information off the audio uh can keep a clear and accurate public record after all the witnesses have been heard members of the audience now have your second chance to uh provide input and to speak at that time you may express your opinion positive of negative about the application and at that time you will be sworn in then the public hearing is closed and we enter into executive session where board members discuss the case and vote you'll be able to listen to our executive session but you will not normally be able to participate in our discussion Christa Anderson who is the City Zoning officer has asked that we remind all applicants that they must read carefully the resolution that documents the zoning board decision and to pay particular attention to conditions contained in the resolution for example if you need a landscaping plan and it's required you must obtain one and submit it to John linsen the city's Forester if a grading plan is required you must have one prepared by a civil engineer and submit three copies along with the application fee to the city's engineering division failure to satisfy all the conditions in a resolution in our resolution will result in a delay in approving your application as it will cause extra work for the city's zoning staff and the resolutions that document the board's decision are normally available one month after we decide the case so now we're going to go to well we're going to handle one first before I go to everybody coming up is anyone here for 479 um moris ay 77479 moris Avenue no one is here we have a letter from their attorney asking that we uh allow this letter to serve as their request to carry the matter to the April 15th uh meeting of the board and they will be Ren noticing this public hearing as they approach the new hearing date U so if uh as there's no one here to present anything anyway could we uh have a motion to uh move this to a uh to April 15 second and they have uh in here they have have they this they have not they wave the uh it's not I don't think I see it in the letter does it matter because they're re noticing I don't know technically it in here it's not stated but they should we can follow the attorney to get that confirmation after okay and okay and all right we have a second roll call chairman Steiner yes Mr Yuko yes Mr Nelson yes Miss Don yes Mr Kieran yes Mr Malay yes Miss to yes the motion carries thank you okay now what I'm going to ask is on the remaining cases um would you come to forward to the microphone and very quickly let us know how many witnesses you have and if you think you can complete your case in 30 minutes so Michael Moren at 24 Russell Place evening I two witnesses uh Rich Keller from Casey and Keller and Bill figer from Bill figer AI AA Architects do you think you can do 30 minutes 30 minutes I believe so okay well with your first up as soon as we go through everybody else um Kevin and Ryan Holmes good evening Kevin Holmes I'm here with three Witnesses Tom beo my architect Ed Clark our landscape architect and Richard Keller our engineer we can complete this in 30 minutes okay good and then uh Ramen and Salma eggball and you're the attorney if I remember correct correct good evening Mr chairman um we have two witnesses this evening Bruno design and our project engineer and I do think 30 minutes is sufficient okay good so that's the order that we will hear the cases in thank you very much and let us begin with uh the first one Mr Moren 24 Russell play if you would come forward with your Witnesses uh at this point we will swear you in if you could please raise your right hand do you swear from the testimon just one a Time the 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 please state your name spell your last name Michael Moran m o r an thank you okay can you uh give us a little bit bit of an idea of what you're looking for tonight and how we came to get here so I purchased this home uh down the street from my current home I live in a two family house on Russell Place uh I went under contract in April May of last year took a period of time to close on the sale uh because it was handled by the state so I it's been a long time coming even longer time coming to get in front of uh all of you so I do appreciate your time I have been living in a two family house for the last few years as you might know it's tough finding single family homes in an affordable range um my ex-wife lives on the property behind my current property uh at Russell place so I moved into the two family home uh just as a kind of a means to Segway uh out of my uh previous home and I just been searching for the last few years to um find a place that I could stay in the neighborhood I've had three kids go through Jefferson Elementary School down the road I have one in the middle school now so when I purchased the home I knew it was going to need substantial work uh the previous owner hadn't maintained it in a number of years uh when I took over it there was people living there legally that were uh running out the rooms so I actually purchased it site on scene and as I got into the property and worked with Bill and with with Rich I realized um what I I don't know it started as a smaller remodeling project I think in my head and I realized just some of the constraints that the house had physically I uh I preferred to put a full Second Story on it the second story right now is an attic with 7 foot ceilings and just to kind of modernize the downstairs and make the kitchen living area more appropriately sized I was proposing to bump out the back of the house about 10 ft uh which stays within a footprint of our of a concrete patio that's there now um that's that's it there's a the grade drops off in the back of the home so a deck off the uh the kitchen in the living room I thought was appropriate as well so I have plans I can show you uh I think that rich actually plans some it might be more helpful for him to speak first on my behalf because he's got some uh visual aids to assist if anyone has any questions if you don't have any other questions for me all right are there any questions from the board for the applicant questions for the applicant from the public any questions for the applicant okay seeing on which one of your uh experts would you like to go okay you're going to go first yeah okay so would you please come forward and we'll swear you do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matters truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes I do please state your name spell your last name Richard Keller k l l e r thank you and have you here before the board I before uh May maybe within the last year I've appeared before this board on the bedan application across the street um I've appeared before this board the planning board and about 110 boards throughout the state of New Jersey any changes to your credentials since the last time you were here I am still licensed as of uh 6:45 when I left the office yes any questions from the board or would you like to accept them once again any questions seeing none please proceed sure so I'm going to uh do two things first of all I'm going to hand out I came application my partner did it he was not available tonight so I came but I did some checking on the numbers and uh our new associate engineer I think was a little confused by summit's method of when a when a deck or patio goes more than one foot above ground you count it as building coverage so I do have some corrective I'm going to hand out a correction to the calculations we actually have a a greater decrease in impervious coverage as a function of the application and our um total uh lot coverage variant actually also did decrease the building coverage stayed about the same with Chris does memo so I'm going to hand this out I will show it on the board but I will hand it out people pass around we're going to see because my laptop died yesterday and a br new La um should be a bunch up there extras down there no there are no extras down can take one you there more of us than you think and that they're more than the 12 I have my own copy so I'll safe well staff and we're just going to have you mark uh one of these copies of the calculations as exhibit A1 correct what's moment of truth I do have hard copies just in case but Compu few hours ago we're going to see if this uh Works success okay that's that's good all right um that's the uh what you have on the screen is actually the drawing that was uh as part of the application it uh it is uh our grading plan uh title and topographic survey um and it was also used as a grading plan the uh the date on that is 1117 2023 and I will have uh I'll refer to the survey also which will Mark as A2 uh that was not submitted but it's the base layer for the plans that have before you and then finally I'll have an A3 which is the Moran variance application photo board that's an annotated photos as well as site photos taken by myself uh two days ago with the with a current date of February 5th 2024 so if I uh start out just with a little quick description because we're going to try to keep it under 30 minutes um property is located on the easterly side of Russell place about 575 ft to the uh south of moris Avenue about 285 ft uh to the north from edar so on the drawing uh edar is to the right mors Avenue is to the left um we're about 160 feet north of the railroad tracks that are just uh two lots away and kind of divide the neighborhood the property is located completely in the R5 resident residential Zone as our all the surrounding properties um it's about 50 ft deep as our most of the um with with the exception of a a few ten of a foot here or there most all the Lots on this block are 50 ft deep our property is in average 143 ft deep it's 7,748 ft in total um the property is currently improved I'm going to go to the to that survey which we're going uh exhibit number two that's really the base map of what you have before you and if you can remember I can use my hands okay so the property itself um is currently improved with a one one and a half story dwelling um cam driveway concrete uh walks a slate walkway concrete patio there is a 1ot uh detached um garage at the rear of the property as well as a driveway that goes from the property all the way to the back and has an area for parking to the right side and an area to back out of the driveway and turn back around and pull out forward to the street the um the existing house has a front yard setback of 21 uh 74 ft I would point out I'm sorry 21.42% uh 25 ft back however the existing house is set at at uh uh [Music] 21.42% it's consistent with the neighborhood um on the existing sidey yards there is a side yard offset on the right side of 5.42 ft and the uh on the right on the left is 13.38 so while it does meet the combined sidey yard setback that right setback is an existing non-conforming condition where 7t is required so again for shadowing since we're looking at vertically going up we're going to need a variance to match that existing non-performing condition the um with the detached carage in the back um what is not completely unique of the property but since the garage is all the way in the back it does mean we have a very large driveway with uh 1495 I'm sorry with a a fair amount of of uh pavement to get to the back and the turnaround area um so with the detached garage and the shed uh in the back on the right hand corner um the existing building coverage is conforming at 14.95 which is just under the 20 um the 20% uh allowed at 19.3 but obviously any changes are going to kick that over um however with the detached garage that long driveway does push the impervious coverage up to 4350 in its existing condition that's 56.14100 and a half story to make it a full twostory and then adding a 300t 2 and a half story addition to the back of that again matching matching the offsets uh significantly upgrading the the uh the materials on the on the on the uh on the building and sprucing up the overall Aesthetics uh in addition to the uh the 300t Edition um there is a uh there is a 12 by 16 proposed deck coming off the first floor uh you come up a few stairs to the first floor and and then the property drops so that the first floor is is about a full story above grade when you get to the back of the property so they're proposing a deck which will connect the back of the first floor down to the backyard and it'll sit over a proposed patio right underneath it so because that is a um it's more than one foot above grade it does count as building cover so it does drive up the building coverage uh variance application but it is a uh it does provide both a usable um Outdoor Connection and visible uh outdoor connection to the first floor and then it means to get down to the backyard uh which is currently um not as viable it's done through a sidey yard um side yard uh exit right about the on the left side of the house by the chimney I would point out that that entire assembly of the stairs up to the walkway is going away that'll be reestablished to be lawn area and then in the uh in the back of the property um to again help improve the coverage we are removing 331 squ ft of Pavement in the back we're also removing the uh the shed uh which is uh comes in at 51 Square ft and we're removing the concrete area in front of it which comes in at 58 Square F feet um so the total um we're also as indicated removing the 46 s f feet of pavement on the left side or or coverage on the left side part of which was actually building coverage because it was an elevated pad so in the uh in the final analysis is the numbers that I passed out to you over them briefly the uh the actual impervious coverage as it as it exists today is 4350 ft that's 56.14100 in a few minutes so there is a net reduction of 278 ft so there's less runoff less drainage um and uh the in terms of the building coverage we we separated that out um it was not stun so on original drawing but we separated that out um to show that the uh the building will come in um from 1467 we're going to add that 300 Square ft we're adding the square foot into the deck comes up to 1716 but again when we that's partly because we're also reducing um some of the what's technically house on the left side of the uh uh the house with with the elevated uh entrance as well as the sheds going away so the net result is the gr building uh currently is 1495 we're going up to 19944 so we're over by 394 square feet coming in at 25.0 n where 20% is permitted I would point out we're over at 394 Square ft um that represents basically um the garage is 441 so if we if we had an integrated a house with an integrated garage um we would not be seeking the variant relief um it's always more difficult when you're adding to an existing house when you're starting with a a blank slate and you can integrate a garage at the back of the house underneath Etc um but we're trying to work with the uh the existing site and the existing um character of the neighborhood um I will point out if we go to our if I go to my neighborhood exhibit I would point out uh photograph number one is uh photograph of the property of 24 Russell place looking East from the street and you can see that compared to the houses on either side it is much smaller with only at half story above where both houses on either side are more complete two stories and actually two and a half stories if we look at the photo underneath that you'll see that uh this is the driveway that exists between 24 and 26 Russell place and you can see that uh there is a fair amount of space since the driveway's on that side the actual distance between the two homes is 25.3 feet so your ordinance does allow 7 foot and 7 foot offset so it's 14 ft so your ordinance deems that you should have at least 14 ft between dwellings side by side side we actually even though we have a sidey yard deviation proposed existing and proposed the separation between those houses R range between 25.3 and 28 ft so there's really no adverse impact on that neighbor in terms of air late and open space I would also point out that that house to our right is actually to the south of us so they're casting shade and Shadow toward us we're not doing it on to them so again there's really no negative impact on the surrounding neighbor created by the addition on the back you can see again the at the top we're removing some some of the driveway along the left side of the house we're removing uh driveway actually pavement uh concrete as well as the stairs you can also see that uh just by looking you can see that um the the houses on either side of us are actually much closer the right side being 17.4 the left side being 19.0 21t 22 ft our house is coming in at 20 at 21.7 which we're going to match we're still actually the largest setback of the three homes on either side of us around us so we're certainly not out of character with the neighborhood the um the variant s is for lock coverage uh building coverage and because the applicant again is using existing footprint we need variances for front set back and side yard set back on the right side um I I because we're trying to be quick I would normally come back for my planning proofs after the architect goes but I'm just going to kind of blast through them and then then I'll let you the architect can kind of uh explain a little bit more of the house if the Board needs to understand it show you some images but with regard to the planning proofs we see uh uh a C1 under 4055 d70 C1 is applicable uh that is where there's a a physical um constraint created by the property that creates an exceptional difficulty or practical difficulty in uh in improving the structure and that is that the uh the lawfully existing structures on the site deviate from the required setback of 25 ft and the 7ot sidey yard and to try to match those 25 from to go from a 21. uh4 21 uh4 up to a 25t and go from 5 foot to 7 foot uh really has no architectural payoff it's structurally gymnastic and I don't think there's really any benefit to to um that it's difficult to do because you're taking an old house that has bearing walls and now you're creating structure where there is no bearing below it so if you can do the structure in that depth um it's unlikely but if you can do it um you're you are basically ret tearing off the whole second floor of the house and reframing the whole roof plane to do that so it's really a practical difficulty giving the location of the existing structure to do that um so the location of the existing dwelling violates the setback um and as I said it would would be structurally and aesthetically impactful to jog in the existing freestanding garage at the rear uh the property also adds 441 ft of building coverage um and requires that long 2275 ft driveway to connect to it it uh it's a practical difficulty bringing the house of in parent standards without the need to variance relief we also think there's some C2 components where the purpose of the land use Act is advaned through the and the benefits resulting from the deviation will at any any proposed detriment this known as the flexible C variants and essentially it's where the plan uh with the variance relief requested represents a better planning alternative than a conforming one um and certainly the the purposes of the land use act that are Advanced are a which is Public Safety we could remove more driveway and get closer to conforming I don't think we fully conformed to coverage but we would have to back up a long distance from that garage we would have to back up the entire length through the narrow part of the house next to the house and out onto the street on a street where you've got kids playing Etc it's much safer to allow for that turnaround in the back um rather than thinning that out to uh to lose another couple hundred square feet we think it's a safer planning alternative to allow it again there's a net reduction in in total impervia so I think that we can certainly there's no negative impact to drainage um there's no negative impact we're not creating additional living space I think it just prevents presents a better safer opportunity to pull out for um the uh and I think certainly on a net basis um this house is you they say you should always buy the um the worst house in the neighborhood this is actually one of the worst houses in the neighborhood it's had a lot of deferred maintenance um a lot of the other homes have been uh added to in the past they're in much better shape uh there's a lot of stuff going going on on some of the properties you see to the property to our right um but this is the house that is in most need of renovation I think that this will bring it up to us uh um a uh provide the amenities that people expect to find in Summit and expect to find on this block and certainly when you just squint you look at some of the other houses on the Block they're all 50ft Lots this is certainly not going to be uh any in any way D any of your surrounding ones so I think it actually promotes a better visual environment so it's two purposes of the land use act that we uh we advance and with regard to the negative criteria for C1 and C2 um obviously we need to two-prong we need to demonstrate that there's no substantial detriment to the public good and secondly there's no substantial impairment to the intent and purpose of the master plan and zoning ordinance we think that there is no detriment to the public good um there really is no adverse impact on the neighborhood as indicated we've got close to 28 ft to our neighbor to the right they cast Shadow towards us not them we're adjacent to the driveway uh the rest of the addition is centered on the property meets the Beats both the side uh left side and combined side yard setbacks um I would point out uh the metric we look at over for over intensity is f we're fully compliant with the F so we're we're not an over intense use um none of these variances are sought with the intent of getting you know a fifth bedroom and a bedroom in the basement they're uh they're trying to create the program we expect to see in homes and summer um the uh there's no detriment to the uh the public good porch uh and again there's no uh there's no real substantial effect on the character of the neighborhood as we look to the front yard and there's certainly no uh detriment to the master plan um the application will not cause uh uh it's still your overriding goal is to maintain these the character of these residential neighborhoods I think this improves the character um it Still Remains a single family um a residential neighborhood of the highest order uh it is uh it's an opportunity to pick up a property and bring it um more compliant with what people are looking for in the town the Dianes I think are minimal in terms of their number I think they're justified through the existing conditions as well as the uh C2 criteria and I'm happy to answer any questions we'll begin with our word professional um so I'm just confirming that you have um less than 300 square feet of additional coverage right we're negative we're negative okay all right so so as a result he not required to any um seage pits or any stor water remediation y that's really all I have thank you I'd like to just go through the variance figures to make sure we have the most updated ones because I heard some slight deviations from our zoning officer memo for the front yard setback you said 21.42% thing proposed is 21.2 okay um and that's just slightly less in the zoning officer is 21.74% 72 is that still it's actually 5.4 2 is the existing on the front and 6.77 is is the existing okay um and then you said lot coverage 52.5 6 lot coverage we do have uh those were the revised numbers I gave you on the handout and so the proposed lot coverage is 52.5 6 which represents 4,072 ft and building of 25 09 correct correct okay thank you thank you so uh who are we going with Christa or uh the there's very minor discrepancies and because their numbers are slightly less on the setbacks of 21.42% 4 we should air on the side of giving them the extra point3 which he's identified in the plans as being the minimum figure that they are requesting here okay Christa is very accurate but I do have the fact that we have the original drawing and I can look you know where Christa uses a scale I can use the computer so it's just slight deviations it's different than the survey yeah and different than the what's written on the plan here the set yeah because that was again Junior engineer I couldn't bring him with me to to to to hang him out to dry but um I I did spend a fair amount of time redoing all the numbers today I'm quite confident in them okay you're stuck with them any other question any questions from the board now just question on the the driveway is the proposed the new revised proposed smaller or is that just a typ of 1951 versus 1915 it is um the driveway hope hopefully there's not um the driveway does drop from 2275 down to 1915 so we're taking out the 311 and in the back uh as 331 in the back and we're taking out a little bit of the driveway of the front uh left side of the house sorry can I ask one more go ahead question so you're taking out um the existing steps and the wall on the on the side of the house is there um is there extra driveway added to that to make up for that little walkway no we actually are it shows on the drawing we're um we're calling that as to be one so there'll be is there is there a door on that side the door is uh was not part of the revised plans if you look at the the house plans there's now I think a a connection between the kitchen and the dining room it's a coffee area with no door any other questions from the board I have a question um just because we are increasing the building coverage by with 350 ft or something by you know adding in the story um obviously new gutters the whole where is and I know maybe lot coverage doesn't trigger storm water but um having walked on this property today the one question I have is there's a fence right between the neighbor of I think 26 is the number and there's this sort of Gap where the property drops off between the fence there's you know this 24 is built a little bit higher than 26 and so you know I guess my question is like where are the you know are the gutters going to be pointed in such a direction that the storm water is going to run off onto the property cuz it just could be very easy um having walked there to have it end up on the neighbor's um driveway and yard just because on this and and I don't know if you're going to fill that part in or if that's their property but um I don't know if anybody else noticed that but there's probably a six 6 in gap between you know the the property level where it drop and then it drop in the fence and it drops off in there so just wondering I just want to I see that as a channel for storm water for the from the roof to possibly end up certainly uh we'll take a look at that I'm not aware aware of where the current roof U leaders are generally when we we do turn out a working drawing if this board would approve it we do go out and look at where they are where possible we like to have them spill at grade um but we try to pull it away from any joining properties because it spills that grade it gets to wash across the lawn um you don't like to take um roof leader actually is the one of the few things you can put in a drywall we haven't ruled out a drywall it's not required by your Township but we'll certainly take a look at that I have two questions for go ahead um sorry um I don't see any renderings for what's in the basement the uh the architect has plans I have no idea what's in the basement okay I'm I'm assuming utilities and stuff and it's a walk out get they we'll get that from the the architect okay all right y um so maybe my next question is also for the architect I'll try it with you into that um you're building a two-story addition over the back which is currently the patio and I would assume you're coming off the the the roof to adding that going out to the back of the house that's only 300 ft total yeah the the addition uh is only 300 ft 30 by 10 so obviously the roof line there'll be all new roof lines correct we're adding that Second Story over the front part to have stor so the architect can certainly show you how those roof lines will meh okay any other questions from the board okay any questions from the public okay seeing none we will go ahead and go to the second witness hello my name is Bill figdor architect raise your right hand do you swear from the testimony you're about to give him this matters the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do please state your name spell your last name uh William figdor fi D O R thank you and I believe you've appeared before us relatively recently as well is that I don't remember the last time but I've been here a few times years okay any changes to your credential since the last time you were here no license still in good standing in the state of New Jersey yes all right any questions for on the board would you like to accept them we will accept your credentials and uh please uh proceed um there was a question about the basement plans yeah I see it's on page three I don't know if you have that cheat or not I do I just didn't open it all the way my mistake oh I'm sorry no because originally Chris Anderson told me that the plans were not complete for the board for some reason so I sent her PDF all right gotta thank you essentially we're we're um taking a a rund downhouse and fixing up it was um was occupied by um squatters at the time we I measured um complete with mice and the whole deal um however uh it's going to be a nice addition the second floor now is this is essentially an attic so uh there's not really much really good space for a family um I think this will really enhance the neighborhood it ties in it's not trying to be a MCM Mansion not at all as a matter of fact um I scaled back a little bit from what the original uh request was um to where the the addition is actually where the concrete slab is now so we're not really increasing like the house is literally not covering any more property there in the back the 10t feet is an existing slab so that will be become house it'll be attached to the house um so it's um it has a colonial feel it's not trying to be uh stand out so um I think it's a nice addition to the neighborhood I've worked with Michael before to so I know his work and whatever so I'm very happy to work with him again I'm not going to go over numbers because I think he did a thorough job with that as far unless you have any questions questions from the Marie no nothing okay questions from the board no satisfied just checking both sides okay uh question questions from the public okay um thank you um do you have any final comments for us any wrap up or final comments for thank you for the consideration and the time rich thank you Phill very much appreciated that's it okay at this point we uh move into executive session and first of all we look at our uh conditions and vote T so so the only condition I have noted is our usual condition of compliance with those noted in the board Engineers memorandum is that that's acceptable to you yes okay okay that's the only condition who would like to kick us off thanks d got it I went by the property on Saturday and um for lack of a better word a little shocked of the condition of the house obviously you've done some work on it so that's contributed to it too but uh you got a A lot of work on your hands um I don't think what you're proposing is a big impact on a neighborhood um I have a similar size lot similar driveway a whole deal so I can feel for your pain um I live on the other side of town um but I don't think this is definitely an improvement for the neighborhood if you look around at the other houses uh it's not going to cause a problem for them uh I did have a little concern about you talked about the house on the southern side not making a shadow on yours I was a little concerned about the house I guess would be north of you um it's not a lot it's not a big problem so I don't see much of a detriment to the neighborhood with what you're proposing and uh I I can support this application thank you yeah I I I can support it as as well um some of the complications some of the variances are driven by the locations of the existing structure as was noticed earlier um I appreciate the effort to restrain the coverage by removing some of the existing coverage uh to you know lessen the impact of what's what was being added um I was a little bit concerned about building coverage but I think you you've addressed all those concerns and as as was noted it's definitely in scale the neighborhood it's it's a you know probably the smallest house in the neighborhood and I agree was shocking seeing this house I don't like hearing words like squatters and and uh you know the special notice we got from the zoning office today about the uh the not being permitted to be occupied so this is a house definitely need of improvement happy to see it being done I think this is a very nice project um and yeah I can support it as well thank you anyone else I I also too can support it um really think it's great I think it's it's it's going to be a big Improvement um the scale of the house since it is so much smaller than the others and it definitely needs I'm work I'm glad to see that somebody's putting love into it okay uh with all of the positive criteria pointed out and uh uh the the need for an upgrade of a piece of property in that neighborhood um is certainly something that I can support and uh that uh this is an an an easy project uh as far as supporting it not an easy project to complete that's going to be on your end but uh I think uh we should give you every opportunity to move forward so um would someone like to make a motion to approve I'll second roll call please chairman Steiner yes Mr Yugo yes Mr Nelson yes Miss Zan yes m Mr Kieran yes Mr Malay yes Miss toad yes the motion carries congratulations good luck and again read the resolution when it comes which is about a month from me all right we will move on to our next case which is five Robin Hood Road let us get our paperwork out and chance take your time all right if you could please 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 please state your name spell your last name Kevin Holmes h mes thank you okay can you uh give us a little background on the project and uh what you hope to accomplish here tonight absolutely uh sitting in the back is my wife Ryan Holmes my children are back home 5-year-old daughter adelyn my son Mason three years old we are both uh all of us are lifelong residents of New Jersey we grew up in Morris County we currently reside in hobok New Jersey um and have been looking to move for to Summit for some time now uh we we have family and friends that live in the town or the surrounding areas um we're currently we closed on our on our property back in October 2022 uh and are constructing a new home uh that home is in the process of being built as you'll see in photos later um before you before you this evening we were seeking a variance for three reasons one for a front porch uh when we were first constructing or or designing the home always tough to see it on paper versus being built uh and for athetic purp we think a front a front porch would be relevant here um that leads to building coverage variance in addition to a variance for a pool at the home so uh I will turn it over to my professionals here happy to answer any questions any questions for the applicant seeing none any question can I ask one question I don't know how relevant this will be but I is more curiosity than anything else it it appears from comments in report that your initial plans were approved based on no need to variance and then you demolished the house and started bu you know started the project and then now you're coming for variances what what changed in in between there I I think as I said it was kind of tough when we were developing and designing the home with our architect to get a sense for how this home was going to look on the piece of paper and so as we started oops as we saw it going vertical we started seeing the scale of the home and the front facade and thought a porch would help soften it and appeal within the neighborhood and so that that's it was I don't want to call it an afterthought but it was something that we thought would be certainly a value add to the home and the neighborhood and hence why we're here now okay all right any any member of the public wish to ask a question of the applicant okay let's uh who's your first witness K and I'll just note for the record that Mr Keller was just sworn in the previous application you remain under oath your credentials were at that time thank you and I am going to bifurcate my testimony because we do have a an architect and a landscape architect I think on this application is the more critical so I'm just going to give a brief overview of the site um and then um and then I'll turn it over to uh to Tom Bay the architect to uh discuss the architectural resolution to the uh to breaking down that mask within the torch as well as our landscape architect who will talk about uh the proposed pool where that's going why it's oriented the way it is and then I'll come back I'll recap the what the variance that the extent of the variant relas and I'll get through the proofs but I'll try I I'll try to be brief and we'll give everyone a chance to ask questions in each section y perfect has everything in your presentation been submitted to Stephanie actually what you for some reason um the what drawing that's on the board now is the same that's in part of your packet it is uh grading drainage soil erosion sment control plan by Robinhood Road it is last revised 1024 2023 okay then should we perhaps get a copy of the entire electronic thing to her tomorrow which we'll label as a one okay I do have two exhibits here that were not presented one is the base survey I'm not sure why that didn't get submitted but the engineers report did did highlight the fact that we did not include a separate survey and while it is the under layer for the plans you have before you it is a little harder to read on this drawing so we did uh we did bring a copy of the uh of the survey and then when I come back to do my later testimony I will use uh a drawing called H residence variance exhibit and that is that would be uh A1 A2 excuse me and that is dated 25224 and in addition to having an annotated site plan showing both existing and proposed conditions it contains some site photos so if we start those were taken when those were taken uh Saturday and Sunday two days ago uh yesterday and the day before then they represent the they are true representation they've not been modified and they do accurate really represent the site as it exists today okay um not much has changed in the last 24 hours the um so the if we look at the survey um the property is located at the um southernly intersection of Essex Road and Robin Hood Road in the R15 residential district I would note that the uh houses the way it's oriented the house to the left the houses across the street are in also in the R15 Zone the house that's behind us or further up Essex Road is actually uh the start of the R20 5 Zone the property is a rectangular lot it has uh roughly uh 100 ft of Frontage along Essex Road and 200 ft of Frontage along Robin Hood Road the um the property uh does slope uh from the back of the property toward Robin Hood Road when the house was built um the uh the there was a level pad was created so there were some steep slopes created in the back when they created a level and then uh since Robin Hood Road is dropping they when they created that level pad they used some retaining walls and some and created some uh pitch slopes in the front so there is an area of steep slopes indicated in the green on your drawings and uh in the drawing you have up on the screen now in the in exhibit A1 the um the property does uh slope along Robin Hood Road the start of Robin Hood Road it's about 2 and a half% which is fairly minor uh and then it starts to pick up slope so by the time you get to the uh southernly endend of the site your up at about 15% pitch on the road it does mean that the property the corner property that sits immediately to our left does s does sit significantly below the property uh in question the um so the to quantify those steep slopes there's actually 2242 square feet of what I would consider to be man-made slopes I think the the property used to slope along with the road which just gets up to about 15% which is your threshold again when when they when they leveled off a building pad to create the the uh the prior home uh is when they created steep soaps in the front and back which is not uncommon the uh the existing home was built in uh the pre-existing home uh was a one and a half story uh 1929 home that was built in a tutor Revival style um it uh it had an existing uh non-conforming setback to Robin Hood Road of 33 39 I'm sorry 3 9.39 ft uh where 44.25 is the established average the existing the home that was there prior to the construction was deficient by almost 5 ft uh to the average in the neighborhood the existing home um was somewhat unique because um the lot is shallow it's long and shallow and when you apply the setbacks with two front yards and then the two sidey yards and not wanting to push the house further back the the original designers of the home built a home that was 125.638 ft on the right side where the three car garages are the middle section the connective section is about 19.8 ft and then the bulk of the house on the left side or the or the uh um the uh easterly side is actually about uh uh 23.1 ft deep the uh the house also was built apparently uh over time there were additions to it because I think the architect will tell you uh inside there are a number there were a number of grade changes there were different floor Heights there were different additions there kitchen addition done in the SE or renovation done in the 70s uh there was a lot of deferred maintenance in the old home it was quirky and it was really deemed it was it was very difficult to renovate the existing home with what's really more like a a ril apartment scale than of a single family dwelling the um so Kevin and uh Ryan uh homes purchased the property in late 2022 uh they contacted uh us to do a survey Tom beo to design a home for the property um the uh the current home uh is actually under um building coverage by about 100 square F feet it's only under F about by about 44 ft and it's under coverage by about 886 Square P so uh we looked to do a house that was fully conforming we went to uh we designed a home the architect designed a home we did a grading plan that um the location of the accessory structures the location of the home was all compliant with the ordinance requirements for average setback for rear set for side setbacks excuse me for f and coverage and accessory coverage uh there was some thought to doing a pool at some point and finding the smartest way to do a pool and I'll talk uh when I come back about uh the relatively little area that's available to you when you do a pool on a corner lot with a 70ft front yard setback and a 15t fo side yard setback you've got 85 ft of uh of combined setback with a property that's less than 100t deep it only leaves you about 14t of depth to put an accessory structure so um I'll come back um after the architect is gone and I'll I'll talk about the response and uh and the variances that were created as a as a result of that I wanted to start by introducing the site the topography the lay of the land um so as you listen to the architect and the landscape architect and their Solutions uh it would be would make more sense I'm happy to answer any questions before I come back um are you going to talk about the uh seage pit at all I will mention that we are providing seage Bank yep you going to talk about that later or I can I I can do that right now the um the uh the property does if you go to the uh to the sheet that's part of your application package um we did have a net with the new house about 9917 square feet of impervious area was added so we did provide a dryw that is consistent with the town's uh storm water management requirements uh the dry well uh will accommodate um the amount of runoff obviously what generally happens is if the board approves it um we would do a permeability test or perk test prior to uh prior to the installation of any drywall system to confirm that it works and if we get poor perk we'll design an alternate system um one of the nice things about sitting up so high is we can always use a gravity system so if we don't get percolation we can drain out of the bottom of a drywall we can move the location there a lot of options so um but but uh there will be um with the application as you have it before you as well as what was approved now there would be a A dryw system that would ensure that there's no uh additional runoff uh to the neighbors after construction and I I took a look at the calculations I and I believe that um this satisfies your ordinance okay it's rare when we get a site that actually drains toward the street for a change so and I've got I've got grade change down there so I think we've even if we hit poor permeability which we often do in the section of uh of summit uh we'll be able to design something that I think meets the ordinance and is protective of the neighbors other questions from the board um I have one I'm not sure if it's appropriate for you or the architect one thing I didn't see in my packet was um the lot with the buildable envelope and where the house is cited visa and the proposals Visa V the buildable envelope and you know I don't think that makes it hard for me to visualize I don't let me just go to my third exhibit I don't think we actually do show um the buildable envelope if you look at the the drawing you see if in front of you there um the green line the green dash line over on the left side of the the drawing that is the area which in which you can build a uh an accessory structure 70 ft back in the street but it does show 15 ft from the left side excuse me and 15 ft from the rear line so that would be the required setback from the home further down we do show um there there's that dashed line across the front that's the that points out to the dash line so that is the required front yard set back and then turns because you have two different setbacks the required setback along Robin Hood is 44.25 along assets it's actually 35 so you can see there's the dash line again that indicates the uh the required setback from SX so we are uh in the proposed condition we are actually not we're not quite up at the uh at the minimum of uh 44.25 we're actually at uh oh yeah one one of the Bays comes in at 44.3 most of the houses back back at about 46 ft but uh the what I did on this drawing is I wanted to superimpose the existing condition so I'll just briefly introduce this so you can see the Blue Line uh in the front of the house is the existing or the pre-existing home showing that the home was set at 39.4 FT from the street and you can see that it actually sit sat considerably into the front yard setback and that was one to one and a half story massing so that mass uh that is in in the red color um is uh is all being removed that 125 ft width is being paired down to uh the main front part of the house is about 98 ft there's a little jut out in the back of the covered patio so the overall house is actually being shrunk on the site but it is being made deeper because that 19.8 nominal Dimension uh 24.7 really wasn't a workable Dimension um for a home and uh and when you coupled all of the elevation changes we really really started the blank slate looking to hold that 44.3 ft setb back and then bring the back of the house in at the 15t setb back which we're at actually 15.2 so the the the house is nestled into the rear at seac and it is uh just beyond the one bay window at 44.3 we're really using setback to setback because instead of having a long linear house we're trying to get a house that's a little more traditional and it's its size and depth um what ended up happening though is with the pulling the three-car garage forward on the right side um and reorienting the driveway and to get into the driveway we wanted to allow proper backup um to the garage so what ended up happening is even though there's a fair amount of push and pull across the facade uh when it's constructed it appears a little flatter than I think the uh the client was anticipating so when we look at the uh the photographs in the upper leftand corner you can see while there is um you know an attractive roof it's a very expensive uh dimensional wood roof uh and there's some push and play in the elevations that pushes back and forth I think when you get back 35 40t from the street uh it does feel a little um in need of some breaking up in terms of the massing and that's why the architect has proposed putting a uh a porch over the center section which is where the TYC wrap is and that will help both break down the the mass vertically it'll differentiate that Center section it'll highlight the entrance into the house um and because it's open and has a diaphanous layer that you can see through it it really does not have any impact on the uh on the street facade it only helps to break up the massing of the of the building photograph number two is looking up into where we're proposing the uh uh the pool will go and you can see there's the grade that retaining will will remain um that sloped section in there is where the landscape architect is planting some large trees to help block any visibility into the site and into pool area so even though we are um not meeting the 70 ft we're a good um I think we're a good 50 let me just get the number I think we're still uh 52.7 feet back from the street um and and well well beyond the front corner of the house so with the Landscaping uh you'll never be able to with the current topography and certainly the proposed Landscaping you'll never be able to see that pool that's back there and then finally again this is the picture from the uh picture number three is taken from the intersection looking back um down towards South um at the house and you can see again the further away you get from it the house does start to feel a little more planer than the than the uh uh the owners anticipated and that's why the architect is seeking to put that front porch across the middle section to break that mess up it's not about getting an extra bedroom it's not about um about getting uh um a play for more program it's really an athetic decision that I think will break down the massing of the house the pool I think is in a logical location um we decided to orient it um in this axis rather than trying to sneak it into and turn it sideways and sneak it into that green area which is permitted for a pool um this allows us actually to pull the active portion of the pool further away from the neighbor uh behind the property there's the sunshell the entrance into the uh the pool and then we were able to bring that uh bring that pool uh closer to the uh to the street still beyond the front line of the house um just can't make that 70ft set back we think it's a better planning alternative which I'll get to second so um that's the uh we don't have a building envelope but I think this drawing does allow you to kind of see where the uh where the allow are and I also had a question actually for you Andy I know with accessory structures if one has been abandoned we sort of start to noo if if the if if an applicant's going to put a new accessory structure up so if the prior house has been demolished should we be looking at its Dimensions as existing or are we just looking to noo usually when we do do see plans of recent demolition the applications come in as a you know a deviation from what had existed previously I if I point that what what's unique about this one is it's an active construction site so um it's not like we took a shed down five years ago a garage down we want to now put it back up or get credit for it um it is an active construction site um under a current approved building permit with a fully conforming plan we're make some deviations and those deviations rise to the level of needing variance relief okay other questions yeah there are some couple things that the zoning officer asked to get some applicant testimony on and one is um she notes that the plans don't show any exterior lighting for the pool and she wants just to confirm that there is no exterior lighting planned for the pool I don't know if you would answer that or I I do know that the answer is no but the the landscape architect um is really the one in charge of the pool okay and would that be the same same thing for the exterior entertainment equipment that she wanted to ask about such as televisions or speakers anything like that yeah I don't know that there's any of that proposed but the applicants on landscape architect can address that as well others I can address your okay I can address your second question on the um the audio question uh there is underneath the porch which uh on the left side of the home there's a covered patio there's a TV that's proposed underneath that patio that's the only AV Equipment that's currently being considered so Christa asked the question and but I don't know why she was asking I mean is there some reason we should be concerned about that I it's it's not prohibited um under the code at all I think the obvious concern is just noise to the neighbors if it's you know sufficient distance away I'm sure they don't want huge amplifiers that right at the setback line so and it will comply with the Sound Ordinance yes of course that would be the you have noise regulations in place you can't have Amplified sound exceeding the sound levels in the state's code so otherwise you would get viation and as long as you're there I mean maybe your landscape AR can can say the same thing but lighting for the pool anticipate any lighting for the pool nothing outside of the ordinary that would come with lighting inside of a pool so inside I think concern is more lighting outside the pool that potential spill over I'll I'll let my landscape touch on do you have an answer to some of the cuz I saw you come up I'm just wondering if you had an answer she she's helping with the visual oh your job is to hold it up okay right thank you any other questions I have a question about the sound you were talking before there's like four AC units there's a generator obviously that's only works when the power goes out although around town it seems like a lot of people their generators run even when the power's not out um and then the pool equipment is towards the front yard is that like pool equipment that's going to be running in the filter where you I mean pool equipment it's it's yeah that the pool equipment does run fulltime when the pool's in operation obviously comes offline in the winter but uh yeah and they do make them certainly quieter than they used to but we thought it was better to place it at that point in the property where it can be screened by landscaping and further away from the neighbors behind because I could put it um within 15 ft of the neighbors behind but we thought it was a better location to pull it up front where it's more easily screened there's no sound uh sound can be attenuated through Landscaping that can go around it so it's it felt like a better planning alternative than what was permitted at the back of the site but it does it does require variance relief it is an accessory uh part of accessory use that's in a front yard for the for the pool equipment um generators as you said they test twice every two weeks they test and obviously if there's a major power failure everyone's got you know there are a lot of generators running but they're not you know they're not diesel generators they're gas gener generators they tend again um they're not whisper quiet like the pool equipment is these days but they do make noise but it's rare um and then the AC units it is a long house so you do need some AC units for different zones um but again that stuff these days the the stuff is pretty quiet um and you can run I have a brand new house next to me we have a porch that overlooks a home with two AC compressors and I'm not going to say I don't hear them but I don't know these and again they're all much further away from the neighbors than they're required to be and the landscape architect can show you his most recent landscape plan that shows how they're buffered any other questions okay questions from the public seeing none uh we'll go to the next witness before you come back if you can raise your right hand do you swear airm the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do please state your name spell your last name Thomas Boo b a i o thank you architect for the applicant once again I think you've appeared before us relatively recently any changes to your credentials since the last time you were here no any questions from the board would you like to accept them once again I think we will accept your credentials and please okay well I'll start by saying having designed so many homes over my 33 years I don't have too many that come back for a variance as a new construction this is unusual this is not an architectural failure of a plain vanilla box it is a client who gives um he gives a dam about the way a house looks and I commend him um and that's why we're here we're here to put a front porch on because that is in my view the simplest solution to the appearance of a big box I don't just design a big box I try to make great homes there was a lot of undulation in the facade there's an articulation of material and this is an expensive big box because it's a wood shingle roof and none of the materials um in my view fall to that being conventional or plain now with that said the charge is how can I add more Dimension and visual appeal to the home and that's architecturally what I'm going to hear toy try to explain and show and hopefully convince Amanda is helping me I left my Triad in my office so she works for me her first zoning um so the first thing I'll show you is in yellow is the area of the new front porch the new front porch will extend into the front yard and it is because it's columned and roofed subject to being called a building so it is a front yard set back l violation and produces a building coverage violation its size shown on the first Flo PL is 6 and 1/2 ft at its narrowest and about 8 and2 feet being accurate 8. 8 3 and 12 in to its widest the intent of the front porch is to hold Civic charm it doesn't really function to give them living area um they have a pool they have a patio and a covered porch in the back it is entirely here to add Dimension and charm for the neighborhood front porches are in many communities considered to be um a veil right they they actually want to encourage front porches because it encourages civil engagement people can walk by drive by and front porches have seasonal decorations they have sometimes a rocking chair and they are suggestive of a sort of bygone America um sometimes we in new construction we use that area we try to max out envelopes um the front porch was not part of our original intent and the next page I'm going to show you and these are just colored pages on our original plants is the area of what this front porch is it is 90% air other than a roof which will be of wood to match the house there are just four columns it is considered a building by the ordinance and as such we're here for the relief for that um the pool was a much later element in the house we've moved that forward to capture it as part of this process so that there's never a reason to come back before the board for this particular home that's really the extent of my architectural testimony questions um are you going to talk about the Landscaping I'm not I was not going to talk about architecture he Rich went to college for Architects he he actually did a lot of the testimony okay I'm good for now other questions I I have a question what was the original plan for the front of the house like was it just the area you know since since the porch wasn't part of the plans what was just that part uh there was a front stew and there was you know not much did it have the covering did it have the U no it didn't have a cover so it was just a flat door yeah actually this picture that's on here I'm going to go in you'll see it um the feature of this home is that array of towers that's going to be the staircase and from an architectural standpoint that is the most Charming thing on this house other than it's charm from the ma from the massing the front door is right there was that front door inside a little bit it's no it was it never had a cover so it was designed without any sort of coverage from the okay yeah I mean I have we had coverage we have like 80 or 90 square feet he could have had a front porch it's just that its extension into the front setback would have been mitigated it would have been like one or two feet big thank you was there any consideration given to using different um facades over various segments of the house I mean that's another way to you know make something not look flat or give it interest without adding a porch Mr Holmes I assure you had me look at many many elevations I was uh I was challenged by my coloring techniques um so yeah there was everything was studied from um you know from a small front porch to uh one that span the mass the reason the front pors goes from this side to here there's no other doors it's really just to Garner this um engagement of this of the entrance there's there's a feeling that the front door is hard to find there's a feeling that there's no you know where is the house where is the entrance and so this front porch is really what I said it's one of civic duty it is to give an opportunity for because they're not going to sit out there they have a back porch it's really for the U articulation of the facade the neighborhood identification of an entrance and seasonal you know decorations I'm going to ask a very simple question uh so what's the hardship the hardship is that the front porch would extend into the U average front yard setback is established by The Zone and not so simply not just 40 ft it's subject to the average distances even though the old house was in front of my actually in front of my porch the new house had to comply with all the setbacks that which gave them to us we just couldn't get a front porch on it so without the porch there's no hardship without the porch there's no you didn't right so that's correct so maybe you guys can shut me up with C go go right ahead um in the original design uh we knew what the setback was um what would have happened to the size of the structure had the porch been in original design would have been how much narrower well if you had to take 8T as being the one we want we would have to push the center part of the house in 8 ft so showing you on the floor plan this here and this here you can see how narrow the dining room was just just so I can you know get that out there the dining room is 10 ft wide there was no way to get a porch on this house they they would have been here for a variance either way the whole project constru the whole project assuming you went with the size that's right yeah when I come back from my testimony I can talk about yeah we'll get we'll get you I promise um one question I have in and I'm not sure you meant this is part of what part of what you said was that they already have a pool and I don't think that's what you meant no the uh what I was trying to say is that the front porch is not part of adding um living area or usability to the home they have a rear porch and they'll have a pool that's where they're going to be they will have a pool they don't have will have a pool oh no sir with all due respect correct we there was no design for a pool in the initial construction that's right okay we had a covered rear porch as part of my original design and that in fact is where the you know the front porch is really I just wanted to make sure that we were talking past t understood I'm sorry about that but it it really is the front porch is more about the neighborhood than it is about yeah and you have nothing to add about the pool me right oh no from your end okay that's going to be somebody else yes it is okay we'll figure it out Mr any other questions in the board yeah just back to the porches I'm struggling with this a little bit so if you went narrower 5 feet where would how would would you still need a variant yes okay yeah we have six and a half at the you'll see it at some of the key points mhm uh 5 narrow it's hard for furniture or you know little rocking chair or something uh but the front the front entrance according to your plan comes off of Robin Hood then up the hill so this side porch this porch goes down the front of the house at least the plan I have shows the the stair the steps or the walkway goes down to Robin Hood yes that's correct so this is it is the porch blocked off at the end so there's no access to the porch from the from that's right right side yeah there's no Paving around the remainder of the porch there might be some flower beds around there and certainly that front porch could be the subject of potted plants if they're so inclined if the porch is not meant to be social and sat at and you know that the family intends to use the back porch why even make it so big I mean I think that's a the idea of of decorations I mean you put decorations on your front lawn too it is a very big porch um for something that uh the testimony says isn't even going to be used well it is it is the front entrance um so it will have some ability to be used um it is really uh an issue about what is beneficial to the view of that house the house is looked at as being very boxy and we struggled with trying to get more Dimension than I simply are provided the first time and that Dimension comes from jutting this out a certain Dimension could it be less I'm sure it could be if it had to be less it's not intended to be a place where there's a great amenity being provided back to the homeowners they care a lot about the way this house looks I I care too and as an architect I you know I struggle to argue points this one I uh I somewhat tried so many different things I think the porch is a very beneficial element to a home I'll be the bad guy in the in the room okay if it's beneficial to the home why wasn't it in the original design because the original design struggled with that front yard setback they just simply couldn't get a front porch on there and they wanted to come in without a variance I don't do too many new homes with variances of like I have I don't know if the last time I did a new home that had a variance we try to be conforming cuz we can control the I can control the criteria and the outcomes that's that's kind of my point you have a lot and you know you know what the requirements are yes and a house was designed and it's a beautiful house I went I I used in fact my old friend used to live in the house that was torn down when I was in high school so I'm familiar with the area uh it's a beautiful house it looks great I'm just struggling with we had a conforming house and now the porch is the problem follow me I'm strugg I hear you I could have made the porch smaller if it's just about entrance but it's really about the scale no no I I understand I understand your argument overall structure and what you'll see is the four that's beautiful yeah there's no doubt about it's a beautiful house it's you know it's it's could it have and again you guys can why wasn't it Incorporated from the GetGo is really what I'm asking I I'll take the blame for that as the owner that that was as I said before you need to come up to the microphone I will I apologize I'll take the blame blame for that this this for me was when we were designing the home with Tom I saw it on a piece of paper and I didn't appreciate how flat the front of the home was and as we started to build the home and the wood went up and then the shingles went it it it just to me just had no dimensionality and so is an afterthought it was something that to me I thought it would be a very drastic improvement to the physical appearance of the home so that that was to Tom when I started meeting him in the office I said what can we do here to try to help this out and we understand that that's a big ask from all of you sitting on the board and I respect that but it was a conversation I at least wanted to have because I thought it would be such a drastic improvement to the building itself yeah and so and not not the pile on here but yeah sure that was the purpose of my initial opening question was you know what what changed and you I have to be honest I'm really concerned I mean I think looks great but I'm a little concerned about the size okay especially given the timing and you know initially going without a variance because you want it to be compliant and now suddenly you want to have a very large porch and now you cure for a variance um so yeah I mean I I don't know how to how to slice this up but I I like the idea of a porch I'm just not sure I like it that size is it the width that's or is it the the jutting out from the house because it could go narrower from the J out although I I'll argue that no one will ever perceive the no one will ever perceive the average front yard setback it's something materially it's just on paper and based on the former house having been much closer that's why we brought rich as a planner I I thought that the positive and negative criteria do need to be debated on it um it's is it the width of is it the scale of the width or the depth for me it's definitely the width um depth I'm less troubled about yeah I mean either way either way you're you would reduce the coverage by you know making it small yeah yeah anything we do well I have a feeling that we're not going to resolve this until we hear the positive and the negatives from uh why don't we put this on hold and move on and then come back to it when we uh when we hear those positives and negatives um any any other questions from the board no any questions in the public no okay you'll go to your next witness and I'm not sure who that is that's going to be Ed Clark our landscape uh architect okay [Applause] Clark substitution nobody brought their voting we found [Applause] one you've been replaced and um we've also got the The Walking microphone that you can use that's true you can use that as well so this we don't have yet right I don't think we have it yet yeah I don't think we have that either yeah okay [Music] okay will where you in at this point if you could raise your right hand do you swear airm the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do please state your name spell your last name my name is Edward Clark c a r k thank you and I believe you two have appeared before us relatively recently I have I was in front of the planning board I think it was May oh okay can you just briefly describe your background and experience then for the um I'm a licensed landscape architect in the state of New Jersey my license is current I've been licensed since uh 1997 um our own practice in Flanders New Jersey um and I've given testimony in Summit and other municipalities throughout the state on projects similar to this any questions from the board would you like to accept this credentials any questions all right we'll accept your credentials and please proceed uh so I heard someone say that they don't have plan I have reductions I could hand out thank you these these have not been submitted correct this uh what you have here has not been submitted so this is a what what number we have A4 okay thankk that should be okay thank you um I'll I'm going to focus on I'm going to focus on three points and interest of time and then I can answer any further questions first the first first sheet you have is L1 that's the the overall plan and uh I like like to focus on the the screening the restoration or the establishment of canopy and how the landscape plan will integrate integrates the home to the street so F first on the load of screening we heard testimony before I want to start on Robin Hood um and talking about the pool area how the grade it's itself is lending quite a bit of screening to the pool area it's about a 10-ft grade change uh from this point on Robin Hood to the elevation of the pool deck um in addition to the grade we're providing screening um along these three sides of the of the yard using green giant arbores which uh there's an photograph of those on the third U page of the handout um so that'll provide Evergreen screening and uh chosen more narrow species given our space we provide Evergreen screening on the three sides uh on the return back to the front corner of the house there skip laurel which is also an evergreen and that will um in addition to the grade screen the pool area plus screen the defensing that goes around the pool area the scre the screening species runs two the covered porch and then switches to a more narrow species uh given given given the amount of space left and the the neighbor has a 6 solid fence there also like to talk about the screening over by the driveway so this overlap formed by the bend and the driveway uh we provided two Clum analan which are made of under story trees and that overlap will give some screening to the garage area the point I wanted to talk about was the reestablishment and introduction of of canopy um along Robin Hood and coming up Essex we have three three and a half inch swamp White Oaks it's a native shade tree um that will in time Arch out over the street very full head on it we can expect that tree to achieve a height of 75 ft and 30 foot in width over time we've uh carried that around Robin Hood up Essex there's some overhead wires at this point so we switch back down to the uh the Amite here and up on the looking from Robin Hood on the left corner of the house where there is some height showing uh We've brought in a a bohall maple there so we're um going to end up with a total of five native species of shade trees and the two onesto trees by the driveway the purpose of these Street trees and this repetition of a street tree plant gives planting some continuity they're spaced 40 to 50 feet on Center which is standard and again as it matures it will integrate the street to the front of the house front of the house is further integrated to this to Robin Hood by a traditional boxwood style planting that runs the length of the porch and then switches over to a different Edge as we get to the garage so very traditional lower Evergreen type planting along in front of the house and lastly the walk that leads from the front door to the street along the stairs there'll be plantings uh on that sloped area native grasses um some Boulders tucked in to act as Che cheek walls on the stairs and also on the front down where the existing walls are where gets a little steep we're just planting that area with Native grasses and Native firms take any questions you have on the landscape plan go I very very impressive plan it's my first reaction yeah um a couple questions though the Green Giant arbes that provide the main screening for the pool and that's what our forest are called out the need for are it says size 78 ft are those 78t when they're planted or is that that's the size of installation size yeah that's very good and the screening around the ACM generator looks very good too can I expand on that because that came up earlier uh the screen so the Mechanicals are all positioned together the generator the pool equipment uh the air conditioning units in addition to the planted screen around it there is a um tuen Groove Cedar wooden screen that will help with the sound as well so there's a double layer screening there I just want to bring that up because I came up earlier yeah I compliment you and the applicant for going to this extent I'm sure this ain't cheap um very very very good plan very good plan but I think we would if we do approve it I think we want a condition for the Forester to man take a look at it I can't imagine you'd have a problem but no can't either there was I'm sorry so the pool design is that part of your part or you just doing the landscape is sort of the layout of pool just wondering I know I know there was the footprint of where that was going to be discussed later I didn't know if that was you about you know the pool could be rotated 90 Dees to be within the allowable building footprint I don't know if that's your area or someone else's but it there was discussion early that that would be it was mentioned that it would be brought up so I don't know I can speak a little bit about the positioning and sizing of the pool so pool R about 435 so so smaller than the average pools in this neighborhood um it if it were turn 90° into that complying envelope push it very close to the covered porch and need to become even more narrow than it is it's uh only 15 ft is drawn so that that was bringing bringing it away from the neighbor so know the neighbors that left his position quite far away and and further down that as mentioned before pulls the pool activity further away from the neighbor but the pool counts towards right now counts towards the lot coverage right or the building coverage or what does it count towards coverage right so okay there was one other question before about the lighting any other questions yeah we have the lighting for the around the pool so OB there's lighting required inside the pool we're not we're not um proposing any post lights up lights it would probably be path lights uh around the margin of the patio yeah to navigate that so 18inch high downward facing path I think concern be any up propos up lighting or posts is it are you putting any Lighting in on this plan at all we will do not have the landscape lighting plan but there there will be some lighting mainly mainly on the wall and they'll all be within they'll all shine within the the envelope none will escape the envelope that's right it'll be mostly comprised of path lights downward facing path it's about 18 to 24 in okay going have a question um were you on the um part of the project from the from the start like before the house was demolished I was just wondering because there's so there's only one existing tray is that correct that was that's right I came on not I wasn't here prior to the beginning of the project but there's one remaining tray okay what type of tree is that it's a red mapleway maple is it it's substantial it's about 24 in diameter trunk and fairly healthy CR okay but you don't know so nothing that was the only one that was saved that's right okay the the trees that were existing on the site Mr winon had site mentioned that some were damaged or had structural problems and I think there was some ash trees on as well if if the pool were turned the 90 [Music] degrees in the uncovered kind of pool patio um there there would be no need for that kind of front yard set back with a pool right or would that still fall within 70 feet from it would then be comp it would be 70 feet if it if it were in this box yeah 7 70 ft off actually viate by be 68t that pull as as shown 15 ft a color uh it's 15t to the water surface so 17 ft coping so if you were to kind of nle it back in you'd still need a deviation but um it would be obviously less but I can when I come back I'll talk about orations okay any other questions yes yeah uh as mentioned this is a heck of a plan uh when I was standing in the I guess it would be the East front corner the other day uh yeah my concern was for the Neighbors directly across the street because they're about the same elevation um but I hopefully these eight foot trees will will block their View and then there's a I you know I should know the name of the street but I don't so I'm embarrassed when you go down Robin Hood and turn to the right house up on the hill looks right into their yard do you think the height of these trees is sufficient for I mean I don't think they're going to be looking at their bedroom windows all day at the pool but you know you never know do if you go to sheet L3 um photograph number four so the trees will go in at 70 fo um oh I see they they grow about for the year you can hedge them or you can let them go like they are in that photo fantastic thanks any other questions okay questions from the public see none I guess we're going back to for planning leave that so the Varian is requested the um obviously we're looking to add the front porch which encro en encroaches into the front yard set pack and causes us to exceed L building cover I'll quantify that the um the uh proposed setback is 38 ft uh open porches as is in mentioned in Christa's memo um are permitted to extend into a required front yard by a maximum of 6 ft we're at 6.3 ft uh but not more than 50 ft in area we obviously have a much larger wor 377 s ft so it's not that porches aren't permitted and the architect could have done a 50 foot uh porch but it would have looked pretty spindly um against that house and I think we certainly could cut off the3 uh cut off three and A2 in uh 3 and A2 in uh to comply with the 6 feet I don't think um certain given the topography given the setback I don't think anybody driving down the road would ever perceive of that 3 in um but uh it would certainly be uh easier to at least come into some uh better compliance with one of the matrixes that we're allowed to extend 6 feet we at 6.3 um the required front yard setback is 44.25 so we encroach 6.3 ft uh out of that 377 squ ft 309 ft actually encroaches into the front yard setback so that's the amount that um is forward of that dash line of the porch so obviously not all the porch is forward of that minimum setback line so therefore it's only 309 ft that encroaches it would be um and we did look at go back to the Architects Ade drawings we did look at possible ways of making the um porch smaller unfortunately again we have a house that's really built out with the massing if we looked at cutting back the front porch only over um so it's symmetrical around the entrance um there's a setback with this asymmetrical layering of the pediments that means that this is not very far step back so when you did that it became kind of goofy in terms of it um how that second um Mass which does reach the facade layers in and if you try to expand that the front porch to cover from that next Bay it cuts into the bay underneath that sticks out and then you have a a porch That's non symmetrical over the door when we looked at logical places to come once you decided to make it larger it was clear from the architectural perspective that the architecture was calling out for the porch to come full length on on the was really the most uh it was this the resolution that kind of sang the most it made it it it ties that whole Cent Mass together differentiate the garage and and the garage connection Wing the vertical circulation wing and then the wing that looks out onto the uh the existing porch under construction and the really only PL area of the property so it was a it was a an organizing tool as well as well as a layering to break down that mass we looked at alternate locations it really was the best was the full full length um and I would say um you know there there's not a hardship um and and see two variances don't require a hardship um it's hard to say that we built a house now we created a hardship it would be self-created and that certainly doesn't doesn't hold any water in terms of zoning um so in terms of the and I'll go to the proofs in a second um but that also ran up our building coverage to 19.4% or 18% is permitted so that's the extent of the variance um the building coverage approved uh uh for the houses under construction was 3461 or 17.4 so it was just under 1.46 it was just under um and again so we're adding 1.9% to the building uh coverage through that 377 foot porch of which only 309 squ fet actually encroaches so the um actually if you were to take 70 can I just pause you to go over that the building coverage figure again 19 point the building coverage um is as proposed is 19.4% or 18% is maximum permitted okay so that is less than what Christa had noted at 19.625 yep okay um the uh and again that area that front porch is 377 Square ft so the um we're over by 271 Square ft on the uh on the total coverage on the total building coverage we are fully compliant with lot coverage so the with the pool with the with the prop proposed patio with the proposed um uh pool equipment we're still under on the allowable lot coverage um no other variances are needed in terms of of coverage uh the only one is for the building coverage for this open porch the pool and the patio equipment um again for an accessory structure they need to be two times the minimum setback so in set of 35 ft it's 70 ft I will um say that is a um mil and Summit have shared U zoning ordinance ideas is for a long time um and that's a metric that actually uh Summit picked up from U Milbourne Short Hills uh where it was two times uh I will point that there was another Community um up in uh North jerse that also followed that lead since then due to the number of variances and recognizing that um when you have lots that are shallower IR Rand a problem both those other communities have changed to where the the accessory structures now just simply need need to meet the minimum front yard setback and they can't be forward event any part of the existing home so a lot of towns have gotten away for it because it does create a difficult uh problem when you're trying to get especially when you have a a corner lot where you're backed in 15 foot is your sidey yard behind the only real play area is on the left side so whether we put a pool in or the kids play there they're going to be playing on that side of the yard and the kids aren't going to stay 70 feet back they're going to play in that whole front yard area because that's the yard they have and that's what we want to see in residential neighborhoods um but we do need a variance because you can't beat the th 70 ft reasonably so we have proposed 52.7 that's a 17.3 ft uh uh deficiency um and then the pool equipment um the front yard uh set back to the pool equipment is actually 39 ft so that's a 31t uh uh deficiency and so that uh that will comes forward of the existing home it would be set back further than than the house with the proposed porch whether it was 6ot or 6.3 so in terms of the variances um the planning proofs the front porch deviation clearly is not a hardship and Municipal land use law through the creation of the C2 variants the flexible C variants um said you don't always need to have a hardship there could be times when you advance the one of the 14 purposes or a number the purposes of of zoning um and as long as the benefits out way the detriment you can satisfy the positive criteria under C1 you don't need a uh a hardship and we certainly think that's the case here um that the plan with the deviation represents a better planning alternative to a conforming one um and it really comes down to the visual impact to the street we think it's a much more attractive home with it on than without um the porch improves the scale of the house it breaks down uh the massing divides it into its functional elements um so it appears smaller than it is when it um I showed you the photograph of uh of the site as it exists today under construction um with regard to the uh the pool and the the pool in the patio and the related relief there uh that's really a combination of the C1 and the C2 and the C1 being that um we have an exceptionally narrow lot in terms of its depth again we don't have a depth on on a corner lot because you don't have a you don't have a rear yard but at less than 100 ft Deep by the time you factor in the front yard setback the 70ft setback required for accessory structures um it's uh it creates a difficulty in getting any access structures into that S I go to Ed and I think if you if you take this pool and you were to try to get it so that it wasn't too close to the house there was enough room for patio you know I would point out um the plan we're more than 20t off the the sidey yard going down Rob um it's not a full Hampton Style Hampton Style being a uh a pool that sits in a lawn area but three sides of it are in lawn so there's no there's no walkway around it it's all biased to a patio that hold on to it mediates between the cover patio outdoor kitchen area a small seating area in into the pool um if you were to turn that sideways um for functionality and safety you would really have to cut that pool down from 15 by 29 you really need to make it like a 13 by 15 fo pool which you lose the sun shelf you lose the ability it it becomes really a glorified spot it's it's really not a functional pool anymore and it's certainly not in keeping with any of the pools that are within a 500 radius of this property so I think that if you were to try to turn that among the other things the negative it would move closer to the property that sits to our to our left the active portion would move closer to the property that sits to the top of the drawing along along essics and I think that the reality is the the kids are going to play they're going to be playing in the lawn anyway playing the pool the lawn Etc I think it's a better planning alternative to keep it a reasonable size pool and again as as it said it's it's among the smaller pools we often see 600 foot pools this is considerably small than that and it's been tucked in to keep it away from the neighbors and then um it's protected with landscape so I think in terms of the uh the patio relief um that exceptional um shallow dep on the property um really means that you were allowed 14.76 ft for active structures and that's what I showed you on the our exhibit the A3 I think it was a um we showed the green line um to try to fit a pool into that first of all you would you would come to the full 15 ft to try to fit in in there um you really couldn't because it would just be too close to any outdoor dining area or barbecue area you'd really end up with a pool that was 13x13 stuck into that corner there this really would be a dysfunctional uh pool and especially when there's really no benefit because this this property can be easily screened I I defy the neighbors across the street are going to know whether that pool is 70 fet back or 52.7 ft again especially when you add the fencing uh and you and the generous landscape plan that's been uh put in to both mitigate against noise and visibility of the uh of the area so I think um it certainly um there's a hardship that's created and I think in terms of trying to come closer to the ordinance there's a C2 component where this is just a better alternative than turning that sideways and trying to stuff it in uh to the point where you really get an a pool that's less of a pool and more of a hot tub um obviously we still need to meet the negative criteria and that is uh again two prongs no substantial detriment of the public good and no substantial impairment to the intent and purpose of the master plan and zoning ordinance um I don't think it has a negative impact on the neighbor right um and that's because I I again um having lived on a 70 by 170t corner lot um in nober Short Hills with a similar requirement um and I needed the same variance um except for me to meet 70 ft I would have been in my neighbor's property but um my neighbors I think once I put the skip Laurels up and I put the uh the same almost the same planting materials my neighbors across the street couldn't tell where my pool was they couldn't they wouldn't have known whether it was 70 ft or the 30 5 ft which we actually built it at behind the existing home um it was a um was a long and thin house sort of like what used to be here but um again I think that the any of the negatives are mitigated through a generous landscape plan and uh and the placement of the pool is actually better for the community and better The Sur for the surrounding neighbors by moving the ne any noise further away from them and the neighbors across the street are are you know they 52 feet a 50ft road that's 100 foot and they're set back about another 40 ft so you've got about a our pool would be about 140 ft from those neighbor from the from the neighbor's house across the street so that's a fair amount of difference and I don't think there's much difference between 140 and 190 ft um in terms of uh uh visibility because again those landscape the landscape uh will mitigate against all that um again the porch improves the Aesthetics of the house the increase in the footprint is open and Airy um the setback to the main mass of the home meets the average front yard setback the uh encroachment of the porch is roughly equivalent to the um front yard setback in the previous dwelling so we're actually um as was shown in this exhibit you can see the red area Bound By The Blue Line you can see the existing solid Mass used to come very close to that uh to the proposed location of the proposed porch except now it's an open uh porch with the mass moved considerably further back the um the encroachments are the to the street setbacks so there's no impact on the enjoyment of air light and open space to the neighbors on either side and our distances far enough from neighbors across the street also have no negative impact um we think there's also no detriment to the to the master plan um we think it's uh it's in it helps to um continue to drive this as a neighborhood of uh of uh of single family dwellings that are well taken care of and well constructed uh with the amenities one would expect to see in in in the R15 neighborhood in Summit uh we think it meets the criteria under both C1 and C2 not requiring a hardship for the C2 component uh and we uh ask that you approve it I'm happy to answer any questions Mar we talk about fence yeah the the fence is a is a 4ot fence I think the landscape architect um talked about the material um but it uh your ordinance does allow front yard fences of fourt that does me full compant requirements all the gates would be opening to the out would open out away from the pool which is also pool code compliant and the fencing would be designed with um no toe holes no openings greater than the I think it's um two in on a vertical FL whatever the whatever the code is um we would certainly meet the full code and it does not need barings Rel the for the fence that would really Define um not only a safe area for the pool Define the the actual the area that the kids anything else um no there's nothing else okay on the board yeah I have the question just confirming the the fence is going to be Cedar is that correct on the that that's right okay and then the gate for the fence so there's no path going in it's basically just going to be across grass that's right what's going to prevent I mean if you have a lot of traffic there what's going to keep the grass from getting worn out no anticipate a lot traffic on there on the gate on you have to use the microphone I'm sorry we don't anticipate a lot of traffic through that gate more maintenance than anything else we anticipate most of the traffic coming through this gate um if you go to um sheet L3 there's an image of what the fencing materials will look like and on sheet L2 there's a rendering of what of what this Gateway will look like L2 on the lower left corner that's that's this gate here anticipate most of the traffic will foot traffic will come through this G second page left that's that's a rendering of what this approach will look like and don't anticipate a lot of traffic coming through that any other questions I have a question for the planner um you referenced um other pools in the area that within a 500t radius of this house um you know sort of the scale of the pools were those pools do you have a list of those pools were they installed um require you know did they require a variance did they comply um because I feel like using that as an example um is not a really good reference point without knowing whether those pools you know comply do they meet the setback with all of those things it's sort of I apologize for not I I wasn't able to get a an errow image like I used on on the previous application it was it was uh it wasn't actually it wasn't informative on the house because when the photo was taken it was just completely the property was empty but um I just kind of did a cursory glance and most of the pools I've done most of the work we do in Summit does not require variances so we try not to come here when possible but most of the pools we do tend to be between 20 and 40 and um 23 25 by 45 to 50 ft where possible in the r-15 zone they tend to be more 20 by 30 um uh sorry 20 by 30 so here we've got a a pool that's 15 the water surface 15 by 29 I think it was um so it is it is smaller than the pools that we usually do in the area um and again we don't do too many that are that get to be the 13 by3 size it's just it's just a it's not a it's not a size that we often see in and becomes a functional and people just just decide not to do pool that well I think that's because it's sort of an after the fact design of the house because if this had been Incorporated again similar to the porch as part of the initial design the the pool could have been rotated n uh 90 Dees and sure maybe it would be 13 fet wide instead of 15 or deep whatever you want to say but it could have been longer the footprint of the house might have been designed differently the patio might have been designed differently um I what I see here is this pool could your patio is not constructed this pool could be pivoted and you could have you know less patio and be closer to meeting those setback requirements that's just you know as I said I would also have the more active zones would be closer to the neighbors on both sides um yeah you certainly could have this is not um I think regardless this is the most functional for this is the most functional U place for a pool to be um on the property regardless of this house I think we still would have looked at doing when this becomes your usable um yard I think it makes the most sense to uh to place the pool in this direction and um as I said the this uh two times the average setback is um it's a good metric for um we're keeping the H for the accessory structure from getting to close to the front yard but in these kind of conditions I think that the there really is no negative impact and the positives outweigh in including for the Neighbors if we were to try to stuff that into that into that zone there I think probably the clent may not do a pool at all but um if they were to try to fit it into there I think it's I think it's actually less beneficial to they it on both sides it'll be less usable less functional well what about the setback for the Neighbors behind where it's only 16 ft well the minimum is 15t 15 we put that's the quiet section so we've got the the sunshell um which is the only few in deep so you can put a chair in it and you've got the entry that's another 67 ft further and the main play area pools and move further away toward Robin Hood Road so it keeps it away from that 15 put that back and moves it into an area really analogous to the center line of the house so that's considered not a rear yard that's consider side yard it's a side yard behind the pool y even though it's not it's parallel to the street yeah you have two front yards and two side yards there's no there is no technical rear yard I think what you're saying is that if we had these two elements when you decided to do this up front when this whole project was started we'd have a different house we'd have a different house but I think we've had the same variance for the same tools I I would have recommended the the best and I think um I think I've worked with Mr Clark before I think that um we would both agree that the best orientation if this house were 5T shorter and it was 5T shorter and it was narrower this way I think we'd still be looking for the best orientation for the pool on this site um given the uh the usable yard that's left on a corner lot with two large setbacks I think that's the best orientation whether whether we we don't need a coverage variance there's no limit on Accessory structures we're we're well under uncovered so I I don't think that uh um I think this is just the best plan so whether we maybe we muddy the Water by coming with the front porch or the really the front porch um is what the African decided to go for the varant and said well you know let's think about the pool now and we looked at the pool that was always the best orientation of the pool um so whether the house was smaller or accommodated the porch without the need for deviation I think that's the best location I think the landscape architect agreed was there any plan when you originally bought the property to put in a pool or is this just I this was sorry similar to the porch this was an 11th Hour decision if you want to call it that this again and I and I hear all of your concerns and appreciate them around the timing and sequencing here and I get it if this was the first home that I built perhaps I would have done it differently um but um I appreciate you hearing you know we Tred to be very thoughtful and how we approach this given the timing and sequencing and I think often to my detriment I care more about what the neighbors feel than than I you know than I would feel and and I try to take that all into consideration how we thought about the porch how we thought about the landscaping and and also the layout of the pool so um yes to answer your question directly it was well as long as you brought it up have you talked to your neighbors uh I have um my neighbors that sit um on this side they have two children that are my age um and I talked to them regularly and we're having dinner with them next month and they verbally are fully supportive of all this the decisions that we're making here obviously they were notified VIA mail as they need to be but I spoke to them as well and they were they were verbally supportive and text was you have my support so um they understand and obviously they're living through the construction which I feel bad about but um we again we tried to be as thoughtful as we could about this and I promised them if if a pool is approved and you're all willing I'll have his kids over every day so um any I have I have one more question um about that just in terms of the you know sort of now you're at this point where the house is almost finished um typically in modern architecture plans there's massing done 3D massing right and you can do sort of a float around walkth through of the house before did you do a 3D massing no I'll answer that question well I think the architect would know if you if you used that uh you know type of we did not as a 33 year architect I do a lot by hand so I do some hand renderings we actually are doing them now I have some younger people who are beginning to do 3D modeling but we didn't we didn't employ that here any other questions from the board any questions from the public okay are there any other we did I get to you yes okay I just want to make sure I didn't leave you out I'm getting okay um any other Witnesses do you have anything to say us as a wrap up or summ any more of your time but I appreciate very much appreciate your time and consideration tonight so thank you okay conditions and votes needed yes I have two conditions noted first our usual compliance with those conditions noted in the board Engineers memorandum then we also raised that the applicant shall submit the Landscaping plan to the City forest or for review and approval and because these are C variances no D Varian are sought they would need four affirmative votes to approve the application this evening okay we um who would like to begin I will begin reluctantly um I I love the landscape plan I think that fantastic um I think this house presents as a very big house when you drive up to it when you come from um the service road and turn on to Essex um when I see this porch I feel like it actually adds to the mass doesn't take away from the look of the mass of the house to me um I I'm just I'm not seeing the the porch here and the pool I could probably be be persuaded about with the setbacks but the porch is just not um I don't know I'm having a hard time with that one yeah I'll I'll make some comments because I'm still not sure still not sure how I feel about the whole application um I think it's always unfortunate to see an older house go and um just parenthetically I might note that if if we had been here before the house was demolished this hearing might have gone very differently just just so you all know um I think adding the front porch is an attractive positive thing for the house um I but I agree I not happy about the size of it but looking at the diagram when I forget who was the planner the architect showed it I was trying to picture and I'm not an architect obviously how we could cut it down that it wouldn't throw off the balance of the house and I I couldn't quite picture that but I'm still troubled by by the size of it I'm just not sure what the solution is there um I'm okay with the alignment location of the pool I'm convinced that it is better uh for the Neighbors the way it's aligned um even though that does drive you know an extra variance I love the Landscaping plan I think that's one of the best plans I've seen especially for screening pool so I think whatever the alignment of the pool is the neighbors aren't going to see it a lot of the noise is going to be muffled by the by those very tall trees there um I don't see any negative impact on the neighbors from that so that I'm not trou by at all I I'm just still torn about the porch but I don't have a good solution because I don't see how it can be cut without throwing off the balance of the house but I'm open to hear what other people think um oh I was going to say I I I Echo most of what you say Mr Yuko um and what the house without the porch looks bald um it reminds me of nothing so much as the house next to Reeves re um which basically looks like the dormatory of a New England college and that's the after they went they they spent an evening with historic preservation improving the the project so I think this is going to be a hold of my nose and say Yes simply because I think for the benefit of the neighborhood not having the porch um would end up being an architectural detriment and I do hope you learn the joy of sitting on your front porch with a cup of coffee reading in the morning even though you say you won't use it it you do engage with the neighbors that way um but but you know the the whole variance creep bothers me a lot we we we we see way too much of that um like you I don't have a good answer for it is it I'll I'll just add um it it it needs supp porch um there's you know I walk by this probably that your home you know well once a week and it needs something I don't know about the the size of it um what I struggle with a little bit is is the sequencing of of of everything and I agree with the pool like the Landscaping plan is you know it offsets any of that real concern um but even things like you know six feet plus a few inches why even present that just make it six feet right it's there's there's a few asks here that that we're I think we're wrestling with and it feels like most of it is sequencing um but I also understand you know it will be a nicer home certainly with the porch and I and I do think the neighbors would appreciate having the porch so you know somewhere to do is like I'm kind of reluctantly um supportive but um yeah list um I I agree that without the porch it it needs help it needs something it really does and I mean the I don't I'm not that visual but even seeing a onedimensional picture I think you could tell that there was that was something needed on the the original plan so even if you didn't have the 3D plans um I can't support both the porch and the pool I feel like the porch is to help the neighbors to get some charm back into this structure um the pool area the fact that the fence is all the way up you know by the street even though it's allowed and the big tall arv ities I just feel like there's there's a there's a better way I don't I don't support the pool area um if the pool's not there you don't need the fence up by the street or I just feel like you can soften it up over there too whereas the way it is now it's going to be it's it's not a hard wall but it's a wall of barbes and I've seen them they're just it's just like you know it's it's not there's no charm there so I would support the porch like I said just because it's it needs it um but not the pool not both are we we're not splitting this this is a All or Nothing right oh I was just going to ask that you can't divide into up to the applicants on how they want to present it if they want to request both okay aspects of the application they can charge ahead with that request okay if I pipe in like the rest of my cohorts up here I struggle with the sequence uh I just got done with a renovation at a house and I sat down with the architect and we talked and I relied on the architect as the expert um I'm a little troubled by the sequence I really am uh obviously the house would look a th% better with the porch no doubt about it um it's a corner lot and and maybe I'll get in trouble for saying this but that's kind of what I do I get myself in trouble some Lots just aren't designed to hold a lot of things I'm not saying this is one of them um but I'm struggling with the um sequence that being said um I feel and and maybe our our board attorney can correct me for this I feel like we're kind of cornered is we're damned if we do because you know we're we're going over what we're allowed and damned if we don't because then are we jeopardizing the look of the neighborhood so and and so I'll note just to address some of the comments on sequencing timing you know the fact that it's coming to us at this stage right the board here's the application as it's presented it does not necessarily matter you know whether it could have been different from the get-go whether it could have been a different application we are here to rule on this application as it stands and that's why I kind of tried to touch on you know the the the the overage of the porch you know we're over what we're what we're allowed to do um so I I I'm struggling with this whole whole process but um in the LIE of being fair as a fair as I can be I will support this project contractor cont contrary to my comments because I think it's going to be a it's just how do you where do you go from here well not all the facade is up in the front yet either so there is some opportunity to sort of revisit the look of the front of the house just by taking a look at you know what else can you do with the facade besides the porch um you know having gone through recent renovation and construction um you know the variation in building materials you know flipping siding all all the different things that people do different colors of material um instead of having everything all one color bringing in stone there are other things that can be done to break it up and add interest um so um still not so I'm going to ask the U the applicants do they feel that if given additional time they could come up with something different that might uh amarate some of the uh issues with the or do you wish to have us go ahead tonight I think on on the front porch if and I don't know if this addresses some of the concerns but if if the uh if what's helpful is reducing the size of it by 3 4 Ines whatever that may be to get Comfort on the scale that's certainly something we'd be open to I'm I'm happy to to offer that up tonight or however best to proceed under that measure I'm not quite sure how people would well that would still have us over on the building coverage though well but but the front yard setb would be it would be reducing this the port six feet which basically gives you but it still counts towards building coverage it would it would yeah but but but okay I'm thinking with the setback cutting the width of the front porch six feet doesn't give you a front porch it gives you a front plank I don't know if it was thought was inches you're talking inches here go six foot it would it would be exactly six feet as oppos to 6' three inches whatever but the width the length would be the same the length would be the same it would be so at least it meets it meets the encroachment all allowance if that makes sense Tech technically it still would need the variance because it's over the size allowed for the porch encroachment but yes it would be within that I don't know how you tell the difference of 6 in from 50 ft away yeah personally I don't know yeah my eyesight isn't that good well but the 6 Ines only counts if the porch itself is a grand total of 50 square F feet correct right so so that's a difference without a distinction correct any other comments from board members well I think when if if you take a house like this as big as it is and you put something in there that's too small to me it's going to look worse than putting something that fits appropriately because the house is so big so I don't know how I mean putting something smaller and it looks out of place to me doesn't serve a point okay yeah I'm actually think I'm getting more comfortable with with the porch um I'm not sure the three Ines appreciate the offer I'm not sure that's understand I'm not sure that that's that addresses the concerns but I you know given what the house is like I said if we were here when the old house was still there this might have been very different hearing but as Mr Paul said that's not the hearing we're having um you know I I think I've become more comfortable with with the porch I'm not not happy about it but I think given the reality situation um I I can't picture a change that wouldn't offset the wouldn't throw off the balance of the way a house is not happy about saying that but I think I think that's where I am now and like I said I'm I'm not troubled by the pool pool I'm very comfortable with well based upon everything you've heard um does someone wish to offer a motion I'll move to approve with the conditions as outlined earlier okay there a second did did we read through the conditions yes we did you read them one more time I'm Sor yes yeah we are our usual compliance with conditions noted in the board Engineers memorandum and as you requested the applicant shall submit the Landscaping plan to the city Forester for review and approval okay and you're you're agreeable to those yes okay uh well I'll second I didn't hear anybody second okay we have a second chairman Steiner yes Mr Yuko yes Mr n NS son yes Miss Z no Mr Kieran yes Mr Malay yes Miss to yes the motion carries congratulations you again I say the same thing read the resolutions okay um we are going to take a break and I think the attorney for the other may wish to talk to our attorney relative to time because uh we have other business to do as well and we normally try to get out of here and I'm not sure if you want to start tonight or so we uh will take a five minute we'll be back here at 3 minutes to 10 so I have to do that for the guys in the back uh okay we are back in session and uh we're going to try and see how much we can get in between now and 10:30 and uh we will uh thank you and I do I do appreciate the board's Indulgence I know it's late certainly I will be as quick as I possibly can you don't want to hear from me but just to remind the board we're here for a continuation of a public hearing that started on January 3rd for uh pool and Outdoor Living improvements uh at the egg Vol residence on 259 Summit Avenue um the variance we're seeking is a steep slope variance we heard the testimony at the last meeting the questions the comments of the board and we're going to do our best to present a picture that makes sense as to what's being done why it's being done and why we think it's appropriate so um first I would like to recall Jason Bruno who was sworn at the last meeting to go over some of the visual uh exhibits that we have showing what the pool will look like before we do that just one double check on everyone has either read or because it was we didn't have a quorum without people reading and signing off do we have I I was just going to ask Mr Paul I was I was not here January 3rd so I did not know that we started part of the hearing so I have not read transcript I've not seen a video so so you cannot vote and I believe I also did not read the entire transcript um I was here January 3rd I did not th this was was back in November it was this is back in November 6th I think okay my my my apologies it was continued to January and then we pushed it to tonight so there there was no testimon January 3rd no there was no testimony January 3rd the testimony back in November Che I checked for you your fine time the only one who will be eligible as Mar okay okay all right so we have enough yes okay I just wanted to make sure that the applicants knew that they had a a full board okay uh you were I'll note for the record you were previously sworn you remain under oath in this application you would just provide the board with uh a summary of the modifications that have been made and what the renderings do defend one of the uh one of the uh grab the other microphone if you would and make sure it's on yeah no okay one of the uh concerns and issues that came up were was the barrier requirement around the pool uh the pool uh is being retained by a wet lead retaining wall and as you can see in these uh pictures um we're proposing a as the barrier we're proposing a 3ot high boxwood hedge it's one of the densest plantings that we can uh offer and you could clearly see on the bottom along the edges uh the boxwood hedge defines the whole edge of the pool the deepest water depth um in the far end of the pool is 6 ft uh 4T water depth requires a swim out so we're proposing a swim out you might not be able to see it but there's a swim out in that far corner so you could have egress out of the pool and then Stepping Stones leading to the main patio there um so there's ample width of planting bed to get these large box Woods in uh that would serve as as a barrier um so that was one of the concerns that came up uh which I believe has been uh approved and um one of the other issues was the along the rear property line um we were proposing the fence to be about 3 ft in from the property line and we were showing a a a single man gate to access the 3 ft for maintenance and so on um what we've done now is we've pushed that fence to the rear property line within 6 in of the property line and just flip-flop the folders and the fence uh this way there is no need uh anymore for a manate it's just all pool compliance fence across the back um you know property line and that also handles theg graded this photo is a little bit dark but you could see the fence and the boulders and we tried to uh illustrate the grading the best we could um the pool equipment is located below the retaining wall is going to be screened as requested with some 4 to 5ft tall skip Laurels and also a fence to help puffer any noise or visual uals that may be considered negative so that's been addressed as well um up behind the driveway there are two existing seat page tanks uh behind the driveway and uh we were proposing layers of plantings uh a 6ot privet hedge and then arbores uh We've eliminated the arbores because the location of them uh came into question in proximity to the seage tank so we eliminated that one layer um so from a landscaping perspective um I think those are most of the key issues that we've addressed and I'm sure uh Rudy the engineer he'll testify for uh some of the storm water issues that we've addressed as well happy to take any questions or yes so we I mean we still have our Forester who is you he very rarely uses the kind of language seen the update report he still opposed to the application because of disturbing you know the uh getting rid of all the trees and what have you um and I'm a little torn about how to proceed with this because normally we would him to approve a landscaping if we were to approve this we want him to improve the Landscaping plan Mr B I'm curious what you think I mean if we approve this and we condition it on on this plan being approved by Mr Linson what where does that leave him and US yeah so I guess you can limit the scope of what he is asked to review perhaps just certain plantings or you know if you think he's prone to oppose it and the board would be prone to approve it or you know there's some disconnect there um we can specify that request to him on the aspects of it that we're asking him to review and approve okay because I'm I'm I'm not I'm not saying I'm not saying I'm approving this I'm not saying I'm not approving this I'm just saying if we approve it I'd like to have Mr Linson review and approve the plan if we get to that point where it's approved you know we can may I just say in lie of the proposed trees to be removed we are proposing six large Tre trees you know that would comply to the to the Foresters and maybe he'll be okay with that I mean I'm just saying yeah I I do have a question about the trees because it's a lot of trees coming it's every tree on the property and um some of them are being taken down to put a soil stockpile I kind of think that there might be another way around that um also I noticed that um if you're facing the house from the street to the left of the house to the left of the wall the masonry block wall there are trees that are being removed that they're really not impacting it's not about the construction right it's not about the pool they're not in the way they're not for the stockpile I'm assuming it's because you don't want a canopy over any canopy over the porch or something or can you correct tell a good obervation um some of the trees clear clearly are in the way of construction and Grading uh and seid tanks uh the two that you just pointed out to the left of the house uh the left rear corner of the house are extremely large Tula poppers and uh they their health has already declined significantly um there are large dead limbs in the canopy already um and uh you know if there is a storm uh they are very close to the house and present a safety concern for the homeowners um but uh you know it's um it's kind of Now or Never uh you know it would be very difficult once this project is built uh to you know remove those trees in the very near future and they they will need to be removed um they are in Decline um uh so have you had a conversation with Mr Linson we've offered to meet him on site and he declined our offer so um we wanted to do that um so I'm assuming this issue will come up during the permitting process if the board approves the variant um but that was our goal was to um walk the property with him um explain the project to him um let him know that we're very willing to supplement uh you know the with new shade trees and do what we whatever we can to work with them and certainly we would comply with ever whatever recommended species he has for the property I know he offered up a list of uh specific plantings and trees I have a question on the you mentioned the the two seepage tanks that are there now I don't know is that just a place for that ask the question um we'll tell you more for an engineer because I'm not an expert in this category uh being that this structure is getting it's it's pretty close to where those two tanks are does that affect the effectiveness of that tank working we can I think he has yet to testify or you yeah no Mr Holman will testify okay then we'll hold that question for okay okay have a question um are you a tree like wait I'm sorry you did you speak to a tree expert like there's tree doctors or I mean you're a landscaper but you yeah so um Alpine tree is a certified Arborist does a lot of work in Summit Short Hills chadam and um he knows the Forester very well so um we will be bringing him in to do the removals um and he has seen the trees he's gone out and um analyzed the the health of the trees and also has a concern with the the canopy decline um on some of them so uh we have consulted with an arborist did I mean they recommend the trees be removed yes um there's I mean there's limbs up in the canopy that are the size of small trees you know so clearly they they pose an ongoing Hazard and um it seems that possibly they're in Decline from possibly previous uh construction practices previous owners we don't know but um it's clear very clear that there are you know dead but they didn't recommend any pring I mean I I've had oper at my house and they they said these trees you know a tree that does not look good they've actually said no we we're not going to take it down I mean there turns up I'm just wondering if they their analysis was is that this is a continual process it's not just you know like a one time it's done and over and uh the trees are going to be re you know rebound down um those two large Tula poppers they're on a very steep slope there on the left side of the house um so his recommendation was to not prune them because of the ongoing safety concern uh just you know remove them and we would be obligated to and happy to oblig to you know plant some new trees so do you have a report from him about those recommendations I don't but I'm sure I could get one um my thought is maybe we hold this thought right now finish the rest of whatever testimony we can get in between now and 10:30 and if indeed we do have a delay between now and I think whatever the date may be that that would provide an opportunity for the two arborist to get together Mr Linson Etc and he we can indicate to him that we want his opinion not walking on it and not telling people I'm not calling to do that and Mr linon already have spoken to each other about this project but okay they have to but you want we want him on the site and get his you know sure a little bit more than we have here I have a feeling is what we're looking for and we can request it Ram I'm sorry you are ramal I'm the homeowner yeah okay I'm sorry sorry about that um so look as far as the trees are concerned we believe the trees have to go anyway we've already spent thousands of dollars uh cutting down and removing pieces that have been torn down by storms they're right over my daughter's bedroom and we simply can't risk it so whether this project was going to happen or not those trees are going to have to be removed whether the arborous degrees or not because they are fundamentally a danger to the home and to my family they must go so it's not a part of this project there are a few other trees to Miss's point that do have to go because and they have to be sacrificed because of the project but we are going to replace them um to whatever recommendation we get by the arist that's appropriate for the secos system so I just wanted to mention that it's not these trees are not coming down because of the project they're going to have to come down they're slowly dying that's apparent every storm we have massive components of these trees are coming down already and they're a danger to my family and I don't dispute that I appreciate your concern I think my interest would be if if we are inclined to approve this to get Mr Linson to approve this say okay Mr Linson those trees are going I know you don't want them to go but they're going hypothetically how do you feel about this plan that's kind of what I'm completely understand where we want to be okay and we we and and his lack of cooperation is is elongating this process and it's costing me the house owner an enormous amount of money because people are continuing to have to come up with different reiterations spend time on the phone trying to get in touch with him so it's it's a detriment to to the process okay I had a different question because it was not here the first time um but thinking about sort of all these plantings in terms of safety the hypothetical that concerns me is there's some family gathering the doors to the de to the patio get open the toddler wanders out and keeps wandering towards the pool and what's going to stop that from happening from the house yeah well um other than a Vigilant parent yeah the best way to prevent child pool drownings are adult supervision um I mean it's the whole purpose of the pool fence and the plantings and all of that is to prevent that sort of thing from happening but when the house is open to the pool what sort of safety is there there are door and window locks that can be put on there are alarms that can be installed we already have alarms on the door yeah and and they're locked so I understand your concern I don't have the same concern I've had pools before and as long as the fencing is to code and other people from the outside I mean if it's somebody who's at my home with my permission then obviously that's where parental care emergency we've had in my previous get in the microphone please sorry we had alarms on every door just because of that concern because at that time my children were much smaller so we had the same exact concern so uh we can install they have alarms that you can install that you can hear several hundred meters down the road so I share with your concern and we'll take care um I have one question I don't know if this falls under the landscape plan and I mean it's cuz it's it's a little structure but the fire pit under a roof is that um that's not a code issue fire code issue or is that there's enough clearance okay I'm just I'm asking and the fire department well this is I don't think they've seen the revision of this so they haven't commented yet well they haven't answer they didn't comment on this revision did they not answer was was the fire pit under the under a roof in the initial one yes yes yes so you is there anything in the first one no no there was no comment at all okay um no I think the no there was that I remember on a different project yeah but they're building a fire ask no good if you have a question right now we're we kind of broke broken protocol let's do it this is for swimming pool um in Christ Anderson's report about the pool swimming pooling walls because of the height of the walls she Rec recommends the fence in your response there's no there's no answer to her recommendations of the fence on top of the wall that fence or barrier uh is being yes boxs yeah what prevents people from going or through that just walking around the wall the height I'll be honest with the first thing I'd do if I was an eight-year-old jump it off that wall the height the height and the density of of the shs any other questions that's all the questions I have for Mr Bruno um Mr ball I think we probably should Mark the photo exhibits I believe we're up to A2 and A3 if my notes are correct sound right Maria you have any questions I I'm I still have concerns about the lack of the fence around the retaining wall I hear what you're saying um but you know when I looked at the plans it looked to me like they were only they were 3 foot high boxwoods now if there was going to be a pool fence up there would have been taller than that I'm just picturing and I know that I know the idea is that well it's not a walking service around that pool so it doesn't really count and it's not required to have a fence but just back to Mr Nelson's comment about you know you're an eight-year-old up there and the other eight-year-old gets up and somebody pushes boom they're you know through that the beds are four feet wide um so uh ample space to even walk you know through the boxwoods and not yet have the the danger of falling off the wall um this kind of indicates like a maybe a toddler or and you could see that the the boxwoods almost shoulder height to you know a a young child so um it really is a I think a very strong visual barrier um and deterrent to keep people in the pool and on the patios um how tall are those boxs again these would be 3 ft okay and that's 3 ft when planted correct okay I you know and I kind of think maybe I might be overstepping my bounce a little bit because it's just going to go to a building code official because if a building code official says that there needs to be a you know a fencer on the top then there is so I you know I think I may be overridden on on any of my concerns about that so I just needed to make sure that I said something about it would that trigger another variance though foot fence no we can't give variances from the building code so if it's a building code requirement that ultimately the construction official says no you need a fence that that's the final on that we can't override that okay any other questions for this witness from the board I have one more I thinken touched on earlier yes there is there's a fence and U and some strug side yeah okay do me a favor show everybody so so we're not you got these pictures right yeah they should have been emailed um so has the fence and Shrubbery to soften the fence the bottom picture okay any questions from the public I don't I like to see one person in public SE okay s seeing none uh still got a few more minutes go for it Mr hman and all again note previously sworn and credentials were accepted at the last hearing you remain under oath yes um revised plans were submitted after uh the last meeting to address some of the concerns in the engineering review letter and I guess just take a step back and address the storm water I'll just start briefly with the regional impacts to the neighbors and then I'll talk about the site specific on on the plans and then I'll summarize the Geotech and um and uh structural reports and CS that were done all right so um this is 259 uh Summit app here here's the rear yard where the development is proposed the pool patio um this is uphill the backyard area here uh Wildwood and and Summit have some of these rear yards currently drained to that uh Culvert that was discussed last time time there were some concerns about the long-term uh maintenance of that and um the condition so instead of improving that or or protecting it or reinforcing it that that's why we're proposing a 24-in pipe to convey the water that currently drains to the through the backyards underneath uh 259 and then discharges to the bottom of the slope here the ultimate the next discharge point is to a head wall I was out of site today I was able to see this headwell uh that's within an an easement um carries drainage to the city stormur system um I'm sorry could you I just want to make sure I'm following that so this this is a toppo map um provided by the city of summit and I drew in based on also the Watershed mapping the um the existing storm sewer right right here where where the downstream area is and then the Upstream area um or uphill uphill area I should say in in that area so that you know we Quantified um what's going into our site and then I could briefly talk about the site specific storm water and drainage unless there's maybe a question now about the impact you know this is the overall impact and this is the focus on the 24in pipe that's proposed to replace the culber and this is a new exhibit yes A4 which Mr hman would you characterize that as a more Regional map yes so ask question let him finish his testimony and then we'll get to questions we go back to protocol so what I was just describing was this is the uphill area here's the downhill area and what we talked about was the 24in pipe that's proposed underneath the pool the walls um to connect to and provide drainage for mostly The Neighbor Next Door but also this the rear yards in that area our drywells our new drywells are proposed to offset the fill that's brought in to level out the yard and to and to ensure that the 100-year storm there's no increase um to to that run off as far as Peaks and volumes go and this drywall system in the backyard we're collecting this plan change involves directly connecting the The Pavilion roof drainage and the Pool and Patio area um will be accommodated by this new dral system um we have the existing dryw system here uh we looked at maybe running drainage into that but since that size for um a portion of the roof and driveway we're going to leave that as it is collect the area that it's collecting now reroute the Overflow away from the pool and provide a stable discharge um away from the proposed wall um the proposed improvements won't impact the existing function of that existing drainage system um and also the proposed walls and pool take into account the existence of this triwell and and there's no negative impact um as far as the drywall system on on the walls for the puttings of the walls or the pool itself so another concern I was talked about was um the burial of the pipe and the insulation of the pipe underneath the pool um I had a chance to talk to the manufacturers representative um and we looked at the allowable cover tables and we can see that the 1 foot minimum is provided and we're within the maximum allowable fill or cover over over the um the proposed pipe uh that's specified on the plan um so I think that really covers most most of my testimony for storm watera and drainage um there's any questions of course um take those and then just to summarize Geotech and structural um structural CS were prepared um I don't believe they were submitted for review um yet 10 days in advance however um they're consistent with they were prepared at the time of the original design and I they're consistent with um stand standard procedure as far as um covering all all the usual um overturning sliding and and all all all the forces that go into designing a retaining wall of of this size um and as far as viotech I could the recommendation there in in the soils report that was prepared for the wall and pool construction um that concludes that the soil is suitable for the construction of the um the soil borings in a report will show that the the soils are suitable for the uh pool and wall construction and not suitable for backfill which we kind of discussed last time so we're bringing in the the plan proposes um Crush Stone backfill um behind the wall which is located here that's that's the bigger wall and act the whole distance um of the wall would have the uh the back fill so I guess that yeah that would conclude and really what what um the changes are to the plan since uh we were last in front of the board Marie you reviewed not this one or the one because I see you've reviewed three so I reviewed this plan is this number three have the original then there was one revision and then this is the second revision so you're calling this revision three you are you are in your your report you you did Marie you called it revision three but I called it revision two because I didn't count the okay I just wanted to know which because they didn't see that first one right no well I just considered it original and then they did one revision of there a report from you that goes on for Pages here yes um dated January 3 mine review three is that what you're saying yeah okay and that's that on this that's on this plan that's on this plan okay because he indicated that thought that what hadn't had a chance to be reviewed so it has been that one has been reviewed okay so I turn it over to you for your question okay so I reviewed the plan um I I did speak to um Mr Holzman about about some of the things that were referenced on the plan but you know haven't been submitted and he did reference that that I don't have the structural plans for the wall I have not reviewed that um so I I obviously have concerns that I would say oh go ahead and you know you can take a look at that um and I didn't see the soil report actually that was submitted at the end of the day on Friday but I haven't had a chance to review that either um so there there was um we talked about you know is there can I have some ideas of volumes of um backfill um you know just to kind of give important an idea of what what is suitable it's not suitable um you know what kind of what kind of soils are we talking about how much are we removing um I know you mentioned something just now about the co you talked to the manufacturer on the pipe and talked about the cover now I know we went to that profile sheet but there were no covers listed I scaled it off it looks like it's okay but could you um could you testify to that yes all right yeah so as part of this plan submission we prepared um a profile uh where the pipe starts on a neighbor's property and terminates at the head wall existing head wall on uh 259 Summit have um so I have 14.9 ft is the maximum amount of cover from the top of the pipe to the pool coping that's the dimension on the plan and then the minimum recommended cover over the pipe so it maintains its structural uh rigidity is one foot so we have that that distance scaled is approximately three feet from the bottom of the stone to top of the pipe um the bottom of the stone is the stone that's recommended as part of overe Excavating by the geotechnical report and providing extra Crush Stone below the footings in the pool itself so that's that's also Dimension to scale or or drawn to scale on on on this profile um I I think one thing I just wanted to make sure the board recognized was the last time we looked at this that that pipe that was going underneath the pool was like a like an arch right it was it it was a custom built like double brick Arch on top of maybe a stone um yeah channel that that that's been there quite quite a long time that's that's what we can visually observe from the head wall at at at the downstream end so it's it's connecting to the next door neighbor at 255 right up the Upstream part of that pipe that you're replacing is on your the neighbor's property um and I'm I'm unclear about what size that pipe was because they had done some um some improvements to their property and rerouted that pipe on their property is that right I mean that's what was in the storm water report so it used to go straight across the yard and now it it some circuitous route no no no I I think the only pipe I'm referring to is one straight line pipe that 20in it's probably uh the standard size 21 in and that's what the that's what the neighbor um replaced his plan was to replace his his pipe and then actually go into 259 which is what we believe happened in 2019 um and he he most most likely installed a 21in pipe what was measured in a field I by the surveyor was 20 it's probably 21 so I I I don't think that's a significant um that's the same pipe the 20 in is the same pipe that's not something different okay so so what's on the neighbor's property what Daylight's over there is that a 21 in a 20 in PVC or is that a that's what was observed by the surveyor at the time I I went out there today and I see um an HDPE flared end head wall pre-manufactured I I I couldn't measure it it's too far onto his property there's the fence there but that that looks like a stable condition at the at the Upstream side there where he's got he's maintaining it he has Stone around it and um I could see that there's a flar in section there um so the I think and I think at the last meeting the neighbor had come and asked questions about you know is this is this pipe going to in influence anything that's happening on their property they have some pumps that are going into that pipe and that this is important to the functioning of their system too um who who owns this pipe on this property do what do we know about this as far as ownership goes there's there's no easements uh that that we could find or so with the city approved 2019 plan that I reference um so the ownership is what's on the neighbor's property is his and and what's on uh our property 259 here is is owned by the property owner okay um so so it who's who who's in charge of the maintenance of it then I think status quo maintenance would be the property owner of the neighbor is in charge of his side what what the portion of his even though it's one conveyence system and then the homeowner of 259 is responsible for the pipe on his on his property and um what about the the outlet can you talk about where that's going it's going it's going to a head wall it mentions on the plans that you have to modify the head wall a little bit based on the size yeah inspecting the head wall today it you know it it's uh Stone and um and brick it'll have to be modified just by reducing it the exact method um probably would be just uh concrete um to reduce reduce the size as or the same back fill that we're using which is Crush Stone um on top of the pipe uh that that's going to you know be between the pipe and all the way up to grade or the bottom of the pool is was there any thought about maybe um either one rerouting that or two um putting like a haunch over the top of it making a little bridge over the top of the the pipe at all and yeah I think that bridge was maybe considered originally um as part of the reinforcement of what's there now um but that span of concrete and and and and volume of concrete ended up being a more impactful process a better design would be since they're already Excavating for the pool just to go further down and install the new pipe connect to where where I'm showing the existing 21 pipe was previously installed you know as part of the 2019 project as a continuation of that just keep running it underneath because we're already Excavating there we looked at rerouting it around the pool but trenching down that much and the proximity of dry Wells it it Poss possibly could also impact may maybe a tree on one of the trees in the back I'm not I'm not certain um but that that was considered but right now this this is the preferred option okay um what about the um the outlet for that pipe um where does the water go to Now is it going to change where it's this charging to at [Music] all no we we it's going to discharge the same exact point and continue on to on a little keymap actually is we could see the uh the easement it'll continue on to to the head wall at that location where we wouldn't expect any any change in volume or rate to St water runoff from this project um do you have a a lot more questions at this point or just a few as I look at the clock um would this be a good chance just check in I think I'm okay for now what you're I think I'm okay for now okay and that's I have a feeling is an appropriate point to uh well let me ask the board how many questions have we got from up here this witness well I had some about the you know this the septic the storage tanks but it might might get involved okay you think that would be involved or why I'm not sure okay ask the question we'll see what going to be I'm not does the structure going next to these two tanks up at the bottom of the driveway are they affected by a structured being put next to it because these things have to have certain amount of mass area to percolate out to right and you're cutting that off on the one side it it percolates down soil testing was done um as part of yeah this this lot development for this newer house and at that time you know the soil testing was done and we provided all the Cs actually I was I was directly involved in that project so so I'm confident that the proximity of the improvements isn't going to impact the drial itself it's approximately 22 by 11 ft you know it scaled pretty much dra on to scale within the that fence where you see it and then it looks like you're looking to put three more down at the bottom of that hill right and that that was my other question because when I was there I mean down there was was really wet I mean yeah we we dug test pits and um and determine that there's no seasonal high water table um within the bottom of our I mean you're basically going to be putting a tank into water that's not what the soil test showed though I mean I understand what you saw visually I don't disagree with you at the surface but you know when when we dug down we could see that you know and we we we took soil samples and uh did see on that report because I did read through it when when it got sent out today and it did say where they were hit in water those those are the Geotech reports and I thought I read in there somewhere where they some of the digging they did they did hit water yeah but it's it's I think it their water probably is 12 to 16 ft down in the pool area where they dug where we dug at the lower area our my soils testing in my report shows that the water table is uh where the groundwater is not within 2 ft of the bottom so it's designed in accordance with with the standards it needs to be okay okay other questions from the board well it just sounds like in any event this is a this is if we were to approve this this is where we want to maintain storm water um jurisdiction for years we already had that noted as a condition last time okay thank I do have one question about this um because I think from the prior testimony um Mr egali is that saying your name right um had mentioned that you know uh the reason for this is obviously twofold for the enjoyment of your family for this project and also for the safety and I think that part of the safety concern had to do with sort of that like hump in the backyard and then there's like a cliff and a drop off those dry Wells dry Wells are going into the in into that really low area and I can't tell from here if you're changing any of the grading um how much how much back how much fill are you putting on the property and how is that um you know how is that going to be graded relative to the the neighbors yeah it we are filling and but we're not taking away the low point so there's an inlet here that allows it's mostly the backyard from um the house directly behind it yeah on on Wildwood um so we're maintaining that drainage and then the other drainage from this direction is maintained with the pipe but as far as you know this is regraded and so these Topo lines are representing the fil the new fill not the existing okay correct the the the darker solid lines and in in in My stormm Water Report you know detailed calculation showed what the existing volume was of that depression are and proposed volume by reducing the grades we're offsetting that with with the volume in in the drywells but we really haven't had a chance to read that report as we just got it today right no the storm water report's something different that was reviewed in there okay all right any other questions so so you're saying the dry Wells Will volume will equal what's currently being used right now yeah the Dr is in combination with the depression that remains you know we're not filling in that whole depression it's a portion of it to create somewhat of a usable backyard it where that you know really steeper depression uh exists any questions from the public don't see any um we've gone 15 minutes over where we normally do um how much further have you do you have that was all the affirmative testimony we had okay you want to keep going guys or do you this for what about the Forester part I me is does is this going to have to be adjourned no matter what because we're having the Forester I don't know well we haven't decided that that's we held it trying to understand we kind of held it to see where we would go and here we and I thought that if we were going to adjourn it it gave an opportunity for the forest to to change his position and go out with everybody but uh if we're at the point where and I have a feeling the applicant would love to have a decision tonight if I'm if I'm reading his uh facial expression properly if we're looking to if we're looking to have a decision that then I have a couple questions i' thought we yeah for sure with all du respect to Mr chairman of the board members it's way past my bedtime um so I'm I'm just thinking if we can come to a decision maybe there's some Provisions I don't know okay then we have a few more questions to ask and let's ask them and go from there so I maybe this has come up before but I'm a little concerned about this dual ownership of this pipe that goes through these two yards and and one neighbor's Huns for one half and other neighbors Huns for the other half what if one neighbor decides I'm not going to bother fixing it you know what what happens I mean is that maybe this has come up before I just don't remember it because there's no easement it's not recorded it's not a formal designation of responsibilities as described it's you know the portion that's on the owner's uh the applicant's property is their responsibility the portion that's on the neighbor's property is their responsibility if one were to fail in their you know requirement to maintain it and it affected the neighbor the neighbor would have the ability to bring up private action to sue for damages um against the property owner but aside from that there's nothing more formal in place if I may I think it's a great question question um so I think this is where maybe Common Sense would Prevail it's my property I don't want the infrastructure to fail that we're building Above This pipe which is why we've gone to Great Lengths to investigate the best option we did consider the circumventing circumventing the structure but as it turns out this um high density pipe buildings are built on top of it so it seems like a reasonable option I've spoken to my neighbor um he was here testifying last time and so we wanted to be sensitive to the fact that we are in an area where there is just this gradual slope uh on down to a small uh lake or Pond whatever you like to call it so I think it's in the best interest of me as the property owner who's invested a significant amount of money to live in this town uh to maintain the Integrity of that drainage both for myself and for my neighbor on both sides so you're the I'm trying to picture the geography of here you're kind of the downhill neighbor so yes it's a sort of a stepwise yes so if the uphill neighbor if he has line collapses gets clogged whatever let's say near your property line right and the water I don't know what would happen I assume the water would go somewhere and probably end up on your property somewhere on Surface you know but Mr ball says you would have then a legal action against the neighbor to fix it so yep I mean that that's the nightmare I was trying to see how I could say from a practical point of view if if that pipe failed it it would probably it would reach this proposed Inlet um here which is the low point of this particular depression you know there's a smaller depression that collects drainage within the neighbor's property right there but it would end up here before it affected any structure all the structures are up higher it ran up there and and into the new drywall system which could overflow to the bottom of the slope so that's kind of looking at a worst case scenario not not a you know responsibility just Pro what I would think would happen based on topography if if the neighbors's pipe was was um not working okay not working he chose not to take care of it and it's a different neighbor who's not as kind that scenario could be that could be identified and and and remedied you know at some point but I can't speak to the I think a home is only as good as your neighbors well yeah could be a disaster I agree with you but I mean what water water's a nightmare water and water's a nightmare yes we all know that the other question I had you know we got this sore report today and honestly I haven't read it is there anything of significance and you haven't had a chance to read it no no I haven't so why are we why why did we get this today we do we know why this came to us today yeah I I I was under the impression that had already been submitted we learned recently it hadn't so we got it in as quickly as we were aware it had not been submitted I mean I I don't know if there's any if there's a if there's a nightmare another nightmare in here that we should be concerned about I have no idea I I had a chance to read it today and I wouldn't characterize anything as at the ordinary um except you know the recommendation to bring in backfill which is which is um that meets the same or that meets the spe yeah then not to use native soil for for backfield be on the walls would that fall into your daily Mar yes right I and I would I would take a look at that I we condition it upon the review and approval review and approval of and now Marie are I guess based on the testimony tonight are you envisioning some sort of potential issue is it likely it's something you can review and approve Lo or is it something the board may need to retain jurisdiction for example in case you see a major concern and need the application to come back here well that the one thing that I've thought about is that this variance is for steep slopes so the only reason that the walls are being put in is to is is to address the steep slopes um and if something were to happened and I haven't I haven't reviewed the structural um calculations and I haven't reviewed the soil report and um you know that the applicants professional is stating that that he he thinks it's okay but I don't know that that was also done by a different engineer those structural um calculations if something were to happen with it that's the one thing that we're all hanging our hat on with is is it's a steep slow variance and these walls are addressing it um I would think that there there should be some jurisdiction that if something had to change with the walls and they had to move to a different location or the height had to change or something about it did not match what the plans were I would think it would be pretty important for it to come back here because that is the one variance that they're they're seeking on us so maybe it's something along the lines of our board engineer will have the opportunity to review the both the soil report and the structural report are they two separate things or is it all right there two separate things um in the event of any concerns identified by the board engineer the board will retain jurisdiction to bring the applicants back for potential further revisions or Amendment if necessary are you okay accepting that as any issues anybody else have a problem I have a separate just note here to just mention that the you know the Environmental commission also weighed in on this I'm sure from the more most recent staff comments so I just think that should be brought up just they um they also have an opinion on the trees and what should be there and um I that just hasn't been brought up prior to now so I just mentioned that um you know they actually wanted the drywall system to be located so that so many trees wouldn't have to be removed um I don't see really another I mean it's a pretty big drywall system there aren't so many places on the property where you put that so I can see the challenge with that um but then they're saying that they conditionally recommend approval only after further consideration by the landscape architect of tree removal and replacement selection so is this something where um I'm because I don't know the protocol for this where typically the environmental commission would be sort of involved also in approving what kind of tre trees get put on the property or you know no trying to figure out how much weight this carries not typically typically it's in the event we are passing along review Authority it's to the city Forester for review and approval of particular plans and in this case we may um as as discussed earlier we might want to focus that review and approval on certain aspects of it and you know I if I'm the only one who feels this way I I won't pursue it but I am I'm very concerned about the Forester our Forester in this in this situation one because you know normally it's kind of routine he'll review it and if he'll accept it or he won't this I'm a little concerned his concerns this is negative yeah his concerns are such that we may not get the kind of resolution we want from him and I'm wondering I hate to say this from for the applicant's point of view maybe we're rushing this you know that's just my concern I I think we're playing Beat the Clock uh you know what I mean um if I'm the only I mean maybe Jo are the only ones I am on the of the same opinion that we we really need to solve this landscape versus landscape situation and I don't know if we can do that without by a condition that could be met by before the a condition that could be met before The Resolution comes out because that's going to be we still have a month before this before we pass a resolution uh and if there's a way to get those uh those all the landscape folks together on the property to talk about it and to hear the um the applicant's sincere desire to remove these trees for the safety of his family uh before the resolution um I would love to go that way if that's at all possible I don't know how to make it happen Mr attorney well like we said you know if the board is inclined to Grant the pool in the location with the tree removals necessitated by that and direct you know there there is a tree removal ordinance in the city Summit and it requires replacement and I the applicants have testified that they're going to comply with that tree removal and replacement provision if we say to the city Forester the board wants to approve these steep slope variants directing review of the you know tree removal whether it's the plantings whether it's some particular aspect we can limit it and do that um while directing the focus away from you know the trees that are proposed to be removed in accordance with the city ordinance and not necessarily impacted by this application maybe that's one way to handle it I don't know if that adds a level of comfort or gets us where we need to go you kind of lost you a little let me just express it in my in my words if we approve this tonight with the condition and what's the how how you have it worded for the Forester right now uh it's our old condition that it's subject to review and approval so he says no Then then the condition would not be met and it would not be approved okay all right I'm I'm okay with that review and approval and if not approved it comes back if you want to retain I guess we're we're already retaining jurisdiction for drainage for the soil reports we might as well for the Landscaping as well that if they doesn't approve it that they haven't that they're not just gone they're back here and then we might overrule the so so I guess my question is are we talking about review and approval of the tree removal are we talking about we're certainly willing to comply with the arborous recommendations for the remedial plantings and species that we have no issue with I think we're down to the removal and the testimony that was presented is both through our landscaper and and our arborist and the applicant is for safety reasons it's really those two trees need to I don't think we can stop him from moving the tree so that's up to between him in the city right if it needs a permit it needs a permit if it doesn't it doesn't correct yeah so I would suggest that the condition be related to the remedial restorative plantings and species and locations and that would be the condition of review that this board approve the tree removal that's necessitated by the dry Wells and th those necessary for the safety which is my concern my my interest is that Mr linsen our Forester is okay with the Landscaping plan the trees need to prove for safety I accept his opinion on that if it needs a permit from the city to remove it it needs a permit that's another issue but my concern is Mr Linson approving the the replacement plan so to speak because you're getting rid of all the canopy between your house and the Nate backyard neighbor which you know there's screening there and now there's no screening so we're might be screening after but um maybe not the same level so takes time didn't the city Forester kind of give us his opinion though in his notes yeah so we're just asking him to we're asking him to what we are asking or what we're contemplating is removing the tree removal aspect of the application from the Foresters subsequent review of the Landscaping plan and potentially only asking him to look at landscaping and screening so he only gets to aine on what's going in not on what's going out what kind of precent does that set for other I you know this this project aside that's that's a sort of a precedent for all projects isn't it well and he's not but he's not totally out of the removal process I mean if a city permit it goes to there's there's still the city ordinance which requires replacement of trees or payment into a fund for replacement elsewhere if the property can't it you know that that process is all laid out in the city code and we are not granting any relief from that requirement here so they'll have to comply with the replacement plantings um in accordance with the city code and all we would be doing is directing review of kind of the ancillary Landscaping everything else that's proposed as a result of the application if you're comfortable with that and and I think the other piece of your question was I mean in theory I'm stepping at and toes here any decision we make as a board does not have precental value on any other decision that's correct they're all one offs every application that's good to know is viewed on its own all right I'm I'm okay with that I'm I'm struggling just a little bit forgive me because I'm trying to comprehend this but it sounds like on 110 of this year he basically said I am not in favor of the application because it looks like he said the trees need maintenance at this time but none warrant removable is he's talking about those three on the side or is it the ones that are I mean I think it's the ones on the side he's talking about I don't know I don't know but do we put weight in what his comments are here or we just say oh thanks for the input that I'm just I'm just trying to answer extent it's advisory to the board on his opinion so you can you can still Grant the variances and they're still Bound by the treat pre removal Provisions outside of our boards process here tonight so if he says to them you can't remove that treay they would have to take it up with him and I imagine I I don't recall off the top of my head I imagine there's an appeal process somewhere in the tree removal Provisions that would go potentially to the governing body I'm I'm not sure I'm reading his comments from 110 which were followed up by the ones that I think we're all looking at on 21 which says whatever but uh I would ask the question in this it says the application necessitates that all of the trees on uh the rear yard be removed just a few short years ago great effort was made to preserve these trees when the home was built the tree uh the trees need maintenance at this time but none but none warrant removal I'm not in favor of the application have you provided him with the information about why why they um they haven't gotten the um uh the you know what they the maintenance that they needed this time or found out what maintenance think they need at this time I believe Mr Bruno testified that Alpine uh spoke the to the Forester about the tree removal and and he was invited to meet and they came to no resolution would he wouldn't he wouldn't meet with us they couldn't really resolve anything and even based on our arborus recommendation um he was not willing to budge and I mean his statement that none are necessitated for removal I mean clearly if you want to you know put a pool in in a backyard I mean some trees aren't requiring removal and others are requiring REM for safety reasons um so there are there's two different reasons uh for removals and we'd be happy to meet them on site to go Tree by tree as for the plan and come up with a very lamentable you know proposal for reforestation look I think um I'm I'm baffled by his visceral reaction here I think there is some underlying issue that's really upset him in the past um but I think I myself I'm I'm torn by the idea of cutting trees um I I love this area because of the trees so um however I think the two trees in question that are massive Sol or a safety issue so um regardless it looks like there's a city ordinance that we'd have to abide by anyway um so I'm happy to meet with this gentleman and talk to him about the safety concerns that I have and whatever trees he wants us to plant and the number of trees he would like for us to plant I'm more than happy to do that um so that we can maintain some semblance of canopy and uh separation between myself and and the other neighbors yeah I I can't cite the details but I'm sure there are some trees that you you could remove I should say I'm sure they're Pro there might be some treats you could remove as a right as a property owner without the need of milein and say yay or nay um so I mean I think we have to we have to get we have to somehow communicate that some of this is got some of this might happen regardless of what Mr Linson says which is a normal situation homeowners can remov trees without permission sometimes they don't need to get permission for every tree to be remove so I think our our condition is worded okay I think if our attorney is that how did we reward it so currently um that the applicants shall submit their Landscaping plan to the city Forester for review and approval of the plantings and screening proposed as a result of this application the applicant shall be subject to the city's tree removal ordinance requirements and shall obtain any required permits for tree removal I think that covers it any amendments to that okay any objection to that okay um well I I just the the only question I have about that is the the two different opinions on what trees need removal I don't want to belabor this but if uh Mr Bruno's arborist Alpine says these trees are dying and the Forester says they're not and the Forester is also an expert where does that leave I just I think this just needs to be left someplace like our our the city of summit's expert as lindson and maybe I could just ask a clarifying question are we talking about out significant tree at least defined in the code which I'm looking up right now which is 16 in I just had it a second ago I believe I'm sorry I made you move it yeah the ones we are discussing I believe we we testified to last meeting were sign the ones and those are the ones that are in the area where the pool is proposed there's two on the side of the pool if I'm and then three in the rear where the drive one behind the drive way and five in you know more towards the back of the property to blend in as an understory with you know the surrounding sh and so but the two near the home are not necessarily impacted by the construction but are proposed to be removed it can be impacted by the construction we do have to modify an existing pre-cast wall um so and that's they're both on the steep slope so um there may be some impact to the Roof Systems and and right now the trunks are currently buried so um you yeah um you know I'm just glancing through the tree removal code again and it's looking like even private trees on private property if they're significant are subject to a tree removal permit and no permit shall be issued without first being approved by the city Forester so if if for some reason the applicants and the city Forester cannot see eye to eye on that tree removal technically our condition is requiring that you know it it is subject to it and if you can't come to an agreement the application couldn't go forward and we can't override the city ordinance on that no that's outside of our jurisdiction that's out outside of us that part of it correct so lson could still say no to those trees we're going to have to work it out I think you've seen Mr Bali is reasonable man and we'll find a solution to to the problem with deal Withers um do do we also want to retain jurisdiction in the event that there is that conflict or do we just want to leave it at that that if it can't be resolved then the application that technically would not have its approval I wouldn't just a quick question if if you took those two trees out of the plan you'd make a decision you'd have to go if you'd want to take those trees down properly you'd have to go for a permit right and there'd be a decision right at that point you've included them in plan right it sounds like you're willing to go above and beyond what Mr lynon what that's what I think they're saying is that those trees may be impacted as a result of this construction so that's why they are included in the plan it's not something that they can just necessarily remove and still have the same application if I understood that last bit of testimony I mean we know the trees I mean it doesn't take an arborous to see that the trees are dying I understand that point I'm saying could the project be completed with those trees in place um it we would have to make some concessions from a construction perspective on the retaining is what I'm hearing so at the end of the day yeah I honestly think we've beaten this in dep yes we I would ask for any um I'm going to go through one more time any board members have a question of any of the witnesses or the attorney okay does the public have any questions I don't know if you're out there so I'm asking questions for any of these Witnesses or the attorney seeing none do you have any other Witnesses I do not do you have have a conclusion I are we we should open up to public comment as well just sure oh public com I thought I did that was all public comment anybody none very briefly I just want to remind the board we're here on a steep slope variance that's necessitated by the grades in the backyard which we believe is appropriate it's reasonable we've gone over a lot of tangential issues I appreciate Indulgence of the board especially giving us extra time this evening so thank you okay so and that's right the only variance is the seep salt that's correct got conditions and vote so I have six conditions the first five of which are from the original hearing although the last one's slightly modified from that one um so bear with me one may or may not be applicable anymore um first is compliance with those conditions noted in the board of Engineers memorandum second second is and correct me if this has already been addressed the applicant shall confirm with the appropriate utility that the application does not conflict with existing utility lines in the rear yard are we happy that that's done or should we leave that no I had asked for a letter of no interest from the okay um third then the board shall ret retain drainage jurisdiction for a period of 2 years after the completion of construction fourth the applicant shall submit a revised storm water management plan to reflect the maintenance of the existing pipe on the property which I assume has not been done yet correct okay fifth um as we've discussed the applicant shall submit a landscaping plan to the city Forester for review and approval of the plantings and screening proposed as a result of this application the applicant shall be subject to the city's tree removal ordinance requirements and shall obtain any required permits for tree removal and sixth and final condition is the board board engineer shall review the soil report and structural report in the event the board engineer identifies any concerns with either report the board shall retain jurisdiction and may require revision to the plans just have one thing on that that TR thing shouldn't it be that they acknowledge that they are subject to sure no objection it's a totaly you sure right the wording before just didn't didn't didn't they shall be subject to yeah which they are but yes but they're acknowledging that they are yes Okay who wants to open up oh and the vot uh just steep slope so it's four affirmative votes okay and let's it's just miss Zan who is ineligible to vote on this one who is yes who wants to open up nobody wants to open up um I went out to the site I don't know I forget what what time is it now four days ago five days ago um I was a little at first um I looked at the backyard and I was like Wow but then I thought well wow it's there for a reason somebody somewhere along the line um but I'm I was um worried about drainage but I'm completely complely um on board with what you've designed as far as drainage goes I think it's a step in the correct direction it should hopefully solve a lot of problems um the positives negatives uh really doesn't affect anybody around other than drainage so uh I can support this project yeah I can too we've had a number of applications in that general area of Summit Avenue over the years and water is always that neighborhood is water water you know everywhere literally U it's always a concern the seep sub variance by itself is it's I'm I I think it's going to not have any negative impact they seem to be addressing the water as best they can I have that concern about that joint maintenance of the pipe but I guess they have legal action against each other if something goes wrong with that um I'm happy we have that condition about the the trees um we're curious how that's going to be resolved over the next month um and I I hope uh I hope you know the applicant can put in this and and remove those trees because of a safety coners for his daughter but that's out of our hands that that part of it anyone from this side um I appreciate that um the applicant has mentioned that he you know one of the things he likes about Summit is is the tree you know the large trees that we have and and appreciate that you taking that into consideration when you're doing um your construction I can say that uh I think we've taken every possible precaution to move this through appropriately and properly and protecting our City's master plan um as far as the negatives are concerned uh you know the only people that are affected are these these two property owners and the property owner next door came and testified in favor uh so I think that we've done uh done what we can do to make sure that um all of our ordinances are followed and that this will move properly into uh the future and I would look for a motion to approve motion to approve roll call chairman Steiner yes Mr Yuko yes Mr Nelson yes Mr Kieran yes Mr Malay yes Miss to yes Miss Cho yes the motion carries and thank you to all of you who stayed up with us I believe we have some resolutions to do and minutes and I'm going to uh not handle the uh annual report tonight we're just going to hold that if we may thank you very much apprciate it can I just have the exhibits please yeah all copy your exhibits have have to stay I take them thank okay so I'll start with the resolution right please the first one we have is 66 Prospect Hill Avenue that's cb-23 d2216 block 352 Lot 12 the applicants were Jeff and Holly Simmons um our eligible voting members are chairman St Diner Mr Nelson Miss Don Mr Kieran Mr Malay Vice chairman lits and Miss to do we have a motion for approval so moved okay second okay chairman Steiner yes Mr Nelson yes Miss Z yes Mr Kieran yes Mr Malay yes Miss to yes the motion carries okay the next one we have is 44 Beverly Road that's zb2 32218 block 509 lot 16 the applicant was George Albert the voting our eligible voting members are chairman Steiner Mr Nelson Miss Don Mr Kieran Mr Malle Vice chairman lyit and Miss to can we have a motion for approval so moved okay and a second second okay chairman Steiner yes Mr Nelson yes Miss Z yes Mr Kieran yes Mr Malay yes Miss toe yes the motion carries and then lastly we have minutes for approval so these minutes are from January 17th um 2024 okay we're moving them moving right along nice and then a second well actually you were not at that meeting so second okay so we're going to exclude you from The Voice vote Mr Kieran so all those in favor any opposed okay the motion carries uh on the uh shade tree commission I never knew this but apparently the zoning board has a Le on to that particular uh and uh we sent out I guess an email asking for volunteers and your re yeah your results so I have um Mr Yuko and Miss Z both expressing interest so I don't know how you want to do it I don't think it's something that we necessarily need to vote on no I think it's a I think it's a cheer's appointment but it's uh we can um you guys have have a choice between you Tom you've you I think you've done it before I've never done oh you've never done okay I yeah I'm fine either way either way okay what am I going to do flip a coin I'm I'm going to talk to both of them well which is a question I have I don't it's a liaison so I don't think there's obligation to go to the you're not a voting member and I don't think there's an obligation to go to all meetings no I think I think you do go to the meeting okay okay okay you know something we're going to find out the information as to what's required for the position give it to both of you and you go both get back to me okay okay to make this before 11:25 uh the annual report you all got the um the number of cases that we went through I understand a number of people have handed in tonight their recommendations and thoughts Etc so I certainly haven't seen them Scott's not here tonight he hasn't seen them we'll get them to him and we will have a further discussion at our next meeting I I was going to email some I wasn't sure who so please please get get send them to Stephany send them to me send send send them to Scott where wherever they get to we'll make sure they get to the right place uh our next meeting is February the 21st which is a Wednesday again Stephanie will be sending out her usual can you make it um and that is always I always appreciate the yeses as soon as we can get them is there any other business from any member please no uh do we need a motion to adjourn we do is there a motion to adjourn so moved nobody wanted to make I thought that would all those in favor I thank you all