Whatever. >> So, >> Oh, yeah. Good evening and welcome to the September 4th, 2025 meeting in the city of summit zoning board of adjustment. My name is Scott Lens. Scott Lockets and I'm the
zoning board chair. Please rise and join us in the pledge of allegiance. >> I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for
all. >> Thank you. In accordance with New Jersey statute 10 col4-10, adequate notice of the special meeting has been provided to a newspaper record been posted here in city hall. This
meeting is a judicial proceeding. Any questions or comments must be limited to the issues that are relevant to what the board may legally consider in reaching a decision and decorum appropriate to a judicial hearing must be maintained at all times. For the benefit of the interested public, this meeting is being live streamed on the city's YouTube
page. Also broadcast on Summit's government channel, which is Comcast channel 34, Verizon channel 30. Transcript of this meeting is also being taken using video and audio. So we need all speakers to utilize one of the microphones in this room. Please note that the fire exits are to my right,
your left, and at the back of the room where you entered. City has a listening system to assist the hearing impaired. If anyone needs hearing assistance, please obtain the system at the deis. Return it thereafter. Miss Sans, please call the role of members. >> Vice chair >> here. Mr. Yuko
>> here. >> Mr. Malay is excused. Mr. Nelson >> here. >> Mr. Kieran >> here. >> Miss Chief is excused. Mr. Fes is excused. Mr. Chantuli >> here. >> Mr. Nearing >> here. >> Chairman Ly >> here. >> You have a quorum. You may proceed.
>> Thank you. Miss Sans Andy Ball is a zoning board's attorney. Mr. Ball advises the board on matters of law and is the key interface with the applicant's attorney. Mr. Ball does not vote on these applications. Jessica Sans is a city employee and is the zoning board secretary. Our board secretary works with the applicants on preparing
their applications, planning our agendas, and keeping our meeting minutes. The board secretary also does not vote on these applications. Also present are our experts who are hired annually by the board to provide input. Tonight we have Marie Rafé from Collier's Engineering. Also present is
Ednikis from Burgess Associates and he's our board planner. These experts are seated at the table to the right of this board to the public's left. They also don't vote on these 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. Before we enter into executive session to vote on these applications, you will be advised of how many votes are required for approval. Each case will begin with the applicants
or their attorney giving an overview of the application process to date and the variances that are required. We then hear from any additional expert witnesses the applicant may have to help explain the application and why the variances are needed. The board experts followed then by the board members
themselves may ask questions of the applicant, their attorney, and their expert witnesses. Due to recent cases running excessively long, we strongly encourage applicants and their experts to give brief and concise testimony so we may get to as many cases as possible
in a given evening. Once the board members and the board professionals have completed their questioning, the public will have an opportunity to ask questions. It's not the time to tell us what you think about this case. That will come later. Please be careful as how you phrase your questions. They should not be proceeded with a statement
about the case, but should be a direct question to the witness. Also, before you ask your questions, we ask that you please clearly state your name, spell your last name, provide your address. It is important that our court reporter, who's behind that wall, be able to keep a clear and accurate public record.
After all witnesses have been heard, members of the audience have their second opportunity to speak. And at that time, you may express your opinion, positive or negative, about the application. Then the public is hearing public hearing is closed and we enter into executive session. This is where the board members discuss the case and
then vote. You'll be able to listen in on our executive session, but you will not normally be able to participate in our discussion. I'm now going to ask that each applicant and/or their attorney if present come up and give a brief synopsis of their anticipated testimony tonight, including the number of witnesses and whether or not they can
finish their presentation within 30 minutes. So, we'll begin tonight with 112 Essex Road. >> Oh, hi. You could just >> Yeah, stand there. >> Um, yeah. Uh uh so you said a brief
synopsis of uh uh yeah we just have our uh architect uh uh Mr. Kelly and the two of us. No no no other witnesses. >> Okay. Do you think you'll finish in 30 minutes or less? >> Yes. >> All right. Excellent. We'll get to you soon. Thank you.
>> Next uh for Hughes Place. >> Good evening. I'm requesting two C variances. Uh it's going to be very short definitely less than 30 minutes. I have no witnesses. >> All right, great. Thank you. Talk to you soon. >> 58 Valley View. >> Good evening. Samantha Alfonso here on
behalf of the applicants and uh we hope to only be 30 minutes. I have the applicants um their uh pool contractor hopefully and the engineer. >> Excellent. Thank you. >> Thank you. And finally, 609 Springfield.
>> Hi, welcome. >> Hi. Um, so I'm here uh with my husband, 609 Springfield, and we have our two witnesses, our architect and the um engineer, and we'll definitely be able to finish within 30 minutes. >> Perfect. That sounds great. Thank you. We'll talk to you soon.
>> Okay. 112 Essex has come in. come up to the deis and we'll swear you in. >> Yeah, that's perfect. Thank you. >> Both of us. >> If you're both gonna testify, then we would swear you both in.
>> Just in case. >> It never hurts. >> Of course. >> All right. If you could each raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give in this matter? The truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> Yes. >> And one at a time, please state your name. Spell your last name. >> Uh, my last name is Raman Nathan. R A N
A N A T H A N. >> My last name is Visa Nathan. B I S W A N A T H A N. >> Thank you. >> Great. Please tell us a little bit about your case.
>> Yeah. So, so we've been in summit for >> Can we Can we sit there? >> Yes, that's perfectly fine. Just make sure you speak into the microphone. Thank you. Go >> closer maybe, too. Yeah. Uh yeah, thank you for having us. Uh so uh my wife Shalpa and I have been
in Summit for 5 years and we have two kids uh who are aged uh nine and six. For them, this is the main the home that they know and they're very clear like this is the home they want to grow up in. Um so as of now uh our home has uh
two bedrooms at the lower level and two uh bedrooms at the upper level but those are sort of uh sloped. We want to move the entire family up and have a three bedrooms on top so that the kids can also be up and we can accommodate uh guests uh in the lower bedrooms when we
have them. >> Great. Any questions for this witness? >> Seeing none. All right, we'll talk to your architect. Thank you. >> Do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give in this matter? The truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> Yes, sir.
>> Please state your name. Spell your last name. >> Jack Kelly. >> Thank you. And you've appeared before us a number of times, including recently. I imagine no changes to your credential since the last time you were here. >> No changes. >> And I imagine the board would accept you back once again. >> We will. Welcome back, Mr. Kelly. Thank
you. You were not here last month. I was not. >> We missed you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. So, we are I the Ramonathons live on Essex Road and as he mentioned, uh it's existing Cape Cod style house that
was built in 1953. Has that 1950s kind of look to it. Um it's located in the R15 zone and the lot area is just over 14,000 square feet at 14,15. The project involves four components.
Um, as he mentioned, we we're going to the first the primary one reason why we're really here is we want to remove the roof, the Cape Cod style roof with the dormers and all the slope ceilings and create a true second floor uh with
full height walls 8t tall and flat ceilings. Currently this the walls in the in the second floor are 4t 10 sloping up to about 7 feet. So it's really a feels like an attic and there's a lot of unusable space. So as he
mentioned they want to their two children share a room on the first floor now and they have the other bedroom and the second floor they really use for for their home office. Uh the goal is to put the family all together on the second floor, create a bedroom for each child,
uh and then two bathrooms, one for the parents and one for the children. This requires one variance for combined sideyards, which I'll get to in a minute. So number two, we are looking to expand an existing sun room in the back of the house, which is really a kind of
a porch, finished porch, I would say. It's constructed on a slab. It's not really properly heated or properly insulated. Someone just It's feels like a porch that was filled in. That small addition to that room also requires the
combined sideyard variance. Okay. There's a small addition in the front to enlarge the entry. That addition requires no variances. And we're adding a portico. Once we have a two-story style, colonial style house, um the portico looks appropriate and the
portico does not require any variances. So those are the four components. I I'm just going to go into this explanation of the combined sideyard variance. Um, in this R15 zone, you're required to have 15 feet on the right and 15 feet on
the left as minimum setbacks. You're also required to have 35% of the lot width in your setbacks. In this case, that equals 36 feet and 1 inch. Um, the current situation is 34.4T
and the proposed will also be 34.4. So, the house is out of compliance as is. Again, the minimum setbacks are met, but we're a little bit shy on the combined sideyards at at 1.7 ft, which is 19 in.
Um, we have prepared an additional exhibit that you don't have, which we can mark or I can leave it or whatever. >> Yep. We'll mark that as a one. >> Okay. So, what we did is we highlighted the extent of the variance in blue. All
right. So, I just said that 1.7 we're 1.7 shy. 1.7 is in the rear corner tapering down to the front corner which is 1 foot. Okay. So, it's a tiny sliver of the house.
The even smaller sliver on the sun room the sager set back there. The extent of the variance is 5 in. So instead of the 36.1, we have 35.6,
which is a variance of 5 in. >> In theory, Mr. Kelly, couldn't you split up that difference since it counts to both sides of the house? >> I I did it in the worst way, but yes, you could split the 1.7 into the left
and to the right, which is about 10 inches on each side. >> Okay. But we're not adding on the right. So I chose to show it on the left. Thank you. The right hand side of the house is a garage and we're not changing it. So it's still
one story. And actually that's the worst setback. The setbacks on the left are larger than the one on the right. So the extent of the variance is is rather small, I would say. We also took a measurement between their house and the house to the
left just to see what distance we had from house to house and that is 32 feet and 7 in which is more than the minimum 15 and 15 on both lots. So I this is not really an imposition on their neighbor um at 32
feet 7 from house to house. One other number I'll give you is the increase in height. Again, there is a partial second floor there now. So, the increase in height is only 7 feet. The existing house is 23 feet tall and the proposed house would be 30 feet tall. So, that's
well under the 35 ft standard. >> Mr. Kelly, are there other houses either next to this one or across the street that are similar in height or demonstrate a clear second story? Yes, I was going to get to that, but yes, this part of Essex Road, um there's a mix. I
mean, their house next door to them is a split level. The house to the right of them is another Cape Cod. A couple houses down the street. Uh the houses were torn down and there are large two-story houses just maybe two two houses, two houses,
not the split level, but the next one was a tear down. So that part of Essex Road, um there's been there's been a few tearowns and so then what do they build? They build a two-story house. So I think it fits it'll fit with the neighborhood
very nicely. Um I was going to ask Mr. Ball this question, but I'll ask it now. So we need a variance for this second story edition of a certain amount and we need a variance for the first story edition of a different amount. So I don't know
how what kind of variance do we get the variance for the bigger one and that encompasses the smaller one or or >> so we would usually phrase it as one overarching combined sideyard variance but just note the distinct um you know
distances of you know to the smaller portion of the addition as well as to the larger portion. Okay. Um but yeah so overall it we'll treat it as one combined yard setback variance. >> Okay. Thank you.
When I was putting my notes together, I didn't know how that would that would be how you would phrase that. Um, I can go through the other additions. Uh, we're really just trying to make the sun room in the back a more usable room. Um, we're going to add heat
and air conditioning to it. We're going to raise the floor so it's not on a slab. Uh, put in proper windows. And really, we're going to make it some other improvements throughout the house. All the windows will probably be replaced. Uh we have to replace the roof. So we'll do a nicer roof. Uh and
we may replace the siding. So there's going to be an overall enhancement to the whole property. Um we also will be upgrading the heating and cooling systems. I have to put in a second system for the second floor and we'll also be able to upgrade the insulation
to today's standards. Some other positive aspects I think besides what I just said uh we are under building coverage under floor area ratio under lot coverage there's virtually no change in the lot coverage there's virtually no change in the grading no change in the
drainage no change in water runoff because basically we're adding up and the addition in the rear replaces a patio and the addition in the front replaces replaces a a a platform and steps. So, there's actually a small
decrease, sorry, decrease in in lot coverage. Um, one other number I didn't say out loud is the blue area is 53 ft. It's a tiny amount on a 14,000 foot lot
and the blue area in the sun room is 8 square feet, which is almost negligible. So, I think that this proposal could be could be considered and without any
detriment to the neighborhood. I think it would fit into the neighborhood very nicely. I I don't see it as an imposition on their immediate neighbors or uh or or the neighborhood in general. I think it's it's a nice improvement and a very very small variance.
>> Great. Thank you, Mr. Kelly. Ed Marie, you have any questions for this witness? Um what is the um existing and opposed lot coverage that you're doing on the property? >> The existing is 28.1 and the proposed is
27. >> So slight decrease. >> So you have a you have a slight decrease in your uh lot coverage. >> Yes. >> Okay. So since there is a decrease in their lot coverage, they're not required to comply with any of the storm water regulations that you have on your
ordinance. So um I'm I'm fine with with that. >> Great. Thank you. >> Uh just two quick questions regarding the uh the change to the heating and ventilation system. Do you anticipate any new changes to the AC units? >> I was I forgot to mention that location.
>> I think you mentioned it. Yes. >> Um, we would pro I don't know about I don't know about the age of what they have now, but I'm going to need a new one for the second floor. Um, and your letter mentions uh screening.
>> Yeah. Will it be put in a compliant location and will you screen? >> Yes. And yes. Great. >> Thank you. Any tree removal? >> No. >> Okay. Thank you. >> It's amazing. We had no other than Ed's report, we had almost no comments from
the city. >> We noticed. >> Sorry. Uh Mr. Kelly, would you describe the changes to the architecture based on the addition of the second floor as consistent with the spirit of the DRRO and the design guidelines?
>> Yes, absolutely. Okay. >> And the HBC echoed that. Great. >> Any questions from the board for this witness? Just a silly question. What's creating the extra square footage if you're not
building any new walls or anything other than on the sun? Look at this. The sun porch 4 foot addition. >> Yes, >> that's the only creat >> uh we're adding four feet to the rear and four feet in the other direction as well. Well, I'm sorry. There's a small addition in the front >> the portico.
>> Yeah. No, there's a small addition to to the foyer to enlarge the foyer because it's extremely cramped. >> And of course, the new second floor is larger than the old second floor. But >> and I think I think you mentioned this,
but um even in the area where there is construction, your sideyard setback is over the 15t minimum. The only reason you're here for variance is because you're not having that extra buffer of a little extra. But on each side, even
with construction, you have over 15 feet of set sideyard setback. Is that correct? >> Yes, we will. >> Thank you. >> Remember, mostly we're going up. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Uh do we have any questions from
the audience for this witness? Seeing none. Okay. Is there anything that you'd like to say in summation? >> Just thank you for listening to us. >> Yes. Thank you for having >> Great. >> Annie, can you go through conditions and
number of votes required? >> Yes. So, the only condition I have noted is our usual and I'm double checking as right now. Was there there there was no engineering. So, never mind. I do not have any conditions. >> Okay. >> Um, this is a C variant. So, four votes
are required to approve the application. >> All right, let's enter into executive session. And I'm sure this will be a barn burner. >> Go ahead, Tom. >> So, I I say this once in a while, I wish all cases were this simple and this easy and this minor. I sometimes feel bad that people come for such small things,
but it is a variant, so you have to come. Um, as the engineers noted, there's no impact on the storm water. Forester says no no screening or that your screening is adequate. You don't need any additional screening. As mentioned, the HBC uh finds that you
design, you know, losing a Cape Cod. It's not a historic structure. So, the HBC had no concerns with it, keeping with the guidelines and the look of the neighborhood. There are no bulk variances. Those get attention if there's a lot coverage or F or something like that or height. Um, you have none of that. So, it's a very small variance,
very nice project. Improve the house, improve the neighborhood. So, I can support it. >> Uh, yeah, also can support it. pretty straightforward. Um I think considering it's an undersized lot in R15 zone, if you were the full 15,000, you probably
wouldn't be sitting here today. So, um pretty straightforward. Thanks. >> Great. >> This side, >> I can support this project as well. So, hope my cohorts worded it a lot better than I can ever. >> Great. >> I can support it as well. It's a lot of
bang for a little bit of buck. So, >> thank you, Mr. >> I'll move to approve. Great. Anybody else want to say anything? >> I'll second it. >> Jessica, you please call the role. >> Vice Chair Zon, >> yes. >> Mr. Yuko, >> yes. >> Mr. Nelson,
>> yes. >> Mr. Kieran, >> yes. >> Mr. Chantuli, >> yes. >> Mr. Nearing, >> yes. >> Chairman Ly, >> yes. >> Good luck. >> Thank you. >> All right. Next.
>> Can we get four Hughes, please, please? We just need that exhibit A1. All right. If you could please raise your right hand. Do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matter? The truth of the whole truth is nothing but the truth. >> Yes. >> And please state your name. Spell your last name.
>> Manny Maliki. M A L E K I. I reside at Fort Hughes Place in Summit. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Uh good evening and thank you for May I start. >> And thank you for your uh thank you for your viewing. I'm processing my request for variance applications. I moved to
Summit in 1999 and except for a few years I've lived in Summit and raised a family and I live currently at the for Hughes Place since uh 2012. I'm seeking two C variances. Both variances are for front yard setback.
The first is for uh construction of a dormer on the second floor to serve as a bathroom servicing the two existing second floor bedrooms. Currently, any occupants on the second floor must travel down the stairs to access the first floor bathroom, which for the
elderly and kids poses safety concerns, especially during the night. For Hughes Place is a small Cape Cod style house with the majority of the second floor occupied with low ceiling attics. Only 47% of the second floor is used as a living space, thus requiring
installation of this proposed dormer. The dormer's entire floor area will be built within the 28 ft x 28 ft footprint of the main frame area of the house and will not add additional square footage to the second floor. The proposed dormer will maintain maintain the same roof
ridge line as the existing dormer which is located on the other side of the roof which is a bedroom one of the bedrooms and will be symmetrical to the overall building appearance. Furthermore, the dormer does not create any noticeable visual obstructions to my neighbors or to the public.
The other C variance is for placement of an AC unit on the east side of the house facing Baltistro road for Hughes Place is a corner house positioned in an odd angle. The east wall is facing Baltistro, west wall facing Hughes Place
and north wall facing both Baltistro and Hugh Street. Therefore for Hughes Place has three front yards. The only backyard side of the house, the south side, has a limited space for AC placement that positions it under the um
first floor bedroom window and facing my next door neighbor's bedroom located on a use place. The proposed east site location is the only site that is fenced, thus providing a visual barrier from all sides hiding the AC unit. It is also a shaded shaded area that enhances
AC operation and efficiency, lowering electrical usage and environmental impacts. open the floor to any questions. >> Uh Ed Murray, do you have questions for this question? >> Um are you um are you adding any additional um impervious coverage to
your property aside from AC units? Uh I'm looking at your bulk criteria, your zoning analysis, it looks like you comply with the F requirement of the overall um and I think you've addressed your direct customer out of the AC unit.
Um I believe that was the extent of our questions. Is the roof pitch going to be the same as the roof pitch of the roof below? um not the below but it's going to be the same roof pitch as the bedroom on the other side. >> Okay.
>> And to reduce that with the I have only the the the clearance inside the bedroom which is going to be the same height is only 6'8 in. >> So to change the pitch uh either the ridge line is going to be above the main ridge ridge line or I have to lower the
ceiling which make the space on inaccessible >> which significantly reduce that. >> Yes. Okay, thank you. Look for any questions. >> Questions from the board. Tom. >> Yeah, I want actually for for Ed first. I couldn't hear everything you just said about the AC unit. So Ed, your report says if approved, the proposed AC unit
and the front yard must be screened with dense landscaping and fencing. >> You want to say the area in question is imposed wood appears to be 4 foot high solid wood fence. Was your exchange about changing any of that or >> No, not not about changing that. What I was asking about is not really regarding that because he had indicated it's going
to be behind the fence. >> Correct. from the road. So therefore, it is screened by that fence as a result. I believe you provided an illustration of that, didn't you? >> Yes. That was all I had. >> Anyone? No.
>> Great. Excellent. Any questions from the public for this witness? >> Seeing none. Right. Anything you want to say in summation? >> No. Thank you for your time. Great. Great. Mr. Ball, any conditions and number of votes?
>> I believe, but we'll confirm no engineering report on this one either. So, I have no conditions noted. Um, once again, number of votes, we only have some variances. Four votes are required to approve. >> Excellent. Can I just ask a question about conditions? >> Of course. >> Moving forward with these applications,
can we require they put a house number on the house? >> I know it's part of the CO inspection. >> I think that's part of the building code already, isn't it? But a lot of the houses we go to, they don't have house numbers on them. >> I don't know that that's falls within our jurisdiction. >> Find the right number.
>> Well, you can ask for it, right? >> It's required, right? >> It's required under a co, >> right? I mean, so that's that's your enforcement mechanism already. I don't know that us it's not technically a requirement. So, I wouldn't necessarily recommend it into our resolutions. But,
>> can I get a motion to approve? >> So, moved. Second. >> Great. Jessica, can you please call the role? >> Yes. >> Vice chair. >> Yes. >> Mr. Yuko? >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson? >> Yes. >> Mr. Kieran? >> Yes. >> Mr. Chantuli? >> Yes.
>> Mr. Nearing? >> Yes. >> Chairman Ly. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> 58 Valley View, please. No water. Will it connect or do I need to do something new today?
I hope not. >> Let me try. It >> says it's connected. Don't worry, it'll come on as soon as you're done with your initial presentation. >> Oh, so we don't stop our uh record timing here. If I I'll just start and we
can use the board if that's okay. >> Thank you. Please proceed. >> Samantha Alonso, Alfonso and Weber G on behalf of the applicants, Greer, Michael Hines. Um they are looking to install a pool and patio area. Uh to do that their their yard steeps significantly. They
have a lot of steep slopes. It's um 9,233 square feet of steep slopes that exceed 15%. Uh they're proposing to disturb just what they need to for the pool and
patio. And that's 5,616 square ft, about 18% of the overall site. So the net increase in coverage is uh about 1300 square ft, although that would only
require one dry well. Technically, they're actually going to put three in. I know the plans showed two. Um, but they took a look at it again and asked Rudy to take another look and see if he could add even more retention on site. Um, and he said that he can. Uh, so
he'll talk more detail about that change. Um, but it will just add more uh to the storm water system that's already proposed. Uh I had a chance to speak with John Linson this morning. I know there are
two reports. Um the second report I believe he was looking at the concept plan that did not show the species and the details that the actual landscape plan shows. So he he said it's okay for me to let you guys know. His first report stands he's fine with the
landscape plan. Um, and we're of course happy with the condition to make sure that he's happy with the final plan and he can sign off on it as part of compliance. >> The final plan that has listed the quantity and species. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> And that was already filed. He had
reviewed it 613. He he issued his report on based on that plan. >> That's the one dated May 1st. >> I'm sorry. >> That's the one dated May 1st, I believe. >> Am I looking at the right one? >> Yes, the plan. Yes. Thank you. Okay. Um,
if the board doesn't have any uh immediate questions of me, we could hear from the applicants. >> Sure, let's do it. >> All right. Great. We're going to swear you in. >> If you could each raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> Yes.
>> And one at a time, please state your name. Spell your last name. >> Greer Hines. H Y N S. >> And Michael Hines. M I C H A E L H Y. >> Thank you. Welcome. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Um you guys, could you just confirm you own the property together with your family, right? >> Yes, we do. And um could you describe the existing conditions and and what you're proposing here? Um we have a a very steep slope going
down into a um a lawn in our back and um comes off of our driveway. And so what we're proposing is to put in a an ingground pool kind of in within the hill and um obviously it'll disturb some of the steep slope. It'll disturb some
of the trees, but it'll give us an opportunity to make our backyard more functional, have more space um for our kids, our family. Um we've lived in Summit for 21 years. We love it here. We have no intention of going anywhere. And
so we were like, why not try to make our space that we exist in live in now um what we're looking for to be in here for a long time. >> Thank you. And I I know we're looking at the plan, but could you just show everybody just point to where the pool
is? It's the big blue square, right? >> Is that the technical term on the >> big blue square? I just want to if we can Can you hear me? Okay. If I talk loud, >> maybe use the standing mic.
>> Just turn the little toggle on it. >> Is that okay? >> Okay. >> Yep. Perfect. >> Um, so I just want to make sure it's clear what is existing because the driveway already exists. This patio exists. There are actually stairs here existing, but they're going to be
replaced and um tucked in towards the patio. This patio is is new proposed for the pool. And these retaining walls are proposed to create that flat area for the pool and patio.
>> Right. >> Okay. That's right. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Um Okay. And you asked uh we had talked about fences. There was a question about the kind of fence. Um so I do have photos of
the proposed but since my computer isn't working it it there are two >> types two that you're considering right now and you're not sure which. >> Right. >> And they're both sort of rowd iron aluminum. >> Right. The typical one has a a straight
slat and one has a vertical slat. >> Yes. >> Right. Correct. >> Horizontal. One's vertical, one's horizontal. >> Um, if the board wants to see it, I could show my iPad around. Um, it's not set in stone yet. They are still considering, but of course, it would be
pool compliant and construction code compliant and um would be part of it could be part of compliance as well if you want to see the fence detail. >> Did you have a chance to review the administrative reports? >> Yes, I did. And you agree to be bound by
them subject to any of your experts? >> Yes, I will. >> And you spoke to your neighbors as well? >> Yes, we did. >> And I think there was just one uh question, right? And you're actually keeping the trees that you asked about. >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> And you engaged professionals to assist you with this application. And a few of them are here, I think, to help, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Great. Board professionals, any questions for these witnesses? >> Uh, no. Not at this time.
>> Not for this witness. Right. Great. Board, any questions for these witnesses? Right. Seeing none, any questions from the public? Seeing none, Samantha, please. Your next witness. >> Thank you. Thank you.
Yeah, that works. Since we have uh we have Barry Mason here, the pool contractor, and Rudy Holtzman, maybe we could have them both sworn in. >> Sure. >> Since they're both here, >> each raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give in this matter, the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
>> Yes. Yes. And one at a time, please state your name. Spell your last name. >> Barry Morrison. M E R S O N. >> Thank you. >> Rudy Hollesman. H O L Z M A N. >> Thank you. I guess we will get to We
might as well do it now. Mr. Hollesman, I I know you recently approved before the board. Your credentials were accepted at that time. Any changes to your credentials since the last time you were here? >> No. >> Any questions from the board or would you like to accept them back once again? >> We would. Welcome back. Okay.
Okay. Thank you. Okay. Uh Rudy, you're familiar with the application. Could you just go through a little bit for the record how you gained that familiarity and how you proposed how you came up with this plan?
>> Uh sure. >> It is working. I think it's just low. All right. Um, my office prepared the topographic plan and worked with um the uh contractor Barry and um Michael and Greer on coming
up with uh fine-tuning a location for the former patio um based on kind of the patio size and pooling like it was understood that walls would be required along with um some steep slope disturbance. Um
so uh we did actually uh review the steep slope ordinance um all the uh relevant storm water management um erosion surface water runoff impacts
and came up with this uh this particular location and uh the surrounding system to uh accommodate the increase in coverage >> and then they went and asked you to add another drywall, right?
>> Yeah. After we received the um review and looked at considering uh the ability to add that dry well um and the request to make sure we're accommodating the roof drainage. Um
we added that dry well right at the same location. Uh you can see on the plan here it's just parallel you know in line with the existing system and we could do that without increasing uh the steep slope disturbance and limited disturbance quantities that you
currently see on the planet in front of you. So, I guess to get a little more into the collection system, uh you can see the patio between the pool and the driveway.
Um we'd be collecting that specific area, the drainage system ting right in. Also, we're collecting the driveway area with an existing inlet that exists there. Um the nature of the site, there's a high point probably
right about here. So half of the house drains through transport to the back. The front portion goes towards the front yard. The same with the driveway. There's a hump about here that drains out to the street. So the project is focused all the um and then as far as the quantity of uh
steep slope disturbance, um I can switch over to Sheet two of the engineering plans [Applause] right behind the driveway in existing condition. Um
this that slope will be kind of maintained but we are going to disturb and regrade and stabilize that with landscaping. Then a 3ft uh 4ft wall at the back of the patio. Patio's flat pool and then the pool is
surrounded by grass and landscaping except for the patio. And then below that, a two-tiered wall um that ties into the existing grades at the site. That two-tiered walls will be composed of stack boulders um and doesn't exceed
4 ft in height. This part of it, this part of the wall, the two-tiered wall is 3 foot high each with a space of six feet in between the two tier walls. That area um will be landscaped in
maintain grass landscaping and and we stabilized after construction and that's basically a flat that's a flat area between the two two interior wall. So to address this the steep slopes by flattening out the area around the
pool and having a tiered wall system we're providing some some more of an opportunity for runoff to percolate in the ground which you would expect in a flat area. Um the soil testing showed positive results. Nice sandy soil, gravel and in addition to the natural
ground percolation all the impervious area we managed through that that system. And then as far as tree removal goes, uh sheet three indicates um the trees that were indicated to be removed. Those are all within that
footprint of the approprious area. There's an effort to really try to save all the trees on the perimeter of the site. So as you can see, the grading tins will work and that's one of the reasons this location was chosen. So the grading
tins don't have to cut fill the soil kind of deeply in that side. Um set back area. We can maintain the trees in in that side area. There was a question on if we could save that one tree, but it's actually really
close to where the wall is going to go. So, you really can't, right? >> To see the tree was mentioned. Unfortunately, it lands right on where one of the walls need to be in order to um you know, the walls are minimized to the extent of unfortunately there's a tree located right where wall needs to
be. Okay. Do you want to go through the engineers report? Would you like to go through it or do you want us to? However you prefer. >> Well, it >> might be easier if Marie just asked questions.
>> Is that all right? >> Yes, of course. >> All right. Um, so you're collecting you're adding in another seepage pit and collecting the roof runoff. All of the roof runoff, a portion of it, >> a portion. I was able to quantify that
actually and it was about 1,600 square feet. Um, I have another exhibit actually that I could um show if you if you'd like. I know you didn't get a chance to review it. Um, but I quantified that and I quantified the volume of the third dry well and was
able to see that it would accommodate the actual drainage area from the roof and portion of the driveway and patio collected. >> Okay. So, so he's correct. I haven't I haven't looked at that um you know to see if the added impervious coverage from the roof can be accommodated in
that, but you know we can work together to make sure that there's enough in there. So you have um the design that I reviewed had um a scour hole for any potential overfill on the seage pit. Is that still going to remain? >> Correct. Yes.
>> Okay. All right. So the configuration is is basically the same. Um could you tell me a little bit about that existing driveway drain? I don't know where it went to before, but you're going to intercept that at some point.
>> Correct. Yeah. That that driveway drain drains to the slope. Um that drain has some volume. It it's it's a form of a dry well. It has an open bottom as able to observe, but um we're not relying on that directly um as part of this design.
Um but that driveway drain which you see empties into the slope will be intercepted and cap or capped and removed at the uh end portion. >> Okay. Thank you. Um could you tell me a little bit about um the existing swale
that is on the right side of the property um and and how that might be incorporated into this. It says that it's to remain >> Yeah. I was able to observe that that swale mostly functions to capture some
of the uh runoff from the side slope on the driveway along with the neighbors some of the drainage from the neighbor. So in in that sense we're the point of uh that note is to maintain that particular swale and the pipe that's at that swale it it's it's
stable area you know we call it as a wash but it appears to be stabilized. >> So the um is it fair to say that the drainage that is um going to be on the site afterward in relation to that swale
is going to be the same as existing. >> Correct. Um, are you having drainage behind the retaining walls? >> Yes. uh for surface drainage that
there's the ability to put in um somewhat of a swale um directed from the middle of the walls towards the ends but that'll be supplemented with appropriated HP pipe um as indicated in
the border wall detail and that will be in the daylight um within the limiter disturbance um at at both um corn basically both corners of the of the disturbance near the side property.
>> Um I noticed you have um a note on the plans about a 6-in PVC that's on the right hand side of the property that um collects the roof drains. Um is that the one that so that is that going to be then abandoned and capped off?
No, it it appears that that the 6 in PVC pipe right near the property line appears to be associated with uh the neighbor and not directly tied. It's not collecting the roof drain from the subject property. >> Okay. So, you're not intending on
moving that or >> correct to be maintained as is. Right. >> Okay. Okay. Um see if there's anything else. >> No, I think that's all I had. >> Great. >> Just a few questions. Um, regarding the
location of the pool um and its area, it's it's complying with all the setback requirements, correct? >> Correct. >> Of of the pool requirements. Um it seems to be that uh in your professional opinion there are steep slopes located right adjacent to the driveway uh for
the property. There isn't or the only other area that's available for the location of pool down below further down the slope that's not in the steep slopes. >> Yeah. This map shows that >> the steep slopes kind of end somewhere
within the middle of the existing um lawn area. Um, but what we found is that moving it there, I still be triggering the student steep floor variance would be over 1,000 square ft just to
get to that point of the pool at the elevation with stairs and a level patio. >> In addition to that, you have a unique condition of the way the driveway is configured. It takes up a good portion of the side as well as a portion of the rear property.
>> Correct. Correct. Um the tree removal that's indicated on the plan and I was trying to follow your testimony with regard to that. Um is it a total of seven trees that are being removed or six? >> A total of seven. I believe there's an X missing from tree number 39.
>> I think that was the tree you were trying to wall. I believe that's the seven. Okay. Thank you. >> Um I think that's all I have. >> Great. Thank you. Ed board questions for this witness. Um, I have a question. So,
uh, maybe two twopart question. What year was the house built? >> Or do you know >> 1933? And I guess because my observation of the backyard is that there are a lot of steep slopes, but this one is a drop off
sort of which um do you think that this in a way it it appears like a retaining wall already without a retaining wall in that this was probably filled in to construct the house? Is that I mean is that or do you think that that's just
the topography of the neighborhood? It looked to me like maybe the lot had, you know, there had been time ago an attempt to flatten the lot to make a make it buildable or more, you know, functional for the home.
Um, it's certainly possible that to some extent there was still and grading done part of the drive uh the driveway construction, the garage under and the rear yard. Um, but with the with the mature trees on that slope, I you could tell it's been there quite a while.
Yeah, >> Tom. >> Yeah, I have a question. Um, so obviously there's a lot of effort being put into landscaping here because you know people use a pool don't necessarily want people watching them using the pool and you know and so it's a very effective plan and the landscaper and I
accept Miss Alfonso's representation that Mr. Lson's original comments apply but we're we're going to get that in writing. He said okay. >> So he he says that perimeter screening is adequate to shield the proposed improvements. >> I wonder if I get your opinion too. I mean, in terms of the direct neighbors,
obviously from the front, I don't think much can be seen in the backyard. The direct neighbors, what would there be visibility of the retaining wall? Um, andor the pool. I mean, do you have an opinion on that? >> It shouldn't be, right? Because it's
going to be how many feet? 85 feet away from the rear yard and very far away from all the neighbors. They already have that existing tree line. Not to answer for you, Rudy, but >> yeah, I agree. And and what I noticed there's there's a lot of
well-maintained, well built stone walls on the site right now with a lot of landscaping. Um, and I would I walked the site and I'm looking at the walls. You don't really see them too much in the site. So, I think the walls we're proposing will
effectively match a a lot of what's there now. just based on a distance. I don't expect them to really be seeing uh significant wall that that that's an obtrusive height.
>> Okay. All right. Um that's me one second here. >> Yeah, I think that's all I had. >> Thank you, Don. >> Yeah. So, um, you had mentioned that in the lower lawn area, if you had proposed
to put the pool there and the patio there, you would still require, uh, steep slope, but would it be the same same percentages or would be less? >> With the same exact size pool and patio, it it's difficult to say. It'd be in the
ballpark. I mean, I'm comfortable saying it'd be over 1,000 square feet. Um, but one of the things that we found is, you know, the soils back there are suitable for the drywalls and we think that that's a better spot
than if we're, you know, within these steeper slopes. So, that's another thing that we considered when putting putting the whole location together. >> So, you did the the perk test already, right? And tell them the number. Well,
we found 11 11 inches per hour for the >> 11 inches per hour. >> Where where was that taken in in the steep slope where the pool's going? >> Yeah. >> Or where the where the >> No, back back >> back in the lawn area. >> The lawn area behind where? >> Sorry.
>> Uh the pool and patios. And then the neighbor that's behind them, what's the is there the difference in elevation between their backyard? Are they lower? >> Correct. They're lower back here. Um
these trees, there's a tree line here, landscaping that provides somewhat of a buffer. So I didn't see any direct drainage or signs of erosion along this um property line. I see a maintained lawn um directed behind. Okay. Any
questions from the public for this witness? Seeing none, >> unless the board has any questions uh for you or or Barry, I think we can wrap our presentation. >> Great. The other one is is the pool contractor. >> Yes.
>> Yes. And we uh my company did the original landscape design and the plant layouts in conjunction with with our landscape architect. So that's really why I'm here. >> Great.
>> I appreciate it. >> And I would assume all construction has to be done over your drive over the current driveway. >> Yes. >> Down the hill. >> Yes. >> Yeah. There's no there's no possibility for a stone construction access of any
kind. The only way in and out of that yard is is the driveway. Great. >> Um, Mr. Ball. >> Um, did we open to the public for those two? >> We could. >> Yes. Technically, for the record,
probably should. >> Yes. Uh, any anyone in the public care to make public comment? Seeing none. >> Okay. >> Okay. Um, I have three potential conditions noted. First is compliance
with conditions noted in the board engineers memorandum. Second is that the final landscaping plan shall be submitted to the city forester for review and approval. And third, the final storm water management plan shall be submitted to the board engineer for review and approval. >> Great. Thank you.
>> And um once again C varants only four votes are required to approve. >> Okay. >> Who would like to begin? >> Just one question. the final storm water report was was the difference was he added what was the difference? What was >> the additional dry well?
>> That's what I thought. That was all it was. >> He added an additional dry well, but he added more volume to it. So, he was he's he's putting more water in it from the roof area. So, I haven't checked those calculations um just to be sure that everything's fine. >> Okay. >> It's oversized though, right? If
anything, it should be. But we want to make sure you have the right >> Mr. current. >> Thanks. Um, yeah, I think it's a a a thoughtful plan, good use of the property. Unfortunately, there's a steep slope, but I think they're the owners
are are addressing um storm water um adequately. So, I I can I can support this. >> Yeah, I I think I can support it, too. I mean, it is a large steep slope variance, but they seem to be based on testimony to be confirmed that they're going overboard in dealing with storm
water, which is something we like to see. Um, it's a beautiful landscaping plan. Um, you know, I can't wait to can sneak back there and look at it when it's done. It's a beautiful landscaping plan. Um, and I think it is a better attractive use of the property. I think the fact that the, you know, we can't
always conclude much from the neighbors not being here. You never know for sure why they're not here, but you think if people were up in arms about this, somebody would be here. So, it sounds like they're not concerned about the screening or or the activity. Um, yes. So, uh, like I said, well, I'm
usually reserved about large seal variances, but they do seem to be going overboard in in addressing it. So, I I could support it as well. >> Um, yeah, I could support this as well. I know I've been gone on record about saying how we don't want Summit to look like a uh
>> Minecraft town. Um, and you know, that's kind of what I think about when I see uh requests for sleep steep slope variance in this case. That's not really what I'm seeing. This is, you know, almost like transferring the line, moving it into a
different spot on your yard, but kind of looking at the yard. It was, I won't say like a sheer face, but it's a pretty one of the, you know, almost a wall and then drops off to a flat yard. Um, pretty hard to work with without, you know,
what you guys are proposing. Um, and it is a thoughtful plan. I think that we can say that it is maybe an exceptional topographic feature to have a as sharp um I'll call it I don't want to call it a cliff but it's pretty you know you
have the stairs there to access the lower part of the yard but this will make everything more functional so yes I can support this uh I agree with my colleagues I can to support this application definitely thoughtful landscape design
but I'm most impressed by the efforts support storm water management clearly worked on the plan very carefully and to me it seems like it will be a success so with that I will ask for a motion to approve >> so moved >> second
>> Jessica can you please >> who are we giving the second to >> Mr. Nering >> okay >> entered the chat >> miss you please call the role >> yes vice chair >> yes >> Mr. Yuko >> yes >> Mr. Mr. Nelson. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Curran. >> Yes. >> Mr. Chantuli. >> Yes. >> Mr. Nearing. >> Yes. >> Chairman Ly. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Good luck, guys. >> All right. >> 609 Springfield.
>> Appreciate your comments because a year and a half. >> It shows. It shows. >> Thank you. [Music] We'll give those guys a second to [Music]
All right, I will swear you both in at this point. If you could raise your right hand. Do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matter, the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? >> I do. Yeah. >> And one at a time, please state your name and spell your last name. Uh, my name is uh Jessica Lindamman spelled L I
N D E M- An >> and Todd Lind Lindaman T uh L I N D E M A N. >> Thank you. >> Welcome. Please tell us a little bit about your application. >> You want to go?
>> All right, I'll kick it off. Um, well, thank you in advance for considering our proposal. Um, we love our house. We've been in Summit since 2019. Our house is nearing 140 years old and the last major improvement to the home was a little
over a hundred years ago. And here we are, you know, wanting to make a historic or or put our signature onto the house while honoring the architecture and the vocabulary of
the house and bringing greater form and function to the land and to the property itself. >> And with those improvements, Jess can talk about those. >> Sure. So on a on a on a personal level,
we're um the basis of what we're asking permission to do, what we're proposing is to uh to move our the very long driveway um which would then give us the enjoyment of a private sideyard, a deck
area and um on the east side of the house. And then on the west side on the high street side of the house would provide us with a garage uh which we don't currently have. Um the garage would be
attached to the home and it would also include ground level storage which for gardening equipment which we don't currently have which I currently have it's carrying it up and down the basement stairs. Um, this also provides
us with a much shorter driveway and the driveway would then access onto High Street, which is a a quieter street. Um, in addition to um to that to to our personal enjoyment of it, um, we also
feel this will be a much improved look for the lot. Um, right now the the driveway is is quite long and takes up quite a lot of the land. Um and it's a wide open space. Um what we're proposing
in creating uh the sideyard will in addition to the the landscaping plan would would provide more shrubs, more visual screening and to me a nicer look. Uh on the high street side, what our
architect has put together to in our opinion is um a big improvement to that side of the house. Right now it's wide open. There's a just a picket fence there. Um our two AC units are, you know, visible from the side. Um the
garage and basement access would be much more visually appealing. And then the um landscape plan would actually be adding uh visual screening which doesn't currently exist. Um,
so that about sums up uh our interest. We really feel it's such a distinctive home. It's on a very visible corner lot. The front architecture of the home is so beautiful. Um, the re the lot itself and
the the rear of the lot we feel is is lacking and needs visual improvement and um to kind of bring up to standard of what the the community shows. Um, that sums up our our synopsis. And then just
to let you know, I um had a very clear vision for the landscaping. And so I put the landscaping plan together. Um, and in response to the comments that we received, I did update that landscaping plan and you don't currently have that
in front of you. Um, I'm happy to answer to that or to those comments or any questions you have or I can provide a copy. Yes, we love copies. >> Okay. >> Which we will mark as A1. >> Okay. Would you like those? >> Yes, please. Thank you.
>> Thank you so much. Thank you. Just out of curiosity, do you do you have a background in landscape design or is it just a personal passion? >> Um, no, no background. I just knew
what I wanted and I feel really passionate about uh transitioning the yard to uh native plants. Um we don't have a sprinkler system. I don't want to put in a sprinkler system. I want it to be natural and um have a very clean
appearance from the sidewalk but also be lowmaintenance. And there's a lot of beautiful native plants. >> Yes. >> So I I I just felt we I didn't You need a landscape architecture to talk to that. >> Okay. No, that's fine. Thank you.
Um, board professionals, any questions for these witnesses? >> Uh, no, not at this time. >> I would just say that as a landscape architect, I think you did a good job. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Perfect. Thank you, Ed.
>> Does the board have any questions for these witnesses? >> And maybe this was addressed while I was looking something up. Can we add a condition for Mr. to review that report that she that design she submitted. >> Yeah. >> Done and done. Mr. Yugo.
>> All right. You want to introduce your first witness? >> I think we all know their first witness. And >> are we going to say he needs no introduction? >> Never. Never seen him before. >> Never seen or not. >> Please raise. >> Again, I'm not sure if that's good or
bad. >> Please raise your right hand. Do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matter? The truth. The whole truth is nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> And please state your name. Spell your last name. >> Andrew Clark. C L A R K E. >> Thank you. And you've appeared before us quite a number of times. I imagine no
changes to your credentials since the last time you were here. >> That's correct. >> I imagine we'll accept it back once again. >> 100%. Welcome back. >> Thank you. Thank you. Well, I'll um start off by saying what this application doesn't involve.
does not involve steep slopes or any uh particular uh regrading in walls of any sort. So that's a good starting point. All right. So I'll just walk through the existing and proposed conditions uh from the engineering and site work standpoint
quickly. I think this will be um pretty succinct. Um I conducted the survey. I'm making reference to my lot grading plan dated um April 14th, 2025. And I prepared this plan. Um I first did
the survey, actually had done the initial survey um topographic survey for the previous owner and then the Lindammans purchased it and then we got involved in this design process after that. So I conducted the existing survey as indicated. It's on the corner, the
northeast corner of High Street in Springfield Avenue at 609 Springfield. It's in the R10 zone. Um what's existing is the dwelling um that that fronts on Springfield Avenue and there's a as
described a long driveway that comes to sort of the back end of the house. Um there is no garage existing. Um, this entry is also sort of a little bit fuzzy sort of shared driveway entrance
with the neighbor on Springfield as well. And the topography of the site along High Street is a little um unique in that the sidewalk um the the the lawn that's between the
house and the sidewalk is a little bit lower than the sidewalk. So the sidewalk and then it comes down to the house. Um it's just a little bit different grading arrangement, but it does drain all right and it sort of comes in a gentle swale around the house towards Springfield A.
So basically the whole site is mostly uh grading towards Springfield A. On the east side uh of the house there's a little bit of a high point about midway up the house that drains towards Springfield. the other sort of little
corner of the lot drains to the back right corner, the northeast corner, but it's all very flat. Uh, generally speaking, there are some trees on site. There are a couple of large trees in the front, um, 36 and a 32in tree. Those are going to remain. They'll they'll they'll
be undisturbed. And then there are three trees along the north side of the dwelling that uh would have to be removed in order to accommodate the proposed addition and driveway. Um so those are indicated on the existing conditions.
Then the proposal is to remove this long driveway. Um uh tune up the neighbors driveway so that it's 2 ft off the line as required by ordinance, which it's not now. Um so there'll be a slight modification to their driveway. And that driveway comes
out making way for some a landscaped and lawn um area in that east side of the house. And then on the high street side uh an addition is proposed with a garage and a shed area like a storage area
behind it and uh a new seller entrance because in the back we're going to put a deck that brings you down to grade from there where the existing seller entrance is. So we're going to move the basement entry to the the what would be the front on High Street and have the driveway
access the garage. The grading is primarily the same. So on the high street side, there'll be a slight adjustment to the grade just because of the introduction of the driveway and the little walkway to the basement entrance. On the east side, there will again be a
high point. We're going to move it back a little bit and then just create a very gentle swale um to direct water towards the front. Um we are slightly reducing the lot coverage so we're not required to uh provide any specific storm water
improvements in that regard. And this property is a little unique in a couple of other aspects. One is that the owner is interested in gardening. Um she obviously has an interest in the landscaping and gardening aspect of it. When I did the survey and was out um
doing some of the field work, we chatted for a few minutes and it was clear that that was an intent and that they don't want a sprinkler system. So, they actually like the water on the property. So, when it rains, they they invite that for for the plant life. Um on the east
side here, there's a bit of a burm in between the two properties, the our property and the neighbor on Springfield. So what so what I'm proposing to do is sort of extend that slight burm a little bit around to the frontage. Uh it's not it's not big, but
it's enough to sort of steer and contain storm water. So what'll happen effectively is storm water on this side will come down and and flow across the yard and then get coralled by this slight burm in the front. that that'll be landscape which is a little bit
different feature and is kind of a nice nice way to approach it in that regard. The house is also a little unique in the storm water aspect and I almost I actually went back to the property cuz I was like trying to remember like what what was going on with the gutters.
There are no gutters on the house. It has you know overhanging roof that just flows directly off. Um, so that distributes the runoff from the house and also creates, you know, a situation where normally we're like, what do we do
with the roof leaders and we don't want the point discharge? Well, we don't have that here. We're going to have a couple of roof leaders that I expect will be part of the addition and those will just be discharged at grade to uh flow out and spread out on the lawn like the rest of the runoff from the roof. So, from a
storm water standpoint, I think the existing condition is fine. I didn't see any indication of flooding or problematic issues and we're slightly reducing the lock coverage. So, that shouldn't change in that regard. And with these enhancements to the landscaping and a little bit of the grading with the burm, there should be
no negative impacts to the neighbor or the street. Um that said, there are a few variances obviously. Um the sideyard along High Street, the addition is coming closer. We're in a conforming condition now and
we're moving to a condition where at the back end it's 8.1 and 9 ft in the front of that addition. So that's a nonconforming versus the 12T that's required. Um and we have the building coverage is a variance. Um it's a pretty
minor variance. Um but it it is a variance nonetheless. Um the alternative the we talked quite a bit about this plan and the idea and there there was some discussion about maybe a detached garage, but we felt like this was a
better alternative generally um for the house, the aesthetic, the design itself. And to do a detached garage, you'd probably have to sort of park it in this back corner here, which would have less yard available and a little more impact
on the neighbors. So, um, while we're over on building coverage, we probably would still be over on building coverage if we were putting a detached garage based on the numbers as well. But this, I think, presents a much better design alternative for the property. Um, I I
believe that the screening and in terms of impact to the neighbors is in a in a very good position. Certainly with regard to the neighbor on Springfield A, you can see I have these row of evergreens that were surveyed uh you know along the neighbor's um pretty substantial adjacent garage, the
detached garage there. So in this side of the property, it's already some good screening, very mature screening on that side. And so any enhancements that happen in here will with landscape just build on that. And removing the driveway from that side, I think is a net
improvement um to that aesthetic on that side. It's a little tighter over here, but the Lindammans have spoken with the neighbor on High Street and Springfield Avenue about this project. Uh they seem to be in support of it. There was some discussion with the neighbor on High
Street about coordinating some screening over there. There is some smaller uh like arbivide type uh vegetation that's right along where the addition is planned on the neighbor's side. So, it's on the other side of the fence, but it was so small that it didn't really
register for my survey, but I drove by there again in preparation and noted that. So, there's a little bit of screening that's there now. They're going to work with the neighbor to enhance that. I think, as Mr. um Linson indicated, was would probably be a good approach. Um, so I don't think that the
setback, while it's non-conforming, should be a problematic or intrusive issue with the neighbor along High Street, which would be the one most affected. Um, they also have along that side, their driveway is closest to our boundary there. And as you can see,
their house is set back uh a pretty good distance because of that driveway that comes around and does a rear load. So in terms of the impact, it's sort of the the least uh potential impact for that neighbor given their arrangement as well. So all that said, um I think it's
a good application. I I think the engineering and the storm water aspects will be well managed and uh an enhancement over what's existing and the the benefit of this yard area will be um good not only for for the homeowner but for the neighbors. and I can take
questions or run through the memos if I missed something which I might have. >> Miss Rafé, >> um let's see. So um because there's a decrease in impervious coverage on the property. They're not required to do any storm water mitigation. I was concerned
about the um downspouts and where the roof leaders were going, but it sounds like you have that all under control. So there'll be, you know, as long as there's no impact to the neighboring properties, I think you're good. Um, I do have a question about um the the
driveway opening >> and the reduction of that size for the neighbor on Springfield Avenue. Right. >> So, they've it's been now been reduced to um a a 12oot opening with really not a flare on the apron at all. I think
it's allowed to be bigger than that. And I just I I'm I'm thinking this neighbor is going to be, you know, turning their car into that driveway and they're going to I think they're going to be hitting the curb. >> Well, on the right side on the right side that that part of the apron that's existing. So, it's really what we're
doing is is the left side where there's a big wide apron that covers both driveways. We're going to bring that back, but we could certainly make an adjustment to have that flared a little bit and coordinate with them and we'll, you know, that they've seen the plan, but we can show them a plan again before
we do final permitting to make sure that they're comfortable with what we're presenting and and the movement that would uh result from it. >> Right. >> But I think it's I think it's functional. >> Okay. Well, that's good. I I just don't want to see somebody slowing down too much to get into their driveway, backing
up other people on the road, you know, because the because the uh there's not enough of a of a drop curb on there. >> Um >> should we make that a condition that they work with the neighbors? >> Is that a loop drive in the front of theirs too? Does there I don't know if it goes around, but it's
>> functional and code complaint. >> Yeah, it's more about pulling in though. I think >> they probably have a turn on on the left side of her house. >> Yeah, it's it's sizable drive. I think it's just about just this movement coming in. But yeah,
>> um yeah, I think I think that's that's all I had. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to quickly touch on a few things. You had touched on the sideyard variance, the uh front
yard setback variance. Uh there is a existing condition of a front yard setback variance. >> Oh, on high street. Yeah. >> You're presenting the architect, correct? >> Yes. Yes. So, I'll imagine you'll cover that as well as far as the F as well. Uh
and overall number of variances. In addition to that, we have a basement stairwell encroachment. The exterior basement is being revised and relocated towards the front area. >> That's right. Yeah. And and uh I think that's a good uh thing to point out. But I think you had estimated it's not
dimensioned obviously you had 27 1/2 ft. I think at the nearest point it's closer to twi 25 1/2 ft >> at sort of the top of the steps there. >> Um so in terms of that number but yeah I mean I I I I that clearly is is an
encroachment into that front there and I think it shouldn't have any substantial impact but um it is it is certainly an encroachment into that front yard. >> Okay. Also for purposes of informing the board there there's also a variance for the garage which way it faces. Correct. >> Right. It's facing the street. That's
right. >> And in your professional opinion uh looking at this configuration of the property and I know you talked about the relocation of the driveway and possibly a um accessory garage or a standalone garage. In this condition it's facing
towards High Street >> right in this condition. and you're sort of improving then the access to the lot based upon um taking a driveway off of Springfield Avenue which is more of a heavier travel roadway >> to a lesser travel roadway of High
Street. So therefore there is that tradeoff. >> Correct. Yeah. And and in my opinion that's a a good tradeoff to relocate that access to High Street. >> Okay. >> It's definitely much lower traffic there. the driveway itself and the onecar garage that's really only going
to accommodate two cars. Correct. >> That's right. >> So, and I'll let the architect describe how many bedrooms there are in the facility. We had a question. >> Yeah, we we we did talk about it briefly. I think I believe he said there were six bedrooms in the house that exist. So, so it's a fair point that
technically we would be required by RSIS to have three parking spaces. So, two parking spaces is a deficiency in that sense. Um, >> so you're looking at a diminous exception. >> Correct. >> Correct. And in this case, the the Lindammans are, as they say, a onecar
household. So, um, you know, certainly in terms of their tenure in the house, um, shouldn't present an issue. Plus, the shed aspect of this uh actually strengthens the idea that the garage will be used. Often when you have a onecar garage, it ends up many times
that you put your snowb blowers and your your equipment in there and you don't end up parking in there. I think having the shed uh makes a stronger um position for actually using the garage. >> Thank you. >> Thanks.
>> Questions from the board for this witness? >> Go ahead, Don. >> Come on. You got to be a question. The basement's there. Well, that's open. Or is it a built up? >> Uh, it's going to be open. >> So, where does that drain to? >> Well, I'm sure there'll be, you know, a
small drain in the in the bottom of it that ties in with the footing drain for the addition. That's typically how they do it is, you know, into a sump pump and has a discharge point somewhere. Yep. >> Questions from the public for this
witness? Seeing none. All right. Let's talk to your architect. All right. If you could please raise your right hand. You swore from the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> I I do. >> And please state your name. Spell your last name. >> Michael Sharella. My last name is
spelled C H I A R E L L A. >> Thank you. And I believe it's been a little bit of time at least since the last time you were here. >> Yes. >> Uh could you briefly describe your background experience for the board? >> Um I'm a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey. I've been practicing in
the summit area for the last 25 years in which case I've appeared before this board many times. um and um and also surrounding towns. >> Any questions? Um
I may have missed it, but license is in New Jersey in good standing. >> All right. >> Any questions from the board or would you like to accept them back once again? >> We would. >> Welcome back. Please proceed. >> Thank you. >> Okay, just to recap what we're doing. Um
we are we're on a corner lot on High Street and uh we are trying to add a onecar garage to the back of the house with the driveway access from High Street. Um this garage addition will also bleed
into the ex like overlap the existing house um with a small pantry addition. And in the back of the garage, we're going to um also have a little area for storage. Um, one thing Jessica did not
say is that she's passionate about gardening. So, what we're trying to do is we're trying to um afford her a little area so that she can put her garden tools behind the garage. And then uh in in in this um little pocket between
the addition and the existing house, we're going to fashion a deck that leads out from the kitchen area to the what we would be calling the backyard. It's actually a sideyard, but that's um going to be like an open landscape area that
we're that that will be enjoyed by the by the deck. So, we're asking for some variances. Um let's start by talking about the um the front yard setback variance that we're
asking for. Um we're we're in violation by about 10 in. Um, the reason why I am in violation is because I'm taking the garage door and I'm bumping that out a little bit just to give it like a little
um a little bit of a detail. Um, so that we don't have one um plain wall from the pantry to the garage. So, we're doing just like just just where the doors are, just where the garage doors are where
we're we're bumping out um a little bit. And um this also helps us with the design that um we're able to play with roof lines a lot better. There's like a cascade of roofs um that the existing house has um that you can see like um as
we from High Street, you see that on the right hand side. So, what we want to do is we want to um maintain that that design strategy of a cascade of roofs from um with our addition. So, we have a hip roof, an existing hip roof on the second floor toward towards the back
side of the house. And we're and and we're um reflecting that in in in our our addition and and then making the hip roof for the addition. Then we're cascading a little bit down further just
over the the the projected um garage door. that we're being very playful with roof lines, which I think is um going to be very sympathetic to the roof lines to the existing house. We're also in violation of the sideyard
setback um with the garage edition. So really what we're doing is this is the first floor pen. Um, we made the we made the garage from from the
existing house uh exterior wall. We we made the garage just like wide enough that we could fit one car um with with the ability to open up doors and to be able, you know, without hitting without hitting the walls. So, the garage is going to be 11'4 in wide. And to make
that happen, we're encroaching into that sideyard about 4T. Um, We're still maintaining good 8 ft away from the property line. Um Andrew was talking about um the alternative about
putting a detached garage in. Um and we're not considering if we did that. Just want to say that that detached garage would be actually 4T closer to the um side property line. Even though it would be performing because it's a
detached structure, it would be performing with side yard, but it would still be closer to the neighbor's properties than what we're proposing. So, um, regarding the
the basement access, um, it is it would have been possible for us to configure a stairway that would not be in violation. that would be um within the the envelope of of of the of the building site um of
the buildable area I should say. But if we tried to do that, it would end up looking like a basement entrance and we didn't want that. We wanted to elevate that entrance to be something because it is facing high street and it's something that will be seen from
you know from the street. So we wanted to elevate that like a better design. We're putting a pair of French doors, nice French doors, putting like um a set of um straight, simple, more pleasant stairs
to access that um area. And um and also, it should be noted we're not going all the way down to the basement. The doors are actually going to be just high enough that it's going to be in the basement level, but once we walk into the basement from the French doors, we're going to be walking down
additional stairs. So again, we're trying not to have that to be like the feeling of a basement stairs. We're again, we're elevating that to a to to a higher level. Um, regarding
building uh coverage, uh, we are over building coverage. Um uh just like in a nutshell um the existing footprint of the house plus our addition plus the porch that all that all conforms to
building coverage. It's when we introduce our our deck. The deck is really what's putting us over. So we're asking for um we're asking for your approvals based on that um for for the deck. as a
violation. Um, and again, the purpose of the deck, it's really like like a a great trans transitional area from the kitchen to the garden on the outside. We're going down about five steps from
the deck to the ground. And, uh, also the deck's not so big. Um, we're just making it pleasant enough that they could enjoy some space on the first floor level before they the garden. and um floor area ratio. Um I'd like to
think that floor area ratio what we're asking for is minimus. Um we are um including a small pantry that's um given from high street. If we take a look at the at the rendering, you can
see that that pantry um element right here. Um, and I think this is like an important, this mass is like an important element of design that it's really helping to marry the garage
edition to the uh to the existing house. Um, so we we just didn't want to look like they were slapping slapping on a a garage addition to this vintage old house. So, we're using that as like a way to really marry the two. And uh
hopefully the rendering um illustrates that nicely. And um part also part of that floor area variance that we're asking for is we've got a little mudroom
stairway that leads from the first floor to the garage. Um, if we had put in the the door to the stairs at the top of the stairs, then the stairway would have been given to the garage and it would
not have been included. But we thought it would be better if we could heat that that stairway, get a little small like cubbies at the bottom of the stairs, which you see right there. Um, and then put the door to the garage at the bottom of the stairs. That
would be you know, better use for the Lindon. Um, but by doing that, we have to now consider that as living area and I think I did I cover everything. Record time.
>> So, happy to answer any questions. >> Perfect. Thank you. Uh, board professionals, what questions do you have for this witness? >> I do not have any questions for this witness. >> Okay. >> Just a few real quick. Uh, regarding the garage orientation, it's a onecar garage. It is creating a condition where
you could have placed the garage in another location to avoid front facing, but yet this is maybe a two-sided question as it relates to the deck and the utilization from the architecture and the interior of the building. Can you talk about why the deck makes more
sense there and the garage and its placement? >> Yeah. standpoint of its relationship to the site. >> Yeah. So, one of the things one one of the things that inspired Livins to take on this project is currently they have a
driveway coming from uh Springfield Avenue to um to the right side of their house and that's where they're parking their cars and they hate it. Um they lose in effect a backyard. They don't
have any other area that's like private for them. And so one of the things they want to do is they want to they want to eliminate that that side of the house for a parking garage area and they want to develop it into their garden into
like their like outdoor oasis. And for us to do that, it made the most sense to come up with this design where we're actually taking the garage and just accessing it. High street. Um I
don't I don't imagine we could have put an attached garage access from High Street slid back that where it where the where the front door would still not be in violation. You know it's
that that that two times the setback role. I I don't know that I don't know that we could have achieved that but that looked like a like a like a frog analog. U regarding the uh overall building
coverage, the dimensions of the deck >> are generally uh >> can you describe that for the board and it's sort of limited by the the limits of the building would you say? >> Sort of defined by the edges of the building. >> Yeah. So
in a nutshell um it's not excessive. >> It's not it's not. So part of the part of the strategy of of laying out the overall footprint is that we try to maintain the line of the addition to
match the line of of uh the existing living room of the house. And uh then we took this proposed deck and we just flushed it out with the edge of the um of the proposed addition. And then and
then the steps themselves come down um kind of like in front of in front of that line. I don't know if I answered that your question, but >> I think you did. Okay. >> I think you do. Regarding the garage on the side that's facing the neighbor, uh what is on that side? Some windows.
>> Yeah. >> Just in general. >> Yeah. So, I have an elevation that I can point to. That would be um this elevation here. Um we have um uh a group of windows. They
would be uh small windows high up so that you're not really like looking so much into the into the garage. So, we tight to the ceiling of the garage. And um we also have a uh an entrance that you don't you
don't see in this view. The entrance is um from the um from the east side uh entering here. We we extended a nice overhang with a um
with a corbal that um like a coral coral support that mimics an existing coral support um of the of the house um that's where the existing driveway entrance is.
>> You drew some design details. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, we're trying to really take the spirit of the existing detailing the the existing design and and and bringing it into our new work. >> Okay. Regarding AC units, sorry, buildings, but uh there are two in the
front or two or so in the front of the building. >> Yeah. Is there any more to be added in this design? >> No, you don't anticipate. Okay. Thank you. >> Thanks. Do we have questions for this business?
>> So, is the um does the basement have living space in it? >> Yes. >> There bedroom are there bedrooms down there? >> No. >> No. >> And then um we may have covered this before, but the base the stairs the basement stairs on the outside they are actually encroaching on the front yard
set. Is that part of the variance? >> Yes, >> that that's part of the variance obviously. Okay. Is there a better loca, a different location that would work for them? >> It would still be that same location. If if if push came to shove, we probably
would turn it into um a conforming stairway, but just would not be as attractive. So, I'm I'm I'm asking for relief based on the idea that we're going to provide an attractive entrance. >> I'm just struggling with the attractive
description. when half the door is below grade. And if I drive by the house, all I'm going to see is the top of a door. >> Yeah. And that's why I wanted to make that point that the the doorway um to the basement is actually not at the basement floor. It's elevated a couple
feet above the basement door. So, it's kind of like a half a flight down. It's really just enough that um you know that the head of the door will match the ceiling. >> And and so I could actually tell you that we're going down one, two, seven steps,
>> four, five, six, seven, >> seven steps. >> Yeah. Um and I know I I get the understanding as why why the garage is where it is. Um but was there any consideration? I know you hate the Springfield Avenue entrance and exit. um
all that kind of stuff. But was there any serious thought given to putting building the garage on that side of the house facing Springfield Avenue other than the fact that you don't like it? >> I mean, you could move it forward and reduce the size of the driveway, make it its own separate driveway, have a yard
behind a garage, >> then you still be within the building envelope, be a onecar garage. Yeah, you would lose the deck. So, I guess there was some concern. >> I have a similar question. If I could just piggyback on that and that way we could just maybe do one. I guess my
thought uh you know is the parking. If a house with six bedrooms should have three parking spots and there are two parking spots. If you had put the garage um in the area where the current driveway is. Maybe you reconfigure the
driveway so it doesn't have that little slopey attachment to the neighbors. Just make it a straight driveway. There is room to put a twocar attached garage on that side of the house. It looks like >> correct. >> Yes. And and and have and have access to
Mr. Springfield Avenue still. >> Yep. Okay. >> Yeah. That's that's definitely something that um we did talk about and um that was something that was really dismissed by the owners because again to their point they're they're they're really
disliking the idea of having a driveway where they're it's their only backyard on this house and they would love to be able to remove the driveway and and actually have a legitimate backyard as part of the house. and um and that's why
we uh came up with the the proposal that we did. And you know there's other benefits too. We don't have all all of a sudden we're our access is not from the busy Springfield Avenue. It's now from side
street. So that should be um you know it's a plus and um uh you know designing designing for the Lindon. Uh they only do have one car. I understand that um your question about
like, you know, can we get like more parking than than than like a twocar parking, one in the garage, one in the driveway. Um I I I was we were speaking with Andrew and
he was um um suggesting not suggesting, but he was thinking that we could probably widen the way so they could handle two cars in the driveway. That's something that >> And which way would that be widened?
>> Um, >> probably towards Springfield, right? >> Um, yeah, that's what I that's what I would think in Springfield. So, this week we still have like a decor. >> Am I right with that?
I think Andrew has thought about it more than I have. >> Yeah, I did I did think about it and and that would be an answer to providing a bit more parking. So So right now the driveway is 12 ft wide. And if we move this inside line that's closest to
Springfield, another six feet, it would be 18 ft wide, which would be enough to fit two cars side by side. So it would add an extra parking space effectively. It would add about 138 square ft of coverage. uh still be well within the permitted lock coverage and also still
well under the threshold that would trigger the stormwater requirements and it wouldn't really change much else about the the profile of the you know site rating or any of those things. So that could be an option if it was a you know compelling um position for the
board. Was there any any consideration with potentially stepping the garage um back away from High Street by a foot or two versus extending it out because of the door and not having that
one large wall between the I guess it's the pantry wall and the garage wall >> to to make the pantry like less wide. So, so right now we're right now we're coming out with like a four foot addition for the pantry, right? And
you're saying like what if that addition were like three feet >> or or rather the garage No, rather the garage was >> flush. >> No, step back versus stepped out to give you that visual break on what that wall look like.
>> Yeah. So um for me um trying to design um the massing to be sympathetic with the existing it just made sense that um that the garage should come out a little bit further and and again I can I can play with that cascade of roof roofs by
doing that and get like a nice overhang over the um o over the garage doors too. Um, if we push that back, it probably it would be changing the massing of of the design and I think it would be changing it for the worse.
>> Okay. And any other considerations besides a deck of what an outdoor space might look like if it were not decking? Are are you thinking from like the French?
Excuse me a second. >> We So we have So we have a group a wall of French doors here and uh with the idea that we could have like a platform and then step down from the platform to grade. Yep. I mean, if you had something like a patio, maybe a step to a patio,
that's not completely coverage. >> Yes, there still be coverage. >> Yeah, I think um it's, you know, it's it's always nice to have something like some outdoor area that's on the level of the first floor. And it's not it's not a it's not really a big deck. We're only
coming out um about 11 ft. So, um it's like just enough to put um you know, a small chair and a small table and chairs. Yep. >> Something like that. Um so, if if if we
did something more modest, I guess it's possible. Um you know, do do we do we eliminate this wall of doors and just put a just like a a pair of French doors then? Um, so this
way we can only we only need like a six foot wide platform. I think all of a sudden we're kind of like downgrading everything. Um, if you were take a look at the the design of the this is the uh elevation um of that side of the house which which
I'm calling from viewed from the backyard which is the east side. Um you get to see the three French doors here. Um what we're doing is we're making and this is this is like a shallow overhang, but we're making an overhang to um be
inspired by the existing front porch with like a gentle arch wood posts. So we're making that as like a archway that's part of the, you know, that that that's part of the deck as as as a
design element to kind of like Mary again the the design to the um of of her proposal to the existing. So I I I I think when we scaled back on that, you know, when we scale back on
that um deck and we just turn it into like a platform with stairs going down, does does this detail even make sense anymore? >> Okay. >> So it's it's something it's something that could I guess be done. I don't know what the Lindammans think about that,
but I would >> I would hope that >> I'm not asking you to do anything. Just wondering what you considered along Yes. >> as you're designing. >> Yes. Thanks. >> Thank you, >> Ed. If they added um >> grass pavers, six six foot wide worth of
pavers to the to the asshalt driveway, would that be count? Could that count towards additional parking? >> Oh, as far as grass pavers allowing for a wider area to park? >> Yes. That's what I'm trying to think.
>> The driveways >> I think it's I think it still counts as >> still be cover but they're well under cover a lot of coverage. >> So you have room for that but you're looking at the aesthetics maybe >> right aspect >> where it's not >> 18
feet of ashalt. >> I believe they can do it. I'm just trying to make sure it doesn't create an issue. No, I don't even know if they >> would not because if it's even considered as coverage. >> Um I know some ordinances talk about not
parking on the grass parking on an improved surface. In other words, this is technically an improved surface. Okay. >> Structurally. So therefore, that shouldn't be a problem. I just want to double check my of course the ordinance, but you can keep going. I'll get back to you.
So, if there's any other questions, >> I don't think so. >> Questions or statements from the public? Seeing none. >> Okay, >> Andy, what do we have for conditions and numbers? >> Uh, so for conditions, I have first our
usual compliance with the conditions noted in the board of engineers memorandum. Uh second that the updated landscaping plan will be submitted to the city forester forester for review and approval. And the third possible condition I think we are just waiting on
an answer but I get the sense that the board is considering or kind of likes the idea of adding that additional parking area to make sure there's no uh variance associated with the parking.
Did you mention anything about the neighboring driveway? >> Oh, I I did also have a note with that as well. Um, so I know it was represented that you would work with the neighbors uh regarding the the removal of the driveway to ensure that their
driveway remains functional. So, as long as you're okay with noting that as a condition of the application, we would include that as well. >> It should not be a problem. >> Okay. If that was to be >> is that how large an area were we talking about for that?
>> I think you were talking about six feet in order to make it a width of 182. >> And the applicant agreed. The applicant agreed that >> absolutely. >> Oh, great. >> Okay. So, the applicants will add a a six foot and how are we phrasing it?
>> Six foot um turf paper tur uh reinforced turf parking area. >> Right. the pavers that allow the grass to grow through >> right >> adjacent to the proposed driveway >> R6. >> Is that acceptable? >> That's acceptable. >> Okay.
>> If I can add to that, enough to park two cars side by side. So therefore, we know the length as well. >> Okay. That's great. Thank you, Ed. >> All right. So with that, I think we should open up >> our deliberations.
Who would like to begin? I'm very concerned with that house. It's only a block or two from my house. >> And to me, it's always looked like the worst possible sighting of the house that could possibly happen on the lot. It just doesn't fit the lot. And I think the improvements you're going to do are
well well needed and I think it's going to make nothing but an improvement on the appearance of the house, appearance of the neighbors. It's a very unique house, very poorly sighted. So I think this will I completely support it with the addition of the
digital. >> Thank you, Mr. >> Um, yeah, I was kind of struggling with this one because it is a lot of variances. Um, the 8 foot, you know, offset on the side where the garage is, you know, there are a lot there's a lot
in the parking one. I think it's not just about the people living in the house now. It's about what precedent do you set for that house afterwards? who, you know, who can later move into this house and have it be functional. Um, so
I'm still, you know, I I was a little torn. I think I could I think I could lean towards towards Yes. with the addition of the parking space. I do understand the having lived on a corner lot and had the challenge of, you know,
the back where's my backyard? I do appreciate that challenge and that this is the side where you have sort of the maximum space for enjoyment that there is some some compromise here. So um I think with the parking I could I could approve >> and just clarify those turf tavers that
eliminates sparking variance doesn't it or >> it eliminates the uh dimminimous exception is the technical phrase for the RSI. >> Okay. >> Okay. Not a variance. >> Right. So they they will have parking under those standards. they will satisfy
the RSI. Okay. >> I do have one question about that though. Just the you know thinking about it the aesthetics of 12t of paved driveway and 6 feet of of >> I I mean I think it still has to I almost wonder is it going to look better
to have 18 ft of driveway than this? I don't know what the answer is. I'm just, you know, the it cuz it's just >> I was going to try to ask if that if it if it turns out that it's a better aesthetic design to just have because I think they're considering actually brick
pavers for the driveway, not pavement. >> If to have that continuous brick pavers might look better. Yes. >> Would that be acceptable as far as the condition goes? >> If I could also offer to that is that it's easier to take care of snow
on a paved surface than these grass papers. tends to beat up the turf over time. >> Okay. >> And the testimony earlier was that even to do that doesn't create any coverage variances or any need for storm water. >> 186 additional >> 38 square. >> Okay. >> So,
>> so the brick pavers I think sounds >> 6 foot brick paver parking area. >> No, the whole thing is going the whole driveway it's going to be 18 ft wide of brick pavers. >> Right. But they they are adding a 6ft brick paper parking area enough to park two cars side by side adjacent to the
proposed driveway. >> But I think just a note that it's the same material as the rest of the driveway is important so that it that has that cohesive look. >> Mr. Um,
I I also believe that looking at these individually, I could I can understand and sympathize, especially on a corner lot. I think that I too struggled with the totality of the
variances. Um, some of the architectural moves I I believe you and agree with and some of them I don't know uh that that that uh basement stair
if that somehow disappears from this design I don't think that would be the end of the world. Um, but I think your your overall approach to this project is great and I totally agree that moving the driveway
off of Springfield to give yourself a usable backyard. I think it's a very noble and reasonable request of this board and to to have the safety factor of ingress and egress from a much
quieter street makes a lot of sense to me and I I do agree that the overall architectural aesthetic is very complimentary to an incredibly beautiful house, one of the most beautiful houses on the street by far. Uh so to keep within that spirit and
keep within the spirit of our DRRO and our design guidelines is you you are to be applauded for that. So um I'll try and memory hole that's stare get past it and um support this project.
So with that can I get a motion to approve? >> So moved a second. Just can we call the role please? >> Vice chair on. Yes, >> Mr. Yuko. >> Yes, >> Mr. Nelson. >> Yes, >> Mr. Curran. >> Yes, >> Mr. Chantuli.
>> Yes, >> Mr. Nearing. >> Yes, >> Chairman Ly. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Good luck. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Is it okay if I read the res? >> Yes, please. >> We have two resolutions for memorialization tonight. First up is 475
Springfield Avenue zoning board application number ZB-25-2295. The eligible members to vote are vice chairs on Mr. Nelson, Mr. Curran, Mr. Chantuli, and Mr. Nearing. Can we get a motion to approve? >> So, so move.
>> Second. >> Vice Chair. >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson. >> Yes. >> Mr. Curran. >> Yes. >> Mr. Chantuli. >> Yes. >> Mr. Nearing. Yes. >> And next up we have 25 Essex Road. Zoning board application number
ZB-25-2293. The eligible members to vote are vice chairs on Mr. Yuko, Mr. Nelson, Mr. Curran, Mr. Chantuli, and Mr. Nearing. Can we get a motion to approve? >> Some move. >> Second. >> Vice Chair. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Yuko. >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson. >> Yes. >> Mr. Curran. >> Yes. >> Mr. Chantuli. >> Yes. >> Mr. engineering. >> Yes. >> Thank you. We have no minutes for moralization tonight. >> Can I get a motion to turn? >> Just before we do that, there's a real quick question.
>> Yes. >> When you visit these when I think I know the answer, but I just want to make sure. When you visit the properties and the people come out and want to talk to you, I always say I can't I'm not allowed to speak to you. Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> So, not about the substance of the case. >> Correct.
>> Hi, how are you? Is okay. >> Of course. >> But you feel like you can't talk to you then. I've had that. They >> don't don't accept envelopes full of cash from them. You know, >> are you going to give that one back? No. >> You can't ask if they have a dog.
>> Good question, Don. But yeah, >> I mean, I knew the answer, but >> Oh, it's good. Motion to >> second. All right. Thank you, guys.