Good evening and welcome to the January 8th, 2026 meeting of the city summit zoning board of adjustment. My name is Scott Loy and I am the zoning chair board or board chair, sorry. Please rise and join us for the pledge of allegiance. I aliance to the flag of the United
States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you. In accordance with New Jersey statute 104-10, adequate notice of this special
meeting has been provided to a newspaper record. It's been posted here in city hall. This meeting is a judicial proceeding. Any questions or comments must be limited to the issues that are relevant to what the board may legally consider in reaching a decision to quorum appropriate to a judicial hearing must be maintained at all times for the
benefit of the interested public. This meeting is being livereamed on the city's YouTube page. It's also being broadcast on Summit's government channel, which is Comcast 34 and 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. Anyone needs hearing assistance, please obtain the system at the deis and return it thereafter. Miss Sans, can you please call the role of
the members? >> Uh, yeah, we should swear members before we give it. >> All right. So, we're going to switch things up tonight because this is also our reorganization meeting for 2026. And we are lucky enough to have Mayor Fagan here tonight who's graciously agreed to
swear in our new members of the board, >> which is David. >> That's it. >> All right, that's it. >> All right, David, you're on the last seat. >> Okay, I'll ask you to raise your right hand and repeat after me. >> I >> I >> state your name. >> David Mullen. Do solemnly swear
>> Do you do solemnly swear >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey >> and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey >> and that I will bear true faith >> and that I will bear true faith >> and allegiance >> and allegiance >> to the same
>> to the same >> and to the governments established >> and to the governments established >> in the United States >> in the United States >> and in this state >> and in this state >> under the authority of the people >> under the authority of the people. I do solemnly swear >> I do solemnly swear >> that I will faithfully >> that I will faithfully
>> impartially >> impartially >> and justly >> and justly >> perform all of the duties >> perform all of the duties >> of a member of the zoning board >> of a member of the zoning board >> according to the best of my ability >> according to the best of my ability >> so help me God >> so help me God
>> congratulations >> welcome back >> welcome back Davids >> we're very happy to have you uh Miss Sans would you now like to call the role. >> Absolutely. >> Perfect. >> Mr. Curran is excused. Mr. Malay >> here. >> Mr. Mullen
>> here. >> Mr. Nelson >> here. >> Mr. Yuko >> here. >> Miss Zong >> here. >> Miss Chief is excused. Mr. Feskins >> here. >> Mr. Chantuli >> here. >> Mr. Bell is excused. Mr. Lyz >> here. >> You have a quorum. You may proceed.
>> Excellent. >> All right. Jessica, I'll let you do this part. Sure. >> Before we elect the chair for 2026, we have three resolutions that we need to act on. These are for the professionals who will serve the board in 2026. Our first professional appointment is for
our board engineer. We have Collier's engineering and representing Collier would be Miss Marie Rafé. Do we have a motion to approve this resolution? >> So moved. Thank you. >> I'll second it. >> Thank you, Mr. Lakettz. >> Yes. Mr. Malay,
>> yes. >> Mr. Mullen, >> yes. >> Mr. Nelson, >> yes. >> Mr. Yuko, >> yes. >> Miss Zan, >> yes. >> Mr. Fes, >> yes. >> Thank you. >> Congratulations. Welcome back. >> Our next resolution will be for the
professional appointment of board planner. We have Burgess Associates. And representing Burgess, we have Mr. Ed Snikis. Do we have a motion? >> So moved. >> Thank you. And a second. >> Second. Mr. Litz. >> Yes. >> Mr. Malay. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Mullen. >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson. >> Yes. >> Mr. Yuko. >> Yes. >> Miss Zan. >> Yes. >> Mr. Feskins. >> Yes. >> Thank you everyone. >> Welcome back. Ed. >> And then for our final professional appointment, we have board attorney.
That's Davidson Eastman Munos Pon represented by Mr. Andy Ball. Do we have a motion? >> So moved. >> Second. Mr. Loyets. >> Yes. >> Mr. Malay. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mullen? >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson? >> Yes. >> Mr. Yuko? >> Yes.
>> Miss Zan? >> Yes. >> Mr. Fes? >> Yes. >> Thank you all. Welcome back. >> Want me to do it or do you This is >> At this point, we will consider nominations for chair for 2026. I'd like to nominate Scott Ly to
continue serving as chair of the city zoning board of adjustment for this upcoming year. I think Scott has shown an exceptional ability to manage complex public hearings with both efficiency and partiality. He has made sure that all voices are heard and has worked to keep our discussions civil and on point. Has
a strong understanding of our land use saw and summit's local master plan and zoning ordinances to help ensure that our decisions remain legally sound and consistent with our long-term goals. So, I'm honored to nominate renominate Scott for the position of chair. >> Thank you, Tom.
>> I'll second that. >> Mr. Mle, >> yes. >> Mr. Mullen, >> yes. >> Mr. Nelson, >> yes. >> Mr. Yuko, >> yes. >> Miss Zong, >> yes. >> Mr. Fes, >> yes. >> The motion carries.
Thank you all. >> Now we will consider nominations for vice chair for 2026. >> I'd like to renominate Mamm Zan as vice chair for Summit Zoning Board of Adjustment. >> I'd second that. Absolutely. >> Great.
>> If she wants it, of course. >> Mr. Malay. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mullen? >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson? >> Yes. >> Mr. Yuko? >> Yes. >> Mr. Fes? >> Yes. Uh, Chairman Lickets. >> Yes. >> The motion carries.
>> Congratulations. >> All right. So, this part makes sense. Now, Andy Ball is the zoning board's attorney. Mr. Bal advises the board members on matters of law. It's a key interface with the applicant's attorney. Mr. Ball
does not vote on these applications. Jessica Sans is a city employee and did a great job navigating us through those nominations and our board secretary works with applicants on preparing their applications, planning our agendas and keeping our meeting minutes. The board secretary also does not vote on the
applications. Also present are experts who are hired annually and just accepted back in. So congratulations guys uh to provide input to the board tonight. We have Marie Rafé from Collier's Engineering. Also present is Ed Snikis from Burgess Associates. He's our board
planner. These experts are seated at the table to the right of the board, the public's left. They also did not vote on these applications. Our board consists of seven regular members and up to four alternates. All the members can participate in the hearings tonight, but only a maximum of seven can vote. Most applications require a simple majority
to be approved before we enter into executive session to vote on the application. You'll be advised as to how many votes are required. 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 why the variances are needed. The board experts followed by the board members may ask questions of the applicant, their attorney and their expert witnesses. Due to recent cases running excessively long, we strongly encourage applicants
and their experts to give brief and concise testimony so we met may get to as many cases as possible in any given evening. Once the board members and then the board professionals have completed their questioning, public will have an opportunity to ask questions. It's not the time to tell us what you think about
that the case. This comes at the end of the hearing. Please be careful as how you phrase your questions. They should not be proceeded with a statement about the case. Should be a direct question to the witness. Also, before you ask your questions, please clearly state your name, spell your last name, and provide your address. It's important that a
court reporter be able to keep a clear and accurate public record. After all witnesses have been heard, members of the audience have their second opportunity to speak. At that time, you may express your opinion, positive or negative, about the application. Then the public hearing is closed and we enter into executive session. The board
members discuss the case and then vote. You'll be able to listen in our executive session, but normally not be able to participate in our discussion. I ask that each applicant and their attorney, if present, come up and give a brief synopsis of the anticipated testimony tonight, including the number of witnesses and whether or not they can
finish their presentation within 30 minutes. So tonight, we're going to start with 30 RGale Avenue. Again, just come on up. give us a brief synopsis and we'll get right back to you.
>> Hi everyone, welcome back. So the first is uh Yang and it's 30 Rdale. We were here October 20th and the board had some concerns about there was an adjacent tree on the neighboring property and the board was wondering if we can move that garage back. I think we can do it in 30 minutes. I only have uh I have two
witnesses. I have my engineer and then I have my applicant and we do have a neighbor here. the neighbor who is on that subject property adjacent to it. >> Great. Okay, we will >> and then I'm here for the next one. >> Oh, for Troy 37 Webster. That's also me. That is a forgiveness application. So,
there were some things done that we didn't realize we needed permits for, but we only have um one witness unless you have questions for the applicant. I I think we can do it in 30 unless the board really wants me to go into the history of the application. >> All right, great. You're not doing the third one? >> I am not.
So, can I have a representative from 221 Blackburn, please? >> Hi. >> Hi. Welcome. >> Um, my name is Bri Grant and I live at 221 Blackburn Road with my husband, Bill. Um, we've been contemplating a substantial renovation for some time
now. Um, our house is in a great neighborhood near Franklin and we are looking to expand um upon our and enhance our first floor space and put a um addition over our garage. We've hired
Elizabeth Rush who's here with us today um to work with us on a design. So, >> okay. So, it'll be you and her as witnesses. >> Yes. And I think there's additional questions. >> Okay. Thank you so much. We'll get to you soon. All right. So, let's circle
back to 30 Rdale Avenue and begin. >> Oh, Webster was Webster was never a fun video this afternoon. So I'll introduce myself and then I'll hand out some exhibits just to make it a little bit easier. My name is Amanda Wolf of Dempsey Dempsey and Shehan in Summit. I have with me Ryan Smith. He is
an engineer from Yanukon Villa and Aldrin and he will be assisting us. So as I said before, we were here October 20th and we had our contractor Abe who was here with us. We didn't have our architect, unfortunately, but Abe was able to answer some of the questions.
Given the board's concerns about that tree on the adjacent property and whether we could move the garage back, we did retain an engineer to help us figure that out because we did want to figure out if we could comply with the board's request. Um, the board had also requested that we provide site plans
with a tree survey, cross-sections, and impervious coverage calculations, and photographs. Those are what I will be handing out as exhibits A1 and A2. Um, as you may recall, there's no garage right now. So, we are really just trying to comply with the ordinance and install this garage. And we are only looking for
two variances. There's a sideyard setback for 2.7 ft where 8t is required and then concurrently a combined sideyard setback of 29.3% whereas 33% is required. You may remember we are actually reducing the impervious coverage with this proposal because
we're cutting down some of the driveway and removed. Um so with that let me give out these exhibits. So if we can mark the it's a site plan if we can mark that. I believe it's five
sheets. We can mark this as exhibit A1. And we did try to submit it in advance of the hearing. Unfortunately, it was only nine days. So, >> are your exhibits? >> Okay. So, we have full size copies.
Pass those out too. >> Thank you. We'll take whatever full size. >> I think >> And then do you want me to hand out the
photographs or do you already have them? >> Those are printed. Those are getting handed out right now. >> Okay. larger. >> Yes. A2. >> And just for the record, Mr. Yang took those photographs in December of 2025. >> So once everybody has their plans and
whatnot, I will let Mr. Smith take it over. Um, if we could have him sworn and he will qualify himself. >> And Mr. Smith was not here last time. >> He was not. Great. >> You can 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? >> I do. >> And please state your name. Spell your last name.
>> My name is Ryan Smith. SMITH. >> Thank you. And can you briefly describe your background and experience for the board, please? >> I am a licensed land surveyor and professional engineer in the state of New Jersey. I've testified before many boards. I've been before this board before. It's been a couple of years. Uh see a few new faces, a few familiar
faces. Um I have a bachelor's degree in computer science, a bachelor's degree in surveying engineering technology, and a master's degree in environmental engineering. I've also sat on my own board in Hopakong, New Jersey. Any questions from the board or would you like to accept his credentials? >> We would. Welcome back. Thank you.
>> Please proceed. >> Okay. Uh I'm going to start on page one on the plans that you were given tonight. Um I'm sorry that they were not in a timely fashion. Uh I'm here representing 30 Ridgedale Avenue, block 4204, lot 35. That's in
the center of your page. Um it's in the R six zone. It uh contains 9912 square feet. The minimum in that zone is 6,000 square feet. So, we're well over the minimum area. The lots in this area are 60 ft wide in a 60 ft
minimum zone. We are 60t wide. The existing dwelling is being renovated and the site improvements are already under construction. The applicant is seeking variance for sideyard setback, combined sideyard setback, and for the existing driveway, which is located less than 2 ft from the property line. The addition
is for an attached garage. Of the 28 lots you see uh within 200 feet on the area map on sheet one, 27 of them are residential lots and one is a school. Of the 27 residential lots, 20 of them have
garages. Of those 20, 16 have attached garages and four are detached garages. I'm going to go ahead and switch to sheet number two. When the applicant was before this board in October, the board asked for some additional information. Uh, some of the
things you guys asked for was a topographic survey showing what was already done and what is proposed, a site plan showing all the hardscapes existing and proposed, some impervious coverage calculations, and the tree locations. My office surveyed the
property and prepared this five sheet set of plans. Uh in front of you is exhibit A1. You have the full size. Sheet two contains the topography and the trees on it. It also shows the existing dwelling. This is the >> It shows the existing dwelling here in
the center. We're showing the uh the shed that was there. has already been removed. It's in there dashed. Uh the wood ramp that was there. This shows the driveway that is still there. The hatched area is what's proposed to be removed in order to make room for the new improvements. Um we've also showed
where the original wall was along the side of the house which has been removed. It's shown in dashed on here is removed and the new wall that was constructed in line with the side of the house. So that's the existing conditions. This sheet also has uh the
steep slopes analysis with the topography on it. So we're showing in the hatched area all of the steep slopes. Um we are showing the also the uh for the proposed which is on sheet three. I overlaid the limit
of disturbance on sheet two here so we can do the steep slopes analysis of the disturbance. We will be disturbing 986 ft. The limit is 1,000. So we comply with the subduance. If everybody is okay with sheet two, I'm
going to move on to sheet three. Sheet three is the lot grading plan. We're showing the uh proposed attached garage. Here we're showing the uh proposed additional driveway which is going to fill in between where the old driveway was and the old wall which had been removed.
That's currently dirt right now, but it's going to be paved up to the new wall that has been constructed, but will be replaced with a set of stairs that are going to come down from the new vestibule. The new vestibule replaced an old porch that was on the front that was dilapidated. Uh there's going to be a
new landing and as I mentioned a set of stairs coming down to grade along that wall. Couple other improvements that the client is doing is in the backyard. The existing stairs that run down along the back of the house are going to be moved
over about 5 ft. And in doing so, we're also going to put some retaining walls. There's a steep slope running down from the patio in the backyard towards where the shed used to be. We're going to terrace that and remove some of those steep slopes and make it a nicer backyard. So, there's two proposed walls
and the new stairwells are shown here as requested by the board. And what we usually put on a lot grading plan is we have our lot coverage calculations. Uh we have the existing lot coverage which was carried over from sheet 2. The existing lot coverage on this lot was
2944 square ft. We're taking out 669 square ft. We're adding 633 ft for a net reduction of 36 square ft. The final total of the coverage will be 2908 which is 29.3% maximum in this zone is 40. So
we comply. Um because we are actually reducing coverage on this lot, we are reducing runoff. And because we're reducing some of these steep slopes, we're also reducing the velocity of the existing existing runoff. Um one of the other things on
this page that is important to notice is the zoning table which shows all of the bulk requirements including the 2.7 required sidebar. Uh the 2.7 foot setback is listed here where required is 8T. That's one of the variances.
The combined sideyard setback required is 33% of the lot width, which is 19.8 ft. We are proposing 17.1. So, we need a variance for that. And then there's the variance, as I mentioned before, for the existing concrete curb and driveway,
which is less than 2 ft. It's about a half a foot off the property line, but that's been there. Any questions about sheet three? question about runoff, I guess. Yes, since you mentioned it. >> So, where you're located in the garage,
I'm not sure how the roof's going to be pitched, but you if it's pitched uh I guess parallel to the lot line, guess that would guide storm water runoff much closer to the property line, if not on the property line. So, what remediation
measures are you designing in that structure to make sure that that runoff stays on property? Well, the uh roof leader is going to discharge to the driveway right here, which runs out to the out to the street, which is where the existing roof run the existing
runoff. If we go back to sheet two, you'll see that most of the runoff comes to the back of this driveway and runs down the driveway to the street. So, we're pretty much keeping it in kind with the existing. >> So, you're going to regrade the driveway when it's paved. So, it >> the driveway has a curb here. >> Okay, perfect. >> So, it traps the water.
>> All right. Thank you. You got >> um any other questions on sheet three? >> Um yes. >> Yes. >> There is um a generator pad on the side of the house that is not showing up on the drawing here. It looks like it's a
it looks like it's newly poured. Um or it looks like it's a generator pad. I'm not sure what it could be for. It could actually be for AC units. It could be >> I mean you don't always put AC units on concrete. Usually put a generator on concrete. So, >> may I see what you're referring to because it was not there when we did the
survey in the center. >> Am I allowed to show the >> This came up before you just asked if you could see. Well, there's a there's a concrete pad on the side of the house. Not the driveway side, the opposite side of the house.
>> So, that's Sorry, that's for the Does >> he need to be sworn? No, Mr. Yang has already sworn previously, so he remains under. >> Yes, go ahead and just please be sure to speak into the microphone. >> And I apologize there wasn't on under
drawing the the contractor a ped concrete slab two days ago. It it is for the stabilities of the condenser for the AC units which per our HVAC contractor that it's
better using a a concrete slab versus just just putting that on on the soil. >> Okay. So, that changes the the coverage a little bit. Your lot coverage, it's probably 3 ft by 8 ft. I'm just guessing from my picture, it could be it could
be, you know, somewhere in that range. As as long as we're talking about that, I was down at the site today and I noticed that it looked like there was a um service entrance for a duckless heating and cooling system on the driveway side
today. There's two white it. To me, it looks like it's for a duckless air conditioning system. It'll be right where the garage is going to be. Either it's in front of the garage or in the garage. >> Oh, the vents that >> the pipe work. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And then that's that's in front of the
garage. Why don't you come up? >> To to my best knowledge, it's it's probably in front of the garage. >> So So it's going to be in the driveway in front of the garage. So it's going to narrow your garage opening. >> It's going to make your driveway
narrower. I I don't think at least on my nonprofessional opinion it's it's not wide enough to actually cause any sort of difference to the to the opening of the garage. But
>> but the pipe what your question I'm just under I wanted to make sure I'm understanding it is those pipes look like they're actually going to be discharging into the garage. That's that's is that >> based on the layout here. >> Yes. According to the statement just made, it's going to be in front of the
garage. >> It can't be. >> I don't know. It's hard for me to gauge. >> Not from the um >> Yeah, it's really a few feet off from the door. Maybe four feet off, five feet. >> Well, condenser can't be in the garage.
>> Well, yeah, this is some kind of discharge pipe. >> It looks like it's for duckless, you know? It's the the pipe >> like an exhaust pipe. >> I have like a hydra vent. condenser unit cannot be inside an enclosed garage. >> Well, you can you
you can exhaust through the garage, not into the garage. >> Just some It's just a question. I should have took a picture, but I didn't carry my phone with me. >> My wife gets very mad at me for not carrying. >> What is it?
For what? >> I'm sorry. Trying to figure out that. >> Yeah, I I found it very unusual that you would just stall that if you want to build a garage there. >> That's got to come out. >> It's going to be in the way. >> That's got to come out. That's going to be in the way of the garage. That's got to come out. >> Okay.
>> And that could be that could be moved. >> That's going to have to be relocated. >> Sounds like it's going to be >> Okay. I just curious. >> What is it for? It's for the heat pit. >> It's a duckless It's a duckless heat cooling system for the HVAC.
>> And just just one follow-up question for the applicant. I know we had a rough estimate of a 3x8 concrete pad. Does that sound accurate >> for an AC unit? That's way too big. >> It might be I >> It could be 3x6. >> It could be two units.
>> Two by Yeah, they looks like two units. They're two units. >> It's two units. >> Yeah. >> Okay. In my professional opinion, um, a typical one unit sits on a 3x3 pad. If you had two next to each other, 3x 8 would be correct because you'd have a two foot gap between the two of them. So
3T 8 would be 24 ft of coverage, which would change our coverage reduction from 36 to 12. >> Great. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Shall we? >> Yes. Good. Sorry. Got it. Okay. Sheet
four. Um, this is the one I like to blow over really quick because it's just soil erosion and sediment control detail sheet. We have to have this in order to apply for soil erosion sediment control. Sheet five was for a special request from the board. We don't normally do
>> ask a question before we get to sheet five. Absolutely. >> Just looking at the limit of disturbance. >> Um >> why is like the driveway area and all of that not in the area of disturbance and like is the limit of it's that speckled
area. Is that the limit of what? How do we Oh, never mind. It's this whole like >> the whole limit of disturbance runs around here. >> Okay. All right. >> So that's and and if you look back to sheet two, you'll see the entire delimmited disturbance. This particular
detail is deceiving. It's called a decompaction standard. When you do disturbance, you're required to restore that by doing tillillage down to 6 in. The areas that are exempt are areas within 20 ft of a foundation. And anything underneath heartscapes, you
wouldn't till that. >> Okay. >> So, what you're seeing is the actual cutout of that 20 ft. So, anything in this area, so the hatched areas are the areas that need to be restored. Okay. >> Thank you. So, back to sheet five. Uh, the board
requested that we do some cross-sections of the property so you can see what it looks like. Uh, from the front of the property to the back of the property. It, uh, again, it slopes upward. Um, you can see the crosssections where this one runs along the driveway through the shed
recently removed and then it slopes up steeper into the backyard. The, uh, second crosssection, we did these every, I think it was 12 1/2 ft. We did split it even across the lot. This one actually goes through the existing dwelling and you can see where the PA patio in the backyard is. You can
see the wall in the front yard, the steepness of the front yard running up to where the vestibule used to be or the porch used to be and where the vestibule's going. Um, another one very similar cuz it's only a few feet over. And then the last one runs up the sideyard where the house isn't. So, we showed the steepness of the lot. I think
a better perspective for this was probably the topographic plan on sheet two, which shows the steep slopes. That's probably a better indication of where the lot's steep, where the lot's not steep. Any questions for sheet five?
>> Thank you. If not, I'd like to go back to sheet three to discuss a few of the items on uh the punch list here. Okay. During the previous meeting, I was aware that there were some discussions about alternative locations of the garage. Again, the proposed garage is
right here, and there was a question as to why we couldn't move the garage back to where the existing shed was. Um, there is just off the property, probably about 3 3 and 1/2 ft from the old shed, a very large maple, a 36-in maple tree,
Norway maple, that uh actually in the review letters, John Linson, your forester, mentioned that tree. And um his notes actually said, and I'm going to read it straight from the uh report, that is the best location for the garage. to place it further back on the
property would damage the root system of the ne the neighbors Norway maple in my professional opinion. A shed has a very minimal foundation. It's probably not damaging that tree. It's probably interfering with that tree's root system, but it's not damaging it all that much. The tree was there. The shed
was placed on the ground. The tree had to deal with it. Similar situation to the shed that's next door. If we were to place a garage here, a garage has a substantial foundation. We had to dig that out and destroy those roots. It would kill that tree. That's a bad location for this for us to move it
back. If we wanted to move it back even further to try to get it past the drip line of this tree, we'd be disturbing be disturbing a lot of steep slopes and we'd be adding a lot of imperous coverage. Not exactly the best situation. In my professional opinion,
this is probably the most ideal place for it because it also adds something to this property a lot of the times. And I'm not going to knock any architects if they're in the audience. Architects like to show off their wares. So they'll have a tendency to place things as far
forward on the lot as possible. Gives us a nice street view. By moving things back from the front broken line, I think you might even have it in your ordinance. If you don't, it should be coming soon. By moving this line back from the front line of the house, it reduces the impact on the streetscape.
So you're adding a garage here, but you're not adding a garage in everybody's face. you're backing it up. So, that's that's one of the advantages of having it here. In addition to the fact that there's already an entrance right there. I mean, obviously, we could move it three or four feet forward, five
or six feet back. This is probably the best location for it as is. So, I'm going to sum up a little bit some of the advantages of having it where it is. Um, by putting it here where the architect had located it, we're avoiding dam damaging the
neighbor's tree. We're reducing lot coverage, which reduces storm water runoff. And because it's set front back from the front view of the house, we're reducing the impact on the street view. And we are providing a garage as required by Summit Ordinance 35-14.2F.
In my professional opinion, these variances can be granted without substantial different detriment to the public good and will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the summit zoning plan and ordinance. >> Okay, that concludes my testimony. >> Thank you, Mr. >> Yes. board professionals, what questions
do you have for this witness? Um, >> was there any um what's going on with the um the front retaining wall? Could you talk about the height on that in the front yard? >> The height on the front yard, as we're showing on the plan here, is going to be four feet high at one end. Okay. >> And as it comes up here to where the new
landing comes, it's going to start to taper down to zero as the steps come down. I know you didn't have a chance to review it, Marie. Thank you for indulging us. >> I I did review and I um I actually u left a message with them to kind of go
over some things. Um and it seems like you responded to most of my most of my uh comments. Um I I know at the last meeting we had talked about the possibility um of of maybe putting a little more buffer
between the driveway and the the property line on the side. Um the ordinance calls for two feet. Is there any thought on um moving the the driveway over since you are redoing the driveway? >> Well, we weren't really planning on pulling this curb and digging it out. And one of the reasons is, and you'll
see this further on in the testimony when you get through the uh pictures, the neighbor who is here tonight has a substantial hedge line right along here that provides an existing buffer. If we rip that out, we're probably going to do a little bit of damage to those shrubs, and I'd rather not do that. If it's the
board's wish, we will move that driveway over, but I think it would do more damage than good. Um, so I I recognize that you're um only disturbing 986 square feet of steep slopes and that is less than the 1,00
square ft. Um, but it is close. And so I I'm just going to put that on the record that if you go over 1,000 square feet, that's going to be a variance that would be required. >> We do understand that. And when I did this, I was actually a little generous with the grading around it just to make sure because if we put it right at the
limit and we were going to be close, I was going to say, "No, we need to go for that variance, too." But because we were so far under, I said, "Let's blow this limit out a little bit just in case you get a little overzealous." And I blew it out a little bit and we're still under. So that's where we are here. >> All right. Thank you.
>> Um, so we were talking before about the AC unit, the pad that's on the side of the house um opposite from where the driveway is. Um is there any screening that's proposed around that? >> If that's the wish of the board, I would
suggest that we probably revise the plan to show the new AC unit pad and AC units with the screening as required by ordinance. >> Okay. Thank you. Um we had talked um at the last meeting, I don't know if the board still um is
considering this um that the possibility of of maintaining jurisdiction over storm water for the next um two years after certificate of occupancy. That would be up to the to the board to discuss that based on on these new plans. So I'll just remind the board you
might want to consider that and um I think that's all I have on this. >> Do we still have an appetite for that? >> Y >> Mr. Just a few questions. Uh Mr. prefer to ask one of my questions regarding the uh AC units, but regarding this
staircase that comes out the front, can you just explain the lines that I'm seeing in the walkway? That's those aren't steps themselves. That's actually just concrete. >> Um, >> I'm going to go ahead and point at it over here, but I'm not sure if you can see it from here.
>> Um, if you're coming down from the house, you're going to step into the proposed vestibule. Once you walk out from the proposed vestibule, you'll be on a proposed landing and you'll be walking down some raised stairs >> that are not at grade. When you come down to this landing here, you will be even with the top of the wall and then
cut into the wall are stairs going down the side there. There will obviously have to be a barrier along that a railing. >> That's what I figured. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Which will be filed for when we when they file for construction permits for that wall. >> So, the width of the wall really isn't shown in that instance. It's really
going to be built into that walkway. >> Exactly. >> Right. Okay. But you will provide a railing. Okay. Thank you. Um will someone be offering the photographs for discussion? Um because I see that you have the shrub material along that side.
It does. Does it actually extend beyond the garage that's proposed in your understanding of the photograph? >> In my understanding of the photographs, what I'm looking at there, yes, it I believe the shrubs actually go back to about here. >> Okay. I just wanted to confirm that. >> Yeah, they definitely don't go all the
way back to the neighbor's shed or to our shed, but they they are further back than where the proposed garage is. >> Okay. And that still that 2.7 ft is available for pedestrian access to the back. >> It is it's a little tight, but I suspect that most people going into the back will be going up the stairs and then
walking around this way if they were not to go through the house. >> But it is about 30 inches in that area. Yes. Clear. >> Okay. >> All right. Thank you. No question. >> Thanks, Ed. Scott. >> Yes. Or what questions do you have? >> One question. Um, so the the revised
plans tonight might end up being two or three questions. Sorry. The revised plans tonight have have or have not been reviewed by all the professionals. >> I I have reviewed them. There was there was no um official letter that was issued, but I have reviewed them.
>> Okay. And and do you agree with their numbers for the revised variances the two variances they're asking for? >> Okay. Yes. I don't want to speak. They really haven't changed this design. >> There's actually three. >> Yeah. >> The actual three. Yeah. The driveway. Right.
>> So, the two that are noted for the bulk table, uh I would agree with them. There's 2.7 and then the combined sideyard uh requirement. >> Okay. >> And and the driveway, >> right? >> Okay. Uh that's all I had. Thanks. >> If you thought that they changed a
little bit, they did. It was it was 3.0 to 2.7. So, it was a very minimal change, but there was a slight change. And the sideyard setback went from well percentages or feet. I mean I think it's 29. It was 29.16. It's now 28.5. >> Ed, would you agree with that? Is that
if you were going to put a percentage on the sideyard? >> I thought I heard 29.3. >> Yeah, it was 29.3. >> I can't do math. >> 29.3. >> Can Can I just confirm the setback for the driveway? Is it at zero or is there a
>> 2.7 feet, I believe? >> No, the driveway. >> I'm sorry. Yeah. >> Yeah. We when I when I surveyed it, it was actually half a foot clear. 0.5 ft, which you can see on here. So, between the back of the curb, which is the neighbor's side of the curb, and the property line is is a half a foot. 0.5
ft. >> Um, I just one question. Um, unless I think of another one, too. So with the all the duct work already done in the house and the exhaust um kind of set was there any consider I
mean I know maybe that you didn't know about that but um given that would you consider moving the drive the garage back to line up with the back of the house because I think that that would allow you to still use the door which I think was one of the homeowner's goals
was to have the garage connected to the house and not have to change that other exterior duct work. It seems like if you just pushed and it would sort of benefit that not being forward facing on the street and be a little bit further from most of the house next door too.
>> I would have to be very careful of that because remember we're right at the limit of where we're still a net decrease. If we move this back, there's going to be additional driveway here in front of it because we're taking up more. So that would now become a net increase in lot coverage. Um, if we did that, then we might have to do storm
water mitigation. Marie, I'm not sure what the limit is in Summit. Is it 400 ft? >> 300. >> It's 300 square feet. So, we could, if we move that back, we are entitled to have another 312 square ft before we would have to put a dry well in. I would
prefer not to increase it at all. That's my personal opinion. I think that reducing it is probably the best situation here. What would you say is the extent of the root system for that for the neighbor's tree? >> For that neighbor's tree, it it's difficult to say where the actual roots
are. A general rule of thumb that most foresters use is the drip line and that kind of varies depending on the kind of the tree. Like everybody knows that a tulip tree is very stick straight and has a very small tuft on the top. It has a very long tap route. >> Would you say that this drawing is an
accurate representation of the drip line? I would say that it's a conservative estimate of the drip line. >> Okay, >> Miriam, it sounds like garage is not going to move. >> Yeah, I mean it doesn't look like moving
it back would be in the drip line. If you put line it up at the back of the house, it wouldn't be, but I'm I'm asking because I think that >> it triggers coverage issues for >> it might cover trip. It might it might not. Right. So, how much what's the
scale on this? one in 20 and the garage is how wide? It probably it probably wouldn't even um because we're already at 12 ft reduced and I don't I I don't think it would be
I'm just I'm suggesting it because it might actually benefit the homeowner too to not have to redo some of that dust work. >> Well, if we if we move because there's basically 14.2 two feet wide here >> and we're going to take away a half a foot for the space that's already there
for the that's already grass. So 13.7 feet for every foot foot we move back we're adding 13.7 ft of coverage. >> So in theory yes we could move it back. >> I would defer to my client as to whether he wishes that to be so though. >> Okay.
>> That would be about 20 ft back. moving about 20 ft. >> 20 times >> maybe or it could be less than 20. I'm just looking at where the >> I think you have the scale wrong. I think it's 1 in equals 10. >> Oh, 1 in equals 10. Oh, so it's even less. FT back. >> Okay. So, you could Yeah, you have I
think you have the SP you have the without triggering coverage, but it's just and it looks like it's not in the drip line just you know a thought because of the the exhaust there. But that would change the numbers again, which is why I asked because
otherwise you might come back and ask to move it or something. Yeah. >> Don. >> Yeah. I just have a couple of questions. Um I'm a little concerned that you as their professional um didn't know about these air
conditioning things, which kind of leads me to believe if there were building plans submitted, were those air conditioners included in the building plans? I'm assuming they were >> they were not included in any documentation that I received. >> I'm sure you I'm wondering the city got
them because >> that would be a question for my client. I understand where you're going down. Thank you. >> And then my other question is um looking at this picture of the backyard and that's all debris pile of soil removed from somewhere. I don't page um elevation all the way to
the back of the fence is what it says. You see the same picture took? It's got the PVC pipes there. >> PVC pipes and stuff. That's >> So that's going to be removed, I would assume. Right. >> Yes. That's where the old shed was. >> Yeah. So >> that's where they put the construction debris. >> It looks like there's a pretty big slope between their property, your client's
property, and the neighbor's property. >> And there is there's a bit of a drop off right here as soon as you get to the edge. >> Water we plan anything to plan to keep the water from running down that way? Again, the water really kind of runs front to back >> because it's steeper this way than it is that way. >> You would think so based on the
topography of of what we're looking at, but once things are graded and this is gone, there's like no burm, there's no curb, there's nothing to prevent water from running that way other than the >> You're absolutely correct. >> But in the existing condition, there was a shed there that was dumping water
there. >> Yeah. >> And now there's not. >> So, we're actually reducing >> water running that way. >> Oh. I guess now that you say that because what happens at the back of the garage? How what are we doing? If you're saying the water is running sort of towards the street that you just said that, but now it's not because now you
have a garage blocking it. So where is the water going? The runoff. >> If you would prefer, we could put a burm along this side to ensure that the water stays on our property. >> I make could make you can make that a condition and I will revise the plans to match that. >> I would of course defer to my client as to whether he wants to do that. >> Planting BM if you want to call it that.
plant trees. >> But I don't think that's resolves then for the homeowner what happens with the storm water that's coming from the back to the garage. Like where is that going? >> True. >> That's going to run between the garage and whatever berm we put there. >> But there's only 2.7 ft. So how big is
going to be? >> It's very tight. >> What other questions do we have for this witness? Seeing none. Any questions? Questions only from the public for this witness. >> Miss Wolf.
>> Excellent. I will call Mr. Yang. >> And let's mark the pictures that you already have now as two just formally and then Mr. Yang can explain them. Mr. Yang, you understand that you remain under oath, correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. And let me actually hand out one
other exhibit. And Mr. Yang, can you just while I'm handing this out, I'm going to actually give out a letter from one of your doctors. Could you just explain the genesis of it and why we're submitting it? >> And we'll just mark that as A3.
>> The the letter came from VA, Veterans Administrations. I am a service connected uh veterans. And with that uh I have I injure my lower back while I was in the service and that led to a
spine in spine surgeries back in 2020. And despite the surgeries, I still sustain a permanent nerve damage on my left foot. I think I have >> and a condition called foot drop >> which I cannot lift the I cannot lift um
lift out my my foot and that uh cause me to be more prone to to twisting my ankles and and tripping whenever and let's say if I step on uneven surface or if surface with wet or
icy or or snow covered roads and that's why having a covered connected garage on my driveway will help mitigate my mobility limitations and I appreciate uh board's understanding and I also wanted
to address the one of the questions on the air conditionings. We do have a uh it is a separate contractor and and the plan is fully filed with the town and after the contractor poured the concrete
slab and once the condenser is condensers are installed there will be an inspections and and and signed off. >> Yeah. My my concern was the one that's in the driveway. There's there's a unit that's going to be in your driveway. I don't.
>> It's you. You said it was an eight uh heat duct system, which is Isn't that Isn't that a duckless system? >> It's a pipe that's on the driveway. I can show you the picture, but it's not an actual unit. >> But will there be a unit attached to it
that provides heating and cooling, >> right? But the the units will be on the opposite side of the house. >> So, >> I'll take your word for it. I don't I don't know if we're on the same page. Yeah, that's my understanding.
>> Oh, and Mr. Gang, if you just wanted to go through some of the photographs, if you could just describe them to the board. >> Sure. So, the first pictures here shows the shrub that's in between my uh my property and the neighbors.
And same thing on the on the second picture showing the same showing the same um images but on a much more and broader scale. And the the the third picture shows the distance between
my driveway and the neighbor's house just to see there's um roughly 10 ft of of distance. Would you say that the temporary storage cube approximates the location of the new
garage? >> Is it sort of the same area or no? >> Right. >> It's a little forward >> to my >> Yes. to Yes. >> Yes. >> That's the door. So, it's >> Yeah, it's it's approximately the the
the locations. Thank you. >> And then moving on, page four show is just a a visual view of the elevations going to the back. I know it's probably much better with the engineers drawing and also the the mapel
trees approximate locations of the maple trees in the backyard. And then uh page five shows similar visuals question. Sorry. >> Go ahead. >> I wanted to sort of take a deeper dive
into your conversations with your neighbor regarding location. >> The neighbor's actually here. So I want to ask the neighbor directly. >> This is here. >> Well, we are a quasi judicial proceeding but certainly asking the neighbor directly is preferable.
>> Okay. Thank you. Uh before we do that, let's just make sure our board professionals have any questions for this witness. >> Okay, Mr. Okay, >> before we talk to the neighbor, any questions from the board?
>> I have one. Um just because you know it's the second time I've been out to the site and the last time I noticed all you know noted all the debris and I do think that we have an ordinance about um sort of keeping the work site tidy.
There is an awful lot of debris all around the property that really probably needs to be removed to be in conformance with the with the DRRO. I think um I think it's chapter 15 um that addresses that. But um that I
think the property needs to get cleaned up. >> There's a lot of lot of trash everywhere and I think for the neighbors sake too that it's not blowing into their yards. >> Got it. Noted. Yeah. I I'll make sure to to get that cleaned up.
>> And just there's just one real quick question. So by So in the front yard, there are no stairs directly down to the driveway. You have to go out to the street. >> Does that make sense? >> Well, there are no stairs right now. >> Well, no. I I >> there were
>> I get that. But in the in the new building and when you're done, if I come out the front door, I go to the proposed landing down the steps and I have to turn right and go directly to the street. I can't go straight to the driveway. >> That's right. >> Okay. >> Can we hear the neighbor now or do we have to wait?
>> Yeah. >> Okay. Great. If you want to bring up the neighbor and we'll have her I don't think so. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Gang, would you >> just for the record, this isn't Edward Yang? And if you could just give us your your name and address.
>> Okay. Uh my name is Edward Yang, Y A N G. And uh I own and reside at 32 Richdale Avenue. >> And I'll just swear you in if you could raise your right hand. Do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matter? Is the truth the whole nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Thank you. you can go ahead and tell them about
your conversation about your preferences for the garage and all that. >> Yeah, absolutely. So, um I've purchased my wife and I purchased the home three years ago approximately in March 2023. Uh and and we're super excited to be residents of of Summit. Um I have an
attached garage. The neighbors across the street have attached garages. The neighbor on the other side of my house um who is Mr. Steiner has an attached garage. Uh and so we recognize the value of having that uh available. Um we also have topological challenges on our
property as well. It's extremely sloped downwards. Our shed is on bricks as you could imagine to be, you know, to make sure that it's level. And so we also understand that there are a lot of challenges in in building a garage anywhere else than than that's currently being proposed. And lastly, uh and kind of like
importantly, one of the reasons that we're so we love our home is is the giant trees on our property. It provides a lot of shade, a lot of cooling in the hot summers, and it really keeps things like the electricity bill down, and it makes sure that we can enjoy that space in the backyard where we're able to, you know, get out and and we have a young
child who's able to play out there in the shade without having to worry about the sun and the heat constantly. So, really overall, like, you know, in my personal opinion and my wife's opinion, this is the best it can be. Um, we had a a long conversation with with Jay and and we're really excited to be neighbors
and and overall really supportive of of this proposal. Um, we do have one tiny ask if if I may for the board which is uh I think it's already mentioned is retaining that storm water jurisdiction for for two years. Um, just to make sure that you know it's it's heavily a lot of
downward sloping. We just want to make sure there's no flooding in anyone's basements. >> Great. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> U is board any questions for this one? >> Mr. Yang, just given the location where the garage is proposed. I noticed I was on property earlier this evening and you know clearly there's going to be some
massing much closer to the windows on the side of your property. Just want to confirm that you're okay with that. >> Yep. We have uh we have shrubs and then we also also have additional kind of landscaping there as well. Um and you know I continue to maintain that as well. >> Thank you. >> Just one question for you. Would you
prefer if the garage were shifted back? Do you have any preference as to the location that the board suggested? >> I I think what what uh is is presented here is what was shared with me and I think that's the best uh spot for it today. Um the door is there. Everything's there and obviously you
know it's the least amount of work for for Jay and and his team. >> Great. Thank you so much. >> Any other questions? No. Okay. No. Thank you so much. Great. >> So those are all my witnesses. >> Okay. Um, in quick summary, I think
you'll understand that the applicant is just trying to construct a garage that is ultimately required by this ordinance. We did seriously consider the board suggestions and recommendations and we hired another professional to help us out with that. And ultimately, we included in testimony that the
location is probably the best location given the flows and the drainage and the other concerns that would be associated with moving that garage back along the street. So, we would respectfully request that you approve this application. >> Great. Thank you. And uh before we hear
conditions, number of votes, I'll just check and see. Is there any other comments from the public for this application? Seeing none. All right, Mr. Ball, what do we have for conditions and how many votes to approve? >> Sure. So, number of votes we need for a
majority uh because only C variances are involved here and I have three conditions noted. First is our usual compliance with the conditions noted in the board engineers memorandum. Uh second is that the plan shall be revised to reflect the location of the air conditioning units and that they will be screened. And the third condition as we
had just discussed was that the board shall maintain storm water jurisdiction for a period of two years after the completion of construction. >> I believe we also have to install the railing along the wall for safety purposes and there was discussion about the burm along the side of the property
line. The railing is required as per >> required by code >> building code. So I don't um and then there's the duct work that has to be moved that can't exhaust into the garage. >> That should be covered under building code >> except it's not on the plan. So just
hopefully it'll be the problem is I'd like to note that that's on the plan. So I think we need to So it's not shown anywhere just like the air conditioners aren't shown on the plan. So it needs to I feel like it needs to be part of the record that it's there. just request. >> I assume there's no objection to it that
the duct work will not exhaust into the garage. >> I trust that's fine. >> Okay. >> And so I guess let's hear from the board. What are your thoughts on the potential burm? I know there was some discussion of that. >> I mean the retention of storm water
jurisdiction and clearly Mr. Yang is concerned with it as well. You know, I I could take it or leave it. there's going to be an avenue of recourse for him if it becomes an issue. But sounds like the two neighbors are are talking and seem
to be getting along. So, I don't know if it's a necessity. It certainly is a nice thing, though. >> Yeah, I could live with that. >> I I don't think it's actually it it might not be functional because there's such a limited space to build a burm. I'm not sure it's actually it's like something that you say, but then when it
comes down to constructing it, I'm not sure that there's the space to do it and leave space for storm water to get by. So, it's almost like grading that maybe if you're grading there, maybe you grade it so that it's not running off. I don't know about a BM.
>> Leave it out for now. Well, the risk the risk that they may run though is if it becomes a problem in the future. >> You might have to put in some far more sophisticated solution to deal with it. And there might be excavation involved and
demolition, but I mean that's a that's a risk I think the applicant's undertaking. >> And then the access to the backyard, you only got 2.7 feet on one side and a 4ft wall around the rest. >> Yeah. So it might it might >> I may be speaking out of turn here, but
it might be beneficial to do it now as opposed to later. But that's >> Well, Marie, is there um an alternative you could think of like, you know, a trench drain or something that might actually allow you to pass by because >> we just add a condition saying that the
civil engineer will study this specific condition on the the the lot line and determine the best course of ensuring that what the runoff will be minimized into the neighbor's yard, whatever. >> Are so are you looking to say that that
would be a condition that if there was a problem within the next two years that they would have to do something or are you requesting? >> I think he should look at it now and just whatever professional uses best judgment and >> when they submit final plans to you just >> so the condition is that there will be
some type of storm water management. Well, it could be grading, it could be a trench drain, it could be a burm. It's >> he's got to propose a solution to you. >> So, usually we would have something along the lines of the engineer would review and propose any potential changes
for storm water management in that area with the board engineer for review and approval. >> Can we do that? >> Yeah. >> My only concern with that is we're not submitting a storm water management plan, I don't believe. >> No, we're not. not a formal storm water management plan necessarily, but I just think some
indication of if it's determined that a trench drain or grading would help that, you know, situation that, you know, a rough kind of plan and discussion be had with the board engineer for that possible >> or perhaps the Yeah, the condition could
be it that it needs to some kind of um plan for managing the storm water runoff on that side has to be presented for review and it keep keep it by the engineer just if if that's I don't know because that there's I think there's something that's going to be required
there because of the drop off because you're funneling all the water into a really small place and it drops off onto the neighbor's property. So something is something's going to have to be done to not if you're not trying to impact the neighbor probably. >> If you would prefer I can propose a French drain run along that line and run
a pipe down and discharge it under the driveway. I think that is uh >> is that I we don't need to figure that out here. Yeah. >> So you can work that out with Mr. Rafet. >> So council I assume then no objection to including that as a condition. >> Okay.
>> Great. Great. >> Guys took a lot of steam out of our executive session. All right. So who would like to begin? >> I can start. Um, give it to David. >> Oh, no. All right, fine. First off,
>> I forgot there was a new guy. Go ahead. Go. >> All right. My general uh viewpoint is if Mr. Yang's okay, I'm okay here. Um, you know, if we look at the positive criteria, the functionality of the property is
improved. It's certainly a uh an attached garage is bringing the property closer to the standard and custom of similarly situated houses in our town. Um given that the neighbor isn't objecting, there's they're they're going
to be addressing the storm water aspect. I don't really see any negatives here. Um, as far as the issues in terms of the construction code are concerned, uh, the construction officials I think are are more than adequately equipped to handle
it, at least if my experience doing construction and on my house is any, uh, any information on that regard. So, I can support this application. >> Thank you, Mr. Mullen. >> I'll David said it very well. I'll just add that um, I think this is the best location for the garage. I appreciate
the efforts to preserve that tree. that was a concern of mine at the first hearing. Um, and I'm happy we're retaining stormwater jurisdiction for two years. So, I I can support the application as well. >> I was just going to say it was this is a difficult lot to work with and uh as our
cohort said here, you know, the positives definitely outweigh the negatives and I think this is something that I can support. >> Yeah. I also um appreciate the additional detail that was provided today. Um, when you were here in October, there were no stairs in the
front of the house and nothing on the plan, which really made it challenging to figure out how somebody would access the property, emergency services, any. So, you know, the seeing the the plan laid out with the stairs um
helps too. And um yeah, I can support this. >> Mr. Chairman, before Mr. Nelson, >> and I wanted to thank you for your service. When I saw this letter, I was like, uh oh, I got some private information was in there, too. >> Somebody miss me. >> Mr. Ball, I wanted him to know that it
was coming and that we weren't violating HIPPA or anything. >> Okay. But thank you for your service. I appreciate it. >> Thank you. Yes. >> Yes. Thank you so much. And I also want to thank the applicant uh for listening to the board and hearing our our comments. Last session, we reviewed this
application and and providing additional drawings and giving us further detail and explanation as to your proposed solutions to our concerns. So, thank you for that. Can I get a motion to approve? >> Some move.
>> Second, >> Miss Sance. >> Mr. Mle. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mullen? >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson? >> Yes. >> Mr. Yuko? >> Yes. Vice Chair Zon. >> Yes. >> Mr. Feskins. >> Yes. >> Chairman Lett. >> Yes.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. Good luck. >> Thank you for your time. >> All right. Miss Wolf, you're not going very far. >> Not going very far. Got to grab my bag. >> Okay. >> Yeah. That's his letter. >> That's the VA.
>> What's wrong? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah, it is. But you don't want it floating around. >> It is. It's on the website. >> Yep. It's public record. Hi again. I'm still Amanda Wolf, but this time I am representing Miss Uno
Troy at 37 Webster Avenue. We are seeking variance relief. We we started a project in 2008. We did get some approvals for it. There's a decently long history here, so I won't bore you ter too terribly much, but in short, there are really three issues. There's a
deck that was expanded beyond what was permitted. There's a driveway that we believe was approved. I do have an approval document, but it just says driveway. So, I'm not clear exactly what was approved with the driveway. So, we're just coming in to make sure that everything's approved with the driveway.
We also have a building coverage exceedence, and we exceed the building coverage by 123 square feet, which is mostly associated with that deck that was expanded without permits. That's about 131 square feet. So, as I mentioned, we in 2008, we uh saw and
obtained a building permit for an addition and renovation that was constructed for the most part. And then in 2009, the applicant obtained a building permit to resurface the driveway. And then we kind of didn't have anything happening for a while. And
then in 2024, October specifically, the applicant received a letter advising that she had received a notice of violation for doing work without a grading permit because there was an excess of 600 square ft of land disturbance. So then almost every other week going forward, the applicant and
Mr. Clark, who is seated to my right, went back and forth with the engineering department to figure out how to address these concerns. Um, ironically, in February of 2025, we did receive a certificate for approval. Again, it just said driveway, so I'm not
confident what that was for. But then subsequent from that, we submitted an engineering permit. We went back and forth and added a dry well, and Mr. Clark worked with the engineering department to do that. But ultimately, we were denied because of these non-conforming conditions associated
with the deck and um the coverage. So, I'm kind of skipping ahead all the way to June of 2025. That was our last kind of communication back and forth, and there was a do denial indicating that work was done without a permit for a deck, patio, and driveway. Uh, the
zoning officer also noted the deck was constructed within the setback and was being expanded. The brick paver patios from the setback and that the driveway with needed to be accurately measured. So, we did file this application to obtain those necessary approvals. So
tonight we're really looking for a variance for the rear yard setback of 23.3 ft to the deck whereas 30 ft is required for a rear yard setback of 2.0 ft to the patio whereas the rear yard setback is 15 ft required. Both variants
for the building coverage of 22.1% whereas 20% is required and then both variants really for the existing non-conforming sideyard setback of 7.1 ft where 8t is required. So, with that, I will turn this over to Andrew Clark, and I would ask that he be sworn.
>> Before you do that, Miss Wolf, just to confirm, all these uh improvements made to the property were done with the current owner. None of them were inherited, right? >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Correct. >> All right. Thank you. >> Sure. >> All right. Do you swear affirm the
testimony you're about to give in this matter? Is the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? >> I do. And please state your name, spell your last name. >> Andrew Clark. C L A R K E. >> Thank you. And you've appeared before us a number of times, including very recently. Any changes to your credentials since the last time you were here? >> No changes.
>> I imagine the board would like to accept you back once again. >> Welcome back, Mr. Clark. Please proceed. >> Thank you. Uh, I'm just going to make reference first just to sort of give an overview of what what we have here. Uh, I don't have my easel, but this will be
fine. Um, so I produced uh two different drawings for this project and I first got was first contacted by Miss Troy in uh late 2024. Uh, engineering had come out and issued
a notice of violation indicating that they had conducted some disturbance that was an excess of what's required for an engineering permit. Um, I was contacted a little bit confused because I went out and I said, "Well, I'm not sure. There's not really much work going on." So, I
basically did an asbuilt, like a topographic survey of the property, showing here's what's there. Submitted that. Had a little back and forth with engineering. They said, "Okay, but you know, there some of this is beyond what the old permits were for." So, I
tabulated the coverages, all the zoning, and then they said, "Okay, this looks fine, but show us where the roof leaders are going." and then uh put together a grading plan because we need some storm water management. The the coverage seems to have increased above what our records show from that older project in uh 2008
2009. So I dug into that produced the grading plan. Uh in essence the survey which you guys have is on the 11 by17 sheet uh describes the existing conditions
the dwellings here in the back there's a deck shown and then behind that is the patio. Those are the two main areas of concern with regards to the setbacks. We're within lock coverage for the zone and then the driveway was sort of
widened a bit out towards the street. So that was another part of this that came into play. The deck as I understand it was expanded from what was essentially a landing at when the when the addition was done at the back which is this seg
segment in the back of the main body of the house. That was the addition that was added in 2008 2009 to exit from the sliding doors in the back was essentially a landing. That's looks like from pictures that I've uh
reviewed with Miss Troy, it was about 3x8. Um it was a landing and then some steps down and a patio. So when she contracted u to have some work done, the driveway expanded and have that deck expanded, she did not understand that that
required what we're now in front of you doing. Um that that in fact the deck is considered building coverage and that there were zoning issues in play. Her contractor, I believe, assured her that no, no, we're good and and did the work.
That's how the this confusion evolved. So, what's there now is essentially an 8 by about 14 ft is the width of the addition. An 8 by4 deck. It's very modest in terms of decks. Um, and then some steps down to the side. They
reconstructed the walk connecting the driveway to that deck. And then the patios behind that deck. Again, it's a modest patio. So, um, at this point, all this work has been done except for paving the driveway
and finishing some of the rails, um, for the stairs that come off the deck. Obviously, in addition to that, having produced the lock rating plan, which was also submitted, and recognizing the lock coverage difference between what had
existed previously and what's there now, um we're we're enacting some storm water management with a dry well in the front yard. Um the difference in coverage as I um calculated it based on those old plans and a 2006 survey that I had
access to was about 6 my note says here 630 square ft of new impervious coverage from those older records. And so we're attenuating the majority of the house, which is 99,
what do I have? 990 square ft. So just under 1,000 square ft. That's based upon the fact that the roof leaders that handle this part of the house, everything except for the garage portion, that 990, the existing roof leaders come around the right side of
the house and discharge at the curb now. So, we're just going to pick those up and manage them in a dry well. That's the plan. And I know there was a comment from the forester to see if we could relocate that dry well. I think that's perfectly possible. Um, you know, I think the only constraint would be um
service utilities that are there. So, if the gas or water line is impinging on that, but we should be able to move that drywall a little closer to the street uh without any big problem and and hopefully try to save the the he he called a tree. It looked more like a shrub when I was doing the survey, but
>> I wasn't sure what he meant by ornamental, but >> yeah, I mean, nonetheless, the the the the vegetation that's there, and Miss Troy's also interested in maintaining that as well. So, we can relocate that dry well uh to satisfy that. Uh we also did add a drain in the back right
corner. That's mainly because Miss Troy gets some ponding that happens in that area due to the just sort of localized topography and the property the property slope from the rear to the street um going all the way back behind us. Um I
think that in this case the setbacks for the patio in particular which is the one that maybe would be of the the most concern. Uh the deck is got a little bit of encroachment into that yard but it's again it's a deck so it doesn't have the massing of building that you would normally encounter. But
in both cases the the setback for the deck and the patio um the house is in the back on lot six. the house there. I did locate it when I did the survey just for reference so we knew where it was
relative to our site. And the house is 119 feet away from the boundary. So it's it's farther than the depth of our entire lot away from um the boundary. And on lot five, they have a detached
garage that's behind their house that's 70 feet away. So based on that, I think that there shouldn't be any impact to the neighbors with regards to those setback variances. So I don't I don't
see any detriment that would result. Um with regards to the storm water, there should be no detriment to anyone. Um in fact, we're creating an improvement and there's no storm water management now other than just the discharge to the curb. Even if there were no dry well
there, the water slopes from rear to the street. So the pattern of drainage isn't such that it's pushing water certainly not to the neighbors in the back. They're uphill or to the neighbors to the side. So what we're doing is just adding an improvement in accordance with the ordinance. In fact, above and beyond
um the requirement from the ordinance. So in my opinion um there are no detrimental effects by maintaining and continuing and recognizing these conditions. I think one of the comments earlier on from you know there there was
a another step in there where we went through the engineering process got the engineering um approved essentially and then it went to Roger the zoning officer who then reviewed it sort of a backwards process from the normal and he asked for
some clarification on the width of the driveway to make sure it wasn't more than 18 feet wide and and so I added some dimensioning to that to verify that it's not um It's just under. It's so they they followed the 18 ft width when they did the the driveway construction.
So there's no modification necessary for the curb or variance required for that 18 ft. So I think that covers most of the points. Um I'd be happy to field any questions from your professionals or the board at this time. >> Let's start with the professionals. Mr.
Rafet, what do you have? >> So originally in my letter I had um I had some questions about the size of the dry well. Um I think you clarified what that is. Um, it it sounded to me like you said you're only taking the portion of the house that's going into the
drywall and not not the whole entire >> Right. So So I went and did a a review of the roof lines and the and the down spouts and the gutters that are there. And essentially this piece where the garage is on the left side is is sort of doing its own thing as it were. There's
a couple of down spouts that discharge to grade and come down this line over here. just surface runoff. The rest of the house is what we're managing because those roof leaders were already there and they come out to the curb. So, we're going to do is just intercept those. So,
that's why it's not the full measure of the house. It's the 990. I I couldn't quite figure out a reasonable way to get the whole house, but I felt like that was still above and the 630 square feet that that we would that we've actually increased. So, I felt like it was at
least overdoing it a little bit, >> right? And I and I agree with that. Um, you know, based on his testimony, um, I I'm comfortable with the size of the dry well with the requirements that are being met, you you're you're capturing
enough runoff and anything that's over and above is going to the same place it was before. >> Correct. >> So, I think I think I'm I'm comfortable with that. Great. >> All Mr. Thank you. >> Uh, regarding the the sideyard setback, it's a pre-existing condition of 7.1 ft
compared to 8 ft. >> That's right. In fact, it was pre-existing uh when Miss Troy purchased the property. So, it was in place. >> Okay. >> Before and at her purchase, that was the the the condition. >> Okay. And how long ago did she purchase it? Do you know? Well, I think it was
the survey in 2006, so way back >> was was was for the purchase and I had a copy of that survey and and it's consistent with the survey I did. >> Okay. The brick patio, is there any other rationale? I know you mentioned how far away it is to the rear uh houses or buildings that are on the adjacent
lots. >> Is there any other rational as to why it's so separate from the house? >> Well, I think it was it it was moved back a bit from where the landing was. It used to be that there was a landing that came down and some steps and then the patio was there. So, I think it was
just moved a little bit back when they enlarged the deck. Um, just to provide a little space between them for for the yard. >> Uh, obviously it should have been done differently, but that that I think uh was why they moved it back so it wasn't right up against the deck that's that
they were building. >> Okay. The deck you were saying is also to accommodate sliding glass doors that come off. Yeah, there are some sliding glass doors right at that at that rear edition in the back, >> but that the sideyard setbacks for the deck conform. It's really the correct.
That's correct. >> All right. Thank you. No further questions. >> Thank you, board. What questions do you have for this witness? >> Um, I have two. One is uh in the back if you're looking at the survey here the
back left there's an area with what looks like stepping stones like a bunch of stepping stones. What is that like? Is there anything under that? It doesn't show up on the drawing but there's a whole there I don't know >> out in the field you're saying? No, it's uh kind of to the if you were looking at
where the brick patio is to the left in the corner there, right? >> There's just this area of it looks like well maybe not blue stone, but they're definitely they're not natural. So, is there something that's that's also some kind of I don't know landscaping? >> Oh, you're saying this is something you
observed in the field? >> Yeah, it's there. So, I'm just wondering if is there anything else under there? Some drainage or something? >> I'm not I'm not aware of that. I mean sometimes in the field if there's a modest amount of just little stepping stones I don't really survey those in
detail. Um in part because they can be picked up easily. >> Um I don't >> these are I would say it's more than modest though. It's a decent amount. >> You have a photo of that. >> I do but I'm not supposed to show my photos. My personal photos I' I've learned. Um >> well
>> yeah because I also don't know if they might be on the neighbor's property if they're more than two feet behind where that patio is. They might even be on the neighbor's property. >> Well, it's in there's a fence, right? It's inside the fence on the property. >> Well, there's the chain link fence that's on the left side, >> right? So, it's on it's to the right of
that chain link fence like on that. >> So, it's like right in here. >> Yeah, in that corner. >> Okay. Um I'm not sure what those are, but >> I don't recall seeing that. >> Yeah. >> Well, I was there today. I don't know. Maybe it was covered in snow when you went. >> No, I was there today. Um, and then I guess, and maybe this isn't a question
for you, but, um, it seems to me that the patio is pretty easy to move. Now that the deck is in place, why not bring it maybe to the right of the deck where it would be closer to conforming, right? >> Yeah. I mean, I think that probably is a
better question for the owner in terms of whether that would be acceptable. Um, it Okay. Anyone else? >> How deep is the lot? >> The lot's 100 feet. >> Okay. >> It's 60 by 100 and in R six it's exactly 6,000 square feet.
>> Okay. >> How long has that patio been there? >> The the patio I think was relocated at at the time of some of this construction that took place. >> Okay. >> 2024 in that in that area.
>> I mean that patio in that location. Well, Miss Troy would know a little bit better than I would. You can ask her, but >> um yeah, I mean I I I it may have been prior to that, too. It's possible. >> We'll ask her. Yeah. Uh any uh
questions? Questions only from the audience? Seeing none. >> Okay, Miss Wolf, you want to >> bring your client? >> Take a seat. And if we could have her sworn. >> Yep. If you could please raise your right hand. Do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matters the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Please state your name, spell your last name. >> Unaith Troy. Last name T O R O Y. >> Thank you. >> And Miss Troy, you're the owner of this property, correct? >> Correct. >> And when did you purchase the property? >> In 2006. >> Okay. And I'm not sure does the board
have any questions for her about how this all came to be or can I kind of skip over that? Okay, perfect. So, can you talk about the stepping stones that the board was asking about? >> Are they in the corner by about the very
left hand corner? >> Um, they were stepping stones when um the path that runs when you go along the side of the house, there's a path now that runs from the end of the garage
over to the um decking. Those stones were there before. So the walkway replaced them. >> Yes. >> And so they were just moved to a different spot. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> And then the question about the patio, would you consider moving the patio?
>> Go back to the question about why the patio is where is it was really for shade because in the summer time the trees there provide shade. That's why that's where it used table there. So I put it there for shade for the location. Would you be willing to relocate it?
>> If I don't prepare to leave it, but if I because it's of the shade, but if I need to. >> Understood. >> Okay. >> Does the board have any other questions for Miss Troy? >> Um, I have one. Just I saw that on the side of the house, sort of off the deck,
um, along that walkway, there is also a pretty decent stockpile of pavers, and those might just be left over, but I'm just making sure. Is there any other construction project planned or any other use of those the pavers that are um piled on the side?
>> No, I just left them there when stop the work. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Or professionals. Any questions for this witness? >> No, I have none. >> No questions. >> Okay, great. Um do we have any public comments on
this application? Seeing none. Okay. Uh Mr. ball. What do we have in terms of conditions and number of votes? >> Again, we're only dealing with C variances. Four votes are required to approve the application and the only condition I have noted is our usual one, compliance with the conditions noted in
the board engineers memorandum. >> Excellent. Who would like to begin? >> Wow. Don't all jump up at once. >> Yeah, I I can support this application. It's it's modest. I know I know it got lost in the shuffle with the permits and everything like that, but there's no
detriment to the neighborhood. Um it seems like you're doing, you know, some some upgrades for the water management. Um I I can support this project. >> I I agree with my colleagues comment about the modesty of the application. I mean, when we get these asking for
forgiveness rather than permission applications, you know, it always sort of gets me gets my attention. And uh, you know, you typically look for the scale of what the applicant did and sort of the way they did it. And this one clearly seems like more oversight than
indifference. And given the the scale of it, and I thought Mr. Clark made an excellent point about the uh the the the distance to the neighboring properties to the rear. And given that the rear yard setback is invoked by this request,
I think that's it strongly mitigates any negative uh potential consequences from it. So, I'm supportive. >> Great. Mr. Yuko. >> Yeah, I I agree with all that. I know I don't like the the retroactive please forgive me applications either, but some of the others have been much more
dramatic than this. I mean, this is not, you know, a dramatic I can certainly see how it happens. I'm familiar with a uh not an applicant, a neighbor near where I live who just got caught up in something like this, too. So, it it happens. Um it's a modest project. It's
it's not out of line with what's in the neighborhood. I don't see any negative impacts, so I can support it as well. >> Okay. I guess my I have a mild concern about that patio being two feet off the property line because it's not really uh
there's no public benefit and I realize there's no public detriment but I'm trying to I'm trying to wrap my head around that one. I mean I think I understand the want need you know desire for shade but you could put an umbrella up too. Um so that's that's the one
concern I have. I mean, right now it may not may be 119 ft to the house behind us, but who knows? You know, that's someone else's property and we can't speak to how they might use that property another time. And we're basically saying it's okay to have a
patio 2 feet off the property line based on what it looks like today. Um, so I don't that's that's the only thing. The rest of it, I think, you know, I appreciate all the storm water management. I think, you know, having a deck off the back of your house that is, you know, you have to be able to get out
the back of your house, too. This all um makes sense to me. So, um that's my only, you know, small concern. >> Do do we have any additional appetite to to put in a
condition to move the patio or we good with where it is? >> I personally don't. I mean, I appreciate the concern you're raising about what might happen in the future, but I mean, the the lots backing this property are also zoned for the R six. So, if you were to build something to the max F,
you're probably not even getting close to uh even approaching the required setback. So, I think anything any project that would go up that could invoke that concern probably winds up triggering a DVR anyway. So it may be
more of a theoretical concern than an actionable one. >> Okay, great. Can I get a motion to approve? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Miss Sance. >> Mr. Malay. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mullen? >> Yes.
>> Mr. Nelson? >> Yes. >> Mr. Yuko? >> Uh, I'm sorry. Uh, yes. >> Vice Chair Zon. >> Um, >> yes. >> Mr. Feskins. Yes. >> Chairman Lincoln. >> Yes. All right. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Finally, 221 Blackburn Road. riding a bicycle. I guess little bit. >> Thank you. No problem. >> That's totally going to fall. It's a
little tilted, but I was thinking I was thinking that we probably wanted to tell people to be further back because Mr. Chinuli and Mr. Mle were looking at the back of people when they were showing their exhibits before. >> So, that's probably a better place to be, but usually has it.
>> All right, I'll swear you in. If you could raise your right hand. Do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matter? Is the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> And please state your name. Spell your last name. >> Sure. My name is Bri Anne Grant. G R A N T and I live at 221 Blackburn Road. >> Thank you.
>> I uh live at 221 Blackburn Road. I've been there for six years. I live there with my husband, Bill, and our three children. Um we've been contemplating a substantial renovation for some time. We love our neighborhood. We're close to our school, so we wanted to stay where
we are, but just enhance our home. um in particular enhancing the exterior and remodeling our in our interior first floor space which was kind of cobbled together by our prior owner owners. Um we're moving the guest room that was on
our first floor to an addition over the garage as well as an office for my husband um so that he has more privacy and could get his work done without our kids coming in. Um, so that's primarily what we're doing in our remodel. Um,
we've hired Elizabeth Rush to work with us on a plan which she's come up with. Um, and she can kind of walk you through the variance that we're asking for and any other questions that the board may have. >> Okay. Uh, before we get to your architect, board professionals, any
questions for this >> board members? Oh, Mr. >> proposal with your neighbor. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Great. Board members, any questions for the students? No. Any uh questions from the public? Seeing none. All right. Miss
Rush. If you can raise your right hand. Do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matter? The truth hold nothing but the truth. >> Yes. >> And please state your name. Spell your last name. >> Elizabeth Rush. Rh. >> Thank you. And you two have appeared before us a number of times, including recently. Any changes to your
credentials since the last time you were here? >> No. I imagine the board would accept you back once again. >> We would. Welcome back. >> All right. Thank you. Um, okay. So, I'm going to stay seated. I feel like I concentrate better at the table, but um, so I've put we have some um some
drawings. That's basically your complete application that you have. I also will be showing some renderings on the on the screens as well. Um, but starting out, the address is 221 Blackburn Road. It's down at the bottom of Blackburn Road
near Division. The property characteristics, it's about 100 ft wide by 200 and I think 75 ft long. So, it's a pretty deep property. Um, relatively flat at the street approach. Um, back to the rear of the property where their
patio is and then it slopes up gently to I think is Valley View behind you. Valley View behind you. So, um the slopes of the property are very much at the rear of the property. Where we're working is at the at the front of the property near the garage. Um as Bri
mentioned, we are doing extensive renovations to the first floor of the house. Uh just to modernize, open it up. There's there's a lack of daylight. Um but no no additions or expansions except for what I'll go into on the garage
side. Um, I'll stay away from the first floor renovations just because they're not really impacting the variance. Um, and I know it's a little bit late, so I'm going to really focus on what variances we need and and what we're doing in that realm. Um,
so the main uh I guess I'll I'll do it on the boards. Um, the main area of work thistacing garage. Um, as you can see on the right side of the property, the house is a little bit caddyy cornered um to the
property line. So, it's a little skewed, which creates um a sideyard setback issue, which concurrently also creates a combined sideyard setback, which I think the board is familiar. A lot of times when an application needs a sideyard setback, it also triggers a combined
sideyard setback. So, that's what we we are here for tonight. The garage is remaining in place. We are building an addition on top of the garage. Um the first floor is a nice size for the lot. Um and it gives them as much space as they need. The second floor um is a
little lacking in terms of square footage. And so Bill works from home um almost every day and he would like a nice second floor office above the garage. There's going to be a rear stair um an additional guest bedroom and a bathroom located in that in that space.
Um, just wanted to go over some of the characteristics of the home. These are the existing photos. Um, so as you can see, oh, do we know why >> I seen your display? >> What's that?
>> It's frozen. Maybe just unplug it and plug it back in. >> Sorry, that's going to be a major issue. >> When in doubt, >> what did I just say? >> Exactly. >> Unplug the old school thing of like hitting it.
>> I take it that's not your property. See right now >> looks nice. >> I think the city forester would like that. >> Sorry. >> I think you make an exception. >> Okay.
>> There we go. >> Phew. >> Hold my breath there for a minute. Um, okay. So, just going over the ex um the exterior >> before you do that those pictures. They're new this evening, right? They weren't previously submitted. >> Yeah. Um, a few of them are on one of
the sheets, but >> So, we'll mark the entire presentation as A1 >> and I'll email that to you, Jessica. Great. >> And could you can you tell us who took these photos and when they were taken? >> I took these photos. I think it was in September. Actually, the first photo might be off of Zillow. No, actually, I
did take that photo. Um, and then the rest of them I did walk around the house and take them. Um, so as you can see, my pointer isn't showing up on the um monitor for some reason, but the f top left photo is the front of the existing house. Um, it's a little hodge podge
podge of styles, vinyl siding. Um, the roof is in need of repair. the, you know, the portico has some lackluster round smaller columns um with the front door and then the the uh garage is
recessed to the right of the home. And it's just a little bit small. It looks like at some point it must have been an addition um after the main body of the house was built. Um and then on to the right at the top right of the house, you can see that's kind of the side profile of the existing roof line of the main
body of the house. that's remaining the same. Really, where we're focusing again is on top of the garage. I provided the aerial view um just showing you where we are um at Blackburn and the relationship to the neighbor to the right of the house because although they have spoken
with that neighbor and they are in favor of the application, that of course is where the majority of the work is is go is proposed. So, just wanted to show you the aerial view of where that house is located next to their house. Um and then we do have a rear photo at the bottom.
Um, so going on, I believe that you have uh sheet A4 in your packet. We do have some existing photos on the left. The existing front elevation is at the top right of this sheet. Um, and then the
bottom proposed elevation is on the bottom right. As you can see, um, the garage is remaining as is. The mudroom door to the left of the main garage door is remaining as is. That will remain a mudroom. And then Bill's office and the guest bedroom will be above the roof
line. The um sorry ridge line of the main gable of the addition will not exceed the height of the existing ridge line of the house. Okay. >> Have a question about this elevation. Hypothetically, let's say, >> sure, >> you did not want to trigger that
variance. >> How would that affect the just the curb appeal and the visual aesthetic of it? Um if we didn't want to trigger this variance, we would have to shorten that second floor addition,
right? Um it wouldn't be symmetrical on top of the um existing garage opening. Um the house has a lot of symmetrical features. We're trying to kind of cohesively create just the whole house aesthetic and the
front elevation. Um, and we thought that bringing it over and creating that gable in that size would balance with the front of the house. >> So, in your professional opinion, doing what I suggested would be hideous. >> I I would not be prefer preferred.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> I would not propose that. >> I was almost leading the witness. >> Yeah. >> Um, the next photos I'm going to jump right into the renderings. Um, so we had some renderings done just to show you um
what the proposed final front elevation would look like. We're proposing all new siding on the house. This would be Hardy board siding. We're proposing all new roofing, asphalt shingle roofing,
probably in a weathered wood. It's a slightly softer warm gray finish. um some copper detailing at the portico and at the front ga top gable um just to break up that twotory volume at the front of the house and then of course um
you know just classic I think it's written down on the elevations um Azek historic sill um casing around the windows corner boards um just to kind of bring the whole house together we're also proposing if you notice the front
elevation these dormers um above of um like that are on either side of the front door on the second floor. There's just a lot of repetition of gable roof lines. So, we're proposing to do a little bit of work and make those recede a little bit and reframe those as um hip
roofs just to quiet down all those peaks on the front of the house. Um another view this shows this is a photo match showing the relationship to the neighbor's house. As you can see, the Grants is closer to the street. Uh the front door is closer
to the street. Um and then the garage is set back. Um the neighbor's house is actually even further set back. So, um it's not, you know, right next to each other. They're not facing each other. And the garage is on the same side as the grant's proposed garage. So, I
always like to point that out. It's not like their living room is right next to the proposed addition. Um, oh, sorry. Just another view. Just like to show as many of these as I can. This kind of shows the space between the two houses
and a a slightly side view of of the addition. Um, these are the uh first floor plans just to go over this section. Um, actually, yeah, you can follow with my little cursor right here. This is really
the only section that we're building out on the first floor. As you can see right now, there's a pretty large deck at the rear of the property. We are proposing an addition right here, which I believe is noted as around 67 square ft. Um, and
then the major the remaining part of this will be rebuilt as a landing because it is an exit path to the rear yard. Um and then the garage is remaining as is. And then the second floor, obviously any shaded lines right here, as you can see, those
are post shade as proposed walls. So that would be on top of that existing footprint, you know, with the additional small area here that we are building out for the stair below. You would come up in the rear of the family room up a stair. This is the
guest suite with the on suite bathroom and then an office and a library for Bill to work. Um there are some rendered CAD elevations that show you the differences. So I always try to show you the existing elevation and then the proposed below it
just so you have the reference. Um this is the existing rear elevation and obviously we're trying to you know balance the house on the rear. This is kind of mirrored on mirrored from the front. Um, and then this would be the side where I guess the neighbor side
that you saw from the rendering. Um, the garage side. This side it's, you know, you're really just seeing the second story edition in the distance. It's not really impacted on this side. Um, in terms of just going over the staff
comments quickly, that's kind of the overview of the project. Um all work proposed is in compliance with coverage limits of lot coverage, building coverage and F. The variance requested pertain to the right side setback as we discussed and the combined sideyard
setback. These are both due to the existing non-compliant condition of the garage that was there when the when my clients purchased the home. Um, and I just I would, you know, any even if it's an inch over the setback line, it requires
a vari sideyard variance setback. Um, but not, you know, the entire it's just a clip of that front corner. So, just wanted to make that point. Um, in terms of the staff comments, Burgess uh memorandum section 4, no objections to
the comments of the sideyard setback. No objections to the comments of the minimum uh sideyard setback. Um there was a I think they wanted me to testify about the front portico on the general comment section. The existing front
portico is approximately 35 square feet whereas the proposed is about 72 square feet. That would be a net increase of 37 square feet which is 0.16%. um that is really the only increase in coverage that we are proposing.
Therefore, we were not required to submit a lot grading or you know there's no disturbance. Um that being said, we did bring a witness from Mueller Engineering because the grants did do a
pro their patio project to 2023 >> 2020. >> Okay, 2020, sorry. 2020 which um Kathy worked on that project. they implemented storm water management for that. We just wanted to have her here because she's familiar with the property and has worked on their has worked on their
home. So, um she is here and available for questions. Um I think that that's it. I can try to answer any Collier's questions, but might have to pull up >> Okay. >> the engineer for that. >> Great. Or professionals, what questions
do you have for this witness? If we're going to pull up the engineer, I'll just hold off on on asking about storm water then. >> Okay, Mr. Sis. >> Yes, just from questions regarding the the actual relief that's necessary. The house itself, as you had indicated, has
a pre-existing condition at that 7.5, but it actually is more of an angular relationship to the property line. Correct. >> Correct. >> Um, and that angular relationship is approximately it's an it looks like it forms a triangle. Yes. effectively. What is the longest leg of that triangle or
the shortest leg I guess of where the frontage of that garage is? It's I was trying to figure out how much square feet that actually is. >> Um that's within the setback. >> Yeah. >> Um >> and I'm not sure if you know that offhand, but it's really a uh a smaller piece of that.
>> It is a smaller piece. And you're testing my geometry right now. Um I >> I need my ninth grader up here. >> No worries. Um, >> I can definitely get you that information. >> Really where I was going to is from a planning standpoint that is really a smaller component of this overall
building uh that's being proposed as an addition. Correct. It's sort of a small wedge of that building. Um, I wanted to point that out. >> Um, you're complying with the amount of coverage F as you had indicated. >> Yes. >> Um, >> what sort of relief are you asking of
the board? It's really not a hardship essentially. It's the benefits outweighing the detriments. >> Yeah. I mean um as Mr. Mullen sort started to ask me you know I I really try I always try to avoid variances with my clients always um but sometimes there
comes a question um is it going to beautify the architecture? Is it going to be a less beautiful project for the neighborhood? Are you um you know hurting the client's needs by just complying with one section
of the ordinance? So, we did go through all we went through the sizes of the second floor edition and we really came up with with saying this is the best project for this house for the neighborhood and that's why we're here before you tonight. >> Okay. And also with regard to the overall design and form of the existing
building, uh you have your garage area that's sort of set back from the frontage. >> Yes. >> Of the rest of the house. So, it forms sort of an articulation. Yes. >> Do you agree >> of that overall elevation? Okay. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you. board. What questions
do you have for this witness? >> Stole my question. >> All right. Well, you guys haven't been silent in a while. >> Interesting. Okay. Um, any questions from the public for this witness? Seeing
none, what kind of appetite do we have to hear from the engineer, guys? >> I guess Marie has a question. Um, do you have a burning question about the storm water? >> I Well, I wanted to know where the uh the youth leaders from the you know, we
can do that. >> That's so why don't we bring up your engineer and we'll we'll get Marie's question answered. Good evening. >> If you're going to stand, please use the portable mic. Thank you. Thank you so much.
>> Mr. Balls, where are you in? Okay. If you could raise your right hand, do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matters, the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> And please state your name. Spell your last name. >> Catherine of the scene. Mueller, MUE L E R, principal and owner of Mueller Engineering in Warren Township, New
Jersey. >> Thank you. And you two have appeared before us relatively recently. Any changes to your credentials since the last time you were here? >> No. >> I imagine we'll accept her back once again. >> Welcome back. >> All right. Miss Rafé, you had a question? >> Yeah. So, um if if you wouldn't mind
just talking about um you know the existing storm water um on site and where maybe the some of the new downspouts would be going to. >> Sure. Sure. So, we did have a survey done uh as you heard we have some history on the on the property. We had
done the the rear uh uh outdoor amenity space at which time we did have a uh storm water management system designed. We had the survey done. There is a tributary to the Salt Brook that runs parallel to uh Blackburn Road and the
whole lot drains down towards that ditch. There are two um outlets that are shown on our survey and on the plan and by visual observances and you you may be able to see them in one of the pictures.
There's also an outlet, a PVC pipe kind of adjacent to the driveway just to the left of it. So all the down spouts go underground and drain out to the front to the ditch. The improvements for the house and the roof lines will utilize that existing
uh roof leader system. >> So there'll be no changes to the drainage. There's, as you heard, a slight increase in impervious coverage with the expansion of the front porch, approximately 32 square feet that will run overland and be disconnected and go
through the lawn and then eventually drain down to that ditch as well. >> Okay. So, you're not changing any of the drainage patterns. Um, nothing else is going into the uh the existing drywall system that's in the back. >> Correct. >> Not making any changes. And because it's
less than n 300 square feet, you're not required to do any additional >> correctations. Thank you. >> Great board. What questions do you have for this witness? >> Seeing none. All right. Great. Thank you
so much. Any comments from the public? Seeing none, uh, Mr. Ball, what do we have? >> Uh, same deal as last time. Four votes are required to approve because we only have C variances and the only condition I have noted is our usual compliance with the conditions noted in the board engineers memorandum.
>> Great. Who would like to begin? Mr. Yuko, >> I'll take a stab. Um, so the variances for this application are not driven by any increases in footprints or they're going up into the air. And the concern with going up into the air is is there going to be any negative impact on on
the neighbors or any other in terms of light and air circulation, whatever. um or and is there any landscaping additional landscaping screening might be needed. So our forester is not calling for any additional landscaping. Um it does not appear to me that there's any negative impact on the lighter air
for the neighbor and the fact that the neighbor is not here assuming they found out a bit about the application. They they they're not here to express any concern. Um it improves the look of the house and it's a positive impact. It's not out of scale with the neighborhood. um a lot of very very attractive homes
and I think this will improve the look of this home in the neighborhood. Um so I I I can support the application. >> Okay. Well, Mr. Fes, >> you know, Miss Rush has been here before. I think she's done a very thoughtful approach with the design. I
think it fits very nicely. And when you look at the orientation of the house to make this conform, you're either doing something that looks hideous as my colleague mentioned, which I would agree with, or you're detrimentally impacting the function of garage by rebuilding it.
I mean, at the end of the day, I don't see any ne negative impacts, the location of the house next to the neighbor. Um, and the fact that it is set back and the undulation, the articulation away from it makes even the mass feel even smaller. Uh, for that reason, I think it's very thoughtfully
designed, very modest, and I can fully support it. >> Great. >> Just to add on to what Mr. Fes and Mr. Yuko said, um, I think that there is a public benefit. I think I think this design is a public benefit. Um, the house that's there is fine. I'm not
trying to say that, but the garage doesn't look like it's part of the house. It's not cohesive. And I think this improves not only the look of the house, but the whole neighborhood, the streetscape. So I I do think that's a public benefit and I can support this application.
>> I I certainly agree with my colleagues and I think Mr. Steinus was going down this road that the the angle where the house is set onto the property, right, is is sort of a hardship in my mind. Um
I know when you bought the property, you didn't it didn't occur to you that this this would 10 years down the line that this would become an issue. So maybe hardship's too strong a term, but still um it's providing you a challenge and I I applaud you for showing restraint in terms of staying within the footprint of
the house. Uh for the most part, there's so many people that come in here that do not do that. So we always like it when we once in a while get someone who actually shows the restraint. And I agree, my colleagues, the design's excellent. Uh it's it's a very lovely
home, but it's this is an obvious improvement. Uh so with that I'm going to ask for a motion to approve. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Mr. Malay. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mullen. >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson. >> Yes. >> Mr. Yuko.
>> Yes. >> Vice Chair Zan. >> Yes. >> Mr. Fesin. >> Yes. >> Chairman Lincoln. >> Yes. >> Good luck. >> Thank you. >> All right. So, we have some resolutions, but no minutes, it looks like. >> Okay. Up first for resolutions for
memorialization, we have 96 Fernwood Road, zoning board application number ZB-25-2294. The eligible members to vote are vice chairs on, Mr. Nelson, Mr. Feskins, and Chairman Licketts. Could we get a motion? >> So moved. >> Second.
>> Thank you. >> Vice Chair Zan. >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson. >> Yes. >> Mr. Fesin. >> Yes. Chairman Lykit. >> Yes. >> Next up, we have 14 Hughes Place zoning board application number ZB-25-2305. The eligible members to vote are vice
chairs on Mr. Yuko, Mr. Nelson, Miss Chief, Mr. Feskins, and Chairman Licketts. Could we get a motion? >> So move. >> Second. >> Thank you. Vice Chair. >> Yes. >> Mr. Yuko? >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson? >> Yes. >> Mr. Fes? >> Yes.
>> Chairman Lake? >> Yes. And lastly, we have 92 Lip Street, zoning board application number ZB-25-2314. The eligible members to vote are vice chairs on Mr. Yuko, Mr. Nelson, Mr. Feskins, and Chairman Lyets. Could we get a motion? >> So moved.
>> And a second. >> Second. >> Thank you. Vice Chair Zan. >> Yes. >> Mr. Yuko. >> Yes. >> Mr. Nelson. >> Yes. >> Mr. Fes. Yes. >> Chairman Ly. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, everyone. Can I get a motion to adjurnn?
>> Second. >> All those in favor? I >> 9:30