Welcome to tonight's meeting of the zoning board of adjustment of the township of union which is being held pursuant to the open public meeting law C231 laws of New Jersey dated 1975. Notice of this meeting was advertised in the local source, the newspaper of
record, and notice has been posted on the bulletin board in the municipal building adjacent to the municipal clerk's office. >> Roll call. >> Uh, Mr. Wy >> here. >> Miss Martins >> here. >> Mr. Bentega >> here. >> Miss Scott >> here.
>> Mr. McNeel >> here. >> Miss Little >> here. >> Mr. Graves >> here. >> Miss Ricketts is absent. Mr. Champion >> here. There being a quorum present, this meeting is now declared open. At this time, I'll entertain a motion for the
approval of the minutes from um February the 11th, 2026. May I have a motion and a second, >> Mr. Chairman? >> Okay. I move that of February 11, 2026
be approved as written and dispensed with their reading. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> opposed. So moved. Are there any communications? >> Uh, no communications, Mr. Chairman.
>> Hearing none. Our first order of business this evening is calendar number 3471, Mario and Andrea Ferrer. Location is 631 Southmaster Parkway, block 2710, lot 4. It's a pre-existing non-conforming two family and a single
family zone. Councelor. >> Yes. Good evening, Mr. Chairman and board members. Stephen Hail representing the applicants uh Mario and Andrea Fer who are here this evening. Uh and yes, as chairman noted, uh this this is a uh
ex pre-existing two family home and a one family zone. Um and the uh and I think people familiar with the area there there are a bunch and our our our track our planner will address that there's a number of two family homes in
the area. We're seeking uh and council can add to this uh what they call a D2 variance a modification or expansion preamilies. >> It's not on. >> Okay.
>> Okay. Thanks. So, uh, what we'd like to do, uh, and we did receive the Collier's letter, uh, and we'll address those comments. We we'd like to call upon our architect to take the board through the existing conditions at the home and then
what's proposed by way of improvements. And I think that'll show the board it's it's not uh, expanding in essence what what the property can be used for. We're not making site changes, but I think you you'll get a much better picture of
what's what's being proposed here. So, >> time out. >> Yeah. >> Gary, >> you want to address that? >> I didn't hear I didn't hear the question. He's asking questions out of turn. >> Oh, okay. You'll have time to comment
and ask questions after the witnesses has provided testimony. >> Okay. >> You're welcome. >> And just to clarify, we're here discussing 631 selfmaster. >> Yeah. Okay. All right. So, um I'd like
to have our our architect Dougl take us through the the plans first. We'll council we'll swear you in. Just for the record too, council and uh Mr. Chairman, board members, I marked A1 the application as it was submitted for
631 South Master Parkway and I marked A2 the variance plan uh with the architectural drawings consisting of two sheets revised through September of uh 2025 I believe. Yes. So it's A1 and A2. For the record, can I ask the witness to
swear or affirm that the testimony provide this evening is the truth and the whole truth? >> Yes. And for the record, state and spell your name with your affiliation. >> Uh Douglas with two S's. Last name is Oall. A S R A L. I'm a registered architect in the uh state of New Jersey.
License number NJI15169. And I've been a practicing architect uh since uh 2000. My address is um >> We'll accept your credentials. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. All right. Mr. Rasel, if you could, as you heard in my introduction, take the board
through existing conditions of the floor plans and then what's proposed by way of improvements. >> Right. >> And if you want to take us through briefly the site too. That's >> Yeah, just briefly through the site. Um uh as uh the attorney has uh uh just uh
mentioned um uh no changes to the exterior proposed on the site. Um the existing um uh parking configuration is to remain uh with a capacity um for four
uh spaces um on the property. Um uh no exterior again no exterior changes are being proposed. The only alterations that are are to be proposed uh for this uh uh residence uh are uh two closets um
on the first floor um that are indicated um on the first floor plan. Uh I'll take you quickly through the uh um uh how to navigate through the house. >> That'd be perfect. I would be standing walking the board through the home would be great. >> Where it says existing porch, that's the
front door. uh you come to a um uh uh a common uh vestibule uh that diverges left to the upstairs unit and to the right to the first floor unit. Um from the outside um if you look at the exterior elevations on sheet A2 uh
you'll see the the front door uh that still has the presence and uh uh appearance of a one family single door uh same house. So the the the two um uh res um two units diverge from on the inside after
you've entered. Uh so on the first floor uh just two closets are being proposed for uh um one for each bedroom. That's the extent of the alterations on the inside other than a replacement of uh u uh countertops and
appliances in the kitchen. Um as you can see uh yeah the uh the shaded walls of each closet are indicated uh as dark gray. All the other uh walls are indicated existing to remain as you know um white. So um now I'll go to the um
second floor. Um no changes are being proposed on the second floor which is uh has one bedroom and um and it's to remain as it is um except for again repair and replacement of existing elements such as appliances and countertops finishes
>> and all the work will comply with any applicable building codes, fire codes, etc. Yes, certainly. Um uh some upgrades will be made with regard to building codes such as egress windows at the um existing bedrooms.
>> And you've had an opportunity to review the Collier's letter. I I don't think there's any comments that need to be addressed from uh an architectural standpoint. Um, and just to confirm, I know our professional planner is here.
So, there's no no um offsite or on-site improvements that are proposed to the exterior of the premises. >> Again, yeah. Uh, no changes proposed to the exterior of the building or to the um to the ground. >> Okay, great. All right. Um, Mr. Chairman and board members, I have no further
questions of u Mr. Earl at this time. Are there any board members that would like to question the testimony this witness has provided? >> Uh, yes, Mr. Chairman. I have a a question on the first floor floor plan of bedroom number one. >> Yes. >> Uh, looks like there's a closure wall.
Looks like a new wall. Um, >> yes. >> Place there. You didn't mention that. Um, was that originally open to a stairwell or taking you upstairs? >> Um, no. Uh uh it's a separation uh is is at
the um um common vestibule at the front door. You go to the left and then takes it to the stairs going up. I originally when this house was first built, it was a single family and and um uh there was a way to get to the stairs from um
>> So that's a stairwell that's been being closed >> that's being closed off. Exactly. Yes. So private entrance to the um second floor, >> private entrance to the first floor. >> Yeah. So the only commonality is that vestibial after that they diverge.
>> Hi. >> Hi. >> Good evening. You said there's four parking spaces. >> Uh there's Yes. The driveway is long enough to uh um to to accommodate four four vehicles and there's a garage. >> Okay. So that was my question. Is that In total >> in total >> four. Okay.
>> Yeah. In total four. >> Okay. >> Is the home currently occupied? >> Um >> you can't testify. >> You can't I can >> uh recently acquired by my client and is and uh uh ready to undergo u uh
alterations uh pending the resolution. So, so when it becomes occupied, um, will the tenants be required to park in the driveway? >> Because property owners are saying yes
for limited parking. >> Correct. >> It's just Mr. Hail, I think you're familiar with this. This is Rob Pansul, the board attorney. What we what we've been trying to do uh in situations where parking is at a premium, which is in a
lot of places, uh is to have the applicant at least commit to the tenencies, whoever they may be in the future, to taking advantage of the driveway and garage spaces that exist rather than jumping into that first off- streetet spot that might be available when they do have parking. So,
>> just, you know, whether it's enforceable or not, we'd like to put it in the record to make sure to be the good neighbor and make sure that we're trying to take advantage of the parking that you have that other property owners in the area may not have that option. >> Right. Uh, I can understand your concern for the parking. Uh, uh, the bedroom
situation, the quantity of people who who would be residing in this is is accommodated by the same three bedrooms there always was. So, uh, four spaces for three bedrooms is what we're proposing here, which we think is adequate. >> And it's compliant. Yeah. There's no doubt. >> Exactly. >> No doubt. >> Right.
>> There's no garage uh basement area, is it? >> There is. It's an unfinished basement. It's it's strictly utilitarian uh for the uh uh furnace and mechanical equipment um uh to service the the the house, the building. >> Is that common to both units? >> Uh no, it's really common. It's it's
only accessible for the first floor unit. um uh the um the second floor would not be accessing it. >> There's is there any direct access to the basement area from the outside? >> Yes, there is. If if go to the rear of the um house, you'll see that there is
um a a stair um an access from the exterior to a stair that takes you down. >> We will note, which is also typical in these types of situations, that the basement area is not going to be living space. And >> it is not living space. It's not. It would never be
>> utilities and storage >> per per code. It it doesn't meet the um um uh adequate conditions for a living space less than 7 ft in height and and for all those other reasons. Yeah.
Any other board questions? >> I have one, Mr. Hail, concerning u drainage. >> Yes. Kier's report under section 4 um states the impervious coverage is being increased and he recommends a seepage pit be added to the plants.
Would your applicant have any objection to that making that? >> Well, you on this I know we we have the other one after. There's no increase in impervious coverage, but I'm sure our client will speak to uh Collars and see if there's >> a need for uh mitigation that could be
done. But yeah, they the the letter says that um >> the impervious coverage has increased. >> Yeah. But >> and you're saying it's really the same. Okay. >> It's the same. >> Okay. The second one I think has increased. But again, we can look into
and speak to engineering as to whether or not any storm water mitigation is warranted. >> Okay. Um, since there's no more board questions, are there any members of the public that would like to come forward and question the witness and his
testimony that he has provided? Just his testimony. No comments. Just state your name and provide your address, please. >> Sorry. Rocky Patel, 627 South Master Parkway. >> Could you spell your last name? >> P A T E L.
>> Thank you. >> Sorry. So, my only comments were so uh 631 is right next door to where I live. So, I've been in this house for 30 years. uh the neighbor or neighbor or her name was Elellanar. We've lived there for 30 years. We've taken care of 30 years.
I've been in a house dozens hundreds of times. I am not I have never seen a kitchen on a second floor of this house, which is fine. Uh second thing is uh when you say parking for cars parking currently we have a
resident that lives across the street at 638 Southmaster who is renting who park six five to six cars on a street a week. I've called the parking authority as long as my neighbor multiple times. All they do is move the
car to the next spot, leave it there for another three days. They just keep moving the car three days in a row. My father is retired, currently working second shift. That's why he couldn't be here tonight. My mother is also retired but ill, so she's at home. We have three
cars that we barely find parking for. Every morning, I would have to spend 20 minutes of my time to move cars out of the driveway just so I can get out of the house and make it to work. Mornings at 6:30, 7 o'clock in the morning, school traffic is, you obviously know
Parkway is a main highway. It's a very busy road. I cause it. >> Mr. Patello, I don't want to interrupt you, >> but at this time, this is not a a time for comments. It's to question the testimony that he has provided. You could you
could come up at the end of the meeting. I'm going to call you back up. >> This is one of our first meetings. I've never >> No, that that's that's fine. Don't apologize. I'm just saying it's just the testimony he has provided and he's the architect. So if there's anything you would want to know about the structure, he's the man to ask.
>> Structural wise, yes, there is no kitchen on a second floor as he mentioned because I've been in that house hundreds of times to take care of all. >> If I may interject, uh uh when I arrived at the site uh in its original condition, uh I found kitchen facilities on the second floor.
>> When you say original, when was the original condition? >> When I when I came here about a year ago. >> So I've been there since 1996. There's never been a kitchen up there. Is there a bathroom upstairs? >> Regardless, that's at the time I measured the house, there was a kitchen there. >> So, a year and a half ago was was when
the house was purchased, >> right? >> So, was there an alternation done that no one knows about? >> At the time when I visited uh uh after the purchase and I came and I I I witnessed the kitchen there. There there is a refrigerator uh range and a sink.
>> 10 years ago, there was no kitchen upstairs. >> That's a different story. I'm just saying at the time I visited and >> me took care of >> Elanor sir regardless what's your question Mr. Patel what he he is has to be asked questions on the information that he has
testified to relevant to the plan. The use as a two family there's going to be another witness that the applicant has that's going to address that and there's certain details in the record that you will hear that the town whether they
officially used it as a two family there's records that suggest that they could do so. So when he inspected it a year ago or whenever it was, there was a separate kitchen area. That's the town's information confirmed that as well. That's why they're here for what's
called, as the attorney summarized, a D2 variance, an expansion of an existing two family. Whether they use it or not is not really anything that certainly he testified about and I'm sure the planner will address that. >> Understood. Sorry. >> No problem. Um
the only other question uh response I was with the parking with the four. Yes, the driveway can fit four cars, but no one puts four cars in a driveway. >> That's why I made the statement we did. We try to encourage the applicant to be a good neighbor as you have to try with
the neighbor who crossed the street. Yeah. >> Who's not before us. >> That's a situation. So hopefully you can get some relief for that. That sounds like an odd odd case for sure. inter other than else. Yeah, that's all I have. >> All right. >> Thank you. >> You'll have a chance to comment later on.
>> Any other members of the public >> that would like to come forward? Hearing none, counselor, your next witness. >> Yes. I'd now like to Thank you. Uh, thanks, Doug. I'd now like to call upon Robert Hudac, who will testify as our professional planner.
Can I ask the witness to swear or affirm that the testimony you provide this evening is the truth and the whole truth? >> Yes. >> And for the record, state and spell your name with your affiliation. >> Sure. It's Robert Hudac, last name HU. D is in David AK. My affiliation is with Insight Engineering in Wall, New Jersey.
And I'm a licensed professional planner and my certifications and licenses are all in good order. >> We'll accept your >> Thank you. Great. credentials. >> You've been here before. >> You've been here before. Yes. >> All right. Uh Mr. Hudach, uh you obviously are well familiar with the
property and the uh presentation this evening, the architectural plans. If you could take the board through the justification for relief for the D2 variance that I mentioned, perhaps uh some details on the nature of that relief that's being sought.
>> Sure. I want to start off with a a copy of the certificate of occupancy issued by the town. I I believe it's one of the files here. If Trevor wouldn't mind helping me look for it, >> you always look for a young person to help documents.
>> If you look at this this exhibit, I don't know if we've marked it. Mark that as A1. >> Okay. >> A3 for the record. A1 the application. A3. You said >> A3 is the certificate of continued occupancy. >> Yes. This was issued by the construction
official here in Union demonstrating that this was found to be a legal two family residential property with working smoke detector and carbon monoxide detectors. This was issued to I guess
the estate of the prior owner in 2024. So this municipality itself found that this was a legally existing non-conforming use. As you've heard, this zone only permits single family use. However, this use predates the
current zoning of this site. Therefore, any kind of alteration falls under the category of what is called a D2 use variant. So, you still need the five affirmative votes. It's a little different than the D1 in that we don't need to prove out that the use itself u
I shouldn't say particularly fits in the zone, but it's not the same the same criteria as the D1 use variance. >> Want me to go on? >> Great. Sure. Thank you. >> Okay. So, we also have a number of non-conformities with this property. I don't think we they're on the plans, but
I don't know if we discussed them. You have in addition to the use, which is a pre-existing nonconformity, you have the lot area, lot width, lot depth, minimum front yard setback, minimum sideyard setback, accessory building rear yard setback, and the accessory building
sideyard setback. All of these are existing nonconformities that are not being changed or exacerbated as a result of this application. And as you've heard, all the alterations are internal to the site. But with respect to the C the C1 variance, we still have to find
that the site satisfies the Medici criteria that the site promotes the general welfare and that the pro because the property is particularly suited for the proposed use. However, it's noted in the Cole case just the fact that it's a legal existing legal non-conforming use
itself doesn't give rise to the special reasons. In other words, you don't get the benefit just because it's illegal non-conforming use to say that it's okay. We have to make mention of some other factors here. So, the improvements, as I've noted, we proposed are within the existing two family
house. There's no exterior changes. These changes are designed to make the property internally function better. Uh they're locating some closets. There's no changes, you've heard, to the bedroom count, so there's no change to the parking requirements. The master plan
itself notes that it encourages smart growth, meaning that they take advantage of compact building designs, creating a range of housing opportunities and choices, creating a walkable community with a strong sense of place. Our plan, I believe, accomplishes these goals by maintaining the existing two family use
and improving really the flow and and and design of the interior. It won't increase the intensity of the use. We're not changing the number of bedrooms and as as we noted repeatedly, this is there's no change in on-site parking. Under the residential site improvement standards, we would need three spaces on
site. We're providing four, which is I would think is an improvement over the residential site improvement standards. Also, maintaining the two family house use addresses the need for diverse housing options in the community aligns with purpose A and purpose E of the MLUL.
Uh again with respect to particular suitability, this is an existing building and infrastructure that's existing to support this. We're not changing plumbing, pipes or anything like that. So it minimizes the need for extensive new construction. It's not as though we're we're removing bedrooms and moving them around. In fact, we're
keeping pretty much everything the same. And with respect to the uh exhibit here, I want to show you there are a number of two family uses I found on the record here. I just want to get to this. If you look on this exhibit here,
this property is is lot three, lot 2710. There are a number of legally existing non-conforming two family uses in the immediate area. So, it's not particularly out of character. Although I would say the majority of homes are single family or at least are listed on
the tax records as single family. Whether they are or not is debatable, but there are other two family houses that exist and function in this community. I also have a an exhibit showing the area around the house.
>> Are these all part of the same planners exhibit that we can call A4? You >> Yes, we can call it a We can call it A4. A4 is the planners exhibit comprised of how many slides do you have? >> Uh that one has one and then A5 will have I think it's three
>> three pages. >> All right. So it's A4 and A5. >> A5 And as you can see from exhibit A5, here's the aerial exhibit itself showing the subject property.
We have some street views here as well, showing from the norththeast, the southeast. You could see the character of the neighborhood. Again, because we're not changing the exterior of the property, I would say it's in line with the character of the existing neighborhood.
Now, of course, no variance could be granted without finding of the negative criteria that the proposed development would not cause substantial detriment to the public good, nor substantial impairment to the intent and purpose of the zone plan. As noted, our proposal advances the public good through providing more efficient and practical
improvements to an existing two family use. Our proposal advances numerous purpose of zoning as I said efficient use of land um general welfare providing a diversity of housing types and it doesn't result in an increase in the intensity of the current legal non-conforming use and as noted it it
advances the smart growth goals of the township's master plan. Therefore, I offer that it satisfies the negative criteria required by law. So with respect to this variances that we seek tonight or the uh expansion or the alteration I should say of the existing two family use I believe we've met our
burden. Right. >> Thank you Mr. Hudach. Uh no further questions Mr. Chairman >> and board members. >> Any board members would like to question the testimony Mr. Hudac has given hearing none. Are there any members of
the public that would like to question the testimony? Mr. Hudac has given just his testimony. >> Sorry, Rocky Battalion. Uh when you mentioned there would be no additional plumbing uh needed to for that residence, what did you mean by that?
>> Well, there's no change in a sense. We're not adding we're not even adding a bathroom or anything like that. We're not altering significantly any of the rooms that are existing in here. It's not as though we're taking the two family house and adding a bedroom to it
or adding or or or putting in a new bathroom or anything like that. We're just really changing closets. That's my understanding of the application. >> So, no new plumbing will be run or not. >> The architect doesn't have anything on his plans. No. >> Okay. The the only reason I asked was
like I said once again there was no kitchen upstairs. So you need plumbing for a kitchen. So >> yeah and like I said based on the certificate of occupancy the municipality found evidence that this is a legally existing non-conforming use.
That's why they issued the CO. >> Okay. >> Thank you Mr. Battel. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions from the public? >> Hearing none. Counselor your next witness. We have no further witnesses at this time. The property owners are here
in case there are any questions. But >> are there any member board members that would like to comment on this application? >> Hearing none. Are there any members of the public at this time? Would you like to come forward and comment on the application?
Mr. Patel. Sorry. Sorry. Yeah. In closing, just to mention again, I've lived in the house right next door for 30 years, taking care of Eleanor, who previously occupied the house until she passed away three years ago. Uh I know that house in and
out. Uh neighbor as well. We've been here 30 years. We've had no issue with anyone. Neighbors are fine. We have no issue with neighbors. Uh biggest concern is parking. Like I said, my parents are retired. They're they're elderly now. My father still works second shift at night. Sometimes
he has a parked. I'm not sure if you're familiar with South Mazer Parkway, but he has to park by the flashing light. Walk actually recently during a snowstorm walked down a sidewalk to get home because there was no parking because my mother and I had to park in the driveway. Next morning I would move my car out, take me 20 minutes, get the
cars out, find parking space, parallel park on the street. Unfortunately, block traffic. Uh it's it's a very busy road. My neighbor ac street, who's uh you know, he's shy, so I speak for him. He has a young girl. My neighbor next door has a young girl. We have kids playing on the street. We have
kids playing on the playground. There's just there's no parking right now. There's and it's unfortunately uh being being a resident for 30 years. I mean, I've seen everything. And yeah, I might seem young. I'm up there, but uh
it's I just feel bad for my parents. I mean, I won't be there much longer, but what my parents do? They've been there. They've paid for this house. They paid it off. They've done what they've done, due diligence. They're, you know, they're not educated. They've they've done what they've done, and then they want to leave peacefully. Unfortunately,
my father, who's still working, can't come home peacefully to find parking to get home safely. Uh, and my mother when she has to go to doctor's appointments, she has to worry about she lose her parking spot or whatnot. Uh, and like I said, that's
biggest concern is parking and the safety of our children on the streets living on a main street. That's all to say. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Patel. Any other members of the public that would like to come forward?
>> Hi. Uh my name is Kevin Bas. I live in 630 South Master. Uh like my neighbor said, I got called the town like three times a guy right next to me. They got like six fire cars. I even have a video that he
hit my retaining wall. And I call the police. I make the report and they they haven't do nothing. My retaining wall is still there. I haven't fixed it. So my concern is the parking. Like my neighbor said there, they got big van and they
got like six cars on the street. Every time I call the police, they just go and move the car to another spot. So sometimes I get out of home late, there's no parking. That's my concern there. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Diaz. Counselor, would you like to sum up? >> Yes. Uh just briefly, >> wait, excuse me. >> I wanted to ask the question. Sure. Can the property owners or owner come up forward? We have a question from Miss Scott.
>> Mario. Right. Okay. >> Can I ask the witness to swear or affirm that the testimony you provide this evening is the truth and the whole truth? >> Yes, sir. >> And for the record, could you state and spell your name with your affiliation? >> Mario Ferrer. I'm the property owner 631 South Mass Parkway. >> Thank you.
>> Good evening. I think I did hear your neighbor say that across the street somebody has five or six cars that there was some kind of arrangement that they pay to park in the driveway. Did I hear that? >> No.
>> Is there a current arrangement for someone to pay to park? >> No. >> Was it an arrangement? >> No. >> Is the garage being used for parking or is it being used for storage? >> Not my garage. >> Yes. >> Yes. Storage inside. Will it be used for parking? >> Yes.
>> Okay. >> Um just a question. I know the neighbors been stating that everybody has a parking issue and everything. They have such as much parking as I do in my house. I have four parking spots. They have sp unfortunately have to move in and out because that's what everybody
does complying with the other neighbors. If you have six or seven cars, I can't control other people to myself. As all the property owners pay pay taxes, everybody has four parking spots. We all have to move in and out. That's the consequences that we bought the house. When we bought the house, we all knew
that we had to live with those consequences, you know. >> But your intent to kind of fix to go out for parking. >> No, you use it for the tenants. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Mr. Fier. That's >> Thank you. Thanks, >> councelor. Would you like to
>> Yes, just briefly. And yeah, I do recognize the concerns of the of the neighbors with respect to parking, but to Mr. Pansula's point, you know, you get when you come in with an application here, I don't think we could dictate that people can't park on the street, but it
gives some teeth to uh perhaps looking into and and the and the property owner uh instructing per the resolution that hopefully the board will adopt approving this that the parking on site or the parking available on site should be used
for that parking on site. I think it's uh the modifications that are being made to the to this home are very minor and in fact by adding closets it helps attract more quality quality tenants that's going to say okay I'm I'm I'm going to live here and move here because
the house now has has closets and investing into uh this home and bringing it into a good condition for quality tenants is is important. Again I think the testimony of Mr. uh Hudac outlines the justification for
the relief being sought and we look forward to the board granting this and again no problems with the conditions that uh Mr. Pansula noted and again our client will also speak to uh the engineering department as to whether not any drainage mitigation uh is needed. So
thank you and I appreciate the neighbors coming out. >> Thank you Mr. Hail. At this time, I believe we can counsel this. Mr. Bentegna, would you like to begin? >> Yes. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. After
hearing testimony tonight, I feel that it justifies the variance requested. I do like the fact that there's no change to the front elevation, which is suitable for the neighborhood. And I'll be voting yes tonight.
>> Miss Little. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I do take concern and um I feel for the neighbors with regard to the parking and hopefully the owners will try to
alleviate that issue by encouraging their new tenants to use the onsite parking. Other than that, I do believe that this is a good application. Um, I don't see any other problems with
it and I will be voting yes. >> Mr. Graves, >> I concur my colleagues and I will be supportive of this application. >> Miss Martins. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, after hearing the testimony provided tonight,
I do think this is a clean, straightforward application, an improvement to the current site. Um, and I do think that the subject does have out of ad out adequate parking for the number of bedrooms. So, I will be voting yes, >> Mr. Wy.
>> Yeah, Mr. Chairman, I um I agree with all my colleagues. Uh, I think that this is a good application, good and clean. Uh, far as with the parking, I mean, he has adequate parking for his property. He has no control over what the other
neighbors would do. So, um, I don't see anything negative about the building itself. So, I'm going to vote yes. >> Mr. McNeel. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I I would concur with my colleagues um that this is a very clean application and in fact,
uh, based on testimony, there's one additional parking space provided based on the use of this property. Um, it's unfortunate that that the neighborhood is densely populated and they have
issues with with with parking, but it's not going to be exacerbated by this application. So, I intend to vote yes. >> Miss Scott, >> good evening. I concur with my colleagues. The application was clean. Unfortunately, the parking situation is
the parking situation is hopeful that, you know, the new owners will, you know, do whatever they can to alleviate some of the parking issues. So, I will also be voting yes. As for myself, uh based on tonight's testimony, I feel the variances requested uh will not have a
negative impact on the property or the neighboring property owners. I concur with my colleagues, and I too will be voting yes. At this time, I have a motion and a second to grant the application. >> Mr. Chairman, I move that the board
grant the variance applicable to this application and the council is directed to prepare a resolution consistent with the board's decision. Second >> roll call. >> Mr. Wy, >> yes. >> Mr. McNeel, >> yes. >> Miss Scott, >> yes. >> Miss Martins,
>> yes. >> Miss Little, >> yes. >> Mr. Ben, >> yes. >> Mr. Champion, >> yes. >> Thank you very much. Appreciate it. >> April 8th. >> April 8th. >> Be the resolution of approval. Great. >> Thank you again. Appreciate your time
this evening. Continuing with tonight's meeting, our next case is calendar number 3472, Mario and Andrea Ferrer. Location this time is 635 Southmaster Parkway, block
2710, lot three. Again, it's the same type situation, a pre-existing non-conforming two family in a single family zone. Mr. Hail. >> Yes. Good evening, Mr. Chairman and board members. Again, Stephen Hail representing Mario and Andrea Ferrara.
And yes to the chair's uh comment similar in the sense that this is a pre-existing non-conforming two family use in a one family zone. We do have the certificate of occupancy which our uh professional planner who will be Mr.
Hudac again will identify uh and uh we have a a different architect uh for this project but again same property owners and he's going to take us through uh what was the existing conditions and then what's proposed uh by way of
improvements. Uh a bit of a difference here and I know that uh building department is aware of this. uh the uh there were in fact improvements made both to the interior and exterior of the property and additional impervious was
added. Um I think you'll be impressed with the how the the house was renovated uh both interior and exterior. Uh but we do have to have um you know the the testimony to justify uh the relief that
that we're seeking in connection with this application. So um what I'd like to do first is to call upon uh uh or just have uh our architect if you come on and
we'll identify the plans and again show what improvements were made. Uh there also was and I had an opportunity to speak to council uh that there was impervious that was added to the to the property uh and uh Mark Stefanelli will
he just has not only a plan of the of the overview of the area but of the uh of the property and can show and I believe we can eliminate some of the impervious to bring that down. And again, our our our client has no problem
with speaking to the engineering department to see again if if some subsurface detention the like is is uh is warranted. Just for the record to Mr. Hail, I did mark A1 the application with supporting materials as it was submitted and I
marked A2 the architectural plans of Mark Stephanelli uh consisting of six sheets which were dated through April of 2025. So A1 and A2. For the record, can I ask the witness to swear or affirm the testimony you provide this evening is the truth and the whole truth?
>> I do. >> And for the record, could you state and spell your name with your affiliation? >> Yes. Mark Stephanelli. S T E F A N E L L I. I'm a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey. Uh licensed and insured.
I've been an architect for uh approximately uh 30 years, my own business for 20 years, and my office is 375. >> We'll accept Mr. Stephanelli's credentials. >> Great. Thank you very much. All right. Uh Mr. Stephanelli, you've actually had the benefit of watching the previous
application. I've explained that this one's a little different because improvements were made uh to the property. So, if you could take us through uh an overview of the site layout and what are now existing conditions, but also highlight what
changes were made to the property. Okay. >> Uh and again, it's it's still a pre-existing non-conforming two family use. >> Correct. >> Um I'd like to start off by um describing the existing house which is on the screen right now, which is uh
sheet two. Uh if you look at the left side of the drawing, you can see um let's start with the basement. So the basement has a rear door and basically um just a bathroom and I believe um Mario could testify to this, but there
was a kitchen in this corner. So it had a kitchen and a bathroom open room with utilities and a rear door out to the backyard. Uh if we move over to the center drawing, uh the first floor had um a common entry porch in the front
with one stoop and one door which uh split off into two doors. The left door would go up to the second floor apartment being the existing two family and the right door um had a apartment on the right side
which had one bedroom towards the rear uh kitchen, living room, dining room and then another room which I can call a den uh didn't actually have a window in it. So that's basically a den and a bedroom and a kitchen, dining room, living room, and
a door to the common porch. If you went up the second uh floor stairs on the lefthand side, there was a um kitchen and bath, existing kitchen, existing bath, uh one bedroom towards the front and then I would call it a den also
towards the back because it was basically under the roof. So that would be the um the existing conditions. If let me see if I have my plan here. I mean my my pictures. >> That's sheet two I believe. >> Aerial text map.
>> Um I have some existing where are they? Trevor can help me >> my existing pictures. Oh, there they are. Okay. Right. So here is the center picture here on the top is basically what the
house used to look like. And if you look at the aerial view, you could see that the block uh self master's uh a most of the houses are pretty much all the same. So that's what it used to have. A front
porch uh dead center with a path dead center to a common area and a a dormer, nice size dormer on the roof. And the picture to the left is the improvements um that were done to the house. You could see that uh it was definitely
brought up. Um it's more aesthetically pleasing. The the um materials were improved. I believe it's hardy it's hardy board siding now. uh new steps, new windows, new roof. Um the the landscaping has been cleaned up and changed. And you can see the rear the
rear is on the right hand side here with the new siding, windows and stairs and pavers. And also the garage was actually updated also and the driveway paved. Um okay, to go back to go back to my
drawing. It's on the bottom there. Okay. There you go. Thank you. So, the new construction on the on the inside is on sheet three. Um, you can see sheet three. It has basement first
floor and second floor. The darker walls would be the new walls. So again on the first floor you have the two new stoops, one for the second floor stair and one uh going straight into the first floor apartment. So the common porch has been
removed. This front bedroom was added with the window. Um this middle room is still considered a den. And then the existing bedroom towards the rear has been enlarged with uh more closets and a laundry room and an updated
kitchen. So you have kitchen, living room, dining room, two bedrooms, a den, bathroom in the middle and uh a laundry room towards the rear and then an exit out to the rear porch with the new stair. the second floor. Sorry, the
second floor. If you come up the stairs, there's the existing bathroom that was renovated. Obviously, new kitchen that replaced existing and the back, the roof of the back was basically raised, uh, removed, and a new 8ft high wall was
built with two bedrooms and two closets and two windows. So there are two bedrooms in the back and again there's a small den area that uh we're calling a den with a p actually an office. It's basically an office area den and uh there's a bathroom in that area also. So
you have an existing bathroom uh a new bathroom for the front office, new kitchen and two two bedrooms. Um so uh the basement uh construction
there were two rooms added in the basement which we are proposing to be a storage room at this point. A storage room and uh an office and a utility room. And like I said the kitchen and bathroom are
to remain. And then there is one uh exit to the to the rear and we'll go over the use of the the basement is for uh owner's personal use. Are we that? >> Yeah. Our planner will cover that. >> Okay. Planner will we'll testify against
that about that. >> Um M. Excuse me. I I I have a comment on that there. I want an affidavit on that. There's going to have to be some we're not we're not going to that's very shaky ground when we start doing stuff like that. So that needs to be regulated
heavily. We absolutely have no uh living in the basement as sleeping quarters in the basement and that will at some point we are going to address that uh whether it needs to be in some sort of resolution so we can hold them
accountable. There will be no sleeping down there. Yeah. >> Okay. Well, we'll have you we'll have you uh affirm to that. And I think what we've done in the past uh Mr. Pula uh is
we can include that the board is kind enough to approve the resolution have have that condition in the resolution and the resolution gets recorded. So 10 years from now somebody buys the house and it's like oh I can yeah make a bedroom out of the basement. They can't
because there's a it's in the chain of title. >> Okay. >> So, >> whatever we have to do, Mr. Hail, >> this is a little different than the one before. Correct. There's some history. >> Is that is the basement area exclusively for the use of the first story apartment
or does both is that common area for both occupants of the premises? >> Um, all I can say is the basement has a separate entrance uh to the rear. It's not connected to the first floor. So, uh I think um Mario and the planner will
testify the use of that particular room. >> Um >> so the only access to the basement is a separate >> from the >> ingress and egress from the outside from the rear. >> From the rear, correct? >> So you can't access it from the first floor apartment at all? >> No, not at this point. No. >> So let me I have a question another one
now. So if it's you got a >> you can see it on the screen. >> Two family house. Okay. And a separate quarters down in the basement for use of for who? >> For the owner. >> For the owner. >> It's It's for the owner. The It's the
owner's space, but it won't It would not be used as an apartment, but it's the owner's space. >> They live in the area, obviously, and it would be used by the owner. >> Well, wait, wait, you can't. >> They live in the area. >> Again, he I can't really speak for him, so I'd like him to answer that question.
>> Yeah, you got to You can't testify yet. Does the owner live in the house? >> No, in the neighborhood. >> No, no, he's in the area. >> Okay, I understand your concern. So, just to wrap up, there only two more
sheets. Uh, sheet five just indicating the upgrades to the electric. So all the electric uh plumbing, insulation um and framing have been improved and uh brought up to code. And um sheet six
just shows the basically the addition to the old house. The front elevation on the top. You see the the dormer in the middle was made wider on both sides and the the roof was removed and an
additional area was created for the bedrooms. uh in the rear. Okay. Now we can talk about the site plan. Yes. And coverages. So that's that's basically the addition of what uh what took place at the house.
>> Well well just to just to be clear uh so all this work just to be clear all this work was done without a permit because the permit is here was never picked up. That's why we're here. >> Was never issued. My apologies. It was never issued. >> Yes, that's that's acknowledged.
>> Okay. >> Okay. So, the um I can go down the bar. You want me to go down the branches now or do you want to? >> No, I I think if you just give an overview of it and then Okay. >> on the site plan as to what improvements were made. >> Okay. So you know obviously there are some existing non-conforming um u lot
size and setbacks and garage and I believe the planner will testify on that and the coverage uh the building coverage was existing at 31.6% and it was uh increased uh just a bit to
33.2 and that's basically just for enclosing that rear porch area. So it went from 31.6 6 to 33.2 and the lock coverage the existing house had a lock coverage of 64.1 and currently we are at 76%.
Um the pavers there are some pavers that will be altered to bring the lot coverage to 76%. Um so we would need a variance for that. Uh both the heights of the structure and the height of the garage are are both uh
conforming. Just so you know the uh site plan here. I'll see if I can get a little zoom in a little bit. >> I think it's a touch it might be a touch screen I think. >> Yeah, I'm kind of used to the mouse. Uh so basically you can see here uh the
driveway was existing and that driveway can accommodate at least four cars from the front to the back and then one in the garage. So you basically can accommodate five tandem parking spots. The uh anything that's not pavers is
gravel which uh is considered uh typically considered to be pvious. So there are either pavers, gravel or and and black top driveway. So whatever aren't pavers is uh gravel which like I
said is pvious uh the existing so let's see we have um the existing pavers right now are uh going from the back to the uh good
portion of the of the garage which is might be like uh 18 25 ft of pavers and we're going to be removing them to bring it down to 76. And I'm going to show you a picture right now. So, if you look at
this picture here, we're going to be removing this all these pavers right here uh from this garage just to bring the uh the coverage down. So, we're going to be taking those out as proposed in this in this presentation. Uh so that is basically the um the
overall of the project and uh let's see parking I did and then just to note uh architecturally although we do have some bulk setbacks that are existing non-conforming uh the existing basically the existing footprint of the
house was not expanded. ed in any way. It wasn't expanded towards the front or the sides or even the rear. So, the the bas the footprint of the house was maintained. So, we're not making any of the existing non-conforming setbacks any any worse. Um, and like I said, the
building coverage went up just a bit just by covering that that little square in the back. And you can see obviously that, you know, a positive to all this is uh you have a more aesthetically pleasing, a more functional, and a more um a house that's more to code than
there previously was. It's an upgrade for the uh the neighborhood. Um the house, he did he did a nice job on the construction of the house and the uh finishes. So, that is definitely a plus. Uh it looks nice. He did a nice job with the landscaping and the gravel. So, uh that could be considered a positive for
the neighborhood. >> Great. Mr. Chairman, I have no further preliminary questions of the architect at this time. >> Any board members with questions for Mr. Stephanelli? >> I have a question. >> Yes, >> Mr. Stephanelli. Let's re revert back to that last exhibit um with the garage
with the impervious. >> The picture? >> Yeah, the picture, please. >> Right. So, you me you were circling saying that some of the papers are going to get removed. Yes. >> So after the removal, are we still at 76%.
>> Uh let me clarify that. Let's see the uh >> because that's a pretty big area and >> so that area is about 300. You know, I think I have to clarify. So I think I must I might have misspoke. One second. Um that's the existing right. Oh, okay. I
am sorry. So, as you see on the site plan, this area right here, let's zoom in a little bit. Right? So, this area right here is shown on the picture. So, and that's the 76%.
So, this is actually a good thing. So, that's the 76% that is on our lock coverage. Shows up. >> Oh, no. I'm sorry. Oh, I'm wrong again. No, that is >> you're at 8. >> Lock coverage is 86.7
and we would like to reduce it down to 76. That's >> okay. That is 86 with that pavers all the way up to the garage. We're at 86.7%. We can bring it down to about 76% by taking out that area. um if we might be able to squeeze in another 100 square f
feet out of it to get it under 75, but we can reduce some of the pavers that are there now to get that 86.7 down to like 75. >> So I believe the allowance is 60%. >> Correct. Correct. >> Um so we're talking 16 20% over.
>> Correct. >> Um anyway we could work with that. I I think the according to what's built there, I think I I can I can probably achieve right around 75% be because there's really not much more we can take out um as far as what's built right now.
Um I I'm proposing that we take out about three or 400 square feet here, like a foot behind the garage. And then these walkways in the front, we could probably take out maybe 25 square feet on each side. So that's another 50. And
if you want to push it a little more, we can take out a little bit right next to the stairs. So, uh, with all of that, we can get just under 75%. And I'll give you the exact number. I can get to 73.2%. >> But I don't know if there's any other
spot I can take it out. >> Well, >> that's about it. >> Well, let let me just add to something. I mean, it can be taken out. It's just whether this board wants to grant that variance because it can be taken out. >> Well, if we take it out, there'll be no walkway to the to the stairs. There'll
be no uh platform at the bottom of the stairs. There'll be no area for >> I'm talking about the the back the backyard, which is pretty much covered. >> Yeah, we we could take that out. Correct. >> Because other houses have grass. >> So, I mean, a walkway could be put back there.
>> So, you can make this compliant. >> Um, we can go to >> Let's see. The backyard is 31 by I think it was 40 minus. >> So the the back part is gravel. The
front part is pavers in the back. Correct. >> Say I'm sorry. There's either pavers or gravel. There's really no grass. There's pavers. Gravel or black top. >> I think we need a breakdown of what's gravel and what's pavers.
The gravel is the white area on a site plan uh towards the rear of the property. And the gravel is the basically the front lawn uh with the exception of the two walkways going to the porches >> plus the patio right in the back with
all the papers. Correct. >> That's the patio. It's got the hatched area. That's the hatched area. So if we do uh let's see I think that's about six square feet. So 31. It's not the It's not the walkways. It's
the patio that's pushing you pretty much over. >> I mean, you can get a lot more compliant than >> Okay. 265. >> So, >> do do you want to take a a few minute break and look at this so we can
>> respond back to the board? Board members, we're going to take a fivem minute break. >> Okay. We got to wait for him. >> Oh, let me just Okay. >> Pardon me, but but uh he's just
reviewing the the impervious. One thing I do want to Are we back on? >> Oh, okay. Wait. Sorry. I always talk. Wait, he the chairman's got to reconvene. councelor,
would you like to continue? >> Yes, please. Uh, two things. Uh, Mr. Chairman and board members. Uh, I'm going to uh have uh Mark again explain with the uh our discussions with our client regarding the impervious. Uh, one thing I do want to clarify that the
exhibit that's up on the screen, that's why it was a little confusing. It's actually an older version. In fact, the newer version has basically the pavers ending uh at the where the garage begins. But I'll let I'll let Mark explain a little bit more in detail as
to what uh we can do to reduce the proposed impervious. And again there's no problem committing uh to working with collers if they feel that any uh detention some detention is required. So so uh
>> Mr. Stephan >> Stephanelli if you could expand on that. >> Okay. Yeah. So I apologize for the confusion. So the the digital copy on the screen is showing um what's there now and that is approximately 86%.
Uh I have revised the drawings I have in the exhibit right here and I believe you should have it in your package which shows it's this drawing right here which is um indicating the removal of a good portion of the papers to bring it down
right in front of the garage. Now I don't know if you have that in front of you but that I can I can give you the sheet. Um so that is 76%. If we do that, we can bring it down to 76% uh 2,938.
Um spoke to Mario regarding some additional coverage that we could possibly take out. If I took out two feet of pavers on each side of the walkway, that's approximately 50 square feet. And this area here is like 6 by8, which is 48. So, we can probably get
another 100 to 106 square feet out of the 76. And that would bring us down to uh just under 75 73.2%. So if you allow me to uh revise the drawings one more time, I could probably get it to 73.2%
which is 2832. Uh so that's what we can do. And then we spoke if the board prefers to have uh grass versus gravel. Um the Mario said that uh grass uh he would
put grass down as opposed to the gravel just to you know fit in with the neighborhood if that pleases the board in both cases the front and the rear >> and that and that's basically what I have. >> Okay. And then with respect there was uh brought up and I did have an opportunity
to speak to both my clients and uh our architect Mr. Finanelli and our professional planner who will testify and again with council that uh the use of the basement area would be for
because it can't be another dwelling unit or other use would be restricted to the occupants of the of the of the home either common space for first and second floor for storage and it's always good to have that overflow space available.
I think we indicated that the the kitchen there was a concern about the kitchen that the kitchen would be would be removed. >> Is there any other testimony from uh >> not from >> Mr. Stephanelli? >> No, not at this time. >> All right. At this time,
>> are there any board members that would like to question Mr. Stephanelli's testimony? >> I I do have a question, but it goes to the removal um of the kitchen. What what does that mean? What's there right now >> in the You talking about the basement? >> Yes. >> Okay. The basement has
it basically is a kitchen. Has a a stove, dishwasher, and a sink and a refrigerator and a countertop, U-shaped countertop. >> So, removal means all of the rough removed or just the fixtures removed because I mean we can approve it and they can come right back and they put
all those fixtures and all that >> those appliances back, >> right? So, >> what does removal from these plans. >> If the contingency is that the rough plumbing should either be cut, capped, or removed, then that's what we can put >> behind the wall.
>> Yeah. Cut. >> May I interject here? I I as the construction official, I I believe that it should be cut capped because there was a violation notice that was given on 517 of 2024 for a failure to um I'm
sorry, prohibited basement apartment. So at some point that's what we the the building department had determined that was going to be used for an apartment and it was and the client was aware
along with three other violations. So um I would say it would have to be removed completely >> completely >> in its entirety. No, I will note that for the record for the resolution considering
what the board and what the applicant is offering with with and I clarified that there's no access to the unit. So there's no absolutely no justification to have a kitchen in that basement area which would legally become a third unit,
a third living space which is unacceptable. And just to follow up with that, um, this new means of egress. I mean, if this is a storage area, why would you need a means of egress from the basement?
>> Are you talking about the the egress window? >> It says the new office and then it's got a new egress casement window and you're making the window well more like a a stairwell to get out. If it's if it's just going to be for storage, why would you need that?
Uh, look, I think the condition as I've noted it, there's going to be a restriction that follows this property to be recorded that that basement area will not be used as living space. So to the extent and part of the confusion for
the board I believe is some of these improvements have already been implemented without permits. So that's why we're ahead of the game with the cart before the horse a little bit. So we got to remedy it and you could put it in words and Mr. Hail even knows this as
the lawyer cuz he he and I have done enough of these over the years. recording it in the deed is what flows and people who buy it 5 years from now realize, oh, we can't put an apartment in that basement. Any semblance of improvement that was implemented with an
eye towards living down there needs to be cured, needs to be undone. The kitchen, if there's Mr. Mc McNeel is making good points in terms of access windows and that's living space criteria, not acceptable.
So that has to be changed legally. If if we're going to make the the condition stick, >> that's the way you implement it because >> you don't want to get an approval and then two weeks from now realize that they're snubbing their nose at what it is is the concern here. >> And these are legal issues. Yeah, but
would there be and we've done these many times an objection to I know it's going to be storage, but also it could be common space for tenants if they wanted to use it for put a ping pong table, put a pool table, things like that, like a
wreck area. We've done that on many of these for common space for for the for the occupants of the first or second floor. Well, I I I can't honestly say that I would agree to
that, you know, but I mean, you're going to have a bathroom or is that coming out also >> because then what stops people then? >> Yeah. No, I think it's >> Are both tenants going to be able to use it? you you >> are both tables going to tenants going to be able to use it
>> testify. >> I think the basement needs to become storage space because we've seen two family units that have basement space uh accessible to the two unit owners. We did one two weeks ago and it's for storage. And the reason that storage is
encouraged, it keeps storage out of the detached garage so you could put a car in there because parking, as we heard from the prior case, is one of the main issues for the neighborhood. You have a guy across the street who's driving the two neighbors who were here for the earlier case nuts by putting six cars in
and around every place. So if you have a garage that has a car parked there, the the materials you normally would put in the garage to store can go in the basement. That's what the that's what the theory of a of a common area basement is. Not to to embellish it with
recreational facilities and because that becomes living space, you know, and that's that's the concern. Um if I can address the window. So you know obviously light and air is a good thing in any room for for livable space.
Uh but uh if that that window was proposed to be an ingress window if that triggers like you said uh a living space we can alter the window. I mean I don't want to take the window out completely because again light and air is a good thing. So we can alter the window to be
just under an egress. So it does not qualify for an egress and then uh a bedroom would not be allowed in that room because the window would be I mean I wouldn't make it back to an 18 inch. I would get it so it's under an egress window but at least get uh additional light and air because the well is there
now. Um so we can get I think an egress window is 2'4 by 3 foot five or 3 foot2x 4 foot 9. This I believe is the casement which is 24 by 35. So we could make it 24 by uh either three feet or two foot
10 just under the egress size. So it couldn't be considered an egress with them. >> Well well understandable but with all due respect respect Mr. Stephanelli there was a there was a violation notice for a prohibited basement apartment. So that
window is just that's telling me that there's a possibility that we're going to use it. We're going to create a three family and a one family because if somebody's sleeping in there and you got somebody on the first floor and somebody on the second floor, that's creating a three family. This board has been down this road many times and I'm here 20ome
years. So, you know, this board has to protect the neighborhood. It has to have the best interest, the well, the safety, the welfare, and the being of the neighborhood. So like I said there is evidence okay of violations and the
clients are fully aware of them. So I think that you know the architect's suggestion to make it a I agree that a window is not necessarily a bad thing. The the living space qualifying window is what the problem. So if the dimensions will be adjusted so it wouldn't qualify,
>> right? And then >> I think that makes sense. And then >> and therefore illegal for a livable space because it's not an >> exactly. So even 5 years from now if if somebody tries to use it as living space and in addition to the resolution
you could look at and say it's illegal because it's not a window that permits living space. So that's another avenue. I mean the bathroom is the same logic quite frankly because you know who's who's the two units don't have direct access to that area. So of the two units you know who cleans it who puts toilet
paper in there. You know there's just no reason to have an extra bathroom in the garage in essence cuz this is going to be storage space. That's the way it is. It's there because it was being used as an illegal apartment. That's why the I mean the the bathroom
I imagine was accommodating living space. >> I believe that was existing. I >> it was on the existing plan I saw. But I I would be willing to bet that what's there now in terms of a toilet perhaps or as a sink >> to clean up in the basement area. I
don't know. >> Tomorrow I can get that from the tax department because they'll have to lay out if it was original or not. But again, you know, >> I just have two questions. Does is the property currently occupied? No one lives in the property.
>> Are you asking me that? >> I'm asking the owners. The first floor is occupied. Nobody lives on the property. >> Wait before I'm sorry. >> Go ahead. >> If you're going to answer the questions, you got to come up and be sworn again. >> I have a question. >> Does anybody And this is just for
clarification. >> Is there a separate utility built for the basement? Like is that line on the first floor or the second floor or does it have its own? >> I'll let him answer that because I'm not exactly sure. >> Yep. >> You're going to have to come up and be
>> No, no, no, no. Let's finish with the architect. We need to call the owner. >> I know you have a lot of questions. I just don't want to answer in uh incorrectly. >> Right. If you know, you can answer. If not, we'll have to call the owner up and we'll clarify that information. have a question for
just a point of clarity. There appears to be a lot of revisions required to these architectural plans that we have before us. Um are they going to be revised or are they are these changes going to be captured in the resolution?
>> I will try if the board's going to act favorably, I could try to capture because the specifics that Mr. Hail and I have discussed can be binding legally. The one caveat is Collars has already committed the applicant to do a pre it's
supposed to be pre-construction meeting. There is more construction that has to be done to undo some of this. So Collier and in the town will still have their hands on what's going to be done. We're doing it with the pavers and the grass. I imagine we're going to do it with the basement area as well.
>> Yeah. I mean that's if if you want to envision it, Mr. McNeel, is that something you want to see? Is that what you're suggesting in terms of what it's going to look like? >> Yeah, I mean, you know, the these drawings are prepared by a professional and they are going to be a
record. Um, I would rather see what the the actual proposal is going to look like and vote on what they're actually going to do than what um they're supposed to do. >> Certain certainly a fair request. If I
may, sir, um if you approve tonight with the stipulations and the uh conditions, um my office could prepare a revised set of drawings within, you know, the 10 days prior to the 10 days of the next meeting and we could have them dropped
off to your your offices uh more than 10 days before so you can vote and do the resolution next month. I don't have any problem doing that. revising the drawings for the the resolution of next month if with the conditions hopefully I I meet the conditions and you can you
can review it. >> I think what Mr. McNeel is is suggesting uh Mr. Stephanelli is he'd like to see in in drawings what it is you're committing to before he votes. Is that accurate Mr. >> It is I feel
>> and I think we also want to make sure that the kitchen is gone and it's not becoming an enforcement issue. It doesn't, you know, even though it's in a resolution, it still will require the building construction official to come out there to make sure that there's not a kitchen kitchen there. So, if the commitment is to get rid of the kitchen,
let's get rid of the kitchen. You revise the plans and then you guys feel free to get a date and come back. I think I would be more comfortable with that. That's just me. I can't speak for the board, but that's my position. >> I feel the same way. I concur with my two colleagues here. I have a question.
>> You said a few minutes ago, what's the for having a window for additional light in here. If that's a storage area, what's the rationale for having that window? Light and air is always a good thing. That's all. Uh light and air is a good thing. Uh it's the egress that's the uh
the issue. I mean, a lot of basements have uh windows. They're usually like 1 foot seven tall by 2 foot eight. Uh like I said, the opening's there. I can bring it down to whatever the board would make the board happy. I can bring it to 30 in
24 in. It's just a shame to lose the light that's already there. I know the egress is an issue, but um I mean, you know, light and air is always a good thing. That's all my >> gun for storage. >> Uh it's true, but you have to go into the storage room. So,
>> chairman, I just have a question. Can you confirm, are your mechanicals in the unit? Uh hot water heaters, or are they are they in the units or all in the basement? If you look at the second floor plan here, uh there is >> which sheet are we?
>> Uh sheet three. Okay. >> So the second floor apartment uh basically we have a washerd dryer there stackable and we have a um instaot water heater for the uh bathroom up
there. But I believe the individ Oh, and then there's many splits. I'm sorry. There are many splits on both floors. So, there are many splits on both floors and that's why we have the conductors in the backyard. So, both
levels have many splits and an instaot on the first one, too. So, Instaot and mini splits, which are condensers on the uh on the wall. I think you're familiar hopefully. And then there are some condensers in the back. Uh there are air handlers which attach to the wall, hot and cold. And
then there's a condenser in the backyard. Um and they are inside each unit. Correct. >> And then you also have a water heater in the basement as well. >> And the water heater in the basement I believe is where it's removed. Okay. So that will be removed. The water heater in the basement. >> Okay. Thank you,
>> Mr. Stephanelli. Are there separate meters? >> I'm sorry. I don't know the answer to that. >> Okay. I I can answer that. >> Yes. >> It was a meter issue problem. PSC and G.
>> So each apartment has their own meters. >> Okay. >> It's three meters. >> So is there two in a house meter or three in a house? >> There's three. I guess >> it's three. >> Well, I I got back to see. >> Yeah. >> All right. Let me poll Let me uh
council, I'd like to poll the uh board. >> Can I can I just ask one more question? >> Sure. Uh, and I I missed it to be honest with you. Is Is there a renter in this house now? >> I think he indicated there is one now >> on the first floor. On >> on the first floor. >> That's what he said.
>> Okay. There's no rental registration for that. all his questions. >> Um, board members, um, would you like to, um, see the revised plans and conditions before, uh, we hear any further testimony? Henry, Mr. McNeel, I
know you. Scott Anthony. >> Yeah, I believe we should go that route. Um, just by hearing the testimony that's been, I guess, worked on you know without permission we can't I I agree with that >> miss little
>> I agree >> is very pro problematic >> miss Martins >> yes >> okay >> so counselor would we like to uh adjourn and um >> reise get a get a future date without notice
>> sure what are we looking at >> well some of it is off the architects what realist istic timetable. I think you said you can >> get the plans when? >> Pretty good. I've done it before. Two or three weeks.
Um, so yeah, I mean, as long as you give me the 10 days before the meeting or we would send in the drawings and then present at the meeting, right? Is that how it works? Well, we'd want it 10 days before you so callers could just make sure some of these changes, right, including the paper confusion because
>> there is confusion there in terms of what >> So, the work doesn't have to be done, but the drawings have to indicate the work that will be done. >> Exactly. >> Gotcha. >> I thought we was also asking that the kitchen be >> Oh, absolutely. Yeah. >> Absolutely. Uh, Miss Scott, >> on the drawing, I don't think the work has been done just yet.
>> And the bathroom, too, right? >> Right. >> Well, I don't know. Did we talk about the bathroom? The bathroom was existing. Is that Is that still Well, I will confirm that with >> I will confirm that with the tax department. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> So, we are looking at
>> Mark if we if we go to that is that David available >> the eth. Um, >> April the 8th. >> I do have a question. >> I got 15. >> Who's on the ETH? The resolution. Well, that means he'd have to get the
plans in next week. I mean, is he going to do that? >> How long take >> How long had 20 days? >> No. >> Yeah, that's what I was hearing, too, Mr. Stef. >> I think we got to go a little later in April. >> I got the 8th or the 15th. >> He's got to get the plans in.
>> Yeah, >> the meeting is the 15th. >> We have an open date the 15th. I I don't know if you can handle that, but if not, >> the meeting is the 15th. >> When can you? >> Yeah, but we can do later. >> Then I could judge the date. How quickly can you have the plans done? >> 15th.
>> Uh, so what's my deadline? Uh, 15th minus 10. So it would be the 5th. April 5th. >> That's Easter. >> So by Easter? >> April 6th. >> April 6th. >> You need revised drawings by April 6th. >> Now if you're going to make what date? >> The 15th.
>> The 15th. I know I'm not available, but uh you want to go with that date? If not, it's May 13th. Um, what's I think we'd be looking to give a little bit more time in colleges to review it for the 22nd.
Yeah, we have to move that other one, Trevor. But we'll move that. We can move that one. Maybe we can move that other one up. >> You guys are one day away from my vacation, so be careful. >> That we would carry this until April
22nd to give Mr. Stephanelli time to review revise plans, get them submitted, have cyers review them and and again give the >> applicant waves any time constraints of the board can realize >> no problem with that >> April 22nd.
>> That's that's the meeting >> and then 10. >> Thank you. That I appreciate it. >> At this time, can I have a motion in a second to adjourn tonight's meeting? and we're going to continue hearing on April the 22nd and it will be without notice.
>> Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to adjourn calendar number 3472, Mario and Andrea Ferrara, uh 635 Southmaster Parkway. The block is 2710. The lot is number three. This will be adjourned to April 22nd, same time
without notice. Um can I have a second? >> Second. >> Roll call. >> Mr. WY. >> Yes. >> Miss Martins, >> yes. >> Mr. Bentega, >> yes. >> Miss Scott, >> yes. >> Mr. McNeel, >> yes. >> Miss Little, >> yes. >> And Mr. Champy, >> yes.
>> Great. >> Thank you very much. I appreciate your time and working with us this evening. >> Thank you. >> Have a great night. >> Mr. Chairman, there being no further business before the board, I adjourn. All >> in favor? Opposed? So moved.