[Music] the whole thing. Okay. Right. Try it now. Am I okay now? Wow. 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 our May 21st. No, wait a minute. May 7th meeting. Mr. Chairman, I move that the meeting minutes of May 7th meeting be approved as written and dispensed. May I have a second? Second. Second. All
in favor? I opposed. So moved. Mr. Monguso, are there any communications? Uh, Mr. Chairman, there are no communications at this time. Hearing none, we can continue with tonight's meeting. Our first order of business this evening
is calendar number 3454, Overcomers ABA Services LLC, located at 1370 Morris Avenue, block 1303, lots 7 and 29. Applicant wishes to construct an office
building and training center for ABA in instructors with on-site parking. Do we have counsel here for the applicant? Sorry, number two. Good evening. Good evening. Would you like to begin? Pardon? Would you like to
begin, Mr. Goodman? Uh, if you have a shorter one that want to go because my architect's not here yet. Does the applicant wish to speak? Do you have a couple other witnesses? Yes, I do. Okay. You want to proceed? Yeah, I'll begin. Okay. Name is Gary Goodman and I'm here
uh representing Overcomers, which is an organization which u trains uh folks who go into homes for children who are on the spectrum. Um they are renovating an
existing property on Mars Avenue uh which is zoned for uh the use that they want to make of it. Uh and it's on a lot that's zoned um uh commercial, but the rear lot which is a separate tax lot uh
is zoned uh in the residential zone and it's on this lot that they want to uh add additional parking to. um as the applicant uh will testify, uh she uh plans on training, uh I guess uh
trainers, uh people who are going to be working in the homes and uh approximately there is a need uh by the zone for 22 parking spaces and um uh she is going to have a number of these uh
people in training uh who are going to need place to park. Uh her proposal uh is to turn the rear yard into a uh parking area which when combined with
the existing parking on the uh present lot will uh fulfill the obligation of the uh 22 spaces. It will be her testimony that when she planned this project, she met with uh I think the zoning official and um representatives
of the town and um was u uh told that uh they helped her I think design the area in the parking lot that was going to remain uh like a large buffer area in the rear. Uh so uh she was trying to
follow what the uh folks in the township were guiding her. And um without further ado, I'd like to call Stephanie. Hi, good evening everyone. Good evening. I'm Pansul, the board attorney. Uh I'm in the back here. Can I ask you to raise your right hand and swear or affirm that
the testimony you provide this evening is the truth and the whole truth? Yes. And for the record, could you state and spell your name with your affiliation? Stephanie Tyo. S T E P H A N I E. T A I W.
And what is your affiliation? I'm the owner of um 1370 Morris Avenue. Thank you. Would you like to proceed? Yes. So, um, let me ask you the question, Stephanie. Okay. Uh, so you're the owner of 1370 Morris Avenue, correct? Yes. Correct.
Uh, and, uh, you are also the, um, principal of an organization called Overcomers. Yes. Could you tell the board please what Overcomers is about? So, Overcomers is an agency. We were established in 2021 officially and we've
been providing children on the spectrum of autism with services. So, behavioral therapy services. And this is going to be primarily in the homes or in public school districts and daycarees as such. Um, and right now we are planning on expanding and growing to meet the demand
of the children who are going to be, you know, needing more services in our area. And what is your proposal for the house at 1370 in terms of what you want to do with that uh facility and how it is
going to uh service your company? So right now because we are going into the homes and into the schools um we necessarily need like a place of common ground for training staff right so to manage such things as crisis management
um if a case where a child is engaging in severe tantrums or self-injurious behaviors we kind of have to go out to the you know remote locations to provide those trainings whereas now with 1370 we can have a common ground where they can all come and receive these trainings all
at once. on time on a schedule um system. So uh at 1370 uh how many staff members uh will you have uh not including the trainees who are coming but just people who are going to be in
your employee to train people. So about right now including myself it'll be about six people and um how many trainees uh will be attending at one time? So we're looking anywhere between 10 and 15 at once. So in total it
probably be about 20 people occupying the space. And what would be the hours of the operation that these trainees would be trained? From 8 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Okay. And uh how many days a week? Monday through Friday. Okay. Do you u
have any uh evening uh hours or special events that would require you to be in operation in the evenings? No. also will be operating 8 to 5:00 Monday through Friday. Okay. Okay. Now, um the facility itself, uh
what are you proposing doing to the to the house? So, right now, um we are looking to expand on the back lot with um parking. So, the building that we are lifting to is about three stories. Right now, it currently is about two and a
half. Um, and we're just adding a full floor on that third floor. And then the back would be additional parking area in that second lot, seven, I believe. And so the various rooms, are they going to be used as like classrooms to train people? So, and offices, correct? So,
it's going to be office spaces. Um, and just divided depending on whatever group each trainee would be part of. Okay. All right. Uh, I have no further questions. Mr. Ma'am, are there any board members that would like to question the
applicant? I have a question concerning the um the facility and and what you're going to be doing. Is there any special licensing required um to operate that type of facility? Yes. So, I am a board certified behavior analyst. So, I am
certified and licensed to be able to provide the training. Look, you're going to have will you require the licensing of the other six that's going to be training the other folks? Are they going to be licensed also? Yes, they are deemed supervisors. So, they are also licensed. So, basically exactly what I'm licensed for.
They are also holding the same certifications. Will there be any handicapped or autistic children in the facility? So, the children are not going to be in the facility. This the facility is for the staff members as we go to their location. So
we go to the children's location, their homes or the schools. It's a lot of space for 21 people. We do plan on expanding, right? So we're looking at the future and just not for right now because if we're going to be putting all this work into what we do, we do want it to be
something that we can grow into. when you say expand where you start petitioning off the areas or keeping it open space the way it's proposed. So primarily right now it is an open more of an open floor concept and then from as much as we need to you know divide
rooms into we can do that along the way but um right now it mainly is an open floor concept. Are there any other board members that would like to question the applicant? I have a question. Um just to clarify my colleague said so there'll be you won't be performing any evaluations or
anything to the children on site. No not for the children on there will be no children on site. Okay. Thank you. Can I just ask when I swore you in this is Rob Pansul the board attorney. Where is the current operation located that you're I assume you have a current
operation. So we are operating wherever the child is. So we are in public schools throughout Essis and Union County. We are in um the child's home primarily and daycarees. So this is like a first effort for you to try to have a
common area to train correct the people that you're offering to go into these schools. Correct. Yes. Correct. Rather than Did you do an analysis of any other neighborhoods or locations? But I realize the building here it is in a zone that it might be conducive to what you the use is as your attorney said,
but the problem and why you're in the zoning board is you need a use variance because the rear is a residential zone. I mean, do you understand that? And and you understand the implications involved with that. I imagine you'll defer to your professionals, but um it's Were there other sites that you considered
before you looked in on this one? Yes. Um, I will just be transparent and say I when I was purchasing the property, there was some information that, um, I wasn't aware of when I purchased the property. Um, but along the way, we we kind of just had to make it work at that
point because So, you've already p purchased the property. You're the owner. Yes. The property hasn't purchased over a year ago. Okay. So, there's no Okay. Any other board members that would like to question the testimony of this applicant?
Hearing none at this time. Are there any members of the public that would like to question just the testimony that the applicant has provided? Not not necessarily a comment, just the testimony. Thank you.
Good evening. My name is Joe Cran. I'm a resident of 1371 Beverly Road. My property abuts the back along here along with my wife. So you, if I understood you correctly, you purchased property just a little over a year ago. Yes. Okay. The property since that time, and I don't know if it's appropriate, so
please correct me if I'm wrong. It wasn't testified to, but the property since that time has fallen into significant disrepair. Did that happen under your ownership? So yes and no. So initially um things that were already kind of falling apart when I purchased a property it is a very
old property um so when I purchased a property things were already falling apart like um in the back especially. So by the time we initially had it's been a long process mind you right to be able to get before you all today. Um but by the time we had initial plans and things
set, we were expecting a whole different set of drawings that initially were supposed to um be implemented and then we had to switch over to kind of a new more um efficient plan. So yes and no. Okay. So a couple more specific
questions. By the way, you purchased it over a year ago. How much longer than a year ago did you actually purchase it? Um, so we purchased it in March of 2024. So, so 14 or so months ago. Correct. Okay. The the property had at that time
a significant amount of mature trees in the residential zone that the board has been discussing. Did you authorize the removal of those trees? I did. So, um, I I would say um, at that point it was in
the rear of the lot, right? So technically the backyard of the lot. Um and since it was on our property in the rear of the lot, we were just told that we would have the authority to be able to take them down. You were told ju just just to clarify
that we had many complaints on that just so you know. And that's when we this is how it started. We got complaints that they were clearing out trees. So, you never actually checked with the town to see if you can clear out trees because there's no we have no call or record of
you calling. And that is correct. Okay. Um just to be just to be clear, he told you. So, just to be clear, when we reached out to the um the contractor that did take do the um tree take down, he informed us that this is your backyard. This is your property. If it was on the front of the property or
affecting city lines by any chance, then you know, we would have had to um contact. But just legally by law the they let us know that we didn't need to. So the contractor you hired told you it was okay to remove significant mature trees that affected and abudded numerous
properties but it was in our backyard and the property you it was still on our property. It was still in our backyard on our property. Okay. Secondly, who created the disrepair of the home uh or of the excuse me the structure? There's been for the board's edification. You
hadn't testified to it, but I hope it's okay to say. N all the windows are removed, right? It's got, matter of fact, the back windows, to my understanding, matter of fact, I visually saw it, are still broken. There's glass in the back area. Grass is rarely cut. It's cut currently. U but it
certainly, shall we say, grows high at times. Is that a fair way to put it? So, who who authorized the disrepair of the home and the removal of of the structure and the windows? Was that you? So, I did have a contractor that was on the case at that time. Um, and he kind
of informed me that maybe it would be best to kind of just get things started because we were at that time we thought things were going to move quickly. We didn't really know that we were going to run into more issues based off of zoning. Um, so that was his suggestion and then I kind of just
went along with it. So, the same is it the same contractor who said it was just fine to remove? No, those that was two separate two other another contract. Yes. Okay. For for the record, uh a permit was issued for an interior demolition only which consisted of
sheetrock and and taking out uh some non-bearing walls and toilets and stuff like that. Uh windows and the exterior part was never part of that. So there was no permit issue to remove all the windows. Correct. And then that was also not to my knowledge that the windows were removed. So by the time I got on
site and I saw that windows were already broken and removed that was broken and removed. So the propert so the structure for a significant period of months and correct me stood there with frankly vacant windows so that we all understand we're talking correct and that is true.
Yes. Right. And your cor the corrective measure to that was I believe to paint cardboard. Is that correct? Is that what's there now? It's like a gray painting of some sort. There's wood boards that are um nailed in and they are painted. Okay. So that I understand
here. So you've owned the property for over a year. Your property sits today in disrepair as you conveniently mentioned removal of mature windows and I will say although it's a little bit of a comment and you can correct me on a rainy night like tonight in the next couple days
there are folks that used to not deal with flooding that now do. Okay? So that we all understand what's happening in the neighborhood and we all get to look at a structure that's in significant disrepair under your ownership with frankly cardboard windows and an embarrassing structure to the community
of Union in my view. Am I correct on that assumption? Yeah, you are very correct and I think that's why we're here tonight just so like things can be moving forward and addressed and well I would find it difficult given your 14 months ownership to see how anybody could think working here when when I
hear the town building inspector now maybe it's a comment but it's certainly relevant when I hear the town building inspector say you didn't ask for you you spoke you you noted to us that you spoke to two contractors not the town officials in terms of guidance that anything moving forward forward should
be respected in that way. I would like to add because I just because obviously the floor is open. I would like to add that after once we realized once I realized the mistakes that were made in early onset I did go ahead and try to rectify and keep in touch with Anthony
Monguzo and as well as Don Travisano as much as possible um moving forward which is how the plans were developed with their guidance as well. So, well, for the for the for the record, we did have a couple of meetings to try to give you some sort of ideas to try to rectify
certain problems uh along with some shrubs in the back for the meantime and putting up a fence and that wasn't done either. So, uh we did we just tried to get this along because it wasn't actually fair to the residents in the area. So,
um, to your point, yes, we did meet out with you to try to rectify some of these situations cuz the complaints that were coming in were numerous and, uh, numerous and a lot, right? And if you look at the plans that we've developed, we've developed a landscape plan um,
with the help of our civil engineer, we've developed a a I would say a very beneficial to the neighborhood plan to be quite honest with you. Although some of you guys may oppose, I will definitely like to just say that this would be You brought it up. So, I'll ask two things. One is, are there any
violations currently open on this property? Yes. I believe there was a summon written a couple weeks ago of for the property and violations are there's some notices of violations that are on that property. I did speak with I think
his name was Daniel that's a property maintenance. Yes, correct. So, we did have a conversation about it was mainly about the the front lawn um about how it needing being I don't believe that's there was more to that. I would like to say that we are
very much aware that this is has been an issue for the past we've been trying to do as much as possible. Keep in mind that this is a landlock lot. We have had very limited opportunity to do anything moving forward without us coming before the board. So, this took a long time. I
would just like to say I don't want to feel like, you know, this is a lot of opposition. You know, there's been a lot. With all due respect, by the way, let me ask, how much how much under contract did you pay for this for the property? Yeah, I would like to not.
Okay. I mean, you come here, it's a matter at some point, it's a matter of public record. It's public record. It is public record. So, why would I have to um answer that now? Well, we'll all go look. But that said, you're able to put together the funds and yet come here with a naive naivity that frankly is
hard for I'll say it. It's hard for me to believe. What I've seen is the destruction of the quality of life of a neighborhood. The removal of trees that can't be replaced and certainly at least in my view, one of the first things if someone brings up an issue, you should have replaced the trees immediately if
you cared about this neighborhood. But that's where the plans are. And the idea because you brought it up, the idea that 22 parking spaces Mhm. more than 7-Eleven, more than quick check, more than Dunkin Donuts. The idea that 22 parking places in an area that was had
significant ecosystem and prevention of flooding for a neighborhood and to say it's somehow good or want to work with us is in my view frankly insulting. So, but I thank you all for your comments. I would like to say the purpose of us coming here is to show the improvements,
right, that we're planning on implementing. Um, and I'm just going to leave it there. Are there any are there any other members of the public that would like to question the testimony of this witness? You want to state your name, your
address? Sure. My name is John Faranda, F A R A N Da. I would live on 975 Townley Avenue. I'm a resident of the township for 34 years. Um 34 years ago um I attempted to cut a branch off a tree that was on the sidewalk in front
of my house and the tree police came and if he had a gun I felt like he was going to shoot me. And the purpose of me stating that is that the severity of the differential of what's going on with this property is is incredible to me. I
admire what you're doing for the children that you will affect. I worked for a company that uh puts people to work with disabilities. So, I kind of get where you're going, but to change the the landscape and the
thought of 22 cars being parked on a residential, you know, street uh or on a in a parking area back there is just beyond comprehension. You mentioned the word expanding in the house that you put. if you wouldn't mind telling us what that expansion would be in the
house. I meant expanding as a company, as an agency. Okay. So, you don't have any other Do you have any other plans to do anything in the house as far as expanding? Um, as far as going up? So, we're going to the third floor. Yeah. So, right now it's two and a half and
we're going to a full three. Right. So, one of my concerns also when I present this to the board is what happens in the future when this lady maybe sells the business and we've established this now. Where where the hell are we going with what might come in after this? I mean,
it's again a noble effort on your part, but I'm concerned about the future. it's the next guy who comes in and what are they going to be allowed to do and then this board want you know do you want that on your head as having given uh you know the blessing to something like this
to move forward uh there's there's so many you know open questions yeah these are all good points sir I'm Rob Pansul the board attorney that's why I raised the the prospect of needing a D1 use variant in the residential zone it's a significant hurdle that they have to
overcome I mentioned it to the applicant I know council's aware of that represents him tonight. Uh, but it is difficult and then this is a unique circumstance where you actually do the clearing and the demo first before you've actually gotten an approval and that that's I think part of the perplexing part as I sit as the attorney
here. I don't vote but I I certainly am here and guide the the board accordingly. So, uh it's a tough situation. So, I mean, we plan to to cross-examine the witnesses, and I assume there's other professionals here tonight that are going to try to address it, but um the comments, I think, out of
the box are something that's very significant. Mr. Goodman, I'm sure you realize this, right? Well, I don't want to be a dead horse. I think everybody, you know, u kind of understands where we're going as as a neighborhood. You know, we moved into I didn't move into a house in Union. I moved into a neighborhood. Uh and all my neighbors, I
think, feel the same way. You know, we all look out for each other. Uh we keep our properties clean. Uh it's pretty quiet where we are. And uh I know you you had mentioned you're thinking about a nine or an 8 to5 business. Uh you know, but uh I just don't know. I don't
know. There's just a lot up there. But I thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak. I wish you well. I I wish that you would have looked at another parcel, you know, something more commercially u you know, appealing, something that wouldn't encumber uh having people's
properties uh encumbered by possibly flooding water from rains and different things like that. I mean, all those things need to be looked at, but uh I thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Miranda. Are there any other members of the public that would like to
question just the testimony, not a comment? At the end of the meeting, you all have a chance to speak if you so desire. So, at this time, are there any other members that would like to question just her testimony? Hearing none, Mr. Mr. Johnson
would like to question uh the applicant. Can I and no disrespect or but can I ask you what town you live in? Where you I live in Union. But how often did you visit the site while this destruction was going on or construction that you say? I was there almost every day. So
then how did if you if that's the case then how did all of this happen that you say you didn't realize it was going on? The windows being taken out, the trees being taken down. If you were there every day then that means that you saw this going on and you were okay with it all.
So for instance, when you're doing demo, demo can move so quickly. So windows can be out within a day, right? So if I'm coming in after work at the end of the day and something is already taken out, then at that point, well, if it looks like it's not right to you, you shouldn't you were there then to stop
it. But you didn't. But it was already done at that point. So I'm not I'm not on site cuz I had someone that was, you know, acting as the developer on site at all times. So I would stop it. You didn't visit every day then? I I did almost every day. Well, but my but I'm not the one that was running the
development. All those trees couldn't be taken down in one day. They were. They actually were. And it it and all the windows taken out in a day also. So they were separate days. They weren't on the same day. I understand it. But all the windows got taken out and boarded up and painted in one day. Yes. And if the
neighbors want to testify, the trees were taken down in one day. It wasn't a multiple day situation. And all the windows came down in one day. Yes. The demolition happened within I want to say 3 days. Okay. Mhm. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. Question. So, you said the demolition and everything occurred. Do you need do your contractor does do they need your permission to do any type of demolition and so on? Yes. So, we did get a permit um from zoning to be able to do the
demolition interior. Interior. But what I'm saying is you're saying that the windows on the outside, everything was taken down, but you were not aware until you actually saw it. Do they would you would they have needed your permission to do that first? Yes. Yes. As far as the windows, we did have a there was
a a whole another issue with that and we are no longer in communication with that contractor because of that. Okay. And what's also preventing you from doing anything inside or interior or the outside to at least make it look okay on
the outside? Um, so the outside was left alone. The only thing that we um that is affecting the outside is the windows that you know people are speaking of now. There's nothing else that was taken or touched from the outside of the property. Okay. So now when the trees were taken down, did you think about the
flooding and how that could affect it when it rains and so on? So that was not a a thought at that time. It was more of like an obstruction matter um as far as the trees go and they were in the back. Mind you, this is our backyard technically. So it was it wasn't
necessarily a thought of flooding or anyone else's property. Somebody raised their hand over there. Miss My name is Hannah Mariah. I live in 982 Townley. I'm here representing my family. Could you spell you again? Yes.
M A R A I A. Um I emailed Mr. Manduso and I called anybody I could because the sound of them chopping down 200 foot tall trees. I wouldn't say 200. 300 400 three 100.
Okay. The surveyor says 100. I mean it was horrible. It was and it it so I contact because and I'm sorry because I ran out to the contractor and said, "What are you Oh, they're all dead. All these trees are dead." So I have three
boys who could not be here tonight and that backyard is their world. And we moved here from a poor neighborhood in Jersey City. And when we found the house with the privacy and bag, it was like amazing, right? It was a it's a it's like woods back there. So, you don't see
the backs of people's houses and like the kids can play in the pool without people being able to take pictures of them or who knows what's going on, right? Like there was an element of privacy. Anyway, so just to your point, um I thought that those phone calls to
find out did you have permission to ch whoever was doing this, what's going on, what's going in here, and do they have permission to do that? So I had no idea who what anything, right? I knew the old attorney that lived there before. At any rate, I
thought that day that those phone calls put things on hold. And sure enough, they were back the next day chopping down more trees till the whole thing was gone. And they had a rope on my tree, too. And I was like, "Don't you dare." But anyway, um, so that I just wanted to
say to that that it was definitely two days of 15 really tall trees getting knocked down and the boys watching. Thank you. That's my comment to to address that comment about uh the phone
call. Yes, we received a phone call and I immediately sent out a uh a property maintenance uh one of my property maintenance inspectors and they were told to stop. Just for the record, they were told to stop and not to
proceed. Any other members of the public? Just the testimony, no comments because we're going to try to get this meeting moving. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else hearing? None. Counselor, would you
like to call your first witness? Thank you. Yes. Um, like to call the architect, uh, Jing Zap. Talking computer. Did you hear? So she's there.
Mhm. [Applause] Hopefully dock in you got you got on a jump drive. Not yet. That's easy. That's easier. Very good. Very very nice. [Music]
We drop. We did. One, two, three. There you go. Which one you want to open? Um, let's open the We're not getting out of here any This one. No, this is I didn't even get
to the first witness and it's an hour on the other sheet. Was a 425 date. The other one? That one? Yeah. There you go. This is You can zoom in on us. Go for that.
Were you here when we went to quarter to 12? We did. That was just for the record. Council and board members, I did mark A1 the application as it was submitted. I marked A2 the site plans that were generated by Jay-Z architects which
consisted of six sheets. Uh collectively that's A2 for the record. A3 are the drawings for permit by SMB and T uh consultants. That's five sheets and A4 is the storm water report. So those materials that were filed with the
application are part of the record. Okay. Could you go up to Mike? Just please provide your name. Jing Jing Zel. 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. And for the
record, could you state and spell your name with your affiliation? Uh, Jing Juno. J I N G J U N. Last name Z H O U. Miss, could you give your credentials to the board? Yeah, I'm licensed architect.
Uh, been practicing in the state of New Jersey for 13 years. your license card. Yes, we'll accept our credentials. Okay, Mr. Zoo, you were retained by the applicant to uh do a site plan and do
the architecture for this uh property. Correct. Okay. Could you u tell us uh or going through your drawings which are A2 uh what you how you would like to
describe the project? Sure. You want to start with the parking lot? Um, yeah. Let me try to zoom out this drawing. All right. So, parking lots lot seven. Yeah. So,
essentially we have two zoning lot here. Um the lot next to Morris Avenue is what we initially started was um it's uh it's very difficult to see see the
numbers. Um um it's a 6,000 square feetish lot and um we created threetory above ground and one story below grade which is a total
of 6,600 square ft according to union zoning code. Um, we're required to have 22 parking space and because we can't accommodate all the parking space in the existing commercial lot and uh the
client happens to own the lot behind it. So, we're proposing to use um half of the residential lot in the back as parking space. Um right now we have five parking space in the existing commercial
lot and um 17 parking space in the residential lot in the back. And um there's an area behind the rear row of parking. What is that area going to be utilized for? So behind the right
now this whole lot is undeveloped. We're developing half of the lot as parking lot and the rest will be landscape with trees for acoustical barrier and um I'm I don't think it's public use but it
will be landscape. Will there be any fencing? Um yes, we will add fencing. Okay. And how will this um rear parking lot that
houses uh 17 spots uh will it be lit? Um yes, we'll add um parking lamps for parking purpose, but it will be um occupancy occupancy
sensor triggered. Good. Now you could go to your next drawing which shows what your plans are for the house. Yeah. Okay. So before I go to the proposed plan, I just want to show the existing plan. Um the existing plan is basically
a one and a half story very small. it in the appearance it looks like a single family house. What we're proposing is basically follow the right side of the existing foundation wall and
um pour out the rear side the rear half of the building to be align with existing foundation on the right. And in the back wall, we're keeping the existing foundation wall, but we are
pushing, sorry, I'm going back and forth here. Uh, we're pushing the left foundation wall into to the right so we can create a 10 ft wide uh driveway instead of 8
and 1/2 ft. right now. Um and the front wall will also be pushed towards the street. So um it will be aligned with the other buildings on the street. And in terms of the floor plan, it's a quite
straightforward floor plan. All floors are almost identical with big wide open space and uh ADA compliant bathrooms and uh some small offices. So first floor we have a little reception area and a
powder room, one ADA bathroom and open space and second floor is the pretty much the same minus the reception area. Um third floor, no bathroom right now. Yeah. And basement is pretty much
identical as well. Um in terms of the exterior we are um utilized the maximum allowed building height which is 35 ft and created three above grade
um habitable space and keeping the first floor at the same elevation of the existing building so that we can use a little um of the basement and uh exterior the appearance
wise um we're proposing stuckle exterior with some wood plank uh give it a more modern look and we're maximizing the windows on Morris Avenue side and the other three
side will be standard um casement window um u mu uh you Um, have you reviewed the Collier's report? Um, not yet. Not yet. That just arrived actually. Okay. Um, uh, there were
numerous bulk variances that uh were not cited and um I was looking through them and wondered uh if any of those we can eliminate. For example, okay. Um they uh one of the variants requires a dense
screen planting of evergreen material not less than four feet in height. Uh and we don't show that or you don't show that on your plant. That's something we can add. We can definitely add that. Yeah. Okay. Uh what you're saying is
that in terms of the setback uh we're in conformance with the prevailing setback. Is that what you said in the neighborhood? Yep. Okay. So, that u All right. And um uh are any of these uh um
bulk variances uh pre-existing? Yes, the sideyard right now it's uh 5.2 ft and we're keeping it the same as existing. Okay. Uh I noticed in the comments there was a question with regard to how
garbage and recyclables will be handled. Is there a place that you provided on the plan or a place that you could now tell the board where you see that garbage and recyclables being handled?
Um, I don't have a designated location for trash as of now, but we can definitely add it in the somewhere in the rear lot near the
parking lot. Okay. Uh there was also uh did there were concerns by the fire department with regard to uh uh access. It's the driveway as you indicated. Currently the driveway is 8
1/2 ft wide and through our proposed renovations it'll be 10 foot wide. Yes. And so, um, I believe the proposal, uh, the recommendation was that we have proper signage, uh, so that people
realize that two cars cannot traverse the same driveway. We would handle that accordingly. There was a another uh uh issue raised by both the fire department and collars, the engineer
review with regard to turn radius. Uh can you comment at all on uh how uh that could be accommodated in the parking area? I believe the civil engineer has a turning radius map. Okay. All
right. Council, not to cut you off, but I just want to be clear. She she's an architect, right? She's not an engineer. Uh she did the site plan. Uh my question again, she's an architect. She's not an engineer. Yes. Okay. Uh, Mr. Chairman, that's all the
questions I have. Are there are there any board members at this time who'd like to question the testimony of this witness? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I heard you mention that there will be sight lighting.
Yeah, I would imagine you will we will need some lighting in a parking lot. Currently, the plan does not show any. Currently, I didn't show any lights. So, no lighting studies were done. to see how lighting up the lot would affect adjacent properties. Not yet. No
lighting study yet. Uh and with respect to the driveway, um because it's a parking lot, it should be 20 foot wide. Yeah. I don't think that's one of the variances that's being requested uh in this application.
Yeah, the college letter. Yeah, that's what is required. Uh but what exists now is eight and a half foot and and uh what they the parking lot doesn't exist right now either. No, there is a small fivecar parking lot in the back of the house
that does exist. Well, that's why I made the point of her not being an engineer. I mean, she's commenting on details about a site which really would be a site engineer's area of expertise. She's unfamiliar with the Collier's letter of which is a
driving point to the board's review of this application. The impervious coverage is also a variance. It's not simply nonconforming existing uh conditions because you're expanding on it. That that's one of the concerns that I had in in questioning the representative. So, is there an engineer
going to testify tonight or no? Yeah, he's going to testify. Yes. Are there any other board members? Mr. Bentegna. Um, going back to the first exhibit for the rear parking, um, you said there was going to be a fence.
Yes, we'll add one. Is that shown on the um, diagram? Not yet. So, it's not shown. So, no. What type of fence are we going to have? A vinyl, stockade, linked, 4 foot, 6 foot, 8 foot. It's
Yeah. So, but it's not on the plans yet. Not yet. We'll add after the hearing just like the lighting is not on the plans also. Correct. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Any other board questions?
I just Mr. McNeel uh to the fire department's uh report and what concerns or what we need to uh have explained is how do how do you propose emergency vehicles
um to enter the site for fire department vehicles getting back for a car fire and potentially need to turn around um when there's been no turning uh templates to see if that vehicle can turn. Uhhuh.
Get in, get out. Yeah. Um, this building really has a occupancy load of less than 75 people. Um, in a building like this, typically it's not required to have FDNY or fire department access into the
parking lot. Um, it's a it's a small commercial building. The equipment that we currently use uh cannot fit in to the driveway. Driveway, right? Yeah. And you
know, not just a fire truck, but also uh DMS vehicle. Uhhuh. And it's always worst case. If you got 22 parking places, you got to assume that 22 cars will be there. Um my client can testify how many cars
will actually be there. Uh, I don't think it's going to be 22 cars at the same time. Um, but that's the requirement. Yeah, I understand. Yep. I do have a question. So, going back to Mr. McNeel's question in reference to
the maneuverability, um, how you propose that? I understand you said it's not necessary, but in the event of an emergency, cars need to get back there. Has any thought process been put into how that's going to happen as
far as the maneuverability for cars coming in and out and so on? Has that been thought about? You mean the fire fire truck, emergency trucks, ambulance, all types of things that can possibly happen in an emergency, right? Yeah. Has
that been thought about as far as how it's going to come in and out of the lot prop uh properly? Because based on what's proposed here Mhm. there's not enough space. Yeah. Um for the vehicles to come in and
out and to turn in the event of an emergency. For regular cars, I believe there is enough uh it's a one-way driveway. It's a onelane driveway. It's not two lane. It's reality for regular cars, right? Yeah. for regular cars. And the lot is
quite narrow. It's only 45 ft. If we use 20 ft on the left and we give five feet on the right for ADA access, then we only have, you know, less than 20 ft to work with. The building is not really feasible.
It's not a it's not a feasible, you know, design for any building, not to say a commercial building. Okay. So, you're saying it's not it's not feasible. It's not feasible. The lot is only 45 ft. 20 Yeah, 20 ft driveway is not feasible. So, in the event of
emergency, vehicles would not be able to get back there. Okay. Thank you. Uh I I I have a question. Um, I don't know if you know the answer to this, but I see that in the back with the parking. Uh,
and when I, uh, went back there for some complaints, the parking on, um, let's look at the screen and say the left side. H how close is that to the garage? The garage that's back there. There's a garage back there. The garage will be
removed. The neighbor's garage. Let me clarify. My apologies. the the neighbor's garage that um is it on the lot line? Uh we can take Let me zoom in cuz there's two garages back there and it
looks like that these parking spots are let me see are heading towards those garages. And and my point and my point would be that if there was a fire back there or if a car did catch on fire or
an EV or a regular a regular gasoline engine, I would be concerned that the fire department wouldn't be able to get back there because of the fact that other than running back there to put out the garage if it was that close because I believe it is from the tour that I was
on. You're talking about desk garage. Yeah. There. Well, there's uh Can you move that up a little bit, please? Yep. There you go. Uh you come in because that's half the lot. You're going beyond
that. You're going to the end of that probably not probably, you're going a little bit further past that garage. So, that parking in my opinion has to has to back right up to it. Has to pull be be facing and the back of that garage.
Um, you're pulling in. There's your parking spot. Now you're going farther back. So, our parking is here in this area. Correct. And this is neighbor's garage from the Google map. And there's two garages there in the very beginning.
Mhm. Opposite of each other. One on one side, one on the other. One on the left, one on the right. God bless you. Yeah. Would it be more acceptable to the board if we change the layout of this parking
lot so that it's not parking on all four sides? But just we just leave that open but extend into the landscape area a little further. My my my I guess my point wasn't to to tell you how to design it or what would be working or
what would work. My My point was if there was an emergency vehicle that needed to get back to her. I mean these are things that can happen. You know it car can catch on fire and if it's that close to the garage it could if they don't get there in time the fire
department we could have a problem. So respectfully, it's really not an opportune time for the architect to be speculating on changes to the parking lot of which she has no expertise or jurisdiction to be commenting on. Um, if there's an engineer who's going to
comment, I mean, I don't even know if she read the fire report. She hasn't read the Collier's report. Those are key ingredient. Report was sent out, I think, uh, I got it yesterday. I mean, we're not here to hear what if we do this, what if we do that. It's your burden to try to convince the board that you were entitled to D1 use variance
relief. That's what the goal is tonight. So, I can't really see spending much more time with this witness on engineering issues of which she really is offering no opinion worthy of this board's consideration. Any other board questions? Uh, another
concern, another concern is the driveway. If you have a car traveling on Mars Avenue making a right into the driveway and there's another car coming out, is it possible? Would you Is it possible that the cars could go by each other or the car in the driveway would
have to back up? The car and the driveway will have to go back. Right. Right. Because it's not wide enough. Correct. Mhm. Okay. Thank you. Any other board questions? Hearing none. Are there any members of the public that would like to
question the testimony this witness has provided? Hi. Hi, my name is Jeffrey Sz. I live at 1370 Mars Avenue and I live directly right next door to that building. And I gota is how I understand
it's gonna be a basement plus three stories. The architect, there's not if you look look on Morris Avenue in that area, there's nothing that that high in that area. Uh 35 ft is what the zoning allows and we didn't
exceed the maximum building height. What it do to my property? You know, well, you did make the comment. You're making a comment now. Just a testimony. You could anything that she testified on. Okay. And then another thing and the parking lot in the
back that always gets flooded from the drainage from Beverly Road. Is there going to be drainage in there? Yeah. Yeah. And uh you said you'll be closing at 5:00, right? I believe so. Yeah. And uh why do you
need lights in the back if nobody's back there? It's going to be occupancy sensor anyway. And on my and and you and on my side where I live 1372, you say you extending the building on your side. You are on the left or
right? Right. You're on the right. No, we're keeping the existing um sideyard on your side. And uh how about uh some some buildings have lights around their building. Is there going to be lights where my driveway is?
We'll have we'll have the whatever code required egress step lights on the site. Like I said, my bedroom is right next right next to that building. So that can be shine right in my bedroom. Yeah, it's a commercial zone, so whatever code requires egress lights for
egress and we'll have step lights. And then I got pictures of a propert. I got damage to my garage already. No, I think at the time to to document them would be at the end of the meeting. You'd be able to present them. We'll mark them and we can question
them, circulate them to the board. All right, that's it. Thank you. Are there any other members of the public? Thank you. I know we're talking architectural here. So, I have a couple questions in terms of the property following up from the neighbors questions as well. So, the property
currently, I'm not an architect. There's an A-frame, I guess you would call it, up on top. So, that I understand and maybe you could put it up. You're no longer going to have that A-frame. You're going to go straight up in a box square. Is that correct? Correct. It's going to be flat. It's going to be all flat. Okay. So, just so I understand.
So, property that was given a variance was given that variance to a design to an A-frame whenever that was years ago. Correct. Right. And you're changing that design today. Would I understand that correctly? Fair to say. Okay.
So, when that happens, how close will the top of the building be, which is today sloped? I'm not quite sure. I'm not an architect. I don't have the correct ter. But by not being an A-frame and going up to a square, how close will the top of that property be to this gentleman's
1372 property on the third floor? Sorry, I don't quite understand. So, in other words, when you expand the property today, if you look at it, besides obviously noticing the disrepair that it's currently in and deliberative, you know, it's in an A-frame. Mhm. Right.
So, when you go up, you're going to box it. Yeah. Right. So to the gentleman's point, the neighbor the third floor today is is significantly different. How much are you filling in and how much additional space are you adding by completing that
third floor and filling it out? Um, so we can go to the floor plan right now. So the building width is about 30 feet. It's about 30 feet wide. um existing building has a gable roof. So I would
assume it's going to be somewhere in the middle of the building and now that we box it out, we will be almost about 15 ft closer to his property line on the third floor. Okay. So in essence, he'll have someone right next to Yeah. So we
are making an existing condition a little worse. Um that is one of the variance we're seeking. And you mentioned in the design uh or you mentioned in the design that the third floor would have no bathroom currently and would be if I understand it
relatively vacant. Am I correct on that? Uh third floor. Yeah, currently it's all vacant. It's right now. Is it designed We heard the owner talk about expansion. Is it designed for potential rental? I cannot I believe it's all the entire
building will be office building. Okay. But it's not designed with any sort of office use on that expanded extensive change of the building on the third floor. It's not currently designed for any current usage. Is that correct?
She's you're taking third floor. If I understood you correct, if I'm wrong, just correct me. Yeah. I understood that the third floor was going to be vacant with no bathroom. That's what I understood you to say. It's going to be office space. It's just there is no bathroom. The third floor people will be on the third floor. My apologies. How
many offices will be on the third floor? Yeah, it will be a training use uh room on the third floor. Okay. To be clear, no elevator was discussed. No elevator. Okay. How does garbage work with uh 22 employees by the
owner's own comments and significant potential for planned expansion through the owner's own comments? How does trash disposal work? Is that a dumpster? How does that plan into the architectural piece? I think the garbage will have to be in the somewhere in the rear parking
lot, but we can also work out a refuge room because the building we have space inside the building. I can add a refuge room. You're the architect. How did you design for waste disposal for sounds like close to two dozen
employees each and every day? How did you design that? It will be in the parking lot for now. And how would So it has to be in the parking lot, right? Because it can't be in the front by logic. Would that be correct? Yeah. Okay. Not in the front.
All right. So in Union, those of us that live here understand that we take our trash out to the parking to the front every day, every Tuesday and Friday in the neighborhood. Okay. Recycles and on Wednesday if you want to get used to it. Uh, so does that trash get lugged out?
Does someone get assigned or is there a dumpster or how would that work with that many that many employees on a daily basis? Um, that I'm not sure. Stephanie, do you own Well, she's the architect. I'd like to know what was designed for trash.
Well, I'm asking how it was designed. Designed. Yeah. How was it designed? Right now the intention is to put it the I would assume it will be a dumpster in the parking parking space. So you you designed it and the design for refues
for multiple employees is to have a dumpster in the back. Yeah. Okay. I don't I know the width of an average car is between six and seven feet on a driveway that's proposed for 10 feet. I don't know the width of an average garbage truck that picks up and I would be curious as if you could tell us that
if you know it since it's part of the design of refues. I don't think we need we need to drive a car into the back parking lot to Well, how would you empty a dumpster? I think they're thinking about Oh, please, ma'am. We have to have order and just have the witness who sworn in
testifying. There's a record being made. Thank you. I'm just asking how it's designed. You know what's It's not going to be a big dumpster. I mean, this is a it's not a restaurant. It's not a retail space. It's a training facility. I can't imagine they have that many trash, daily
trash. So, I'm not that strong a fella, but the idea of lifting a dumpster or lugging it out seems like a lot. So, I'm curious. You're the professional. How's it handled? I would say I would think like a 20 gallon like
would be enough for one weekend. Some somebody should be easily pushed that out to the street. Last question on design and I'm not sure this might be civil engineer. You mentioned parking, but I would like some clarification. If you did the design and presented the drawing here, how close are those
parking spaces to each neighborhood's um property line? They look like they're literally above. They're right on the property line right now in terms of parking on the left and right. Uh let me just go back. Show us that
right right here. Okay. So the folks on both the left and the right because we heard earlier that the only current parking would be the four spaces that were abudding the building originally. Is that correct when you designed this?
The expansion is for 18 or so spots, right? 17 to 18 spots. Yeah. So, the neighborhood, if I understand it correctly, the structures and the and the and the yards would have an immediate placement of what looks like eight, excuse me, four on the left and
six on the right. So, everybody who's been in this neighborhood that had mature trees that were removed the same month as ownership was taken down would now be looking at parked cars. Is that correct? Correct. Parked cars potentially. Right.
There may be a fence. I heard His offense is so much more aesthetically pleasing. The And can you explain again or is this the civil engineer? I apologize to the board. The lighting situation. She did testify on it. So we So what did you
design for the lighting? We will add parking light. Okay. What kind of parking light? Uh I'm thinking of something on the poll right now. Well, I as I understood today's discussion, it's not about what you think. It's about what's designed and
brought to the board. So what's designed and brought here in your drawings? What I'm there is no lights in the site plan currently. So I understand it correctly. There are no lights currently designed to to a project brought before this board and to this neighborhood. Mhm. And
the idea is that you may have light stansions. I c I suggest that you don't know the height. So you don't know the impact. You don't know the illumination onto neighborhoods, anything like that. No, not currently correct. Yeah. to ask the quality of life of the neighbors to, for lack of a better way to put it,
trust you that the design would be correct given the previous issues we've had with this owner already. Uh-huh. Appreciate it. Thank you very much. Thank you. As the architect, do you do you factor in zoning? Did you consider the zoning? I know you didn't read the
college report in this matter. Do you do you understand the zoning implications that are at issue here tonight? Yes. because you said to the neighbor that the use for the structure was permitted. It's a split lot where you have residential zone. Do you understand it's
a D1 use fairings? Oh yeah. I didn't understand the question. And do you understand one of the criteria that the applicant has the burden that they need to fulfill is that they don't impose a substantial detriment to the neighborhood. Do you understand that's one of the criteria?
Yes. And would you agree that with the expanded structure and some of the details that we've heard as it relates to the necessary parking lot, which is part of the application, you can't separate it, that that imposes a detriment to the neighbors through the testimony we heard tonight.
I mean, even the architectural design of the building is bigger than what's there. Correct. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions by the public? Uh my name is Kamali Grant. I'm
on 985 Lorraine A, which is basically right here on the right. Well, my backyard literally is along this right line that you have here on the side. So, my concern is really just um privacy
really. So, I know you we've been asking questions about the fence, but can we just be specific about how high that fence will and will it be like some type of privacy fence? It's going to be a 6t tall vinyl fence.
six feet. Okay. And then I'm assuming you're saying a lighting pole of some sort. So that mean the pole would have to be higher than the six feet, correct? For the lighting. Yes. Right. Okay. And then on top of
that, I would assume for safety reasons, just generally speaking, you might want to put a camera. I'm assuming somewhere back there. I would assume so. Yeah. Okay. Um
All right, that's all I got. Thank you, Mr. Grant. Any other public questions? Hearing none, counselor, would you like to call your next witness? Yes. Thank you. like to call the
engineer Ali Ranguala. Can I ask the witness to swear or affirm that the testimony you provide this evening is the truth and the whole truth? Uh I do. And for the record, could you state and spell your name with your affiliation? Uh my name is uh
Aliaskar Rangala. Uh it's spelled A L I A S G A R. last name R A N G W A L A Mr. Rangual, could you give your qualifications to testify as an engineer?
Yes, sir. Um, I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey since 2018. Are all your licenses and professional qualifications up to date? Um I have an undergraduate degree in uh construction engineering and a master's
degree in civil engineering. Well, the board will accept his credentials. Uh Mr. Ranguala, uh you're familiar with the uh site and the grading issues and the drainage issues. Could you uh
comment on those, please? Uh yes. As soon as the drawings are loaded, I'll I'll start with my testimony on those. There you go. Thank you. Okay. So, I'll start with the grading plan. Um the existing site as it
stands uh grades pretty much southeasterly and um the proposed grading pretty much follows that uh same uh same slopes. Um uh most of all of the parking the new parking areas everything
slopes south and um south and towards you know the front uh front side of the lot. Um uh on the back side of the lot we uh we are maintaining uh all existing rates. there's no uh no disturbance beyond
roughly around 10 ft from the proposed curb for the parking area. I'm going to I'm going to move on to the one to the the drainage plan. So as I mentioned uh
uh the the lot is sloping south and then towards the east. So we have two inlets proposed towards the south uh property line that captures uh 9 97 98% of all
runoff from the property uh including um any runoff coming from the roof. Um we are proposing an underground storm tech um chambers uh storage system uh which is designed uh to accommodate um a
100redyear storm event and uh we made sure that um uh the runoff volume um from an existing storm from ex in existing conditions the storm chambers is designed uh to make sure that it is it
is going to be much less than uh you know the run of volume coming from the parking lot or proposed parking lot would be much less much less than what is in existing condition. So and I think I believe we have submitted a storm water management
report uh along with the drawings and um on the report we have a table that shows the existing runoff as well as the proposed runoff coming from the chambers. Um and uh just I'm just going to open the
report on my end as well. So uh to provide you uh a com comparison the the the discharge uh for a 100redyear storm in existing condition is 1.287 287 uh cubic feet per second and with the proposed conditions
with the storm water uh the underground storm water system installed it will be 0.011 uh cubic feet per second. So much much uh larger reduction in the in the runoff coming from the site.
Um and um any any outfall we we any out uh outflow from the chambers will be uh coming from u um pop-up emitter that is uh uh proposed in the front of the lawn. Although we don't expect any any any
runoff coming from the pop-up emitter for any storm other than a 100redyear storm. So, you know, it's like once in a 100 year event occurs, we would see some some water coming out of the pop-up emitter. Um I'm I'm going to move on to the
landscape plan. So, we we're providing um uh shrubs in the front um uh area as well as uh on the on the northeast corner of the property. Um
uh and then we are providing uh we are proposing um uh buffering trees uh uh with some ever ever evergreens um uh along the curb line uh on the rear side of the of the parking area.
So basically to eliminate the concern of any u you know lights coming from from cars entering the entering the lot uh and you know going on to to the neighbors properties as well as we I believe
there's fence um that's supposed to be installed uh that should um reduce any glares you know um going onto the neighbor's property as well from cars. These are these are the details of uh
you know construction details uh that we included on on the plans. And then finally um the vehicle turning analysis. So for for this turning analysis um I used um uh a regular size pickup truck uh
coming in and out of the parking lot. So this um um the envelope that you see marked as one is a is a car uh coming into the lot
and then parking in one of the spots on the top uh in the backside. And uh the the envelope number two is showing a car that is currently parked backing out and uh exiting the exiting
the the parking lot. So in case if there is a car coming in while this car is trying to exit there's enough space in front of the existing uh slots where the car can be stopped for you know until the car clears the alley and then you
know the second car uh number two can can leave the lot. I think that's the last uh drawing on on my set. Um, I'll take any questions if there are. Are there any board members that would like to question the testimony of this
witness? Can I just cut to the chase? Did Did you read the Collier's report andor the fire department comments here? I know the architect did not. No, I have not. You haven't read. Okay. I do have a question concerning the template. Car number two is is tucked
behind the building. Um, have you looked at um what the required sight distance would be uh for the car that's coming into the parking lot to see to see this vehicle before he turns in and and their headlight to headlight?
Follow. So, I'm I'm trying to understand the question. Uh you you talking about car number two? I'm talking about a car number three that's turning into turning into Mars Avenue from Okay. this vehicle where he is right now cannot see that car.
Correct. So, how do we prevent that from occurring? Okay. Um, we will certainly consider to include uh site triangles on this on this drawing. Uh, I don't currently have that. uh you know I've not analyzed that from that point of
view but uh from what I've seen of the site there are uh low bushes at this point or what what we are proposing so I I don't believe that should hinder uh the site distance of cars exiting uh the
the parking lot and the second question I had was concerning the the site drainage um we've heard uh that the area prior to the trees trees flooding uh trees being uh cleared and grub uh the area flooded.
Was there any study of the existing soils to to see if um there was any clay layers or anything that was preventing the soil from perking normally um that would probably contribute uh to the load on on on the drainage
system from that surrounding area? I know you took care of the paving, but what about the rest of the lot that may drain in that direction? Um, so we are not disturbing any of that existing uh
area. So, I mean, we're keeping it in in the same condition as it is currently. You didn't observe any flooding going on in that area? Uh, not to not to my knowledge, no. Okay. Any other board
questions hearing? None. Are there any members of the public that would like to question? Again, I'm going to repeat myself. Just the testimony that the engineer has provided. Sir, would you like to come up? Good evening. My name is John Hennessy
and I live at 978 Townley Avenue. Some of the questions I have is first of all, this vegetation was taken down and chopped up. We had no notice it was going to happen. It was made into a disaster. I mean, this maybe this
shouldn't go to you. Maybe it's someone else. But it was concerning, concerning me, concerning neighbors. The flooding of the area is terrible. And I don't see how anything you put in the ground is going to be able to capture it. It's
just sloped and it's going to be continuous. Though other things are bothering me, I just getting to that age where I forget a couple, but I don't I think we we were kept out of the blue. We were totally unaware of
what the what was going to be happening to our area. Uh you say you're going to put lights in and they'll be only so high. They're going to glare. They're going to have glaring. Our bedrooms are glaring. Our kitchens, everything. This is just I there was poor communications
about this whole thing. I mean, everything was we were kept unaware that we're going we are planning to do this until guess what? Here's the plans. It's only been a year and a half. It's poor. It's really poor. I'm
sorry. Yeah. Not sure. Thank you. Sorry to come up so often, but I do appreciate it. It's the beauty of the process, right? And let me just share that gentleman's frustration and the neighborhood's frustration. But I do have some questions. I want to begin on the drainage. So, you mentioned a
100red-year storm. To be clear, Floyd, Sandy, Irene, Ida, storms happen far more than once in a hundred years. Are we correct on that? You can name some others probably if you feel like it's shouted out. Right. But to be
clear to to the board and to us in the public, a 100redyear storm doesn't mean it happens once every hundred years. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. Can you talk about the intens? I I don't know anything about drainage, although I do notice that when you mentioned it slopes
south to east, that's town. Okay. Which is the folks talking about just like this gentleman who's getting the flooding. They just confirmed it for us in this in these comments is the way I understood it from the geography. My question to you is this. The intensity of storms through climate change by any
edification and by D rules D new rules setbacks which I'm sure you're probably familiar with address the idea that we are now dealing in a different climate and intensity of storms. Does the drainage on this property as you propose reflect the new intensity rules that the
D has proposed? Yeah, we are following the all the new D requirements for for design of this uh drainage system. So could you could you explain that a little more for us for those of us that are actually going to deal with the water? Um so for example um this I'll
just give you one example. Um this property is exempt from a water quality uh because you know we're disturbing less than one quarter of an acre but we you know we are taking into account in the storm tech system to to handle any
water quality issues uh that may arise out of the runoff from this parking area. Is the property I'm sorry to interrupt you. Is the property less than a quarter of an acre because the two the two lots? In other words, when you combine the two lots, is it I have to I'm not great on this. Is it a quarter
acre when you combine the two? I'm I'm talking about um more than a quarter acre of additional impervious, which is we're we're much less than. So, your 22 spaces doesn't come up to a quarter acre. The 22 spaces proposed, right? The
additional impervious surface is roughly about 8,000 some square feet if I'm not wrong. Uh is what you know. And by the way, how many square feet would it be for a quarter acre? So quarter acre would be around what like 12,5 something,500 to an acre 13,000.
Um so with that the intensity of storms is the collection rate such that it matches you know an inch an hour. What we're dealing with today, right, in in in this world that's here in New Jersey, we're I'm not being hyperbolic here. We deal with storms that literally have had
an inch two in two inches over two hours for a sustained period of time, as much as three or four hours. Is are you representing to us that this this can handle that type of collection rate? So this uh the storm text uh the chambers that we've designed it is
for volume a 2-hour rain uh event um as you know required by NG DP. So you know we've designed it for a 100redyear storm rainfall volume you know rainfall uh value that we you know we use uh NOAA
for for the rainfall information. So, you know, it's a it's designed for a 2-hour storm. Two hour. Recent events. You're aware of rain today and the intensity of storms expected tomorrow, for example, here. Right. Just to put things in perspective for us here.
Right. Right. I do want to talk to you about uh the parking, which just looks ludicrous to comment, but you said an average truck. I looked a Ford F-150 is 97.9 in wide with its mirrors. So it's
eight foot of a 10 foot. Correct. There's 7.97 feet if you want to do the math. Right. So it's eight feet. So if I understand you correctly. All right. Oh, and by the way, one other premise of this conversation. There is parking currently available in the front of the structure on Morris Avenue. Matter of
fact, cars park right in front of 1370 Morris Avenue. Do they not? I was not aware of that. No. You're the parking guy. You didn't see the parking in front? Um in front of the building? Yeah. Right in front of the building there's a parking spot. There's two driveways you park in between. Right.
One car, right? Sometimes yours, I bet, right? Just see. I mean, you're the parking guy. All right. So, my question to you is because visibility matters. All right. This is a community where we actually lost someone just a couple months ago on
Spruce Street. Lady was hit by a car backing out of her driveway on the street to be candid. And we actually lost a life here. So images matter. They matter very much here. Yeah, of course. So you have an 8 foot forward F-150. All right. And you're coming in
on a left hand. We've talked about coming in on the right. I'm actually more curious on the left. So if you come in westbound and you want to come in here, you have no sight line based on the height that you're proposing here and other other restrictions and the tightness of the variance. How is it that the signage is supposed to reflect?
How is someone supposed to know there's a car halfway through there? How does that sight line work? How does it visibly work? Are you referring to the car exiting or entering? Let's do the car exiting first, sir. Right. So, there's a car, one of the many, one of the many, one of
the 22 wants to leave. Someone else wants to come in at the same time. Let's say 5:05 p.m. just for argument sake. A very convenient time on Mars 7. Would uh and you can't see going left. You want
to come in and there's an F-150 halfway coming down the lot and a very tight lot to be candid about. It's only foot each on each side. It's eight feet. It's a total of a 10-ft driveway. So, you have a foot on each side just to put it in perspective. All right. Coming down, the
car makes a left and comes in and can't traverse the rest of the driveway because it's blocked. Can you just explain to us how this F-150 how far back they would have to go if they were at the edge of the front of the building? how far back they would have to go straight and how how many feet
that is and how that process would work and how the two cars would back up based on the area that you've shown. Um, so I'm I'm not sure the if I understand the question like are you talking about the side triangle? We'll try it again. I'm really not trying to trick you. So an F-150 you said you used
an average truck. All right. So take the property structure, go to the direct head, the front of Morris Avenue to the to the structure side, right? So you're at the structure. The structure is to your left. You're even again, I'm not a ge geography guy, but
there's about 8 to 10 feet to the sidewalk. All right, I think that's about right. I might be off somewhere. Right. Guy makes a left coming in at rush hour on Morris Avenue. So we're clear with each other. All right. How does is the F-150 now expected to back up, which is what your testimony is
here. How far back is that truck supposed supposed to back up in order to allow the other car? No, that car would have to exit first and the other car would be able to if if that if the if your truck what you're saying is
almost at the end of the driveway, they would have to exit before another vehicle would be able to come in. So if you make the left under my proposed and by the way very common scenario, you would have to be omnisient to know that the the truck was there or
we would have to depend on driver courtesy like driver courtesy would be that that gentleman would not make a left. Is that is that the idea or a lady who's driving? I mean I I would think so that if you see a car exiting and there's no room you know my scenario to
you sir is that based on the heights of these buildings based on the lack of visibility based on a car being allowed to as they are today parking in front you would not have the visibility to do so right that's fairly logical I think to most of us that are sitting here am I right about that so if you can't see it
you can't do it so when it becomes apparent to you in the situation I just described to you and I believe Morris Avenue correct Correct me if I'm wrong. Building inspector gets somewhere between 15 and 20,000 cars a day. Okay. I've not done any traffic. Did you look at the structure? By the way, I'm
curious. Did you do this? Do the road count? I've not done any traffic. I'm not a traffic engineer. Okay. Don't accept my word for it, but that's what I believe it is. So, you're now when you can't see. All right. There's no choice. When the guy when the individual driving
makes a left onto 1370's driveway, there is no choice at rush hour. I'll use that. But that's both morning that is after school. Let us not forget school kids. All right? And that is also between the hours of in my opinion 4:15 to almost seven these days, right? When
you deal with that, you're now expecting someone to back up. someone who's driving an eight foot truck on average in a 10- foot road and you're expecting them to go up and I'm just asking you to explain to us how far back they have to go. How safe go all the way back to the
back of the building I would say. I mean in order for another car to be able to pass. So what's that? They would have to go they would have to clear the back of the building in order for another car. So my ask to you is how far is that? How what's that distance of someone in
reverse back? I would say about 50 with a foot on each side. My question to you is how how safe is that is really what I'm driving at. So how far back do they have to go? Yeah. About 50 ft. 50 ft. Yeah. So I understand that you you expect if there's a hypothetical
scenario where you It's a reasonable one though, sir. It's a very reasonable one. You're looking at correct me if I'm wrong. The testimony was 8 to 5, right? Which means lunch, right? Right. which means so 44 one in one out plus lunch is 88. You do that over eight or nine hours
it's about 10 traffic flows an hour. My scenario is far from unreasonable and if folks are unpacking we didn't hear this from the owner but she did say 8 to 5 with the potential for expansion. Some of us might interpret that to be that many folks are leaving at 5:00 right and would therefore create an extensive
pattern of exiting onto a sidewalk a residential side. I don't know that, but you might reasonably do that, right? Because I heard the hours 8 to 5. That said, I'm simply asking you the expectation is based on your study is that someone is going to back up 50 feet
with a foot on each side and you can't tell us or explain to us how that would work in terms of the backup to the back of the property and how that would functionally go. That's what you're telling me. So, I mean, you know, So, I mean the hypothetical scenario
where you you're saying that a car is already pulled in and there is another car waiting at the end of the driveway. Of course, yeah, they'd have to back up all the way up to the back back of the building. All right. And then you don't have a sighteline on Morris Avenue coming eastbound because most times at
least when I've walked and driven, there is a car parked in front of that. Maybe it's yours. All right. uh you don't have a sight line coming eastbound, right? Let me just remind folks of that. Those of us that deal with the quality of life that live here that actually follow the rules. All right? That if you try to
make a right there when someone else is coming out, god forbid if they try to make a left at the hours I just suggested to you, that's a difficult left. All right? So that you would have a situation where you have a stationary car eastbound on Morris Avenue with someone trying to go left. I can't
imagine that that is a scenario that's acceptable to any any relative. We we could certainly show more simulations if that's what satisfies you. But I mean, you know, satisfies me is safety. And what satisfies me is common sense. You ask me what satisfies me. I'll tell you
what satisfies me. Something that makes sense, something that works with the neighborhood, something that shows some reflection of professionalism. Because to my understanding, what is the CIA's report? What What is the CIA's report? But I've heard it hasn't been read by both the architect and this individual.
What is it? That's the professional engineers com I was quite surprised both the engineer and the architect for the applicant have not considered the traffic report. The the traffic comments are in the report. Ne neither one has addressed the comments. So this community wasn't even worth your time to read the engineers report on the
comments and we're up here giving reasonable scenarios that you two are looking at each other scratching your head about. It's frustrating and Mr. chairman, we we only got the report uh within the last 24 hours and Mr. the engineer
didn't even catch it on his uh email when I sent it to him. Uh I sent it to the as soon as I got it, but I mean this application has been floating around for a while and I understand professionals are busy, but it's the impression that's
being given is that we ignored a report. We didn't ignore it. We just didn't get an opportunity to read it because it wasn't provided with ample time. For the record, the report's dated May 5th, 2025. We didn't get it. I'm just telling you what the report is dated May 5th,
2025. You are copied. Whether you got it or not, I can't testify. I don't testify at all. The point is it's your burden tonight to get D1 use variance relief. We're hearing a lot of we could do this, we can do that. Obviously, that's not the legal criteria that this board's going to consider. You realize that. So
that's we're making the record the board's road map is its own professionals including myself as the lawyer. I don't testified that the board I apologize for any inference. All right. I did want to understand I understand was there another report that wasn't read as well or is it just a there's a fire report
and a college the fire report the college defers to the fire department and there's a number of comments consistent with what you're raising with the engineer about the ability for the fire apparatus which is bigger than a Ford F-150 to access the site. So, from
the standpoint of a resident who pays taxes here, all right, let me just give you this question. I guess in your professional work, do you ever have to look at fire reports andor engineers comments before you come testify before of course, did you notice that those
comments weren't as part of your application? Did that not strike you as odd? Um, I wasn't familiar or I wasn't sure of any of these comments until like I, you know, came to this hearing. But you did realize that the application was asking for a 10-ft wide driveway, single
in, single out for 22 parking spaces, a five timefold extension of what's currently there. You did know that. Yeah, of course. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Sure. Just to follow up on a question um on an
answer there's from the last report that I had seen uh there's 40,000 vehicles that travel down Mars Avenue daily 20 are there
any I'm asking just for the question the testimony, not comments. Okay, sir. Uh my name is Jeff Fleming, live at 986 Townley Avenue. Uh we live on the east side of the proposed building. And
as regards drainage, currently the property on the east has a lower elevation than the properties on the southwest. There's a very large slope which would increase the downflow of any substantial rain. Currently, the
soil can absorb much of that drainage. With the proposed parking lot, this will be paved or with pavers or asphalt, whatever that will reduce the absorption of the drain of the rainwaters. So, even
with the installation of two small catch basins, you're minimizing actually maximizing the flooding into our yards on the east east side. Yeah. So we we are proposing a a wall on that side of the property which will basically let
all the water run along the wall uh or the curb into the inlets. So the inlets are designed to uh to Well, what is the height of the wall? Uh it's more than 6 in. We've had substantial flooding. It's actually in excess of a foot. Well, it's
six six inches to 2 ft high. So yeah, it tapers. Yeah. And we've had water come three quarters up through our property which is substantial about 70 feet. So even a foot foot and a half on a very heavy not every rain of course but on
the heavy storm days it's very substantial. So with the paving there you won't have the natural drainage you'll have if you rely on the uh man-made catch basins. And I doubt they could even with the wall I don't think it will minimize the flood situation.
Okay. Well, I mean we did mention about the the runoff calculations in our report and um it does show that you know we are uh substantially reducing the runoff from the property right because there is substantial like I say elevation change to the southwest. Yeah
we're taking into account all the grading requirements all the slopes to make sure that the water is diverted towards the inlets. Okay. Thank you Mr. Fleming. Sir, did I just ask your name and your
address? Uh, my name is Philip Pchinsky. I live at 987 Lraine Avenue. Could you spell that? P O L C H I N S K I. Thank you. Um, I have a follow-up question to the one about the parking with with the the cars coming in at the
same time. What if there was multiple cars? You know, people leave training at the same time. What if there's two, three, four cars trying to get out? Now, we're all trying to back up for this one car that's impact, you know, that's now impeding Mars. So, I mean, I'm sorry,
I'm not a I've not done any traffic studies on for this project. Uh I'm not traffic engineer, so that would be for another professional. Okay. Uh the parking lot in the back is a concern. And I have a safety question. cars jump
parking spots all the time. They hit the gas instead of the brake. Uh a six foot vinyl fence is not going to protect anybody on the other side of that fence in case of a, you know, a medical emergency, an accident, what have you. Um people have young kids. My kid plays
um in my neighbor's backyard right along there. What is your concern or what is your how did you address that type of safety of preventing any sort of vehicle entering the resident's backyards? Um I'm not sure if you're I mean I think you're referring to accidents. I don't
know if that is something well while pulling into a parking spot. I mean our CVS just got you know run if it's required if it's required by the township. We would certainly propose uh blocks to you know to to curb cars uh
going beyond the the the slot. So but you haven't thought about that yet. Um I mean these are people like I said if it's required we would provide those you know on on the on the plans. Okay that's it. Thank you. Thank you. Any
other Stephanie? Good evening again. Um I did want to just kind of correct the assumption. So this is a training office based off of a schedule system. So, we're saying when we're saying 20 staff members, these
people No, no, no, no, no, no, no. You're you're the applicant's representative. Let's finish with this witness. We can re-enter your council will re-enter you as a witness. We can't have you testifying against the testimonies that were coming up. We're addressing this issue. That's why I'm able to You can resurface and offer any
testimony you want. Let's finish with the engineer first because we're making a record here. Yes, sir. I'm just stating based off of the previous testimony. It's not the time to state. It's the time to finish with the engineer, then you'll have the ability to do it. Absolutely, you will. Okay.
Any other public questions? Can I just confirm is the engineer are are you a part of the group SMBT consultants that did the permit plans? I'm sorry. Are you part of the SMBT consulting group that did the separate
plans and I marked A3? You're not a part or affiliated at all with the JZ architectural group that the architect was testifying on the details of the parking lot. Correct. Okay. Hi, my name is Nancy Hennessy. I spilled
I have no I live 978 Townley Unity now for years. I've lived there and they
had don't uh do uh Parkkins in the afternoon or you know every every day um when you when people on Mars Avenue
are going down and they going to try go to that this People come right there and you can't get left to go into that driveway because there's going to
be another one here or somebody and somebody's going to get killed really because they where we are where you're not it says don't park you
know right here and they said they park all the way to the corner. So if if they tried committed they're you
know cuz the the the um I had a stroke and um you know that's okay. You're doing fine, man. You know you're doing fine. It's very it's dangerous to
because all the doctor and everything here they they part like here to here right at the you know so nobody's going to be able will go into
there you know it's I just think it's it's terrible. I will let you do and that's what I have. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Any
other public questions for the engineer hearing? None. Counselor. [Music] Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Shores. like when their property we're coming from Morris Avenue their driveway this
way right then it goes in the back of my my property is that where the drain is going to be cuz that cuz that run goes into my yard cuz sometimes when he's real heavy looks like a pond back there. So, like I said, we are proposing a wall
um you know, retaining wall from six to 2 ft high and that should avoid any runoff from the parking lot to to go into the neighbor's propert. You're talking about the south uh the south property line right there. 1372. I don't know, north, southeast, or west for my
property. Yeah. So, we basically Yeah, we have a wall on each side. So, I I you know, I don't believe any runoff would go into the neighbor's property. And that uh one thing about the driveway thing, can't they put a sign, you know,
if you're coming out, a sign saying no left hand turns? Um, so my testimony is not any traffic studies that we have done, you know, or not done. So, I'm strictly providing my testimony based on the drawings I've submitted. I I've not done any traffic
studies. No, just to mention one more thing. You talk about people coming in and coming out. Is there any way getting like a put like a a red like a traffic light like red the guy can't enter? Green he can enter that. I'm pretty sure that that is possible. That's a good uh
Yeah, I mean we have done that in other locations where we have, you know, limited space for cars entering and exiting. Yeah, that that link. Yep. All right. Thanks. Thank you. Ali, I have a question for you. You had mentioned about this wall. Okay. How
high is this wall? And would the fence be on top of that wall? I believe the fence would be on top. It's a It's 6 in to 2 feet high. So 2 feet now makes that fence 8 foot high, which in that zone only allows a 6' high fence. So that
would kick a variance in. So we, you know, I I'd have to check with the architect if they want to put it on top of the fence or if if the height would be adjusted accordingly. Okay. Because that would kick a variance in because it's only six foot and that two foot, six inches, whatever would be
considered. Yeah, we'll definitely make sure that you know we do it as per the township requirements. So, are there any other members of the public that would like to question the engineer? Hearing none.
Councelor call Robert Hudac. Can I ask the witness to swear or affirm that 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. Robert Hudac. Hu D is as in David AK. I'm a licensed
professional planner in the state of New Jersey. Uh my licenses and certifications are all in order. Um my business address is 1955 Route 34 Wall, New Jersey. The board will accept his credentials. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. I appreciate that. Mr. Hudac, you've been retained to give planning testimony on 1370 Morris Avenue, specifically lot 7, the uh area proposed for a parking lot behind uh the house known as 1370 Mars Avenue. Yes. Could
you please provide the board with your testimony? Sure. First, I want to address the uh the D1 variance which we've heard a lot about tonight. As per the Medici versus PPR case where it outlines what exactly the uh the
testimony we need to provide, it notes that we need to demonstrate that the use itself promotes the general welfare as defined under the municipal land use law because the site is particularly suited for the proposed use. This is a really unique site. Um, lot as you've heard,
lot 29 is undersized for the zone, the NC zone, which restricts development and flexibility and makes full on-site parking accommodations difficult without utilizing lot 7. As I understand, 29 and 7 are both in common ownership. Lot 7 is compliant with the RA zone with respect
to area and width. However, it's functionally isolated. There's no other access to my understanding. The only access is through lot 7. So these constraints imposed upon the substandard width of lot 29 combined with the isolation of lot 7 create a highly
unique circumstance where integrating both lots into a single site design which was what we've done tonight is not only appropriate but necessary to achieve functional safe and policy consistent development. The township master plan notes specifically that for
uses in the NC zone that parking should be accommodated on site and it limits it talks about limiting on street parking. Now it talks about allowing for maybe one space in in front of the building or the width of the property. Again, I know we've discussed it. You can maybe fit
one space there, maybe two, you can park there, but still would not accommodate all of the parking uh off on the street that we need to as required by ordinance. I know we've heard about a lot of the safety issues along Mars Avenue, having been there myself uh over
the years, but there's also a um I don't want to call it a report, but it's a it was a a um publication by the police department entitled the 2024 Proactive Traffic Safety Enforcement Report, and it noted that there was around 2400 actions that occurred along Mars Avenue,
Cyber Avenue, and Route 22. This report dates to like 2022, 2023. And most of those accidents occur during the peak traffic times and they all which is from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. which aligns with the business hours is
spoken about tonight. So the desire to have off streetet parking again we're only talking about the use not about the specifics necessarily in this part of the testimony. But the use of that rear lot for parking, whatever kind of parking it is, makes sense because
reducing on street parking and keeping the vehicles off site as noted by your master plan directly supports purpose a general welfare and safety purposes zoning. Purpose H the free flow of traffic purposes and purpose M the efficient use of land. By combining those site the site together so to speak
and integrating it the way that we've proposed it gets those all those parking all those cars off the street. There's also some case load with respect to this and I'm not an attorney but I'll just note what it says. AMG Associates versus the Township of Springfield. The New
Jersey Supreme Court reviewed a very similar case to this. The front of the lot was zoned commercial and the rear was zoned residential. The applicant proposed in that case parking just as we do on the residential portion and a permitted use which we have here in the
front portion the commercial portion. The court held that the residential portion to be effectively unusable, which is sort of the scenario here, because the only way to access our site is through lot 7, the commercial zone. And allowing the parking, which
the court said was a more benign use than a commercial use of the site, was a remedy against an unconstitutional taking. Now, I don't want to talk too much about that as I'm not an attorney, but that's what the Supreme Court said. In our case, lot 7, in my opinion, can't practically develop this standalone residential lot. the likelihood of us
putting any kind of residential use there is is very slim because you're going to have to go through the commercial zone which would require additional relief. Therefore, the only logical and beneficial use in my opinion of law 29 is to use it for on-site parking or a
portion of it. So with respect to the Medici criteria, the applicant meets that positive criteria for the use variance due to the inaccessibility and isolation lot 7, the need for on-site parking to meet your safety and planning goals. Again, we're complying with your parking standards. We have enough
parking on site and aligns with the precedent set in AMG Associates. The site is particularly suited for the limited expansion parking to the RA zone and the use promotes the general welfare. Now, there are a number of variances that we're seeking tonight. I did have a chance to peruse the CERS
report and the other reports and to note that there's there's a number of variances that we're seeking. One of which we eliminated. We eliminated I believe Mr. Goodman if you'll correct me if I'm wrong. We're we are complying with the the buffering requirement but providing fencing or landscaping along
the edges of the parking area. Correct. Yes. And we are also providing the lighting which meets the lighting standards is outlined in the ordinance. Am I correct? Yes. Okay. Okay. So, there's several of the variances that we've eliminated u through testimony tonight. As I again, as I've noted with
respect to lot 29, it is a narrow lot. It doesn't meet the minimum lot width requirements under the C1 criteria, which is known as the hardship uh the hardship variance. This is where the exceptional narrowness, shallowess or shape of a property or some exceptional topographical condition or other
exceptional situations affecting the proposed development results in practical difficulties which is what a hardship is for the applicant complying with code. This is an existing condition. The lot is what it is. I mean it's a lot 29 is a narrow lot. It's
we're not getting property from the adjoining property owners. Because this is an existing condition, we need to locate the building in the position it's in in order to build a as provide the compliant parking, provide the uh you know the access that we require. And due
to this limited space, I offer that there is a hardship here with respect to the variances we're seeking with respect to the C2 criteria where the benefits of the proposed deviations outweigh the detriments where the proposal offers a better zoning alternative and where the proposed uses will or the proposed
variances will actually advance the purpose of zoning. As noted, we have to seek enough space to provide access to the rear of the property. We again we're providing the parking the space sizes as noted in the um that we need a variance for are compliant with consistent
traffic safety standards. I've again I've heard test me on this number of times. We are providing for screening from the required parking spaces from the residential zone. So I offer that again the alternative is that we can't provide the on-site parking which your
master plan specifically says should be something we that we do it's encouraged. So with respect to those C1, I believe we are advancing the safety and general welfare, free flow of traffic and efficient use of land purposes as outlined in the municipal land use law with the neg with respect to the
negative criteria. The proposed development should not cause any substantial detriment to the public good and not substantial impairment to the intent and purpose of the zone plan. Any variance creates some sort of detriment. Obviously, it's not it's not contemplated in the zone or not
contemplated based on a specific lot. But the key word here is substantial. So I offer that the use is permitted in the in the front half of the property. So issues like traffic and issues like design and height and such, we've already been we've already discussed that. It's already been agreed to by the
governing body that those standards are acceptable for that zone. With respect to the rear use of the property, again, we're only using a portion of it. We are conserving the a good portion of that rear property to ensure that there is some green space left back there. uh
although it's not part of anyone's testimony, I assume that at some point we would be providing additional plantings in that green space so that it could be enhanced. I offer that as far as light air and open space. I mean we are providing um we're providing buffering.
We're providing greenage back there. Uh again, it's uh with respect to the building locations, we have a narrow lot. There's not a lot we can do with this this subject property. So, in my opinion, there really no significant detriment to the public good nor intent and purpose of the master plan and
zoning ordinance. In fact, I think as far as the master plan goes, we're actually advancing one of the most important goals that is mentioned in the master plan for the NC zone. Let me just start to Mr. Chairman if I could since he mentioned legal cases. I'm familiar with the cases as the
lawyer for the board. Um the you would agree that the analysis is sight specific. Correct. You can't just in a vacuum site generalities and legal principles without considering the site. Correct. Correct. And what I did was I looked at and actually this was brought
up to me if I may by another attorney in another case that I had a similar case like this in the Atlantic Highlands and the attorney actually cited the case to me. He said do you know the AMG case? Because that's what satisfi that's the answer to your question here. In that scenario, however, uh the one my case,
we had a through lot. The front half was in the commercial zone, the rear half was in the residential and we were accessing it through the residential zone, actually accessing the parking. That's similar to the AMG case. In our case, we're not accessing or we have no access to the parking through the
residential zone. We are going there. Don't you see that as part of the problem in terms of the testimony we heard from the architect, for example, where you're maximizing the structure, you're putting a third story, you're using complete use of the basement area that conjures into a certain amount of
parking spaces, you're expanding and enhancing on a use that has existed for some time without this type of impact. Whether it's substantially negative is for the board ultimately to determine. But the reality is with what's proposed in the site suitability analysis, the
expansion really is self-inflicted by the applicant, is it not? Well, it's within the permitted confines of the ordinance. So, what you're But there's both variances. There's both variances for the structure. I mean, but I'm we're talking specifically about the use here because you brought up the use issue. What we're proposing there is no
variance related to the use in the NC zone. So any use and again the height we're going up to the permitted height requirement. We're not exceeding that. So there's no variance for height. The use itself is contemplated in the zone. It's not something that's outside of what the governing body and the planning board envisioned for this zone. So what
I'm arguing is essentially that this use which is a permitted use. You're further restricting it because we really can't accommodate the parking. I mean theoretically can you build a much smaller building on the site? Well, that's more than theoretical. That's
more than theoretical. That's factual because there's adjustments to the building that are being proposed. And one of the legal criteria that I advise this board on often, and I've been its attorney for almost 20 years, is those adjustments that can be made by an applicant address the impact from the
variances. So, that's what we're doing here. That's what they'll deliberate later, and I'll probably try to summarize and so advise them as I often do. But it it's not simply use that a use that is permitted. You cannot operate without the parking that's
necessary in the RA zone. That's the difference here. It's different in my opinion and since you mentioned legal cases, I'll offer my opinion on it. You have a site here that cannot allow the use to exist without extending on to the
RA zone for essential parking. I mean, that's the problem. and some of the negative criteria and and Cyers mentions it. He say you have to get traffic analysis and some details when you're going to have this impact this increased impact for a site that's not suitable.
It's it's undized. There's, you know, we know that by the driveway width. I mean, it's 10 ft. You know, it's it's just not accommodating to an enhanced use to that level. At least that's what Kier said we need to hear testimony tonight about. We've heard none. I mean, we we've heard
negativity and that's that's something that's of a concern. Sure. I mean, I guess, you know, with respect to that, can you build something tiny? I mean, we could build a shack on there and not need and only need two or three parking spaces. Well, there's something there. There's something there that's existed for such some time and on either side of
it and along that part of Morris Avenue. I mean, if you're familiar with the area, you know that this structure would be out of character. In fact, as testified by the neighbors most impacted on either side when you're putting the third floor and teeing it off, you know, we heard that, oh, the height permits
it. But that's not the analysis alone when we're dealing with a D1 situation and we're dealing with bulk setback deficiencies. I mean, that that's important. So the so what you're saying and if again if I'm incorrect, please clarify it to me. So the applicant can't
build to the height requirement simply because which they're allowed to do as of as of right. They can't build that because you're saying the lot is constrained. To me that's I I've always heard the opposite of that that the applicant should be able to build to what the ordinance requires. And again
there are setback issues. I I understand that. But as far as the use goes, you know, we're not we are complying with the height requirement. It's not like we're going to 70 ft or something like that. Probably out of character for the zone. I don't think you fully appreciate my comment when you said, "Oh, there's setback issues." I understand that the
setback issues are part and parcel to what you're trying to do with the enhanced use. The the use that is proposed is permitted in the NC zone, not a commercial zone, as you were saying. It's it's a neighborhood corridor, very different, you know, and
and we we have neighbors all around the site and it's been that way for decades. And this particular site, and that's what we're here to do. It's a particular it's sight suitability and the particularity of the sites. We're not dealing with an enhanced use. It's an admirable use. I understand that they
train people to get into the school system and help students. No issue with that. You know, the issue is the functioning office use. That's what we're dealing with here. And getting in and out of the driveway. We you know I don't know if we've heard I mean the record is what it is in the board of deliberate but in terms of getting out
of that driveway if someone's trying to exit and somebody's trying to come in off Morris Avenue sounds close to impossible to me but I don't vote you know that's the reality and I'm not a traffic engineer I don't and I and I appreciate your comments but my
understanding of of the way the land use law has has operated is that as far as the use is concerned if the use is a permitted use things like height and such really and again we're meeting the front yard setbacks as well. You know,
perhaps the governing body should reconsider some of the and again I'm not arguing they should but maybe they should consider some of those things when they allow such uses in this zone knowing that there's these existing because there's a number of these existing non-conforming lots in that immediate area as well. But none of them
have that access to that that rear lot like we do. So that's what you need. Well, there's a lot of smaller offices. There's there's smaller groups of professionals dealing with offices that don't require 22 parking spaces and that's what the board very familiar with the area. That's their role. They have
that difference because of their familiarity with the area. That's why they're here. I mean that's really, you know, I wanted to comment on the use of the case law for sure. I mean they'll deliberate and do what they have to do. I mean your testimony is so noted. Certainly. Yeah. Know I appreciate your I appreciate your comments and feedback.
Like I said, I've testified before on such situations. And uh typically that's the scenario is that when you do have a residential use like this in this rear lot, it's again, we're not utilizing the entire lot. We're not making it commercial in the sense that we're not
putting the commercial building back there. We're simply providing parking, which is a more benign use than having a gi having a building that occupies the entire lot. But you do agree, you said it, and just to be clear, the the the board needs to deal with the negative criteria and the impact and whether
that's substantial to allow it to reject what's proposed in the D1 context. I mean, they have the they have the role to deliberate that and determine whether it's substantial or not. Correct. Because there is always a detriment as noted the courts have noted on numerous occasions, you know, absolutely that any
variance that's granted is some way detrimental. Here it's not the use. It's it well it is the use for lot the one lot lot seven um but with respect to the the lot in the NC zone there is no v we're not seeing use variance for that lot.
Okay thank are there any board members that would like to question Mr. Hudek's testimony hearing none. Are there any members of the public that would like to come forward and question the testimony? Mr. Goodman, you you don't have no other
witnesses, right? That usually Okay, just Mr. crime. Before you begin, I cut off the applicant before. I don't know if you want to reintroduce what she was trying to say. I don't want to make it seem like I shut her down. She was testifying when the engineer was testifying. It's up to you council if you want to re put her back on the stand
before M. We offer public comments or do you feel the comments, Scott? I want to be fair questioning of Mr. Hudac. Thank you, Mr. Goodman. I apologize. Thanks. Hi, Mr. Hudac. Hi, Mr. Bryan. How are you? Good. I'm good. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm I'm obviously I have a
position here that that I'd like to make clear. So, I do have a question for you. The first case you cited, could you just tell us what that case name? Oh, the Medici case. Yes. So, the Medici case, is that what it was? Medici. Medici versus BPU. And I I don't want to step on the attorney's toes on that one.
That's the That's the seminal case that discusses what the uh what is required for the D1 use variance. I just have some questions about it. Did the Medici case, to your understanding, have a full comment from the traffic engineer and were there comments back like a Collier's report before the court
considered it? I don't know off the top of my head. Okay. Were there comments back on fire? Did the Medici case address safety for the residents andor the employees of the building? No, I not that I I don't recall that. Did the Medici case in any way deal with a
design that included lighting and where that design might be for parking? I I don't know off the top of my head. Okay. And again, I only I'm No, Mr. Grind. I I appreciate that. The only reason I cited that is because that's this the the two elements the
furthering the goals of the of the uh MUL and sight suitability are the two prongs of the youth variance. It's the only reason I cited that case. apples and oranges to at least to me is is that they're complete cases, right? So the Medici case at least doesn't seem to me as an again a non- lawyer and a
non-planner to be apples to apples because those comments before you do that, counselor, would you would you mind opining on the Medici standards a little bit? The board's certainly familiar with Medici. We're at the public comment portion of the hearing right now. It was rightly submitted. I think the the comments are are fair from
a layman's perspective trying to understand what Medici is. you know, it's a hotel. By the way, and now I I don't want to get accused of being an attorney. Let Let me just move on then. The Springfield case that you cited, I have the same questions. Were was there an interface and any sort of emergency
management input that made the case that was inputed and validated that that folks would be safe and fire could in fact reach uh a necessary e situation in that in that brief? I don't recall fire being part of that case. Okay. Was there
anything in terms of uh EMS safety in in regards to that that you're aware of? I'm not aware of anything within that the Supreme Court cited in there. Anything in terms of lighting on parking? Yes. Okay. And what did it do? It basically said that the parking the lighting to to my recollection of the
case was dimminimous. I mean again typically uh in these cases at least the ones I've been involved in, lighting is shielded in such a way that it would only go onto the parking lot and would dim at certain hours. It would be on timers or something like that. Uhhuh. Okay. Which is something I again I'd
have to discuss with the client, but it's something we can accommodate. Did it deal with garbage? No. No. Just so I understand. All right. And my last uh kind of question is this. The previous use to this, which you may not be aware, was a lawyer. Correct me
if I'm wrong here, folks. Right. He was in attorney's office. Yes. In fact, there's two parcels here that we're talking about, right? Because you reference hardship and master planning. And again, I'm not a lawyer, but I do know this community went through a master plan with significant public input. In fact, I suspect from members
of this board as well and chose not to change the zone of the of the uh property that you're asking for a D1 variance for tonight. So, we're clear. It's been reviewed sometime in the past few years and that zone was left where it is. But
your talk was of hardship. Is it to a layman's prospect there was a business that thrived there for 354 years? Is we're we're all we I admit we don't have that factually but we can safely say decades more than more than even 50 most likely.
Okay. So if a business thrived there for 50 years and your client buys a property, where's the hardship for the community when the community's reviewed the zoning, decided they needed to stay residential? Isn't the hardship on your client trying to inflict damage to a
community instead? Well, that was my point about the the D1 variance. I'm demonstrating that your master plan, which is adopted by your town, has cited the fact that having on-site parking is preferable to not having it, having on street parking. We have a way to remedy
that through using that residential lot for parking. But to a layman, one could refer or potentially imply that the review of that master plan and the leaving of that zoning where it was through multiple public conversations, multiple public hearings, in fact, the
governing body made that decision to in fact leave it where it was and not have it be changed by this type of zone. Well, that's my opinion. Yeah. No, I I understand where you're going with that and I would from a layman's perspective may be correct. However, what I'm arguing is that you have those two lots
as existing. If you don't develop that other that isolated lot in some way, shape or form, what what are you allowed to do there? The only thing you're allowed to do is a single family home. And my argument is that that more than likely will never be developed as a single family home. So it h but to say
that it can't be developed at all that it's zoned into in utility again I'm not I don't want to seek a legal standard here but from my layman's perspective what's going to happen to that lot from my planning experience I would say the most likely use is to use it exactly as
we're proposing to have some some element of the commercial use bleed onto that lot and develop a portion of it for some use accessory to that commercial use. Understood. And from this layman who just happens to live in the area, uh, from my perspective, from looking at
it, the property gets purchased knowing full well it required a variance immediately. and by the way over the objections of the township has matured trees removed to create a hardship to a community. Then lets the property fall into significant disres disrepair
including cardboard, empty windows, a blight on the entire community including its values and its quality of life and then has then comes before this board in a situation where the property is so blighted that somehow or another we're supposed to accept less than the best
and we shouldn't do that. Thank you. Any other questions? I need to state my name again. John Feranda, 975 Townley Avenue. Sir, the the learner gentleman from Wall was one out of three people who read the Kier's report. Congratulations. Thank you for
that. I say that respectfully. You hired an architect, an engineer, an attorney, and this presentation. And God bless all of you up here who have taken the patience level and the attorney to listen to a presentation that is so woefully incomplete. We have sat here as
residents and I'll use the word layman right now. All my neighbors all of here we haven't heard anything specific about fencing, lighting, traffic study that stuff sort. I don't know how you accept this kind of a plan. And I'm trying to
be fair to you, Stephanie, but when you hire people at this level and take over two hours of residential time and these people's time to come up here and not have those answers, it's beyond me. This is the 21st century. Let's have an
outbreak of common sense. I I I beg this board in the future, if we have situations like this, there's got to be some criteria for information flow. this to me which we we sat here for two hours and and you brought up a lot of you've enlightened us sir you you've given us a
lot of great information that is still not included in this plan. So I don't know where you know what your threshold of pain is to continue to listen to stuff that's incomplete. We as residents, we as residents still don't
have the answers that we need to make a valued judgment and make positive or negative comments about what's going on. It needs to be This has got to be better. It's got to be better than this. Thank you. Are there any other members of the
public that would like to question Mr. Hudac? Just his testimony. No more comments. Uh just quick question. When did you receive the colle? I received it before just before this hearing. Okay. Thank you.
Are there any other questions from the public? My name is Nancy Hennessy. Yeah. Um, I've lived here since 60 uh 60s60s
and wow. Now that they taken all the tap uh to trees down and now behind our yard there's
like a a fence and then from there it just stops and it's like it's it it looks like well you said you sit on more Um, Lorraine.
No. Yeah. What What do you think? What are they thinking? Looking like what you used to be a fence or you know
originally I don't know if it was a doctor or um now is a doctor. Um he used to have colleagues and you know he you would see
them and everything and there were always people there cleaning it up and you know now it looks like and place air you know and it's it's in the
eyes eye sour But, you know, it's and I don't defense it's going to help it, you know, like and then to say, well, you're going to get it fit. Well, they're fine.
What about all the people from uh Mar Lraine? They're coming down with all the, you know, the water and everything. It's just, you know, It's It's
bad. So, thank you, ma'am. Are there any other members of the public that would like to question Mr. Hudac hearing? None. Councelor.
Yeah, Mr. Chairman, if I could ask for a fivem minute break to speak to my client, speak to council. Sure. Five minutes. He's back. Mr. Goodman, we uh finished with Mr. Hudach. Uh did you want to recall the
applicant? No, not at this time. Okay. I guess uh you're you're uh before we do public comments, obviously, Mr. chairman, if you want to do that. But uh uh what my client requests at this time is to withdraw her application.
Uh I had conversations with council and legally just so we're clear council I believe if you withdraw it after the record going through the way it is it's with prejudice which means this does not get built it has the effect that if the only way something can be done on this
site it would have to be through a substantially changed different application. So you have the right to withdraw. It's not a continuence. It's not something that's getting kicked down the road. Yeah. this plan dies and does not happen.
Yeah, it's my understanding and I' I've voiced it with my client that she can come back, but it has to be a substantially changed application uh addressing all the concerns that have been brought forward and um
uh obviously uh substantial uh reduction to uh the size perhaps substantial reduction to any parking requests uh and fulfilling all the obligations that were set out in the engineering ing report and from the uh addressing the fire
concerns. So with that with that said, right and just I'll add gratuitously dealing with code enforcement and some of the issues affecting the site now unrelated to what the land use board does, but we heard a lot of frustration and a lot of detail
about things that need to change and and the board will vote to determine if it gets withdrawn. Yeah, I I understand that. And I just want to say that I think um my my client has aired uh more out of omission, not knowing the right
thing to do, uh not consulting the right people, not getting good advice as opposed to any any malevolent intent to disrespect the neighborhood or disrespect the board or disrespect the professionals. Okay. Well, if if it's the applicant's desire, Mr. Chairman, uh
to withdraw the application, you can't make them go forward. I mean we can uh determine to do a motion in a second. I suggest that it would be with prejudice as if the board did rule. So it does it would have effect preclusive effect on
the applicant to come forward. I don't want to call raise judicotta because but we are going to do a resolution acknowledging that it's being withdrawn voluntarily with prejudice and like any application substantial changes get you. We'll cross that bridge if we come to it. Thank you. just so the public
understands that what the applicant has opted to do uh through some of the legal ease you heard the council and I discussing is not go forward with the application. So uh we were here for a long time. We had a lot of testimony. Normally what would happen you still
would have the opportunity to comment generally the board would then deliberate and then ultimately they vote and they could vote. They would need five votes to approve the application. Short of that, it would have been denied. What the applicant is proposing,
they're not going to build it. They want it withdrawn. So, they would not be able to simply come back here in a week, a month, two months, 6 months, even a year from now with this same application. They would be forbidden legally from doing that. They have to do a substantial change on notice and a whole
new set of plans and processes back to square one. So what you came out tonight to hear and to hear a vote on not being adjourned to continue it dies tonight. So there won't be if the board is so inclined to accept the uh the withdrawal
and I recommend legally it makes sense under the circumstances and certainly the public is here. If anyone has any questions let's hear it. Mr. Cry absolutely come up to apologize. I just have one the properties of light currently. Yeah. I'm assuming the board accepts the withdrawal application. What
are the what are the opportunities for the community to have property fixed so we don't have to endure the terrible condition the great windows we spoke about? Very good. Very good point. This board is limited jurisdiction in that regard. But what I did and I reference it gratuitous with Mr. Goodman because
it's his client but ultimately Mr. Monguso's office gets to deal with the applicant on the summones on the details. things need to change and he will enforce that totally separate from anything that happen here tonight or will happen in the future for the development of the property. There's certain standards that would have to be
fulfilled. I'll reference it in the resolution because I mentioned it. Um but this board doesn't have governance for that, but Mr. Monguso's office certainly does from code enforcement. Thank you, Council. Thank you. No problem. Thank you. At this time, may I have a motion and a
second per the uh well, per the uh applicants withdrawal with prejudice. I would like a motion, a second to withdraw this application. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to withdraw. Calendar number 3454,
Overcomers ABA Services LLC. Address being 1370 Mars Avenue, block 1303, lot 7 and 29. uh voluntarily with prejudice. Second a motion. Roll call, please. Mr.
Bentega, yes. Mr. Johnson, yes. Miss Martins, yes. Mr. McNeel, yes. Mr. Wy, yes. Mr. Graves, yes. And Mr. Champy, yes. Thank you. I will memorial.
Can I have a motion? I will memorialize that resolution and I'll try to get it on the June 4th calendar. We get you got to go. Yes. Yeah. This should go fast. All
right. Our second case this evening is calendar number 34 51 J. Mendes located at 2346 Springfield Avenue, block 4707, lot
14.01. Applicant wishes to construct an addition with insufficient setbacks. Are you the Mr. Mendes? Yes. Okay. For the record, I I know I swore you in the last time, Mr. Mendes, but once again, just for the record, you're still under oath. You're here tonight as the applicant and the owner and your wife.
For the record, what is your name? Alexa. Okay, just to cut to the chase because I know it's late and I appreciate that you guys sat through the other hearing of which there was a lot of public. Um, we adjourned the last time. We didn't start the testimony in any particular detail. Correct. I do
note for the record that there was a submission by a professional. It was a planner. I assume he's here tonight to address the plans. Yes, he is. I did mark what he submitted. So, it is part of the record. Um, and unless you have Do you want to offer an opening or do
you want to cut right to the chase with your professional? I can do I I I definitely can do an opening. Okay. Yeah. We will swear him in. You authorize him to testify on your behalf. Correct. Yes. Okay. Uh, for the record, if I can ask the witness to
swear or affirm that the testimony you provide this evening is the truth and the whole truth. Yes, I do. And for the record, if you would state and spell your name with your affiliation, your area of expertise for tonight. My name is Jeffrey Goan, architect and planner
out of Morristown, New Jersey, uh 35 Pine Street. Uh I've been functioning as an architect and planner in that area. Excuse me. Could you spell your name first? Could you spell your name first? Oh, uh Jeffrey is spelled with a G. G E O F R E
Y. G O G A N. And you've testified previously as both a planner and an architect in a professional capacity? Yes, I have. And all your credentials are still in good standing from the last time you were accepted as an expert in such capacity? Yes. Yes, they are. Mr. Chairman, I would recommend that the expert could be
offered as both a and you'll be offering planning and architectural testimony this evening. Yes, I will. Okay. So, noted for the record. Could you summarize your credentials real quick? I'm sorry. Could you summarize your credentials real quick? Yes. I um attended NJIT
uh from 73 to 78, graduated with a Bachelor of Architecture and did my internship for different firms in the Newark metropolitan area for several years and became licensed in 1983 and opened a firm in Morristown in 1984. The
portal accept your credentials. Thank you. Sorry, I'm trying to uh maximize I guess it's it's large enough, right? So I can uh um uh why don't you introduce the project a little bit? You want you want
to explain the project a little you want to and I'll if you want to refer to anything I'll I'll try to scroll to it and Okay. Good evening board members. Good evening. I'm de Jesus. Uh um my husband tremendous uh we're the property
owners of 2346 Springfield Avenue in Boxville area. Uh been there for quite some time now. Um raising our children there. We also have our children here. I have my son uh Miguel who's 23, just graduated Stockton University last week
and um he's back home. And um I also have my daughter Jalani Mendes. Uh she is um 15 years old. um she's being homeschooled at home. Um I also have u Alani's and Melania at the ages of 11
and nine. Um they attend a private school in Scotch Plains. Uh and basically I just want to uh this is the reason why we're trying to do the addition and the renovations to our home. Um I'm just want to reflect back to like you uh 2020 uh I'm sorry uh back
into co um and um when my children were home and they were being virtually um you know uh doing online classes uh by then Miguel already had graduated Union High School um and he went off to college and I had to basically uh do um
all three girls at home and within that space right now is uh three bedrooms um two baths And um we're expanding. I mean, we have a big family. We're trying to do the renovations just because we, you know, we want the girls, I mean, they're getting to a age where they want
to have their own space and, you know, especially Jalani being that she's doing, you know, homeschool at home and um and just looking for some space within, you know, my for my children to have um their own uh privacy and when they're doing homework or, you know, uh
what so sometimes they have online classes. I just want to give them the space to have those, you know, uh the rooms of each and one of my children. Um again, you know, uh Miguel is back home and um you know, another reason for the
expansion and the addition to to our homes. Um and uh and so we came uh about last year we decided that is either selling or keeping the property and doing some kind of renovations for you know to our
home. we decided we want to go ahead and um you know do the the renovations to our home and um and so we've submitted an application and um and we have uh now the variance in place and so I would
like to now just turn it over to Mr. Golden to explain the comments that were provided by the engineering department. Okay. Just before you do that, can I just confirm on the record your intent that the board grants favorably to the application is to continue with the
single family residential use. Correct? Yes. Okay. That's important to note for the record because when there's addition done and there's other things that's something we will put in the record. Yeah, it'll stay as a single family. Thank you. I don't know if any other board members has questions of the UN. Any members want to question the
applicant? Hearing hearing none. Would you like to? Yes. Okay. Start. Thank you. Um, I wanted to start with u the set of plans that were submitted. Although these are this is a color PDF, but your
prints were black and white. For the record, Mr. uh Goen, not to cut you off, I did mark A1 the application as it was submitted. I marked A2 the prior plan as it were and I marked A3 the updated and revision. So that's all part of the record and anything colorized we can add
off of A3. So you said you marked uh just just to refresh the board, there was another architect involved, correct? Originally, Zen Architecture, right? And I'm basically taking over the project of I've talked to them. They're cooperating and I've recreated all the drawings
basically. Yep. Um, the only thing I do have, if you mark their set, I I did leave their demolition plan in the bottom of of to the last page of this exhibit, which was not printed in the in the set that you received.
Um, all right. Why don't we mark it A4 then as you're going to be referring to it? Yeah, I I will. I I'll look at it quickly. Most of it is on my plan, but I I just wanted to This is the one that I'm talking about that was actually created by Zen Architecture. It's a demo
plan. Yes. I do know too your submission, I believe it was yesterday or the day before, was circulated. Did that go to the board as well? So, your summary uh both of the Collier's comments and some of the particulars from the last uh Yes. presentation were circulated to the board. Yes, it should have all been
circulated. Yeah. I'm just going to go back up to the aerial photo um to show the the essential issue here. Um sorry, I'm just going to get used to this computer. Um to the I'm not used to the uh the board
secretary is noting you actually submitted a sealed copy. So I'll mark that A5 because it's a very good summary. Uh I read it. I agree legally too. You made some comments based on some of the issues raised whether it's an RB zone. I mean, so you're going to
testify to that, but I'll call it A5 for the record. Is your submission dated? It happens to be dated August 18th, 2024 for some reason. I guess that's typographical, but the the version that was circulated yesterday.
Let me just um see if I can Sorry about that. Let me I'm I'm not used to this interface here. Trying to know. Okay. So, um I I'll just talk as I look at some of these photos. This is the
Springfield Avenue side of the building as it is today. Uh Bertha is to the right on the corner. I'm going to go up to the aerial photo. This street right here is Bertha, which is off of Springfield. And
um oh boy, I don't know why it keeps highlighting. I don't mean to do that. Um but the the issue really that's brought us here tonight is they want to put a small addition. Well, relatively small. It's it's it's going to be along
this left side. what we what I we we look at and think of as the left side of the house looking from from uh Springfield Avenue which which is the current front face of the house. We want to build to the left on um off of that sideyard, what we think of as a sideyard. Unfortunately, the the
ordinance definition for yards for corner lots says that your front yard has to be has to be determined by the uh side of the lot that's I believe the narrowest. So in other words, Bertha Avenue is is technically the front side
of the lot according to the ordinance. So the yard that we want to build in to the to the left of the building if as you face it from Springfield is actually technically the rear yard of the property. But yet um many other buildings in the area have these types
of expansions to within 5 ft of the property line. So in other words, intuitively you would look at the building and say, "Okay, that's a sideyard and we can just build up to the five- foot sideyard requirement." So essentially, we're hoping that the board can look at the site and realize the
unique nature and the fact that for all intents and purposes, the front of this building is not on Bertha. It's on Springfield. And we're building into the side to the side of the existing house. and that we are respecting what is currently required
for sideyards, interior sideyards. And if if uh you're probably familiar with corner lots, a lot of towns, you have two front yards. In this town, you have two you have one front yard and two sideyards. One is called the street sideyard and one is called
the interior sideyard. So, uh uh we have um this pre-existing lot which has the driveway off of Bertha, the front on on Springfield, and they want to build what's what in what's
technically the the rear yard and need a variance because of the rear yard setback. That's that's that's the gist of it. And then there are um some pre-existing non-conforming conditions with some of the accessory buildings, patios, some of the setbacks, the
distances between them, the distances between them and the house and the coverages for those different yards. The the ordinance is quite extensive in terms of what it asks for. So I have added quite a few of those lines to my top sheet. And I I think I'll um I'll go
up there now. Let me see if I can just scroll up. Okay, I'll leave it zoomed in like this. So, basically on this top sheet, I'll just show you give you give you an orientation. What I've done is I've put
the existing site plan at the top. with u all the existing setbacks. The coverages are all over here for building and improved live coverage and all the all the different site features are shown here. The existing house is right here. And this is the yard where they
want to build uh just to the left where there are some air conditioning condensers and and a couple small sheds. And actually there there was once a driveway here years and years ago. You can still see some of the asphalt, but um we don't have the full history of when it all changed, but it was many
years ago before they purchased the property in 2015. And we think it might have been related to when a median was put in separating the two directions of traffic on speed on Springfield Avenue. So, everyone was forced to come through the back roads and come around the block and
then enter uh when they're heading west on Springfield. Uh and then down below that drawing I have the proposed site plan. So if you if you look at the uh
variances on the right side we have all these quite most of those are are accessory variances having to do with setbacks and and so on. I I don't know if we're going to go through all of them one by one. If you want we can but um I put all of those dimensions
only on the existing top drawing. Uh all all those required um dimensions and parameters that the ordinance asks for are shown there and I can go through them if you want but essentially there's no change proposed
to the existing site. We feel that it was all done with some degree of knowledge by the township. For example, the previous owner uh put the patios in, the driveway, the uh fire pit, and this
little barbecue area. The owners, the current owners, installed the pool, and originally had a small set of steps up to the pool, like one of these mobile um pool steps. It's an above ground pool, and they they were having trouble with that with safety and and so
on. So they decided to build a small deck around it and have more permanent safe structure with a guardrail and everything. Um and so some of this work was inspected like when they put the pool in they had inspections for the
underground um electrical and I don't know if there's their gas line it's is it at least some inspections for trenching and conduit and so on were done but they don't have all those records handy. Uh uh and what I showed here was a this
line is a prevailing front yard set back along Bertha because there are some rules about accessory buildings in front yards. So I I had to kind of distinguish how much it wants to know how much of it is in the front yard, the percentages and so on. So some of that is what you
see there. Uh, now I'll just scroll down to the proposed site plan and this is where you can see uh I'm sorry. So, so we have 70 ft along the Bertha property
line and we have 84 feet I think it is 84, right? Yeah, 84 along this line. So, so that's why the ordinance forces us to use the narrower or the the shorter corner property line as the front of the building. So, it's it's true that most
of the buildings of course along Bertha that is the front side of the building because it's a corner lot. You know, sometimes it buildings will deviate and be to be oriented a different way. So, in this case, we have all of their recreational facilities and uh patio and
play areas and and parking around these two yards. And then the building is in the southwest corner. And they want to build this hatched area essentially here. Uh this this whole section of the building exists, although they're going to build uh a new second floor
essentially, clean up all the roof lines, reside it, replace all the windows, and there's a singlestory section in the rear of the building right here. So that will that will receive a second floor also. The second floor will extend out over that existing
singlestory roof, but there is no expansion in that direction of the building footprint. The only expansion is to the left uh in this hatched area. Um let's see. Um want to go to um I
don't know if I should just go through the variances um or how much you want to hear about it, but I don't know. I can quickly just run through if you want, but essentially the main variance we're here for is the fact that this yard is a rear yard. And there are some pre-existing
non-conforming conditions with the lot uh depth also where we have the 84 feet deep here where 100 feet is required. And that's a that's a factor for us because if if they did have a 100 foot deep
lot, we we we've been much more able to conform, you know, closer to conformance on the rear yard. This is a the neighbor's house. Uh I I don't let me see if I have the name of that street. I don't think I have the name of the street handy, but it's the next block over. And this is the side of
their house. Their their front does front onto the other side just like we we are supposed to front. they their front is on the side street, not on Springfield, but they have a five-foot setback from this corner of their house to the fence that we have. So, it's
probably right around 5 ft. Uh, and so, in other words, their yard here was was treated as if it was an interior sideyard on the corner uh property, which is what we're asking for essentially the same thing.
Um, so the rear yard requirement is 25 ft and uh we are proposing 20 feet uh 5T I'm sorry I've I I actually bumped it over to some make a little over five feet 5.1
ft. And that's the only new variance being created by the project. Uh actually everything else is pre-existing non-conforming and has to do with the accessory buildings and the there is an existing uh non-conformance of this
front wall along the Springfield lot line is right on the line. So the proposal is to set the front of this addition back um an additional uh f over 5.2 2 ft back. So, it's not going to be aligned
with that non-conforming wall, but technically it it is uh within what's called the street sideyard. So, uh some of that terminology is a little new for me, too. So, u let me just make sure I get it
right. The street side is required to be 12 feet. So, if somebody was building this building today, brand new, they would have to say 12 feet away from this lot line someplace back in here. I'm going to scroll down. Now, um in previous
coverage, I did all the calculations the engineer asked for in terms of uh breaking it down in the different uh areas contributing to the impervious coverage. And basically we're the net is to reduce
the total impervious coverage slightly. We're reducing it from where where it is now which is 69.5% down to 68.7 slight reduction but um you know it is it is a more a little bit more conforming but it's just
continuing the non-conforming uh coverage. The uh Collers also asked about uh and I'll go through all of his comments in a second, but he asked about buffering. There's a very beautiful mature hedge row of arboravite along
this property line now, which is quite well developed. They've got actually irrigation. Um so they're they're they look better than almost any arborite I've ever seen. You know, if you I think I might have a good picture of it. I'll show you. And they they've put a similar
hedge um all along this side now uh which has been there for a couple years and it's also developing very nicely. So that would remain as a buffer and wouldn't it'd be higher than six feet. It's probably already closer to eight or 10 feet in some of it.
Uh and there are a couple of also decent trees here. One is a a fur tree, I think, and one is pine. Uh spruce, I think it is. Spruce and pine, right? Um the owner is actually works for uh one of the big landscaping companies in the
in the vicinity and so has a lot of resources to do anything he wants to do here. Very well. Then there's there's a there's a a lawn area here with a couple of short trees. You could almost call them shrubs, but they're they're short trees. Another lawn over here is
proposed. Uh let me just keep going down here. Look for anything else. Okay. The fence is required to be uh there's a front yard setback for fences 7.5 ft. There's a fence that's been here
since um I I looked at Google uh photos, street photos, and I could go all the way back to the uh early teens, like 2013 or so. So, there's always been a fence along here and they replaced that fence with a vinyl fence. Uh, so I'll
show you pictures of that. I think I don't know if I have the old one, but and then there's another uh fence setback for corner lots uh of two inches. I believe it's No, it's either two I think it's 02
feet. When you're when you have a fence, you're not supposed to put it right on the property line. You're supposed to have it just a few inches off the property line. And right up in this area, there's the existing fence, uh, which is again been there for probably decades, but it was replaced. It it
tapers up like this to give a little more elbow room to this neighbor's driveway. And he uses that. He has tracking pads where he drives up uh back to where his garage is. And so that's been retained. uh there there, you know,
he's he's leaving that little bit of encroachment uh of his driveway, but right up here, the fence kind of crosses the line for a few feet and then comes back around. So, it's just one of those things.
Um let me see what else. Okay, that's that's the 2-in rule. Distance from principal building. Um, there's an existing pavilion uh right here. It's basically one of
those Costco uh kits that you just bolt down to the pavers and it was probably put up during we think during the co years when everybody was on top of each other trying to work at home, do schooling at home and just needed more outdoor covered space to get some fresh
air and and space between, you know, when they're doing things and not have the constantly have the interruptions during Zoom chats and Zoom uh courses and things like that. So, they they just put that up. Uh there were no permits for it. They they can they can thought of it kind of like a
piece of site furniture. It's a it's low. Uh it's open and it's they'd like to keep it if they can. So, I I put the dimensions in there for that as if it wasn't there yet, thinking that you you may want to just legalize it. But essentially, those types of structures
are supposed to be 10 ft from the principal structure. They're just under that at 9.7. Um, the next one is the front setback of accessory structures. There are a bunch of I I I put all four of those
numbers together on the same line, but if uh if you look back up here, you'll see where I I showed all these front setback dimensions to the pool, to the pavilion, to the to this uh patio, which is considered an accessory structure in
Union Township. Even patios are supposed to respect those accessory setbacks. Um and then um align existing with okay uh accessory structures are not supposed to be in front yards. They're supposed
to at least align with the front of the building or I believe it I read I read it to mean the the required front of the building. And I maybe you can tell me if that's how you're interpreting it, but to me that required front, if you look at the
shading here, I I hatched this side of the pool a little darker because it's in front of the the prevailing front of Bertha. If you if you look at where the front fronts of those buildings are, um that's
essentially what I would say is the required front, which you know that that is the ordinance does allow you to go to the rec to the prevailing line if you're not less than 20 ft. You have to be at least 20 ft, but you don't have to go to the full 25.
Um, and then the ordinance asks for coverage calculations for all of these accessory structures as a percentage of the lot area, a percentage of the principal building, and a percentage of the lot of
the yard that that accessory structure is in. So, I tried to give you some of those there. It's kind of complicated and it's uh it is what it is pretty much. Um, and basically a lot of that is
patio, pavers. Um, and the pool is the main thing I I would think because it is in the technically the front yard, but again, they've never looked at it that way. They they've always seen this as the front of the building. So, when they put it in, they were thinking, "Okay, well, let's put a
pool in the backyard, you know, because it's it's it's behind the way behind the front setback uh off of Springfield." Um, and again, some of that was done with with uh inspections. Um, so I have all the
percentage down at the bottom of this chart. Um, which mainly pertain to the pavers. Some of it complies, some of it's just pre-existing non-conforming. And I'll just I'm looking down at my sheet, but it's the
lower section of this this expanded uh list of zoning requirements and and variances. And all of these numbers are a function of uh these these totals that I I gave over here, which come right off the site
plan. I noted too for the record, the Mr. Goen, your your summary as I said at the start. So, uh, why don't I reference for the record, um, that the the followup will be with the township engineer. The board would defer to make
sure that they're in complian. You had no problems. I know you made some comments based on some of the updates in the college report, but generally and substantively, there's no issue complying and working cooperatively with Collier's uh, going forward for the addition. Correct. Yes. Uh, we we we
feel that we have already gone through his letter. I'm I'll zoom into that right now. Uh and just go through those number technical comments that he made. Um yeah, no, I noted that they've been addressed and as that's as I said, the
board sometimes defers does defer to collers on those technicalities. As long as you're willing to work cooperatively with them to assure the details are as they expect, uh we can move on and I'll note that for the record. Okay. Yeah. call C call your sent an email saying
we've reviewed it enough to know that they have addressed all of our concerns. I did I did see that. Um I'll I could just rattle off quickly what they were concerned with. Um I won't spend a lot of time on it, but he talked about the the cornot issue. I've already mentioned the fact that the front is on Bertha and
uh what we really are building is into what we practically think of as a sideyard. Um he asked for the updated survey. We we provided that and we had spot elevations gathered by a surveyor which allowed us to do the grading plan which he asked for.
Um he asked about the buffers, the fencing and the hedges which I I've explained. Um he asked for all that detail about the accessory structures, uh the calculations, the distances, the setbacks. He asked for a drywall system,
a seepage pit, and a grading plan. And I could just I'll come down to that in a moment. He mentioned the existing bay window um is over the sidewalk of Springfield Avenue right
there. And he asked for how the distance how far out it is and how far above the sidewalk. So I put that on my plan. It's about 13 in out from the building and about 70 in above the sidewalk. They're thinking about putting a little planter or something there to keep people from bumping their head, but so far it has
never been a problem. It's been there a long time, but it does encroach over the property line. Um, come back up here. Okay. Um, number 2.7 of his letter had to do with garages that there is a
requirement for at least one garage on each each property. This house we don't believe has ever had a garage. Um, it actually looks like if I'm just going to go down to the aerial photos again. If you look at the aerial photos,
you can see that it looks like it was several buildings. Uh, let me see if I can get a 3D view. You see that? This is the entrance off Springfield a this is a low roof a low a low pitched roof facing Springfield. Then there's a flat roof
behind it on on an upper section. Although this is all second floor right now. And then there's the one-story section in the back that they're going to go ahead and build out over that. But it it it's it's a building that has evolved over the years and even the foundations are different. So it's
somehow it's just been added on to over the decades and you can see the remnants of that. uh in the roof lines and um let me see like here you can see there's an old parapit uh cornice and parapit back there from where maybe
there was a building there once that had like a flat roof with a cornice and then this was added in front at some point decades ago. So, this is this is where the addition's going. And I I'm pointing this out because uh it gets to the
planning justifications of improving the overall streetscape of the building. The fact that we're resolving all these weird roof lines with the new system. So, essentially, this whole upper floor will only have a couple of pieces of wall left. The whole thing will be taken
down and then reframed and a whole new roof put on top. So maybe what I'll do now is go down to the drawings. While I'm here, let me just uh So those are the two mature white pine and spruce
trees. You can see the the the tall hedro arbite here and a little bit of it over here. Um this is from Bertha. This is his tracking pads for his driveway. This is the fence I mentioned. is tapered to allow more room for him to get in and
out. And you can see some of the uh arborite here. This this is all mature arborite. This is a 6ft fence, so that's at least 12 ft high. And this is the white pine on the corner. So, it's already quite well
screened. That's the yard with uh with the lawn and so on. Okay. Um, I'll just I'll just as I'm scrolling, I'll just go ahead and show you that we have a drywall design. Uh, we've
u I think Collier reviewed all the calculations said that we complied with the ordinance requirements for storage, which is fairly uh modest, you know, and uh and we're basically going to pick up all of the roof runoff from the leaders
from the roof and direct that underground through storm drains over to the drywall. And we're also picking up the roof runoff from the pavilion over to the drywall. And then the dry well is sized to perk out most of the water. But if if there's a a
major storm, we have an overflow pipe coming out this way down along this sideyard. I don't show the arborite there, but right along there. It's going to come out onto the sidewalk through this curb. And there's a storm inlet right here on Springfield. So the the water will just come out onto the curb
and run over to the inlet if there's ever a storm that the drywall can't handle. And then the next sheet down are the drywall uh calculations. It details uh where we show the area of runoff and
how much we're storing and uh and a section through the drywall with the uh inspection pit, the manhole buried just below in case they ever have to get in there. um the overflow pipe and the inlet and the all the inverts are are already
known based on the spot elevations that we had from the surveyor. So now this is my sheet of uh plans and I'll just start here uh on the on the uh let me just back out here a little bit. Sorry. The uh
foundation is mostly staying as it is. We're adding this section to the left and we're also going to step down to it a little bit. Uh so, but it'll still be a full basement. In other words, we're at we're rece we're increasing the basement space, couple of windows,
uh regular basement windows. Uh and the crawl spaces will remain that are there. This is a full basement area with a laundry and um the stairs are going to stay. And this is this is slab on grade for the entrance porch and this is a crawl
space. And then the the first floor there's the addition uh this this this line right here is the existing left side wall of the house. So all of this is new over here. The kitchen is staying, the the uh the bathroom, uh the
stairwell, the front hallway, the front door, and all of this is staying. This whole room in the front is staying. There's the bay window I just talked about. That's staying. Uh so basically, it's a simple rectangular addition that's um providing
an office and otherwise pretty much open space for dining and uh family sitting and the kitchen is all existing and remaining. This is a set of steps that goes out to the patio. And this is the Bilco door. And there there are two proposed air conditioning
condensers. This will all still this is all being converted. That the reason the coverage is changing is we're we're gaining back where we currently have some walkways. We're we're going to be pay uh planting that area and we'll put the uh condensers right
there. The second floor uh basically s pretty uh has the existing stair, the hallway at the top, an existing bathroom just being re re uh altered a little bit. There's a room in the front here
already and a room in the back here, but we're going to put a master bathroom and master closets. Call them master primary. Uh these days you're not supposed to say master. um and the the the uh primary bedroom. Uh and then
three more decent bedrooms with closets. Two of them will have direct access to bathrooms and one will come through the hallway a short distance to the shared hall bath. Um and then as far as the
elevations, um I'll start with the Springfield Avenue. And what I did here was you can see the front door existing, the steps, the stonework, the bay window. So this is all existing. This will all be new from here up. But you can see dotted in
here the existing roof lines. There's the the uh par the the the cornice of the original building I we think. And then in front of that there's a a low pitched which I showed you on the photos. So none of that will be there anymore. It's just going to look much
more logical and appropriate and like whole and all the windows will look consistent. All the siding will be consistent and um I can show you on this one you can see the profile of the existing roof where that that low slope front roof the the lows slope flat roof
that goes to the back and then the singlestory roof is here. So, so this is all new construction here and this is all existing and there's the existing steps. This is the other side facing the what what's technically the rear yard.
This is the side of the addition. So, this is all new with windows in the basement, first floor and second floor kind of lining up. Of course, the that tall arborite hedge will will be a buffer between the two buildings. Then the rear
elevation facing the Bertha neighbor is the same sliding door, the same steps, same there. This is all existing. So this is the new section right here. And then the second floor is coming out over this this singlestory roof right here.
So but it's he saw this last time and said he understands now that it's not going to be changing his light and air that much. It's the same wall. Uh, and then let me see what else. This this was the uh the demolition
plan, which I don't have to spend too much time on. Essentially, it just shows you the existing basement in case it was hard to visualize, but I show I show all these removed walls on my plan in dotted lines. Um, but you can see the existing kitchen is here to remain. The steps,
the bathroom, the stairwell, the entry, this room, and the bay window are all all remaining. And upstairs, um, they're just small rooms with small closets, one one hall bathroom, which for four high school or
college age kids, uh, is tough. Just confirming what I had the owner commit to. On the record, it's designed by you for single family residential, uh, not a multif family use. Correct. Yes. It's essentially the the it it satisfies the
purpose of the zoning ordinance and the municipal land use law providing a single family home that's up to current standards for families that are growing in size and having to do more in the house than they had to do back in the 50s and 60s with home work, homeschooling have and another big part
of it is is kind of a traditional set of values where they they want their children to continue to have their friends over supervised in the basement have enough space for elbow room and fun and recreation without having feeling like they have to go to someone else's house or go to a club or something like
that. So, I think those those are valid concerns today for evaluating a home design. Uh I think I've covered the site, the building. Um I I can go back. I think I
I I hit all of those. I I don't know if I did. Let me just see if I did get all the collar. I noted it generally. As I said, the Collier's followup is done directly by you and the applicant, two Collers. Uh you did a a candidly, it's late, and you know, I think the prior
applicant probably would have benefited from a professional who was as prepared as you are in terms of reviewing the Collier's report and offering that kind of detail. That's my card. That's a little lateness of the hour comment from the lawyer. I I took a I I took a notice of uh the name. I'm going to contact her
because I think she needs some help. She's a sweet girl. got seems like it. Poor thing got shouldn't have ever bought the building without a contingency of some sort. But anyway, um let me see here. Okay, so I won't spend any more time on that. I I think I did uh cover pretty much what he came up
with and there was nothing that we didn't weren't able to deal with. So um I think I'll just move on to the planning part of it just to quickly get to that. Um, and essentially as you hear on all these applications, we have to justify giving
somebody special permission to do something that the ordinance doesn't allow. And um, municipal land use law pretty much categorizes two kinds of justifications for C1 and C2 paragraphs. C1 has to do
with hardships. There's some kind of physical hardship. And I think I'll go back to the to the aerial photos here. Um and one hardship that they have which not everybody has and which the zoning ordinance did not anticipate is the
undersized uh it's not actually this the lot is not under size it's just that lot depth is below 100 and it it does constrict their ability to comply with that rear yard uh
requirement. Also, uh the ordinance is pretty pretty clear about making this the front yard because it's the narrower of the two. Uh I have to make sure I get that right. But essentially, uh even though the
whole building has for decorates been oriented to the Springfield, we have to consider it that way. We're asking the board to kind of look at it from practical viewpoint of the hardship of the existing house, where it is, how it's oriented, and treat that left sideyard as a sideyard, as interior
sideyard, as you would as if it was an interior sideyard. Um, and then also that takes away a lot of the concern about accessory buildings being in the front yard because they they're they're more behind the building. Um there's I mentioned before that for
someone to go into a driveway here or or come up uh you you can you I don't believe you can even turn left onto Bertha. You you have to go way up around and come back around and come west on Springfield and turn up onto Bertha in order to get to this property. That's a hardship. That's a little bit of a strange situation
where you can't just come up and turn in any direction. Um, the fact that so much was done before they bought the house is also I think you could consider a pre-existing condition is a hardship. The fact that all the patios and everything were done well but they were done and they have
they want to just legalize it and keep it as it is. So um the lot dep ordinance the orientation I think we covered those are the hardship issues.
Um okay it is a very uh busy street. Um let me see if I can back out here. You have Home Depot and the other highra commercial um
right I I know you you're familiar with I won't spend too much time on but essentially an aerial photo shows in red where the where the site is. There's Bertha. It's a It's a funny little neighborhood where you have to kind of go come up and around and and uh it's
kind of a remnant of a lot of pre-development periods, but that's the parking lot of the the Home Depot lot and then the other big commercial properties right across the street. So, there's there's a lot of traffic and a lot of
um a lot of noise. And um the reason I mention is because it it does suggest that any outdoor recreation would not be on this side of the property. It would be toward the rear toward the bera side of the property as as the way it is
now. Uh as far as the C2 u which is really the aesthetic improvements, we think that we are fulfilling u several purposes of the municipal land use law. I'm not going to read them all off, but essentially that we are fulfilling the single family residential purpose of
providing an appropriate home. Um that we're adding to the health, safety, and welfare of this family and the um community. Um responding to the traffic patterns and the access uh preserving
the non-compliant um yard locations and recreational locations. Um, we're also pres preserving the light, air, and open space of the birth of neighbor by not going in that direction uh toward where we could
technically go up to 5t from that line and and not need a variance. So um and then item G has to do with uh the use to residential I mentioned and then the uh purpose number
uh I has to do with the desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and that's that gets back to the streetscape and the fact that we're removing all those strange roof lines creating a more normal gable roof with uh everything to look like a whole house
that could have just been built uh new. Okay. As far as negative criteria, uh we want to show that there's no negative impact uh that we can imagine from this project that um essentially the proposed building addition to the left side is
really more akin to a sideyard addition that's respecting what would normally be a sideyard setback of 5T. Uh so and it's very similar to all the other buildings in that neighborhood that just including the one right next to us that also has
that 5-ft setback in their rear yard. Um because it's treated like an interior sideyard. Uh so we we we don't think that we're creating any negative impact because of the fact that these conditions have existed for so long in
the neighborhood. U very similar to what we're proposing. There's no uh unusual visual or lighting or noise or we've handled the storm runoff uh all these typical things of water quality, air quality, uh nuisances, odors that you
talk about for negative impact. We don't have any of those on this project. So essentially a balancing state is where you just look at the positives and make sure they outweigh the negatives and the fact that you're you're not uh creating any negative impact to the neighbors or the zone plan and that you
are um essentially can justify granting the relief because the benefits outweigh any any detriment that we can imagine. That pretty much covers I think everything. Are there any board members that would
like to question the witness? Hearing none. Are there any members of the public that would like to question the testimony this witness has provided? Are there any members of the public that would like to comment on this application? Hearing
none, would you like to sum up or would you care to come up and make a closing statement? Basically ask you to go ahead and approve us if you would. uh that we think it's an uh the family had mentioned they want to stay in town, have their f their their kids feel good having kids over and having enough
recreational space outside and uh there there are I've just been pleased to get to know them and it was kind of a last minute urgent thing for me to have to take over and try to help them and I' I've been very uh honored to be able to help the family and can see what they're trying to do and I hope the board can
see that also and appreciate having residents like this in the town not feeling like they have to move out of the town because of some burden that they have to face in in a zoning situation. Okay. At this time, we can conference this. Uh Mr. Bentegna, would you like to
begin this evening? Yes. Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. I feel the testimony justifies the variance requested. So, I'll be voting yes. Mr. Johnson. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I agree. And um the positives far outweigh the
negatives. We have four beautiful positives in the audience with you and uh your expert did a fabulous job. So I too will be voting yes. Miss Martins. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Um this is a very straightforward clean application. Um there was two options. You could
either leave town or stay. So thank you for staying here in Union. So I will be voting yes as well. Miss Ricketts. Thank you Mr. Chairman. I do confer and or I do agree with my colleagues here. This is a very clean application.
Congratulations to your son on his graduation. Um, again, that's commendable that you want to just stay in Union versus moving. So, I also will be voting yes. Mr. McNeel. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, thank the professionals for an outstanding
job. Uh, thank the homeowners for wanting to stay in our lovely town. Uh, congratulating the the graduate. I too have a graduate that just graduated Drew University on last Saturday. So, uh, but the betterment substantially outweigh,
uh, any negative impacts and I will also be voting yes. Mr. Graves, I feel it's a clean application, no negative impact on the community. I'll be voting yes. And Mr. Wy, I think it's a good application. The
positives out there. As for myself, I too think this is a great application. and the variances are are justified by showing that the property is particularly suited for the proposed improvements. Very nice, very
nice job. Um, Mr. Goen. Uh, beautiful, beautiful looking building. So, I congratulate you and I'm glad you're staying in Union. So, I too will be voting yes. May I have a motion in a second to grant the application?
Mr. Chair, no further. No, Mr. Well, I need a a motion and a second to grant the application. Mr. Chairman, I move that the board grant the variance applicable to this application and that council is directed to prepare a resolution consistent with
the board's decision. Second. Roll call. Mr. Wy, yes. Miss Martins, yes. Mr. Bentega, yes. Mr. Johnson, yes. Mr. McNeel, yes. Mr. Graves. Yes. Mr. Champion. Yes.
Thank you. Congratulations. June 4th. We'll have the resolution. Mr. Go. Congratulations. Have a good night. Thank you, Mr. Congratulations, Mr. Chairman. There being no further business coming before the board. I move that we adjourn. Second a motion. I thank you for the waiting.
All night.