Mhm. >> Welcome to tonight's meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment of the Township of Union, which is being held pursuant to the open public meeting law, C231 laws of New Jersey dated 1975. Notice of this meeting was advertised in
the local source, newspaper of record. Notice has been posted on the bulletin board in the municipal building adjacent to the municipal clerk's office. Roll call. >> Mr. Wiley. >> Here. >> Ms. Martins. >> Here. >> Mr. Bentivegna.
>> Present. >> Scott. >> Present. >> Mr. McNeal. >> Present. >> Ms. Little. >> Here. >> Mr. Graves is absent. Ms. Ricketts. >> Here. >> And Mr. Champy. >> Here. >> There being a quorum present, this meeting is now declared open.
At this time, I'll entertain a motion for the approval of the minutes from our meetings April 22nd, May the 13th, and May the 20th. May I have a motion and a second? >> Mr. Chairman, I move that the meeting minutes of April 22nd, 2026, May 13th, 2026, and
May 20th, 2026 be approved as written and dispensed with their reading. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Aye. >> Aye. >> Opposed? So moved. Mr. Mangousa, are there any communications? >> There are no communications, Mr.
Chairman. >> Hearing none, we have one case this evening. Calendar number 3474, AQC Consulting LLC. Location is 16 Mary Avenue, block 4708, lot 13. Applicant wishes to
construct a new two-family dwelling. Counselor, would you like to begin? >> Yes, good evening, Chairman and members of the board. Um, I am Natasha Montalvo with Javerbaum Wurgaft on behalf of AQC Consulting LLC. We are here today for a variance
application to construct a two-family dwelling. The property is at 16 Mary Avenue. It is currently vacant. It does have some asphalt on it. Um we are seeking a couple of variances. There are two existing
existing nonconformities that are not being intensified. That being the minimum lot size, which 5,000 sq ft is required. Um existing is 4,410 sq ft. Minimum lot depth depth where 100 ft is
required and existing is 70 sq ft. We have a couple new variances. Minimum front yard setback where 25 ft is required and we're proposing 20 ft. Minimum rear yard setback where 25 ft is required and we're proposing 10 ft.
Maximum impervious coverage 65% is permitted. We're proposing 73.5. Uh we are a garage is per required per each unit and we're proposing zero garages and the driveway located on the side
yard or rear yard setback. The existing asphalt is being used as the driveway and it's already within the side side yard setback and rear yard setback limits. Um there's a also a driveway with that
permitted is maximum driveway with permitted is 24 ft and we're proposing 25 ft. And also another variance for driveway not in front of a garage and there's no garages so it's just a driveway. Um if there are no preliminary
questions, I would like to call up the applicant Elijah Carter and then after I have the applicant, I do have the engineer and architect. >> Uh for the record council and board members, I marked A1 the application with the supporting materials as
submitted. Uh A2 is the variance site plan that was submitted. And A3 are the architectural plans two pages consistent. So, we have A1 through A3. Uh is the witness here? >> Yeah, Elijah. You can come up onto that
one. >> Can I ask you just to swear or affirm that the testimony provided this evening is the truth and the whole truth? >> Yes. >> And for the record, if you could state and spell your name with your affiliation to the application. >> Elijah Carter. >> Raise the mic up.
>> Elijah Carter, e l i j a h c a r t e r. >> And you are um a member of a managing member of AQC Consulting, correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. Um can you please provide like your background and how long you've been in
in Union in the Vauxhall area? >> Yes. So, uh good evening everybody. Um I've been uh born and raised in Vauxhall, New Jersey my whole life. Um I've been a police officer in Union for uh about 8 years. Uh I went to
uh I graduated Union High School in 2012. And uh the property that I'm trying to build on has been in my family for uh 100 years. Over 100 years. >> And that property is directly behind where you currently live today, correct?
>> Yes. >> Okay. Um and when you built this two-family, this is a two-family that you plan on living in, correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. And you plan to have it and keep in your family generation to generation. >> Yes. >> Okay. I have no further preliminary
questions for that applicant. >> Are there any board members that would like to question Mr. Carter? Hearing none, are there any members of the public that would like to question Mr. Carter? Hearing none, counselor, your next witness? >> Thank you. I'd like to call our engineer, Donna Bullock.
>> Can I ask the witness to swear or affirm that the testimony provided this evening is the truth and all truth? >> I do. >> And for the record, if you could pull the mic closer, state and spell your name with your affiliation. >> Donna Bullock, b u l l o c k. I am a project manager at Morgan
Engineering, which is located in Island Heights, New Jersey. Um I have presented many, many applications, uh variances, um regular planning board applications um for the past 26 years in the state of New Jersey.
All over, mostly Monmouth, Ocean, and Middlesex counties. Um but working at Morgan, we've branched out quite a bit. I mean, I find myself up north and down south and you know, it's kind of fun to to get involved with other communities. >> We'll accept the credentials.
>> Thank you. >> What I do. >> [laughter] >> Can you take us through the the site plan the variance plan on the existing conditions and the proposed? >> Sure. The property is known as 6 Mary
Avenue, block 4708, lot 13, Township of Union, Union County. It is located in the RB residential district and the property contains 4,410 square feet. The existing property is undeveloped and is located on the east side of Mary
Avenue. Located south Located south of the intersections of Mary Avenue and and Valley Street. The lot size is 63 ft wide by 70 ft deep, which equates to the 4,410 square feet.
It is an existing undersized lot condition, which is an existing variance since the property is less than the required 5,000 square foot area for the RB zone. Um there's also a a variance existing
conditions for lot depth since the required lot depth in this zone is 100 ft and the property has 70 ft. So, the property does consist of a lawn area on the north side of the property and there's asphalt to
the south side. There is access for the property right off of Mary Avenue and the the existing street characteristics is a developed street 18-ft wide pavement and there is building block curb um both on both
frontages is frontages within the right-of-way. The property is bounded by single-family residential lots and the drainage characteristics for the property is that there is a high point at the most north northerly corner of the property and the storm water flows
in the southern south southwesterly direction from that uh northerly corner of the property toward the roadway. There is also existing water and sanitary sewer service located within the right-of-way of Mary Avenue.
So, we are proposing to construct a 40-ft by 33-ft two-story duplex with a basement. Um, there's going to be access for both structures on the front and the opposite sides.
We're proposing a paver walkway. There's AC pads located in the rear of the structures and there is a proposed retaining wall along the north and east side of the property. Um, the parking criteria is for one three-bedroom duplex is two
spaces, therefore we require four. Um, there is within the area >> [cough] >> There is within the area on the park existing paved area adjacent to the proposed dwelling, which is 25 ft wide. That can
safely handle three car spaces. And if there were three car spaces there, um behind them, there could be two or three more, not to get in the way of the the steps exiting the side of the building, but there could easily be five parking spaces, two in tandem and one
standard um located on the existing asphalt area. So, there's no variance for parking criteria. >> [clears throat] >> So, with the uh variances that we're requesting, did just talk about it's an
undersized lot, did just say that the uh the uh lot depth in the areas is required to be 100 and 70 ft is existing. If you do look at the tax map, um it's hard to see, but majority of
those lots that are located between Martha Avenue and over to Emily Avenue, majority of those lots are only 70 ft deep. And um a lot of them are also
under the 5,000 sq ft. So, this size lot with these variances that we're requesting are pretty uh uh consistent with the neighborhood. So, we are asking for a front yard variance setback where
25 ft is required and we have provided 20. So, if if we held and and we're also asking for a rear rear yard variance where 25 ft is required and we are proposing
10. So, if you look at this this layout, you can see where we have the uh building setback lines provided on on the uh on the drawing, and you can see how the front required setback and the rear required setback pretty much go
right through the uh proposed building we're asking for. The left the the area that would be remaining to build a house on this lot to conform would be 20 ft wide. So, you'd have a 20-ft wide house by
you know, a certain a certain width. And because it's an undersized lot there's a hardship with that and uh we're asking for relief for these variances because of the lot size and it's it's consistency with the neighborhood.
We are also going to uh we're ask asking a percent lot coverage waiver variance also, where 65% is required and 73.5 is proposed. Although we are increasing the impervious area we are going to provide uh
for the clean roof run-off to be collected into dry wells and that would compensate that would offset the uh the increase in the impervious area. So, uh that's that would um help uh reduce the run-off that would be leaving the site in the developed condition.
As mentioned, there um parking is required to have uh parking space in in front of a garage unit. There are no garages proposed. Again, the the property is situated such that um you know, being so so so short that
providing garages, well, the architect will talk about that, but the the providing the garages would take away too much of of the living space that would be required for the development. Um parking is not permitted on the side yard, as mentioned um from the attorney, there already is existing pavement that
is located along the side yard on the south side of the property. And um basically, uh there was one other one with the parking. There was three. I think uh I think you mentioned all three of those in in your
your statement when you opened the application. Um so with that, um again, this is this is an undersized lot. Um it's it's been in the applicant's family for many years. He just wants to
provide a place for himself and then a second family unit within an area where he owns property adjacent. And um with that, if anyone has any engineering questions of me, I'd be glad to to answer at this time.
>> One quick question. So we've received the Colliers letter and there's no issue complying with any of their recommendations. >> No, there is no issue. >> Okay. And I want to also address one comment from the Colliers letter, um which is on page three, offsite
improvements 3.4. There's a sidewalk shown connecting to the existing side asphalt lot to the residence um behind it. Um we would have to talk to um the applicant's grandfather whether they should remove that. Um it's been there
cuz the family owns both lots. It's just been easy access to go um between both lots. If it's okay with his grandfather, we have no problem uh removing the asphalt uh but uh the sidewalk, but again, I can't
commit to that right now. Um I just want to note that on the record. Um and it plans to remain in the family and until whenever for the near future and long future. So I just want to make that comment on the record.
And then I have no further questions. >> Well, I'll I'll just note for the record since Colliers has some maintenance issues for the potential seepage bits as well as a pre-construction meeting that will tie in the addressing of that asphalt area into those >> Okay. >> uh >> pre-construction meetings.
>> Okay. >> Are there any board members that would like to question the testimony Mrs. Bullock has provided? >> I have a question. >> Mr. Benta, go >> Uh Miss Bullock, just referring to Collier's um 3.2, in reference to uh the
parking spots, um they said there's three on I see three on the architectural plan and you're proposing four. They'll they'll be four. >> They'll be actually five spaces shown when I update my plan. And what it is is on the architectural plans, he shows three in a row. He
didn't show like two more behind that that would be available to fit uh midway between the proposed building and in that asphalt area. >> Right, I know parking can be, you know, difficult there. So, five spots would be that'd be perfect.
>> Yes, yes it would. And and the uh applicant did say that, you know, if if a friend is coming over or something, uh you know, he would surely accommodate to allow them to have a space available for their their visit. >> Thank you. >> What what we like to do and have been
doing in these areas where parking is a potential concern is and since the applicant will be living in one of the units is just expect that kind of cooperative effort when he has guests and such to use the off-street space even if it's tandem as you suggest
>> Of course. >> uh to keep the areas on the street available for other public who don't have the ability to park uh off-site. >> Of course. >> Any other board members with questions? Hearing none, are there any members of
the public that would like to question the testimony this witness has provided? Hearing none, counselor. >> Thank you. I'd like to call the architect, Logan Dry. >> Okay, yes. witness to swear or affirm that the testimony provided this evening is the truth and the whole truth.
>> I do. >> And for the record, state and spell your name with your affiliation. >> Logan Dry, l o g a n d r y KCA Design Associates, architect of record. >> Can you please provide the board with your credentials so you can get sworn in and admitted as a witness?
>> Uh sure. I'm a registered architect. Um been practicing since 2013. I registered since 2019. Um KCA has licenses in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Florida, and Hawaii. >> his credentials. >> Thank you. Can you go ahead take us through the
floor plan and the elevations? >> Sure. >> Should be on the next tab on top. >> Yep. So again, um you know, we first started the process >> [cough and clears throat] >> in terms of like the placement and size of the building knowing that, you know, we had this large area of pavement to the side of us that we could repurpose
for um parking. Um you know, as the engineer had mentioned, if we were to, you know, be in compliance with all of the required front yard and and side yard setbacks, even the rear yard, because it's such a shallow lot, you'd end up with something that, you know, is really unbuildable in
terms of um usable space. Um so what we've opted for instead was, you know, sort of two um I don't know call them row homes as but they are similar to um row home floor plans. We do a lot of work in city of Philadelphia um in
addition to other states, but um I would characterize these as sort of two modest side-by-side single families um in the sense that they are both two stories, they both have a basement. Um so just to kind of run through these floor plans, um they're identical,
they're mirrored images of each other. So starting on the first floor, um you've got your main living kitchen dining area in the front of the unit. Uh you've got a small bedroom and bathroom in the rear of the unit. Um and then there's a staircase that takes you to upstairs or downstairs. We'll just sort
of uh hit the basement here, which again uh we can see we're using the basement there for den space, some some recreational space, and mechanicals. Um again, that same staircase then if you go back up to the first floor, you
can go up to the second floor. Um and again, you'll see here there's two very well-appointed bedrooms with bathrooms, closets, as well as a laundry space. Um you know, the thing that we kind of wanted to keep in mind when we were doing this design, um you know, if we
were to integrate garages, um this would push this into a three-story design, and in order to kind of stay with the height requirements, um you know, we'd have to do a flat roof, which again um in Philadelphia's fine, but given some of the context um in this
particular area, um the sloped roof uh felt like an important design aesthetic to keep. Um so when we're looking at, you know, just how these two uh homes fit together, um you know, we mirrored the roof lines that when you look at it visually from the outside, it
looks like one, you know, singular home. Um we've provided, you know, two different options depending upon um you know, the board's preference or or township's preference on aesthetics. We have a option that's primarily Hardie panel siding, so cementitious horizontal
siding with some uh shake shingle accents at the top, uh small amount of brick at the bottom. An alternative to that would be uh a more full brick facade, um again, the same sort of Hardie panel accents at the
top, but you know, more brick facade um heavy design here. Um and then when you look at the side rear um elevations, again, we're kind of keeping it simple with just the um horizontal hardy panel siding. Again, all of the
uh all of the the rooms will have egress compliant windows for the bedrooms. Um there's the egress wells as well for the basement space that's again triggered by um the size of the space. Anything over 200 square feet has to have an egress well.
Um you know, as far as the construction of the building, um we're looking to do everything uh wood frame construction, uh 5B construction type. There'll be fire ratings, you know, between the units as well as on the exterior walls per the code. Uh and then the buildings will also be uh fully sprinklered in
accordance with the code. Um that's about it on the design. If if you guys have any specific questions related to the architecture of it, feel free to fire away. >> Are there any board members at this time that would like to question the testimony Mr. Dry has provided?
>> Um Mr. Champion, uh I I have a question. Um so, the window wells in the basement, there's that's not that's not egress? >> It is in the basement. >> Okay, cuz Union has an ordinance they don't allow basement living. I mean, other than no sleeping bedrooms. I just
want that on the record because, you know, it's not uh the application I I just want to make sure that that's, you know, on the record. >> Mr. Scott. >> I do have one question. Do you have this I did it as two single family side by
side. So, is it a multi-family or is it two single families? >> It it's it's a duplex because it's on one singular lot, but usually in in at least city terminology, duplexes the units are stacked one on top of another. Here, I'm referring to them as singles just in the sense that they're,
you know, vertically. >> So, if you was to advertise and market them, how would you market them? Would you market them as two single family units? >> I think it would be a it It be as a duplex, yeah. >> As a duplex. As a duplex. >> Yeah. It's a It's a two-family home, but the way that they have the floor plans
is if you go into like normally two-family homes, most of them you have like two separate doors. One is for the first unit on the first floor, the second one's just for the stairs upstairs. The way that it's designed is that each door you open whether you're in this unit or the next unit, you open
the door and it's straight living like and it's like two little skinny houses put together, but it's two-family. >> if there's a family living on top of you or below you, right? So, this is not the case. >> No. Yeah, correct. >> Okay. That's one of some clarity.
>> Does each of those units have dedicated basement space or is it a common area? >> No, fully fully separate. That's I said that that wall in between these two goes the whole way down and when it's when it's in the basement it turns to concrete, so. >> You didn't design or have any details
for what's intended in the basement. >> Uh we just have uh den space and mechanical space in the basement currently. >> We made sure that there's no full bathroom. There's nothing there that can make it look like a turn it into a bedroom or unit or anything like that. >> Well, we deal with this often as you
know, council and and I know the zoning official referenced the egress windows in the basement cuz that's usually a a red flag. It's a safety feature. It's great to have if you need it as long as it's not being used as living space. >> Yes.
>> And that And that's just less than you know, that's less than a 1/3 of the story below, correct? If I'm looking at it correctly, it looks like that. Cuz I I just don't want the applicant when it goes for a permit it's said I don't want them to be shocked and you know, the
calculation comes back it's considered a story below grade and next thing you know, it's two stories, you know, and then >> Yeah, no, it's it's fully below grade in that sense and again I I think if there's a proviso for no bedrooms or in the basement. I don't think we'd be opposed to that.
>> No. I I got I got it. I just wanted >> to the basement without going through the front door? >> Uh basically, you would go through the steps that are in the middle of the house. Other than that, there's no separate like Bilco door or anything else like that. Um there's no direct access from the outside.
>> And it's one open room. >> Correct. It's one open room with a half bath and mechanics. >> Okay. Any other board questions? Hearing none, are there any members of the public that would like to question the testimony Mr. Dry has provided?
>> Uh counsel had referenced a Collier's report. I don't think anything specific was to architecture, but I assume we can also note for the record the the applicant's [clears throat] expectation and really your profession as it relates to code safety and details through the permit process. I mean, that is what it
is. It'll apply as you go to meet the expected standard. >> Yeah, we'll put a full building code set together with architectural and structural plans in accordance with the the current IBC code. >> And similarly, that anything that's needs to be ironed out can be addressed
at that pre-construction meeting that Collier's is referring >> Yes. >> Since there are no comments from the public, counselor? >> I just want to thank you for your time today. Again, this is for construction of a two-family home that the applicant plans to live in and keep in the family
for generations to come. Um again, we are seeking um existing variances existing non-conformities for minimum lot size and minimum lot depth and variances for minimum front yard setback, minimum rear yard setback, maximum impervious coverage,
um not having a garage, the having a driveway in the side yard and rear yard setback, and um the width of the driveway. And I hope you guys approve this application and I appreciate you guys. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Seat.
At this time, I believe we can conference this. Mr. Bent the Vegna, would you like to begin? >> [clears throat] >> Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Based on testimony heard tonight, I think this is a positive application
and I wish the applicant the best and I'll be voting yes. >> Ms. Little. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. Um I agree with Mr. Bent the Vegla, sorry. This is a good application.
The house seems to be consistent with the neighborhood. I'm glad to see that the family is keeping all of this in the family and has done so for many years. So, I will be voting yes on this application.
>> Ms. Rickets. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I too will be voting yes on this application. I actually find it very admirable to build a home on a land that your family has owned, as you said, for 100 plus years. I think that's that's an amazing thing
and this is a clean application and I too will be voting yes. >> Ms. Martins. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This application is definitely an improvement to the current site that's there. So, I don't have an issue with that. I will be voting yes, as well. >> Mr. Wiley.
>> Mr. Chairman, I have no problem with this application. I just think it's very positive. I think it's going to be an improvement to the neighborhood. Getting rid of the lot, putting a nice house up. Uh And it's a good application. I'm going to vote yes.
>> Mr. McNeal. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will concur with my colleagues. I just add to thank you to the professionals for the fine job in explaining the project. And
commend the the young man for um improving um the lot and maintaining the character of the neighborhood. I will too will be voting yes. >> As for myself, uh the applicant has proved and justified both the positive
and negative criteria associated with this application for the proposed use of the property. I see no negative impact on the property or the neighbors. So, I too will be voting yes. And Mr. Carter, I wish you a lot of luck with this construction. >> Mr. Scott.
>> Mr. Scott. Oh, I'm so sorry. I thought I thought I said Miss Miss Scott. Last but not least. >> the meeting. Um I thought the applicant application was great. Um it is admirable that
you're keeping your family's property in a market as this where you could probably opt out to make a lot of money and so you're building something that you can live in. Um it was a very clean application. So, I also will be voting yes. My colleague has said a lot and so
Thank you very much for the opportunity. >> May I have a motion and a second to grant the application? >> Mr. Chairman, I move that the board grant grant this application applicable to the applicant grant this variance applicable to the application
and the council is directed to prepare a resolution consistent with the board's decision. >> Second. >> Roll call, please. >> Mr. Wylie. >> Yes. >> Ms. Martins. >> Yes. >> Mr. Bentivegna. >> Yes. >> Ms. Scott. >> Yes. >> Mr. McNeal. >> Yes. >> Ms. Little.
>> Yes. >> And Mr. Champy. >> Yes. >> We will add this to the June June 10th calendar of the zoning board for resolution of approval. >> Thank you guys so much. Mr. Chairman, there There no further business coming before the board, I move that we adjourn.
>> Second. >> All in favor. >> All right.