Transcript for Piscataway Zoning meeting on January 13 2022
Note: Transcripts are generated by rev.ai and may not be fully accurate. Please listen to the recording (below) if you feel any text is inaccurate.
Speaker 0 00:00:04 Give me one second to record this meeting is being recorded. You were ready to go. Chairman Speaker 1 00:00:15 Zoning, board of adjustment reorganization. Please come to order. Adequate notice of this meeting has been provided in the following ways. No one is published in the career on the board of the municipal building. Notice me available for the township clerk notice sent to the current news and star ledger. Please call Speaker 0 00:00:35 Hey Mr. Weissman, Mr. Tillery, RT. I'm sorry, how do you pronounce your last name in DACA? That's when I thought, Hey DACA, Mr. O'Reggio. Yeah. Mr. Blount, Mr. Patel, does Mr. Mitterando Mr. Ali Chairman Cahill, or did you hear me? Speaker 1 00:01:22 Yes, we can hear you at this time. We will open up nominations for peer person of the zoning board for 2022. Do we have any nominations? Speaker 0 00:01:33 Yes. Okay. Wait, can I just, I have to drop I'm sorry. Somebody is noise. Okay. The guys with the iPhone. I have to keep you muted. Okay. I'm apologize. Please continue. Speaker 1 00:01:55 Mr. Patel. I think you were about to make a nomination. I did not hear it. Yeah. Speaker 0 00:01:59 I would like to make a nomination for Sean Cahill. Speaker 1 00:02:03 Okay. We have a nomination for Mr. Cahill. Did we do the chairman of the 2022 zoning board? Is there a second? Are there any other nominations? Speaker 0 00:02:16 The cleaning lady. Thank you, Jeff. Speaker 1 00:02:22 There being no further nominations for Chairman. Could we have a roll call on the vote for Mr. Kale, Speaker 0 00:02:29 Mr. Tillary? Yes. Mr. Weissman. Yes. Mr. . Mr. O'Reggio. Mr. Patel, Mr. Mitterando. Yes. And Mr. Ali, Speaker 1 00:02:45 Jeremy Cahill. I will turn the meeting over to you. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen, I appreciate the domination at this point, we'll go to item number six, which is the election of a vice chairperson. And I would like Speaker 2 00:02:59 To say Steve Weissman, he brings up a plethora of knowledge of the township, and he's also heavily involved with our township fire department as situation as a volunteer. And I think he brings a lot to the zoning board table and I'd like to, I'd like to have him as my vice chair. Thank you. Kalpesh clerk. Please call the role, Speaker 0 00:03:25 Mr. . Yes. Mr. O'Reggio. Mr. Hay, DACA Patel, Mr. Mitterando, Mr. Ollie and Chairman Cahill. Speaker 2 00:03:40 Yes. At this point, when we we're looking for appointment of a secretary for the zoning board, I would like to see why something like nominate Sean Cahill. The secretary you'll need a second. Thank you. Kalpesh clerk. Please call the roll. Speaker 0 00:04:04 Yes. Mr. Weissman is there. Hey DACA, Mr. O'Reggio. Mr. Patel, Mr. Mitterando. Yes. And Mr. Ali, Speaker 2 00:04:21 Thank you again. I appreciate your, your faith in me at this point. We're looking for the appointment of a board attorney and I would like to nominate Jim Kinneally and has been on the board as long, well, longer than me, actually. He provides insights, legal, legal knowledge that the board, the depends upon, and I look forward to working with him in the future. So I would like to appoint the zoning board attorney to Kim Kinneally on a second. I gotta check her second. Can I go? Yeah. You're an AI online or do I have to go to everybody again? Please do that. Speaker 0 00:05:05 Mr. . Mr. . Mr. O'Reggio. Mr. Patel, Mr. Mitterando. Yes. And Chairman Chaill. Speaker 2 00:05:17 Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you, Jack. At this point, I'd like to offer up an appointment of a planner I'd like to appoint John Chadwick. John also has been here a long time and offers up his knowledge of land use and planning, and he's a complete asset to the zoning board. So once again, I'd like to nominate or point John Chadwick. Thank you. Kalpesh Laura Jane. Get a roll call, Speaker 0 00:05:48 Mr. Weissman. Yes. Mr. Tillery is there. Hey DACA, Mr. O'Reggio. Mr. Mr. Mitterando. Yes. Chairman. Yes. Speaker 2 00:06:03 Thank you. Everyone did. Well-deserved John. I am number 10, the appointment of a, a recording clerk. I'd like to appoint more of Buckley. Laura has provided us all with timely paperwork and knowledge of each of these cases that come before us and without her work and hard efforts we'd be lost. So I would like to nominate Laura Buckley. I'm a second. Laura, do your job global Speaker 0 00:06:42 Mr. Tillery DACA. Mr. O'Reggio. Mr. Patel. Yes. Mr. Mitterando and Chairman Cahill. Yes. Thank you. Speaker 2 00:06:55 I remember 11 is the committee appointments I'd like to just appoint the same three people. I'm sorry. Four people to the subdivision committee and the same two people to the site plan committee that we had last year. Speaker 0 00:07:11 Okay. I'll pause the minutes. I'll fill him in. Speaker 2 00:07:13 Thanks, Laura. I appreciate that. Make a motion for a German. All those in favor. Aye. Okay. Then we're adjourned meeting will commence at seven 30 and about 10 minutes guys. Everyone. Yes. Thanks for joining us, John. Welcome everyone again. Same here. Speaker 0 00:07:40 We have eight minutes guys. You're free to walk about the cabin. Speaker 2 00:07:56 I thank you. Zoning board of adjustment meeting will please come to order. Adequate notice of this meeting was provided in the following ways. Notice published in the courier news notice posted on the bulletin board of the initial building notice made available to the township clerk notice sent to the Curry news and the star ledger will the clerk please call the role Speaker 0 00:08:20 Mr. Weissman. Mr. Tillery, Mr. Hay DACA. Mr. Blount, Mr. Patel, Mr. Mitterando here. Mr. Riley and Chairman Chaill Speaker 2 00:08:45 Let's stay on for a seller to the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag Speaker 1 00:09:01 Justice. Mr. Kinneally, are there any changes to tonight's agenda? Yes. We have one change to tonight's agenda item number five, the application of Buhari Patel 20 to be very close will not be heard tonight. If you receive certified mail, you will not receive any additional notice just as announcements tonight, but they do need to notice data and that's it continued to February 10th. Okay. Let's go to item number 6 21 days, the DB log cache Patel. Mr. Patel, I need to swear you in, could you raise your right hand, read the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth. Yes. Pointing to the board. What you would like to do here. Put your hand down, sir. And what you'd like to do, Speaker 4 00:10:07 But I got the notice from the, my room behind, but that's what I'm getting by the variance significant. So October based on OCI. Speaker 1 00:10:24 Okay. So the application says you want to retain an existing tech edition and shed. Is that correct? Jessa. If I can pull it through your scene into this at this point, because there's a prior history with regard to this property. Thank you, Henry, please. Speaker 3 00:10:45 Yeah. It's a chairman. This application may seem familiar to you because we applicant came before us with a similar application. Previously at that point they were two sheds on the property. I believe there was an illegal structure put in an addition that was added to the structure on the deck, to the back of the, of the townhome, without any permitting. As a result, he came in, he applied to the zoning board to allow for that structure to remain along with the sheds. At that time, it was denied due to the fact that the coverage various requests was over 27%. One of the small sheds, I believe since that point or since that time has been removed, the rest of the application is predominantly the same. We haven't structured. That was putting illegally on top of the existing deck. One of the sheds was relocated out of the easement, but it remains. And the coverage variance is still a pretty substantial 25.4% on the site. Speaker 3 00:12:08 Again, you know, I have concerns with this. This is a tight under size lot as all the lights are in this development, it's a little bit of a cluster development, older town homes surrounding the park, thrilled with the 25.4%. I just think it's substantial from what we've allowed in the past. Combined that with the fact that again, this, the structure was put up without any zoning permits without any building permits. So again, if the applicant would have come to the board originally or to the, to the building department and applied for this, they wouldn't be in the predicament that they're in now. But again, I just feel bad. It's, it's a lot of, a lot of ask for such a small now a lot. What is your side yard setback? Because these are connected home. So that's basically where we're at, you know, Mr. Hinterstein, did you have a recommendation with regards to coverage? Speaker 3 00:13:19 Do I have any recommendations regarding coverage? Yes. Well, what I, what I do see is that if the existing shed that still remains on the property, which is eight by 12 were to be removed, that would bring the coverage down to a little bit more of a respectable number. It's still high, but it's 23.2%. I would say that that may be something the board can look at as, as favorable. If, if they'd be willing to eliminate the last shed that still remains on the property. Otherwise I just don't see with that coverage, this, this application being a positive one, Speaker 4 00:14:03 Sorry to interrupt you. I can remove any time because that's sad. It's like throating. It knew never had the Anton. If Victor good tomorrow, I can do more tomorrow. Speaker 2 00:14:16 That would be a positive move by the applicant. I think at this point, based on the Henry's testimony, that was the coverage Speaker 3 00:14:26 Henry, without that second chance, without the, if, if the eight by 12 shed, which means there be no sheds on your property, correct? Yes. So with no sheds on the property and all the sheds have been removed, we would be at 23.2% coverage. Again, my, my concern would be is, you know, well, again, that's more of an, the enforcement issue, but the fact that all of these shadows and the structure were put up without permits previously, it's a little bit of concerning that, you know, they may go down and then at some point may pop back up again. But I, I guess that would be more of a, of a code enforcement issue. All we can do is I guess, take the applicant's word. And if he says he's going to remove the, the last shed, it will need that. And he would also be required to my suggestion is that any approval is conditioned upon the applicant flying to the building department for the building permits and CCO is necessary for the British structure that was built without permits to make sure that it conforms with the, a building code. Speaker 2 00:15:39 I agree. Thank you, Henry. And what else on the board have any questions about the certification hearing? None. I'm going to open it to the public. Speaker 5 00:15:54 My question is that a, Speaker 1 00:15:58 We need your name and address, please. We need your name and address. Speaker 5 00:16:03 I at three I'm at 23 red bedroom. What was that? Speaker 1 00:16:08 I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth. You go ahead with your comment. Laura, did you get her? Speaker 5 00:16:20 I didn't get the name. I've been here. G a Y a T R I O. Okay, thank you. My question was that, what is everything built up to the code? And I'm assuming it's not up to the code, right? And the whole enclosure is on the deck. Is that what it is? Speaker 1 00:16:40 So at this point, we do not know if it's up to code. If the board approves this application, we'll put, the conditions will be that they get all of the building permits, inspections and approvals to make sure it is up to code. Speaker 5 00:16:53 Okay. And what about the fence itself? Has the fence been removed from the property? From the easement Speaker 2 00:17:09 Application? I Speaker 1 00:17:10 Don't see the fence. Speaker 5 00:17:12 Okay. All right. Speaker 4 00:17:14 I'm trying to see it on my side. I knew left food on the back, Frank, the backpack she's from the bay body, but I put it mine. I heard the last two years back. I got it on. I put the fence on, on my side. So he's meant a clear on behind my, my sense. Speaker 5 00:17:30 Perfect. Speaker 2 00:17:34 Anyone else in the public have any questions or comments? Speaker 5 00:17:40 Hi, my name is JC and I live right on 21 Bedford road. So that's J a G R I T I Speaker 3 00:17:50 Were you in ma'am could you raise your right hand? You swear the testimony you're about to give should be Speaker 6 00:17:55 The truth. Thank you. Yes. So yeah, so my concern was with the same. So, you know, as, as you may know, there, the buildings on Redford road, right there, it's one building folding about six houses and I, my house falls rights back in the middle, so I don't have an end unit. So my concern is that I would like that easement open for safety issues. And I just wanted the board to realize that you know, that this applicant or in the future, other applicants, if they do file a barrier for such is such cases where they want to block up that easement. I'm not going to be okay with that. So, because It was black, it was blocked until just recently where it has been opened up. So again, similar to the previous speaker, I want to just make sure that the easement will stay open. Speaker 3 00:19:01 Thank you. Ma'am Speaker 0 00:19:10 One thing to the public. If you guys want to speak, when the public is open, there's a button on the zoom. You raise your hand that way, a hand raises up next to your name and I could call on you instead of everybody just shouting out. Okay guys, Speaker 3 00:19:25 Mr. Chairman. Yes, I do. You know, one concern. I'm just looking at the survey and one of the residents brings up a point about the science being over the easement. Now, I believe that any fencing that's out there behind this property appears to match what everybody else has there, but the fence does cross the easement and part of the easement up to the property line. So it appears that both properties, this property, property to the rear, they both have a portion of the easement that runs along the property. And from what it looks like, if that's the case, everybody since seems to be in the same situation. I don't know. Technically if the fence along that easement line is actually on his property, but there may be some side effects and that people put in that cross easement. So I think just to be on the safe side, even though it's not going to be zoning office's report, we should probably allow the effects to be, or across the easement with the understanding that the homeowner realizes. If for some reason, the township means that there will be responsible for their removal and replacement and any costs associated with that work would be their responsibility. Speaker 2 00:20:52 Okay. Mr. Patel, did you understand that? Yeah. And I'm not going to put it back on track he's on my side is now. No, that's not. The point that was made. The point that was made is that there's a chance that your fence might be covering an easement. If the township, for some reason, in the future needs to access, access to that area, you will be responsible for taking down the fence and then putting it back up. That'll be a plus. Yeah, I understand. But he's not going to have on my sidewalk. We're going to put that language. We're going to put that language as a condition of any approval deceiving. Speaker 3 00:21:32 If the fence was removed, then, then we won't give the varying for it. And then I think maybe that's the better way to go. And then there's no fence in the easement period. Speaker 2 00:21:44 And in the application, in the zoning officer's report, there's no mention, oh, Speaker 3 00:21:50 Perhaps it was removed. Speaker 2 00:21:57 Yes. Could you identify yourself again? Since you're listed as guests, Speaker 5 00:22:01 23 Redbird road, I spoke earlier. I said, morning guide three naive. Okay. So I came in because there was another case, 4 22 Bayberry who is asking, was asking to leave the, the fence on the easement. That was my main goal tonight. But when I joined, I was assigned out that it's, this means until February 10th. So that was my concern about the fence that it should not be on the Eastman. We are attached houses, attached individual houses. So for me to get out of my house, if there is any fire or something, I only have my front door. I don't have, I have a back door. But if before everybody had put in a fence that was closed in with no gates or everything. So that's why my main goal was I never put in a fence. Now I put in a fence because everybody moved the fence to now from the county, we all received the notice, some township about the fence. I never had a fence, so I didn't have to worry about it, but not that everybody moves big. My backyard is open and I put with the permit now. So my, my opinion on fans is that there should not be evenings because I am looking at as my emergency exit. Speaker 2 00:23:45 If you Speaker 1 00:23:45 Are concerned about an application it's on in February, I encourage you to attend that Speaker 2 00:23:50 Probably virtually. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Ma'am appreciate your input. Speaker 3 00:23:57 My understanding is there's no sense in ease. My current lady removed it. And my understanding is also that I believe there was noticed that sent out by the code enforcement officer of the rest, to the residents of this development, to let them know that they do have to remove any fence crossings in the easement. So this application will not allow it. And we'll, we'll look at any future applications that come before the board at that time. Speaker 2 00:24:26 Thank you, Henry. No one else is raising their hand Chairman. Okay. We're going to close the public portion. Okay. So Henry, as per your recommendation, what, there should be language. If there is a fence up that we would want to be potentially has the right to access easement, or there is no fence, there is no fat Speaker 3 00:24:52 And Speaker 2 00:24:52 There's no. Okay. At this point, I'd make a motion to approve the application with the comments that Henry added, which was that they would be conditions, be on the applicant to submit all the building permits and whatnot. When the building is, Speaker 1 00:25:15 They're going to remove the existing sheds to lower the lock and they're going through 3.2%. Speaker 2 00:25:21 Okay. So I've made a motion to approve the application with those conditions of second clerk. Please call the roll. Mr. Whiteman. Yes. Mr. Teller. Yes. Yes, yes. Chairman. Yes. Speaker 1 00:25:45 Mr. Patel, your application as amended has been approved, we will memorialize it at our next meeting. You don't need to be present for that, but you'll need that document to apply for all your building permits and inspections. Speaker 2 00:26:01 Thank you. Okay. Let's bring it on down to number 7 21. Jose Carrera Speaker 1 00:26:10 Is Jose Carrera present. Speaker 2 00:26:12 Yes. Speaker 1 00:26:13 Mr. Carrera, I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth? Yes. Thank you. Could you explain to us what you would like to do here? Speaker 7 00:26:28 Intentions and adding a second story over my existing first floor and I will be renovated part of the first floor. I would like to request the relief doing to the native for me and my family to improve our living conditions by a larger space. Okay. Henry, Speaker 3 00:27:01 Any issues here? I really don't see any big issues with this application. I think most of the variances are for preexisting conditions. There's a slight exacerbation of the front yard of setback variance due to the fact that they're covering up a small entrance landing, but it, again, it's, it's small and HR. I don't think it has any negative impact. I think the covered landing, maybe a condition could be added that it has to remain open. So as long as it's just the roof and posts, I don't see any issue with that. As long as it's never enclosed. And then the only other issue was, is the applicant represented to the board that there was one shed in the back. And I believe that shed was based on the photographs. I believe it was foresee. And it was, there was some dimensions that he provided and they may also be, let's see here in the, I'm not here, Mr. Carrera, what was the size of that shed that you have? Speaker 7 00:28:12 Not too sure, but I believe that is eight by 12. Yeah. And this is between the property line and the back is 13 and a half feet. And onto the side, tropical nine is four and a half feet. And I think I sent a picture of her that I would like to give the Chaill because I plugged in a beautiful prom, three of them. And I would love to keep that three that my Chaill my battery. Speaker 3 00:28:39 Yeah. We don't have an issue with the sh the main shed. The problem is what you didn't represent was there's also some smaller shed makeshift shed on the backside of the existing shed with a bunch of items that are, that are stockpile back there that has to be removed. So you cannot have that between your existing shed and the property line smashed up against the property when it like that. So again, I don't see any issues with this application other than the fact that, that, that smaller shed that you have back there that has to be removed. You can't have that in that location. If you want to put another shed on the property that meets the, you know, the size requirements and needs the setback requirements, you can look to do that. You just can't have it within the, the location that you have, if they're connected to the other shed. So that has to go. And then if you want to put another shed somewhere on the property, you would have to flag. It is only a zoning officer with permit and size it and located accordingly so that it complies with the township ordinances. But again, the woodshed don't see an issue with it. It's just that smaller shed that you have behind there with that stuff, all that stuff. That's gotta go, Speaker 2 00:30:02 Oh, you okay with that Mrs. Career? Yes. I'm fine with, you're going to relocate it or, or take it down, Speaker 7 00:30:10 Just move it. Yes. And like he says, in the future, when everything's done, that came applying for a permit Speaker 3 00:30:16 And what You won't get your permit for your edition until that shed either relocated or taken out of there. So you have to do that before. They'll give you what your permit, it's going to be a condition of the approval. Speaker 7 00:30:35 I have no problem with that. So if I let's say, get rid of that. And then we go to what I do is take a picture over in, Speaker 3 00:30:47 We'll do an inspection. So you just want to, when it's completed and what will come out there, this only won't be adopted until the next meeting. Anyway. So in the meantime, if you take it out, you, the resolution will be adopted and then you'll be ready to apply for your permit after you get your resolution. So you can jump on that and then just let us know that you took care of it, like Laura know, and she'll let me know. And we'll, we'll go out and do an inspection Speaker 7 00:31:15 You've mentioned about next minute. And so it's going to be another meeting. Speaker 1 00:31:20 If the, if the board grants and approval tonight, they will memorialize it in a written document at the next meeting. You don't need to be present for that, but you'll need that written document, which we will send to you to get your permits. And that written document will have some conditions in it. One of the conditions is the removal of that second shed. You'll have to comply with those conditions in order to get your permits. Got that. Speaker 7 00:31:45 Great. Speaker 2 00:31:47 Okay. Mr. yep. Okay. Any other members of the board have any questions for this application? Hearing none. I'm going to open it to the public LoRa. No, one's raising their hand Chairman. Okay. Public portions closed. I'll make a motion to approve this application with the conditions stipulated by Henry and reinforced by Jim Kinneally. Second clerk, please call the roll. Yes. Yes. Mr. O'Reggio. Yes, yes, yes. Yes. Speaker 1 00:32:31 Mr. Carrera, your application has been approved with some conditions. We'll memorialize it two weeks from tonight, but you should get moving on that second shift. Speaker 2 00:32:38 Awesome. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you very much. All right. Let's move on. Along to number 8 21 dash ZB dash 22 V a wad construction, LLC. Speaker 8 00:32:53 Good evening, Mr. Chairman members of the board, Peter land hearing on behalf of the applicants. This is the third time we've been before the board on this application has been continued. Last time we were here was on October 28th, at which time, both Mr. Kinneally and Mr. Hinterstein suggested that we look at the impervious coverage and they felt that the applicants was being a little aggressive in their request for impervious coverage. As a result of that, we have resubmitted our plan with a different building plan for the property to refresh the board's recollection. This is a site that had a single family house and a detached two car garage. The detached two car garage had an apartment above it illegally. The house is an eyesore. The property is owned by in estate state. My client is buying the property and looking to rehab it. There are some existing variances, the two new variances that we need to talk about, or the impervious coverage, our original submission was a 27%. Speaker 8 00:34:10 The plan, which I will show to you shortly is a 23%. We also had a front yard setback, which was an existing condition at 24 feet. The applicant is hoping we can keep the existing footprint or the pad and build a new house in the pad, but we can discuss that what I'd like to do also for the board's rec recollection, the architect testified at the previous hearing and also the planner testified at the previous hearing. The architect is Mr. Ragab and the planner is Mr. Antimissile. I will ask that the Mr. Anna Selby provided the screen so he can show to the board the new plan. And if we can have Mr. Ash Ashraf Ragab well, I don't think you have to be sworn in, but have them available to testify so we can go over the new plan if he remains sworn in to tell the truth. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Kinneally. I shot you heard my opening comments, is that correct? Yes. Okay. And the original plan was to basically keep a portion of the original dwelling and to retain the two car garage to the rear, correct? Speaker 9 00:35:37 Yes, there was the original application and we revise that we remove the two car garage completely from the bat, and we, we designed the main structure to include a two car garage in it's on the existing slab on grade. That is the existing footprint of that, of the house. Okay. Speaker 8 00:36:01 So that the new house. And can you take the board through the new houses? It's a two story. Speaker 9 00:36:08 It's a two story standard colonial dwelling, the front yard set back. We are asking for, if we have to expand the, the existing staff on grade, slightly to meet the two car garage minimum. And so we are reducing the front yard by one inch, basically from 24, 4 to 2043. And the rest of the setbacks are within the limit. The impervious coverage, we reduced to a 0.2, three or 23% for a footprint of 1,679 square foot for the house and the total area of the house.