Transcript for Piscataway Zoning meeting on July 14 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 1 00:01:26 It is summertime. Speaker 0 00:01:28 Hey, if I could do it from here, he can do it. No kidding. Speaker 1 00:01:33 We appreciate you, Laura. Speaker 0 00:01:34 I'm kidding. I'm kidding. All right, Chairman, it is good to Speaker 1 00:01:39 We're board of adjustment meeting will please come to order. Adequate notice of this meeting was provided in the following ways. Notice published in the Curry news notice posted on the bulletin board of the municipal building notice made available to the Township clerk notice sent to the Curry news and the star ledger will the clerk please call the roll. Speaker 0 00:01:57 Mr. Weisman here. Mr. Patel. Yes. Here. I see you. Kalpesh Mr. Dacey. Not here, Mr. Hidaka here. Mr. Mitterando here and Chairman Cahill Speaker 1 00:02:11 Here, will everyone please stand for the salute to the flag. Speaker 2 00:02:18 I pledge allegiance on the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God, invisible with Liberty and justice for all Speaker 1 00:02:31 Mr. Dacey. Are there any changes for the agenda this evening? Speaker 2 00:02:35 Yes, there are the 1438 west fourth street is adjourned until September of two with no further notice by the applicant. The second changes LLC, 36 11th street that has postponed until August 11th and they must notice those are the changes that I have to see. Speaker 1 00:03:00 Thank you, Mr. Kinneally. Let us proceed to item item number 6 22, ZB five. Michelle Lombardi Speaker 2 00:03:13 Is Ms. Lombardi present. Speaker 4 00:03:16 I am. Speaker 2 00:03:17 Hi. I need to swear you in. Could you raise your hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give you be the truth? Speaker 4 00:03:25 Yes. Speaker 2 00:03:25 Your name and address please. Speaker 4 00:03:27 Michelle Lombardi, 76 Carleton avenue, Piscataway New Jersey. Speaker 2 00:03:32 Thank you, miss Lombardi. Could you explain to the board what you'd like to do here? Speaker 4 00:03:36 I'd like to put a patio for an existing concrete patio in my backyard. Speaker 2 00:03:43 Okay. I, I, you broke up a little bit. When I heard you. You said you wanted to put a, a roof of some sort over the existing patio Speaker 4 00:03:51 Patio cover. Speaker 3 00:03:52 Join the meeting Speaker 4 00:03:55 Roof over an existing concrete patio in the backyard. Speaker 2 00:04:01 Mr. Chairman, you Mr. Dacey Speaker 1 00:04:03 Henry Henry. You any comments about this application? Speaker 4 00:04:08 He's logging on now. Speaker 0 00:04:34 All right, Speaker 1 00:04:35 There you go. Henry. Mute yourself please. Speaker 5 00:04:41 I'm sorry. What was that, Sean? Speaker 1 00:04:43 I, I was wondering if you had any comments or questions about this application? Speaker 2 00:04:46 We're on the Michelle Lombardi application. 76 Carlton avenue. Speaker 5 00:04:51 I do not. Let's see here. Nope. There are not. Speaker 1 00:04:57 Okay. Anyone else on the board have any questions or comments for this application hearing none. I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public portion have any questions or comments about this application? Ms. Buckley? Speaker 0 00:05:13 No one Chairman, Speaker 1 00:05:14 No one. Okay. Speaker 2 00:05:15 Lombardi had requested that we prepare a resolution for adoption at tonight's meeting. So I have a resolution of approval that is before you, if we need a motion a second and a roll call. Speaker 1 00:05:26 Okay. With the public portion close at this point, I would make a motion to approve this application. Can I ask second? Thank you. Please call the roll. Laura. Speaker 0 00:05:37 Mr. Weisman. Yes. Mr. Patel. Speaker 3 00:05:40 Yes. Speaker 0 00:05:41 Mr. Dacey. Mr. Mitterando. Yes. And Chairman Speaker 1 00:05:46 Cahill. Yes. Speaker 2 00:05:48 Your application's been approved and the resolution has been Speaker 4 00:05:52 Very much. Speaker 1 00:05:54 Good luck. You're welcome. Have a great night. Speaker 0 00:05:55 Have a good night. Speaker 6 00:05:56 You also Speaker 1 00:05:58 Let's move on down to item number 7 22 dash CB 13 V Craig Merna Speaker 2 00:06:06 Is Mr. Merna present? Speaker 6 00:06:10 Yes. Speaker 2 00:06:11 Mr. Merna, I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? You swear the testimony. You're about the, should do the truth. Speaker 6 00:06:17 Yes. Speaker 2 00:06:18 Your name and address please. Speaker 6 00:06:20 Craig Merle 365, Matt Lars lane scattering. Speaker 2 00:06:24 Thank you. Could you'd. Speaker 6 00:06:27 I would like to our addition of FRA level, Speaker 7 00:06:37 Mr. Merna, this is Andrew Alrick for the applicant, Mr. Merna, why don't you explain the board what the house looks like now and then, and the improvements that you're gonna make. Speaker 6 00:06:49 So what I wanna do is add second floor master bedroom, bathroom, two bedrooms in a bathroom to improve the house. Speaker 7 00:07:03 And Mr. Merna, we're seeking variance relief tonight. There's various requirements that we're asking the board to waive. Are any of those requirements that we're asking the board to wave? Is that anything created by your current project or were those already existing when you bought the app Speaker 6 00:07:26 Already existing? Speaker 7 00:07:28 So for example, there's, there's a requirement of a 15 foot side yard setback, and you're proposing a four foot side yard setback, but that's because the, the structure is already four feet from the, the setback. Is that correct? Speaker 6 00:07:43 Correct. Speaker 7 00:07:45 Similarly with the 100 foot lot width that is required and you're proposed 77 feet. That is because the existing structure, the existing lot with the 77 feet, correct? Speaker 6 00:07:56 Correct. Speaker 2 00:07:58 Mr. Aithal I believe the board understands that the rest of the, the variances are existing. Speaker 7 00:08:04 Understood. Thank you. Would you like us to address the memorandum from Mr. Hinterstein? That Speaker 1 00:08:12 Would great. Speaker 7 00:08:15 It cutting to the chase. My, my client takes has really no issue with any of these items, but number three, the request that there be a, a step in from the side of the building, I think would change the character. These improvements so much that I don't know if the, maybe the applicant can explain why that's a difficult requirement. Speaker 6 00:08:45 Yes. So what I wanna do is put the master bedroom on that side. That's encroaching that property, but it's, we're going right on top. If I move that over, then I lose that whole master suite, which I don't really wanna do Speaker 1 00:09:04 We understand Henry, do you have an issue with that? Speaker 5 00:09:10 Well, yeah, I, the issue is, again, I understand what the intent is. The problem is, is that you have an existing home here. That's only four feet from the side property line. And now what we're doing is we're putting a second story, increasing the mess. And now, instead of just one story, one story structure adjacent to the property line, four feet away. Now we're gonna have half foot, you know, a two and a two, sorry, structure that's right on the property line, practically. So again, and typically in these situations, just because there's an existing structure, that's perhaps, you know, closer to the front yard setback or closer to the side yard setback, understandable was there. He didn't purchase the home. He didn't pull the home like that, but to exacerbate the situation by increasing the, the mass that you have in a nonconforming location, you know, I, I that's the issue again, you know, and I didn't look at it this close, but from what I'm seeing is it appears that addition two story addition is just over a portion of the house. It's not completely over the rest of the house, that's to the right hand side. So perhaps that could be shifted perhaps the, the, the, that those bedrooms could be, you know, switched around in a way that, you know, won't exacerbate the, the side yard setback, and I'm not telling him he has to necessarily redesign it here, but, you know, I think there should be some exploration to see if that addition could be somehow modified so that it steps back away from that property line. Speaker 1 00:11:07 Mr. Marina, I will tell you that 99% of the time we follow the advice and the recommendations of our Township, engineers and experts. So if there was some way you could live with their recommendation, I think you would find a very favorable application this evening. You wanna take a minute to think about it, or Speaker 6 00:11:29 I can't move over to the left side because it has a, my dining room is there and it has a vaulted ceiling. So I would lose that ceiling height. And my walls are only seven foot on that side. So I would lose that whole space. Speaker 7 00:11:55 Mr. Merna is a, a home improvement contractor. So it, the, obviously the aesthetics of the home and what it looks like to the public reflects on his business, but which I think he's him and his family have been in that business, in this town for generations. Speaker 6 00:12:12 Yeah. Born and raised. Speaker 9 00:12:15 Why don't you do this? It sounds to me that there has not been a discussion with Henry in terms of whatever alternatives were considered and why they were rejected. It might be, be who everyone to sit down and talk about how you went through this and why all the, the issues that Henry has raised are there. I, I think it might be, make sense to take 30 days and, and talk it over. Speaker 7 00:12:52 I, I agree, Mr. Chadwick, quite honestly. Speaker 5 00:12:56 And just look, and just before you make that decision, Amy, I'm looking at this and understand that, you know, aesthetically, and perhaps you prefer to have a vaulted ceiling in your dining room, but again, maybe it's a matter of picking or choosing. If you want the addition, step it back. Perhaps you put a normal ceiling in the dining room, you have all of that room on the dining room that you could technically probably move the, the second floor over. If that ceiling wasn't vaulted, it really allows you to improve on that setback. And I'm not saying you have to do it completely again. Maybe it just needs a couple of feet. There needs to be an improvement instead of making this worse. That's what I'm telling you. You know, Speaker 6 00:13:48 I just wanna know why it's an issue on that side. If it's already been a house already there, are you worried about Speaker 5 00:13:55 The house that's there now? How high is the roof? 15 feet. 16. It's one story. Now you're trying to make it two stories over there. So, you know, it's like anything. So now the residents in that house or that homeowner, whether it's current or in the future, that they're having a single story mass in one story, house, four feet from their property light, you're blocking more of the air light and open space that this house is sort of gonna, you know, have, because you're, you're, you're creating a more solid and a higher wall on that, that property line. Speaker 7 00:14:36 We'll, we'll carry the, if, if there's no objection by the board, we can adopt the board. Member's suggestion to, to work on the issue with the Township professionals over the next 30 days. That's that's meeting is August 11th. Speaker 2 00:14:50 That acceptable. Speaker 1 00:14:53 Yes. Speaker 2 00:14:54 Thank you, Mr. O. Speaker 1 00:14:56 Okay. Speaker 2 00:14:57 Mr. Chairman, we're going to adjourn the Craig MEK application until August 11th with no further notice anybody here on that matter. It will be heard on August 11th with no further notice. The only notice you receive you announcement here. Speaker 1 00:15:13 Thank you, gentlemen. Have a good evening. Thank you. Thank you. Move on. Item number 8 22 DB three Christian Spangler and Marcella SOGA. Speaker 10 00:15:26 Yes. I'm Christine Spangler. Speaker 2 00:15:28 Spangler. Could you raise your T you swear that testimony you're about give, should be the truth. Speaker 10 00:15:34 Yes. Speaker 2 00:15:36 Could we have your, excuse me, could I have your name address please? Speaker 10 00:15:39 Sure. Christine Spangler, one 15 Walnut street. Speaker 2 00:15:42 Thank you. Could you explain to the board what you'd like to do here? Speaker 10 00:15:46 We want to replace our existing front stairs and also the retaining wall in the front of the house, as well as the fence. That's there not moving anything just where it is now. Speaker 2 00:16:03 Mr. Chairman, you may wanna to Hinterstein. Speaker 1 00:16:06 Yeah. Henry, can you go over your side on this? Speaker 5 00:16:11 I mean, with this particular application, again, the, I understand it's snow, their home and the wall is placed inside the inside the right of way. So it falls one or two feet inside the right of way. So if the wall is being replaced, I don't see why the wall can't be relocated outside the right of way move just one or two feet back. Don't have an issue with it being right on the property line, do have an issue with it being the right of way, because if a car were to hit it, then it becomes an issue that now that the Township has some may have some liability when it comes to that wall located in the Township right of way. So again, we, as you know, from the past, I don't typically don't give variances for things to be located, structures, walls, anything of that nature to be located in the Township right of way for residential properties or commercial properties. Speaker 1 00:17:13 No, Speaker 5 00:17:13 I agree. The walls being rebuilt. I, I don't see why it couldn't be rebuilt in a conforming location, step back, another foot and a half, whatever it is to keep it outside of that right. Of way line. Otherwise I don't see really any big issues with this application. It's really just that bad issue. Speaker 1 00:17:34 Okay, Ms. Spangler, if you're okay with that, I think we can move ahead with a vote after we talk to the public. Speaker 10 00:17:39 Okay. I guess my only concern is then the stairs are still gonna meet up with the wall. So it's it. Wouldn't that still be the right of way with the stairs? I don't, I don't know how that would work. Cause the way my stairs are the way the stairs are now, it meets the wall. Exactly. So if I move the wall back, wouldn't the stairs still be further out. I'm not sure steps Speaker 5 00:18:03 Off your house, come down. Then there's a, I believe a little bit of a walk and then another set of steps where the wall is. Yes. So that space would, might be a little bit more compacted. You might have the steps of the house, a shorter walk and you still could have, then the steps coming down connected to the wall, nothing would be in the right. It really is just compressing the amount of space between your existing stairs, which I know are also way out into the front yard. So that walk in between the two steps of steps would just be compressed, I think a little bit. And again, I don't think you're that far off with the wall. I think you're maybe only a foot and a half into the right of way, or maybe have to be pushed back slightly. Speaker 10 00:18:48 So you're suggesting about two feet. Cause when, you know, when the contractor to Speaker 5 00:18:52 Do wherever the property line is, you can go up to the property line, just not within the right of way. Yeah. Speaker 10 00:18:58 Okay. I'm confused where where's the property line end? I'm sorry. I really don't know. Speaker 5 00:19:02 Typically it's about 10 feet from the face of the Speaker 10 00:19:07 Okay. But Speaker 5 00:19:07 Your survey should show that you might want to get your surveyor to stake it out based on your feet in your survey this way, you know, for sure. Okay. Speaker 10 00:19:17 So there would be no one of the things that's on this is the, the fence. So it would be okay to replace it with the six foot fence Speaker 5 00:19:25 The way it is. Now. I see the issue with, with your fence in the location that it's in. I know it requires a variance because of location, but the way the house is oriented set back far enough, that's in line with the it's further back than the actual front corner of your house. I just don't see a huge issue with the way the Speaker 10 00:19:44 Fence is Speaker 5 00:19:45 Situated right now in this particular location and the way the houses are sort of oriented on that on an angle. Speaker 10 00:19:54 Okay. Thank you. Speaker 1 00:19:56 Any other comments? Any other members know, hearing none. I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions? Comments about this application? Buckley? Speaker 0 00:20:11 No one Chairman. Speaker 1 00:20:12 Okay. Close the public portion and I'd make a motion to approve the application. Speaker 0 00:20:22 Excuse me. Those are my voice. Mr. Weisman. Yes. Mr. Patel. Yes. Hey DACA. Speaker 5 00:20:30 Yes. Speaker 0 00:20:30 Mr. Mitterando. Yes. And Chairman Cahill. Speaker 1 00:20:34 Yes. Speaker 2 00:20:35 Ms. Spangler, your application as amended has been approved as amended means you're gonna rebuild the wall outside of the right of way. We'll memorialize the resolution in our next meeting and mail that to you. You don't need to be there. Speaker 10 00:20:47 Okay. Thank you so much. Speaker 11 00:20:48 Have Speaker 1 00:20:49 A good night. Ma'am Speaker 10 00:20:50 Have a good night. Thank you. Speaker 1 00:20:52 Let's move on to item number 9 22 ZB dash 47 V. James Fuller Speaker 2 00:20:58 Is Mr. Fuller present. Speaker 1 00:21:01 You're mirrored. Mr. Fuller. Speaker 11 00:21:03 Yes I am. I'm Speaker 2 00:21:05 Mr. Fuller. I need to swear you and raise your hand. You swear the testimony, the Speaker 11 00:21:12 Yes. Speaker 2 00:21:13 Your name and address please. Speaker 11 00:21:15 James Fuller 69. Waway New Jersey. Speaker 2 00:21:19 Thank you, Mr. Fuller, could you explain to the board what you'd like to do here? Speaker 11 00:21:23 Yes, me and my wife bought this property in 1984. My wife passed away six years ago. All my children are grown. We've been in Piscataway all their lives and everybody's grown now. So I'm, I'm selling the house. I currently have a buyer, but the, the garage, it was converted to a bedroom when we bought the house and the shared is a foot and a half off of the property line. And I'm just asking for relief. So I could process to sell my house. Speaker 2 00:22:04 How many off street parking spots do you have Mr. Fuller Speaker 11 00:22:08 Off? I didn't, I didn't hear that. Speaker 2 00:22:10 How many off street parking spots do you have? How many cars can you park in your driveway? Speaker 11 00:22:16 Two. Speaker 2 00:22:21 Mr. Mr. Henderson? Speaker 1 00:22:23 Yes. Henry, do you have any comments or questions about this? Speaker 5 00:22:26 Well, there's a couple things Township planning on doing some future road work there and they're looking for a temporary construction easement along avenue. That's one item. Like, is there any reason why the shed can't be relocated to a conforming location? Speaker 11 00:22:50 Well, I mean, I'm, I'm selling the property and I, I, I would have to take the shed down, you know, I could, I could take it, it could be taken down. Speaker 5 00:23:00 So it's not in a condition where it could just be relocated. Speaker 11 00:23:06 I would, I would say no. No. Speaker 5 00:23:09 Okay. And then the other issue is, is that the, the RS, I requires two and half spaces for residential home, a four bedrooms. So the additional bedroom that is being created in the house, or that was converted from the garage result in the need for more walk street parking for this application, which it appears there's only two spaces currently walk street. And I was wondering if they could, it appears that you might be able to add to the driveway to the right of the driveway, Speaker 11 00:23:47 Get Speaker 5 00:23:48 An additional car. Speaker 11 00:23:49 There's a, there's a, there's a, like a 40 foot tree there and a utility pole. So the, the wide in the driveway to the right would, would require the, moving, the removing the utility pole and the tree. Speaker 5 00:24:08 Well, utility poles a little bit further down, but if you tell me that that tree is in the way, there's no way of the property Speaker 11 00:24:22 To the left, the, to the left of the, to the, to the left of the driveway. Speaker 5 00:24:28 Yeah. Or a little bit, Speaker 11 00:24:29 No, that's, that's the, that's the, there's a, there's a walkway. No, there's not enough. There's not enough space. You would have to see the, I mean, it's a typical, it's a typical buy level by level. There's not enough space going to the left. Speaker 5 00:24:47 I mean, it seems like there's some constraints here for the driveway. I don't have a big issue. It seems that there is on street parking available. One of the home, my biggest issue is you have any issue providing the Township with the 10 foot construction easement part of the property. Speaker 11 00:25:04 What is that? I don't, I don't quite understand what that is. I know where the easement is, but the, when you say, Speaker 5 00:25:10 Yeah, it would be a temporary construction easement. So the town, the future plans on maybe redoing the curb, perhaps adding S and to sidewalks and variety of way, that's, there is sufficient, but in case they need a little bit extra room during construction that they can access the area and restore it back in kind after the construction. So that's really just temporary. And it's only if they do construction and that's something that Township would prepare the, the easement language and you could have review it and have, or have your attorney review it. And there's no cost obviously to the, to you for that. But it's something that the Township typically looks upon, you know, favorably when there's gonna be future road work on this street in front of the home. Speaker 11 00:26:01 So there, there there's a, there's another with, with the easement. I mean, of course I would, I would agree to the easement, but the buyer, the buyer that's, I'm in contract with they're, they're locked into an interest rate of up until August 3rd. So if we would, we would, we would like to close before the 3rd of August. I don't know how the, the procedure with the easement, how long would that take Speaker 5 00:26:39 Tim? I don't even think you're gonna have a resolution to this. Correct. Tim Speaker 2 00:26:45 Told, yeah, resolution's gonna be considered on August 11th. Speaker 11 00:26:49 Okay. Speaker 5 00:26:50 I think you're gonna have to push that because even if you have an approval tonight, that won't be memorialized until the 11th of August. And I there's a good chance in that timeframe. The, hopefully that the, the easement too could be resolved. Speaker 11 00:27:08 Okay. Speaker 5 00:27:09 I, I don't know if it's under contract Jim, if that causes any issues, there's no easement on the property currently. And Speaker 2 00:27:15 It's, well, it, it did, it has not changed hands yet. So it's still his house. So you could sign the easement documents. So Mr. Fuller, that, that easement, that temporary easement's acceptable to you. Speaker 11 00:27:30 Yes. Speaker 2 00:27:30 Thank you. Speaker 11 00:27:31 How much, how much, how much footage are we? You? I'm just curious how much footage? Speaker 5 00:27:38 I believe it's 10 feet across the front of the property. Speaker 11 00:27:41 Oh, okay. 10 foot back. Yeah. Setback. Okay. No, no, I don't have a problem with that. Speaker 1 00:27:46 Okay. Anybody else? Speaker 5 00:27:49 And then you'll be required to get any building permits that are necessary for the garage conversion. I assume that Speaker 11 00:27:54 Yes. Speaker 5 00:27:55 Was already, Speaker 11 00:27:56 Yes. Can I, can I, can I start that process tomorrow? Speaker 5 00:27:59 Sure can. Speaker 11 00:28:01 Okay. Speaker 1 00:28:02 So we've gotta get the approval tonight, sir. Speaker 11 00:28:05 Okay. Speaker 1 00:28:06 Put the you're not over the finish line yet. Are there any other questions or comments from other members of the board hearing none gonna open it to the public? Anyone in the public portion? Have any questions or comments about this application? Just Buckley. Speaker 0 00:28:26 No one Speaker 1 00:28:27 Chairman. Okay. Hearing none. I'm gonna close the public portion and I'm gonna make a motion to approve this application. Speaker 0 00:28:38 Mr. Weisman. Yes. Mr. Patel. Speaker 11 00:28:41 Yes. Speaker 0 00:28:42 Mr. Haka? Speaker 5 00:28:43 Yes. Speaker 0 00:28:44 Mr. Mitterando. Speaker 11 00:28:45 Yes. Speaker 0 00:28:46 And Chairman Cahill. Speaker 1 00:28:47 Yes. Speaker 2 00:28:49 Mr. Fuller, your application's been approved. Speaker 11 00:28:51 Thank you, chair, chair members. Thank you. Speaker 1 00:28:57 Good luck with the sale. Speaker 11 00:28:58 Thank Speaker 1 00:28:58 You. Let's move on to item number 10 22. CB V. Stella Lee. Speaker 12 00:29:04 Hello. Hi, this is Stella Speaker 2 00:29:06 Stella Lee. Could you raise your right? I need to swear you in you, the testimony be the truth, your name and address please. Speaker 12 00:29:17 Stella Lee, 600 maple avenue, this getaway. Speaker 2 00:29:22 Thank you. Could you explain to the board what you'd like to do here? Speaker 12 00:29:27 I would like to install a six foot privacy fence in the backyard. Speaker 1 00:29:35 Hey, Mr. Hinterstein, could you go over the site impact for this particular application? Speaker 5 00:29:42 Similar to the last case we, we do. We are looking for a five foot temporary construction easement along Lakeview avenue. I think there may be some future plans to do some work on both Lakeview avenue and maple avenue. So again, we would look for temporary construction easement on both frontages, cuz this is a corner property. And again, there's, there's a good chance. There gonna be some future road work there again, it, it would be temporary just during a construction in case they need Toro down the property, five feet from the property line. And that's the one item. Then the second item is, is because this corner isn't a traditional 90 degree intersection on your side of the street. It's a little bit more of an acute angle. It makes it a little bit difficult to see as the traffic coming down. So my suggestion was is that after your first 42 feet of your fence, that you're proposing it's to articulate it slightly and angle it back, that it actually comes back an additional two feet from where you show it. So that it's 17 feet back instead of 15 feedback from that property line. And this way you'll help. I think with that site visibility along Lakeview avenue. Okay. Quite a bit. Speaker 12 00:31:06 So in other words, instead of our original plan of 16 feet, I move it back to 60 feet from Lakeview. It will be okay. Speaker 5 00:31:16 No. What Speaker 12 00:31:17 So is that what you were saying? Speaker 5 00:31:19 Basically the, we have your fence located near the house is fine and you can go 42 feet out from the house as you start running down Lakeview avenue. But then after the first 42 feet, you wanna step the fence back, slightly view that angle a little bit. So that the end of the fence where it meets your neighbor's property line. Yes. To the rear instead of 15 feet back, it's 17 feet back in that corner. Speaker 12 00:31:47 Okay. Now I don't understand about the 42 feet from the, from the house, from, from the back of the house or the front of the house. Speaker 5 00:31:56 We got a survey here that Speaker 12 00:31:59 The 40, is it from, from, from April avenue or is it from the house? Oh, Speaker 5 00:32:05 Lake. This is really just all about Lakeview avenue. So you see how you have your fence starting at that walkway in the back of your house, Speaker 12 00:32:18 In the walkway, Speaker 5 00:32:19 You show the fence 19 feet back, correct? Speaker 12 00:32:22 Right Speaker 5 00:32:23 From Lakeview avenue, property line. Speaker 12 00:32:25 Yes. That's that's near the AC unit. That's Speaker 5 00:32:28 Right. And if you go further to the end of the property, it's shown as 15 feet, correct? Speaker 12 00:32:36 Yeah. I can move it to 17. No, no problem. Right. Speaker 5 00:32:39 So if you want, you could just move it that back corner to 17 and put it in a straight line or you could go 42 feet and then it to the 17 foot mark is all I was saying either way is fine with me. As long as that back corner 17 and it's on a straight line, that's perfectly acceptable. So you go from 19 to 17 instead of 19 to 15, Speaker 12 00:33:03 Right. Oh, okay. Okay. So it's a straight line. So the point that I didn't understand was about this 42 that's. Okay. So, so no problem. I can move it from 19 and then the corner 17. No problem. Speaker 5 00:33:19 Correct. Speaker 12 00:33:20 And you're talking about a six foot privacy fence, correct? Speaker 5 00:33:23 Correct. Speaker 12 00:33:25 Okay. Yeah. Yeah. I, we can do that. Sure. Speaker 2 00:33:29 Are you okay with the five foot temporary construction easement? Speaker 12 00:33:34 What? Yeah, I don't understand that either. What is the five foot easement? Speaker 2 00:33:39 The, the Township plans to do some road work, maybe curbs work on the streets. They would've to step onto your property. So giving them a five foot temporary easement during the construction would allow them to step onto your property if Speaker 12 00:33:54 Oh, no problem. Yeah. Our Speaker 2 00:33:55 Fix. If they, if they heard any grass or any SHS, they'll restore that. And once the construction is done, the engines over. Speaker 12 00:34:03 Oh, no problem. No problem. Speaker 1 00:34:06 Okay. Any other comments or questions from anyone else on the board hearing? None. I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public portion have any comments or questions about this application? Ms. Buckley? Speaker 0 00:34:20 No one Chairman. Speaker 1 00:34:21 Okay. I'm gonna close the public portion and I'm gonna make a motion to approve this application. Can I get a second? Speaker 12 00:34:27 Can I ask a question? Sure. Ma'am what what's going to happen now. Can we are going to receive a letter or something? Speaker 1 00:34:35 Let's let's get through the vote first. Ma'am and then we'll answer all your questions at that point. Okay. Speaker 12 00:34:38 Oh, okay. All right. Thank you. Thank Speaker 1 00:34:41 Everyone. Thank you. Cal pressure. Call the roll. Speaker 0 00:34:43 Mr. Weisman. Speaker 1 00:34:45 Yes. Speaker 0 00:34:46 Mr. Patel. Yes. Mr. Haka. Yes. Tim Mitterando. Yes. And Chairman Kao. Speaker 1 00:34:53 Yes. Speaker 2 00:34:54 Ms. Lee, to answer your question, your application has now been approved as amended with Mr. Hinterstein. We will memorialize this decision at our next meeting on August 11th. You don't need to be present for that, but that document will be mailed to you and you'll need that document to get your permits. Speaker 12 00:35:11 Okay. Thank you. Speaker 1 00:35:12 You're welcome, man. Good Speaker 12 00:35:13 Luck everyone. Speaker 1 00:35:16 Okay. Let's move on to item number 1122 dash ZB dash 58 V and that's N Y SS a limited partnership. Verizon wireless. Speaker 13 00:35:28 Good evening, Mr. Chaill. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Richard Schneider of the law firm of Vogel Chaill Collins and Schneider on behalf of the applicant, I can do this very concisely. Mr. Chairman, if there's any questions, I'll be glad to answer 'em but I'll give the, hopefully the abbreviated version. Speaker 1 00:35:45 We appreciate that. Speaker 13 00:35:46 The matter before you tonight is an request for an interpretation under both the municipal land use law on section 64 0 9 of the class relief act sum, approximately 30 years ago, Verizon obtained approval to construct the wireless communication facility at the water tank located on the subject property that approval granted them the right to install 12 antennas more recently back in 2017, the number of antennas was reduced to nine as a pursuant to a approval that actual an interpretation that was granted by this board due to technological reasons, the applicant is now seeking to increase the number of antennas back to the original authorized 12 antennas critically for purposes of this application, none of the new antennas or additional related ordinances will increase the height of the existing antennas. They will all remain at the existing maximum height. There is no change to the ground equipment located at the subject property and all other conditions remain in full force in effect. Speaker 13 00:36:59 Most significantly there's no variance approval that is required in conjunction with this matter. Therefore summarily under the municipal land use law because we are not increasing the height of the structure by 10 feet by more than 10%. In fact, we're not increasing it at at all. And because we're not increasing the compound B beyond 2,500 square feet or the width of the structure, we qualify under the municipal land use law. And for the reasons more comprehensively detailed in our application, we meet all of the requirements of the federal statute, 64 0 9. And for those reasons concisely, we would ask for your approval to grant the requested interpretation based on the plan submitted Speaker 2 00:37:42 And Mr. Cahill, they have also submitted the requisite proof that the structure can handle the new antennas and that these new antennas will satisfy the radio frequency standards of the United States. Speaker 1 00:37:54 Thank you, Speaker 9 00:37:56 Mr. Chairman, I've reviewed the plans as well. And I agree with the statements made that it does not increase height. And the only recommendation I have is if you grant the request that it be subject to all prior conditions. Speaker 1 00:38:14 Thank you, Mr. Chadwick, any other members of the board have any questions for this application? Hearing none. I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any comments or questions about this application? No one Chairman. Okay. I'm gonna close the public portion and make a motion to approve this application. Can I get a second? Got a second. Thank you. Kalpesh call the roll. Speaker 0 00:38:41 Mr. Weisman. Speaker 1 00:38:43 Yes. Speaker 0 00:38:44 Mr. Patel. Speaker 1 00:38:48 Yes. Speaker 0 00:38:49 Mr. Hay. DACA. Speaker 1 00:38:51 Yes. Speaker 0 00:38:51 Mr. Mitterando. Speaker 1 00:38:53 Yes. Speaker 0 00:38:54 And Chairman kale. Speaker 1 00:38:55 Yes. Speaker 2 00:38:56 Mr. Schneider, we Alize. This is our next meeting in August 11th. Speaker 1 00:39:00 Thank you. Good seeing you, John. Good night, sir. Okay. Let's move on to item number 1222 ZB 29 V. BJ sing. Speaker 2 00:39:11 Mr. Singal or Mr. Arch, are you present? Speaker 14 00:39:14 I am present. Thank you. Members of the board and board professionals. My name is Tim March. I'm an attorney licensed in the state of New Jersey. I'm here representing VJ sing hall, who is also present. We are asking for variance relief for 4 46 second street for the purpose of building a single family home on, on the lot. The lot is rather small. It's undersized. There are some existing variances for lot area, for lot width, lot depth, and lot frontage. Those are existing. We are not doing anything to, to modify those. Those are the constraints of a lot. We are asking for variances for building coverage, side yard setback, rear yard setback, and encroachment of a accessibility ramp into the rear yard. Although that may have been, that may not be needed based on our redesign, but I'm not positive, but just be on the safe side. Speaker 14 00:40:16 I'm mentioning that as well. A little bit of background. This is a, when we initially put the application in, we had one set of plans and based on Mr Stein's review and the Township professionals review, we actually revised those plans and the new revisions, I think, significantly address any of the issues that Mr Hinterstein had on it. I don't wanna, I wanna keep the, the, the pattern of efficiency tonight, so appreciate it. Thank you. So I'm gonna move on to our first witness, who is Mr. VJ? Singha I would ask that he'd be sworn in to testify. Speaker 2 00:40:52 Mr. Sing hall. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear that testimony you're about give, be the truth. Yes. Your name and address please. Speaker 15 00:41:00 Vij Singal 2 62 Pinelli New Jersey. Thank Speaker 2 00:41:04 You, Speaker 14 00:41:06 Mr. Singha. You're the owner of the property, correct. And you wanna, yes. And you wanna build a house on the property? Yes. And this is gonna be a, a multi-generational house, correct? How many people are gonna live in it? Speaker 15 00:41:19 So my dad who is 93, is going to live with me. Then I myself live with me and I have a handicapped daughter, which is 22 year old. Primarily I'm making that house to improve her quality of life. Speaker 14 00:41:33 Okay. And that's your daughter there with you, correct? Yes. Okay. And, and what's her name? Speaker 15 00:41:38 Puja. Single. Speaker 14 00:41:40 Okay. And I understand that she has a medical condition and that's primarily the reason that you're, that you're Des that you've designed the house the way that you have. Is that correct? Correct. Okay. Can you tell us a little bit what, what the medical condition is that she has and, and what the resulting symptoms are Speaker 15 00:41:57 She born with? Some very, very rare disease, which like a lot of people has not seen. It's called epidermolysis blo, which forms a blister on her entire body without being doing anything. You can see that she has the dressing wrapped up on entire her body. So she's like completely on the wheelchair, like zero mobility. She cannot eat anything. She cannot drink anything. She cannot talk. She cannot walk. So from last five years, we were looking the lot of houses, but we couldn't find anything which scatters our need in the wheelchair. So then somebody suggested that we should build the house according to her need. I'm almost living in Piscataway over 20 years. So I love the town. So I want to be remain in the town. Speaker 14 00:42:50 Thank you, Vij. And, and so part of the it's, it's a not mince words, it's a rather large accommodating house, but partly that's because you need to accommodate a, a wheelchair and somebody helping her out, pushing the wheelchair as well, because if she makes any contact, it can be very painful. Is that correct? If she makes contact with walls or scrapes against anything? Speaker 15 00:43:13 So her condition is describe a even fragile than butterfly. So if little bit like fraction can cause the blistering on her body, which can be filled with the blood or water. Speaker 14 00:43:28 Okay. And so the variances that we're asking for is really to accommodate the, the, the size of the interior of the house in order to accommodate your daughter, correct? Speaker 15 00:43:37 Correct. Speaker 14 00:43:38 Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Single, that's all the questions I have for Mr. Single at this moment. Speaker 1 00:43:43 Anyone else on the board? Any questions for Mr. Sing? Okay. You put on your next witness. Speaker 14 00:43:50 Our next witness is Mr. John DuPont. He is our engineer, as well as he's a professional licensed professional. Speaker 2 00:44:00 Raise your right. Swear the testimony the Speaker 16 00:44:05 I do Speaker 2 00:44:06 Your name and address please. Speaker 16 00:44:10 I'm sorry. Say credentials, Speaker 2 00:44:12 Your name and address. And then credentials. Speaker 16 00:44:14 Okay. John P DuPont six Jackson road, Stewartsville, New Jersey Speaker 2 00:44:23 Credentials. I am a credential Speaker 16 00:44:24 Professional engineer. I have a BS in civil engineering from university of Hartford. I am a licensed professional engineer in of New Jersey, as well as a certified municipal engineer, as well as a professional planner. I've served for the Mayor of Carter as a planner and zoning board engineering planner for the past 23 years. Speaker 1 00:44:43 Mr. Mr. Dacey to be accepted. Qualifications are fine. Please proceed. Mr. Arch, Speaker 14 00:44:49 Mr. DuPont, if you can please just take us through the, sort of the revised plan and sort of touch upon the, the variances that we're hitting briefly. Please. Speaker 16 00:44:58 I will share my screen, Speaker 1 00:45:01 Please. Do Speaker 16 00:45:11 You see the cover sheet now? Yes. I'm gonna try to go. I'm sorry. You're there we go. So very briefly, you've heard this is you're seeing sheet number two of our set and basically it's the existing house, right? So there's an existing house on the property. As you heard with a detached garage, several variances currently exist. You have a lot area, lot width, lot depth, front yard setback, as well as side yard setbacks, lots currently 0.3 acres. So it is in fact undersized. So as we looked to this project, the applicant, now I'm showing you sheet three, if you like it Kinneally zoom in. But what the applicants is to demol existing dwelling and the, and reconstruct a new single family home, that our answers are gonna stay intact. Still be lot area, lot with lot. However, we're pushing this house back to meet the front yard setback. Speaker 16 00:46:20 So we're meeting the, the 50 foot to match the neighborhood. We also are looking at make improving the cider setbacks. Currently one side yard setback is 14.5 feet. We have now improved that the 15.12 small improvement, but improvement. The lot coverage for this proposed home does go above the exceedance. So instead of 20%, we're at now 21.3%. So we're a little over. And then the rear setback, instead of being 50 we're 45 and half feet, and that is from the deck. So a couple things from an engineering standpoint, it's a relatively fat flat piece of property. This project did in fact, increase the coverage by 0.04 acres. So still a minor Stonewater management project. But as we did the drainage graining design, we took a good look at the adjacent properties. Now the property to the rear, and I'll show you an exhibit later, the property to the rear is a wooded lot. Speaker 16 00:47:26 So a nice thick buffer, no, no issue to the rear of both the east and west side, there are single family homes. Previously, there was runoff to both sides, mainly more to the east, but there was run off to both the roofs weren't collected the garage, wasn't collected the driveway wasn't collected in this proposed design. Now we are collecting all the roof leaders from a hundred percent of the roof and we designed a seat, each pit, and we graded the proposed driveway to the front. So we think we've, overdesigned it been really conserved with and our accountant for 100% of the increase, we are reducing significantly there off to both adjoin properties. Feel we made a good improvement with, with respect to drain. Speaker 16 00:48:13 Now, as we still talk about drainage, Mr. Hinterstein had a comment in his letter that we currently show the post in the rear of the property. Mr. Hinterstein made a good, made a good suggestion, move it front and then tie the overflow into the existing inlet. So we have no problem. We looked at that that is very reasonable to do. We think we could do that? No problem. So a couple other things in Mr. Stein's letter that I think we should address, just because we, we wanna make sure we, we address everything comment. One was no problem comment. Number two, talked about the proposed deck and Mr. Hinterstein suggested that we shorten the deck up two feet to improve the rear setback. We would like to keep that deck there. We've already reduced the house and reduce the deck. There is a thick wooded buffer that I will show you right now. This is this sheet. If you could see is a exhibit not submitted to the board. Perhaps we have to mark this sheet. Speaker 2 00:49:18 Yeah. That should be marked as a one with today's date. And you should a paper copy of that to the board for our file. Speaker 16 00:49:24 Okay. So a one, and if you see our properties right here in red, we have it hatched and you see the large wooden buffer in every ear. So we feel that there's a sniffing buffer. There there'll be no adverse visual impacts for the two extra feet on that deck. I think that's a, that's where you are now. It's aithal request you also see on this property, on this exhibit, rather that the existing home was right up against the right of way. It was very, very close to the street, totally out of character of the neighborhood, this proposed design. Now we moved it back to the 50 feet and now we match the pattern of the neighborhood. And we even talk about the home. The lot's a little smaller. So there's restrictions on, and I'm engineering. The lot has restrictions area left. Speaker 16 00:50:21 There's a couple of Varis that are required, but they're required because there's, they reduce size of a lot. This house is certainly in scale to neighborhood and we've measured both the intensity. The ordinance is a 20 side. That's the requirements. Well, we designed this house and now placed this house and reduced it. So we do have 25. Well, we actually have 50 feet from our home to the Adian homes. So we think we meet the intent and I'm back grading. That was the second we will move the, not a, also Mr. Hinterstein talked about a low point on the side of the property, right? My cursor is, and there is, there's an existing low point there. Now water definitely collects there now. And perhaps, maybe even sit there, but we are significantly reducing the drain area to that. And we think it's not gonna be an issue we're taking more than half the drain area to that spot eliminating. Speaker 16 00:51:21 So we will sort of look at it. We'll certainly work with your professional staff and, and satisfy them. But we think we've we've addressed that, but we certainly work with, and the final thing is that the, the percentage on the engineering site, you 1.3, the architecture plan shows 21 point, sorry, mine says 21.1, the architecture plan shows 21.3. So I would say that we'll stick with the 21.3 would be the variance. So from an engineering standpoint, it's a pretty simple project, certainly to your staff. We can comply with Mr. Stein's July 12th letter. We'll gladly work with your staff on the, on the drainage and from an engineering standpoint, that's all I have. I'll be back later as a planner, but I think from engineering, that's it. Speaker 1 00:52:14 Okay. Speaker 14 00:52:15 Thank you, Speaker 1 00:52:16 Mr. Chairman, you may wanna see if Mr. Hinterstein has any comments on yeah, I was about to say that Henry, could you address the same by Mr. DuPont? Speaker 5 00:52:23 Yeah. I just wanted to go over still a couple of comments that weren't addressed and that's, I assume you don't have any issue with the providing attachment right of way dedication, slope, easement, and conformance with, I guess, road improvement plans that are, that are already I think, developed that road also. I believe. Speaker 16 00:52:43 Absolutely. No, no, no problem. Speaker 14 00:52:47 I actually, if I can, I could actually address that. I believe those have already actually been dedicated, recorded Speaker 5 00:52:56 About the install and, well, I think you're not gonna have a choice about the installation of the curb and the side that's Speaker 14 00:53:03 We agree to that, Speaker 5 00:53:04 So, okay. I, that really is, and you're willing to work on that low spot. Yeah. If you, everything is fine. Speaker 1 00:53:14 Any other members of the board of any questions for this Mr. Dacey hearing none. Let's move on to your next witness. Speaker 14 00:53:22 Okay, Mr. Jabban, if you can just stop sharing your screen. And our next witness is Mr. Mark MARCE. He is our architect. Speaker 17 00:53:31 Good evening. Speaker 2 00:53:33 Could you raise your right hand? You the testimony? Speaker 17 00:53:38 Yes, sir. Speaker 2 00:53:39 Address please. Speaker 17 00:53:41 Mark. Marcel, M a R C I L L E five five main street, Meha, New Jersey. Speaker 2 00:53:47 Thank you. Speaker 14 00:53:49 If you can just go over your credentials briefly and Speaker 17 00:53:54 In the state of New Jersey, since 2004, my license isn't good standing and I've testified before numerous boards. Speaker 2 00:54:00 Mr. Chairman sufficient Speaker 1 00:54:02 Proceed. Ms. Do Speaker 14 00:54:04 Mr. Marc, if you can, please just let us know the features of the house and, and briefly take us through why it is that they're required for the specific design and circumstances of Mr. Sing hall and his daughter. Speaker 17 00:54:19 Yeah, sure. So, you know, understanding the lot's a little undersized and the, the house is a little bit larger than what would be allowed on this lot. We took great care in trying to reduce the VI. The visual scale of the home has seen from the street. We kept the roof lines as low as possible. The overall roof fight is just under 28 feet. We reduced the width of the front of the house by pushing the garage, the front wall of the garage, back from the front of the house to make the front of the house appear narrower and therefore appear smaller. We introduced the front porch, also reducing the visual scale of the house and push the second floor walls back from, you know, further back to the front floor walls, front first floor walls. Again, in order to reduce that scale, the interior layout, I'd be happy to answer any questions, but we took great care in trying to make the common areas spacious enough to accommodate the required wheelchair access. So we have some sort of turning circles shown on the plane, just to give you an idea of, of the spaces we were trying to work with in terms of, of flowing through the house, but certainly be happy to answer any questions regarding the layout. Speaker 14 00:55:25 Thank you, Mr. Marc, I, I think I'll leave it to the board to see if, have any specific questions. Speaker 17 00:55:30 Sure. Speaker 1 00:55:32 Henry, any concerns? Speaker 5 00:55:37 No, I think the fair down version of the house that reduced the coverage with adequate, I think the deviation now is, is relatively tremendous in nature and is definitely better than the, the previous submittal. Speaker 1 00:55:55 Yeah. By, by substantial amount. Any other members of the board of any questions hearing none. Mr. Arch, Speaker 14 00:56:04 Thank you. I'd ask Mr. DuPont to now briefly opine his planning testimony for the, of a complete record. Speaker 16 00:56:15 I will, I will certainly try to keep it brief, but so from a planning standpoint, we are requesting three new variances. Lot of coverage, side yard setback in a rear yard step. We take a look at the first variance locked coverage. We feel we can support that by the C1 hardship case as per the, we're dealing with a piece of property, which is undersized and width and depth to the zone. The properly currently has a dwelling on it and a detached garage with numerous existing violations. The size of lock clearly impacts our ability to provide the required coverage. The existing undersized lot, the existing lot is significantly smaller than the allows, but does exist. And if the lot was consistent with the zones, one would be far below the 20 coverage and coverage. The next two variances, we feel we could obtain the side yard. Speaker 16 00:57:04 O'Reggio using the flexible C2 analysis under a flexible C2. We must establish that we're dealing with a specific piece of land. The purpose of the MOU all will be advanced. The Varis can be granted without substantial detriment to the public. Good. And the benefits will substantially outweigh the detriments. And if variance will not substantially impact the intent and purpose of the zone plan of the master plan. Again, we mentioned a lot size will impact both the side and York, the proposed willing isn't out of character everyone's size, but rather the lot size is the contributing factor to variances. So in order to approve the side and where are variances, we need to look at the positive negative criteria, positive criteria advances, several purposes of Theo purpose, a to encourage municipal action to guide appropriate land use and development purpose C provide adequate light air and open space. Speaker 16 00:57:57 As we provide the intent 50 foot between our dwelling and the neighbors and purpose. I to promote a desirable visual environment through creative design, we are taking the one home that didn't really match. It was too far forward. Didn't match the character neighborhood. We recessed it. And now we got a new structure. So we're meeting the intent of the ordinance with respect to light air open space. We are improving the vision environment. Clearly we are in scale with the zone. We are proposing to construct a single family dwelling, which is permitted. Our project will improve over what is there now, a better zoning alternative. We are improving the range of each adjacent lot. And every year of the property, it does butt against a heavily wooded area. So we feel there'll be no visual, negative impacts. We are gonna grant the five foot wide dedication up in front of the, for the town. Speaker 16 00:58:51 So special reason. We also have that. We've heard the applicant story and why he's building this home for him and his family, the dwelling isn't oversized, it's built with a very specific purpose, negative criteria. As far as that goes, I don't see any negative impacts. We're proposing a permitted use. We were meeting an in, we were in scale with local requirements. We're eliminating existing violations. Our project will certainly not have any negative impacts on surrounding properties. In fact, we are improving drainage and adjacent properties. Again, there'll be no substantial detriment to the public. Good, no substantial detriment to zone planner, zoning ordinance. I feel the board can grant the approval of this application based on the fact that the benefits of granting is requested will substantially outweigh any detriments. This project will not have any detriments in the public. Good. The will clearly be advanced. The intent of the zone plan in his Zon will not substantially be impaired. That's my abbreviated version. Speaker 14 00:59:47 Thank you. Mr. Dacey. Speaker 1 00:59:48 Thank you, Mr. DuPont, any members of the board have any questions for Mr. DuPont hearing none. Mr. Arch. Speaker 14 01:00:00 Thank you. I'll again, I'll be very quick. I asked that you look at this favorably. It is. I hope that the speed in which we presented it does not undermine the significance that this has to Mr. Sing hall and to his daughter. And I would hope that you would grant us that the additional two feet on the, the porch that we are asking for and look favorably on the application. Speaker 1 01:00:26 Okay. Anyone have any questions? Anyone on the board, any comments hearing none, I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions or comments about this application? Speaker 0 01:00:39 No one Chairman Speaker 1 01:00:40 Okay. Hearing that the public portion is closed and I would make a motion. Speaker 9 01:00:45 Excuse me. Let me just make one comment go, John. This is the, this is a kinda case where you have a, between your rules and the neighborhood. I think they, the case the house will fit the neighborhood much, much better than the existing. Speaker 1 01:01:01 Thank you, John. Appreciate that. I'm gonna make a motion to approve this application as is including the letting the deck remain as presented by the applicant. Can I get a second? Speaker 9 01:01:11 Second? Speaker 1 01:01:12 Okay. Thank you. Kalpesh Paul. Speaker 0 01:01:15 Mr. Weisman, Mr. Patel. Speaker 9 01:01:18 Yes. Speaker 0 01:01:19 Mr. Haka. Yes. Mr. Mitterando. Yes. And Chairman Cahill. Speaker 1 01:01:25 Yes. Speaker 2 01:01:26 And the applicant request that I bring in a resolution tonight. So we will present that to the board. You've already voted on it, so it's all good. Speaker 1 01:01:34 Great. Thank you. Speaker 14 01:01:36 Thank you so Speaker 1 01:01:36 Much. Speaker 16 01:01:37 Thank you. Speaker 1 01:01:38 Do do well with your daughter and we have nothing but prayers and hopes for you both. Speaker 15 01:01:42 Thank you. And we have to put a elevator also in the house because her mobility is zero. That's why I take even little more space. So Speaker 1 01:01:51 Understood. Speaker 15 01:01:52 Thank you. Appreciate. Speaker 1 01:01:53 No, we appreciate God. Bless both of you. Thank you. Speaker 15 01:01:56 Thank you so much. Speaker 1 01:01:57 Let's move on to item number 14, which is 22 dash ZB 50 and that's Kingsbridge 2005 LLC. Speaker 18 01:02:06 Good evening, Mr. Chairman. This is Jim from waters MC first McNeil. I'm the attorney for the applicant. I can give you the quick, you know, the, the spirit of efficiencies we've been doing tonight. I can summarize and give you introduce the application. And just for the board's benefit, we have our architect and engineer who are prepared to testify as needed. So essentially this is a property located at 80 Kingsbridge road. The owner is essentially working on a tenant, fit out for a new tenant coming in. They're proposing to basically use it as permitted use, you know, warehouse distribution, and the main feature of the, the site plan. We're here for, you know, preliminary final site plan approval. The main item that we're working for the board's approval on here is to install two loading docks and to make some adjustments to the parking lot, right around where the loading docks are to facilitate trucks coming in and out is as noted. It's a permitted use in the zone. We're not adding any square footage to the building or anything like that. The building's about 31,000 square feet, or just shy of that. And the applicant, like I said, it's would be ideas to have the setup for a new tenant. That'll be coming in. Hopefully later this year, Speaker 2 01:03:20 You can go ahead and call your first witness. Speaker 18 01:03:22 Certainly we've our architect. Paul Newman, Paul, you, I believe Speaker 2 01:03:27 Mr. Newman, can you raise, do you swear the testimony you're about to give the, Speaker 19 01:03:33 Yes, I do Speaker 2 01:03:34 Your name and address please. Speaker 19 01:03:36 Paul Newman from 1109 Mount Kimball road, Harding, New Jersey. Speaker 2 01:03:43 Thank you. Go ahead. MRCA Speaker 18 01:03:48 Mr. Newman, to the extent for the board's benefit, could you just give quickly your qualifications? Speaker 19 01:03:53 Sure. I have a bachelor of architecture from NJT. I've been a licensed architect at state of New Jersey for 35 years, and I've appeared in numerous boards, including Piscataway previously. Speaker 18 01:04:04 You can proceed. Mr. Speaker 19 01:04:07 Thank you. Speaker 18 01:04:09 So Mr. Newman, maybe the easiest way to do this would be if you could just take the board through the site plan application from an architectural perspective and to the extent applicable from the architectural perspective, touch on any of the comments from Mr. Chadwick, his letter or the other Township letter from Mr. Hinterstein. Speaker 19 01:04:27 Yes, it it's. It's fairly simple from the architectural perspective, the existing building is on the corner of Kingsbridge road where it does the, the curved loop at present. The rear area is used as a warehouse storage area. There's a physical therapy doctor's office, front left, and the area, the primary area is shown in orange has been empty for some time. It used to be a fitness center, and that's the area that the new tenant would like to take. They have requested a couple of loading docks for miscellaneous deliveries, and that's what we're proposing to do in the front lower right hand corner right here. This is actually a view of that corner space. There's a, there's a transformer located at this location and we would actually put the two loading dock areas in this area, right? We're proposing standard loading docks eight by eight garage doors. Speaker 19 01:05:22 That will be basically dark bronze to sort of blend into the building, no other change to the facade at all. The, the work itself to do those to loading docks is relatively simple there. The base of the of floor slab is actually already up several feet because there's a, a slope leading up to the side of the building. So once we remove the dirt area at this space, it actually levels it out at loading dock level. The site engineer will, will detail further about the work that's being done on that area, but from an architectural perspective, that's really what we're doing. Everything else on the site plan has been planned out by the site engineer who will follow to and to create a, a proper loading area at this space. That's really it from an architectural perspective. Simple. Speaker 1 01:06:12 Thank you. Anyone have any questions about this applicant about this testimony? I should say Speaker 5 01:06:24 Mr. Chairman. Speaker 1 01:06:26 Yes. Just quick, Speaker 5 01:06:27 Quickly. I might have missed it. So the entire building, other than that left hand portion, that's being used by the existing chiropractor gonna be used for warehousing. Speaker 19 01:06:40 Correct? The, the rear area is presently used as storage and warehouse area. And we're looking to make this area in the front, right? Also the, the tenant will not be solid warehouse. However, there is a multiple use to it. There's some office use some other type of area and some storage area. It's just that because of the activity they do, they'd need a regular deliveries that can come on the back of a truck Speaker 5 01:07:08 And then area to the left is gonna remain as it's being used currently. Correct? Speaker 19 01:07:13 At the moment. Yes. Speaker 1 01:07:19 Anything else, Henry? That's it right now. Okay. Any other members of the board? Speaker 20 01:07:23 Oh yes. Steve Weisman. Do we know what's gonna be warehoused here? Speaker 19 01:07:28 I'm sorry. Can you. Yeah. Speaker 20 01:07:30 Do we know what's gonna be warehoused? Speaker 19 01:07:33 I'm not sure the exact area of it. The, the tenant is working with a different architect for the interior performance. So I'm not sure how much of it, they need a storage area and a loading unloading area, but it's not a hundred percent warehouse. Speaker 1 01:07:51 What would they be storing by the way? What, what commodity? Speaker 19 01:07:55 It's a, it's a bio life safety company. So it's small, you know, it's small quantities of things, smaller boxes, as I understand it, Speaker 1 01:08:05 Bo well, no chemicals. Speaker 19 01:08:09 No. Speaker 1 01:08:10 Okay. Anyone else have any questions, Speaker 2 01:08:16 Mr. Spank? You can put your next witness on. Speaker 18 01:08:19 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Our next witness is our project engineer, Mario and Ellie, Mario. I think you're best. So you on Speaker 21 01:08:26 Good evening. How are you all Speaker 2 01:08:28 Good evening. I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? You swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth. Speaker 21 01:08:33 Yes. Speaker 2 01:08:33 Your name and address please. Speaker 21 01:08:35 My name is Mario. I Nelli. I work for Berry. My address is 600 par road, Parsippany, New Jersey, and I'm the manager of the land development services at our company. Speaker 2 01:08:47 Thank you Speaker 21 01:08:52 To give you a benefit of my qualifications. I graduated from N G I T in 1993, with my bachelor's in civil engineering. My master's in civil engineering, 2001. I've appeared in front of numerous boards. I've been a licensed civil engineer in your Speaker 2 01:09:09 Credentials defined, sir. Please Speaker 21 01:09:10 Proceed. Thank you. So I, I think the best way to do, to do this real quick is just to pick up on and I'm gonna be sharing my screen. And right now I'm only sharing things that have been submitted. So it's my understanding. I don't, I should not have to market. Speaker 2 01:09:29 It was submitted with the original package. Yes, it does not need to be separately marked. Speaker 21 01:09:34 So I just, I just wanna make sure you're seeing the right screen. I always get nervous. Cause you have multiple screens here. You see the drawing up here right now. Speaker 2 01:09:43 We see a, Speaker 21 01:09:44 Okay, great. So just to give an overview, the campus, like it said, so it was mentioned by, by the architect is Kingsbury road actually wraps 90 degrees. The site currently, this is the existing building I'm highlighting on C 1 0 3. There's multiple entrances to the site. There's three along, I would say the north side of Kingsbridge and there's one on the south. So I'll call it Southeast corner. The revisions that we're talking about doing here is basically when they, we were looking at a place for, to place a loading dock. This was a natural location because the grade outside is almost exactly what we need. It was a little off, but almost exactly what we needed to create a recessed loading dock to give the proper four feet for the loading dock along the building. So what we wanted to then do is look at, you know, the type of truck, which is we've designed it for WB 50. Speaker 21 01:10:45 And what that did is when we had looked at the accessing out of the, in and out of the bill, the site, we said, okay, well, we're gonna have to modify some curb island to make sure we can efficiently move around the CA move around the site safely and with the existing parking and not cause any problems, you know, with conflicts, with existing parking stalls or traffic maneuvering. So basically what I'm gonna show real quick is what we did here is we looked at the vehicles. This is exiting, this is entering. So basically the vehicles would come in WB 50, they would be able to drive in. And basically we eliminated the parking in this area here. So WB 50 can pull in and back into the two, one of the two spaces. What that required us to do on, on a way out is basically just gonna go and around. Speaker 21 01:11:40 So what that did when we looked at it is we basically said, okay, we need to shave a portion of the island off on one side, which we lost two parking spaces. We had to shave a little bit of this island off and we then had to add the loading docks. And we had to Stripe out a couple of parking spaces to allow for safe and efficient maneuvering of the, of the WB 50. And so one of the things we noticed too, is we were gonna increase in pervious coverage ever so slightly to put the loading docks in. So to try to address, you know, storm water management in, in impervious coverage, through land cover management, we actually increase the islands. So we, we end up net reducing impervious coverage by the project by roughly I think it's 63 or 65 square feet. So what we're trying to do is basically create a safe maneuvering, you know, for the truck while not impacting or adversely impacting storm water. Speaker 21 01:12:38 The only real change in maneuvering is that this is a two way aisle right now. They would, this has got plenty of room to actually accommodate two way, but to be when the trucks are in the loading dock, they would be sticking out. So we're gonna make this a do not enter and basically make it a one that direct the traffic around the, where the loading dock is going to occur. You can see, we left a lot of room to make sure that this would safely operate. So in essence, we're gonna do is we're gonna lose 35 spaces to accommodate this, but we're still exceeding the requirement by quite a bit. So the required number of spaces would be 70 and the proposed would still be at 2, 218. So from a, from a logistical perspective, in a maneuvering perspective, it really has very little impact on the overall site except the area right in front of a loading dock. And it also we've accommodated any necessary traffic maneuvering that we would have to do. I, in our opinion, to accommodate these trucks and safely keep the traffic flowing around the, the loading dock and also to continue to provide the number of spaces, both standard spaces and handicap spaces. Speaker 21 01:13:56 So in general, that's really, we're not exacerbating really anything when it comes to zoning, you know, the impervious coverage stays the same. The building's not being modified. The parking is conforming. So in general, all we're doing is basically some minor site changes to accommodate the WB 50 and just to accommodate the maneuvering of the loading back. Okay. And that's the overview, I believe there was a couple of reports issued. Speaker 22 01:14:31 We Speaker 21 01:14:31 Really don't have any issues with anything in the reports. There was a question about the, whether Speaker 22 01:14:38 The, Speaker 21 01:14:39 The physical therapy was gonna remain. I believe that was addressed during the architect's testimony, Speaker 21 01:14:46 The storm water management I had, I, I believe have addressed by the fact that we are reducing impervious coverage. There was a question about the dry well, and basically we have proposed a dry well, because the, the way, the, the way it works out, this actually drains back towards the building. We're gonna install a trench drain and we're gonna install a dry, well, that's actually quite oversized. And the one comment was about, can we send the overflow to the inlet? Well, the inlets quite a distance away. So I like to work with your engineer to maybe figure out maybe a way of, you know, thinking about how to handle this, not having to pipe at a hundred feet, but maybe providing multiple points of discharge and maybe even actually installing a small inlet that would allow the bubble off. Because if, if we did, if we were able to pitch this loading dock towards the parking lot, we would've, but because the finish floor was fixed and the parking lot was fixed, there was really no way to do that. And if we were able to do it, that that runoff would just simply dream across and go into the gutter. So we're trying to maintain that same approach, but we are proposing a 10 foot diameter infiltration, I'm sorry, sea pit. That's only really catching the area associated with the loading docks. So it's, it's pretty, it's, it's got a significant size to area ratio for what we're collecting. Speaker 21 01:16:15 All his other comments. I believe about landscaping. We absolutely provide more detail on the landscaping. We will absolutely provide on the replacement trees. I believe we are removing three trees to accommodate these improvements. We will absolutely give him the types and species. And there was also some other comments about inspecting the curbs, both on the street and also on the site I've inspected. 'em I didn't see really any issues, but I have no problem working with the engineer to see if he concur with that assessment. And I also believe from an engineering perspective, I think the majority of the remaining comments really had to do with the landscaping. And we've gonna make a commitment tonight that we would provide a detailed landscape plan that would address all his concerns with, with the species and types and the replacements and the additional street trees that he was requesting. And, and other things like that. There was another report from Mr. Chadwick. I believe we have no issues with anything in his report. So I'll let that just stand that we will address or comply with that report's requirements. And that's really all I have. Okay. Speaker 1 01:17:31 Starting with Mr. Hinterstein first, are you satisfied with the testimony just given to Henry? Speaker 5 01:17:37 Yeah. For the most part, I don't have concerns about the dry well, and again, a concentrated pipe justing out in that one location and what that may do in the wintertime. Perhaps again, it can be piped out in the other direction, perhaps with B that go out into the water landscape, that area before it, maybe then cascades into the parking lot. But again, I'm sure the engineer would be more than happy to work with us on that and coming up solution. But the other concern is, is there is still the physical therapy chiropractor component of this building that's remaining. And my concern is, is, I don't know if we've moved the handicap basis further away, or it appears that they may have always been in that location because there is no ramp in the front of the building. So with this portion of the building now being converted to warehouse or warehouse slash office, how does somebody that may need to access the physical therapy slash chiropractor area in a wheelchair or with some kind of visibility from the ADA spaces to the, that side of the building, you know, are they crossing through a functioning warehouse? Speaker 5 01:19:01 I mean, that, that's a concern. And then the other concern is, I don't know if we focused on, I imagine that you're in agreement that you're gonna comply with the state's EV EV charging station ordinance. Speaker 21 01:19:15 Yes, absolutely. Speaker 5 01:19:18 Okay. Go back to the ADA aspect of the, and the existing physical therapy, the building and how people that need that ramp or need to access the building in a wheelchair or some type of disability, a to point B that Speaker 21 01:19:43 I can't really comment on the interior of the building. So what you're saying is if they parked here, they went up this ramp here, they entered here, how would they get here? Speaker 5 01:19:53 Correct. Speaker 0 01:19:54 The entrance. So not to, I've been over there. The entrance is around that Speaker 5 01:20:01 Right now. Speaker 0 01:20:02 Sorry, Jim, Laura Buckley. Okay. The, for the physical therapy place is where that circle is all the way to the left of the site. There's no way that you're gonna be able to walk through over there. I go there regularly. Speaker 9 01:20:21 You know, we, we've got almost twice the amount of parking required for these uses as part of the review of the landscaping that I agree with the comments of the expert in Henry, there must be a place where handicap spaces closer to the entrance without there's not gonna be any deficiency of parking resulting from that, but I, I'm Speaker 5 01:20:51 Not Cahn concerned about the parking John I'm concerned that Speaker 9 01:20:57 I would generally, Speaker 5 01:20:58 There's no ramp in that front there's lot of stairs. Speaker 9 01:21:03 Yeah. They may have to go to ramp, Speaker 1 01:21:04 Have to build one. Yeah. Speaker 9 01:21:06 Yep. Yeah. I would. I would suggest that you make, if the board approves this, make it subject to their agreement, to comply with the reports and to relocate the handicap spaces or a few to a reasonable proximity Speaker 1 01:21:26 Right there. I get it. I agree. Speaker 9 01:21:30 Instead of trying to do it at whatever time it is tonight, you know, let them sit down and kind of figure it out. Speaker 21 01:21:38 I'm sure we can figure out a way to accommodate that. I would have to look at it more detail, but if the board chokes to act positively on this application, I would have no problem working with the board professionals to figure that out. Speaker 1 01:21:51 Okay. Any other comments, John? No. Okay. Any other members of the board have any comments? Speaker 18 01:21:58 I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, if I made just a quick question in terms of that too, just I would ask just for the record too, that obviously the, the physical therapist is a tenant and there is a chance at some point there least will expire or run out. So if we can just kind of make part of that condition, that we do it in a logical way to make it make sense for everybody. Obviously Speaker 1 01:22:18 I'll let people on a bigger pay scale than me make that decision. So we'll figure it out. Speaker 18 01:22:22 Absolutely. Speaker 1 01:22:23 Okay. Any other members of the board have any questions for this expert is expert. Okay. Proceed, Mrs. Speaker 18 01:22:35 That Speaker 1 01:22:35 Concludes summary, if you want. Speaker 18 01:22:36 Sure. Just a quick Speaker 1 01:22:37 Mr. Dacey. Could you stop sharing your screen, your screen? Oh, I'm Speaker 21 01:22:41 Really sorry about that. Speaker 1 01:22:42 No, that's okay. Speaker 21 01:22:44 There you Speaker 1 01:22:44 Go. Thank you. Speaker 18 01:22:47 Just to briefly summarize that up. Concludes our testimony for the reasons we provided by the experts tonight would ask that the board look favorably upon our application and grant the relief requested. Speaker 1 01:22:58 Thank you. Any members of the board have any comments or questions about this application hearing none. I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions or comments about this application? Buckley? Speaker 0 01:23:13 No one Chairman. Speaker 1 01:23:14 Okay. Close the public portion. I'd make a motion to approve this application with the comments and testimony that was put forth tonight. Can I a second, second? Okay. Call roll. Okay. Cold Speaker 0 01:23:29 Mr. Weisman. Speaker 2 01:23:30 Yes. Speaker 0 01:23:32 Mr. Patel. Yes. Mr. Haka. Yes. Mr. Mitterando. Speaker 1 01:23:38 Yes. Speaker 0 01:23:38 And Chairman CA Speaker 1 01:23:39 Yes, Speaker 2 01:23:42 We will this at our next meeting on August 11th. Thank you very much, everyone greatly Speaker 1 01:23:48 Appreciate it. Good night, gentlemen. Thank you. Let's move on. Item number 15 at the option above resolutions from the regular meeting of June 23rd, 2022. Speaker 2 01:23:57 First resolution is ring Patel. This application was approved. Mr. Weisman. Speaker 1 01:24:03 You muted Steve? Yes. Speaker 2 01:24:05 Okay. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Haka Speaker 0 01:24:11 Broke up. Tim. Speaker 2 01:24:13 Mr. Haka? Yes. Mr. Mitterando. Speaker 1 01:24:17 Yes. Speaker 2 01:24:18 Chairman Cahill. Speaker 1 01:24:19 Yes. Speaker 2 01:24:20 Next is N Y SS a. This was 1 35 Fleming street. Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Dacey. Yes. Mr. Mitterando. Yes. Mr. Cahill. Speaker 1 01:24:33 Yes. Speaker 2 01:24:34 Next is 28 Howard street, which was approved with conditions. Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Haka? Yes. Mr. Mitterando. Yes. Chairman Cahill. Speaker 1 01:24:52 Yes. Speaker 2 01:24:53 Next is mark ban. This application was partially approved and partially denied Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Mitterando. Speaker 1 01:25:07 Yes. Speaker 2 01:25:08 Chairman Cahill. Speaker 1 01:25:09 Yes. Speaker 2 01:25:10 Those are all the resolutions I have for you because we did Lamar and sing hall earlier. Speaker 1 01:25:15 Gotcha. Okay. Let's move to item. 16 adoption of minutes from the regular meeting of June 23rd, 2022. All those in favor. Aye. Aye. All well opposed. Thank you. I'd make the motion to adjourn before we adjourn. I would personally like to thank Laura Buckley for joining us from her vacation. Very dedicated employee and the residents of Piscataway did not know how good they have it with someone like you helping us out. So appreciate it. Everyone have a great night and we'll talk to you soon. I will not see you in August. I'm gonna be on vacation, but I'm sure you're in good hands with Mr. Weisman. Speaker 0 01:25:49 Oh, you're telling me now. Okay. Thanks. Speaker 1 01:25:51 Well, I'm just gonna tell you on the 10th of August, take you real trouble for you. Speaker 0 01:25:56 I'd rest your week. Everybody. Speaker 1 01:25:58 You take care guys. Bye. Right. Married Speaker 0 01:26:00 Everyone. Good evening. Thanks.