Transcript for Piscataway Zoning meeting on October 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 00:00:02 All right, Chairman, you're on. Got Speaker 1 00:00:04 It. 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 Bolton Board in the municipal building Notice made available to the Township clerk notice sent to the Courier News and the star ledger. Will the clerk please call the role Speaker 0 00:00:22 Mr. Weisman? Here. Mr. Tillery? Here. Mrio Speaker 2 00:00:27 Uhrin. Speaker 0 00:00:28 Mr.. Dacey. Mr. Haka? Here. Mr. Mitterando? Here. Mr. Ali? Here. And Chairman Cahill. Speaker 1 00:00:38 Here. Will everyone please stand and salute the flag, which is right over my shoulder here. Speaker 2 00:00:46 Allegiance Nation, Speaker 1 00:01:01 Are there any to our agenda? Speaker 2 00:01:04 Yes, there are. The application of Calvin 18 seven West Fit Street is being adjourned until October 20th, 2022 with no further notice by the, Speaker 1 00:01:14 Okay. Speaker 2 00:01:16 Also, the application of Will five 40 Stelton Road is being adjourn until October 20th, 2022 with no further notice. With the exception that they must notify middle Barbara. Speaker 0 00:01:29 Yeah, Speaker 2 00:01:29 Those are all change that I have. Speaker 0 00:01:31 You keep going out Mr. Cahn, when you turn your head, Kinneally hear you. Speaker 1 00:01:35 Your mic's cutting out when you turn. Speaker 0 00:01:37 Yeah, when you, when you're looking forward and talk. You're good. Turn too much. It starts going out. You're audio. I'm sorry. Speaker 2 00:01:43 I'll try and look forward. Speaker 0 00:01:45 Thank you. I'm Speaker 1 00:01:46 Sorry. Please do. Okay, let's start the evening. Let's go to item number 5 21 ZB 81 v Za. Speaker 2 00:01:55 Is Mr. Perza present? Mr. Perza mute. Speaker 1 00:02:05 Are you on your iPhone? You muted. I believe Speaker 3 00:02:15 You hear me? Speaker 1 00:02:16 There you go. Speaker 2 00:02:19 Mr.. Dacey? Speaker 3 00:02:21 Yes. Me. Speaker 2 00:02:22 Okay. I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? You swear the testimony you're about to give the truth. Speaker 3 00:02:28 Okay. Speaker 2 00:02:30 Your address please. Speaker 3 00:02:33 That's 14 West three. Speaker 2 00:02:39 Okay. Could you explain to the board what you'd like to do here? Speaker 3 00:02:44 Sorry. Say, Speaker 2 00:02:45 Explain to the board why you're here at the zoning board. What, what do you wanna do? Speaker 3 00:02:49 I, I do the Barrs for the, I wanna make edition in, in my house. Speaker 2 00:02:57 Mr. Chairman, you may wanna talk to Mr. Hinterstein about this. He raised certain issues in his report. Absolutely. Henry, would you please address your site impact? Speaker 4 00:03:08 Really? It seems like the main items are, obviously the existing vinyl has to be, There's an area where the fence is located, I believe, in the right of way. And it has to be relocated outside the right of way. We, we do not allow fences to be located in the right of way. So one of those items is that, that the fence be relocated. I don't really have any issue with the, the, with the addition due, the fact that it's sort of adjacent to the existing home. You just have two front yards here. It's a corner property with two front yards lot. The only issue I really have is the, the pool. I'm not sure need it's, Is the pool still there, Mr. Perza? Speaker 2 00:04:04 Is the pool still there? Mr. Perza? Speaker 3 00:04:08 I'm sorry, what I say Speaker 2 00:04:09 Is the pool still there? Speaker 3 00:04:11 Yeah. Speaker 4 00:04:20 You know, it appears that the pool is less than 10 feet from the stu property line. Do you know how far it is from the side property line? Speaker 3 00:04:30 We have a 20 Speaker 4 00:04:39 How far it is from the side property line Speaker 3 00:04:44 That's supposed, I, Speaker 4 00:04:50 Again, it's, it's tough to discern from this, from this survey cuz there's no dimensions given, I mean, if I had to given my best guess, I would have to say that the pool is closer to seven or eight feet from the side property line. Perhaps we wanna err on the side of caution and provide a variance for the, for the pool, the side property line of seven feet. And I think we'd be safe with that for an existing pool. I don't really see any issues with it above ground pool. And I think that covers all the variances that would be needed. Speaker 2 00:05:36 Project. Ok. Mr. Peri, do you understand that you're gonna have to your out the right of way? Speaker 3 00:05:45 The front or Speaker 4 00:05:49 The, Speaker 3 00:05:52 So we have to remove this, Speaker 4 00:05:55 You have to move it out of the of way. You have to move it so that it's on your property. You have to move it back about one to two feet. That it's not in the Township right of way. Speaker 3 00:06:07 Okay. You say something, the pool, We don't have to pool anymore. When, when after I buy the house, I take the pool out, Speaker 4 00:06:19 The pool's not there. That's what I asked. Speaker 1 00:06:21 Yeah. Yeah. You said earlier that the pool was there, Mr. Goomer. So there is no pool there? Speaker 3 00:06:26 No, there's no pool. I take it out after I buy the house, I'll take it out. Speaker 1 00:06:31 Okay. Speaker 4 00:06:32 Scratch that variance. Speaker 1 00:06:33 There's the variance. Speaker 2 00:06:33 Got it. So the only condition would be the relocation of fence out of the right of way. Speaker 4 00:06:39 Or you could remove it. That's up to you. Speaker 3 00:06:42 I can take it out. Right? I I I I'll remove for the two foot inside my property, right? Yeah. Okay. Speaker 1 00:06:52 That's fine. Speaker 2 00:06:53 Mr. Chairman, you may wanna open it to the public if there are no more questions. Speaker 1 00:06:56 I was gonna ask if anybody on the board had any other questions for this application? Seeing none, I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any comments or questions for this applicant? Buckley? Speaker 0 00:07:09 No. One. Chairman. Speaker 1 00:07:10 Okay. Hearing, seeing none, I'm gonna close it to the public portion and I would make a motion to approve this application with the agreed upon conditions by Mr. Perza. Can I get a second? Speaker 2 00:07:23 I'll second it. Speaker 3 00:07:24 Okay. Speaker 0 00:07:25 Who was that? Speaker 2 00:07:26 Mr. Hey, Dugin. Speaker 0 00:07:28 Okay. Thank you. You gotta see your name. Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mrio? Speaker 1 00:07:36 Yes. Speaker 0 00:07:38 Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. El? Speaker 4 00:07:43 Yes. Speaker 0 00:07:43 And Chairman. Cao? Speaker 1 00:07:45 Yes. Speaker 2 00:07:46 Mr. Perza, your application has been approved. We will memorialize it in a written document at our next meeting and we'll send that document to you. You'll need that for your permits. Speaker 3 00:07:55 Okay? Speaker 2 00:07:55 Good luck. Speaker 3 00:07:56 Thank you. Speaker 1 00:07:57 Good night Mr. Perza. Speaker 3 00:07:59 Thanks. Speaker 1 00:07:59 All right, let's move ahead to item number 6 22 dash ZB dash 80 New singular wireless. Speaker 5 00:08:07 Yeah. Hi, this is Judy Fairweather from Pinless Halper and Chris Quinn is my partner and he is not here this evening. He's at another hearing. So before you seeking an interpretation, because what we have proposed to upgrade the existing site fits under federal law 64 0 9. So I was going to ask my engineer, Dan, Speaker 2 00:08:29 If I could jump in. Ms. Fairweather seen you in some time. Speaker 5 00:08:33 I know Speaker 2 00:08:35 The board has seen a lot of these applications. I will note that the board has the structural analysis and the RF report that you submitted. Generally, if you represent to the board that there are no new variances and that you comply with the statutes, that's usually enough for the board and we can dispense the need for testimony. Speaker 1 00:08:56 Absolutely. Speaker 5 00:08:57 I can absolutely say that there. That we comply with the original resolution and that there is nothing new. And the structural you got and the reports I gave you is all of it. Speaker 1 00:09:11 Awesome. I don't think we need to have any other comments at that point. Mr. Speaker 2 00:09:16 Chairman, it certainly appears is that they've submitted all of documentation necessary to show that they comply with the statutes that allow for an exemption from site plan. Speaker 1 00:09:24 I thank you for your brevity, ma'am. Any other members of the board have any questions about this application? Hearing none, I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions about this application or comments? Speaker 0 00:09:39 No. One Chairman. Speaker 1 00:09:39 Thank you Miss Buckley. I'm gonna close the public portion and make a motion to approve this application. Can I get a second? I'll second it. Thank you. Speaker 0 00:09:59 Mr.? Dacey here. Here. I don't know when he showed up. Speaker 1 00:10:02 Welcome to the party. Speaker 0 00:10:05 Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Regio? Speaker 1 00:10:11 Yes. Speaker 0 00:10:11 Mr. Bla? Speaker 1 00:10:13 Yes. Speaker 0 00:10:13 Mr. Hidaka? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. And Chairman Kale? Speaker 1 00:10:18 Yes. Speaker 5 00:10:19 I have one quick question. Thank you so much. My guys wanna start on the modification. Can they go ahead and I believe they've already applied for their building permit and now that I've appeared in front of you, pick it up before you do a resolution, Speaker 2 00:10:33 You'll have to talk to Dawn about that. Okay, great. But the, the resolution will be on for the next meeting. Speaker 5 00:10:38 And when's your next meeting? Speaker 2 00:10:40 Two weeks. Speaker 5 00:10:41 Oh, great. Hey, thanks so much. Have a nice night. Speaker 1 00:10:44 Thank you Mayor. Have a great night. Let's move along to item number 8 22 ZB dash 74 v. Sadaf. Are you Kali? Speaker 2 00:10:54 Is Sadaf are you Kali? Present. Speaker 6 00:10:56 Present. Good evening everyone. Speaker 2 00:10:58 Good evening. I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Yes. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth? Speaker 6 00:11:05 Yes. Speaker 2 00:11:06 Your name and address please. Speaker 6 00:11:08 Kh name, address. Nine Wembley Place, Piscataway, New Jersey. Speaker 2 00:11:15 Thank you. Could you explain to the, what you'd like to do here? Speaker 6 00:11:19 We have an existing back fence and behind that fence is Butler's Lane. We'd like to place side fence on both sides of the house. It's like a shaped, like a trapezoid. And we have two front yards. That's what it counts at. Visibly. It seems like a backyard, but we came to know after we bought the house that it's considered two front yards. So we would just like to put a six foot vinyl privacy fence Speaker 7 00:11:53 On both sides. Speaker 1 00:11:55 Okay, thank you. Henry, could you address any issue we might have? Speaker 4 00:11:59 There really aren't any issues with this application. This is a, one of these applications where they, the applicant has two front yards. Technically they have the front yard on Wembley and then they also have the, the Metler lane behind them. So to that reason, they're enclosed their rear property fences actually along the Metler lane right of way. But it is actually quite a bit of distance off of Mettler's Lane. So there's no issues with this application? I think it could be thes, could be granted existing. Is there. Speaker 1 00:12:40 Got it. Thank you. Any other members of the board have any questions for this applicant or application? Hearing none, I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions or comments about this application? Speaker 7 00:12:53 Yes. Hi. Hello everyone. My name is Chaill Hasan. I live on five Wembley Place. I'm, Speaker 2 00:13:01 I need to swear you in. You Speaker 1 00:13:03 Ma'am, Speaker 2 00:13:04 You swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth? Speaker 7 00:13:07 Yes. Speaker 2 00:13:08 And please proceed name, address again please. Speaker 7 00:13:13 My name is Shaista, S H A I S T A. Last name Hassan, h a s a n. And I live on, I'm the neighbor of the, of Sadaf, who's the applicant. And I live on five Wembley Place, Piscataway, New Jersey. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker 2 00:13:31 Your comments please? Speaker 7 00:13:33 Yeah, I just have a minor comment. I don't have any problem because I'm the next door neighbor is just, since the property has only the area, if you look at the ble place is like, there are only five houses there and it is like a kind of like cul-de-sac. So, and the houses yard are in the angler position, so nothing is like straight line. So when she will put the, the fence in the, from starting from the front of the house and going all the way in the back, it looks, it looks very diff difficult and it looks, it'll spoil the look of the neighborhood and the property. Especially for my, for me, because I'm very close to her. So I recommend if she can start the fence from the back of the house. So, which will be, because she's going to install a six feet fence and it'll be solid vinyl wall. So it'll look very, very, the area will look very difficult. Very, very different actually. So my suggestion to the neighbor is if she can put it a little bit in the back backside of the house, it'll be, it'll be good. I, I really do want her to, to enjoy the safety for her kids. I know she has small kids, but this is my recommendation. Speaker 1 00:14:49 Thank you ma'am. Appreciate it. Thank you so much. Any anyone else? Laura? Speaker 0 00:14:57 Oh, I'm sorry. It's Speaker 9 00:14:58 Okay. Speaker 0 00:14:59 No, no one else, Jim. Speaker 1 00:15:00 Okay, that being said, I'll close the public portion. I'm gonna make a motion to approve this application the way that we was discussed with Henry. Can I get a second? I'll, Okay. I think that was Mr. Hucker again. Speaker 0 00:15:20 No, I got you up this time. I, Speaker 1 00:15:21 Okay, well yeah, spread. Spread the wealth. Speaker 0 00:15:24 Gotta break it up a bit. Sure. Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mrio? Yes. Mr.. Blount? Yes. Mr. A daca? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. And Chairman Cahill? Speaker 1 00:15:39 Yes. Your Speaker 2 00:15:40 Application has been approved. We will memorialize it in a written document at our next meeting and send a copy of that document to you. You'll need that to get your permits. Speaker 0 00:15:48 Thank you very much. Speaker 1 00:15:49 Thank you ma'am. Have a good night. Let's move on to item number 10 22 ZB 41 V 100 Lakeview Rear llc. Speaker 9 00:16:05 Yes. Good evening. Chairman Lawrence Sachs on behalf of the applicant. 100 Lakeview Rear llc. This property is located block 1 46, lot 45.01. It's located in your R 7.5 zone. The property is a little over two acres. It's about 2.2 acres and we're here this evening. Mr. Chairman and board members two convert an existing single family house to a pool house slash cabana, which will be accessory to a brand new house that's going to be constructed on the lot. And that's a fairly sizable new house that's being constructed. We need some bulk variances and that's why we're in front of the board. So there's four of them to be specific, all of which are preexisting nonconformities. But the first one is for maximum accessory structure height. Your ordinance limits it at 18 feet. The existing house that we're looking to convert to the pool house is 24 feet. Speaker 9 00:17:12 So we need variance relief for that maximum accessory structure. Size, again, limited to 625 square feet. Again, the house is a little over 2000 square feet frontage on a private street. This is an interesting lot. It's the rear lot of 100 Lakeview Avenue. There's actually a driveway easement that access, that provides access to this property out to Lakeview across the lot that's in the front. So we don't have any frontage on any private streets, but there is an existing driveway easement. And I know in Mr. He's report he wanted to confirm that that exists and we will certainly provide that for the review and also for Mr. Kene. And lastly, a requirement that the driveway be paved. The existing driveway is a stone driveway. It's been like that since time and memorial since this house was constructed. So we need variance relief for that. I, I will address Mr. Hinterstein report. I do have two witnesses who will testify this evening. Mr. Kinneally. One of them is the, the engineer, Deborah damico. And I also have our architect Kermit Hughes. So if I can, if I can have Ms. Damico sworn in and she'll just briefly give you an overview of the, of the site and she'll indicate where all these structures are located. I think she, You're Speaker 2 00:18:39 Present. Speaker 9 00:18:41 There she is. Okay. Speaker 2 00:18:44 Ms. Damico, could you raise your right hand? You swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth? Speaker 10 00:18:49 I do. Speaker 2 00:18:50 Thank you. Your name and address please? Speaker 10 00:18:53 Debbie Damico. Damico Engineering 68 North Bridge Street and somewhere. Speaker 2 00:18:59 Thank you. Speaker 9 00:19:00 Mayor Damico, if you can give the board the benefit of your professional qualifications and background. Speaker 10 00:19:05 Sure. I'm actually a graduate high school. I went to college at Lafayette College and I'm a graduate with a Bachelor of Science in engineering in civil engineering From Lafayette, I have, I'm licensed engineer in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania. I'm also a certified municipal engineer. Speaker 2 00:19:25 I think we're, we're pretty good Mr. Sachs. Speaker 9 00:19:27 Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Mr. Dacey, can you maybe share the screen and just show the, the plot plan? Do you have that accessible? Speaker 10 00:19:36 Yeah, it'll take me a second. Speaker 9 00:19:38 Okay. And I, that was provided to the board. That was part of the submission of Mr. Dacey. So I'm not sure we have to mark, We Speaker 2 00:19:49 Don't, we don't have to separately. Speaker 9 00:19:51 Okay. Speaker 10 00:19:53 It's just make the, So can everybody see that? Hope they did the right screen. Speaker 9 00:20:31 There we go. That's it. Okay. Speaker 10 00:20:35 So Speaker 10 00:20:39 Out here on the left side, which is north, so north is facing to the left. That is where the frontage is for Lakeview Avenue. And so here is where the driveway comes in. I believe this is the easement. So the driveway actually may or may not be in the easement. And that has to be verified by a land surveyor, which I am not a subcontract my land survey. And so he can verify where that is. So here's the existing house way back here and let me just pull in a little bit. So you can see, you come in the existing stone driveway and here's the house and that's the existing house. The house will remain, and my understanding for the use of that existing house, because it's adjacent to the pool, would be a place for changing of bathing suits, drying off anything adjacent to the pool as well as use as a man cave. Speaker 10 00:21:46 So there would be tv, pool table, that kind of thing. In the existing house there would be no bedrooms in there and it would only be used for recreational and man cave purposes. Here would be the proposed house. There's an existing stone area here off the driveway that would serve to provide access to the garages. The septic has been tested and it would be located in front of the house. And it has a kind of a, a half walkout, if you will, up the stairs out the back of the house towards the, So that's basically it. There are wetlands associated with this stream. And you see these dots, so, so W one o W two, so three, that's the limit of the wetlands. The existing home is outside the wetlands. However it is in the transition area. To remove that house, we would have to go to DEP and get all sorts of permits because there is not a general permit for removing a legally existing structure. Speaker 10 00:22:57 We could do a transition area averaging, but that wouldn't allow the, the transition area to be replacing the house. So in order to do that, that would, we would have to give transitionary elsewhere, which doesn't make an environmental since to have transition area where there is no, So it makes sense to leave the house from an environment you don't want to, You're only 29 feet from the center of that, that stream back there. So you really, really don't wanna disturb that if you don't have to. So it makes sense from an environmental impact to allow that house to remain, especially with the reduced use of the house from a main structure and a main house for the family to being just an occasional use for like a man cave and social service, social interactions such as with the pool. Speaker 9 00:23:57 So Ms. Deko, so just, I know there's four variances we need. One of them is for maximum accessory structure height. The height, the height of this house is 24 feet. 18 is, is permitted. Same thing with the accessory structure. Size, 625 square feet is permitted. And this house I think is a 2068. Now we don't have any frontage on any private streets. That's correct. Speaker 10 00:24:21 That's correct. There is no frontage. Like I said, there's just the access driveway. Okay. And the closest residents would be facing the street to the west, which I, it is Fairview. So there, and so there are quite a distance away from this dwelling and this willing has been there for, for a long, long time. I took a quick look back@historicaerials.com and I saw that it was on the aerial, very clearly shown from 1970s, from the late sixties. It looked like it was there, but I, you know, I can't say exactly the same structure. So this is been there for a very long time. Speaker 9 00:25:07 Okay. And in terms of the driveway, it's a stone driveway which I'm assuming has been there since, since the property was, was constructed because obviously that easement's been there as well to access the property. Is that correct? Speaker 10 00:25:18 Yeah, and as a matter of fact, in cruising the historic aerials, I could see the driveway in what appeared to be as a tree farm. There were little dots in a grid from way back in the forties and you could see that location of the driveway from there. Okay. That driveway's been there for longer than the house, I think. Speaker 9 00:25:39 Okay. Now in terms of, again, just to clarify, the property doesn't sit in the wetlands, but it's in the wetlands transition area. But because presumably this house was constructed before we even had wetland delineations in the state of New Jersey, right now, obviously it's not required to be taken down. If it were, if it were to be demolished, obviously that would trigger some dep permits and also possibly trigger some impact on the wetlands. Is that correct? Speaker 10 00:26:07 That is correct. That's correct. It is permit. Speaker 9 00:26:10 Okay, Ms. Chairman, I don't have any further questions of Ms. Damico. I have one other witness. Well, actually, Speaker 1 00:26:17 Lemme see. Let me see if any of my board members have any questions. Cause I, I do as well. Speaker 9 00:26:21 Sure, no Speaker 1 00:26:22 Problem. My, my question is, Mr. Damico, how many, how many bedrooms is the existing structure? Speaker 10 00:26:28 I'll let the architect answer that. Speaker 9 00:26:30 Oh, Speaker 1 00:26:30 Okay. I thought you knew. Okay, no problem. I'll wait on that. Does any other members of the board have any questions? Okay, Mr. Saxon, on your next witness, please. Speaker 9 00:26:40 Sure. Mr. Hughes, if you're there, I know know, I saw you earlier, if you can log in and maybe Debbie, you could take your screen off, take off your, We don't need the site plan any longer. Thank you. Yes, thank you. Okay. Speaker 2 00:26:54 Is Mr. Hughes present? Speaker 11 00:26:55 Yes. Yes. I Speaker 2 00:26:57 Hughes I swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give she'll be the truth? Speaker 11 00:27:03 Yes. Speaker 2 00:27:04 Your name and address please. Speaker 11 00:27:05 My name is Kermit Hughes, 180 5 Myrtle Street, Somerset, New Jersey. Speaker 2 00:27:13 Thank you. Speaker 9 00:27:15 Mr. Hughes, if you can give the board the benefit of your professional qualifications and educational background. Speaker 11 00:27:20 Okay. I am a graduate of University of Florida and I've been working as an architect since oh five. I am licensed in New Jersey and licensed in Florida. I've been in New Jersey for about 12 years. Speaker 9 00:27:40 Okay, thank you. I assume you've testified in front of planning boards and zoning boards in the past, Speaker 11 00:27:45 Other boards? Yes. Not this one, but other boards. Speaker 9 00:27:48 Yes. You can proceed. Mr. Sex. Thank, Thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Hughes, I know you prepared a, a plan, well, you show you prepared a plan which shows the existing building layout, which I'm sure that will indicate how many bedrooms are there now, and then what we're proposing in terms of demolition of walls inside that building. Do you have the ability to screen share that? Speaker 11 00:28:11 Let's see if we can do that. Speaker 9 00:28:15 Okay. There we go. Perfect. Okay. All right. And again, Mr. Kinneally, I think this was shared as an exhibit with the submission, so I Speaker 2 00:28:31 Don't think, does not need to be separately marked then. Speaker 9 00:28:34 Thank you. All right. So Mr. Hughes, I guess the first sheet we're showing here is the existing layout of this house, correct? Speaker 11 00:28:39 Yes, yes. Existing Speaker 9 00:28:41 All. Why don't you describe what's there? Speaker 11 00:28:43 All right, so there's a, a deck. I wrote it as porch. It's no covering on it. There's a deck entrance into a foyer and a living room to your left. There's a dining space here to the right, a pantry space, a mudroom. So there's access from both of these doors into the existing, This is the kitchen. And behind that kitchen there's a, a bathroom next to that laundry, and then down to the basement, the basement is unfinished. Then there's an open space here. We we're calling it a den. It's just kind of a hangout space, access to the living room again. And then the question earlier about number of bedrooms, one to three bedrooms. Speaker 9 00:29:31 Okay. All right. And if you can go to the next sheet. Okay. Show, yeah. That, that shows the, that shows what's being proposed in terms of demolition of walls, if you can exactly. Sure. Just, just indicate what's happening here. Speaker 11 00:29:44 Okay. So all, all of these walls are being removed. The walls here are being removed so that we get to this as one wide open space. And this area that was dining room before, we'll probably wind up with a pool table or, or some kind of table there, just so small. But it will still flow as one large separate, one large non area with a little bit of a kitchen here. Also the, that was existing. Speaker 9 00:30:18 And just to stay with this diagram, I know there was a comment from Mr. Hinterstein in his report today about eliminating the, the kitchen. I'm assuming the kitchen can be eliminated, is that correct? Speaker 11 00:30:34 Yes, the kitchen can be, I think it was as, as was stated, man cave and pool house kind of work. So you tend to want a little bit of a kitchen there. But hey, if it gets him through here, I'm sure he, the owner will. Speaker 9 00:30:49 Okay. Let that go all. So, all right. And also I understand there would be another recommendation of Mr. Hinterstein is a de restriction that this not be used for any other residential purposes other than the pool house slash cabana. And I'm assuming that would be, I know that that's acceptable to the applicant. And I guess the last exhibit maybe is just to show what the outside of the house looks like. I think Speaker 11 00:31:19 This is what we have existing. This face, this side faces away from the, from the street. The street is further that way where the hand is pointing this side is, is more toward the, the wet side of the property. And this side faces the pool. Speaker 9 00:31:41 Okay. Okay. Mr. Chairman, I don't have any further questions of Mr. Used. He's certainly available for any board questions. Speaker 1 00:31:50 Okay, thank you. I have a question. With the main Kay being as large as it's being proposed, any possibility that the applicant would be renting it out to parties or Speaker 9 00:32:03 Now I can answer that. Speaker 1 00:32:04 I mean, Speaker 9 00:32:06 Chairman, I can Speaker 1 00:32:06 Answer. I wouldn't mind signing up myself and be honest with you. Cave kitchen and a Bullard right out the door, you know, where do I sign up? Speaker 9 00:32:13 Yeah, Mr. Chairman, let me let Mele the fears on that. And you know, Mr. Cahn and I have been through this in multiple other towns. When, when you're concerned about this issue, we would agree to a condition that this, this particular structure will not be used for any other residential purposes. So we're not gonna rent it out to anybody, no one's gonna live here. We will agree that we'll put that that into a deed restriction as well. So whatever conditions Mr. Kinneally can think of to make sure that this is strictly going to be a pool house accessory structure, my client would agree to that. And I think by removing the kitchen, I think you've, you've really eliminated any, any possibility of it ever reverting to anything else. So, Speaker 1 00:33:02 Okay. Thank you for that. Henry, would you please address some issues that clarify some questions that the board members might have? Speaker 4 00:33:11 Yeah, I mean, one of the things that, you know, I, I realized here that wasn't in the report is that it appears that they're proposing a septic system for the, for the new home. Perhaps the engineer could elaborate on whether or not the existing home and the new home have city water and city sewer. Because if city sewer and water exist in Lakeview Avenue, the requirement would be for any new structure would have to be tied into city sewer and city water. They were not, I think, get permission for the installation of a new well, or a new septic system. I believe the city sewer existed in Lakeview Avenue and, and there was possibility of Ty into it. So, I mean, that would be, I think a condition of any approval and or should be a condition of any approval. And again, that could be worked out with the engineering department if there's an issue, why they wouldn't be able to find to a city sewer or Henry Speaker 9 00:34:16 Before the engineer. The only, the only concern I have is I don't, how do we, how do we access, Cause I'm kind of landlocked here unless I, unless I get this Speaker 4 00:34:24 Property on an access easement, I would imagine. Yeah, Speaker 9 00:34:26 That's what I'm saying. Yeah. Speaker 4 00:34:29 Probably somehow work through that access easement if it's, like I said, that's one of the reasons I needed the language and that needed to review the language. Okay. It may mean that that easement needs to be upgraded to a access and utility easement or something of that nature if necessary. Okay. But again, I mean, I could see that being a condition and then if there's some legal issues that arise later on, I think that would be for the powers higher than me to figure out what the alternative or the solution would be. You know, my other concern is again, is just the size of this. Again, we have people that come in all the time, buy property, they wanna build a new house on that property. And what they do is they demolish the house. We don't allow for two structures, typically on two residential structures, on a, on a single lot. Speaker 4 00:35:24 I know the talk is that this is being converted to a pool house and that's, that's fine. The problem is our accessory structure requirement is that access structure not be greater than 625 square feet or 25 by 25. This particular case, we're over three times that amount. You know, we're a third higher than what's allowed as an accessory structure. And I understand, you know, there's a cost involved with removing the structure or we're modifying it to reduce the size of it. But I don't see really any reason why the structure could not be modified to comply or more closely comply with the ordinances for the height and the size of the accessory structure. Again, you're coming to us and asking to build this rather large house on the site, which it's fine, it complies looks beautiful. But then to also ask that this 2000 square foot pool house be allowed when 625 square feet. Speaker 4 00:36:24 I just don't see, again, the hardship or reasoning behind it other than the fact that, you know, applicant wants it and wants perhaps big money on the demolition cost. Again, many of the homes in this neighborhood are probably in that 2000 square foot range. So now we're, we're putting up a home that's probably larger than 3000 square feet and adding a 2000 square foot pool house. I just think there's really no hardship where I think a, a sound planning, a reasoning for that pool house to be as large as it is or proposed and why it couldn't be modified to more closely conform with ordinances. It's an expense, but an expense would not be considered a hardship on this particular case. So, I mean, that's, that's my opinion. I just feel like the pool house, I have no problem with the new home. Again, I still have some questioning about whether or not existing pool house stays the transition area without actually providing any the for averaging plan where they would eliminate the, the buffer where the home is and then add that to a different portion of the property. It just seems to make sense if it, you know, whatever size of the pool house is agreed upon or if it's agreed upon to be modified. But again, that's, that's my feeling on this. I I just feel that it's a little bit in, in excessive for a pool house. Again, our ordinance is pretty sound or something near that ordinance requirement would be adequate, you know, three times that amount. I, I don't know about that. Speaker 9 00:38:13 If I, yeah, if I can respond and maybe Debbie, if we could take, Carmen, if you could take this plan off just for a second. Cause I wanna bring Debbie Damico back. Thank you. I'll respond first and then I just have a couple questions to Debbie. I mean, we would love to demolish a house that's probably 60 or 70 years old. This is an older house right now. But the problem, Debbie, if you can maybe just clarify again, is it feasible to even build a smaller structure in the same location? Speaker 10 00:38:45 So no, you, I don't know, would allow you to reconstruct that close to the wetland without jumping through quite the hoops. They probably would want you to relocate it elsewhere on the property. The problem becomes demoing the house. There is no DEP permit that would allow you to just apply for a general permit to take something out of the transition area. You could do a transition area averaging and then you'd have to find elsewhere on the lot place to give back your transition area, which doesn't make environmental sense because the purpose of the transition area is to buffer against the buffer against the wetland. And here you're getting rid of, you're not encroaching closer to the wetland, you're coming outta the wetland. So it's actually the opposite of a transition area averaging that you would be looking for. So we would have to go to the D for, for what's called a yeah, left my mind senior moment. I'm too old. Too young for senior moments. But for an individual, Speaker 4 00:40:00 Individual, regardless, you're gonna, I think regardless you're gonna have to go to the DP for a buffer averaging or general permit to do any modifications to this house. You get that. Speaker 10 00:40:11 But there's a difference in standard for an individual permit versus a general permit or a transition area. Averaging those permits are, I don't wanna say cookie cutter, but they're, they're known, they're fast, they're as fast as DP gets an individual permit is really when they start hounding you. And it's really not, It probably would take a very long time to get for what? And it's for an existing home. I'm sure the homeowner would not construct a home and would not be looking for a variance if this house didn't already exist. But it does exist. It makes sense for it Speaker 4 00:40:59 Personally. Speaker 10 00:41:01 Big enough to subdivide and put two houses on. Speaker 9 00:41:06 I Speaker 4 00:41:06 Wanna ask you to put two houses on that property. Speaker 9 00:41:10 Dogo, let me ask you a question in terms of, I mean, you're familiar with this property. Does anybody even see this house? It, is this gonna have any visual impact where it's located right now as being an accessory pool house or cabana? Speaker 10 00:41:27 No, nobody would know it's there. It it, nobody sees it. Now, I'm sure most people who drive down Lakewood Lakeview Drive or down Fairview don't even see the house. Don't even know it exists really tucked out in the woods. Speaker 9 00:41:48 Okay. Yeah, let just, Henry, let me just respond. I mean I, you know, I, I understand your point. I think if I probably wouldn't even file an application to ask for an access. I knew a new accessory structure, house, accessory structure building of that size. You know, cuz I, I just know that that's not the norm. But again, you know, this is a situation where we're seeking to just utilize an existing structure that's there. We're not looking to necessarily remove it because I think it would pose an issue with the d p, the actual demolition may, I'm not even sure if the demolition's up even gonna be permitted. So this, you know, this house is probably just gonna remain there and, and we'll build the other house and you know, if we don't get the approval, it's just gonna sit there as a structure. Speaker 4 00:42:37 You would never get the approval to build another residential structure on there unless that structure is demolished. Speaker 9 00:42:43 I, I agree. No, I agree with you, but what I'm saying, Yeah, I understand your point. Speaker 4 00:42:47 And I, I can't see why the DP wouldn't want something that's in their transition area. And I've dealt with this for 30 years. I've seen all different kinds of transition area waivers and, and, and, and general permits for wetlands. And I'm telling you that I think they would not have a problem with this structure being shrunk so that there could be a larger transition area. I don't count the house as being part of the existing transition area. Its a structure. There's no environmental advantage of having that house in the wetlands transition area. The idea is to protect the existing wetlands, removing that structure and restoring it to natural vegetation would be much more advantageous leaving, in my opinion, the existing structure in the matter that it is. Now the Speaker 10 00:43:37 Problem is Speaker 4 00:43:38 Modifying, it might be way to go, but I'll leave that up to you guys to make that Speaker 10 00:43:43 There is no general permit to remove a structure. I've been through the general permit list. There is none in the d wetlands rags to remove the structure. Speaker 4 00:43:56 The general waiver, I believe for the transition area, Speaker 10 00:43:59 You can't, there is no permit for it. It would be an individual permit that they would then go back in site. Now we could do a transition area averaging, but this then would no longer be transition area. The transition area would be elsewhere on the lot. Yeah. And environmentally would serve no purpose Speaker 4 00:44:21 Happens all the time. Speaker 10 00:44:25 Usually per, for putting in a structure you're modifying or grading around a structure, you're modifying the transition area not for removing it. There is no permit down at the d p for that application. Speaker 4 00:44:40 Well, I mean I'm not gonna talk for the d I think what would end up happening is you would apply to dep, you would let them know what you wanted to do and if they came back and said you can't do this, or this is what you need to do, whatever the DEP says, it's really their regulation. So I'm not gonna say I, I believe that it could be done whether or not it's, you know, how hard it is or, you know, what's involved. Again, I don't know the exact, you know, order of things and the, the how difficult that may be. But again, that's not really the Township concern is, you know, wanting, I think have that structure be reduced in size or eliminated. Especially if you're gonna put another large residential structure on the property. Speaker 9 00:45:37 Okay. Well, alright, I I understand your, your views on it, Mr. Hinterstein and I mean respectfully. I I think what we're proposing here with that, you know, with the conditions that I'm sure Mr. Cahn would impose on this, i e that the property not be utilized for any residential purposes other than for the homeowners of the primary residents that were going to remove the kitchen, that removing the bedrooms. So there's no, there's no one, there's no no area anybody could sleep and there's no kitchen. So it's, it's, it's really not a usable residential structure, but for the fact that it could be used as a pool house slash recreation room and certainly will agree to with deed restriction. But essentially, Mr. Chairman, I don't have any further witnesses. I know I have Mr. Ings here who's would love to live in the, in the new house on this property with the, with the accessory structure. But certainly we'll leave that up to the board. So, Speaker 1 00:46:44 Mr. Sax, I, I'm a good reader of my board and I kind of know where this is going. It would be aous to you to step back, maybe contact dep, see what your options are, maybe postpone this for a bit. Cause I I really would hate to go to a vote now if you haven't really played all your cards. Speaker 9 00:47:07 Yeah, I mean we could, you Speaker 1 00:47:08 Wanna talk to your client about maybe, Cause otherwise we'll take a vote and I will tell you that we rely heavily upon our Township engineer. Speaker 9 00:47:16 No, I understand. Speaker 1 00:47:17 Okay. So I'm trying to give you, you know, a door out. Speaker 9 00:47:21 No, I understand. And I appreciate that Mr. Chairman, you know, perhaps maybe we carry this. Well let me ask you this. Ms. Damico, do you think we could do a little bit of research on this and provide some more information maybe in writing to Mr. Speaker 1 00:47:37 Documentation what Speaker 9 00:47:37 We need? Yeah, yeah. Is that something we think we could obtain? I certainly could reach out to them and see what happens. Okay. Okay. We look into that sewer and water issue for the new structure as well. And then, and again, the Speaker 1 00:47:52 Easement, the city sewer. Good. Good. Henry, Speaker 9 00:47:57 We could look into that as well. Yeah, I, I don't have a problem in carrying this. Mr. Speaker 1 00:48:01 Chairman. Yeah, Mr. Dacey. I think that'd be best interest in both the Township and to the applicant. Speaker 2 00:48:06 Yes. And we understand the DEP is not gonna get back to them too quickly. So probably pick a date, maybe 60 days out. Speaker 9 00:48:13 Well, we might be able to get a quicker response. I don't know. Maybe give us the date in, in November. I don't know if you have what, what you, November meetings Speaker 2 00:48:22 Are, I think there's only one meeting in November. Yes. Speaker 9 00:48:24 November 10th. Speaker 1 00:48:25 Is it crowded? Not let's, let's put put 'em down for that and hopefully if they can lie to fire on the DEP and we can hear this in a month, it'd be, you know, great for both. Speaker 9 00:48:38 All I, I understand Mr. Chairman and I, I appreciate, appreciate your indulgence. Speaker 2 00:48:43 So, so anyone here on 100 Lakeview Rear llc, you've had 100 Lakeview Avenue. It's gonna be carried to November 10th with no further notice by the applicant. The only notice you're receiving is this announcement here tonight. Speaker 9 00:48:57 Okay. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Mr.. Dacey. Thank you. Thank have a Speaker 2 00:49:01 Good night. Speaker 1 00:49:02 Have a good night. Okay guys, let's move on to item number 11, which is the adoption of resolutions from the regular meeting of September 22nd. Speaker 2 00:49:13 First resolution is Michael Coel. This application was approved. Mr. Weisman. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Blount? Yes. Mr. Haka? Yes. Chairman. Cahill. Yes. Next is Naisha Sinkler. This application was approved Mr. Weisman. Mr. Tillery? Yes. To Regio? Yes. Mr. Blount? Yes. Mr. Haka? Yes. Chairman. Cahill. Yes. Next is Ashock. As a Gary, this application was approved. Mr. Weisman Speaker 1 00:49:50 Muted. Oh, good. Okay. Speaker 2 00:49:53 Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Blount? Yes. Mr. Haka? Yes. Mr. Case or Chairman. Cahill. Speaker 1 00:50:02 Yes. Speaker 2 00:50:04 Next application, man. Vendor. Johnie. This application was approved. Mr. Weisman. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Regio? Yes. Mr. Blount? Yes. Mr. Haka? Yes. Chairman. Cahill. Yes. Next is Richard and Elizabeth Snyder. This application was approved Mr. Weisman. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Blount? Speaker 1 00:50:31 Yes. Speaker 2 00:50:32 Mr. Haka? Yes. Chairman. Cahill. Yes. Next application, JR Ventures, which was approved Mr. Weisman. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Blount? Speaker 1 00:50:45 Yes. Speaker 2 00:50:45 Mr. Yes. Chairman. Cahill. Speaker 1 00:50:48 Yes. Speaker 2 00:50:49 Last application, Christopher Arm. This application was approved Mr. Weisman. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Blount? Speaker 1 00:50:59 Yes. Speaker 2 00:51:00 Mr. Haka? Yes. Chairman Cahill. Yes. Mr. Chairman, can I jump in here for a minute? So several members of the public apparently were on the last application for 100 Lakeview rear. And they have been messaging us. I'm not gonna address their individual comments, but I will say that at the conclusion of the applicants case, then the public will be allowed to ask questions or make comments on their own. But that only happens after the applicant's done and since they're gonna be giving us more information, at that point, the public will have a chance to talk. Speaker 1 00:51:34 Will the public know the rescheduling of the the date? Speaker 2 00:51:39 Yes. We announced that it's November 10th. Speaker 1 00:51:41 Okay, got it. So for all those who were couldn't get through November, we said 11th, Speaker 2 00:51:48 10th, Speaker 1 00:51:50 November 10th. Thank you. Let's go on to item number 12. Adoption of minutes from the regular meeting of September 22nd, 2022. All in favor say aye or Mr. Weisman? Thumbs up. There you go. That's good. To item number 13, which is going to be an entertainment entertaining and offer for adjourn. All those in famous Aye. Speaker 2 00:52:09 Aye. Speaker 1 00:52:12 Aye. Ladies and gentlemen, once again, thank you for coming out and volunteering your time. You amazed me every time. Have a good holiday. Happy Halloween. We'll see you. Speaker 0 00:52:23 We'll see you before Halloween. 27. Don't rush months away. Speaker 1 00:52:31 I heard said he said one meeting and I got all excited. It's one meeting. Speaker 2 00:52:35 November in November. Speaker 1 00:52:37 Shouldn't Yeah. Checks my can't all guys. Great night. Speaker 0 00:52:43 Good everyone. Speaker 2 00:52:45 Okay. Speaker 0 00:52:47 Take care.