Transcript for Piscataway Zoning meeting on September 9 2021

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 00:00:00 Recording in progress. Okay. Almost. There you go, Warren. It's all you.
Speaker 1 00:00:07 Okay. Good evening, everyone. And, uh, 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 board bulletin board of the municipal building notice made available to the township clerk and notice sent to the courier news in the star ledger to the clerk. Please call the roll.
Speaker 0 00:00:33 Mr. Tillery, Mr. Whiteman. I don't think he was coming, but I bought Mr. Reggio. Roy.
Speaker 2 00:00:49 I see.
Speaker 0 00:00:52 Right. Okay. He's here. I see him. Mr. Brown. Mr. Patel, Mr. Mirando here, Mr. Ali. Yes. And vice chair, Mr. Zimmerman here.
Speaker 1 00:01:13 Okay. Well everyone, please stand for the sloop to the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God, indivisible, any members who will be voting tonight?
Speaker 2 00:01:46 Yes. Everyone who answered the role would be eligible to vote.
Speaker 1 00:01:49 Okay, great. Great. Thank you. All right. So we'll start with number five
Speaker 0 00:01:57 Is me chairman
Speaker 1 00:02:00 Terms, sorry,
Speaker 2 00:02:01 But Nelson bell corral. Marcel is off to October 14th. Some notices still remain to be sent. Uh, any of you that received notice you will not receive another notice. Um, and the application of CRS Keswani is also off to October 14th, uh, and they will have to serve additional notices as well. If you received the notice, you will not receive another one. The only thing you're receiving is my announcement here tonight. So those are all the changes I have Mr. Chairman.
Speaker 1 00:02:32 Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Jim. All right, then we'll start with number six, uh, 21 ZB. There's 31 B media bin, Z. I hope I pronounce that name, correct? That's correct.
Speaker 2 00:02:49 Ms. Lindsay, I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth? Yes. Could I have your name and address please?
Speaker 0 00:02:59 The
Speaker 3 00:02:59 Daniel dizzy.
Speaker 2 00:03:03 Thank you. Could you explain to the board where you would like to do here?
Speaker 3 00:03:09 Um, I want to make it an a D sooner now my womb and, um, and I say, go floor. Okay. Um, my ETS is not too well, so cheese helping me sometime when another same.
Speaker 2 00:03:29 Thank you. It says here that you want to not rebuild your garage, is that correct?
Speaker 3 00:03:36 Oh, they got rides for our like, uh, eight years ago, because if a tree falls into the garage and I was very, very thankful for my neighbors. And I know
Speaker 2 00:03:53 You do not want to rebuild that.
Speaker 3 00:03:55 I don't need it.
Speaker 2 00:03:58 Okay. Uh, Mr. Chairman, perhaps we could weigh in with Mr. steam to see what he has to say in this application.
Speaker 1 00:04:04 Yes. Henry, do you have any comments?
Speaker 4 00:04:07 Well, the question was is when the, when the garage fell down, didn't you receive insurance money to?
Speaker 3 00:04:13 No. No, because that garage was, he wasn't back on this year, you know? And, um, but they, they showed that they didn't give me nothing.
Speaker 4 00:04:24 Okay. I mean, there, to be honest with you, I mean, the home is an older home. It was built prior to the ordinance being in place. Um, there's adequate parking on the site, uh, for more than enough vehicles. So I don't see any really big issues, um, with the, with the variance, for the not having the garage.
Speaker 1 00:04:46 Okay. So then we'll open to the board to the board members, have any questions or comments.
Speaker 2 00:04:55 Okay. If the board has no questions, you may want to open it to the public. Yes.
Speaker 1 00:04:58 Open it to the public and the public. Have any questions or comments?
Speaker 0 00:05:07 No one chairman.
Speaker 1 00:05:09 Okay. Then the public portion is closed and then I will make a motion to approve this application.
Speaker 4 00:05:17 Second,
Speaker 0 00:05:24 Mr. Zimmerman. Yes. Mr. Tillery. Yes. Mr. Reggio, right? You're muted.
Speaker 2 00:05:37 Mr. Reggio, could you want me to unmute
Speaker 0 00:05:46 Usually pretty good and use it all problems. There we go. Mr. Reggio. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Patel. Yes. Mr. Mirando. Yes. And Mr.
Speaker 1 00:05:57 Yes,
Speaker 2 00:06:00 Your application has been approved. We will memorialize it in a written document at our next meeting. You don't need to be present for that or a virtual flat. We'll send that document to you.
Speaker 1 00:06:15 Okay. We'll move to number eight. Uh, 19 ZB, 67 D avenue.
Speaker 2 00:06:25 Yeah. This was an application that was granted by the board sometime ago and United Realty USA, LLC. I believe we have a, an attorney here representing them tonight because Mr. .
Speaker 5 00:06:37 Yes, this is John DeLuca forskolin. And on behalf of the applicant United Realty USA, LLC.
Speaker 5 00:06:45 Okay. So, uh, as you mentioned, this is in this application pertains to four 12 netherworld avenue, which is block 69, uh, oh seven lot nine and yard 10 zone. Uh, the applicant is seeking bulk variants relief for a front yard set back of the covered porch. Um, pursuant to section 21, 5 0 1, the township Piscataway zoning ordinance, a 35 yard setback is required for this zone, but, uh, more than a year ago on February 13th, 2020, uh, this same applicant appeared before the board seeking variance relief from the front yard setback requirement. At that time, uh, no objections were raised by any member of the public in any manner. Uh, the board unanimously determined to grant band's relief, permitting the applicant to construct a covered porch with a 25 and a quarter foot setback after construction of the house. And as-built survey revealed that the actual setback of the covered porch ultimately was a 24.75 feet due to human error during construction.
Speaker 5 00:07:54 So that's deficient from the boards of approval by less than one foot, nine inches to be exact. Uh, so to protect against any further discrepancies or deficiencies, the applicant is seeking bulk rate variance relief for an additional foot, uh, as to the front porch setback. Uh, I'd also like to note that, uh, there are stairs in front of the Fort front porch. Uh, they were approved for 21 and a half feet and their setback 21 feet, uh, as built. Uh, so I don't have any witnesses, but my client I do see is on the zoom call if, uh, uh, at any member of the board determines that testimony is necessary. But, uh, that concludes my presentation of this application. Uh, assuming no further questions or comments,
Speaker 2 00:08:43 Uh, for members of the board. What happened here was the board approved a, a front setback variance. The house was built slightly closer to the front property line, uh, then they thought was going to happen. So they are asking you to modify your original approval by between six and nine inches.
Speaker 1 00:09:04 Do we want to take a vote from the board? You may want to open it to public Interested. Okay. We'll open it to the public for any questions or comments? Nope. Okay. Public portion is closed. Uh, any comments or questions from the board? Okay. Okay. Henry, do you have any comments on this or is
Speaker 4 00:09:36 This, yeah. You know what, I'm just, just getting acquainted here with this. Um, cause I appear to have written a, uh, a report. I'm just trying to find this. I wrote a more up to date report. Wasn't the previous approval for renovation? Not a new home. That's correct. See, I think this is a little misleading. I don't think you're here just because, um, the porch was nine inches for the route. Um, we're we are talking about Elizabeth two, 10 Elizabeth avenue, correct? No. What, what address is this project? This is for, this is for four 12 Leatherwood two 10. Elizabeth is the next application. That's my application. That would probably be what the problem is. Let me see
Speaker 0 00:10:30 That. I even give you, it's like a one sheet under that. I haven't give it to,
Speaker 4 00:10:34 Uh, I don't believe I have that one. That's where I don't have that goes, it went right to my two 10 and that's why I was getting a little bit, cause he's United. Right? What you said? I do have it. Yes. It was just a discussion. I, I have no issues then with this application. Apologies. Okay.
Speaker 1 00:11:01 All right then we'll I guess take a motion to approve this application
Speaker 4 00:11:07 Out a second,
Speaker 0 00:11:13 Mr. . Yes. Mr. Reggio. Yes. Mr. Patel, Mr. Mirando? Yes. Mr. Ali. Yes. And vice-chairman Zimmerman. Yes.
Speaker 2 00:11:27 Mr. DeLuca, we'll prepare a resolution consistent with this and, uh, memorialize that our next meeting.
Speaker 4 00:11:33 Thank you very much. Have a good any,
Speaker 1 00:11:37 Thank you. You also, okay. We'll be going down that number 9 21 dash ZB dash 41 B harvest, Inc. Uh, Fitzgerald Cabo, Finn come often.
Speaker 6 00:11:55 Um, representing. Yes. Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. Richard Caplin, Ruben Caplin associates on the attorney for the applicant. I just want to make sure both of my two witnesses can hear, um, Mr. and Mr. Dante. So you're there or are you hearing, are you talking? Yes, I'm here. Okay, good. So, um, this is the two 10 Elizabeth avenue application. Um, this is also an application and provoke variances. It is located at two 10 Elizabeth avenue, block 6 8 1 7 30 it's in the R 10 zone. And this is an application at this point for new construction of a single family dwelling. There was a prior application that was approved for both variances. There were some issues with construction and as a result of that, we've come in with a brand new application. Um, and, uh, because of that, the variances have changed slightly. It is an undersized lot.
Speaker 6 00:13:03 And we will describe the fact that out of the four variances, three of them are directly attributable to the lot size and shape. The one additional variance is, uh, the garage barriers. There will be no garage and we will describe why there's no garage. Why that makes we think the most sense for this property. Um, I have two innocence, uh, the first witnesses, Gerald Halfin. He is the principal of high best Inc the applicant. And the second witness is Paolo Don tests of Don PEs, correct architecture, LLC. He is the architect and he will be testifying as an expert on the particulars of the application. Do, would you like to square them in at this point? How would
Speaker 2 00:13:56 You swear them in one, at a time you're going to call
Speaker 6 00:13:58 First and there will be exhibits, but I believe the exhibits are all part of the application. So should we just proceed? Yes. They
Speaker 2 00:14:05 Don't need to be marked separately if they were part of your application package.
Speaker 6 00:14:08 Okay. So the first, uh, witness will be, uh, Gerald Finn, who is the principal of plan distinct.
Speaker 2 00:14:16 Mr. , can you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth? Yes. I have your name and address please.
Speaker 7 00:14:26 Uh, Fitzgerald Cobell thing for one for Brentwood drive to Skyway, New Jersey. Oh 8 5 4. Thank you.
Speaker 6 00:14:34 Um, Mr. , can you describe your connection to the applicant and the project and give a brief description of the project?
Speaker 7 00:14:43 I am the owner of high best Inc. Uh, that's my property over there at two 10, uh, Elizabeth app on where, uh, as you mentioned, were looking to, uh, get, uh, variants approval again, um, because we decided to make, uh, interior changes when basically when it was decided that I have to re apply again to move forward with those changes, it was unfortunate, but you know, at the same time we decided to make it better by pushing the house back. So we're looking to get approval to continue building, uh, this home.
Speaker 6 00:15:20 And when you say pushing the house back can be more specific,
Speaker 7 00:15:23 But to conform with the front yard setback. So
Speaker 6 00:15:26 The original, your original design was not conforming and there was a variance for the front yard setback,
Speaker 7 00:15:33 Correct. Due to the, uh, you know, conforming a lot size,
Speaker 6 00:15:37 The new plans have pushed the house back. So now it conforms that variance is no longer required. Yes. Okay. Um, could you briefly just describe the neighborhood and, and the house that was there before the house you're going to build now and why you think this is going to be beneficial to the neighborhood?
Speaker 7 00:15:56 Uh, the house that was there previously was a small, a ranch about six to 700 square feet. Um, in keeping with the neighborhood, the house that we are, um, looking to build is still a ranch. Uh, it's about 1500 square feet, um, with a full sized, a walkout basement. So in keeping with the neighborhood, it's not some large house, it's a ranch size house that would blend in nicely with the existing neighborhood.
Speaker 6 00:16:26 And the original house was, uh, how close to the street do you recall?
Speaker 7 00:16:32 Uh, I believe it was seven or eight feet.
Speaker 6 00:16:35 And the new house that you're, that you designed?
Speaker 7 00:16:39 I believe we pushed it back, uh, correct me if I'm wrong. 25 30 feet.
Speaker 6 00:16:44 The w we can have Mr. Dodd has testified. Right. But it's now conforming to the zoning, correct? Correct. It was the original house where the garage?
Speaker 7 00:16:53 No, it was
Speaker 6 00:16:54 Not. And of course the new house does not have a garage. Correct. Um, and, um, can you generally describe the neighborhood and how this house fits in with the neighborhood, the new house that you're building?
Speaker 7 00:17:06 I mean, I, I would say a lot of the houses on that street are our ranches. There are some two-story homes, um, but in building this new house, it wouldn't, it would blend right in with the existing, uh, surrounding homes.
Speaker 6 00:17:22 Okay. Um, anything else that you'd like to describe at this point before we turn it over to Mr. Don says
Speaker 7 00:17:29 It's, uh, pretty much it,
Speaker 6 00:17:34 Should we proceed the next witness or questions from us to come open? There are no questions for Mr. Belson. We can move on to the next witness. Okay, Mr. Dantas. Yes.
Speaker 2 00:17:53 Mr. can you raise your right hand? You swear the testimony you're about to give you the truth. So help you go, yes. Your name and address, please.
Speaker 8 00:18:00 My name is Paulo Dante. Last name is D a N T a S. I am the owner and partner of Dante's correct. Architectural union, New Jersey located at 4 27 Chestnut street, suite 3 0 2, a union New Jersey.
Speaker 6 00:18:17 Uh, Mr. Don Tess was the applicant's expert at the, uh, prior hearing. He did qualify as an expert. Would you like him to go through his qualifications?
Speaker 2 00:18:30 Uh, Mr. Dodd has, has your, uh, licensed status changed since the last time you testified Mr. Zimmerman? I believe he can be accepted as an expert architect. We will accept.
Speaker 6 00:18:43 Okay. Thank you. Um, Mr. , can you describe your position in connection with this application? Um, do you have the set of plans out where you can?
Speaker 8 00:18:56 Yes. Am I, yeah. Am I able to share the screen? Yes, yes. Okay.
Speaker 6 00:19:04 So Mr. Dennis, I'll let you proceed. It probably be easier than,
Speaker 2 00:19:09 And before Mr. Dante starts, this was part of the submitted application set. So it does not need to be separately.
Speaker 8 00:19:15 That's correct. All the, all the bits that I'm showing today were part of the initial submission. Thank you. Okay. Uh, the proposed project is located at two 10, uh, Elizabeth avenue and Paskataway New Jersey. Uh, what shall consist is the demolition of the existing, a one story single family home. And what the owner is proposing is to construct a new one story, single family dwelling of approximately 1,525 square feet, a building footprint on sheet, a one a may, and she will one, uh, the proposed site conditions in relationship to the existing survey or as follows. Uh, the minimum lot area, uh, require is 10,000 square feet. Uh, our existing lot area is 8,334 square feet. That's an existing non-conforming, uh, situation. Uh, also the minimum lot with is a hundred feet, uh, where our existing lab is 50 feet, and that's also, uh, existing non-conforming, uh, the minimum lot depth required.
Speaker 8 00:20:35 Uh, and this area is a hundred feet and excuse me, and our existing lot is 166 point 71 feet on the front yard. Setback requirement is 35 feet. Uh, the existing front yard was proposed as 7.96 in which now we're proposing the new front yard of the new single home, uh, to be located 38 point 15 feet from the front property line, which eliminates the existing deficiency and making a compliant, uh, the rear yard setback requirements, 25 feet. Uh, we are proposing 67 point 72 feet on the side yard setbacks, um, requirements, 10 feet in which, uh, one sided will be 10 feet. And then the other side will be 10.3 feet. The building height requirement, uh, is 35. We're proposing on one story, uh, building of 18.9 inches, I'm sorry, 18 feet and nine inches. The building coverage requirement of 20%, we're proposing 19.3 of 1,615 square feet, which you include the building plus the cover porch. Um, on the front, the one car garage is required. However, there is current no garage, um, uh, at the property and the owners proposing also, additionally, no garage. Uh, the client is proposing to tandem parking spaces in the existing driveway. The existing drivers shall remain and will not be increased. It will be repaired as needed. And the new walkway from the front of the house to the right of way, we'll be providing she a three.
Speaker 8 00:22:39 I would like to start with the first floor, which will consist of a front porch at the main entrance in which you'll enter into an open concept, a dining kitchen, and living area. The main entrance also includes a coat closet adjacent to that. We also have a closet for the residents from the living area. They'll be access to a rear deck. The face of the rear yard were all proposing three bedrooms, which includes a master bedroom, the master bedroom at the rear, excuse me, the master bedroom at the rear is approximately 13 feet by 12 feet in which includes a master bathroom with a shower, a toilet, and a single sink. And then a walk-in closet bedroom, number one and two, and guests will share a common bathroom hallway bathroom, which will consist of a sink and a private tub and toilet area. The bedroom bedroom sizes on average, or approximately 10 feet, six by 10, fix a 10 feet, six in size. The design intent was to separate, not on the living areas from the private areas. Therefore, we were proposing all bedrooms to the right side of the home and the living areas to the left side of the home. In addition, the project scope was to include in the design access to the rear deck from the living areas. And this gave us more of a site to side, um, design orientation from the front of the home. We have a U shaped stairs, which has been provided to access the basement.
Speaker 8 00:24:30 The basement will be a finished open plan that will include not only the mechanical room and utility room, a full bathroom. And we also will be providing direct access, uh, from the back, uh, from the basement. Uh, this is for not only for the convenience considering the main stair is located towards the front, but also considering the topography of the site, which sloped towards the back, which made sense to make an access to the back after seeing the plans also noticed that there was no laundry room. So however, the laundry room will be proposed in a basement somewhere near the stairs sheet before, which is our elevations and the architectural characteristics and material selections that are based not only are the statics from the neighborhood, but also of what the scope was intended. Some materials that we are proposing or the vinyl siding, shingle roofing system, and the decorative trim around windows and doors.
Speaker 8 00:25:36 Uh, the proposed design, uh, provides a movement, were very facade steps, uh, such as the Culver porch, which is recessed and different roof peaks in order to eliminate this, uh, eliminate a monolithic structure and decorate a railing at the front of the porch and steps for more aesthetic policing, uh, facade. So based on that, we had some positives on the building for this one story, single family dwelling. It is in our opinion, uh, that this will benefit, uh, the neighborhood. Uh, we believe that, uh, will improve the current conditions of the property aesthetically and also the curve appeal, uh, the improve, the improvements, uh, that we're proposing will support not only a starting family, um, or an existing family that will allow for this home not to be, um, to be a long-term, um, home versus a short term home and allows for a bit of growth.
Speaker 8 00:26:36 Uh, the floor plan in the home provides a minimum standard layout for a typical family. Um, and given, buying a home is a financial investment and undertaking, which most fires will consider, um, the above bedroom count and living areas or adequate for the living. We also wanted to mention that, uh, we believe that excluding the one car garage, um, it was an intent to, uh, minimize, not increasing the law, the lock coverage, and also try to minimize also encroaching on the side yard requirements. We believe that this additional, um, uh, dish, uh, I'm sorry, it was also an opinion that the two cars or able to be not only parked in existing driveway and having an enclosed garage would not be necessary, um, along with, uh, additionally that the previous song did not really have, um, uh, one car or an enclosed garage. So therefore we're not adding any further gentlemen, uh, to the property. We believe due to the unique circumstances of the property, uh, variances weren't were not created, uh, but the existing hardship that is resulted from the particular property sizes, such as the, uh, the require light size lot with, and also the front front, front yard,
Speaker 8 00:28:08 The front yard width that's correct apologize. So any negatives that we feel for this one, uh, single family is by and out. Uh, we, we believe that by not allowing this to be improved and, um, the site, or not only it was set back in the beautification of the property and also the neighborhood, and also would create a little bit of hardship on all the other lots that are under size and 50 foot wide, lots, uh, throughout the neighborhood you're looking to not only continue living in town, but also expand from it as well. Um,
Speaker 6 00:28:46 Juul. So did you also do a, um, a quick survey of the neighboring properties, which ones had garage with some did not have garages similar properties?
Speaker 8 00:28:56 Sure. So based on the similar properties, um, and this is including our neighborhood or block, uh, from our street side and the opposing street side, uh, we had six properties that are 50 feet wide, including ours. Uh, three do have garages and three do not have garages. So it would, it's 50%, uh, based on my client's conversation with him and on reviewing the letter, give me one second. The letter from the divisions of engineering, planning, and development data, September 1st, uh, 2021, we are going to accept and we'll do all requests, um, recommended. And that Mr. Kaplan concludes my testimony.
Speaker 6 00:29:51 And again, it's your opinion that the house says design is it benefit to the property is a benefit to the neighborhood and, and, and you see no detriments whatsoever.
Speaker 8 00:30:02 Yes, I do see that. Um, should I bring it down? Yes, please. Thank you. Okay,
Speaker 2 00:30:13 Mr. Zimmerman, if I may ask Mr. Kaplan a question, Mr. Kaplan, what, uh, is your offer to ensure that the basement area never becomes either a separate apartment or additional bedrooms because additional bedrooms would increase your parking requirement. And currently you're proposing no garage because you have two off street parking spaces.
Speaker 6 00:30:39 Um, Mr. yes. Are you willing to stipulate that the basement will not be used for four or a bedroom?
Speaker 7 00:30:49 Correct? That's correct. It's intended just as an open floor plan.
Speaker 6 00:30:55 Okay. Well, we could certainly stipulate to that, make it a condition of the approval that would be sufficient.
Speaker 2 00:31:02 And you would also agree that there would never be a separate, uh, dwelling unit and a base
Speaker 6 00:31:09 Mr. , correct? Correct. Correct. That's correct. Yes.
Speaker 2 00:31:13 Would you agree to a deed restriction that said that,
Speaker 6 00:31:17 Um, if, if, if necessary, I believe we would, there's added cost, obviously in doing that, we've got to pay for the recording fees prepared to record recorded, but I know Mr. wants to get this application approved, so I understand,
Speaker 2 00:31:33 But Mr. may be, uh, very sincere with regard to the board and his representations, but if he sells the property, I want any future owner to know that that restriction is
Speaker 6 00:31:45 Mr. Coppin, are you, is that acceptable? Well, what that does basically is we would, we would file a, a, we'll call it an informational deed in the county clerk, which would stipulate that the basement area can not be used for a bedroom.
Speaker 7 00:32:04 Understood. I mean, if you can help me with that process, I,
Speaker 6 00:32:07 We can agree to that. That's no problem. As long as you understand it will be in the title records, the township wants. Perfect. Yes, that would be acceptable.
Speaker 2 00:32:15 Thank you, Mr. Zimmerman. Those are all the concerns I had from a legal standpoint.
Speaker 1 00:32:19 Okay. Thank you, Henry. Do you have any, uh, comments?
Speaker 4 00:32:23 I believe he agreed to, uh, all the items in the report. So with that being said, I don't see any issues. Uh, other than that, Mr. Kenny Lee, uh, and the African as a greeter.
Speaker 1 00:32:35 Okay. All right. Thank you. So let's open it to the board for any questions or comments. You're none. So we'll open it to the public. Any questions or comments? Okay. Public portion is closed. So with that, uh, I will make a motion to approve.
Speaker 2 00:33:00 Second
Speaker 0 00:33:04 Cal fish has faced Mr. Tillery. Mr. Reggio, Mr. Patel. Now we lost them. Cal Pash, Mr. Mirando. Yes. Mr. Ali and vice chairman's and Roman. Yes.
Speaker 2 00:33:28 Mr. Kaplan, your application has been approved, but the conditions as we just discussed, but thank you very much. We thank you. Okay.
Speaker 1 00:33:34 That's a good idea. Thank you. Okay. Moving on to number 10 21 dash ZB dash 43 B I'm sorry.
Speaker 1 00:33:54 Thank you very much. Okay. Is
Speaker 2 00:33:59 Bella supermanium presence?
Speaker 0 00:34:05 I literally just saw his name a few minutes ago and he is not here.
Speaker 2 00:34:10 He was on earlier for the first part when we started it, but then I saw him log off. Yeah.
Speaker 0 00:34:16 I saw him on just a few minutes ago. Uh, chairman, would you like to go to the next case and then, um, number 11?
Speaker 1 00:34:25 Yes. And then we'll come back to that. Okay. Number 1121 dash ZB. There's 52 B Christopher Jessica floors.
Speaker 9 00:34:35 Hi. How are you?
Speaker 2 00:34:37 Uh, Chris and Jessica Flores. Are you both going to testify tonight?
Speaker 9 00:34:41 Probably just me, unless you need him to speak,
Speaker 2 00:34:45 If you can handle it and I'll just swear you in. Do you swear the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth? Yes. Your name and address please?
Speaker 9 00:34:54 Uh, Jessica Flores, 13 Rugen avenue and Piscataway.
Speaker 2 00:34:58 Thank you. Could you explain to the board when you would like to do here?
Speaker 9 00:35:01 So, uh, we're converting the existing garage into a master bedroom and we want to add on a garage and that garage got, um, denied on the permits because the setback needs to be 35 feet from the property line of the houses under 25 feet currently from the property line. So I'm just looking for the garage to still be where the existing garage is. Yeah. So it's all like even
Speaker 4 00:35:37 Mr. Jeremy, perhaps we can address his report. Yes. Mr. Henry would do like, dude look comment when you report. Yeah. Let me just bring it up here where these reports are scattered about. I believe this is the one that, um, don't see the report. Let me just see if it's PDF that I have up second. Yes, it is. All right. So this is 13 running. Yes, correct? Correct. Okay. So a couple issues that I had were, um, one is the fence. Uh, the fence should be shown on the survey and the distance from the fence to the property line should be noted. Uh, I don't believe that that's on there now.
Speaker 9 00:36:26 They was existing. Like what I got when I bought the house, I'm not changing the fence as it currently stands
Speaker 4 00:36:34 At all. You're not keeping the fence. No,
Speaker 9 00:36:37 I'm not making any changes to the fence.
Speaker 4 00:36:39 Okay. But from the way I bought the problem is what kind of fence is it just
Speaker 9 00:36:44 Like a wood fence
Speaker 4 00:36:46 Solid though, correct? Yeah. Yeah. See, the problem is, is if it's not in the right spot, it requires a variance. So regardless if it's, if it's existing or not, we need to know where it is. So you're going to have to, somehow you could draw it on the survey yourself, but what you need to do is you need to locate that, serve that, that fence on the property as best that you can to determine whether or not a variance was needed for it. Um, you know, we could go on the assumption that it's in a conforming location and that would be at the 20 foot or 30 foot. Let's see here
Speaker 9 00:37:25 Further back than where the house is. So, and if the house is 25 feet, it's at least another 10 feet back.
Speaker 4 00:37:34 Yeah. So you need 35 feet. I believe. So the fence has to be 35 feet from the property line of bolts, both streets. So that that's the tricky part and it definitely looks like it would conform. Um, if it's to get that house on the left-hand side, um, along BD street, and if it's, you know, 10 feet back from the front of the house, then it probably does come. But you just got to just verify that. Um, again, we can go on the assumption that, that it's in a conforming location. I mean the worst case scenario is that you would probably have to come back and get the variance. If you find out that it's not in a conforming location, or you would have to relocate it, um, again, if it's close, it's not going to be probably an issue, but you probably would have to come back for a let discussion item, similar to the other application that you heard tonight, just to confirm that. Um, so that that's one of the items, um, for
Speaker 2 00:38:35 Tonight's proceedings, you do agree to supply a drawing showing even if it's hand drawn the location of the fence.
Speaker 9 00:38:43 Yeah, I can do that. But my concern is if I need a variance for the way the fence currently sits, like I said, I bought the house that way.
Speaker 2 00:38:51 Uh, you may have, and you may have to come back for offense variance, but if you want to move forward on this application,
Speaker 9 00:38:57 I mean, worst case scenario, you said that I would just have to move the fence back. So when I redo my fence, cause I do want to do the fence eventually I could just make sure it's conforming at that time. And then I wouldn't need a variance. Correct?
Speaker 2 00:39:11 Correct. Correct. If you're going to, if you Sue, first of all, you need to supply the revised drawing. If it's a nonconforming fence and you agree to move it, then you don't need to come back.
Speaker 9 00:39:20 Okay. That's fine. Now just to confirm, cause I'll draw it onto the survey and then where do I need to make that to, I send that to Laura or where do I send that? You can send it to me. Okay. And then my question is, so it needs to be 35 feet from both sides of the house, like the back fence off of BD
Speaker 4 00:39:46 From the property line.
Speaker 4 00:39:50 So you could see where your house is located on, uh, you know, on the side there you're pretty well off of BD street. So it looks like you're about, you know, it's tough to really tell here there's not a, a tie back dimension, but it appears that your house is roughly 37 37 in chain from the, um, BD street property line. Okay. My guess would be as long as you're within two feet of your house, uh, along BD street, the fence would comply even with the side of the house, then you definitely comply with the 35 feet.
Speaker 9 00:40:31 Yeah. It sticks out just a tad from the house, but yeah, I can measure that and then I can update the survey. Like I said, the back sense that's along the side. I definitely think that ones I'm about 10 feet back from the house. So that should be okay. And like I said, worst case, I would agree to changing that fence to where it needs to be when we do the new Benson.
Speaker 4 00:40:54 Okay. Um, and just, just to let you know, most likely Go ahead.
Speaker 2 00:41:03 Can you go to point number two in your report?
Speaker 4 00:41:05 Yeah. Uh, point number two was basically that the garage addition needs to be a step back two to four feet. So I know you wanted to keep the garage even with the house, but the problem is the houses and conforming has to it's set back location. You're approximately 10 feet closer to the street than what's required. So typically when additions have to be made, um, or when an addition is made, uh, to a home, that's not conforming. If you could improve the conformity of the setback, that's, what's always, you know, um, looked upon as favorable. So when you're doing is if you keep the addition, even with the existing house is you're exacerbating a non-conforming situation. You're making it worse, like putting an additional mass in the front yard setback. So what we're looking to do is we're looking to push the garage back a few feet, two to four feet that creates a little bit of setback on the addition, which actually improves the setback. It's still not going to comply with the requirement of 35 feet, which again, you need to show why you wouldn't be able to do that. And again, as a garage, a two to four,
Speaker 9 00:42:17 Well, cause then I'm going to have two feet. Well, either two feet, less of garage. If I leave the garage, matching the back of the house, or I'm going to have two feet sticking out into my yard with
Speaker 4 00:42:29 That's exactly what you do. That's up to you though, what you, what you do, what you want to do. You could discuss that with the architect, but um, people articulate additions and, and, and, um, and things of this nature all the time. Um, a lot of houses don't have straight lines across the back, across the front, uh, homes, articulate many times in order to comply with ordinances. So again, you're in a, non-conforming quite severely, you're 10 feet. You're probably more than 10 minutes.
Speaker 9 00:43:01 I'm not nonconforming the houses already existing there. I didn't make, you know what I mean? I didn't build the house there. I just bought it.
Speaker 4 00:43:07 But what you want to do is put an addition on it. Correct? And so
Speaker 9 00:43:12 If I left my garage just hypothetically, if I was leaving my garage and making it a two car garage, it wouldn't be able to just align like that would be strange to have a garage that said that
Speaker 4 00:43:25 That may be able to be looked at a little bit differently, but that'd be something for you to determine what your architect cause the problem is, is you're taking the garage out and you're looking at it, another structure for the garage. And I see no reason why you can't step that back to being working for months with the setback And then the proposed move over, hanging in the front. Again, you have sort of a decorative, a roof over, hang up the proposal on the front of the house. Again. Um, overhangs on 18 inches are considered front yard, setback violations. So by putting a four foot overhang on the front of your house, you're making your, uh, non-conforming front yard setback, four feet worse. So again, I don't see, I mean, it's decorative and it's nice, but I don't see really any reason why you can't make that a little bit smaller.
Speaker 9 00:44:19 Yeah. I don't care about that. Honestly. Wasn't even going to be there. So that's fine. I don't that's I don't care about,
Speaker 4 00:44:26 Yeah. Again, it's something you go work at with New York think were the major concerns. Uh, the existing modified draw. You would have to modify your pave, the dry waste, so that access to the garage from your existing garage. So if you're in agreement to, to step the garage back and, uh, and either pair back that overhang, um, in the front paved, paved the driveway to the, to the new garage, I don't see any. And then I think you already agreed to the, the revised survey, uh, showing double fence.
Speaker 9 00:45:01 So my question is now I have to go back to the architect and they have to push the garage two feet back and then I have to submit new drawings again, or
Speaker 4 00:45:16 Yeah, well, those drawings you'll have to submit when you come in for the building permit, if you agree to it, you'd be fired for as far as the board application goes, you really just need to provide the board with that survey information that we're asking for the fence. And then you're going to have to show, uh, I don't think you've ever really submitted a survey. I think your architectural plans. So what you're gonna have to do is you do have a sketch here that was provided awful. The architectural plans provide that to Laura showing that the garage is the new construction portion because it's being stepped back. So we have it for the board file. Uh, so we need two copies of that revised survey and two copies of the portion of the architectural plan that just shows that new construction being stepped back. Um, and then, then we'll be fine on the zoning end of it. And you'll just have to provide the revise, our protection for when we go from the permanent.
Speaker 9 00:46:15 Okay. So I just want to make sure I don't mess up anything here. I'm going to do the survey and send two copies of that. If you guys agree to everything, my permit will be approved, but then I just have to send two copies of the new plan showing that the garage is pushed back.
Speaker 4 00:46:36 Yeah. Yep. You're still going to that sketch that was submitted with the survey, which was really a copy from, I believe the cover sheet of your architectural plan that shows the new construction, or it's one of the pages of the architectural drawings. You need to provide two copies of that. Along with the two copies of the revised survey to Laura, that just shows that was stepped back. I mean, it's, it's just a square box that says new construction. So your architect just has to adjust that to feedback on the drawer. Um, and then submit that with the re with the survey information that we asked for, then you'll be good as far as the zoning goes. And then you just, when you submit your for your permits, just make sure that the plans coincide with the, the change that we talked about for the roof overhang and for the garage.
Speaker 9 00:47:25 So now I have to reapply for my permit. We'll see
Speaker 0 00:47:29 Henry share any applied for the permits and got denied. So what you need to do with resubmit as new zoning permit with the new plans, they already have your files. They just have to amend your file and just do another zoning permit.
Speaker 4 00:47:42 But you just can't do that until Laura has those, those revised plans that we talked about and your resolution has to be adopted. So your resolution is not going to get adopted to the next meeting anyway. So in the meantime, I would work on getting that information into Laura. So this way, once the resolution is adopted, you probably wouldn't lose any time. Um, cause you need the adopted resolution before you could go from your purpose.
Speaker 0 00:48:08 You can always call no.
Speaker 9 00:48:10 Oh yeah. I'll be calling you. Um, so when's that next meeting. Okay. All right. I'll um, I'll reach out to you in the morning and Laura,
Speaker 2 00:48:30 Mr. Chairman, if the applicant doesn't have any more questions, perhaps it's time to go to the board to see if they do
Speaker 1 00:48:36 Hey, what would it to the board? Do you have any questions or comments hearing none a little bit, bit to the public. Any questions or comments from the public
Speaker 0 00:48:53 Now? Mr. Chairman?
Speaker 1 00:48:54 No. Okay. The public portion is closed and we will, um, wait, what? The modifications from the application.
Speaker 2 00:49:08 Yeah, essentially you could vote on this at this time, Mr. Zimmerman. Um, and the con the changes as agreed to in Mr. Henderson's report would be conditions of the approval.
Speaker 1 00:49:17 Okay. All right. So, um, I will, uh, make a motion then to approve this application with the modifications as specified by, uh, Mr. ,
Speaker 0 00:49:38 Mr. Tillary. Yes. Mr. Reggio, Mr. Patel, Mr. Mirando. Yes. Mr. Riley and vice chairman's are women.
Speaker 1 00:49:50 Yes.
Speaker 2 00:49:51 Ms. Flores, your application has been approved with several conditions. We will memorialize this in a written document at our next meeting. Uh, you don't need to be present for that. Uh, we will mail that document to you, but you'll need that document to get your permits, uh, to proceed. And in the meantime, you have certain other things you have to submit, so you may want to get working on that.
Speaker 1 00:50:12 Thank you. Yes. Good luck. Okay. Do we want to jump back to number 10? Is
Speaker 0 00:50:19 ICM on chairman?
Speaker 1 00:50:20 Okay. Yep. Let me see. Um, then we will go back to number 10, which is 21 dev ZB desk.
Speaker 2 00:50:31 Romanian Romanian presence.
Speaker 10 00:50:35 Yes, sir.
Speaker 2 00:50:36 Uh, I need, can you turn your camera on please? Sure.
Speaker 10 00:50:47 Excuse me, sir.
Speaker 2 00:50:48 Yes, I can. Could you raise your right hand? I need to swear you in. Do you swear the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth? It'll
Speaker 10 00:50:55 Be
Speaker 2 00:50:56 Your name and address please.
Speaker 10 00:50:58 Well, I Subramanian 14 wild Haven court, Piscataway New Jersey.
Speaker 2 00:51:03 Thank you. Could you explain to the board what you would like to do here?
Speaker 10 00:51:08 Um, an existing barn or shed in the back of the structure that's in the back of the house and it's kind of in a despair. So we want to repair, rebuild that structure
Speaker 2 00:51:23 And you have a, an additional structure on your property as well. Is that correct?
Speaker 10 00:51:29 No, no. That additional structures are long gone. We used to have it, but we don't have it now.
Speaker 2 00:51:36 So which structure remains on the property?
Speaker 10 00:51:39 The one is an issue you're facing from the house. If you're facing the backyard, the structure and the right is still there. That's the larger structure of step.
Speaker 2 00:51:52 Uh, Mr. perhaps you can take over here.
Speaker 4 00:51:56 Yeah. Mr. S uh, sir,
Speaker 10 00:52:01 I'm sorry.
Speaker 4 00:52:04 Um, did you have a chance to review the report that I wrote That Laura Lord,
Speaker 10 00:52:16 Well, you meant it. I didn't get a chance to look at.
Speaker 4 00:52:19 Okay. Because there's some, there's some items on there that, um, that really need to be addressed. Um, um, I mean, th the first is is you, you state that the structure's there, but, um, again, and the structure doesn't comply with the requirements for an accessory structure, as far as the size, as far as the height. Um, and it appears, uh, and looking and doing some research on this, that there was never any, uh, approval given or various, uh, given for this, this structure or the previous structure that was removed, but that's not no longer there. So sort of focus on the, the, uh, you know, the larger structure, but, um, yeah, it's, it's basically illegal structure. So understand your, your, your, your basis of your argument. Was that an existing structure that was there when the property was bought? But again, regardless if it's been there 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, if it's an illegal structure, it's an illegal structure.
Speaker 4 00:53:35 Um, you know, I just don't see how a structure that's more than twice the size of what's allowed as an accessory structure and, and while above and in height requirement of something that, you know, the board should look at favorably. Um, again, I think the ordinance which allows for 35 to 25 foot structure of 625 square feet is more than adequate, um, for, for this property in a single family zone, uh, that you're located in. Um, I mean, again, you know, you're trying to build a barn here, accessory structure that is twice the allowable, um, allowable size of an accessory structure, uh, in the zone, really in any zone. Um, so again, I have a big problem with that. And again, I don't, I personally, you would have to justify why, uh, why the board should, uh, grant relief to that, to that word, Nance and, uh, grant grant you the variance. Uh, so, uh, you know, based on that, um, you have anything there, anything other than anything else to offer regarding the structure of why the board should approve a structure? That's twice the size of what's it more than twice the size of what's allowed in the, in the zone.
Speaker 10 00:55:03 At the time I bought the property, the structures that
Speaker 4 00:55:06 Structure was in district,
Speaker 10 00:55:10 Sorry. So at the time we bought the proper district structure was already there. And the person who saw me, that's Mike Santini, he's also a realtor in . He told me everything was approved, everything was legal and the city never raised any objection. The township never raised an objection, then you're close to the property or till now. So that just me, that this I'm in, I had no idea that this structure is illegal. In that case, I would have never brought the property. That's a, we're looking 30 years down the line, and you're coming today and saying that, you know, it should have been done long time ago, but I was never aware of it. And all that I'm trying to do is I'm trying to get the same footprint. I'm not changing anything in the footprint. I'm giving the same footprint, I'm skipping everything, same thing. I'm trying to just repair, rebuild a structure. So I had to be safe and secure structure.
Speaker 2 00:56:09 I think the zoning board's position is that it's more than twice the size that's permitted under the ordinance. And you're going to have to provide some evidence to justify why it should be allowed remain.
Speaker 10 00:56:26 The thing is when we bought the structure and the, one of the attraction for this particular property was that this access to restructure was there. And that's what we were told by the owner at the time, Mike Santini. And he said, the structure is there. So it's a good property. And we said, yes, because we would want to use the structures. Like we paid extra amount for the structure. And whereas the other properties are going at a lower price. We paid him the full price and what do we have, what we paid? And we just took the property there. Okay.
Speaker 2 00:57:03 And buyer beware do not accept the assurances of a seller check with the town, which you apparently did not do. So we are going to need some evidence to justify allowing them this, to remain. Um, and unfortunately your desire to repair, this is not evidence to allow it to remain.
Speaker 10 00:57:26 What kind of evidence, uh, we'll help, sir?
Speaker 2 00:57:30 Well, I am not your attorney. I am the zoning boards attorney, perhaps you wish to consult an attorney to see what you could do.
Speaker 10 00:57:40 Okay. Ben, when we buy something and the township and the deal goes through, everything goes through and the township in effect gave a CEO for the occupancy of the property.
Speaker 2 00:57:55 They gave me geo they did not give you a zoning approval. There's a difference.
Speaker 10 00:58:01 Okay. And then, uh, to a layman like me, right? And basically a CEO says that, uh, what is in the property is acceptable and it doesn't come back 30 years down the line. And then we look at it and say that that's the CEO, but that is not a boring zoning approval. I mean, I would just the layman visit buying, uh, the thing. And if the township raised an objection at that time, I would have backed off right then and there,
Speaker 2 00:58:33 The township is not there to protect a buyer's interest. And the township does not look into zoning approvals when a property changes hands 30 years. You make, I'm sorry. Go ahead.
Speaker 4 00:58:47 Yeah, just, I just wanted to point out to him 30 years ago, a CEO entailed probably proving there's a smoke detector in the house. That's probably about it. So, um, nothing more, nothing less, like you said, it doesn't provide any assurances that anything on the property was legal back then deal process, check that you probably had a smoke detector,
Speaker 10 00:59:13 But we are essentially trying to rebuild whatever is there. We are not just making sure.
Speaker 2 00:59:34 And I understand your position, but the fact that it was there when you purchased the property and you wish to make it safe now is not zoning justification for allowing an illegal structure to remain. So do you, Mr. Subramanian, do you have any other witnesses tonight?
Speaker 10 00:59:56 And then,
Speaker 2 01:00:01 So are you asked, unfortunately, you're breaking up a little bit and I may be too. I apologize. Are you asking this board for an opportunity to adjourn the matter and get more witnesses?
Speaker 10 01:00:14 Uh, yeah, that's what I'm asking and all of a sudden, I'm trying to see what kind of replaces.
Speaker 2 01:00:23 Okay. Mr. Chairman, uh, the applicant is broken up at least with regard to my reception, but appears that he is asking for an adjournment, uh, to see if he can consult with, uh, either an attorney or some witnesses who may help his case.
Speaker 1 01:00:39 I think we can grant that at this time.
Speaker 2 01:00:42 Okay. So, uh, Ms. Buckley, what would be the next date? October 14th. Okay. Mr. Supermanium would October 14th be a good date for you?
Speaker 10 01:00:54 I won't be. I'm not going to be in town in from, you know, in October. So I think, uh, if you can get me a number, data would be better.
Speaker 2 01:01:04 Um, Ms. Buckley, November, November 4th. How about November 4th?
Speaker 10 01:01:09 That sounds good
Speaker 2 01:01:11 So far. So anyone here on the super Manian application, it's going to be adjourned until November 4th with no further notice by the applicant. This is the applicant's request for an adjournment. I cannot give you any legal advice by suggest that you consult with an attorney.
Speaker 1 01:01:34 Okay. Thank you, Mr. Superman. Okay. Moving on to number 1221 dish ZB dish 53 B verbiage, age Patel.
Speaker 2 01:01:54 Good evening. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give, should be the truth, your name and address please?
Speaker 11 01:02:02 and my son and my husband, they are with me tonight and, uh, addresses one 10 Woodrow avenue. He's got me.
Speaker 2 01:02:14 Okay. Are your son and your husband going to testify? Okay. Then I need to swear them. And could you raise your right hand,
Speaker 11 01:02:26 Please
Speaker 2 01:02:26 Swear the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth. Yes. Yes. Thank you one at a time. I need your name and address please.
Speaker 11 01:02:32 My name is Patel and the address is one 10 Woodrow avenue, Piscataway New Jersey. .
Speaker 2 01:02:48 Thank you. Could one of you explain to the board what you'd like to do here?
Speaker 11 01:02:52 Yeah, the living space and,
Speaker 2 01:03:03 Uh, Mr. Zimmerman, perhaps you could ask Mr. if he has opinions on us,
Speaker 4 01:03:10 Do you have any comments on this? Trying to find the report here? Here we go. Uh, my Molly's crash problem was is that you provided a floor plan of the proposal? I don't believe I saw a floor plan of the existing home. Um, can you just maybe go over, uh, briefly, you know, what's on the first floor now and what what's on the second floor and, um, because there wasn't any information on the existing home.
Speaker 11 01:03:47 We don't have a second floor. It's all, it's a one floor house and on, and it's on the floor we live in there's three bedrooms, a kitchen, a full bathroom. And,
Speaker 4 01:04:01 Okay. And so there's two bedrooms next to that hallway. That's going to go up the stair corridor, correct,
Speaker 11 01:04:12 Please.
Speaker 4 01:04:13 There's two existing bedrooms, I guess out the edge of the, where the garage is. Now
Speaker 11 01:04:19 It's a kitchen and
Speaker 4 01:04:23 Yeah. Okay. I'm looking at it, I think backwards here. Okay. So there's no garage on the house now, correct
Speaker 11 01:04:46 Areas. It's just, it's when usable, due to the angle, it sits at compared to the,
Speaker 4 01:04:56 And you're looking to put living space on the first floor in the garage and then add the second floor above the garage, correct? Yeah, basically you're doing, I'm not mistaken. You proposing almost the same thing. It looks like a bedroom in each.
Speaker 11 01:05:15 Yeah. So two bedrooms
Speaker 4 01:05:17 Carmen's garage and then another bedroom on top of that. And each one also is going to have a full bathroom. Okay. All right. Let's go over the report again. Is there any way to help with, I mean, you have an existing coverage varies right now on the property, um, is I think you have a shed on the property. Is there any way to get rid of the shed to help help with the coverage, existing coverage, variants that exist on the property you are looking to get rid of this chair? I would make that condition of the approval. If, if the board looks upon it favorably that the condition would be that the should be removed, that although it's not very large, it'll help a little bit with existing coverage issue on the property. Um, and again, uh, I'm in agreement that it appears that the existing garage really wasn't usable space. Um, and that there, I believe is the fishing parking. If I'm not mistaken, how many cars could be parked on the driveway, part six cars comfortably on the driveway. Okay. So there's adequate parking on the, on the premises, uh, even without the garage. So again, I think he addressed my concerns, uh, discussing the floor plan and, uh, and I think a removal of the shadow helps slightly with the existing coverage of variance. So I think that the board could be, um, comfortable and looking favorably on the other.
Speaker 2 01:07:16 Interesting. Do you have any, uh, calculation on the proposed lot coverage? If they remove the shit?
Speaker 4 01:07:22 It's tough to tell this is a scale unscaled drawing. It's a photocopy. I could provide that with you. Um, Mr. Kelly, you
Speaker 2 01:07:30 Can do that before we adopt the resolution.
Speaker 4 01:07:34 We can do that.
Speaker 2 01:07:39 All right, Mr. Chairman, I think it's time for any board members questions.
Speaker 1 01:07:43 Okay. We're open to the board and board members have any questions or comments Hearing none we'll open to the public, the public evidence. Any questions or comments?
Speaker 4 01:08:00 No,
Speaker 1 01:08:00 Thank you. All right. Hearing that then I think we can, um, vote. I will make a motion to approve this application based on the comments by Mr. .
Speaker 0 01:08:17 Oh, sorry. Mr. Taylor, Mr. Reggio, Mr. Patel, Mr. Mirando. Yes. Mr. Ali and vice chairman Zimmer.
Speaker 1 01:08:34 Yes.
Speaker 2 01:08:39 Um, Mr. Patel, your application has been approved with some conditions, uh, as we've discussed, we will memorialize this in a document at our next meeting in two weeks. You don't need to be present for that, and we will send that document to you, but you'll need that document to get your permits. Good luck.
Speaker 1 01:08:55 Exactly. Good luck. Okay. Moving on to number 1321 dash ZB dash 56 V. Nicole Campos.
Speaker 2 01:09:10 Ms. Campos, could you unmute? Thank you. Are you both going to be testifying? Good. You both raise your right hand. Do you swear the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth? Yes. One at a time. Could I have your name and address please?
Speaker 1 01:09:26 52 44 Weatherspoon street, Piscataway New Jersey.
Speaker 12 01:09:30 Uh, Jonathan Campos, 5, 2, 4, 4 Witherspoon street, Skyway majority.
Speaker 2 01:09:35 Thank you. Could one of you explained to the board what you'd like to do here?
Speaker 12 01:09:39 Well, I, uh, I built the fence without knowing that I had to get a permit and, uh, apparently I, on one of the side of the streets, I built it too close to the property line. And, uh, that's what the variants for today to see if I could keep the existing, uh, fence.
Speaker 2 01:10:02 Uh, Mr. Chairman, you may want to check in with Mr. Henderson. Yes.
Speaker 1 01:10:06 Mr. Henderson, any comments on this? Not the patient.
Speaker 4 01:10:10 Yeah, unfortunately, you know, I, I feel for minister Campos, but what the problem is is that the fence is only 3.3 feet from the front property line Wong, uh, Roosevelt avenue. Um, we, as, you know, rarely ever allowed people to put fences, uh, closer than 10 feet to any front yard property line. Typically they are a corner type properties. And when we do allow that, um, as in this case, but again, 3.3, uh, I, I think that, um, the fence is going to have to be relocated and wiping it, um, at least one fence panel back, which would bring it to about, about 10 foot of that 10 foot, uh, step back that we've sort of approved again, in many cases we've asked for more, but, uh, looking at this particular site, I think that th the 10 feet would suffice even if the, uh, even if the road is improved, uh, in the near future, which I believe in may.
Speaker 4 01:11:13 Um, but again, I mean, the house next to the property next door is vacant, which, you know, I don't ever remain vacant forever. Uh, there's always a chance that a house will be built on that. And what happens is if the fence is too close to the front front property line, you starting packing, uh, adjacent driveways that may, uh, be installed in the future and the ability of that resident to see pulling in and out of a driveway. So again, 10 feet, I would be hopeful that the applicant would compromise. And again, the requirement is, uh, 35 feet, I believe, um, which we're not even close to that, but, uh, I believe 10 feet in this particular case, um, would be sufficient.
Speaker 12 01:12:05 Um, also I built the fence. The property next to us is vacant, but I bought the fence a little, they have a fence as well, and I built it a little bit behind theirs. So I don't know I was,
Speaker 4 01:12:18 Yeah, there, their fences, their fence is a wire fence though. You really can't eat the ordinance. You can, if you want to leave that fence in that in the front yard setback, you're allowed to quote a four foot solid 54 foot high, 50% solid fence in the front yard setback. So that sex is just like a chicken wire or a chain link fence. So that fats can go all the way up to their property line by code. And it's not an issue. It's the soft offenses that are the issue in front of your setbacks, unfortunately. So I understand you try to maintain it with the BBB existing fence. Unfortunately, that's a compliant fangs.
Speaker 12 01:13:01 Okay. So like you said earlier, if I brought it,
Speaker 4 01:13:08 That is a guideline, I think you probably have full, full fence panels along the sides. So instead of having to reject, I'm trying to figure out what's the least amount of work way would probably be just remove the last two side panels and then moved that frontline back one post, um, and go and go across that way. And then you would probably be right around 10, 11 feet. I don't know what size your panels are pretty much, So you'd be right around 11 feet sufficient, but again, it's looked upon favorably and again, the board could use their own judgment, but I know in the past we've asked people to move the fence back 15, 20 twenty-five feet, depending on the situation, because this is a vacant lawn right now. I think 10 fetus is adequate.
Speaker 2 01:14:14 Or are you willing to remove one of the panels to make the setback approximately 11 feet?
Speaker 12 01:14:19 If I have, I mean, if, if the board is allowing me to keep my funds then no, but if I have no choice, then of course there is no issue with though.
Speaker 2 01:14:28 I've been the board attorney here a long time. We've never had a fence three feet from the property line. So Mr. Henderson, is there an issue with the shed?
Speaker 4 01:14:38 Uh, I don't see a, I think the only issue was there may be a shed. Is there a shed on the property?
Speaker 0 01:14:47 So it was the existing deck, I believe. Mr. Keneally.
Speaker 4 01:14:52 Yeah, I don't was there a variance? I mean, everything is in line with the, with the home, so I'm just trying to see if there was a, with the variances where that
Speaker 2 01:15:06 That's. Okay. I see a reference to a shed. If a shed's not involved, then we won't address.
Speaker 4 01:15:11 Nope.
Speaker 2 01:15:13 Okay. Mr. Chairman, you may want to open it to the board.
Speaker 1 01:15:17 What we do, the board, any board members have any questions or comments Hearing? None. I'll open it to the public. Any one of the public have any questions or comments?
Speaker 0 01:15:32 No one chairman.
Speaker 1 01:15:33 Okay. So with that, uh, I will make a motion to approve this application with the,
Speaker 2 01:15:41 Um, it's as an as amended by Mr. Dean's recommendation that it be set back at least 10 feet. Correct.
Speaker 1 01:15:48 Thank you then.
Speaker 12 01:15:48 How approximately how long do I have to make this
Speaker 2 01:15:51 Change? Very good question. Uh, Henry, how long would you recommend,
Speaker 4 01:15:59 Are you doing the work yourself? Are you having a fence company?
Speaker 4 01:16:05 Um, you know, if it was a fence company, I would probably say two to three months, uh, enlightenment the fact that right now it's tough to get contractors out there, but if you're doing it yourself, I'll offer you the same amount. I think you could probably do it a little bit quicker, but I don't know your situation as far as your, your, you know, your free time. So again, I think two to three months, the board could look at that as you know, maybe 90 days from the, uh, adopted resolutions as a, uh, as a satisfactory amount before the winter, hopefully.
Speaker 2 01:16:39 And Mr. Zimmerman, do you amend your motion to include that timeframe?
Speaker 1 01:16:45 Yes, I will amend that. That's correct.
Speaker 2 01:16:49 Can we have a second on that motion,
Speaker 0 01:16:56 Mr. Tillary? Yes. Mr. Reggio? Yes. Mr. Patel, Mr. Mirando? Yes. Mr. Ali. Yes. Vice chairman's are women.
Speaker 2 01:17:06 Yes. Your application has been approved as amended. I must move it back to 10 feet. You have 90 days to do it from the date we memorialize your resolution. That will be two weeks from today. You don't need to be here for that. And we will mail a copy to you. Good luck.
Speaker 1 01:17:28 Okay. Moving to number 14. Adoption of resolutions.
Speaker 2 01:17:34 The first resolution I have is Raj Kumar Patel. This application was approved. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Reggio? Yes. Mr. Patel. Yes. Human Rocco. Next resolution. Muhammad. Robbie resolution was approved. Mr. Killary. Yes. Mr. Reggio? Yes. Mr. Patel. Yes. Rhonda. Next resolution. Jessica Ghouta. This application was approved. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Reggio? Yes. Mr. Patel, Mr. Minter. Rondo. Yes. Last resolution deer park. Us holding sync application was approved. Mr. . Yes. Mr. Reggio? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Mirando? Yes. Those were all the resolutions I have for you to see.
Speaker 1 01:18:28 Thank you. Thank you, Jim. Number 15 minutes from the regular meeting of August 12th. Can I have well,
Speaker 0 01:18:42 Mr. Tillery? Yes. And who second? I'm sorry. You're on a roll today.
Speaker 1 01:18:55 Okay. Do I have a, well, I'll make a motion to adjourn the meeting and I have a second, a
Speaker 2 01:19:02 Second,
Speaker 0 01:19:04 Roy, on that one.
Speaker 1 01:19:08 Thank you everyone. For being
Speaker 0 01:19:11 In two weeks, we have a decently large tender, lot of used variances. So see you all in two weeks
Speaker 1 01:19:22 And I
Speaker 0 01:19:27 Recording.

Piscataway, New Jersey Public Meeting History

Transcript for Piscataway Zoning meeting on September 9 2021