Transcript for Piscataway Zoning meeting on February 9 2023

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    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 of the Municipal Building Notice made available to the Township clerk Notice sent to the Courier News and to the star ledger. Will the clerk please call the roll?  
Speaker 1     00:00:18    Mr. Weisman?  
Speaker 0     00:00:19    Here.  
Speaker 1     00:00:20    Mr. Patel?  
Speaker 0     00:00:21    Here.  
Speaker 1     00:00:22    Mr. O'Reggio?  
Speaker 0     00:00:23    Here.  
Speaker 1     00:00:24    Mr. Blo. Mr. Hay? Daca.  
Speaker 0     00:00:28    Here.  
Speaker 1     00:00:28    Mr. Mitterando?  
Speaker 2     00:00:30    Here.  
Speaker 1     00:00:31    Mr. Dacey.  
Speaker 0     00:00:32    Yeah. Here.  
Speaker 1     00:00:33    And Chairman Cahill.  
Speaker 0     00:00:34    Here. Everyone please stand and salute the flag over my shoulder here please. Aye. Pledge flag. Mr. Dacey. Do we have any changes to the agenda? I'm not aware of any changes to the agenda. Okay, then let's proceed to item 5 22 dash ZB dash 82 V Ever Star Properties. Mr. Schwartz, you were president. You're muted. Mr. Schwartz. Mr. Schwartz, you're muted. Sir.  
Speaker 3     00:01:27    You know, I thought I unmuted myself instead. I muted myself.  
Speaker 0     00:01:30    It's okay. You just have to repeat yourself now.  
Speaker 3     00:01:33    By this time, I should know better after doing this for several years. My name is Brian Schwartz. I'm an attorney. I represent Eve Star Properties. So good evening Eve Star Properties is looking to build a single family house on five 13 South Washington Avenue. This is a challenging property. It's small. It's located on the corner of a very busy intersection. It's right over the overpass. It's across from a mis, a commercial property. So it does have its challenges. My client, who is a builder, wants to build a nice house, which is going to be an asset to the neighborhood. He is trying to work with the challenges that are attending to an isolated lot like this. And we're going to present testimony tonight. First, you're going to, I'm gonna introduce my client. Secondly, I'm going to have the architect take you through the plans and explain what we think is a very nice property.  
Speaker 3     00:02:32    And then we're going to finish with our engineering planner who's going to explain the statutory criteria. I know this board is familiar with the Eyre Delmer decision. I've been in front of this board before on a nice land lot case. So I know that you're very well educated on the Doey case. I will show that we notify the neighbors of their opportunity to either buy the slot or to give us, or to sell us some of their lot. I got no response. It's been two weeks. I, I still have not respond, gotten any response. And really it's not a property that where we can buy some property from a strip of land from the next door neighbors. Both neighbors have their driveways right against our property. If they were to sell part of their property, not only would they lose their, their driveways, but they would become more nonconforming lots. And so we're kind of stuck with what we have. So with that, I'd like to present our first witness. Please proceed. Mr. Carna, are you somewhere there? Hmm.  
Speaker 5     00:03:39    That  
Speaker 3     00:03:39    Would be the applicant, correct? Yes. And I'm not seeing him.  
Speaker 1     00:03:43    Well, what, what's the name or phone number? Because if he came on as an attendee, I have to make him a panelist.  
Speaker 3     00:03:48    Oh. Oh, okay.  
Speaker 1     00:03:49    That's the issue. What's, what is the name?  
Speaker 3     00:03:54    His name is Manish Carna. And he would be 9 9 44 would be the last four digits. Yep.  
Speaker 1     00:04:03    Let me see if I can make up a panelist. But if he called in, I can't make him a panelist. He could speak, but we can't see him. Okay. If he's not on the  
Speaker 3     00:04:10    Computer. All right, fair enough. Well, I, I could stipulate that he's a very good looking man and  
Speaker 1     00:04:16    He's unmuted. He could speak for himself. No,  
Speaker 3     00:04:22    Mr. Dacey. Unmute yourself.  
Speaker 1     00:04:30    Six to one. Mute.  
Speaker 3     00:04:36    There you go. There we  
Speaker 5     00:04:39    Goomer Swear you raise your right hand. Do you swear the testimony you're give  
Speaker 6     00:04:46    True  
Speaker 5     00:04:47    Your name and address please?  
Speaker 6     00:04:52    Sorry,  
Speaker 5     00:04:53    Mr. Your name and address please?  
Speaker 6     00:04:56    Yeah. Manna address. 10 28 Hazel, New Jersey.  
Speaker 1     00:05:02    Can you, can you spell your last name please? I can't hear you.  
Speaker 6     00:05:06    K a r n Ana.  
Speaker 1     00:05:09    Thank you.  
Speaker 5     00:05:11    Go ahead Mr. Schwartz.  
Speaker 3     00:05:13    Mr. Carna, I, I'd asked that you speak loudly and slowly because the connection's not the best and we wanna get what, what you have to shake. Mr. Carna, what is your connection with Eve Star Properties?  
Speaker 6     00:05:26    Yeah, I'm the member managing member of the Star Properties. And I have,  
Speaker 3     00:05:33    Go  
Speaker 6     00:05:33    Ahead. Yeah, Evie start.  
Speaker 3     00:05:35    And you're and Eve Star owns this property at five 13 South Washington Avenue, correct?  
Speaker 6     00:05:41    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:05:42    And does Eve Star or you have some experience in the building industry?  
Speaker 6     00:05:48    Yeah, I have been in the real estate business for since 2014, you know, when I started as a passion of flipping houses and later on gave me an opportunity to build house. Since 2018, I have been involved with various groups and REITs to build houses here in New Jersey and outside of New Jersey. With every start we, we, we formed, you know, last year in 2022, but before that also we have worked together in other projects and, you know, well, but prior it was all prior to Covid 2020 and 21.  
Speaker 3     00:06:25    And you're familiar, obviously you've worked with our project architect on the design of the plans that we're proposing to the board tonight.  
Speaker 6     00:06:35    Yes, I worked with him. Well, well, yeah.  
Speaker 3     00:06:38    And you intend to build a house that's consistent with in, in conformity with the, the plans and the designs. Is that correct?  
Speaker 6     00:06:48    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:06:48    And what kind, what kind of house is it going to be?  
Speaker 6     00:06:52    It's gonna be a single family house for four bedroom and three bathroom. That's what we propose. And also with the space of two parking, two garage and a space, you know, where kids can play.  
Speaker 3     00:07:08    W what, what caused what attracted you to this property in terms of for the purpose of building a house?  
Speaker 6     00:07:17    We looked at the neighborhood, you know, and generally what happens is when you have, when you're looking at the Resellable property, you look at the area convenience of the transportation and the school district, especially since my customer base are the, my proposed customer, you know, are mostly the family people. So that's what we look for. And we found that attractive because, you know, the school systems is good and also it's nearby the park, which is good for our families, you know, so that's, that's what attracted me.  
Speaker 3     00:07:52    Alright. I wanna talk very specifically with you about the next door neighbors. On one side, on South Washington Avenue five 11, there's a house and on your side, on the side of the house facing your lot, there is a driveway and then a row bushes. Is that correct?  
Speaker 6     00:08:13    Yes, there is.  
Speaker 3     00:08:14    And at some point, did you determine that in fact those bushes are on your property and the driveway even encroaches a little bit onto your property?  
Speaker 6     00:08:24    Yeah, it's a little bit, we had discussion with the owner.  
Speaker 6     00:08:30    We had, sorry, go ahead. Yeah, we had discussed, we discussed with the owner of five 11 and then he said, you know, like he's aware of that and since there was no one was, you know, using that property, that's what they kind of expanded it. But they have no objection if we take, build anything on there, you know, but again, I don't think we can, we are able to make a fence there because it's a corner block property on the South Washington Avenue. But on the, our backyard backside, I think we can still, after certain setbacks, I guess we, we can put the fence there and they have no objection to that one.  
Speaker 3     00:09:15    But, but the, which  
Speaker 6     00:09:16    They're aware,  
Speaker 3     00:09:17    The important thing is that he knows the adjacent owner knows they have no legal rights to encroach onto your property, correct?  
Speaker 6     00:09:25    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:09:25    And they know that they're not gonna be able to do that once you construct a house on your property. Is that also right?  
Speaker 6     00:09:31    Yeah, no, they said, you know, just Marcus us where we have our property line and we won't use it. That's what they've been found with that.  
Speaker 3     00:09:38    Alright. By the same token, their driveway obviously goes right onto your lot line, so there's no area that you could buy from their pr they, they couldn't give you any property, any portion of their property without taking away their driveway. Is that right?  
Speaker 6     00:09:52    Yeah.  
Speaker 3     00:09:53    Now we actually did send letters to the adjacent landowners, isn't that correct?  
Speaker 6     00:10:01    Yes, we did.  
Speaker 3     00:10:02    And I'm going to ask if I can share my screen.  
Speaker 6     00:10:07    Yes, please.  
Speaker 3     00:10:13    Okay. I I beg forgiveness from the, the board of looking at pictures of my grandchildren. But you now should be seeing a picture, a picture of a, of a letter. Is that correct? Is everybody seeing that? Yes. Great. Okay. And this is one of the letters we sent, which was sent on January 17th to the adjacent owner on 11th Street, correct? One 11 11th Street. Yeah. And I sent that out and in fact I took it to the post office and had it stamped that we sent certified mail and it offered to either sell your lot at the fair market value, meaning a building lot price as if the variances were granted or if they wanted to sell a portion of their lot and I gave them a self-addressed stamped envelope and gave 'em a form they could fill out St. Richton buying five 13 South Washington or interested in selling a portion of the property. Is that correct?  
Speaker 6     00:11:13    Yep.  
Speaker 3     00:11:14    And I did the same thing with Mr. Marco, who we determined is the owner of five 11 and we also sent it to the property address of five 11 South Washington Avenue. Is that right?  
Speaker 6     00:11:30    Yep.  
Speaker 3     00:11:31    And you have, I've advised you that in fact we have not received any response to our three letters, is that correct?  
Speaker 6     00:11:41    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:11:42    Okay. Mr. Court, have you provided copies of those letters? Zoning? I I was just gonna say I, I don't, I don't think I've sent them to Ms. Buckley yet, but I certainly can. I've got PDFs and I can them to her after this hearing tonight so that you'll have, please,  
Speaker 5     00:11:57    Please do that. So it becomes part of the  
Speaker 3     00:11:58    Record. It become part of the record. And again, I can represent not only that my office sent them out, but I personally took 'em down to the post office and had 'em stamped. So, so they went and we have done, not received a response that's now been 23 days. Right. All right. Really, Mr. Mr. Carna, that's all I really wanted to ask you other than to confirm that you will in fact build the house in conformity with the design plans approved by this board, correct? Yes. And you know that we plan to build that and you know that if the board is kind enough to approve your application, there may be certain standard conditions attached and you'll comply with those conditions as well. Is that correct? Yes. Yes, we will. All right. Thank you. That's all I have from Mr. Carna.  
Speaker 0     00:12:48    Thank you Mr. Schwartz. Do any members of the board have any questions for this witness? Hearing none, I suggest you put on your next witness, Mr.  
Speaker 3     00:13:01    Schwartz. I'd be happy to. It's Mr. Paraj Kumar, who I believe is on here. Yes, he's under. I'm Mr. Kumar.  
Speaker 7     00:13:12    Yes,  
Speaker 3     00:13:13    There you,  
Speaker 5     00:13:14    Mr. Kumar, swear you the testimony you're about to give should be the truth.  
Speaker 7     00:13:19    Yes, sir.  
Speaker 5     00:13:20    Your name and address please?  
Speaker 7     00:13:23    Sorry,  
Speaker 5     00:13:23    Your name and address, please.  
Speaker 7     00:13:25    Yeah, my name is Persh Kumar. They call me PK for short. Address is 4 72 Westfield Avenue, Clark, New Jersey 0 7 0 66.  
Speaker 5     00:13:40    Go ahead, Mr.  
Speaker 3     00:13:41    Schwartz. Mr. Kumar, what is your profession?  
Speaker 7     00:13:47    I'm, I'm a registered architect in New Jersey for last, I don't know, 2022. 22 years.  
Speaker 3     00:13:56    And have you testified before boards as an expert in architecture within the state of New Jersey?  
Speaker 7     00:14:01    Yes. Testified several boards, in fact, also Piscataway, but that was several years ago,  
Speaker 0     00:14:08    Mr. Schwartz, his credentials are acceptable. Thank, please  
Speaker 3     00:14:11    Proceed. Thank, thank you. All right, Mr. Kumar, did you prepare or have prepared under your supervision a set of architectural plans relating to the construction of a single family dwelling on at 5 5 13 South Washington Street?  
Speaker 7     00:14:26    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:14:26    Are you gonna be able to share those plans with us or do you want me to help you out with that?  
Speaker 7     00:14:32    No, I can share.  
Speaker 3     00:14:33    All right. Why don't you start with, I'm, I'm gonna let you do the talking. If you're able to bring them up and share your screen, why don't you start with the facade, explain what the facade looks like, give us, you know, generally what the construction materials are going to be, and then get into the floor  
Speaker 7     00:14:50    Plans. Okay. Can you see that? Yes, sir. Yes. Okay. So I'll go one one board at a time. So this is a dash one. As you can see, this is the, the main rendering, the, the color rendering. It's a gorgeous house. It's, it's located on a corner lot. It's a prominent corner with Washington Avenue on 11th Street. And so we have kept the natural materials, brick and brick and stucco on these two sides. And because it turns a corner. So we want to continue those, those kind of materials all around the, the, the corner. And then, and then on the back two sides we have siding just like, and, and all these materials are already existing in the, in the neighborhood, in the, in the houses around this area.  
Speaker 7     00:15:56    The, I know there was some concern about the massing and all that, but I, I would like to, you know, say that it's, it's not, it's actually making the neighborhood much better. It's becoming, is raging the archi the bar of the architecture in this area higher so that people, people are actually, when they see a nice house going like that, you know, the neighbor, the neighbors there eventually, you know, they, they like to do something to increase their, make their houses better. And the whole area becomes a better looking, you know, architecturally there is, as you can see, the massing is not, is we cannot have, you know, all the other houses, they are maybe 8,000 years old. And looking at the, at the current trend of, of the housing, you know, I don't think I have done a, a house in maybe 10 or 15 years with a three bedroom house.  
Speaker 7     00:17:02    People are looking for at least a four bedroom house. And I think the, the, the owners, Mr. Carna had, they have done as investors, they have done their research to see, you know, what is sellable, what's not. And you know, these are the minimum standards that, that they are looking to do. And we obviously have to look, look into their requirements and provide for the client what they are looking to do. In any case, you know, looking at the current trends, you know, this is, this is a kind of, I know it's not, it's going to be a little bigger than the rest of the houses, but it's not, it's not ridiculously so big that, that it's, it's not, it's not going to be appropriate. It's just raising the bar. So you know, it's getting, you know, the whole area much better. I I, you can see there are some, some canopies on top of the, the garage and the entrance, and those are standing sea metal, which not on the right side, you see blue color, but actually it's, it's aberration.  
Speaker 7     00:18:16    It's actually, they're gonna be gray, but that's the current trend. It's, and you can see the porch, you can see the ins and outs, the little overhangs, the, the, the double bay windows. You see the, the two garages, they are not right next to each other. They are set back. So, so all of this gives you a sense of breaking the monotony. It's not like you have one big box and we just put it over there. It breaks the massing, it, it makes it aesthetically appealing. As you can see on the top, there isn't much. We, we are about three or four feet lower than what the zoning allows us to do. 35 feet. We are even three or feet, four feet lower than that. And if you see the basement, we, we obviously need to have, and so obviously if there is no storage in the attic, pe you know, the owner would like to use the, the, the basement not only for play area, entertainment area, but also for some of their storage.  
Speaker 7     00:19:21    And obviously we need to get some light in the, in the basement, so you can see some of the windows in the basement over there. And so we had to raise the first floor about three feet, so we can, we can accommodate those, those windows in there. And, and then, so, so I'll go, you know, I'm just gonna show, I'll show this the neighborhood a little bit. So you can see off of the 11th, off of 11th Street, there's a commercial property, gated property, which is really far away. You can barely see that structure in front of, of Washington Avenue. The, the, the house over there. It's the, first of all, I think it's the big right of way for the Washington Avenue itself. And then there is a big setback for that house, you know, across the street. So it's really far away. The, the, the, the other houses, they are not, this is not like Jersey City, it's like a dense, you know, densely high density housing.  
Speaker 7     00:20:31    This is like the, all the houses, they have plenty of setbacks, they're far away. So it's not like it's you, you have, you certainly have a building which is right next to all the other smaller building. And it looks out of, out of, out of place. It's not gonna be like that. They're, they're far away. All these buildings are far away. So, so this building coming up at the corner is going to be, it's, it's obviously looking so gorgeous, it's going to really bring up the value of the whole area. So I'll go to the next page.  
Speaker 3     00:21:08    Okay. Before you go to the next page, if I could just ask you a couple questions. You, you hit on the fact that the, that the height is going to be 30 feet, eight inches to the peak, and that is a little bit about four and a third feet below what the maximum is. Does that reduce the mass of the building from the lot liner from the street?  
Speaker 7     00:21:36    Of course it reduces the mass. It's, but I mean we have this 30 foot eight inches. It's, it's a plus minus because obviously when you have, you know, the height is actually taken from at the four, at the four corners, four corners of the average height, you know, and it can be plus managed a little bit here or there, but, but that's roughly the height that is, you know, it's supposed to be. And obviously it's, you know, we have nine foot ceilings, you know, these days nobody wants to do less than nine foot ceilings. We have to have a basement high enough to get windows in there. We hardly have any attic, but, you know, we try to keep it down as much as possible. So, and then the, the massing is broken up so that it doesn't look like it's one big block of, like lot of houses. They're just boxes. You just put it in there. But this has a character to it. This has, you can see the, the shades and shadows, the, you can see the ins and outs and the massing, it breaks it up, it makes it look very aesthetically a appealing, you know,  
Speaker 3     00:22:46    Speaking of that, the front has a porch and we had some conversation with the zoning office about whether, whether that is a front encroachment. The zoning office says that it is under the Piscataway zoning ordinance C can you comment on that? The fact that the porch is a technical encroachment into the front yard,  
Speaker 7     00:23:09    I don't think it would be considered an encroachment because it's an open space. It's open to the exterior. The, the, the main reason is aesthetics and also weather, weather protection with a canopy on top. So you, you see, it's not like a solid, solid porch, it's an open porch and it's indented inside. So the, the, the main wall, the window you can see is, is back, the main door is in the back. But this is just a decorative pillar, which is, which wraps around. And so it's an open, there is not a usable floor area. This is, this is just for aesthetics and for weather, weather protection.  
Speaker 3     00:23:55    All right. The, we also had some dialogue with the zoning office about the width of the garages. Do you have an opinion with regard to the utility of the garages that they're current with?  
Speaker 7     00:24:12    Yeah, can I, I wanna explain next sheet.  
Speaker 3     00:24:15    Yeah, I, I understand that's sagging into the next sheet. So why don't you go ahead and show that.  
Speaker 7     00:24:20    Okay. Can you see that? Yes,  
Speaker 3     00:24:26    Yes, yes we can.  
Speaker 7     00:24:29    Okay, so this is the, wait,  
Speaker 3     00:24:31    Wait, these are the plans that we submitted, right? This is not a new exhibit.  
Speaker 7     00:24:34    No, no, no. This one already has we submitted? Yeah, so,  
Speaker 7     00:24:43    So as you can see, I mean this is a two car garage and this is the bare minimum garage sizes that we are keeping. Normally, normally, you know, an average car is about six five by 16 feet. A compact car is about five foot eight by 13 seven. And that's gonna fit in here. It's not that it's, it's, it's it's way short. It's just like, you know, but it's bare minimum that, that we can do that in order to squeeze. If, if you wanna squeeze it, it's just not gonna work. The, the garages you have to get around them, you have to open the door and all that, you know, so the, so these car garages that we have, the sizes, they're bare minimum. And, and you can see we have some steps going from the garage and on the right side also. So it's 11, although, you know, the zoning officer said it's minimum requirement is 12 feet.  
Speaker 7     00:25:50    But we have done a lot of, typically, typically if you see the, the two car garages 20 by 20 inside, and, and if you look at these, the cars that we, the sizes of the cars that I just suggested, you can look them up, you know, and, and it's, it, they easily fit in there and it's, it's just slightly smaller on the width side of it. And they're, you know, they're well operatable. So I, but I don't think you can make it any shorter, you know, than this. I wanted to go into the other areas. Can I talk about Brian?  
Speaker 3     00:26:33    Go ahead.  
Speaker 7     00:26:34    So if you see on the left side, this is a 30 foot, 30 foot wide house. So in the front, the front half is about 14 feet. The back half is about 14 foot five. So in the front you have a stair in the middle. You take out four feet out of 14, you are left with 10 feet. You have a dining table, a dining room, a dining table is minimum 40 inches. You need some chairs around, you need area to get around. If you try to squeeze this in, you barely have enough space. You just have a, basically a big passage. And then it's not only the, the, the open space that you look, look at, you have to see when you enter the house, you need some, some space to get around. You have to go, you know, to the backside, to the family room or to the right side.  
Speaker 7     00:27:26    So some of that area is cut off. It's, it's just for circulation purpose. So the furniture that you have, you're gonna keep in your living room is very limited. You have a sofa, maybe, you know, two, two chairs, whatever TV in the front. You have a very limited space to put your furniture here. Same thing on, on the backside, you know, if you make that 14 foot, try to squeeze it in the, the refrigerator comes right next to the, to the stove, the backside, the powder room, pantry, hallways, all of that is not gonna work. And again, your, your family room becomes so, so small with, with the furniture and everything, you need to get to the backside. You have a sliding door, you need some space to get over there. So you need some circulation space. So, so the net area that you're left with for the furniture is not too much.  
Speaker 7     00:28:21    And if you try to squeeze in, I don't, I don't see how that's gonna work. And if you go to the basement, same thing. If you try to squeeze it in the bathroom goes away, unless you move the bathroom to the middle of the middle of the entertainment area, which, you know, you lose the purpose of the, of the entertainment area and any storage or whatever. And, and then the mechanical room has to have your furnaces, your, your hard water heater, your electric panel, all of that. And you need some service area all around to service that equipment. If you try to squeeze that in, you hardly have any, any space left, you need to get around it. You have to look at the circulation space and, and all of that. So it's, it's very, it's tight, you know, right now and to try to make it smaller, I don't see how that can work.  
Speaker 7     00:29:18    If I can go to the second floor, Mr. Bryant, unless the please do. Okay, so go, go, go to the second floor. You see those bedroom sizes on the top, top left corner, I mean bottom left corner, you see 11 seven. By 11 four, I mean imagine a a, a bed, which is about six by six. If you try to squeeze the bedroom here, what is left nine foot by nine foot, you, you don't even have space to walk around with, with two side tables and, and a bed in there. And same thing for the back bedrooms. You try to squeeze them in. You hardly have, you need space to, to be in front of the closets. We try to keep a sliding door. So you have, you don't have the door swinging out into the space and, and you need some space to get in front of the closets.  
Speaker 7     00:30:13    You need to walk around the furniture. You barely have enough space to, to, to walk around with these kind of sizes of bedrooms we have, then you try to squeeze in on the right side, the master bathroom. If you try to squeeze, you have only one, one sink left, you, you, you know, for a master bathroom, nobody really has that these days in the front, the walk-in closet is gonna go away. It's, it, it just becomes one small little thing, which is not appropriate for a master bedroom in the back. The terrace is probably gonna go away. So I don't, I don't see how you can squeeze in, you know, whether it is length-wise or it's width-wise, how you can squeeze it in. And obviously, you know, we have to design it all the way, looking all the way from the bottom to the top, from basement to first floor to second floor, how everything is going work together.  
Speaker 7     00:31:13    We can't design in isolation one floor at a time. And so when you look at the whole design all the way, how it's going to function in three dimension in all the floors, and not only the, the the floor plan, you have to think about the outside also you have to look at the aesthetics, you know how the outside is gonna work with the inside. Everything has to work together and make, you know, everything work properly. And right now we have a really good solution, which is very palatable to the, to the owner, you know, as far as sellability is concerned and all of that. And then I would like to show you the elevations. So the elevations, which I already showed you, the rendering. So this just gives you a detail of, of, you know, the front two sides, the top two elevations, the, you can see the, the brick and the, the stucco. And you see the nine foot ceilings, which is normally every house in the last 10, 15 years I've done, nobody wants a new house at eight foot ceilings anymore. So, so that is, you know, it gives you light and air and, and, and, and then the back.  
Speaker 7     00:32:41    Am I, is there a question or something? No,  
Speaker 3     00:32:44    Go ahead. No, we're good. We're good.  
Speaker 7     00:32:46    And then the back two sides, they're just simple, you know, simple siding with the terras in the back and all of that. So like I said, it, it's broken up, the massing is broken up, so it's not one solid box that's sitting in there. It doesn't look like it's a, it's a big mess. It's broken up. And that's what makes it more appealing. If I just give you one, one last, leave you with the one last impression of the, of the 3D rendering. So as I said, when people see something like this coming up in their area, they wanna make their houses, you know, be better looking. Also, it raises the whole neighborhood that raises the bar of the architectural quality in this whole area. And I don't want to repeat what I've already said about all the, all the colors and the, the, the, the natural materials and all of that.  
Speaker 7     00:33:45    But it, it makes it, it's not, I, anything you do on this site, it's so small. Anything you do on this site is going to be oversized. And so, but we have to look at what is the current trends, what the, what they are able to sell, what people would like to live in, in, in this, this kind of a house in this area. You know, we have to look at all of that and, and still, I don't think it's like a, it's like a dense habitation. It's like heavy density housing right next to each other that this, this building is going to look out of place. All the other houses, they are sparse. They're, they, they have a lot of setbacks all around. So, so it's not like it's, you know, it's, I feel it's still going to be appropriate and yes, it's bigger, but it's not, you know, out of the world that, that we can, we are doing something over here.  
Speaker 3     00:34:43    Okay, but pk, did you take into account the scale of the size of the house with the size of the lot in deciding how to design this house?  
Speaker 7     00:34:56    I'm sorry, say that again.  
Speaker 3     00:34:57    Did, did you take into account the scale in terms of the size of this house as and compared to the size of the lot in designing the  
Speaker 7     00:35:06    Style? Yeah, of course that's of course that's why we try to keep a lot of setback in the front area, which is the main, which is Washington. We have 45 feet when I mean we have, yeah, 45 feet when allowed is 35. And, and, and the width, like I just explained, that's the minimum that, that is possible in this kind of a scenario. So I mean, I don't see how you can make it smaller to fit into this, you know, to meet the requirements that's, that's being presented by the owner.  
Speaker 3     00:35:42    And one last question. Do you think from an architectural standpoint that this house is going to have any detriment to the two lots, the two houses that are adjacent to it, behind it and to the side of it?  
Speaker 7     00:35:55    Actually, I think it enhances. I mean, it, it's going to give them an incentive to make their houses better. I, I don't feel, how is it going to be detrimental? It's not, it's not overshadowing them. It is not, there's plenty of, on 11th Street, there's plenty of setback far away and there is, there is setback, there is 10 feet on, on the side technically it's side, which is adjacent to the, to the other house. So it's 10 feet from the, from the building line to the, to our lot line. And then they have another setback for them. So it's not like it's right on top of each other. It's about maybe 20 feet or so away. So it's, it's not like, you know, there's a lot of gap in between the houses.  
Speaker 3     00:36:45    All That's all the questions I have. Thank you very much.  
Speaker 7     00:36:47    Thank you.  
Speaker 0     00:36:48    Thank you. Pk. Any members of the board of any questions for this witness? Hearing none, Mr. Schwartzman, on your next  
Speaker 3     00:36:57    All right, expert, moving right along. Appreciate that. Our, our next witness is Matthew Water. He is the, the project engineer. And  
Speaker 0     00:37:10    Can we move the screen back to panel?  
Speaker 3     00:37:12    Yes,  
Speaker 7     00:37:12    Please. Sorry.  
Speaker 8     00:37:17    Good evening.  
Speaker 5     00:37:18    Good evening. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 8     00:37:23    Yes, I do. Your  
Speaker 5     00:37:25    Name and address please?  
Speaker 8     00:37:26    Matthew Wilder, w i l d e r one 30 Central Avenue, island Heights, New Jersey.  
Speaker 5     00:37:34    Thank you.  
Speaker 3     00:37:36    Mr. Wilder. You're wearing two hats tonight. You are our planner and also engineer. Are you licensed at state of New Jersey in both professions?  
Speaker 8     00:37:44    I am. I'm licensed engineer and planner. I have appeared before probably 55 boards on 250 applications, including before the Piscataway Township Planning Board several years ago.  
Speaker 0     00:37:55    Mr. Schwartz is his credentials of fun. Please proceed.  
Speaker 3     00:37:58    All right, Mr. Wilder, you're gonna be showing us engineering plans in a minute. Were they prepared by you or under your supervision?  
Speaker 8     00:38:06    Yes, they were.  
Speaker 3     00:38:07    And so you're fully familiar with the contents of those plans?  
Speaker 8     00:38:10    Yes, I am.  
Speaker 3     00:38:11    All right. I'm not gonna ask you questions, I'm going to rely on you to tell the board what you need to say. Why don't you start off with the engineering aspect, then go into planning.  
Speaker 8     00:38:20    Sure. So before we getting into planning, I'll talk some, a little bit about the engineering, but I'd also like to talk about some of the, just the nature of the subject property in and of itself. So the first exhibit I'll share with me this evening is an aerial exhibit.  
Speaker 5     00:38:37    Was this part of the submitted package?  
Speaker 8     00:38:39    This was not part of the submitted package.  
Speaker 5     00:38:42    Mark this as a one and you'll supply a copy to the planning for the zoning board.  
Speaker 8     00:38:46    Yes, I will. And so exhibit A one is an aerial exhibit prepared by my office and dated 27 23, and it's an aerial from near map.com. It's an October, 2022 aerial. And simply what we've done is we've highlighted the subject property in a red outline just to sort of give the board an understanding of where this property sits and what are some of the items surrounding it. So the property is lot 1.01 within block eight 10. This property was actually part of the Edgerton Park subdivision from June of 1907. Generally speaking, this subdivision created lots which were all 25 feet wide and a hundred feet deep. At the time the subdivision was created. This specific property was comprised of two lots, which were lots 5 33 and 5 34. So as you can see immediately to the west, north, and east of this property is similar residential development as what we're proposing this evening south across, across Levin Street is Clems ironworks. And there's actually quite a bit of convergence of zones in this area. Which leads me to my next exhibit, which again has not, was not previously submitted, which is a tax map area exhibit.  
Speaker 3     00:39:57    This will be a two and we'll submit, we'll provide a PDF of this to the board tomorrow.  
Speaker 5     00:40:03    Thank you. Yes.  
Speaker 8     00:40:05    And similar, we've outlined the, the property in red. We have some radius circles that are showing 200 foot and 500 foot radis around the property. We have identified some of the other undersized lots in the same block, which are highlighted in blue. We have the green lines, which designate the different zone boundaries that found in this area. And then what we've also done is approximated the location and size of the homes on the Aja, other properties in this block, just to give the board an understanding of, of size, scope and shape of what we're looking at. So as you can see from the Aithal, the property's located within the R 10 zone, as are the properties to the east and the northeast. To the south is the ally zone to the west across Washington Ave is the R 75 zone. And then you'll even notice a small portion in the north of the property in this area that is actually in the C commercial district.  
Speaker 8     00:40:56    Because of the varying zones and the, and the differing requirements, you have a pretty wide array of uses in this area as well as designs and sizes of, of structures and buildings within the vicinity of the subject site. So we are here this evening seeking variance approval to permit a two-story single-family home on what we've discussed is an isolated undersized lot. So I'll now flip to my plot plan, and this is the plan that was submitted as part of the application. And I'll, I'll very briefly walk the board through our proposal this evening. As Mr. Kumar discussed, the home will have a two car garage along with two accurate parking spaces accessed by 11th Street. There's one parking space in front of the right garage door and there's one parking space on the side of the house in the rear of the home. We have stairs in this area and a concrete pad in this area.  
Speaker 8     00:41:49    They provide access to a sliding glass door in the form of the stairs over here, and then a man door in the back of the garage. We are currently depicting the AC unit on the side of the home, but understanding that it creates a variance, we will relocate that to the north side of the driveway so that it has that at least 10 foot setback. So that is one variance we are not seeking and we will amend the plan to address that. So before going through all of the requested variances, the, the engineering of this plan is, is relatively limited since it is just a single family home. But the last item I'd like to discuss is the grading. So currently the property flows from the southeast to the nor southwest to the northeast. It all flows towards the, through the property to the adjacent properties. Our grading design has mimicked that, but for one exception, the roof drains for the home will direct all runoff into 11th Street where it will travel along the gutter until being captured by an inlet located in front of 1 29 11th Street, which is about 250 feet away down 11th Street to the east from the subject property. So with that in mind, I can sit, I can state with certainty that the proposed development development will result in less runoff being directed to any adjacent properties post-development.  
Speaker 3     00:43:09    Matt, before you leave your engineering portion, we did receive a letter of no interest from the county claim department, correct?  
Speaker 8     00:43:17    That is correct. And  
Speaker 3     00:43:18    I believe I forwarded that to the secretary. I got it quite some time ago. If she does not have it, the board doesn't have it, I'll be happy to send it again tomorrow. It came in email form. Okay, go ahead.  
Speaker 8     00:43:33    So now I'll, I'll sort of put my planner's hat on again that the engineering elements are, are fairly limited. So we are here seeking variance relief to build a single family home on what's commonly referred to as an isolated undersized lot. And with that we are asking for some variance relief. I'll first review the variance relief that is not a function of the application. So there are three variances simply associated with the lot that are unable to be changed. The first is minimum lot area, 10,000 square feet is required and 6,432 square feet exists. Minimum lot width, a hundred feet is required and 50 feet exists. And then minimum lot frontage, a hundred feet is required and 50 feet exists. Again, these are all dimensional variances simply associated with the lot. So our proposal this evening does require some additional variances. And there there are three additional variances that we're seeking.  
Speaker 8     00:44:25    The first is maximum building coverage, 20% is permitted and 25.4% is proposed. A minimum front yard setback, 35 feet is required. And we are proposing 10 feet to the, to the house itself, which is dimension here, seven feet to the porch. And then there's about a four and a half foot setback from the, from the stairs to the front property line. So all of these setbacks are measured to 11th Street. We have the same requirement from a front setback standpoint to Washington Ave. But instead of, we are proposing a 45 foot setback to Washington, as is mentioned over here. So I believe the variance as being saw can be granted under the guise of the C1 or C2 variance criteria. 40 55 D 70 C one states that this board can grant relief if they're an exceptional situation impacting a property. This could be exceptional narrowness, shallowness or shape of a specific property.  
Speaker 8     00:45:25    What we have here this evening is a lot that is 35% smaller than the zone requires. That is exacerbated by the fact that is, it is also a corner lot that's encumbered by two front yards. Just for simply the purposes of comparison, I took a look at what the building envelope would be for a conforming interior lot and what the building envelope would be for a conforming corner lot. So a conforming interior lot 10,000 square feet would have a building envelope of 3,200 square feet to accommodate a home. A conforming corner lot would have a building envelope of 2200 square feet to accommodate a home. What we have is a building envelope that is 331 square feet and five feet wide. So the case which really addresses this type of relief is, as was discussed earlier this evening, is the Do Meier case, Domey versus Lacy Township.  
Speaker 8     00:46:17    That case established the criteria by which these types of applications should be considered first. The, the first requirement to address the Domey case is to address both the positive and negative criteria. I'll speak briefly about the negative criteria when discussing some of the other prongs of the, of the Do Myer case and the positive criteria I'll discuss when discussing the C2 variance criteria. The next is to try to bring the property into conformance by the means of acquiring property or selling property to an adjacent landowner. As was discussed, we issued buy sell letters and have received no responses to the same. The next requirement is to submit architectural plans, excuse me, which provide information on the appearance of the home and demonstrate compliance with the building codes. The architectural plans, which were submitted and reviewed recently by Mr. Kumar, provide all this information. And I believe the rendering does a good job of giving the board a feel of the aesthetics of the home and how you have multiple facades and angles to sort of break up the break up the facade of the home. The next thing we need to do is demonstrate that we attempted to meet the required bulk zoning requirements in a similar nature to other undersized lots in this area. For this, I will jump back to my aerial exhibit, which again is a one  
Speaker 8     00:47:40    So lot 7.01 is this lot right here, which is at the intersection of 10th Street and Washington Ave. That's the only real similarly undersized corner lot in this part of town. So for comparison purposes, I took a look at what the setback is from the structure to this curb line. In the case of lot 7.01, the, the setbacks about 18 feet from the existing curb line to the face of the, the nearest face of the structure. Well, our proposal will have 18 and a half feet from the curb line to the face of the home. And I'll also note that the, when you're on 10th Street and you look at this property, you simply see a facade. You with no architectural embellishments, no angle points to break up the line of the wall. Whereas on the 11th Street side, when you're looking at the subject property, you have all of those architectural elements discussed by Mr. Kumar that break up the, the eye of, of the home and looking at it. So we, we did try to compliment and, and remain consistent with similar undersized homes in this area. So the next item we're required to do is, oh, excuse me. So as it relates to the, to the variances again that we're seeking, there's really no feasible way to meet the required front yard setback to 11th Street. And we're of the opinion that it's more important to meet the 10 foot side yard setback to adjacent left 3.01, which is this property here than it is to meet the 11th street front yard setback. Back  
Speaker 8     00:49:17    On the, the other, another variance that we are seeking, as was sort of discussed, is the garage size. So we are seeking a variance from, for providing 12 by 20 foot garages. The left garage is 11 and a half by 18.75 feet, so slightly undersized in both length and width. And the right garage is 11 and a half feet wide by 23 feet long. So it's longer than the town requires, but again, it's six inches narrower than is required by code. We thought it was important to have a two car garage. We could have reduced the size of the garage and had one car. We wanted to ensure that we had adequate offsite parking for the development. The, with many undersized lots as is seen on my tax map, exhibit eight two in this area. And while on street parking is permitted on 11th Street, you have multiple curb cuts within somewhat close proximity it can make for a disjointed on street parking. So we wanted to make sure that we could provide enough off-street parking. And, and I will note that the, the development is consistent with the residential site improvement standards as it relates to the amount of off-street parking.  
Speaker 8     00:50:30    And then on, on the topic of the proposed building coverage, that's really driven by the size of the lot. Again, the, the building coverage proposed is 25.4%, whereas 20% is permitted, but I think it's prudent to note that the total impervious coverage is under 34, is under 37%, which is, is a nominal amount of impervious coverage for a residential home. So while the building coverage does exceed what is permitted, the the overall impervious coverage is right in line with the other residential homes that you'll see in the area. And the last part,  
Speaker 3     00:51:06    Matt, and on on that subject, you also did testify that the water runoff will be actually better after construction than it is now.  
Speaker 8     00:51:16    Correct. As you can see from the grades on site, the, the highest part of the site is in the southwest corner that roughly elevation 64 and then the north east corner, the elevation 61 and a half. So the existing property fully drained from the, from the streets onto the adjacent properties. While we're maintaining that for the lawn areas, the gar the driveway itself will, will slope toward 11th Street and the roof leaders from the home will direct all the runoff into 11th Street. So we will be reducing stormwater runoff from the subject property onto the adjacent properties.  
Speaker 8     00:51:52    So the, the last prong relative to the Doll Meyer case is we need to demonstrate that the proposed use does not violate any traditional zoning purposes such as light air open space as it relates to the use. It's a permitted use, it's a residential property in a residential zone. So there is obviously no detrimental impact from the use itself. As it relates to the proposed development. We believe we've mitigated the potential detrimental impacts, again, by directing less runoff onto the adjacent properties. But by, and also as it relates to the building coverage and the setback and the massing, we believe we've mitigated those potential detrimental impacts by having multiple facades and angle points that create shadows that, again, create architectural interest in the property, but also break up the line so it doesn't feel like it's overwhelming. And then as I indicated the, again, the building coverage being 25.4%, but the overall pervious coverage is 37.7%.  
Speaker 8     00:52:48    So again, very much in line with what you see for residential development in this area. So I think obviously the, the hardship is clearly evident. We have a 6,400 square foot lot where 10,000 square feet is required. That being said, oftentimes the C2 variance criteria, which is the flexible variance criteria, can provide greater opportunity for development. So 40 55 D 70 C two states were an appeal relating to a property with advanced the municipal land use law. And furthermore, the benefits of the deviation substantially outweigh the detriment a can be granted. So I just briefly spoke about the potential negative impacts during the fifth prong of the Dolley case. Again, stormwater management purposes of, of planning light air open space. I don't believe there are any detrimental impacts from the proposed development a as it's out as it's been outlined. So what I'd like to do is point to the tax map and we, we did do an analysis of the neighborhood and I I thought it would prudent to share that information.  
Speaker 8     00:53:54    So in this table over here, what you can see is we've taken the, all the adjacent properties within this block. We've indicated that their lot, what their lot area is, and then we've approximated their building area again using an aerial. So it is plus or minus, but it gives a, a good sense for what the building sizes that you can find in the area, what the corresponding building coverages are. And then we calculated what the overall b average building size was, and we calculated the average building size to be slightly over 1300 square feet. And if you look at our proposal, what we are proposing this evening is a home, a discounting the covered porch in the deck for a moment that is 1600 square feet. So again, slightly larger than the average home in the area, but certainly in line A and certainly consistent with the new home construction standards.  
Speaker 8     00:54:46    So for that reason, I don't believe that there is a detrimental impact from this application. I do however, believe that the, there are several goals and purposes of planning which are advanced of the municipal land use law. And that is specifically goals. G and i, goal G of the municipal land use law is to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of uses, one of which is residential. So again, this is an infill development. What we are proposing is a residential property, a residential home in a residential zone surrounded by other residential properties. This is where residential development should be proposed. And again, all of the municipal services are already being provided to this lot. So this is, this is your, your prototypical infill development goal. I of the municipal land you saw is to promote a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good civic design and arrangement as Mr.  
Speaker 8     00:55:43    Kumar had outlined. The home is a beautiful home. It will certainly be an aesthetic upgrade to the area from an architectural style. It brings a whole new style to the area again, you know, in increasing the, the architectural interest in the area. And it's important to note that the property is a, a prominent corner lot and the, as the rendering illustrated, you have the stone facing and the other embellishments on both the 11th Street side as well as the Washington Street, Washington Avenue side. So you, you have, you have this prominent corner that is exper experiencing an aesthetic upgrade through the introduction of this home. So with all that being said, I believe that these variances can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good, the zone plan or the zoning ordinance. And I believe that the variances can be granted under either the C1 or C2 variance criteria.  
Speaker 3     00:56:39    Madam, I'm just gonna ask you one question which I already asked. Mr. Kumar, the architect is this house of this scale couldn't have any negative impact on the adjacent houses on 11th Street and on Washington, south Washington Avenue.  
Speaker 8     00:56:54    It would not. And, and again, ignoring the home for a moment, we, we meet the required side yard setback over here. 10 foot is required, 10 foot is proposed. We meet the rear yard setback over here. 25 foot is required, 25 feet is proposed. And again, the, the home is four feet lower than the maximum height is that is permissible. So again, by meeting that, those setbacks adjacent to the adjacent dwellings and proposing a home that is sh shorter than would be permitted by code, I don't believe there is any detrimental impact on the adjacent properties.  
Speaker 3     00:57:26    So where this house will provide adequate open space, light and air for the adjacent in for the neighborhood?  
Speaker 8     00:57:34    Yes, it will.  
Speaker 3     00:57:35    That's all the questions I have.  
Speaker 0     00:57:37    Thank you Mr. Schwartz. Thank you Mr. Wilder. Does anyone on the board have any questions or comments for this witness, Henry, maybe?  
Speaker 9     00:57:46    Yeah, I, I have a few comments regarding the testimony. I mean, there was a lot thrown in there. I mean, I think we could look at this. I obviously the isolated case, you know, has to do more. I think about the fact this is in a use variance case. This we, we, we recognize this is a residential area and I don't think anybody's ever questioned the fact that the residential home doesn't, you know, belong here. That being said, yes, there's three variances. The area, the, the frontage lot width and the one other variance that's preexisting that, you know, obviously that can't be corrected, but the other variance is there needs to be a show of a, of a hardship under the C1 or the C2 flexible analysis. And under the C2 flexible analysis, you, the, the benefits that come out of the C2 analysis cannot only benefit the owner or the builder of the project. And, and as I see it, you know, building a house that's 5% over in coverage, that's four bedrooms, two car garage, that has nothing to do with the improvement of anybody else other than the owner.  
Speaker 9     00:59:08    So I, I don't see the proof of me for a C2 analysis where I think that the, the community as a whole needs to benefit from the deviation in the, in the ordinance. And as far as the c1, again, this is a home that is, you know, if you take away the garage is still, you know, in the high 2000 square foot range, you have a cape, a cape on either side of this home. So, you know, to say that this house is in character with the neighborhood, I just don't see it, especially when you have a cape that's no more than 25 feet high on either side of this home where this is proposed, yes, it's a, it's a difficult lot, it's a corner lot. But I, I think that a better plant could be made where the, the home would be more in conformance with the ordinance.  
Speaker 9     01:00:05    Maybe not completely, but definitely better than four foot setback from the 11th Street roadway right of way on 11th Street, way less than 25% coverage. Again, this, this house is bigger than proposed to be bigger than every other house in the block. No testimony was, was provided as to when those other houses were built. So we don't know if some of those homes that were testified to are bigger because they were built prior to the, you know, when zoning was even in effect. So that information's not there. Yes, there, there may be some other similarly sized homes, but I still didn't see anything to the size of, of what's being proposed here. So to that being said, I believe the majority of the hardship testimony that's provided is really only a hardship to this developer. I don't see why, unless you could prove otherwise a three bedroom home couldn't be built on this lot with a one car garage or again, a, a more modest home that is more in conformance with the ordinances that just, I just don't see it.  
Speaker 9     01:01:18    It's just, again, it's the hardship is for the owner's benefits only. I believe it does impact light air and open space due to the size of the home with the other much smaller homes on either side of this side of this home. And I also feel like the setback variance along the front yard of 11th Street is gonna have a significant impact on that site corridor and the openness of the 11th Street that exists there now in relationship to the other homes. So that's my opinion on this application. Again, I didn't hear, I mean, I would, I would ask Mr. Wilder a question is why couldn't a 25 foot white home be built on this li or could a 25 foot home be built on this lot?  
Speaker 3     01:02:06    Mr. Hinterstein? Could I ask that our architect addressed that question? I I think it's more of an architectural question.  
Speaker 9     01:02:13    Well, as an engineer and a planner, I think he could also testify to the fact that he's seen or knows, and I'm sure he's testified in 55 other applications or boards, that he's, I'm sure he's seen homes of all different sizes. If he can't answer it, then that's  
Speaker 8     01:02:30    Fine. Of course. I mean, we, we've done a lot of work by in shore towns and in shore and in Jersey City. And in those areas you have 18 foot wide homes, correct. This, this isn't that area. So  
Speaker 9     01:02:43    I just asked if a house of that size could be built.  
Speaker 8     01:02:46    The answer is always yes, if something can be done.  
Speaker 9     01:02:48    Okay. Thank you.  
Speaker 3     01:02:50    Thank you Henry.  
Speaker 0     01:02:56    Mr. Schwartz, I'm gonna suggest at this point that you might wanna talk with your client and explore going back to the drawing board and looking at something a little bit smaller. Only because I can read my board and I know where we're going with this. I believe I heard testimony tonight that said that this house will make the owners of the homes on either side wanna improve their homes. That came across as a little condescending. To be honest with you. I honestly think that the house is probably too big for that lot. And I would suggest that you go back to the drawing board because if we do vote on this the way that I think this board is leaning, it will not be favorable outcome for your client.  
Speaker 3     01:03:33    Mr. Mr. Cahill, I appreciate your statements. Could I ask then, the benefit of taking about five minutes and hearing other opinions from the board that would give us more information so we can go back and do something that perhaps will be palatable to the board?  
Speaker 5     01:03:54    Mr. Schwartz, lemme jump in here. We've had a lot of isolated lot cases recently. None of them have been approved with a lot coverage of what you're suggesting.  
Speaker 3     01:04:04    I'm, I'm sorry, I didn't, I didn't hear that.  
Speaker 5     01:04:06    You're breaking up, Joe. I'm sorry. None of the recent isolated lot cases with a lot coverage of, or a building coverage of what you're suggesting have been approved by this board.  
Speaker 3     01:04:17    So I I I, I read you then that that's something that we have to focus on is the lot coverage percentage.  
Speaker 5     01:04:24    Yes. And, and we understand your, your argument about the front setback, since it's a corner lot that could probably be improved. I don't think you're gonna be able to comply, but it could be improved.  
Speaker 3     01:04:38    All right. Of course. It's not my opinion, my, my decision to make, but I'm reading the board loud and clear and I'm not so stupid that I want to go to a, an adverse decision. So could I have just one minute to contact my client and I come back to the board?  
Speaker 0     01:04:55    Please take your, take that one minute.  
Speaker 3     01:04:57    All right.  
Speaker 0     01:04:58    Thank you. I think I lost my screen.  
Speaker 3     01:06:51    All right. Mr. Chairman, you are an extremely persuasive person and I think it's a good idea for us to come back. I'd ask that the hearing be kept open and continued to a future date.  
Speaker 0     01:07:06    Hopefully. Yeah, your choice. March 9th, March 23rd.  
Speaker 3     01:07:11    I'd rather be March 9th cuz I know that later in March I, I personally have a lot of hearings and that gives us a month. And I'd like to think that we could come up with a, an alternative design and submit it within 10 or 15 days, which should be sufficient time for your professionals to look at  
Speaker 0     01:07:27    It. Fantastic. I'd, I'd like you to work hand in hand with Mr. Hinterstein and hopefully we can get a resolution, a resolution to this on March 9th.  
Speaker 3     01:07:36    I appreciate that. All  
Speaker 0     01:07:38    Right. I appreciate you, Laura.  
Speaker 5     01:07:40    This application of Eva Star properties five 13 South Washington Avenue. It will be carried to March 9th with no further notice by the applicant.  
Speaker 3     01:07:50    Could I ask, could I ask one more favor? I don't know if there's anybody not being in person. I can't say if there's anybody from the public who's interested in the application. Is is, is there anybody from the public who's interested?  
Speaker 0     01:08:02    Laura, are there any residents online? Yes, several. Okay. Okay.  
Speaker 1     01:08:07    I mean, one, one one's raising her hand. Now, I don't know if you want her to speak  
Speaker 0     01:08:11    Or not. Not we're continuing. I  
Speaker 5     01:08:14    Think it would be better to wait until we have the final application. Mr. Chairman.  
Speaker 0     01:08:17    Okay. Yes. I, I agree. And  
Speaker 1     01:08:19    Public, I'm sorry, Chairman gonna cut you off for the noticing for your web information. Email me or it's on our website for you guys to log on next time. That way everybody has to log in.  
Speaker 0     01:08:30    We don't need to do further notices, correct?  
Speaker 5     01:08:33    I'll, I'll call you tomorrow, but at this point, no.  
Speaker 0     01:08:37    Alright. Thank you everybody. Okay. Okay. All thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Board members have a good, have a good evening. Any members of the public who are here on this, we're gonna come back on March 9th to hear the rest of the testimony and at that point you'll have an opportunity to give your opinion and your comments. Thank you for being so patient this evening. Let's move along to item number 6 22 CB 94 V, Patricia, Malcolm.  
Speaker 5     01:09:09    Ms. Present.  
Speaker 10    01:09:11    Hello,  
Speaker 5     01:09:13    Are you Ms. Hello?  
Speaker 10    01:09:15    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:09:16    Okay. I need to swear you in. Could you, your right hand  
Speaker 10    01:09:19    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:09:19    Honors testimony you're about to give shall be the truth.  
Speaker 10    01:09:24    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:09:25    Thank you. Could I have your name and address please?  
Speaker 10    01:09:28    Patricia Malcolm, 36 Palisades Avenue, beca, New Jersey 8 8 5 4.  
Speaker 5     01:09:34    Thank you. Could you explain to the board what you'd like to do here?  
Speaker 10    01:09:38    Just enclose my deck for the sunroom and a small little deck on the side.  
Speaker 5     01:09:47    Mr. Chairman, you want, may wanna check with Mr. Henderson?  
Speaker 0     01:09:49    Yes. Henry, could you please offer some insight on this?  
Speaker 9     01:09:53    Yeah, I don't have too much of an issue with them wanting to enclose the deck. The house is an existing, the existing setback of the house is already in a variance condition. The deck is actually indented a little bit so it doesn't exacerbate the existing setback variance. It's really more of an existing one. The only issue is there's an extremely large shed in the back of the property, which is an accessory structure and it's located almost on the property line. I believe it's shown as one foot off the property line. Again, this was probably installed without a permit at some point, but I think that that shed's gonna have to be relocated to a conforming location or at least, you know, a much better offset than what exists there today. Other than that, the only other issue was engineering stated that they do need a five foot easement in front of the property so that it complies with the 25 foot half width right of way in front of the home. Currently there's only 20 foot, a 20 foot right of way. So they're asking for the right of way easement to make the half width right of way in front of the household in a conformance with the, the circulation master plan for the Township. So those are the only two issues if they're willing to comply with those issues. I don't see any issue with the enclosing of the deck, but that's what we need to find out.  
Speaker 10    01:11:27    Okay, wait a minute. The, in the back that was put on the existing little foundation that was there for almost 60 years. It's, it's something that was just put on there. It's been there 50, almost 50, 40 years  
Speaker 9     01:11:41    That shed hasn't been there 60 years,  
Speaker 10    01:11:44    40 years. It's been there 40 years.  
Speaker 9     01:11:46    I don't even think that shed's been there 40 years.  
Speaker 10    01:11:49    It's been there 40 years.  
Speaker 9     01:11:51    That shed's would be, I think in pieces if it was there 40 years. It's a wood structure. I just don't see that shed being there 40 years. But even if it's there 40 years, yes. I don't know if that, our zoning ordinance has been around for quite some time and the accessory structure setback requirements, I think have been in place for quite some time.  
Speaker 10    01:12:13    But it was already, it was already a structure. Was there a, a c block structure was already there and we just said it on top?  
Speaker 0     01:12:20    Well, it's, it's not, it's not there. It doesn't conform to the township's ordinance.  
Speaker 9     01:12:25    If you place the shed top  
Speaker 10    01:12:28    After 40, 40 years, I have to move it.  
Speaker 9     01:12:33    You're not catching this. You put the shed on the existing foundation, the shed. It's not  
Speaker 10    01:12:38    A foundation.  
Speaker 9     01:12:41    The shed requires a permit. You did not take out a permit to put that shed on that foundation. If you would've submitted for a permit, we would've told you that that's not okay. So now, you know, I understand it's been there for quite some time, but it doesn't comply with the accessory structure setback requirements. It's a, it's not a small shed and it's over a hundred square feet. It's an accessory structure and the setback requirement for a structure of that size is eight feet. You're one foot away. So perhaps you wanna look at to maybe they, you can get somebody to, to relocate it for you or at least relocate into an area that's better than one feet. You know, if it was five feet off the property line, I think perhaps the board could look at that variance favorably. But one foot when it was put in without a permit, you know what, what happened is then everybody would just put the sheds wherever they wanted and come in here and, and ask for forgiveness after the fact. But the fact is you need a permit and it needs be eight feet away from the rear property line.  
Speaker 10    01:13:53    Okay. This, this, this is her spouse used this Malcolm. So you're saying we have to move the shed before we can get a variance for the sunroom?  
Speaker 0     01:14:05    That is correct.  
Speaker 9     01:14:06    Yeah.  
Speaker 10    01:14:09    Oh man.  
Speaker 0     01:14:11    Sorry, sorry. And it has,  
Speaker 10    01:14:13    And it has to be five foot  
Speaker 11    01:14:15    From the,  
Speaker 9     01:14:16    I I think what we could do is we could give a variance for to be five feet off of the property line versus the eight, but, because I feel that that's reasonable, but it would have to be moved to at a minimum five feet from the, from that rear property line.  
Speaker 11    01:14:34    Okay.  
Speaker 0     01:14:36    If you're willing to agree that we can move forward with this, I think,  
Speaker 11    01:14:42    Okay, so we  
Speaker 10    01:14:43    Move the shed, we'll get  
Speaker 11    01:14:45    Approved for the sunroom  
Speaker 0     01:14:47    And you also to, to the easement.  
Speaker 9     01:14:52    And the easement is really just pretty much won't, the easement won't have much of an impact. I believe you already have sidewalk in front of your house, but if they ever do road improvements or sidewalk improvements, they typically would go into that right of way area in front of the house. It may already be there, so it might not have a very big impact on you,  
Speaker 0     01:15:15    Jim. Yeah, Jim, do we have to have Mr. Malcolm's warning? He's been given.  
Speaker 5     01:15:19    Yeah. Mr. Malcolm, if you wanna say anything more, we need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand?  
Speaker 10    01:15:24    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:15:24    Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 10    01:15:28    Yes.  
Speaker 0     01:15:29    Okay. Any other members of the board of any questions for this applicant? Hearing none open, open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions about this application? No comments. Laura? No one Chairman. Okay. Close the public portion. Mr. Malcolm, you agreed.  
Speaker 10    01:15:48    Excuse, excuse me, excuse me. I got comment.  
Speaker 0     01:15:52    Oh sure.  
Speaker 10    01:15:52    On property. Approximately when built these two houses next door to you, tried to take two feet of our property and the zoning board and we had to pay $10,000 to get our property back from the builders that was building over there. The builders that was over there cussed me out because we wanted our property back. Bob, Bob Smith came by and he said, oh, let have the property and, and take care of it. And I said, well, if I move next door to you and took two feet of your property and we had paid $10,000 already to get this property back. Cause the zoning board made a mistake up there by taking two feet of our property on the other side of the house.  
Speaker 5     01:16:40    The zoning board does not take property or just property lines. If there was a, in the survey that is a dispute between two property owners.  
Speaker 10    01:16:51    No, but we had, we had a survey done and the survey was, was two feet that they tried to take away from us.  
Speaker 5     01:16:58    Yes. And that was a dispute. You had  
Speaker 10    01:17:00    Those houses and those two houses were supposed to have foot, foot footage in it. Most of them have. They were not supposed to be built, but they were built anyway. Okay, thank you. Okay. Okay, ma'am. So we Yeah,  
Speaker 0     01:17:19    We're gonna take a vote on it right now, ma'am.  
Speaker 10    01:17:22    Yeah, I know. Okay.  
Speaker 0     01:17:23    Okay, ma'am,  
Speaker 10    01:17:24    Make that a trip.  
Speaker 0     01:17:27    I I'll make a motion to approve the app ma'am, if you'd like the application approved. Gimme 30 seconds. Okay.  
Speaker 1     01:17:33    I, I muted them. Chairman.  
Speaker 0     01:17:35    Okay. I, I'll make a motion to approve the application with the stipulations. Any isolated? Can I get a, a second? I'll second. Thank you. Caller roll.  
Speaker 1     01:17:48    Mr. Weisman?  
Speaker 0     01:17:49    Yes.  
Speaker 1     01:17:50    Mr. Patel?  
Speaker 0     01:17:51    Yes.  
Speaker 1     01:17:52    Mr. Regio, you're muted. Roy?  
Speaker 0     01:17:59    Yes.  
Speaker 1     01:18:00    Mr. Bla?  
Speaker 0     01:18:02    Yes.  
Speaker 1     01:18:02    Mr. Hay. Daca?  
Speaker 0     01:18:04    Yes.  
Speaker 1     01:18:05    Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. El? Yes. And Chairman Cahill?  
Speaker 0     01:18:10    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:18:11    Your application's been approved? We will mor memorialize it in a written document at our next meeting and send that document to you.  
Speaker 0     01:18:19    Thank you Malcolms. Let's move on to item number 7 22 dash CB five V. Patricia and David Cape.  
Speaker 5     01:18:29    Are Patricia and David Cape present?  
Speaker 12    01:18:34    Yes, we're present.  
Speaker 5     01:18:36    Okay. I need to swear you both in. Could you raise your hand?  
Speaker 12    01:18:39    Okay.  
Speaker 5     01:18:40    You swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 12    01:18:43    Yes. Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:18:44    One at a time. Your name and address please.  
Speaker 12    01:18:47    Patricia Cape 40 47 Valier Avenue, Piscataway, New Jersey. Oh, 88 54  
Speaker 13    01:18:54    David Cape 40 47 Valier Avenue, Piscataway, New Jersey.  
Speaker 5     01:18:59    Okay. When you were here several weeks ago, we suggested that you go back and submit a revised plan. Have you done that?  
Speaker 12    01:19:06    I did speak to Henry about what the issue was with it and I did speak to my architect and he's in the process of making new plans. I understand that we wanted to do a, a small bump out on the left side of the house to put stairs, which Henry advised we couldn't do. So now we're gonna put the stairs to the, to the addition. We wanna add, we're just gonna put 'em in the front hall closet, like they're gonna be inside the structure. We're not gonna move anything out, which will, I guess reduce the percentage of the building coverage.  
Speaker 5     01:19:42    So I'm not sure that we can go forward tonight before we see the revised plan because we don't know what the revised building coverage is gonna be.  
Speaker 9     01:19:50    Jim, Jim, we do know that. Oh, okay. So, so my recommendation to the capes were that, you know, this house is already extremely over and the existing lock coverage and what the amount was is that they were, they're not gonna add any more to it. I thought, I'll have to look at this zonal report. I'm sure it's in here. I'm praying it's in here. No, she just wrote that it's what the proposed was. She didn't write what the existing was. I'll get that to you to Mar Jim. So basically what the, what the amount is, they're not going to, they're not gonna add any additional building coverage to the home, so they're gonna just relocate the new staircase within the existing structure. And so when I see the revised plans, I'll make sure that that's the case and I'll get you the existing coverage amount so that it complies with that. And that's what the variance would be for  
Speaker 5     01:20:43    That. That's fine. And it looks like the rest of the variances are existing.  
Speaker 9     01:20:48    The rest of the varis are all existing. I don't see any issue with any of 'em. The house does have a slight, you know, look to it, that it could be used easily as a, as a two family home. I would just recommend that a deed restriction be put on at, that's to be used as a, as a single family home so that if it's passed on and sold later on, that people know it's strictly as single family and it's not modified.  
Speaker 5     01:21:17    Mr. And Mrs. Cape, do you have any objection to that?  
Speaker 1     01:21:20    No. No.  
Speaker 0     01:21:21    Okay. Great. Any other members of the board of any questions for this applicant? Hearing none. Gonna open it to the public. Anyone on the public have any questions or comments about this application? Buckley?  
Speaker 1     01:21:34    No. One. Chairman.  
Speaker 0     01:21:35    Okay. We're gonna close the public portion. I'll make a motion to approve this application with Henry's recommendations. I second  
Speaker 14    01:21:42    Aithal.  
Speaker 1     01:21:44    Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Regio? Yes. Mr. Dacey? Yes. Mr. Hidaka? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ellie? Yes. And Chairman Cahill?  
Speaker 5     01:22:00    Yes. Your application has been approved as amended. We'll memorialize it in a written document at our next meeting and mail a copy to you.  
Speaker 1     01:22:08    Thank you very much. Thank  
Speaker 0     01:22:10    You. Take care. Enjoy.  
Speaker 1     01:22:11    Thank you. Okay, thanks. Bye-bye.  
Speaker 0     01:22:14    Let's move on to item 8 22. ZB 10k Harvey Quin  
Speaker 5     01:22:21    Is Mr. Dacey present?  
Speaker 14    01:22:23    Yes. Present.  
Speaker 5     01:22:25    I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand testimony? You're should truth  
Speaker 14    01:22:30    Yes  
Speaker 5     01:22:33    To the board. What you'd like to do here.  
Speaker 14    01:22:38    Excuse me? You  
Speaker 1     01:22:39    Broke up. Jim,  
Speaker 5     01:22:40    Can you explain to the board what you'd like to do here?  
Speaker 14    01:22:43    Yeah, it's just about my friends on Wayne Street that I would like to have it keep it as six feet high all around it.  
Speaker 5     01:22:55    Did you have an opportunity to see Mr. Hinterstein report of February 28th? February 8th? Sorry,  
Speaker 14    01:23:07    I don't, I don't hear  
Speaker 0     01:23:09    Mr., Dacey.  
Speaker 14    01:23:13    Hold on, hold on. I can't hear you. Hold on. Gimme, gimme just a a moment. Brian, please. I don't hear anything.  
Speaker 0     01:23:22    We're not talking. That's why.  
Speaker 14    01:23:26    Okay.  
Speaker 0     01:23:26    Can you hear us now?  
Speaker 14    01:23:27    Yes. Can you repeat it now?  
Speaker 5     01:23:30    Yes. Have you had a chance to see Mr. Hinterstein February 8th report about your property?  
Speaker 14    01:23:35    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:23:37    Can you comply or comment on those?  
Speaker 14    01:23:40    Yes,  
Speaker 5     01:23:42    You can comply.  
Speaker 14    01:23:43    Excuse me.  
Speaker 5     01:23:44    Can you comply with Mr. Hinterstein requests  
Speaker 1     01:23:49    The report that was emailed to you last night? Yes. The staff memorandum.  
Speaker 14    01:23:53    Well, it's about the chair, the chair that is when it came with a house and I believe when we bought the house it was inspected. So  
Speaker 0     01:24:06    It's not conforming. It's, it's not where it should be,  
Speaker 14    01:24:14    But  
Speaker 0     01:24:15    It was installed without a permit and it's not where it should be  
Speaker 14    01:24:18    Was we bought it with it came with the house. We bought it like that,  
Speaker 0     01:24:22    Aware of that approved.  
Speaker 14    01:24:25    Okay. But when you buy the a house, it's, it is supposed to be inspected. It's in there by the town  
Speaker 0     01:24:31    That's between you and your inspector has nothing to do with the Township.  
Speaker 14    01:24:35    Oh, okay.  
Speaker 9     01:24:39    That may, that may be the case now. But back when you bought the house, I don't know when you bought it.  
Speaker 14    01:24:45    Yeah, it was  
Speaker 9     01:24:47    2000 May not  
Speaker 14    01:24:49    2010, 2011.  
Speaker 9     01:24:51    Yes. Back, back then they didn't do those type of inspections, but now they do. So now you go to sell the house, they would see that that shed's not compliant and you probably would get a violation for that.  
Speaker 14    01:25:02    But what is it? Is it, sorry, is it up the back fence or the one on the side?  
Speaker 9     01:25:08    Well, the shed is supposed to be three feet off of that property line. Right now it's about a foot and a half. So it only has to be moved slightly, maybe about another foot and a half and it would comply, which I, I think you can do, I mean it's not that much. It's only a foot and a half. And the fence, the problem is it's, you know, it's a little bit too close to the sidewalk in the road over there on Wayne Avenue. So I think what I asked for is just that it'd be if you wanna keep it solid to move it another 10 feet back or you could change it to a 50% solid picket fence like you have on the rest of the property. That's  
Speaker 14    01:25:45    Up to you. What if what, what if the same fence, I just got it off to four feet and I keep it the way it is.  
Speaker 9     01:25:54    It has to be 50% solid. The, the problem is, it's, it even at four feet, it's gonna be, you know, solid sort of the problem. And it blocks the visibility of that sort of corridor of the road. So you know, where you have your, your picket fence, you know, basically where it stops and then the solid fence starts is where it really should be moved back 10 feet and then you could keep it solid. But we're just saying that it should move it back and reestablish it 10 feet in or you know, maybe even on an angle, but it, it really should be completely moved back. And then if you wanna keep the, the four foot picket fence, it's fine. It's just the fact that it, it's not allowed to be solid or six feet high in a front yard setback, you know. So in this particular case, again, if a permit was taken out for the fence, I think what happened was is that whole fence was a picket fence at one point and then it miraculously got changed to a solid fence but without a permit or else you've been told probably that it had to be either to 50% solid and move back, you know?  
Speaker 14    01:27:08    Yes, yes. Yeah. Yeah. I didn't know that because I was just replacing, so I thought it  
Speaker 9     01:27:12    Was I understand. I understand.  
Speaker 14    01:27:14    No problem, sir.  
Speaker 9     01:27:16    You agree to move it back 10 feet, was it, we're still giving a variance, but it just has to be moved back I think a little bit to open it  
Speaker 14    01:27:23    Up. What is it? 10 feet from the, from the street, 10  
Speaker 9     01:27:26    Feet, 10 feet from the right of way line from the property line. So wherever the property line is, it's, the property line is usually about 10 feet off the curb. And so it would be about another 10 feet from the property line. So it's 20 feet from the curb of the road is what you would probably use as your guideline.  
Speaker 14    01:27:49    Okay. So it's not possible for me to keep it for free and just cut it off.  
Speaker 9     01:27:55    I'll leave it up to the board. My opinion.  
Speaker 14    01:27:57    Not if it's solid. No, not if  
Speaker 9     01:27:59    It's solid. No, because it's still solid. Yeah.  
Speaker 14    01:28:01    Can't do it.  
Speaker 9     01:28:03    You know, I think it's just how close it is to that sidewalk that's a problem as well. You know, I mean you could keep the post there and like I said, you could swap it out for the, if you wanna put back a picket fence, you could do that. I don't have a a, a big issue with that, but again, that would comply. You would really still need the variance for the back portion, but it's the side portion that's the biggest problem right now.  
Speaker 14    01:28:35    Okay. Alright. Alright. Hey, what about, well the chair has, so how gotta move about a foot and a half. Make it three feet off the property line  
Speaker 1     01:28:47    In the report it said eight feet off the property line for an accessory.  
Speaker 9     01:28:51    No, I think that maybe was a different, different one. Okay. Let's see. Yeah, my report just says that the share was installed at a no hardship exists for, to remain in a current location and it should be moved to a conforming location, which is really, I'm looking at your survey. It was only a foot and a half off. Does there, is there a solid, solid fence around the shed now? Is it in the backyard that's fenced in?  
Speaker 14    01:29:18    Yes,  
Speaker 9     01:29:19    It is.  
Speaker 14    01:29:20    Yes.  
Speaker 9     01:29:22    I I personally think that we might be able to grant the, the variance for the shed as is considering that there's a six foot solid fence buffering it anyway, I think the, and it's, it's a small shed. It's, it's I think a hundred square feet in the less, but the bigger issue is the, is the solid fence on Wayne Avenue. You know, I think that that really needs to be moved back to that 10 feet.  
Speaker 14    01:29:47    10 feet.  
Speaker 0     01:29:49    Alright. Mr., Dacey. So we will take the shed moving off the, off the plate and now you just gotta decide on what you wanna do about the fence.  
Speaker 14    01:29:59    Okay. Alright. And how long do I have to fix the fence? Yeah, because right now it's like wintertime.  
Speaker 9     01:30:08    Yeah. I I think June 1st is a reasonable, a reasonable date. I know it's wintertime, but I don't think it's been too, too cold, but you know,  
Speaker 0     01:30:18    It's gonna be 60 reasonable. Yeah,  
Speaker 9     01:30:20    I think we could be reasonable. We'll give you March in April and even May to do it maybe June 1st. It has to be completed  
Speaker 0     01:30:26    By, is June good for you? Mr.? Dacey?  
Speaker 14    01:30:29    Yes. Yes.  
Speaker 0     01:30:30    June's. Okay. All right. Yes. And you, and you're gonna conform with moving it 10 feet off the,  
Speaker 14    01:30:35    From the line. Right from the line.  
Speaker 0     01:30:37    Okay. Anyone, any other members of the board of any questions for Mr.? Dacey for this application? Alright.  
Speaker 14    01:30:44    Or I could keep or I could keep the for free, like before right?  
Speaker 9     01:30:49    Picket fence? Yes. 50% solid.  
Speaker 14    01:30:53    Okay. Alright. Yeah, that's good. June is, it's okay.  
Speaker 0     01:30:57    Okay, I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions for this application or comment? Public?  
Speaker 1     01:31:05    No Chairman.  
Speaker 0     01:31:06    Okay. Close the public portion. I'll make a motion to approve the application solely about the fencing, not relocating the shed. Can I get a second?  
Speaker 1     01:31:14    Not a second. Second.  
Speaker 0     01:31:16    Okay. Please call Aithal.  
Speaker 1     01:31:17    Mr. Weisman?  
Speaker 0     01:31:18    Yes. Thank  
Speaker 1     01:31:19    You. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Reggio? Yes. Mr. Blo? Yes. Mr. Hay. Daca? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ellie? Yes. And Chairman Cahill?  
Speaker 0     01:31:31    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:31:32    Your application has been approved. We'll memorialize it in a written document at our next meeting and mail that document to you.  
Speaker 0     01:31:40    Good luck, Harvey. Take good luck. Alright, let's move on to item number 9 22 dash 1 0 4 V Latasha Jones.  
Speaker 5     01:31:51    Is Ms. Jones present?  
Speaker 1     01:31:53    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:31:54    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?  
Speaker 15    01:32:00    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:32:01    Your name and address please?  
Speaker 15    01:32:03    Latasha Jones, nine 16 Walnut Street. Piscataway.  
Speaker 5     01:32:06    Thank you. Could you explain to the board what you'd like to do here?  
Speaker 15    01:32:09    Yes. My husband and I we're trying to get a deck in the backyard. You wanna, this it, right? Yeah, just trying to get a, a deck built in the backyard  
Speaker 5     01:32:26    And, okay. You may wanna check with Mr. Henderson. Yeah. Henry, you had any issues with this on your staff report?  
Speaker 9     01:32:33    The, the only issues with this is that the AC compressors actually don't comply with the new ordinances. Since these are brand new AC units. They have to meet the 10 yard setback from the adjacent property line. So this would be a variance that wasn't noted, but hopefully they have the catchall phrase, Jim, in their notice  
Speaker 5     01:32:55    And, yeah. And when you say 10, it's 10 feet, not 10 yards.  
Speaker 9     01:32:59    10 feet,  
Speaker 5     01:33:00    Okay. 10 feet.  
Speaker 9     01:33:02    10 feet is the requirement. They're at five feet. I think that that is fine because there is a solid fence on the one side of the property. My only recommendation is that they buffer the front of the compressor units with either landscaping or a solid fence to screen out those units from the road.  
Speaker 5     01:33:23    Was that okay, Ms. Jones?  
Speaker 15    01:33:26    Go  
Speaker 16    01:33:26    Ahead. I have a question  
Speaker 5     01:33:28    I need to swear you in, sir. Could, could you raise your right hand? You swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 16    01:33:34    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:33:35    Your name and address please?  
Speaker 16    01:33:36    William Jones. 1 9 16 Walnut Street, pa, New Jersey 8 8 54.  
Speaker 5     01:33:42    Thank you.  
Speaker 16    01:33:43    Please,  
Speaker 5     01:33:44    Mr. Jones.  
Speaker 16    01:33:45    So you just, just to be clear, just it needs to be covered from the, the road, the condensers, they need to be cut blocked off from the street?  
Speaker 9     01:33:56    Yeah, just the visibility. So it just has to be buffered. You could throw a couple of shrubs in, in front of 'em, like, you know, so that it's just blocked off so I can't see 'em from Walnut Street. That's really it. So if you're planning on putting up a fence there in front of 'em, that's fine. Or we could just throw a couple of shrugs or ornamental grasses or something that'll just buffer  
Speaker 16    01:34:16    'em. It's covered already. I'm not sure if it was covered prior to you seeing it or not because the, whoever we just purchased the house and when we got it, there's a, there's actually a gate where you don't see it. That's why I'm a little confused.  
Speaker 9     01:34:30    So did you install a fence?  
Speaker 16    01:34:32    No, it was already there.  
Speaker 9     01:34:34    There was no fence during construction and slightly after construction. But you're saying that  
Speaker 16    01:34:41    It's not visible, it's behind. It's  
Speaker 9     01:34:43    Not visible from the street. So  
Speaker 15    01:34:44    Then  
Speaker 9     01:34:45    No. So then, then if you're saying there's a, a fence there, then I don't have any issue. We'll issue the variance. If we go out there and there is an offense there, then I'll, then they'll, you'll have a problem. So as long there's a fence stand out, buffering or they're behind the fence, then there's no answer. We'll just get the variance and then since it's buffered, we don't have any other issues.  
Speaker 1     01:35:05    Okay. Okay. Thank you.  
Speaker 0     01:35:06    All right. Any other members of the board of any questions for this application hearing? No. I'm gonna move it over to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions or comments about this application?  
Speaker 1     01:35:19    No. One Chairman.  
Speaker 0     01:35:19    Okay. Hearing, I'm gonna close the public and I'm going to make a motion to approve the application provided that the unit is covered or, or buffered, I should say. Can I get a second please? Call the roll.  
Speaker 1     01:35:35    Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Reggio? Yes. Mr. Bla? Yes. Mr. Hidaka? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ellie? Yes. And Chairman. Cahill?  
Speaker 0     01:35:51    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:35:51    Mr. And Mrs. Jones, your application has been approved. We'll memorialize it in a written document at our next meeting and mail that document to you. Thank you.  
Speaker 1     01:35:59    Thank you so much. Have a have a good night. Good evening guys. Have a good night. Bye-bye. Thank you  
Speaker 0     01:36:03    All coming into the home stretch. Let's go to item number 10. Adoption of resolutions from the regular meeting of January 26th, 2023.  
Speaker 5     01:36:11    Resolution. This application approved Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Patel. Mr.. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Aithal? Yes. Mr.. Dacey.  
Speaker 0     01:36:26    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:36:27    Next, Kinneally, Iran. This application was approved. Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ali? Yes.  
Speaker 0     01:36:41    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:36:41    Next is Keisha Horton. This application was approved. Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Patel?  
Speaker 1     01:36:48    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:36:49    Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ali? Yes. Sharon Cahill?  
Speaker 0     01:36:55    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:36:57    This application was approved Weisman? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ali? Yes. Chairman. Chaill.  
Speaker 0     01:37:09    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:37:10    Next is eight properties. This application was approved. Mr.. Dacey. Yes. Mr.. Dacey. Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Yes.  
Speaker 0     01:37:25    Yes.  
Speaker 5     01:37:26    Last is H properties Z four. This was granted? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr.. Dacey. Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Ali? Yes. Chairman. Cahill. Yes. This evening.  
Speaker 0     01:37:46    Okay, I Number 11, adoption. The minutes from the regular meeting of January 26th. 2023. All in favor say aye. Aye.  
Speaker 5     01:37:53    Aye. Aye.  
Speaker 0     01:37:53    Aye. Thank you. Make a motion to adjourn. All in favor say aye. Aye. Thank you everyone once again for coming out. Appreciate y'all.