Transcript for Piscataway Zoning meeting on February 23 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 00:00:02 All right, Chairman. Speaker 1 00:00:04 Thank you. The, the 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 Cur News notice posted and Bolton Board of the Municipal Building notice made available to the Township clerk. Notice Curian News install ledger. Will the clerk please call the role? Speaker 0 00:00:27 Mr. Tillery? Here. Mr. Patel? Here. Mr. O'Reggio? Hmm. Mr. Blan? Mr. Hay? Daca? Here. Mr. Mitterando? Here. Mr. Dacey And Vice Chairman Weisman Here. Speaker 1 00:00:53 Did I just hear Mr. Ali? Speaker 0 00:00:58 No. Speaker 1 00:00:59 Okay. Will everyone please stand for the SL to the flag? Speaker 2 00:01:10 My pleasure. Allegiance, allegiance, United States of America, states of America to the Republican stands, Liberty, justice for Justice, Speaker 1 00:01:27 Mr., Dacey, are there any changes to tonight's agenda? Speaker 3 00:01:30 Yes. There are two changes to tonight's agenda. 100 Lakeview is adjourned until March 9th, 2023 with no further notice. And St. Moses Church is also adjourned. That is adjourned until March 23rd, 2023 with no further notice. Those are all the changes I have. Speaker 1 00:01:49 Thank you Mr. Kinneally. Moving on to next item on the agenda. Item number 5 23 ZB 10 B Lewis Fordo. Speaker 3 00:02:02 Is Mr. Fordo present? Speaker 4 00:02:05 No. Yes. Speaker 3 00:02:07 Mr. Fortunato, 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 4 00:02:15 Yes. Speaker 3 00:02:16 Thank you. Could I have your name and address, please? Speaker 4 00:02:18 Lewis Fora. Nine Henry Place, Piscataway, New Jersey. Speaker 3 00:02:24 Thank you. Could you explain to the board why you're here? Speaker 4 00:02:27 We're requesting relief for a setback, discrepancy on, on the front of the house, and also for coverage. Speaker 3 00:02:39 Mr. Chairman, you may wanna talk to Mr. Henderson. Yes, Speaker 1 00:02:42 Mr. He Interesting. What was, what is your take on this request, please? Speaker 5 00:02:49 Yeah, there's really no issues with this application. I just wanted to understand why, why the house? Do you under have any idea why this is larger than what was previously approved? Speaker 4 00:02:59 As far as the, believe it or not, the, the addition is exact to, I mean, the whole house is exactly to its plans. I mean, it could be measured, you know, by the foot and you'd see it's, it's exactly the, the way it reads on the plans. There's no, there's no a additional size or, or length or width or anything. Speaker 5 00:03:22 So it was just a mathematical error the last time around? Speaker 4 00:03:26 I think so. Yeah. Yeah, I believe so. Speaker 5 00:03:29 Okay. Yeah, I, I really don't see any issues with this application. Mr. Chairman, again, all the deviations are the minis at best from what was previously approved. Whether it was a mathematical error or construction error, I don't think anything was done here maliciously or with intent. So I don't see any issues with the, with the variances being requested. Speaker 1 00:03:53 Thank you, Henry. Anyone on the board have any questions at this point? Speaker 6 00:03:57 One quick question. Speaker 1 00:03:58 Yes. Speaker 6 00:04:00 What year do we know what year the house was constructed? Speaker 4 00:04:04 The original house or the addition? Speaker 6 00:04:06 Both Speaker 4 00:04:08 House was built in 1961, we think. And the addition was 1995. Speaker 6 00:04:16 Okay. Thanks. Speaker 1 00:04:18 Thank you, bill. Speaker 4 00:04:20 No, I'm wrong. 1996. It was 1996. Speaker 1 00:04:27 Any other questions from the board? Uhrin? None. I'll open up to the public. Anyone from the public have any questions Speaker 3 00:04:36 Or comments Speaker 1 00:04:37 Or comments? Thank you. Ms. Buckley, do you see any hands raised? Speaker 0 00:04:41 No. And Chairman, Speaker 1 00:04:42 Thank you. I'm closing the public section of this discussion. Opening up one more time. Anyone on the board have anything at this point? Hearing none. I'll make a motion that we accept this resolution. Mr. Request, I'll second. Can we have a roll, please? Speaker 0 00:05:07 Mr. Tillery? Speaker 3 00:05:08 Yes. Speaker 0 00:05:09 Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Dacey? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Speaker 6 00:05:14 Yes. Speaker 0 00:05:15 And Vice Chairman Weisman? Speaker 1 00:05:17 Yes. Speaker 3 00:05:18 Your application has been approved. We'll memorialize this in a written document at our next meeting and send that document to you. Good Speaker 4 00:05:24 Luck. Okay? Yeah. Thank you. Speaker 1 00:05:27 Next item, 6 23 dash ZB dish oh nine B Santos Lopez. Speaker 3 00:05:35 Is Santos Lopez present? Yes. Sorry. Yeah, I'm here. Okay. I need to swear you in. Could you, your right hand, do you swear the testimony you're should be the Yes. Your name and address, please? 46 Marcel Lane. And are Santos Lopez? Speaker 7 00:05:58 That is right. Speaker 3 00:05:59 Okay. Could you explain to the board what you'd like to do here? Speaker 7 00:06:03 We would like to build a avo or pavilion in the, in the backyard of our property for kinda like, you know, enjoyment, especially in the sometimes where he gets really, really hot and, you know, we need like, some cover area. We would like to, you know, for enjoyment of, you know, of our backyard and, you know, for the kids and to enjoy. So that's the main, main reason. Speaker 3 00:06:31 Mr. Chairman, Mr. Hinterstein has comments? Speaker 1 00:06:34 Yes, ahead, Mr. Hinterstein? Interesting. Speaker 5 00:06:37 Yeah, Mr. Lopez, it, it appears again that your application called out the 12 by 12 gazebo or pavilion. And that is the common size, I think for that, for that style pavilion. But the, the architectural plans actually show it a little bit larger and as a result, the, I think it's more of a technicality, but the coverage variance is increased by 0.2%. And I also believe that you're gonna need a rear setback variance of one foot to encroach into the rear setback slightly. So, Mr. Kinneally, I would, I think may the, the note that the, the coverage variance for this application should be increased that 0.2%, I guess it will make it 22% building coverage versus 21.8. Yes. And the, and I think there's gonna be a new rear yard setback variance required of one foot to 24 foot instead of 25. Speaker 3 00:07:49 I've got that. Speaker 5 00:07:51 And then Mr. Santos, are you, I mean, Mr. Lopez, are you, you, have you seen the comment regarding keeping the pavilion open? You're not to enclose it? Speaker 7 00:08:00 Yeah, it definitely will stay open. There's not gonna be any, any walls on it. It's just gonna be the, you know, the, just the roof. And that's, that's about it. We'll never enclose the proper, the, the area. Speaker 5 00:08:12 Okay. I don't have any other issues. Speaker 1 00:08:15 Very good. He doesn't, excuse me. Anyone on the board have any questions? Hearing none, I'd like to open this up to the public. Anyone from public have any concerns, comments, questions? No. One. Chairman. Thank you. Close the public part of the meeting on this. I would like to make a motion that we accept this request as outlined with he by Henry, that the slide addition to the coverage, Henry, are, they're gonna have to put in for a second their ends for the setback, or is that We're covering it right Speaker 3 00:08:56 Now. Yeah, we're covering that right Speaker 1 00:08:58 Now. Thank you. Okay. And the inclusion of the, the, the additional variance for the setback. Can I get a second? I'll second. Did you get that, Laura? Speaker 0 00:09:12 I got it. Speaker 1 00:09:13 Okay. Speaker 0 00:09:13 Mr. Tillery? Speaker 8 00:09:15 Yes. Speaker 0 00:09:16 Mr. Patel? Speaker 1 00:09:17 Yes. Speaker 0 00:09:18 Mr. Hidaka? Speaker 1 00:09:20 Yes. Speaker 0 00:09:20 Mr. Mitterando? Speaker 1 00:09:22 Yes. Speaker 0 00:09:22 And Chairman Weisman? Speaker 1 00:09:24 Yes. Speaker 3 00:09:25 Mr. Lopez, your application's been approved. We will memorialize it in a written document at our next meeting and send that document to you. Good luck. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Speaker 1 00:09:34 Moving on. Item number 8 2 3 ZB dash zbikowski. Speaker 3 00:09:45 Is Mr. Kowski present? Speaker 8 00:09:49 Yes, I'm here, sir, Speaker 3 00:09:51 I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? You swear the testimony you're to be the truth? Speaker 8 00:09:57 Yes, sir. Speaker 3 00:09:57 Your name and address please? Speaker 8 00:09:59 Michael Janowski, 30 Brandy Wine Circle. Piscataway. Speaker 3 00:10:03 Thank you. Could you explain to the board what you'd like to do here? Speaker 8 00:10:07 I have a garage at my residence. I would like to close off the garage and make it living space. Speaker 3 00:10:15 And Mr. Hinterstein has a few comments in his report. Perhaps he can address those. Speaker 1 00:10:22 Mr. Speaker 5 00:10:22 Chairman, the, again, this application, I, I have too many concerns with it. The concerns I did have have been somewhat th those questions that I had have been answered since the time the report's been written. The applicant has provided some copies of some permitting for some of the additional elements that are on the property, as well as submitted for a zoning permit for a shed that wasn't previously shown on the survey. So I think all the, the, the extra items have been resolved as far as permitting. The only really issue is the, the garage, the driveway is large enough to accommodate, you know, I think at a minimum three vehicles, which would meet the RSI s standards for off-street parking. With that being said, I really don't see a big issue. Most of the homes in this area are modest ranches. The garages are relatively small. I think Mr. Trojan could probably attest to the fact that he's probably never put a vehicle in that garage because I don't know if it's large enough to, to handle a, a car. So again, I don't, I don't see any issue with the, with the garage being converted due to the fact that the off street parking is, is sufficient. Speaker 1 00:11:47 Thank you. Are there any questions from the board? Hearing none, I would like to open this up to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions or concerns or comments they'd like to make at this time? Speaker 0 00:12:01 No. One Chairman. Speaker 1 00:12:03 Thank you. Ms. Buckley. Clo I'd like to close the public portion and I'd like to make a motion that we accept this request. Can I get a second? Thank you. Can you take a call? Roll call. Speaker 0 00:12:18 Mr. Tillery? Speaker 9 00:12:19 Yes. Speaker 0 00:12:20 Mr. Patel? Speaker 1 00:12:21 Yes. Speaker 0 00:12:22 Mr. Hidaka? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. And Mr. Weisman? Speaker 1 00:12:27 Yes. Speaker 3 00:12:28 Your application has been approved. We'll memorialize it in a written document at our next meeting and send that document to you. Good luck. Thank you, sir. Speaker 1 00:12:37 Moving forward, item number 9 23 dash ZB dash oh eight V. That's Banner assets llc. Speaker 3 00:12:49 Mr. Arch, are you present? Speaker 9 00:12:51 I am. Good evening, members of the board, board professionals. My name is Tim Arch. I'm an attorney licensed in the state of New Jersey. I'm here representing Banner assets. This is a very similar actually to the first application that you just heard tonight in terms of what we're asking for. This is a, a property where it was granted approval in 2011, 11 for a single family home on an undersized lot. The prior owner began construction, the property was foreclosed on. The current owner is seeking to continue that construction and to build that approved house. And when they put in an as-built survey of the foundation, it was discovered that the foundation was slightly off from what the approval had stated. And when I say slightly off, it is, let me just make sure my numbers are correct here. I believe it is five inches off on the one side and two inches off on the front. Speaker 9 00:13:44 And so because of that, the, the current owner is not able to get their permits to do any of the additional construction and to finish out the house. And so we're here tonight asking for an amended approval in order to account for that two inches on the front, which does put us into the 35 foot front yard setback by two inches and that additional five inches on the side. We did receive a report from Mr. Hinterstein on February 22nd. We are in agreement with all the comments and will comply with all the comments of the report. I do have Mr. Michael Burns here, who is a representative of banner assets, if the board has any questions for him, although quite frankly, I don't know if any additional testimony is needed as Mr. Hinterstein said on the first application. I think this is the definition of diminimus changes to the previous application, even more so than that prior application. So with that, I will turn it over to you. Again, if you have any direct questions for Mr. Burns, he is here. If you have any additional questions for me, but that is the relief that we're seeking tonight. Speaker 1 00:14:52 Thank you Mr. Arch. Mr. Hinterstein, you agree? Speaker 5 00:14:58 Yeah, I think Mr. Arch summed it up pretty well. I mean, all of the variants being requested are de in nature and they've agreed to all the conditions that are sort of outstanding on the property currently. So with that being said, I won't belabor this point. I I think that the application could be looked on favorably as long as they're in agreement with the, the items in the staff report. Speaker 1 00:15:23 Thank you. Any questions from the board? Hearing none, I would like to open up to the public. Any questions, concerns, or comments from the public? Speaker 0 00:15:34 No. No one. Chairman. Speaker 1 00:15:35 Thank you Laura. Closing the public section. I'd like to make a motion that we accept these changes and vote. Thank you. Kalpesh, please take the oath. I'll second it. Speaker 0 00:15:48 Mr. Tillery? Speaker 10 00:15:50 Yes. Speaker 0 00:15:51 Mr. Patel? Speaker 1 00:15:52 Yes. Speaker 0 00:15:52 Mr.. Dacey? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Chairman Weisman. Speaker 1 00:15:57 Yes. Speaker 9 00:15:59 We'll Speaker 5 00:16:00 Memorialize this at our next meeting. Mr. Arch. Speaker 9 00:16:02 Thank you. And Speaker 10 00:16:03 This is Michael Burns on behalf of Banner. I just wanna thank the town, the board for their time and consideration on, on this file. And we, we look forward to finishing this project and, you know, improving the property for the Township and for ourselves and everybody around. Speaker 1 00:16:21 Thank you Mr. Burns. Speaker 10 00:16:23 Thank you. Speaker 1 00:16:25 Moving forward. Item number 10 23 dash ZB dash oh six V, you dream l l c. Speaker 9 00:16:35 Good evening again. Members of the board and board professionals. I'm Tim Arch. I'm still licensed attorney in the state of New Jersey and I am here representing you. Dream L L C, which is the owner of a property at it is 3 97 Park Avenue. You might know it as a, a property that contains a, I believe it's a barbershop and a, a convenience or deli on the bottom. And there are two residential units that are on the top. Now this is also an application that in 2011 was in front of the board for a preexisting nonconforming use for the bottom commercial uses. And at that time this board was, was kind enough to grant that preexisting use on the commercial uses underneath. But what never went addressed was the residential units or the two apartments that were on top. So we did PR present a packet to the board of all the evidence that we were able to find. And, and quite frankly, it's interesting cuz some of the evidence that was from the 2011 preexisting can really just apply to this one as well. I would like to share my screen just briefly just to go over three pieces of those evidence just to highlight One second. Speaker 9 00:17:53 Can everybody see my screen okay? Yes. So this, the first thing that I'm showing, this is an affidavit that was submitted in the 2011 application for preexisting non-conforming. There were several affidavits, this is just one of them. They all are substantially similar and all of them indicate that the, that the individuals have been living in the town since prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinances. And all of them ha indicate that the building has always been operated as two commercial store businesses operated on the first floor of 3 97 Park Avenue. And the reason I highlight that is obviously if there wasn't a non-commercial use on the second floor, it would be odd to specify or call out that there are commercial uses on the first floor. So I just wanted to bring that to everybody's attention that those affidavits are specific as to as to talking about the first floor, which you would only do if there was also a second floor that had a non-commercial use. Speaker 9 00:18:53 That's just by implication. I also want to go to two different articles that we were able to find. One is from June 10th, 1975. Now the prior owner who was a man named Mr. Shrum, he was the one that got the pre-existing non-conforming use in 2011. You can ignore all the conflict charges and stuff and all the salacious things in it because that, that really has nothing to do with that. But the one thing I did wanna highlight here is it talks about Mr. Schram's properties and it actually indicates that cuz Mr. Schrum is a housing inspector and it indicated that his properties, most of which were residential units. So again, some indication that it wouldn't be out of character, that the two residences above this building have been used as residences and have been there as long as the building has been there. And then the final piece of evidence that I think is, is worth noting is an article from March 26th, 1967. Speaker 9 00:19:48 And this is a birth announcement which are quite common pieces of evidence. And this one is for Jackson's son to Ronald and Claudette. And they list their home addresses 3 97 Park Avenue in Piscataway. It's possible I, I assume that they were living in the barbershop or the deli, but I assume that it probably makes more sense that they were living in one of the residences above those two. So those are the pieces of evidence that I wanted to highlight that were some additional things as well. We also provided photographs of the existing residential units to show that they are well suited to be residents as there's separate utilities, they're upkept as as residences and the new owners now wish to get permits to upgrade them and to, and to bring in residents. And that's why we're here In order to address those two residential units, which we believe have always been up there. Speaker 9 00:20:42 There's no indication from the, from looking at the building, it's a single, it's a masonry building. There's no indication from looking at it that there's anything different from the second floor to the first floor that there were any conditions. I will also note that we did get a, a memo from, or a staff report from Mr. Hinterstein that indicated a couple different comments. We are happy to comply with all the comments on Mr. Stein's report. Of note that we are going to delineate four spaces for the residential units within that parking lot so that they have their own spaces. And we are gonna provide a handicapped space that's gonna be striped as well as do some maintenance work and on the apron, as Mr. Hinterstein pointed out. And, and also clean up the, the, the one side of the building or, or the, the areas of the building that Mr. Speaker 9 00:21:33 Hinterstein indicated. So with that said, as I said, I do have Ms. Rema Patel who is here. She is a representative of you dream. If the board feels that there is any direct questions that need to be raised to her, she can certainly testify. But as I said, this is, this is for all the reasons that the preexisting nonconforming were granted back in 2011. I think those also essentially apply to the, to the application here. And I think that it was quite frankly just an oversight that it wasn't addressed at that time for the, for the two upper units and it was only the, the first floor that was addressed. So I'll, I'll hand it over to the board if they have any other questions or if they have any questions of Ms. Patel. Speaker 3 00:22:13 Mr.. Dacey does delineate parking spaces will be assigned two to each apartment Speaker 9 00:22:22 In Mr. Henricks? Yeah. Yeah. It says four parking spaces. So there's two apartments, so I assume it would be one for one apartment or two for one apartment, two for the other. I don't know if Mr. Hinterstein wanted us to just label them as residential parking and then the between the residents they can figure that out. But if you want it to be delineated between each unit, we could do that as well. Speaker 3 00:22:44 Mr. Hinterstein, do you have an opinion on that? Speaker 5 00:22:46 Well, the requirement is two spaces for each unit. So you may maybe make sense to delineate it for each unit and obviously if there's one unit that doesn't need it and perhaps the other unit that does, they can work that out amongst themselves. But again, the requirement is two parking spaces per per apartment. So I think it'd probably be beneficial to, to label it that way so that there's no confusion. Speaker 9 00:23:17 We can certainly do that. Speaker 3 00:23:19 And Mr. Weisman, I've reviewed the board's resolution from back in 2011. It certainly seems that this building preexisted the adoption of the zoning ordinances in Piscataway and nothing appears to have changed in the building since 2011. So in addition to the evidence submitted by the applicant, I believe the board's resolution in 2011 also supports the contention that this is a preexisting nonconforming use. Thank you. Speaker 1 00:23:45 Any questions from anyone on the board? Speaker 5 00:23:48 Mr. Chairman? I just have one question. Speaker 1 00:23:50 Yes, Mr. Speaker 5 00:23:52 Mr. Arch? There's a, a site plan or a floor plan that's been submitted. It appears that that's just one of the apartments. Can I assume that the other apartment is a mirror image of the floor plan that was provided? Cuz I didn't see a floor plan for each, but I could have missed it. So Speaker 9 00:24:11 I do not know the answer to that question off the top of my head. I will ask Ms. Patel if she knows the answer. Are the, the two units just mirrored Speaker 3 00:24:19 Ms. Patel, I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth? Speaker 11 00:24:25 Yes sir. Speaker 3 00:24:27 Your name and address please? Speaker 11 00:24:29 FEMA Patel 67 Park Avenue. Piscataway, Speaker 3 00:24:32 Thank you Speaker 11 00:24:34 From, yes, they are mirror images, same two bedroom, bathroom, kitchen outline. In terms of the site plan for the first one, Speaker 5 00:24:50 I have no other further questions. Mr. Chaill? Speaker 1 00:24:52 Thank you Henry. Are there any questions or concerns from anyone on the, any member of the board? Hearing none, I'd like to open up to the public. Are there any questions, concerns, or comments from the public on this request? Speaker 0 00:25:09 Nope. No one. Chairman. Speaker 1 00:25:11 Thank you Ms. Public Closing the public, the public portion. I'd like to make a recommendation to move forward. I will. A proposal to Thank you Ms. Buckley, can we get take a roll. Speaker 0 00:25:27 Mr. I'm sorry, who? Second? Kalpesh. Patel. Patel. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr.. Dacey? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. And Chairman Weisman? Speaker 1 00:25:44 Yes. Speaker 3 00:25:46 We'll memorialize this at our next meeting. Mr. Arch. Speaker 9 00:25:49 Thank you so much. Everybody. Have a wonderful early evening it looks like. Speaker 0 00:25:53 Yes. Speaker 11 00:25:55 Thank you. Speaker 1 00:25:57 Moving forward, the next item, adoption of resolution from the regular meeting on February 9th, 2023. Speaker 3 00:26:04 First resolution is Patricia Malcolm. This was an application that you approved Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr.. Dacey. Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Speaker 0 00:26:16 Yes. Speaker 3 00:26:18 Weisman? Yes. Next is Patricia and David Cape, which was a vote to approve Mr. Hillary. Yes. Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. What? Mr. Uca? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Weisman? Yes. Next is Harvey Ez. This was an application that you approved Tillery. Mr. Hillary? Yes. Mr. Patel. Mr.. Dacey. Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Speaker 1 00:26:44 Yes. Speaker 3 00:26:46 Chairman. Weisman. Speaker 1 00:26:46 Yes. Speaker 3 00:26:47 Final resolution. Latasha Jones. Which you voted to approve. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Speaker 1 00:26:54 Yes. Speaker 3 00:26:54 Mr. Haka? Speaker 1 00:26:56 Yes. Speaker 3 00:26:56 Mr. Mitterando? Speaker 1 00:26:58 Yes. Speaker 3 00:26:59 Chairman. Weisman. Speaker 1 00:26:59 Yes. Speaker 3 00:27:00 Those are all the resolutions I have this evening. You. Speaker 1 00:27:03 Thank you. Moving on. Adoption of the minutes from the regular meeting on February 9th, 2023. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Oppos. It passes. Thank you. I make a motion for adjournment. Do I get a second? Thank you everyone. Have a good night. Speaker 3 00:27:21 You too. Have Speaker 1 00:27:22 A good night everyone. Take care. Good job, Steve. Thank you. Thank you Steve. Have a good one. Job well done. Thank you. Alright.