Transcript for Piscataway Planning meeting on December 11 2024

Note: Transcripts are generated by rev.ai and may not be fully accurate. Please listen to the recording (below) if you feel any text is inaccurate.

Speaker 1     00:00:05    Actually, we're gonna have seven tonight. Mr. Barlow.  
Speaker 3     00:00:09    Who else?  
Speaker 1     00:00:11    The only ones we're gonna be missing are Carol and Alex.  
Speaker 3     00:00:16    Who's number seven  
Speaker 1     00:00:19    By she on.  
Speaker 3     00:00:20    Oh. Oh. I only had  
Speaker 1     00:00:23    Hello?  
Speaker 2     00:00:26    Hi. Good evening, all this is PCTs control room. Laura. Just letting you know all systems are a go here. So whenever you're ready, you can begin.  
Speaker 1     00:00:41    We have, oh, it is seven 30. All right, Madam Chair, we're ready to go.  
Speaker 0     00:00:48    Good evening. The Piscataway Township Planning Board meeting will please come to order. Adequate notice of this meeting was provided in the following ways. Notice published in the Coer News Notice posted on the bulletin board of the municipal building notice made available to the township clerk Notice sent to the Courier News and the star ledger. Will the clerk please call the role  
Speaker 1     00:01:10    Mayor Wahler. Present Councilwoman Cahill. Here. Ms. Corcoran? Here. Reverend Kinneally?  
Speaker 2     00:01:20    Here.  
Speaker 1     00:01:20    Mike Foster.  
Speaker 0     00:01:23    Here.  
Speaker 1     00:01:23    Mr. Ahmed?  
Speaker 2     00:01:26    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:01:27    He's here. And Madam Chair  
Speaker 0     00:01:29    Here. Mr. Barlow, would you read the open public meeting Notice please?  
Speaker 3     00:01:34    Certainly. Madam Chair, this meeting is being conducted through an online meeting platform and keeping with the Department of Community Affair Guidelines Planning Board has tried its best to comply with the Open Public's Meeting Act and the guidelines in dealing with the online public meeting. The applicant whose matter will be heard this evening had the login information for the online meeting platform in their notice. Members of the public who wish to be heard will be afforded an opportunity to be heard. We just ask that you raise your hand at the appropriate timeframe and will do our best to comply with the guidelines in the open public meeting. Zach? Thank you, Madam Chair.  
Speaker 0     00:02:13    Thank you. The flag can be seen over my right shoulder. Can we all recite the Pledge of Allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation. One nation nation under God, indivisible, with, with liberty and justice for all. Can we have the swearing under the profess of the professionals tonight, please?  
Speaker 3     00:02:42    Certainly. If Mr. Foote and Mr. Clarkin, if you could raise your right hand. Do you swear any testimony you give before this board this evening will be the whole truth, so help you God?  
Speaker 1     00:02:54    I do.  
Speaker 2     00:02:55    I do.  
Speaker 0     00:02:57    Mr. Barlow, are there any changes to our agenda tonight?  
Speaker 3     00:03:01    Madam Chair, the only slight change is item number 12. The River Crest matter will be heard with number 11. They're gonna just switch places. And as I've previously advised, Mr. Kinneally will be handling the River Crest matter because of a conflict. So I will have to recuse myself.  
Speaker 0     00:03:21    Okay. May I have a motion from some members of the board to pay the duly audited bills?  
Speaker 4     00:03:35    Reverend Kinneally, I make a motion that to pay, duly pay the bills.  
Speaker 0     00:03:39    Can I get a second please? Second. Second. That second. Okay. Phone call  
Speaker 1     00:03:47    Please. Mayor, did you get that?  
Speaker 0     00:03:48    Mayor Wahler? Okay. Yes,  
Speaker 1     00:03:49    I got everybody. Thank you. Madam Chair. Mayor Wahler? Yes. Councilwoman Cahill? Yes. Ms. Corcoran? Yes. Reverend Kinneally? Yes. Mr. Foster?  
Speaker 0     00:04:00    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:04:00    Mr. Hammed? Yes. And Madam Chair?  
Speaker 0     00:04:03    Yes. Item number eight, adoption of resolution to memorialize the meeting of November the 13th. Oh, none. We're not available. Do that? None. None. Okay. Move on to item eight. I mean, item nine, adoption of the minutes for the regular meeting of November the 13th. Reverend  
Speaker 4     00:04:23    Kinneally, I make a motion for the adoption of, of November 13th, 2024 meeting.  
Speaker 0     00:04:29    Thank you. I second please. Dawn. Second.  
Speaker 1     00:04:36    I got you, Dawn.  
Speaker 0     00:04:37    Thank you.  
Speaker 1     00:04:39    Yes. Councilwoman Cahill? Yes. Ms. Corcoran? Yes. Reverend Kinneally.  
Speaker 4     00:04:45    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:04:46    Mr. Foster?  
Speaker 0     00:04:47    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:04:48    Mr. Hammed? Yes. And Madam Chair.  
Speaker 0     00:04:51    Yes. Discussion for one year, extension of time for item 22 PB zero six slash zero seven V as in Victor at 1112 Brookside Road block 8 0 0 1. Lot nine. Tim Arch. Sorry. Go ahead, Mr. Barlow.  
Speaker 3     00:05:15    I I was just gonna say Madam Chair, this was a prior approval by the board for a subdivision, minor subdivision on November 13th, 2024. Mr. Arch for Mr. Prasad's office at forwarded a letter ex requesting an extension of time. They're running into two issues. The first is they have an N-J-D-E-P permit that has been filed and they're waiting for sign off from the DEP. The second matter is they're purchasing a 10 foot strip of property from Piscataway Township. It's my understanding from speaking to Mr. Clarkin that that should hopefully take place by the end of January as a result of those two items. I guess as an abundance of caution, they've ex requested an extension of time for one year till November 16th, 2025. Mr. Prasad, if you have anything else you want to add to that, feel free. I couldn't,  
Speaker 0     00:06:14    Couldn't have said it better myself.  
Speaker 3     00:06:17    So it's, it seems to be a reasonable request. And if it's the board's pleasure Madam Chair, it would be appropriate for a motion to grant the extension of time.  
Speaker 0     00:06:28    Okay. Do I have a motion from the board for, is it to grant this extension request  
Speaker 5     00:06:33    Motion Councilwoman Cahill.  
Speaker 0     00:06:36    Do I have a second?  
Speaker 1     00:06:37    Dawn Corcoran second  
Speaker 0     00:06:39    Roll call please.  
Speaker 1     00:06:40    Mayor Wahler? Yes. Councilwoman Cahill? Yes. Ms. Corcoran? Yes. Reverend Kinneally?  
Speaker 4     00:06:47    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:06:47    Mr. Foster?  
Speaker 0     00:06:49    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:06:49    Mr. Hammed? Yes. And Madam Chair?  
Speaker 0     00:06:53    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:06:53    And Madam Chair, I just to.my i's and cross my t's. I I did prepare a resolution confirming the extension of time. If the board wants to grant that, that's one less thing you have to do next month's meeting.  
Speaker 0     00:07:07    Okay. Do I have a motion to grant the, to propose the resolution to grant this extension of time.  
Speaker 4     00:07:18    Madam Chair, Reverend Kinneally, extended extension of time. So moved.  
Speaker 0     00:07:25    Do I have a second? I'll  
Speaker 5     00:07:26    Second the resolution. Madam Chair,  
Speaker 0     00:07:28    Roll call please.  
Speaker 1     00:07:29    Mayor Wahler? Yes. Councilwoman Cahill? Yes. Ms. Corcoran? Yes. Reverend Kinneally?  
Speaker 4     00:07:36    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:07:36    Mr. Foster?  
Speaker 0     00:07:38    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:07:39    Mr. Ahmed? Yes. And Madam Chair?  
Speaker 0     00:07:42    Yes. Thank you  
Speaker 3     00:07:45    Madam Chair. Since the next matter is number 12, the river crest, I will step out and allow Mr. Kinneally to take over and I'll come back when it's, when it's done and, and be ready for snack innovations.  
Speaker 0     00:07:58    Okay, Mr. Kinneally?  
Speaker 6     00:08:00    Good evening Madam Chair and members of Planning board. This is a, a discussion of whether or not property located at River Crest Drive and Orchard Street meets the criteria to be determined as a non condemnation area in re in need of redevelopment. I believe you have your, your planner here, Mr. Clarken, who performed that study who will give you a briefing on his findings. Yes,  
Speaker 0     00:08:24    I forward Mr. Mr. Clark and you have already been sworn in. You wanna  
Speaker 7     00:08:28    Thank you very much Madam Chairwoman. I believe I'm sharing my screen.  
Speaker 6     00:08:32    You are.  
Speaker 7     00:08:34    All right. So I will get into it. So as Mr. Kinneally, so Kinneally said, my name's James Clark in Foresight Planning. I prepared this study for this board. This is for blocks 7 3 0 5 lots, 19 0 1, 20 and 21. I'm actually going to skip ahead all the way to the end 'cause you'll see a nice little map so we can just get some context of where we are in terms of the township. So if you were going along River Road and you took River Crest Drive all the way to the end, you would hit River Crest Cabana Club. So as you can see, lot 19.01, which is where the pool or swim club actually resides within those boundaries. That is the majority of the study area. The two others are Paper Street lots, which I'll get into a little bit more. But as you can see, mostly residential surrounding the club.  
Speaker 7     00:09:25    You have Connecticut, Mac Middle School, you have Martin Luther King, right next door is a rehab center and North is the former Ericsson site. So skipping a back three, maybe I'll kind of give some more context as to current conditions. Oh, skipped too many, you know, just describing these lots. So as I said, lot 19.01 was is where River Crest Cabana Club is located. It was originally constructed back in 1960 as a private member summer pool club. So the other lots are actually owned by the townships. So that's Lot 20, which is 0.1 acres or 51 60 Orchard Street and Lot 21 51 70 Orchard Street, which is about 0.09 acres. As I said, they were, they are Paper Street lots and were never constructed and they've really just become a part of the gravel parking lot for the pool. No need for that street ever arose. So it just was never constructed and kind of just stayed that way.  
Speaker 7     00:10:34    This entire study area, all three lots is within your R 10 residential zone, which as you know is primarily single family residential. So during my onsite investigation back at on September 30th of this year, I observed the conditions and as you can imagine, the summer swim club was shut down for the summer season. So no one was there, everything was kind of packed up for this for the fall and the winter. But basically what is there today on the parcel is a six lane, 25 yard swimming pool. You have a smaller kitty pool, a one story cabana club, a small half story pumphouse, two storage sheds, a party tent, a volleyball court, basketball court diving board, and other accessories tables, things of that nature that you would typically find at such a pool club. So the Cabana Club itself is probably the biggest structure or is the biggest structure on the property. It has an open air entryway, a lifeguard office, two bathrooms and a kitchen all found within that one story Cabana club. And it, it's not more than 2000 square feet, the half story pump house is sort of half built into the ground behind the pool. It includes all your pumps, filters, plenty of equipment that you would find to operate two pools that is located there. It's pretty small, only about a hundred square feet.  
Speaker 7     00:11:53    So just as a note that in discussions with the president of the swim club, it was advised that membership has significantly declined in the last few years where really the swim club is not really able to survive economically. You know, expenses continue to rise as we've all seen in this economic environment and total membership fees are declining. So at the conclusion of the 2025 Swim swim club season or summer season I should say, they plan to close down for good. And it's my opinion that the stated disrepair, substandard and all and wholesome conditions for both the patrons and the workers there may have contributed or did contribute to the decline in membership and ultimately leading to the decision to close the pool permanently. We did do some, you know, due diligence as always no building or zoning records were found for this lot though however it is in your sewer service area.  
Speaker 7     00:12:52    And also due diligence was also done for environmental concerns and nothing came up, not even wetlands, not one hit for N-J-D-E-P. So no environmental concerns for these three lots. I think I already went over the surrounding land uses on the maps. So I'm gonna skip to the master plan perspective, which is pretty consistent through all the study studies that I prepare for this board so that you know, as you know, they can develop a land is very rare in this township and this increases opportunities for redevelopment. And since this was first developed in 1960, this definitely counts as an older section of the township that is ripe for redevelopment in my opinion.  
Speaker 7     00:13:34    So now that I've kind of given some context of where we are and what is the current conditions, I'm gonna show you some photos of what I found when I was there. So this first photo is kind of looking at the cabana club on the inside. So that first door right there is the lifeguard office. There's a middle door for a men's restroom and then towards the end was the snack bar such kitchen, this is an outdoor view of the clubhouse and you kind of see the volleyball court as well. So you can see that the construction is original back to when it was first opened in 1960. Nothing has changed. It's one story center block structure.  
Speaker 7     00:14:16    Moving on, you can kind of see just, this is more off to the side of the cabana club, but the first picture or that I think shows some of the unwholesome conditions right here is a picture of the woman's restroom which lacks proper a DA access. And I'm pretty sure the layout does not meet building code. You know, when this was built it was, you know, the building codes weren't the same as they are today and just the layout and the footprint may, may not meet code, which makes it unwholesome in my opinion. Here's a picture of the lifeguard office, which as you can see, see is very small. It definitely cannot serve all the staff members that were hired during the summer season as there's only one desk and not really enough room for everyone that needs a working space. This is the curb or entryway sidewalk I should say from the gravel parking lot.  
Speaker 7     00:15:08    And as you can see, just not graded properly for a DA access. Just another lack of improvements that have not occurred since it was a really opened. It's just a view of the gravel parking area that was never improved. This is another picture of the men's room. As you can see, no a DA stall very tight quarters probably does not meet building code if it were to be inspected today. This is a view actually kind of looking north. That's a, the party 10 I mentioned. And then this is the first picture of the kitchen slash snack bar. You can see the hot water heater under there and the small ventilation fan that I don't think would meet codes standards today for a modern kitchen.  
Speaker 7     00:15:56    And then you, you can kind of see the tight quarters here, all the storage space, the three fridges and it's actually blocking a window, which is another lack of outside of success. This is just a wide view area. You can see the pump house in the back and those are the two pools closer view of the tent in the shed. And then another thing is the pump house was also built originally in 1960 and it has not had major improvements. So I think that in itself is substandard to today's requirements. And then a few other photos of the other shed towards the rear. Definitely too close to the property line and some in inadequate storage. And I think, yeah, that's pretty much it. So now on to applying the statutory criteria. So based on these conditions, it's my opinion that it meet criteria A, which is the buildings are showing conditions that are in a state of disrepair, substandard, unsafe, and have unwholesome guest and working conditions that have left in their current state is unsafe to the health, safety and welfare of the public. There's substandard structures that have not been improved. As I said, very small compact unsafe spaces, no EDA access and the lifeguard office is not large enough to handle all the staff levels. But also more importantly just ventilation and lack of air conditioning on these very hot summer days as they get hotter is definitely of a safety concern.  
Speaker 7     00:17:32    As I said, the restrooms in the kitchen definitely seem or are showing lack of a DA access and ventilation concerns. And so overall I think that lot 19.01 specifically, 'cause that's the one that holds the Cabana Club, meets the criteria for a of the redevelopment code or law I should say. Now criteria E is more concerned with two primary factors that have to be met in order for the properties to meet the criteria. So the first is diverse ownership or diverse ownership of a title that discourages undertaking improvements. And I think this is, I'm not sure why that skipped ahead, but I definitely think that's the case here as the two paper lots. Paper Street lots that I mentioned are owned by the townships. Sorry I jump around.  
Speaker 7     00:18:29    So that's one owner. And then the River Crest Cabana Club is the private owner of the actual pool. So this diverse ownership of the respective properties has been an impendent impediment to land assemblage and hinders redevelopment of all three lots into a more modern and better use. So sorry, was there a question? So yeah, so by creating a single parcel and would possibly create one owner for the V for the redevelopment process and put us in more productive use than currently exists today. And then, sorry, I was talking about diversity of ownership and the other is lack of proper utilization of the lots, which I also went into. You know, it's definitely of note that neither of the paper streets have ever had a need for either the township because there was just no need for access for a new neighborhood. And also it's never been developed by private capital either as there has been no need for those two small paper lots in the pool. So with those two portions of the criteria being met, I think that criteria E of the local redevelopment and housing law applies to all three study a lot areas or study area lots I should say.  
Speaker 7     00:19:53    And I think designating them as such would open up more opportunities for land assemblage and redevelopment to reverse the negative conditions. And then finally, criteria H as you know, is the smart planning criteria. I think redeveloping this would be a really great opportunity for infill on a small scale that would advance smart growth property principles such as a walkable community near schools and recreational parks. And it would promote development in an area of existing infrastructure given that the residential neighborhood is already there. You have proper access, roads and sewer service and all those important infrastructure needs for such a small scale infill. So I find that the study area also meet the H criteria. So in summation, I recommend that this board and the township council designate the study area and area in need of redevelopment based on the fact that blocks 7 3 0 5 lot 19.01 meets criteria A and that lots 19.01 20 and 21 meets criteria E and H. If we move forward with that, we'll be able to prepare a redevelopment plan that would also go before this board and hopefully reverse the stagnant conditions that I've shown in this report. So it's my recommendation that we designate the study area as a non condemnation area in need of redevelopment.  
Speaker 7     00:21:16    So with that I can take some questions.  
Speaker 0     00:21:18    Thank you. Could you take your exhibit down? Thank you. Sure. Members of the board, do you have any questions of Mr. Clark and at this time regarding his testimony?  
Speaker 5     00:21:29    Madam Chair, it's Councilwoman Cahill. Mr. Clarkin, I was re-going, I was re-looking through your report. Did I see, and I apologize now I can't exactly find it. Did I see a space where it's the recommendation for an area of redevelopment but without a suggested use? Or am I wrong on that?  
Speaker 7     00:21:59    Yeah, usually in need of redevelopment studies do not suggest to use, I just think possible uses could be residential in nature given the location to schools, parks, et cetera, on a small scale infill.  
Speaker 5     00:22:19    Okay, very good. Thank you so much.  
Speaker 0     00:22:23    Any other members of the board have questions then? I think we should open it up to the public for any questions that they may have on this testimony. Members of the public, anyone in the public wishing to make a comment on this testimony by Mr. Clarkin regarding the redevelopment. This area in need of redevelopment.  
Speaker 1     00:22:54    No one chairwoman.  
Speaker 0     00:22:56    Thank you. Close to the public  
Speaker 6     00:22:59    At this point. Madam Chair, if there's no more discussion, if you, if the board agrees with Mr. Clark's findings, then you would entertain a motion to find this area to be in need of redevelopment on a non condemnation basis.  
Speaker 0     00:23:14    Would someone like to make that motion?  
Speaker 8     00:23:18    Madam Chair Dawn Corcoran. I'll make that motion.  
Speaker 0     00:23:21    Thank you. Keno. Do I have a second?  
Speaker 4     00:23:24    Reverend Kinneally. I'll second that motion.  
Speaker 0     00:23:26    Thank you. Roll call please.  
Speaker 1     00:23:28    Mayor Wahler?  
Speaker 0     00:23:31    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:23:32    Councilwoman Cahill? Yes. Ms. Corcoran? Yes. Reverend Kinneally?  
Speaker 7     00:23:38    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:23:39    Mr. Foster?  
Speaker 0     00:23:41    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:23:41    Mr. Hammed? Yes. And Madam Chair?  
Speaker 0     00:23:44    Yes.  
Speaker 6     00:23:45    Madam Chair. In anticipation of that vote this evening, I have prepared a resolution, which is before you recognizing that finding.  
Speaker 0     00:23:55    Thank you. Mr. Kinneally. Would member of the board like to propose this resolution or rec this resolution, move this resolution, I should say  
Speaker 4     00:24:06    Getting. So move this resolution  
Speaker 0     00:24:10    As an area in need of an an area of  
Speaker 4     00:24:13    Redevelopment.  
Speaker 0     00:24:15    Do I have a second? Please join cor. Second. Thank you. Roll call.  
Speaker 1     00:24:22    Mayor Wahler? Yes. Councilwoman Cahill? Yes. Ms. Corcoran? Yes. Reverend Kinneally?  
Speaker 4     00:24:29    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:24:30    Mr. Foster?  
Speaker 9     00:24:31    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:24:32    Mr. Ahmed? Yes. And Madam Chair.  
Speaker 0     00:24:35    Yes.  
Speaker 6     00:24:36    That concludes my service to the board this evening. Have a good evening everyone. I'll return you to Mr. Barlow. Thank you very much.  
Speaker 0     00:24:43    Happy holiday.  
Speaker 6     00:24:44    Thank you.  
Speaker 1     00:24:45    See you margin.  
Speaker 6     00:24:47    Thank you Jim.  
Speaker 0     00:24:54    Item number 11, snack innovations 41 Ethel Road, 21 PDB 36 slash 37 V as in Victor. Amendment to prior approved in reference to the mezzanine space. Mr. Kevin Morris, attorney.  
Speaker 9     00:25:17    Thank you. Good evening Madam Chair and women members of the board. My name is Kevin Morris, attorney Woodbridge, New Jersey. Appearing on behalf of the applicants N Innovations Incorporated subject properties at 41 Ethel Road West and Piscataway, the board's familiar with the site snack innovations produces manufacturers healthy snacks, been conducting business in the municipality at that location for a number of years. The business is doing well, it continued to grow and we appeared before this board back in 2022 and received site plan and bulk variance approval for the applicant to construct a substantial addition to his existing facility at the property for warehouse area and office space. Part of that approval included a variance for 57 parking spaces. The approval was memorialized by a resolution dated February 9th, 2022. Now subsequent to the approval the applicant had switched its engineer to a project engineer, switched its architect and over the last two years has been constructing and has for all intents and purposes finished a really beautiful addition and nice site improvements.  
Speaker 9     00:26:29    But with the switching of the architect, some confusion ensued and the applicant constructed a 2,984 square foot mezzanine within the approved warehouse area. You know, the architect was under a mis apprehension that mezzanine space in a warehouse does not constitute floor space. I can tell you in some municipalities that is the case. That is not the case of Woodbridge Township. But in any event, 2929 84 square feet of mezzanine that was not approved was constructed in the existing approved building. Now that mezzanine area would require parking at one parking space for every 500 square feet, 5.97 a total of six spaces. We have a parking variance for 57 spaces. So there was no parking on site available for the mezzanine area. That's the bad news. The good news is part of the original approval called for the applicant to construct 1000 square feet of additional office space area.  
Speaker 9     00:27:32    Now that office space area at one for 200 square feet would would equate to five spaces. So the applicant, the construction is done, they're desperately seeking to get a TCO and and conduct their business operations. So the solution we propose for you is the applicant is prepared to forego the construction of the 1000 and square of 1000 square foot of office space. If we do that, 'cause it hasn't been constructed yet, that frees up five parking spaces. We need one additional space for the mezzanine area. It's inside the approved building. And that additional space can be achieved by simply striping a space in the constructed and approved parking area. There'll be no amendments or physical construction necessary to put the space in and thus no increase in impervious coverage. So that's how we get to the six spaces. And the applicant understands should the board look favorably on adjusting the approval to accommodate this, that if in the future the applicant seeks to construct that 1000 square foot office space or any other improvements, that they would have to come back to the board because that would trigger a requirement to get an amended site plan approval.  
Speaker 9     00:28:44    This is really an adjustment to an existing approval, but this solution today that we propose keeps us in parity with the 57 parking spaces that were approved and will allow the applicant to go forward and get its operations underway in its beautiful new facility and to enjoy the benefit of the substantial investment it has made in the Piscataway business community to make healthy snacks for all of us. So that's our request. And I submitted a letter to that effect with two sketches, the sketch set equipment, mezzanine, it's really just a warehouse mezzanine, that's how the architect labeled it, but it's simply warehouse area. And we request that you look favorably upon this request to accommodate the adjustment. And again, we maintain parity required parking and no changes to the existing constructed approved site plan.  
Speaker 3     00:29:37    Madam Chair, if I may just, just briefly, this is one of those cases where really little, little di minimis changes the staff can, can handle those in-house and and deal with them. This isn't a full blown change that would require Mr. Morris to come back for an amended site plan with experts and things like that. It kind of in a gray area. I think it's a little bit bigger than the staff can just, you know, do in-house on their own. And that's why Mr. Morse is, is in front as he indicates it doesn't change the, the proposed change would keep the parking where it is. Mr. Morris, I just had one question for clarification, just so I have it in my own head. In the prior resolution on, on page two, paragraph four, the applicant had proposed 1420 square foot office mezzanine.  
Speaker 9     00:30:34    Oh, that was, that was existing.  
Speaker 3     00:30:36    That, okay, so you're not, it, it's not that you added to that, it's just a new section with 29 84.  
Speaker 9     00:30:44    Correct.  
Speaker 3     00:30:45    Okay, because I was saying if you were just adding the 1500, it, it might even make it more di minimis, correct?  
Speaker 9     00:30:51    Correct.  
Speaker 3     00:30:52    Okay. Okay. So it's a new  
Speaker 9     00:30:55    Brand new construction right.  
Speaker 3     00:30:57    Within the warehouse. Okay. Correct. So again, Madam Chair, this is more for the board to consider Mr. Morse's request and if the board feels it's a, that the slight change is appropriate, I think just a, a motion approving the change would be appropriate and that would give the staff the ability to inspect and, and issue the, you know, co I guess is what, and Ms. Corcoran can speak to that is the hold up.  
Speaker 8     00:31:36    Right? They came in for a zoning permit, which was denied because this wasn't part of the original approval. So if the board does look favorably upon this, then the applicant can reapply for their zoning permit and then the construction official and his department can finish the review.  
Speaker 0     00:31:51    Jingle bells,  
Speaker 8     00:31:53    I'm gonna apologize. That is my clock. I'll turn, take that down. It's cute.  
Speaker 0     00:31:58    Good. Invaded by Jingle Bell. Lemme  
Speaker 8     00:31:59    Finish this matter. My thought,  
Speaker 9     00:32:01    I thought I was in Disney World for a moment, right?  
Speaker 8     00:32:04    I'm sorry.  
Speaker 0     00:32:05    Okey do but  
Speaker 8     00:32:06    Staff staff has no issue with this.  
Speaker 0     00:32:08    Oh, okay. So, okay. Board members. Is it, does everyone agree or would have any questions? Ms. Cahill? Anyone hearing no questions on the board? Would someone like to propose a resolution or motion? Motion? Ms. Cochran  
Speaker 8     00:32:35    Madam Chair, I will make the motion that the there, that this matter be approved, that they can construct the 2,984 square foot mezzanine and they will add, add the additional parking space as Mr. Morris has indicated,  
Speaker 3     00:32:52    And with the understanding that if they do add that office space later, they'll have to come back before the board for site. Perfect.  
Speaker 0     00:33:01    Do I have a second? Second.  
Speaker 4     00:33:02    That motion. Reverend Kinneally. I'll second it.  
Speaker 0     00:33:05    Thank you. Roll call please.  
Speaker 1     00:33:07    Mayor Wahler? Yes. Councilwoman Cahill? Yes. Ms. Corcoran? Yes. Reverend Kinneally?  
Speaker 4     00:33:13    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:33:14    Mr. Foster?  
Speaker 9     00:33:16    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:33:16    Mr. Hammed? Yes. And Madam Chair?  
Speaker 0     00:33:19    Yes. Thank you.  
Speaker 9     00:33:22    Alright, thank you ladies and gentlemen. My last planning board meeting for the year. So the best to all for Happy holidays and a blessed New Year.  
Speaker 0     00:33:30    And same to you, same to you. Awesome  
Speaker 4     00:33:33    Kevin.  
Speaker 3     00:33:34    Take care. Kev, thank you for switching that prior matter. Also much appreciated.  
Speaker 0     00:33:42    Item number 1324 PB 18 slash 19 V as in Victor, GWL four Corporate place, LLC. Preliminary and final site plan in both variance.  
Speaker 10    00:33:55    Good afternoon, Madam Chair, members of the board. Good afternoon. David Per from Bob Smith and Associates for the applicant. GW four corporate LLC. Yes, property is at four Corporate place block 5,001 lot 2.02 in the LI five zone. This is a continuation hearing. We had the first hearing on November 13th, 2024. It was a preliminary and final site plan with bulk variances to remove an existing office space and patio area from an existing warehouse and construct 13 truck loading spaces, 11 tractor trailer storage spaces with NI 219 parking spaces, a bio retention basin and some other site improvements as well. We requested two bulk variances for a minimum rear yard setback where 50 feet is required and 49.62 feet is existing and for off street parking where 286 spaces are required. And 219 spaces our per proposed with eight EV charging spaces. The applicant at the prior hearing agreed to install the fiber optic conduits, excuse me, along the property frontage, eliminating that variance and also install fencing around the proposed bio retention basin.  
Speaker 10    00:35:08    Also eliminating that variance. I believe testimony was completed on November 13th, 2024, but the board decided to postpone the vote. If so, the applicant can provide a written letter from the current tenant who is a bit difficult stating that the tenant will vacate at the end of January, 2025. Such written confirmation has been provided to the board's professionals and it was submitted prior to this hearing. Tonight. I have all of the applicant's professionals available. I don't have any direct questions for any of the witnesses, but they are available if the board should have any questions. And with that, I'll leave it to the board  
Speaker 0     00:35:50    Members of board. Do you have any questions of the witnesses that appeared previous in our previous meeting? They're available for your questioning.  
Speaker 11    00:35:59    Mad Madam Chair if I may jump in. I, I guess Ms. Corcoran, I, I guess what are we exact, I remember when we left off the last one. What assurances, if we prove this tonight that this is actually gonna, I guess there won't be able to pull building permits or anything like that,  
Speaker 8     00:36:15    Correct? I, I did. I just wanna say I did go back out to the site today and quite frankly there's just trailers all over that property. You cannot circulate that site. I think it is extremely important that we do condition, if the board looks favorably upon this, that there be a condition that no zoning permits, no building permits can be granted until all these violations have been addressed and until the tenant has leave left the premises.  
Speaker 3     00:36:42    And, and if I can just follow up on that mayoral, my understanding is the, and Dawn, correct me if I'm wrong, the code enforcer also went out and inspected it and, and absent of trailers, he felt that there had been a significant improvement to the site. In terms of the other items that were of concern to the board and the board's professionals in the past, it's those trailers and I guess I don't wanna speak for the applicant, but I assume the trailers will go when the tenant goes. But I would certainly urge the board as a condition of any approval to put that nothing will be issued in terms of building permits, zoning permits, anything of that nature until the tenant has vacated. And those items have been remediated. And we, and again, Mr. PSAT's correct, the letter was submitted from the tenant indicating the target date for the vacation.  
Speaker 0     00:37:40    Is there a target stated target date?  
Speaker 3     00:37:43    Yes. 1 31 25 Madam Chair,  
Speaker 0     00:37:47    That will be incorporated in the motion.  
Speaker 3     00:37:50    If the board acts favorably, I would suggest that a condition of approval be that you know that and that nothing will, they can have their resolution. They're just not gonna move forward until the, the municipality is satisfied that the, the site has been remediated appropriately. And I think that would be a, a, a fair compromise. Mr. Prasad, do you have any objection to that?  
Speaker 10    00:38:16    Oh no. We anticipated this would be a condition of the approval. I spoke to the applicant earlier today and they completely understand they want the tenant out of there as much as you do.  
Speaker 0     00:38:27    Should we open it to the public?  
Speaker 3     00:38:29    You should. Again, Madam Chair, real quickly,  
Speaker 0     00:38:32    Members of the public, this is a continuation of a previous application before the board at our previous meeting on November the 13th. If anyone in the public would like to ask any questions about this application, would you please cite, raise your hands and indicate your question. Did you have a question?  
Speaker 1     00:38:55    No. Madam Chair,  
Speaker 0     00:38:57    Close to the public. Okay. Board members, would someone like to make a motion and including all of the  
Speaker 3     00:39:03    Real, I I should have put this on the record and I apologize and I didn't mean to cut you off. The record should reflect that while Mr. Atkins was present for the last hearing, he's not present today so he would not be voting. Mr. Foster, who was not present at the last hearing but is present this evening, has reviewed the transcript of the hearings and has signed the appropriate document indicating he is fully familiar with the facts of the case and he would be entitled to vote  
Speaker 0     00:39:32    And so he's eligible to vote. Okay.  
Speaker 3     00:39:33    Yes, Madam Chair. So I just wanted to put that on the record. Thank you.  
Speaker 0     00:39:36    Thank you. Would someone like to make a motion in cooperating all of the discussion that we've had and conditions?  
Speaker 4     00:39:48    Reverend Kinneally, I'll make a motion that we go forward with this application pending. The conditions are met. As I had stated before, this is the reason why we're having this discussion again tonight, because of the cleanup, it wasn't completed and the applicant wasn't ready to move. But according to this date, if the applicant complies with everything, I make a recommendation that we approve.  
Speaker 0     00:40:19    Well, I have a second  
Speaker 1     00:40:21    Madam Chair. Second.  
Speaker 0     00:40:24    Who's that? Whose name is that? Who's giving a second? Okay, Mr. Mr. Barlow. Mr. Barlow will enumerate all the, the, the conditions,  
Speaker 3     00:40:36    I'm sorry, Madam Chair.  
Speaker 0     00:40:38    I said you'll enumerate the conditions. They'll  
Speaker 3     00:40:40    Be set forth in the resolution. A hundred percent. Madam Chair, everything that's been agreed to on the record, I will incorporate into the resolution for next month.  
Speaker 0     00:40:46    Thank you. Roll call please.  
Speaker 1     00:40:48    Mayor Wahler? Yes. Councilwoman Cahill? Yes. Ms. Corcoran? Yes. Reverend Kinneally?  
Speaker 4     00:40:54    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:40:55    Mr. Foster?  
Speaker 0     00:40:57    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:40:57    Mr. Hammed? Yes. And Madam Chair?  
Speaker 0     00:41:01    Yes. Thank you. Thank you Madam Chair and members, have  
Speaker 1     00:41:05    A great night. Thank  
Speaker 0     00:41:06    You. Happy Holiday. Happy Holiday. Happy holidays. Take care.  
Speaker 4     00:41:11    Bye-bye.  
Speaker 0     00:41:15    Item number 14 L rrn properties, LLC, bulk variance and minor subdivision 24 PB zero eight slash zero nine V. Sorry, I have old problem Mr. Wiley,  
Speaker 3     00:41:32    You were there?  
Speaker 13    00:41:35    Yes. This is an application for a minor subdivision that would permit us to renovate an existing house, which has a lot of deficiencies as an older home. And it also would project that on the adjacent subdivided lot a new single family home would be erected. Tonight we have our site engineer, our architect as well as our planner. We also have the principal of LRN properties who actually this is her family's property. If we could have her testify if there becomes certain questions with the application. So without further ado, I'd like to start with Les Walker, our engineer.  
Speaker 3     00:42:42    Mr. Walker, if you could state your name, spell your last name for the record and give us your professional address, sir.  
Speaker 14    00:42:50    Sure. Leslie, L-E-S-L-A-E, Walker, W-A-L-K-E-R. My address is Meridian Engineering, located at 1199 Amboy Avenue, suite 1D in Edison, New Jersey.  
Speaker 3     00:43:04    If you raise your right hand, you swear the testimony you give before this board will be the whole truth?  
Speaker 14    00:43:09    I do.  
Speaker 3     00:43:10    Your witness, Mr. Wiley?  
Speaker 13    00:43:13    Yes. Mr. Walker, did you describe the existing conditions on the property?  
Speaker 3     00:43:19    Mr. Wiley, can you just qualify 'em first?  
Speaker 13    00:43:22    Oh yes, I'm sorry. You correct? So what licenses do you possess with the state of New Jersey?  
Speaker 14    00:43:28    I am a licensed professional engineer and have been for over 20 years and my license is in good standing.  
Speaker 13    00:43:38    And you were involved?  
Speaker 14    00:43:39    I've in front of this, I've been in front of this board before. I have a, a master's and a bachelor's degree from Rutgers University in civil engineering. Testified throughout the state probably, you know, for, for the last 20 plus years, all through Middlesex County somerset hundred and, and then further north and south on a more limited basis. But I have been in front of this board previously  
Speaker 13    00:44:03    And I'd like to be deemed as an expert in engineering. He's accepted. Thank you. Could you describe to the board what the existing conditions are of the property at 60 Normandy Drive?  
Speaker 14    00:44:19    Sure. Let me pull up, share my screen. What I'm going to share is a colored rendering of the, the proposed site, but you can see the surrounding improvements on that plan. Can everybody,  
Speaker 3     00:44:37    Mr. Walker, Mr. Plan there, Mr. Walker, Mr. Wiley, we'll mark that as a one. And then any other exhibits you're gonna utilize a two, a three, et cetera.  
Speaker 14    00:44:46    Yeah, this is the only one it hasn't been submitted to, to the board as a whole. I did send it over to Ms. Corcoran and Ms. Buckley earlier this evening.  
Speaker 3     00:44:56    Yep.  
Speaker 14    00:44:59    On the, the site is known as lot 1.01 in block 38 0 5 60 Normandy Drive in the township of Piscataway. The irregularly shaped a lot, has approximately 15,408 square feet. The shape of the, the site resembles kind of two overlapping triangles with the one further to the west being the larger of the two triangles. It has frontage on Normandy to the north Hancock to the west, and a and a very small, less than one foot long odd frontage on, on Bristol. That, that is creates a a, an existing condition variance. It has an existing single family home on where, where one of the, the, the two homes shown on the plan. Here is the one further down the page on the right, there's an existing home there. It, it's if, if you're familiar with the site, if you've taken a drive by, you know, you can tell that it's a, it's an older home. The first floor actually, you step down one step when you go into the home from, from the grade, you step down and, and the, the, the lower level you, it has like squatty windows because it's, it's got low ceilings. So it's, it's definitely a, a, a home that needs a little bit of love.  
Speaker 14    00:46:25    There are a handful of existing trees on the site, generally along the streets. And the rest of the, the site outside of the home, the driveway and the, you know, is, is grass right now. You see on the, on the plan, the, we're proposing two homes, a subdivided lot that would create a second lot to, to build a second home. And then some, some modifications, additions, deletions on the, the existing home that, that we will get to in testimony here. The, the improvements shown along Normandy Drive on this plan are from a Remington Vernick plan that they prepared for the township. The township is looking to undergo capital improvements along Normandy, maybe in, in conjunction with a, a warehouse that's gonna be coming in the neighborhood. I, I believe it's already been approved, but there's Remington Vern's plan is incorporated into, into our site plan here. And then we show some, some additional improvements that the applicant would make outside of, of those, those Normandy drive and intersection Hancock improvements that, that the applicant would, would have to go on undergo.  
Speaker 14    00:47:52    So as I said, we're, we're seeking to subdivide minor subdivision just to, to create kind of really two triangle lots instead of one double triangle each each home, the new home. And then the, the modification of the existing home would, would end up having four bedrooms and a two car garage. The lot B is the smaller, the, the two triangles again at the bottom, the existing home that that lot is the smaller of the two, it would have approximately 5,812 square feet. The architect will cover in detail the, the changes that at home. But generally removing the first story, the portion in the back of the, the, the first story addition in the back, I looked at historic maps and it goes back at least 25 years. And then after that they, the older maps get kind of grainy, but there's an, there's an a, an addition, one story addition in the back of the existing house that actually is over the property line by 2.8 feet.  
Speaker 14    00:49:02    I believe it is onto lot 5.01. And that's been there for many, many years. But this, with this, with the modifications to that home, we'd be looking to demolish that part, have it removed and have it off of the adjacent property. Correct that situation. And the we'd be removing, they, they're gonna remove the second story, raise the ceilings on the lower level, raise the floor. I, I, I spoke earlier about the, the floor when you first walk into the house is, is actually a step down raising that floor up to a, a reasonable, so that you're not stepping down, you're stepping up into the, the, the, the home and then raising the, the ceiling. So you have regular height ceilings and then adding a second story with a new second story with, you know, three bedrooms. So to, to get to the, the fourth bedroom. One of those bedrooms will be on the first floor. And that's, that's for an, an aging parent that the applicant is, is taking care of.  
Speaker 14    00:50:11    They are, they'll also be adding a garage and a small front porch to give the, the front of the house some character. The second lot is that lot is, is 9,596 square feet. And it's a, it's a new construction, four bedroom, two car garage home. And you know, the architect will get into specifics on that. But again, both are four bedrooms and two car garage. In addition to the frontage improvements on, on Normandy, I said we, you know, the applicant's going to be installing sidewalks, curbs and road widening to get to the full 15 foot half width cart way on, on the, the, the applicant's side of Hancock. And then with a taper at the end, sidewalk, driveway opening, you know, all those and, and street trees both on Normandy and Hancock for grading and drainage. The site generally drains from the south to the north towards Normandy.  
Speaker 14    00:51:26    The per the, the township requirements. We are, we've, we've designed dry wells that will handle three inches of, of runoff from the roof areas during, during, you know, a fairly substantial storm to, to put those in drywalls in the ground. And then once those are filled, you know, it's a simple, you know, bypass at the, at the down spot of the house and it'll run over the grass just like, probably just about every house in that neighborhood currently does. But the exception that, that these will have drywalls to accommodate that first bit of water that comes off the roof.  
Speaker 14    00:52:07    The, the, the sanitary gas water, they're all available in the road. The, the improvements to Normandy by the township are include incorporating storm sewer that does not currently exist along that street, with the exception of one small great inlet up at the, the intersection of Hancock and Normandy. But there are several inlets and pipes right along our property frontage that, that the, the town is going to be installing. And then we are also including the fi required fiber optic twin conduit along Normandy and Hancock Frontage, lighting and landscaping really there's, there's no lighting other than traditional residential lighting, you know, a light by the garage, a light at each e external doorway and, and that's really it for lighting. We are pro, pro, pro, yeah. Proposing six foot PVC fence, vinyl fence to infill where needed. There are, there are existing fences around the backside and these sides of the properties and just wherever there's a gap or gonna continue the same fence that's there and just just put in new panels where needed in the, the backyard of Normandy, which, which or the backyard of of lot a, which is the new home at the top.  
Speaker 14    00:53:39    That backyard actually faces Normandy and, and anywhere along the backyard there. And then anywhere where there's a small gator or something in a a front or side yard, we are proposing a four foot picket style fence with, with some landscaping along the bottom of it.  
Speaker 14    00:53:59    So in addition to the, the six street trees, we're also proposing eight evergreen trees. And then, like I said, along the fences, along the foundations of the homes of the front, the front of the homes we're doing in proposing 119 shrubs and perennials, that that will pretty it up nice and, and make, give it a good curve appeal. So it, as noted in the, the township reports, there are a number of variances required for this application. So minimum lot area required is 10,000 square feet. Lot a as I said is 9,596 square feet and lot B is 5,812 square feet. The planner will get into it, but there are numerous other lots in the neighborhood that are substandard in size, minimum frontage. This is an existing condition down at Bristol where I, where I mentioned there's like 0.64 feet of frontage actually around the corner onto Bristol. That's an existing condition. We can't throw anything about minimum lot depth where a hundred, a hundred feet is required. Lot a right here in the, in the, the tightest part of the two triangles has a lot depth of 55.89 feet. Again, that's, that's existing today. And it, it'll remain no change. It just, it just becomes a variance because we're changing the configuration of the lots. Lot B because of, you know, the way lot depth is measured, that'll actually have a depth of 76.5 square feet.  
Speaker 14    00:55:52    Again, it's, it's just a, it's a function of the shape of the lot. Minimum front yard setbacks for lot a the new home we are showing, proposing 25 feet where 35 feet is required on Hancock and 24 and a half feet in the back along Normandy lot b the existing home, the existing home is, is right now it's, it's less than 10 feet off of the, the right of way with the addition of a small porch to, to provide a little bit of character on the front of the house that goes down to 6.7 feet. So that's a, a variance that, that exists today, but we're making it a three feet tighter than, than it currently is. Side yard, again, with the, with the addition of the garage for the existing home, the side yard from the garage to the, the side property line along a lot 8.01 is 5.7 feet, where 10 feet is required minimum rear yard for, again, for the existing home.  
Speaker 14    00:57:05    I I mentioned before, it's 2.8 feet over the property line. So, so it's a negative 2.8 feet setback with the, with the removal of that portion of the building, it would bring it back onto to the, the applicant's side of the line and it would be 1.2 feet off the property line. And that's, that's the, that's the, the location of the existing two story portion of the house. So it's not moving, moving the line, expanding the, the house in that corner. It's just, that's after we take off the, the one story edition that encroaches onto lot 5.01. That's where the corner of the existing structure is. Finally maximum lot coverage we're fine on lot A, but lot b the, again, the existing home with modifications, the we are at 28.8% where 20% maximum is required in the ordinance. We, we were under a, a previous version of the plan we've submitted, this is our fourth submission of these plans.  
Speaker 14    00:58:12    Under, during the, the, the, the workshop meeting, it was, it was suggested that we add a garage, we added a two part garage and that's what caused us to go over that 20%. And at the time the discussion was that that the, the lot coverage, vi variance violation would be more amenable to the board than, than having a no garage on the home. So there are two existing nonconformities that are being eliminated by the, the application as well. There's a shed in the back of the existing home and nonconformities for side and rear yard setbacks to that shed are being eliminated. So in summary on the, the variances, there are 10 bulk variances required. Six are created by the proposed development. Three are non-conforming conditions due to the irregular shape of the parcel. One is an existing non-conforming condition that we're improving. That's, that's the, the rear setback on lot lot B. And then we have two existing, two existing violations that are being eliminated corrected. I can stop or I can roll right into the, the township professional letters.  
Speaker 13    00:59:39    I just wanna add just one thing. In terms of the parking standards, we now meet both RSIS standards as  
Speaker 14    00:59:47    Well. I'm sorry? Yes, that that's correct. Two for, for a four bedroom house, two and a half parking spaces required with a, with a two car garage and a minimum 20 foot wide driveway that, that equates in, in the residential site improvement standards, that's three and a half spaces. So two required, three and a half provided for each lot. So, so we meet the parking standard for, for both lots.  
Speaker 13    01:00:12    Okay, so then let's do the review of the reports.  
Speaker 14    01:00:17    Okay, so as I said that we, we've already submitted, we've submitted four times, gotten feedback from professionals or, or at the, at the workshop meeting. And the letter came back from CME this morning and there's only one minor note correction that, that is noted in that letter. And, and we have no problem taking care of that. The Delaware and rare engineers letter that came in November 13th of this year, excuse  
Speaker 3     01:00:50    Me, Mr. Walker. Mr. Walker, I'm sorry. Just with the CME report, what's the one item?  
Speaker 14    01:00:56    It was a, it was a, a note in the, a, a a number in the bulk table. We actually had a side yard, I believe, or a lot depth indicated for lot a that was less than what the, the, the town planner measured it as. So they had say, say our number was 71 feet. It's really like 75 feet. So we're, we're gonna make that correction. Okay. It's, it's, it's, it's, it's in our favor and we yeah, we agree to make that, that change. Okay. The Charlie's letter from Delaware and merit engineers really had nothing we agreed to, to everything that's in his letter. You know, as I said, we've, we've submitted on several occasions and there's, there's only, you know, general, general comments about, you know, if a a, a pre-construction meeting is required and stuff like that. So all boiler plate stuff that, that we have no problem with.  
Speaker 14    01:01:58    The, the division of engineering planning and development memo, memo dated June 25th, revised December 9th of this year. The only, the only question, and I already kind of covered it, we're okay with everything. Number four com was a comment about the lot b on the existing home parcel being 28.8% maximum coverage where 20% is allowed and there was suggestion that we should reduce the garage or reduce the house or something to, to get it more in line. That was, that was a, you know, again, that was, that was a a a matter of discussion at the, the workshop meeting. And that's why the house looks the way it does today because we went back and updated it per recommendations during that meeting. But everything else we have no problem complying with. I just wanted to, to put that one on record.  
Speaker 11    01:03:00    Madam Chair, can I jump in? I I just wanna let the counselor for the applicant and the professionals know, in the 30 years that I've been involved in planning this town, I've, we've never approved anything at this magnitude of, with the oversized coverage, you have a, a lot, it's a 10,000 square foot zone. You only have the existing house and I know the property very well. 5,800 square feet, you're asking for almost 28% over coverage. We've never, ever approved anything like that.  
Speaker 14    01:03:34    28% is what's required. And, and or 20% is what's required. And we're at 28.  
Speaker 11    01:03:39    I know. So we're over. So I'm saying we've never, ever approved anything at 28%. My advice is go back, slice that living space to newin in half and then maybe do a one car garage and it'll substantially down. You gotta remember that house sits right on the road. It's an older house, it sits right on the road. You're, you're potentially gonna have a brand new lot next door. And I know that the property's irregularly shaped and it's challenging, but, you know, you can't have everything here. I mean I just, I've I've never seen it. I know this is unusual application, but, you know, 30 plus years we've never approved anything with this much over coverage.  
Speaker 8     01:04:21    And, and Madam Chair, if I may, this is Dawn Corcoran. The staff has consistently expressed our concern about the size of these dwellings, about the coverage. Yes, we did suggest that a a garage be added to the home, but that was also under the, with the understanding that the home would be reduced in size. That being said, I do have one question with regard to the calculation of the 28.8% building coverage. Did that in also include the proposed covered porch?  
Speaker 14    01:04:52    I would have to go back and look at that. I, I believe that it did, but I would've to go back and review that.  
Speaker 8     01:04:57    That's just something that I, I wanted to bring up. I was running the numbers this afternoon and I I don't believe it. It did, I, you know, again, you can correct me, but I think the coverage may even be slightly higher.  
Speaker 11    01:05:10    Y you know, I I I, if I may also add, and I'm, I'm concerned about the, there's, I believe on one of the houses there's access points to the basement from the outside. Very concerned about that. Also concerned about two front. I I just don't want this term in, into a rooming house in the neighborhood. Yeah. And then it comes an enforcement action. I,  
Speaker 13    01:05:32    I, this  
Speaker 11    01:05:33    Has the counsel, let me finish this. Has the writing of that. Now I know that maybe the, the owners or whoever will say, no, we're gonna live there. But I've seen funnier things when applicants say that. And then about two years later they end up selling the property.  
Speaker 13    01:05:47    We, we would be willing to have a restricted covenant. Oh,  
Speaker 11    01:05:51    I could guarantee you, you will be having one.  
Speaker 13    01:05:53    Okay. But you know, to, to this would alert any potential buyers that, look, this is a single family house. Yeah. But  
Speaker 11    01:06:01    Here, council, here's part of the problem. Even though there's a covenant, the problem is it becomes an enforcement action with complaints. We've seen that around town now that some of the covenants and it becomes an enforcement action with, with the, with the employees from the property maintenance doing this. I mean, I'd just rather, no, as far as I'm concerned, no basement ingress outside. That's a non-starter. And there's gonna be some other things that are gonna have to change on it. You remember, the applicant is proposing on an very irregularly shaped a lot, a lot of over coverage here, excessive stuff. And I, I get what they're trying to do, but you know, they gotta work with the town. And to me that's where they live. Planning wise, I don't know. I got a problem with this.  
Speaker 8     01:06:51    And, and if I may just also keep in mind, I know the architect is still gonna come on, but I, again, correct me if I'm wrong, but we also have a bedroom in the attic for each of these dwellings. Lemme see. Do we have  
Speaker 11    01:07:02    Yeah, that has, that has rooming house written all over it.  
Speaker 3     01:07:06    And I believe one has two utility rooms. Correct.  
Speaker 8     01:07:09    The, the, and I was going to thank you, Tom. The one on proposed lot B, there's a utility room on the first floor, but then in the basement it also shows a proposed laundry slash utility room. I mean, what is in that utility room? What exactly is in that, in that bump out on the first floor?  
Speaker 11    01:07:31    Well,  
Speaker 14    01:07:31    When the, when the architect comes on, then, then he'll be able to cover that. But that's, that's an existing, that's part of the existing house, but he'll be able to address that one.  
Speaker 8     01:07:41    And we're just bringing, and again, I'm, we're just bringing it up because if there's, if there's very minimal in that room, very well can be converted into a second kitchen. And then when now we have the father's suite, we have a kitchen, we have a bathroom. And again, it really is setting itself up to be more than a single family dwelling.  
Speaker 11    01:08:02    I, I, I, I be honest with you counselor, I think your, your, your client needs to go back and revamp these plans because this board, as long as I've been on the planning board or as, we've never, ever approve something like this on this small of a lot.  
Speaker 13    01:08:20    Well, mayor, I, I think what I'll, if I can indulge the board, I'd like to talk to my client for brief recess of Yeah.  
Speaker 11    01:08:30    I mean, if you wanna present, but I, I mean, I don't wanna waste time.  
Speaker 13    01:08:33    Yeah. Whether she wants to,  
Speaker 11    01:08:34    To listen. I, I, Mr. Wiley, I, I want, I wanna work with the applicant here. But the thing is, is that this is pr this is pretty intense for that small piece of property. Understood. And I know it's a challenging property. I I'm, well, I'm, I know, I know the property in that area very well. I get it. I understand. It's not easy. Go ahead. You could, you could speak with your client. So  
Speaker 13    01:09:01    Yeah, let, lemme speak with my client and then I can advise the board whether we would come back, whether we wanna go ahead with the rest of the application and just ask for a recess for about five minutes. Sure, that's fine. I'm just alerting my client that I'll be calling her by phone, so she should have that on so I can speak to her in  
Speaker 11    01:09:24    Private. Okay.  
Speaker 13    01:09:26    All right. Thank you very much.  
Speaker 3     01:09:34    Just make sure you, you mute yourself, Mr. Warren,  
Speaker 11    01:09:44    Mr. Barlow. Yes, sir. Depend upon what he wants to do with his client. I mean, do we, do we take all the testimony from all the, they're they're experts or, you know, I mean,  
Speaker 3     01:09:55    Practically speaking, I if he, if he comes back and they're gonna redo the plans, then it would make sense not to hear the rest of the witnesses. 'cause that would change potentially the planning testimony. Well,  
Speaker 11    01:10:06    That's what I'm saying. I don't, I don't want, I don't want wasting time  
Speaker 3     01:10:09    Here. No, no. A agreed. But if he, if he comes back and he indicates he wants to persevere, then,  
Speaker 11    01:10:19    I mean, just so the board members know, the town is under engineering design for Normandy Drive. Now the reconstructive from Bayland Avenue all the way down to the dead end where the, the cr, the cricket fields parking lot is. So  
Speaker 3     01:10:34    We should Yeah, but let's, let's hold off on, on any discussions until Mr. Wiley comes back.  
Speaker 1     01:11:05    Yeah. Mr. Barlow, PCTV is recording. They're live, so they're asking what's how much longer if we know,  
Speaker 3     01:11:13    I, I would ask the, the one person who could tell us, but he's not here. Yeah. So they need to put in some, you know, elevator music. Like,  
Speaker 1     01:11:25    Sounds like Jeopardy. Yeah.  
Speaker 3     01:11:28    Oh, Mr. Wiley is back.  
Speaker 1     01:11:30    Okay. Wonderful. Okay. Let me just find the mayor. Hold on one second.  
Speaker 13    01:11:38    Process. And  
Speaker 3     01:11:41    Just give us one second, Mr. Wiley. Just give us one second to make sure everybody gets back on.  
Speaker 13    01:11:47    All right.  
Speaker 3     01:11:51    Most importantly, Ms. Buckley  
Speaker 13    01:11:55    Indispensable.  
Speaker 3     01:11:59    Oh, but muted.  
Speaker 1     01:12:00    Thank you. I got it. Okay, we're good. Coming back now.  
Speaker 13    01:12:07    Alright. This, this is what we would like to do. We'd like to have the architect testify as to why this proposal is as big as the board is, is expressing. And because there are certain unique features as to this existing building. And we can go through the process to discuss what we can knock down. And, and I've talked to my client, I mean, she's willing to consider, you know, reductions, but she's been, I guess through this process for almost two years now. And I think if she could hear from the board, Hey, you don't need this, you don't need that, that would help a redesign and help the process. I would keep the planner off today because again, I think, I suspect the outcome after the architect would be substantially different that his testimony couldn't work. But that's how I proposed to do it. If the board's got no objection to going on that approach,  
Speaker 11    01:13:23    MI, Mr. Mr. Madam chair, I don't have a problem listening an architect, but I gotta tell you, if this would be the application tonight, I don't think it's gonna be successful.  
Speaker 13    01:13:36    I, I I've told my client that I think she understands that.  
Speaker 11    01:13:40    I mean, I'm not, I, we're, we're, we're here to work with the your client, but it, it's  
Speaker 13    01:13:44    Just Okay. But the, the difficulty, and I'm not blaming anyone here, it's my client's is is novel to this whole process. No, I,  
Speaker 11    01:13:55    I understand that  
Speaker 13    01:13:57    She's been at it for two years. She's, you know, redone the plans about four times at this point. I realize there's still problems or issues that the board has, but I thought that if I can go in this direction where she can hear directly from the board about why she designed some of these things.  
Speaker 3     01:14:23    Yeah. Well,  
Speaker 13    01:14:23    Third thing could be cut off and make it more conforming to the ordinance.  
Speaker 3     01:14:30    Okay. Well then do you want to call your architect? Yes. Since let's, we're agreed that we're probably, we're not gonna finish this evening then, Mr. Wiley, we won't call for a vote. You can bring your planner back. Let's hear from the architect in terms of what, what he is able to do and if he can get to 20% or, and he'll let us know. Yeah. Okay. Who is your architect? Mr.  
Speaker 13    01:14:54    Reginald, if you could,  
Speaker 3     01:14:58    Okay, sir, if you could state your name, spell your last name for the record and give us your professional address.  
Speaker 13    01:15:05    Yes, I am Reginald Pier. I'm, I live at 2 0 9 Concord Place, north Brunswick, New Jersey. I graduated from Howard University.  
Speaker 3     01:15:19    Okay. Well, before you gimme your qualifications, let me swear you in, you raise your right hand. You swear the testimony given before this board will be the whole truth.  
Speaker 13    01:15:28    Yes.  
Speaker 3     01:15:29    Now, Mr. Wiley, we'll go over your qualifications.  
Speaker 13    01:15:32    Okay. If you could gimme your educational background. I, I graduated at from Howard University with a bachelor's degree and I have a light standing license since 2000 and in good standing since 2009. And have you ever provided testimony to planning boards and zoning boards in the state of New Jersey? I have Madam Chairman and I'd like him to be deemed as an expert in architecture.  
Speaker 3     01:16:06    I think you're muted, Madam Chair.  
Speaker 0     01:16:12    Does he have any other degrees other than a bachelor's?  
Speaker 13    01:16:16    I do not.  
Speaker 0     01:16:18    Can you tell us a little bit more about your testimony in the state of New Jersey?  
Speaker 13    01:16:23    I've testified in, in Newark on a few of their boards, and that's primarily it.  
Speaker 0     01:16:35    You're testifying tonight as a planner?  
Speaker 13    01:16:38    No, no. As an architect. As an architect, yeah. We have a planner, but yeah, no planning testimony will be given tonight. I've also given testimony in Neptune. I'm sorry,  
Speaker 3     01:16:50    Your architectural licenses in good standing in the state of New Jersey, sir?  
Speaker 13    01:16:54    Yes.  
Speaker 0     01:16:55    Okay. Well, you, you can testify as an, as an architect, as a licensed architect.  
Speaker 13    01:17:02    Yes. So I, I may not be able to speak as eloquently as Les Walker, but please forgive me and, and allow me to just give the best I can moving forward. My client owns this property. I think you've heard a lot from Les and I, I believe his testimony to be as accurate as possible. And we worked a lot together. The current property that my client owns deems to be a little bit inadequate for her, for her and her family. She has a rather large family, so she's really the, the, the matriarch or the family is really kind of taking charge and trying to develop this strictly for her family. So she brought me on to, to come up with these plans. She knew, based on what I advised her, that you know that this is an odd lot and the size of the, the, the, the existing house and where it's located on the property is already non-conforming.  
Speaker 13    01:18:10    And I said that we're gonna have to go for some variances if you really wanna pursue doing an additional on existing property. Not, and, and also based on the setbacks and everything in the zoning, even adding a new house on the, the new pro, on the, on the divided lot, which is lot A. So just to discuss about lot B, which is the existing house. The existing house, as Les described it is the main entrance. You come in, you gotta step down, it's really right off the front street. You step down, that's where the living room, and then you enter into the kitchen, the kitchen is already down there as well. And then there's utility closet with the laundry. Then there you step up a couple of steps in the back, in the rear, which is primarily like a, a den. And then it leads out into the, to the backyard.  
Speaker 13    01:19:13    If I may, I will share my screen just to kind of give, give more context to what I'm, I'm, I'm trying to describe. So, and, and this is the main entry where you come in down Mr. Barlow's aspect? This would be a two. Okay. And if you could just describe the exhibit briefly, Mr. Pge, for the record, it, what I'm showing is just the Google map view of just the existing house and the size of the house on the lot as it stands right now, what I was describing was in this front portion here is the, and and I, if I may, I will go, I will show as exhibit, the next exhibit. Sure, sir. Which is the existing plan, which indicates the existing living room, which is by dissected by the a stair leading up to the second floor. This is where the existing kitchen is.  
Speaker 13    01:20:22    This is where the utility closet is in their, in their laundry room. Currently. This is where they back den areas as well. Couple steps up. And then on the second floor there, there are, in actuality this is one, one bedroom, so it's 1, 2, 3 bedrooms as you see there, relatively undersized as as it stands, that's the extent of the existing. So as we move on, I can show you what we, we, we did for the, for what we, our addition as it stands in the gray box is the existing layout. This is an existing utility room, which has the water boiler and the furnace, that stuff that's in there. Electric is existing here, there, what we we're gonna do is remove that stair, create a stair up to just this level to match the new level. And then this is the father street. She, she needs, she needs, she has an elder father that she wants to take care of.  
Speaker 13    01:21:36    So she's just giving him a, a nice bedroom of his own with access to the kitchen, that kitchen that we're creating. Right. He has a bathroom, his own bathroom and bedroom closet entry with a little bit of a foyer so it doesn't open up into, and in the, and the, the outdoor elements entering into his living, living courts. So they would share the kitchen. My client would live in this particular dwelling. So we would have a kitchen here, living room. And then below is a small rec room with a, a laundry. And I, I indicate a utility. I understand, I heard the, that the, you know, there's two utility rooms, but in some cases when you're increasing the size, you like to have a place where you could have dual heating and cooling and then you wanna provide, so this may not necessarily be a utility, but quite frankly it would just be a laundry and the rec.  
Speaker 13    01:22:48    That's all we would do there. As Les testified there we are creating a two car garage. We tried to keep the, the footprint as, as true to what an actual garage would have to be. And the requirements were to ha have it at least 20 by 24. That's why you see it ca carved into this, into the living area space. There's really minimal amount of space here that we could add based on the size of the lot. So I'll say on the, on the floor above, we wanted, we wanted to add a couple more bedrooms. So this now we were able to add a nice gracious primary suite with a nice primary bath, a walk-in closet. And then we have an office bedroom and then we utilize the, the half story for another separate bedroom to make it the fourth bedroom. Alright. So and that is property? That is property B, property A.  
Speaker 3     01:24:01    Mr. Pge, before you go on to that, I, I guess the, where we, the concern is the lot coverage based on the size of the additions to the house on lot B. So, and I, and I think Mr. Wiley, Wiley proffered, how can we make the house smaller so that we have less lot coverage?  
Speaker 8     01:24:28    And, and, and Tom, if I may, I I know the architect just said that the garage, you know, it's a two car garage. And just for the record, the zoning coordinates requires that the garage be 12 feet by 20 feet with no obstructions. So that is why one of the comments in the report was perhaps we could look at a one car garage. Maybe that's where we could cut some of this coverage.  
Speaker 13    01:24:51    Yeah, I think the only issue there, of course, I guess it's also function number of bedrooms, but excuse me. Bless you. You know, it looks like we would only be able to provide two cars off street, you know, for one car garage plus the driveway and driveway's a little tight. But, you know, so there's, so that's the issue there, I  
Speaker 8     01:25:19    Think. And that's with the, based on the four bedrooms. Right? So was there any consideration to eliminating one of the bedrooms then? I mean, do you need the attic with the bedroom and the, and the bathroom  
Speaker 13    01:25:34    And then that was one of the things that we were going over with our client. And the client really needs the, the space. I mean that, that's a big part of what is, is needed for her to function and live there with the size family that she has. Well,  
Speaker 8     01:25:51    Well if I can ask this, and I'm not sure that it's the question for you, but as the, as your client give any consideration to perhaps moving into the new dwelling so that she has the four bedrooms, a new dwelling that way this home doesn't need so much renovation, it doesn't need the four bedrooms, it doesn't need the two car garage, doesn't need the two separate entries. I mean, has any consideration been given to that?  
Speaker 13    01:26:14    Oh, there has been consideration, but I believe the amount of people that she's trying to accommodate requires her to have that, that amount. And she would prefer to live in this, this dwelling versus the new dwelling. But that is something that can be a consideration and we can have that conversation with her to be  
Speaker 5     01:26:38    Madam, Madam chair, if I may too. This is Councilman Cahill.  
Speaker 13    01:26:47    Oh, I think you're muted now. Muted. Councilwoman,  
Speaker 5     01:26:52    I'm muted. So sorry, am I muted here? No, you're good. Okay. With regard to the fourth bedroom, why not make that the office space without the bathroom and just make the office space that's on that second level, that bedroom you're looking, if you could go to the second floor, you already have a a, a primary bath and a secondary bath, why not make that office the bedroom and they share one bath. I have th three bedrooms. You have one, you have a powder room, a full bath downstairs, the powder room downstairs, a full bath upstairs, another full bath on that second floor. Why not make the office on that third level without a bath room?  
Speaker 13    01:27:54    We can take that into consideration.  
Speaker 5     01:27:57    I don't know if that save space, but I know there was,  
Speaker 13    01:28:01    So there, there's, I don't think that's  
Speaker 5     01:28:02    Gonna save, no, it's not gonna save the space. I, you know, and a actually, to be honest with, it's not as big a deal. But when you're talking, I think, you know, the concern we have in this town, of course is as the mayor mentioned, you know, a lot of folks do get the deed restrictions, those covenants. And then in, at the end we're, we as a township are still paying to chase when the house gets sold, the the new owners, you know, sometimes claiming ignorance, sometimes putting locks on doors. And that was really more what I was speaking to. So actually just ignore that. But something to consider.  
Speaker 13    01:28:48    Yeah, I mean, you know, the thought process behind the design is really to make the best quality of space for the, the, the folks that are gonna live here possible and make as comfortable for her, her family, that that's gonna live there. Okay. Yeah, I certainly understand it's just quality of space. I mean, I think the, the office was a little bit small and and shy of space that, you know, she wanted to allocate for one of the one our family members.  
Speaker 3     01:29:23    Mr. Pge, I, I certainly understand her concerns and I appreciate you have a client you're trying to address her wishes and her concerns. The the problem is there's a zoning table and a zoning ordinance and for to, by creating this two lot subdivision, you're expanding a house on a small lot. So the, the, the issue that I get that we're looking for some clarification direction suggestions, is how do you make this smaller so that a house you have, you know, if you wanted to build this house on a 10,000 square foot lot, God bless you, it'd be great. But you have a 5900 5800 square foot lot, which means the house should be smaller, not bigger. So I, I understand what you designed and why you designed it, but what we're trying to get some clarification is you could design something smaller. Correct.  
Speaker 13    01:30:33    And then in what? And then it would Yes, I could. And I, I don't believe it would meet her needs.  
Speaker 3     01:30:38    Okay, well  
Speaker 13    01:30:41    Then she's  
Speaker 3     01:30:41    Got, if if, if, if there's no, the, the feeling I'm getting, if there's no attempt to modify the proposed structure, and as a result the application is denied, she's living in that house the way it's,  
Speaker 13    01:31:04    So, and you know what, and we quite understand that and  
Speaker 3     01:31:08    We're looking, the purpose  
Speaker 13    01:31:09    Of us being here is to get approval and we will make whatever modifications.  
Speaker 3     01:31:15    So, so I  
Speaker 13    01:31:15    That the board needs us to make.  
Speaker 3     01:31:17    Well, but I, but we don't wanna make them for you. We're asking for some direction. If you made it a one car garage and you perhaps  
Speaker 13    01:31:24    Yeah, that would certainly save money. And I, I recognize that would probably sacrifice a bedroom  
Speaker 3     01:31:30    Unless, and sacrifice a bedroom. If you made it a three bedroom, one car garage, I would, it would seem, putting aside what she, what the applicant would want, is it doable? But I'm not an architect. So I don't know if you, it would appear to me you could design that. She may not want that, but you could design that, correct?  
Speaker 13    01:31:54    I can, I can, yes.  
Speaker 8     01:31:58    And again, also, and I'm sorry this is Dawn Corcoran. Keep in mind, you know, the, the covered porch that comes into play with the building calculation as well. So I don't even, as we, when Mr. Walker was given his testimony, I don't know whether that was even included in the building coverage calculation. So just something again, something to keep in mind.  
Speaker 13    01:32:17    Yeah, well look, you know, and obviously the cover porch is an optional feature.  
Speaker 8     01:32:23    Of course, of course  
Speaker 13    01:32:25    It adds to, you know, curb appeal, the aesthetics and aesthetics,  
Speaker 11    01:32:32    But also Mr. Wiley. But,  
Speaker 13    01:32:34    But it might, it might kick us over the 20%. That's  
Speaker 11    01:32:39    Mr. Wiley. I've also seen a lot of cover porches after a couple years being closed in illegally.  
Speaker 13    01:32:45    Right. But, but you could have a restriction.  
Speaker 11    01:32:48    I'm not saying that this would happen in this case, but Right. It happens quite frequently.  
Speaker 3     01:32:52    Mr. How, how many square feet is the proposed house on lot B as you designed it  
Speaker 13    01:33:02    According to, I think Les has that number. Oh, sorry,  
Speaker 14    01:33:10    I, I took a look at Les Walker again. I took a look at the, the possibility of shaving down the garage to a one car garage. Now with it bumped into the house to allow for the door, you could really only shave off maybe eight feet. So you, you'd save about 160 square feet and that would get our number from down to around 26%. We're at 28.8. That would get us down to 26%, but still not the 20% that that is required. And that's just going to a, a one car garage with a, with a driveway that would provide for another parking space outside.  
Speaker 8     01:33:49    And unless it could you, and that's still including, you said that bump, right? So could you technically like tighten up that living slash dining room area and then  
Speaker 13    01:34:03    We could, we we were trying to work as best as we could with the existing structure without having to demo. If you, if you, you look at this, we are, we are really trying to work within the confines of the existing structure and trying to manage that aspect of it as best we could to, to minimize the amount of construction costs associated with, with the work and just by creating an addition. But certainly this can all be relooked at and re you know, thought out based on what the client is willing to, to do. Unless if we, if we eliminated the bump out, what would we be reducing the footprint by?  
Speaker 14    01:34:51    What bump out John,  
Speaker 13    01:34:52    There's a utility room on what's the first floor,  
Speaker 14    01:35:00    Reggie, is that, that that existing utility room off of the father suite, is that something that could go away or that's something that, that's where all the,  
Speaker 13    01:35:07    It could go to the basement. Imagine it, it could go away. We just have to reroute the utilities. That's all it, it's certainly expense issue. But it  
Speaker 3     01:35:17    And that's what, seven and a half by 17?  
Speaker 14    01:35:21    Seven and half by 12 foot. Seven  
Speaker 3     01:35:23    12. I'm sorry, my eyes are going Sorry Les.  
Speaker 14    01:35:27    So just, just under a hundred square feet there so that, you know, you're looking at another 1%. So now you're down around 25%.  
Speaker 14    01:35:39    I know, I, I know, or at least I, I seem to recall that. So she, she's, you know, caring for her elder father. That's, that's room reason for the first bedroom, first floor bedroom. And then it's, you know, her and her husband and then two older sons. So, you know, the idea of of three bedrooms really doesn't, really doesn't function when you have two older boys. I, I believe I, I have, I have four children in a bio level and my kids are miserable half the time because it worked when they were young and could share rooms, but they're not happy as they get older. Sharing  
Speaker 11    01:36:14    Mr. Wiley, this is the mayor again. I, I can I, can I ask what's the, what's the client's intention with the other new law? Is another relative gonna live there? Are they selling it? Yes.  
Speaker 13    01:36:26    Yes. Ask what? She has other relatives living there that will be planning to live there, there planning to live there.  
Speaker 3     01:36:34    It, it seems like the, her a more practical approach would be to design, build the  
Speaker 13    01:36:40    House that she  
Speaker 3     01:36:40    Needs. Yeah. Design the new house as she needs on the conforming lot. Exactly. And leave the old small house with, without the, all the additions.  
Speaker 8     01:36:52    That's exactly what I was saying before, Tom. Maybe there has to be consideration to maybe just her moving, I just moving into the new Well, and then you could design and then just making this other one, giving it a few updates and make it maybe a little bit more marketable or maybe it'd be more appropriate for the other family members.  
Speaker 3     01:37:10    Yeah, I mean I think the main thing would be to remove the, the part where the house goes onto the other lot. Obviously that condition needs to be corrected, but then she can design, you know, with the father's suite and everything. Look, we're all have we all have parents that are getting older. We're caring for people. I, I don't think anybody doesn't appreciate that. But it, it may be design the new house with all those amenities that she wants and as Dawn said, make slight adjustments to the existing home. It's just the thought. I mean, as the mayor indicated, the, the board would like to, to work with the applicant, but the applicant has to work with the board.  
Speaker 13    01:37:57    Understood, understood. Is there any other comments from board members? What was that from the board members? Any other comments from board members? Because we like to, yeah. See what all the concerns are and see if we can  
Speaker 4     01:38:24    Reverend Kinneally. Reverend Kinneally, I'd just like to make a comment. If you went to the, that other house you could go up, instead of going out and spreading out or being too close to the, the road line, you can, you can build up and add, add that other bedroom up. Not in that first structure where we are now, but you can go up in that, in that second house and, and just remodify the old piece, the older house that we're having a problem with. And maybe that would solve the problem for you. Talk to her about doing that on the, the new con homes Construction. Yeah. Adding the upper bedroom and the utility up another level.  
Speaker 14    01:39:07    Reggie, isn't that a, isn't the existing house two stories? I mean they're, they're under, under like low ceilings, but it's, it's already two stories.  
Speaker 13    01:39:14    Yes. The, the existing house is, is two stories, unfortunately. The, the, the ground floor again is like six foot 10 ceiling height, which is probably the minimum you can have. Okay. Usually it's seven really it should be seven as the minimum. But existing wise it is very, very low.  
Speaker 4     01:39:37    Very low. Okay. Well that's only my possession we're over, over the heights and the, well, there's nothing else I could see.  
Speaker 13    01:39:51    Are there any other comments Madam  
Speaker 5     01:39:53    Chair, if I may? Madam chair. So did you know Dawn, I just wanna say this in terms of like the, the the third floor addition. I mean that to me is less worrisome than, you know, the, the, the expanse sort of like, you know, the footprint, meaning the garage, you know how close it is to neighbors, all that stuff. Okay. Right. So I mean I think that it's less about that and more about giving that space on your, you know, backyard setback and your side yard setbacks. You can still accomplish then the bedrooms with trying to figure that that out. Although I guess I heard Mr. Walker saying even the one car garage doesn't give back much with that. So Dawn, what is it? And I know we're not architects, so is it really this additional utility space next to the Father suite? Or is it, isn't that already existing though?  
Speaker 8     01:41:05    That is existing, already  
Speaker 13    01:41:07    Existing removed it or give us roughly about 1% reduction. The, the slicing, you know, putting to one car garage gives us another 2%. So we're at 25% making those two changes. It's just that other changes are more difficult because they would effectively reduce the, you know, footprint of the existing building.  
Speaker 8     01:41:39    And, and Gabrielle, that, that's what I think Tom and I were trying to get at. Maybe this house just doesn't meet the needs of their client. Maybe the, the better option is for them to design the new home on proposed lot a that can meet all of those needs and then just maybe kind of make some renovations to this existing dwelling without having to do the addition perhaps. Or doing a very small addition. Maybe not having that father suite. Yeah, maybe doing a one car garage, maybe dropping the utilities to the basement, reduce, you know, eliminating the cover porch. Maybe they can get so much closer to the 20% if they don't have to try to,  
Speaker 5     01:42:12    Okay, so the covered porch work, the covered porch is included in that calculation.  
Speaker 8     01:42:16    I still don't know, to tell you the truth. Well, not sure if they're gonna rework the numbers.  
Speaker 14    01:42:21    Dawn. Dawn, if there's a, if there's a roof, it counts, right? And if there's no roof, if it's just a, it doesn't count.  
Speaker 8     01:42:27    Correct. So anything that's covered, anything beyond 18 inches less counts in that, in that coverage.  
Speaker 14    01:42:35    So we could eliminate the roof potentially to, to save what is, what is the, you know, we're, we're kind of shooting in the dark here. I mean I obviously 20% is the ultimate goal, but what is a palatable number that would, would get us an approval and, and you know, we're at 28.8% right now. What is, what is the, the number that, that gets us where we need to be?  
Speaker 8     01:43:02    I mean, I don't, I don't know. I don't know. I don't even  
Speaker 11    01:43:04    Wanna answer that question. Yeah, I mean I, you know, the fact is, is that probably 99% of the towns in this town are, are in compliance, you know, maybe even more a higher percentage than that. So,  
Speaker 14    01:43:20    So then the answer is 20%. I I just, you know, it's to, to, to give Reggie marching orders to go back and make modifications to the house, you know, we need to need to at least know what we're, where, where our goal is.  
Speaker 11    01:43:32    The problem is is, you know, this is a very unique piece of property. Yes. And it's very, under normal circumstances, it's close to the road and right there, and I understand what the client's trying to do, but you know, it, it's, it's exacerbating the non-conforming use of it based or the non-conforming footprint, so to speak.  
Speaker 8     01:43:56    I mean, you're taking a, a lot that conforms to the re the lot area requirements and now you're creating these, as we stated in our February two undersized lots. You're creating all these bulk variances. I don't know, I don't know how you come up with the number. I I would say get to as close to 20% as you possibly can.  
Speaker 13    01:44:23    Alright. I think that's, you know, it's given us some guidance. My client, I'll have to make some  
Speaker 11    01:44:30    Mr. We, we, we're, we're gonna, we're gonna, we're gonna try to work, work, work with your client and we get as, as Mr. Barley said, we all understand, we all have relatives that are getting older and some, some are living with her. You know, we, we got that. This is not an unusual thing.  
Speaker 13    01:44:50    No, I look, I understand the municipals perspective, but it, like I said, my client doesn't have a lot of experience in development and this has all come as a surprise to her. And she's made what she thinks are concessions on her part, but her expectations were too high to begin with, I guess is how I would express it. But, we'll, we'll, we'll make some decisions, you know, within the next month or so and decide what we're gonna do from there. I realize that there may be a question whether we should carry it or, or if this is such a major change, we would've to give new notices. I'll  
Speaker 11    01:45:47    Discuss. Well, Mr. Mr. Barlow, can I make a suggestion? Might I say we put 'em on for next month? Just all, they don't have to re-notice him or anything and Right.  
Speaker 13    01:45:55    Well, I appreciate that  
Speaker 11    01:45:56    They want to carry then they can ask for, for us to carry it.  
Speaker 3     01:46:02    I, I would agree a hundred percent. And Mr. Wiley, since what the board member's suggestions are proposing, a is a lessening of the variance relief that might be sought. Right. I certainly don't think you need to reno anybody that's on the meeting. I will make an announcement. All right. That this matter is not going to be voted on this evening. It's going to be carried to the January meeting, which is January 8th.  
Speaker 1     01:46:27    January 8th,  
Speaker 3     01:46:28    Eighth. So if you're here for that, you wouldn't get any, any new notice. Mr. Pge, if you could unshare your screen.  
Speaker 13    01:46:38    Sure.  
Speaker 1     01:46:40    And Tom, just one thing, our meetings meetings in January are gonna start at 7:00 PM not seven 30,  
Speaker 3     01:46:45    Correct. Seven o'clock. So, so if you're here, don't come at seven 30, come at seven. But Madam Chair, because it was a notice for this evening and there has been testimony, if there's anybody from you should open it to the public just if they have any questions and, and they may have comments that, that may,  
Speaker 0     01:47:06    Members of the public, if you have any questions regarding this application, would you indicate I show a show of hands or wave of hands?  
Speaker 1     01:47:17    No, Madam Chair.  
Speaker 0     01:47:19    Thank you. Close to the public.  
Speaker 3     01:47:23    So, Mr. Wiley, with your consent, we'll carry this to the January 8th meeting at seven o'clock. All right. There's going to be new plans. Please get them into the board's professionals as, as quickly as you can. And if you have, if, if you need more time, I, I can imagine that the board would look favorably because as I said, I think the board wants to work with you to, to see if, if this can can happen.  
Speaker 0     01:47:50    All right. Thank you very much, board. Have a good holiday. Okay, you well. Everyone there? Motion to there? Motion. Okay. We have paid the bills. Is there a motion to adjourn? I'll make that motion. Madam Chair. Thank you. Happy holidays everyone. Happy holiday. Holiday. Happy birthday to the mayor's wife. I hope. Happy birthday for that. This board meeting saved me some money tonight. Yeah.  
Speaker 3     01:48:29    Lauren, do we have a TRC this month on the 18th?  
Speaker 1     01:48:33    Yes. Next week. I'll be mailing them out tomorrow.  
Speaker 3     01:48:35    Is there anything on  
Speaker 1     01:48:36    Oh one item, Dale? Okay. Yeah, I'll send the agendas tomorrow. One item, I can't think of what it's at the moment. I'm sorry, Rivendale. Oh, thank you. Rivendale, pickleball,  
Speaker 3     01:48:44    Courts.  
Speaker 1     01:48:45    Thank you Pickle. Thanks Paul. Yeah, I'll mail out tomorrow. All right. Have a good night everyone. Goodnight  
Speaker 0     01:48:51    Everyone.  
Speaker 3     01:48:53    Bye. Bye.  
Speaker 0     01:48:55    Bye.