[00:00:05] THIS IS THE MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP ZONING BOARD. MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP, SOMERSET COUNTY. THIS IS OUR REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULED MAY 23RD 2023 SCHEDULED FOR SEVEN O'CLOCK. IT'S THE ZONING BOARD'S INTENTION TO CONCLUDE THIS MEETING NO LATER THAN 10 P.M. UH, IT IS NOW 703. UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS, ACT NOTICE IN TIME AND PLACE OF THIS MEETING HAS BEEN POSTED AND SENT TO THE OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED NEWSPAPERS. JOE FOR THE FIRST TIME YOU TAKE THE ROLE OKAY? BLODGET HERE. ROSENTHAL HERE. ABU SAFI HERE. I WAS ASKING HERE. SING. ABSENT SO FAR. WALMART. ABSENCE SO FAR WOULD BRONZE. MEHTA. DRILL. HERE WHAT ABOUT DIDI? WHAT ABOUT DEDE? WELL, HE WASN'T HERE. I WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN CHECKING. ABSOLUTELY ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. JAMES GOOGLE E. I GOT RICH PART ALONE. HE IS NOT HERE, RAKESH DORJI. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. GREAT. MR WOOD. CAN YOU LEAD US INTO A SALUTE TO THE FLAG? REGULATIONS FLAG. THAT'S 23 PUBLIC, FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION. EVERYTHING INJUSTICE FRAUD. ALL RIGHT, UH, THE FIRST PART OF OUR ALL OF OUR MEETINGS AS A PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS THAT ARE NOT ON THE AGENDA. UH THESE ARE COMMENTS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO MY DISCRETION. WE RESPECTFULLY ASK ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO LIMIT THEIR COMMENTS IN Q AND A TO FIVE MINUTES. COMMENTS FOR ITEMS THAT ARE NOT ON TODAY'S AGENDA. COMMENTS IN THE GENERAL NATURE IF THERE ARE COMMENTS FOR APPLICATIONS THAT WILL WE WILL BE HEARD. ALRIGHT HEARING NONE. UM BECAUSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT [IV. APPLICATION CONTINUATION] SESSION, ALL RIGHT. THIS IS A APPLICATION. CONTINUATION FOR CASE BE A TECH 07 TECH TO THE APPLICANT WAS THE MELBOURNE SCHOOL PROPERTIES LP BLOCK 28 010 LOTS 57 AND 58. AH 9 82 ROUTE 5 18 PRELIMINARY MAJOR SITE PLAN LIBRARIANS BOTH VARIANTS TO CONSTRUCT DAY SCHOOL FOR CHILDREN BETWEEN THE AGES OF SIX WEEKS AND EIGHT YEARS AND THE MEDICAL BUILDING THE EXPIRATION DATE OF THE APPLICATION IS 6 TO 2023 F DATED NOTIFICATION AND PUBLICATION IS REQUIRED. UM WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD. I GOT A COPY OF AN EMAIL. THAT THE ATTORNEY FOR THE APPLICANT FRANK PATINO, SENT TO SHERRY. SAYING. THIS CONFIRMS THE BOARD WILL TAKE JURISDICTION OF OUR APPLICATION TONIGHT ANNOUNCED THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING IS BEING CARRIED WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE TO JUNE 20 TO 2023. THAT THERE WILL BE FIRST ON THE AGENDA ON JUNE 20 TO 2023 AND THE APPLICANTS HERE BY EXTENDING THE TIME FOR THE BOARD TO ACT UP THROUGH JULY. 25 2023. SO I HAVE NOT SPOKEN DIRECTLY WITH MR PACINO ABOUT THIS BECAUSE I WAS RIDICULOUSLY BUSY THIS AFTERNOON. BUT EVERYONE GOT AN EMAIL FROM SHERRY SAYING THAT THEY PULLED OFF AS ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE MELBOURNE SCHOOL. OKAY? JOE DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING MORE ABOUT THIS THAN WHAT I KNOW IN THIS EMAIL? I DO NOT. SHOW THE BOARD HAS TO DECIDE. WHAT IT WANTS TO DO. I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, SHERRY PROBABLY SAID THAT THAT'S POSSIBILITY OF DOING IT THAT WAY. BUT THE CHERRY TALK TO YOU ABOUT IT. NO AND I DIDN'T EITHER . SO THE BOARD HAS TO DECIDE WHAT IT WANTS TO DO, DO YOU? YOU COULD TAKE THIS AS A REQUEST BY MR PETRINO. HE'S ASKING THAT THE BOARD TAKE JURISDICTION. I MEAN , LOOK, I REVIEWED THE NOTICE AND THEY'RE THEY'RE IN ORDER. AND YOU COULD ANNOUNCE THAT IT'S GOING TO BE CONTINUED WITHOUT NEED FOR FURTHER NOTICE. IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN THE AUDIENCE ON THE MELBOURNE SCHOOL TONIGHT? NO. MAYBE IF THERE WERE PEOPLE THERE, BUT YOU GUYS HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT YOU WANT TO DO ABOUT THIS. I HAVE A QUESTION. PLEASE. UM DO WE HAVE OTHER APPLICATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN IN THE CUBE THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER ? UH SO DO WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION NOW? OR CAN WE HANDED PER ADVISEMENT IS GONNA COME DOWN. YOU HAVE TO. OKAY THAT'S YEAH, THAT'S ALL RIGHT. BUT THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO LOOK AT THAT LATER. UM CAN I CALL UP SHERRY? AND FIND OUT JOE. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE BOARDS? I GUESS [00:05:05] THE QUESTION THE QUESTION. THE QUESTION IS, DO WE HAVE SOMETHING ALREADY ON THE SCHEDULE? I DON'T KNOW. YOU KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING SCHEDULED FOR JUNE, 22 RIGHT NOW. HMM. NO, I DO NOT. CAN I JUST LET ME JUST QUICKLY CALL SHERRY? CALL SHERRY MOBILE. JUST TO CONFIRM YOU'D LIKE. I WILL NOT THEN SORRY ABOUT THIS. LET ME DO IT SILENTLY. MY ASSISTANT SOMETIMES SPEAKS UP WHEN SHE'S NOT WANTED. I SEE YOU'RE WATCHING AND I HEAR THE DELAY. RIGHT AND I CAN SEE THAT YOU'RE WATCHING A BETTER TIME DELAY SO THE QUESTION IS. THERE'S NO OTHER APPLICATION SCHEDULE FOR THE 22ND. AND THEY CAN, IN FACT, HAVE THE ENTIRE MEETING ON THE 22ND. I WANT TO STAY ON THE PHONE UNTIL LISTEN, IF THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO SO I MEAN, FACED WITH THAT, I GUESS. YEAH I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE THAT WE WEREN'T INCONVENIENCING ANY OTHER. THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT SOMEONE RESIDENT OR SOMEONE ELSE THAT HAS AN APPLICATION WON'T BE ABLE TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION OF THEIR CONSUMING THE MEETING. UM IT'S A LITTLE BIT UNFAIR. ANYONE WHY DON'T WE SAY LIKE, YEAH. WHY DON'T WE SAY THAT? WE CAN'T WE? WE WILL GIVE THEM A TIME SLOT. BUT THEY HAVE TO READ, DEPENDING , UM, ANY OTHER. UH, APPLICATION THAT'S IN THE PIPELINE TO GO FIRST. HE DIDN'T HE DIDN'T REQUEST THE WHOLE MEETING REQUESTED TO GO FIRST. WELL, THEN YOU CAN GO FIRST. SEE WHAT YEAH. OKAY SO HERE HEARING THAT I BEEN SOMEONE SHOULD MAKE A MOTION. TO FIRST ACCEPT JURISDICTION BECAUSE MY LEGAL ADVICE IS THE NOTICE IS IN ORDER. AND. TO CONTINUE THE HEARING TO JUNE 22. UM. PUT THEM FIRST ON THE AGENDA, AND THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS HIS EMAIL EXTENDED TO JULY 25. I ALWAYS LIKE EXTENDING TO THE END OF THE MONTH. AND CONSIDERING THAT. THEY HAVE NOW CANCELED AGAIN. I WOULD SAY. INSTEAD OF CONTINUING TO AUGUST 31 TO ASK FOR ASK THEM TO GRANT HIS REQUEST ON THE CONDITION THAT THEY GRANT THE EXTENSION TILL SEPTEMBER. 30TH YOU KNOW WHO KNOWS THAT SOME NATURAL DISASTER HAPPENS AND THE BUILDING SHUT DOWN OR SOMETHING? OKAY THAT WOULD BE MY ADVICE MOTION TO ACCEPT JURISDICTION TO THIS HEARING ON JUNE 22ND NEED FOR FURTHER NOTICE WITHOUT NEED FOR FURTHER FURTHER NOTICE EXTENSION SUBJECT RIGHT SUBJECT TO THEM, GRANTING AN EXTENSION IN WRITING TO SEPTEMBER, 30TH SUBJECT TO THEM GRANTED, GRANTING THE EXTENSION TWO. YOU SAID THE END OF SEPTEMBER 30TH SEPTEMBER 30TH. CAN I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. UH, ROLL CALL, PLEASE. JOE. BLODGETT. YES ROSENTHAL? YES. I WAS SORRY. MHM. WOULD BRONZE. NATO YES. ALRIGHT UM ABOVE APPLICATION HAS BEEN CARRIED TO THE JUNE 22ND 2023 ZONING BOARD, MEANING NO FURTHER NOTICE IS REQUIRED. THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO AN EXTENSION TO AGREED THEY AGREED TO JULY 25 YOU'RE GONNA SHARE IS GONNA TELL THEM IT'S GOING TO BE SEPTEMBER. 30TH IF THEY DON'T IF THEY WANT JUNE 22ND DATE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, EVERYONE. THE NEXT APPLICATION IS, UH, CASE. [V. APPLICATIONS ] BE A TEXT EURO ONE. TECH TO THREE. THE APPLICANTS WERE ON IT SO FAR, UH, BLOCK 15 001 LOT 35 , COMMONLY KNOWN AS 59 KILLED THE ROAD BULK VARIANTS TO CONSTRUCT A PERGOLA AND PAVILION OVER THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PATIO AREA WITHIN THE REQUIRED 20 FT. SETBACK FROM THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE AND A ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF THE APPROVAL GRANTED IN CASE BHS 06 TECH 19 EXPRESSION DATA IS 7 26 2023 SEDATED AND NOTICE, NOTIFICATION AND PUBLICATION IS REQUIRED. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING. IT IS FOR PROFESSIONALS FRONTIER. SO, YEAH, IF I COULD JUST ASK [00:10:01] ANYBODY WHO'S SPEAKING WITH THE ACOUSTICS OF THIS ROOM IS ARE NOT GREAT, AND PARTICULARLY SINCE THE MEETING IS BEING RECORDED, SO ANYBODY WHO'S SPEAKING JUST SPEAK DIRECTLY INTO THE MICROPHONE. IT WILL BE ANNOYING. I'M GONNA REPEAT, REPEATEDLY ASK EVERYONE. HOPEFULLY YOU WON'T HAVE TO. I'LL DO MY BEST TO REMEMBER. THAT WOULD BE WONDERFUL. SO JUST TO REPEAT LUKE PONTIER OF THE LAW FIRM DAY, PITNEY HERE TONIGHT ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT RONALD SAFAR DOCTOR SO FAR IS THE OWNER OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 59 KILLED THE ROAD AND THAT'S DESIGNATED AS BLACK 15 007 LOT 35 ON THE TOWNSHIPS TAX MAP. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE R TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE AND IS APPROXIMATELY 2.11 ACRES. THE PROPERTY TODAY CONTAINS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS, ALONG WITH THE PATIO IN GROUND POOL AND RELATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS. THERE ARE SOME EXISTING NON NONCONFORMITY IS ON THE SITE, FIRST FOR SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR THE DWELLING WHERE APPROXIMATELY 31.7 AND 31.9 FT ARE EXISTING FROM EACH SIDE LOT LINE IN A MINIMUM OF 40. FT IS REQUIRED. ANOTHER EXISTING NONCONFORMITY FOR LOT FRONTAGE WHERE APPROXIMATELY 171.58 FT AS EXISTING IN 200 FT IS REQUIRED. AND FOR A LOT WITH WHERE APPROXIMATELY 154 FT IS EXISTING, AND 200 FT IS REQUIRED IF THE BOARD WILL INDULGE ME JUST FOR ONE MORE MINUTE. I DO WANT TO PROVIDE A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE APPROVALS ON THIS PROPERTY. AND THE APPLICATION THAT'S BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING. SO THE APPLICANT PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED A VARIANCE APPROVAL TO EXTEND THE PORTION OF THE DRIVEWAY INTO A CIRCULAR LOOP DRIVEWAY AND TO REPLACE A PORTION OF THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY WITH PAVERS TO EXTEND THE PORTION OF THE REAR PATIO AND INSTALL AN OUTDOOR KITCHEN ON THAT PATIO IN CONNECTION WITH THOSE IMPROVEMENTS, THE APPLICANT WAS GRANTED A VARIANCE FROM THE TOWNSHIP CODE. TO PERMIT UP TO 19.4% IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE ON THE PROPERTY. THE APPROVAL ALSO INCLUDED A DESIGN EXCEPTION FROM THE REQUIREMENT TO PLANT 14 TREES ON A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AS WELL AS TO PROVIDE STREET TREES ALONG THE FRONTAGE. HOWEVER THE APPLICANT DID AGREE TO PLANT FOUR TREES ON THE PROPERTY RATHER THAN 14 AND AGREED TO INSTALL A SIDEWALK ALONG THE PROPERTY FRONTAGE, WHICH WILL BE ONE OF THE FIRST ON THAT STREET. ALRIGHT THIS APPROVAL WAS GRANTED UNDER APPLICATION NUMBER B A 06 19 AND MEMORIALIZED UNDER RESOLUTION NUMBER 04-2020, WHICH WAS ADOPTED ON MAY 19TH 2020. THIS BOARD GRANTED A ONE YEAR EXTENSION ON MAY 20/4 OF 2022. SO THAT THE FIRST PART OF WHY WE'RE HERE THIS EVENING SOLUTION FOR THE EXTENSION IS 01 2022. IT IS AND IT WAS ADOPTED ON JUNE 23 2022 CORRECT? YES, THE APPROVAL ITSELF. THE HEARING WAS ON MAY 20/4. AND THAT EXTENSION THAT ONE YEAR EXTENSION. THE RESOLUTION. 01 2022 ADOPTED ON JUNE 23 2022 EXTENDED. MODIFIED CONDITION NUMBER 23 OF RESOLUTION 2020 04 TO EXTEND THE TIME WITHIN WHICH THE APPLICANT MUST APPLY FOR AND OBTAIN CONSTRUCTION PERMITS FROM MAY 1920 22 THROUGH MAY 1920 23 CORRECT. I ASSUME YOU'RE NEXT THING YOU'RE GONNA TELL THE BOARD IS YOU WANT TO ORALLY AMEND THE APPLICATION TO REQUEST A FURTHER EXTENSION TO MAY 1920 24 THAT'S CORRECT. AND SINCE NOTICE WAS NOT REQUIRED FOR AN EXTENSION LIKE THAT. THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. THIS IS LIKE CALLING AN AUDIBLE AT THE, UH AT THE LINE. NO PROBLEM. OKAY, AND THE REST OF THE APPLICATION IS WHAT THERE WE GO. ALRIGHT SO THE REAL JUICE OF THE APPLICATION THAT'S BEFORE YOU TONIGHT AS THAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO INSTALL A PERGOLA AND PAVILION ON THAT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PATIO AREA AND SO IN CONNECTION WITH THE INSTALLATION OF THE PERGOLA AND PAVILION, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A BULK VARIANCE FROM THE TOWNSHIP CODE ORDINANCE SECTION. 16-4 0.2, D. AND THAT REQUIRES AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURES BE SET BACK AT LEAST 20 FT FROM ANY OTHER STRUCTURE, WHEREAS THE PERGOLA AND PAVILION ARE PROPOSED TO BE SET BACK, APPROXIMATELY 10.7 FT AND 5.8 FT JUST FOR THE RECORD, PERGOLA IS SET BACK. HOW MANY FEET IN THE PAVILION IS SET BACK? HOW MANY FEET WE'LL HAVE SOME MORE TESTIMONY FROM OUR ENGINEER, BUT THE PERGOLA SETBACK, 10.7. IN THE PAVILION IS SET BACK 5.8. FIVE POINT 88. SO I JUST WANT TO, UM I WANT TO GET ALL THE WITNESSES SWORN IN, BUT I'M GOING TO ASK THE BOARDS TO [00:15:03] EXPERTS TO CONFIRM SOMETHING JUST TO GET THE BOYS FOCUS ON THIS. SO WHICH WITNESSES? ARE YOU GOING TO CALL TWO WITNESSES ? JEFFY GARY IN WHO'S OUR PROJECT ENGINEER, AND DAN HUGGINS, WHO'S OUR LANDSCAPE DESIGNER? SO WHY DON'T YOU BOTH COME UP NEAR THE NEAR THIS MICROPHONE? EVERYONE INCLUDING THE TWO BOARD EXPERTS, EVERYONE RAISED THEIR RIGHT HAND. DOES EVERYONE SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE IN THIS MATTER IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. OKAY STARTING OVER HERE INTO A MICROPHONE. IDENTIFY YOURSELF, SPELL YOUR LAST NAME AND GIVE YOUR RELATIONSHIP TO THE APPLICANT OR THE BOARD AS THE CASE MAY BE SURE, FIRST NAME IS JEFF. LAST NAME IS E. GARY IN E G. A R I A N E G. A R A. R I A N A. N AND YOU ARE LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, THE APPLICANT ENGINEERING EXPERT. CORRECT CORRECT. OKAY. NEXT. DON HUGGINS. H U G G I N S AND I AM THE LANDSCAPE DESIGNER. UH FOR DOCTOR. SO FAR, I ASSUME HE'S GOING TO BE A FACTUAL WITNESS, NOT AN EXPERT. HE'S JUST GOING TO BE DESCRIBING WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING, WITHOUT GIVING ANY EXPERT TESTIMONY. CORRECT. AND THE COMPANY HAS DONE HUGGINS DESIGNS. OKAY, SO I'M GOING TO CALL YOU I'M NOT GOING TO CALL YOU A LANDSCAPE EXPERT. I'M GOING TO REFER TO YOU AS A LANDSCAPER. YOU CAN. YOU COULD. THAT'S THAT'S FINE. I'VE BEEN IN BUSINESS FOR 30 YEARS, SO I UNDERSTAND, BUT PUT IT THIS WAY. YOU WANT TO TRY TO GET HIM QUALIFIED AS AN EXPERT. NO NO, THAT'S FINE. YOU CAN YOU CAN. YOU CAN. YEAH THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S FINE. RIGHT. THANK YOU. NEXT. CHANGE THE ABILITY OR PROFESSIONAL PLAN. SO LET ME ASK. THE ONLY REASON I'M DOING THIS. THERE WERE SOME ISSUES RAISED IN JAMES'S MEMO. AND THERE WAS A THOUGHT THAT MAYBE THE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED HAD SOME CHANGES FROM THE ORIGINALLY APPROVED PLAN, AND I'VE CONFERRED WITH OUR TWO BOARD EXPERTS BEFOREHAND WITH THE APPLICANTS, ATTORNEY AND EVERYONE AGREES. BUT I WANT YOU GUYS TO SAY IT THAT THERE ARE NO CHANGES SO THAT THE ONLY VARIANCES ARE THE TWO THAT THE APPLICANT ATTORNEY DESCRIBE SO WHY DON'T RECORDS. YOU START OFF AND THEN JAMES, YOU CAN GO THROUGH THE MEMO AND TELL THEM WHAT TO CROSS OUT. YEAH OUR OFFICE, ACTUALLY NOT ISSUING THAT LONG GROUP WITH THIS APPLICATION BECAUSE YOU HAD NUMEROUS OTHER MEMBERS. BUT TO THE EXTENT OF THE BOARD LEADERS ARE I DID COMPARE THE PRIOR THANK YOU. SOUNDS WITH GENERATION. TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH THE FIRES. EXPLAINED BY THE AFRICAN. WE DIFFER. RIGHT. SO THEREFORE, IN YOUR OPINION, THE 19.4% COVERAGE IS NOT INCREASED ANY CORRECT THE LAYOUT OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WERE APPROVED IN 2020 HAVE NOT CHANGED ANY CORRECT OKAY, SO. JAMES WHY DON'T YOU ADD YOUR TWO CENTS IN HERE? REGARDLESS NO CHANGING IN TERMS OF THE PREVIOUS COVERAGE. UNBELIEVABLE PEOPLE. WAS GRANTED UP. UM. CAN YOU TURN TO YOUR PAGE EIGHT OF EIGHT OF YOUR MEMO? THERE'S A LIST OF VARIANCES AND DESIGN EXCEPTIONS. AND JUST GO THROUGH AND TELL THE BOARD WHICH OF THOSE ARE GOING TO GET CROSSED OUT BECAUSE THEY WERE PREVIOUSLY GRANTED AND THEY STILL APPLY. CROSS OUT FRONTAGE WITH YARD SETBACK, LOT COVERAGE AND THEN DESIGN EXCEPTIONS. THAT LEAVES US WITH. VARIANCES FROM SECTION 16. WHAT DO YOU WHAT DO YOU ALWAYS SAY, DAD? MILITARY THING FIVE POINT 5 16 TACK SPOT 15 SPOT ONE C BETWEEN ADJACENT BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES. THOSE ARE THE TWO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES THE APPLICANT FROM NORTHERN. THOSE ARE THE PAVILION, WHICH IS 10.7 FT. AND THE PERGOLA. NOW THE PERGOLA, WHICH IS 10.7 FT. IN THE PAVILION, WHICH IS 5.8 FT. CORRECT. YOU KNOW? IT SEEMS [00:20:09] TO BE ONE STRENGTH. YEAH I MEAN , THEY'RE CONNECTED, AND YOU KNOW WE CAN WE GO THROUGH TESTIMONY, BUT THEY'RE NOT. THEY'RE NOT THE SAME SIZE, SO THEY WERE GOING TO CALL IT TOO. ALRIGHT SO EVERYONE EVERYONE AGREES. SO THIS IS THE CASE NOT TO MAKE LIGHT OF IT, BUT THIS IS A VERY SIMPLE CASE. IT'S TO STEP BACK VARIANCES FOR THE TWO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. SO WHY DON'T YOU GO AHEAD AND PRESENT? YEAH SURE. YOU WANTED TO DO THE EXTENSION FIRST. GREAT SO AS YOU HEARD, THE APPLICANT DID RECEIVE APPROVALS BACK IN 2020, THIS BOARD WAS GRACIOUS ENOUGH TO GRANT A ONE YEAR EXTENSION LAST YEAR WHEN WE APPEARED AND REQUESTED THAT EXTENSION THE APPLICANT HAD BEEN CONSIDERING AT THAT TIME IT WAS RAISED THAT THERE WAS A PERGOLA AND PAVILION IN THE APPLICANT WAS CONSIDERING WHETHER OR NOT TO INCLUDE THAT AS PART OF THE APPLICATION. UH ULTIMATELY, HE MADE THE DECISION TO INCLUDE THE PERGOLA AND PAVILIONS. WE SUBMITTED THIS NEW APPLICATION. BUT THIS IS A PROJECT IN ITS ENTIRETY, AND SO WE'RE SEEKING AN EXTENSION OF THOSE INITIAL APPROVALS SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE ENTIRE PROJECT? I KNOW NUTSHELL . THE REASON FOR THE EXTENSION LAST TIME. THE REASON FOR THE EXTENSION WAS THE MAY SEVERAL REVISED SUBMISSIONS TO THE BOARD EXPERTS TO GET INTO COMPLIANCE. THEY FINALLY SAID YES. YOU'RE IN COMPLIANCE. THE APPLICANT WANTS TO DO THE PROJECT AS ONE NOT IN TWO PHASES. AND SO THAT'S WHY YOU WANT THE EXTENSION. SO ASSUMING THE BOARD GRANTS THE APPROVAL TONIGHT OR WHETHER THEY GRANTED OR DENY IT, WHATEVER IS LEFT STANDING OR WHATEVER IS APPROVAL ALL GET BUILT AT THE SAME TIME IS THAT CORRECT? AT LEAST THE PERGOLA AND PAVILION WON'T BE CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT THE REST OF THE PROJECT. SO OKAY? YOU GUYS WANT TO DO THE EXTENSION FIRST OR WAIT UNTIL YOU DO. THE VARIANCE IS ALSO AT THE SAME TIME. YEAH. OKAY SO NOW PRESENT ON THE, UH THE VARIANCE IS THE ACCESSORY SETBACK, VARIANCES. SURE SO AT THIS TIME UNLESS THERE'S OTHER PRELIMINARY MATTERS, I'LL CALL OUR FIRST WITNESS. WHEN WE GOT THERE. WE'LL SHARE HE'S BEEN SWORN IN, JUST HAVE TO QUALIFY HIM FOR THE RECORD STATE. YOUR NAME AND LAST NAME AGAIN, JEFFY GARY IN UM. YEAH, AND JEFF, CAN YOU PLEASE FOR THE BOARD, DESCRIBE YOUR EDUCATION, EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS? SURE. I AM A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. I MEAN, GRADUATE OF THE NEW JERSEY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY IN 2006. LICENSE IN 2012. MY LICENSE IS A GOOD STANDING AND I HAVE TESTIFIED BEFORE THIS BOARD ON THIS APPLICATION IN THE PAST AND CURRENTLY STILL DOING TESTIMONY AND SIMILAR LANDINGS MATTERS. WE WOULD REQUEST THAT THE BOARD ACCEPT HIM AS AN EXPERT EXCEPT HIM. THANK YOU. AND JEFF, DID YOU PREPARE THE VARIANTS AND GRADING PLAN THAT WAS PART OF THIS APPLICATION AND IS BEING SHOWN RIGHT NOW, BOTH ON THE COMPUTER SCREEN AND ON THE BOARD NEXT TO YOU. CAN YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AND LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY? SURE SO THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON KILLED THE ROAD BLOCKED 15007 35 IN THE YARD TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE. IT IS A LOT OF APPROXIMATELY 2.116 ACRES WITH A UNIQUE SHAPE AS YOU CAN TELL FROM THE SITE PLAN. THE LIGHT ITSELF IS IN THE SHAPE OF AN ARROW WITH THE DRIVEWAY BEING THE STEM. AND THEN WHAT IS PART OF THE PROPERTY BEING, UH, WHERE THE DWELLING IS SITUATED IN THE ARROW COMING TO A HEAD. TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. THE LAW HAS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS LOT AREA THAN THERE WOULD BE IF IT WAS A TRADITIONAL COMMON RECTANGULAR SHAPED LOT. UM THE REAR YARD AREA IS WOODED, WHICH WILL HELP PROVIDE A BUFFER AND SCREEN FOR THE PROPERTY FROM THE ADJACENT JASON PROPERTIES. CURRENTLY THE PROPERTY IS IMPROVED WITH THE TWO STORY BRICK AND FRAME DWELLING, WHICH INCLUDES AN ASPHALT DRIVEWAY POOL AND PATIO AREA AND THE REAR OF THE DWELLING, PUTTING GREEN AND LANDSCAPING. THE PROPERTY IS SERVED BY PUBLIC WATER AND GAS. THE REASON EXISTING SEPTIC SYSTEM ON THE PROPERTY. UM UTILITIES ARE DEPICTED ON THE PLAN. THE WATER STILL OR GAS AND ELECTRIC ARE SHOWN, UM BEING DONATED FROM THE ROADWAY TOWARDS THE HOME. UM AS MENTIONED BEFORE [00:25:02] THERE'S EXIST SEVERAL EXISTING NONCONFORMITY ON THE PROPERTY SUCH AS LA FRONTAGE, WHERE 200 IS REQUIRED, AND CURRENTLY THERE'S 100 71.6 FT WIDTH OF 200 FT, WHICH IS REQUIRED WHERE ARE LOT HAS 154 FT. AND THEY START YOUR SETBACKS OF 40 FT. WHICH ARE REQUIRED IN OUR LOT HAS 31.7 AND 31.9 FT. THANK YOU. AND CAN YOU AGAIN BRIEFLY TAKE THE BOARD THROUGH THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE ALSO SHOWN ON THE EXHIBIT? SURE SO THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND THE APPROVED PLAN WHERE A PADDY EXTENSION TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY WITH AN OUTDOOR KITCHEN THE EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY WITH A SEVERAL PARKING AREA. WHICH SUBSEQUENTLY INCREASED ARE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE AREA TO THE PERCENTAGE OF 19.4% WHICH WAS APPROVED AT THE MEETING. UM AND LASTLY, THERE ARE THERE IS A STORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, PROPOSING THE PROJECT TO ACCOMMODATE THE INCREASE IN IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE. GREAT AND CAN YOU NOW TAKE THE BOARD THROUGH WHAT'S PROPOSED FROM AN ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE TONIGHT? SURE SO THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ARE RELATIVELY SIMPLE. THERE'S A PAVILION AND A PERGOLA TO BE CONSTRUCTED OFF THE REAR OF THE HOME, UM, WITH WITH AN APPROVED OVER THE APPROVED OUTDOOR PATIO AND KITCHEN. THE PAVILION AND PROBABLY WILL HAVE A CONFORMING HEIGHT OF UNDER 25. FT AND THE PERGOLA AND PAVILION ARE PROPOSED TO BE SET BACK 10.7 FT AND 5.8 FT RESPECTIVELY, FROM THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE. IN YOUR OPINION, THESE IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE AESTHETICALLY PLEASING AND HELP TO IMPROVE THE OVERALL APPEARANCE OF THE PROPERTY. YES DO YOU SEE ANY DETRIMENT TO ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS BASED ON THESE IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSED. I DO NOT. AND WHAT WOULD THAT BE DUE PARTLY TO THE SITE. YES AND DO YOU ANTICIPATE ANY ISSUES , GIVEN THE PROXIMITY OF THOSE TWO STRUCTURES TO THE PRINCIPAL RESIDENTS DO NOT. THERE WAS A COMMENT THAT WE RECEIVED IN ONE OF THE REVIEW MEMOS REGARDING SOLAR PANELS WITH THE APPLICANT AGREE TO PLAY SOLAR PANELS ON THE ROOF OF THE, UH PAVILION STRUCTURE. YES AND TO ADDRESS THE COMMENT, UM FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. THE APPLICANT WILL AGREE TO INSTALL THE SOLAR PANELS, AND IT WILL NOT BE A GOOD IDEA DESIGN TO HAVE ANY VINES ON THE STRUCTURE. GREAT I DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, BUT I WOULD OPEN IT UP TO THE BOARD AND ITS PROFESSIONALS AND ANY ENGINEERING ASPECTS. THERE WILL BE MORE TESTIMONY ON THE DESIGN ITSELF OF THE PERGOLA AND PAVILION NEXT. HAVE A QUESTION. THE HOUSE EXISTS AT A SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 31 AND CHANGE ON BOTH SIDES. WHAT ARE THE SIDE YARD SETBACKS OF THE STRUCTURE OF THE PAVILION AT LEAST FROM THE SIDE YARD. YOU MEAN YARD? I CAN SCALE THEM. I HAVE THE MODEL WITH KILL THEM. SURE. APPROXIMATELY 36 FT TO THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE. 36. AND 62 FT FROM THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE. AS ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. THEY HAVE DIFFERENT SIDE YARD REQUIREMENTS I IMAGINE, BUT THEY ARE GREATER IN SETBACK THAN THE EXISTING HOUSE. CORRECTING THE ALSO LOCATED BEYOND THE REAR WALLS OF THE HOUSE DIRECTLY BEHIND THE STRUCTURE. JUST TO CONFIRM THAT THE DISTANCE REQUIRED FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. 30 FT. OKAY. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU YOU'RE GOING TO GET INTO THIS, BUT YOU SAID THAT THE UM PAVILION WAS UNDER 25. FT BUT DO YOU KNOW THE HEIGHT OF THE PAVILION THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING? WE WILL HAVE SOME MORE TESTIMONY FROM THE LANDSCAPE DESIGNER WHO WILL COME UP NEXT. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. WHO'S GONNA ANSWER WHETHER WHICH OF THE SUGGESTED. [00:30:08] ITEMS IN THE VARIOUS REPORTS. YOU'RE GOING TO BE COMPLIED WITH. UH JEFF CAN HE TESTIFIED TO SOME OF THEM, FOR EXAMPLE? WHO'S IN IT? I ASSUME THE LANDSCAPE DESIGNER IS GOING TO TESTIFY, WHETHER WITH RESPECT TO MR BARTEL LOANS MAY 17TH MEMO WORK, AND JEFF MR BART ALONE, SAYS THE APPLICANT WAS REQUIRED TO INSTALL A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING AS A REQUIREMENT OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION. THAT'S RESOLUTION NUMBER OF 4 2020. THE APPLICANT SHOULD PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF THE LANDSCAPING INSTALLATION. CURRENT PHOTOGRAPHS WERE AGREED TO INSTALL THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPING AS A REQUIREMENT OF DISAPPROVAL. SO WHO CAN CAN HAVE JEFF CONFIRMED, BUT OBVIOUSLY, ANY OF THE CONDITIONS OF THE PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE BOARD IS GRACIOUS ENOUGH TO EXTEND IT APPLY. WHEN THAT IS THAT LANDSCAPING GOING TO GO IN LAST? IN OTHER WORDS, AFTER EVERYTHING ELSE HAS DONE OR SOME OF THAT LANDSCAPING PUT IN ALREADY? I DON'T BELIEVE ANY OF THE LANDSCAPING HAS BEEN PUT IN YET BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN OKAY PLANS AND PERMISSION TO PROCEED. AND YOU HE SAID THAT THEY HAD AGREED TO SOLAR PANELS ON THE ROOF OF THE PAVILION. NO VINES ON THE PERGOLA THAT WAS RESPONDING TO COMMENTS FROM WHO . THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER , THE OPEN SPACE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. OKAY SO WHAT ABOUT THE REST OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION'S COMMENTS? WHO'S GOING TO RESPOND TO THEM? SO THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMENTS WILL BE DISCUSSED BY THE LANDSCAPE DESIGNER. I BELIEVE LOT COVERAGE HAS BEEN COVERED. THE LANDSCAPING, JEFF SAID THAT WE WOULD NOT BE PROVIDING VINES. THE TREES IS NOT. THERE'S NO TREES PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED. THAT WAS PART OF THE PRIOR APPLICATION. AND WHAT ABOUT LIGHTING? UH OUR OUR LANDSCAPE DESIGNER CAN CONFIRM. OKAY. AND THEN WHAT ABOUT THE OPEN SPACE? COMMON. LET'S SEE IF THEY HAVE ANY AGAIN. THEY HAVE SOMETHING ON LIGHTING. I GUESS THERE'S ALSO ONE LIGHTING, SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE LANDSCAPE. DESIGNER COMMENT. RESPOND TO THE LIGHTING ON BOTH OF THOSE, OKAY? GOT IT. OKAY DON'T YOU ASK? IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT. BUT IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN THE PUBLIC NOT RELATED TO THE APPLICANT HERE ON THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION. IN OTHER WORDS, ARE YOU HERE ON THIS APPLICATION? NO, YOU'RE JUST HERE IN GENERAL. THE RESULT. OKAY THANKS FOR COMING. SO THERE'S NO ONE IN THE PUBLIC, RIGHT? OKAY. GREAT. WE'LL CALL DAN HUGGINS. AND DOWN AGAIN FOR THE BOARD. CAN YOU JUST PROVIDE YOUR FIRST AND LAST NAME? DON HUGGINS. H U G G I N S AND YOU'VE BEEN ENGAGED BY THE APPLICANT AS THE LANDSCAPE DESIGNER FOR THE SITE, CORRECT. CAN YOU PLEASE WALK THE BOARD THROUGH THE PROPOSED PERGOLA AND PAVILION DESIGN, RIGHT? UM. AND I HAVE HANDOUTS FOR EVERYBODY TO I MADE SOME COPIES OF PICTURES. THIS IS THE AND I'LL JUST I GUESS I CAN I SHOW YOU THIS WAY. JUST LIKE AN EXPLAIN AND THEN IF YOU LIKE WE DO PART OF THE SO WE DO HAVE RENDERINGS THAT WE CAN BRING UP. THESE ARE ACTUALLY SEPARATE, SO HE DOES HAVE A LITTLE PACKET FOR EACH OF THE BOARD MEMBERS. SO IF THIS CAN BE DON'T WE MARKED A ONE. YEAH. SO THE PACKET WHAT DOES HE HAVE TO HAND OUT? THE BOARD MEMBERS ONE JUST TWO PICTURES THAT ARE WANTED TO GIVE KIND OF A RELATIVE, YOU KNOW, IDEA OF THE PROPOSED PAVILION. THIS IS PROPOSED. WE HAVEN'T GONE OVER TOO MANY DETAILS BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY I PLACED IT ON THE DESIGN SO WE CAN GET THE APPROVAL AND THEN WE'LL GO. SO CAN YOU MARK ONE OF THOSE, A ONE AND ONE OF THOSE EIGHT TO MARTY'S AS A ONE AND A TWO, AND THEY JUST FOR THE JUST QUICK DESCRIPTION. THEY ARE REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS THAT DONE HUGGINS HAS HAS PREVIOUSLY CONSTRUCTED. HOLD ON, I'M GONNA GIVE YOU AN EXHIBIT TAG. A ONE EXHIBIT A TO PUT THEM ON THERE AND THEN GIVE A DESCRIPTION FOR THE RECORD. CAN YOU COME ON UP HERE TO GET THIS TAG FROM ME? OKAY, THAT'S YEAH. THIS LINE. THAT'S GOING TO BE A ONE AND THIS IS GOING TO BE A TWO BELIEVE THESE. YES YEP. YEP. GOT IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND WHILE THOSE ARE BEING DISTRIBUTED A ONE IS A [00:35:06] STANDALONE PAVILION STRUCTURE. A SAMPLE REPRESENTATION OF WHAT THIS 1 MAY LOOK LIKE, AND A TWO IS A PERGOLA ATTACHED TO A PAVILION SHOT FROM UNDERNEATH. TO GIVE AN IDEA OF WHAT THOSE TWO COMBINED LOOK LIKE. I JUST WANTED EVERY EVERYONE TO SEE. WHAT THE PROPOSED PAVILION FREESTANDING WOULD LOOK LIKE, UM . THIS GIVES A GOOD REPRESENTATION OF THIS IS APPROXIMATELY 18 BY 18. THE HEIGHT IS FROM THE GREAT HEIGHT TO THE BEAM IS APPROXIMATELY 10 FT. THEN WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY ANOTHER. 18 OR 18 INCHES, AND THEN TO THE RIDGE OF THE ROOF. WE WOULD ADD PROBABLY ANOTHER FIVE OR 6 FT. TO THAT. SO CAN YOU SHOW THE BOARD? WHERE ON THE PLAN YOU SUBMITTED. THE PERGOLA WOULD GO AND THE PAVILION WOULD GO AND THEN ALSO RIGHT THERE. OKAY SAYS PROPOSED OUTDOOR KITCHEN. THEN IT SAYS, PROPOSED PAVILION BY OTHERS. IT SAYS 20 BY 22 CORRECT. AND YOU SAY THAT PAVILION REFLECTED IN A ONE IS APPROXIMATELY WHAT DIMENSION 18 BY 18. THE ONE THAT'S YOU'RE ASKING TO HAVE THE BOARD APPROVED HIS LARGER THAN THIS ONE. IT'S 20 BY 22 IS THE ONE YOU'RE ASKING TO BE APPROVED. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT? THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE AND JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS WHAT'S BEING PRESENTED AND THEN THE PERGOLA. ON THE PLAN, IT SAYS PROPOSED PERGOLA BY OTHERS, AND IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY DIMENSIONS ON IT. IT'S A 14 BY 16. THE ONE PROPOSED IS 14 BY 16 CORRECT. WHAT'S THE ONE IN THE PICTURE? THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE OF HOW IT ATTACHES TO A FREE STANDING OR. UNDERNEATH THE SOFFIT JUST SO YOU CAN HAVE AN IDEA OF HOW IT WILL BE CONNECTED. IT WON'T BE TWO SEPARATE FREE STANDING STRUCTURES. WILL IT BE ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE? NO. AND WILL THERE BE A FIREPLACE AND CHIMNEY? AS INDICATED? NO, NO, THIS IS JUST NO FIREPLACE, NO CHIMNEY. NOTHING LIKE THAT PLAN. THERE'S A PROPOSED OUTDOOR KITCHEN UNDER THE PAVILION. CORRECT CORRECT. YEAH. AND THE RE AND THE PAVILION IS 5.8 FT. AWAY FROM THE HOUSE, CORRECT CORRECT. AND WHEN YOU WERE INITIALLY GIVING YOUR TESTIMONY YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE HEIGHT OF THE PAVILION IN EXHIBIT A ONE AND THAT'S A REPRESENTATION OF WHAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR THIS PAVILION AS WELL. CORRECT I THINK IN ALL IT WAS AROUND 16 FT HIGH, CORRECT. WHAT IS THE HEIGHT LIMITATION? GONNA ASK JAMES, AND WE'RE RAKESH. WHAT'S THE HEIGHT LIMITATION FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE? 25 FT. SO WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT YOU'RE PROPOSING, BECAUSE IF THE BOARD APPROVES IT THE BOARD. WELL, I LIKE BUT I SAY THE BOARD LEGS BUT I GUESS. HOPEFULLY THE BOARD LIKES WHAT I LIKE WHEN IT COMES TO THIS, BUT I LIKE HAVING CONDITIONS YOU LET ME KNOW, BUT I LIKE HAVING CONDITIONS SO THAT THERE'S NO SURPRISES LATER, SO IT WOULD HAVE A MAXIMUM HEIGHT. SO WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT? I WOULD SAY 20 THAT WOULD BE DETERMINED AFTER WE SEND THIS TO THE ARCHITECT, AND HE DETERMINES HOW THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD DO THE RICH ORIGINAL LINES AND PITCHES ON THE ROOF WITH THAT INCLUDE THE PANELS, THE, UM SUN PANELS. OR PANELS WOULD BEGIN TO TALK ONLY BE ON OBVIOUSLY, ONLY BEYOND THE PAVILLON INCLUDE THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE IN OTHER WORDS, YOU'RE GONNA BE UNDER THE RIDGE AT THE TOP OF THE ROOF LINE WOULD BE THE MAX. AND THEN THE ROOF WOULD BE IT WOULD BE UNDER UNDER. THAT WOULD JUST BE UNDER YES. OKAY SO FOR PURPOSES IF THE BOARD IS INCLINED TO GRANT THIS CONDITION WITH THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE PAVILION IS 20 FT TO THE PEAK OF THE ROOF, CORRECT. AND. SO THE PERGOLA WHERE DOES THE PERGOLA COME IN? DOES IT COME IN AT DOES IT IT WOULD COME IN JUST UNDER THE SOFFIT. IT WOULD COME IN UNDER THE PAVILION SOFFIT. IS THAT CORRECT RIGHT ON AN ATTACHING TIE INTO THE BEAM. AND SO JUST FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES IN THE, UH, EXHIBIT A ONE THAT YOU HAD SHOWED AND SAID THAT IT WAS [00:40:04] ABOUT 15 FT. ABOUT 10 FT. TO THE STAFF IT IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID APPROXIMATELY. YES. AND HERE THIS WOULD BE THE BEANS SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO PUT IT THIS WAY. IF I HAD A CONDITION THAT HAD PERGOLA NO HIGHER THAN TOP OF SOFFIT. NO IT WOULD TIE IN RIGHT RIGHT AROUND THAT'S STOPPING AREA TO TIE INTO SOFTENED. CORRECT I INTO THE BEAM. THE SOFFIT IS HANGING BEAM WOULD HAVE. YEAH WHAT WOULD HANG THE STOP? IT WOULD BE HANGING OVER. UM HANG INTO THE BEAM, WHICH IS COVERED BY THE SOFFIT, WHICH IS ON TOP. YES JUST TO JUST TO POINT OUT THAT ONE OF YOUR RENDERINGS THAT WAS PROVIDED SHOWS THAT EXTENDS SLIGHTLY ABOVE THE SOFFIT. CORRECT THAT WAS JUST A QUICK RENDERING SURE THING. VERY CONCEPTUAL IS JUST TO KIND OF GIVE YOU AN IDEA AND OF THE IMAGE WITH THE HOUSE. UM I HAVE A QUESTION. ARE THERE ANY PLANS FOR ANY RETRACTABLE SHADES OR WALLS THAT WOULD COME UP AND DOWN THAT WOULD ENCLOSE THE FIGURE THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE. THAT WAS, YEAH, NOT AT THIS TIME . CERTAINLY NO PERMANENT WALLS. I MEAN, IT'S MEANT TO BE AN OPEN AIR STRUCTURE. ARE THERE ANY REGULATIONS THAT WOULD PRECLUDE ADDING ANY RETRACTABLE? STRUCTURES TO CLOSE IT IN. ZONING ORDINANCE. QUITE A FEW YEARS. ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS. SO WE NOTICED THAT IN, UM YOUR OTHER DRAWINGS, BOBO. THEY WANTED IT TO TVS. THERE'S FANS. THERE'S LOOKS LIKE A HEATER. UM I GUESS THERE ANY ZONING REGULATIONS WITH REGARD TO THAT AND OUTDOOR STRUCTURE LIKE THIS OR I DON'T THINK SO. THE KITCHEN. YES, THAT'S TRUE. FISHING WAS GREAT. WE UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT BUT THE OKAY, BUT IF THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE AN OUTDOOR TV, IS THERE ANY SOUND ORDINANCE NOISE ORDINANCE IN MONTGOMERY, WHICH WOULD LIMIT YOU KNOW? THERE ARE NO THERE IS A NOISE AUDIENCE IN MONTGOMERY, BUT IT STANDS WHETHER HE HAS A T V OR NOT, RIGHT, SO THAT'S WHAT THEY HAVE TO COMPLY WITH. IN OTHER WORDS, THE NEIGHBORS COMPLAINED THAT THE THINGS AREN'T TOO LOUD. PRESUMABLY THEY CALL UP THE ZONING OFFICER, AND THEY WOULD JUST MEASURE HOW LOUD OKAY I APOLOGIZE. HMM. EIGHT OTHER EQUITABLE CODE. RIGHT? TO THESE STRUCTURES CHANGE IN ANY WAY THE WATER RUN OFF OF THIS DESIGN. THE DESTRUCTION. TO PRESENT OUR GIVEN THE SIZE. EXCUSE ME, SO THERE WOULD BE GUTTERS ON THIS THEN? YEAH THAT'S THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. IT'S USUALLY WE USUALLY LEAVE. IF THE IF THE CLIENT IS OKAY WITH NO GUTTERS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT ONE, WE DO NOT SO THE WATER JUST RUNS OFF AND THEN RUNS ONTO THE PATIO AND RUNS OFF. BUT, UM TYPICALLY, THAT'S HOW WE DO IT WITHOUT GUTTERS. YEAH. BECAUSE IT'S VERY HARD ONCE YOU RUN THE GUTTERS ON THE STOP, YOU GOT TO TAKE THEM ALL THE WAY DOWN. AND THEN IF WE DO THE COLUMN IT'S JUST AESTHETICALLY. IT'S. YOU MIGHT ACTUALLY WANT TO PUT PUT A CONDITION IN NO GUTTERS. BECAUSE IF YOU IF YOU IF YOU IF THEY PUT IN GUTTERS AND IT'S CONCENTRATED FLOW IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME. NOTHING LIKE YOU. AT THE MAINTENANCE. UP TO THE ABSOLUTELY DO YOU MIND IF THERE'S NO GUTTERS? WE DO NOT MIND. MY SUGGESTION IS JUST PUT IN CONDITION. NO GUTTERS, THEN YOU YOU DON'T HAVE THOSE SORTS OF ISSUES ARISE. YEAH THERE'S A SPACE BETWEEN THE DWELLING AND THE AND THEY NOT THE PERGOLA, BUT THE STRUCTURE THAT I MEAN, IF I WERE THE HOMEOWNER, I WOULDN'T WANT A DAUGHTER THERE HONESTLY. BIG JUST TO PREVENT RUNOFF IN BETWEEN THAT SMALL AREA, BUT I DON'T WANT TO IMPOSE A CONDITION THAT'S NOT [00:45:04] SPECIFICALLY AND NECESSARY FOR FUTURE. NEEDS. YEAH I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S A IF YOU HAD A GUTTER THERE. WHERE WOULD YOU RUN THE GUTTER? THE CHAIRMAN. ABOUT IT. LET LET IT BE UP TO THEM. SO DO YOU WANT TO REFERENCE IF THE BOARD APPROVES IS DO YOU WANT TO REFERENCE TO THEY HAVE THE OPTION OF GUTTERS AND NO GUTTERS JUST SO THERE'S NO PROBLEM WHEN THEY GET TO THE CONSTRUCTION PERMIT. THEY JUST HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT ANY LETTERS OR MANAGED IN THAT IMPACT THAT'S EXACTLY WHY I'M SAYING THE EASIEST THING TO DO IS PUT A CONDITION NO GUTTERS BECAUSE THEN, BUT I UNDERSTAND, BUT BUT THAT'S UP TO YOU. YEAH THERE'S WAYS OF MANAGING IT THINGS. NOBODY OKAY , SO IT'S UP TO THE APPLICANT TO HAVE GUTTERS AND NO GUTTERS IF THEY HAVE GUTTERS. THEY HAVE TO ANSWER TO PERSONALLY, OKAY? AH! CHAIRMAN I HAVE A QUESTION. YOU SAID THAT THERE WOULD BE NO VINES. WHAT UH, PRECLUDES PLANTING VINES THAT WOULD BE ON THE PERGOLA. TWO YEARS OUT. ARE THERE ANY RESTRICTIONS OF. THERE WAS A RESTRICTION THAT THERE WOULD BE NO VINES GROWING ON THE , UM PARTICULATE CORRECT, SO THERE WAS A COMMENT IN FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION REQUESTING VINES AND THE RESPONSE QUESTIONS REQUESTING THEM AND WE WERE JUST SAYING BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO PUT SOLAR PANELS ON THERE COULD BE A CONFLICT OF VINES ARE GROWING INTO THE SOLAR PANELS. OKAY, I'M SO WE WERE KIND OF SAYING THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENT, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO COMPLY WITH THAT. BUT IF IT ALLOWED ITSELF LATER, YOU KNOW HE, THE APPLICANT MAY CONSIDER THAT OKAY, SO BACK TO THE GUTTERS. CONDITIONS UP TO THE APPLICANT WHETHER OR NOT TO HAVE GUTTERS, BUT IF THEY HAVE GUTTERS, THEY MUST OBTAIN APPROVAL OF THE TOWNSHIP ENGINEERING THE BOARD ENGINEER AS TO THE DISCHARGE POINT AND MAINTENANCE OF THE GUTTERS. YOU NEED TO GET YOUR MIND OUT OF THE GUY IN MY MIND IS NOW OUT OF THE GARBAGE. MR CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY PLEASE REGARD TO THE 20 FT HEIGHT. IT WAS A BIT ARBITRARY, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS HASN'T BEEN DESIGNED YET. UM I WOULD PROPOSED TO THE BOARD. TO STIPULATE. IF IT IS 20 FT. IT'S GOING TO BE EXCESSIVELY STEEP. YEAH, STIPULATE THAT 20 FT AND NO GREATER THAN 20 FT AND NO GREATER IN PITCH THAN THE EXISTING ROOF OF THE HOUSE. SO THAT LEAST THAT THEY MATCH. BUT NO MORE THAN THAT. AND THAT WOULD BE AN AESTHETIC THING TO FOR THE NEIGHBORS KNOW EXACTLY. THAT'S RIGHT, RIGHT? EXISTING HOUSE AND I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. THIS PAVILION IS BEING PLACED ON A PATIO. RIGHT THERE BE FOOTINGS. BEFORE THE PATIO. SO 20 FT HIGH IS MEASURED FROM THE PEAK OF THE ROOF TO THE PATIO. HOW HIGH ABOVE GROUND ELEVATION. WILL THE PAVILION B BECAUSE HOW HIGH UP IS THE PATIO AT GRADE GRADE? YES, YES, NEVER MIND. UH MR HUGGINS. WELL, WHILE I HAVE YOU HERE JUST TO CONFIRM ANY ANY LIGHTING THAT IS INSTALLED ON THE PERGOLA WILL BE DARK SKY COMPLIANCE. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT VOLTAGE? YES. I DIDN'T HEAR THAT. ANY LIGHTING THAT WOULD BE WOULD BE WHAT COMPLIANCE LIGHTING THAT WOULD BE INSTALLED ON EITHER OF THE PAVILION OR PERGOLA WILL BE DARK SKY COMPLIANT. KATE IT ALSO THE LADY WILL ALSO COMPLY WITH WHAT OPEN SPACE MEMO MAY 16TH SAYS ALL THOSE CONDITIONS DIRECTED IN A DOWNWARD DIRECTION, SHIELDED TO MINIMIZE SPILLOVER ON SURROUNDING AREAS AND LIGHTING UTILIZED COLOR TEMPERATURE NO MORE THAN 3000, KELVIN'S AND DARK SKY COMPLIANT, CORRECT. CORRECT. WHEN YOU SEE WHAT ELSE? HOW ABOUT IN THE MIDDLE FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. BESIDES WANTING OPEN SPACES NO MORE THAN 3000, KELVIN'S, AND I [00:50:01] ASSUME THAT'S BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE LED LIGHTING. AND THEN OPEN SPACES. THEY WANT YELLOW LIGHT. NOT THE WHITE LIGHT TO COMPLY WITH DARK SKIES. YOU ALSO AGREE WITH THAT, TOO. OKAY? IN MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE YELLOW LIGHT IS THAT I THINK 3000 CANE . BELOW IS THE YELLOW LIGHT. BUT THAT DEFINES THEIR HMM. MILLION MOMENT. DID YOU? NO, MIKE. VERY INTERESTING CONVERSATION. I WISH I WAS THERE. YEAH. SO I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS ON DIRECT IF THE BOARD HAS ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. OKAY? DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS IN ADDITION AT ALL? GREAT. THANK YOU. AH IT WILL OPEN. YES, JAMES. DETAIL OF THE . NUMBER 19. SAY THAT AGAIN. LOUDER DETAIL OF THE PERGOLA AND THE PAVILION BE PROVIDED SO THAT WHAT CAN BE CAREFUL? GOT YOU VERIFY THAT IT COMPLIES WITH THE CONDITIONS. OKAY UH, INCLUDES THE PROFESSIONALS COMMENTS? ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC FOR THIS APPLICATION? NO I DON'T SEE ANY AND I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT. CLOSE. SECOND DOESN'T FAVOR HI. OKAY THERE ANY DISCUSSION THAT WE NEED TO HAVE FOR THIS APPLICATION? OKAY? UH COULD I AM SEEKING A MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION? THE YES, I CAN. YOU READ ANY CONDITIONS? APPROVAL AND THE VARIANCE IS REQUIRED. SO THE MOTION WE NEED TO GRANT THE TWO ACCESSORY SETBACK VARIANCES TO ALLOW THE ADDITION OF THE PERGOLA AND THE PAVILION AND TO BE A MOTION TO GRANT AN EXTENSION I ASSUME OF THE PRIOR APPROVAL. AND THE CONDITIONS ARE THE SOLAR PANELS WILL BE INSTALLED ON THE ROOF OF THE PAVILION, ALL CONDITIONS OF THE PRIOR APPROVALS STILL IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT, MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE 20 FT TO THE TOP OF THE PEAK OF THE ROOF. THE ROOF. SHALL HAVE NO SHALL BE NO GREATER IN PITCH THAN THE EXISTING HEALTH ROOF. PITCH. PERGOLA TO TIE INTO THE BEAM ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH. IT. ALL OTHER LAWS AND ORDINANCES SHALL BE COMPLIED WITH, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO NOISE REGULATION. IT'S UP TO THE APPLICANT WHETHER OR NOT TO INSTALL GUTTERS. IF THERE ARE GUTTERS, THE APPLICANT MUST OBTAIN APPROVAL OF THE TOWNSHIP ENGINEER AND THE BOARD ENGINEER OF DISCHARGE POINT AND MAINTENANCE OF THE GUTTERS. THE LIGHTING SHALL BE DARK SKY COMPLIANT AND COMPLY WITH THE COMMENTS IN THE OPEN SPACE MEMO AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE MEMO AND THE DETAIL OF THE PERGOLA IN PAVILION SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO VERIFY COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF THE APPROVAL. IN THE BOARD'S STANDARD. CONDITIONS THAT ARE IN ITS RULES. I MOVED TO APPROVE BASED UPON WHAT MR DRILL JUST SAID. THANK YOU SECOND. MAKES MISS OSAKI FOR A SECOND. HOW CAN I HAVE A REAL COLD? MUSUBI. I WAS ASKING YES. YES ROSENTHAL? YES? WOULD YES. BRUNCH. OKAY CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT. ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE MINUTES FROM THE MARCH [VI. MINUTES - March 28, 2023 – Regular Meeting] 20/8 2023 REGULAR MEETING SHOULD HAVE ALL RECEIVED THEM AND READ THEM. CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THOSE MINUTES? I'M A PROBLEM, ROSENDO. I HAVE A SECOND A SECOND. SO LARGE IT YES. ROSENTHAL. YES. CZARSKY. YES. YES. YES. META. RIGHT THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS A [VII. CLOSED SESSION] [00:55:16] PROPOSAL TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION. UM THE RESOLUTION TO BE RED IS THIS ONE MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CLOSED SESSION, WHEREAS IN JS A ATTEND FOUR TECH 12 THEY OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS AND AUTHORIZES THIS BOARD TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC. FROM A PORTION OF THE MEETING AT WHICH THE BOARD DISCUSSES CERTAIN MATTERS, WHEREAS THE BOARD IS ABOUT TO DISCUSS SUBCOMMANDER, SPECIFICALLY ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGED LEGAL ADVICE FROM THE BOARD ATTORNEY REGARDING THE WOODMONT TREATMENT CENTER RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE APPLICATION WHERE CONFIDENTIALITY IS REQUIRED IN ORDER FOR THE BOARD ATTORNEY TO EXERCISE HIS ETHICAL DUTIES AS AN ATTORNEY, WHEREAS THE BOARD BELIEVES THE PUBLIC SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM THIS DISCUSSION NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP BOARD OF A JUDGMENT ON THIS DATE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2023 THAT THE BOARD NOW GO INTO CLOSED SESSION AND THE PUBLIC BE EXCLUDED. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT THAT IS ANTICIPATED AT THE GENERAL SCOPE OF THE DISCUSSION WILL BE DISCLOSED AND INCLUDED IN THE MINUTES OF THE OPEN SESSION OF THE BOARD MEETING. BUT SPECIFICS OF THE DISCUSSION WHICH WILL INVOLVED AND INCLUDE LEGAL ADVICE WILL NOT BE DISCLOSED TO THE PUBLIC BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THE LEGAL ADVICE FALLS WITHIN INTERNALLY KIND OF PRIVILEGE. THE ABOVE RESOLUTION WAS APPROVED ON THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2023 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION? BLAZE OF SKI. I MOVED TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION. SECOND IT THANK YOU, MR MANDELA. AH! UH BROTHEL. SO WE HAVE ROLL CALL. COULD YOU TELL SHERRY THAT WE COULD HAVE A ROLL CALL ON THAT ON THE NEWS? LISTENING SHERRY'S AT HOME LISTENING? HELLO HELLO, SHERRY. THANK YOU FOR ALL OF YOUR WORK. THANK YOU. UM, WANNA ROLL CALL, PLEASE. BLODGET? YES. ROSENTHAL. MOUSSAVI? YES, ASKING. I WOULD BRONZE MATTER. OKAY UH, WE AREEM ALL RIGHT. CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO REOPEN THE MEETING? SOME OF THEM. SECONDED. ROCO TO REOPEN. YEAH COOK TO CLOSE THE CLOSE AND OPEN THE OPEN. YES TO THE MOTION. THIS IS THE MOTION TO CLOSE THE CLOSE AND REOPEN THE REOPENED BLODGET? YES ROSEN BALL, MOUSSAVI. WAZOWSKI YES, YES. BRONZE? YES, YES. WHY DON'T WE JUST ANNOUNCE FOR THE RECORD THE SUBJECT. WE ALREADY ANNOUNCED THE SUBJECT TO THE CLOSED SESSION WAS ON THE WAS ON THE RESOLUTION THAT YOU READ. WHERE'S THAT RESOLUTION? WHICH. OBVIOUSLY, SHERRY HEARD THE VOTE, BUT IT WAS THE DISCUSSION INCLUDED DO. RENDERED ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE ADVICE REGARDING THE WOODMONT TREATMENT CENTER RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE APPLICATION, AND I'M GOING TO HAVE A RESOLUTION FOR THE BOARD FOR THURSDAY NIGHT, AND IT SEEMS THAT THE CONSENSUS OF THE BOARD IS TO ACCEPT THE WITHDRAWAL AND DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE POSTED WITHDRAWAL OF THE INTERPRETATION AND THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE USE VARIANTS. APPLICATIONS SO THAT WILL BE ON THE AGENDA FOR THURSDAY NIGHT TO BE ADOPTED, AND THIS STATEMENT THAT IT HAS MADE SHOULD BE IN THE MINUTES SO THAT WE DON'T NEED A CLOSED SESSION MINUTES FROM THIS CLOSED SESSION IS GOING TO BE PART OF THE OPEN SESSION MINUTES. RIGHT? OKAY. UH, THE. FUTURE MEETINGS THAT WE WILL HAVE. OR MAY, 20TH MAY 20/5 IS JUST THURSDAY AT 7 P.M. JUNE 22ND WHICH WILL BE THE MELBOURNE APPLICATION, I GUESS, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT MAY 20/5 WAS SUPPOSED TO BE THE CONTINUATION OF THE OF THE MEETING. WILL WE HAVE A MEETING ? JOE? DO YOU KNOW OR OR IS THERE ARE THERE OTHER 20/5? I'M SORRY. THERE'S A MEETING ON THE 20/5. THERE IS A NOTE IN ON THE WEBSITE THAT IT'S SOMETHING TO DO WITH THEM. I DON'T GET IT. INNSBRUCK CLUB. THAT DIDN SORRY . OKAY, SO THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT WILL BE HEARING. OKAY. OKAY. GREAT. UM AND THEN JUNE, 22ND WILL BE THE MELBOURNE APPLICATION. JUNE 20/7. I AM NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT MEETING SO. AT THE MELBOURNE APPLICATION DOES EXTEND BEYOND [01:00:01] ONE. ONE MEETING. YOU WILL HAVE TO RUN THE SHOW. THAT'S FINE. WONDERFUL UH, CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? I MOVED TO A GERM PLAYS OFF SKI. TIME IS 29 29. THANK YOU. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.