[0:00] The meeting of the Manalapan Board of
Adjustment
[0:03] zoning Board of Adjustment. Notice of
this meeting was given as required
[0:06] by the Open Public Meetings Act and a
copy was posted on the second floor
[0:09] bulletin board in town hall
and the township's website. Be advised
[0:13] no new item of business will be started
after 10:30 p.m. And the meeting shall
[0:17] terminate no later later than 11:00 p.m.
Please note audio and video of this
[0:21] meeting is being recorded
in accordance with uh 56-2024.
[0:27] The meeting is being broadcast live on
the township YouTube channel and will
[0:30] The view of this is posted by the
township website for the public to view
[0:34] at their convenience. The exterior doors
of the municipal building will
[0:37] automatically lock at 7:45 p.m. If you
leave the meeting uh the building during
[0:42] the meeting, you'll be locked out.
Please have somebody accompany you to
[0:46] allow re-entry. Please rise for the
Pledge of Allegiance. Pledge salute
[0:52] » [clears throat]
>> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
[0:55] United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation
[1:00] under God,
indivisible, with liberty and justice
[1:03] for all.
>> Call the secretary to roll call, please.
[1:08] » [clears throat]
>> Mr. Crinno is excused tonight.
[1:12] Mr. Colavita?
>> Here.
[1:14] » Mr. Kaminsky?
Is excused tonight. Mr. Deery?
[1:17] » Here.
>> Mr. Hefner is excused tonight. Mr.
[1:20] Kozak?
>> Here.
[1:21] » Mr. McGann is excused tonight. Mr.
Mulvihill?
[1:24] » Here.
>> Mr. Rice?
[1:25] » Here.
>> Mr. Haverly?
[1:27] » Here.
>> Mr. Fury?
[1:28] » Here.
>> And Mr. Pellegrini and Mr. Warburg are
[1:32] excused tonight.
[1:37] » Make an announcement on common land.
>> Yeah, I'll I'll do that for sure.
[1:41] » All right, guys.
Just a couple
[1:44] items on the agenda tonight. It's uh
25-31
[1:48] uh and 56-
uh
[1:51] 56 is site plan number 56-SP.
It's common
[1:57] family
uh
[1:59] the use variance in preliminary and
final major site plan.
[2:03] This is not being heard tonight. It will
be a special meeting
[2:07] in the future and you will be re-noticed
for that if you're here and you have
[2:11] received a notice.
>> Second meeting in a row you did this to
[2:15] us.
>> We didn't do it to you.
[2:17] » I know.
>> All right, thank you.
[2:19] There's also another item on the agenda
tonight 25-21 John Tullio and Jennifer
[2:25] for Bruno. It's a use variance and front
yard variance. That will be heard on
[2:29] June 8th. You will not be re-noticed for
that if you're here for that this
[2:33] evening.
[2:40] » [clears throat]
>> All right, first
[2:42] application
26-08 David Robertson
[2:50] » This is who is representing my council.
I'll let him do the speaking.
[2:52] » Okay, all right.
Go ahead, sir.
[2:54] » Thank you.
>> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.
[2:57] » Swear to affirm to tell the truth and
nothing but the truth.
[3:00] » Yes, sir.
>> Your name for the record.
[3:01] » Joseph Macey structural engineer
>> He's been here before so the board
[3:04] accepts him.
>> Yes.
[3:05] » Okay, great. Are we going for the
record, Chuck? Are we going for the
[3:08] record?
>> No, I'm I'm enjoying being here with all
[3:10] these wonderful people.
>> No, of course. A good evening, ladies
[3:12] and gentlemen. My name is Kevin Diduch.
I'm the owner and principal attorney of
[3:15] KD Law in Turnersville, New Jersey.
For purposes of your record my last name
[3:19] is spelled d i d u c h. I pronounce it
Diduch but please just call me Kevin.
[3:23] It's easier.
It is my privilege this evening to
[3:26] present an application on behalf of my
client David Robertson
[3:29] on behalf of his company Robertson
Developers LLC for a property at 120
[3:34] Harrow Avenue here in the Township of
Monroe.
[3:37] The property is situated on your tax map
as block 1201 lot 14 and it's currently
[3:43] situated in your residential two or your
R2 zone.
[3:47] The applicant this evening is seeking
three bulk variances for their
[3:52] The purpose of constructing one single
family residential home on the lot.
[3:56] Uh
the three items specifically under your
[3:59] code that we're seeking relief from are
section 175-162
[4:03] minimum lot area. Your standard requires
1 acre and the property offers 0.826
[4:08] acres.
Minimum lot frontage, your standard
[4:11] requires 120 ft in front of frontage.
Whereas the property only offers 100 ft.
[4:18] And minimum lot width, where in your
ordinance requires 150 ft. And the
[4:23] property only offers 100 ft. So, we do
have Mr. Mancini here who will be
[4:26] presenting
um a couple of exhibits. I have one
[4:29] exhibit as well that I'd like to log in,
but we'll go in order as they're
[4:33] presented to the board. So,
All right. If I can call Mr. Mancini up
[4:36] first.
>> Yeah, I'll run on the outside.
[4:38] » Let it sneak on me.
>> Okay.
[4:41] Keep me on your toes.
Good evening, board. Uh Kevin did a
[4:44] great job summarizing the variances. Um
I'll just remind the board that those
[4:48] are all existing conditions. Um
Uh
[4:53] that that are part of I I believe it's
block
[4:55] 1202 lot 14, just to correct the record
on that. Uh the property is located in
[5:00] the R2 district as you heard, and it has
those three existing non-conforming
[5:03] conditions. Uh the plan proposes a
single-family home, which is a permitted
[5:07] use in the R2 zone.
Um approximately 100 uh 1,500 sq ft. Um
[5:13] the proposed home will comply with all
the other bulk standards. So, all the
[5:17] setbacks and coverage requirements will
be met.
[5:20] for the proposed home. So, the variances
um if the board sees those as variances,
[5:25] I mean a lot of boards uh perceive these
as existing non-conforming conditions,
[5:29] but out of caution, I think the board
and we uh would treat them as variances,
[5:33] but they really fall under the C1
criteria or hardship criteria. Um and
[5:37] I'll read that right from municipal land
use law.
[5:41] Uh by reason of the exceptional
narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a
[5:44] specific piece of property, the strict
application of any regulations would
[5:48] result in peculiar and exceptional
practical difficulties to or exceptional
[5:53] and undue hardship upon the developer of
such a property.
[5:56] Um that is there's practical
difficulties to resolving the
[5:59] non-conforming conditions of the lot
shape and size.
[6:03] Um
there's no land to be acquired to bring
[6:05] this into conformance. And in fact, it
is uh substantially consistent with all
[6:11] the other lots on this side of Harrow
Ave. Um
[6:15] So
You want to mark this A1? I'm just going
[6:18] to reference the the township tax map.
Um the subject property is located there
[6:23] in blue.
Um and you can see that
[6:28] uh along this south side of Harrow Ave,
um all of the lots are 100 ft by 260 ft.
[6:37] Also, if you want to mark
>> Yeah, we can mark these as A2. Um these
[6:41] are aerial photographs that show how
this property situated on this side
[6:45] compared to other
[6:48] » So not only are are all the adjacent
lots consistent in size and shape, but
[6:52] you'll see that all the all the existing
lots around us also have homes on those
[6:56] lots.
So we don't have any double lots where
[6:58] the house is in the middle. Generally,
these are developed in a consistent
[7:01] manner.
Um
[7:04] so
that's the so-called positive criteria.
[7:06] The board obviously has also considered
the negative criteria, whether the the
[7:10] variances can be granted without uh
substantial impairment of the intent and
[7:14] purpose of your uh zone plan or
substantial impact on the public. Again,
[7:19] the use is permitted. Uh the home's
consistent as as you can see with other
[7:23] homes in the neighborhood. Um the
proposed home will comply with all those
[7:27] other bulk regulations as I mentioned.
There's still ample open space on the
[7:31] lot. Uh and there are a handful of the
the other lots that are uh similar
[7:36] shape, uh lots 20 through 21 on the tax
map.
[7:40] Um therefore, we find that the po-
positive and negative criteria would be
[7:43] met. There's no substantial detriment to
the public. As you're driving down
[7:46] Harrow Ave, you wouldn't perceive this
is a non-conforming condition. In fact,
[7:50] you'd perceive this as being exactly
conforming with the character of the
[7:53] neighborhood.
>> [snorts]
[7:55] » And likewise, I don't see any impact on
the intended purpose of the zone plan.
[7:58] So I think it'd be appropriate for the
board to grant variance variances.
[8:04] That's all I have. Unless the board has
any questions, of course.
[8:07] » We can certainly open it up to the
board. We didn't receive any review
[8:10] letters from your professionals,
nor do we really expect to receive one
[8:14] per se, but
to that end, if the board has any
[8:17] questions, we have Mr. here to answer
them. We also have a representative and
[8:22] the applicant here as well if you have
questions for him.
[8:25] » And of course, the development of the
home will be subject to you know, the
[8:28] plot grading plan requirements, utility
connection requirements, anything else
[8:31] that would be associated with the
construction phase.
[8:33] » And all the other existing standards for
development within the zone.
[8:37] » Correct.
>> Just maybe one of just have the
[8:39] applicant swear in and put on the record
his attempts to his attempts to
[8:43] acquire any land. Obviously, you can't
from the tax map, but just that's part
[8:47] of the criteria, the hardship criteria.
So just state your name and address for
[8:51] the record.
>> Uh David Robertson.
[8:53] » Okay, do you swear to affirm to tell the
truth and nothing but the truth this
[8:56] evening?
>> I do.
[8:57] » Thank you.
[9:00] » David Robertson, and yes, I do.
>> Okay, just
[9:05] » Yeah, and Mr. Robertson, in the course
of developing this property, you did in
[9:09] fact try to seek additional land
adjacent to your property to continue
[9:14] the development and otherwise comply
with the current zoning code. Correct?
[9:18] » Yes, correct.
>> Okay.
[9:23] Anybody else from the board have
any questions for the applicant?
[9:31] Seeing none, hearing none, can we open
up to the public?
[9:35] So moved.
>> Second.
[9:39] » Anybody from the public wishing to
address the board
[9:42] » Yes.
>> on behalf of this application, please
[9:44] come to the microphone, state your name
and your address, and then the uh
[9:48] solicitor will swear you in.
>> All right. My name's Molly Chase. I live
[9:52] at 122 Hare Lab.
>> Do you swear to tell the truth and
[9:56] nothing but the truth?
>> I swear to tell the truth and nothing
[9:58] but the truth.
[10:01] Okay.
Can I go ahead?
[10:03] » Go ahead. You're on.
>> Hi, my name is Molly and I live at 122
[10:07] Hare Lab with my husband Jake and
directly next to this lot. I have been a
[10:11] night shift ER nurse for the last 7
years. My job is chaotic and stressful
[10:15] to say the least. I see people during
their most vulnerable and heartbreaking
[10:19] moments of their lives. Most people do
not come home from work carrying
[10:22] memories of blood-curdling screams from
a parent losing their child
[10:27] or the pain of telling a family member
there is nothing more that can be done,
[10:30] but I do.
Our home is my sanctuary away from that
[10:33] chaos.
My husband and I purchased our home in
[10:36] 2022 because of how peaceful and special
this neighborhood is.
[10:40] The homes are not built right on top of
each other and the mature trees between
[10:44] the properties provide beauty, privacy,
and a sense of calm.
[10:48] Our bedroom faces this lot and every
morning and night we look out at the
[10:51] trees and watch deer pass through.
That tranquility is one of the reasons
[10:55] we chose to build our lives here.
I'm here today to respectfully ask the
[10:59] board not to destroy the character and
peacefulness of this lot by approving
[11:03] construction that does not meet the
zoning standards already established for
[11:07] this neighborhood.
I also ask that the safety of the
[11:10] surrounding neighbors I also ask that
the safety of the surrounding neighbors
[11:14] be carefully considered.
Less than 2 weeks ago I received a phone
[11:17] call from our neighbor Lori screaming
for us to get out of the house
[11:21] immediately because the home across the
street had caught on fire.
[11:24] Thankfully, due to the quick response of
our brave police officers and
[11:28] firefighters, no one was hurt.
But situations like that are a reminder
[11:32] of why spacing, frontage, and lot size
requirements exist.
[11:36] Homes built too closely together can
increase safety risks and make dangerous
[11:40] situations even worse.
These regulations and standards were
[11:43] created for a reason. When exceptions
are repeatedly made to allow significant
[11:48] deviations from those standards, it
creates a precedent that the rules meant
[11:52] to protect our neighborhoods can simply
be bent.
[11:55] There are many other properties in
Williamstown with some with sufficient
[11:59] acreage to build a home without
compromising the integrity, safety, and
[12:02] character of this block.
I truly hope the applicant is able to
[12:06] build the home of their dreams, just not
in a way that comes at the expense of
[12:10] ours.
Thank you all for your time and
[12:13] consideration.
>> I have a question for you.
[12:17] Yeah, you don't mind?
>> No, yeah.
[12:19] » If you're standing in the street looking
at the lot,
[12:21] » Yes.
>> are you on the right or the left?
[12:24] » I am on the left.
>> You're on the left. What is the lot size
[12:29] of your property?
>> Uh it's around the same.
[12:32] » 100?
>> Uh it's the 0.82
[12:35] » No, the width.
>> Oh, the width? Uh I believe it's around
[12:39] the same.
>> Same?
[12:40] » But it again, ours was built in the
1950s.
[12:43] » Yeah, if yours is the same width
>> Yeah, I think so.
[12:45] » and you're maybe to the left of the new
>> Uh about, yeah.
[12:50] » Okay.
>> You're welcome.
[12:55] » Anybody else wishing to address the
board on this application?
[12:57] » I would.
>> [clears throat]
[12:59] » Same thing, your name, your address, and
also swear you'll swear you.
[13:03] » My name is Jacob Rednour. I live at 122
Harrow Avenue.
[13:07] » Okay,
do you swear to tell the truth and
[13:09] nothing but the truth?
>> I do.
[13:11] » Thank you.
And that was what How do you spell your
[13:13] last name? R A N
>> That's R E D A N A U E R.
[13:20] » Thank you. Okay.
>> I respectfully object to the requested
[13:23] variances because the property fails to
meet three major R-2 zoning requirements
[13:27] for minimum lot area, frontage, and lot
width.
[13:31] These are not minor deviations.
Particularly, the proposed 100-ft lot
[13:35] width where 150 ft is required.
The zoning standards exist to preserve
[13:39] neighborhood character, maintain
appropriate spacing between homes,
[13:43] protect drainage and safety, and prevent
overdevelopment of undersized lots.
[13:47] Additionally, given the recent house
fire in the neighborhood just 2 weeks
[13:50] ago, I believe safety concerns should be
carefully considered when evaluating
[13:54] reduced lot dimensions and spacing
requirements.
[13:57] Adequate frontage what
width and separation between structures
[14:01] are important for emergency access,
public safety, and protection of the
[14:05] surrounding homes.
Approving multiple substantial variances
[14:09] for new construction could undermine the
intent and purpose of the township
[14:12] zoning ordinance and create an
undesirable precedent for future
[14:15] development on similarly
non-conforming lots.
[14:19] The applicant should be required to
demonstrate with clear evidence that the
[14:22] proposed home will not negatively impact
surrounding property owners through
[14:26] increased runoff drainage problems,
overcrowding, reduced privacy, traffic,
[14:30] parking, safety concerns, or the
long-term value and desirability of
[14:33] neighborhood properties.
As a nearby property owner, I'm also
[14:37] concerned that granting multiple
significant variances on an undesir-
[14:41] undersized lot could negatively affect
surrounding property values by altering
[14:45] the established character and standards
of the neighborhood.
[14:49] I understand the desire to develop the
property,
[14:51] but I believe there are alternative uses
for this lot that would be better to to
[14:55] preserve the character, safety, spacing,
and environmental integrity of the
[14:58] neighborhood with without requiring
substantial deviations from the township
[15:02] zoning standards.
I fully respect the board's role and
[15:05] appreciate the time and consideration
given to this matter. I simply ask that
[15:09] the existing standards be help upheld
and that the long-term interest, safety,
[15:14] and character of the surrounding
neighborhood be carefully protected in
[15:17] making this decision.
I would also respectfully request to be
[15:21] kept informed regarding any future
hearings, revisions, approvals,
[15:25] conditions, or significant developments
related to this application as this
[15:28] project directly impacts my home and
surrounding neighborhood. Thank you for
[15:32] your time and consideration.
>> I'm just going to ask you just like uh
[15:35] you know, uh
you were asked earlier, I believe your
[15:38] wife, girlfriend. Uh so, your lot is the
same size?
[15:41] » I believe it is a little bit over 100 ft
wide.
[15:44] » Okay. And how about the other uh lots in
the neighborhood? They're pretty much
[15:48] the same size as what the applicant's
trying to build on?
[15:51] » I believe maybe a little bit bigger or
maybe around the same size.
[15:54] » Maybe?
>> Yeah, I'm not too sure.
[15:57] » Okay.
>> All right, thank you.
[15:58] » All right, good.
>> I have a question for you. You
[16:02] you made a statement that you think
there's a better
[16:07] source for this or better use of this
lot. What would you like to be there?
[16:13] » Well, you could use it as a buffer but
for like privacy between the fact the
[16:16] house that's there and the house that's
on the other side of the woods. You
[16:18] could do a community garden. You could
do some kind of park, memorial, anything
[16:22] like that.
[16:26] » Yeah, thank you.
Wait, wait, Mason.
[16:28] » Yes.
>> What's the size of your home square
[16:30] footage?
[16:34] » I believe it's 50 around 1,500 sq ft.
[16:38] » Morning, Marjorie Swan.
>> Okay.
[16:41] Maybe a little bigger give or take.
Thank you.
[16:47] » Anybody else wishing to address the
board?
[16:50] Same [snorts] sir, your name, your
address, and then have have you sworn in
[16:53] by the solicitor.
>> Dan Saxsteder.
[16:57] 134 Harold Avenue, I'm to the left of
Jacob.
[17:01] » Uh if you could just if you could just
spell your name for the record if you
[17:04] don't mind.
>> S I C K
[17:06] S T E D
E R.
[17:09] » Okay, could you raise your right hand?
You swear from to tell the truth and
[17:12] nothing but the truth?
>> I do.
[17:14] » Thank you, sir.
>> I just want to bring it up to you guys'
[17:17] attention that that lot appears to be a
rectangle. It is not a rectangle. When
[17:23] that property was split up from the main
portion of the lot, which was
[17:28] 122,
there was a small
[17:33] I'm going to say call it a cabin
on the property line and over onto that
[17:38] other lot. So, when the property line
goes back, it actually cuts into 120
[17:45] back out toward the back and then back
over.
[17:48] I don't know if it will show up on your
uh drawings that you have,
[17:52] but
that was called the love shack. That
[17:55] house was built
to live in while they constructed the
[18:00] main house.
And it was left up instead of tearing it
[18:04] down because the kids needed someplace
to stay.
[18:07] So, it's not a complete rectangle.
[18:13] It's going to narrow
toward the back.
[18:19] » We'll have the We'll have them address
that for you.
[18:21] » All right.
>> Good, sir.
[18:23] » So, there was a house on this lot? And
and I know you said
[18:26] shack in the back, the cabin, but there
was a house on this lot?
[18:31] » No.
>> Oh, I thought you said by the way.
[18:32] » Part of the they called it the love
shack.
[18:36] » Okay.
>> Was The majority of it was on
[18:41] uh 122, but part of it stuck out on 120.
That was all one parcel of land when Mr.
[18:49] Lee bought all the properties on the
street. He bought eight lots.
[18:54] And he kept his lot to be the biggest
one.
[18:58] And so, he didn't want any neighbor on
that side, and he had his garden and
[19:02] everything over there.
>> And then he subdivided it into these
[19:05] lots.
>> Yes, when he passed, the stepdaughter
[19:08] wanted a piece of it and blah blah blah
and never did nothing with it, never
[19:12] paid no taxes,
and here we are.
[19:14] » Okay. Thank you.
>> Mhm.
[19:29] » Madam, your name and your address,
please.
[19:30] » Good evening. Marie Sackstedter. My
husband Dan was up before me. S A C K S
[19:36] T E D E R. 134 Harold Avenue.
>> Did you swear from the tell the truth
[19:41] and nothing but the truth?
>> I do.
[19:44] Um
I just wanted to start off with my
[19:47] husband and I have been residents of
this uh home for 30 uh excuse me, for 41
[19:53] years.
We know quite well how the street is and
[19:56] what's going on and pretty much every
single neighbor.
[20:00] When the original owners, my husband
mentioned Lawrence Lee,
[20:04] originally owned eight parcels of land
here. Little by little over the years he
[20:09] had to sell parcels off to pay for his
uh property taxes.
[20:14] Their property, my neighbors that we're
talking about, their property is
[20:18] actually bigger than my property cuz
this is the largest parcel.
[20:23] Originally he never wanted anyone to be
any anyone building on that property,
[20:29] the empty lot that we're referring to
about here at 120
[20:34] Harold Avenue at uh
block 1202 lot 14.
[20:39] He never wanted anyone to be on there,
so he put his addition completely up to
[20:45] the edge of his property, which is her
bedroom, which is their bedroom.
[20:50] I can understand why she doesn't want
anyone over there and I would agree. The
[20:54] property needs to have something else
done to it other than allowing the
[20:59] variances to change, which you've
already made
[21:03] uh
variances of why it needed to be what
[21:07] like ours is only 100, it's now 150 ft
wide.
[21:11] When was that variance put into effect?
Does anyone know?
[21:15] When was it changed from 100 ft to 150
ft?
[21:21] Some I mean, it was changed after we
moved to our property 41 years ago.
[21:25] » Let me ask you a question. How wide was
your property when you bought your
[21:27] property?
>> 100, it's still the same.
[21:29] » Okay, so it was 100 at the time. So,
they changed it at some point in time.
[21:32] » 250.
>> I'm assuming that for the other
[21:35] developments, the larger developments,
so that way the developments weren't
[21:38] close together. I can only assume. It's
an R2 zone.
[21:41] I don't know the last time it was it was
reviewed by the master plan. So, it has
[21:44] to have been in the last probably 30
years.
[21:47] » Okay, so the same thing goes for the the
width, how far back it has to go and so
[21:52] forth. What is the
If if you have a neighbor next door to
[21:56] you and they want to build something
Well, nobody's there. What is the width
[22:00] that has to be from your home to your
property line?
[22:03] » Generally 25 25 ft. They indicated that
they comply with all the If they build
[22:08] the home where they like to build it,
they comply with all the other bulk
[22:11] variances as far as
>> But they're old variances. They're not
[22:14] the new variances.
>> No, there's I believe they said they're
[22:17] going to build in the winding window
envelope and it's going to comply with
[22:20] all of the bulk variances. Bulk
variances are how far the house is from
[22:24] the side,
>> Not according to this letter that I'm
[22:26] reading.
>> You're not letting me finish.
[22:28] It complies with the bulk variances.
That's all That's all I wanted to say.
[22:33] » I know, but according to this letter for
these different sections, they want to
[22:36] change all of them from 120 to 100 ft.
They want to require 150 to only down to
[22:43] 100. So, they're they're
They're trying to change things.
[22:48] » Where the house is located. [laughter]
That's what I'm trying to say.
[22:53] Okay, bulk variances. What they're What
they are requesting is the lot area. And
[22:58] the lot area is the total square feet of
the lot.
[23:01] » Mhm. It says 1 acre, but they're asking
for less than 1 acre.
[23:05] » Correct, cuz we only have 0.82 acres.
>> And that's what that lot is, but let me
[23:08] finish. Maybe hopefully you understand
what I'm saying.
[23:11] The lot frontage
150 and they want 100.
[23:15] Lot width variance, okay, is the width
of the lot Same thing, the width of the
[23:19] lot.
>> Right.
[23:20] » 150 by 100. Where the house is going to
be located, okay,
[23:25] it's going to satisfy and I refer to as
bulk variance. It's going to be the the
[23:28] required distance from the one side
on the right and I'm pointing to the
[23:32] right. Required distance from the left,
the required distance from the roadway,
[23:36] and the right required distance for what
the backyard is supposed to be. So,
[23:39] they're
>> But, why should they be allowed a
[23:40] variance if this is the minimum
requirement by this township? Probably
[23:45] the same reason
>> when the gentleman before subdivided it,
[23:47] Mr. Lee, he subdivided it into 100-ft
lots.
[23:50] Probably the same reason when the board
considered it way back when.
[23:53] » But, that was Our house was built in
1957. So, he originally was the original
[23:59] owner. So, this is prior to 1957 is when
they did it to the 100. So, we're
[24:04] talking about old variances and now
we're talking about new variances. So,
[24:08] why should they be able to have
something different?
[24:12] » Cuz that's what they're asking for. The
municipal land use law, let me just
[24:14] finish what I'm saying.
>> I understand what you're saying.
[24:17] » The municipal land use law allows them
to apply for variances.
[24:21] Okay, and that's what they're applying
for.
[24:23] And it's their obligation to satisfy the
burden of proof before the board that a
[24:27] hardship does exist, that the conditions
do exist, and they can't do anything to
[24:32] correct the conditions.
Now, one of the criteria is you can
[24:36] build or can't build, that's that's up
to the board. But, that's what the
[24:39] obligation of the applicant is.
>> It certainly wouldn't be fair to anyone
[24:44] to have a neighbor
I mean, only because their property ends
[24:48] their their her bedroom window ends at
the property line, okay? For you to then
[24:54] now have somebody that's
What did you say? 25 ft you can be from
[24:58] the
>> Side yard is 25 ft.
[25:00] » That's I mean that's a lot. That's
pretty close. I mean you might as well
[25:05] just reach out and touch the neighbor.
>> That's the unfortunate of urban living.
[25:10] It really truly is.
[25:13] Go ahead, please. Please.
[25:20] » That was in 1940 something 1945.
Correct.
[25:30] » Because it was he owned he owned both
lots. It was a combined lot.
[25:35] I understand it.
>> And he didn't have to get anyone's
[25:37] permit I mean he went through the the
zoning everything cuz we were a resident
[25:41] when he put the addition on.
And they didn't even have to get our
[25:45] Well, they did have to get our
permission and we said yes because he
[25:49] didn't have anybody to worry about cuz
it was an empty lot that he knew he
[25:52] already owned.
That was there that he didn't want
[25:56] anyone building there. And now all of a
sudden the lot was sold and somebody
[26:01] wants to build a house there. Unless
they're going to plan on turning their
[26:04] house sideways
I don't see how
[26:08] what type of a home that you could build
there that it would be adequate enough
[26:12] to be okay for everyone else.
I just And at what point do you make a
[26:18] decision if that is if the variances go
through?
[26:23] Is it at the end of tonight's meeting?
>> At the end of the testimony and when you
[26:27] » For tonight? Okay, just wanted to know.
>> I'm just wondering last question is did
[26:31] anybody in the neighborhood if that lot
was you know,
[26:35] let's say special to the area. Did
anybody in the neighborhood try to buy
[26:39] that lot to keep it empty?
>> Well, yes.
[26:43] » It was bought up right away.
>> Yeah.
[26:45] We we did not even know that the young
lady who lived in Pennsylvania who owned
[26:51] the lot, We didn't know she didn't pay
the taxes because we I we had no contact
[26:57] with them. But, we just knew that
when the lot was purchased, that's when
[27:02] we realized the lot was even up for
sale. But, if we did know, they would
[27:06] have purchased that lot. It would have
been cuz they wanted they don't want
[27:10] somebody cuz their property ends right
there.
[27:13] And it wasn't up for option when
[clears throat] they purchased their
[27:16] house.
Any other questions for me?
[27:20] Okay, thank you. Please give it to some
serious consideration. Thank you.
[27:27] » Anybody [clears throat] else from the
public wishing to address the board on
[27:30] this application?
Seeing none, hearing none, motion to
[27:33] close.
>> Motion to close.
[27:36] » Second, Bryce.
>> All in favor?
[27:38] » Aye.
>> Any opposed?
[27:40] » [clears throat]
>> Mr.
[27:42] Did you
>> Kevin Smith.
[27:44] » Kevin.
>> Yeah, please. Um
[27:47] I think the board's questions were
intuitive.
[27:49] And I think a lot of the questions that
um
[27:53] need to be asked were properly answered.
I mean, the the lot is consistent with
[27:56] the remainder of the neighborhood. There
is no deed restriction on this lot that
[28:00] prohibits it from being developed as a
residential lot. So, it perfectly
[28:04] squares perfectly within your
residential zone. As we've said before,
[28:08] the applicant fully intends to comply
with every other bulk standard that's uh
[28:12] that they're required to comply with
when building the new home.
[28:16] And uh for those purposes, we do believe
that the board uh has the proper
[28:19] information before it to grant the
relief that's been requested. So,
[28:23] Jared, do you want to add anything?
>> No, I think that summarizes it well.
[28:27] Thank you.
>> I have a question
[28:29] for Jared.
How did the applicant acquire
[28:32] acquire [snorts] this lot?
>> I don't know that. So, I'll ask the
[28:36] applicant to step forward and answer
that for the board.
[28:43] » Um my realtor brought it to me. It was
posted on the MLS through Compass. He's
[28:48] an agent for Compass. So, I get
notifications on the Compass app that
[28:53] the lot was for sale. I took a look at
it and thought it looked like a good
[28:57] piece of property and I I made an offer
and it was accepted.
[29:00] » So, it wasn't bought through a tax sale
through the township. It was bought the
[29:03] regular What do they call that? Fair
share
[29:07] » Arms length transaction.
>> Well, it's through a realtor.
[29:10] » Yeah, through through a realtor, through
through the MLS.
[29:13] » Okay, no, I was just wondering cuz it
said something about taxes and I just
[29:16] wanted to make sure.
>> No, I I understand.
[29:18] » you purchased it, just to clarify, you
you understood it was undersized.
[29:23] » Um
that was brought to my attention during
[29:26] my due diligence period um that it was a
little undersized, but it looked
[29:31] consistent with every other lot on the
street, so I I thought it was buildable.
[29:35] I thought we could fit a house on there
if every if every other lot had a had a
[29:39] house on it.
>> And that's I think it was stated
[29:40] [snorts] by your attorney or that
you had an agreement to just let me lay
[29:45] it
adjacent to it to make it compliant.
[29:48] » That's correct. I mean, there's there's
homes on on every other lot on the
[29:52] street, so I there's no other lots to
purchase.
[29:54] » Let me let me ask one other question. Is
there any way you can
[29:59] close the other house to your
left is right on the property line. Is
[30:04] there any way you can
uh relocate the house a little further
[30:08] away
to give them some more You don't have
[30:11] to, but you meet the 25. I'm not saying
that, but
[30:15] give them some relief?
>> Yeah, no, I I understand.
[30:18] » Um certainly take it under advisement.
We wouldn't make it a condition of
[30:21] approval per se, um so long as the
applicant complies with the other bulk
[30:25] standards in the zone. Um certainly
willing to entertain that.
[30:29] » Yeah, I am.
>> How about moving it back?
[30:34] » Well
>> I mean, if we could do it for
[30:35] » He he has room to the right.
Right? Am I reading it wrong?
[30:40] No, I'm looking at it. He can go to the
cuz the house that's on right on the
[30:44] line
>> Right. So, essentially, the neighbor's
[30:47] house is non-compliant.
>> It's the 25 ft.
[30:49] » Right.
>> Moving it back would make it more
[30:51] incongruent with the rest of the
neighborhood. I think what we want is
[30:54] conformity with the neighborhood.
I I I understand the the logic of buying
[30:58] and moving it back, but I just don't
think it would
[31:01] um
be a positive impact overall.
[31:04] » Of moving it back?
>> Of moving it back?
[31:07] » Correct.
>> Right, but moving it to the right
[31:09] » It's fine.
>> Yeah, yeah. I think the bigger thing to
[31:11] consider is the other improvements like
I I believe we need to check the septic.
[31:13] » Septic? Right.
>> Yeah, I think it's the city Is it city
[31:16] water or is it septic?
>> It's city water.
[31:18] » the septic?
>> All right.
[31:20] » And that might make them move it anyway.
Cuz if they're septic
[31:25] the way it's the county might make them
move it to comply.
[31:30] But, it'd be something to consider and
make things
[31:36] » That's all I have.
>> Sir, there was another question uh about
[31:41] the
not the size of the lot, but uh the
[31:45] configuration of the lot. Can you
address that?
[31:47] » Sure. Yeah, I can speak to that. So, so
the lot lines
[31:51] are rectangular as are all the other
lines within this lot. There's an
[31:56] easement
for the so-called blush.
[32:00] Um
I'm
[32:02] happy to answer any questions.
Um there's an easement on the back of
[32:05] the property. It's well to the back of
where the activity is happening, so it's
[32:10] shown on on the plan that was submitted.
Um
[32:13] referenced in the indeed that was
recorded.
[32:15] Um
I don't know about
[32:18] » Is that still there? Is there a small
structure
[32:21] » There's no structure there now. The
shack is not there anymore.
[32:23] » The shack's gone.
>> The love shack's gone.
[32:27] » Was there a destruction there?
>> For whose benefit is the easement?
[32:31] » Yeah, that's what I'm that's what I'm
getting at.
[32:32] » It's to the benefit of of um lot 15,
which I presume is 122, so.
[32:38] » The other issue with our own property
>> you got to wait. Okay. Okay, well, as a
[32:42] condition of that, will you be it's uh
well, it it's for the benefit of 122,
[32:45] not the benefit of Okay, we'll leave
that alone.
[32:50] » So, the easements
It's not
[32:53] No one will
>> Well, it's for the purpose of the
[32:55] structure, I'm assuming.
>> It's not there.
[32:57] » It's not there. So, it's just going to
remain there. The only way it would be
[33:00] removed from the lot would be if the 122
would consent to it, but you're not
[33:04] requesting that, so.
I'd have to go back to the deed. I don't
[33:08] have that with me.
>> May I already say that the easement is
[33:11] extinguished when the
when the structure goes away?
[33:15] » Okay.
>> Which is out of out of out of bunch of
[33:17] court documents showing on the survey
>> You were going to say it again, weren't
[33:20] you?
You were going to say love shack again,
[33:23] weren't you? You call it yourself, why
not?
[33:25] » Yeah, I was going to say that.
>> [laughter]
[33:28] » No, I don't do that.
[33:31] Anything else, sir? No, closing
statements, sir?
[33:34] » No, no, everything is
perfectly well and fine. We appreciate
[33:38] the board's consideration. Thank you.
>> I have another question, if you don't
[33:42] mind.
[33:46] » Public portion has been closed. Mr.
Solicitor, just one question. Just have
[33:50] to stop at some point in time, so we
have to follow the process, but he's
[33:53] going to do an exception. Do you mind if
you should stand up right there?
[33:56] » Okay, I just have a question about when
you mentioned it just
[33:59] » Uh we can't hear you until you come up
to the mic. Thank you.
[34:03] » Marisa said it again. When you mentioned
25 ft and the lot is actually only 100
[34:08] ft wide, so if they got to go 25 on one
side and 25 on the other side, they can
[34:13] only make their house 50 ft wide. Is
that correct?
[34:17] » That's correct, yes. It's a tiny little
house. Not necessarily, it could be
[34:20] deep. I don't know what this 1,500 sq ft
it could be 30 by 50.
[34:24] » If the survey is showing some kind of
configuration, they have to be able to
[34:27] go deeper.
>> Deeper, yeah, it could be if you just
[34:29] look to your left there, madam, and you
feel free to look.
[34:33] » Originally, when my husband mentioned
the love shack,
[34:36] they built that originally before they
built the existing house at 122 that
[34:41] they presently live in. They built that,
three brothers, so that they could
[34:46] have somewhere to stay while they were
building the house at 122.
[34:51] It was knocked down by the second owners
uh because complying to uh homeowners,
[34:58] so they opted to tear down the love
shack. Um but it was and there is still
[35:04] some existence
>> this just doesn't really help us, to be
[35:07] honest with you. If If it's not there
anymore, part of the structure is
[35:10] doesn't really
>> part of the structure is still there.
[35:13] » What's there? The love shack?
>> Um
[35:16] » The footings for the uh
chimney is it brick?
[35:20] » That is still there.
>> I have a suggestion.
[35:22] » One that probably
>> owner, if you can get the approval, you
[35:24] agree to remove all the
structure in the back?
[35:28] Whatever exists, you'll get rid of it
and properly dispose of it. Okay, so
[35:31] that'll address that issue, so.
>> Okay. But I just wanted to make sure
[35:34] that we were that it was 25 and 25, so
it can only be 50.
[35:38] » The house width They will not be issued
a build building permit if it doesn't
[35:42] comply. And if they want to make it
wider, they have to come back to this
[35:45] board
to make it wider. And you will be
[35:47] noticed according to municipal law not
you'll be noticed by certified mail.
[35:51] » Okay.
>> Okay?
[35:52] » Thank you for your time.
And please consider us.
[35:57] » All right, well, we've uh heard the
testimony of the uh
[36:01] neighbors open open portion.
Um
[36:05] Do we have a motion?
[36:08] Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. Just I'm going to
generally summarize the application.
[36:13] The The application is David Robertson,
application number 2608. He's seeking a
[36:17] C-1 vari- variances for the lot area,
lot front- frontage, and lot width
[36:22] variances. The attorney as well as the
engineer described the relief that is
[36:26] being sought.
I had marked as evidence A1, which is
[36:30] the tax map.
A2, which is the
[36:33] survey. I'm sorry, the tax map is A2.
Survey was A1 with the configuration of
[36:38] where potentially the home will be
located. Attorney place for the record,
[36:41] I'm going to just read into the record
what the municipal land use states what
[36:44] you must consider.
The applicant of the requirement the
[36:47] applicant has to prove that the strict
application of zoning ordinances like
[36:51] setbacks or lot size causes unique undue
hardship to the physical characteristics
[36:55] of a specific property
such as narrowness, shallow shape, or
[36:59] exceptional topog- topography.
The applicant again must demonstrate the
[37:05] physical hardship, must demonstrate the
unique condition,
[37:09] and the applicant must uh put on the
record what there's no other
[37:12] alternative, for instance, obtaining
additional property to make conform with
[37:16] the requirements of 1 acre.
So, it's your determination again, you
[37:19] have to look at the negative criteria
that it will not cause a substantial
[37:22] detriment to the public good, which is a
kind of an elusive concept, but I think
[37:26] we understand it by now being kind of
astute board members, and will not
[37:30] impair the intent and purpose of the
zone plan and zoning ordinance. So,
[37:34] that's what you must consider. Should
you need a motion to approve, and then
[37:37] you can vote accordingly.
>> Thank you. I apologize. I thought you
[37:42] did that before we uh
>> It was so quick before. I slowed down
[37:44] this time.
>> Okay. All right.
[37:46] » Sorry about that.
>> That's all right. No problem.
[37:48] » So, we did hear the testimony from the
applicants. We heard uh the portion,
[37:53] uh and our solicitor has summarized the
application and the standards.
[37:58] Uh do we have a motion?
[38:04] » Motion to approve. Bruce.
>> Do we have a second?
[38:11] » Second.
[38:13] » Madam Secretary.
[38:16] » Mr. Race.
>> Yes. I feel the applicant has satisfied
[38:21] the criteria. The applicant has no means
of of such obtaining additional
[38:26] property.
Uh there's no deed restriction on the
[38:29] property. I believe the construction
will uh
[38:32] improve the improve the property. Yes.
>> Mr. Deary?
[38:37] » Yes, I stayed.
>> Mr. Kozak?
[38:40] » Uh the lot conforms with other lots
existing lots in the area. Yes.
[38:44] » Mr. Mulvihill?
>> Yes, I stayed.
[38:46] » Mr. Colavita?
>> I think our question here was whether
[38:49] the property did uh conform to the rest
of the area.
[38:53] Um and it does in fact conform to that.
And there's no other variances that are
[38:59] being requested. Uh yes.
>> Okay. You're approved.
[39:03] » Okay. The one thing I just maybe just
amend your motion was subject to outside
[39:07] all outside agency approvals. So they
have to comply with everything else as
[39:10] well as removal of the
previous structure located at the back
[39:14] of the property. If you don't mind just
amending your original motion and just
[39:18] » Can we amend the original motion to
include statements made by our
[39:23] solicitor?
[39:26] » Yes.
Um
[39:28] I'd like to amend my motion to include
all recommendations by the solicitor.
[39:34] » Okay. And
you do make a second to that.
[39:37] No, just as everybody agrees. Just Yeah,
that's all. All in favor? All right.
[39:41] Anyone opposed?
>> Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, folks.
[39:46] » Um our next meeting is June 8th. So
we'll hopefully have a resolution ready
[39:49] by then for you.
[39:55] » Thank you.
[39:58] » The next application before us this
evening is Mr.
[40:03] Uh is number 26-11, Mr. Paul Murdock,
really our variance.
[40:10] Please step forward.
[40:14] » Okay, Mr. Murdock, just state your full
name for the record and your address.
[40:19] » My name is Paul Murdoch.
[40:23] » And your address?
>> Pardon me?
[40:25] » Your address.
>> My address 216 Karen Drive,
[40:28] Williamstown.
>> Okay, and just if you could just
[40:31] [clears throat] raise your right hand.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
[40:35] and nothing but the truth?
>> Yes, I do.
[40:37] » And just for the record, the applicant
is seeking a rear yard variance
[40:41] uh to allow 5 ft where 12.5 ft is
required to construct a 720 sq ft
[40:46] detached garage
along with any other variances or
[40:50] waivers deemed. It's in the RGPR zone,
216 Karen Drive in Williamstown.
[40:56] » All right. Sir, in your own words, can
you uh tell us why you're here this
[40:59] evening?
>> Pardon me?
[41:01] » In your own words, can you tell us why
you're here this evening?
[41:04] » Oh, I I wanted to make better use of the
uh yard
[41:10] have more useful space in front
of the garage.
[41:17] » Okay, so you're going to construct a
garage or is it there already?
[41:22] » No, I'm going to uh construct it. I
hire a contractor.
[41:34] » Good.
>> I have a question for you. You're You're
[41:36] asking that the back of the garage be
closer to the property line.
[41:41] » Right.
>> 5 ft instead of 12 and 1/2 ft.
[41:45] » Yes.
>> Okay.
[41:47] » Yes, that's correct.
>> Why can't it be used for what it's
[41:52] » asked?
>> Yeah.
[41:53] » I I wanted to use make better use of the
uh
[41:58] of the yard
to have more space in front
[42:03] of the garage. We've got a a deck there
that
[42:07] would clash
with the uh
[42:10] garage.
You'd be coming down off the deck,
[42:14] you know, right down to the garage right
in front of the garage.
[42:21] That I want to move 7 1/2 ft farther.
Right. Back, yeah.
[42:28] » And the purpose of the garage is for the
cars?
[42:32] » Right.
>> So, you're going to have a driveway
[42:35] going back, too, aren't you?
>> Well, I don't think that I can have a
[42:39] driveway. I don't know.
Uh
[42:43] That or
[42:47] Do we have Do we have a survey Do we
have a survey there?
[42:49] » It's not part of the application.
>> Okay.
[42:52] Is that the survey there?
>> Yes.
[43:00] » [snorts]
>> Dan, I want to say it's probably it's
[43:01] 40%. I don't think I think it's okay
with the lot coverage.
[43:03] » Yeah.
>> Okay.
[43:04] » But if he's But if he's adding a
driveway Yeah, if he's adding a
[43:07] driveway, that might
>> Yeah, that's going to And the drive The
[43:09] drive
>> And you need to take a look at the
[43:10] configuration of
where it's located.
[43:14] » Proposed is 34%.
>> So, they're saying he'll be under
[43:18] » He'll be under without a driveway.
[43:22] » So, the only reason you want it
[43:27] plus the driveway.
[43:33] So, the only reason you want to move it
forward is not a hardship, it's just
[43:37] that you want to have a bigger yard.
You can move it forward then, right?
[43:43] » I can't uh
>> You can't apply.
[43:48] » Yeah.
>> Is it like if it's going to touch the
[43:50] house or there's something there or
there's a pool [snorts] or
[43:54] septic or anything?
>> Right.
[43:56] » Mhm.
[44:02] » Just as for the record, just as square
footage of the garage,
[44:05] what's the plan say?
>> That's going to That's allowed to
[44:08] » The The plan uh
>> states 30 by 24. So, this is a little
[44:13] bit smaller than that. According to our
record, it's 720 square foot. And sir,
[44:17] how big is your house?
[44:21] » Pardon me?
>> Do you know the square footage of your
[44:22] house?
>> The square footage of my house?
[44:25] » Yes.
>> Uh
[44:27] what's the square footage?
>> Um
[44:29] » 1590
>> So,
[44:32] just I'll put it to you this way, the
the attached or detached garage that you
[44:36] plan to build is not going to be bigger
than your home.
[44:41] » I'm not sure of the square footage.
>> Okay.
[44:45] » Of the house.
[44:48] » We're using
>> I changed
[44:49] » saying this
this way or
[44:51] » It's Stone Forest.
>> Where is the side?
[44:53] » Yeah, they're they're they're probably
It's probably 1500 square feet. 1300
[44:57] square feet. It's a rancher in in Stone
Forest.
[45:00] » It's just that what, you know,
as far as the name.
[45:03] » [clears throat]
>> The square
[45:06] » I It's It's It's 1500 ft of living
>> Yeah, we
[45:09] » Yeah.
We're just trying to put on the record
[45:11] that, you know, it's not going to be
bigger than your home. And you just have
[45:15] to know that the
you know, it can't be bigger than your
[45:18] home.
[45:21] » I can't hear anything that's on there.
>> It's [laughter]
[45:24] okay. It complies. How about we just say
it's safe we summarize it it complies.
[45:27] » I'm having a hard time hearing us. I
want
[45:29] » Okay, I talk loud, okay?
>> It might sound
[45:32] » Okay. The accessory building your
building is smaller than your house that
[45:35] you want to build. Yes or no?
>> What's the question?
[45:40] » The building that you're building that
you'd like to build, okay, is smaller
[45:44] than your house.
>> Yes.
[45:46] » Oh, yes.
>> Okay, there we go. You
[45:47] » Yes.
>> Thank you.
[45:49] » I'm sorry.
>> That's okay. All right.
[45:52] It's been a long day.
>> Once.
[45:54] » You need to be sworn in as State your
name You need to be sworn in and state
[45:58] your name.
>> Joyce Murdock.
[46:00] » Okay, do you swear affirm to tell the
truth and nothing but the truth?
[46:02] » I do.
>> And you live in the same place with this
[46:04] gentleman?
>> Yes.
[46:05] » Okay, good luck. Thank you.
>> I just wanted to say I don't know if she
[46:10] I couldn't hear it too good, but
the whole problem is that
[46:16] the 12 ft from the back of the fence
would put the shed
[46:21] right where I come down my steps
to go into the yard. I don't even have
[46:28] about three steps to either turn left or
turn right. The It would be directly in
[46:37] front. If it would If it would be 5 ft
from the shed, it would be in the center
[46:45] of the yard
and it wouldn't be so I mean, I could
[46:49] come down and we could use I mean, if
you just look from my house, all you
[46:54] would see is right next to We just built
a new deck on there. And it just
[47:00] wouldn't be feasible when I go down the
stairs that we're blocked right there.
[47:05] And we And we need the size the shed
because we have so many things in our
[47:11] seller
that we wanted to put in there. That's
[47:15] why we wanted the size. My husband's
ex-husband's retiring. We just paid our
[47:20] house off. His dream was to have this
nice shed that he can sleep in there.
[47:26] And now, it we we couldn't build that if
we had to have it 12 ft from the fence.
[47:33] And we're making it uh just like our
house. It's not going to be a sore thing
[47:39] sticking up. We're putting the shingles
on. It's going to look proper and neat
[47:43] for nobody to complain. And he That's
That's what he wanted. Just that like
[47:50] that.
>> Okay, so you're stating that you It's
[47:53] going to look like your
>> use of the of the with
[47:57] the 7 ft farther back.
>> Okay, and you're saying you're going to
[48:00] make it look like your home like these
fans.
[48:02] » Just like a little section.
>> Yeah, not a pole barn.
[48:06] » I hate to have this retirement and be
happy.
[48:09] » Okay, another question. Do you do you
currently have
[48:12] If we're both talking at once that court
recorder won't be able to or the the
[48:16] recorder won't be able to understand. Uh
You don't currently have any issues with
[48:22] drainage in the back of your property or
you know, with your running into your
[48:27] neighbor's yard. So, if you put this
building there and close to the property
[48:33] Um there's not currently drainage
issues.
[48:36] » A
a drainage issue?
[48:38] » Correct.
>> No, there's there's
[48:41] not even it's just woods behind. Uh
>> But you do have a neighbor to
[48:47] the side of you, correct?
>> We have neighbors to the side, yes.
[48:48] » Okay. All right, on that side of the
property.
[48:52] » No, there's never been an issue with
drainage.
[48:54] » Okay.
[48:57] » How high is it going to be?
>> Tall. Uh two stories.
[49:02] Probably 20 ft maybe.
[49:07] » It's got to be approved by the state.
>> Yeah.
[49:10] » And it's going to be the same color as
your house.
[49:13] » Right.
>> Right?
[49:14] You're not going to use it for your
business.
[49:16] » Oh, no.
>> No business, just
[49:18] » No, I have a
I'm restoring a
[49:21] old pickup.
>> And the
[49:23] » That's the main reason.
>> You said there's woods.
[49:25] » Right.
>> There's not no neighbor right behind
[49:27] you.
>> No.
[49:29] No, there's been that's been woods ever
since we lived there for 26 years.
[49:41] » Any other questions from any of the
other board members?
[49:47] Motion open to the public.
>> I move.
[49:51] » Do we have a second motion to open to
the public?
[49:55] » Second, goes on the
>> All in favor? Aye. Any opposed?
[49:59] Anybody from the public wishing to
address the board on this application?
[50:04] Seeing none, hearing none, motion to
close.
[50:07] » Motion to close, Mr. Chairman.
>> Second, Rice.
[50:10] » All in favor?
>> Aye.
[50:11] » Any opposed?
>> Mr. Solicitor, I have
[50:14] » Okay, I'll summarize the application
briefly, number 2611, Paul Murdock is
[50:18] seeking a rear yard variance.
12 and 1/2 ft is required, he's
[50:22] requesting five for the construction of
the 720 ft square
[50:26] ft detached garage. He's put on the
reason the
[50:30] his wife has actually put on the record
the reasons for the uh request for the
[50:35] uh garage in location and the size.
Also, the applicant's indicated that the
[50:41] construction materials will similarly
match the house as far as the shingle
[50:45] color, color of the siding, or whatever
the
[50:48] what's utilized for the outside of the
house. Not going to operate a business
[50:51] there. Of course, they have to comply
with the township lot grading ordinance
[50:55] and all other outside agency approvals.
[51:00] » All right, we've heard the testimony and
our solicitor's uh summary.
[51:05] Do we have a motion?
[51:11] » Motion Motion to approve, Rice.
>> Do we have a second?
[51:20] Mr. Secretary?
>> Mr. Rice.
[51:23] » Uh I believe the applicant has not
proven that there is undue hardship. Uh
[51:27] the applicant has ability to move
the said shed up.
[51:33] Um
so I vote no.
[51:37] » Mr. Geary.
>> Uh I vote yes. Um sounds like to me that
[51:43] um
it's going to be a little situation
[51:46] getting off your deck and being right in
front of you like that. So, I vote yes.
[51:50] » Mr. Kozak?
>> I think where he's putting it will
[51:53] utilize the yard better for him and as
he stated in his testimony,
[51:59] it would be behind
us. So, it won't
[52:02] affect any private individual house. So,
I vote yes.
[52:07] » Mr. Moville?
>> Yes.
[52:10] » Mr. Colavita?
>> We spoke about the drainage and the fact
[52:14] that there's no
properties in the rear behind him. Also,
[52:18] I think they
proven to us that you know, the the yard
[52:22] it would take up most of the yard. So,
yes.
[52:26] » Okay. You're approved.
At our next meeting in June, we will
[52:30] have your resolution prepared and then
we will have to provide a copy of that
[52:35] to the zoning officer so you can move
forward with your permit.
[52:38] » Okay.
>> have to wait until that meeting.
[52:40] » What do I need to do?
>> I'm sorry. You cut me off. I don't hear
[52:44] you either. So,
>> Your application has been approved.
[52:48] That'll be available at our next
meeting.
[52:50] It'll be sent to you so you can then go
through the zoning process to start your
[52:56] Okay. Building process.
>> So, go back to the zoning office then?
[53:00] » Yeah, you'll you'll be notified when the
ordinances
[53:03] prepared for you.
>> Okay.
[53:05] » Okay?
>> All right.
[53:06] » Have a good evening.
>> Appreciate it. You all have a good
[53:10] evening.
[53:15] » Do
we have people Are you waiting to hear a
[53:20] certain application [laughter] or
[53:31] Last week? Last month?
>> I thought there was a meeting about the
[53:36] Cross Keys and
[53:44] » Oh, that was the council meeting. This
is the zoning Board of Adjustment.
[54:05] » [laughter]
[54:08] » So, uh
Got you.
[54:11] Open to the public. We have a motion to
open to the public.
[54:15] So moved.
>> Second.
[54:17] » All in favor? Uh any opposed?
Anybody from the public wishing to
[54:21] address the board on any uh topic?
Seeing and hearing none, motion to
[54:26] close.
So moved.
[54:28] » Second.
>> All in favor? Uh any opposed?
[54:32] Uh
approval of minutes from April 27th,
[54:35] 2026. Do we have a motion to approve?
[54:41] We have a second.
>> Second.
[54:44] » All in favor?
Uh any opposed?
[54:47] Do we have any reports?
>> No.
[54:57] » Stick up your your name tag, if you can,
and plug it.
[55:00] Kathleen?
>> No report from the council.
[55:03] » Thank you.
Do we have a motion to adjourn?
[55:06] Motion to adjourn.
Do we have a second?
[55:10] All in favor? All right. Any opposed?
[55:18] So make a statement.
One minute each.