November 21, 2013

9 Mr. Merklinger said that he views the ramp at that side door as an extension of the stairs that were originally there. He said that the parking issues and fire drills are irrelevant and that they are based on feeling. Mr. Merklinger asked the neighbors to look into their hearts and advised the homeowner to meet the conditions. He said that he votes in favor of this application with the condition that the applicant extend the walkway out to the street. Mr. Merklinger said that fire drills are for safety reasons and that everyone should be happy that they are practicing safety. He said that he would not suggest the lattice along the ramp and reiterated the fact that the variance that they are seeking has nothing to do with the parking. Mr. Bullock stated that he is a member of another advisory group for a group home in West Orange and that he listens very carefully to the logic. He said that the group homes he sits on the Board for never have fire drills at 11:00 pm and that the neighbor's comments cannot be brushed aside. Mr. Bullock said that he sees problems with this application and, with what Mr. Grygiel said is before this Board, he will have to vote no. Mr. Sussman said that he is concerned with the impact this has on the neighbors such as the parking and the fire drills. He said that he would like to see the fire drills restricted and that he will listen to what the other Board members have to say before he decides how to vote. Mr. Neuer said that personal feelings do not take precedence and that it is the obligation of the applicant to establish his case. He said on that factor alone the Board cannot approve this application because it is defective. Mr. Neuer said that the applicant is a for-profit entity that bought the property not knowing if they can use it and built the ramp. He said they never should have bought the property. Mr. Neuer said that he finds it difficult to believe that the applicant did not know that they did not need a permit to build a ramp. He said that the house is too narrow and that they are taking sick people and putting them in life threatening situations. Mr. Newer said that Mr. Marucci testified that the egress is not safe if two cars are parked in the driveway. He read the definition of a group home from the 2013 edition of the New Jersey Zoning and Land Use Administration written by William M. Cox and Stuart R. Keonig

if two cars are parked in the driveway. He read the definition of a group home from the 2013 edition of the New Jersey Zoning and Land Use Administration written by William M. Cox and Stuart R. Keonig which said that a group home has children as residents. Mr. Neuer said that there are no children in this group home. He said that as a group home this application fails because it is not a group home. Mr. Neuer said the definition under the statute does not apply to this application. He said that safety and public health are not being met in this application. Mr. Neuer said that Mr. Marucci was required to satisfy the negative criteria and he did not. He said that there is not a drawing of the widening of the driveway or a walkway and that it is the applicant's responsibility to show the Board those drawings. Mr. Neuer said that he will vote no and urge the other Board members to vote no. Mr. Quentzel said that the applicant did not consider any other alternatives for the ramp and they just based it on what the State of New Jersey told them. He said that the ramp could have been built on the other side of the house. Mr. Quentzel said that he is abstaining from voting on this application. Vice Chairman Buechler said that the ramp was already built and that the application has other issues that impact the neighborhood. He said that the parking issues and the cars parked on the front lawn are valid but the ambulance issue is not valid according to the photos that were