May 29, 2014

William Sullivan, Esq. approached the podium. Mr, Sullivan stated that he represents the applicant, Yury Patin who is proposing to construct an addition to an existing mixed use building located on Northfield Avenue, known as lot 4. He stated that the applicant also owns the adjacent property on Dogwood Road known as lot 5, described as a split lot zone, and is proposing to construct parking accessory to the building on lot 5. Mr. Buechler asked Mr. Sullivan what the correct address of the lot on Dogwood Road is; he said that the application noted the address as 5 Dogwood Road. Mr. Sullivan said that this was a typographical error and the correct address of lot 5 is 6 Dogwood Road. Mr. Neuer stated that the list of the adjacent property owners on the cover page shows Mr. Bornstein as the owner of lot 5. Mr. Sullivan stated that the applicant owns both lots 4 and 5. Mr. Neuer stated that the cover page must be revised to show the correct owner of lot 5. Mr. Sullivan summarized the history of the property stating that Yury Patin owned lot 5 for approximately four or five years. He said that in 2004 the previous owner of lot 5, Mr. Bornstein, filed an application with the Zoning Board of Adjustment to build a house on that lot; that application was denied by the Board. In 2006, Mr. Bornstein filed an application with the Zoning Board of Adjustment reducing the side of the house to be built on lot 5 but withdrew the application, In 2008 Yury Patin purchased the property and filed an application with the Zoning Board of Adjustment to build a house on lot 5 but withdrew the application. In 2011, Mr. Patin filed an application with the Zoning Board of Adjustment to build a house on lot 5 and the Zoning Board denied this application without prejudice. Mr. Sullivan. stated that there is also a misconception regarding lot 5, stemming from a prior hearing, that this lot can only be used as a buffer. He said this is not true. Mr. Sullivan said that a condition of approval for a prior resolution of an application that was filed for lot 4 stipulated that the applicant must plant plants on the adjacent property known as lot 5. He said that lot 5 was not the subject of that application and therefore this condition is not valid. Mr. Sullivan said that lot 5 is developable and he referred to a 2004 resolution, 7B-04-60, where the Zoning Board concluded that the lot is

hat application and therefore this condition is not valid. Mr. Sullivan said that lot 5 is developable and he referred to a 2004 resolution, 7B-04-60, where the Zoning Board concluded that the lot is buildable. Mr. Neuer asked Mr. Sullivan if the lots are going to be consolidated; he replied yes. Mr. Neuer asked Mr. Sullivan if he would like to amend the application to consolidate the lots; he replied yes. Mr. Sullivan called his first witness. Frederick C. Meola approached the podium and was sworn under oath. Mr. Meola detailed his professional and educational background as a licensed professional Engineer in the State of New Jersey. Mr. Sullivan asked Mr. Meola if this Board has previously accepted him as an expert in Engineering; he replied yes, Chairwoman Gabry accepted Mr. Meola as an expert in Professional Engineering.