November 20, 2014

APPLICATIONS 1. ZB-14-04/Patin Carried over from 11/17/14 Block: 165.02; Lot: 30; Zone: B-2/R-5 782 Northfield Avenue & 5 Dogwood Road Seeking a “D” use variance and several “C” variances to construct an addition to an Existing building and construct parking accessory to the existing building on an Adjoining lot. Chairman Buechler stated for the record that this application was heard on 5/29/14, 8/21/14 and 11/17/14. He said at the last meeting on 11/17/14 the record was closed, public comment was made and all that is left of this hearing is the Board Members’ discussion and deliberation. Chairman Buechler opened the meeting up to the Board Members for discussion. Mr. Neuer stated that he has respect for Mr. Sullivan and Mr. McDonough but concludes that the applicant has not met its burdens and urges the other Board Members to vote not to approve this application. He said the basic fact is that this application is about adding to an existing property and not creating any new benefit to the community or a vacant lot. Mr. Neuer said that it is about taking a commercial zone and forcing it into a residential zone which is not good planning or zoning. He said that this should have gone before the Township’s governing body for re- zoning consideration. Mr. Neuer noted all of the prior applications for this property. He said that the first application was submitted in 2004 by Mr. Bornstein, who was the owner of the property at that time, proposing to construct a 2400 sq. ft. house on the lot and that application was denied by a vote of 5-1 because the house was too big for the lot. Mr. Neuer said that Mr. Bornstein submitted another application in 2006, proposing a 2000 sq. ft. house --to be built on the lot but he withdrew the application and the Board never considered it. He said that in 2008, Mr. Patin submitted an application that he withdrew and the Board never voted on it and in 2011 Mr. Patin submitted another application proposing a residence with an easement for the lot and the Board dismissed it without prejudice because he failed to provide notice and appear at the scheduled Zoning Board hearing. Mr. Neuer said that there have been three applications that dealt with potential uses for this lot and only one of them went to a vote. He said that the applicant has not exhausted the use of the residential lot with zoning relief because the Board

tions that dealt with potential uses for this lot and only one of them went to a vote. He said that the applicant has not exhausted the use of the residential lot with zoning relief because the Board deemed the lot buildable at one time in the ZB-04-60 resolution. Mr. Neuer stated that Mr. McDonough said that this site is a split-zone, but the case is that the split lot single parcel is divided into two pieces; one residential and one commercial. He said that the zone line follows the lot line and that the owner should have gone to the Township’s Governing body to change the zone line.