February 19, 2015

MINUTES TOWNSHIP OF WEST ORANGE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING February 19, 2015 The West Orange Zoning Board of Adjustment held a regular meeting on February 19, 2015 commencing 8:00 PM at 66 Main Street, West Orange, N.J. in Council Chambers. Vice Chairman Neuer called the meeting to order at approximately 8:00 P.M. It was announced that notification of this meeting was given to the Township Clerk, the West Orange Chronicle, and posted on the Township Bulletin Board on December 11, 2014 in accordance with the “Open Public Meetings Act.” Vice Chairman Neuer asked everyone to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Alice Beirne, Esq., Board Attorney, read the Opening Statement. PRESENT: G. Bullock, D. Gabry P. Neuer, B. Quentzel, M. Sussman, A. Weiss ABSENT: B. Buechler (excused) W. Steinhart (excused) ALSO PRESENT: Paul Grygiel, Consulting Planner Eric Keller, Consulting Engineer Alice Beirne, Esq., Board Attorney Rose DeSena, Board Secretary D. Dillon, Audio-Digital Transcription Service ANNOUNCEMENTS Future Meetings: February 26, 2015 (Special Meeting) — 8:00 pm March 19, 2015 (Regular Meeting) — 8:00 pm April 16, 2015 (Regular Meeting) — 8:00 pm. MINUTES Adopt Minutes: January 15, 2015 (regular meeting)

Vice Chairman Neuer asked the Board members if they had any additional comments to the January 15, 2015 regular meeting that were submitted to them for review. Seeing none, he asked for a motion to approve said minutes. Mr. Sussman made a motion to approve the minutes of the January 15, 2015 regular Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting as submitted to the Board members; Mr. Quentzel seconded the motion and all were in favor. It was noted for the record that Ms. Gabry was present but did not vote on these minutes. SWEARING IN Consulting Planner for the Township, Paul Grygiel and Consulting Engineer for the Township, Eric Keller, were sworn under oath. APPLICATIONS 1. ZB-14-10/Franco Carried over from 1/15/15 Block: 176.25; Lot: 10; Zone: R-4 24 Ferris Drive Seeking four (4) variances for installing an above ground swimming pool. EXHIBITS Blank-1 — Letter and attachments — 10 pages dated 2/19/15 A-1 — Photograph Hugo Franco, applicant, approached the podium and was sworn under oath. Vice Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Franco if he has any written agreements from his neighbors; Mr. Franco said he has an agreement with Mr. Abdallah but not with Dr. Blank. Vice Chairman Neuer stated that the written agreement that Mr. Franco presented to the Board did not have Mr. Abdallah’s signature on it and that the Board cannot accept it. He said that in order for the Board to accept it, the agreement requires the parties to sign it. Vice Chairman Neuer stated that at the last meeting the Board required Mr. Franco to return with a written agreement from Mr. Abdallah and Dr. Blank and he did not satisfy either obligation imposed by them. Mr. Franco stated that the agreement he has with Mr. Abdallah is verbal. Vice Chairman Neuer advised Mr. Franco that the Board cannot approve applications for property not owned by the applicant without written permission from the other property owner. 2

He said that the survey that was submitted as part of his application clearly reflects an encroachment of the property owned by Dr. Blank. Vice Chairman Neuer said that even if the Board wanted to approve the retaining wall that was built without permits they cannot do that. Vice Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Franco if there was anything he wanted to say; Mr. Franco stated that he has tried many times to work it out with Dr. Blank with no success. Vice Chairman Neuer asked Dr. Blank if he had any comments; he replied yes. Jonathan Blank approached the podium and was sworn under oath. Dr. Blank stated that he lives at 20 Ferris Drive and was made aware of Mr. Franco’s wall encroaching on his property at the last Zoning Board hearing. Vice Chairman Neuer asked Dr. Blank if he has agreed to leave the wall on his property; he replied no. Dr. Blank stated that he sent a letter to the Board Members expressing that he would like Mr. Franco held accountable. Vice Chairman Neuer asked the Board Secretary if she received the letter; she replied yes and presented the letter to Vice Chairman Neuer. Vice Chairman Neuer stated for the record that the letter from Dr. Blank is not signed or dated. Vice Chairman Neuer asked Dr. Blank if he was to ask him to read the letter would that be his testimony; he replied yes. Vice Chairman Neuer asked to have the ten (10) page letter from Dr. Blank marked as Exhibit Blank-1 and entered into evidence. He also asked to have the letter dated 2/19/15. Dr. Blank referred to Exhibit Blank-1 and summarized the contents of his letter. Vice Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Grygiel if the fence on the wall constitutes a variance. Mr. Grygiel said that the Township’s Zoning Official makes that determination but if it appears to be one structure, then it would require a variance. Dr. Blank stated that the fence is on the wall. Ms. Weiss stated that this seems like a legal issue and not a Zoning Board issue. She asked Dr. Blank if he is interested in negotiating with Mr. Franco; he replied no. There were no further questions for Dr. Blank from the Board Members or the Board Professionals. There were no members of the public that had any questions for Dr. Blank. Mr. Franco stated that he took a picture of the fence and presented it to the Board Members.

Vice Chairman Neuer asked to have the photo of the fence marked as Exhibit A-1 for identification. Mr. Franco referred to Exhibit A-1 and stated that the wall cannot be seen; Vice Chairman Neuer stated that this is not the issue. Vice Chairman Neuer closed the hearing and opened it up for discussion from the Board Members. Vice Chairman Neuer stated that during the course of the hearing the Board Members learned about the wall encroaching on Dr. Blank’s property. He said that there was a Planner and an Engineer listed on the application but they did not appear before the Board. Vice Chairman Neuer said that, based on the application and the way that it was noticed, even if the Board Members were inclined to approve the only thing they could approve was the swimming pool. He said that the retaining wall was built without permits and it encroaches and there is no way to know if the fill that was used was clean fill. Vice Chairman Neuer stated that there were also other defects in the application. Ms. Weiss stated that this is a legal issue and that the Board Members have no choice but to deny the application. Mr. Sussman said that he agrees with Ms. Weiss and that the Board has no choice but to deny. Mr. Quentzel said that he also agrees with the other Board Members and that they cannot approve the application with the survey showing the encroachment. Vice Chairman Neuer stated that the swimming pool was positive but what was done was illegal. He said that the applicant did not ask for permission and the Board cannot legalize the use based on the application submitted to them. Vice Chairman Neuer moved that the application be denied with prejudice. He said that the applicant did not properly include all the necessary variances in the application and that the applicant did not present any compelling reasons to approve. Vice Chairman Neuer said that no negative or positive criteria was presented, the fill was installed without permits or inspections so there is no way to know what the contents of that fill is and the wall was built without any review from the Township’s Building Department. He said that this Board does not have the power to issue any injunctive relief. Ms. Gabry seconded the motion to deny with prejudice. The vote was as follows: Bullock: - Steinhart: - Gabry: Yes to deny Sussman: Yes to deny Neuer: Yes to deny Weiss: Yes to

ny injunctive relief. Ms. Gabry seconded the motion to deny with prejudice. The vote was as follows: Bullock: - Steinhart: - Gabry: Yes to deny Sussman: Yes to deny Neuer: Yes to deny Weiss: Yes to deny Quentzel: Yes to deny Chairman Buechler: -

Vice Chairman Neuer instructed the Board Secretary to let the Township’s Zoning Official know the results of this application. He said that the applicant testified that this matter was referred to the Municipal Court but there is nothing pending in the court. 2. ZB-14-14/Carter Block: 96; Lot: 3; Zone: R-1 34 Oak Bend Road Two “C” variances for the rear yard setback and impervious coverage for the Construction of an in-ground swimming pool, patio and pergola. Michael and Bonnie Carter, applicants, approached the podium and were sworn under oath. Charles DiLorenzo, Engineer for the applicant, approached the podium and was sworn under oath. Mr. DiLorenzo detailed his educational and professional background as a Professional Engineer and a Professional Planner licensed in the State of New Jersey and said that he will be testifying as an expert in Engineering and Planning. Vice Chairman Neuer accepted Mr. DiLorenzo as an expert in professional engineering and planning. Mr. DiLorenzo stated that he is also a licensed surveyor and will be testifying as a surveyor. Mr. DiLorenzo detailed the application stating that the applicant is proposing to install an in- ground swimming pool in the rear of their property. He said he noticed a discrepancy in the survey that was submitted with the application after he surveyed the property. Mr. DiLorezo said the applicant’s property extends to the middle of Oak Bend Road and the street was calculated into the impervious coverage. He said that he deducted the impervious coverage on Oak Bend Road and a variance for impervious coverage will not be required. Vice Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Grygiel if pavers are impervious under the Municipal code; he said that space between the pavers does allow some pervious. Mr. Grygiel stated that the center of the road on Oak Bend Road will not be included in the impervious coverage. He said that Oak Bend Road is a private road. Mr. DiLorenzo continued his testimony and detailed the aesthetics of the property after the swimming pool is built. He said that “c” variances are required and that there will be no negative impact on the neighbor’s property. Vice Chairman Neuer asked Mr. DiLorenzo if there is access to the property from Tulip Avenue; he replied yes. Mr. DiLorenzo said that the main access to the property is from Oak Bend Road.

Mr. DiLorenzo continued with his testimony detailing the pergola that is being installed and the design of the swimming pool. He said that the hardship is due to the impervious coverage on the property prior to the applicants purchasing the property. Mr. DiLorenzo said that the pavers were also there when they purchased the property. There were no further questions for Mr. DiLorenzo from the Board Members or the Board Professionals. There were no members of the public that had any questions for Mr. DiLorenzo. Vice Chairman Neuer asked Mr. and Mrs. Carter if they received any comments from their neighbors; Mrs. Carter replied no. Mrs. Carter said that they have active teenagers who want to be able to have their friends in their home. She said that she appreciates the Board’s consideration. There were no further questions for Mr. and Mrs. Carter from the Board Members or the Board Professionals. There were no members of the public that had any questions for Mr. or Mrs. Carter. Vice Chairman Neuer closed the hearing. Vice Chairman Neuer stated that he sees nothing negative with the application and that the Engineers testimony was compelling. He said that the applicants should not be penalized by the impervious coverage because they inherited some of the impervious conditions. Vice Chairman Neuer stated that the pavers are not one hundred percent impervious, the benefits outweigh the detriments and the setbacks are de minimis. Vice Chairman Neuer made a motion to approve the application Ms. Gabry seconded the motion to approve the application. The vote was as follows: Bullock: Yes Steinhart: - Gabry: Yes Sussman: Yes Neuer: Yes Weiss: Yes Quentzel: Yes Chairman Buechler: -

3. ZB-14-08/Sai Hira Ram Trust, Inc. Carried over from 1/15/15 Block: 177.02; Lots: 15.01 & 16; Zone: R-4 23-27 Laurel Avenue Seeking “D” and several “C” variances for converting two properties to use as a House of Worship and related uses. EXHIBITS A-13 - Existing Elevations for the Meditation Room and Temple A-14— Materials Board A-15 — Standing Seam Green Metal Roof photo Vice Chairman Neuer recused himself from hearing this application and turned the Chair over to Ms. Gabry. Robert Williams, attorney for the applicant, approached the podium. Ms. Gabry advised Mr. Williams that there are five (5) Board Members present. Mr. Williams stated that he will order transcripts for the absent Board Members. Ms. Gabry stated for the record that she was absent from the last meeting on 1/15/15 and read the transcripts from that meeting. Mr. Williams stated that their architect will be testifying at this meeting. Drazen Cackovic approached the podium and was sworn under oath. Mr. Cackovic detailed his educational and professional background as a licensed Architect in the State of New Jersey. Ms. Gabry accepted Mr. Cackovic as an expert in architecture. Mr. Cackovic presented the existing elevations for the meditation center and the Temple. Ms. Gabry asked to have the existing elevations for the meditation room and the Temple marked as Exhibit A-13 for identification. Mr. Cackovic referred to Exhibit A-13 and began detailing it. He stated that the existing house near Laurel Avenue on lot 15.01 will remain and the structure on the adjoining lot 16 will be demolished. Mr. Cackovic presented the existing and proposed floor plans for the meditation center. Ms. Gabry noted for the record that the existing and proposed floor plans for the meditation center were pre-marked as Exhibit A-9 for identification.

Mr. Cackovic referred to Exhibit A-9 and began detailing it. He stated that the applicant is proposing to keep the stone on the facade of the existing residence on lot 15.01 and will do some interior renovations. Mr. Cackovic stated that they are proposing to turn the rear of the house into the meditation room which will include a restroom and a storage area. He said they will also add a two (2) car garage and construct a patio in the rear. Mr. Cackovic presented the proposed elevations for the meditation center. Ms. Gabry noted for the record that the proposed elevations for the meditation center were pre- marked as Exhibit A-12 for identification. Mr. Cackovic referred to Exhibit A-12 and began detailing it. He said that the left side elevation will be clad in shiplap siding. Mr. Cackovic presented the sample materials photo board. Ms. Gabry asked to have the sample materials photo board marked as Exhibit A-14 for identification. Mr. Cackovic referred to Exhibit A-14 and detailed the materials being proposed for the existing residence. He said that they will use the existing siding on the right side of the residence and the rear part of the residence and the exterior of the addition will be stucco. Ms. Weiss referred to Exhibit A-14 and asked Mr. Cackovic what the green shiny material will be used for; he said that it will be used on the roof. Mr. Cackovic said that the material is not shiny; it is matte. Mr. Cackovic presented the proposed floor plans for the Temple. Ms. Gabry noted for the record that the proposed floor plans for the Temple were pre-marked as Exhibit A-8 for identification. Mr. Cackovic referred to Exhibit A-8. He said that the existing structure on lot 16 will be demolished and detailed the proposed floor plan for the new Temple. Mr. Quentzel asked Mr. Cackovic how high the ceilings in the storage area are; he said approximately 11 feet high. Mr. Cackovic presented the proposed elevations of the Temple. Ms. Gabry noted for the record that the proposed elevations of the Temple were pre-marked as Exhibit A-10 for identification. Mr. Cackovic referred to Exhibit A-10 and began detailing it and describing all of the materials that will be used on the Temple. He said that the proposed roof material is standing seam metal.

Mr. Cackovic presented a photo of a standing seam metal roof. Mr. Gabry noted for the record that the photo board of the standing seam metal roof was pre- marked as Exhibit A-7. Mr. Cackovic referred to Exhibit A-7 and stated that the applicant is proposing a similar type of roofing materials that will be used on the Temple. Mr. Sussman asked Mr. Cackovic what type of material that was in Exhibit A-7; he said steel. Ms. Weiss stated that she would like to see a sample of the roofing material in the color green that is being proposed. Mr. Cackovic presented a color photo of a roof constructed with the green standing seam metal materials. Ms. Gabry asked to have the photo of the roof that was constructed with the green standing seam metal materials marked as Exhibit A-15 for identification. Mr. Cackovic referred to Exhibit A-15 and stated that this color green is very close to the color green that they are proposing on the Temple’s roof. Mr. Cackovic presented a color rendering of the proposed east elevation of the Temple. Ms. Gabry noted for the record that the color rendering of the proposed east elevation of the Temple was pre-marked as Exhibit A-11 for identification. Mr. Cackovic referred to Exhibit A-11 and began detailing the materials that will be used on the east elevation of the Temple. Mr. Cackovic referred to Exhibit A-14 and stated that asphalt shingles will be used for the caretaker’s residence and the trim material being proposed on the residence and the meditation room will be Azek PVC in the color white. He said that the Azek PVC trim material does not have to be painted for at least twenty five (25) years. Ms. Weiss asked Mr. Cackovic how many square feet they will be adding to the existing residence; he said they will be decreasing the size of the residence. Mr. Cackovic said that they are eliminating the attic in the rear portion of the residence. Ms. Gabry asked Mr. Cackovic how many seats will be in the meditation room; he said that there are no specific guidelines for people sitting on the floor. Mr. Cackovic said that they have requirements for chairs and for people standing but not for people sitting on the floor. He said that the Township’s code official will make that determination. Mr. Grygiel stated that the parking requirements are what is relevant.