April 1, 2015

APPLICATION(S. PB-15-01/Reuven and ADI, LLC Block: 114; Lot: 110; Zone: MSS 222 Main Street Amended Final Site Plan with “c” Variance. EXHIBITS A-1: Reduced size (11”x17”) Site Plan Drawings, prepared by Rui Amaral, RA, revised through 3/31/15 (7 sheets); A-2: — Full Size Site Plan Drawings, prepared by Rui Amaral, RA, revised through 3/31/15 (7 sheets); A-3: _ Limits of Disturbance, Paving Calculation, prepared by Rui Amaral, RA (untitled, unsigned, undated, verbally identified during hearing); A-4: Color aerial photograph, color site photographs, and color surrounding area photographs, prepared by John McDonough, LA, PP, AICP, undated, (3 sheets). DISCUSSION Robert C. Williams, Esq., attorney for Applicant, addressed the Board. He described the property as a vacant building located in the Main Street Sub Zone; the Applicant proposed to convert the existing office building to retail stores on the first floor and two residential units on the second floor. He said that subsequent to the initial and second set of site plan submissions, the Applicant had received an additional memorandum from Frank Russo, PE, PP, Omland Engineering, (dated March 26, 2015); the Applicant would be addressing all comments; the most recent site plan revisions, (dated 3/31/15) had attempted to incorporate all comments. Rui Amaral, RA, was sworn in, stated his credentials, and was accepted by the Board to be an expert in architecture. Mr. Amaral described the existing conditions, (Exhibit A-2, Sheet 3); the property was a corner lot at the intersection of Main Street and Shepard Terrace, the front yard setback was approximately 20 feet; the property sloped toward the rear. The building was located in the middle of the property; the current parking was along the southern side of the property; vehicles entered on Main Street and exited on Sheppard Terrace; vehicles moved in a one-way direction. The building was currently vacant. Mr. Amaral described the existing conditions for the first floor and second floor, (Exhibit A-2, Sheet 6); current design for both floors was office use. Mr. Amaral said the proposed changes included two retail spaces on the first floor and two residential apartments, (Exhibit A-2, Sheet 1). He said the building front exterior would remain basically unchanged; the brick fagade was in good condition; the structure of the building was intact; he noted

ial apartments, (Exhibit A-2, Sheet 1). He said the building front exterior would remain basically unchanged; the brick fagade was in good condition; the structure of the building was intact; he noted the construction of the building was concrete. The existing front entrance would be removed; two separate storefront entrances would be installed. The existing first floor windows would be removed and replaced. The front of the building would be paved to accommodate the new first floor entrances. The driveway entrance would remain the same; the only change would be to provide parking spaces; there really was not any current parking. He described the proposed parking configuration including four angled parking spaces on the left side of the property; the location, size and container capacity of the of the trash enclosure; and three parking spaces located