April 7, 2021 Adopted Planning Board Minutes

(Applicant) to do some selective demolition to expose interior areas of the foundation because he found some inconsistencies on what he could see on the finished side of the foundation. On October 12, was told by Applicant that was done and returned to view results. Found many issues of concern. First. The foundation fixed /modified at many different times and sections. Original foundation which is approximately 50% of what is there in terms of the coverage is approximately 100 years old. It is made of a rubble stone and some brick work mixed in as well. Older part of the structure is uneven. There is also a secondary section of the stone that appears to be a part of an addition added to the rear in concrete block material. In his opinion, no way to determine a proper footing under this stone of this foundation is unsuitable as age has loosened the mortar and doesn’t appear to be done by a professional Mason and does not present itself like a professional Masonry installation. Gives concerns to stability and especially its ability carry the roof loads and floor loads to support floors above and or used as foundation for the house itself. If does by a professional we would not see the inconsistencies that he saw when there. Basement structure is out of square. Mr. Martin referenced irregularities in pictures of the aforementioned letter. Main opinion of this property is that, “It is unsuitable to support additional floors above.” Mr. Martin summed his presentation up with that if this property was demolished and foundation and every aforementioned thing remedied it could another user/resident of West Orange at this location. BOARD QUESTIONS: -Councilwoman Susan McCartney asked if the new foundation was poured, will it change the footprint of the property. Mr. Martin responded that he was unsure. -Councilwoman McCartney asked Chairman Bagoff if that would change any of the other conditions that are in this original application. Chairman Bagoff deferred to Mr. McPherson said the applicant would stay have to comply with the other conditions which anticipate that the footing would remain the same for the new structure. Mr. James Parisi interjected that based on his understanding during a conversation with Mr. Marucci, when he created the subdivision plans (the ones that were approved by the Board previously) he took into consideration in the event that the old

s understanding during a conversation with Mr. Marucci, when he created the subdivision plans (the ones that were approved by the Board previously) he took into consideration in the event that the old house would have to be removed without requiring variances he doesn’t think it’s exactly the same but that it will be substantially similar. -Chairman Bagoff asked Mr. McPherson that if Board grants an amendment in relief and applicant changes the footprint of the building or would they have to come back before the Board or would they have to hear this tonight? Mr. McPherson’s reply was that the variance was granted because of the anticipated/existing footprint of the building so that would have to be another consideration because it would go against the variance and proposed that Board hears from Mr. Marucci. Councilwoman McCartney said that opening this to a larger discussion was not her intention, but she doesn’t want it to effect the other conditions. -Chairman Bagoff asked in the original Resolution was there a Site Plan offered (Preliminary/Final)? Mr. McPherson responded that there was not. Chairman Bagoff said if there weren’t Preliminary/Final Site Plans, it would just be for the subdivision of the land and renovation of the house. Mr. McPherson added with a variance to improve the quality of the land. -Chairman Bagoff said that if they would have to have a new Site Plan then and come back before us and if any variances, if no new variances they could just go to Building Department if it falls within the code. Mr. McPherson answered in the affirmative. So because of that, the Board does not need to hear from Mr. Marucci as the Site Plans and Subdivision are not part of this existing Application. Chairman Bagoff deferred to Mr. James Parisi and he responded that it made sense that the new structure would be conforming to the Zoning Ordinances and would not require any additional variances and can work directly with the Building Department. Mr. McPherson agreed stating that it would then be variance from this Resolution. Mr. Parisi confirmed that only