November 9, 2011

APPLICATION PB-11-04/John Galante Block: 177.5; Let: 6; Zone: R-5 739 Eagle Rock Avenue Minor subdivision with six (6) variances. EXHIBIT PA-1 Minor Subdivision Map DISCUSSION Steven Greenberg Esq. introduced himself as attorney for the applicant. Mr. Greenberg said the Applicant was seeking to subdivide an irregular shaped parcel in to two lots. The lots are separate on the tax map. Lot 5 fronts Eagle Rock Avenue and has an existing single family home. The applicant seeks to subdivide the vacant lot property that fronts Valley View Street and build a single-family house. Present ordinance requires minimum lot width of 75 feet. The frontage on Lot 5 already exists with non-conforming size. The applicant proposes to subdivide with six (6) “C” variances. Mr. Greenberg introduced his first witness, Mark E.V. Daniels, PE. Mr. Daniels was sworn in, The Board accepted Mr. Daniels as an expert witness as a licensed planner. Mr. Greenberg asked Mr. Daniels if he had the opportunity to visit the property. Mr. Daniels said that he had visited the property. Mr. Daniels said there was an existing home on Lot 5 with 50 feet frontage on Eagle Rock Avenue and driveway access on Valley View Street. Lot 6 had frontage on Valley View Street. Mr. Daniels said both lots had non-conforming side-yard setback issues. Mr. Daniels said the neighborhood was a mixture of architectural styles, including Cape Cods, split-levels, and older home styles not currently shown in the builder’s catalogs. Mr. Daniels said the neighborhood was very well kept; the only unkempt lot was the one belonging to the applicant. Mr. Daniels said the minor sub-division would be conforming to the neighborhood. Mr. Greenberg asked Mr. Daniels if he believed this sub-division would be of benefit to the neighborhood. Mr. Daniels said he believed the neighborhood would look better with anew home and kept yard. Chairman Bagoff asked the Board if they had questions for Mr. Daniels. Mr. Eben stated the property rises and then levels off. Mr. Eben wanted to know how would the garage work. Mr. Greenberg said that the architect would discuss the specific site details. Mr. Weston asked to have the width of the lots calculated, Mr. Daniels did not do a calculation, but said that all the lots on Wakeman Street were 50 feet lots; on Valley View Street there were three properties that appeared to conform to

the lots calculated, Mr. Daniels did not do a calculation, but said that all the lots on Wakeman Street were 50 feet lots; on Valley View Street there were three properties that appeared to conform to the current standards. The properties had a mix of conforming, somewhat conforming, and some deficient lot sizes. Mr. Weston asked if the positive/negative criteria had been satisfied. Mr. Daniels said NAPLANNING. BRD\WAMINUTES\2011\11-9-11 Minutes.doc 2