August 21, 2025, Regular Meeting

Mr. Furao testified that if they were to calculate the maximum building coverage and the maximum lot coverage without having it to be reduced to 2,491, they actually would be compliant. The maximum building coverage would actually come out to be 18.7 percent, which is under the 20 percent required, and the maximum lot coverage would come out to be 19.4, which is under the 30 percent required. Chairperson Neuer walked through the February 13, 2025, memorandum from the consulting engineer John Hess of CME Associates with Mr. Furao. Chairperson Neuer asked Mr. Furao if he had the opportunity to review the February 13, 2025, memorandum from the consulting engineer John Hess of CME Associates. Mr. Furao said yes. Starting with design comments on page 2, with what remains to be submitted on checklist items, Chairperson Neuer asked if that information had been submitted. Mr. Furao said the submitted documents on the list of property owners should have been submitted. Mr. Endler added they never received a revised letter from either CME or the Nishuane group, but had conversations with the town professionals and had sent in revised plans that fulfilled the completeness requirements. MacNeill from CME said they have provided the additional items to their office for review. He added they have items A, B, C, and D but for number E, that is the only item Mr. MacNeill could not find. Mr. MacNeill said they did not have any issue with them proceeding if they could provide those requirements. Chairperson Neuer asked if plans and documents for West Orange CCO have been received. Mr. MacNeill said no. Mr. Endler said that will be provided along with the previous application and the revised tree removal permit as needed. Chairperson Neuer asked Mr. Furao with respect to item number two, what is his testimony with regard to section 25-9.7 of the land use regulations. Mr. Furao said the applicant has his architect on the line and he talked about the design of the dwelling. Chairperson Neuer Mr. Furao, what are his comments with regard to four and five regarding the steep slope. Mr. Furao said those are the variances and the relief that they are secking from the board currently. The basis for the variances are that the lot is without disturbance within the sleep so that the lot isn't developable. Chairperson Neuer asked what is the basis for the variance request under item

y. The basis for the variances are that the lot is without disturbance within the sleep so that the lot isn't developable. Chairperson Neuer asked what is the basis for the variance request under item six regarding the height of the retaining walls. Mr. Furao said because of the steep slopes on the property, it is to provide an accessible driveway. They designed the driveway at the maximum slope possible to reduce the height of the wall. They also provided the applicant and the proposed dwelling a backyard. Those are the reasons for the retaining walls in the rear of that height, exceeding the heights of the ordinance. Chairperson Neuer asked Mr. Furao what is his response to Mr. Hess's number seven regarding safety fences on top of the retaining walls. Mr. Furao said there is no issue with it, they'll be willing to comply with that. Chairperson Neuer asked Mr. Endler if he wishes to amend the application to include safety fences on top of the retaining walls. Mr. Endler said they can have