February 19, 2026, Regular Meeting

e BOARD QUESTIONS W. M. Barbee asked about the Southwestern corner of the property. lighting on property. Mr. Cohn said that the property is all residential with the lighting reflecting that. L. Cohen asked about the trees on top edge of the property. Mr. Cokeley said that is noman’s land. T. Dubovy asked about the slope with the amount of distance between the gravel path and the property line. Mr. Cokeley answered that it’s five (5) feet closest and 15 feet at the farthest. I. Schwarzbaum asked if the Stormwater Drains are adequate when dealing with the downstream. Mr. Cokeley said that there is a reduction from the previous site. I. Schwarzbaum asked for confirmation of no issues for Llewellyn Park. Mr. Cokeley said that he believes that there will be no issues. NO PROFESSIONALS’ QUESTIONS NO PUBLIC QUESTIONS Mr. Cohn testified, as a request on the record in response to questions from the Board, about the prior removal of trees. He testified that the prior owner had agreed to remove deteriorated trees prior to the sale of the house, and that the Township Forester (Walt Kipp) had walked the Property to determine which trees should be removed at that time. The trees were marked and removed. He also testified that they are replanting many more than were removed and that the goal is to provide shade on the site for his son and the horses. PRESENTATION Mr. Joseph Burgis, P.P, was sworn and qualified as a Professional Planner. He testified to the Applicant’s special needs for the connected buildings and the benefits of providing therapeutic horsemanship on the site. e The site was designed with the benefits it would provide for the residents in mind. He testified to the N.J.S.A. 40:55-70.d.(1) use variances needed for the barn and arena connected to the house, for the accessory apartment, and the keeping of 4 horses where only 3 are permitted. e He identified the site as oversized for the zone and the area. At over 136,000 square feet it is the largest lot around and uniquely capable of supporting the use. e Itis particularly suitable because it will support the resident’s disability. The site is near family members, but also isolated enough from other residences, and it will not have any negative impact. e He testified that if the buildings were separated, they would not need one of the variances, and that they can be safely connected as shown

her residences, and it will not have any negative impact. e He testified that if the buildings were separated, they would not need one of the variances, and that they can be safely connected as shown in the plans. There is a health and safety component to allow them to be connected in this case. He reviewed the testimony of prior witnesses and the fact that state law allows accessory apartments for stables on commercial farms, although not on residential farms, as further support for the accessory apartment. Mr. Burgis reviewed the purposes of the Municipal Land Use Law N.J.S.A. 40:55D-2 and stated that these support the positive criteria with purposes © to promote public health safety and welfare, ¢ providing adequate light air and open space and