Board of Adjustment/Zoning Board

FORT LEE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT April 27, 2021 Present: H. Liapes, H. Joh, D. Conway, S. Tropea, L. Pacheco, E. Hong, D. Sugarman. Absent: J. Nitti. Also Present: J. Mariniello, Esq., M. Jovishoff, Phillips Preiss Grygiel Leheny Hughes LLC, B. Intindola, Neglia Engineering Associates. The meeting was held remotely, by means of communication equipment. The foregoing Electronic Public Meeting is recommended due to the current situation involving COVID-19 Virus and directives of State and County governments. The meeting was conducted using the Zoom operating system. NOTICE OF MEETING: Chairman Sugarman stated: Let the minutes reflect that adequate notice of this meeting has been provided in the following manner: On December 8, 2020 this Body, by Resolution, adopted a Schedule of Regular Public Meetings for 2021. The time, date, and location of said schedule was posted on the Bulletin Board at 309 Main Street. A copy of said schedule was mailed to the RECORD, JERSEY JOURNAL, STAR LEDGER, SPECTRUM, posted on the Borough’s Website and was filed with the Borough Clerk. A written notice of the time, place and proposed Agenda was posted on the Bulletin Board at 309 Main Street and mailed to the RECORD, JERSEY JOURNAL, STAR LEDGER, SPECTRUM, posted on the Borough’s Website and was filed with the Borough Clerk. On April 19, 2021, an updated notice with the Zoom Information was posted at 309 Main Street and mailed to the RECORD, JERSEY JOURNAL, STAR LEDGER, SPECTRUM, posted on the Borough Web Site and filed with the Borough Clerk. Copies have been mailed to all persons who have prepaid the $35.00 fee fixed for the year 2021 to cover the cost of mailing. Chairman Sugarman stated: Many of you know former Board Member, Richard Sierra. I am sorry to have to tell you that last Thursday he passed away. Approval of Minutes It was moved by Mr. Liapes, seconded by Ms. Hong, and passed on a vote of 7-0 by members Liapes, Joh, Conway, Tropea, Pacheco, Hong and Sugarman to approve the minutes of the meeting of April 13, 2021. Memorializations Docket #33-20, ARS Architectural Design & Trade, LLC, 1637 Maple Street, Block 3554, Lot 3, Two-Unit Dwelling It was moved by Mr. Liapes, seconded by Mr. Conway, and passed on a vote of 7-0 by members Liapes, Joh, Conway, Tropea, Pacheco, Hong and Sugarman to adopt the resolution of approval for a Two Unit Dwelling. Page 2-ZBA Minutes-April 27, 2021 Docket #4-21, Edwin Glenn O’Connor, 1580 John Street, Block 3754, Lot 6, Two-Unit Dwelling It was moved by Mr. Conway, seconded by Mr. Tropea, and passed on a vote of 7-0 by members Liapes, Joh, Conway, Tropea, Pacheco, Hong and Sugarman to adopt the resolution of approval for a Two Unit Dwelling. Acceptance/Completeness Docket #16-21, 2239 Center Avenue LLC, 2239 Center Avenue, Block 6053, Lot 9, Two-Unit Dwelling Chairman Sugarman stated this acceptance/completeness will be heard another evening or done administratively. Docket #14-21, V&R Investors, LLC, 1514 Eleventh Street, Block 3753, Lot 1, Preliminary & Final Major Site Plan – Three-Unit Dwelling It was moved by Mr. Joh, seconded by Mr. Liapes, and passed on a vote of 7-0 by members Liapes, Joh, Conway, Tropea, Pacheco, Hong and Sugarman to deem the application complete. Outstanding items to be submitted prior to public hearing. Will call for a hearing date. Docket #15-21, JZS Developers, LLC, 1429 Anderson Avenue, Block 2252, Lot 10, Two-Unit Dwelling It was moved by Mr. Conway, seconded by Mr. Pacheco, and passed on a vote of 6-0 by members Joh, Conway, Tropea, Pacheco, Hong and Sugarman to deem the application complete. Mr. Liapes recused himself from the application. Outstanding items to be submitted prior to public hearing. Will call for a hearing date. Docket #17-21, Ayed Awad, 543 Main Street, Block 4454, Lot 28, Preliminary & Final Major Site Plan – Mixed-Use Retail and Residential Building It was moved by Mr. Liapes, seconded by Mr. Conway, and passed on a vote of 7-0 by members Liapes, Joh, Conway, Tropea, Pacheco, Hong and Sugarman to deem the application complete. Outstanding items to be submitted prior to public hearing. Will call for a hearing date. Public Hearings Docket #10-21, Electrify America, 154 Main Street, Block 4351, Lots 3 & 12, Minor Site Plan – Electric Vehicle Charging Station Chairman Sugarman announced that the application was carried to the meeting of May 11, 2021. Notice was carried and time waived for the Board to act. Page 3-ZBA Minutes-April 27, 2021 Docket #5-21, 2053 Fletcher Associates, LLC, 2053 Fletcher Avenue, Block 4458, Lot 2, Preliminary & Final Major Site Plan – Eight-Unit Apartment Building Marc Macri, Esq. representing the applicant. Mark Martins, Mark Martins Engineering, LLC, 55 Walnut Street, Norwood. Mr. Martins was sworn in and his credentials accepted as an engineer by Chairman Sugarman. Mr. Martins stated: The site plan cover sheet shows the property is located on the westerly side of Fletcher. There is a frontage on Fletcher and the access road to the rear. It is 50 feet wide and irregular in depth where one side is 132.25 feet and the other is 157.54 feet. There is a total area of 7,337 square feet. Page two shows the existing survey. There is a two and a half story framed brick dwelling fronting on Fletcher. The site slopes from the front of Fletcher to the back access road about 18 feet. Page three show the proposed site with a three-story, multi-family building. There are two driveways in the front and rear. They both have two, two-car garages on each level and two cars in the front of each garage. There is a 20 foot frontage on Fletcher, 3.08 foot left side yard and 6.50 foot right side yard. The 3.08 feet is only to the garage on the first level and 6.5 feet on top. There is a 15.35 foot front yard to the access road. The drainage sheet shows there will be a drainage connection underground out to Fletcher. All drainage will be piped underground to drainage systems. We are following the grading and will require a small retaining wall on the left and right side to level out. The landscape plan shows the removal of around 20 trees, mostly in the rear. There is new landscaping planned and sidewalks and curbs all replaced and new. Mr. Macri questioned: Have you reviewed Neglia’s report, and can you comply? Mr. Martins stated: Yes, we will. Mr. Jovishoff questioned: You are removing 19 trees and replacing one. Is there an option to plant more trees? If not, can you commit to the tree replacement fund? Mr. Martins stated: Yes, we will contribute to the fee in lieu of. Mr. Jovishoff questioned: There is a small portion on the access roadside that has no landscaping. Is there a possibility of landscaping or a fence? Mr. Martins stated: A fence will screen better so there can still be access. Mr. Jovishoff questioned: There is no sidewalk between the subject property and the corner of Lewis. Is there an option to extend it to connect with the sidewalk? Mr. Martins stated: No, there is a dentist office there and grading concerns. It would be a disruption to the neighbor’s property. Mr. Jovishoff questioned: Is there any new fencing along the side yards? Mr. Martins stated: No. Page 4-ZBA Minutes-April 27, 2021 Mr. Jovishoff stated: Please correct the landscaping schedule to show all proposed plantings. Mr. Martins stated: Will do. Chairman Sugarman asked for questions from the public. Christine Weiselberg, 450 Lewis Street, questioned: Can you show on the diagram where the main entrance is and what the façade is going to be facing fletcher? Chairman Sugarman stated: That will be the architect. Ms. Weiselberg questioned: Where is the main entrance to the building? Right on the property line by the dental office? Mr. Martins stated: It is shown as the cut out with the sidewalk leading to the entrance. The walkway is by the property line. This is the main entrance but there are also entrances in the garages. Not everyone is going to enter from the side. Ervin Shehati, 2039 Fletcher Avenue, questioned: How far is the end of the driveway from the property line? Mr. Martins stated: Approximately six feet. It lines up approximately with the edge of the building. Mr. Shehati questioned: What is the measurement of the side of the sidewalk to the property line? Mr. Martins stated: There’s a wall abutting. It is 6.5 feet from the building to the property line. Ms. Weiselberg questioned: What is the distance from the sidewalk to the dental office building? Mr. Martins stated: It looks like 6 feet. Ms. Weiselbeg questioned: You said you asked to be reduced to three feet? Mr. Martins stated: We are seeking a variance on the southerly side that is 3.08 feet. Ted Weiselbeg, 450 Lewis Street, questioned: The side, not by the dental office, shows three feet between your space and the new building going up now? Mr. Martins stated: That side is 3.08 feet to the property line, your side is 6.5 feet and complies. Raymond Virgona, Virgona & Virgona, 125 River Road, Suite 201, Edgewater. Mr. Virgona was sworn in and his credentials accepted as an architect by Chairman Sugarman. Mr. Virgona stated: Sheet SK-1, the bottom right shows the front building elevation on Fletcher. It is three stories and there are two, two car garages with two floors of residential above. It is about 35 feet in total height, which conforms with the homes in the area. It is brick and cement. The right side elevation Page 5-ZBA Minutes-April 27, 2021 is the dental side. There is a railing on the side of the walkway entrance. The grade drops off going to the rear. There are entrance doors behind the garages there is a lobby with stairs to the apartments. All are two bedrooms. The left side elevation shows three stories with the garage. There are portions of the building in the rear property line to the extreme left and right one story. The rear elevation shows two, two car garages and where you see the grade changes. Sheet SK-2, shows the right side is the lowest level at the access ramp. There are hallway stairs to the main lobby of the building. The center of the sheet shows the first floor plan with the two, two car access off of Fletcher. The stairway leads to the A& B Units. They are the same apartment, just off set. They are two bedrooms and two baths with a laundry room and hot water heater. The next floor and the floor above each have two, D Units and one, C Unit. Mr. Macri questioned: Can you show where we will maintain the garbage? Mr. Virgona stated: There are trash areas in each garage, and they will bring it out to be picked up with the normal trash. Mr. Jovishoff questioned: The trash, will there be building management, or will it be individual tenants bringing it out? Mr. Virgona stated: Individual tenants. Mr. Jovishoff questioned: Will there be HVAC p-tac units in each unit? Mr. Virgona stated: Yes. Mr. Jovishoff questioned: Are there any common area units? Mr. Virgona stated: Just heating by electrical baseboard. Mr. Jovishoff questioned: There are no emergency generators or transformers? Mr. Virgona stated: No. Mr. Jovishoff questioned: Can you put the locations of the exterior lights on the units? Mr. Virgona stated: The lights in the soffits are recessed over the entrance and the garages. Mr. Jovishoff questioned: Will you show the location on the final plans? Mr. Virgona stated: Yes. Mr. Conway questioned: There are eight indoor garage spaces, one for each unit? Mr. Virgona stated: Yes. Mr. Conway questioned: The garbage will be stored and brought to what side? Page 6-ZBA Minutes-April 27, 2021 Mr. Virgona stated: The street the garbage’s are located on. Chairman Sugarman asked for questions from the public. Ms. Weiselberg questioned: The house there now is currently a one family, two person house. There is garbage for two people there. Is there enough room for eight apartments to bring out garbage and not block the driveway or sidewalk? Mr. Virgona stated: Yes, there are four units on both the front and rear. Ms. Weiselberg questioned: Is there visitor parking? Mr. Virgona stated: No, unless there is a driveway space available. Ms. Weiselberg questioned: Are there interior mailboxes? Mr. Virgona stated: It is a possibility because we have lobby space. They may prefer outside. Ms. Weiselberg questioned: If they want it outside, where will it be? Mr. Virgona stated: The entrance walkway on the north side. There could be pedestal mounted there or the vestibule inside. Ms. Weiselberg questioned: These units will be rental? Mr. Macri stated: They will be for sale. Ms. Weiselberg questioned: There is no visitor parking for eight units? Chairman Sugarman stated: The traffic engineer will address that. Mr. Shehati questioned: There are eight units and there are going to be eight garbage’s in front and back. There will be four out at one time. Where is the space? Mr. Virgona stated: There will be four on each side a day. Mr. Shehati stated: Trash and recycling are the same day. Chairman Sugarman questioned: How many days a week is there recycling and trash? Mr. Shehati questioned: We have recycling once a week and trash twice a week. However, every member that takes out trash every day that is allowed. On Monday’s is the largest traffic days and instead of two on average there are four recycling and there will be a minimum of sixteen. How do you expect trash bins to be situated on normal days with snow? Mr. Virgona stated: Not much different than any other building. There is adequate space. Page 7-ZBA Minutes-April 27, 2021 Mr. Fortunato, 2047 Fletcher Avenue, questioned: When you are talking about the side of each house, people will be able to walk down both sides from Fletcher to Edwin? Mr. Virgona stated: No, there is no reason to do it and the slopes don’t allow for it. For the residents there is internal circulation that allows for it. Mr. Fortunato questioned: Each unit is individually owned so how is the landscaping maintained? Mr. Macri stated: Yes, by a property manager. Mr. Fortunato questioned: Why are there are eight units for a one and two family property? Chairman Sugarman stated: That is what the applicant asked to be designed. Mr. Shehati questioned: The zoning regulation is R3 and for two units but they are looking for eight. Who can explain that to me? Mr. Mariniello stated: That is not a question for the architect. That is a question for the planner but I will answer it. They need a use that is different than what is allowed. They are asking the Board for a variance. Mr. Shehati questioned: Who is the question for? Mr. Mariniello stated: I just answered it but you can ask it again at the end. Mr. Shehati questioned: I asked about the trash and how is there space? Mr. Macri stated: They are going to be in pails put at the end of the driveway like everyone else. Mr. Shehati stated: You are talking about eight bins at a minimum. That’s a car length. Mr. Macri stated: There are four units to each side. They are not going to block themselves. They can put one in front of the other. Mr. Conway questioned: Marc, with all of the discontent from the locals and I myself have concerns with the size of the project, is there a way we can table this and you can confer with the applicant on reducing the size and coming back? Mr. Macri stated: We will carry the application to May 11, 2021. Chairman Sugarman announced this application will be carried to the meeting of May 11, 2021. No further notice is necessary, and time is waived. Page 8-ZBA Minutes-April 27, 2021 Docket #7-21, Rock Solid Built, LLC, 210 Tremont Avenue, Block 2555, Lot 8, Minor Subdivision – Two (2) Single Family Dwellings Mr. Tropea recused himself from the application. Marc Macri, Esq. representing the applicant, stated: This application is to separate this lot into two lots and build two, new single family dwellings. Mark Martins, Mark Martins Engineering, LLC, 55 Walnut Street, Norwood. Mr. Martins was sworn in and his credentials accepted as an engineer by Chairman Sugarman. Mr. Martins stated: This is on the southerly side of Tremont about 95.3 feet west of Palisade Avenue. The property is 89.54 feet wide by 100 feet deep for a total of 8,954 square feet. There is currently a one and a half story framed dwelling on the property. The topographical survey shows the property four feet higher in the rear than the front. We are looking to subdivide the lot into two equal lots. The frontage on both lots will be 44.77 feet and 100 feet deep for a total square footage of 4,477 square feet. It is an R2 zone and we are proposing a single family for each lot. There is a 20 foot front yard setback, a two car garage, six feet on each side and a five feet on the common side of the new lots. There is 25 feet to the building in the rear and 20.79 feet to the paver patio. The next sheet is the grading and utilities. There is a four foot difference front to back. We are maintaining the existing elevation on the westerly lot. We are going to level out the rear yard and pipe to drainage units. We are going to relocate the poll and run underground lines. We are going to remove one tree on the street. We will have new plantings and arborvitae in the rear with fencing on the side lines. Mr. Jovishoff questioned: There are thirteen trees required to be replaced. Are there any options to replace or are there trees in the rear yard that may not interfere and can be maintained? Mr. Martins stated: We can look but because of the grade change I don’t think so. I can’t commit to yes but if we can we will. Mr. Jovishoff questioned: Can you decide between now and the final plans and if not you will pay? Mr. Martins stated: Yes. Mr. Jovishoff questioned: The fence is on lot 8.01 nor 8.02. Is there an option of having the fence on the property line so they both have a fence? Mr. Martins stated: I prefer one side to have or the other so there are no arguments because there could be potential problems on maintenance, etc. if shared. Mr. Intindola questioned: Can you touch on drainage? Mr. Martins stated: Each driveway contains units and will be pushed there. We can put it in the back to pick up there per your comment. Chairman Sugarman asked for questions from the public. Page 9-ZBA Minutes-April 27, 2021 John Lagomarsino, 215 Tremont Avenue, questioned: There are three large oaks and a utility pole. You are removing one and attempting to save two? Mr. Martins stated: Yes. Chris Ipek, 1407 Palisade Avenue, questioned: The backyard, how is it different in size? Mr. Martins stated: We’re proposing 25 feet and it is about 40 feet now. Mr. Ipek stated: There were ponding issues previously. My house is below. When it rains it ponds and goes through my backyard in my house. You are taking away yard that helps to absorb. Mr. Martins stated: We are regrading to pitch to the streets and also adding inlets. It should be a benefit when constructed. Mr. Ipek questioned: Where are you redirecting and where is it going to keep going? Mr. Martins stated: We are redirecting towards the front and those areas will be brought underground. Mr. Ipek questioned: How sure are you? Mr. Martins stated: The applicant has a responsibility to show no adverse events. If there are, we have to fix it. Mr. Ipek questioned: The houses are closer as opposed to the Borough regulations. Are you prepared for fires and fences and firefighters? Mr. Martins stated: There are 6 feet and 5 feet side yards for a total of 11 feet. The Brough requires a total of 14.5. Mr. Ipek questioned: Do you plan to make more room, so the houses aren’t so close? Mr. Martins stated: No, this is the plan. Thomas Mo, 204 Tremont Avenue, questioned: You are diverting the runoff in which direction and where? Mr. Martins stated: Across the side yards and to the front. Mr. Mo stated: I experience the same issues as Chris. I am next to him. The flooding is going to be worse during heavy rain storms. Mr. Martins stated: Our plan adequately addresses these concerns. Mr. Macri stated: All rain water goes into the leaders and into a tank, correct? Page 10-ZBA Minutes-April 27, 2021 Mr. Martins stated: Yes. Mr. Mo questioned: Can you put more drains to catch more? Any on the side? Mr. Martins stated: No, not right now. I am confident we will take away and divert the water going across. There is no system right now. So diverting the water when we are building will have a positive impact. Mr. Mo questioned: The finish grade on top of the retaining wall is there going to be spill over from the runoff? Mr. Martins stated: No swell on the sides. It is directed towards the street and away from the property. Mr. Mo questioned: Can you put more drains on the side? It is for during surges not regular rain. Mr. Martins stated: If necessary, we will. Mr. Intindola stated: If you put drains on the side, if you get four inches of rain in three hours they may backup and have the opposite effect of what he is trying to do. If he has the drains in the back going to the front, 97% of the issue will be fixed. Jae Chang, 215 Elsmere Place, questioned: Prior to this building there were natural aspects. Now the proposal is to mechanically drain it. What about maintaining this? Mr. Martins stated: In general, you are responsible for maintaining your house. Yes, you have to maintain the system. We are relying on gravity to take the water to the street not mechanics. We are managing the grade to direct away form the yards towards the street. Mr. Chang questioned: What is the recurse if it doesn’t work? Mr. Martins stated: Recourse is for the Board to answer. I can tell you our design is in conformance with the Borough standards. Mr. Ipek questioned: The tank system is good for how long? Mr. Martins stated: The overflow is 4,528 gallons each tank system. All grades are pitched towards the street and away from the properties. Mr. Ipek questioned: Is this allowed by code? Mr. Martins stated: Yes. Mr. Mo questioned: The underground stormwater chamber, how do we know that it is functioning after a few years? Is there a monitoring system? Mr. Martins stated: It is the homeowner’s responsibility. Page 11-ZBA Minutes-April 27, 2021 Chairman Sugarman stated: If there is a problem it has to do with the building department. The Board can’t enforce but the building department’s job is to make sure it is enforced. Mr. Mo questioned: A monitoring well can’t be put in? Mr. Martins stated: We’re confident it will work. There will be an inspection port and a place to vacuum out debris. Mr. Lagomarsino questioned: There is a dual system? One for each property? Mr. Martins stated: Yes. Bob Zampolin, Zampolin and Associates, 187 Fairview Avenue, Westwood. Mr. Zampolin was sworn in and his credentials accepted as an architect by Chairman Sugarman. Mr. Macri stated: The homes are identical in nature. We would like to describe one home as to both. Mr. Mariniello & Chairman Sugarman agreed. Mr. Zampolin stated: The house has a depth of 54 feet 8 inches and a width of 33 feet and 10 inches with a two-car garage and two cars on the pad. There is an out cove in the garage where the garbage will be stored. Fort the basement there is about 1000 feet of living space. The staircase which is open to the above first floor and a large recreation area. There is a guest bedroom and full bath as well. There is no exterior access from the rear, only through the garage, and there are 8-foot ceilings. The first floor is what they call transition style. It is an open floor plan, no walls short of the powder room and kitchen/living room dividing walls. There is a staircase going down to the paver patio. There are 9 foot ceiling heights here and about 1700 square feet of living space. The second floor has four bedrooms with three bathrooms and a laundry room. The ceilings go from 8 feet to 9 feet to 11 feet and about 1650 square feet of living space. The exterior has a brick façade on the first floor to the second floor widows and stucco. We can comply with the 28 feet to grade and will correct to comply. The rear shows 16 foot sliding doors and large windows. The coloring will be gray stucco, charcoal brick and black windows. Mr. Jovishoff questioned: Can you put the location of the exterior lighting on the final plan? Mr. Zampolin stated: Yes. Chairman Sugarman asked for questions from the public. Catherine Parilla, 10 Ellen’s Way, Alpine, on behalf of 211 Tremont Avenue and 213 Tremont Avenue, questioned: Are the garages on the first level? Mr. Zampolin stated: Yes. Ms. Parilla questioned: The height of the building needs a variance, but if it were underground wouldn’t the height be lower? Page 12-ZBA Minutes-April 27, 2021 Mr. Zampolin stated: The driveways would have to pitch down but yes it would bring down the height. Chairman Sugarman questioned: What is the variance needed? Mr. Zampolin stated: It complies with the 28 feet height. The height to the eve line is 21 feet and we violate it at 25.23 feet and 24 feet. It is over by four feet on one side and three on the other. Ms. Parilla questioned: Aren’t the drainage issues affected by the additional lot coverage since your adding impervious coverage? Mr. Zampolin stated: Our engineer and the Borough engineer agree it will work. Ms. Parilla questioned: Even though they are increasing it? Mr. Zampolin stated: Yes. David Spatz, 60 Friend Terrace, Harrington Park. Mr. Spatz was sworn in and his credentials accepted as a planner by Chairman Sugarman. Exhibit A1 – Photo Board of Site and Surrounding Area Top left- Subject Property Top right- Looking to the right Bottom left- Looking to the left Bottom right- Directly across the street Mr. Spatz stated: The property is an R-2, Single Family Zone. They are proposing to subdivide the property into two smaller lots with single family dwellings. There is one “D” variance needed for FAR. There are several “C” variances needed. The height could adjust from 28.01 feet to 28 feet but would only be a “C” variance if it remained. This proposal is well suited for this property. The property is slightly less than twice the required amount, about 523 square feet less and 5.3 feet less in terms of width. It is comparable with other single families in the area. It is consistent with the zoning. We are providing single families in a single family zone which is appropriate. It provides for public health and safety. They gave ample testimony on the drainage. It will be addressed and the problem will be satisfied. The homes designed are in character and scale with homes on Tremont. The height is consistent and conforming. The FAR can be supported. I believe there has been ample testimony on the improvement to drainage where there is none now. There is a conforming amount of parking. The bulk variances for the lot size is just minimally smaller. The dwellings fit with the existing size homes in the area. The lot coverage is only exceeded by 166 square feet. The lot dimensions do not impede on the light, air and open space. The positive criteria are met for the “D” and “C” variances. There is no substantially negative reasons why not to grant the variances being sought. It is in character with the surrounding land usage. On balance the positive outweighs the negative and thus, the variances can be granted. Chairman Sugarman asked for questions from the public. Mr. Ipek questioned: You said the drainage is adequate? How do you come up with this? Page 13-ZBA Minutes-April 27, 2021 Chairman Sugarman stated: He is relying on the engineer’s testimony. Ms. Parilla questioned: When you are talking about a “D” variance and a “C” variance, what is the difference? Mr. Spatz stated: “D” variances are related to Use, FAR, Height that exceeds 10 feet or 10% of the regulation and density. Bulk variances are the setbacks, coverage and height that is below the threshold. Ms. Parilla questioned: Are there “C” variances that are hardship variances? Mr. Spatz stated: We are not seeking variances under hardship. Ms. Parilla questioned: You said the houses are stylistically the same but not to me. Why do you say they are? Mr. Spatz stated: I meant in terms of massing, their size and the mixture of homes that have been designed, not the architectural style. Ms. Parilla questioned: When the planners planned this property is was 50 feet by 100 feet. If they wanted two houses here, wouldn’t they have done it originally? Mr. Spatz stated: The properties are 50 by 100 and we are 89 feet by 100 feet. We are substantially above the 50 feet by 100 feet and are seeking a minimal variance. Ms. Parilla questioned: How do you feel about a builder seeking six variances? Chairman Sugarman stated: That is not up to the planner to say. Chairman Sugarman asked for comments from the public. Catherine Parilla, 10 Ellen’s Way, Alpine, stated: I was raised in Fort Lee so I know the community very well. I feel strongly that my friends bought properties here and are now close to what looks like town homes next to each other. If they wanted two homes there they would have done it originally. There are two, two hundred year old trees that will have to come down and this will alter the look of the neighborhood. Mr. Macri stated: I ask that you look favorably upon this application. Mr. Zampolin designed two beautiful homes and the builder is very reputable in the area. These two new homes will be a wonderful addition to the block. It was moved by Mr. Conway, seconded by Ms. Hong, and passed on a vote of 6-0 by members Liapes, Joh, Conway, Pacheco, Hong and Sugarman to grant the applicant approval for a Minor Subdivision and to construct two Single Family Dwellings. Page 14-ZBA Minutes-April 27, 2021 ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Mr. Joh, seconded by Mr. Liapes, to adjourn the meeting at 9:56 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Christen S. Trentacosti Christen S. Trentacosti Recording Secretary