{
    "document_id": 10732,
    "page": 2,
    "width_pt": 612,
    "height_pt": 1008,
    "rotation": 0,
    "pipeline_version": "paddleocr-vl-1.6+paul-48",
    "engine": "paddleocr_vl",
    "source_run_id": 10843,
    "item_count": 9,
    "counts_by_type": {
        "header": 2,
        "text": 7
    },
    "build_ms": 4,
    "items": [
        {
            "id": "p2.1",
            "order": 1,
            "type": "header",
            "bbox": {
                "l": 60.96,
                "t": 979.92,
                "r": 322.08,
                "b": 968.64
            },
            "text": "Jackson Township Board of Adjustment Meeting of June 2, 2021",
            "attrs": {
                "block_label": "header"
            },
            "level": 2
        },
        {
            "id": "p2.2",
            "order": 2,
            "type": "header",
            "bbox": {
                "l": 498.24,
                "t": 980.16,
                "r": 547.92,
                "b": 969.12
            },
            "text": "Page 2 of 4",
            "attrs": {
                "block_label": "number"
            },
            "level": 2
        },
        {
            "id": "p2.3",
            "order": 3,
            "type": "text",
            "bbox": {
                "l": 60.24,
                "t": 956.16,
                "r": 575.76,
                "b": 917.76
            },
            "text": "2021 hearing without the need for further notice. Mr. Gertner stated lastly, given the schedules there has been material provided and there should be an executive session. Mr. Book suggested it be sooner than later, possibly the June 16th. Mr. Gertner advised it would be best to have it in July since it is the reorganization meeting and there is usually executive session on that date anyway."
        },
        {
            "id": "p2.4",
            "order": 4,
            "type": "text",
            "bbox": {
                "l": 59.28,
                "t": 904.8,
                "r": 577.44,
                "b": 538.08
            },
            "text": "Applications: 1. Toby & Eliezer Shain, Block 7806, Lot 33, 1 Columbia Court- Eliezer Shain- home owner- affirmed- M r. Book mentioned that Mr. Shain was looking for a 10x12 shed with 0' to the property line where 10' is required along with a 6' in height fence in the front yard of the corner lot, and asked where exactly is the fence desired. Mr. Shain stated there is a gate on site currently at 4' and the 6' is desired because the children have climbed and jumped the chain link fence, and the neighbors come and speak to his children and the 6' will provide privacy. Mr. Book asked if the highlight in yellow markings are where the fence is desired. Mr. Shain said yes. Mr. Book asked if the chain link fence will stay where the solid fence stops. Mr. Shain said yes. Mr. Book mentioned the chain link fence is a few feet off the sidewalk, and asked if the new fence going exactly is where the chain-link is set now. Mr. Shain advised that it was correct. Mr. Book advised after looking at the site, there is no shed currently, it's a coop. Mr. Shain said that it was correct. Mr. Book stated there is an issue with the shed being right on the property line, and there is enough contour to have it maybe 2-3' off the property line, would that be ok. Mr. Shain said yes. Mr. Book asked if it is being used for storage. Mr. Shain advised it will be used for bikes, the lawn mower, and lawn equipment. Mr. Book asked if there will be heat or electric. Mr. Shain said no. Mr. Najarian asked if the shed is existing. Mr. Book stated there is nothing there now. Mr. Hurley asked if this is going into the neighbor's yard. Mr. Shain said no. Ms. Fritch asked if there is going to be visibility issues. Mr. Hill stated there have been similar applications where the 4' fence previously existed along the property line and because it was lower and open there was no site issue, and solid fences may cause an issue, and someone backing out will have to be cautious backing out of the driveway, and it was asked to move the 6' fence further off the property line and the recollection has been asked the fence to be 10-12' off the property line. Mr. Book mentioned this property configuration is similar to his, and his property line does not encompass the sidewalk, and personally the fence was moved in 3' from the property line and the chain link fence is not that far in and if this is moved back 3-4' there should be no site issues. Mr. Hill stated in most of the properties in the Brookwood area, the average is 6' off pavement so the property line isn't far from the sidewalk, and another option is to angle the fence at more of a triangle figuration. Mr. Shain noted the driveway has never been backed out of, cars are backed in and pulled out. Mr. Book mentioned that the Board cannot assure that everyone else is doing what you're doing, and the fence should be moved along Rutgers Road so there is a total of 10' off the pavement, it would be 4' in off the property line. Mr. Shain advised if that is the safest option it will be done. Mr. Costanzo asked regarding the shed, what was agreed too. Mr. Book stated 3' on each side. Mr. Shain asked what the other suggestion was just for clarification. Mr. Hill stated the Board is asking the fence to be moved 4' off the property line and the other option would be to keep the rear right corner at the property line and angel the fence 4' off the property line at the driveway so it's more triangular. Mr. Gertner stated the applicant wants to maintain as much property as possible. Mr. Shain stated the second option would be preferred. Mr. Hill stated with looking at the diagram, the rear right corner of the fence will remain on the property line and instead of being along the property line it will be 4' off the property line. Mr. Costanzo asked if the fence will about the driveway. Mr. Hill stated it will be 4' off the property line. Mr. Gertner asked if the fence will meet the property line. Mr. Hill advised only on the back corner."
        },
        {
            "id": "p2.5",
            "order": 5,
            "type": "text",
            "bbox": {
                "l": 60.72,
                "t": 526.8,
                "r": 404.16,
                "b": 514.08
            },
            "text": "Opened public comment, seeing no one use the “raise hand” function; public comment closed"
        },
        {
            "id": "p2.6",
            "order": 6,
            "type": "text",
            "bbox": {
                "l": 60.24,
                "t": 502.08,
                "r": 576,
                "b": 463.44
            },
            "text": "M r. Costanzo made a motion to approve per the testimony given; the shed will be 3' from the property line on both the East and North side, and regarding the fence line, the vinyl fence will be as purposed and will open the site line at the North East corner and as it works towards the driveway it will setback 4' from the property line"
        },
        {
            "id": "p2.7",
            "order": 7,
            "type": "text",
            "bbox": {
                "l": 60.48,
                "t": 452.16,
                "r": 475.92,
                "b": 439.44
            },
            "text": "Motion to approve by COSTANZO/ Najarian. Yes: Costanzo, Fritch, Hurley, Mcllhinney, Comello, Najarian, Book."
        },
        {
            "id": "p2.8",
            "order": 8,
            "type": "text",
            "bbox": {
                "l": 59.76,
                "t": 428.16,
                "r": 562.8,
                "b": 351.12
            },
            "text": "2. Paul Fornicola/ 534 Whitesville Road LLC, Block 22401, Lot 15, 534 Whitesville Road- Sal Alfieri- attorney for the applicant- stated this was here in March and the direct testimony was complete and there were some things agreed to, and the mechanic is present, and it was agreed that any approval from this Board, there would be approval with Toms River as well and there is an application to be filed and both towns will be worked with to see who takes jurisdiction, and Mr. Hill asked there be a fence installed by the wetlands and that was agreed too, and Mr. Borden was here at the last hearing and his testimony was completed and Mr. Clifton is present so there can be testimony placed on the record."
        },
        {
            "id": "p2.9",
            "order": 9,
            "type": "text",
            "bbox": {
                "l": 59.28,
                "t": 339.36,
                "r": 564.72,
                "b": 34.8
            },
            "text": "John Clifton- Clifton Diesel Repair- 534 Whitesville Road- sworn- M r. Alfieri asked how long has M r. Clifton been in operation. M r. Clifton stated 2 years. M r. Alfieri asked what is done there. M r. Clifton stated the business is a diesel repair shop, so anything can be done from breaks to motors, body swaps, hydraulics, anything to do with diesel trucks we do. M r. Alfieri asked what the hours are. M r. Clifton stated 9 a.m-5 p.m., and sometimes the shop is open until 6 p.m. M r. Alfieri asked what days is the business open. M r. Clifton stated Monday- Friday with an occasional Saturday. M r. Alfieri asked how many employees were on site. M r. Clifton advised it's himself, his brother and 2 additional employees. M r. Alfieri asked how fluids are handled from repairs or storage. M r. Clifton stated there is safety cleaning company used, and there is a fee paid for anything to be removed such as waste fluid, oil, anti-freeze, and safely clean is used and oil absorbed mats are used to catch oil and fuel, they don't absorb water however they do absorb the fluids. M r. Alfieri asked what type of equipment is stored on site. M r. Clifton mentioned there are some vehicles in the shop and on site outside. M r. Alfieri asked if there is a tow truck onsite. M r. Clifton said no. M r. Alfieri asked how are drop offs arranged. M r. Clifton stated a client would drop off a vehicle. M r. Alfieri asked if the clients let the shop know they are arriving. M r. Clifton mentioned not always, there are times when vehicles are broken down over night a vehicle is left and the keys are left in the drop box. M r. Alfieri asked if the Board were to approve this use, there would be no dismantled vehicles on site, this is not a junkyard. M r. Clifton stated this is not a junkyard, so of course that would be agreed too. M r. Alfieri asked if there are site improvements purposed, such as a parking lot expansion. M r. Clifton advised there are no site improvements purposed. M r. Alfieri asked how much space is available in the shop. M r. Clifton stated the bay is 4 vehicles wide and deep. M r. Alfieri asked if there is office space owned. M r. Clifton said no. M r. Alfieri asked if the operations are just in the garage. M r. Clifton advised that was correct. M r. Alfieri asked how the fumes can be controlled. M r. Clifton stated there is nothing excessive, the normal fumes from a vehicle running, there are containers on site for these liquids and standing next to a container there is no scent that comes from it. M r. Book mentioned he went to visit the site, and there is a concern because this doesn't seem like the right site, and what was seen is at 534 Whitesville Road. M r. Clifton said yes. M r. Book asked if it's the very last day, number 7. M r. Clifton said yes. M r. Book stated it's possibly 20' wide and it's long and inside the bay there was material laid out and parts, and there was access to bay number 4, and there were 2 gentlemen working on cars, is there another auto repair operation. M r. Clifton said yes. M r. Book mentioned the guys were on the ground and luckily it was nice out however in the winter that can't be done, and there was a crane and diesel vehicles in the back are they yours. M r. Clifton stated there is someone who rents spaces and that is"
        }
    ],
    "excluded_furniture": {
        "first": [],
        "last": []
    }
}