welcome everyone today is Monday February 24th 2025 and this is a regular meeting of the city of Asbury Park planning board chairwoman kerac can you please call this meeting to order all this meeting is being held in compliance with the open public meetings act chapter 231
Public Law 1975 adequate notice of this meeting has been provided to the coaster as press by publication of the annual meeting notice and posted on the municipal buling board and Municipal website all notices are on file with the board secretary official action may be taken at the following matters before
this board this meeting is being recorded by APV please join me the Pledge of Allegiance Pledge of Allegiance I will now take roll call James bonano is absent this evening councilwoman Clayton here Jim Henry
here Jeremy Hoffman presid mayor Moore here Jen saer here Daniel shano here Bob Zuckerman is absent this evening and kathern mclen here uh Vice chair munan here chairwoman
Barbara kurac here all right we have our first item is a resolution uh for 316 Main Street with 316 Main Street Amendment yes okay anyone eligible members are
Daniel shano mayor Moore Barbara KAC Michael goonan James bonano Katherine mclen Bob Zuckerman and Jer Mi Hoffman for um motion and second all right can I get a um a motion
to approve the uh the resolution so move second okay Daniel shano yes mayor Moore yes Katherine mclen yes Jeremy Hoffman yes Vice chair Mike gunan yes and chairwoman barar KAC
yes next item up is uh is 512 514 Summerfield Avenue okay I've reviewed the notices and package all in good order we have jurisdiction proceed all right great good evening Andrew Caris on
behalf of SackMan Asset Management LLC um it shouldn't take very long tonight um it is just a little bit of a review of what we're here for the property aditions is 512 514 Summerfield Avenue block 3101 Lots 2 and three it's in the
CBD Redevelopment area and mixed use District what we are proposing is an interim parking lot as permitted under the CBD Redevelopment plan an interim parking agreement has been entered into with the mayor and Council allowing for
it as required Again by the CBD Redevelopment plan provides for a one-year interim parking lot with the option for two additional one-year terms what is being proposed are 19 parking
spaces in this parking lot one thing I do want to bring to the board's attention this is only interim I will be filing with the board within the next 30 to 60 days an application to develop this lot um or Lots they're two lots
combined as a result we're not looking to make any significant revisions to the property additions to the property we're looking at essentially to use it as is mm that is on there striped there is some buffering that we can add to it but as far as any
significant revisions to the property we're not looking to do that in light of the fact that this will be a Redevelopment site again with an application coming in in the near term with that being said I have one witness tonight our engineer who can come up we
can go through the plans that have been prepared and presented to the board going through what is there what is being proposed and how the lot is going to we have the uh inter parking a copy sign copy let's enter that into the record if not A1 we'll make it C uh B1
for board one and that's signed let me identify it for the record interim parking agreement uh it says the blank day of blank 2024 however it appears to have John Moore's signature witnessed by Anthony coochie
clerk uh stman managing member of the LLC and it looks like Francis Blake of the state of New York a notary notorized that so let's make that D1 any any objection no okay
plug you know I could have y please raise your right hand s affirm the testimony about the giv this matter the truth whole truth or nothing about the truth okay please state your name for the record and spell it uh Ian Burton I a an b r t o
n okay and why don't I swear in my staff to Sol swear affirm testify swear or affirm that the testimony about the giving this matter be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do please State your names for the record and your
affiliation with the board Tom our board planner thank you say Lo your board thank you you would think I hav done this before or just once or twice few thousand times right okay goad I can you please give the board the benefit of your qualifications uh yeah uh site
civil engineer I work with midlantic engineer midlantic since 2020 keep your voice up please oh sorry I've been with midlantic since uh 2020 and I've been licensed in the state of New Jersey since 2017 I licens as active and in good standing have you testified before
boards before as an engineer I have have you testified before this board I have not had the pleasure welcome to this board all right you can have a seat I'm going to ask you what is up on the board to identify
yes this is our boundary and topographic survey is that part of the plans that prepared relative to this application yes what I'd like to do is Mark the entire group of plans as A1 for
identification the 23rd take look 24th 24th oh I'm sorry taking a look at thep graphical map that is up on the board markers A1 for identification you can please go through that for sure so this is uh the the view of
the project site uh as it stands it's at the uh interet work near the intersection of Summerfield a and uh Emory Street uh it's known as a block or I'm sorry it's known as a 512 514 SFI AB know as block 31 01 Lots 2 and three of
approximately .13 Acres um an existing parking lot uh with 20 spaces um currently it's uh oh I'm sorry 19 spaces it used to be or historically it was 20 spaces uh until last year when we
installed the uh Transformer in the northeast corner okay so existing near 19 spaces correct I believe so is there any Landscaping on the property there's a row of um some short pine trees in front of the Transformer along sunfield Avenue
and that was done as a result of a resolution that allowed for that transform on the site am I correct correct okay um is there any other Landscaping that is existing on the site nonexisting but some can be put in if we look at the North Westerly part of the
property there is a strip there where by that uh last space put some Landscaping mot are block new views of that par lot am I correct that's correct okay we have no issue with do with that am I correct correct in terms of the actual ground the surface that is
a maam lot yes paper aging myself um and there as indicated are 19 parking spaces what are the sides of those spaces um so I can actually U jumping ahead I can switch to the next sheet is our proposed plan okay
which would show the the 19 spaces uh we have of the 19 16 are 16 ft long and 8 and 1/2 ft wide the remaining three are 18 ft long and 8 and 1/2 ft wide and that is what is being proposed am I correct correct and what about the aisle
uh 24t uh Drive AIS with an existing 16t curb cut onto Summerfield afterno and a design wave would be required for those parking spaces that are not of the 18t am I correct correct and that's cly question correct correct do we show any
Landscaping on this page of the plan uh as previously indicated we show the area in front of the Transformer along sunfield Avenue as a as the currently landscaped area but no other proposed landscape but we'd be willing to put in order to block any views of the parking
lot landscaping again on that last space on the northwesterly size of side of the two lots adjacent to Summerfield am I correct correct and that is what it's called for in the intern parking agreement correct correct terms of lighting is any being proposed from the
site so we currently not proposing any but admittedly there was um some shown in the site plan that was submitted not proposing any Li and that's in light of the fact that an application is going to be coming in to develop this site within the next 30 to 60 days am I correct
correct there is some existing lighting though that shines onto this department L correct correct and where is that how much so there's uh one Street light uh you know overhead cobet uh in Summerfield Avenue um there's a number of put generalize and say wall pack
lights on the building uh at the corner of Summerfield dive and Emory uh there are a number of kind of area lights above the uh doors in the rear of the the building to the South and there are two U I'm going to call them bright wall Packs along the building on the adjacent
parking lot and is that sufficient in order to light up this parking lot the intern basis and is an intern Park yes what about are there any garbage cans or anything on the parking lot or
those been removed uh there are currently and they will but they proposed to be removed okay so there will be none on there when when and if this application is granted am I correct correct what about storm water managements anything being proposed right now there's no proposed to war
pension and that's as a result again of an application coming in to develop the lot which would then uh cause storm water management uh system to be develop am I correct correct that's really what is being proposed with this site right now we're
not looking to do anything else to the lot um again based upon the fact that it is going to be developed with the building at some point I've gone through the reports that have been presented by fakan and CCH and I'll mark those as the
Ving report B2 P date 2025 and that report is dat February P 2025 there's a cc8 report that'll Mark as B 4 to
242 we've had a chance to go through these two reports am I correct correct and you've gone through an indicated again there's not going to be any storm Lo proposed for the site light of hopefully be developed in the future am I correct correct mentioned the design waiver am I
correct M and you're not proposing any additional Lighting in light of again the potential development of the site am I correct correct and that that's really our application in terms of the comments and the reports that talk about lighting and all we're not proposing it um at this
time it is interim um it's only a oneye agreement that can be expanded for two additional periods of one year go ahead throw throw a wrench on our end or my end at least because if you look naturally what I was going to asked for is you know the park L be your surface
which you see in the letter that was due to storm water run off Dow draining to the southeast Corner um however if you're going to submit a new application that would be up to the board to decide if that is in need of repair or mediation now the parking sizes they
testify that they're going to come for that design waiver they are insufficiently sized for a traditional parking space traditionally you want 18 the asur oress ask for 18 they're 16 um just to play Devil's advoc for my own s
providing 24 if an application does come in providing 24 ft for an aisle is suff so if you do have some extension you can look at that and as far as the lighting I was just asking you just I guess the board wants a lighting plan to be resubmitted if you're not taking if you're taking those
lights out you well what is existing we're going to leave leave right we're going to leave it again so what we reviewed on and what we the board saw is a proposed lighting plan that I guess just removed all together that is correct so it was the board now I can
represent the application for the building that my client is going to be proposing for this site um it's just about done I should have it in within I'd say two weeks um to the director of planning Redevelopment um I've given
myself 30 to 60 days knowing the back and forth that ordinarily takes place um but this is a development site so all right so pretty much if I can summarize I just want to make sure I understand it properly everything that both are
engineer and our planner have brought to the surface you're pretty much saying you won't do yeah I mean it has in there P mounted lights and we had actually proposed originally to do that but we're not going to put P mounted lights in there three of them that are going to be
taken down um it's great expense to do those for a parking lot and then take them down a year from now okay so once again nothing that all of the issues that were brought up you're not going to do anything we're not proposing it I'm just asking yeah it's lighting was the
main one lighting storm water the size the size of the size of the parking spaces the storm water is going to go into someone else's lot if it it's the way that it's graded right now it's going to go into the next lot according to Sam's report according
to Sam's report so um can I go ahead so I don't know if you want to but I want to screw up the process here I know you said only Ian was going to testify but perhaps you have the knowledge to speak to who's
using the spaces it it's dictated by the agreement and what's the agreement who's who's using tenants they're tenants of sack and his subsidiaries and it's related entities it's basically all
those buildings that ad join to the West yeah we have provide under that agreement reports to the city about the use of that lot and the tenants are utilizing that lot okay so I section five page two entitled restrictions on
use of the parking lot the use of the interim parking lot on the property shall be restricted to use by the residential tenants of building Zone by the owner Andor by sacan Enterprises Andor its related entities the owner shall not let lease rent or convey any such spaces to other developers or
members of the General Public without the express written consent of the city in addition to that there's an annual reporting requirement in section seven yes and so what happens when your next development comes up and you're
short on parking are you po are you going to be let's just say that you don't have enough parking spaces we're not sure not parking I'm I'm saying on on another development that you a new development that's come that comes around let's say you need 20 parking spaces
you only have in that development 15 you have to pay five five parking spaces into the city coffers that's correct and that is still true even though you have these if this gets approved even if though you have these
is that correct M I believe can't use them for future projects you're not using them for future project you're not going to try and offset your parking requirement for future project no okay I'd like to still put that into the
U as I I just discussed with you I understand under the uh CBD plan you cannot do that without a prior written agreement with the city that is correct right so by law you can't do that okay that's fine so my understanding is this
will get if we approve it's for a year but you could come back and ask for we can get two one-year extensions two oneye extension correct so if you don't do these things you know the problem is if you don't do the things that we say we one done I I know you're saying well it's going to be developed but then you
know a year forward you come back and you say well something happened and you know we don't have those improvements yeah but the mayor and Council then they can go ahead and say okay we're not they can do a number of things they can say we're not going to extend it because it
requires their approval to do it they can say very simply we're not going to extend it unless you go back to the planning I we can get Carter tell us what your plans are if within x amount of time
from if you grant them what they're requesting if if if the project doesn't move forward within that time you'll have to come back and then do the well that's why I indicated that my plan is to get the application in within 30 to 60 days we can put something in there if
an application is not submitted within that period of time trigger Factor yeah on just just on get back little set for a moment just so I can understand the timeline here um this this seems to be very conditional on submitted plan which from no reason in doubt you are going to
submit the plan my question is based on submitted plan and in the timeline to develop that how best case scenario your plan gets submitted that we don't have in front of us and we approve it how long are we talking about that there there will be no improvements to the site you're asking basically to bang my
head against the table right now well give me a time frame I mean that's what I'm F out you're asking you're asking that's all I'll do you want me to be honest with yeah I submit an application and I get incompleteness letters it could be two it could be three it could
be 6 to8 months it could be one month sure before it's deemed complete and then we start getting before the board so what I'm trying to figure out here in all fairness you're asking for commission to kind of not make any improvements to the site which I know an opinion of right now but worst case
scenar and best case scenar how long is this going to be at the parking lot with none of the lighting or anything else that I would love to say that when we get this application in uh to develop the site as a building yeah that it's
going to move quickly um that it's going to be deemed complete and we're going to get a hearing and then we'll go through the hearings make whatever revisions and then six months from now we have completed application I wish I could say that yeah fair enough but I guess in some ways
it's been said because it's up to three years right with the one year Ral one year two one city council we and the city council have to agree to extend it for each additional year it's not an
automatic extend a maximum of three years maximum of three years and even the Redevelopment plan has in there a maximum period for intern parking agreement which I think may be five years yeah just wanted
in that vein if if we if we go with the year from have to yeah go well go with the year and yeah we'll go with the year and if ground's not broken and there's no real good reason for not being done you
got to come back in well listen we have to go back before the May Council first so um but I be of ground being broken within a year okay so then it's going to take longer than it's going to take so ultimately you know we're going to move
diligently forward with the application I can only speak for how we're going to Insurance um but the year is up we have to go back before the mayor council to get that extension soor John what are you proposing as the trigger the submission
of the application well the one year at the exporation of one year for example when it goes before mayor and Council we put in the resolution that we're going to want them back and you know if it's going to be another year or two years you may very well say no this isn't
short term this is three years you got to you got to make these improvements I mean if it's 60 90 days that's one thing 6 months whatever you know something the board's never been unreasonable as long as I've been here and uh it's getting to
the board and then I know I'm talking about afterwards I'm talking about from date of approvals forward you know going forward you know then it's then it's on you to do your post compliance resolution compliance and then get all your various approvals from other
agencies and the like we don't want to be stuck three years from now with not having this done no I get it am I characterizing it correctly M okay yeah thank you
yep it's unlikely they come back in a year with the extension and the improvements are not going to be made probably not there's no way they're going to be made I mean right is if you come back in a year and
it's still not made and then you ask not to make the improvements again you and very well you're probably going to get another I well number one you can't prejudge right and number two I can tell you right now I've never seen where an
application is submitted and then all of a sudden we're developing and around in a year just so realistically it's going to be longer than a year so realistically we're going to have to go back before the mayor and counsel the the application they'll be moving on Dual tracks you know we'll
have the application moving as quickly as we can to develop the site I anticipate at some point in time we'll have to go back before the mayor and counsel because hopefully will be done before the board I can't say that we will be but we may be in resolution compliance at that point in your
experience would you say it's likely that this is going to remain as of today a parking lot as is for at least a year and a half I'd say one to two years exactly I I don't believe three years usually we're
looking at around okay I'd say improvements that's up to you guys I'm sorry what was that do I would say if it's going to be bu up for two years so I I feel the opposite way I I hate
parking lots I think I've spoken on this many times um but in this case it's a parking lot already we need parking downtown it's going to be redeveloped why ask them to spend money for something that's already there we have parking lots all over the place why ask them to improve this thing for a year or
two um they're asking us for a year right and they're saying they're going to redevelop this within a year so why ask them to spend the money on something that's already there yeah but aren't there regular aren't there aren't there requirements for paring Lots certainly like being yes in my report I lay out
all the things if you're doing a real live permanent parking lot there are there are Dan and as much as I hate parking lots if they were if this was going to be here for five years or they were this was just going to be a parking lot that was going to exist in downtown I would be barking that I want this to meet everything they're asking to just
let cars park here for a year until they they redevelop it I well does it it's a year and a half is one thing three years might that's what I'm trying to think through is like is there a Tipping Point where that becomes a greater consideration well you control it
because we have to go back before the council yeah that's what I was going to say is like if they have to go back with the mayor and counsel I would say I mean it's just for me it's just a parking lot if they have to get reapproved in a year I would say as I would want as a condition of our our resolution to say when they come back before the mayor and
Council we recommend that the council only extend this if the applicant has made a good faith effort to move forward with the Redevelopment and if they haven't then it needs to come back to us and maybe we reject it then reject the extension I have no
objection Sam I have a question for you uh as it stands right now is the lighting adequate for on a temporary basis we haven't seen that lighting plan so the lighting not not a lighting plan the lighting that is actually there on
side I haven't seen it yeah so what what was proposed it exceeds yeah the level yeah well that was what was what was proposed exceeds the level yeah so what they're saying is that the three polls that they had proposed or the three mounted lighting fixtures are no longer going to be a part of this application
they're going to use what's their naturally I have not seen that okay take a break we walk down there so I don't actually I don't understand so are we saying that the plan that we're looking at is not the real plan yes for lighting well it was
ligh it was a proposed plan by of the fact that we're now going to submit an application to redevelop the site we're not looking to spend the money unnecessarily to put these P mounted lights so so on on your item Donna
number 14 where it says the illumination exceeds levels are we saying that that that number 14 should be eliminated it's irrelevant and it's is it irrelevant is it truly irrelevant yes because that's based on the lighting
plan they're showing in this plan which is three new light fixtures and they've testified we're not doing three new light fixtures okay so now we don't have that lighting okay so it's not too much no okay so what else we don't have what we don't have on this lighting plan is
an understanding of how much light is really coming off those wall packs on the adjoining building yeah and how it affects how far extends onto this site so we really can't like Sam said we don't we can't say if it's
enough okay all right is there anything else that should be removed that's been presented to us besides the lighting from the plan that from the plan because I'm going on what I read and I'm reading I agree with you so what is there
anything else that has been removed correct just lighting okay but you but on the plan you're are there you've agreed to install a a planted buffer on the northwest corner correct
right okay so that's not on the plan correct so that would have to be added to the plan yes okay now can and and we can we can move on from this if if you if you still say you're not doing anything but I'd like to
know we have issues with the the compact spaces a design waiver is required it says you're only supposed to do 25% and you're all you're doing 84% so are you still saying you're not going to change that well I don't they can't change that
I can't change why can't you change it if it's a compact space you can restrip it to not do a compact space sorry there not enough room to not do a compact SP you have to eliminate spaces in order yeah so it e or the drive
oh yeah or reduce the tri right or reduce the amount of spaces okay so your stance is still you will not do any of that we're not proposing any revisions I'm asking will you do it it depends what you're asking for I'm asking for
I'm asking for you to do that for us not to have to do a design W I don't know how we do this without design wavers because you don't have enough width on the parking lot to bring it down to how many spaces if we did it how many spaces would it it I'm not
designing it for you but what could happen is if you eliminated the West Side theoretically hypothetically you're losing 10 you still have nine you have nine to but to eliminate half the parking spaces doesn't make any sense okay
okay does anybody else have any questions just the cans this is very minimal but the cans are they where they going to go we're we're moving to to somewhere else okay so that's that and and is anything going to happen to that pole that's what's it there's a Ballard
that sits in one of the spaces is anything going to happen with that one because that makes the space even shorter it does that's staying as is aard they're there now the foundation for the like no I think
unless oh yeah these two over here yeah there's no I think there's utilities or something I believe that just makes the space even shorter East portion of the building of the yeah I think there may be utilities and that's what they're protecting all
right so then so then we have those spaces or even shorter spaces yes sorry one second the the shorter spaces are concern my main concern right now is like without a lighting plan with the lights there now is it's
safe for people to park there right and that's like you know how can we we don't know that right how can we okay a plan and then 6 months from now or 3 months from now two days from now something bad happens because there's not enough lights there to protect your tenants or whoever you're going to let
park there is that an open parking lot is there G no it's open I mean it's an existing condition that's been there for I knows how long you just zoom oh take
bre I think it's just looks like it's block yeah right to the left that's that's what talking yeah those are there now and they if we took I mean if that's if that's
something that that we would like to do that's fine if that would help people make help them make a decision what's that the lighting take a short break see what the lighting is like go down there and see what the ligh tonight I think if it's good put me at
ease I mean I mean it's subjective I it's not no it is subjective it's definitely subjective or or we come back with a lighting plan
yes do you want to take a look at it and then and if it's insufficient then we can add some wall packs up there I personally would prefer a lighting plan but if everybody would like to go take a walk I'm happy to take a walk because to be quite honest I'm
against this to the be to to the start so a lighting a lighting is not going to change my mind but I'm happy to take a walk if people would like to do that and if they I'm only one vote so you know if people would feel that that would help them feel at ease and that would help
move this project forward and that would change their vote I'm happy to take a walk would put my mind at ease but fine I'm not I'm not going to walk down there and look at it because I'm going to let the engineers and the planners go look
at and tell me it's enough all right you guys want to take a walk over take a ride take a take a ride take a walk take whatever you like yeah there's plenty of parking SP there's plenty of parking over there you can park in the park
want make a motion to take a break yeah motion to take a recess so move second all in favor he guys see when you get back okay I'll take roll call um starting ready councilwoman Clayton here
Jim Henry here Jeremy Hoffman still here uh mayor Moore here Jen saer here Daniel shano Kathy mclen here Vice chair goon here chair Roman KAC here all right we're here back on does somebody want to
testify as to what happened why don't we first hear from in and then for professionals yeah so we walked over and there were two existing lights on this um say the lot one building X 516 uh there were three um call area lights
over each of the three doors and the three stories for a lot 11 408 and then there were two um wall packs on this adjacent building um Midway and to down on the south that's pretty but so it's
on the that the south building so it's a it's on someone else's property not this property it's on a different property correct sorry uh it's the East but yes it's on a different property okay and then there is one Cobra like want to call it Street Light Within summer field across the
street from the site don't have light levels subjectively it appeared at lit subject I I do agree but Barbara said it the only thing is that the site does not have any control over those
lights subjectively I do think that it's well lit I wouldn't have a problem parking there myself okay so so the the actual parking lot that we're talking about um no one has control over those other lights correct yes they're all on different buildings
well no on Carter owns those two build three of those buildings today he owns them now just saying today he owns today well yes does he own we have control over it so as we sit here today there is control over those over all those lights yeah okay except for
the one three of the four on that's Mar DJ and get to the East to the east if we wanted to we make a condition of the maintenance of the current Lights by the property owner shared owner sure yeah
that's does anyone um have any any board members have any other questions or any concerns that they would like to I should say do you have any questions for the um the engineer before we get to anything else
no one else has any other questions so you were satisfied with the light I don't know I don't know if I'm allowed to testify um that's up to noty us coms I'm my opinion is I I feel like the the
lot is adequately lit for parking I would be comfortable parking there um um I feel like as it is right now I feel like it's adequately L okay does anybody else have any other
questions um of the witness all right I'm going to open it to to the public does the public have any questions of the witness okay is excused witness is excused um does anybody um have any
anybody on the board have any comments that they would like to State before that why don't we open it to public comment let's open it to public comment motion
so second in favor hearing none close second got that all in favor all opposed I have it okay now comments by the okay any uh any board member would
like to make any comments any any uh about the approval of this or non-approval of this parking lot well I I think that we should you know Jack talk about putting the Trigg
yeah I have a few things that throw out there and you decide you may ask Jack before you yes where are we so it was a 2year one year one year a one year Le with two oneyear options right Mutual
cons they have to be extended only on Mutual consent yes not a least it's a one year agree inter oh yeah one year inter I'm sorry one mischaracterization one year inter parking agreement at the end of the year they have to go back to the mayor and Council for any extensions and they can
have according to this up to two oneyear extensions of the gr okay so we're now in the first year or it begins upon your yes the board appr thank you and just another just question on process whatever I think somebody said earlier
that the maximum amount of time that you can do temporary parging lot in The District 5 years did I hear that right that is correct in the CBD plan it permits up to 5 years the governing body decides how
many yeah yeah so can they uh so I understand the council have given authorized one year plus two one year renewal for maximum three is there a scenario that could arise just in terms of like powers and process where they could be granted uh
subsequent uh extensions to go past five years there five years the max cap they would have to do an agreement no we would have if we want to go beyond the five years it would have to be a plan member yeah okay worst worst case near scenario well
that's depending I don't want toate the scenar but then maximum uh it could theoretically be beyond what the council will approve it's five years under the CBD Redevelopment plan that is correct three and then up to five up to two more
with a a plan Amendment which is no no it's beyond five is a plan Amendment we were granted three we would have to go back before the mayor and Council but the max we can get is an additional two more years okay thank you okay I I have it that I'll go through the simple ones
trash cans to be removed um applic will install Landscaping in the northwest corner of the property adjacent to Summerfield Avenue obviously uh send that over to Donna for review
um and existing lighting uh property lighting to be maintained by the applicant during the terms during the term of the approval um I also came up with um that the applicant will file the application for development of this
property within blank days file not submit to the submit yeah file I put 60 days okay 60 days I also put in that um uh when the project goes to council for any
extension that being the first second or third the board requests the council ensur that the site is developed in a as soon as possible I may go a little further with that or in the alternative send the applicant back to the planning board for reconsideration of the site
plan waivers and exceptions previously Grant granted for compliance with the ordinances appc the ordinances this thing's going to turn into a three four or five year deal I don't think the board's going to want to give you why don't we put some we'll proceed
diligently with the appli that's so this way you've got something we put in the resolution we send it over to council even though we have two council members here that says look you know gave him a pass but it's not an indefinite pass you know please when you when you reconsider
extending this thing make sure you're going to put the Fe their feet to the fire and the development of the property and if not send them back over and we'll do what we have to do and then however long it takes them to develop it it takes them to develop that doesn't bind the
council no we really can't tell the council what to do but it sure puts him on a hot seat in a very nice way of course makes them accountable let's put it that
way and Jack just for clarification yes if this goes to the council for any reason they uh the council has the authority to send it back to the planning board yes for review of the uh waivers and stuff yes I believe so yeah
yeah under this agreement the council could say look we'll extend it however you got to go back to the planning board and comply with this ordinance can't Remain the way it looks or if you don't you you don't complete the project in uh 180 days whatever it is then you're
going over you're mandated to go back to the planning board for site plan approval okay okay um I will I will say that the thing that I find um I find a number of issues
with this this is my comment moment um that uh an applicant would come here and say we are not going to do anything my opinion my comment um anything based on what our professionals
have suggested uh outside of uh landscaping and obviously removing some trash cans um I have a problem with uh the uh the parking the the uh compact parking how
much is being requested and I have a problem with the storm water that's me that's my comment and does anybody else have any comments that they would like to PR for so I I will say I have the
same same problems you have compact space is storm water but but I also have a big butt which is even though I have those problems um this is they're asking for a year and I I just I am uh inclined to
say it's a year they're going to develop this I would much rather see this developed quickly into something else um so I'm inclined to say for a year those things is much they bother me they don't bother me enough to say no well the
other part is that one why would it not get developed anyway well my my point is they're planning yes yes you're absolutely right but they're planning to do something with it so by saying yes this is okay we're basically just saying yeah you don't have to invest and change this lot
that you're going to redevelop in the next year or two we're not going to make you spend money that doesn't need to be spent when you're planning to do something with it anyway I feel like I would love to see this have Landscaping bigger spaces but like to what end we're going to make make all these changes and
then they're just going to rip it up 18 months from now seems wasteful okay anybody else have any other comments that they would like to say uh I think what I'm struggling with
on this is um little length of time you know we we've already established it's not going to be a year uh and so we're looking at 18 months at that so that's what I'm struggling with so I look forward to seeing the actual language of the drafted resolution see that what
except that slates my concerns but there's a big difference between 18 months and 3 years that could become you know five years and then maybe more does it you know they go get the plan Amendment just given projects be proposed they don't always get
developed market conditions can change this and that that's the uncertainty is what gives me POS but I agree with the idea of not having if it's really 18 months you know not making invest money that that's going to be point out mhm is there something that you'd like
to ask Jack about that or to help you no I think talk I just want to you know I L with the draft drafts with the uh coming backday but just but just just so they were clear is that whatever what Jack dra I mean you're
already voting before before you see that yeah so as long as you're okay with whichever way you're going to go that's fine I'm just saying so the resolution the provision you're putting in there to
submit within 60 days yes so if they don't submit in 60 days happens have to come back to us yeah yeah the approval it's that's a condition of approval and they can't they can't go forward with the project if they don't comply with the conditions of
approved he has to come back very nice way is everybody okay to vote do they have all their answers to all their questions okay anyone want to make a motion I will make a motion to approve this
application with the conditions Jack specified second who the second first is that Jim Henry first Mike John Mike John okay okay okay okay councilwoman
Clayton yes Jim Henry yes Jeremy Hoffman yeah mayor Moore yes Jen saer yes Daniel shano
yes Kathy McAllen yes Vice chair goonan yes chairman chairwoman car carac no eight yeses one no thank you very much um okay I expect actually within a week to be submitting that application I
just want to make sure my plans are all set it'll be in very soon you know how we feel so okay all right thank you have a good evening everybody thank you I got motion to adjourn
wait meeting uh the next meeting is one week from today which would be March 3rd we discussed that we would be canceling that uh if there's nothing because we were waiting to see if anything would have to be held over from today and there isn't and we've already passed all
the deadlines for all the paperwork so correct 33 is canel 33 is canel all right day off and then we'll see you all March 17 okay motion to adjourn motion to adjourn St Patrick's Day okay second
second okay all in favor none opposed all right I