[Music] Oh, it would have been hard to do. >> Okay. >> I'm calling the meeting to order of the planning board regular meeting of June 4th. First item of business is the flag
salute. All rise. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all.
>> Fran, would you please do the roll call? Would you like to do an open reading statement which I did not? >> I'm sorry. >> No. Yeah, I can skip that. I don't have it. There you go. In accordance with the requirements of the open public meetings law of 1975,
notice of this meeting of the planning board of the township of Burners was posted on the bulletin board in the reception hall of the municipal building Kier Lane, Bassing Ridge, New Jersey was sent to the Burnersville News, Burnsville, New Jersey to the Courier News, Bridgewater, New Jersey on January
9, 2013 and was electronically mailed to all those people who have requested individual notice. The following procedure has been adopted by the Burners Township Planning Board. There will be no new cases heard after 10 p.m. and no new witnesses or testimony will be heard after 10:30 p.m.
Okay, now we can do the roll call. Miss Alber, >> yes. Miss Gaziano, uh will be a little late. Uh Miss Gilmore >> here. >> Miss Clar here. >> Mr. Or >> here. Um I do not see Miss Absent right
now. Maza >> here. Mr. Centuro here. >> Mr. Hagen cannot be with us for a medical reason. Uh, Miss Padichi >> here. >> Missag here. >> Okay. The next item is approval. Oh, I'm
sorry. On the roll call, um, I received a note from Mr. Hagen that he is ill. So, um or he's he's actually going to be fine, but he was do we do that now or afterwards? Okay. He requested to be excused um for legitimate illness. >> So, move.
>> Thank you. Thank you. Um all I >> Okay, thank you. Okay. Now, we can move on to the approval of charges against escrow accounts and uh the first item would be for David Sly May 2013 non-quy items only.
Can we have a motion? I make a motion we approve the um charges for Dave Fly. Thank you, Miss Kleiner. A second. I'll second. Okay. Um any discussion
and seeing none, roll call. Miss Alper, >> yes. >> Miss Gilmore, >> yes. >> Cler, >> yes. >> Yes. Plaza. >> Yes. >> Mr. Santoro. >> Yes. >> Mr. Di. >> Yes. Maki. >> Yes. >> Thank you.
>> Mr. Santo, would you take the next item? The next escro account. >> Uh the next item is approval of charges against escrow accounts for EKA Associates May 1st to 15 2013 related to the quarry rehab application. Um,
and you have a motion to approve the charges. Okay. Second. >> I'll second. >> Okay. I'm sorry. Was that Miss Gilmore? >> Yeah. >> Any discussion? Uh, yeah. The same question I asked last week. Other than
the council um fees, would this represent the last professional round? >> Um, I'm not positive. Um, this I could ask Mr. Banish. Is Mr. Banish going to be charging anything more against the uh employee
rehabilitation plan review of you? Do you know what your brother's doing? >> No, I don't. >> No. Okay. >> My guess is I would think not, but I I can't say that. >> That's right. Yeah. I was thinking and I I I anticipate something from Mr. Dill. As a matter of fact, I think probably going out this week.
>> Yeah. We should just find out. Make sure by the next hearing we're all up to date on it. Yeah. >> Any further discussion? >> Roll call, please. >> Mr. Alber, >> yes. >> Miss Gilmore, >> yes. >> Planners. >> Yes. Or
>> yes. >> Yes. >> MT. >> Yes. >> Mr. Sun. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Just make it clear. I know that everyone knows but make it clear. >> Yes, on my >> uh recused.
>> Recused. I'm sorry. >> Recuse. >> Okay. Thank you, Fran. >> Okay. The next item is the continued public hearing of the Islamic Society of Bassin Ridge, block 9301, lot 2,24 Church Street, preliminary and
final site plan approval. Mr. Pano, good evening. >> Yes. Good evening, madam chairlady, members of the board. My name is Vincent Casano. I represent the applicant. Uh we were last here on April 25th, 2013 and this is our eighth meeting on this
application. Um so far you've heard from um Henry May who's back here tonight to finish his testimony. Uh you heard from Ali Chadri who was one of the founders of the Islamic Society and you heard from Dan Lincoln. None of the testimony
of those three witnesses are complete. Uh I will recall Mr. surgery at a later date and Mr. Lincoln also. He's here tonight and but I'm not sure if we're going to reach him. I plan on calling Henry Nay uh to answer questions that
the board raised at the last meeting. Uh Mr. Nay will give the board answers to the questions that they asked and Mr. Simon asked also. Um I would ask one thing again um and that is that Mr. Nay be allowed to finish his testimony.
It's going to be very rapid. I I think that'll be finished in about 15 or 20 minutes. Um the um >> You mean to allow him to finish his answers before there are new questions? >> Correct. Correct. Um I wanted to point out also that we had a a site visit and
a balloon test on May 11th. It was well attended by not only members of the board but also by members of the public. Um as I indicated, Mr. Nay is going to testify and I would think that the procedure should be that after Mr. Nay
testifies uh that the board and members of the public and the objectives be allowed to cross-examine him and after that is done uh I would expect Mr. sign in to present his expert witness uh to testify >> expert traffic engineering. >> Traffic engineer, right? Uh to testify
on regard to the parking and traffic, whatever is whatever he's going to testify to. Uh and then what we're looking for is a uh determination by the board as to the parking requirement. Um, as you know, um, we cannot complete our
site plan until we have the parking number and that's because of impervious coverage, the, uh, storm water management and other items of that nature. Um, so we're looking for that figure tonight so that we can go forward with our, uh, site plan. And, um, with
that, madam chair lady, I would like to recall Henry Nay. >> Okay. Before you do that, Mr. Santoro, >> I'm sorry, Mr. cuz you reminded me. Should we be putting our comments on the record about the site visit? >> Yeah, we're going to do that. >> But let's do that later.
>> Wait, do that later. Let's try to get this parking issue >> done with. >> Uh before you proceed though, I want to just lay out the ground rules and the the process for tonight. Okay. Um and I think that you'll be in agreement. Um we want the proceedings to to go
forward in a respectful and efficient manner. So, for that reason, we're going to do it the way we have done it previously where it seemed to have worked out well. We will hear your applicant's first witness's testimony, Mr. Nay. Um, on that point, do you is Mr. Charger also testifying as to
parking tonight or only Mr. Nay? >> Only Mr. >> Okay. So, after I I would like Mr. Nay to be able to give us complete testimony and I'm going to ask all planning board members to hold their questions and to take notes. Um, you may ask questions if you cannot hear the witness or if you
cannot follow the testimony. But otherwise, to the extent that you can make notes and hold your questions, I'll ask you to do that so we can uh give Mr. Knee the respect. Do um then we will proceed to have the objectors ask their questions and the planning board will then follow up with all of their
questions. Um, let's see. So, there's no other witness from you. If time allows, we will then hear the objectors. uh Burners Township Citizens for Responsible Developments traffic engineer only on the issue of parking.
Mr. Simon who is the attorney for this uh citizens group has advised by letter of June 3rd that issues regarding circulation ingress egress and volume will be be addressed by the citizens group at a later time. Mr. Sun would like to reserve the right to bring a formal report at a later time which
means that the applicant and board may need to recall the objector's traffic engineer if necessary. Um I'll ask everybody to silence their phones and to proceed respectfully with their questions and it um Mr. Simon has something to say but first Mr. Bonia is
are you in agreement with those rules? >> I am. >> Okay, very good. Mr. Simon, >> thank you. Just just as a part point of clarification, I do have I believe just a few questions for Dr. chargery that
just go to the issue as to the number of parking spaces. Some of the questions will depend on uh frankly what Mr. Nay is going to say. But I think that I would ask um if possible that before once the cross- examination and any
questions from the the public and the board um of Mr. Nay that before I present my my first witness if I can just ask Dr. Tory a couple questions just on the number of parking spaces and that's it. >> Mr. Ponia, what's your position? >> I have no objection to that. >> Okay, then we will agree to that as
well. >> Okay. And with that, um, we can proceed. >> Right. Um, >> this is Henry Nay, Madam Chair Lady, and he is still Henry, you're still under oath from the last meeting. >> Yep. >> You got enough room there? >> Yes. >> Okay. Henry, at the last meeting, the
board and the objectors attorney had some questions for you and they wanted you to supply some additional information. [Music] One of the items was they wanted to know
the people who made the traffic uh the parking studies, their names and their affiliations, what company they work for, etc. Do you have any information regarding that? Uh yes, I prepared a uh matrix of the employees
uh or part- timerrs that I use uh and the firms that they have been affiliated with and the nature of their affiliation. >> Can you remember your stuff? >> Okay. The and the nature I've prepared a matrix of the names of the employees or
the individuals that did the traffic counts. their number of years of experience, the firms for which they performed traffic counts for and the nature of their employment with those firms. We do have a uh an exhibit that we would
like to submit to the board that has that information on it and Mr. N will comment regarding it. And I believe the next exhibit number is A16. I want to check with the planning board secretary. [Music] Uh,
I've got her here. >> Okay. 8:16. >> Thank you, friend. And Fran, would you please make a note that Miss Pavini has arrived? >> Years. I have I I have marked that 8:16 and I'm going to give that copy to Ms. Florio
copy. >> Does that have a title on it or we're just you're just going to give it a title? Uh it does not have a title, but Henry, what would you call this? U list a list of traffic counters associated with the project.
Can we say a traffic counter chart? >> Okay, fine. Great. A16 traffic counter chart. >> Yeah, we have 10. [Music] [Music]
Are there any extra copies, Mr. Clon? >> There are a couple. >> Okay. Why don't you put them on desk? Uh, anyone in the audience feel free to have a copy? >> Is that okay, Mr. Bazone? If somebody can take them. >> Okay.
Henry, can you just briefly describe what A16 is? >> Uh, yes. And I I'll take you uh and the board through the uh through A16. Uh the first column contains the names of the individuals that did the traffic counts
uh of which there are five. The second column indicates uh what locations they counted and the date that they counted those locations. The third column has the years of experience that they have in traffic counting. And then the next uh six
columns are the names of six uh engineering firms that these individuals, some or all of have worked for uh doing traffic counts and the basis for their employment. Some of them are part-time employments employees and that they turn in a time sheet, draw a
payroll check, and others are independent contractors who simply bill for their work. Um, and uh, taking you through that, as you can see, um, depending on which firm they work for, they either work as independent contractors or as part-time employees.
And to my knowledge, um, they are still active in the last three firms in doing traffic counts. The other three firms have either been acquired or closed. And and according to A16, Henry, none of these individuals are your employees. Is
that correct? >> No, they are not. They're listed under uh All of them have worked for me as independent contractors on this project as well as on this. >> And how do you get these people? I mean, do you call somebody? Is there some sort of service or what happens? Uh they are
retained through an engineer that uh worked for me for a number of years. Uh still controls actually does through his firm traffic counting for a lot of people but they work directly for me when we do the counts. So uh he basically uh sets them up at the
location I describe what I want and he sets up the forms that gives out the counting machines etc to these employees to these people. Okay. Henry, one of the board members had a question regarding the attendees at the different uh services at which you made the account.
Were you able to determine the number of attendees that were at each one of the services at which account was made? >> Uh no, I was not and uh it's my understanding through talking with Mr. Troy that that information is not readily available. Okay. And is that
relevant in order to determine the number of parking spaces required uh from a from a perspective of uh traffic engineers? No. If you um and I might explain that uh statement uh if
you refer to the uh appendix C that was handed out um a number of months ago and I have copies of that if you wish to refresh your memory. Uh one of the subjects it discussed was selection of independent variables and one of the criteria are that they're readily
available that they are easy to measure and attain and things like attendance just in speaking with the uh individuals that I that have done counts that attendees is a rarely used uh asis for
projecting parking. I went through uh parking generation which has 105 different land uses. Of those 10und and and under those land uses there are multiple um independent variables that have been studied. For example, if you
recall churches they they have projections of parking based on the gross square footage gross floor area. They have parking projected based on the number of seats and they have parking projected on the basis of attendees. Just so for example uh looking at gas
stations they have parking uh based upon the number of pumps or the gross square footage of the gas station. So there are a lot of different independent variables. I look through the entire text there are three condition three there are three instances where attendees is referenced. That doesn't
mean that it's a variable that the IT recommends. It means that the engineer that performed the study was able to obtain that variable and use it in his analysis. One of course is churches and drawing an analogy there. While the
parking requirement of the town is one for three seats, if you had 150 seats, you require 50 spaces. If you go by attendees, you need 90 spaces because it's 6 spaces per attendee in in trip generation. The other uh use was one
study that only had one one variable and one study and that was for synagogues and it was 41 per attendee and the other use was live theater and that had two variables number of seats and attendees.
So attendees are not a common use. Uh they're they're rarely used. I believe I was asked that question and said I had not seen instances where it had been used and in checking through the text uh through trip generation uh there's very little evidence that it's been used by
other engineers in doing studies and lastly I checked in and Levenson and in the parking um consultant council's recommended zoning standards and none of them use attendees they use seats and other things other variables that are more easily measurable. Quick
clarification question. Appendix C I assume you mean is appendix C to the fourth edition parking generation which is exhibit A14. >> Yes sir. That's correct. >> And that's on page C2. Correct. And another question that was in regard
to the uh in regard to the parking count. When you performed the parking count at each mosque, did you do you count the number of people that were in each car that uh came to the mosque? Uh yes, we did. And um you have that
someplace. He knows the answer. Yes, I do. An untitled summary. Uh, and I would title this uh, summary sheets of the parking counts.
>> Don't get her mad. >> Sorry, David. I didn't hit you, did I? >> I'm going to mark one copy. A7. >> Okay. 19. Excuse me. [Music] Not that one.
[Music] Just repeat for the record what we're calling this exhibit. Traffic count sum parking count summary sheet. Parking count summary sheets. Sheets. >> So this is A17.
>> Yeah, A17. Parking count summary sheets. Now Henry, A17 is six pages. Is that correct? >> Yes, it is. >> And can you just briefly describe this to the board what the relevancy of this is? >> Uh well, I'll start with the relevancy.
the the board requested information as to whether we had gathered uh vehicle occupancy data uh and I indicated we had and we were asked to present that data. So what you have is a summary of the parking counts that are broken down as
follows. On the left hand column are the 15minute increments that the parking accumulation and parking counts were done. The next five columns have to do with vehicle occupancy. So, as a vehicle entered between 12 and 12:30, let's say, and they had one person in it, they were
recorded as a one. If they had two people in there, they were recorded as a two. Three is a three, four as a four, and five is a five. So, as you look across, you see you can see the number of vehicles that came in or entered the site during the
15-minute period broken down into single vehicle occupants, two vehicle occupants, three vehicle occupants, four vehicle occupants, five. Then there is a summary of the total cars that entered in that 15minute period a summary of the total occupants in
those uh cars and then a number of the number of vehicles that exited and then the final ter number is 14. So as you look at the first row which is Balo Mosque in Tom's River the January 18th 2013 date you'll see that there were eight
cars there were 12 occupants and there were 14 cars parked which means at the time the count was started there were six cars parked in the parking lot and then you run through the summaries uh uh through the sheets and what I did on the bottom is I highlighted the peak period
of entry in this case it was fairly equally ly distributed over 1 to 2 p.m. at which time 73 vehicles uh entered the site with 107 uh occupants. So that the average vehicle occupancy rate was
1.4658. And if you go through them, I I mean I don't know if you want me to run through each one of them. I don't want to board the board with this, but the other pages are basically what different dates that the parking studies were conducted. Uh no that there they are the date and and different some of the different masks as
well and it has the same information in there that you just explained to us. Is that correct? >> Yes. And I should explain uh for the board's edification that when you see peak period some of those periods are not a full hour. Uh for example if you
look at um at um and Tom's River uh about 85% of their people entered in a half hour period. So I concentrated on the peak entry periods and just to summarize that the lowest
number of vehicles of the total that entered in that peak period was 77% and the high was high was 95%. There were two 77s an 82 and 85 and a 95. So for all intents and purposes it captured the peak period uh exclusively in that area.
And Henry, can you tell the board why you did not use this particular information in order to determine the parking uh required parking? >> Uh yes, as I as I indicated, I'll go back to uh the comments earlier. Vehicle
occupancy and number of attendees is not a a a good predictor. I'll give you an example. If you take the the uh Mustafa arrival rate and you multiply it by its cap by its capacity, you need 195 parking spaces. Yet the peak number of
cars they had was 76. So it it it the predictions the projections utilizing those numbers are are out of sync, if you will, with the actual reality. Um, the board wanted to know on appendix A
of your report, they wanted you to um calculate his report dated his report dated March 29th, 2013. They wanted you to calculate the required number of spaces based upon the 100% tile. Did you do that? Uh, yes I
did. [Music] Um, could you explain to the board what the 100% is just very briefly in the 85th percentile and the 33rd that we've been talking just just for the record if board members are having trouble finding
the March 29th report. It's attached to a letter written by Mr. Baga dated April 10th. So if you get his April 10th letter, it's behind the scen divider. That's the report that you're talking about. Correct. That is correct. And you're talking about appendix which did you say?
>> Attendix A which is page 12 of his report. Correct. >> Correct. >> This exhibit is has a title. It's appendix A annotated with 100% calculations and it's dated 6413.
I will mark this A18. You're going to mark appendix A in the report as part of the file A18. You can if you want. >> Well, it it's modified. I would just want you >> now I understand.
>> Sorry. >> I'm going to pass that around to the board. I'm going to give Fran the copy mark A8. >> So, this is going to we're going to call this either revised or modified. You pick appendix A. >> Correct. >> Which one do you want to call it?
>> Modified appendix A. modified appendix A. [Music] >> Okay. Maybe maybe you're talking about appendix B. No, you're
>> It's the top. It's the top half of a >> page. So, it's appendix A, not on page 12. It's appendix A on page 10. >> Okay. >> So, it's a chart. >> So, it's appendix A. It's the the the chart of appendix A on page 10 that's
being modified. Correct. So we're going to call this modified appendix modified chart of appendix A summary of study results. >> And can you tell us what that is, Henry? Modified chart. Yeah. I just want to
make sure everybody has a copy before I uh A18. Uh if uh you you look at appendix A, what you'll in red is how we've modified the uh table if you will. Uh the question
was all right I've given you the 85th percentile and the 85th percentile uh number was 39.84 parking spaces per thousand square ft. What is the 100th percentile? The 100th percentile is the highest reporting that
we had. So as you look at the uh rates that are shown in the right hand column, you'll see that the Islamic Center of Mars County had a rate of 40.24 parking spaces per thousand square ft of square floor area. So we applied that uh ratio
to the um the square footage of the uh Bernard Township Mosque and came up with the parking number. Uh if you'll recall um I did a differentiation between parking for the prayer floor area and
parking for the prayer four area plus the area of the multi-purpose room. And in my comments, which I'm just repeating for clarity, uh I believe and I indicated that the based on the information that we had from the other
four mosques, the number that shows their size prayer four area is synonymous with the 152 square ft that I've used. However, since the board uh had asked the question, I provided both the 1502 and then I added the the u
multi-purpose room area. So for the poor floor area, if you apply the um the 100 rule, you have 61 spaces as opposed to the 60 that were projected. So the 100
causes an increase of one and for the uh total 44 area we uh including the multi-purpose room we went from 81 spaces to 82 spaces. So in this instance uh going over the discussions we had
about why I chose poor prayer floor area the results are much tighter. So you can see there's very little impact between applying the 100th percentile as opposed to the 85th percentile. I believe there was a report that Mr. Drew mentioned uh that was prepared by
parties by the name of Maven Poe and Zen entitled principles of relationships of parking and trip generation rates. Did you see that? >> Yes, I did. >> Okay. And I believe Mr. Drill indicated it may have some relevance. Uh did you look at that and determine whether it
had any relevance? Uh yes. Uh and and I' I'd be interested to get Mr. Dill's uh reaction if if he disagrees with me. Uh I read it a number of times and uh concluded that the author's uh purpose was starting with the fact that
engineers, traffic engineers use the 85th percentile in projecting peak parking demand, but they use the average generation to project trip generation. And the author's position uh to me was
that we should be considering using the 85th percentile for trip generation as well as for parking and that uh it would provide a better safety factor if you will or a more accurate presentation of the range of traffic that could be generated.
So I I think it it took the uh 85th percentile for parking as as almost a given and and related that to the trip generation and how that there's a difference in the methodology of calculating trip generation where we use the average as opposed to parking where we use the 85th percentile.
>> It basically supported your position to use the 85th percentile. Is that correct? But yeah, I think it reiterated what what was read from other uh journals the uh from from Wenton Levenson which indicated 85th percentile and from the parking consultants council
as well. There was a question raised by Mr. Simon regarding uh how long has the Mars County mosque been having two services. Did you find that out? >> Yes, 10 months. Uh July of 2012. There was also a question raised by the
chair lady and she pointed to page 164 of the IT parking generation study in which it had a comment regarding um calculation of
the um um attendance. >> What page is that? >> Page 164. >> So again that's page 164 of exhibit A14. >> That's correct. Can you read that Henry and then maybe you can explain what that means?
>> Um I'll read the wording. Uh the sentence that was read was that uh it is also important to collect attendance data for the days of the survey. Um however I think what it should be read in is in the context of reading the first first portion of the uh paragraph.
It says future studies should include weekday data that encompasses group activities such as youth groups, study groups, retreats as well as base employee data. And for those uses, it's also important to collect guidance data
for the days of the survey. So I think it was pointing towards that additional information that it was looking at, not at the general parking for the mosque during services. How do you know that? Well, if you read it, it says it it's also important to collect data for the
days of the survey. So, the days of the survey, they're talking about weekdays for group activities. Okay. So, it only relates to weekday group activities. Yes, that sentence does. Yes. Um, anything else I mentioned? Anything else you want to go? Uh,
>> I have no further questions. the witness. >> Mr. Gloria, >> um my apologies. Um I didn't catch it. It came quickly. Um you said the two services at the Morris County Mosque be
banned when? >> I'm sorry. It was July 12th. >> July 12th. >> 2012. >> Okay, Fran. All right. Um, so if you have no further questions of your witness, Mr. Vzonia, then we're going to proceed with the
um any objectors questions of this witness as to his testimony tonight only and then we'll the board members will have an opportunity to ask all questions. Um, is there anyone here who would like to ask questions of Mr. Nay?
Mr. Simon, please come up again. State your name and who you represent. Um, Mr. Simon, why don't we use a remote? [Music] There's a couple of them.
Hey, you have to ask. offline. >> Mhm. Yeah. Yeah, that's right. >> Yeah, I didn't get that from her. >> Right. >> I want to make a note. Can
>> you um >> Not yet. >> Raise the mic up a little bit. >> Yeah. Raise it up just a little bit. turning those switches off. >> How about now? >> Doesn't look like it's on.
>> This one's on. >> Okay. So, it's on here. >> Yeah. >> Are there two on switches on that thing? Fran, are you recording him and we just He's just not over the PA. >> Say something else.
>> I will say something else. >> Does that work? >> Yeah, I think there's a volume control. >> As long as it's recording, you talk loud anyway. In any event, so loud. Takes one to >> Yes. It takes one to no one.
>> I agree with that. >> Just a couple questions, Mr. Uh Rob Rob Simon from Hello Law on behalf of Burners Township Citizens for Responsible Development. >> You have to be next to this microphone. And in fact, if you screw it up, that's the problem.
>> Okay. My apologies. >> You don't have to go that far away. Be friendly. >> Right in the center. Right in the center. She donates us to >> join the group. >> Um, Mr. J, just a couple questions about the exhibits you uh presented this
evening. >> Let's start with um with A16 in terms of the uh encounters for the different sites. So based on based on A16
and this chart, um if you had testified in prior hearings related to this application that some of these individuals who counted didn't account for you were part-time employees, that would be incorrect. Correct. >> Well, that depends on how you define
part-time employees. I'm not an IRS agent and right now they're not very popular, so I'm not sure exactly. Uh, I've called them part- timerrs since the day I opened my business. You can use whatever if you have a legal term. Uh, you can use it. Part-timers means to me
someone who is not does not come in at normal working hours and leave at normal working hours and does not work a full 40-hour week. >> Yeah. And and you recall that I specifically asked you a distinction whether you gave those part-time employees a W2 or 1099.
Correct? Do you remember that? I I remember that. Yes. Do >> you remember what you uh testified to in response to that question? >> I remember I was poed at the question. >> Please answer the question. >> I was angry at the question and I'm not
quite sure how I answered it. >> KZA Engineering. >> Um you said they're they either were acquired or closed. And I said of the first three, they were acquired or closed, >> right? KZA Engineering is one of the first three. >> That's correct.
>> So what's the status of KZA Engineering? >> They were acquired by Maser Consulting. They were acquired by Maser Consulting. That's better. Does that does that make any So, um those individuals I see there were parts
of you talked about an engineer that you were that you I guess are affiliated with that set up these these counts. Um who's that engineer? >> Justin Taylor. >> And and who is he affiliated with? uh right now who's affiliated with
dynamic traffic >> and you said you don't know the attendees at at each one of these services yet you your counters identify the total occupants during a peak entry period correctly >> yes
>> okay so if if your counters identify those total occupants during the peak entry period Um, were there other attendees beyond those people? >> Well, you had people in the parking lot when the counts began. There was six vehicles in the parking lot. So, I have
no idea how many people were in the mosque from those six cars. >> Other than those six cars that were there when And the county started at 12:30. Correct. >> That's correct. >> And the and the service started at what time? Uh, I believe that service was
1:00. >> You don't know of those six vehicles that were in the parking lot, for example, for the uh uh the LA mosque in Tom's River, right? Whether they were attending service or not. >> No, I don't.
Now you mentioned a couple of categories where um attendees are are relevant to determining the number of parking spaces and you mentioned churches, synagogues and live theater. Correct. >> I never said they were relevant. I said
that they are if you'll recall there was a long discussion about trip generation, the fact that it is not intended to be a recommended practice and they publish whatever data they have. What I'm indicating is that in three instances,
somebody obtained attendance information and used that information in their analysis. And that was for the synagogues and churches in the live theater. >> One synagogue uh and the church, I don't know how many. And the uh live theater, I don't know how many.
Um, is is it relevant for let's say determining the parking for a hotel, >> the number of attendees at the hotel >> or the number of people who who go on site? Yes. >> No, I don't think it's relevant. I I've
never seen a person count at a hotel unless you're a detective. So, so the the amount of occupancy per room is is not relevant to determination of number of uh parking spots that should be allocated for that use
>> unless it's a twist hotel. I don't think it is. I mean, you would assume that whether it's one or two people in a room, they arrived in one car. The basis for trip generation and parking estimates at a hotel are number of rooms, not number of occupants. Actually, number of occupied rooms.
[Music] And similar to the question I just asked you, you didn't look at the total occupants during peak entry period and compared that number to the capacity of each of the prayer areas or the square footage of the rare areas. Correct?
>> Uh no, I did not. Uh in one instance I did multiply the uh vehicle occupancy rate by or divided the vehicle occupancy rate into the square footage of the uh mosque to indicate as I believe that uh
where we had 76 parking spaces if you applied the maximum you'd need 196 or 95. So you didn't do an analysis to determine the number of parks and spaces required
for each prairie area based on the capacity of that prairie area. >> No. Uh all studies are are basically empirical. You just go out count the park number of cars parked and related to the various factors or variables that
we've discussed. And as I've indicated, number of attendees is a variable that is not used uh very often and certainly is not used in any recommended standards. And so when you uh prepared your your last report in terms of your
parking analysis and you used not only the gross square footage of the building in question but also the gross square the square footage of the prayer area. You didn't know what what the capacity
of each of those prayer areas were in terms of number of people able to pray. Correct. >> Uh with the exception of our facility. No, I did not. >> When you say the exception >> township, we I have a map that shows the >> Oh, the exception of the um scaled out
142. >> Correct. Correct. That's correct. [Music] >> No further questions at this time. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Simon. Um is there anybody else any other anybody out there who would like to ask questions?
I don't see anybody. >> So maybe that Mr. Simons again ask Mr. Chargery any questions he needs before he puts his witness on unless we have any redirect or the board doesn't >> Well, we have we have questions I would assume. So um let's do that. We'll do the board questions first.
Okay. Um All right. Board members questions for Mr. Nay. >> Oh, no. No. Mr. Py, you you want to ask your questions? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Go ahead. Mr. A, do you have A15? >> A15. Exhibit A15. The one that
>> A which is A15. >> Exhibit A. >> It's the original study results. >> Oh yes. Well, it's the study results I believe of two particular >> of River and Franklin. >> Right. >> Where is that? Is that attached to the
>> No, it's a separate exhibit. >> Separate exhibit. >> A hand was something I think that was handed out >> after I did the study of the first group. Uh that's a date. I have it. >> 253. Yes, I have it.
>> Don't mind me. Just keep going. >> Directing your attention to about 2/3 down the study results by gross floor area on A15. Uh we we touched on this a couple meetings ago, but I just had some followup. uh based on additional
questions I have in your and your testimony this evening uh you come up with an average of 15.89 an average rate correct based on gross floor area.
>> Oh I'm sorry I was up front. Yes. And gross floor area. Yes. And that and that's a function of adding the three rates for the the the locations above and then dividing it by three that gave you the >> the 15.89.
>> Yes, I believe. Yes, I believe. >> And that that included the 2.07 rate for the Franklin location. >> Yes. >> Now, I did the math, but I'm not going to ask you to agree with me unless you you feel comfortable with it and you can do the math yourself. So, if you were to
remove the Franklin 2.07 rate from that average calculation, uh, you come up with 22.8. Does does that look right to you? >> I believe. Yeah. >> Um,
if 22.8 8 would be the average by removing that same Franklin location. What would be the 85th percentile rate? Uh you the 85th percentile rate would probably be
you you if you if you take what is it 213 I don't know it would probably be somewhere around 24 22 23 point something 24 >> okay um you say around
>> well you here's your variable you're starting at Tom's River with 217 you're starting at uh with uh Tom's over 243. So if you subtract the difference, it's 2 it's 2 uh 84. If you take 85% of 2.84,
it's about 1.7 1.8. So So you're around 20 23 and change somewhere in there. >> Okay. Between 23 and 24. >> Yes. [Music] And then based on the the gross area of 4,252,
that would give you a a multiplier of 4.252. >> Yeah. 4.25 is 2 is the gross square footage. And you you you'd be in around the same number, 90 something parking spaces. >> Well, it would be the 4.252 252 times the 23 and change. Correct.
>> 23 and change. Yes. >> And and do you want to use a calculator and give me a better instead of what? Oh my god, I got to think about this. I haven't used this in a while. >> Um, well, let's let's let's do the 85th
percentile first and get it right. >> Okay, >> this is an enter. Where's the equal? That's a divide minus. Where's the equal? >> I want to know what percentage.
>> I don't know. >> I did 21. Why didn't Why didn't you give me an answer? >> Know what? >> Give me an answer. Let's see.
It's 23. Uh the 85th percentile would be 23.80. >> 23. >> If I multiplied that by [Music] 2.52
4.252 252 [Music] I think I know I sorry I get 101 two Bring it up.
[Music] >> I don't think I don't think I'm walking this hard. I got 13,262. >> Is that your final answer? >> Yeah. >> 22.8 * 4 >> 23.8, right? >> 23.8 >> 23.8
46 >> 93 spaces. >> Uhhuh. >> It's 20 23.8. 8 * 4.252. >> Yeah. Uh I think 101. >> I can't I just did the same calculation.
My calculator says 101.19 or 101.2. >> 101. >> So is that is that the correct answer? 1012. >> 101. Okay. >> Now you reviewed the uh January 3, 2013
memo from Mr. Drill and Mr. Banish that addressed how they analyzed the parking calculation. >> I I read it when it came out. Yes. I haven't re-reed it. >> And directing your attention to the last page 8 of8 and and and the last
paragraph of that page. uh do they not consider a gross flare a a gross floor area calculation using an 85th percentile similar to what >> I don't think they did. I think the IT
report used gross floor area. They really they just regurgitated the IT fifth generation study of three mosques. >> But the the 85th percentile rate that was utilized
in that memo was uh 25.79. >> I don't recall. >> You don't have the number available to you. >> I I'll take your word for it. >> And using that rate of of 25.79 uh the conclusion was 110 spaces. Do you recall that?
>> Yes. So 110 using the 85th percentile rate in the January 3, 2013 report and 101 spaces utilizing uh the 85th percentile rate based on your findings excluding the Franklin
calculation. >> No, that's not correct. You're do you're giving the calculations from A15 which was based upon the study of three three parking studies. Well, I I qualified it excluding the Franklin. >> Well, I I don't I don't know where
you're going with it, but but >> I'm not going anywhere with it. I'm just I want to make sure I'm correct in my interpretation. >> Exclude the additional data. You're correct. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Okay, Miss Delmore. >> Um I have some questions about your
A17. um you took the average vehicle occupancy rate and um what I did was I added them all up and got an average and
then divided that by um divided that into 142. And so I'm getting around 105 parking spaces. So it just seems that >> 105 what?
because there's only it's one. >> Just a quicky clarification question. You said A7. >> Yeah, A7. >> I'm checking the average um occupancy rate. >> A17 has 1 2 3 4 5 six sheets to it.
>> Right. I added all the average occupancy rates. >> So you took the six add you average and I >> You can't average the average. You have to you have to go back and add all the numbers up and divide by the number. >> Okay. Well, it's going to come out to be about the same then anyway.
>> What did you come up with? >> Dividing that by the uh you know the area of floor ratio, it comes out to be 105 spaces. >> No, no. What was what was the number? >> I I'm not sure. >> It's 1.35.
>> Okay. So to say that we that you only need one parking space for every three people, which is what a church would have, it just doesn't add up. It's going to be 1.35. I'm using your data.
>> Well, I I agree with you, but your assumption is that every seat is full. And I pointed out to you that if you apply the IT ratio based upon attendees against your for churches against your
requirements where if you had 150 seat church you require 50 parking spaces but if you use the per attendees it comes out to 90. So there's a big difference. It's almost double the number of parking spaces. The
point being that basing it on attendees is not a good number. You can you can put in all the parking you want, but if you're sitting there looking at a sea of black top 95% of the time, if not more, what have you achieved? You certainly haven't acted in a prudent
manner because as any part of engineering, it's balancing these factors to come up with an efficient system. I mean, anybody can build a tower table if they have big enough bricks. The reason you hire an engineer, we can do it with thin walls and steel. So,
economics do come into play. Other factors come into play. The amount of runoff that you get from from more black top, the amount of pollution you get from the heat on the black top, the lighting pollution cuz you're adding more lighting. I mean, all of these are factors that go into parking. I didn't
invent the 85th percentile rule. It's used almost everywhere. effectively when most of you use your audiences they reflect the similar criteria. So what you're doing is you're singling this particular location out and saying we have to put in parking for as if
everybody's there but you don't do it anywhere else. Take a house simple thing four bedroomedroom house got four kids they all have a party you might need 50 parking spaces. That's not how you judge how many parking spaces you need for a house. that if you took the worst case scenario, which is what you're doing,
you would require 50 parking spaces or some number much higher than the two or three you would normally have with a single family home. So that's part of the responsibility of a planning board. When I advise a planning board, I don't say take the worst condition. Shopping centers don't take the worst condition.
There are times during the year that you will exceed the parking in a parking lot in a of a park of a shopping center. It's just a fact. Nobody uses 100%. Including including the regulations of this community.
>> Well, >> he's giving you his opinion. his opinion. I >> and and I'll back my opinion by the text that I produced in that April letter that goes back when I when I produced I gave the information to this board which talked about 85th percentile accepted by
two professional groups that recommend standards for for zoning ordinances for parking and also supported by the institute of transportation engineers parking generation although they don't call their text a recommended practice because they don't have enough data in a lot of categories that are contained in
that book. >> I think that most churches um and mosques, they want to increase their membership. Um they will try to bring more people in and it will get to the point where if
you have >> I'm sorry, Mr. Mr. Gilmore, finish your question. >> No, that's >> I would only say this. If you have a successful restaurant, they're going to have to work out parking. Most of them do by having valet parking. We've indicated that we are willing if we get
to a point where we're filling the parking lot to go to two services if that works or to go to traffic uh reduction plants, have vehicle share, ride sharing programs, something to that effect. It's within the prerogative of
the church to manage its parking. Remember, this is a little different than the ice cream stand or the shopping center. That's a place of public assemblage in terms of inviting people in and selling for a profit. And the more you get, the more you make. The
church has to manage its own property and it has to manage its own congregants. And if it requires two services to do that, that's what most churches do. That's what this temple will do. or if it requires to have ride sharing programs to keep the number of people down because on Fridays which is
their peak parking days most people come from work that's what they'll have to do these are parking management options that are open to them it's not really as I once said to somebody when I was doing great adventure they wanted us to bond the cages for the animals and I asked
them are you going to run a safari park if we fail I mean we're not running and I'm asking the same question this is not a public ascent This isn't something that you have to sit there and worry about your neighbor getting angry because they couldn't get in to do something. The people that are
going there, if you look at most of the mosques that we counted, one has only 17 parking spaces. They do grass parking for the rest of it. The town's happy with it and it works because it's only one day a week and it's not every Friday because they're not full every Friday.
There might be the counts we had nobody was 100% full but they might be one or two days that they are full. Uh I don't know that but but what we're presenting is a reasonable parking ratio based upon the standards used in the traffic
engineering fields. You want to provide for 100% parking. That's your prerogative. But I don't I think you have a hard time justifying it in light of what you do for the rest of the community and what you require from those facilities. Miss Gilmore, anything else? No, >> that's okay.
>> Thank you. Um, other board members questions and Miss Floria, would you please uh note that Miss Gaziano has joined us? >> Okay. Um, other board members questions. >> No one else. >> Mr.
[Music] I guess the first question relates back to the um this comment you made on A4 exhibit C. Um my understanding of your testimony
>> you're saying appendix C >> appendix C to the four the A4 A4 >> which which page number on the bottom >> uh C2. Okay. It's my understanding that that's what you were testifying to before when you said that number of
attendees are not often used in the uh selection. >> I Yeah, I was referring to page C3. Determinate. Determining an independent variable. Okay. I guess I'm a little bit confused.
Are you saying that is the number of attendees a factor in the site selection process? >> The site selection? Right. >> I don't know. But you selected um >> Oh, you mean my site selection process?
Yeah. No, the number of Well, I don't know what the number of attendees are. I know what the size of the facility is and I know what the size of the prayer area of the facility is. Those were independent variables that I was able to confirm. Uh initially I in my initial
study I sort out only the square footage because we did it kind of quickly and we con tried to conform to the IT um model which just used gross floor area. Uh and as I indicated in my report on reflection I thought I'd add prayer area since the prayer area as was indicated
in the testimony and at each of the four mosques we studied is the only activity that is occurs on the Friday prayer service. there's nothing else going on except the prayer activity at those locations. So they were selected because
of the ability a to get the data because they all were self-contained had self-contained parking lots where we could obtain the data. Many of the sites we looked at uh use street parking which is very difficult to to cover in terms of of trying to figure out who is using
the facility. So that was one of the factors we used. We also use the size of the pool area as one of the factors and the and the size of the facility itself as the other factor. They were attainable in those instances. >> So those were the only factors you considered in the
>> Oh, I also indicated uh I mean we're going back. This is old testimony, so I'll repeat it. I also indicated that we wanted to make sure that there were no adjacent parking areas where parking could spill over into. I also indicated that we looked at whe the mass transit
facilities were uh available along the frontage which might impact upon the parking. So we we looked at those factors and I believe those are the five factors that I considered. >> Okay. Well, you you raised it tonight about the attendees and I just want to make sure I understood it. So said another way um cuz I didn't hear you
mention attendees. Is it fair to say then that you did not consider then the number of attendees uh in connection with the selection process? >> That's correct. >> Okay. Um yet uh you'd agree though on page C2
where it talks about site selection um on the right hand column cuz remember this is two columns >> it's the bullet number two below the s suggested criteria for identifying sites as are follows and the second listed on
that page of the four listed talks to the development and I'll just quote it the development shall have reasonably full occupancy 85% or greater is desirable and appear to be economically healthy. The percent
occupancy at the time of the survey is important and must be recorded. >> Okay. You see that? >> Yes, I do. And it has absolutely nothing to do with churches that that is that is a if you look at parking generation as well as trip generation, they principally deal with retail as a major
component. You have a lot of you also have hotels where you based upon occupancy rate the number of units that are occupied. It is not pertaining. You can't take that statement as a comp punch and say you got to know the percent occupancy of a church because if
you go through it says let me just or a church or a mosque or any place. The only thing that what you're talking about if you got a shopping center and you're doing parking or traffic counts if you've got vacancies it's important to note because when you do your generation you deduct the vacancies from
the generation of parking and traffic when you calculate the numbers. Uh I've never known anyone to deduct uh empty seats because that's a that's a factor that's almost unattainable because it's going to be different on every service. >> Is there a section of the IT anywhere
either appendix C or elsewhere in this exhibit that supports the proposition that you're articulating to me now? Uh, I I really don't know, but I suggest that I can provide you with the name of somebody in Washington that you can contact and I'm sure they'll verify what I'm saying.
>> Well, don't take A14 as written that nobody Moses didn't bring these down from the temples. This is >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry. >> You you you you have to just answer the question because it's becoming very sarcastic and uh unpleasant. So, >> I wasn't intending just answer the
question. You cannot take this document as the final written word. It is not that type of a document. If you read through the preamble, it it basically says a lot of qualifications to the use of the data. And I will I will tell you as a professional having over 50 years
experience in this field. That statement does not relate to churches. it relates primarily to uh retail facilities and facilities that are more often studied by traffic engineers. >> The the um the next question I have uh
relates going back to and I think we touched upon it before but because we went back to uh exhibit A15 and talked about the two different methodologies of calculation one being prayer area uh square footage versus gross floor area
square footage. I believe Mr. positive questions on A15 were directed towards gross floor area calculations. I just want to briefly talk about the your prayer area calculations. I think we had talked about it last time. Your number
for your prayer area calculations is 2,34 square ft. No, the number for prayer area calculations is 1,52 ft. If you include the multi-purpose room, it's 2,34
ft. >> Okay. I So that's the 85th percentile. Then the 15. >> No, it has nothing to do with the 85th percentile. >> How is it that uh on exhibit Maybe you could explain exhibit A18 to me then? >> Um >> I see the line.
>> Just want to make sure red. >> Oh, that's okay. A18 is only half the uh half of the table from the report. >> Why don't you pull out the two in front of you? You have both in front of you. A15, which is what I want to talk about,
and A18. Well, I would >> I would I would not not to uh I'm not being argumentative, but since we went to great expense to get additional data rather than looking at A15,
uh I would prefer if you would refer to appendix A, page, believe it's 10 in my uh March 29th, 2013 report. >> How about we do this? we talk about both, but we'll start with what I want
to talk about, which is your exhibit A15. So, let's start with A15 and then we'll circle back and we'll talk about that other one in a minute. So, A15 and A18 both reference the same number 2034.
And if you're telling me that that's not I I just want to know what that comprises, how did you get to that number? What does it mean? 234 comprises 152 square ft
>> which is what the designated prayer area as you look at the site plan >> and I'm looking at >> at the architectural plan >> and I'm looking at it let's be sop specific I'm looking at sheet A1 that's bearing a revision date of
looks like July 6th 2012 12 and that's part of the architectural drawings that were submitted as part of the application.
So if you turn to that, it's got the prayer hall gross square footage area at 1,594, not the 152 that you put forth in the 7815 and 718. >> I would prefer the architect to explain
the difference. That's gross floor area. That is not the prayer area. So I I'll let him account for the other >> 42 >> the other 92 ft. >> Well, the gross floor area of of the facility according to what we're all
folks appear to agree upon is 4,252, right? >> Yes. >> So I'm just again trying to understand where your 22,34 came from. >> That's 22,000 >> 234.
where that came from is 152 square ft of prayer area. Okay, as defined by my client and also defined that way by the other four mosques that we study. The 532
ft that is added to that was in response to a question that you asked of Mr. tory uh wherein you asked if was there anywhere else someone could pray and he indicated that they could pray in the multi-purpose room that is 532
ft >> okay which is according to the prior testimony I have it written down it was 550 square ft I don't understand the difference >> I didn't invent the numbers they were given to me so if there's a discretion I'll have to get somebody else to
explain >> understood Good. So, you're telling me 1502 + 532 and that's how you got to the 234. >> That's correct. >> Okay. But >> and the gallery um area, which we had
previously heard comprised of uh up to 3,000 or 300 square ft, was not included in your calculations. >> No, it's not. >> All right. Could you just humor me and and and I want to understand if if I
were to use the gross numbers and we'll hear I guess maybe from an architect or whatever but if I add the gross numbers of the prayer hall from the plan set of 1594 plus the multi-purpose room of 550 plus the gallery of 300 I get 2444
and I just wanted to try to understand if I use that number how does that convert do you agree with the the my addition about the uh >> I I don't know what you I don't know what you're just adding. >> The square area was uh according to plan set, 1594 square feet.
>> Okay. >> You can Can you get him an architectural plan? >> I'm not I'm not denying that. I I'm I'm not denying the numbers. What I'm What I'm saying >> trying to get you to if you don't have it in front of you, he's going to say >> I can agree to his math. >> Okay. No, but he wants you that number
of what the prayer hall gross. per the architectural drawing >> per my definition. No, I don't. >> What's your definition? >> My definition is the area where the prayer the prayer area itself, not not any alo, closets or other things that
may be included in gross floor area. It's the prayer area itself. It's an interior wall that may be an exterior wall dimension. I don't know. Can you can you pull a plan set up and have it in front of you so we can you could explain this to me because I'm not seeing closets. I'm not seeing any
impediments. I'm not seeing columns. >> Okay. What I'm being advised is that the 5594 square ft is a gross floor area from the outside walls. It's not an internal dimension and you
have a small al cove that would not be considered part of the prayer area. So the what I was given as the prayer area interior dimension was 152 ft. >> And where did you get that number from? >> Through my client and through and I
imagine he'll tell you where he got it, but I'm assuming through the archive. >> Well, I don't want you to assume you got it from Mr. Charger. >> Yes. >> Did Mr. Georgia give you then a number as well for the multi-purpose reception area square footage. >> So the 550 ft that was testified to gets reduced the number you just stated.
>> Uh >> 532 >> 532 is the number I was given. >> But again that number you didn't calculate. >> No I did not I did not not in this not on not on our site. >> Were you given a a number for the gallery which was estimated to be uh 300 square ft?
>> No. >> Okay. Well, if we took just for argument sake your numbers and we added the 300 square ft to the 2,34, what would the resulting parking um
number be? If I were to multiply by the rate >> on the 85th percentile chart shown on exhibit A18, you say that 2,34 square ft of prayer space would require
an estimated parking number of 81. >> Yes. >> So that's the 85th percentile. Yes. My question would be is if you include the gallery which is I'm telling you 300 square ft is what the prior testimony was what number would that increase?
>> So so overall you would be about 2500 ft >> I think 23. >> Is that correct? >> Well if it's 300 added I mean using your >> Well, you got you got 300 plus you got plus you don't plus the the you think the 1502 is 1549 that's another 47
square ft. you had a little more in the uh so it' be about 2500 square feet. If I were to apply the 85th percentile, I would have about 100 spaces. >> Sorry, I didn't hear the answer. >> 100 spaces. >> 100 spaces. >> Yes.
>> Give or take rounding. Another one. [Music] Anyone else have any questions? When I regroup my thoughts here, it's no longer valid.
Otherwise, I'd have to go find what the other Any other board members have questions? >> Board professionals. >> I had just one. Madam Chair, uh Henry, earlier on this evening, you made a
comment and I didn't quite follow the line of reasoning. I heard more discussion about it, but um I think you said that the number of attendees would not be determined or wouldn't be considered to be relevant as a selection of an independent variable. And then I
think you cited this one of the sites in Tom's River as an example. Yes. >> Stop. >> Yes. >> And and I didn't quite understand or follow your line of reasoning. >> What I did is I I took the vehicle occupancy. If you look at the
architectural plans from Mustafa, they say they have a maximum maximum occupancy of 239 in their fair. So if you take that and you take the vehicle occupancy for that, which I think was 1.22, 22 and you and you divide it into that you come up with
195 spaces that you would need. In other words, if yet yet we only had I think a maximum of 76 at that facility. >> Okay. So you were using that as an example of how that's independent variable would
>> give you an erroneous result. >> It would give you it well if you apply if you in other words you will not find those type of ratios. you you don't find those in any of the studies. We're nowhere near anything like that with with I don't know the occupancy rate but uh we don't know the occupancy rate for
example of the three services or three mosques that were studied by the IT. All they have is gross square footage for that. So so they didn't use occupancy rate either. [Music] >> Um I did any other board professional questions?
>> I just have a follow-up question. >> Okay. I had one more question though just for myself. Um this is following up on Mr. Orur's question on uh page C2 >> exhibit A14. >> Uh you had said that the
provision that Mr. or cited requiring a present percent occupancy at the time of the survey. You said that that does not apply to a house of worship or mosque. Is that correct? uh I uh and many other uses that we might
study. Uh for example, um when we study a drugstore, we go and gross square footage. We don't know how many patrons are inside the facility. Uh and we don't go in and find the occupancy. Uh you study a movie theater, you know the
number of seats, but you don't know whether they're all occupied. You're basically dividing the number of seats by the number of vehicles to find out what the ratios are. So most of the data that is gathered in ter by traffic engineers that uh are published in
parking generation don't have that information. That's almost impossible to get the number of occupants. >> Mr. Do you disagree with the um the recommendation in parking generation that the percent occupancy at the time
of survey is is important and must be recorded? Do you disagree with that statement? >> No, I don't disagree with that statement, but I think it applies to the the majority of what's studied. If you look at parking generation, when you look at the pages, there are three pages
of uses and the largest single use is retail referring to the the index of parking generation. The largest single use is retail and with one exception, everything is gross floor area. And when you look at retail
uses, yes, the percent of occupancy in some uses, if you have a shopping center, it's important to know if you are if you have vacancies in the center from a trip generation standpoint as well as from a parking generation standpoint. But for example, at a service station where you use square
footage of buildings, what occupancy, what do you consider occupants? What's the maximum occupancy? As many as many cars that can get at the pumps. So there's some areas where it's where you can get this kind of information that it's practical and getting occupancy at
the church is not an easy number to get. >> Okay. So that that is your opinion but that's not written. What you just described to the board is not written anywhere in the appendix outlines the process that can be used to collect parking demand data and presents a
standard data collection form and provides a call for additional parking data collection. It's not listed in that part of the appendix. Correct. >> Uh that's correct. >> That's my professional opinion. >> Thank you. That was my question. And um anyone else? >> Okay. Um
>> last question, >> Mr. >> Um I understand that's your professional opinion. Is and it's not reflected in the IT for is that opinion uh represented in any other published material that you've been identified for us tonight? >> Not that I can think of. No.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. Now, Mr. Pson had a question. I have a followup. >> Henry, in regard to the mass that you um that you did the traffic counts at, uh did you look at the plans to determine if they had an area similar to ours such
as a multi-purpose room? >> Yes, I did. No. Well, I looked at the floor plans uh specifically for two reasons. Gross floor area uh which I was obtained both from the engineer and from the architectural plans. And then I looked at the architectural floor plans
to to confirm what was given to me verbally uh by the different mosques what the floor area was of the of the prayer area. Okay. And you only counted the prayer area and the gross floor area of those particular studies. That's
correct. Where where Mr. Warren indicated what would it be with those other additions. If I were to take the data I have uh from the and take and find similar rooms, then it would change my answer to your question because you're applying a multiplier based on a
limited floor area within each of the mosques which is defined as the prayer area to other rooms which is not what I did which is why uh is not what I recorded. So to to compare apples to apples, I don't have a problem you using the gross square foot because that's a
number that's you know it's common to all of them. But when you pick different rooms, it it it it screws the data up. So I would either uh and my point that of recommending 60 parking spaces as the minimum is based on the 1502 because
based that's if that area is 1594, I would have to adjust my conclusions. But that prayer area matched the prayer area not in size but in definition of what prayer area is with the other four mosques that I looked at. So either you
use the overall or you use the prayer area in your determination. But I don't think you can throw in a little extra room and use the same multipliers. You'd have to get the floor plans and see if they have a similar room that you could throw in. about on that uh topic of
floor plans, did you do any kind of of determination as it relates to the moss set forth in A18 to determine that the year of construction for those facilities? In other words, how old are they? >> Uh growing. I have that information. Um may take me
a minute, but I got it. [Music] get back the other way. >> Okay. I have too many.
Um, Mal in Towns River was approved in 1995 and it was occupied soon thereafter because it was an existing building. Mustafa was approved in 1997. It opened in 2006. Uh,
Ali was approved in 2008. >> You're jumping around on me there. Uh, >> well, it was what 1997 >> was 1997 approved. It was constructed in 2008. Ali was approved in 2008. I think it was
completed in 2011 or 12. It's it's the newest of the ones. And Islamic Center of Mars County was approved in 2008. And that again was an existing building. So I assume soon thereafter they occupied it. >> I'm sorry. The Morris County one was when?
>> 2008. >> 2008. >> That was the renovation of the existing building. So he assumed that it was occupied almost immediately thereafter. >> Any other questions, Mr. Jer or anyone else? >> Okay, Mr. Simon.
>> Oh, he didn't ask me no questions. >> This is a re another question of this witness before for before Mr. Charger. Okay. was a question. >> Just a follow-up question on what Mr. Orur just asked of you, Mr. Nay. Did you
do any independent uh investigation by reviewing resolutions, meet uh meeting minutes, transcripts, or any other independent investigation that you did to ascertain the extent to which a
prayer area at one of the mosques that you studied has been expanded. meaning that prayer occurs in rooms or areas other than those specifically depicted as prayer areas.
>> No, the the conversations I had were based on current operation where the prayers are held and how big it is that space. So I I don't know if I didn't ask the question anyway. I asked where they were held and how big the space was. >> You don't know one way or another whether they are held in areas other
than the prayer area that's depicted. uh other than indicated to me that was the prayer area and that's what they used. They didn't say they use I I asked the question we asked the question was there anywhere else? No, this is where we pray. >> You asked that question. >> No, I didn't. I I I directed Mr. Mr.
Troy to get that information and I also spoke to the art to the engineer on the operation of the two Toms River facilities. So I did ask it of the engineer >> of the engine. Is the engineer a member of that particular mosque? >> No, no, no. I just asked him about based on his the his knowledge of the approval
process. >> And the other question is you made a comment earlier um that with regard to one of the mosque that you reviewed where there was parking on the grass which which mosque was that by the way >> uh primarily is the Tom's River Mosque
the one on Route 9. >> Which one was that? And you you made a an I'll characterize it as a flippant comment that um they have no problem with that, meaning the the governmental officials. I think that's what you inferred. >> Yes.
>> And and how do you know that? >> Because uh Mr. Staten indicated that to me. They're they're going for a uh an expansion. >> Who's who's Mr. Stanton? >> Stanton. Mr. Stanton is an engineer who is the site engineer. Jim Stanton of Stanton and O'Donnell. Um he indicated
that they are doing a limited expansion of the parking lot so as not to violate the caffer standards of the number of parking spaces allowed under caffer before you have to file for a caffer permit. Uh which is which everyone knows
is below their need. They're not filling their full need but they are putting in I think 25 or 27 more spaces. It is for for purposes of the secretary. Taffer is a short C AFR facilities review act.
>> And so the amount of of additional parking at that particular facility um that's going to I guess be paid this additional 25 spaces that's in consideration of capper rules that are applicable to that particular facility but would not be applicable to the proposed liberty corner facility. Correct. Uh
>> that's correct. >> I have nothing further. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Simon. Um, are there any other questions? Uh, um, there's somebody in the back. You can come forward. State your name, please, and your address when you come up. And Fran, can we have a piece of
paper so you can write it? >> Did we Forgive me? Did we open the public hearing? >> No. No. with this discussion still from um I'm Lori Quick from 114 Church Street. Um I want to ask how many activities
occur and how important is that to attendance and its irregularity? Um, as any worshipper in any faith as I am, I've stood on the altar in Lenorex,
been turned away from celebrations. Yes. How variable is attendance and how often will that vary in a community of worshippers? That's what I would ask. And I think that goes the question. How does
attendance and a variation impact parking? >> I think that could be answered by Mr. Charger. >> I believe that that question is more for Mr. Chargery when he gets recalled and not a question for the traffic expert,
but that's up to the board. Do you agree? >> Um, >> does the board agree? >> I agree. Can we have some discussion? Anybody disagree? >> No. >> Okay. >> Did she not? I have a question. >> Mr. Spanish >> and maybe I didn't understand the question
maybe the case but I thought she asked how that variation in attendance affected the parking require was that her question this morning that was her question. Oh my. >> Okay. So, um,
>> so how would can you answer that question? How it's the question was how would that vary the parking requirement? The during the Friday uh prayer period which uh is the peak parking day. Uh the variation will be as with with it will
depend I guess on on uh what what who's available that day and what day of the week it is. Uh that's why we captured six different locations. Um I don't know if there are any significant Fridays that are that are much more significant
than any other Friday. So that's a question you'd have to ask Mr. Troy. He had given me uh his long-term projection which we originally started with which was 150 parishioners over a long period of time and that's how they
based uh the size of the facility. Uh he did also give me the morning prayer period which has a much lower number and the Sunday school period which I also analyzed from a traffic standpoint. I did not analyze them from a parking standpoint because the numbers are about
a quarter or less of what uh we anticipate on a Friday. I think I may ask something follow. I think Miss Quick's question had to do with the frequency throughout the year that there is heavy attendance
um that would be expected and and on that basis it would vary your parking estimates up or down. >> Okay. You think something like is that >> I I'm I'm I'm not you know if you ask me for a Lutheran church in New York I could answer the question but but I I
can't answer the question for a mosque nor could I ask the answer the question for synagogue. I don't know what the specific uh religious days are uh and what the highest days are. Well, the frequency >> from the frequency standpoint, I don't know. I think
>> right. But but at what point does the frequency of those kinds of days, >> okay, >> impact your recommendation for the amount of parking that's required for this facility? >> Let let me put it this way. We we we don't generally recommend parking for
the peak day, the peak year. Uh but if there are for example if typically the third Friday of every month was a known day then we would do the count on the third Friday because it's repetitive over 12 months but so I can't answer
that question. I my indication was based based upon the number of anticipated attendees initially. The study that I did is of existing mosques that are that are one is new and the other have been open for a number of years
>> and on the days that I studied them. What happens on July the third Friday of July? I can't tell you unless that's studied. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. N. >> Okay. >> So, so based on what Mr. Shri may add to the record, could that potentially
impact your opinion recommendation on how much parking is required? Well, unless he comes up with something he has and advised me of, uh, yes, but he's indicated to me that that some of the questions that were asked about, uh, certain days that followed, certain Fridays would there be less attendance. It's indicated that the Fridays are
fairly regular regularly attended events and that the every Friday is as important as every other Friday is pretty much there are a number of days but it didn't sound to me and you can ask him the question that it was something that you could say well we got 15 days like this so let's look at one
of them was like every Friday is anticipated to be similar to the next Friday it there will be variation and over time you hope the congregation will grow but that that it's fairly steady Just so you know, Mr. Banish, that Mr. Simon is going to be questioning Mr.
Chargery next and a limited scope to I guess lay the foundation for information he wants the objective traffic expert to has to to have. So I would say that as soon when he's done questioning him on that limited scope, maybe you could also
ask those questions to Rich Audrey. >> Got a follow up for Miss. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Fish. Okay, so Mr. Simon, uh, the next I'm sorry. >> Okay. >> One comment, your question that based on
Mr. Nay's last answer, Mr. Nay, on those days that the attendance is at capacity. Okay. Where do those cars go to park? At this particular mosque.
>> At this particular mosque in Liberty Corner. If that eventuality is reached, they will have to develop ride share. They may do valet parking. They may park in some lawn areas. >> Where? >> Some what? >> Park in what?
>> Lawn lawn areas. >> You're going to jump up the curb and just put the car on the grass. >> They may or whatever. Something like you like if you had a party at your house. >> Understood. Just wanted to be clear on your >> Okay. >> Where would the value? >> Okay. Mr. Simon.
>> Hey, Mr. Simon. You want to ask Mr. Mr. Troy, your the questions that you need, >> right? Okay. Um, Mr. Ponia, then uh shall we excuse Mr. Nay and Mr. Shre can come up? Let's do that. >> Well,
>> well, I think we should allow it. Um, I think we're going to have to allow it. Mr. Abate has a question for Mr. May. So objection. >> It's not an inconvenience. >> Okay. >> Joseph Abate, 485 Sunville Road, Basking Ridge, New Jersey.
>> Mr. N, I have a question. Sparked my interest. You talked about the Mars County or Marstown mosque going to a second service? >> Yes. >> In July. Do you know what prompted that? Was it parking capacity? Was it traffic? Do you
know what the background behind that was? Uh, no. I know. >> Okay. No further questions. >> Thank you, Mr. Vote. Anyone else before we go back to Mr. Chry, Mr. Simon? >> No hands. >> And seeing none, we're going to proceed. Mr. Simon, please come forward to Mr.
Charry. >> Where's the microphone? Not not profile. Sorry. [Music] I don't think so. Dr. Chowry, just just a few follow-up questions and these are solely
pertaining to number of parking spaces. There may be other questions they may ask of you during the course of the proceeding, but these are specifically narrowly focused on on parking spaces and trying to ascertain the appropriate number of parking spaces from this application.
Are during the course of the year, are there services or holidays that will generate more attendance at a Friday service than others? As I had previously testified going back to January of last year and
subsequently there are two major high holidays and we hold those functions at a hotel. We've been holding them at the old in and at the doce. So our demand for ser parking at the
>> just for the sector >> just for the record let's give the names of the two holidays when they occur. One is called the eul e i d u l f i t r and that's held at the end of the month of Ramadan.
And the second one is held about 2 months and 10 days after that. It's called eel adha. That's e i d u l e a d h a. >> It's 10 days after. >> And that 2 months and 10 days after.
>> Could you spell that second one again, please? E I D U U L A D H A and can you also I know that you stated it but just to make sure we get it in the minutes and it's recorded. And where do you where are those two major holidays
observed? We have held them at the old mill in we rent their boardroom and uh the last one was held at the Dolce and for this year Dolce Dolce Basking Ridge. Okay. Thank you. and I'm actually currently waiting for them to confirm availability of their rooms for the next
one which will be around August 9th of this year. >> What's the capacity of those rooms? >> About 300 people in one of the rooms that we rented last time and we did not fill it. That's the Alexander Graham
Bell room at the Dolce. >> At the Dolce >> and at the Old Mill in the Washington Ballroom and what's the capacity? Both of them are 300. >> I think the capacity of the washing the ballroom is greater but I don't remember. We have never filled it. I
know based on what we get including you and all you know families and children that come. >> Is this a suggestion that we don't interrupt Mr. Simon also I realize that we're starting to do so including myself so I apologize too. >> Apologize for that.
>> Other than I testimony Dr. Thank you. >> Thank you. other than those two holidays. Let me actually back up. So, in determining the size and construction of of this current development proposal,
you did not take into consideration the fact that this facility would need to host either one of those events. Correct. We obviously considered everything but we have recognized that on those days we
want the families to be able to socialize have some food and there should be plenty of room for them for the children to come and play and so forth. So we able to rent an additional room for example for the children to be uh taken care of while we are in so forth. So we recognize what we were
building for our prayer service needs and other small activities uh and this major activity twice a year uh that it is better for us to uh do so at these public uh facilities where they're used to hosting people that are coming there
for festivities. I know the question of whether it's better. I asked you whether when you designed this facility, is it either presently or in the future ever contemplated that it will one day host
one of those two events? I believe I've also testified that obviously we are going to observe the fire code. We will have a limit on the number of people that we can have in that building. And if we are organizing a function that's going to exceed that, we will definitely
use other facilities. And as these two specific events that I mentioned, we have a good reason to hold them at hotels. >> And you didn't answer my question. I just want you answer. >> I think I answer your question. I read my transcript. You did not answer his question. You gave information. You
thought where he was going with it. But just listen to his listen to his specific question and answer his specific question. Can you answer ask your question again? >> Sure. My question is at this time or or I'll ask it in two parts to make it
simple. At the time you designed and decided on the size of the subject facility, did you contemplate that one day that facility would host one of those two events? >> That's a yes or no. >> No.
>> Okay. As we're standing here on June 4th, 2013, do you contemplate that someday the proposed facility will host one of those two events? >> No. [Music]
Other than those two events during the course of the year, are there any holidays events that you foresee to require a demand
in terms of attendance that's going to be greater than any other time of the year? during the month of Ramadan when we expect higher attendance uh for >> July and August this will this time it'll be starting around the 9th of July
and uh so in the last 10 days one of those evenings we have larger attendance but even in our experience that number is about 30 to 40 people whereas on a Friday during our regular prayers we have about 65 people 62 to 65 now about
the average so we will never reach the limit in terms of the parking space that we have. >> So the throughout the year the Friday prayer is there any other time of the year where that attendance will be greater than any
other time? >> The last Friday of the month of Ramadan usually is uh higher than other um typically higher by let's say what percentage approximately >> by about 10%.
So other than that that one Friday, all the other Fridays are pretty consistent. Yes, >> they are. In fact, I experienced it. They're very consistent and stabilized. >> What do you mean by stabilized? >> As I have testified back in January of
2012, our average number is about 65. I can now tell you having observed over the last several months that that number is now 62. And that's the average.
>> And and and during that that time it's 65 or 62 in during the if you move into this facility. I assume that you expect to have greater attendance than 52 or 65. Correct. >> We expect to over the next 10 years as
we have predicted. And and during that prayer service on Fridays that that's stabilized is there anyone who is working or walking or sitting in the administrative office, the kitchen, the office, the office library.
The nature of this service is such that anyone in the building is in the service. No other activity goes on and not even a clerk sitting in the office is should be sitting when the prayer is going on. the the purpose of this prayer
is a congregational prayer and that's the reason why most people come on a Friday they don't come on other days for these prayers because this Friday is supposed to be a prayer when you're supposed to join others and therefore anyone who is there uh would join the service >> you you answer a question of mine a
moment ago regarding the fire >> what is your understanding as to the maximum capacity of number of people in that in the subject >> in this discussion there was an exhibit that our architect presented to you and we discussed that several times. I
>> I know about the 14 >> and there's 142. >> No, I understand that. I didn't ask you about the 142. I asked you what is your understanding as to under the fire code as to the maximum capacity for the building?
>> Not in terms of necessarily number of prayers. If you have an event, if you have a bank, if you have a wedding, if you have any other events, what is your understanding as to the fire code requirement or maximum in terms of capacity?
>> Let me help my attorney interpret that question because I think I've answered it. >> Can you answer the question? >> I'm saying that number for us from what what I understand is 142. So you're saying your understanding of the fire code capacity is 142. That is my understanding and that's what I
>> that's his answer. >> Okay. And and when you originally presented this application, in fact, you testified or in fact this remain testified here this evening. When you originally testified it on your plans, you stated in your testimony and on the
plan that you were assuming a a capacity of 150. So was that your original understanding as to the the capacity under the fire code? Has it changed? You will recall that I
testified qualitatively and quantitatively as to how we justified what that number was in 10 years. That was our calculation based on what we understood our own community to to grow and at what rate it will grow. And now
since the 142 number was calculated and we were advised that that is the maximum capacity of the building we will observe that who advised you that the 142 was the maximum capacity. >> Mhm. >> It was done in response to this board
right now. He wants to know who told you who told you 142. Did Mr. Bazan tell you 142? Did the architect tell you 142? Did Mr. Nate tell you 142? Did someone else tell you 142? Who told you? Dan Dan Lincoln, our architect, made the
calculation. So that Dan Lincoln told you 142. That's your answer, >> right? >> Okay. Mr. >> And in fact, I would also say that Mr. D, you also stated that very clearly. That will be the number for you. >> Okay. I don't go back to your transcript and find it. >> Okay.
>> I have those transcripts. Yes. >> Originally, before Mr. Lincoln submitted his first floor architectural rendering picking these 142 spaces for them. Did you um contact New Lake,
the fire chief or or anyone else to determine the capacity of the building from a fire code perspective? >> I did not. >> You did not. Yeah. And in terms of the what I'll call the
non- prayer activities that you testify to whether it's wedding receptions, lectures, potluck dinners, celebrations, banquetss, what is your anticipated number of
patrons attending those types of activities and how did you arrive at that number? >> Let me do this one by one. our uh Friday social gatherings based on our own experience at the community center.
That number is between 30 and 40 including children. >> And what time is that? >> That would take place uh in the evenings usually on a Friday evening from 7 to 9 or depending on when the sun sets. Uh we usually start at the time of the uh prayer just after sunset and then
continue after until the next prayer. other events. Uh we do not have any wedding receptions nor do we plan to have wedding receptions. However, a religious ceremony for someone to get married can be performed at the center
and that usually attracts four or five people from the family. The most we've had is 12 people at the community center. Um during the month of Ramadan, it is our tradition to invite the community members and often we actually hold an
interfaith uh breaking of the fast on a Friday and for that our experience last time was 25 people. We had people from all faiths come and we had it at the community center. So about 25 to 30 people for that as well. So those are the only activities that were attract
other people at other activities that we had. And you talked about the community center, >> right? >> Um >> have you in Well, why don't you just tell me from what time have you been at the at the community center?
>> When did you start? Um >> in 2007. >> 2007. So through today. >> Yes. We just one day due to the Sandy >> and during those um those prayers, do
you encourage those attending or members of your uh congregation to to carpool? >> Absolutely. >> And why is that? Let me think >> because we recognize that the demand for that particular parking lot is made by
high school students by people who come to the batting cage, people who bring their dogs for the dog run. Uh and we are there during this 1-hour period. So we want to uh advise people to be cognizant of that. And have you made any
type of observation as to the either the number of vehicles or the number of occupants per vehicle since 2007? >> Informally we do that for our own internal understanding. Uh but we don't do a formal study by a professional.
>> In terms of the the ratios that M testifies you know ranging anywhere from let's say 1.2 two to 1 38 something like that if I remember correctly give me any type of similar ratio for
the community center first of all we do not agree with the method of using that ratio and as our traffic engineer has pointed out >> right he's giving you good just >> he asked you a question you answer a
question it goes much okay based on my rough calculation that number is or 1.35 >> 1.35 >> yes >> and that's Dr. charger. That's over how many years is that? Is this based on 2007 to today or is that a recent
determination? >> Actually, it's over the last what 19 20 weeks. >> And what's the what's the square footage of? We use two rooms.
The activity room which is called the house has been determined by the fire department to have 35 capacity and the other one has capacity of 50. So we use both of those. I don't remember the square footage of either of those rooms. >> Okay. You say you the activity room. What's the other one called?
>> The other one is called the recreation room or the recck room. It's the converted garage that was expanded. >> Okay. So you're giving the fire code number. barcode number that is posted in those buildings which is 35 in the front and 50 in the second.
>> But you said that you don't know the square footage of >> I don't know the square footage. No. >> Can you say that that that those numbers are posted? Do you know for how long those numbers have been posted? >> They have been posted since I believe August of last year.
>> And those and those buildings are used by other than ISBR. >> Correct. And so do you have any idea how those those numbers of 35 and 50 were determined? >> You'll have to ask the fire official that
>> you haven't spoken to the fire official. >> I have not spoken to the fire official about that. No. >> And with regard to the the two rooms that that you use for for total capacity, you said of 85. >> Mhm. Is there a a video and audio hookup so
that the imam can be heard in both rooms? >> Correct. >> I have nothing further for Dr. >> Thank you, Mr. Simon. Um, I'm going to turn to the board members now and then ask if you have any questions on Mr. Charry. So for then we'll go back to the
no >> it's up to the board obviously but the reason Mr. Simon questioned Mr. Charter was to lay a foundation for what he wanted his traffic expert to testify on. So unless a board member has
like a burning burning desire to ask Mr. Charger a question I'm going to suggest that let Mr. Simon now call his expert witness. Okay. Because that's what this that's what this was. That's the purpose of this. >> Okay. As long as procedurally I don't
need to ask anyone else in the audience >> because again you're bringing Mr. Troy back for general questions. Correct. >> That is correct. >> Okay. >> Some general questions. Um >> okay. I'm satisfied with that. And there's been a request for a two-minute
break. And um is that okay, Mr. Simon? >> All right. So 2 minutes, but let's make it quick. Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music] Okay, if everyone could be seated, we're going to begin.
>> As soon as tells me she's ready. >> Okay. Um, is is the mic mic has not yet attached anybody? I just madam chair I just have a couple followup questions uh that I want to ask Dr. Chry it's in regard to >> All right.
>> Okay. >> Dr. Chry um Mr. Orur mentioned the um the floor plan prepared by our architect which is dated or the last revision date is
February 18, 2012. That there's an exhibit number on that isn't it? Is it the color rendered one? >> Uh yes. A5. >> Can you tell the board um you testified previously that the prayer areas where all the prayer services are held? Is
that correct? Yes, absolutely. The prayer hall is the specifically designated uh prayer hall what we call a musalah. It is carpeted specifically and no shoes are allowed and that is where you need
to be in order to follow the leader of the pair called our imam. >> Now what about the uh multi-purpose room? Multi-purpose multi-purpose reception room. Can't somebody pray there? Our multi-purpose room is going to be filled
with furniture and for other things that we are going to be doing and generally would not be used and it is not carpeted. It is not prepared for uh and would be in the absolute extreme condition. Uh if there is a overflow condition that you would use that then you would have to provide carpeting for
that but generally we would not do that and we don't plan to for our purposes. >> Okay. And what about the gallery? Now the gallery looks like a hallway. Is that what it is? >> Gallery is a place where there's going to be traffic. uh people coming in and out. Now remember when we start our prayer, the sermon begins, people are
still coming in up until the actual prayer uh where the imam stands to lead the prayer. So it's a continuous prayer. So there's no room for people to sit there and you have to allow for traffic and it will be a fire hazard to actually block that for prayer. Is there any circumstances under which the gallery
will be used for prayer services? >> We will never use that. Absolutely not. The square footage that's indicated on the plan is for the prayer area 1594 square ft and we have testified that the prayer area is 152.
>> The reason for that is that uh as Dan Lincoln has confirmed that the 1594 is using the exterior wall dimensions and that for the purpose of his filing that was a number he needed to provide. But he looked at the interior space that
will be used for the prayer after uh we have furnished it properly and using the space that will be available uh for prayer including gallery space uh and the aisles on each side and so forth. So he calculated what the prayer hall specific designated prayer hall would
be. >> 1502 excludes the aisles. >> No 1502 would be the prayer hall area. Uh but if 1594 is >> no the aisles are included but this is the interior calculation of that room. >> But if 1594 is the exterior walls what
is 1502 >> is the interior interior space of the air. >> Okay. Excluding exterior walls only. >> That is my understanding. Yes. >> Okay. I have no further questions.
>> Thank you Mr. Bonia and Mr. Simon. >> Dr. Chrys with regard to the um this calculation of the 1594 versus the 1502 um do you know whether in Mr. Nay's um investigation
and his calculations of the of prayer area floor area whether he used the inside walls or outside walls consider considering that plans typically will depict as they do in your plan appropriately thanks to Mr. Lincoln
the exterior walls. He asked you, "Do you know?" >> I know that he looked at the plans. >> Okay. >> All right. So, I think So, I think it's time for you to call your next witness,
which is Mr. Simons, next witness, which is out of order, so that the board can be in a position to make a determination of the required number of parking spaces for this site. >> That is correct. >> I'd like to call um Mr. Alia, please.
>> Can you spell his last name for us or can he spell his last name for us? >> Sure. You're going to go first. So it's L I T W O R N I A. [Music] >> Certainly. It's L I T W O R N I A.
>> Your first your first name. >> Alexander. >> Say something. Um, I say hi. Is >> that good? >> You're good. Okay, you're pretty good. >> What's that? >> Yes. >> Yeah. For recording purposes, it's fine.
Use your loud voice as usual. >> Thank you for that test. Okay. So, let's get Mr. Whitney has sworn. Can you raise your right hand, please? You swear that the testimony that you will be rendering in this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth to help you guide.
>> Yes, I do. and you've already spelled your full name for the record. >> Mr. Lorty, can you please provide the board with your occupation, affiliation, areas of expertise, and license, and experience in the field of traffic
engineering? Well, basically I've been a traffic and transportation planner for over 20 years. Worked on various projects, represent various boards at the present time and testified all over the state. I was, for example, on the governor I was
the governor's appointee for the highway access code. I was the appointee to work out interstate differences on trucks on Route 9W between New York and New Jersey. I worked and did an article on the I287 interstate connections and
which was nationally published and worked on I95, I295 on the Westside Highway, Long Island Expressway, various projects. Uh testified and worked in Jersey City and presently in different various
municipalities in the area, Jersey City. Uh we county pick the mic up >> certainly for the mic. >> Is that better? >> Yep. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And just to warn you just quickly, is are you a professional engineer?
>> Yes, I'm a professional engineer in New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Florida, and Pennsylvania. >> And you're you're licensed, >> correct? >> As an engineer? >> Yes. >> In the state of New Jersey? >> Yes. >> Okay. With regard to those uh towns, cities and burrows that you um identify
um you also currently are the the traffic consultant for a number of municipalities. Correct. >> Correct. >> Including which ones? >> Mount Laurel Township. The city of Seekin. Slow slow and loud. >> Mount Laurel Township, Mansfield Township, City of Obsin.
>> Whoa. I didn't hear that third one. >> Seek into the microphone. Slow please. >> Instead of looking at Mr. Simon, you have to look >> Look at the board. Look up here. He'll ask you, but look look up here right into the microphone. Mount it is it's a directional mic. You got to speak directly into it otherwise it doesn't project. >> Okay.
>> No. >> Turn your body township. Mansfield >> township. >> Which county? >> Hamilton Township. >> City of Seek.
>> City of Sean and other townships on an on call basis. Mansfield Township. What township? What county? >> Excuse me. >> What county? Can you give us Mount Laurel Township? What county? >> That's in Burlington County.
>> Mansfield Township is in That's in Burlington County as well. >> Seek is in Atlantic County. >> Hamilton Township is in Atlantic County. >> And Mr. Leian, you've also testified before building a planning board in New
Jersey. Correct. >> Correct. Um, approximately how many times? >> Hundreds. >> And in those hundreds of times be qualified as an expert witness in the field of traffic engineering. >> Yes.
>> I request that Mr. Leorn be qualified as an expert traffic engineer at this time. >> Questions. >> Do we have any questions of uh from board members as to the qualifications of Mr. Leornia? >> I have one question. >> Mr. Um, >> Senator, >> have you performed parking study studies
as part of your duties? >> Yes, parking studies for Burlington County, for various hospitals, for hotels, etc. >> Any other board members have questions? Mr. Plaza, >> I don't care. Could you just give a very brief overview of your educational
background, sir? >> Of my what? Your educational background. Okay. I graduated from Rutgers University and with a degree in civil engineering and worked on various highway access projects. I was in the service and took various seminars. Took
seminars in different places including Dartmouth, uh Princeton, um Oklahoma State and other areas. worked on various projects including highway research board projects in the city of
Newark and Louisville to determine how various projects can imp highway safety projects can improve capacity and safety on roadways various highway safety projects which was a precursor basically of the topics
projects and all the other local aid projects in the state of New Jersey and in the government now Um, I didn't take a lot of traffic engineering courses because they didn't have any when I went through school. >> We probably wrote a lot of the books on
it, though. >> I have a question. When were you licensed? >> Oh, probably 1972, I believe. >> And that was in the state of New Jersey. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> The number 18396. So, it's a older number.
>> Okay. Um, any other board member questions? Um then Mr. Psonia, do you have any questions of as to the qualifications? Okay. >> Um does the public have any questions as to the qualifications of Mr. Lwornia?
>> And seeing none, um >> that's right. Okay. Under our current rules, the whole board must decide. Um does anybody have any objection to Mr. Lew's as a an to qualify him as a traffic expert?
And seeing none, um, >> yeah, we're going to accept you as an expert witness on, um, traffic engineering. >> Thank you. >> Okay, you can proceed. >> Thank you. Um, Mr. Loria, you've had the occasion to review the
the current plans for the subject application for which you're here tonight. Correct. >> Yes. >> And you're familiar with the property. You visit the property and surrounding neighborhood. >> Yes. and you have reviewed not only the plan
including Mr. Lincoln's uh floor plan at the Pix 142 states that were discussed earlier this evening and you also reviewed uh misreads various traffic reports and submissions as part of this
application. Yes, I didn't really look at the ones in complete detail that was submitted tonight, but I looked at the other data >> and you've also reviewed the uh the board memo from Mr. Drill and Mr.
Banning with regard to the number of parking spaces for this project. >> Yes, I did. And you understand before you start and you um madam chair alluded to it a little bit earlier that your
testimony this evening is limited to determining the appropriate number of parking spaces required for the proposed use. >> Correct. >> And that maybe at a different time we're going to get into things like circulation ingress egress safety and things of that nature. You understand?
>> Yes. So why don't we uh start with maybe a little bit of an overview from you with regard to comments as to Mr. Thrills and Mr. Banish's memo
as to IT text parking generation fourth edition and like >> well basically the memo was pretty much on point. A lot of the traffic parking data that was supplied to the board in the first submission was dealing with
churches or other data that were really not applicable to a mosque. Uh and as pointed out in the memo, the latest troop generation data that does work, not troop generation, but parking generation data that that works is in
the IP parking generation number four, the fourth edition. And in there they did go to a mosque. And at the mosque the 85 percentile for this spot would be about 110 spaces and the 100 percentile
would be 100 approximately 128 spaces. So the general parking ratio that was recommended by the board professionals was the 85th percentile which was about 110 spaces roughly 110 parking spaces
using the IT data. The IT data basically had some faults with it. One of the the IT data had some faults with it. >> The fault wasn't in the data itself but in the lack of data. Usually you need 10
data points to be statistically significant to show any differences in data. Uh there weren't 10, but usually the IT manual say you can use usually three or four data points if they're in a close in a close area and use it that
way. So the applicant then provided some additional data. >> Before we get into the additional data, let's just back up for a second. >> Okay. >> In the in the memo, um there's a discussion about the reasons why the any
ordinance um calculation relating to churches um was not applicable with regard to this instant application. Do you agree with those conclusions? >> Yes. And with regard to the IT tech parking generation fourth edition and you you
talked a little bit about the number of parking spaces required both at 85% and at 100% correct. If you can just describe for the board for purposes of this application
whether the 85% or the 100% should be used and explain why or why not. Okay. Well, basically n out of 10 times you would use the 85th percentile in
your parking ratios. People in the past have used average parking rates. An average parking rate means 50% of the time you have enough parking, 50% of the time you don't. Cuz if you're only providing the average number of spaces, you're only going to have enough 50% of
the time, which is the average. Now, the 85th percentile basically comes out with the fact that 85% of the time you're going to have enough parking. 15% of the time you may not have parking. you have to park in another area
or you would have to park illegally in aisles, on lawns, on grass, whatever else you want to do. But you're not going to park on the site you without without it being well, you're not going to park on site in a legal spot anymore cuz you don't have any. So 15% of the
time something like that will occur. >> Okay. So, so in a 52 week year, >> yes, >> basically 8 weeks approximately of the 52 that you're not going to have an apartment. Correct.
>> Well, that's normally you could say something like that would be a quick yes or no. When when you're dealing with something like a church or something that that would be required to have older parking off the
road and there's no place else to put the extra parking, you can have a problem more than just a few times a year because of the fact that as a church say it has 100 seats and
basically you have 50 seats used up and you bought 25 cars. So you're really coming out with basically two people per car, but you still have 50 seats empty. Now if you take a church and then that
church gets more and more filled up, now all of a sudden you have 100 people and you have 100 seats and you have 50 parking spaces used up. So you double the parking and you double it. But if you were to measure these in average rates, you find out that the parking
rate if you only if you only measured it when it was half the seats were filled, you're never going to have a rate that works when this church is full. So what happens is as churches or as synagogues or whatever, as they get more and more
clientele, more and more attendees, you start to lose the extra spaces and they fill up more often. So, as the place becomes more successful towards the the time when it fills up, then you're going to be over that 15% all the time and
then you're going to have a real problem. And then when you have the real problem, as you say, the the applicant would either need to find parking off site or I guess they
would potentially have to demonstrate uh proofs to be entitled to barriers, correct? Well, basically if a project was approved and then they used up the spaces and they didn't have enough spaces, then they would be trying they
would probably be parking illegally and as was testified by the applicants expert and in Tom's River in one site they had people parking on the grass and I was to the other site that he didn't
mention the Mustafa site and there were there was one driveway into into the site Right. People were parked on both sides of the driveway. So in effect, no fire apparatus could get into that area. If in fact there was going to be a fire and emergency, it would be impossible
because of the illegal parking on both sides of the entrance drive. It was so crowded. One of the cars that was parked on the drive to get out backed out into the county road to get out, which is not a preferred way of entering and exiting a site, and it becomes hazardous and
dangerous. So the idea is provide enough parking for the for the project. So with regard to just sticking to the moment with with the fourth edition in terms of the calculation based on gross uh poor area
>> correct >> that it's your a professional opinion that the percentage should that should be used in making that determination if that was the analysis that you were going to engage in would be the 100% and
not the 85%. In some cases like this where there is no place to put surplus parking, I would usually go for a higher rate. Yes. >> The answer is yes. >> Yes. >> And as as an IT uh fourth condition
standard, you you find that termination of 128 argument spaces um at at the 100% um as instructive and reliable. Correct. Well, as I said before, usually we go to the 85th percentile. We recommended the
85th percentile almost all the time. It's just when you have some conditions that can't be met, then I would recommend the 100. So unless you can come up with some conditions, I would go with the 85th percentile or the 100 percentile and in that area. So the 100
percentile would be better, the safest way to go. And with regard to the use of gross floor area uh by the IT standard that takes into account um often that there's
either other building functions or other uses of the building um that may come into play in determining certainly the parking demand for for that particular project. Correct. >> It would show a different parking demand as well. Yes. And the fact that the property owner,
the congregation or whomever decides to build a building of of a certain size is certainly indicative in terms of square footage because it's certainly indicative of what they expect in terms of the the traffic to and from not necessarily the cars but also for
pedestrians into that building. Correct. >> Yes. And so you also took a look at Mr. Nay's analysis where he looked at not only gross floor area but he also looked at
floor area of just the the prayer. >> Yes heard the prayer. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. And if you can um just provide the board with an with an overview of your impressions and analysis based on your review of Mr.
study both in terms of first floor area and also how you attribute it just to the prayer. >> Well, when you looked at it just for prayer area and you took you could take a look and see how many spaces there would be for how many attendees can pray
in that area. Uh and you can use that data for different for different ways of analyzing everything. The way that Mr. and they looked at it. He correlated the number of parking spaces and he used the prayer area. But as I
said before in the example I was giving with churches with 100 seats and only 50 people in them, it gives you a different rate than if you have 100 seats and 100 people in them. And what he's doing is correlating the
amount of parking with the square area. But the square area that he's using, >> this is the square footage area. >> The prayer area that he's using does not show what the occupancy is. In other words, if it's half full, it was the
moss that was measured half full of people at that time or was it completely full or is it on 25% full? If you don't know how that correlate how that correlates, you can't really use the data. It doesn't work that way. It's like when you measure hotel rooms down
the shore. In the winter, you can have three parking spaces per 100 units. But if you in the summer, you'd have three. You'd have 100 spaces per 100 units. But if you want to look at the rate, what's the rate? It's still one per occupied
room. It's not one per 100 in the winter and one per 100 in the summer. It's one per occupied room. Works pretty well. So you count occupied rooms, you don't just count rooms. >> So
without knowing what percentage of the prayer area was was being used on the particular days, um you don't find Mr. N's analysis regarding the actual calculation of prayer area to be instructed here. Correct.
>> Correct. and that you find that he's that he's he's erroneously doing his calculations as the prayer area based on 100% occupancy where we have no idea of knowing what percentage of prayer space was occupied on that particular day. Correct. >> Correct.
>> Now, in addition to which and I know Mr. Laornia, by the way, just so the record is clear, you were here this evening um to listen to Mr. Nay's testimony before beginning your testimony. Correct. >> Yes. And in your your review of Mr. Rene's
most recent March of 2013 uh report where he did his traffic counts on particular days. Um you had told me that you um you found faults in terms of certain aspects beyond that which you just described in terms of the
percentage of occupancy of the particular prayer area and you talked about the fact that for example that one of one of the counts was done on president a couple of counts were done on president's the president's weekend holiday. Correct. >> I believe so. Yes. >> Yes. And that there was um two counts
that were done right after the Muslim holiday. >> I think one at least one was right at the day after. >> And and just describe Stephen though it's it's fairly obvious. Just describe to the board why you find fault with those counts being done on those
particular days. >> Uh we did supplemental counts. But both before you could talk about the supplemental counts, why is it not ideal to do counts on days that I just described, namely at President's weekend or right after a Muslim holiday?
>> Well, if you have a holiday, people are away on vacation or whatever else. So, you're not going to get an accurate reading. And if there's a big holiday or a church service on on a a Thursday, you might not expect the same amount of
people to show up on a Friday. And you also heard through my cross- examination and your review independently of the report um that there was no determination conclusive determination as to what areas were
actually used for prayer in those other areas. Correct. in the other in the other in the other mosque. We don't know how many how much or what percentage of the prayer areas were used by or not and we don't know the size of the the number of attendees
that it could hold. >> And then you also mentioned to me that when you have two mosques in the same town like in B in the river in this case that that might dilute the potential pooling in each one of those >> well it's like congregations. similar to
the testimony you could have on a gasoline station as well. If you have a two gasoline stations across from each other, each one's going to have have uh some of that service area. So, if you have two mosques or two churches, the most likely some of that some of those
attendees will be going to a different mosque or a different gas station or a different use if they're close by. And in Tom's River, you have two moss. So, you would expect to have delution. If there was just one, you would expect more people.
>> And you you just happened to mention it in passing, but you also had an occasion of independently doing some some counts at two of the mosques that Mr. Nay uh studied. Correct. >> Correct.
>> I'm going to um Mr. D out what should I do you know what are we do we have B I mean um O exhibit projector exhibit. This will be the first objectives exhibit. >> All right. So, we're going to do label your first one 01 and your second one
02. I just have 01. Okay. We'll label that one 01. [Music] >> You have a name for it? >> Um, yes. It Well, there's >> Hey, we'll pass it around and we'll try it. >> Just make sure you give one to Mr.
designer. Of >> course, I grab some out. >> I can spare two. >> One for you. >> Thank you. [Music] All right. So, this is easy. It has the
title on it. It says parking characteristics at Islamic Center of Ocean County. >> Well, but but also it also says that's why I I hesitated parking characteristics that might be a
lot halfway down. So So I'm going to ask please take a moment and review what's been marked as 01 for identification. >> Just do me a favor though. Let's give it a title. parking study. >> Is it a parking study? >> Lithuania parking analysis. All right,
that's great. Here's a title. Lithuania parking analysis. Mr. Leoria, I'd love to mark one. Can you please review it and tell me when you have finished reviewing it? I'm going to ask you some questions about it.
>> Okay. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> If you can please for the board very slowly identify what 01 is, what the significance of 01 is and maybe walk through some of the calculations that
are contained on 01. >> Basically the first the top table. So wait first first of all is is there are two tables on 01 correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. And those two tables
represent some parking counts that were performed on Friday May 31st 2013. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. And either you or someone at your office, one of your employees performed these
counts. Correct. >> Yes. >> Okay. And can you just identify which tap you performed yourself personally and which count one of your employees performed? >> The top one that was done at the Islamic Center of Ocean County which is at the
Mustafa site at the Mustafa noted as a Mustafa in N's report was counted by me on May 31st on Friday. >> That's 2013. Correct. >> Correct.
The bottom one was counted by one of the men on my staff who's also an engineer and he counted that one. And that's at the the other Tom's River site, the LA site. >> Just for clarification, the upper chart,
the initials are AJL. I assume those are your initials, >> correct? >> And the lower chart, the initials are JF. >> Tim Freeman. >> Tim Freeman. >> And that's your employee who was also an engineer. Correct. >> Correct. So if you would walk through for the
board's benefit what 01 is to represent. Well basically what I did was measured the count and we measured the number of vehicles coming in and out of the site and showed the vehicle accumulation in the right column which shows how many
vehicles the total vehicles that were parked on site. We also counted the number of people per vehicle as they entered. So they had people coming in with either uh a vehicle coming in either one, two or three people per
vehicle. We looked through that. Then what we did was we calculated the occupancy rate and the occupancy rate was really the total number of people by divided by the number of vehicles and came out for 1.25
25 for that site. For the the site, we counted that the maximum was 90 88 vehicles, excuse me. And that uh was at the Bural Towns River site. The occupancy rate we got for that site
was 1.49 vehicle people per vehicle. Now, when I looked at the Nay report, the 98 vehicles was much greater than his. if I could find you. Okay. Why while you're looking for that report, Mr. Loria, just for purposes of
clarification for the record, your your first table uh identified as Islamic Center of Kushian County. That's the same facility as um Majid Alafa. Correct.
>> Correct. That is the same facility. and the number of cars counted by one of Mr. Nay's uh people um at the at the over president's weekend we counted 76 vehicles correct
>> yes >> are you referring to appendix B which is page 13 of Mr. It was on page 10. >> It was in appendix A, page 10 of his report. He listed that way >> without the I don't have a copy of the adjusted table.
>> Got it. Got it. >> It also appears uh on A18 here tonight. A7. >> Yep. Got it. >> So whereas Mr. Rene counted 76 vehicles
on a Friday of President's weekend. You uh this past Friday, May 31st, 2013, you yourself personally counted 98 vehicles. >> Correct. >> Yes.
And if you can just like uh go through for the board at the bottom of the first table, how you have an occupancy rate of 1.25. You can just walk through some of those
numbers so it's clear for the board. >> Okay. At the bottom of the first table, there's an occupancy rate of 1.25. Uh it shows the number of persons that were in one. If you look under persons per vehicle, there were 82
people, 82 vehicles with one person in them. Under the number two column, there are 22 vehicles with two people in them and two vehicles with three people in them. Now, if you take the 81 vehicles with one person, multiply them
by one, you get 82 with the next line below it. The 22 vehicles with two, you multiply by two, you get 44. To third one, you get three, multiply it by two, and you get six. Then you add those numbers up and you
get 132, which is the number of attendees. And if you take the number of attendees and divide it by the number of vehicles, which is 106, you get 1.25. Now, we did the same thing for
>> So that 1.25 25 is is per car occupancy. >> Correct. Number of people per vehicle. >> Okay. And so and so the difference of the number of cars counted by between by you versus by Mr. Nave is 22. Correct. >> Yes.
>> Go on. >> He wants you to continue. >> Go on to the second table, please. >> Okay. Now in the second table, we did the same thing. and we counted the number of people per car and we did the same analysis and came out with 1.49
people per vehicle at the at the other aisle site in Tom's River. So, and the total the maximum number was 88. Mr. N counted that twice and he got 82 vehicles on January the 25th and he had
93 vehicles. So our count was in between his 82 and the 93 which fit right in between with that one. So that count came out to be pretty close to his. It was right in the middle between the two that he had. So as far as the number
coming in was pretty consistent. >> And um is it your opinion of the of the analysis to focus on how many spaces do you need when the facility is is used at capacity? Well, basically what we like to do, what
I like to do is take these numbers and if I know that the the new site, there's an archite in the architectural drawing, we looked at the actual number of prayer plots, prayer spaces. And if you take the number of prayer spaces on
the architectural drawing, okay, which was marked as which was previously marked as A7. Oh, that was three. And you took those to determine how many part how many pair spaces they were. It came out to be
Uh if we look at it, it was a prayer room with rugs at 2'2 in wide by 4'4 in wide. Nine rows by 11 rows is 99 spaces. Well, that came out to be a an area of
about 9.3 square foot for a prayer rug. and some of the prayer rugs that I' I've looked at some prayer rugs and some of the prayer rugs that one of the prayer rugs I have at home uh that somebody gave me who was
from Saudi Arabia and I measured that one and it came out less than 8 square ft. So basically we're planning on 9 square foot 9.2 2 9.3 ft prayer rugs that are a little bit larger than the real prayer rugs that are in existence
now. So we're we're cutting this occupancy down a little bit. Uh which we're modifying what the occupancy can be. So just forgetting that for one and we'll just leave the numbers in as 99. Then there was also additional seating,
another 12 seats. And then in the uh multi-purpose room, another 30 spots. So if you add them all up, you can come up probably with about >> 142 is what the applicant is proposing. >> The applicant was saying probably 142,
but if you take a look at it, there's no reason why you couldn't go to 150. And you understand when the applicant originally presented the application they were proposing 150 um >> that's what I understand. Yes.
>> And with regard to the the percentages that of the ratios uh to car occupancy of the whether it's the 1.28 or 1.25 or the 1.49 49 that you found or the ratios
that in fact Mr. Nay identified for the first time this evening through uh his exhibit A17. Um do you find those um
occupancy rates to be relevant to your analysis and tell me if you do so why? >> Well, there's two things. First of all, as far as the occupancy goes on my our exhibit A1, what 01? Sorry. Uh on 01, it
had 1.25 as people per vehicle and for the one site and 1.49 in the other site. What I did is I took the all the data and aggregated it for the total number of vehicles etc. And when I added them both together and averaged them up, I
didn't go add 1.25 plus 1.49 divided by two. I took the total number of people and the total number of vehicles for both sites and came out with approx I think it's 1.3 1.3 uh six which is very close to the
1.35 that the applicants testified that he had u he had been using is a number that they've been using found to be realistic. So it it balanced out pretty well that way. And so I really didn't have any problem
using that number 1.36 1.34 1.4 in that area. Now if I took the number of people that could be sitting or attending this and figured that there would be 1.4 four persons per car and I came out to I'd
see I think it's aboutund and it's aboutund and uh 110 parking spaces 107 to 110 spaces. >> So that's that's based on a a ratio of what 1.4 >> 150 persons divided by 1.4 4 rounding up
the 1.36 to 1.4 comes out to 107 parking spaces. >> Okay. >> And and the 1.4 ratio figure that you're using is in fact conservative and that is higher than the ratio that you came out with as
an average came out. Correct. >> Right. The average I had was 1.36 for the two sites. And the the applicant testified that when you you questioned him a couple minutes ago, not Nay, but the other applicant, that he said 1.35,
which was pretty consistent with what I found. So at 150 attendees divided by 4.4 as a conservative figure, I come out with approximately what? 107 spaces.
>> Correct. >> Right. >> Yes. >> And and you find that that type of calculation um is more reliable in terms of this board's job to determine the appropriate
number of parking spaces for this proposed development than Mr. Nay's analysis with regard to analyzing the uh the square footage of the prairie. Correct. Correct. This would correlate more with the 100% tile parking ratio
because you're filling up you're using all the spaces that there are available for the prayer area and you're you're not skipping because you're using like 9.3 ft versus an 8t or an 8 square foot or 7.8 square foot. So you're you're
you're on the plus side conservatively speaking for the square footage of the prayer area and you're still coming out with the 100 percentile coming out with 107 parking spaces. And that 107 is pretty consistent because if you take a
look at the the IT numbers, the IT numbers were about 110 for the 85th percentile, 128 for the for the 100 percentile. So it's in the same ballpark, but it's a little lower. And you feel in your uh role as a
special traffic engineer that this is the most accurate way for for uh this board to analyze uh actual demand removing any problems that are inherent in today's analysis you've identified. Well, I feel confident if you use that number that you're not going to have
people parking in the aisles or parking on the grass, which is a problem. The biggest problem I saw, like when I was into Tom's River site, there were cars parked on both sides of the entrance and exit aisle so that nobody else could come in and it was completely parked.
The lot was full. And like Mr. NA said, well maybe you would if you use that ratio, you would have had the need for 10 and something parking spaces or so. But the other hand is nobody else could get into the site anymore because it's already packed to the road. So how would
we know if more people can get into that site or not? There's no place to park there. So if you were this board's consultant and this board asked you Mr. Levornne, how many parking spaces would you recommend be required for this
particular application given everything you know in your Mr. May's report, Mr. Banish and Mr. Perau's memo and your review of the plans including the architectural plans you just um
referenced in A7 um you conclude that approximately 107 spaces should be provided 177 spaces would mean that all the spaces could be used and there wouldn't be any overflow or illegal parking. So it would
take care of 100% of the parking demands. And this is the the best in your opinion the best way of making this calculation especially given the uh the vehicle occupancy of cars on the road. Correct. >> Well, I I looked at some of the vehicle
occupancies. You have to realize when this is occurring during the day. So, it's like a 1:00 on a Friday, 1:30 on a Friday. I counted some of the other cars out there on the street to see what the occupancies were on the other vehicles. The other vehicles had a vehicle
occupancy that was lower than what I was counting going in and out of the mosque. It was around 1.2 as opposed to this number which was around 1 1.36. So my number was higher than what was.
In other words, there's more people per car going into the mosque than there are normally along the road at that time of day. So you're still getting a higher percentage than the street percentage of people per car, but you're still not taking care of the parking demand
because you're not taking care of the total amount of spaces that could be used for prayer at that rate. >> I have no further questions for Mr. Thank you, Mr. Simon. Mr. Pson, would you like to ask questions of this
witness? Yeah, of course. [Music] You can hear me. speak loud. >> It's recording, but you you just have to speak a little louder. Yeah. >> Good evening, Mr. Laguardia. How are you? >> Fine, thank you. >> All right. Uh, just a couple questions I
have for you. Um, can you tell me when you visited the site in Liberty Corner? >> In Liberty Corner? I didn't visit it in Liberty Corner that I can recall. >> Well, that's that's the site that we're talking about tonight. >> Okay. That site I didn't know it was called Liberty Corner.
>> Okay. >> Tonight. When did you visit the site? >> Tonight. >> We're going tonight. >> Yes. >> Okay. That's the first time. >> Yes. >> Okay. Did you look at the surrounding area? >> Yes. >> Um Okay. Was it at night or during the
day? >> During the day. >> What time? >> Around 5 to 6 a couple times during around I went there twice today. >> Right. What times did you go there? >> Around five and around 6.
>> Okay. And did you drive into the site? >> No, >> you just observed it from the road. >> No, I observed it from the over the uh fire station across the street. >> Okay. Um >> and I observed it by driving past it one
two three four times. >> Okay. That's that's it. >> That's it. >> Okay. And the sites that you studied, which are listed on 01, that was only one day that you studied it. And your
associate did it also on the same day. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Just one study. >> Yes. >> Uh let me ask you, do you as part of your um evaluation to determine the required number of parking spaces for a use, do you look at the local zoning
ordinance? >> Yes. >> Okay. Is that common? >> Yes. >> You do in order to determine parking? >> I look at it. Yes. >> Okay. Did you look at the Bernard's Township zoning ordinance regarding parking? >> I looked at the sections that were in
the memos from Vanish. >> Okay. Did you look at what the parking requirement is for house of worship? >> I looked at what the parking requirements were. Yes. >> Okay. What was the parking requirement for house of worship? >> Uh there's a
there was a couple things. one part of the parking variance, the parking ordinance said for for churches it was one per three seats or one per three worshippers. And then there's another section of the ordinance that said that the board had
the power to look at an individual site to determine if it needed more or less parking in accordance with the needs of that type of a facility. >> Okay. When you say that the ordinance says for churches, it doesn't describe houses of worship.
>> I didn't really look at the difference between houses of worship and and that. I just looked at this mosque and saw how it fit into this into this definition or not. Okay. >> Is there a section in the ordinance that talks about the parking requirement for
a house of worship? I'm not positive if it's if it says house of worship or not. I did look through it and that didn't make something that stuck into my mind. What stuck into my mind especially was a portion inside the ordinance that said that the board had the ability to look
at this to determine whether this would work or not. And the definitions for how parking spaces were determined in there for house of worship and for churches etc didn't make any sense. So I feel felt that the way it should be done is
by a separate study for this type of use. >> So you're saying that the Bernard Township zoning ordinance regarding houses of worship or churches did not make sense to you because >> because this is a mosque and it had different types of of worship because
they didn't use a seat and they didn't use a bench. They per se, but instead they were using prayer rugs. And there's no criteria in the ordinance on how big a prayer rug should be. I measured some.
They came out to be approximately 7.9 square ft. The one I measured. There's another inside the from what I can get as research and looking through some other data. It said that they use some mosques use 8 square foot for prayer
rug. This one used 9.3 square ft for prayer rug. and they use those to determine the number of spaces attendees could use. >> Did you make a calculation as to how many people could fit into the prayer area based upon the rugs
>> based upon the prayer rugs I came out to be about 142 and I felt there could be I believe it was 142 when another eight could be squeezed in in different areas along the aisles or whatever. >> Okay. And that's the number I used in my
analysis. >> The uh the ordinance um Bernard Township zoning ordinance um defines doesn't be doesn't state what the parking requirement is for house of worship, but it does state it for a church. And you
state it was one space for every three seats or one space for >> three worshippers, I believe. Okay, >> I think you may be an error there. It's one space for every 24 linear inches. If you remember, you remember that? >> No, not right. No ma'am.
>> Okay. Um, are you saying that in fact that the Bernard Township zoning ordinance that speaks of churches or houses of worship do not apply to a mosque? >> I'm saying it doesn't apply because the definitions were based basically on pew
seats as opposed to prayer rugs. And the the difference is such that I don't think you can calculate how many attendees can fit in and need parking spaces for prayer rug as opposed to pew seats. >> Are you saying that the counting
ordinance regarding the parking for a church or house of worship is based upon the furniture that you use in a church? >> I'm saying it was based upon the number of seats in the church. suspension is a punch.
>> Is that correct? >> If you want to call it that, it's okay with me. Let me ask you, I I call it a pew. I don't I don't really I've never used the term church furniture before. So, that's a new one for me. >> Okay. Let me ask you about a uh a
synagogue. What is the parking requirement in Bernard Township zoning ordinance for a synagogue? >> I didn't look up synagogue. Uh what's the parking requirement in Burlington Township zoning ordinance for a mosque?
>> Well, when I looked at the ordinance, it said to me and the section that I recall specifically that if in fact you that the board had the permission and power to require additional parking or less parking than the ordinance called for if
in fact it felt it was required. And I felt that this was a case where it would be required because the moss didn't fit the definitions that I read when I read them a couple weeks ago. >> Definition of what? >> Of of number of number of parking spaces required for prayer rug didn't occur in
the inside the ordinance. >> Okay. So they didn't mention prayer rugs in the ordinance. They felt the ordinance did not apply. >> Correct. Let me ask you about the um if someone came to you hypothetically and they
wanted to put a church here in Bernard's County in a residential zone where it's permitted and they met all the requirements of the ordinance. What would you tell them the parking requirement is? >> Well, last time I did that I did for a church and measured what the parking
ratio was and found out how what the parking ratio was for that type of a church or that location. and measured it. Found out I'm telling you what I did. >> Okay. >> Burn Township. >> That's what I would do in Bernard Township. >> Okay. >> I would do the same thing. I would still measure how many part people came per
car >> to determine if there's going to be ample parking with the ratio of the of the parking ratio that's in the Bernard Township zoning ordinance to see if it was going to be adequate or not. >> Okay. And to you would make a calculation based upon how many people
will be coming in the car in order to determine the parking spaces. >> Yes. >> And the section of the ordinance that deals with the board can uh require more spaces. Uh how would you handle that? What would you advise the client?
>> I have to ask what the question is first. >> Well, the question is the board can require more parking spaces. So, what do you tell the client when he comes to you and say, "How many parking spaces do I need?" Do you tell him that it's in the ordinance or do you tell him, "Well, the
board is going to tell us later on what the parking requirement is." What do you tell a client? I would look in the ordinance and see if it fit to the ordinance. If it if it was for church pews and then I would look to see if it was a church, how many pews there were, how many seats there were, commit, use
the ordinance number, and then also come up with a parking ratio from my own studies of the existing area for the existing churches and determine if that was going to be enough and then use what the ordinance said most likely. >> So, you would use what the ordinance said?
>> I would use what the ordinance said. Ver I didn't finish. I would use what the area said verified with some counts. >> Okay. So you would go by the ordinance standard and you would look you would also do some counts too >> to supplement it. Yes. To make sure that
there was enough parking and it met the requirements of the ordinance if the ordinance was acceptable or not. >> Tell me uh I mentioned before about a synagogue and a mosque and a temple. Is there anything in the Bernardage County zoning ordinance that addresses
>> that addresses >> synagogue? >> I didn't I said you asked me that before and the last time I answered it. I said I didn't address I didn't really recall going through what it said about synagogue or not. I don't recall cuz I wasn't looking anything for the synagogue.
>> Would you look at the requirement for a church? >> Would I look at the requirements for a church if I was doing a s a synagogue? >> Yes. I would look at the requirements for a synagogue if I was doing a synagogue. >> Well, is there any requirement in the ordinance for a synagogue?
>> Wasn't doing a synagogue, so I didn't look in the ordinance for a synagogue. I said that three times. >> He did he did say this is the third time he said it. >> I'm not asking the question. >> Each township zoning ordinance, is there a section dealing with the parking
requirements for a synagogue? >> I don't know. the fourth time. I didn't look up in synagogue requirements in the ordinance. >> Do you consider a mosque a church? >> I consider the mosque a church.
[Music] I would consider the mosque a church. Yes. >> Okay. >> I would consider a place of worship. Yes. >> Okay. And you would apply then the ordinance requirements for each church?
I think what I would do is the same thing I said before. I would apply the the ordinance requirements and I would also make a personal study to make sure that that ordinance was acceptable or not. >> Okay. Um
the uh you review the ITC report the fourth edition regarding parking generation. >> Fourth edition. Yes. And you agree with um what's in that report? >> Yes.
>> Could you look at um I want to call your attention to page number one. I want to see if you agree with this statement that's contained. Read the highlighted portion. >> The ranges of information and statistics are provided only as anformational guide
to planners and designers regarding parking demand. The informal report does not provide authoritative findings, recommendations or standards on parking demand. Also, as I stated in my testimony, usually you need 10 points of data. So, it becomes statistically significant. >> Right?
>> There weren't 10 points of data significant that were provided >> in here in the IT >> in the IT manual. There were three, >> right? >> There are some additional man additional data was provided. It also says in that section for the section that the mosques
that were surveyed, including the ones in I guess Canada and Phoenix, Arizona, that there was parking in the aisles and other places that were outside of authorized parking spaces. It also said that they should take a look at the
amount of people that were utilizing the facility to see the amount of occupancy of the facility to determine the better rates. And that's what I was trying to do. >> It says you shouldn't just apply a formula, so to speak, without doing
independent studies. Is that fair to say? >> That's fair to say. You should do some more occupancy rates and then use those rates. And as I looked at the data that was provided by Nate today as far as occupancy rates go, they were similar to the ones that I found were also similar
to the ones that were testified to by the applicant. And if that's true and we know how many parking spaces, how many parking spaces are required because we know how many what the average rate is going to be in the area that's based on
probably if we take a look at the in that vicinity from at least six or eight studies now from between my between my data with the occupancy data that I had and the occupancy data that I looked at and they had were pretty similar. So if
we looked at that, we knew 150 people were able to be maintained as attendees and we divided that by the occupancy, we would come out to about 110 107 spaces at 100% occupancy.
>> Now is it true that many churches and mosque and temples and multiple services on Sunday or during the week Is that true? >> Yes. >> Okay. I go to a local church here in
Basking Ridge. I think they have four or five services. >> You think that's unusual? >> It's It's different by church. Catholic churches usually have more. Protestant churches have less. Some churches have one. >> Okay.
>> It just depends on that. and and uh >> and what what's the reason that they have multiple services besides providing for uh the accommodation of the parishioners? Is there any other reason that you could see to have multiple services
and I'll give you an example such as maybe having less impervious coverage. Is that sometimes a good idea? Usually they provide enough parking for the attendees at the service and more
services are then more masses or services are added depending upon the number of parishioners that attend the service. >> Right. >> And I have not yet looked at one church that was planning according how many seats there would be according to
impervious coverage. Usually it's gone towards a a a size church with a size number of people that would have it which would be accommodated at a single mass. I haven't heard in any of the churches I've ever done where they said what's the impervious coverage. They
always wanted to know how many they always when the churches I dealt with didn't ask about impervious coverage. We'll put it that way. >> I can appreciate that. But the purpose of having multiple services is not to so the parking lot is not overexpanded.
Is that true? >> Usually it was because there's not enough places to sit down. That's why they've had another service. >> That's that's correct. Now, if the applicant in this case provided for a second service, would that solve some of the problems that you you uh mentioned?
>> That would solve some of the problems. Yes. >> Yes. So if the applicant went to two services instead of having just one service then the requirement would be less because of the fact that they will have multiple services >> then the requirement might be less
>> but I don't know if it would be always less it would be sometimes when it might not be less and that might be >> and usually if you do have multiple services you find that one of the services is much better attended than the other one >> right >> and because of that there that creates a
difference. In addition to that, you have some services that are held in a lot of different areas have places for surplus overflow parking to occur or to go. >> So like I'm not sure which your church is, but some of them have on street
parking inside the CBD areas and the downtown areas where you can park and walk. But the purpose of multiple services is to not only to accommodate the parishioners but so that you don't build a very large parking lot and you can have just as many people attend but
in different services. >> Are you suggesting that you lower the number of prayer spaces of attendees and then add number of ser more services? >> No, I'm saying that we add less parking spaces. >> Hey, Mr. Mr. Ros, quickly, it sounds
like that the issue I thought for tonight was you wanted the board to determine what the required number of parking spaces is because it sounds like going to two services would be a reason for the board to grant a variance from a parking requirement.
Are you suggesting that going to two services should be considered by the board in determining the number of parking spaces? >> Well, I think >> required required under the ordinance. That's what I thought you asking tonight. No. What? Right. What I wanted to point out was that if we go to two services, then we don't need as many
parking spaces that he's saying. That's the point, >> right? But I thought for tonight, you want the board to make a determination of how many spaces are required under the ordinance? >> That's correct. So I'm asking you again the question that you're asking about going to two services is that relevant
to determining how many spaces are required under the ordinance or is that relevant if the number of spaces was more than the applicant wanted to provide wouldn't that be a reason to seek a variance from the number of spaces? >> Yes. The ladder. >> The ladder. Correct.
>> Okay. Because tonight, for tonight's purposes, if you want a calculation of the number, you can keep on, if it's your case, you can keep on asking those questions, bud. I don't think that's relevant to calculating the number of spaces required by the ordinance. I think that goes to whether or if you were applying for a variance, that goes
to the positive and negative criterion. I I agree with you. But what I'm what I want to point out is that he's indicating that 107 states are required under the under his interpretation. what the what it should be and I'm saying that if we go to two services then you
know that we don't have that number of parking spaces required and I wanted to point out that we're saving previous but you're saying that you don't have that number demand but but again I don't think you're saying that if you go to
two services that would alter the determination of the number of spaces required under the ordinance >> correct that's correct Okay. So again, it's up to you. >> I got through it. >> Okay. >> Question.
>> Okay. >> So I have a question. >> All right. Um we do first. >> Okay. We'll just keep it the same procedure and then we'll do the uh objectors and public and then the board members. >> Mr. War, you're going to have to go back
up. >> Okay. Yes. Um Okay. >> We're going to open up questions now to the to the public. >> And then the board. >> Okay. Um does anybody have any questions of Mr. Warne based on his testimony or
cross-examination? >> No. >> No. Okay. Seeing none, now we're going to go to the board members. Mr. Orur. >> Yeah. Um Mr. Litw Warney, I understand um the number that you calculated uh for the occupancy was based upon what I
believe to be A7 uh Dan Lincoln's um floor plan in which he indicated there was 142 uh mats, if you will, in two separate areas of the building. And I understand your testimony about an eight additional eight mats because of uh the
differentiation between what you say the mat size. >> I just thought there's enough room along the aisles to place another eight spaces with benches or whatever in the back the other room. >> Is that using the same Okay. >> Using the same layout. >> Using the same layout. Okay. Because if
you take a look, there's room along the wall as along the wall in the multi-purpose room to put additional carpets in in that area or benches. >> I see. So, you're talking about adding eight extra mats in the multi-purpose room.
>> Correct. >> So, where they say 30, >> I'm saying 30 uh 38. >> 38. Okay. If you were also to put mats in the uh gallery, even though we're hearing that that's >> I didn't include that. That's like you estimated eight extra can fit into the
multi-purpose room. Can you give me an estimate as to how many mats would be uh capable of being fitted into the uh gallery? >> Into the gallery. Let's see. [Music]
That's my guess. >> Probably about 25. 25. So, uh, if that were to be used, that would be 25 plus the 150 175. And if I'm understanding the method, >> that would be about
175. Yes. >> So, it's 175 then divided by the 1.36. Do I have >> I use 1.4 rounded it up to 1.4. >> Okay. So, help me. I don't have my calculator out. Do you have yours out? Can What does that come to?
[Music] I have I just want to hear from Thank you. [Music] >> That comes out at 178. >> Uh it's not making sense to me. Um I just did it just now divided by
>> I got to check it out. >> I think you multiplied it by accident. >> Well, no. I think I just clicked the wrong button. Multiply. >> So, it's 175 / 1.4. Correct. >> Correct.
Makes sense. 125. Okay. So, uh to be clear, if the gallery were used with that extra 25 m max together with the extra eight you're calculating for a total of 175, the number of parking spots needed would be
125 spots. >> That would be with 100% usage. >> Okay. with no parking in the aisles or anything else >> giving the applicant the better benefit of the larger mat size as well. >> Yes. Do >> you have any idea if the mat size were uh reduced to the size mat you said you
had at your house uh what that would do to this calculation? When I say this calculation I mean the 175 number would that increase and if so by what percent? about 10%.
>> So the 175 would would be increased by >> 10%. So 17 >> another 17 which is the 10%. >> Okay. Okay. And then can you do me the favor with using your calculator? Add the 175 + 17ide by 1.4 and tell me how many spots we're at.
>> Or you want me to do that? >> 137. >> We at 175 spots. You said added uh 10%. So that's uh 17. That's 192 spots or or uh max. Is that correct? Did I do that
right? 175 + 17. Let's get this range. [Music] 192 >> 19 uh 192 and that's divided by 1.4
>> that's already done. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Yeah, telephone is not good for the computer here. >> I'm getting 137.14. Uh >> that's right. Yeah, you're right.
>> I believe it's 137. 175 + 17 / 1.4. I'm getting 1 137. I need to figure it out. 137 or 154
>> 13. >> It's we figured out that it's 37 spaces. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And then and then you said that it's if 1.4 >> now if if in fact you added another 10%. >> No, that was that was 10%.
>> Okay. Thank I think I understand the answer is 137 spots. Thank you. Nothing further remain >> board members. Any other questions? >> Okay. Seeing none. >> Okay. So Mr. citizens to stand up.
>> Mr. I have one question. Our architect previously testified that the aisles had to remain open for fire purposes and that was a requirement of the fire department. Did you know that? >> Um I wasn't trying to fill the aisles so
that they're not accessible. But I was saying that there's >> I I still think there is an aisle space left when I add the eight spaces and and the gallery spaces would still allow >> for another 25 with an aisle space
around. >> You understand that this plan was presented to the fire official and the fire official approved this plan? >> You know that. >> And I think that if we modify this plan and send it to the fire official with different layout, he might approve that
too. But it wasn't done by me. So I I can't say that it would. But I think I have I'm confident that you can get more spaces on this plan approved by the fire marshal. >> And where would you put the spaces? >> Where would I put the spaces? You can
put some You can put them in the gallery. >> In the gallery. >> You asked me where I could put them. >> I did. I asked you. Yes, I did. >> You would put them in the gallery. >> No, I didn't say I would put them in the gallery. I said you could put them in the gallery. And you could also put them
inside the multi-purpose room. >> And you can put them also inside the administrative offices. >> You could put them wherever you want. I didn't call for putting them in all those places, but if you want to call for them, we have to make a larger number of parking spaces available. Do
you know that there are certain requirements regarding where a person can sit when they have a a service that they can't be in back of the demon who's giving the service?
>> These benches aren't in these spots in here. Wouldn't be it wouldn't be behind >> if you're referring to the plan if you can for the record identify what you're talking about. Looking at exhibit A-7 shows that there are benches for 12 people that are in front of the and on
the side there is ability to put some of these prayer rugs to move over and seats can be put in that area or in the gallery. >> Okay. >> I wasn't trying to put them in the gallery but I understand board members had requested how many could fit in the gallery if in fact they were and I
estimate 25 could go in the gallery. Theoretically, they can be put in the office library. >> Theoretically, they could be put in the office library or the other office or >> Theoretically, you could put them anywhere you want, but you just have to put more parking spaces in.
>> Thank you. >> Welcome. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Lemon. >> All right. Um, so that would conclude Mr. Lemonia's testimony and the testimony on the parking. All right. >> So, at this time, I'd like to ask Mr. Drill um how you would advise us to
proceed. >> In my opinion, Mr. Bonia has requested that the board determine this evening the parking requirement in this particular application under the ordinance. That's correct, Mr. Bonia. >> That is correct. So my suggestion is
start off I will read what the ordinance require what the ordinance provision says but before I and then let the board make its determination but before I do that I think we should have Mr. Bonagna present what he thinks the parking
requirement should be and then have Mr. Simon present what he thinks the parking requirement should be based on both of their experts and then I'll advise the board and I'll tell you right now the board's not limited to what Mr. Bonia says or Mr. Simon says. They can make their determination based on the facts
and the expert opinion in the record. But I think it would be a good idea to get a range from the applicant and the objector since they're the ones who brought the experts in on this issue. >> Yes, please. Um
we still maintain that the parking requirement is as set forth in the ordinance that the um that the church um category of parking applies to us. Um
the testimony that I hear from the opposing expert is that the it doesn't apply to us a church or Mr. drill has opined also that a church does not apply to a mosque. Um he's what we're doing
we're putting a label on the structure. We're saying in effect that a church is not a mosque and it's not a synagogue and it's not a temple. Um I don't believe that in Bernard's Township zoning room. I don't believe
that we only have the zoning ordinance for Christians only. I think it applies to >> Excuse me. Everybody hold your comments please. Mr. Person is entitled to give his presentation as he wishes. Go forward.
>> I think the word church applies to a house of worship. [Music] You use a church for worshiping your God. That's what you use the church for. The label you put on it is not important.
You can call it a church. You can call it a synagogue. You can call it a temple. You can call it whatever you want. But it's the use that you make of a structure that is the important thing. This is a house of worship. This is where we worship our God. And this is
what we we don't look at the label that it's called the church because we're not like that in Bernard Township. We don't just label things. We have in New Jersey what is called the municipal land use law. We do not have the municipal land structure law. It's
the use you make of a structure that controls, not the, you know, the label that you put on it. In the past, we've applied it to synagogues as I've indicated in the documents I filed with the board. Um
the objectors expert says that it doesn't apply to us because we don't have any pews and we don't have any uh benches and um and that it doesn't you can't dimensionally fit our rugs in there. You can you can make a
calculation on that. It's very easy to do. And um and as I indicated, it's not based upon the furniture that you have uh in a church. That shouldn't determine the parking calculation. >> Can you can you quantify this? I think
the board understands >> your the argument that you're presenting, but can you a quantify it to a number? I >> I can't do any better than what our experts said. He said it was 60 parking requirement and that is uh what he felt would be the uh parking sufficient
parking for the site. >> But the 60 spaces that he said would not be based on what you just said. one space for every three mats. >> Right? >> So, in other words, I'm asking you to choose. >> You ask the board to make determination.
If you're saying it's one space for every three mats, what does that come out to? >> I think I had the calculation at one time, but I don't have it now right in front of me. >> Okay. Well, but what I'm I'm going with my expert. My expert says that it's 60
parking spaces. Okay. But your expert says it's 60 spaces. So put it this way. Is it your position that there will be 142 or 150 mats in
prayer mats in the mosque. The occupancy of the mosque is 142 people. Whether we can fit the number of uh prayer rugs 142, I don't know. under your interpretation of the ordinance
and you're saying that the board should apply a church standard one space for every three seats but substitute for the word seat mats. Correct. >> Correct. >> So under that interpretation how many mats should the board for it purpose of calculation use?
>> I did not make that calculation. >> I I need you to do it. >> Right. >> I need you to do it. >> How many mats? >> They tell me 42. >> 142. >> 142. I'm sorry. So what one position you're espousing is 142
divided by 3 equals >> 47 >> 47 48 >> 47 >> 48 spaces. Now is that really the number of spaces that you're asking the board to determine? >> No. What I'm saying in fact is my expert said that 60 would be the appropriate
number. >> Right. Okay. And I assume that your expert said that because the expert recognized that the ordinance standard is in ordinance section 21-22.1A
under required number of spaces which states and I'm going to going to knock off the first two sentences. I'm going to quote A1. Since a specific use may generate a parking demand different from those enumerated below, and that church
standard is enumerated below, documentation and testimony shall be presented to the board as to the anticipated parking demand period. Based upon such test documentation and testimony, the board may colon and there's an A and B. A allow construction
of a lesser number of spaces provided that adequate provision is made for construction of the required spaces in the future. Or B, in the case of a non-residential use, require that provision be made for the construction of spaces in excess of those required
here and below. Again the churches that church three uh one space for three seats is here and below to ensure that the parking demand will be accommodated by off street spaces. So is your position that the number 60 given by your expert is made under the ordinance
standard which is section 21-22.1 A1B that latter standard where you supply more than here and after stated below. >> Correct. >> Okay. now but we do not agree with that that particular section of we think that
section of the ordinance is invalid. I understand. You understand that, right? I understand that's your argument. You understand that >> you haven't I asked you when you gave me your memo that there's no case that allows this board to ignore the ordinance that you got to take that up with the township committee. Correct.
>> Correct. So we're not pre we're not making you wave that position that you ultimately may want to take in some forum but I mean do you have any case that says that you can ask this board to ignore subsection B of
the ordinance you have any authority that says the board can ignore that and I think I think I can supply the authority to that because what the board is doing is legislating and I think I mentioned this before I mean I
>> do you have a case that says that? >> I'm sure I can find one. I don't have one right now. >> I asked you back just for the record. I asked you back in December for the case and you didn't have any case and the memo doesn't have any case that says it. And then when Dave and I gave our memo January 3rd, I have a bunch of cases in there that say that the board has to
apply the ordinance as written and I haven't gotten anything back from you since January with any case or any authority saying otherwise. >> That's true. >> Okay. So again, so your position is 60 spaces per your expert's um opinion and
it has to be that he's been using 21-22.1 A1B because otherwise he'd be in here for 48 spaces. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. So why don't we get Mr. Simon up now and hear Mr. Simon's position on how
many spaces and as you got from M questioning of Mr. lasagna. Just giving me a number is not going to do it for me and just giving the methodology is not going to do it for me. I want the methodology and the number because the board's then going to have to make a determination. And again, the board in
my opinion is not limited to 60 from Mr. Baznaga or whatever you're going to give the board, but this will give the board some idea of I assume um you know different ranges. >> Thank you.
W with regard to the colloquy that just took place, I think it's pretty clear and I I had mentioned this to the board and during one of my introductory remarks at a prior hearing that the second you open up this file and you
look at this application, it's very clear that the church category does not apply here. This applicant knew from the start that they were not proposing pews. They were not proposing seats. They knew
from the start that there's no specific ordinance provision that talks about mosques, prayer rugs, or the like. This is not at all about labeling a structure.
All the board is charged with doing under the ordinance with authority under the ordinance is to determine the appropriate parking requirement for this particular use. Mr. Drill just cited to you the
ordinance provision that talks about where there's a specific use that generates a parking demand. The board needs to make sure that the parking demand is accommodated by off streetet spaces. I believe I said this also in a prior hearing. If you have a McDonald's
that goes in and the McDonald's knows that it's going to require 200 parking spaces, but they go under the ordinance and the ordinance technically says that for their particular fast food restaurant, all they need to provide are
30 spaces. It's not like that McDonald's corporation can go in and say, "Ha, it says 30 spaces. We provided 30 spaces. We know we're going to generate 200 spaces. We know there's not going to be any um provision for off-site parking
and we can't park on the street. We don't know what we're going to do. But you board can't do anything about it because we provided our 30 spaces under the ordinance. It's absolutely ridiculous. In terms of Mr. Luia's analysis and a critique of Mr. the NAS analysis,
we opine that the 100% requirement is the requirement that should be used here if you're going to go that route versus the 85% because there's no other place to put these cars. We believe that the appropriate analysis
is certainly not counting floor area of a particular prayer area devoted within a particular mosque because of the reasons stated by Mr. Lewia namely that you have no idea the percentage of that area that's being
used and it's completely irrelevant to his analysis. until you know what percentage is being used, then maybe you can calculate it out, but you have no idea whether it's being used 100%, 50%, 90%. So, you can't do his analysis. And what you're left with is what the
experts do agree on. They do agree on a calculation of number of occupants per car. And that calculation is somewhere around everyone agreed 1.3 something 1.35 1.36 depending on how you
calculate it. What we're suggesting is that in order to be conservative the board can basically average up and use a 1.4 for calculation even though it is not advantageous certainly to our
position in terms of the um having more and more parking spaces which is not necessarily what we're looking for. We're looking for what's appropriate and we believe that being conservative at 1.4 as an occupancy rate is appropriate. We also believe that the number of
attendees is entirely relevant because that's what they're building for. And I believe I even asked this maybe of Mr. Lincoln at a prior hearing, which is that, hey, you want to have less spaces, just make your building smaller, just
have less capacity. Dr. Simon, do me a favor. And I'm beginning to understand your argument. Experts agree. Use an occupancy of 1.35 or 1.36. Say 1.4. >> Right. >> You said Mr. um warning you said 100%
the 100th percentile should be used again just try to I'm I'm I'm I'm almost there. Okay. try to give us the methodology and the number because so we're going beyond the methodology. >> What we feel that the appropriate
methodology is to determine the capacity of the prayer area and not just the prayer area but also whether it's the a room adjacent to it that can um accommodate prayer. We already know from
use of the community center that they already use two separate rooms with an audio and video hookup. And so that's not going to be foreign certainly to this proposed user. And we feel that based on the original submission of this application where they stated that they
were going to have 150 attendees. And now all of a sudden they they they start doing the calculation based on a prayer area of 9.35 as opposed to a prayer area of uh area rug of 8 or even 9 that they can only get 142.
We don't believe that that's accurate and that even if you use the original number of 150 being conservative and using an a number of 1.4 occupants per vehicle again being conservative you come up to 107 spaces.
So that is what our conclusion is. Our conclusion is that that's the appropriate analysis to determine the actual capacity 150 attendees for Friday prayer. >> So you're saying the board should use 150 attendees even though the testimony
is I haven't heard any other testimony about the maximum fire code being 142. It could be 170. It could be 190. Mr. Drill, we just don't know. Okay. So you're saying use 150 as the capacity
>> that at at a minimum at a minimum >> use 100 you you would use 150 because we take the applicant at at its word and that's what it testified to when it originally submitted its application. >> 50 then what do you do >> and then you are dividing that by 1.4
which is a conservative occupancy rate where all the occupancy rate numbers were at between 1.23 23 and 1.4. We're using 1.4 to be conservative. That comes to 107 spaces at a minimum.
Okay. So your that should be required. So your position is that under the ordinance again same section that I asked Mr. Baza 21-22.1 A1B
because it's your position that uh that this is a specific use that generates a parking demand different from those enumerated below. No doubt and so documentation testimony shall be presented at your position it has been as anticipated parking demand and based
on that documentation and testimony the board may under B just like with Mr. Bonia required the provision be made for the construction of spaces in excess of those required here in below to ensure the parking demand will be accommodated by luxury parking. So I just want to make sure you take your position that
the board should use 150 capacity divided by 1.4 to come up with 107 spaces as the requirement under the ordinance at a minimum. Okay. Well, at a minimum, what does that mean at a minimum? If the if the board determines that that that there more spaces, we're
you know, we're not going to take a position on that. But certainly based on the testimony of your 150 150 uh patrons, one point divided by 1.4 107 spaces. >> Your expert opine that any more than 107 spaces are required under the ordinance.
He he did opine that if you took the gross floor area that is in the IT fourth edition and you use the 100th percentile you come out to 125 spaces at
the at the 85th percentile it's 109 spaces which is as you know within two spaces of the 107 that we're proposing >> but as I understand it your expert's opinion is not use the for purposes of
the 107 spaces. It's irrelevant whether it's the 100th percentile or the 85th percentile because your expert is saying use the capacity the number of potential mats divided by the 1.4 four which is the vehicle occupancy rate to get 107
>> correct other than that the whether it's 85% or 100% if you look at the IT standard it's a good cross check to see that we believe that our number is appropriate >> okay so give me all right now I I understand the cross check so just to
make sure I get the cross check correct >> if the board uses the hundth percentile and he uses the IT data even though in Dave Banish's in my memo we basically
said that is a the failsafe fallback if actual reports aren't done and there were actual reports done here >> correct but if you use the hund the 100th percentile with the IT data what would you get you would get um for 100%
you would get 128 parking spaces >> and using the 85th percentile that you would at 110 109 parking spaces. >> Okay. But again, but we feel that the number is 107. >> 107. You recognize that the memo that
Dave and I put together was that was a fallback if there was no actual studies. >> Totally understand. I just want to make sure the record's complete. >> Does the board understand the two different positions being espoused by the applicant and the objectives? Does anyone have any questions before
basically you do a I'm not going to say a mini deliberation. You're not deliberating on the application, but you are going to deliberate on how many parking spaces are required in this application. Anyone have any questions for me? >> No. >> And I suggest you now close the meeting
to public input and deliberate on the number of spaces. >> Okay. Public session of the meeting is now closed and we're going to deliberate on the parking requirement. >> Board members, who would like to begin? [Music]
>> Yeah, finger was thrown my way. So, I'll step up. Looks like you pushed off the ledge. I I'll say this. I started at the beginning of this application saying, "Hey, give me an objective standard, something that I can like wrap my brain around and apply fairly and uniformly."
And I'm starting it's it took eight hearings uh and months and months and I think we're finally at the point where there's some objective standard. Now we have two actually um that we're hearing about and honestly with this cross the check and
the cross check, it's putting it within the right range. So, I guess it's a function of which one do you do you pick? And when I say in the right range, I don't think that the applicants expert for me is in the right range. I'm just not um I I honestly don't find his
overall testimony credible as it relates to a number of different um areas uh with regard to the calculation. Um among other things, I found found it a little bit incredible that the appendix C of
the fourth edition um parking generation um selection criteria uh had some other uh standard. He basically gave in essence what I'll call a net opinion. Um an opinion that only he alone has not supported in any other kind of um
authoritative material. uh never been used by any other expert certainly not reflected in the document that uh cited the uh the standard in the first instance um there's other instances in which I I found that the testimony
somewhat uh incredulous uh as well um the facts upon which uh he was basing his testimony um in my opinion weren't weren't u weren't adequate. Um I I guess uh I'm not satisfied that the number is
necessarily the 150 from Mr. Chroy's testimony from day one. He gave us a number and then tried to in my opinion make the data fit uh the number he wanted and the whole qualitative quantitative analysis type of testimony
I never um accepted. Again, that came full circle back to give me a an objective standard. Um, we now have data counts that although I personally think perhaps the data counts are insufficient, or at least I was thinking
that way and that maybe we needed more data points, I'm hearing both experts now say that they're agreeing to that 1.36 is kind of the number. One expert saying it should be 1.4. To me, that's getting to the ballpark. I'm leaning more
towards the conservative 1.4 personally on that um on that kind of methodology. Um and I think our ordinance from my review of it and having scratched my head with it, uh whether you're a church or a mosque, synagogue, whatever you
are, I think the ordinance is applied the same way. And it says you should look at whether I as what's being presented here, the data would support either a higher number or lower number to the extent a numbers provided. So
clearly it's not a church. Um and even if it were uh we'd be looking at whether a higher number or a lower number would be appropriate and what we're hearing is it's actually a higher number. So the so in applying the ordinance I think both experts are saying let's apply the
ordinance and the specific section that Mr. Trill read out and I'm looking at a highlighted section um >> 21-22.1 A 1 B. So in my mind, no doubt we're applying um that section um and we
should be applying that section. At least I in my spin on the analysis, it's being applied to do an upward adjustment of the number. Um I say upward because it's not uh a divide a divisor using three. We're actually using a different
ratio. The the point is that at the end of the day, I think the number is probably somewhere between well, the questioning that I asked, let me qualify before I say the final number. The question I asked assumed under the um the mat analysis, how many
mats could fit in there? We heard the testimony of the applicant saying we're not going to use that gallery area. Um this gets back to, you know, are they going to use it? Are they not going to use it? That's more subjective. And I'm more in favor of an objective standard which would necessarily look at the
gross square footage area and then so we have a cookie cutter building and we can uniformly apply this uh standard on a going forward basis. That's how I would feel most comfortable with it. But I'm hearing that um the objectors uh experts saying, "Look, we'll even if we ran with
their numbers and and added 142 mats with the A7 being the the guide and the Dan Lincoln's um testimony from back in November, even if they're larger mats, um and we add eight extra mats because
either they can fit in the um general purpose multi general multi-purpose room or because if we lower the mat size instead of being the 9 whatever it is square ft you get an extra eight spots there at the 150 um and then I'm kind of accepting that maybe you divide that by
the the 1.4 for and you do come up with um I believe it's the 107 is is perhaps the right number, but I'll note that I still think that the data would support us going to a higher number by virtue of the fact that we could conceivably say that the gallery area could be used. And
we heard the objectors uh experts say another 25 mats could be used. That'll drive the number up to the we heard 175. It could actually even go 10% higher, 17 more spots by virtue of the fact that the rugs were not they're kind of being,
if you will, over inflated, maybe aren't the average. We heard a lot of testimony about that packet uh when Mr. Chry testified the first time. We heard the applicants expert testify about that this time. So conceivably, you could say, and I forget what the number was.
We should say for the record 137 >> 137, right? and it was 137. So on the high in my mind the world of spots that we're talking about would range from I guess at the low end what the expert uh applicants experts saying is 60 again I
don't think that's anywhere near the right number up to as high as 137 or 125 I should say the other number would be cuz if we entirely exclude the um gallery area we were still at 125.
Uh, so I'm kind of leaning towards, okay, if we're not going to go as high as what I would call the higher end, which I still think we probably should do because at the end of the day, we're talking about this ordinance requires the parking to
be off uh street and we there is no other parking in the area. So, it's not like there there's any logical place to put overflow parking. So, I'm always in the favor of not having a a uh >> not to press you on it, but just to make
sure I understand. I'm going to do the same thing to you I did to them. The number as I'm understanding and even though you believe that a higher number could be applied, what you're saying is you want to you're choosing between the
experts and you're going with the 150 divided by 1.4 to come to 107. Is that what you're saying? We're 110 somewhere in there. Slightly up. Not not as high up as 137. >> Okay. But if you're going to if you're going to decide to go higher than
>> I'm not making a motion, John. I want to hear what other people say before I >> before I before I come back and say a number. >> Okay. Thanks for >> I believe that there's evidence that I I feel comfortable with that the number of
mats would be 142. And that was even I think testified to by Mr. Lu that 142 was the number of masks. Um I don't I don't think that there's anything really in the record for us to
say that I I think it's speculative that it would be anything more than 142 to say that you're using a gallery or you're using I I agree with Mr. Bizonio's um cross-examination point that you could also be say sure and you can also use the administrative offices
and you can use the closets and I think that that's being unfair to the applicant. I think that there's a prayer hall that their prayers uh their prayer rods the number is 142 at two by the objector's own expert. Um to say that
it's 150 because they can fit in an aisle or or be squeezed in I think was his testimony. I I don't think that's being fair. Um I think the number is 142. I think there's enough evidence to show that it is. Um I think that both
sides have agreed that the the um multiplier or the divisor I guess the division >> divisitor is 1.4 four. >> Actually, one expert said 1.35, one expert said 1.36, right? >> They round it up,
>> right? Which which I think is I I I think there's a concession there. And I think 107 is the number. I I I think that it's it's a little tough on the applicant to say it should be 100% but I think in this case because there is not
a lot of other area for parking that um discretion is is smart and I think that the number should be 17. Thank you madam chair. >> Miss uh thank you Miss Alper. Um who
wanted to speak first? Um, I can speak. >> Okay, Miss Kleiner. And then I um um you know, after hearing everything, I I do think a mosque is a house of worship. And a house of worship is probably equivalent to what was Can I go back one second? I'm so sorry.
>> 142. And then what was your division? >> Okay. So 141 >> 971. All right. Sorry. Um I uh
agree um with Jody in a lot of um ways. I do believe the mosque is a house of worship and it's although we don't have we have it listed as a church but I think that the ordinance should be applied here and I do I am more comfortable even though I understand
what Mr. donated and the 85% we we have an obligation to make sure if we do approve this application that there's enough parking. We don't want to start out or even have 3 years down the road parking uh not enough parking. I mean, I
know it, you know, you don't want to create a unsafe condition or safety. Um, you know, so I I am in favor of trying to um figure out how uh many vehicles would be there. And I think doing the
prayer maths is the the logical way. I actually like the 142. You I could even go with 150 and dividing it by either the 136 or 140. >> So, put this put it this way. If you went with 142 and divided, someone have a
calculator and divide it by 1.35 or 1.36, what do you come to? >> 142 divided by 1.36 is 104. >> Okay. And then if you took 142 and divided it by 1.35, what do you come to?
>> 105.18. >> So >> So you're saying somewhere between 1047 or Yeah. based on 142 is the number of mats based on >> the 1.36
>> and so 142 because the 142 was the applicant's number of mats based on the um fire prayer hall and 1.35 was the applicant's occupancy rate 1.36
was the objector's occupancy rate >> so what do you want to divide the 142 by 1.36 or 1.35 five. >> I guess the 35 or the three. >> Okay. So, the 35 would bring it to 105 spaces. >> Okay. And I I think that's um fair. I I
um I think we have an obligation to uh ask the applicant to construct the number of parking spaces that we think will be needed. Um not like a mall when it's Christmas and they have to park across the street and use a policeman or
something. You know, I just that's what I think we have to do. Miss Cliner, thank you. Miss Kadichi, >> I'm I'm leaning the same way as Miss Albert and Miss Kleiner. I think using occupancy to me makes makes sense
because you're you're you're basically saying you have this much capacity in terms of your prayer mats. This is what your the studies have shown to be the occupancy per vehicle. So I think it's it to me it makes sense that you use
that approach to determine the number of parking spaces. Uh I do agree with 142 that has come out to be the number that everybody has said between the multi-purpose room and the prayer room and they would be hooked in.
So, um, whether it's 104 or 105, I it's one space, but I think we can go with I'd be comfortable with 104 or 105. >> Okay. But 105 is if you use the 1.35 as
a divisor. If you used 1.36 >> between 104, >> I would like you to choose, please. >> 105. Okay, >> that's it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Kadisha. Yes, Miss Gazian. Okay, I I'm thinking a little
bit differently. Um my concern is that with parking, you've got to be really careful because if there's not enough and there's nowhere else to go, it can become a huge safety problem. um both for fire, for police, for other um you
know um drivers and pedestrians etc etc. So um my thinking is that we do need to go with the gross floor area because we don't really know what the use is going to be of each particular room and we don't know um in terms of the prayer
mats. We know they could be smaller if they chose them to be to be able to fit more occupants in. Um, so it's my feeling that we go with the gross glory area which would end up with the at the 100% 128 128. >> Give me the gross floor area that you're
using. >> Well, I just have my notes here. I don't know what it was, but it equals at at the 100% rate, it equals 128. >> 4,252. >> Just give me a 128. >> Yeah.
Yeah, I I have to make sure I I under I understand the methodology. So, I'm looking at exhibit I got to go back. >> A15 A15 is Mr. And these parking study results
for the Tom's River and the Franklin Township MOS dated February 1st, 2013. And on the bottom of his page, which is going to be he shows
the >> it wasn't it was >> the gross floor area. Go ahead. >> 4,252 square ft. Now, he only had the 85th percentile, which would have brought the number of spaces to 99. And what you're saying is you was at the 100th
percentile, but I don't think that we need we need someone to run a calculation. >> It was from somebody else's report. It wasn't from Mr. May's report. It was from All right, go to somebody else. I'm gonna have to dig through my stuff.
>> Can I just ask a question based on what Mayor Gaziano was saying? If if we felt if we were concerned that maybe there was going to be more use than the 142 at some point, is there a way to improve it
for say 105 or whatever the number? But and to have a provision >> for other spaces. >> Yes. Because you could also take you could say that again it have to be based on evidence in the
record. Um and I'm going to when I'm going to see where that figure comes from. But let's assume that the calculation comes out that if the gross floor area of 4,252
square ft is used and I have to figure out what the it's that's based off a rate and we have Mr. and Nay has rates and I don't know if the objector's
um expert had a rate but assuming we find that rate and that came out to what's the number you had in your account? >> 128. >> Let's assume it came out to 128. You could say the number is 128, but then you could apply a and say we're going to allow construction of a lesser number
instead of one. The number is going to be 128, but you're going to allow construction of a lesser number down to, you know, the 105 that everyone else is talking about. But continue with the deliberations. >> Okay. Um, who would like to speak next? >> Okay. Miss Pavini. Um, I agree with uh
Miss Piti and um Miss Alper. I believe that going with 42 prayer mats and I don't care if it's 105 or 104 spaces, but I take the 135 and go for five spaces. It's close to what our
professionals had come up with originally. So, I think there's a close enough concurrence. 135 142 per prayer mat. same as Albert and Duchi. >> 142 >> divided by the 135 to come to 105.
>> Mhm. I think it it co it coincides enough with the banish drill u memo. I also believe that you know Mr. um stated that um houses of worship is not based on furniture and I agree with him 100%
because we're not counting furniture here. We're counting prayer rugs and because as Miss Gaziniano said, it is a safety issue. We have a fire company, a four-way stop. There's no off streetet parking. We have to at least account for
the majority of the parking moving forward. If there's an issue, I think they have to come back to the board. But I think the 105 spaces to begin with would be adequate because it it's a different type of worship. It's during the day.
It's on a Friday. Um, and people come from work. I mean, that's admittedly so. So, it's not as though we're counting cues or um, families in a car. People coming for a very specific reason, a very specific
time. And, um, I think we have to account for the parking for that reason. >> Thank you, Mr. Painy. >> Mr. Plaza. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh I concur with
Miss Pavini and and her for comments as to the the calculation. Uh but I want to be clear that I am basing my decision on the fact that the standard in the statute uh >> the ordinance
>> in the ordinance uh the cited standard doesn't apply in this particular case. this not the you're saying that the >> this the standard is >> you're saying that >> set the ordinance Mr.
that you're saying doesn't apply >> the enumerated the uses that's a use enumerated below the standard in my opinion is found in 21-22.1A that's the standard >> the use is enumerated >> let me back up that the ordinance
absolutely applies >> the use enumerated and defined below namely >> churches auditoriums and theaters >> does not apply I >> now I stand agree >> and I listened carefully to Mr. Bonia's arguments and I I understood the
arguments. I'm just not persuaded by the arguments. I just don't think you can logically make that argument and and and have it hold water. And for me, it did not. Which puts us into the second part of of the ordinance, section B, which asks us
to rely on different type of evidence. We just can't apply a a cookie cutter numeric formula. And in this particular setting, it was expert testimony. Expert testimony is given to us because these are things that uh are outside the ken
of of average people. And so the experts are here to help us, help us understand it and help us make a decision. And then that puts us in a position of having to decide how much weight to give to what we have here, our conflicting expert opinions as to the the ultimate
conclusion. >> In coming to my decision, I I looked at where the experts both agreed and disagreed. And it's it's interesting that really in a lot of respects they agreed more than than they disagreed. Uh
but at the end of the day, similar to Mr. There war's observations. I did find uh Mr. Lewia, if I if I pronounced it right, I hope I have. Uh I I found Mr. Lew to be more credible. Uh I found that
Mr. Nay at times was trying to back his conclusion in and find the rationale as he went and and and picking and choosing and and dismissing uh elements of the IT as it as it was necessary to get to where he wanted to
go. And I think one really glaring example for me was the gross floor area analysis he did in A15 which the inclusion of a 30,000 square ft project. so skewed the result in his
favor and that when you remove it, you get back up to the same numbers we're now talking about. Even applying Mr. Lew's analysis, I I that was that was very important to me and and it it led me to uh be more persuaded and to to be
in a position where I'm going to place more weight on Mr. Lew's recommendations as to the appropriate methodology. uh for that reason. Uh but I'm also in favor of using the 142. That is the figure in the record. I I'm hopeful and
I I don't really know, but I'm hopeful that being that that was the established usage for the parts of the project that are going to be deemed as the only parts that would be usable for prayer that that's going to have some binding effect ultimately uh if the application is
approved on the occupancy ultimately granted uh by by the fire official. It would seem to make sense to me. But using that number and then applying the vehicle occupancy rate espoused by uh the applicant's own expert, which I don't think we could be fairer than
that, it it gives you the 105. So that's the number I'm in favor. >> 142 divided by 1.35 is the 105. >> Correct. >> Who's next? Yeah. Well, >> Miss Gilmore, >> I was just sitting here making calculations and um I also agree with
the 142 and uh also the 1.35. I think 105 is a fair number. Um and uh it's when we looked at all the different studies that seemed to be um
the right one. >> Mhm. Thank you, Miss Gilmore. So, the number that you said was 105. >> 105. Okay. Mr. Santoro, >> I'll weigh in also that starting with Miss Albert, I think the 142 is the
night right number to start with. Um, the one comment I have that's different is that I'm not sure that 1.4 is a conservative number for the rate because the uh objector's own study shows a range that goes above that. So, I would
lean more towards using 1.4 than 1.35, but I think um it's still close. So, going with 105 is fine with me, even though 1.4 would give slightly less space. So, I would say use 142. Um,
go with the consensus and use 1.35 and say 105 spaces. Have you looked Have you looked >> but I can't find it. So, um I'm I'm also comfortable with what everyone else has said. I'm afraid it's going to be low,
but um because both experts did agree on the 1.35 1.36. Um I'm willing to go along with the group. >> Okay. So, someone Okay. Um did everybody else speak? Okay.
>> Um I'll weigh in. Um I think that uh it's already been said but I think I said it in a prior hearing we have to look at the realities of the use and not the label and on that we agree. So even if the there were different houses of worship of the same denomination, I
think we have to see how they are particularly used. And so I think our ordinance is consistent because even if you call something a church, we still have an obligation to consider the ordinance which provides that we must can I see that Mr. D?
we um if a specific use generates a parking demand different from those enumerated below, even if it is a church or whatever you want to call it, um it is appropriate to use documentation and testimony to address the anticipated parking demand. And I think that's
exactly what we've been doing tonight or or throughout the hearings on the parking issue. Um with that said, um I found Mr. Liter's testimony to be more credible. Although I think both I thank both uh witnesses for their testimony
and for all the work that they put into them and for Mr. Nay being very cooperative and coming back with more information. I did find ultimately that Mr. Lwornia's testimony is more credible. Uh I happen to think that the 150 is
is a number that we should use because the 142 seems to be based on the fire code and I think the reality is such where Mr. Chry had started the testimony saying that he anticipated 150 attendees
and um also that there is enough space in the proposed mosque to accommodate 150. So I would use that number. I would use the multiplier of 1.4 and that would give me what number?
>> 107. >> 107. I think that's the right number. And I think that um I think perhaps uh we really could go higher because it concerned me. I thought listening to Mr. Or's discussion
um I think that the reality is such that it could be higher and I would even be in favor of banking an additional number of spaces because I'm particularly concerned that in this site there is nowhere else to go. >> We can't park. You cannot park in the
park down the street. You cannot park on the street. You cannot park at the firehouse. I don't know where you're going to accommodate the overflow. And um I think that the reality is that when you have more worshippers than what you
anticipate, you you find ways to accommodate them. I think that's the reality. So I would go with a higher number. >> You go with 107. >> I would go with the 107. >> So would you bank, Madam Chair? >> Um
I have to give you a piece of legal advice. >> That's fine. >> We're going to go into our separate our separated >> talking amongst themselves. >> I think that's what they two services.
Mhm. Mhm. >> Based upon legal counsel, um I I I would be I would feel comfortable um going with the 10 and I would say 107, but we're talking about
two spaces. So, um I think that if the consensus is 105, uh I would agree to that. What do you have, Miss Gaziano? >> I'll go with 107. >> 107. >> Okay. I just want to make sure that we have the correct number of spaces and um
anybody else want to want to weigh in again? >> Maybe the answer is to go a couple higher and use that as a a real number rather than having something banked. >> Right. I had said before at a prior hearing that we're really not supposed to be negotiating or compromising on a
number. We're supposed to be coming up with a number that we think is conservative and that can is realistic. >> Maj majority. So >> under the ordinance Let me tell you where people where we are right now. We have the following and obviously until there's a motion and
a vote people could change their position. We have Albert at 101. 142 * the 1.4. We have four at 107. That's the 150 divided by 1.4. We have four at 107. We
have Gaziano at I'm hearing 107 >> and Beyonce at 107. And then we have all the other board members at 105. >> How many board members is that? >> We have 1 2 3 4 5 six.
But we have more than >> one. >> I'll tell you what. You know what? >> Six. >> You cannot You came in late. >> Oh, okay. >> Okay. You cannot >> fine >> make determination. You technically came in late, but you came in before the testimony on this issue started. So,
you're okay. So, with that, we have to cross out Gaziano for making this determination. So, we have Albert at 101. >> Let me go to 107. >> Okay, we have Albert. So, what do you say? Well, I do want to
say that board members are entitled to change their mind to 150 >> because of what Mayor Desiana said that that if there is more in the future, we don't want to be in a situation where >> So, you're saying you don't what you're saying is you don't want to rely on a
fire code official to have to um be enforcing to get it down to 142. But if they can fit 150 mats, then that's what under the ordinance you would calculate based on 150 mats. >> That's exactly what I'm saying. So 150 * divided by 1.4 is 107. So I'm going to
go through everyone. If you're going to change your position, just tell me. But we have or at 107, Alfred at 107, Bianke at 107. Right now we have three at 107, and we have
everyone. We have six at 105. Does anyone want to change their position? >> Mr. Plaza. Madam Chair, I I won't rearticulate what I said previously, but for the those reasons, I'm prepared to accept the opinion and recommendation of
Mr. Lwornian as stated as as stated in his conclusion. >> So that would be the the 107 >> for the based on the calculations that he laid out for the board. Miss Gilmore. >> Um I'd also like to change to 107
because um listening to I think the 150 is the better number. >> And so again that means you're going to adopt >> L Warner's opinion. >> Okay. So now >> I will move also.
>> Okay. Well, I'll tell you what then at this point I think someone should just make a motion to make the determination of the number of parking spaces required under the ordinance at 107. We'll see how that the vote comes. >> Sounds like Mr. Orb made the motion. Miss Alper seconded the motion. Um
discussion. >> I think you just dis >> I know. I I just formality. >> Yep. >> Then can we have the roll call? Miss uh Florio and Miss Gaziano will not be voting. >> Okay. Miss Oper.
>> Yes. >> Miss Gaziano. No, >> Miss Gilmore. >> Yes. >> Miss Kleiner. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> It's my motion formalities.
>> Mini. >> Yes. >> Maza. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Spici. >> Yes. Miss Bianke. >> Yes. >> Yes. Okay. >> Okay. Okay. So, the board has determined that the required number of spaces under
the ordinance is 107. So, you want to talk about scheduling the next hearing now or do you want to figure out what work you have to do with the site plan before you do that or I think we have our site plan basically done.
Um, what are the next dates for the hearing? Okay, >> Miss Florio, can you tell us what's available for the next hearing? >> Um, Yeah. June 27th and thank you all
um application. Uh we carried the Menza and Bisel application to July 2nd at our meeting last week. It looks to me as the next open date is July 25th.
I can't be here for that. I can't be here, but that doesn't matter. Just to let you know, I can't be here. >> Well, first we'll check with the applicant, Mr. Bonio. Does that work for you? >> What? >> Okay.
[Music] Okay. >> Let me ask you this. What exactly is on June 27th? And what exactly is on July 2nd? >> Exactly as what I've put in what's in front of everybody. July uh June 27th
um is a completeness review and the continued public hearing from Maluchcci >> as well as continued discussion of rules and regulations if we get there. >> Well, we would be willing to forego the rules and regulations, but I believe that the Malucci application will be
lengthy. I'm just guessing based on the last we had a long way to go, >> right? But I had a an I an idea. But let's because we could put you could list ISBR for June 27th, but knowing that if Maluchcci shows up
>> Yeah. >> It's their meeting if they but they came off before it would be a shame to have them come off. So that's one possibility. And what do you have on the agenda for July 2? >> On July 2nd, we have two completeness reviews. neither which should take a
great deal of time as far as I understand and we have the first public hearing on Mensah and Visel which I understand from Mr. fly is not a short application like grand
>> and again if that application came off that would open up that meeting. So my suggestion is going to be but it's up to the applicant and the public would have to you know watch the website
is to list it for June 27 and July 2 and the other the other date not to give not to make sure the board's working through the summer but if one of these comes off >> and they both have recently just at the last moment >> at the last moment both of those
applications came off >> Mr. is available. [Music] >> Could I just make one comment? I thought at the last meeting we discussed who was available on July 2nd and who was not
and there are a number of board members who were not available on July 2nd. >> So look at Mr. Bazone. If it's listed for July 2nd, there's a high likelihood that you'll end up having to get a transcript. If that's a problem with your client, then we might as well just
forget about July 2nd because you are you gonna do you anticipate finishing your case? Let's say this thing went to July 2nd. Do you think you could finish the case on July 2nd? >> Are you kidding? >> I mean, we spent four meetings or five meetings just to figure out the clinging numbers. doesn't. That's I'm saying
realistically, just so you know, if you picked July 2nd, what Fran is saying is there's like a 95% chance that you will have a bare number of board members, five. And so to continue it, you'd have
to order a transcript. Now, if your client doesn't want to do that, then you should not ask for July 2nd. That's I'm just as a practical matter. I'm saying that, putting it out there so you can make a determination. And in that case, you'd only be listed as the backup on June 27th if Maluchcci came off again.
And if you're not willing to go July 2nd with five members as a backup, then you still are going to have that out in the at the end of July, beginning of August. The site plan is almost complete right now, but we may not be a able to get it
in 10 days before the hearing. That's the problem. And uh I can go with testimony at that time. Uh, but I would like to have the site plan done. >> Site plan should be done. >> Yeah. >> So that means June 27th is off, >> right?
>> And quite frankly, June 27th, July 2nd, what's the difference? So I guess the original date that Fran gave is really in the end the most realistic date, which will be July 25th. Now, does anyone have a problem with July 25th?
I'll be on vacation, but again, it's these are flight plan issues. There's no one. So, I can I can get someone to cover for me July 25th. >> Okay. So, this matter should be continued to July to July 25th without
need for further notice. But, Fran, where do we stand with the time the board has to act? Um, actually right now the time to act is it was extended to the end of July, July 31st. So
>> I I always like to get, you know, a month ahead. So let's get an extension to the end of August. Okay. Agree. >> Yeah. July 25th would be the hearing date and we grant you an extension to August 31st.
>> Right. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Zono. And thank you to the applicant and to everyone who's here tonight. Um that will close the um public hearing of the ISBR application. >> Okay. >> I know it's very late. Uh well, we're
going to go continue. We're just going to roll o over. Um, it's very late, but we did promise with public comment, I believe, that we left it that we were going to have a discussion of as to whether we were going to put the zoning board recommendations on the agenda as a
formal item. We had all agreed that we were going to read the zoning board recommendations. Um, so I'll start with that. Did everybody receive the zoning board recommendations and did they read them? >> Is there anybody who did not? Okay, since we've all had an opportunity to read them,
um I think the best way to do it would be we could do it by motion and then we can have the discussion. Would you recommend that, Mr. Drill? >> Is that the best way to do it? >> Okay. Um can I have the question?
>> Yes, Missy. Mr. Drill, >> secretly, do the zoning board of adjustment uh a year end report come to the planning board? Yes, >> it does >> mandatory. And what I said at the last meeting was in my opinion what the the
requ the planning board members have with the master plan >> to no you're required to read the report and then decide what if anything you want to do with it. I gave a at the last meeting I gave a detailed um opinion on it.
>> I'll get a copy of the video. So, I'm going to suggest this. Um, there's certain purposes for which we could put it on a formal agenda. We're not going to put it on a formal agenda just to talk about it and chat. Um, what we would do is put it on the agenda for a specific purpose. It could be to amend
the master plan prior to the next time that it's due to be revised. It could be if you feel that um you need you feeling need to make a zoning recommendation to the township committee or it could be for another specific purpose. Mr. Mr. Dr. Is there any other purpose for which
we would uh put it on the agenda? >> Yeah. Neither to if you wanted to amend your own master plan if you wanted to propose um the zoning ordinance amendments to the uh township committee. >> Okay. So, those are the two purposes. And then the next thing I want to say is
that um the township committee has ruled on the zoning recommendations. That does not preclude us as Mr. Drill advised from putting it on the agenda. But I would like to just address that because I don't think I don't know if the planning board members are aware of the status or what was done at the township
committee meeting. So I believe um if if Miss Gaziano or Miss Pavini wants to advise I think that might be appropriate as to what occurred at that meeting and whether you you know considered each of the zoning questions. >> Yes, Mr.
are you saying regarding the when the >> zoning board recommendations >> regarding the same report that's >> exactly the same report I just wanted to have all the facts so that we can then make a decision as to whether we want to go forward with putting it on formal agenda item so would miss somebody who
was present that night >> yeah so the first and I don't have it in front of me but the first item was talking about um reooking at zoning in the smaller lots and possibly um
>> yeah looking at impervious coverage but um relaxing the standards in the smaller lots and the um no one on the township committee was interested in looking at that at this time. Uh the second one was the definition of imperous coverage. Um
I did say that I am in favor of that. no one else did. But um but again, I don't know that that requires anything from planning board. That would really just be us um directing Mr. Schlay to to um take another look at that slide.
>> So if if there was a change, it would be a change in the ordinance if you agreed >> just a definition >> to have a definition in the ordinance. That's the right place to put it if you >> um the third thing was about a historic preservation commission. there was no
interest by the tattoo committee in relooking at that at this time. And the fourth item was about the pool ordinance. Um we felt we went over that one in a little bit more detail, but we felt that we had already looked at that in 2009. We had gone over it in detail
with drawings. Um and none of us was interested in passing that um if that would allow even one pool to go in in someone's front yard. And at the time that we looked at it, it was not 100%
that that would not happen. So no one was inclined to move forward with that. Maybe probably you want to add anything. Okay. I think rather than making a formal motion, I'm I'm going to suggest that we have a little discussion
because I'd like to know what you thought about um whether you your thoughts are at this point, whether you think there's something that you wanted to address in the report. Does anybody want to speak? Mr. Santoro,
>> I think it would be uh prudent for the township committee to look at the definition of impervious coverage. Basically, like the mayor said, um, in my reading of the report, um, I didn't think it was as clear as it could be in
the ordinance. So, I think that would be a a point that you're already looking at. So, not clear as to what action we need to take, but I think uh the council committee should look into that having a better definition in the ordinance. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Santoro.
Mr. Plaza, >> thank you, Madam Chair. Uh based on my personal experience on zoning board, I agree with Mr. Santoro. That was an issue that comes up quite a bit. Um and I, you know, the precise changes made to the definition. I I I can't speak to
there. We have to give that a lot of thought, but I I do think a tightening of the definition would assist uh both applicants and the zoning board in in doing its uh doing its work. >> Mr. As to the other three, I didn't see any merit uh at this time to either
doing anything prematurely with the master plan or making a recommendation. >> Thank you, Mr. Plaza. Anyone else? >> Miss Padichi, >> I I do agree with Mr. Plaza. I think that the definitions only one project committee is considering looking at it.
I think they should pursue it. Otherwise, I don't see any going forward from the planning board perspective making a specific pet. Anyone else? >> Mr. Schl here. Uh why don't we just ask him on the pool one? Are there any
changes? David, you were before both the planning board, the zoning board, and the township committee on that issue. or was there any change that can be made that a proposed ordinance that uh was different than that which they considered that would address their concern?
>> Yeah, I know the concern which the mayor agree with that a couple of meetings and it's the same issue. I mean I mean any any ordinance 100% watertight as far as what you want to accomplish something is always going to
get um you know there's a loophole or or a It's an odd situation that comes up situation zone board. Um but in in the case of the it's a difficult issue to address. Um you know you can't just say
if you're on a culdeac you don't have to comply with the ordinance. It's really tough to craft that and to tighten it up so much that there's no chance that a pool could get approved where you wouldn't want it. um it wouldn't it wouldn't even make sense to make a change in the ordinance cuz it would
just it wouldn't be loose enough for people on the culdeac. So I I looked at it spent a lot of time looking at the ordinance in order to to draft it the way it uh it was presented to the stat committee and then looked at it uh long
and hard some more after that. Uh I didn't see anything that could be done there. >> So there's nothing new on that. nothing to address the the trans community is concerned that it be you know 100% you know airtight as far as you know
providing full protection. I think the trans community is more concerned about not letting something slip through than having somebody go to the zoning board for you know what would be a slim duck approval but they just have to go to that extra step. uh they're more concerned with protecting somebody who
might get the unfortunate pool in the front yard, so to speak. >> All right. Well, given uh that comment, I mean, I don't see why that one should be advanced. I understand the historic district uh one is not or historic advisory historic
preservation advisory committee is something the township committee does not want to address. So, I wouldn't push that. But as it relates to the impervious coverage, I I honestly think that numbers one and two should be looked at and then it wouldn't be either
way it would have to be either some way reviewed by this body whether it's it's uh the township committee um initiates it, it comes back to this body. To me, it would make from a feasibility standpoint the most sense to originate
it from the body with the planners to be able to say, "Hey, here's what the definition should be." And to send it off to them as opposed to have them guessing and not having the input of the planners to say what it should be and then sending it back for changes. I mean,
>> what are you what are you talking about now? >> Impervious. Well, >> you're talking about number two, right? If nothing else, >> you talking about the definition, >> right? I think I'll start with the definition. >> Yeah, but we're we're already going to be working on that at TC. That's what I'm saying. So that I I don't I don't
necessarily see the need for this body to be doing duplicating and doing the same thing. >> I have basically just going to be working with our professionals. >> You'll be working with the the planning board professionals. >> Yes. >> To do that result. >> Yes.
>> Okay. I wasn't suggesting that we do that. I was just suggesting that we put our information on the recommendation and join in the request to the committee. If something were to be formulated, I I guess it comes down for review. >> I I would suggest that as well, Mr. Pa.
I I was going to suggest that we um rather than put this on the agenda for future meeting and use the experts, spend the money on the experts if the township committee is already going to do that. I I'm comfortable with writing a letter to the township committee.
um regarding the definition of impervious coverage and asking the township committee to to look at that as as they've already discussed doing. Um do we need a motion for that? Mr. Drill, >> you can make a motion to direct fan to write a letter to the governing body.
Okay. >> Joining in the uh recommendation of the BOA that the definition of impervious coverage be I guess it's amended, previewed, reviewed. >> No, there is none. There is none as far as I know. said there's no
>> added added there's no definition but but the materials aren't specified anything like that >> I prefer to say as opposed to amended say again >> just say reviewed as opposed to amended >> okay
be reviewed in accordance with the BOA's annual report >> Mr. >> Yeah something like that do you want to make that motion Mr. Plaza and a second. >> Miss Paditi, I heard um any other
discussion on it. Okay, then we'll have a roll call poll or should we just do by >> You can do a voice. >> Voice vote. >> I Okay, thank you everyone. >> Um is anyone opposed? >> Okay, hearing none, that's what we'll do. Thank you for all um taking the time
to do that. Um are there any other comments from board members? >> Um What does it say Mr. >> Are there any comments from staff? Thanks for signing. Meeting is a girl for sure.