I know it's a little jarring actually. >> I've never sat here. >> There's no I don't have the password for it. I really don't. Tyler. >> Oh, I like it. >> I'm calling to order the regular meeting of the June 16, 2026
Township of Bernard's Planning Board meeting. Please rise for the flag salute. >> Flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God,
>> liberty and justice for all. >> This is the open public meeting statement for 2026. 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 Bernards was posted on the bulletin board in the
reception hall of the municipal build building Folier Lane Basking Ridge, New Jersey was sent to the Burnersville News Whippony, New Jersey to the Courier News Bridgewater, New Jersey on January 21st, 2026. Was electronically mailed to all those people who have requested
individual notice and was posted on the official township website. The following procedure has been adopted by the Bernards 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. We have a roll
call. Miss Slayman. Mr. Angelo >> here. >> Mr. Argaw >> here. >> Miss Bannon >> here. >> Mr. Crane. >> Can you say that again? Mr. Crane. Mr. Crane.
Say it again. >> Here. here. >> Miss Manuk, >> Mr. Schaefer >> here, >> Mr. Seville >> here, >> Miss Smith >> here, >> Mr. Suburvey >> here, >> Mr. Tomkins >> here. >> Bone >> here. >> Fay
>> here. >> Mr. Sly >> here. >> And for the record, Miss Layman is present. Madam Chair, you have a quorum and may proceed. >> May I have a motion to excuse the absence of Mr. E Orio, who let us know beforehand that he was not going to be able to make this meeting.
Thank you, Mr. Seville. Seconded by Miss Manduke. All in favor? >> Opposed? None. Thank you. Motion carries. Uh, next item on the agenda is the approval of minutes for May 19th, 2026 are in regular session. These
minutes were previously distributed to all members of the planning board in advance. Um, ineligible. I have um as ineligible to vote, Miss Bannon and Miss Manduk. Um, >> oh, Mr. Crane as well,
>> correct? Because he recused. >> Oh, thank you. He recused. Um, and Mr. Crane is >> Sorry. >> I wasn't here the last one either, so >> this is for May 19th. >> Oh, May 19th. Oh, >> you were here. >> Disregard.
>> Okay. So, um, May 19th, 2026, regular session. Are there any comments or edits? Seeing none, may I have a motion to approve the minutes as drafted? >> So moved. >> Thank you, Mith. Seconded by Mr. Tomkins.
>> And I have a roll call. Miss Slayman. >> Argua. >> Yes. >> Mr. Schaefer. >> Yes. >> Mr. Spill. >> Yes. >> Miss Smith? >> Yes. >> Mr. Spurvy? >> Yes. >> Mr. Tomkins? >> Yes. >> Mr. Angelo? >> Yes. >> Thank you.
>> Motion carries. Next item on the agenda is a completeness hearing of Amsac Gasking Ridge LLC block 11301 lots 1.01 and 1.02 180 to 181 Mountain View Boulevard amended preliminary and final
site plan PB26-E2. Do we have a representative or no? >> Oh, we do. >> Just want to talk into the mic. That's all. >> Sure. Um, whatever the pleasure of the board, I'd be happy to make an appearance or just be here to answer questions.
>> And your name? >> Michael Castori of the law firm of Dave Pittney here this evening on behalf of the applicant, Amsac Basking Ridge LLC. >> Um, we do have Mr. Schlly's memo in front of us. Um, Mr. Schly had
previously given us a memo that had a few items that were needed to be completed and we got a follow-up that was dated June 5th, 2026. We got a follow-up me memo on June 15th, yesterday, 2026, where it indicated that
all items had the application been reviewed for completeness pursuant to section 21-51 of the land development ordinance and all applicable items have been submitted. Is that correct, Mr. Schlay? >> Yes. >> Does anyone have any questions of the
applicant or his attorney? Okay. Then I will entertain a motion to deem the application complete. Time. >> So moved. >> Thank you, Mr. Seville. A second. >> Second. >> Uh, Miss Manduk.
May I have a roll call? Miss Kefir. I miss Slayman. Old Hav die hard. Miss Slayman. >> Mr. Argaw. >> Yes. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Hold on one second. Mr. Crane is has recused himself. Thank you, Mr. Crane for reminding me of that from
from this vote. >> Mr. Argawal, >> yes. >> Miss Bannon, >> yes. >> Van Duke, >> yes. >> Mr. Schaefer, >> yes. >> Mr. Seville, >> yes. >> Miss Smith, >> yes. >> Mr. Suburvy, >> yes. >> Mr. Tomkins, >> yes.
>> Chairwoman, Mr. Angelo, >> yes. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Um, could we possibly speak about a potential scheduling of a hearing date? >> Um, sure. Uh you can go ahead. >> Uh what was the board planning to meet?
I believe twice in July. >> Uh we are not going to meet July 7th because we have a lot of people that are going to be on vacation. >> Understood. >> Um July 2nd meeting in July is also relatively
tentative. I would prefer an August meeting to tell you the truth. >> All right. Sure. When and what was >> it's the first Tuesday after the first Monday of the of the month. >> August 4th. >> August 4 >> be the first meeting after August 4th.
>> Uh that would be I believe the 18th 18th or we can roll you into September. >> Pardon us for >> No, no, it's fine. Take your time. August 18th, right? We'll lock it in if that's all
right. >> Yeah. Hopefully we'll have enough members then and yeah, it should be fine. >> Anything else? >> Thank you so much. >> Okay. Have a great one >> later this summer. >> Okay. >> Enjoy your vacations. >> Yeah. The 250th.
Um, all right. The next item on the agenda is an ordinance referral. This is an ordinance referral from the township committee on ordinance number 2599, an ordinance of the township of Bernard, county of Somerset, state of New Jersey, amending, revising, and
supplementing the code of the township of Burners, chapter 21 land development regarding uses permitted in the E1, E2, E3, E4, and E5 office. I would like to have Miss Fehee come up and if you could give us a brief overview. Um you have
distributed a me memo to us dated June 12th, 2026. Uh a master plan consistency review of this ordinance. We also have received the ordinance that was sent to us uh the suggested drafted ordinance by the
planning board. Um the changes um I would just like to note for the record that Mr. Crane is back for uh this application I mean this ordinance review. Correct Mr. Crane? Mr. Crane. >> Yes.
>> You're back for this ordinance review, correct? Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Okay. So, um I hope that you all had a chance to review the memo and I apologize for sending an incorrect memo at the beginning of the day last
whatever that was, Thursday or Friday. Um but I'm I can make this pretty short and sweet. Um the memo as you explained >> back maybe move it a little further away from
>> think so. Yeah. >> Uh okay. So it's sort of threefold. Um as you said it, uh amends the definitions section of your zoning code to add a definition pertaining to data centers as well as a
critical IT load. The second part of the ordinance um amends the sections pertaining to what's prohibited within all zones within the uh within the township. And
then the third portion um removes the words data processing centers from your list of permitted uses within all of the office districts specifically because currently what your zoning ordinance says is that data processing centers are
a permitted use in the E1, E2, E3 and so on. Um, I listed within the memo, um, after reviewing the 2023 master plan, I want to say eight different goals, uh,
pertaining to land use within the township that at that mic because this everyone Yeah. would you mind? Yes, >> this was fine actually. >> Sorry. It's just important to get this
record straight and I want sitting at this one. >> I know, but let's see. Um, >> take a take a load off your feet. >> Okay, so um >> much better >> after after listing the memo or sorry
the uh the goals that are specific to um what I felt was relevant to prohibiting this particular kind of use. I also went through the um objectives within the land use plan and
listed those for you as well. There's four specifically and um also four specific objectives with regard to conservation and environmental resources as data centers as we all know within
the news um are peing the interest um with regard to the environmental impacts um that they may or may not bring with them. So, um, in my professional opinion, after finding
a lot of goals and objectives that align with prohibition and finding no mention whatsoever of a preference for data centers um, or data processing centers within the master plan, I believe that
this ordinance is not inconsistent with the master plan, but in fact consistent with your master Um from your memo it was the um natural resources, environmental, you mentioned the electric grid and water use as well,
>> right? And the the township's wishes to things at um a specific capacity to not go over um and that that's pretty clear. >> Yeah. Go ahead. I heard a little Oh, so we have three options. Consistent, not
inconsistent, inconsistent. Right. >> Um the way that I always explain it to the boards that I go before is the way that it's written within the MLUL and it is specifically not inconsistent. >> Can say that it is consistent with you
can go above and beyond that, but the the the requirement is to state whether or not it is inconsistent. have another question. I know that our attorney me on the definitions. Would you like to >> uh I just there there's one
recommendation I would make about modifying the ordinance and it's nothing substantive. I just it um part one amends section 21-3.1 to add a definition well definitions for
critical IT electrical load and data centers. Then part two amends section 21-10.3 to add a subsection A2 prohibiting data centers. But that the rest of that paragraph is essentially a repeat of the
new definition of data centers. And then sub A3 is sort of an ex carve out from that definition >> A3. Yeah. >> What data centers does not include. I always believe that that you don't
want to cover the same subject matter twice because at best you're consistent. Your suggestion would be >> put to move all the definitional provisions into the definition section. >> So move section
>> two and three. >> Well, the the the two after the word data centers because that that's the operative thing and then so so the rest of two and three to the extent you want to generally exclude all those things from the definition of data center
should all be in 21-3.1. Yeah, I agree. >> So, um I I don't disagree, but I just want to make sure that I'm clear. Is any of the language after data centers period in section two necessary
given that it >> if it if it's if it's just listless data centers and >> just data centers. >> Okay. So, and then I'll move the rest of the data data centers shall not include up to the >> the definition section. That would be my
recommendation. The only part that isn't mentioned in the first part of the definition is that sentence that says this limitation shall not apply to hospitals, public safety facilities or public utility infrastructure otherwise permitted by this chapter which I feel is important
and so we could move that up to the front. >> I think it makes sense to move that up to the to the front and then also move >> shall not include >> shall not include >> everything from shall not include onward. Right. >> Okay. I think we're all on the same page. Does anyone else have a um
comment? I know Mr. Crane had something that he wanted to ask. Crane. >> Yes. It's more of a comment about the ordinance, not so much a question. Everybody else their questions. I'll make my comment. >> Okay. Let me just make sure everyone's
done with their questions. Everyone done with their questions? Okay. The floor is yours, Mr. Crane. Yes. Uh I just want to start off that I think this is a well-ritten ordinance with a lot of thought to it. It
maintains our office building uses for data processing which is so uh it doesn't become a non-compliant uh use as long as they meet the standards of the 10,000 or 20%.
Um the uh uh I think we've have a history in asking regeneration residents. So I'm familiar with the office buildings going up from the 70s. Uh there was always a concern how it would impact the community. I think
we've done a good job of putting by the interstate and having large setbacks. Um and minimizing the residentials around it. Uh so I think I think our history of of not having impact on residential uh
is stays in place here. It allows the existing use to stay in existing use. It eliminates high impact use for the future. Um the the one thing that most people think of data centers is the amount of water electricity going into
it. They don't realize on evaporation towers, uh, if you had a 200,000 square office building, you'd be generating 100,000 gallons going into the sewer because it doesn't all evaporate through the cooling tower. Um, there's uh the
master plan talks about the utility service plan, about how close we are at capacity with our sewer plant, the Harrison sewer plant. Um the this is this is critical that we don't exceed
our capacity and by keeping the office building uh capacity the same which it would be that we wouldn't have an impact on the sewer plant. It also water that goes from evaporation towers also has to be processed. There's
extra electric cost and could add to the flooding to the streams. So I just want to emphasize it's just not the utilities going in. It's also the utilities going in that has the environmental impact >> going out. You mean >> going out? Yes. So I don't everybody
understood me or has any questions but that's my uh two cents. >> No, that's well stated, Mr. Crane. And you're also on the sewage authority, correct? >> Yes. But vice chair, but I don't want to speak as a resident. >> Okay. As a resident. All right. >> Um yeah, I think she does cover a lot of
this. um Miss Fehee in her memo in terms of generally the environmental impacts and limitations um and the minimizing the impact of development on the everyday environment. But you made it more specific. So thank
you. Anyone have any other questions or comments? >> My only comment I'll make is just thank you to Miss for giving thorough and effective memo. I think lays out all the the risks Yes, you did a nice job going through our master plan and getting very very
familiar with it. And having worked on it myself when we revi we did a re-examination, I was very impressed that you our master plan. All right. So with that, I will um entertain a motion.
I would say motion to deem it as not inconsistent unless you'd like to go a step further, Miss Vandu. Not inconsistent with our master plan. Um, and uh to make the to make the suggested
edits um available to the township for the definitional section um that we noted. Thank you, Miss Ban. >> Second by Mr. Schaefer. May I have Are there any other comments before we do a roll call? We have a roll call. Miss Slayman.
>> Bannon. >> Yes. >> Mr. Crane. >> Mr. Crane. >> Yes. >> Van Duke. >> Yes. >> Mr. Schaefer. >> Yes. >> Mr. Spill. >> Yes. >> Smith. >> Yes. >> Mr. Spurby. >> Mr. Tomkins.
>> Yes. >> Chairwoman Mr. Angelo. >> Yes. Very good. Um, so the ordinance will go back to the township committee as deemed not inconsistent and with our suggested revisions in the definition section. Now I will entertain any
comments from members. Mr. Crane, do you have any comments? Any comments from staff? No. Okay, I will entertain a motion to adjurnn. Mr. Agarwal has the motion and second.
>> Second. >> All in favor? >> I opposed. >> That does it.