My life's been pretty >> anyway. Le's not coming. >> Oh, Mar's not coming yet. >> And Le's not coming >> because Ry's not here. is not here.
>> We are now. >> Good evening and welcome to the July 21, 2015 regular meeting of the Bernards Township Planning Board. Please rise for the flag salute. >> I pledge to the flag of the United
States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [Applause] >> 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 building, Collier Lane, Basking Ridge, New Jersey. was sent to the Burnsville News, Bernardsville, New Jersey, to the Courier News, Bridgewater, New Jersey on
January 12, 2015, and was electronically mailed to all those people who have requested individual notice. 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.
>> Friend, roll call, please. >> Miss Albert, >> here. >> Mr. Kuchi. >> Yes. >> Mr. Hagen, >> yes. >> Miss Kleiner, >> yes. >> Mr. Malay, >> here. >> Um, I do not see Miss Pavini. >> She she she called in. Her daughter is
she's bringing her daughter home from a medical emergency. She's asked to be excused. >> Okay. Uh, Miss Padichi >> here, >> Mr. Plaza >> here, >> Mr. Centro told us in advance he would not be here. Miss Ax >> here, >> Mr. Harris also told us he would not be
here in advance of the meeting. So is there a motion as to Mr. Harris, Mr. Santoro, and Mr. >> So moved. >> Thank you, Miss Padichi. Second. Second. >> Thank you, Miss Kleiner. All in favor? >> I. >> All opposed >> to excuse the absence.
Uh, hearing no opposition, the motions carried. And again, that was a motion to excuse those absences previously recited. The minutes will so reflect. Uh, next item on the agenda is the approval of minutes. That is the May 19, 2015 regular meeting minutes which were
disseminated in advance of the meeting. Is there a motion? Mayor, I have uh a mayor. I'm the mayor. Uh Mr. Chairman, I have uh a uh a comment. Would you rather have the motion? >> If we could get the motion.
>> Okay, Mr. Mayor. >> And and thank you for the field commission. >> Um Mr. Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to approve the May 19th uh minutes as >> special meeting. >> Um special meeting is drafted. >> There's any.
>> Is there a second? >> Second. >> So seconded. >> Thank you, Mr. Pichi. Okay. Discussion on the motion, Mr. M. >> Yeah, I'm marked as absent. Excuse me. I'm marked as late. Uh I arrived at 10 because I was recused from the earlier portion of the meeting.
>> Yeah, maybe we could just move Mr. Malay up to the members present. with that explanation instead of >> okay >> marking him late because you >> arrived at 10 after recusal. >> Yeah, I wasn't tardy.
>> All right, with that that's all. Okay, Miss Kleiner, that that amendment is acceptable to you >> and I'll second the amendment. >> Any further discussion? >> Seeing none, the roll call for please. >> Miss Alper. >> Yes. Mr. Kuchi, >> abstain.
>> Mr. Hagen, >> yes. Miss Kleiner. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mle. >> Yes. >> Miss Padichi. >> Yes. >> Miss Ax. >> Yes. >> Mr. Plaza. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Next item on the agenda is the approval
of charges against escrow accounts. Tonight we're considering those of Jonathan Drill Esquire for June 2015 and those of EKA Associates June 16 through 30, 2015. Is there a motion? >> Mr. Chair, I move that we accept the
charges as stated. >> Thank you, Miss Elers. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Thank you, Miss Axe. Any discussion on that motion? >> On the bell, uh, have they been notified that they have negative escrow? I imagine they have. Thank you, Mr. Florio. >> I may have to send them a second letter,
but that yes, they have been notified. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Pichi. Any other comments or or suggestions? Okay, seeing none, then roll call, please. >> Miss Zapper, >> yes. Mr. Kuchi, >> yes. >> Mr. Hagen. >> Yes. >> M. >> Climber. >> Yes. >> Mr. Malay. >> Yes.
>> Miss Padichi. >> Yes. >> Miss Ax. >> Yes. >> Mr. Plaza. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> All right. Uh, we have two items. Next up for completeness review. The first one is 131 Morristown Road Investors LLC
PB15-00002 block 801 block 231 Morristown Road Preliminary and Final Site Plan and Bulk Variance. Oh, good evening. >> Good evening, chairman. Members of the boarding completion. >> My apologies. You have
>> project. >> Okay. Uh before you preemptively comment, I'm just going to have Mr. Fly, our township planner, take us through the his memo. >> Sure. I issued a completeness actually I issued a completeness review memo back on June 11, 2015 which indicated there
were a couple items deficient. Uh the applicant made a resubmission and I issued a a second uh completeness review memo dated July 13, 2015 indicating that all the required items have been submitted. >> Terrific. Do you have anything further? Nothing further.
>> Okay. Uh, is there a motion? >> Yes, Mr. Chair. I'll make a motion to deem the application for 131 Morristown Road Investors prelimining a site final site plan PB number PB15-00002 block 8 01 lot 231 Morristown Road. I
deem it a motion to make it complete. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Petri. Is there a second? >> Second, Miss Albert. Thank you, Miss Albert. Uh, is there any discussion on that motion? >> My apologies, gentlemen. >> Yes, ming.
>> Miss Alfred did. >> Miss Alfred, >> did you have any further comment on the motion? I'm sorry. That's easy. >> I'm sorry. I'm trying to do two things at the same time, but it's not working. My apologies. >> Sorry. Forgive me. I'm just having fun. Uh, no further discussion. Seen then,
please roll. Miss Alper, >> yes. >> Mr. Galluchi, >> yes. >> Mr. Hagen, >> yes. >> Miss Clanner, >> yes. >> Mr. Malay, >> yes. >> Miss Padichi, >> yes. >> Miss Ax, >> yes. >> Mr. Plaza, >> yes. Uh, do we have any idea when this
is going to be lifted? Do we? >> Well, we have tentatively um put them on October 6th. That's tentative. Um, we've not talked to them about it at all. Okay. So, that's a tenative date. Obviously, it'll firm up as we get closer to it.
>> Okay. >> Thank you, council. >> Our next matter on for completeness review is ecological solutions for Mine Brook Road LLC PD12-005B, block 4701, lots 2.01 through 2.13, amended
preliminary and final major subdivision, amended preliminary final site plan 12005B. Mr. Park, >> yes. uh issued a completeness review memo dated July 7, 2015. Uh in that memo, there are six items
listed as deficient. >> Okay. Is the applicant present on that? >> Um Eric from Golden Engineering. We submitted >> I'm very sorry. You got to be a lot closer. >> You were kind of walking up to the mic. Just state your name, please. Spell your last name.
>> Certainly. It's Eric Rutner. R U P N A R A I N. and I'm the engineer for the applicant on this amended portion of the um the mine Brook project. Um we did receive your planners memo. Um there's a couple things in here
that what the applicant is looking to do is there was a feature that was approved as a part of the original subdivision and site plan and we're looking to eliminate that feature and that is the bio retention swale. Uh so a couple >> I'm very sorry but for some reason other you've g have to get really close close
to >> speak louder too. Okay. Is that better? >> Yes, much better. >> Um, there was a fire retention swale that was approved as a part of the original subdivision and site plans. Uh, the applicant is now seeking an amended
preliminary and final subdivision and site plan approval to eliminate that swale. Uh, so we did submit the amended application. I've looked and reviewed uh the planners memo and there are a couple things in here um for instance uh that's being requested and one item is
construction details which since we're eliminating a feature and we're not adding anything as a part of this amendment uh that really doesn't apply to this particular project. Um we also submitted a >> why don't you go item by item. >> Oh let Mr.
Well, there there are um a couple features that are propos aside from eliminating the swale there. There's an outlet structure or another piece of pipe there going to be re shifted over. Um I mean this is really you can have a discussion
with the board engineer about it, but they there need to be construction details. If you're not changing anything, the features that are shown on the plan, it's a minor item. I wouldn't argue over it tonight. I'm looking for details that may be exactly the same as is shown on the approved plan. Um, but
to me it looked like something uh was changing on those details. >> I think the only thing on that was actually changing in that area was the weren't moving. >> Can I ask you something? >> Tonight's July 21st and he issued that letter July 7th, correct? >> Yes. >> Why didn't you call him? Why are you
coming here bringing it up for the first time in front of the board without calling him first? I did not. >> Is there would you consent to adjourning this so that you in the interim would have an
opportunity to to contact Mr. Shaw because going through this point by point? >> It's not a real good use of time >> and it's also not likely that we're going to entertain a a submission waiver request on the fly without our planner having had an opportunity to consider
it. So we would probably be inclined to just deem it incomplete. And then so instead of doing that, would you consent on behalf of the applicant to an adjournment? So that >> in other words, you're going to extend the the board's time to determine whether or not it's complete because if you don't, they're going to deem it
incomplete. Then you can apply for a waiver after and then the 45day clock starts again. >> That's fine. >> If I can just jump in there, there is one item that I I think we can address. >> We're not going to do everything. Let's not do >> No. No. Well, it's going to be incomplete. But if the applicant is going to come back, maybe if they know if the board is willing to grant at
least one waiver, then they don't have to worry about that item rather than, you know, the board they may come back and, you know, they could have at least information on the one item, which I think is a pretty simple one. >> Okay. What's that? >> It's the environmental impact uh assessment and project report. Their their change to the plans is strictly
related to eliminating a drainage feature, a swale. They submitted a a detailed storm water management report. Um, so basically they're submitting the portion of the environmental report and project report that is relevant to this. In my opinion, what they're doing as far
as the drainage change does not affect any other aspect of the project as far as traffic or economics or or uh any other environmental concerns. And um, you know, rather than them going through the motions with an environmental impact assessment and project report, you know,
they they are uh, I suppose they're requesting a waiver of that. And as far as at least the submission requirement, if the board feels they uh need some information on some other aspect other than stormwater management, they can request it during the uh the hearing process, but it certainly to me doesn't
seem like that's necessary as a submission requirement. >> Okay. >> All right. So, we've been given that guidance. You've got that feedback, but you need to address the other issues in advance. Do we have an idea of when we can get this relisted? >> We think we can get it relisted August 4th. I think though so that the board
doesn't deem it incomplete tonight, you should consent to extend the completeness determination 45 days because if they deemed it incomplete tonight, that would start the 45day flight. So you would consent to a 45day extension from tonight? >> Yes. >> Now knowing that if you talk to Mr.
Schlly and work out any differences and if you still need waiverss or whatever, August 4 you could be slotted on for another completeness determination. >> Okay, that's uh perfectly fine. I'll give David a call tomorrow and we'll work out any details. >> Okay. Terrific. And just to so we're
clear, you have the authority on behalf of the applicant to give the extension that you just gave to the board. >> Um the applicant unfortunately is not here. >> No, but have you been authorized by the applicant? >> I have not spoken to the applicant. >> He's another problem. I didn't want to say this before. He's an engineer. He's not an attorney and that's another
problem. >> But I didn't want to start. He could be have been given a >> Is there any real harm in just deeming it incomplete like >> if you don't have the authority to to give us that extension? Unfortunately, we have no choice. It's not going to change the outcome. You can still confer
with Mr. Schl. We'll get the application back on track. >> So, is there a motion? >> I move >> Go ahead, Mr. Chair, that we deem the uh application in complete. >> Second. >> I'll second. >> Thank you, Mr. D. Any discussion on the
motion? Take on roll call, please. >> Miss Alper, >> yes. >> Mr. Kuchi, >> yes. >> Mr. Hagen, >> yes. >> Mr. Planner, >> yes. >> Malay, >> yes. >> Miss Padichi, >> yes. >> Miss, >> yes. >> Mr. Mr. Plaza, >> yes. >> Thank you. >> Okay. So, the motion's granted, which
means the application is deemed incomplete, but you'll contact Mr. Okay. Thank you. >> M, you'll be leaving us at this time as >> Yes, I will. Application. Have a good evening, sir. >> Thank you. Is anyone else departing us? Mr. You have a good evening, sir.
>> Mr. >> Okay. Next item on the agenda is the continued public hearing. Islamic Society of Basking Ridge, Inc. PB12-001, block 9301, lot 2,24 Church Street, preliminary and final site plan approval.
>> Okay. Uh, M. Your appearance, Mr. R. Thank you, Mr. Simon. How about your appearance as long as just in keeping with custom? >> Good evening, Mr. Simon. Uh before we proceed with the application, there's some housekeeping items that Mr. Droll will address. >> We have two housekeeping items. We still
have uh Mrs. Loretta Quick's PowerPoint. Remember, she presented the PowerPoint. She testified. It wasn't admitted into evidence that night. You're going to work out some uh differences. It got
very close. She had told us she couldn't be here tonight. She submitted what she thinks complies with whatever you two guys worked out. And it ends up apparently that there's still a couple differences. So again, until the two of
you, meaning the applicant and Mrs. Quick, reach an agreement, I don't think we should put this into evidence tonight. And then if you can't come to an agreement at the next hearing session, then the board will have to make the call on it. But I know you guys are very close. And so, um, if you could
just get a hold of her like tomorrow, email her and I'm sure I believe her husband is here and he will tell her to expect contact by the applicant so she can finish working out this thing so it could be admitted. Okay. >> Surely you understand that I'm not
authorized to speak. >> Absolutely. >> I didn't ask you to speak for I asked you to to to pass a message on. I'm sure you can do that. >> Well, we'll see. >> Yeah. That's the first housekeeper. If if for some reason you don't come to
an agreement, let's say by the Thursday prior to the next meeting where this would come up, can you put in writing articulating your objections to whatever aspects of the exhibit >> the applicant has? This way we can
consider it in advance and be ready to rule. >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay. The second housekeeping item is that Mr. Simon and Mr. Rayar presented a joint suggestion to the board and I'm going to paraphrase from
it and it's my understanding that the chairman agrees with it except for one part which I mentioned and then my understanding is the chairman is going to want to so rule and ask the board if anyone wants to make a motion to overrule him. So this is a letter I'm paraphrasing from a letter dated July
16th um to the board from Mr. Simon with a copy to Mr. Ramar myself. Um, regarding the above referenced matters scheduled for hearing on July 21, 2015, please accept this letter as a joint request to the board from Mr.
Rayar and me. We respectfully request in the interest of continuity and having an orderly conclusion of the to the application that if the public portion of the July 21, 2015 hearing extends beyond 9:30,
but ends before 11 p.m., neither Mr. Raymore nor I would be required to give our respective summations until the August 4th, 2015 hearing. Under those circumstances, at the conclusion of the public portion of the hearing, in
parentheses, sometime between 9:30 p.m. to 11 p.m., the board would close the public portion of the meeting. Should public comment on July 21 extend past 11, we would respectfully request that the board consider possibly extending the meeting that night for 30 minutes or so in order to bring the public comment
portion of the hearing to an end on July 21. Should the public portion conclude before 9:30 on July 21, council agree that Mr. Simon would present his summation that evening, meaning tonight, to conclusion, and Mr. Ramar would then
deliver his summation at the August 4th hearing. Finally, should the public portion on July 21 not conclude by the end of the evening, the goal would be to complete the public portion on August 4th to be followed by summations by both council that evening.
each summation not to exceed 90 minutes. Kindly advise as soon as you can the disposition of the buff request. Now, they also requested that the August 4th meeting start at 7 PM and I had indicated to them, but I'll indicate that the chairman was not inclined to start that meeting any earlier, but that
everything else he thought he was in agreement with and he was going to so rule and ask the board for if anyone wanted to make a motion. Am I correct? >> That that's correct. And and with the start time issue being logistically creates problems uh both in terms of uh
coordinating the use of the meeting room as well as notice requirements. So that's that's why we're not inclined to do that or well why I am not inclined to uh to rule on that. Is there a motion from the board over ruling the preliminary decision? Okay. Seeing none
then that that's the decision on the joint request from the applicant and and Mr. Simon. >> Okay. Anything else Mr. Nope. >> Well, before we we're gonna we're just going to have a reading of the statement that we've been reading at the
commencement of public comment meetings for the benefit of everyone here and to give everyone a break. Miss Alfer has graciously agreed to read the statement this evening. >> Miss Alfer was told to read the statement this evening. This is the continuation of the hearing on the Islamic Society of Basking Ridge
application for construction of a mosque on block 9301 lat 2 known as 124 Church Street. And tonight we are in the portion of the hearing which is known as the public comment portion for the public's benefit so that everyone will understand a little bit about the process. The board has rules that apply
to the manner in which the planning board is required to proceed. And previously, as you know, the applicant, the Islamic Society, presented its evidence and testimony, which was then followed by the objector's evidence and testimony through objector's attorney, Mr. Simon. This is now the third portion
of the hearing known as the public comment portion. And there is a rule that applies to it which states that after the applicant's presentation and then the objector's presentation portions of the hearing, the board shall thereafter recognize public comments by interested parties provided that those
making comments are sworn and each such interested party is subject to cross-examination and questioning. So, the way this will proceed is that we will recognize anybody who wants to make a public comment. You will then be sworn and testify to the facts which you
believe are relevant to the application, whether you're in favor of or against it or just have comments that you want the board to consider in deliberating on the application. And once you make those statements, you'll then be subject to cross-examination. Also, the board rules state that the board may exclude
irrelevant, immaterial, unduly repetitious evidence and or disorderly testimony. We urge everybody to please be respectful of each other. Everybody has a voice. The whole purpose of this is so the board can hear what is on the public's mind that is relevant relating to the application so that we can fairly
consider what's before us. Please, it is not helpful to us for people to either cheer or clap or make negative comments about anything that's being said. We have to consider the evidence. We must consider the facts within the law that constrains us. And people's
emotional sentiments will not help us come to that conclusion. So we do ask that everybody be respectful and you will be heard if you want to be. All the statements that are provided to the board as we stated must be sworn testimony which as well as any exhibits
uh must be relevant and material in order that the board allows it it into evidence. The reason we make that point is because there were previous rulings made relating to the application. The board previously ruled on two issues. The first related to traffic on
Church Street and the second related to sewer capacity and hookups. What we ruled is that neither of those issues is within our jurisdiction. The board will not consider any testimony or exhibits on the issues of traffic on Church Street and sewer capacity hookups because they're irrelevant and
immaterial as a result of being outside of our this board's jurisdiction. That does not mean that they're irrelevant or immaterial to other agencies considering the application or other aspects of the application, but this board cannot consider these issues in the application
for site plan approval which is pending before this board. We urge the public to avoid introducing any irrelevant or immaterial testimony or exhibits because the result will be objections from the applicants council which will have the effect of interrupting the flow of the public's presentations. Members of the
public are of course entitled to submit any comments, exhibits or evidence to the proper forums regarding the church street traffic and sewer issues. The church street traffic issue is before the county planning board and the sewer hookup issue will be before the Bernard's Township Sewage Authority and
the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. So you will have an opportunity to address those issues before those two agencies or organizations. But if any comments are addressed to them in this forum, we must ask you to cease your testimony regarding those issues. We cannot
consider them. The board's rules are on the township website. You can download them and the citation of the particular rule to which we have been referring is rule 2 colon 2-3F like Frank and it's under the section
captioned order of presentation. Another relevant and important rule is rule 2 col2-9 which is captioned evidence and exhibits and referring to two sentences. The board must follow case law precedent as
to admission of evidence in administrative proceedings. The last sentence of rule 22-9 states that the board may exclude irrelevant, immaterial, unduly repetitious evidence and disorderly testimony. Miss Florio is going to put a
pad of paper on the table and we ask that when the chair recognizes you, come up to that uh place, write your name and address on the pad and it will make Fran's job easier in taking the minutes.
>> Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Miss Albert. Appreciate it. Okay. Uh with that having been said, we're going to resume public comment. M I believe you were sworn at some other point, but we're going to do it just in case. But could you just write your name down for
You swear that the comments and testimony that you will give in this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth will shall help you guide. >> I do. >> And can you state your name and your address for the record? >> Michael Park, 14 and Road. >> We want to thank you, Mr. Chairman,
Madam Vice Chair, board members. U also special thanks to And I've also >> Mr. Bar, you're either going to have to pick up the mic. >> You have to take the handheld. >> Yeah. The handheld mic and hold it directly. >> This one here. >> Yep.
>> Yes. Yes. >> Sorry. >> Right. Right up to >> Okay. Um well, thank thanks again and I've also enjoyed the interaction with you, Mr. Drill, Mr. Rayar. Um and perhaps as someone else had said about uh many folks that we've met in uh
in town uh through this uh process u and as I stated in the beginning and repeat today that I I have appreciated the friendly conversations I've had with Mr. Chry over the years. Um and perhaps as Mr. Hagen had said, Mr. uh Mr. Chry,
sorry you had to go through all this. Um and um maybe as Mr. Santoro said uh the board put this uh the applicant in this position, but those aren't reasons to actually approve the the application because if anything, those I'm not certain those aren't reason to
disqualify uh board members, but I'll leave that to the board. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to first make a motion dismiss this application for lack of standing. That basis is it's probably fair somebody says why we why after three
years are we even still here in this application should have been dismissed on day one. I think you're actually the board's own rules say that the application needs to be signed by the property owner of record or agent for complete aspects of application. And unlike what Mr. drill uh advised on the
jurisdiction of of of uh the SO issue. Uh the applicant does not have standing to file this application because they're not the owner uh of the easement and uh they u I think it's clear that they lack a sufficient interest in the purported
sewer easement to even file an application before this board and therefore it should be dismissed for lack of standing. >> Objection. >> I don't know if an objection is appropriate because he's making a motion. So, are you making a formal motion on this point? >> Yes, I Yes, I am. >> Okay.
>> Regarding uh sewage, and Miss Alpert just read a uh statement for the third consecutive meeting that anything dealing with sewers is not before the board. >> He's making a motion to dismiss based on standing. We're going to hear the basis.
the basis might not be legitimate based on that argument that you're going to make, but I I think in fairness, he should be able to make the motion and then you'll be able to oppose it. >> Thank you. >> Because even Mr. Drill had stated, it's not within the board jurisdiction to
resolve property disputes, but those are recorded property interests. >> Okay. I I need you for the benefit of the board to be a little more specific as to what the actual basis I I think I know I think I can infer from what you're saying what what the basis of the
motion is but I need you to articulate it a little more directly >> that is well to degree that this site plan application includes the includes the easement across the quick property and Mr. Ramos states himself >> the application does not include
anything your property is not in the application. I know that your contention is they don't have an easement to run the sewer line under your property. So what the chairman is asking how does whether or not they have an easement to have the sewer under your property impact their standing to bring an
application for development on the property they own? Because I believe that that's the application he signed as owner. >> Mr. I think you're referring to I'm sorry. >> What did I say? Oh, >> you said me. >> I'm sorry. Mr. Quick's property.
>> So, >> well, repeat your repeat your theory again, please. >> I'm trying to understand your theory. My understanding is from looking at the application, the applicant signed the application for the subject property, meaning where they want to build the mosque, and that the applicant owns the
property on which the mosque is going to be constructed. Is that your understanding >> on the uh the 124 Church Street without the uh without the easement or the purported >> right without the easement? >> U because repeat that again because I'm not uh
>> tell you what my advice to the board is standing is necessary to make an application on a particular property. >> If the application is being made for 124 Church Street to have a mosque on it, if
the the applicant owns 124 Church Street or if the applicant didn't own it and they had property owners consent to file the application, they would have standing to file the application of development on 124 Church Street. I believe that this motion that the the dismissal based on standing, the theory
of the motion is that the applicant doesn't own a sewer easement over Mr. Crick's property. That's in my legal opinion irrelevant to standing to bring this application. that goes to the underlying the board shouldn't approve this because they have no sewer easement
where I I've already weighed in. The board has weighed in and in fact the Burners Township Sewage Authority has weighed in and said they they need to come here first before they'll consider it. >> So unless Mr. Bart has something more on standing,
I I believe he's barking up the wrong tree on with sewer on standing. Is that a proper recitation or accurate recitation of the basis of your motion? >> Well, I think it's as far as a demarcation between a piece of property and the easement. But I'm not certain I
would agree with Mr. Drill that the um uh a sewer hookup versus knowing if if they actually admitted they didn't have an easement and didn't have an and a court. Okay. >> It's not a standing argument. That's an argument to deny the application. Well,
you're talking about the scope of the application. I disagree with Mr. Drill on the scope of the application, >> but but you're talking about the applicant's requirement to demonstrate that they will have adequate sewer service to the property if granted approval. Is that >> Well, no, I'm not talking about the sewer hookup because that but really is
that they they're saying that easement is part of this application. >> Okay. I I understand I understand your motion. Does any board member have a question for Mr. concerning the motion that he's making before we turn it over to Mr. Rayar to weigh in on opposition.
Mr. Hagen, >> could you ask him to restate the entire motion just >> Yeah. >> Because feast meal? >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, >> well, I made a motion to dismiss for lack of standing. >> Okay. Mr. Hagen and I think some other board members are not clear as to the specific basis why you think you're
entitled to win that motion. And so now without any interruption uh from from the board, we're going to ask you to present it again. >> Right. Well, and so the um the applicant lacks the standard the the standing because they have an insufficient
interest in the purported sewer ement to even file an application. Mr. uh Mr. or Mr. Ramar himself admitted that there was no recorded sewer ement to serve the property and actually although Mr. drill may have tried to to
label it. Mr. Ramar stated he did not know what it was as far as describing what type of maybe adverse possession. Um and so if the um if that easement is part of the application and the application must be signed by the
property owner of record and this is not recorded. Therefore, they do not have standing. >> Is there any follow-up questions from the board? Okay. See, Mr. Hagen, >> am I correct in understanding that what
we're talking about is the sewer beyond our jurisdiction or are we talking about something other than that? >> We're talking about an easement across somebody else's property. >> May I ask a question, Mr. >> Sure. Absolutely. >> Are you saying, Mr. start that because
we're not aware of the legal existence of an easement across the quicks property that the applicant therefore does not have standing to make the application before the board. >> Well, not only aware but the applicant
is not even proposing that they have a recorded interest. >> Uh Mr. Mr. Raymore, do you want to reply to the motion? >> I would argue against the motion for the reasons that Mr. Bill articulated. This was an application
for the site of the proposed mosque. We have all the required ownership and therefore all the required standing. Everything that goes on beyond the four corners of our property is for some other jurisdiction and for some other
day. Any questions for Mr. Rammore? >> As my preliminary ruling, the issue that you're raising with respect to the easement is outside of our jurisdiction to consider. It doesn't
relate directly to this application or the property that is the subject of the application. That's not to say it isn't a valid issue to be raised before some other board or agency, but it's just not an appropriate consideration for this board. So the motion is denied. Is there
a motion by the board concerning that preliminary ruling? Okay. So that then is the decision of the board. You can proceed with the rest of your presentation. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Just if I may ask because it's a motion, Mr. Simon's allowed to uh speak on any
particular motions or no. >> That was that was your motion adverse to the applicant. So, the applicant was permitted to reply to the motion. It would not be appropriate for others to chime in. >> My second motion is to transfer this proceeding to the board of adjustments
to determine whether this is a house of worship or community center. Now, as uh Mr. Plaza, you asked yourself if Mr. Rayar um whether it was last month or the month before, and Mr. Rayar he
admitted himself that they have presented no religious expert testimony in three years to cl Why the motion to transfer it to the board of adjustment is are you implying that the planning board does not have jurisdiction to make that decision himself? >> Yes.
>> Okay. So there's case law that says >> one first. >> Okay. Well, okay. What basis do you rely on to say that the planning board does not have jurisdiction to make that determination themselves?
>> Um well, are you you're saying that they they do >> I'm asking you you made the motion. On what basis do you say the planning board doesn't have jurisdiction to make that determination themselves? On what basis is it only the board of adjustment that
can make that determination? >> Well, I think one is as you say whether it's the case law but the one actual location they um the applicant cited themselves which um I'll get to that moment at my exhibits a
different way. uh the Islamic Center of Mars County. In that case there, they they uh sent it to the board of adjustments to determine whether um >> who sent it. >> What's that? >> In other words, if you went and filed the board of adjustment application for an interpretation or something, I don't
know if the board of adjustment would hear it, but you have that right. But there's case law that says if an applicant comes to the planning board, we're talking about NJSA 405D-70B. 70B is the statutory authority for a board of adjustment to issue interpretations.
Planning board does not have statutory authority to issue an interpretation. So if someone wants an interpretation, you have to go to the board of adjustment. If you want an interpretation on that, file an application with the board of adjustment. But there's case law that says the planning board when it has an
application before it, if an issue was raised on whether or not they have jurisdiction over the application, all the cases say that the planning board has jurisdiction to deter can interpret to to determine whether or not has jurisdiction. So my advice to the
board is this board does have jurisdiction to make that determination. That doesn't stop you from trying to go to the board of adjustment. Although I have a feeling if you went to the board of adjustment at this late date, they might ask, you know, why you waited so long. But that would be between you and them. But again, my opinion is that the
planning board has jurisdiction. There's no case whatever that supports Mr. Bard's position on this. >> Mr. Rayar, anything to add? >> Only that this board has at least twice, if not more, already ruled that this is
an application for a house of worship and therefore a permitted use in this zone. decide whatever prior action we may have taken. The motion goes to it being transferred to the zoning board of adjustment. Do you have anything to add as to that requested relief?
>> The motion doesn't ask us to make that interpretation. Again, it's it's suggesting that this is not the appropriate board to make that determination. Do you have anything to add beyond what Mr. Drill said? >> No, the motion should be denied. >> Any questions from the board? that for the reasons stated by the board
council that that motion is denied. Mr. Do you have any other motions? >> Uh proceed. I'll proceed. Um Mr. Chairman, I would like this board to determine that this is a house of worship and community center and one thing that Mr. Rayar said, this board
made many straw polls and as maybe as Miss Aler said really the board made two determinations and at whatever point um that um well Mr. Rayar is alleging that the board made a determination on what basis as compared to and I think that's
part of the purpose of the public uh comment to bring additional um facts and evidence. There's a lot of maybe determinations that the board has made that the chair still or the other members still said that the public would have their their due uh time to bring an
additional uh testing which I presume um could change those. I mean, no different than um you know, how many straw p well maybe someone else can say, but how many straw polls has this board taken that they're still going to have to revote upon? I suppose other than the two that Mrs. Albert uh just said a moment ago
that you're expecting um evidence to be presented to weigh in on some of their early determinations. I think as Mr. Drill had said, because if you u you stop interacting with the the applicant, maybe uh it goes too far. But I think what Mr. drill said himself was that you
still could present evidence and u the public had an opportunity the public has not have had an opportunity to present testimony. >> Well, this is your opportunity now. >> Thank you. Um Mr. Chairman, I would like and I Mr. Drill may have had it marked
as an exhibit, but I would like to introduce uh this document, the ISBR building project. I think you had it labeled as MB1. Uh I don't know if you want to change that. What? What do you think I have? >> Uh, can I approach and show?
>> Sure. >> His initials. His >> initials. Can you give one of those to Mr. >> Sure. I have you want me I have one more >> and I think previously that Mr. Rayar he recognized this document as a document
the ISD >> and I believe at the time that I think it was Mr. Bar brought this to the Mr. Speak louder. >> I think at the time and I think it was Mr. Bar who brought this originally to the board's attention. We said that this document is irrelevant because it's a
document that long predates the application and was a concept that is not embedded in this application. >> This is not the application. >> First, we're just trying to find >> Yeah, this is just based on my recollection. Okay. It's not in the list
of documents that were not admitted into evidence because I don't believe at the time it was proposed to be admitted into evidence. My recollection is that Mr. Bart, can you correct me if I'm wrong? Did you tried to use this during cross-examination? Is that correct or incorrect? >> Well, I think it would be the only other
opportunity, right? Because >> I were asking you a question. When did you try to use I >> I don't know if it was there direct testimony or indirect. that you're asking to distinguish between direct and indirect. >> I have a vague recollection that what the board said was you can't
try to get it in under cross-examination, but as part of your case, if it was done by them, bring it up. So, I'm >> think it was IDed only. >> Right. So, I'm thinking that I don't think the board has made a ruling on whether this document should go in or not. I think all that was determined was
it was not the right time. Now would be the right time if it's ever going to go in. So I would think that explain to the board um now they haven't seen it. They shouldn't see it unless it goes in. Explain why >> we need some foundation. >> Yeah. Foundation to admit it and then
Mr. Ramar is obviously maybe not obviously but my guess is he's going to argue against admitting it and then the board will make a ruling. >> Certainly. Um well I I think you know by >> what's the the purpose of you wanting to >> it's relevant to what we just discussed
whether or not the board can make a determination whether it's a house of worship or a community center. >> Yeah. But you just indicated that the board has that jurisdiction. >> What so what is the document is the document entitled ISBR building project?
>> Right. And it says there that they are to use the project as a community center. And where did you get this particular document? >> It was on the uh um www.isbbr.org/uplo/249201175907. >> So let's ask Mr. Ray and when when did
you get it off that uh >> um I I couldn't get the exact date, but I think it was out there as of today. Well, put it this way. I'm not asking whether you think it's When did you The best you can approximate when did you download it off the site?
>> Well, the first time we discussed it here at this um um I'd have to ask Fran to go back to the minutes. I I don't know if it was there or been what you know. I'm sorry. I I don't I >> was it were we at the library or were we in this room? Do you remember? >> No, I don't.
>> Mr. Rayart, let me ask you. >> May I ask a question of Mr. Bart about >> Mr. Bart? Did you say that you've seen it since the time that you originally downloaded it? >> Yes. Yes, I saw it today. >> You saw it on the site that you just gave us? >> That's correct.
>> So, let's ask the applicant. Mr. Rayar, you've seen this document. Is this document currently on the ISBR >> website? No idea. >> Do we have >> a laptop in the house? >> This is a document that was created in 2011
before the I understand. I understand that. >> I mean, do any board members or any board professionals have a laptop? >> Okay. >> Let me just >> We have a We have a laptop. I'm going to
go on. Actually, I'm gonna ask Mr. Schlly, >> he's a witness. I don't I don't want to become a witness to go on the ISP website. and see if this document's on the website. Mr. Ramar, if this document is still on the website, I assume there's going to be no objection to having it
admitted >> for whatever. >> Right. Then he can argue whatever it is, but if it's on the website now, I can't imagine why it wouldn't get. >> No, no, no. Don't because then you're a witness. >> Mr. SL, you're looking for that document.
>> Mr. Bar, do you think you could help Mr. Schwai find it or not? >> Um, or did someone help you find it? Well, I don't know if that's a fair question, but besides that, >> could you help Well, are you able to help them find this document on the website or not? >> I I could try. I mean,
>> give it a shot. You might just have to put it. >> Why don't you just type the If you type the >> Oh, back. But that's just gonna do a Google search. So if you want to come up here and actually enter an address, is that
what you want? >> Oh, okay. >> All right. >> We're going to take a fiveminute recess while we work this out. >> I think we'll go to that. All right, we're back on the record. Yes, Miss >> Almost. >> Okay, we'll wait.
>> Okay, there we go. All right, we're back on the on the record. >> This is what we ascertained. So, Mr. Bart submitted a document It's entitled ISBR building project. I've marked it for ID only as OB-1
for ID only. The board is not going to see this particular document. So we asked Mr. Bart if he could go on the ISBR website and find the document. So Mr. Bart went on and he googled couldn't
find it on the ISBR website. He googled ISBR building project and up came a document that looks like the document that's marked OB1 for identification, but it's not exactly that document.
Things have been changed in it. However, Mr. Bart says he's just interested in the first paragraph. So, in the first paragraph, he's interested in some particular wording in the first paragraph. And so I am going to read from the first paragraph of the document
and then the the applicant has indicated that it's not from their website. It's a cache document that used to be on their website and they can make their argument from it. But I'm going to read for the record the paragraph that Mr. Bart wants the board to consider and he wants to argue off. Is that correct, Mr. Bart?
>> Yes. Thank you. >> Okay. So here is the par the first paragraph on this document that's on the CA that's seems to be from the cachade um website from Google. It says the same title ISBR building project and it says
as follows. The Islamic Society of Basking Ridge, PN, ISBrn, plans to establish a community center for Muslims in the Somerset Hills area of New Jersey that really meets the spiritual comma
social and cultural needs of our growing community in an open comma diverse comma inclusive and moderate environment comma consistent with the Quran and Sunna. Period. For more about ISBR and its programs and services, comma, please
visit our website at www.isbbri.org. Period. So Mr. Bart would like the board to consider that and he wants to make an argument based on that. So I guess Mr. Rayar, is there an objection to Mr. relying on the paragraph I read in
making an argument that it would seem to be that the proposed facility is not a house of worship, it's a community center. The document is irrelevant for all purposes and should not be introduced
into evidence or the subject of moral collry by Mr. Park. I have at least four reasons. First of all, the document Mr. Bar presented does not have the language Mr. Drill just read it to the record. >> Okay, let's I mark the document. Okay,
Mr. Bart has agreed that this document that I marked for ID only is not going into evidence. What Mr. Bart wants is the document I just read from the paragraph I read from for that to go into evidence. >> So my second point >> correct correct Mr. Bart?
>> Yes. Thank you. >> Is as to that document which was located a Google search during the course of a planning board hearing. It's not on the ISBR website and it is a
2011 document that is not part of this application. It never was part of this application and what's on that document wasn't applied for. So, so it's irrelevant to
give you two analogies. The document I on that cache. But this one says, >> "Okay, don't don't you I'm Mr. Mr. Rayar, this document is not Mr. >> I understand, >> Mr. Cricas agree. It's not going into Mr. >> Mr. Bart, I'm sorry, >> but it's as if Mr. B would argue the
applicant doesn't have standing to make this application because on the face of that document. It says that the applicant has yet not yet bought the property which it says >> I but that's not the application he's making. The application he's making is
that >> but the point is it's not the application. It's therefore irrelevant for any purpose. He could also argue, ladies and gentlemen, the planning board, this is an application that would have 50 parking spaces. A lot of water
has gone since that point in time. To make an argument about something that might have existed at a point in time, but no longer exists, is irrelevant to the decision that this board must make to the application that is currently
before it. An application is not currently before it for 50 parking spaces, nor is there an application before it for a community center. So those are nice discussion points, but what does it have to do with the
decision that this board has to make? And the touchstone of relevance is is it relevant to anything that the board has to decide. The board does not have to decide on whether to permit a community
center. It doesn't have to decide on anything related to a community center. It only has to decide whether the house of worship presented and the multi-purpose room that is part of the house of worship comply with the board's
ordinances or not. A document that predates the application is no more relevant than something that may have been in the initial application that because of color with the board and professionals is no longer before the
board. So this document what Mr. Drill read and what Mr. Bar is trying to argue none of that is before the board none of it is relevant to a determination the board must make.
Does the applicant acknowledge that this was material that was previously posted on its on its website? >> Yes. I don't know about Yes, it looks >> it's their web address, right? You don't >> It looks like it was, but it was be in 2011.
>> I understand. >> I I disagree with your position that it's not relevant. I I don't know how much weight should be attributed to it, but it is relevant in that part of what this board is called upon is to determine whether or not the application
is for a permitted use uh and a house of worship being a permitted use versus a community center which which is not. So, this is a statement made at some point relative to this same property by the applicant.
It's it's no longer up there. And to your point, it's not a position that's been uh proposed or taken by the applicant in this application, but it was the prior characterization of the applicant as to its intended use of that
property. I think that makes it fair game for Mr. Bart to raise and to make the argument he wants to make. Doesn't mean the argument carries the day, but he should be entitled to make it. And so for those reasons, I'm going to overrule the objection as my preliminary ruling.
Is there any motion by the board as to that? >> And just to be clear, there's no document that's being admitted into evidence. The document the paragraph that I read from the document that Mr. Bart
found on Google, that's the paragraph that is going to be considered and that's the paragraph off which Mr. Bart is going to make his argument. Is that correct, Mr. Bart? >> That's correct. >> And then, Mr. Remar, you're free to obviously to to address it in your closing. >> Okay.
>> All right. So, now that that paragraph's been read into the record, would you please just conclude your argument as to that? >> Yeah, sure. Thank you. Even the applicants uh direct case uh they uh they compared
the u activities or for for parking generation of this application to a number of other locations. Some of which were communion centers, others which were mosques. For example,
the Islamic Center of Mars County, um the Islamic Center of Ocean County, the Bal Mosque, uh the Islamic Society of uh Central Jersey, Muslim Center of Middle Sex County, and I think it's even maybe Mr. Rayar, I may even know this too, but the
the ground zero mosque is actually a community center, not a mosque. And it seems nationwide what happens is folks file as house of worships worships where community centers are not permitted and community centers where house of worships are not permitted and that's
what's happening here. Um and you know again it was Mr. Rayar himself who I mean if it truly is uh an application for a house of worship we'll get in later on because we talked at length here talked about irrelevant
irrelevant testimony people who are not qualified about practices um that here uh no religious expert testimony was presented uh when this application began that'll probably be what three years next month uh Mr.
Chargery um he was presented as a lay u uh witness not an expert. Mr. Chry admitted under oath he was not an imam. He was not a spiritual leader. Uh he even said to Mr. Or that they could have interesting conversation about the definition of a mosque on September 4th
2012. Um I believe they said they're not part of a religious denomination. Even the New Jersey Supreme Court, what was it? Cameron State versus Cameron uh 100 New Jersey 586 1985 and even Jehovah's Witnesses in 1988 citing them must
determine whether the activity alleged is in fact religious. Um so here determining without that um without that expert testimony of course besides the fact that the applicant has failed really to the to the the state a claim here um that um from what you can
only gather is that it's a community center I guess themselves said at one time they had a plan to put a community center here what changed no no religious expert testimony in three years so um I mean unless the applicant
applicant had presented some evidence which they didn't. I mean we wouldn't be having this conversation. One can only logically conclude that it's a community center not a house of worship. Therefore, I make a motion for the board determine that's a community center and
not a house of worship. >> That that that goes to a an ultimate determination that must be made as part of the application. So what you're doing is arguing >> uh a position that we should >> take under advisement during our deliberations. Okay.
>> Okay. Continue my s And and Mr. Chairman, while you're while the board is concerning that determination here, um I would like to uh present this document from the uh burrow
of Rockaway which u talks about the Islamic Center of Mars County that the applicant has referred to. um that when you consider the various activities that the u um the applicant has talked going on, one being the teaching of Arabic
that they determine it being a non-religious subject. >> Well, first first of all, have you have you seen the document? >> I haven't seen it. Mr. Ramar hasn't seen it. >> And Mr. Simon, >> right, let's just see what document he's talking about. >> I shouldn't say it because it's not
You want me to describe the document and actually the point I'm up? >> Well, I can tell you these are they purport to be minutes from the Burrow of Rockaway Land Use Board's meeting of February 24, 2014. Now, I can just but just by looking at it, they're unsigned
minutes and there's no certification that it's a true and accurate copy or anything like that. And what's the purpose without making your argument? I assume you want to use
um whatever evidence was introduced in that case before the Burrow of Rockaway land use board. Do you want this planning board to consider? >> Right. I mean the uh the applicant was comparing themselves to without going into the details. The problem is going
to be that no one who appeared in that case is here to be cross-examined or to testify. >> Was a different applicant. >> Yeah. >> It's got no connection to the applicant. So >> Mr. Bart is saying there's a connection.
Mr. Bart says that the applicant cited the Islamic Center of Morris County as an example. Am I correct or not? >> That's correct. Which is >> So that gets you over the relevance hurdle perhaps, but it's still this document would be hearsay without uh an exception that would allow you to to
introduce it in this proceeding without having a witness to create the necessary foundation. So >> So I'm going to mark this just for the record for identification only as OB2 and >> it's uh it's excluded as here. board.
>> Anybody have a motion? >> Okay, thank you. Continue. >> So, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I mean, I have a number of other reasons why this uh not only should the applicant uh the application be dismissed, but uh really
how the uh as Miss Alper had talked about earlier about um the applicant provided its um evidence and testimony uh which really should have been qualified, insufficient evidence and insufficient testimony actually unqualified uh testimony.
And one in particular uh by the applicant's own admission basically is that they are going to encroach on the the 50-foot buffer on the Ibach side of the property. And that's you can easily derive that
when um of course they're proposing the way they're proposing to uh avoid encroaching upon that buffer is to put wheel stops which u Mr. slide which his conclusions I'm sure can tell you that he himself said they were a bad idea.
>> Excuse me. I think he's referring to the quick side, not the side. >> Isn't the detention bas on the uh >> that's the that's the quick side of the >> That's on Mr. and Mrs. quick side of the project. >> We're the detention basin. >> Yeah. Talking about the parking spots,
the wheel stops. You're talking about parking. You're talking about the parking next to Abate or next to Quick. Which parking have the 18? >> That's we're asking you. >> It's It's on the same side as the detention base. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> To the east.
>> I'm sorry. You got the wrong side. >> Yeah. >> It's the quick property. >> Yeah. >> Um I didn't think there's any room with all those detention bases. Well, the applicant is proposing wheel stops uh as a basis for uh uh putting in
fully uh conforming size parking stalls and u I think it was Miss Patichi had asked about the concern about um tearing up the cars for one and actually there was a be hard to find but there actually was a class action suit against
a automotive uh manufacturer for uh because they were u pulling the bumpers off the cars the Volkswagen. That's H versus Volkswagen of America uh in Oklahoma uh would certify a class action 2000 what 221P
uh 3D132 and Mr. con he testified that the wheel stops are designed to prevent the average car from um encroaching upon that that buffer which by that own admission that means some
cars of longer than 18 in some are less. So there's no way that um these wheel stops are going to prevent folks from encroaching upon. Now there was some discussion about the
affluence of the uh uh of the u folks who come uh to the center and so u I mean that what's that average what's that average comprised of? So, Mr. Chairman, what I'd like to introduce is a document from the uh
General Motors website that shows the um the overall length of a Cadillac as compared to the wheel basease, which will help you to determine that there's at least what is it
87 inches that can overhang between the front and the back. So, therefore, whether you back in, I mean, I suppose I don't know if there's going to be anybody that's going to Maybe the vested monitor will keep keep people from backing in. But if not, I would like to introduce this document here. If I could show it to Mr.
>> Bill first, >> Mr. Mark, please. as well. I don't know where to begin on this. Mr. Bark is not an expert. He's not qualified. Who knows what to make of this document?
It talks about the wheel basease. Is the What is the wheelbase? Is it axle to axle? And then it talks about overall length, but it doesn't How much of the overall length is to the front of the wheelbase or to the rear of the
wheelbase or between the wheel bases? This document without some knowledgeable person to interpret it, verify it and use it and make a cogent argument from it is completely irrelevant. Do
>> you have an extra copy of that for me? Sure. >> You want more than one? No, just one. description of >> Okay, so the document purports to say that it's from Cadillac website printed
today, July 21, 2015. And on the top it says Escalade and ESV dimensions Cadillac. And it has dimensions and it has useful dimensions data and other technical specifications for the
escalator. So I'm going to mark it for ID only at this point as OB3 leave it to you because this is just something printed off the internet. You don't have a witness to introduce it through. It
would not be appropriate to allow you to introduce that. it would that would potentially create a limitless number of documents that could be printed and somehow try to be introduced in this case. Uh I do think though that the
argument in and of itself is not irrelevant in that people have experience with automobiles and SUVs and your point uh as to a car or SUV being backed into a space where the extension of the car beyond the the end of the
wheel is much longer than in the front is a you know the points well taken. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, >> do I ask the board if they want anything? >> Is there so for that it's it's uh it's my initial decision to exclude the
document. Does anybody have a >> I'll just add one thing. If a newspaper article where the reporter identifies him or herself is not allowed into evidence because the reporter is not here, then what the chairman is saying, how do you let a document in off the internet where there's no author
identifying even? It's one step worse than a newspaper article. >> I ask where you mentioned number 87 in what is that? >> That's from the document. Yeah, because the um your overall >> if the document's not in evidence, it's
not appropriate to refer to it or to have the witness testify as to its contents. >> But but may may I suggest be just because you got this a little bit cloudied with with the intervening objection and the decision, why why
don't you make the argument without referencing the document? You can still make the argument the document. Don't reference the any of the dimensions from the document. make your argument based on you know a large SUV based on if you have you have common knowledge you have knowledge about SUVs
in general that's a question do you have knowledge about SUVs in general >> yes make the argument based on your knowledge >> thank you Mr. U Mr. Chairman as you've said uh you know the the average citizen
observations are right that that people in including myself people back into spaces And uh, of course, when you're backing in, you need to know that in fact that uh, there's probably more room between when you hit a a wheel curb in a in the back than when you do in the front
because generally speaking, you know, the car is overhanged. Matter of fact, if you go and see Mr. Ramar there in um um Riverwalk you know you'll see many folks there having these u full bike racks
hanging out the back which some of them you know is wider than a person which has to be you know a couple of feet. So there are again it's up to the applicant to provide the evidence to say that it's not going to encroach upon the buffer and by the
applicant's own admission being it's designed to prevent the average car let alone the fact that the the vans that they're going to have for delivering foods which did you ever have a van and yeah they even hang out even further. So the applicant has failed to
show any evidence why they're not going to encroach the buffer and therefore they need a variance that actually wasn't noticed which we shouldn't even be here again. Now another thing too and and again I know that this probably if somebody asked you about how many people are
going to be on this property by law now and I think it was last one thing I I think last was and I know Mr. Chairman, you had said you can make some negative inferences if the question's not a answered. And one was for Mr. Drill to say to Mr. Rayar under the RLUIPA, could
folks could they limit the number of people on the property? I to my to my knowledge, the record doesn't reflect that answer. And so therefore, we have, as you talked about, Molini had talked about inconsistent testimony. We've had so much inconsistent testimony about the
number of people who could be on this property whether it's inside the building outside because and part of that might be limited to or would be helpful if the applicant had actually provided some religious expert testimony but till this point it hasn't been here again three years later why we're even
here but I do think that and it was Mr. Lincoln um that did u uh testify he agreed that if you took the total square footage of the building divided by the five square feet I think he said 460 people in the building I know we had
change of council and I think it was Mr. lasagna that said well if we can have 460 in the building we can have 460 on the lawn what's to restrict us now and of course with all these nobody really knows and this is really and this is I would reserve any objection because you
could talk about after all this the evidence and testimony until Mr. Rayar really summarizes this in a coherent manner. There's nobody presented any evidence here that's really reasonable to rely upon. And so I I I really do reserve any uh any additional objection
and I'm not I wouldn't concede that this is all the public comment going for him because they have not presented a case here for this to be approved. And you unless they had that summary, you'd almost have to dismiss it. >> Okay. Summation is not evidence. The evidence is in. So
this is your opportunity to comment on the sufficiency or insufficiency of that evidence. You cannot reserve the right to comment further after the summation keeping in mind that the summation itself is not evidence. >> Okay. So that if if in fact at one point
maybe Mr. Rayar will say 460 people can be on this property that translates according to all your experts and somebody else 300 over 300 parking spots out of 107. So, I know at one point early on there may have been some interaction with the uh with the
applicant, but we don't really know how many people are going to be the restriction on this property to determine the parking spot. So, therefore, so far what we've heard from the evidence until you can only conclude that they their position is 400 because of course they said we don't agree with
this position. You've heard all that 460 people on the property. They need over 300 parking spots. Therefore, reject it. Maybe they'll come up with something different at the end. But again, to your point. So, um um but as you say here, if um we can infer that they didn't answer
respond to a question negative, I can only I can only infer that that's still an open item. There also was a u a straw poll relative to uh the detention basin and whether
it's a drainage improvement and I think was even Miss Alper. I mean, I think rope pole was was uh was actually taken before the uh 1500 square ft and what's significant insignificant uh but that's a judgment call and that's your judgment
call but um now as far as improvements I mean of course you know the ordinary definition of the Webster right Mr. Webster, the ordinary definition of improvement. You would think that it would make something much better than it was before. And I think
it was Mr. uh uh and Mr. Khan was trying to confuse the fact that this was a storm water improvement. And and as Mr. Quinn has said, it doesn't this development, it's going to increase the runoff, just going to control it. And so really,
what is the improvement here if at a minimum status quo? We don't even know that because there's uh been a lot of testimony early on, right? The county board approved such and such, right? Doesn't exist, right? There's no county board approval. And I believe there's one thing that uh might still be pending
is the uh the second emergency spill off. So maybe this still needs to be changed, but maybe somebody want to answer those questions because the plans still need to be changed. So I'm not certain what really is here the the drainage improvements. Now
the state of New Jersey um on their website uh you know I'll try to introduce it and see how far I go right just get this here because they talk about retention basin failure and those failures are two things that
people pointed out here right mosquitoes and um drowning probably uh your parents uh worst nightmare. And so here's something from the state of New Jersey website. >> Give it to Mr. Ramar, Mr. Simon, and me,
please. >> Yeah, thank you. What? This does not look like to me it's from a D website. >> Uh well, it was from the state of uh I'll give you the website, I guess, if you want. >> Well, it it also doesn't have this the
website name on it. It was prepared by an individual that looks like a private individual. >> Um it has a copy of two different newspaper articles. So, what website, what official state of New
Jersey website do you say this is from? >> www.state.nj. ustransportation backpubacatfstormwater_failure.pdf. If this was an official publication of the D or a state agency, I'd feel differently about it. But this this is not
I mean >> who prepared it? >> It doesn't say well the front page says it's prepared by a gentleman named David Ahd. It doesn't say if he's a P, an LS, whatever. We we don't know.
And then the other two pages are copies of newspaper articles. >> Mr. >> says it all. It's not an official document. There's no >> I mean the board rules say you can take judicial notice of publications
including governmental publications on websites. This does not appear to be that. >> And the attachments are articles. >> I don't even know which newspapers. >> No, one of them says one of them says it's uh GM News,
>> right? And the other one says Star Ledger, but it it doesn't really matter. I mean, to me, >> okay, >> yeah, >> it's not a government >> publication. assuming even that the first page of the document is is a PDF
from a government website. It's it's merely a cover page that then attaches based on the description as read by Mr. Drill newspaper articles which would be hearsay within the hearsay. So it's a it's double layer hearsay and although there is an
exception under our rules to allow the government report if the report then contains additional hearsay such as newspaper articles and you don't have the authors of those articles then we can't allow it. >> Okay. >> Sure. So that's just for the record that's going to be OB-4 for ID only. And is the board making a
motion? >> Well, Mr. Chairman as used to talk about things that you would still these reports whether whether you accept this or not they talked about two problems that have been raised before one was that they uh they breed mosquito problems and the other one is um uh the
death of people in them. So I mean I guess uh you know the uh there was no evidence presented why this really was an improvement other than the fact of reference to a word. Now I will if I could present here a a picture I took
myself of a u a retention basin within the town. Um particularly uh the Canterbury area. Um now the it is easier to to see it with the color version. So uh first I'll show this to Mr.
>> Lar Simon then me >> I just described. So, so the black and white colors may not be uh what it's intended to show is all the debris built up in the >> So, first, where is the actual location
of that? >> At the intersection of uh Canterbury and uh Minebrook. >> Okay. And you said you took the photograph. >> I took that photo on Sunday. >> Okay. And so that photograph, to the best of your knowledge, fairly depicts the conditions of what's in that photo still today.
>> That's correct. >> Okay. This is might be my ignorance. Is that location anywhere near the the subject site? >> Yes. >> Uh what do you define as near? >> Well, how about can you can you estimate the distance?
>> How far from the subject property was that photo taken? >> How about I ask Mr. Shai? You would know, right? >> What's less than two miles? Listen. >> Is it less than a mile? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Less than a half mile? Yes.
>> How about a quarter mile? >> I'd say it's about a couple hundred yards. >> Okay. That's your best. >> Okay. Okay. Okay. Any objection? >> First of all, I thought Mr. said this is
obviously not. >> The picture speaks for itself though, so that's >> Well, it doesn't. part of my we don't know what this is a picture of. >> We know where it was taken because Mr. Bart testified. We don't know what the design
characteristics of it are. So this board has no way to take any meaning from this photograph. It's just a photograph. So it's irrelevant to this application.
It's not proative on any issue. And The bar was not qualified to tie it to this application. We see debris on some concrete. We don't know the design characteristics. We don't
know what rules apply to maintaining whatever this structure is. We don't know anything other than have a color photograph and it's irrelevant under all the rules of evidence of this board or
in this state. >> Do you want to respond? How how is this relevant to what we have to decide? >> Well, how is it relevant? Um it is a relevant uh it is relevant to go to the to the definition of what is a drainage
improvements and um this here is a retention basin unlike we'll get into the uh the confused testimony of the applicant at one time it's detention next time it's retention maybe it's detention today but
so it's relevant to actually what is the definition of an improvement Yes. Thank you. >> And on what basis do you determine that that's a retention basin in the photograph? >> Retention. >> Yeah. Um well I think by the applicant's
own testimony a uh a detention really would be holding water whereas retention under their their testimony has these grills their grates or even on their plan have these exits from the basin. >> Okay
I'm not going to limit this is not in any way intended to limit what you can argue but right now we're dealing with this particular photograph. Do do you have any expertise in in water management or drainage improvements where you can offer an expert opinion as to what's identified in that or depicted
in that photograph? Well, I think we the common knowledge that that's gravel and u built up debris, general builtup debris um that uh is um laying in what they they describe in their own plans as
a imperous uh uh concrete uh low water uh um channel. >> But you could see that this photograph doesn't depict any condition on the applicant's property. No, it does not. Right. Uh, then
>> I need a copy of that for the record. We're going to mark that as OB5D. And what are you going to do with it? >> I'm going to exclude it on the grounds of relevance. >> Oh, absolutely. >> Well, Mr. Simon is saying that. Is there
any motion by the board? >> No. Okay. >> Mr. Simon, when you're done, can you walk it up to me? Thanks. Again, for the record,
OB5 for ID only one was excluded. Good. Thank you. Um, now when it comes to the uh the basin that the applicant is um intending to uh proposing to put on the subject property,
uh you may recall early on Mr. Khan testified that the uh uh actually in August 6, 2013 that he previously they designed the detention basin to take and hold water and not let water go into the ground, no permeability,
which I which I think uh from uh you're an expert which means it's impervious. And then um somewhere along the line they uh they said, "Well, we're going to put in an infiltration infiltration basin."
Now um and then in uh September of uh 2014, Mr. Rayar talked about it being a detention basin along Church Street. Uh in September of 14, Mr. Rayar referred to it the fencing of the detention basin.
September of 2014 moves well closer to the detention basin. I think you really have uh two uh well two reasons to deny it by the applicant's own testimony. If the if the if it's going to be a uh detention
basin, it's impervious according to their testimony and was not included in the calculation. and therefore they don't they don't uh satisfy the uh impervious coverage and if it's infiltration then it's going to be I think it was Mary um um Mr.
who talked about it being uh uh damaging to the adjoining property. But what I'd like to show here is actually something from um and actually something that the applicant I think referred to about the New Jersey storm water best management practices manual. This one's dated to
February 2014. They have the later version. Um and it really it talks about >> show everybody. You mean show Mr. Mayor, show Mr. Simon, show myself please. rules. >> Now, this one is this one a copy from
the stormwater best practices manual? >> Yes. >> Okay. And how did you come to get this copy? >> Uh from the uh state website of uh state.nj. USD storm order
BMP manual and um NJ_SWBMP not jumping ahead but can you give one of these to Fran too just in case this gets admitted >> is that in on consent Mr. No, >> no. Wishful thinking >> again.
It's irrelevant for all purposes. >> This talks about infiltration basis. >> Put it this way before before he makes his argument about it. Is is there anything from this document that would make you think that the board can't take
judicial notice of page 9.5-1 and page 9.5-2 of the New Jersey Storm Water Best Management Practices Manual? >> I don't think the board can take additional notice of an incomplete
document. By its own terms, this chapter 9 or 9.5 goes on for more pages. What is the supposed to make of two pages taken out of context. >> Even before we get to the relevance of the document, >> you you could fill that context in on
summation if you felt it was necessary. >> Why would I do that? >> I don't know. That's that's for you to decide. >> This document doesn't stand by itself. It hasn't presented a genuine complete document. Maybe if it were a genuine complete
document, we get over that hurdle, but it clearly isn't Mo moving past the for a moment what's the profer on the on the relevance of this document? >> The relevance is that u the applicant has really two options
right what part of the document do you want to rely on you relying on the definition or you relying on the purpose or you relying on the conditions where the practice applies because those are the three items on these two pages because after that the design criterion starts and you haven't photocopied all
the design criteria. No, the page two which basically is consistent with Mary's concerns that infiltration must not be used with your installation would create a significant risk for basement seage of flooding. Do me a favor point out to us Mr.
Point just point out point where You guys know you text for breaks. All you do is text me break. Standard texting charges may apply. >> No, I didn't text. >> No, I'm encouraging people because
otherwise you can't just Mr. Bar Mr. Bart, you should be >> Mr. Rainbar, >> you're not allowed. >> Please be by it. If you want that on the record, >> I can't swear to this because I'm not an expert, but I think this is the system
the bend got revised and it's not the current system. >> Moreover, it's as Mr. Drill pointed out incomplete. It refers to a a a diagram which is not here and it starts with
design criteria. It has an A. Usually when one does an A, one does a B or a C or a D more than an A. That's not here. I don't know what to make of the document. >> Unlike the prior documents, this comes off an official state website. >> Well, this is not necessarily off the
website, but this is an official >> Oh, I'm sorry. It's a copy of his publication. >> Forgive me. it. I believe the the witness testified that he got it off of >> official state >> off state website. So, >> right. But but the issue is this is an
official state publication whether it's uh in the handbook loosely or the website >> complete or not. Mr. Ramar, you can see that that the document referred to in in the exhibit being offered is an official
publication of the state of New Jersey. It appears to be that. >> Okay. Mr. Schlide, do you could could you confirm that >> as far as you know? >> I didn't hear what the question >> I I retracted. >> It says
New Jersey storm water best management practices matter. I don't know if this is put out by the D or put out by some consultant who looks at the regulations and puts out a manual. Like when we're
lawyers, we have manuals and treatises that interpret the rules of professional conduct or a statute. >> I understand. Versus it being official state policy. I understand. Mr. Banish, are you familiar with this document?
>> Mr. Chairman, Mr. Drill just showed me a page that was uh submitted by Mr. Bart that appears to be the BMP from the D website that I've reviewed in the past. I have seen that document. I'm familiar with it. I haven't seen the whole thing this evening. >> Is that something that's published by
the D? >> Yes, it is. >> Okay. recommended best management practices for the design of storm water management systems is essentially what it's about. >> Okay. >> Relying upon that representation from board professional vanish I I find that
it is within our rules permissible for Mr. Bart to rely on it. Uh the argument as to relevance is overruled. He could make the argument it goes to weight. You can address the weight issues in your summation. Okay, just for the record,
what you're admitting as OB6 are two pages. It's chapter 9.5. It's page 9.5-1, page 9.5-2 from the New Jersey Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual, dated February 2004. Fran, do
you have one of these to mark? >> Would you like me to mark? of these six was for ID, but this is going to go in following um the board's practice. The next public exhibit going
in would be P8. So, it's OB6 for ID, but it's going to go into evidence as P8. >> Okay. Public. Okay. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yeah. So, in in summary here for this, Mr. Chairman, as it states here that u um and
And at one time um the applicant said they were going to have a detention basin that was impervious that has no permeability. Then they went to an infiltration that with Mary's concerns that would have significant risk of for basement seepage.
Um so under neither case is this a drainage improvement, right? It's either impervious which is not a drainage improvement or it's a significant risk risk for the neighbors. So when the board took a straw poll I asked
when the board uh takes again that they uh they find it as not a drainage improvement uh as well as uh um finding as Mr. Khan had testified that if they do go with the uh detention um that is uh impervious according to their
testimony. It's not It's not up to us to say tell them um what the rules should be. I also ask you to check really with the professional I think Mr. Khan was incorrect when he talked about cutting the grass would prevent wetlands. Um
because if uh cutting the grass does not prevent the wetlands which that drainage swell similar if you create wetlands and then it itol then it becomes that does become a taking of the quicks property. So that whole drainage system um the
detention basin not being an improvement as well as um I believe you should check that Mr. Khan's testimony was incorrect that cutting the grass by itself would not prevent wetlands in a swale. He was not offered as a hydraulic engineer.
Um so um either it's a taking uh which uh would be against public policy as well. Could you explain what would constitute the taking? >> If you create a wetlands, you are restricting Quick's property. You're creating wetlands that don't exist. You
don't you don't agree with that? >> I'm just asking for a clarification of what you just said. Now, another matter that really is a health health safety risk and this goes and it was really goes to Miss Alpers and of course without having um any
religious expert testimony in um in three years. um all basically all that other testimony being irrelevant unfortunately um that where Nay talked about it was probably said before 70 he thought 70
some wild number 70% would come to the uh uh to the center from work and 30% from home um which u what he thought was only 30% would use the uh um the uh uh wudoo uh
as compared to Khan talking about 99% uh coming from home. Now again, he wasn't uh he wasn't a religious expert either and that probably goes to Mary's concerns about the inconsistent testimony. Um and so there is something about the whole the whole plot being
misdesigned because Mr. Khan, he said that they would have to design the pipes and you're going to find wherever those pipes are based upon the state standard of um uh occupancy of their building. And without that, um, you can't even tell if any of the utilities here on
this plot uh don't have to be redesigned because um um if it's 600 people um uh or 500 people according to the whatever that division was um that need to do woo that clearly uh this facility is uh is
incorrectly designed. Now I I know this also there's also this this this this application should be rejected because of the failed internal circulation plans. And I just I want to make one statement here about uh and I think Mr. Drill said it was okay to
disagree with his legal reasoning about the definition of on track and offsite. And I couldn't find it. I thought I had it a year ago about where where onsite is and the applicant said that their deed goes to the center of the road and
that onsite is the section of Church Street where their deed goes to the road and offsite truly would be outside that line. Hopefully that makes sense without drawings. All right. I mean their plot comes into Church Street. I forget who's on the other side of the street, but you
know, the old deeds are you own to the center of the road in a lot of cases. And I think the uh the board would tell you, of course, they're not going to give you a uh a site plan uh approval unless you actually deed over that portion. And so therefore, if um on site
and on track is actually that section of Church Street um that is uh right in front of the subject parcel, I think it was incorrect that no one could testify um that um they couldn't turn into that
box, so to speak, because it was Mr. uh Mr. Rene himself that said if you had to uh wait over 50 seconds to get out of that property you had a failed level of service and therefore people should be able to tell
you that they turning into that uh onto Church Street that it took over 50 seconds for them which would uh go to uh the fact that it's a failed traffic circulation. So, um, that's where I think that the, uh, the advice was
incorrect, and that is that Church Street, maybe the intersection down at the Memorial Triangle, not get in there, but that section in front of the subject property, people should have been able to testify about the traffic in front of their house on their side of Church
Street. Now, we went back as you talk about credibility and one thing of course when Mary asked about the um what do you do with inconsistent testimony as you know better than anyone I'm so I'm I'm sure about you give credib you can't give credibility of testimony. So it it
really gives you I I hope in summation we get we get a good summary here because right now uh with the inconsistent testimony unqualified witnesses um what is one to conclude and where you may recall Mr. Khan talked about how it was common sense to park in
the fire lane. Janet Lake said it was against the law to park in the fire lane. Mr. Khan said it was common sense to have deliveries in the fire lane. Somebody else said it's against the law to use the fire lane for deliveries. I think it was Mr. Khan said common sense. Kids can text back and forth with
parents when ready to pick up school. Hey, you know what one of the worst motor vehicle infraction is? Text them while you're driving. Right. And the applicant's going to actually offer that as a suggestion to the uh Texan people um while they're driving um as a uh a
great traffic plan. So obviously they failed the traffic circulation. Um he said what the county approved the county wants uh to have shown that there's room for a bus and um it it really is unclear whether this uh how
this handles a bus when you uh either lock the door so people can't get in. Um now I know Mr. uh Mr. Rayar was a real stickler for the English language as he said and it gets to this whole idea of a
fire lane or fire lanes, right? You have you have a fire lane in front of an entrance, but the ordinance says fire lanes, right? And it was Mr. Schlly who said you could have more than u two entrances. And again, we're um we're a
little at a loss because we haven't had any qualified religious experts to talk about that's actually relevant that actually shouldn't be stricken from the record about what are the practices going in and out of here. But one can only logically conclude with Mr. Schlly
statement that you can have more than one public entrance and that in the ordinance it talks about fire lanes that uh the fire lanes are in in uh properly uh designed uh on the subject property. Now also as well you talked about folks
actually being I I think subject to sitting here listen to the various testimony when again as uh Mr. Molini had asked about what to do with inconsistent testimony. Um and part of that is u I mean Mr. Drill himself on um
uh November 28th um said to Mr. You can't whisper to a witness when he's answering is inappropriate. It only gives you uh inconsistent testimony, right? Mr. Orur on February 5th, 2013, he says, "Mr. Charger is
whispering has not testified." Mr. Bizno um Mr. Mr. U was either Mr. Plazo or Mr. Drill on September 13, 2014. Mr. Khan, you can't look to Mr. Raymore. You need to answer the question.
So um so those all they all they all add up um to um you know the fact that the uh the testimony is is unreliable um and that um one um you know what can one
believe and so so with that Mr. Mr. Applause uh Mr. Chairman there is one uh minutes I don't know if you want to make motion a motion to correct the minutes or submit that in writing. Is that the conclusion of your other arguments? Is this a final? >> Pretty much so. Would you would you accept if I just write in if I have to
amend any uh minutes? >> Yeah, because the minutes just because they pertain to this particular application that the board has corrected minutes in the past. Not very often. So, if you think minutes are wrong, send it in. That's that doesn't have to to do with the deliberation in this case.
>> Okay. But if you're going to be re referring to a specific portion of a of a proceeding of an evening, give us the clip just like I'll say again >> or if if if nothing else give us the timing of it how deep into the meeting so we can find it. Okay.
>> So I mean in conclusion because Mr. Chairman um there's been a lot said about and one reason I think it really the board needs to deny this because there's one thing that's been said about you know the the town um basically monitoring
activity which is very dangerous. I mean even the New Jersey uh Supreme Court in um 86 uh was it Marca versus Worick 86 NJ232 in 1981 uh talked about the danger of uh continuing official surveillance
of religious persons or entities. So therefore the town should not be put in the position of um of uh being asked to uh to do such. So uh with with that Mr. uh Mr. chairman. Um the uh
with insufficient evidence, insufficient proof, there's no reason to approve this application. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. B. Before you go away, any any cross any questions or cross? >> Okay, seeing none. Thank you, Mr. B. >> Does any board member need a break
before the next member? >> Okay. So, we're going to take uh we're going to take a five minute break. Okay, we're back on the record. Uh we're going to be continuing with public comment. Uh someone indicated to me uh during the break that they could not be
here at the next meeting and that's you know this time of year that's obviously an important consideration. Is there anyone else uh due to vacation plans or other reasons that can't be here on August 4th? It's by show hands. Okay, sir. >> Okay. And that's the Martinson's back
there. Okay. >> Someone on the right there. >> Somebody else over here. >> Yes. >> And Okay. So, uh in in order of acknowledgement, we're going to do Mr. Mrs. Martinson and this gentleman and the lady over there. Okay. We're going to try to get everybody in. So, Mr.
Martinson, if you could come up. And just like everyone else, you put your name and address on the pad. It should still be there. And then when you're done with that, Mr. Dill will swear you in. >> That's my >> There was a piece of paper there. >> Okay. Who has the pad or the paper?
>> Mr. Bart, you took the piece of paper. >> Mr. Bart, did you take >> confiscation? It was It was just a single piece, so it might have gotten >> coingled. Martinson. >> Lloyd Martinson. >> Lloyd Martin. >> We will start a new
>> We'll start a new. >> Well, he's signing up. Mr. Bart, you were the only one to sign the other sheet. Then it disappeared. That correct? >> That doesn't mean there's a lot of people I saw. >> Okay. >> But Mr. Mr. Bart, that is an excellent example of circumstantial evidence.
>> Can you identify yourself for the record, please? >> Lloyd Martinson. >> Can Can you spell your last name? >> M A R T I N S O N. >> Okay. And your address? >> For Carriage Way. >> Okay. Can you raise your right hand? Use the comments and testimony that you're about to give in this proceeding will be
the truth, the whole true nothing but the truth to help you guide. >> I do. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to make public comments on the uh application. Uh I am opposed to the application and I
have three primary reasons why uh that is the case. First of all, it's most negative impact that it has on the the neighborhood uh surrounding the uh the property.
Secondly, to the the negative impact it has on to the township as a whole, but particularly the Liberty Corner area. And then finally, I'm opposed because I believe a it is really one of the most
inappropriate sites that could be selected and I believe that there could been a lot of other more appropriate sites found if the effort had been made. I've learned a lot by coming to the meetings. Um, and probably the biggest
thing that I've learned is this is just hearing all the other testimony over the months by the people who are in who live in the surrounding neighborhood.
Um, that their testimony has given me a much better understanding of how negatively this affects them. Um and a lot of them have already come forward. Uh they voiced opposition.
Uh I believe it is not right what is happening to them. When one buys a home, you do not expect that the single family home adjacent to it will be replaced by a house of worship with over a 100 parking spots
and with many services throughout the week. That I believe is an understatement and is just obvious to everyone. I also I join the many other residents who have already come forward in support in support of these people who are so
directly affected by this. Um, all any one of us has to do is imagine being in their homes, in their situations, to feel great sympathy and
uh and to realize very quickly how misguided this proposed project is. That mere fact in and of itself is enough for me to strongly oppose it and to ask the board to do the same to
protect the rights of these homeowners. The second point is about the the impact it has to Liberty Corner as a whole. Um, again, there's been a lot of testimony about that. I'm not going to repeat it all but overall um I have
learned a lot just by coming to the meetings uh about that I believe that this proposal has a very negative impact on the local area
the preservation of the township um and that it's counter to what I believe that not only myself but a lot of people in town want which is a limit of the use of heavy use development such as this and including and especially in
an historical area like Liberty Corner. Um I've understood a lot more about what the planning board its role in trying to do uh this mission to try to accomplish this mission. Um and I know that a lot of work has
already been done to try to preserve the rural character and the historic nature of the township by the planning board in particularly in Liberty Corner. Um, one example is the the Mance proposal by the Liberty Corner Presbyterian Church
uh and the opposition to that. I also understand I've come to understand how the planning board in the town has secured the development rights at presumably a heavy cost to many acres of the English farm tract.
Um, I believe this is a very impressive act towards that goal uh of really trying to preserve the township. I also understand that the master plan that was developed in 2010 was done by
the under the direction of the board and adopted by the board. And what I wonder is what was the purpose of this master plan which makes such of an effort to guide the decisions of this board? um on proposed
development and for decisions like this. Um to me, just even having a very cursory look at this over 200page document uh shows that this proposal that is before the board
goes in the opposite direction of what that master plan is trying to do. Again, a very cursory look. All you have to do is go to page two of that on the web.
Um, page two of that very long document. I'm just going to read from it under the section on on uh it's actually the second page, but the page number is 13. Um
under the section land use and management objectives it states the following land use objectives serve to guide the master plan colon and it gives five objectives.
Number one, land use policies should strive to maintain and enhance community character, protect the integrity of existing neighborhoods, and prevent the intrusion of
incompatible new development. That to me is the again this the the proposal goes 180 degrees in the opposite direction very hard against that very objective. And I wonder how have people gone
through the master plan in in detail to see in what other ways is this really just going against what was laid out in 2010. That's just reading the plan. And then there's just your general observation
that I would think a lot of people in town share. as you drive by the location on 124 Church Street and I've done that they've been residents for 14 years and you just you just see house after house after house
after house and then you just imagine house you know single family home single family home uh much larger structure 100 plus uh parking spaces multiple times throughout the day House
House. Of course, that's going to uh just greatly change the character of the area in Liberty Corner. How did we get to where we are? Um it seems like the scope just grew and grew over the years from being something
small to something bigger and bigger that as prior testimony has said, it just doesn't seem to fit. Um, one thing we're we're certainly concerned about, um, is traffic.
Um, now the issue is not the traffic on Church Street, which has been unfortunately passed on to another body, but that being put aside,
traffic throughout the township. There's other streets other than Church Street that need to be uh considered. And I actually haven't heard anything about this. We live on one of those streets or right in that same neighborhood. Um,
what I realize is that, and most people realize, anyone coming off of 287, if they want to get to this location, uh, from the Mount Airy Road exit on 287 often is going to want to find a shortcut, uh, after just a few tries, instead of
coming down Mount Air to Lions to Church Street, and they will cut through neighborhoods like Canterbury and Stockmar and Tuxford and Old Coach and Mbrook. This happens all the time. Um, anyone's familiar with the area knows this is exactly the way people will go.
You can be in our neighborhood and see teachers from all Brook School or whatever coming in that way. You you see people working in that area going to that area of town. Um, it will just naturally happen. And so I was wondering I'm I'm opposed
to it based even on just the traffic effect that it could have. Um but overall just the direct opposition that it has to the preserving of the uh the township. And then my last opposition is based
upon um that I really believe that it's I don't know how we got to where we are with this, but it seems to be just about the most inappropriate place you could put a facility like that. And there's plenty of other places that you could
look at. Um, I don't know if it's just it's gone so far and just grew from something else. I don't know the reasons why this is the site was was decided upon, but it just seems to me just objectively to be just a very big
mistake. Partly that's based upon my own experience. Um, not only have I been involved in a few different times with uh the potential selection of a school site, um, and realizing what goes into that,
you would and you would never consider putting a school, for example, right in a neighborhood. But also just more recent experience during the same parallel time that this has been been being considered and proposed in my own company. I I'm not
only a resident, I own a company, an IT consulting company with about 125 consultants and we have an office, our primary office that um the people who aren't consult about 20 people is in Bernard
Township. Um originally several years ago we it was a satellite office in uh Bernard's Township and our main office was in Springfield and our satellite office was very small with about six people and a
building actually on Church Street next to Krowers. Um when we even the occupation of that facility as an office, you know, there's a lot of things that we knew that we had to do to make the town
be pleased with the fact that we weren't intruding upon the historical nature of Liberty Corner and adding traffic and all that to know about what our business was. There were just a few of us, you know, about visitors that we might have. This is very all very appropriate, but it almost seems comical when I look at
the fact that this proposal is under serious consideration given the tremendous negative effect it will have in these areas. Um the what we ended up doing was when we decided to combine
uh our Springfield office and our Basking Ridge office into a single location in Bas in Bernard Township. Um well, I'll tell you what we did not do. We did not go into a neighborhood and attempt to convert a house to a
commercial building, even if there had been such a loophole for some something like that to be considered. Um it for one thing it would be obvious to us that would create strong opposition by the neighbors in the community. Um
and it wouldn't be opposition to the mission of our company. It would be in opposition how we would be misusing a residential property in a residential neighborhood and cing causing havoc in the neighborhood. I I don't consider our decision to not
go down that path as any way virtuous. Um, it would just simply be counter to the goal of getting set up quickly in a suitable location without hassles, which I see this proposal going for many years.
So, instead, all we did several years ago is look at a variety of sites in the area. Um, the economy has been slow. Uh, it's been great for people looking for space. Uh, we we had many options. Um, and we decided between two sites
both one off the Burnsville exit of 287 and the other off of the Mount Airy Road exit of 287. Uh so we we chose the one off the Mount Airy Road exit across from >> My apologies, Mr. Martinsson. You need to bring that up just a little bit more. Thank you.
>> Sure. Okay. Um so we chose the Mount Airy Road exit uh location and moved in a few years ago after building out the office. Well, we're a small office about 20 people, but during that same time, I saw
other organizations and facilities securing space um or having just secured space in similar locations. Uh the just for example, um there was the
Montgomery Academy uh which has I believe about 90 students. I mean, it's gone far a field for a long time, but at least he was talking about his own personal experiences. Now he's talking about Montgomery
Academy, which I don't know that he's a member of or an owner of. >> Were you directly involved in that property search or are you just citing that by way of example? >> Uh, I'm citing by way of example. >> So then as to that, the the objections to state at that point the threat has
been pulled too thin as to its relationship to this application. >> Okay. Um, so there's been plenty of time basically for other sites to be looked at that we
saw that would have been potentially appropriate for larger organizations um and efforts. But instead the and the and the other thing is it the site that we chose is right off an exit. It's not in anyone's
neighborhood. There's no traffic issues. Um there uh and I don't understand why the focus has not been getting a site that has been more appropriate. And if I had found ourselves considering a
residential property in a residential neighborhood and again if there's some sort of loophole, I would think that we'd be crazy to be considering that because what would actually happen would be what's happened here is a lot of people would be opposing it. There'd be
signs all over the place. There'd be hearings in front of the planning board. Um, and you we would expect full opposition, not because an opposition in an IT staffing firm or what we're doing, but just because of how it was a misuse,
a inappropriate land use. And this is for us who have we have no ties to the community other than some of our employees live in town. Our our by and large our our clients are around the country. Um, I don't it's puzzling to me why
that's trying to be part of the community and it is part of the community and having ties to the direct local community that it cares about would go against that goal of keeping those ties strong and and just
starting off in this way. Um, in in the master plan, >> I object. The witness is now repeating himself and the obvious answer to everything he said
is it's a permitted use at this site. And repeated references to the master plan and to everything else that he's going into don't change the fact that it's a permitted use at this site. It's now redundant and a filibuster. Are you citing to a different section of
the master plan? >> Yes. >> What section did you want to site to? >> I have one more uh quote from the master plan in uh page 146 conservation. >> Objections over rules. It can go to weight, but it's the master plan. I
don't see how we could possibly rely on the master plan and making an argument to the board concerning a an application. So proceed any motion. >> Okay. Please. So on page 146, the following master plan goals and
objectives are directly relevant to the conservation open space plan. Number one, to promote and encourage social comedy, and that means I looked that up. It's courtesy and considerate behavior toward
others, civic responsibility, and neighborliness, which are key quality of life indicators in Bernards. And as even that aspect of it where it's not thinking of the concerns of the neighbors
um to me says that goes against the master plan in and of itself. So in conclusion, I believe that there have been other sites that would have been far better um and that the application
shouldn't really have happened shouldn't have come this far and I asked the board to reject the proposal and to find uh and to protect both the township Liberty Corner and the rights of the neighbors.
>> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Smarts. Any questions from the board? Any cross-examination? Great. Seeing none. Thank you, sir. You're excused. Miss Martinson, if you want to come up. >> Now, you took the paper. >> You took the paper.
>> He recovered it. covered. >> Have a choice. >> Can you state your name for the record? >> Katie Martinson. >> That's Katie Kat. >> Katie. K A T I E. Okay. Can you raise your right hand? >> Yes.
>> You swear the comments and testimony you're going to give are going to be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth to help you guide >> and probably know your address, but your address. >> It's for carriageway. I just have a short point to um
illuminate what um Lloyd was saying about the traffic issue through our own neighborhood. I have an exhibit that I think would help people see what I'm talking about. Um, am I allowed to pass that out? >> It's a map.
>> I understand. Let's hear what the objection is first. The traffic on carriageway has nothing to do with this site and necessarily gets to traffic on
the county road which is the only way you enter or exit our site. That objection is sustained only because the the prior decisions of the board relative to its jurisdiction in this matter relate only to the the site itself which
not only does it it doesn't include traffic on Church Street. So it it doesn't therefore extend to street even beyond that. So unfortunately that line of of testimony isn't permitted.
The objection that I have to the application is based on maintaining the character of the neighborhood. And when we moved in to our home in 2002,
uh a very uh important part of our decision was the is this a busy neighborhood? Is this a neighborhood that's safe for our children to ride their bikes across the street, play outside, get over to the
park, and therefore I think that the additional cars that we coming through our own neighborhood, which is not a county road, actually is very relevant to this
application. >> Mr. Dr. So the traffic is twofold. The reason there were two issues. One is that it was a county road. So the county had jurisdiction over church. But the other part of it was that because the use is
permitted. The cases say increase in traffic on any roads is irrelevant. That's what the cases say. So I I understand that there could be an adverse impact on more traffic on your street. Although
you would need a witness to actually testify to that. But even if there was one, the cases say because this use is permitted. There's nothing that the board cannot consider that. And the board gave a lot of leeway and they let uh your husband for example site the master plan and all
that. But if the master plan suggests a and the ordinance says X, this board has to follow the ordinance. So master plan is a planning document and the ordinance is the implementation document. And basically what you can see has happened here is that the ordinance was changed
after the application was filed. And prior to 2011, the board would have followed the new ordinance which made this conditionally permitted instead of principally permitted. But in 2011, the legislature adopted a law and the
governor signed it called the time of application law. And what that law said, which the board has to sign, all these members are taken oath of office. follow the laws of state state of New Jersey and the constitution and it said that if the ordinance is changed during an
application the ordinance in effect at the time the application was filed governs. So they whether the board likes it or not whether anyone likes it or not the board has no choice but to follow the ordinance that was in effect at the time and that means increased traffic on
any streets whether it's a county street or any other street cannot be considered by the board. If they do and they were to deny the on that basis and my opinion they would get reversed. >> That's my opinion to the board. >> Well, I I'll have to defer to that. I'm
not an attorney. Um so I don't have any basis of refuting that, but it seems to me common sense that you know that is something that affects >> I will tell you sometimes land use and zoning and common sense. Sometimes
It's not always common sense is all I'm going to say. Can you state your name? >> Yes, it's Nadine Ahmed. >> Spell both the first and second name. >> Nadine. N A D I M for Mary.
A HM D and I live at 102 Independent Strike in the Hills. >> And can you raise your right hand? You swear the testimony that you're going to give in this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth to help you guide. >> I do.
>> So, first of all, thank you very much for the opportunity to allow me to make comment. Um, secondly, for also providing that opportunity for my kids to see democracy in action. So, whichever side of the debate you're on, I think it's a great opportunity for the kids in the community to be able to see
democracy in action. Um, my comments are going to be in favor of the planned application. Uh, and I do understand that the decision in front of the board is a very difficult one with lots of emotions on
both sides of this debate. However, I would encourage the members of the board to continue to focus as you have been on the scope and the remit of your specific responsibilities
as they pertain to the context of zoning ordinance, including permitted use the application. I would also encourage the board to discern facts versus conjecture.
Google does not make one an expert, either an attorney or an engineer or a religious expert for that matter. For example, we've heard public comments
in prior meetings on the issue of shoes. and the placement thereof in a mosque. Again, Google does not make one an Islamic scholar nor qualified
to discern the finer points of Islamic jurist prudence just as one cannot become a doctor by reading a medical textbook. Secondly, the main issue and again my comments are
not going to be comments as an expert but as a Muslim that practices his faith. So you can make your assessments based on my commentary. The main issue related to shoes in a mosque any Muslim Muslim will tell you
is that there is a requirement to remove one's shoes when one prays. That's it. It's not much more complicated than that. The placement of the shoes in my opinion and my opinion only based on the site
plan I think there's opportunity to place the shoes elsewhere in the prayer area as long as the shoes are not on the carpeted area which is the area designated
for prayers. We also heard testimony in prior meetings on the issue of compact cars and how people in Bing Ridge don't drive around in Mini Coopers, right?
This actually isn't an accurate assertion as many of today's most popular cars are in fact compact cars such as the Honda Civic. the Mazda 3, the Ford Focus,
Volkswagen Jetta, Nissan Sentra, to name a few. I personally own and drive a Honda Civic and Mazda 3 and I also live in Basking Ridge. We also heard about parking spaces
previously and also earlier today. I was actually encouraged to here that the effective parking space in a parking spot isn't necessarily the distance from the
wheel stop to the back of that parking spot because there was a lot of discussion about the overhang beyond the wheel stop. It's called a wheel stop because it stops the wheels. So I think in any assessment of
effective parking spaces that should be considered and in fact was mentioned in one of the comments today. There have also been many many comments regarding parking volume
with the implication that 107 cars would be parked in the parking lot five times a day every day. I would just like to clarify that Muslims do not have to attend the
mosque for the five daily prayers. I personally offer my own prayers in my office and sometimes at home. A few people may choose to attend the mosque for some of their daily prayers,
but based again my personal experience, this will be a very small number. The peak time will be the Friday prayers where Muslims generally tend to congregate in the mosque just as our Christian
brethren gather in churches on Sundays. There was also commentary made previously and today in public testimony that it's important to preserve the historic nature of the area and how in fact the community in the
past did not support the building of a new residence for the minister of the Presbyterian Church. However, I would like to point out that I don't believe this is an apples versus apples
comparison. The proposed application from the church included tearing down a historic building within the historic district of Liberty Cornets.
The proposed mosque is neither in the historic district nor is it a historical building. On the topic of history today will become history tomorrow.
Similarly, the first mosque in Basking Ridge, if approved, will become history in the future. Just as the opening of the first synagogue in
Bing Ridge was a historic milestone over 25 years ago. There was much said about religious expert testimony over the past several years.
A religious expert or an imam is there to serve the spiritual needs of the community. That person is not a traffic engineer. That person
does not determine the occupancy of a mosque. So I would assert that conflating the role of the religious expert or imam is not appropriate in this case. They're
there to serve the spiritual needs of the community, instruct the community on the rights of worship. So again, I want to make sure that we continue to discern facts versus conjecture.
I will conclude by finish by finishing where I started and that is to urge the members of the board to pass out emotion and conjecture
and continue as you have been to base your decision purely on the scope and the remake of the board. as defined by the applicable zoning ordinance.
>> Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Mr. Amanda. Any questions from the board? Any cross examination? >> Okay, seeing none. Thank you, sir. You're excused. And then, ma'am, you were next. Well, you're putting your name. Is there
anyone else that can't be here on the August 4 meeting? We're trying to get people that are going to be away on vacation. We got somebody back there. Anyone else? Show hands. Okay. So, be next. >> Did you sign up yet? >> Just put your name and address on the on
one of the two sheets. I'm sorry. Prior to making my statement >> Could you state your name for the record? >> Uh, surely. Uh, my name is Kathleen Hatherthersaw. >> Okay. Can you spell that last name slowly? >> Surely. H O T H E R S A L L.
>> Okay. Can you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony and comments that you're about to give in this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. I hope you die. >> I do. >> Can you state your address? >> Surely. Um, I live at 45 Winding Lane.
>> Okay. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen of the board. Thank you for your consideration of my statement. I'll be very brief. Uh I my family has lived at 45 Winding Lane. Uh it'll be 51 years this uh August. So we have very very deep uh roots in this community. And my
family also has even deeper roots in this nation. Uh in addition to having lived in Basking Ridge for 51 years, I'm also a daughter of the American Revolution. I have an ancestor named Abraham Clark from New Jersey who who was one of the 56 brave and noble men
who risked their lives to sign the Declaration of Independence on July 4th, 1776, asserting our nation's independence from Britain. 13 years later, a nation was born unlike any that the world had ever seen in its 10,000-year history of ci of human civilization. For the first time, a
nation existed that held itself evident that its citizens had the right to freedom of worship and that this included all citizens. All citizens, not just those who agreed with the nation's sovereign. They bestowed upon us a heritage in this respect that was precious, noble, and sacred. One that
has served us very well through the decades and centuries. We owe them a debt that we can never repay. however, never in full. But we can partially repay it by remembering it, honoring it, and carrying it forward, especially those who hold positions of public
service. I urge you to remember this and to honor the rights of all Americans within your jurisdiction to freedom of worship to the best of your ability and not to resort to such practices as the creative use of legislation or ordinances as an end run around the Constitution and a way out of observing
those rights by interfering with the construction of a house of worship. In my opinion, a mosque would be an asset and not a liability to the community and would contribute to its cultural and spiritual character and not detract from it. I urge you to approve
uh its construction and uh to allow it to be expedited. Thank you ladies and gentlemen again. >> Thank you this is Paul. Any questions from the board? Any cross-examination? No. >> Okay. Seeing none. Thank you. You're excused. Thank you.
>> All right, sir. Peter Fitzpatrick, 277 Mount Mount Prospect Road. Okay. Can you raise your right hand? >> Yes. >> Do you swear that the comments and testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth? Nothing but
the truth. I'll help you back. >> I do. >> First, >> you can either you can either take that mic out of there or leave it in the stand before. >> First of all, I'd like to thank the planning board uh for for all your service and your time on this issue.
It's been a long long journey for all of us. Um my comments are basically this. I I feel that the uh the planning board has shown great difference to the uh ISBR. I think that they've shown more difference to them than to us, the residents.
Even though this is a planning board, this has essentially become Mr. Ray Moore's courtroom and playground. He's consistently tried to render any expert witness put forth by us, the residents, as net opinion and shocking as irrelevant.
while his witness, the traffic expert or jack of all trades, Mr. Khan, when asked, could not even answer the most basic of traffic questions. Many of his answers came back as, "I'm not sure or I don't know at this time."
He actually said that the fire lane could be used for deliveries. Then Mr. Simon asked how often he had testified as a traffic expert and his reply was once or twice in the last 15 years. Really?
The same witness, Mr. Khan, was also the engineer on this project. And in that capacity, he dropped the ball too many times to to be mentioned. Then there's the then there's the fact that this house of worship is proposed right across the
street from the Liberty Quarter firehouse which services threequarters of the town. The fire officials said that they that that they are not comfortable with the layout of this building or application and that they would be remiss from bringing one or two of their fire trucks onto the property
in case of an emergency. They also stated that they would not be comfortable with cars parked along the road and the street uh in case you know there was another fire somewhere else in the town. Do we really think that permitted use
or that a permitted use ordinance should override the safety of all our towns residents and the neighbors just to appease one applicant? One of the conditions of this permitted use ordinance was a required 3acre parcel. There are wetlands on this
property and the usage and the the acreage the usage of the acreage is much smaller than 3 acres. One of the great questions asked by the board was does this ordinance specifically say a usable 3 acres?
No, the ordinance doesn't say the word usable. Unfortunately, that would mean we would have to use common sense and good judgment. But in our latigious society, common sense means nothing. The parsing of words means everything and determining whether a capital letter means one thing or a lowercase letter
means something else. Come on, guys. This is all this is all words smmithing. If you look around this room, ladies and gentlemen, these last three years, you will see many towns residents. We are black. We are brown.
We are Indian and Asian. We're Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Mormon, Hindu, and Buddhist. This is not and never was about religious intolerance. This is about preferential treatment. While our signs to preserve Liberty
Corner have been stolen from our lawns numerous times over these last three years, we see a Bernard Bernard's Township police officer stationed in the ISBR driveway. What's the message? Who's paying for that expense? And who's be
who's been given special treatment? I'd love to have that cop in my driveway. My signs might still be there. All the residents of this town want is for you, the board, to do your job. This application needs to be looked at
for what it is. It's a high usage, oversized house of worship in the middle of a historic district and across the street from our town's busy fire department in the wetlands and then smooshed between modest homes. Homes
that will have no escape from noise, traffic, and loss of privacy. We ask you to do the right thing by the town and by its residents and deny this application. You have the grounds to deny it because safety is relevant,
wetlands are relevant, the common good is relevant, easements are relevant, buffer zones are relevant, lights and noise are relevant, and the residents of this town are relevant. >> Pleasure. Thank you.
[Applause] [Music] Sir, you got to hold up. >> Any questions for everyone? >> Any cross exam? >> Any cross examination? >> No. >> Okay. Anyone else not going to be here
on the fourth? Oh, there is someone. >> Hi, Christina. Eric, 56 Peach Tree Road. >> Can you just spell your last name? >> E H R Raise your right hand. You swear the comments and testimony that you're going to give
in this proceeding will be the truth. The whole truth, nothing but the truth to help you guide. >> Yes. >> Um I've stood in this room several times on a different issue. It was uh traffic into the high school in front of a different board and it was ruled that um
traffic could not be utilized could not go through the municipal building because there were concerns potential committee had concerns that it would impact the response time for the police officers who were in the municipal buildings and it was deemed that another
alternative had to be made and another alternative was made and here we are with a completely different traffic pattern. So I just I don't understand how a township committee can make a rule about response time and not allow residents to utilize a municipal
building because traffic is an issue but if traffic is an issue in another area where there's response time Liberty corner fire department. How that is not a reason why this cannot be done. >> Wait, don't go away. Don't go away. Anybody? Any questions from the board
professionals? Any cross exam? >> Okay. Thank you, ma'am. You're excused. >> Okay. As this gentleman's making his way up, I just want to make sure anybody that's not going to be here because of vacation next meeting. We're trying to get everybody in that wouldn't be here because of vac No, no, that's You're fine. >> I can be out. No, that's fine. But
anyone else? Okay. So, now we're just going to go as is just uh so the record reflects there was no further show of hands by anyone that that can't be here at the next meeting on August 4th due to travel or otherwise. >> My name is Doug Watson. Douglas Watson,
52 Liberty Corner Road. >> Okay. Can you raise your right hand? You swear the testimony and comments that you're about to give in this proceeding will be the truth. The whole truth. Nothing but the truth. I hope you die. >> I do. >> And I can tell you're going to have to talk louder. >> I do. >> Okay. >> I've rarely been accused of not talking
loud. >> So, first of all, to gentlemen, I'm not a lawyer. I'm not represented by a lawyer. I do not need one. I'm here simply to express my opinion and my wife's opinion and to give my public
comment as this board has requested. Um I want to thank the last speaker actually because I that was a very calm and and helpful presentation and in fairness taught me some things uh which perhaps I didn't know maybe I should have done. Um, and that really
reemphasizes that I'm absolutely unaccountably not an expert in Muslim worshiing practices, which I know was part of a discussion or an earlier meeting. Um, I am sort of an expert in corporate leadership, but that's irrelevant. and I but I've had many years of experience on
boards of small uh foundations be they hospitals, rehabilitation centers, health foundations and I understand the challenges that are faced by uh not for profofits in trying to move >> my apologies. You're getting feedback.
It isn't one thing it isn't the other. So you need to be a little bit further away but the feedback is going to be just as hard to hear on the recording. So, if you could just take a a step back from that microphone. Yeah. And then continue. Then you'll be fine. >> Okay. Thank you. My apologies.
>> No, that's all right. You're just hearing my opinion twice, which is makes it twice as good, right? >> Um, so absolutely I respect the Muslim faith and indeed all faiths and I wish them nothing but the best, but I want
them to integrate into our community. uh if they truly respect our community, they will listen to what we the public are saying. In full disclosure, this is not the first time that I presented to a township planning committee. Many years
ago, a different religious group, if memory serves me right, it was the Grace Fellowship Church had an application before this board and they wanted to convert a house down Liberty Corner Road uh into a church facility. He argued it
was an approved use. Uh and they planned to build a large car park with lighting. Sound familiar? Uh we the local community opposed that project. In this occasion, the church listened. They withdrew the proposal and
bought property out of town in a more secluded area. After all, the congre uh the congregants uh don't very few congregants walk to church these days or temple or mosques in a community like this. So whether it's in the center of
town on the outskirts of town really is irrelevant. This application proceeding has been going on for four years. What does that say to the applicants? It says we've got a very patient board. That's true. But are they listening? I
think not. My personal experience, my wife and I have lived in Scotland, in England, in Switzerland, and in sunny Burners Township, New Jersey. They're all different. They have different cultures. They have different
languages. We even drive on different sides of the road. They are all wonderful communities to live in. My wife and I adapted to the respective communities and the respective cultures. The appropriate strategy, I would argue,
for anyone moving into a community is to assimilate into that local society without unduly impacting the character of a community. Liberty Corner is a historic village and that's why we chose to live here. We
like it here. We like it the way it is. Assimilation means that one tries to minimize the impact on that community. Live in it, enjoy it, but try to minimize your changes to it. For the record,
at this location on Church Street, even if this was a proposed Scottish Presbyterian church with daily services accompanied by a bike pipe band with fish and chip supplers on Friday and Saturday evening, I would vote against it. It is nothing to do with the
religion itself. It's the use of the property and the occupancy and the traffic and everything else around it. The gentleman on my left keeps reminding us it is a permitted use. Okay. A restaurant is permitted use in the
central Baskin Ridge. But I wonder how this board would react if McDonald's came with flashing lights for an application the center of Baskin Ridge. It's irrelevant. I know the board has to give consideration to the overall impact on our community. We're not allowed to
use the tword in this conversation, but health and safety is a huge concern as discussed by many of the presenters before and respect the arguments about uh uh fire access etc. I wonder what will happen to the value of our houses
in this immediate area. One might look at similar experiences in other communities around here. And I suppose the good news is that my real estate taxes will probably go down. Any religious establishment will attract
members of the faith to this area. I respect any new religious establishment. Big important will will attract members of the faith to this area. That's good. I respect the character of the people currently requesting this construction.
But I worry about the future congregants that that will come and how they will behave. >> We have that's that's completely out of line and it's not relevant to this application. >> It may not be. But do you want my public
comment or not? >> It's it's both irrelevant. It's also speculative. >> Okay. >> State. >> I I withdraw the last sentence. We already see some strange aberant behavior from supporters.
>> Removal of signs from private property. I believe that was a fact. I >> I object. That's that's >> okay. >> That's complete speculation. There's no evidence in the record on that. It's a state. This is >> uh there are people accusing those with
signs as being Islamophobic. How can we believe people who behave like that are going to live up to the commitments they make >> uh with the board of our community that's >> when he objects you have no choice but to stop
>> that's completely out of line. >> I don't I don't have to stop my testimony. >> You do. No. After he makes an objection because then we have to rule on the objection before you proceed. >> Okay. >> I didn't get the >> objected. They said it's completely out of line and totally speculative.
>> Sustained a speculative >> I withdraw. >> Thank you, sir. >> Let's have the courage of our community to say no. There are plenty of land properties available in the more rural areas. The board should not be granting variances for this lot. Comply with the
town planning guidelines, fire access codes, ground coverage, retention basins, covers, drainage, whatever. No variances. And finally, may I strongly request that this board retain the final say. Let's postpone a final decision
until after the fire safety and county road issues are resolved or not resolved by another institution. Let's keep it in the town. Let's keep it at this table. As an earlier uh speaker said, this will end up in court and I don't want to be
part of the plaintiffs of that. Last but not least, I truly truly thank each and every one of you for the time and effort and the the cander and patience you've had with me and other people have testified today and in prior days. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. W. >> Any questions from the board? >> Any cross exam? >> Any cross exams? >> No. >> Okay. Thank you, sir. Excuse. Any other member of the public wishing to be heard? Come forward. >> My name's Jen. Um, sorry. Legal name. I
don't use my nickname. >> Ma'am, you remember to write your name down. >> My name's Jen John. Last name spelled as Z H A N G. Ma'am, I I really would appreciate it if you could write that on
the piece of paper there. >> And while you're doing that, can you spell your first name? Is that the spelling of your last name? >> Z Hen, and I live at uh three Weddington Drive, asking Ridge. >> Can you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony and comments that you're about to give in this proceeding
will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth, to help you guide? Yes, I do. I oppose the application. I wonder how many people who support the application live next to 124 Church
Street and have imagined that the mosque is to be built in your backyard. Would you like to trade your house with the house next to 124 Church Street at the current market value?
That's the end. >> Thank you. Don't run away. Any questions? >> Any calls? >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Any other members? Yes, sir. Easy. >> You please give us your name.
>> Frank Zo Z H AO 50. What's your address again? >> 50. >> You swear the testimony you're about to give me the truth. The whole thing about the truth will help you. First of all, I would like to thank the
board members and also the public that has been spent so many times uh coming to this uh uh hearing. It's been almost over three years, right? 24 and
counting. And uh I would like to you know I even though I was not living I'm not living in the kind of kind of a close adjacency to the uh proposed uh building site but
after uh many times of uh attending the hearing I feel as a resident I feel I mean uh feel my you know be responsible to speak out what I feel about
uh through many of the hearings and also through the uh public comments uh we are kind of limited to the uh the ordinance relevancy of this building code right building uh plan but I think
as a public we live here we breathe here we are we should be allowed to express some of our feelings as well as uh you know uh subjective to those ordinance and master plan. The use of
the land has has profound impact on the characteristic environment and other important aspect of the matter. The use of land should in uh according accordance with the principle outlined
it in the township master plan and also uh in conjunction with the ordinance. Uh number one the for public welfare and the well-being of the neighborhoods in the master plan in the general objective
section there are list uh 15 b items. The first one I think I presumably is the the very important one, the most important one is to encourage municipal action to guide appropriate use or
development of all lands in this state in a manner which will promote the public health, safety, morals and general welfare. Also, this is also uh written in the
town uh ordinance section 21st 21 about the land use >> 21- >> 21-1.1 purpose. So, you're reading one of the purposes of the ordinance, >> right? >> Okay. I think uh in this particular uh
land use section uh I just read the one one uh section of this uh providing maximum protection of the public health safety morals and general welfare in accordance with the
provisions and of the NJSA 40 uh colon 55D-2 to through the full exercise through through the full exercise of the land use management powers available to the township. So I think the uh paramount of
this board you should consider this as the most important aspect of any land use regarding the public safety and wellbeings. The number five item of general objections in the master plan uh says it
ensures to promote the establishment of appropriate population densities and concentrations that will contribute to the well-being of the persons, neighbors, communities and and regions
and pres and preservation of the environment. The major reason for separating the land use for commercial and residential is that uh besides the uh preserving the natur the uh nature surrounding and
environment and protecting the habitant. It is the traffic congestion, pedestrian safety, security and air and uh noise pollution that adversely affect the public safety uh health, moral and
general well-beings in the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed use in this property even in the n even in the residential zone area will yield more traffic in and out uh
and more condensed use than some of the business in the commercial zoning area. Uh here are some reasons. Uh in the recent Friday, we're well actually that was in
March uh Friday afternoon or Friday noon time. Uh more than 80 people were observed entering two houses in the Baskin Ridge Community Center which I think they have
the their Friday uh noon paria for a total capacity of 80 of those two buildings. Uh there are coming in around 60 cars that includes cars, vans and SUVs, not
just those many Coopers. Though majority of the people respected safety precaution driving slowly into the parking lot but some rushed into the parking a lot with unsafety with unsafe
speed >> and through the through the observation. >> This is about safety. >> Is there any objection? You have to wait. >> Okay. He unless he has a speed camera, unless he has a police report, then he he is
talking about ambiguities and and speculative actions. >> Did you personally observe this? >> Yes, I do. >> What's your belief as to who you were observing? >> Well, I I observed unsafety behavior.
No, no, but the the people using the community center, who who were they? >> No, those are the people coming for the Friday prayer and entering those two buildings. >> It's your testimony that you were observing members of the ISBR using the community center. >> Yes, I did.
>> Then if it's his personal observations, he can testify to it. You know, I assume your next argument would be relevance, but he if he personally observed that these are the actual congregants of the applicant, he has the right to make the argument that driving
behavior in that parking lot might be replicated on the site parking lot if approved. It goes to way allow and and as to he doesn't need a radar gun. you know that people are permitted to give their opinions as to such things as the rate
of speed of a vehicle based on their general experience as licensed drivers. Any motion by the board? >> Yeah. Some rushed into the parking lot with unsafe uh speed maybe due to the
late arrival and also some parked their cars in the driving throughways. I wouldn't I don't know how to explain ex explain this because uh you have circulation right but there is a small section at the back of the uh uh the you
know the the main parking lot it's a small parking lot without any kind of throughout the way but there is a driveways right and then you park your cars through your driveways and go to the parking lot space and some of cars are parking on those driveways not are
on those you know wide lane designated parking spaces. Okay. And I guess it's due to the uh due to the uh uh lack of the parking space available because that parking lot not only used by the uh the
community center and also used by people in the in the high school. So you know I I don't mean that know those people are you know parking uh not according to the safety precautions or driving coming uh not you know in in a
in a the very unsafe speed there are there are bad people but I'm presenting this is is that the separation why we separate the residential use and commercial use because there's That's a good reason because people in the
commercial settings they rush in and rush out right it's very often if you happen to be you know go go need to buy some bagels the coffee in the morning and you are very you know hurry going to work you just it's crazy right so those
are the reason that separates commercial and residential uses of the land okay that is that is because the uh the uh uh hit safety So sometimes you know beyond your intention and control control right you
you cannot say okay all my congregation members are coming with good intention and good behavior. Secondly, a regular use of a facility five times a day from dawn to the last to the last one is you know as late
between sunset and midnight. Uh with more in weekend or Friday whatever. Uh this is an open area with noise can easily penetrate hundred yards. If you know that section of the uh the the the
uh road, right? You have cars coming and out with annoying noise of engine starting, doors shouting, chip sounds to lock and unlock a door.
So another thing is before the sunrise for every day in your next door is really a health hazard if you don't agree. Okay. I used to live in a a a place where uh my my neighbor he
needs to go to work every like five o'clock in the morning and he has a kind of junky cars and he went started it's like every you know I would say every neighborhood I was get you know kind of being awakened up every day at this five
and I really really I feel a kind of a a healthy uh concern to Okay, even worse, during the long snowy winter in our town, we all have we all remember those
couple of years, right? A plow truck is necessary to clean the driveway on two sides of the huge parking lot. Remember they have to start the first prayer before dawn and you have to clean
up the snow before then. This will make neighbor really unbearable experience in my opinion. Over the long term, many health problem could develop due to lack of sleep or sleep uh deprive uh andia.
Third, the proposed use also extends to other public gatherings throughout the year such as pot party that we uh observed and other festivities. Okay, those are not kind of uh uh very well
specified in the uh in the uh site plan. We all have neighbors on left and right. Imagine that your next door neighbor having large number of people coming all the time, sometimes into the late night.
It is quite a disturbing experience. >> I always think that if you have a neighbor like that, you will call police. It certainly will cause discomfort and anxiety. Fourth, the kids dropping
places. I'm talking about inside of the premise. The kids dropping places in the middle of the fall line and sandwiched by two potential moving vehicles. If you remember the site plan, right? You know
what I'm talking about, right everyone? which would cause potential accident. Okay. when I was asking this question to the to Miss Kong about uh this design and asked him very specifically in his
uh professional career, has he ever designed a dropping off space or by any chance that he knew anything uh in any place that has such a design of the
children dropping dropping uh spaces? He say the answer is no. Second, fire safety in a general objective in the master plan. The second one, so we will just
talk the first one, right? I presume the first one is the most important thing. The second one is to secure safety from fire, flood, panic, and other natural and man-made disaster.
There are very real fire safety concern inside and outside of the premise. First, during the hearing of the fire uh evacuation plan, both town fire official, Miss Mrs. Lake
and Liberty Corner fire uh fire house chief uh Mr. Abraham expressed their serious concerns. Uh here I quote uh what Mrs. Lake, Miss Lake State.
The projector's fire safety was hampered by having a relative narrow lot with an angled building that could leave worshippers and emerging emergency responders then locked to the rare.
The fire chief also testified that the the uh firefighting response will be hampered by among the other things the proximity proximity of the proposed building to fire lanes and the uh
resulting resulting risk for firefighters and truck to pass under the buildings pass under buildings collapping a collapse zone. The close proximity of only six feet
from building structure to fire lane definitely poses a serious threat to firefighters as well as fire uh fire equipment. the narrow fire truck circulation pass
inside the parking parking lot uh the parking in east side of the parking lot I would say east southeast side of of the parking lot will further hamper the firefighting efforts I think this is well uh kind of uh the uh u addressed by
Mr. Cody Smith right in the snow days in and out of the site become a nightmare if not all impossible uh I didn't bring a photo if you all remember how the snow days
how we accumulate snow right I have a twocar you know twocar lane driveway and for the last couple of years I clean up snow uh last year was not as bad. The snow is
about this high. The year prior, my snow is over my kids head or actually over my head. So, this is a just a small kind of driveway. Okay, twocar driveway. I push the snow on the side to to get the
driveway out. And imagine for a for a parking space has a 107 car parking space how much snow will will generate it. Okay, I cannot imagine where the snow will go because if you
look at the site plane the uh circulation into the building especially uh entering the building kind of make a curve right there's not much kind of space on the two sides right I don't really don't know where the snow
goes and also as Mr. Cody Smith pointed out when the snow prowl push the push the snow against any kind of wall or or you know grass or whatever it stops in that particular eastwards east the east
side parking space that will kind of uh you know push against the wheel dropper right right so that effectively effectively that the space about two feet of space that your car
can push into it. Stop at the wheel stop that is disappearing. Okay, you know what I'm talking about, right? Everyone understand, right? So, effectively cut 2 feet short of the parking space. So,
uh very kind of a disturbing thing is that when Mr. Mrs. Lake and Mr. uh fire chief was uh kind of the uh testifiing testify uh their their opinion. They
were challenged right and grilled by Mr. Rayar during their testimonial and uh they both stand firm on their belief based on their professional education and training. We feel safe and confident
that we have very high quality professionals uh safeguard our community. Third, preserving the characteristic of the neighborhood in the master plan. Uh that's objective for land use and
management uh objectives. Land use policy should strive to maintain and enhance community character, protect the integrity of existing neighborhoods and prevent the intrusion of incompatible new
development. The building of this proposed structure uh will in many ways change the characteristic of this neighborhood. First, the land will be largely covered by the building and the road service
materials. The impermeable service is much larger than the fire station across the street which has only 70 parking space. We all know the Olympic corner fire uh
firehouse, right? I have some picture here. from that picture the u the aerial kind of uh view of this magnet. >> And just so you know, there's already
remember that aerial that's in evidence showed the whole neighborhood. Do you want to put additional aerials in evidence? >> Well, it's not evidence. I just give you some kind of visual comparison if if public want to take a look. >> Well, do you want the board to see it or
not? I want you to see it >> then it's evidence. Then you want it to be admitted as evidence. >> Okay. If if that could be >> just passing it wrong. >> Oh, okay. Sure. You can have those. >> Thank you. Uh let me have some more if
you I just need one for myself. They're not in evidence. >> No, they're not evidence yet. >> Okay. All right. >> Mr. Ramar, do you have a problem with this? >> What's the source? Let's get the source. >> Oh, this is from a Google map. >> Hold on one second, Mr. Ramar. There's a
a front and a back. >> The front is the before. The back is the after. >> Oh, you are you in front of me? >> Yeah, there is a front and a back. on the we can hear it. >> Yeah. First of all,
>> the the the Google map that's the base of this document on either side is not objectionable. >> Ladies and gentlemen, please you can't hear me >> the goo the Google map. That's the base
is not objectionable. Then someone on one side added the word before and someone on the other side added the word after. >> On the before side, someone also added >> Yeah. And I was going to get to that. And then someone drew something on the before side. I don't know who did it and
I don't know whether it's accurate. >> And then on the after side, someone superimposed uh a site plan. It's so small. I don't know if that's the most current one or not. And I don't know whether the scale
is identical to the scale of the rest of the Google map. >> Okay. Did you do the superimposing of the site map and the boundary lines? >> Yes, I did. >> Okay. >> I don't think a Google has it yet. >> Okay. Well, just so you know, our the
township's engineering department and planning department and the various experts, they they've submitted exhibits that have the property lines scaled. So, there is some way to do it. Obviously, you and I don't know how to do it, but there is a way to do it. >> Well, I don't know if he knows how to do
it or not, so I'm going to find out. >> Was that the scale? Do you know if that's the scale, or is that just your best estimate of how it will look? another before when you drew the property when I >> Well, I it doesn't have to >> the best best knowledge of my So is this is this just your handdrawn? >> Yeah, this is my handrawn
>> best estimate. >> And how about the on the flip side the the site plan? >> I superimposed myself. Yes. >> But how did you determine that that's the proper scale or not? >> Well, I >> against your best estimate. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> It doesn't have property lines on it. Correct. >> No.
>> You know, if we just look just deal with >> the exhibit itself. >> Well, can I basically suggestion what he's trying to create is already on the aerial map. That's the first page of
the pend. >> Can you just give us the sheet, please? >> Cal. >> Okay, cool. >> And and if you look at it, his hand drawing is not identical to what's on the site.
>> Be good. And it shows because because it's on the scale >> because it's not a certified drawing. You you can't testify that it's the scale. It it's potentially confusing to the finder of fact which is the board and and should not be relied upon for
that reason. Uh you have the other exhibit which is part of the plans. You can if you want to make the same arguments relying on that depiction in the certified >> could to put on the zipp that sheet up.
>> So what is your ruling on the handout? >> It's excluded. >> Okay. So here this is excluded. I've marked one OZ1 for ID only. It's the ruling is it's excluded from evidence. Any board members make a motion on that? >> No board members made a motion on that.
>> Thank you. I don't >> see 1214 plan. Oh, C1. >> Sorry. C1. You have to go back. Go back up. >> Okay. Yeah. >> Can we blow out this one a little bit?
>> I want the the the aerial map. or down orientation. >> Okay, we can go under 200 maybe. a little smaller. I want to see the uh the fire firehouse across. Yes. Yeah,
that's what I want to show. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. All right. Oh, this is much better thing. >> I think that's a good idea. >> Can I proceed? >> Yes. >> Okay. Mr.
>> C can you give an estimate about how much longer you have? >> Oh, I can be finish less than maybe five minutes. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Just need a quick. >> So, first of all, can someone identify what's up on the screen? >> What sheet that is?
>> It's sheet C1. >> So, that's a portion of sheet C1. Met C1. Yes. >> Okay. There we go. >> Okay. Thank you. Well, on this uh aerial kind of view of the property, I you
know, the reason I want to shoot this, I want to you demonstrate in proportionately this relate to the you know the the fire uh house across the street because people don't have kind of a relations how big this property is, right? I'm talking about the
characteristic of the of the surroundings. So uh this one the uh the impermeable services that covered by buildings and road and the uh the the you know parking materials are larger than the fire station across the street
which only have has a 70 parking spaces. What we have here 104, right? Two, the wooden fans will be raised in neighbors in a neighborhood, not seen in in this section of the uh of the uh uh the the the
town. Okay. Here we rarely see any kind of fans. And to be honest with you, I see a lot of kind of driveways are not paved are kind of dirty, you know, dirty dirt roads or uh
or those small small kind of stones, right? The third there are two large retention basins that one one in the front and another one in the you know in the front kind of uh facing the main roads and that is never seen in any of
this uh anywhere I don't know where anyone seeing it a detention center retention retention basin in front of house next road no see for 34t high uh mid
I think all Those are in sharp contrast to the n to to the the uh natural scenic undeveloped and open characteristic of this land of the neighborhood. So what is the issue here? I think the
issue that has driven this for three years and the 24 24 hearing is not about whether or not we promote the uh the the you know diversity uh of this community. It's not about the virtue of the Sunday
school. We all know it's good. Okay. It's not about the making history because you can make make history somewhere else in the town that appropriate for this purpose. The issue here is about respect.
It's about to respect the rule and more importantly respect the spirit of the master plan and ordinance. Second, respect the neighbors. And three, third, respect historical and nature of this section of the town.
There are so many signs that indicating the outcry. I mean those those yard sign indicating those outcry of the neighbors. There are volunteers of resident devoting time financial resources to deal with issue to deal
with this issue. People who are not landers not lawyers not ordinance experts raise to the call. When you see the one site is represented by an outsider lawyer and
another site is by United resident and individuals who live, breathe, drink, walk, see and hear in this neighborhood. You know which side you should stand with.
on the other hand okay let's put our shoes know stand in our other people's shoes what if I am a member of this organization try to raise or you know build a facility in here when I come to this place to attend service five times
a day and seven days a week I want to go to a place that resembles the peace and harmony but this is justn't uh fit doesn't fit in in conclusion it is logic for a
person to ask and I want to ask Miss uh Shandre our you know uh former mayor what are the compelling reason to build such a huge facility in a adjacent in a
uh area that in adjacent to a historic site in the residential area between two single family houses and in the area already experienced traffic headache across was the firehouse that would
potentially hamper the first response to the majority of the town resident and I this give a uh kind of uh in addition to uh to address the question answered by
uh Mr. Mrs. Mrs. uh uh who is not here today. Uh yeah, want to clarify that how many uh resident and and business were serving uh are serving by the uh liberty corner house. It's about 6,500.
It's in their uh website. So last but not least, uh it is in the contrast to the natural surroundings. I really want to know what is the comparing reason. I think the board should know as well. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Any questions? Any cross examination? All right. See that? Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. Any other members of the public wishing to be here? Indicate with show hands. Anyone else?
>> Well, come on up. >> Come on up. You want to speak? If you don't close the public hearing, >> if you're ready, let's time to go. going to continue but not public com. >> Okay. Okay, let's see. I'll cut it short.
>> Barbara Burgerer, 94 Church. Did >> you put your name and address on the >> Yes, I did. >> I have been sworn in. I've been name again. >> Barbara. Okay, I'm going to swear you in again just in case >> I swear the testimony and comments you're going to give in this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, but the truth of God.
>> Yes, I do. >> What's your address? >> 94 Church Street. I have been to most of the meetings. Uh, initially I was up here asking Mr. Shadri. And
prior to that, there were phone calls. And I told him in the one f the first phone call, I said, "I wouldn't want my own church there." I said, "I wouldn't want any church there." And I'm not I'm not anti-Muslim. I'm not anti-Jewish.
I'm not anti- anything. I'm open-minded. But I told him, "It's not the location. It's just not." I said, "Liberty Corner can't take it. Can't take anymore." You know, my late husband and I moved to Liberty Corner 30 years ago,
and we came from Basking Ridge because Liberty Corner we thought was going to be quiet, peaceful, we just love the village and we built our home. I've been a widow 20 years and I've been maintaining my home on my own. And so
many people said, "Why don't you move? Why are you doing your lawn? Why do you have a tractor? why are you doing all this? And I said, because I love Liberty Corner. It's a place that I want to stay and I wanted to be be peaceful and quiet. I
wanted to retain the same character that my late husband and I fell in love with. And I even saved an article uh from 19, let's see, it was from the Burnersville News from 1990
and it was on Liberty Corner and it was about um this Robert Gutter. He was a Marstown architectural historian. he was commissioned to um apply for the historical registration for Liberty
Corner. And he said he made many comments in the article. I have copies if you'd like to look at it. And he he commented on Liberty Corner on the historical value and the church, Liberty Corner Church, and all the homes on
Church Street and um Lions Road, etc. and he said that without an effort by the residents, Liberty Corner will not survive as it is. And so he was telling the residents
in a a lecture that he gave that it's a if it's a kind of place that you love, it's up to you to keep it that way. And that's why we've been here for three years. That's why we've put up preserve liberty corner signs. It's all because
we care about our town. And I had something else to comment on. I really feel um I feel for the Islamic society because they do want to have a place. But, you know, I did some
research online and I found that there was a Muslim architect that said there's different things that you want to and do not want to do when you build a mosque. And you want to build large.
This is not a large complex. You want to have a basement. You want to have handicap. And most of all, you do not want to be invasive in an area that is a neighborhood that is cherished as
we are cherishing Liberty Corner and I have copies of this newspaper article also, but I am against. >> Thank you. Any questions? >> Any cross exam? >> Seeing none. Okay. Thank you, M.
>> Any other member of the public? Okay. >> Okay. My name is Isabel Ortega. And >> spell your last name. >> O R T E G. >> I live in 21 Prescuit Court.
And >> can you raise your right hand? >> Yes. >> You swear the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth I hope you got. >> Yeah, I swear. >> So I moved to Baskin Ridge 5 years ago um seeking for a charming, quiet and
residential area and community. And I oppose anything that will disrupt this quiet and peaceful area. Uh we do not want anything that will generate generate more noise especially near the
park where my kids play. Uh why the applicant want to impose a place that does not fit into a residential area. I do not understand what is the principle of insisting to build a temple uh when
huge amount of residents are opposing. Uh I am a professional woman and worried mom opposing the building of this temple in this area. Why they want to establish a templ temple where they do not have
space to grow and that implies so much con constraints to them and the community. It is an incompatible new construction. It is and it will be an overuse building in a residential area.
We like it here the way it is. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any questions from the board? >> Any cross exam? >> Any other members of the public wishing to be heard? >> My presentation is over.
>> Okay. So, Someone's glass. My name first. Okay. My name is Shan. It will be a difficult one for you. >> Yeah. Can you spell it slowly? The first and second. >> Okay. X I U S H U A N G. That's the
first name. Last name. >> It's late. You got to go slowly. >> Okay. X I U S H U. A N G. Sorry. >> Okay. >> And last name is C H E N G.
>> Okay. Got it. >> Um, >> your address? >> 77 Dorchester at Basking Ridge. Sorry, I'm very nervous. I >> No reason. >> I didn't know this is the last public hearing. >> You raise your right hand. You swear the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the
truth. I hope you die. >> I do. I will be very short. um only one point to be made that is um I don't know how the planning board make judgment on uh either approve or disapprove a proposal
but I think uh the planning board the ordinance uh and also the master plan provides you indication what are the necessary conditions that a plan should be approved and but I I and I I realize that this proposal obviously meets the
necessary condition because For example, the um I think the necessary condition is that it meets the uh zoning code allowance. This is the necessary condition otherwise this project will not exist. However, beyond the necessary
condition, I think to approve a project like this, it also needs to meet the sufficient conditions. You need to um uh see if all the conditions are um sufficient and uh complete and satisfy
all the criterias that should be considered. For example, the h uh for example, the uh for example, the charact characteristics of the neighborhood, the feeding of the existing residents, um the potential
risk um to um the potential fire risk inside the parking uh inside the lot, the kids drop off zone, safety hazard that is sitting between two moving vehicles possibly, and the the access to
uh in and out of the fire trucks that covers most of the community inside my own home and also the vo the voice of the uh the neighbors that are living right next to it or around this area. So I think all these suffic all these
should constitute your um to base your condition upon if this proposal meets all the sufficient condition for your approval. I I beg you to um to consider that and if the zoning code is the only
criteria and make it sufficient and necessary for your approval then I think the intelligence of the entire planning board is um by by and large underutilized because I think um this is why you we need so many intelligence
behind the bar to make a decision to consider all to take all these elements into consideration when you make a decision. With that I finish. >> Thank you. Any questions from the board? >> Any cross exam? [Applause]
>> Any any other members of the public? How long is your presentation? >> Five minutes. >> Okay, come on up. We're not We're not jumping over you, Mr. It's not practical to start you if You signed in everything? >> Yes, I did. >> Okay. The name, please.
>> First name, uh, spell X I N G Y U E and last name, uh, H U A N G. >> First name one more time, please. >> Uh, X I N G Y U E. Got it.
>> Okay. And the address is 18 Vanderville Drive asking. >> Can you raise your right hand? >> Sure. >> The testimony and comments that you're in giving this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth to help you guide. >> Yes, I do.
So uh I guess I've been on off into this hearings when I'm available for this and I've heard all kinds of argument all kind of evidence and I first of all really appreciate the you know planning board members for your you know effort
and your you know uh you know tireless sort of working hours and to cover this and uh one of a few things I think I want to kind of highlight here. The number one is that appears the neighborhood who are close to this you
know proposed site has the most affected people. If you look at those people who here stay here all the way every time those people are get affected most. They could their you know their livelihood could get affected and their home value
could be affected. As someone mentioned earlier this could end up in court. I think I want the members to think about if someone has to spend money because of this if it's necessary for make for you to make a decision that could have one or another affect their life which is
very significant one that's number one number two as a board of the township I know you are looking for the you know after all the you know health and well-being and safety of the residents of the township of course but at the
same time. I wonder when you make this forget about audience but also hear the voice from residency from all the citizens about their opinion because what happened that you don't want to
cause any conflict in the future or safety concern he could be because that be a bigger issue right because you know and since could you know we all have open mind. We all have different you
know beliefs and religions but some of the decision will affect some people and affect the township more than other and the decisions why should you make that and why people say they all have open mind they said maybe we should consider
this for a different place or different location and why that is the case many of us are well educated and we're moving to this town to get a good education for our kids have a family and so on and so forth and as town you know planning
board I think that's what we're looking out for you to you to kind of help us to protect the township and protect all of us so I think I really appreciate and thank you for your effort and I don't want to say some of residents their you
know life second part of their life their financial you know resource get because of this decision so the very important decision in your hand. So I what I want to say is that when you make that decision, think about twice about that decision could have impact on some
people particularly some neighbors who are not far away from this site. That's what I'm asking you to do. And audience is one thing but the people the neighborhood it's a very different thing and the audience could be changed right
and some point maybe the audience already changed because I was told that you know few years ago after the implication the audience was changed so in a sense that why we change the audience what's the base for that I think in that sense we think about something higher and the safety the
community and the whole township as a big hole So besides those people get affected and to some extent it is a democratic process but if you think about the small and we do think about you know the you know high quality
judicial decision also based on the number of people who voted may as well. So in this kind of not of a hearing process you see people express their opinion their you know concerns and so on so forth and I think that really is
the decision for you to say should we consider this very carefully should have a vote should have you know ask how you think about this if that is too difficult for you again thank you all very much and uh I
think uh I'm really impressed with the sort of how hard you have been working on this one. Every hearing is always very very late. So I thank you all for this. That's it. >> Thank you sir. Any questions from the board? Any cross examination from
anyone? Thank you sir. Any any other members wishing to be here? Please come up. [Applause] My name Janet Ashnalt. >> Oh, >> Janet Ashalt.
>> Can you spell her last name? >> A S H N A U L T. 309 Douglas Road. >> Raise your right hand. >> I do. Um I wasn't going to speak tonight. Uh I
I was I had changed my mind about speaking tonight because a lot of what I had to say had to do with what is in the master plan regarding land use. and one of the previous speakers um we kind of uh nullified what he was saying about that. So I'm going to skip that part of
my comments and I it's going to be short but I do have a couple other points to make. Um I've been a resident of Liberty Corner for 23 years where I've been happily living out my childhood dream of having a small farm with a couple of horses in my yard. I pay my taxes to
Bernard's Township. I my mailing address is Far Hills. But when somebody asks me where I live, I I even though I know it will usually require an explanation, I always say Liberty Corner. Uh many years ago, I commented before this board in
opposition to the construction application uh filed by the Millington Baptist Church, whose property was right around the corner from my home. Thankfully, that project never came to fruition. more times than you would than you may think. When I am enjoying the
ambiance of my neighborhood, I think to myself, things would have been very different if that church would have been built. So, here we are again with another Liberty Corner neighborhood faced with the possibility of a public building constructed directly in the middle of several residences and also
our local firehouse. Okay, so I was going to talk about the land use in the master plan, but I'll skip that. Um, so I really love living in Liberty Corner and I'm grateful to the township for what has been done to increase my
property value throughout the past 23 years by keeping this a very desirable area in which to live. Uh, for many of us, our homes are the largest financial investment that we'll ever make and we really count on you to protect that
investment. I don't know statistics on how being next to a public building devalues a home, but I do know I would think twice before purchasing a home in that type of configuration. If the application is approved, I will really feel for those Church Street
neighbors that are most directly affected. When it comes time for them to sell, will we ever know what price they could have gotten for their homes? Thank you. >> Thank you. Any questions from the board? Any cross examination?
>> Any other members of the public? [Applause] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Brian Curley. I am not a resident of the township, but
I wish to speak to Harden Court Chester. >> Raise your right hand. >> I do. Thank you for the board for giving me the opportunity even though I'm not a resident. I rise to speak in behalf of the ISBR on behalf of my wife and my
daughter. I am not Muslim. I am Catholic. My wife is Muslim. My daughter is raised in both traditions. It's difficult to raise her in both traditions because it's difficult to find a mosque close by. It's difficult
to find a mosque close by that has the kind of teachings and the kind of traditions that we want her exposed to for the Muslim day. Now, there's a lot of talk about do it elsewhere, but I asked the board to stop and
there's many ironies in this. First of all, we're talking about a proposed mosque on Church Street. I find irony in that. I also find irony in the fact that I don't know the history of Bernard's Township, but it being chartered in
1760, I have to guess that many of the residents who initially settled this township probably came here because somebody told them at that time, "Go practice your faith elsewhere. Go set up your church elsewhere. Go do it
elsewhere. There's plenty of other suitable places." I sit on the board of adjustment for Chester Township. I've taken the same oath as you all have here. And I trust that you all take that oath seriously. I'm sure you do.
But this is not a popularity contest. This is not about how many residents are do we weigh on one side that protest and how many do we weigh on the other side that are for it. We all know that. But after three, four years and and I
commend this board for sitting through all of that testimony, but having sat through long and contentious applications myself. I'm also an attorney and I've had long and contentious cases and I've had them come out in a way that I might not have
expected, but I do know that after four years, this has become a roar shock test. I don't know how this board will go back over four years worth of testimony and go over all of the things that are necessary to render a decision in this
matter, at least in a timely manner. I commend you and I bless you in the effort that's ahead of you because that is a gargantuan effort. But I'm sure that there's also a lot that can be discarded along the way because much of it is not relevant. Much as Mr. Rayar is
taking heat for objecting to relevancy. We all know that that is part of it. This is a permitted use. And I ask the board not to treat this as a roarshack test, not to simply treat this as a Christmas tree where we can find a branch to hang some ornament on there
because there's enough branches established after four years worth of testimony. There's more to this than that. First of all, as a permitted use, what are you permitting? I ask the board to keep that in mind
because that is an impact. Yes, there may be an impact on the community, but there will also undoubtedly be an impact on the people who want to practice their faith. My wife and my daughter in particular, and I rise to speak for them. As I said, and I asked the board to consider that this
is at its core weighing what the legal aspects are, what the relevant evidence is, and whether or not this use should be permitted on this property. Someone else testified earlier, this is not
about speculation. Either way, this is about what is the proper use of this property and will it be permitted in the confines of the law. And I urge the board, I know how hard it is sitting in
your seat to put aside the emotion and living in the community and all of the things that go along with that. And I ask the board, please remember that oath that you took to decide this matter on the law, on the merits, on what's
involved, and that if you do consider anything beyond that, on the periphery, consider that this is a house of worship. After four years, I don't know if you've set a record for this type of a proceeding.
My good friend, Mr. Simon may know better since he practices in this area and would know which if there have been any uh applications that have gone longer than this. But you have a task ahead of you, a large task ahead of you. And I ask you to consider, I implore you to consider
and put aside any personal preferences, any prejudices, anything else other than consider the law and consider that it will have an impact no matter what you do both ways. Thank you for hearing. >> Thank you, Mr. Any questions from the
board? Any cross exams? Any other members of the public? My name is Burgger Brink Lond. First name is Burgger. B I R G E R. Last name is Brink Lund. A double
hyphenated last name. B R I N C Kyphen capital L U N Dress >> 190 Alexandria Waybridgeidge. Excuse me. >> Raise your right hand. You swear the testimony and comments you're about to
give us the truth. I do. I've listened and I rise now on behalf of the citizens in Liberty Corner. I thank the gentleman from Chester for his observations and his lecture to the the
board. I'm sure you needed that. I'd like to state that uh there are five other locations possibly in Basking Ridge that would accept and welcome this project. And now I find out there's
one in Chester, too, apparently. [Applause] Thank you for bringing that to our attention. Finally, I conclude I conclude by saying that I'm opposed to this project. Thank you.
>> Any questions from the board? >> Any cross exam? >> No. Any other members from the public wishing to be heard at this time? >> Mr. Quick, you still have an hour. >> 10:30. >> No, I'm saying your presentation is
still an hour. Excuse me. Right. At the light of the hour, Mr. Quick, we're not going to start uh your presentation tonight. You're going to be first up on August 4th. Okay. You're you're available.
>> Okay. Uh so sort of uh trans reporting the Rayar Simon letter to the next meeting upon the conclusion of uh >> let's let's do that. So, let's just see if >> we're going to follow the same format.
If we wrap up by 9:30, Mr. Simon, you'll be ready to go. >> Well, you you you've now asked the public, there's anyone else left to speak. If there's only one person left to speak, >> then this public hearing should be
closed except for Mr. Quick. >> Otherwise, you're going to end up with 20 more people. >> No, I if we're not done, we're not done. It's it >> you can't >> it's it's4 to to 12. Okay. I I've got board members.
>> All I'm saying is this was supposed to be the last public hearing. You have kindly let everyone who wanted to speak speak. Wait, who said it was the last public? We we were hopeful. >> We were hopeful. >> We never said that. >> I can't
>> just just to make just to make things clear for a second. In your own letter, it says should the public portion not conclude by the end of July 21, then the goal would the goal would be to complete the public portion on August
4th. That's what the proposal from both of you which the chairman accepted and the board went along with his. So, it's >> yeah, everyone was hopeful it would con it would conclude, but even you guys recognized that it might not. And
>> and while I'm grateful to my fellow board members for hanging in there as long as they did in the hope that we might get through public comment, we we gave it the college try. It's quarter to 12. And I've got a member of the public who happens to be the owner of the house
directly adjacent to the application. I haven't done yet. >> I'm not trying to cut him off. >> I understand that. But until he goes and finishes, it's not over. It's We can't preemptively say he's the last one when when he's we're not prepared to go tonight to
finish. And I'm not, believe me, I'm not ending now to create that possibility. We really were trying to to to get to a point where you and Mr. Simon could close. We didn't get there. So, there's nothing I can do about that. And we're going to pick up. He's first up. Mr.
Quick will be first up out of the gate on August 4. If there are other people present at that meeting that have not yet given their public comment to appear at that time and want to be heard, they can be heard. >> If they're repetitive, you can object on the basis of being repetitive because
about every issue other than the Mr. Quicks issues, which again, direct next door neighbor. But if if other people are repetitive and they're just repeating what other people already said, then you'll object on that basis. But the hearing is going to be continued to August 4. Again, the entire meeting
is being dedicated to that. There might be that little completeness thing you heard about before. That's going to be five minutes if that. And it's also continued to August 18th in case it's needed, which we're hoping it's not. And and I would hope
that just like the chairman said that the that that the joint proposal in your letter in Mr. Simon's letter still stands correct >> correct >> Mr. Simon correct >> in terms of the public
>> would go and if it doesn't then you don't >> and and that's quite frankly that's why we have August 18th there just in case also because the public hearing completes and after the closing complete
the board has indicated it needs some time as the member of the Chester board of adjustment recognized four years worth of stuff and maybe you don't know but the board secretary get to four years >> how did it morph >> the board secretary has been compiling a
notebook for the board which has every single exhibit in it and every single set of minutes from the beginning so that they have something to review but they are going to need time to review that and compose their thoughts before they deliberate. So the again we're
continued to August 4th, 2015. No need for further notice. Also August 18th and the application's already been extended to September 30th. Let's leave well enough alone for now and just leave it at that. >> Okay. >> All right. The application's carried.
>> All right. Members from comments from >> comments from members or members from comments >> comments from staff. Thank you gentlemen. None motion second. Thank you. All in favor? I