All right, we're going to call to order the um April 8th meeting of the zoning board of adjustment um for the open public meeting statement. In accordance with the requirements of the open public meeting law, notice of this meeting of the board
of adjustment 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 mailed to the Bernardsville News, Whippony, New Jersey, the Courier News, Bridgewater,
New Jersey, and was filed with the township clerk, all on January 8th, 2026, and was mailed electronically to all those people who have requested individual notice. The following procedure has been adopted by the Bernard's Township Zoning Board of
Adjustment. There will be no new cases heard after 10 p.m. and no new testimony heard after 10:30 p.m. First um item on the agenda is the flag salute. May I ask you please to stand? Flag of the United States
for which it stand indivisible. >> Miss Layman, would you please do the roll call? Chairwoman Bowman >> here. >> Miss Dandria >> here. >> Miss Herrera >> here. >> Mr. Krauss >> here. >> Mr. Leazinski >> here. >> Mr. Lindamman
>> here. >> Miss Pakar >> here. >> Miss Silver >> here. >> Miss Trap >> here. >> Mr. Soi >> here. >> Mr. Quinn >> here. >> Mr. Sly >> here. >> And for the record, Miss Layman is present. Madam Chair, you have a quorum and may proceed. >> Thank you, Miss Layman.
Um item number five on the agenda is the um approval of the minutes from our March 4th, 2026 regular session. Do I have any comments, edits, or motion to approve as drafted? >> Motion to approve as drafted.
>> Thank you, Miss Par. >> Second, >> Mr. Krauss. Layman. >> Uh Miss Dandrea, >> yes. >> Miss Herrera, >> yes. >> Mr. Crafts. >> Yes. >> Mr. Lindamman. >> Yes. >> Mr. P. Miss Pear. >> Yes.
>> Miss Silver. >> Yes. >> Chairwoman Bowman. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Um, next on the agenda is the approval of the resolutions. We have Leure uh Carmelo Jr. block 4301,
lot 124, Colts Glenn Lane ZB25-00001A. Um, any comments to the resolution or motion to approve as drafted? >> I'll second it. >> Thank you, Miss Herrera and Miss Pear. >> Andrea, >> yes.
>> Miss Herrera, >> Mr. Krauss, >> yes. >> Mr. Lindamman, >> yes. >> Miss Pear, >> yes. >> Miss Silver, >> yes. >> Chairwoman Bowman, >> yes. >> Thank you. Uh, the next resolution is Megan and Thomas Kalinan, block 9201, lot 5, 3469
Valley Road, ZB25-033. Motion to approve as drafted. >> Motion to approve as drafted. >> Second Krauss and Miss Dandrea. >> Dandrea. >> Yes. >> Merr.
>> Yes. Mr. Krauss. Yes, >> Mr. Lindamman. >> Yes, >> Miss Pakar. >> Yes, >> Miss Silver. >> Yes, >> Chairwoman Bowman. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> We have Andrew and Lindsay Hodkins, block 1804, lot 210 Colonial Drive,
ZB25-034. Any motion to approve the resolution as drafted? >> I'll make a motion to approve as drafted. >> Thank you, Miss Pocktar and Miss Herrera. Miss Dandrea, >> yes. >> Miss Herrera, >> yes. >> Mr. Krauss,
>> yes. >> Mr. Lindamman, >> yes. >> Miss Pakar, >> yes. >> Miss Silver, >> yes. >> Chairwoman Bowman, >> yes. >> Thank you. >> We have Robert and Amy Fainone, block 20001, lot 40, 79 Colbert Road, ZB26-00001.
I have a motion to approve as drafted. >> Second, >> Miss Herrera and Mr. Krauss. >> Miss Dandrea. >> Yes. >> Miss Herrera. >> Yes. >> Mr. Krauss. >> Yes. >> Mr. Lindamman. >> Yes. >> Miss Pear. >> Yes. >> Miss Silver. >> Yes.
>> Chairwoman Bowman. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> And last of the resolutions is uh the pardon resolution block 3603 lot 2 14 Columbia Road ZB23-015. This was a dismissal. Do we have it? Uh
motion to approve as drafted. >> Make a motion to approve as drafted. >> Octar >> second. >> And Mr. Krauss. >> Miss Herrera. >> Yes. Mr. Krauss. >> Yes. >> Mr. Lindamman. >> Yes. >> Miss Pear. >> Yes. >> Miss Silver. >> Yes.
>> Miss Trap. >> Yes. >> Chairwoman Bowman. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Um we had on our agenda the completeness and public hearing for Michael and Jasine Vuvio. Um they have indicated that they will not be able to make it
this evening. Um we need to carry this meeting and we need to figure out the date that they can come back. Has there been any indication that they will be ready next time?
>> That's correct. confirmed that they plan on showing up, keep them on May 6. And if they >> and have the people who are on for basics already been notified? >> They haven't been. >> We would have to bump. I mean,
bump them for somebody who just doesn't show last minute. >> Well, that's happens again. That's why we'll confirm to the best that we can that they are going to be ready. don't know, but
>> okay, we'll know whether or not they'll be available. >> Okay. And you don't do you think we could do a special meeting for them? >> Where have our special meetings reserved? >> Okay.
>> Okay. We can, you know, I thought tonight was a good night to >> get a bigger crowd and and more >> right. Okay. So then to act as 411.
>> Oh, we got Okay. have the discretion to >> and then maybe schedule them at the end. >> Okay. >> Previously, >> right? >> Tell the attorney that turned about the
cover parameters on what I've seen for your so why don't we go ahead and carry them to the May 6 meeting um and then maybe we'll figure out where they're on the agenda for the evening
>> at a later date >> preserves their notice their time to act and >> yes. >> Yes, please. >> All right. So, the application of Michael and Jasine Vuvio concerning property do my microphone. the application of uh Michael and Jasine
Vuvio concerning property located at block 11004 lot 11 uh otherwise known as 22 Century Court Basking Ridge under application number ZB25-011 is going to be carried to the board's May 6th 2026 meeting 7:30 p.m. here at
the municipal building no further notice will be provided or will be required certainly entitled to do that if they want to u so this formal announcement serves as your notice I don't think anybody's Is anyone here for the VU application? Okay. Okay. All right.
Thanks, Todd. All right. Let's uh that's the announcement. We're good. >> Okay. Good. >> All right. So, then next on our list is the uh public hearing for Church Street Properties. >> Madam Chair, just while the applicants
council's approaching, I'll just point out speaking of notices, uh they did properly notice Church Street Church Street Properties. I don't know why that's a tongue twister. uh for this evening. Uh notice was provided by certified mail on March 27, 2026 to owners of property within 200 feet and
also published in the Burnsville News on March 6th of 2026. Both more than 10 days in advance of tonight. So the board has the jurisdiction here and decide the case in my humble legal opinion. And I'll let Mr. Simon do his introduction. We'll get everybody sworn in and we'll get going. And before you do, I'm just going to state for the record, it's
block 9301, lot 2030 Church Street for preliminary and final site plan with Dvariances for the F uh for F ZB25-032. Welcome back, Mr. Simon. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for that introduction. Good evening to
everyone. It's always great to be before the board of adjustment of Burners Township. Uh my name is Rob Simon. and I'm an attorney with Herald Law um right around the corner and in Warren technically um here on behalf of the applicant Church Street Properties Limited um as was stated uh 30 Church
Street uh in Liberty Corner uh application for preliminary final uh site plan approval uh F variance and waiver relief to permit the construction of a two-story addition to the existing professional office building approximately thousand square feet of
floor area per story um property is located on the south side of Church Street. Uh contains uh 869 acres in the B4 Liberty Corner business zone which permits uh the proposed or the existing
and the proposed use. Um currently the site is occupied by a two-story office building and 23 parking spaces uh with a two-way driveway providing access to Church Street. Uh what we're uh intending to do as part of this
application is to construct a two-story addition to the rear of the existing building. Um increasing the total first and second floor areas to a little shy of 7,000 square ft. Um the f, as you'll see, we'll get into it with in the
testimony. The first floor is going to include uh reception and conference space, and the second floor will include storage space and and some some offices. We also have a seller area. Um the building expansion is intended to occupi accommodate, excuse me, up to three
additional employees. Uh the staff will be going from 15 to to 18. We're also uh expanding the parking area into the rear of the site, increasing the total number of parking spaces from 23 to 32 and also
increasing the number of access accessible spaces from 1 to two. Uh you'll hear testimony regarding uh new LED parking lot light fixtures, uh various upgrades including relocation of trash enclosures, expansion of the
existing dry well storm water uh management uh system. And we have uh this evening um not only the variance for for F uh there was another variance called out regarding the side setback for storage shed. We're actually going
to be removing that shed. We'll also get into that uh with some with some testimony in favor of some uh additional storage that we should be getting by virtue of the uh the proposed addition. There's various waiverss that have been
identified in uh Tom's and Dave's reports. Um we actually since we received those reports uh we we've done some quick work to try to eliminate uh a number of those waiver requests and we'll also get into that uh with regard to to testimony and obviously um as
Chris is aware will uh ask for any additional waiverss variances exceptions that may arise through the course of the hearing. Um uh as I stated we have received and reviewed uh Mr. Quinn's Mr. ize uh memos and we intend to address those through the testimony presented.
Uh we will have uh intend to have four witnesses this evening. We have run uh Trevaloney Jr. RT uh who's going to talk a little bit about the current operations at the site and what is being proposed by way of this application. We have uh Rudy Holtzman from Yanicon's
office, the engineer on the project, Larry Appel from Appel Design Group, the architect on the project, and Donna Homequist, our professional planner on the project. So, um unless there's any questions for me, I'd like to have um RT
get sworn in and we can get him to test. >> Everybody all at once preference possible, right? for your witnesses as all six of you swear. So, I'd like to call uh Ron Trevalone
Jr., please. So, um Ron, I know you're not used to this type of proceeding. I'm going to help you walk you through it a little bit. Uh, if you can just introduce introduce yourself to the board, who you are, why you here, what's your your
position with with Trevcon and um what the proposal is is all um first off, thank you for your time. Uh, my name is Ron Tremoloney Jr. Um, I'm one of the principles of Trevcon. Um, here to talk about the history of
Trevcon, a little bit about me. So the history of Trevcon uh it was started uh by my father Ron Senior. Um he spent his first 20 years um working for international construction companies. So we traveled a lot and for about 20 years he had enough of that. He had a family,
three little kids and he uh he stopped that and he started a company called Trevcon. And uh for the first year he worked out of our househ which is in Basking Ridge. Um, and after a year he was able to grow a little bit and rented some space in Burnsville and grew out of
that in a couple years. In 1990, um, he bought 30 Church Street and that's been our home base for over 35 years. Um, >> a little bit about what what is Trevcon and what do you do? >> Sure. We're a marine construction company. We specialize in uh, peers,
bridges. Um example is like the Mario Ko bridge the old tapenzee. Uh we did a lot of the foundation work there. Um so our main office is in Basking Ridge. We have a waterfront facility in Elizabeth. That's where all of our equipment barges six acres thousand foot of uh orphage.
We also have a office in New York City which is where most of the project management 30 Church has always been the estimating and accounting um office. Um for me I graduated in about 2003. I went to work for my father, worked 10 years
in New York City on projects as a superintendent learning the field and then after that I came to the home office estimated and I started running the company about six, seven years ago. My parents still live in Basker Ridge, 16 Brookidge Drive, right around the corner. Um he comes in once a week but
he's pretty much retired. Um so tell the board a little bit about what the gent hiring professionals and doing this particular. >> Sure. So again 30 treachery was bought in 1990. In 2005 with the help of the
board back then we're able to put an addition on more offices. We're able to expand. That's been fine. And in recent years one of the biggest problems we have is we don't have a conference room. We have one room we use. It's maxed out of four people. And for a company our size now, you know what we're doing some
major projects, not having a room where we can all sit down, estimating and operations and have the technology and monitors putting the drawings up, the estimate proposal, the bid. Um, it just doesn't work. I mean, right now there are people in the office instead of
having a meeting in in a room, we have a Microsoft Teams call on our computers even though we work right next to each other because there's no space. So, that's what we're looking for is is hopefully to get a conference room and also add a couple additional offices. I know a couple guys in our New York City office who live in the city, young
family, they want to move out here and you know, hopefully they can buy a house out here, but then I need a spot for them. So, we're looking for a couple more offices for them in the big conference room to help with these estimates. And also uh we're proposing some
feller space. >> A lot of our employees right now love to go for walks all day. Not all day. I'm sorry. During the day, which I'm all for. And uh you know, winter time. Um there's no place to go. So I like to put a gym in for them for you know for an hour a day.
>> Hours of operation for I I had mentioned in my employees. >> Yeah. >> And um in terms of hours of operation, 9 to5, 8 to 4. >> Yeah. >> And you also um >> Simon, can I interrupt you please? Can
you speak into the microphone for the record? Thanks. >> Of course. Sorry. >> That's okay. Um and with regard to um when the property is not in operation, you you had told me that you um allow whether
it's the church to park there during off hours or even the the local restaurant to park during during off hours. Correct. >> Our neighbor to I guess to the north is Faseria and they don't have enough parking. So we told them, hey, after five o'clock we're all gone. We'll you know, we'll
look the other way. You know, it's fine. and the church on Sundays it's pretty packed and they ask the same thing. We're like that's fine just you know >> and I had mentioned also in my introductory remarks about the fact that there's that detached shed in the rear that um as Mr. Schlide points out
technically violates the um side dart setback requirement. It's a minimum of 10 ft and it's at 8.7 ft. And you actually explained to me that with this uh proposed addition and the additional storage space you don't you won't even need it anymore. Correct. So that would
that would go away as part of it. >> And we keep files in there, but which but which they should really be in the building. So I would be happy to get rid of the shed and and keep it in the building. >> Um then just some other operation uh questions that were brought up by uh Mr. Schly and andor Mr. Quinn. Uh trash and
recycling. That's a that's a once a week >> actually every other week. >> Every other week. Okay. And you don't expect that to change as part of this project. Correct. Correct. On the street and then the garbage is gone before we can get there. So, >> and in terms of deliveries, just explain, you know, currently what
deliveries entail and whether you expect any um change in that protocol. >> No, I mean, we're a construction company. We're pretty sizable these days, but everything goes through our waterfront facility, all the materials, all the equipment. We're just the office people. So, I mean, maybe once a month a box truck comes in for a half hour and
loads paper. Yeah, that's >> and um in terms of parking, you've never had any problem with not having enough parking spaces and your understanding is that the the request for the additional parking spaces is mainly to meet meet
the ordinance requirement. Correct. >> It's probably going to help the church and the restaurant more than us. >> Right. Um I think that's all the questions I have for RT. Open it up to the board. Thank you. you ever have um people come from New
York to convene and have conferences at your location? Is that the intention or that would be a a proper team's meeting? >> A a complicated bid. We want everybody on board the estimators and who are in the main office and our operations team which is most they'll come out ideally
in a conference room and I want to make sure everyone's on the same page like this is a big bid. There's only one chance to do it. like I want to be, you know, it's very risky and ideally you have everybody in the room with all the drawings and everything, spend the whole day going through it. So, yes, I would have people out there, but it wouldn't be every day. It would be once in a while.
>> And your parking would obviously accommodate it >> on those days. It would be a little bit easier, but >> yeah. >> Was something mentioned about a wood deck? Is one there? And will it be open? >> Yeah, I think that'll be something that the architect will talk about. We get to
it. Yeah. mention it in your overview of what the space will be used for. So, >> also there's a um metal storage um container on the >> one that's in the rear. >> In the rear.
>> Yeah, that's the one that the restaurant I believe. >> Yes, our neighbor. >> So, that can that can certainly be moved. >> Okay. >> Um as part of any um approval of this application. >> We're just being nice. We have the space. >> It's not yours. It's theirs. They put it there.
>> It's it's it's it's theirs. It's not ours. And they know that. We just ask them to move it and they'll move it. >> Okay. >> No, it's I don't know if it's in the driveway. >> No, no, no. I don't I don't know how it was put there in the beginning, but
we'll certainly move it. So, it's not sitting in a driveway. So, that's not it's not paved, but it's on grass, but it's it is the in the easement. Yeah. >> It's almost hanging over. >> Yeah. And and and and Tom, that driveway
easement is not an operation at all. So >> to follow up on an earlier question, what would you see as being the max number of people coming in for >> the big bid? I probably say between 15
and 20 people for that. >> They'll come in overnight and stay. >> No, they'll come out in the in the morning. They'll spend all day and they'll go back to the city or wherever they came from. Yeah, >> that would be subs might come in. You know, a few
people >> that 15 to 20. How many of those are the people that are actually normally working in that office versus so you're only talking about an extra five people coming? >> So, we have some accountants in there.
So, they wouldn't be involved with the operation. uh in one day including everybody maybe 25 people 30 people >> but but the but the 32 parking spaces would be more more than accommodating for that people >> carpool too >> anybody ask probably silly question what
what is >> concon what is the relationship to >> so they're they're the tenant of the of >> okay >> Church Street Limited but >> you said they own the property so it's not >> uh the Trevalone family does my father and you're leasing okay gotcha understood thank you
>> ask who who's the neighbor on the opposite side not the restaurant side but the other side is that a business too that is next to you >> was a business and we actually bought it about a year ago >> oh so you own that property or the the company does or the family does it >> family does >> yeah it's a it's a different ownership
entity >> okay and is that used by your property. I mean, your I'm sorry. This company, does they do they have ability to use that? >> Figure out what to do with it. >> Okay. >> It just came on. You know, I saw a couple trucks like, you know, it's right next to your neighbor. We might as well buy it and try and rent it out or
renovate it. So, we have it right now. >> So, you have the option to use that for overflow if you needed to for parking. Hypothetically, at this point, >> the problem with that is uh walking across the driveway in the winter time, it's like you put your jacket on, it's like it's not ideal, but we've thought about that >> possibility. Okay.
It's a It's an office property, I believe. Yeah. >> Great. Does anybody else have any questions? >> Does anyone from the public have any questions for this witness? Okay. Seeing none and no comments, I assume. So,
thank you very much. >> Thank you. And I will call Rudy Hollesman, please. Mr. Holesman, you've already been sworn. If you can please provide your credentials to the board, occupation, affiliation, areas of expertise, and license and experience in the field of
civil engineering. >> I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey. I have about 25 years experience u preparing site plans and subdivisions of science from Virginia Tech and I'm currently employed at uh Yan V bill and
Aldrich in uh Chester, New Jersey. >> Okay. And you've testified before many planning and zoning boards throughout the state of New Jersey. >> Numerous boards including uh this board. Yes. >> And and your license remains a good standing. Correct. >> Yes. >> Okay. We ask that Mr. Hollesman be qualified as an expert in the field of
engineering at this time. Um, and Mr. Hostman, you're familiar with the uh the site plan and application materials uh for this application? >> Yes. >> And your uh office actually prepared the site plans for this project, right? >> Right. >> Okay. Are there any exhibits that you
want to mark at this time um beyond what's already been presented to the board? >> Yes, we have um a lighting plan in an effort to come in conformance with um township lighting standards. We actually prepared um a plan in consultation with
um the architect and the lighting consultant. So that plan although not signed and sealed um is useful I think today as an exhibit to help show that um an effort was made to reduce spillover and also to come in conformance with the
lighting standards. >> Okay. So, I think what we'll do, Madam Chair, if it's all right with the board, is that um have the witness go over the the site plan and different site plan sheets and the elements and then when we get to the lighting and landscaping, we can mark that that exhibit and go over that.
>> That's fine with me. Yep. Thank you. >> Mr. Mr. Hos, if you want to start by giving an overview of of the site and the the surrounding area and then get into some of the uh plan specifics. >> Sure. >> Yeah. I'm sorry to interrupt. This is
the plan set dated October 23rd, 2025. No revision. >> Correct. >> All right. So site um is developed uh fronts on Church Street, 100 ft of frontage. Uh the two side properties have buildings and
parking lots in the same zone. Uh it's generally flat. Uh and it's two-story building existing. Will the proposal is to add a building addition off the back. Um part of that addition is over portion of parking lot, part is over grass over
here. Um >> so you're just for the record, you're you're moving the cursor to identify the areas that you're referring to. building edition is the shaded area here. Um, and then I'll kind of highlight
parking lot edition area all back here. So, laying out the site, it it made sense to expand directly back um for the parking lot and maintain the basic circulation
pattern in the entrance. um and exit to the street the same way. Uh so as far as the number of spaces, there's 23 existing and 32 proposed.
Um >> and if you just identify on the plan where where the new spaces are proposed to be going. Uh we have three uh on on this side here. That would actually be uh the westerly >> east
>> uh easterly side. Correct. North is upside down on this plan. And uh westerly side we have um seven spaces on this side. Um as part of as part of expanding in that
direction some large uh Norway spruce or white pine trees will be removed. Uh these spaces are conforming when when including as far as size when including the overhang and the removal of those
trees will allow that overhang. Um, >> and you're going to get into uh the landscaping plan where the while these trees are being removed, we're going to be uh proposing new landscaping to take. >> Yeah, there's significant um additional landscaping proposed, not all shown on
the plan, but yeah, we'll get into that more as far as um addressing some of the comments and and talking about the landscaping more. Maybe I should have asked the previous witness, but when they
county roads are the counties ultimately going to this than I am, but I just wonder how box trucks will turn. never been a problem because there's always spaces available. >> Yeah, I think the maneuvering will will
continue in that manner. And during my site visit, I saw a significant amount of open spaces for box truck to potentially make that maneuver. Okay, turn the spots available in the park. Did you want to talk a little bit about
um so loading unloading in terms of uh making sure that there's enough areas within the drive aisle? Yeah, we had identified on a previous plan um that was um approved uh by this
by uh Berners Township Landis Board that a 12x 25 space that that actually theoretically would be moved back a little bit, but it it's um it's there for purposes of showing that's that that's where the loading and
unloading is is expected to happen in order to access the the building. And then the maneuvers can be made from from there. >> Have that on this plan that you're showing us now. >> Pointing right here. This this is >> what was that?
>> And when you when you say Rudy here, if just for the record, just identify verbally where that is on the plan, please. >> Uh just past the uh stem of the parking lot entrance within um the aisle way.
Correct. >> And in terms of uh the parking, uh there's there's 23 spaces uh currently and what's being proposed is is 32. Um my recollection is there there's some spaces uh that are uh 9 9 by7 from a
prior approval. >> Correct. al along the uh westerly park parking u lot. Those spaces uh were were identified as being unders sized and were um granted that exception at at
the time of that meeting and we're identifying those as currently um under size, but they have the overhang area to accommodate the full uh 20 ft required by ordinance. And there there's 14 existing parking spaces n 9 by 18
with the twoft overhang and one of those spaces is being relocated. >> Correct. >> Can you point to where the 9 by17 spaces are? >> Uh I have number one and two right right here. >> Okay. >> Um I don't see them identified
between those. I'd have to double check here. So nine. Yeah, I think yeah, numbers one through nine. So nine would be pointing uh >> they would be 9 by 17.
>> Right. Right. >> They are those are existing spaces. Yeah. To remain and and I I >> But you're saying the front has an where you if they were to pull head on there's an overhang so they could pull up a little bit and they have enough room. >> Correct. And I I observed some cars uh
during my site visit using those spots and I I didn't see any issue with the size of those spots. >> Code requires 18 with a twoft overhang, but when it built obviously the curb didn't get >> um can we go back though to the truck
loading? Um is that going to block traffic because it's at the stem? Should that be moved maybe slightly south? I think is the opposite, right? >> Yeah. And I think with the revised plans, we'll call it out in that area.
Um I don't think designation is required necessarily like as far as physically identifying it with um >> that's more an idea of where the the truck would pull up and park. >> No, actually that the way you see it there, that's coordinated with those front steps immediately adjacent steps
are going away. >> Okay. >> That the new loading area is going to be >> is going to be further south anyway. It >> it's going further into the site because the main entrance is moving further away. >> Yeah. Yes, >> that would make more sense. Yep, I get
it. >> Thank you, Tom. >> So, the um be clear, the applicant meets the parking requirements for the for the proposed use, correct? >> Yes. Correct. Um, and what about electric vehicle uh
charging? >> Yeah, as far as um electric vehicle charging, the plan uh could be revised to show one space that's that's required um as mentioned in uh review comments
and a make ready spot is what could be shown on the plan. And number spot number 21 um which is located up here just behind the proposed uh handicap spots. I think makes the most sense to to run the
wiring to and to prepare that for uh the make ready spot, make ready EV uh parking space >> and and even though under the the state statute by um providing for one make ready space that technically reduces the
number of spaces required from I guess 32 to 31. Still at this time we're we're proposing to put in the 32 spaces. Correct. >> Correct. There's a credit for the EV space. Um but we're still showing uh the 32 to meet meet the overall requirement.
>> And and Rudy, it's my fault. While you're talking about the the spaces and and the loading area, the identification of the frame shed uh that RT was mentioning during his testimony. if you can just identify that for the record since we're talking about that area in
question right now. >> Yeah, that that frame shed is located uh be behind the existing building. Um proposed I it was built apparently um not with a conforming side setback. You
could see 8.7 um was identified as uh not complying. Uh the shed is is actually to be uh removed as part of uh any any revised plan. >> That will not be a variance that we'll be asking for because we're going to
remove the shed. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. Why don't you uh proceed to talk a little bit about grading landscaping removal? >> Um as far as grading grading goes,
site's relatively flat. um and matching with with the proposed parking basically the existing topography. Um landscaping currently the site is uh I
would say well maintained with uh numerous trees and landscaping uh throughout the property and around the building. Um far as um drainage goes, there's uh the existing drainage system that collects drain to the uh to the existing drywall bank will
remain and it'll be expanded within uh the new expanded parking lot with additional inlets um that will connect to the same exist the same drive system that's to be uh expanded. And that expansion basically is sized to
accommodate the increase in overall uh impervious coverage on the site >> and there are there are some uh existing trees that are proposed to be relocated. Yeah, there's removal required um of
trees uh with with both the building addition uh the back right corner looking at the plan requires the removal of a tree uh along with at the rear of the site accommodate uh the parking and then
there's a tree to be removed uh associated with the proposed drywall bank and there will be a tree added for removal on top of the existing uh exist this on top of the uh existing trial bank somehow.
>> And in terms of the replacement trees, uh my recollection is that there were maybe a comment or two in terms of making sure that the applicant complies with the ordinance in terms of type of trees uh to be chosen and the applicant agrees to fully comply with that
ordinance. Correct. >> Correct. in a plan, it would be prepared to reflect that, but specific tree types and locations haven't been identified um at this time on the plan. >> Um, correct. >> What I didn't comment on, I drew on the
plan is that or the existing inlets here. >> Have an inlet where the pipes come in and you have a foot below that collects the drywall. The drywalls in normally when that's done they cut the
bottom of the inlet. >> Yeah, I I agree with that. based on a soil type out there, we could open up the bottom and and put gravel in there to >> to reduce the amount of standing water. >> Understood. >> Thank you, Mr. Qu. Um
so, uh moving on to uh lighting and um illumination levels. Uh do you want to mark that in exhibit? Um, I'm opening that currently. >> So, um, can we mark that as A1 and then
have the engineer identify what that is? >> Mr. Holtzman, if you can just identify what what A1 is for the record, please. >> A1 is um our sheet 507 of uh the site plan set um
identified as exhibit 48 2026 in the in uh the signature block. This plan is I characterize as addressing a majority of uh the review
comments that were received um by providing uh updated lighting fixtures locations and a new uh point analysis of light intensity.
Correct. >> Correct. >> Digital version obviously. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Sheet five in its today's date. And then um and this is purported to uh
make the conditions pertaining to maximum average illumination in the vehicular areas and sidewalk areas revised to conform. Correct. >> Correct. with within the lighting schedule. Some we've um
seen that this lighting plan meets uh the requirements um and reduces spillover along the the property line um on on on to the property uh to the west.
So, the plan involves up front in the front front of the parking lot maintaining I'm pointing to the three existing light poles. Those will remain and have new new fixtures. Uh, one new light
pole. Then there's two light light poles on the uhly side of the parking lot. I'm looking at it looks like the three
uh you've bars and now you've got P3B L's >> so they cut the light off behind I always had an issue with the lighting on behind to the west there was a fair amount of spillover
>> correct yes I noticed that on the plans and I think what >> like you've you've eliminated a lot of that with the new throat Yeah. What what this style of lighting does is doesn't call out the typical house side shield which we used to use. It's a
different terminology and there they control the throw more through lenses internally. So it looks the same from the outside as far as the fixture, but it's it's it's um directed more towards um the parking lot where we want the
light to end up. Yeah. Yeah, we noticed that that as well. Yes. >> And Mr. Holtzman, given the fact that we're presenting this plan for the first time tonight, albeit in response to uh comments from uh from Mr. Quinn's
report, we certainly would agree as a condition of any approval that um the board professionals would have a full and fair opportunity to further review this lighting plan and and make any other proposed modifications that we would agree to that. Correct.
>> Yeah, we would Yeah, we would prepare plans. Yeah. Subject to any any review um of this particular plan >> to to meet the ordinance requirement. Correct. didn't want that's still being >> I don't think so because an additional
light pole was added to meet the spacing requirements. Is that true, Mr. Holtzman? >> I can't I didn't have time to Well, I'll have I'll have Mr. Appel talk about that context on that
programs generated. I'm not saying we don't grant the waiver, but that that that is a rule of thumb. There's no great loss in granting that waiver because pattern that's much more fine than you would
and and we're certainly just like for other relief if the board professionals recommend to the board that a waiver should be requested that we certainly would present the proofs for that. Does the uh lighting stay on after business hours?
>> Business hours are typical office hours, so I can't speak to the exact timing and control of the lights, but I don't have the uh operator answer the question. And right now, um if you don't mind, sorry. Um what when do the lights go off if you
if you recall? Sounds like they could be on a timer then. >> Parking lot lights go off. >> And and certainly though we would we we would be >> I was just going to ask you, >> are you turning the lights off on the restaurant? >> Parking there for the restaurant would
need the lights. So certainly where I was going with that is that right. So the app so the applicant would agree to um rearrange or reset its timer so that the lights would
go off later after the the restaurant um was no longer in operation on a particular evening as well as to provide security lighting um to the approval of board professionals. Correct. if it's not already there, which I find hard to believe. >> Well, I guess you don't have sensors or
uh dimmer or anything like >> other than the restaurant would be bothered by those lights being on. There's nobody in the property on one side and you've got a restaurant on the other side that's open late. >> Question of overlay, >> right?
I think you've stipulated to the fact that you'll adjust the timing and and provide security lighting. >> Two other related there's another design waver by Mr. Schlly is one that could be eliminated.
sidewalk area 2.33 foot candles at the entrance ramp >> that one as well >> we could control that lighting and eliminate that request as well. Yes, >> got to clear up at the uh spacing is going to be
number four >> and the applicant would have no issue with that at all. Um, so I know RT spoke a little bit about um deliveries uh and and trash. Can you just uh identify the dumpster pad
location, etc. This thing dumpster pad is located um right in the back of the middle middle aisle. Um and and it's the same thing with the proposed dumpster enclosure. Um I think there's a typo in a detail, but
the size you see here is uh the same size basically that's there. That's what's proposed. And that size should be sufficient based on the increase in use um accommodate uh whatever trash
receptacles in there that go out to the street on a uh every couple of weeks. Is it just a residential type of dump? I mean, it's not a dumpster. It's just residential type of unit. I mean, um, recycling bins and trash bins. Okay.
>> Go ahead. >> Sorry. Trash bins are stored and then you bring them to the to the curb. >> Okay. That's where >> That's Yeah. I'm just going through to see there's anything
else. Um, oh, um, the Mr. Quinn's report number seven referenced that the engineering plan should reflect the removal of the existing front steps as depicted on the architect's plan. >> Correct. We talked about that. Any
revised plans could clarify that? Yes. Yeah, we can we can do that. I I tried to >> No, you did. You gave a good outline. I think we just at this point Sure. >> Yep. >> Let's start with uh Mr. Clint's letter, please.
>> Um comment two actually, but in variance territory for floor area ratio, we wanted to N or if it's correct area used for square footage uh to come up with the floor area ratios is
listed in the table um on sheet three. 198.5. >> Correct. >> Oh, there's there's identification on sheet two of a of a
different acreage, which you point out. I believe that's a a surveying uh not notation that references an older survey. >> Um but >> this is an existing condition. This is
not exactly a survey. So um it's based on a survey, but okay. As long as you're testifying that the actual lot area is 0.90, then we've captured >> correct. When you did the calculation of
the FAR, what number did you use >> for the 39198.5 square ft for the lot area portion of it? Okay. >> And the architect will talk more about the actual square footage used to come up with the floor area ratio, but
>> because obviously it would be different if you use the 868, >> but yeah, it would be slightly different. I think the percentage would would still be the same, but the the calculation would be correct. Would would be different referenced on sheet two.
>> Yeah, actually I can't speak to that exactly. Uh the survey of record is our survey I believe but it wasn't submitted with this um particular application that I know of but we could provide that we could
provide a survey of record and and submit a survey and and clarify >> yeah we could clarify why that area is referencing an older survey I believe the acreage and and we'll clarify that that 398.5
square feet.9 acres is the correct method. mathematical number. >> Yeah. >> Long commentary. You guys have already talked about the uses at the um I think Dave and I both mentioned that that wooden deck you're not near
the impervious cover calculation or clarification. Right. If if it's an open deck and you can remove it. >> Yeah. based on our observation, we we just called it uh impervious coverage and not not an open back. >> Right. You again, you're not anywhere near close to impervious coverage. So,
it's a kind of an intellectual exercise. But, um item five, I had just showed the existing drainage on the existing condition plan for clarity. We talked about the metal container. Bob Simons also mentioned removal of the
front steps on the architect on the uh Thank you. >> Can I interrupt you just for a second? Can we be clear that we would like to have that removed that metal >> container? >> Okay, >> I already have it written down regardless.
>> Um, comment eight is about storm order, just that their calculations support what they state. >> Um, number nine, we had this happen once before. This happens in Bernards and in other places where there's a lot of uh blocky shaly material. You can't take a
sample out and run it through the lab and get a precise permeability reading. You do flood test that you did. However, you can still convert that toration rate based on you know whatever area you flooded uh water you used. At the end of
the day, you'll have to submit to the township engineer something that shows that the percolation rate, which passed, we don't know what it is, enables the collected volume to drain in 72 hours. That's
>> we could agree to do that. Yes. Yes. >> I have comments on 10 and 11 about spot grades because I I get down on these things. Uh 122 is you may want just look at your elevation for that for that basin. It looks like it's not collected. I >> think there's a typo. Correct. Right.
>> Again, for for clarity on construction, just clarify where the new curb is to stay and the old is to meet also item 15. You should apparently a tree is grown directly on top of one of the existing dry wells. >> Yeah, that could be added for removal.
Correct. Yes. uh for the board's edification, the LEDs that are proposed are 3,000,000 Kelvin. I don't know if you've heard a lot about these, but temperature ranges typically are 2700 to about 6,000
Kelvin. The 2700 is the yellow softer light,000 is like the bluer light. Most site lighting for retail area 4,000K, that's daylight. That looks really white. 1000K light is a little softer and
should appeal more yellow than white. Um, something that most people are not aware of with the LEDs, they they often look stark white and people wonder why they look so white and not warm. Um, we uh
addressed the light spillover on adjacent lot 19. Um, we were talked about the hours of proposed light site lighting and adjustment for our security lighting shall be addressed, right? You guys will put that on the plan. Uh, we'll need a detail for the light
pole to support the 12oot height um in your calculation, your illuminire calculation. Also, I mean, I know that your light township standards for recess lighting, right? So,
are the old village type lights. I don't know that these are gonna LED lights. They're still You're still going to be able to see the luminere on these? >> To the best of my knowledge. Yes. Yeah. >> I don't know. I'm not I know Dave picked
that up in his letter, too. I don't know if it's the standard has been for the township to go towards these lights so that you don't see the luminere when you're driving by. All you see is the illumin area right style village light where you see window
panes and the top so you can see the whole luminere >> and Mr. Holtzman just for the edification of the board is putting it up on the board Tom just so you can see it. >> So that that's that doesn't comport with the township's current standards what we're looking for in terms
but again this is a site that already has these features. I don't know what it'll do to the character of that particular site to change it to a recessed fixture or if the applicant has even considered that, but I just felt there should be discussion about that
because that's the direction we're trying >> industrial than you would see in a shopping. >> Well, what I'm saying is you'll see the luminere, >> right? >> You'll see the bowl. What we've been trying to do with with a lot of our sight lighting is standard is now for
recess lighting that's up in the fixtures. So you don't see the bulb out open unless you get under it. So when you're driving by you don't see a lot of bright lights >> glaring >> because you don't see the lumin air. All you see is the lit up pavement, right? >> They're not that way. These are the
older style lights that were, you know, a lot of and Chester Burrow where I was the engineer for years. We were using these regularly. We were looking. I think that's something we could talk to the lighting consultant with and the designer to see if they have um a
fixture that that accommodates that. I think we're especially because it was a condition 2005, we're fine with complying with that. All right, then continue to move on. Uh, my next comment, we talked about the loading area. Um, I had a comment, Rudy, and you can
look at this. The details for the drywall. It looks like what you you're building your new drywall higher than your old drywall. I don't know why the system should match, but that's something for you to look at. Uh, 20 item 23 just notes that the detail and
the plan view are are discrepancy with regard to the concrete pad that you'll address. Detail for the drop curb should also be revised to reflect the 6 in high curb right to be constructed. Um the ADA access detail should be modified to be
consistent with the condition site. I I always see these ADA details that people slap on that have nothing to do with the site. So make it pertinent. Um then 26 is is just a comment that the applicants environment consultants confer the absence of wetlands
transition areas over seven is also a comment the project subject to somerset county review and approval since start county road and lastly that the uh the limit service warrants uh certification by some union.
Yeah, the plan could be a revised to address all those. Uh, >> yes. >> Yeah. Unless we commented to the contrary, which we really didn't other than talking about the waiver and a couple of other little things.
No, I I I >> some require a little discussion. Yeah. Yeah. I nothing jumped out um as far as revising details um typos numbers and values to be um
corrected and updated. Um but anything for discussion? Yeah, we could um jump jump to those if you want to identify those. When uh we can when we get to the architect, we'll deal with the architect comments.
Well, yeah. I mean, for it's it's not feasible right now because we don't own, you know, that that other lot. Number one. Number two, um I think the applicant already testified that, you know, in in practice that the applicant has been essentially a good neighbor and
allowing whether it's the church or the restaurant to use the parking spaces during off hours and they agree to continue to to do that and and modify uh the timer on the lighting accordingly. in terms of actually having a
connection. Not only there is there no agreement, but um we don't know how that would impact, you know, the number of parking spaces that may be used up during during the day. Um and then you have related insurance issues and and the like. Um and so while we're not
inclined to, you know, discuss the a connection so to speak because I think it raises a whole host of issues that we were not um able to even comment on and there's been no contact from that adjoining neighbor to seek um permission to to use our spaces uh that certainly
will agree to continue to to abide by uh current practice. Dave, there's been I I'm I've been aware of this for 20 something years and no outreach by the county for for any of those properties that I'm aware
>> with regard to the current pending. >> They they they may, but we haven't heard anything. No. >> Yeah. county that that easement >> county has the the I have I believe they have on the adjoining properties. They're they're
connected. >> It looks like it is. Yeah. >> Other side where there's actually easement was. So we have we've reviewed this easement in preparation for this application that was actual document. >> It was put in place by the planning
board. >> Yeah. 2000. >> Okay. >> So, who would have to exercise that? So, if if they were if the would could the applicant at any point be told, "All right, we need to we
want to we we need to use this." Since we've known about that that easement existing then suddenly they would be forced to >> do something. >> It would require the neighboring >> the neighboring you can see on the plan their parking aisle ends almost at the
property line. >> Yeah. >> But there is no easement that provides for it all to happen. The applicant would have to reach out to And there's been there's been no outreach by by them at all. And and
frankly, you know, just even thinking about it right now, this is such a low traffic generator. I mean, it's, you know, 32 spaces even even as approved. So, >> looking back at the minutes from the comment from Yeah, Dave, I think you said 2025 2005.
Yeah, it's all right. No worries. >> The thinking was that it was traffic going to a specific So, let's ask from a safety perspective, do you have any um issues with accidents happening at the
at the access drive? Yeah, it's with with if there's more than 25 spaces, the ordinance in the design section of the ordinance states that you're supposed to have separate ingress and a separate egress. I mean, this is an existing condition right now.
We're just adding nine nine spaces. >> Well, it's not it's not an existing violation though because you don't have >> I didn't say existing. Yeah, it's just an existing condition. existing condition but >> correct >> requirement doesn't applying in my opinion it's less important
because you have less familiar with property Yeah. And and and in fact, I mean, we'll we'll get other than what Mr. Slide has just commented on, we agree to all the statements that are contained in Mr. IZ report.
Eventually approves it. What's a resolution Or you could always come back if you run up against I mean I before we're done I'll I'll check with the design team and the applicant but I don't see any reason why we can't comply with these time frames.
Mr. Holtzman, do you have anything further to add? >> I'm happy to take any questions, but yeah, that concludes Yeah. my testimony. >> Thank you. Does the board have any questions from Mr. Holtzman? >> Four comments the environmental
commission had on this. What are best management practices during site work and as far as part of final grading and restoration with complying or >> now we could comply with all those comments? Yes.
Does anyone from the public have any questions for Mr. Holtzman? Comments? Seeing none. Thank you, Mr. Holtzman. >> Uh, so at this point, I'd like to call our architect, uh, Larry Appel from
Appel Design Group, please. Mr. Mr. Pel having already uh been sworn if you can give uh the board uh your credentials, occupation affiliation, areas of expertise, licenses and experience in the field of architecture.
>> Um sure. Um my name is Lawrence Lauce Appel APL principal of Appel Design Group Architects. located in Floren Park, New Jersey. Um, I hold a bachelor of science degree in civil engineering as well as a master's in architecture. I
am here only testifying as the architect this evening. Um, in addition to uh having my New Jersey license since 1992, I'm also licensed in uh New York uh Pennsylvania. I'm ENARB certified. Um,
and my uh current license is valid. >> We ask that he be deemed duly qualified. >> Yes, absolutely. Thank you. >> Thank you. Appreciate that. >> Um, Mr. Appella, you're familiar with the application materials, including the architectural plans for this
application. >> Um, yes. >> And you created those architectural plans, correct? >> Yes. Okay. >> And you're familiar with the property and the surrounding neighborhood, right? >> Yes, I am. >> Okay. um if you can uh present your um observations and conclusions to the
board with regard to the uh elevations and floor plans that you've created for this project. >> Um sure. Um one of the things um everything that I have this evening um is identical. So what you're looking at on the screen will be identical to what you have uh in your packages. So, I'm
assuming I don't need to. >> You do. I'm going to tell you. >> And just uh Mr. Appel as you put up on the screen uh your various plan sheets, if you can just identify them by by sheet number and last revision date. >> Uh sure, that would that would be fine.
So um looking um drawing number PB-1. So I am looking at the architectural set of drawings that are dated 102325. If I'm referring to the rendering that's the separate um sheet which is a color
um sheet. It was probably on a 11 by7 page. So um that'll that that drawing um I will refer to as the rendering even though there are some existing photographs on that as well. Um the if
you are looking at um the drawing PB-1 so the first page of the architectural drawing shows the existing conditions. We're showing that for uh reference. And um just to um illustrate, I'm on PB-3
of the architectural set. And it does show to the left of that stair um which is the main stair um is where that addition is placed. So it's only this piece to the the rear of the
property. Um the front um facing the street has no changes. Um the sides and rear are constructed just beyond the prior addition and aligning with the prior addition. So um the portion where
the stair is was a natural inset which we thought would be an ideal place to um create an entry. Um we um are providing a better accessible entrance now via ramp in the front of the building rather
than going around the side in the rear. So it uses a common entry platform. And the prior um um entry that we're removing um that entry was um a little bit clumsy. It had a step down from the
um main area down onto a platform which um you're not supposed to do. It was just one of those um things that I think there was just not available space to do it right. This gave us an opportunity to correct that. So the size of this
footprint is uh 35 ft by 29 foot8. And I'm going to say approximate because we're aligning with the existing. That's what we're we're using. Those are the dimensions that were uh taken architecturally as well as from prior conditions as well as the site drawings.
So um part of this addition involved and there was some discussion about that creation um relocating the reception area which we spoke a little bit about already. Um a new conference room uh which uh um ownership had spoken um
about. Um and above this some second floor office space as well. The lower level which we've called the basement um the board professionals have um corrected that um it is technically a
seller not a basement although we did properly um uh allocate the um area when the zoning calculations were done. So, as a seller, because it's more than um uh more than half is below grade and
there's no separate um egress to the exterior, there was at one point we're removing that area away because um it just didn't make sense and um it was not necessary. So um we have achieved the
requirements per the ordinance so that it is a seller and that seller is used for storage and amenity for um um for the office use which is um a gym and a full bathroom.
So I'm going to switch to the exterior facade. Um, I guess it's um I can do maybe better to look at the color picture. I think that may be a little
look at. So, um, when you're looking at the, uh, the area >> you have up right now, the colored rendering that has been previously provided to the >> That's correct. So, this is the, uh, color rendering. Um, it also has a a key
plan to the right. So, it will show you where each of the photographs were taken. And when you're looking um the um recessed area where the stair is is where that in the center area where the lower roof line is. So, right behind
that is the entry. it sort of created a natural place um to um create a covered entry and we think that it makes sense both um architecturally um as well as functionally having the having the cover there. So um our
approach was quite simple. Um this is a limited size addition. um we believe it to be um modest and compatible with the existing architecture. What we were looking to do is match whatever we could. We thought
what was done was reasonable and appropriate and we just wanted to um respect that. So, we've matched um the existing siding, the existing roofing, the existing windows, the existing
shutters. Um and um the building height again is matched. It is under 35 ft, which is the ordinance requirement, and it um what's at the rear of the building matches what's in the front um heightwise.
Now, um, one of the important things that we were trying to do is not touch the front of the building. We thought the front of the building was important to, um, the historic context of this area. Um, this is part of the Liberty
Corner Historic District. And, um, our idea was preservation of the front portion of the structure. There are no changes there. Um this will um fully maintain the existing current streetscape. Um the addition is only to
the rear and again it's in what we believe is an a comp a complimentary um design. It will not overpower the existing architecture and we believe that this was uh successful and we believe that the drawing the color
rendering from the side illustrates this. The neighborhood character we believe will not be impacted because all portions of the proposed design happens behind the existing structure. So we didn't flare out the building, make it
wider. We respected that. Um, and we understood this was the intent of the ordinance. I don't know if if it um the historic ordinance came out and said that, but it seemed to um allude to that this was the requirement.
Um so um we believe this further promotes the historic district through um um beneficial and continued adaptive use of a structure. You don't want to see these fall um out of favor. You want
them to be um restored and maintained. This building is wellmaintained and um it is visible from Church Street and it maintains the uh the streetscape. Um, we also, um, are not changing the height of
the lighting. Um, I'll talk a little bit, um, about there are some questions about the light fixtures. I think I can provide a little bit more information um, regarding this. Um, the signage stays the same, the landscaping at the
front stays the same, and um, the pedestrian orientation and character are all maintained as well. So, um, part of this being a contributing
structure in this historic district, we are also matching all of the architectural elements um, from the prior renovation that took place um, around 2005. Um, again, this is a modest addition.
The property is wellmaintained. We're utilizing and matching existing vernacular materials and details. again, asphalt um pitch roof, asphalt shingles, um the clapboard exterior,
and the um uh we the biggest change that we're making here is the um front entry that is now being relocated um to that area where the stair and the
uh toilet room are. So, um I believe that there were a number of questions that were relating to um the lighting. Um my understanding from working um with
the lighting representative and consultant is that the existing ballards were removed, no longer necessary. So having less lights it will probably be helpful and they would not be matching the style nor would they coordinate with
the color temperature that u Mr. Quinn had uh made reference to before. So yes, we um we requested that the the light be a little bit warmer and not harsh. We thought that was appropriate. We think
3,000 or 3500 is correct and uh Mr. Quinn is also correct in that most retail tends to be a little bit whiter and hotter and in my opinion is a little more glary and less residential. So I think this is more appropriate for the
3000 is more appropriate for this use. So, we've um one of the changes to address the board comments and um please understand is that um I don't want to if I don't get all of this correct right now because there's a little outside my
expertise in here is that um this was um we wanted to bring something today to address these comments. That was important. Um but we also wanted this exhibit was brought to the board and the professionals tonight. They have not had a chance to review it. >> You're talking, Larry, let's just be
clear. You're talking about the lighting >> lighting exhibit. >> Correct. Correct. Okay. A1. >> Yes. So, um, so this lightning exhibit that was, uh, that was, uh, brought in is we are happy to, um, address any additional comments that the board
engineer would have. We hope that they're going to be minor and technical. We believe that we've addressed this. We've um added uh one of the P3 uh polls which um addressed the fivetime
uh ratio for height that was uh discussed earlier. We felt that was um important, appropriate. We changed some of the fixture wattages to assist with getting the light levels correctly. Um so now we meet the 0.9 foot candle
average in the parking sidewalk and ramp areas. Um all our uniform color temperature. So all of the fixtures are new LED luminires. The spillover has also been uh reduced because um of these
adjustments. So it's there's not as much spill over into the adjoining uh property. So there was a question about shielding and lenses and stuff like that. I was trying while we were having this discussion trying on my phone and picking up and they're just huge PDF
documents and I couldn't really read all these things but from what I'm reading I think these fixtures may already have flat lenses means that the when when they term use the term flat lens it means that it's
hidden concealed reflected up and and out to provide lighting. So, um I would rather not testify completely on that because I I was looking at my my phone five minutes ago, but we will provide that information to the extent available
if for some reason it is not that type of fixture. We'll endeavor to find one of these fixtures that are compatible. Um but um there are a lot of these uh conventional lanterns that are used if
we can get these hold lights to be um less glary. We will try to do that. I don't know if there are I I think during my testimony I've covered most of the see here that the um I'm just going to
jump the gun here in terms of Mr. Schlly's report starting on uh number 25 label colors of all exterior building materials consistent with the submitted color rendering. You'll agree to do that? >> Yes, >> Mr. Pel. Um, on the architectural plans,
identify any roof mounted mechanical equipment and means of screening or add a note stating that there shall be no roof mounted mechanical equipment. >> Can I can answer that pretty pretty easily. It's a pitch roof. We're not proposing any equipment up on the roof
other than um a ridge vent or any kind of ventilation like that. Um there will be um condensing units on the ground. So the type of um heating and air conditioning on here would be small
system either a ducted mini split or a split system that would be very similar to what you have in your homes. So we would expect to have a small condensing unit or two small condensing units for
um this addition. It'll be padmounted um concealed um landscaped. So, um, these are kind of normal and appropriate. These are not big pieces of equipment. If it is the ducted mini splits, they're actually quite small.
>> I have a generator as well. >> Uh, that is a good question. I don't I don't believe there. >> There is a generator currently. All right. See where's it? >> You're um since you're there, you're on the uh AC units. Will they be staying in
the same area? >> Going about for the for the addition. >> I see two AC units. I see the sump and then I see two AC. Is that >> those are existing AC units from the survey? So, we will end up having an additional one probably um uh at the end
of the building in the corner or something like that if it'll be the be in the um the rear of the building. >> Will there need to be um pads or will it is it going to be placed on something that's already counted as imperous cover? >> It'll be on a on a on a uh one of the
prefabat pads. >> Okay. if it's already counted. >> Uh that I could I I would need to confirm that with the >> if it's not you're not anywhere close, but if we could just make sure that it's counted so that it so that the coverage
is accurate. Same same for the generator. So if the generator is on a pad, um just make sure that it's covered. >> RT, I don't see where the generator >> Oh, okay. Okay. So, so that that one of the AC units apparently.
>> Okay. >> The existing AC for the existing building are remaining separate for that existing building. >> That's correct. Normally, what we do is we try not to to disrupt something that's not broken. So, what we what we
will do is and we find is that these kind of buildings, you know, renovated buildings, they're better having multiple small units that try rather than trying to combine with a single one. I've heard him say that, but they look >> So, can it just be labeled for the final
plan set so that it's accurate and then again just have the impervious coverage calculations if there are pads under it? They the pads are shown but they're mislabeled. >> Okay. >> Right now there there looks like there's
one, two, three, four, five condensing units and my guess is that there's only three, >> but we would clarify that regardless. >> Yeah, it's just a housekeeping that's all. I'm not concerned about it. Just
um nor normally that the the generators don't necessarily run everything or can be done with load shedding. So the a small addition like this would we would use the existing services and provide a sub panel for the addition.
>> So Mr. Pel going on I'm referring to Mr. Schlly's letter on number uh 27. This has to do with the seller that as a condition of any approval, the use of the lower seller level regardless of its classification should be limited to storage, utilities or incidental
accessory amenity space that will not increase the number of employees or visitors. We agree to that. Correct. Number 28 addresses the impact of the proposal on the Liberty Corner Historic District. I
believe that you already testified as to that including historic preservation objectives and I will tell you our professional planner will be touching on all that as well at the appropriate time. Um I think that's it for
architectural comments. Mr. Sly, Mr. Quinn from the board have a question. Yeah, I I'm just having trouble here in that I'm looking at a picture of the first closest to the street part of the building. So, so that I'm I'm going to
pull up our rendering exhibit and I'm going to >> So that's the lower left hand image on our rendering sheet, >> right? So aligning if you go up to the
picture above that what's the tib? >> Okay. >> So >> that area is cut off. It's not seen on the rendering. >> Got it. Okay. >> Because it would have made the rendering kind of so like smaller and on a smaller
sheet of paper you wouldn't show a lot of detail. So we cut off there. Okay. So the >> but none of that is changing. We're not doing we're not proposing any the area that we cut off. We're we're not doing
any modification or changes. >> That really nice window that's on the very first part. Nothing at the front of the structure is being changed. The only portion that is being changed
is to the rear. So the where I'm pointing >> can you guys you asked the question. Can you let Mr. Appal answer please? >> So where I have this this where I'm showing this this vertical line which is
where the um recess for the entry is everything to the right is new. everything to while we're creating this porch, but without exception, everything to the left is existing. So, we are not making any changes. So,
that is visible um from Church Street at the front of the building. Nothing is being changed. Nothing's being touched. That address what you were asking or >> Yeah, I Well, I guess it's just not visible as you said. >> Correct. >> Not correct. I I I I I should have
explained that when we when I brought up the uh the rendering that it the existing portion >> lower left corner photo that's >> that's correct. That's as you can see from Church Street. >> Right. Right.
Anybody else have any other questions for Mr. >> Does anyone from the public have any questions? Any comments? >> Um, seeing none, Mr. Appel, do you have anything further to add?
>> I don't. Thank Thank you everybody. >> Thank you very much. So, um, at this point, we'd like to call, uh, Donna Homequist, our professional planner on the project. >> Can we take a five minute? >> I think we can take a seven minute break.
>> As you said, not saying anything. >> Don't just leave us. I'll back to you soon. >> Power. >> We are back. Um, Miss Layman, do we need to do roll call? >> No. No.
>> I think everybody Everybody's here. We're all here. >> We're gonna turn it back over to you. Do you want to or um >> introduce your witness. >> Yes. So, we're presenting Donna Homequist, our professional planner on the project. Uh Miss Vulquist was
previously sworn. So, Donna, I'm going to ask you if you can please provide your credentials to the board occupation affiliation, areas of expertise and and experience in the field of professional planning. >> Um my name is Donna Holquist. The last
name is spelled HOL MQV I S. I'm the CEO and founder of Preferred Planning Group. Uh my business address is uh 110 Chestnut Ridge Road uh sweet 192 Montail, New Jersey. Uh I've been a licensed professional planner in New
Jersey since 1990. I have a Bachelor of Arts from Ruckers University and Master of Urban Planning from New York University. I'm also a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners. I um serve as uh on the board
of planning advisors of New Jersey planning officials. I speak every year in Atlantic City and this Friday I'm doing a webinar with Michelle Donado on AI data centers. You can still sign up. It's a lunch and learn uh at noon. Um so I I do participate in um you know the
instruction and authorship etc. I've qualified in front of over 130 communities in New Jersey giving expert testimony. I've also been an expert professional planner witness in federal court, tax court, superior court, municipal court and also on condemnation
matters. Um I do municipal consulting, master plans, etc. I do applicant work and I also do uh a share of opposition work or community advocacy as I call it. That's the last time I was in Bernard's as community advocate.
>> Thank you. We will accept you. >> Thank you. Uh so, Miss Homequist, uh if you can please provide your um planning analysis. Um well, first of all, um you're familiar with the application. Correct. >> Yes. I've I've looked at all the plans that that the board has reviewed, all
the um expert uh board professional reports. I've looked at your master plan and your development regulations >> in order to give you uh conclusions >> and you're familiar with the site and surrounding area. >> Yes, I have seen that. >> Okay. So with that, if you could please
provide your planning conclusions um including description of the property and the surrounding area and what is being proposed and to address uh both the the now the one variance that's being requested as well as the the
waiver relief to the extent required. >> Yes. I'm just going to briefly touch on the surrounding development pattern. Um the historic district designation, what your master plan relevant uh goals and objectives uh particularly focused on the historic district. Um the purposes
of planning that we're advancing with this application and of course uh illustrate the statutory criteria for the D4 variance for F that we need in addition to the waiver request. So I'm going to introduce uh two exhibits during my testimony. I have one up there
now. >> Why don't we um if we can mark this as A2 for identification please? >> Just identify what we're looking at. >> Uh we're looking at as is the base map we uh subscribe to near mapap and we're
using a vertical image from October 4th 2025. That's a leaf on um near map base. And what you can see um outlined and shaded in red is the very extensive Liberty Corner historic district. It
totals about 142 acres and the majority of that as you can see to um the southern portion is English farm is over 60 acres. Very dominant feature of that historic uh designation.
The area in yellow is the B4 uh zone that our site is is highlighted in blue so that it stands out and you can see where we are in that Liberty corner zone. So the B4 is almost like a subset
of this very vast historic district that you have designated in the community. We didn't show the other zones, but adjoining our site to the south uh encompassing English Farm is an R2 zone. To the west is an R4 zone. On the
opposite side of Church Street, um there is outside the um historic district is the firehouse and and the ball fields. That's in a public zone. And of course, the Liberty Corner uh elementary school is also in a public zone. Um, so I have
to say I I have a certificate in historic uh preservation from the university. This is a really extensive historic district and um it is talked about in your master plan. So when we looked at uh the land use pattern both
sides of Church Street um a lot of commercial development but as you get more towards the west it starts shifting residential and the Presbyterian church of course a very dominant feature and mentioned uh very prevalently in the
historic designation uh description. The Liberty Corner Historic District within the master plan um talks about it being designated on both the state and the national registers. Um I explained what it encompasses. The Presbyterian
Church is noted to be constructed about 1868 uh to 1869. Um some of the language that the master plan talks about um I think is very significant um because it as a planner it really gives me a picture for what
has existed here for like 200 years and what the community wants to keep replicating even though you know land uses change businesses expand but that character has to be maintained. So, uh, some of the key words in your master plan, I'm going to quote crossroads
hamlet, uh, strong rural character, vistas of outlying farmland, obviously English farm, huge, um, and, uh, also very significantly, it talks about the building uses change, but quote,
consistent with rural village history of Liberty Corner for more than two centuries. So I I think that's what our team, especially our project architect and our client has tried to do here with expanding and modernizing the building
for their business, which as you heard has been in town for quite some time, but keep with all these characteristics that are uh community goals and objectives for this area, especially the B4.
our site 30 Church Street is um in the documents they're they're public documents. You can see the National Park Service if you really want to go into uh what was written about the entire district but specific buildings within that district which 30
Church Street our site um is listed as contributing and of excellent integrity and it is uh denoted to be a colonial revival cottage um constructed about 1905 to 1910 and the our architect went
through some of the features that we are preserving and replicating uh with the addition. So having laid that as the foundation I want to just shift into the zoning analysis and um then talk about a little more in depth the master plan and then the statutory
criteria u then hopefully you will see fit to grant the variance. >> Quest I'm so sorry. Oh, sure. The uh the exhibit that uh I was of is entitled Church Street
Neighborhood Context and it's figure one. The date is April 2nd, 2026. Um just summarizing the highlights of our site and its existing zoning compliance. Um, regarding the lot area,
we have almost three times the minimum required lot area. Uh, lot width and lot frontage, we also have two times the minimum required for the B4 zones. It's a very large lot. And, uh, front yard, we have four times the minimum required.
Uh, rear yard, we have um really extensive uh, you're allowed 10 foot minimum and we have over 200 feet. We are way below the lot coverage. Even with our addition, you're allowed 75% and we are proposing 39.4%.
These are all things that I as a planner look at when we see an F variance because want to be certain that there is not an overbuilding, there is not a mass on this site that is going to dominate the area or create a negligible um a
negligent impact rather. And then of course we have the F which the numbers were testified to but we are allowed 12.5%. Existing on the site is 12.5% and we are proposing with our addition 17.75%. As you've heard the shed that has the
non-conforming sideyard is going to be removed. So we are eliminating the non-conforming dimension uh by removing that. So getting into the the dev varants um important to look at the master plan
um some other specific things this is your 2023 master plan again I'm quoting talks about local policy will determine how neighborhood character is protected or exposed um talks about a distinctive sense of place and specifically mentions the
Presbyterian church as contributing to that um quote reinforce neighborhood scale rather than overpower it. Design and construction of complimentary additions can permit the neighborhood to thrive, assure that the heritage is not
lost, preserve the distinctive character, promote adaptive reuse, respect architectural and historic integrity, and lastly, ensure harmonious context. In my opinion, this design achieves all that. uh we advance at
least four purposes of planning for the municipal land use law. I'm going to cite them. That's uh NJSA45D-2. Uh subsection A appropriate development uh to promote the public health safety and general welfare. Uh subsection C provide adequate light area and open
space. Subsection E promote and establish um appropriate population densities. and subsection I provide a desirable visual environment. I think this plan is consistent and compatible and promotes all of those. So now I'm
going to get into the data analysis that we did um to form those conclusions. Okay, we do the analysis and then offer the conclusions we uh looked at. I'm going to shift my
my viewpoint now. We we like >> free. Yeah. This is >> Sure. >> What is this exhibit? >> This is entitled Dirty Church Street
Panorama Aerial and it also is dated April 2nd. Uh we we look at near map panoramas. They they shoot at an angle of 45 degrees. And we also can pan around and look at the neighborhood. So,
we did that. We panned around. We looked at the neighborhood. And I, in my opinion, this angle, this viewpoint, and you can see our north arrow uh on the bottom. So, we're we're looking eastward. Our site is outlined in blue dotted
line. And of course, the Presbyterian Church is very prominent in the lower left corner. Um, as a planner, I like to look at your map because I can pan around. I can look at everything. But that 45 degree angle
to me uh really taps into what what are the surrounding buildings and how big are they? And your map is extremely accurate with the measurements. Um, we chose Leaf Off for this because otherwise a lot of uh the buildings and
so forth would be obscure. So, we chose an air map panorama from March 18th, 2025. So, very, very accurate. Um, we're zooming in here because when we did our study, we looked at 13 properties. We
stuck with the commercial properties. 13 properties encompassing both sides of Church Street. So, those commercial properties are primarily to the east of our subject site. to the west of our subject site, we start getting more residential. We don't want to wanted to
compare apples to apples. So, we looked at 13 lots, both sides of George Street total. And we did uh analysis of the community has excellent taxes information online. So, we were able to
get the building square footages, the lot areas, and then we also, as you know, some of the sites in this study area at multiple buildings. And so, we also looked at near map vertical imagery
and were kind of scaling the buildings to make sure nothing was getting missed. Sometimes, you know, not to knock the township, but sometimes things anyway, we were in agreement when we felt like the township had its tax assessor online records was extremely accurate. So we
used the lot areas and building square footages right from u the online source of your tax assessor. Why I think that this exhibit is very helpful to the board. As I said nine of the 13 properties that we looked at
exceed the F. So that's a little under 70%. It's 9% exceed the F. I don't think you would think that going through this neighborhood. I certainly do. So I I think that's u a hidden feature if you will and that's why we do this kind of
uh what I call forensic analysis. So looking at this exhibit again uh number 26 uh Church Street is the restaurant that's immediately to our east. Then the two properties uh just to
the east of that number 22 and number 20 uh are very significant in my opinion because when we looked at our analysis uh number 22 has an F of 0.253 254. And again, I yes, there's two large
structures there, you know, in addition to a smaller one, but I don't get the feeling either on the street or looking at this 45 degree angle that that's a monstrosity or that that doesn't belong here. I think it actually complements the area. Um the property uh to the
north of that number 20 uh very narrow lot that you know has an elongated building uh number 20 is is uh similar to us it's.179 uh f we are proposing the one uh.178
uh the allowed areas of those two lots that I just called out are also similar to ours uh we have about 39,000 square feet Uh number 22 has a little more than 35,000 square feet and number 20 has
about 20,000 square feet. Um so again nine of the 13 that we looked at exceed the 0.125 F and then these two that are closest to us um are in line and exceeding what we have. And
yet I don't look at that and think this is distracting or diminishing the character of the Liberty Corner uh historic district. Um you could see from the site plan and looking at this image
um the addition is very small and it's coming, you know, just off the back of the property. I don't think the addition of the parking area is going to create a noticeable difference. Um and so for those reasons I would submit to you that
our F variance is reasonable and it's based on the analysis that I did. Um for positive criteria for an F variance we really need to look at the impacts and what are the impacts of the mass scale that we are proposing. Um we have
compatible architectural features. The addition is to the rear of the building. Uh the applicant is trying to provide what I call amenity space which is this large conference room to conduct their business operations in a collaborative
manner. You know, seating for everyone at one time. Um it isn't increasing the amount of employees on the site except by an increase of going from 15 to possibly 18.
This is a very low inensity office use as the testimony was that the parking that they have on site now goes underutilized and in compliance with the ordinance more parking will be added but no one on our team and our client does
not expect that to be fully utilized. We are maintaining setbacks. Uh we're maintaining the existing driveway on Sher Street. So there really will not be any changes uh to the traveling public
or anyone walking on the street. The negative criteria we need demonstrate to you there's no substantial detriment to the public good, no substantial impairment to the intent or purpose of your zone plan and zoning ordinance, that being your master plan.
By maintaining setbacks, complying with the building height, and being under the maximum allow building coverage, uh we are not blocking light air in an open space for any of our neighbors. And um my analysis and my conclusion and
opinion as a professional planner is that we are uh creating an addition that is in keeping with the village character of the Liberty Corner Historic District. We are compatible with FS in the area as I stated and we are modernizing business
use that has been on site for many years with consistent architectural features. And I don't think anyone will think this is a detriment to your historic district. Having given you that analysis and conclusions, I'd be happy to answer any
questions. Um with regard to the um F varants, you believe that the site will accommodate um any issues related to having um F
that exceeds the order. >> That's correct. Uh we are not increasing the amount of employees by what I consider a substantial amount. I don't think going from 15 to 18 is going to create any detrimental impacts
>> or excuse me with regard to the negative criteria that um the F variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good. Um, you know, you believe that based on your analysis and the testimony that you provide, coupled with
um the fact that there's not only no devi other deviations requirements in terms of bulk standards, but that development existing and as proposed far exceeds what is the maximum
minimum permitted. Um that you believe first prong of the negative criteria that the >> Yes, I do. >> With regard to no substantial impairment to the zoning ordinance or the master
plan, um I know that you you touched on the historic district. Is there anything that you that leads you to conclude other than the fact that there's no brick element for the entire master.
>> No, because in in addition to the streetscape of um Church Street and Liberty Corner, the two prominent features in this historic district are Presbyterian Church in English Farm. And I don't think our plan is uh going to
detract from either one of those in terms of integrity. >> I don't believe there'll be any adverse impact of this? >> No, I do not. And then um just briefly regard to the the waiver request and
we've identified through the test other witnesses uh variance various excuse me waiverss um that still may be required um including the fact that we don't have separate entrance and exit uh for for
the driveway um and um the fact that there's technically a loading space required and none are none are proposed. proposed um that and parking lot open space um effectively a fire lane by one foot
requirement. Um if you can just go over for the board the criteria for granting a design section 51 of the municipal land use. Yes, I I will. And I and I think also it's a very significant factor that we
have an existing business on this site and that is a low intensity uh usage as as testified by the applicant. Um, permunicipal land use law waiverss are addressed in NJSA40 col55D-51D.
And the land use law states that the board is empowered to grant exceptions from the requirement as reasonable and within the general purposes of the regulation intent if literal enforcement is impractable
or will exact undue hardship because of peculiar conditions relating to the site. So I think some of the peculiar conditions are that we have an existing use that it is a low intensity use uh that we have site dimensions of what I
discussed before a larger lot area and and so forth the dimensions I went through and that the gist of this addition although it generates a number in F that may be of concern to the community in practicality it is only
to create a more collaborative environment for the business and increase a staff of maybe three people >> and so um given the existing condition >> likeed to mention I think there's
>> underest for the previous approval and >> um and that will be continuing um you believe applicant has met their burden um in that um the request for waiverss are
are substantial. >> Yes, we meet the statutory standards to enable the board to grant those uh waivers. >> Nothing further. Thank you. >> Have any questions for Miss Holist? No,
actually can uh does anyone from the public have any questions for Miss Holqu did a very good summary there at the end. >> Is there anything else you >> It's not It's not a complete summary. >> Thank you for for being a little
clairvoyant. Yes. >> Um yeah, so I'll I'll try to be brief. Um, it's very hard for me sometimes. >> Hang on one pardon me. Do you have a question? >> I'm not sure who would answer it. Is okay. Is there a limit to the number of employees that this building can have in
it based upon the size or >> but okay I'm I always wonder if you know if the applicant not the applicant but the owner of the building sells it the applicant moves out another building uh own another office space comes in could
they increase the number of employees and say we're not going to have this conference room anymore we're going to put 10 employees in that conference So, could we put a condition to limit the number of employees in the building or what? parking spaces
>> would would limit it. Yes. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Is there any specific Yeah. >> Yeah. No, I'm I'm just un Yeah. trying to understand what kind of at the limit if we said maximum of ex employees, would that only pertain to this
applicant or anybody that They'd have to come back. Okay. >> Not be a medical office. You limit it to a type of office. >> Different use. Yeah. >> I I I don't I don't know. That's what
>> parking essentially serves Well, even in this situation, we're talking about a uh they have more parking spaces than they need. So, like if they if the if somebody else were to move in, square footage would mean that they would have to use I mean they would be
they would have enough spaces for whatever their use was. So, like Yeah, but which is not it doesn't seem like it's going to happen in this situation, but you know Yeah. And I'm just asking like you know number of spaces doesn't the number of people in a
building. >> But what what are the what are the permitted uses in the zone? I mean I wouldn't want to put a restriction on something if it's already a permitted use in the zone. Right. But they're impervious coverage. They're far under. So they could create
a much bigger parking lot and accommodate more employees. Can can can I can I make a a suggestion which is that and a lot of at least towns where I'm the board attorney we have this so that if there is going to
be a change of use even if it's to a permit itted use that the applicant needs to um or the or the new user needs to provide information in terms of you know number of employees and and there a
couple of other uh criteria just so that the municipality is aware of what's going in there even if it's permitted or you could even go so far and require I don't know minor site plan approval if you're if you're going to have a first floor retail use I think that That
frankly would be appropriate and that would provide the board with an opportunity to get another look at any type of new user, especially a new user that will have a nonf fully office component that may impact the number of
employees and traffic and things like that. one way, even though not necessarily recommending this, that um they would be comfortable with a cap even for a future user of of 25 employees. So, it would be a little bit more than
what they're anticipating having right now, but not materially more and still you'd have plenty of parking and I think it it it would address any concerns that the board may have reasonably in terms of a future user. I
don't think it's great, but just throwing it out there. I just have a concern about putting like a cap on the employees because there's no way for us to monitor that. like you know they can employ whoever they want
at their business and we're not going to come in and say you have to give us a report every month of who you're employing at your business and then that would continue also to like the next user. I just feel like it's overly
restrictive. Is there >> Yeah. I just don't really feel like that's necessary. I feel like our concern is really, if I'm understanding, um, Mr. trials. Like our concern is really like traffic and potentially like having a business that has a higher
intensity use could create that problem for the Liberty Liberty Corner community. There's a church, there's a school, there's um a bunch of um businesses there. We don't necessarily want to have a really high intensity use on that in that particular spot. Is
there a way to sort of speak to that rather than capping the specific number of employees. >> Well, so so that's why I suggested that if there's a change of use, even if it's to another permitted use, let's say it's a retail use, that that the the new
applicant would be subject to to site plan approval. And I think that way the board can ask all those questions it wants to ask um for this new use in terms of traffic, intensity, number of employees, etc. and you're not deciding
right now what's what's the magic number, >> right? I mean, I would prefer that, I think, but I the new use to me is is that mean they'd have to change it from a private business to like a retail
establishment or something completely different. But if it went to another similar business, then that wouldn't be a new use. Correct. >> It would not be. No, it just be office to office. >> Office to office, right? Can I ask a question real quick? Has is there a
precedent to this? >> We're asking about >> Yeah, I agree. >> on the amount of people in a building. >> Yeah. >> I I mean >> I mean no, I'm asking. I'm new. But the thing is though, we already know that
there's going to be 18 and there's plenty of parking. I mean, like, you'd have to have like 30 people to or more to to occupy all the parking. >> Okay. So, so, so hang on one second. I understand where you're going. I think I understand where you're going.
>> Can I just ask a question? Doesn't the number of parking spaces already control how many people are going to be able to occupy the building? So, if you went to 25 employees, you have 32 parking spaces. Isn't that reasonable? If you
were to increase it, you wouldn't necessarily have enough parking, which would sort of bring them back to the board naturally to expand their parking lot. Is that not >> There's no on street parking there. People could just park on the street.
They would have to make the >> But the concern is traffic. So if they had more employees but they didn't have cars, then we don't care. I think that the but there's so right now there's around >> yeah I mean it's
>> mean I think we're but we're granting the F based on 18 employees or so and with 32 parking spaces. So potentially they'd have, you know, a new user could do internal
improvements that make it that don't have to come back before board that would Can I just finish? Sorry. It's okay. The um so that they wouldn't have to come before the board and could potentially have, you know, 32 employees at an office that would each have their own parking space and then the single
ingress egress for the parking lot becomes a little bit more >> concerning and there, you know, the other the other things just become a little bit more concerning. So it is, you know, I I agree that something could >> and I wasn't trying to limit anything. I was just saying that the applicant is asking for a variance. That variance is
predicated by a number of employees that was stated. So would it be reasonable to put a limit on the number of employees based upon the increase in the F? I mean, that's logically what I was going for if it made sense. way you could go and put a board hat on for a second. Board
applicant has represented that they're going to 18 employees. The applicant and I'm just up has further represented that the most number of employees they anticipate at any one point would be 25. So I just
that is a representation of the applicant and all representations of the applicant are deemed conditions of approval. That can be set forth again separately as a condition of approval. And if somebody came in there office or
otherwise and they exceeded that number, they're they're in violation of the conditions of approval of an ordinance of a resolution. Excuse me. >> How do you enforce it though? >> Do you need a restriction? Now what what you could what you could do is that if
there is a add provision in your resolution that if there's a change in tenant or occupant that they need to um provide information to the zoning officer certifying as to the number of
employees. I I think I I don't want to, you know, not be a zealous advocate, but I think that's reasonable. They have no negative impact on the Right. >> Right. Right.
In >> many municipalities, they have what's called site plan waiver where you go before the planning board and you're like, "We don't want to apply for site plan, but here's the basic information about Okay, >> that seems fair.
>> Full support. I just want to make sure that you know if something changes just like we always looked at what could happen. Attorney think here are the conditions too. Five employees on site property changes. The applicant
now return to the board. If if the use of the property shall change, the applicant shall um return to the board for I'm going to call it amended approval, amended site plan approval
to um form the board as to um number of employees and other aspects of its operation. other than a professional office. If it went to retail or something
good on this, >> does anybody have any questions or comments? Um, Mr. Simon, would you like to finish your summary or start your Would you like to begin your summary? >> Yeah. I know where to pop that in. >> Yeah. No, that's that's all good, Mr. >> Better that you did it before his
summary. Applicant just asked for 18 months instead of 12. Thank you for bringing that up, Mr. Schly. Um, so so real brief. Um, thank you very much for listening to our our
presentation. I will tell you that I drive by this property twice a day for the last 30 four and a half years every day. And um when the applicant first approached me
about this, it took me a couple of trips thereafter to actually find what I was looking at because it really is um in all seriousness tucked away and you do not notice it. I mean um I challenge you
to know as you actually unless you actually look around a couple of trees. Um, and the fact that the applicant is proposing this addition completely in the rear where you really can't see it whether you're coming east or you're
coming west. Um, coupled with the fact that this is a massive lot for this zone. It is four times the size of what is permitted in the zone. So they already not only have a lot to work
with, but they far exceed the minimum setback requirements. In fact, it's it's four times on the front yard setback, I think, which is important in terms of an addition like this. Um the fact that their lot coverage, the maximum is 75%
and they're not even at at 40% uh lot coverage. Um, and you know, you heard the testimony from Miss Homequist in terms of the F that there are other compatible F exceedences in the area. You heard that I think nine or eight out
of 12 already exceed uh the F requirement. Um, so and you also heard about preserving the streetscape, being compatible architecturally, uh, not being violative of the of the historic district and the intentions
with regard to the historic district. But what it comes down to, at least for for yours truly and the development team, is that if you think about businesses in downtown Liberty Corner that are there, and this is the Liberty Corner
business district, and you have an incredibly successful business that is longstanding in this community where the family um is from Basking Ridge and Mr. Trevolini still has a house, you know,
still lives here. The fact that they're investing not only money in this project, but investing in this community, uh, for the community to be proud of, you know, their work that they're doing, you know, not just in New York State with with one bridge, but, you know, I know worldwide. Um, I think
that's commendable and I think that all those factors uh warrant approval and we appreciate your consideration. Thank you, Diamond. Um, does any have any comment to this application?
>> Seeing none, I'll kick it off to the board. Mr. Soies, do you want to give us your summary? >> I will do my best. Applicant here is seeking preliminary and final major site plan approval 5% or the maximum% variances that's going to be eliminated
sign waivers. First one for the lack of a delineated load. Second one for uh having entrance and exit area for 32 space parking area that size parking lot open space. requesting relief to the extent.
Final one for the front of the sign waiver fire lane in front of a public entry. ft wide and at least 20. That's it for the relief source memo that we went through that memo being dated 2026.
All the conditions and Mr. Oh, dated April 3rd of 2026 of 2025 hearing and some of these might have already been covered by the aforementioned memos shed from the property. Applicant will
remove the metal storage container from the property. Unelineated low health subject applicant will provide one EV space. Tom might need your help with this one. Applicant will add gravel to the inlet.
That one will be reviewed. Applicant's lighting plan shall be subject to the review and approval of the board professionals. Applicant will ensure that the outdoor lighting features are on timer that would turn the lights off. the nearby restaurant closes.
Applicant will provide security lighting subject to the review approval of the board professionals. Applicant will provide an updated survey demonstrating that the 0.9 acre lot area is the actual lot area and uh also corrects the older survey that shows the
0.868 acre lot area was incorrect. Metal storage container applicant will provide recessed lighting fixtures only. applicant will revise plans to include the lock coverage for the proposed AC pads and also revise the plans to label
the existing generator and proposed AC units. What we were just talking about before uh no more than 25 employees shall be permitted here. Document of the property changes the applicant or their successor shall provide certification to the zoning officer demonstrating compliance
with the employee limit that I just mentioned. If the use of the property changes, the applicant or their successor shall return to the board for amended site plan approval to inform the board as the number of employees uh other information relative to the
operations of that new use. Then the applicant will have 18 months to get a certificate of occupancy after obtaining permits. I think I touched on everything there. If I'm leaving something else, >> well done. I try. Yeah. Okay. And that's it.
>> Anybody want to kick us off? Anybody have any comments? >> Lot of reasons. First, wonderful presentation, very thorough. Um, as the attorney mentioned, it's a D4 variant, so we're looking at positive criteria. Um,
I think it's definitely maintaining that character of the district. Um, as the architect mentioned, it's a beneficial and adaptive use of the structure. Also, the addition is everybody mentioned you drive by, you
really can't see it. So, putting the addition in the rear uh with respect to the negative criteria, there's no substantial not blocking light or space. and it's in keeping with
how else have any comments. >> I I'm just going to say that I I did drive by there today and I drove through the parking lot because I couldn't find the place at first and the parking lot was half empty. Um it it was a low use and now that I know what the use is
quiet in office use sitting at a desk you know crunching numbers. So I I would be in favor. I agree. I drove by it and I drove right by it. I had to back up and go in and plenty of parking. One of the things
that I was concerned about though was the fact that the FAR was over 40% more than the allotted use. But I think the testimony that there are many other businesses in the uh Liberty Corner business district that have a far even
greater than what it um satisfies me that it's an overbuilding. I I would concur on just driving by and there's no sign there's no 20. I couldn't I couldn't even find the number so I went in and just toolled around a little bit. Um, but knowing that there's
a business in town that's a headquarters of a larger company is is is astounding to me too because I didn't know that it existed and definitely support you know a business like that staying in our area in Liberty Corner and having a familyun business um and you know and in the
footprint that you can expand and and you and that facility like you have police. >> Yeah. And I I would agree. I mean, first of all, I think you your presentation was wonderful and it's very much appreciated uh by all of us. I would I'm
sure I could speak for everybody in saying that. Um very thorough, very well thought out and very very informative. Um I too drove uh the property. I put my navigation on to find it, so I I I did all right.
>> Same. Um but you know when I drove the property and I looked at the other um adjoining or adjacent properties I really like the fact that you're expanding the the existing building. Um,
the other properties have multiple buildings and I actually think that the expansion of this building creates a soft, gentle transition to the residential zone. I really think it's very lovely. I mean, the building itself
is lovely. Um, and um, without having to repeat all of the criteria. I mean, it's completely in character with the neighborhood. The historic nature is preserved. Um, and I really just overall I think that it's going to be a beautiful addition. I don't see any
detriment whatsoever. Um, I don't see any impairment to the to the um master plan or the zone. In fact, I think it it absolutely is an enhancement. So, I thank you and um it's great having a great neighbor and and great uh member
of the community here with us tonight. Um, I've actually been in your building. Uh, I was doing a research project for all the businesses in Liberty Corner and I went to all of them and I talked to people there and it was a everyone was lovely and uh, and I did find it because
I walked so walking was much easier. So, uh, and yes, it was an excellent presentation. So, thank you very much. >> Want to make a motion? Sure. I move to deem the application
our board attorney to draft a resolution memorializ the relief sought by the applicant subject to the condition applicant and all of the waiverss that were discussed.
>> I'll second >> wonderful Miss Herrera and Mr. Krauss. Miss Herrera, >> Mr. Krauss, >> yes. >> Mr. Lindamman, >> yes. >> Miss Pear, >> yes. >> Miss Silver, >> yes. >> Miss Trap, >> yes. >> Chairwoman Bowman,
>> yes. >> Thank you very, very much. Always pleasure to be before this board. Thank you. >> Just got to end the meeting first. No, we would have never been able to get >> this would this would had to carry.
>> Uh do we have any comments from members? >> Things anybody wants to discuss? Any comments from staff? >> Uh motion to adjurnn. >> Make a motion to adjurnn. >> I didn't hear the first. Who got first? motion. >> Okay,
>> Mr. Krauss and Mr. Matter to me. >> Mr. Krauss and Merr. >> This is what I want with me. This is what I got. >> And we do have a meeting next week. >> This Mr. Krauss made the motion and Miss Herrera seconded. >> Thank you.
>> Sorry. >> Oh, sorry. I do have comments for the staff. Um, sorry.