It's not. Okay. And we are back on the record. Mr. Chairman, if you get a motion, second and voice second. >> All in favor? >> All right. Go ahead. Steve,
Mr. Chair, I could be up the next matter. Uh this is a supplemental resolution uh as uh for the benefit of the public. There is pending litigation related to this matter involving
parties being there with me. Uh Aaron Duff is the plaintiff uh proay the planning board and economic properties LLC are the defendants in what is called a broader grid appeal. Uh basically that was a decision of his board to grant
preliminary and final site plan approval and other relief uh for the economic properties LLC six unit residential townhouse development uh on property situated in the Quincy Lane redevelopment plan area specifically lot
6 block 71 address 55 Claremont Road that was approved uh the plaintiff brought a challenge to that in court it is pending uh cross motions for judgement public record uh were denied from both parties as proceeding to a
prerogative grid appeal trial. Uh however, the court did give indications uh uh of uh an issue with respect to requiring clarification from the Quimby land redevelopment plan ordinance and
from this board's determination in its original resolution as to how it viewed uh certain provision in that ordinance visa via a redevelopment agreement and other legislative determinations by the burough council. Uh so with that in mind
and with the case management order of the court dated September 25, 2025 in that matter uh saying in part uh uh the matter was subject to cross motions for summary judgment. Uh the court of found material question and
fact uh the planning board has suggested it may consider amendment of its resolution of approval in this matter to address certain concerns identified through the earlier motion practice. Uh the court actually ordered a further supplemental briefing to include among other things uh the effect if any of the
planning board's amended resolution should the board uh such a excuse should such an amended resolution be adopted by the board. Uh so that is sort of the the pre the background for context of uh
the act that the board is going to consider right now. Uh just for confirmation on the record for Bolardo, our board secretary uh an administrative officer uh the my understanding is that
board chairman Graham uh and board members Zazarino, Semar, Vice Chair DeMarco and Geller uh were all uh voted on the original resolution and remain of course then qualified to vote on the
supplemental resolution. and also that board members Lorson and Malia have since uh watched all the videos of all the prior hearings in this matter and have signed the certification
uh and aid that's actually an affidavit. I not uh I notoriize it myself uh so that we have seven board members who can uh vote on whether or not to adopt this
supplemental resolution uh to go along with the original resolution. Board member Walden is not participating uh in this. Am I correct? >> Yes, that's exactly correct. So uh then
it's for the board to uh if any or for a motion, a second and a roll call vote to adopt the supplemental resolution or not. >> I'll take a motion. >> Motion to adopt the supplemental resolution
um regarding Equinet Properties application number SP-238A. >> Second roll call. of the eligible. >> Mr. DeMarco, >> yes. >> Miss Galler, >> yes. >> Mr. Graham, >> yes. >> Mr. Malia, >> yes. >> Mr. Morrison, >> yes.
>> Mr. Simol, >> yes. >> And Mr. Zazarina, >> thank you, Mr. Chair. The bills that are over from I see nothing other than the comment that this uh proceeding is um actually
costing significant balance and nothing to do with closure. Anything else? >> I'll move 1779120. Second. >> Okay. Roll call. >> Mr. Dear.
>> Yes. >> Miss Gallup. >> Yes. Mr. Bryant, >> yes. >> Mr. Malia, >> yes. >> Mr. Moran, >> yes. >> Mr. >> Mr. Walden, >> yes. >> And Mr. >> Yes. >> Paris.
So, we had public hearings for three different projects all from the same um developer and um I guess with a fairly common set of plans
for an amended preliminary site plan. So, um who's representing Mr. chairman by May. While council is approaching, I did have an opportunity
to review the notice for these three separate but related uh matters. Uh the uh I did find the content to be sufficient. I found the notice to be timely served and published. Certified
mail October 10 published October 9 uh for actually um for this matter. I think the other two matters were uh exactly the same as far as content and being sufficient and timeliness, but if I recall correctly, and I'll double check
in a moment, I think they were certified by mail and published on October 10 both. Why I remember that actually, frankly, scares me at all. But they they the um but in any event, uh they're all timely because they're all at least 10 days prior to uh this evening's hearing,
which is what required under the municipal land use law. Uh so the most important thing for me to say is at this point all three matters you have jurisdiction to hear and beside and receive in my opinion based on the timely uh and sufficient content of the notice.
>> Thank you Mr. Warner. Good evening Mr. Chairman and members of the board. My name is Nicole Madzak M A G D Z I A K of the law firm Dave Hitney here this evening on behalf of the applicant. As Mr. Chairman, you had previewed. We are here this evening uh one applicant but
three sites. As some board members may recall, these are three scattered sites which were um used in to satisfy in part the burough's affordable housing third round affordable housing plan. This planning board in 2022 initially
approved preliminary site plan for all three sites. Site plans were amended in January and February of 2024. So last year, since that time, the applicant has purchased the properties and construction has begun at all three sites. Um, and just for the record, the
three sites we're speaking of are Mine Brook Road, just right across from the municipal building, 18 Mount Airy, and 63 Bernards. Prior to um receiving construction permits, the applicant did go through the resolution compliance process
whereby the plans, both site plans and architectural plans in addition to the storm water report were updated to satisfy the conditions of those three resolutions. One of those conditions in particular related to obtaining historic preservation commission approval of the
architecture. So there is a variation of the architecture that differs not only from what you saw at the amended site plan in 2024 but also what you see in your packets this evening. So our architect professional architect will go through the iterations of that
architectural plan set and how it evolved from the time of approval through resolution compliance. The latest set of architectural plans that we are seeking approval for include variations in colors and materials which are designed in consultation with the
burrow. So the bureau has previewed these plans already and has um approved what you >> um the township or the burough engineer and it's also been reviewed by um the burough administrator and clerk. So a group of people at the burough who are
working through resolution compliance in partnership with the approved. They're saying they're fine with it. >> Yes. >> They did not work through res >> right during >> swear in our board professionals that
which I normally do when I swear in all the witnesses but since we're starting already if I may chairman please raise your right hand swear to God testimony about truth the whole not the truth including what you already have that yes sir.
>> Thank you. Thank you. from Mr. Bentley to clarify resolution compliance was completed with the um site plan set reports and architectural plans that the HPC reviewed. So it is modified from what this board approved
and then subsequent to that um additional changes were made to the architectural plans in consultation with the bureau outside of the formal resolution compliance process >> through the board >> through the board engineer. Correct. >> Yes. And Mr. rightly also had those
plans and um had advised us that we are required to obtain amended approval which is why we are here this evening >> as if I may as did the board. >> Yes. Yes. Mr. Board uh the board professionals in addition to the modifications to the architectural plans. We are also
proposing solar. As some board members may recall, we did have some discussions about the ability to provide solar at these sites during our amended site plan process back in 2024. It was unclear at that time whether or not we would definitively be able to do that. Since
then, the applicant has determined that these sites are appropriate for solar and we can provide solar. So, we are proposing that as well. Solar is an accessory use that is permitted by the zoning. The solar that's proposed at these sites is not proposed to um be
used at the site and to be sold externally. It is only meant to be used at the site and then any excess would be sold not sold but it would go back to the grid just like a solar on your single family home would. There's no community solar agreements or any third party agreements that are involved in
the solar. So it is for use on these sites. So it does fit into the category of being an accessory use. So we >> saying it's a grid tie system or is it a >> full solar system? >> Our architect will address the details of this the proposed solar. Yes. And um
with that I guess we'd like to introduce our architect Eron Pumo so that she can first run through the evolution of the architectural plans and with that address the solar. We do have exhibits this evening that are elevations that depict the solar on the buildings just
so that everyone can understand where they're going to be placed and what that will look like where the witness is she only but for >> yes >> and again it's my understanding chair and I would recommend it anyway uh that
you're we're doing this I believe as a consolidated hearing uh because I believe a lot of the testimony is be similar for each application, but are you going to do it sequentially or are you going to kind of tie them all three together just for
process and procedure purposes? >> Sure. So our intent is to first run through all of the changes to minebrook then run through all the changes to atmount area and then 6 through3 burner. So sequential >> correct and and uh technically then we
should when we finish we should have three separate uh decisions and and and I'll have three separate resolutions although they may look similar for any the public I guess we're going
to have and comments at the same time after all three. What is that? It would be the chair's discretion. I think that would be true and make the most sense since it's going to be very similar brief. Maybe it's best to hear
all the test all the direct testimony from the expert at first and then after questions once by all members of the public as to one vote, two or three uh problem. Yeah. >> And then we can uh and then we can have
one joint all three public comment period. I think that would be efficient. >> Great. Thank you very much. >> So, I'll swear you in the before you pick anything up. You swear to God or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and I don't.
>> Thank you. Please proceed. >> I don't know if I can say that. So >> don't worry we have [Music] >> is the goal on video I guess >> yeah I guess be on the goal so you guys could see it There are
[Music] so effects of It's a very angular [Music] So, M, if you can just for the record provide your background education and
also confirm you were actually here during our amended preliminary final, but that your license is still current and in good standing. >> Sure. Uh, my name is Aaron Kumo. My last name is called PUML. As Nicole stated, I was here at the last series. Uh I have a bachelor's of architecture from New
Jersey Institute of Technology. I'm currently an associate at English architecture and engineering and I have a New Jersey uh professional architect's license and it is current and you were previously accepted as an expert in architecture by this work. >> I was. Yes. We'd like to offer Miss Pumo
as a professional architect. >> Thank you. Okay. Go ahead. Good evening everyone. Uh apologize for all wanted to show you the evolution of um the various changes on each of each of these sites. So I'll go through um each
uh each phase that we were in. So >> and if I may, are these uh different than what was submitted at least 10 days in advance to the board? >> No, >> not different. >> Okay. These are colorized. >> They're color. >> Yeah. Let's mark them anyway. Whatever.
You do them any way you want to do them. I can just quite keep track but just the first one you start. >> All right. We hit each when you hit each board. So we know what A12
push back. They teach us lawyers not. >> So the board all the way to the left is we're working at A1. This was the original colored elevation proposed here a few years ago
[Music] 142 >> before we start >> I'm sorry. Uh the original elevation was comprised of like standing sea metal roof, fiber cement siding in an array of uh gray
tones and off-white uh tones and and white siding with the black windows. Um I'm going to go to the middle board which we'll call AU. Uh the date on this board is 118 204.
So colored elevation. >> Yeah. Was that for was that the amended delivery and final approval? >> This is the HPC >> HPC by 12423. So this design here um after we received
the planning board approval for here part of our resolution and compliance was to meet which with the HBC and go over uh selecting finishes and colors with them. So, we actually had a few phone calls, a few um emails back and forth, and then we actually met in
person uh al together and went through all three sites, although I'm only talking about mine right now. Um and selected uh the colors that you see here and made some changes to the original design. Um what we ended up changing or
modifying was the colors. Um we added some uh blue lap siding. Um the window style change. There is in the original design there was a two over two window. So there was a mutton at the top sash and the bottom sash. And uh when we met
with HPC um we decided to go with just a single mutton over uh the top sash. Um and then any other that's it for the changes here. And then the last evolution.
>> So there were no material >> color changes with HPC. They just said paint. >> Oh, no. Change the colors. >> Yeah, change the color. >> If you can see, um, this part here was white and then it's blue. So, there was a little more than
>> the material was still fibers and serious. >> Please speak loud and clear for the record. And then the last board here which will mark A3. The date on this board is 417 2025.
So this board or this design is let me see uh this design is updated from the HBC um design uh by some material changes here. So while the colors look very
similar, there are some actual material changes which are the roof went from standing metal seam uh roofing to an ash ashalt shingle roof. The fiber cement siding is now shown as vinyl siding in both the lap siding orientation and a
board and bat and orientation. So the orientation of the siding remained the same but the material type changed. Um, the windows stayed the same, the window style stayed the same, and he didn't make sure everything. >> You got to speak louder.
>> And the there was a reduction in the stone beer on um this front elevation here, particularly right here and the side. >> And and when you're saying instead of here or there, can you please speak directionally for the record? Uh, >> sure. There is a reduction in the stone
veneer on the western elevation and the front elevation. And uh those are all the >> the only incl. >> Yes. Yeah. But for the most part, when we went from
the HPC approved uh colors to here, we tried to pick colors that were as close as possible to what was originally part of the resolution combined >> and in the same proportions. >> Yes. Yeah. Nothing with the roof line changed, nothing with the building
outline. It was strictly >> colors. You kept trying to keep the colors and try to keep the proportions the same. >> Yeah. Except for the stone. >> Yes. >> Okay. Now you can explain why. >> So for instance the root that's why
why the switch from the bell route to the gas shall hire be the representative of the applicant. He was involved directly with the discussions of the evolution from the A2 to A3. So we we can swear him in.
>> We'll need to swear >> I'm sorry. I want to please raise your right hand. I sort of got a reference to testimony about the truth. The whole truth. Yes. Thank you. And I think this this will count for all three since we're doing this as a consolidated
hearing. Maybe people in except for members of the public. >> Correct. Mr. Thank you. >> Um the primary reason why you see these changes in front of you today was we went through a value engineering exercise with the burrow because they
are providing financing for a portion of the construction costs. uh we were looking for opportunities to save but also u match the original intent and design as closely as possible. And so after we went through this exercise and had our construction team bid out
certain traits and get quotes, this was the result where we could achieve the most substantial savings. >> It's money. You're basically saying you're changing this to money then which is >> all right. And what's the lifespan of a
metal roof versus the lifespan of an asphalt roof? >> That's something that I'll let the architect state to. >> You can you you can get a 30-year warranty on a asphalt roof as then and you can get the same
>> metal comes with a 30-year. >> They can not longer. >> And you said you can get a a 30-year asphalt. What's typical asphalt? >> 25 to 30 20 25 30 difference on what's
you know included in the contract. >> Is that saying that if if they're going to go with a 30-year uh basketball group, it's going to be a 30-year group? >> Yes. lifespan on vinyl compared to uh the composite side.
>> Vinyl has a similar if not same lifespan as as as hardy. It's actually very people kind of look down on vinyl, but it's a very durable material and does last a long time. >> Well, how do all vinyls aren't you? What
do you What makes you say that? We're proposing a uh West Lake Royal building. >> Sorry, you gota really speak up louder. >> We're proposing a West Lake Royal >> vinyl sighting. That's >> what such lifespan versus
>> I don't know off the top of that. I'd have to look. >> You can call someone or have someone call for you. Vinyl fades. Vinyl cracks. Vinyl warps. Vinyl doesn't have the same insulation properties as
fiber board. And a very simple search. Vinyl sighting doesn't necessarily work well with solar panels. Has anyone looked into that?
Are you specifically talking about like glare from the panels or >> glare from the panels and excess heat from the pan from the panels um actually impacts the vinyl? >> The the vinyl I don't well for this
particular project the the solar panels are hidden behind this roof. So there there wouldn't be any type of glare or anything any interaction between the solar panels here and the the exterior sided materials. just comment following up on that
because you know we see lots of products that this group is structured where as you said there's kind of a parapet effect like some that which I think is important to identify that essentially
the solar panels are hidden by the parad >> they will be yes >> I actually have an exhibit I can pull up to show everybody a solar panel exhibit if you want to mark this says A4 typical panel section solar panel
section but is that tomorrow and the date on this exhibit is 1022 2025. has a point. >> So, what this is showing is exactly what you were just talking about. The pitched
roof uh forms a parapit wall on the inside where the rest of the roof is flat roof which will hold all the the solar panels for this particular site. The paraffit wall is about 9 foot 10 high. So you're not going to see any of the kernels from the street or or from
the B level. >> So your proposal then the only roof area here that has shingles or metals that is >> that area correct. >> That's correct. >> And okay. And since it was a flat roof
before, right? >> You would have had drainage and snow and so forth. effort. >> What percentage of reduction being caused? Did you realize >> I can
we went from well I I'll speak to it from the side of since we're talking about it from the bonding perspective of the burrow. We went from a $5 million gap down to 2.6. How much of that is the roof and how much of that is the siding? >> I don't know the exact breakdown of
that, but altogether that's the safety issue. And we looked at to see if there's other material changes and none of these were the biggest ones. All the others were not worth pursuing. >> Nobody knows. That's just a number.
>> Yes. And it sounds good, but I mean you haven't shown us any quotes. Is this a number you're telling us? >> Well, we had the bureau had to hire a a consultant to review our numbers >> and review us with that.
>> No, it wasn't requested. So, you said right off the bat, you said a $5 million gap. >> Mhm. >> At the time we passed this project, what was the gap? >> We at the time we had we still have to
price it go to market. So that's that we had an estimate in there. >> Yeah. >> And we wanted to really understand what the costs were and part of what drove the costs um was the rock that we had to remove or that we are removing from mine
broke in the excavation and it's a very that slope is very conce what do you call it? Um you don't realize how much of slope there is in dece. >> Yeah it's very deceiving. And so when we did geoteex and got more information
about the soils there, that drove a lot of the costs up. And so in an effort to mitigate the cost driven by that, uh, we went through this value engineering exercise >> as opposed to just cutting the number of units back and and moving the wall forward. >> Yeah, that's not feasible.
The number of units provided across all three sites is um required in order to meet the scattered site in the aortical housing plan for third round. So cutting the units would mean that the burrow would no longer meet their obligation for housing. >> Yeah. Yeah. As opposed to I I just don't
know how much of it was. But I mean, you know, if it's $2 million to cut into the rock, you come back and you say, "Let's figure out another way to make to make the round." you know, we don't spend $2 million, you know, whatever it is, millions of dollars to preserve one or
two or three, you know, four units that, >> well, keep in mind, we have federal we have federal tax credits committed to this project. So, that's if we were to reduce units, >> we would we would have to start all over again. So, that's baked. That's not going to change. You still stop when
someone says, "Look, by the way, there's something there and it's going to cost however many millions of dollars to do it." >> Yeah, we investigated and we got a price tag and we want their negotiation process of the burrow and this is the risk.
>> So, is the $5 million gap for this one project or >> all three sites? Yeah. >> All three, >> which is now down to 2.6. >> So, what was the gap for this particular site? I don't have it that broken down by site. We look at it as >> can we I'm uncomfortable that we don't I
I don't know I mean when you presented this no one asked for the numbers they weren't even quite I wasn't quite sure even from your application um the specifics of even why you were asking I would feel more comfortable if we had
the numbers what it was what it is what is for the roof what is for the siding instead of everything being just in one bucket. We're making different decisions. And to be honest, this is this is what
your company does. I'm sorry if anybody has any questions, but my my concern is when we approve this, you said this is what we do. >> This is what we do. We do affordable housing, right?
How often have you gotten approval and then come back saying, "Oh, instead of we we didn't ask you to use cedar, we said use card fiber board." I mean, >> we don't go through this because we have a lot of time and relevant
you to do this. Do you come back to change it? I I personally think fiberboard to vinyl is a huge material change. That's my opinion. >> We're talking about money. We're talking about time, but you're not giving us
details that really you should have given us in order for us to make an appropriate decision that's well reasoned. So, if somebody has it in their computer, can you pull it up? Do you do you have the minutes from the board meeting? Do you have the report
that that the council had um the study they had done? Do you have any of that? >> Well, the bureau actually spoke with Mr. Zazerino about this to convey support. >> I was going to So, yeah, I was going to say, >> yeah, >> I'm sorry, but that doesn't change the
fact that the rest of us, we do have to have the information. >> I thought the scope of the planning board was the material changes, not the cost. So, >> well, these are material changes. You're not going to material change >> based on your profitability for the
project. Okay. That's not a concern. >> The reason why a 2.6 million bond going from 5 to 2.6 Yeah. >> why that's considered a profitability. This is we we went through this exercise. We wanted to cut the costs because we didn't know after doing the geotech we realized there's a lot more
rock there than we expected. And a lot of this you have to get sight control and you have to get your sometimes multiple rounds of geotech to really get into the ground. And that's the stuff that's the nitty-gritty where you get surprises. >> Well, but this wasn't,
>> if I recall correctly, the discussion of the rock >> was a big part of the application. >> Yeah. >> And this is not a surprise to you. Again, if these are projects that you do regularly, they're often not on the easiest sites,
>> right? be. So again, if this is what your expertise is that this is a a surprise, >> it is surprise >> given the amount of discussion that went into it when this was approved. I'm surprised that it's a surprise. >> It's nice, too, because every site is
different with with land, it's it's very dependent on local geology and sometimes tests come back um preliminary tests come back differently from deeper tests. Sometimes the preliminary test says this might be the amount of rock under there. This is the soil. Let's we need to do
more piles. And so that's what we did. We did more piles. We did more investigating. And when we priced it out, we realized that in in the ground work was higher than anticipated. And so in an effort to mitigate those costs. That's what we went through a value
engineering exercise in consultation with the burrow and also speaking with our contractors that have been doing this work uh to try to squeeze savings where we can without dramatically changing the look of the building and this was the result. Were were there
other so the mind work geotech surprise were there other surprises with the other two sites or that see >> that's the one that comes to mind because that's the most that's the most the most dramatic excavation there is site work a little bit of site work that we've had to do on 18 and 63 but they're
not as expensive as mine book is really the that that geotech was um disappointed >> you had a $5 million overrun >> yes on the on the geo No, it that I mean it's all one big it's all one part of the big project, but
that was the biggest cost drive. >> So you didn't know what the gap was until you got into it more, but you knew there was going to be a gap, right? I mean, you know, that's >> million dollar gap in this project. Then part of that part of what was happening is we want to price it out because you
know a lot of this until we go to market we don't we're working off of estimates. So we didn't want to go to the burrow and say this is the estimated gap and then that change it out. We really wanted to be sure after we priced it out and completed our geotech work. And once
we had that number, that's why we went back to the burrow and then we went through another G value engineering exercise to try to cut bring that five million down further. And so that's what you know as part of this you were able to bring it down to 2.6. >> Do do you know what the you're saying
the budget that you originally had, do you know what the gap was between that budget and when you finally went to market? Because the driver for going to market was how quickly you brought this to the town. >> Yeah. There there was a multi-year gap. >> Yes.
>> In what you put in at the budget >> and the driver being >> you bringing the drawings to us. >> Yes. >> Do you have any idea what that budget what that gap was? >> At the time the gap was nowhere near 5 million. We knew and we knew we had to kind of work with the budget to see
where what savings we can get and some of that is we get initial pricing and then it changes. So like I totally understand that it changes. My question is that gap in how long it took to get from the budget that you put in years ago.
>> Yeah. >> When that budget when you finally went to market. >> Well, after we got approvals and we started digging into the more geoteex. So, we got the approvals. >> I'm not even talking about geotech. I'm talking about material like the the party siding the metal roof.
>> That's where you're saving the money. >> That's where we're saving the money. But the gap is being driven by >> I'm not talking about the gap. I'm talking about the gap in the material cost. >> The gap in the material cost is more driven by the time frame of your budget
and when you went to market to get the pricing. >> The this is being driven. Okay. So I don't I don't I think what you're asking me what you're asking me is what's the change in material cost from 2024 to now. I don't have that figure because I look at as a I came in here with the
understanding I believe the total gap was at five and we were able to bring it down to 2.6. I don't have like which portion of that is material cost, which portion of that I'm speaking to the reason why I keep going back to Geot because that was the most shocking that was the number that really drove
>> was that given to the was were those type of breakdowns given to the council or when you spoke to >> Yeah, we spoke with Nancy and I know that she and Jack Pigeon had those discussions with the council and shared those numbers with the council and they had a consultant um I don't know it was
like north I forget >> but that one broke down to that level. So it wasn't just general numbers. >> Yes, we had trades and we had materials and we we we provided the breakdown. But the reason why I mentioned the geotech is that that's what really blew up the budget.
>> No, I'm just looking at where you made up the difference. >> Yeah. >> And what you made up the difference is the material. >> Yes. >> So I mean again the you know a low budget would lead to those changes as well.
What's the total? We're getting the land, right? Which is all contributed. What's the total for all three projects? >> Roughly, I think we're at about 0.5 million. >> Any reduction in your pain?
reduction in month B half the is deferred and then any cost overruns that happens beyond contingency comes out of the fee so it becomes a buffer for any cost overruns >> 10% contingency I'm guessing
>> it's it's it's I think for the soft it's five and I think for hard it's also five So, M speaker, >> I'm really pissed that we weren't made aware of this geotech.
This is huge. When you receive subs, >> yeah, that's And did you look at any alternative building designs? This is we we base the prices based on the building designs that are here. >> No, because there was a
>> there was an effort to reduce the 30 foot wall. >> Mhm. >> On the east side northeast. There were some discussions reducing the footprint and changing the design of the building
>> to lessen the excavation. Mhm. >> Did you consider that >> some of that was done? They f that wall in. I think they filled in the one corner. I think they got past 25 or 26. >> That was that was even part of the
planning process. That was all done before we occurred. >> It was part of that discussion. probably >> that's just they just carry it back. We're pissed that this will not so you might as well
finances specifics of finance something this magnitude at 25% overrun on the project. >> Yeah. Come back. Let's talk about it. It's a pound town like problem. You know that means this design and the thing we approved basically
has some significant issues you know that they represented that they could do. Okay. And especially if the tech, you know, the the tech stuff is that significant. We needed to get more
people involved and discuss it. Not just a couple people, not just Nancy and an engineer with them to discuss our fixes. That just that just shouldn't be happening.
Are any of the changes do you feel are any of the changes improvements uh architecturally that it's like well this actually is kind of a better thing than >> what the original one was? >> Oh. I will say that the
coordination um with HBC was a much was a good improvement to the regular design. So that good step definitely in the process. >> Um >> I mean why is asphalt better than steel? You know that that kind of thing. Is it? No. You know I don't
>> I can't really I wouldn't really make that argument. I would say it's just as good as metal if you have a good installer. good warranty. Um, also say about the asphalt shingles, we we um specify and install a uh architectural
shingle which is gives it a little more like a three-dimensional look. It's not very flat. So there's a it's an improvement from like your >> it's a multi-layer >> lower end shingle. >> So premium gray. Guess we certainly want to know what the
>> brand was that she selected and and confirmed the 30-year guarantee. >> Anything else that would be in your opinion? I I don't think you can make the case for fiber cement and that vinyl is better than
>> I will say that we do end up using a thicker gauge vinyl. It's not it's also enough the lowest end vinyl, but you can't really make the argument of vinyl versus fiber cement. Fiber cement is a little more durable, but we do end up using the uh thicker gauge, which is
>> so we need to confirm that thicker gauge gel with whatever warranty. >> Yeah. >> Well, you think with this particular building, the I guess it would be northeast corner is going to be the
corner that up against the 25 fold wall by feet. Correct. >> Yes. Um, so you're going to have notes on uh on that side at all. And the only reason I know is I have one wall of my house based that way. So you're going to
have mold. You're going to have issues with all that. As far as cleaning that, I think you're going to have an issue with vinyl over the fiber board just because it's a a more robust product. Um,
>> yeah, you may have to clean it off than you would with fiber cement, which is a maintenance >> insure maintenance cost that you guys have considered. >> And something that I just want to reiterate is um we we also have a property management group within the same company. So, we're long-term
owners. We don't sell our properties. Our portfolio stays with us. So, any issues that come up with any of these, I mean, we're going to be owning these for over 30 years, and we're going to be uh maintaining them. So it's it's in our interest if there's a problem with the vinyl, we're going to get it addressed.
>> No, sorry. I know it's a tax statement. >> Okay. >> You know, when you're property manager, one manager for three properties part time, I mean full time, but they're part time. >> Yeah, we have superintendent lives in the building.
But as but when you found that the eastern side of the property you lo you know you found the rod did you try moving the building to the west? >> No >> why >> this is the this is the footprint and
design that we presented and got approval on. So that's what we work with. >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah. But now you got a 25% overrun. So you come back and you say, "We found rock and we would like to get this building shifted."
>> You're presenting a solution. >> No. When was the rock notice? >> Uh we did a lot of the geotech after the approvals in 2024. So mid 2024 and we really got a better hand on all the rocks.
>> So say from June 2024 till now. >> Yeah. you've been working with the town or somewhere there. >> Yeah. And I throughout the summer, we really trying hard to get better pricing and beating up our contractors submitting bids. And so really at the
end of the summer, I'm glad we had a final number on what that gap would be. And we worked very borrow that was about the end of the summer. Yeah. >> The point was and it's a missed opportunity. You could have changed the
the floor plan. It's still got and the slightly it slightly changed at 18 m area. Okay. It could have been changed as a alternative to spending money to just knock out all the wrong. So that
that shouldn't have happened. Okay. It's like I can understand human wide why that might be the direction but there should have been more people and with that significant and over exceeding the contingency dramatically
it was inappropriate for that not to be a broader discussion topic for that to be compartmentalized the way it was. Anything else on the materials that
>> so in your opinion the material substitution are close enough? >> Yes, >> I think is what they're saying. And that you would make sure that the vinyl was heavy duty vinyl and that the asking if sing shingles were as you've discussed
they're really like multi-layer those same shingles with 30-year warranty. Uh we haven't got an answer back from um our HPC because we didn't have enough time. Any any other
comments with the uh solar panel? Okay, we'll switch this to just the I'm trying to see are they the angle of them would there be any effect of the like would the houses up
above there have any adverse effect? >> Um no southern they have a sudden exposure. They do have the the panels are are um angled, you know, >> they're angled slightly, but
>> to pick up the sun. >> Yeah, I just was wondering they're not fixed. >> And um I'm sure it's in here. The drawing of course on the line drawings. Is this It's 33 kilowatts it looks like. Um, is
this a rigid tie or are there batteries at all involved with this system? >> There's no batteries. >> So, it's pure grid tie. I have a real issue with creating this large substantial a solar system and having it
be only grid tie which basically means if the power is out which it will go out >> I don't think you've got generators on this property >> we don't have a generator >> okay and the solar is dead as soon as the power goes out there's no value to
it and um this is an addition And I think that I guess the only thing I could reasonably ask you to do is to engineer the provision the
potential to provide a self-contained solar system uh solar based system or some kind of storage battery storage devices. They're all improving and so forth. But >> yes, >> it's possible just by the way you lay out your distribution panels and your
bus lines and all this other stuff that you could say, "Oh, this is where I would put I think you have a solar controller in this as part of it, but it may just be solar load." They're looks like a ton of mini inverters that you've got like one per
panel almost like you've got an inverter and that's all feeding something and synchronizing. We can look into battery. I think I I think it's unreal given the cost constraints. It's probably unrealistic at this point to ask you to string for any kind of significant battery
capacity, but engineer it in a way where you could put in battery capacity. Um, as part of that, think about I I don't know where you're
probably running all this stuff from this from the roof down to the garage level. I think to the lowest level where it would be facilities, but but look at that, too. If there's I don't think there'll be any need for additional conduit or anything like that normally.
But think about where you're putting these controllers and like oh well how much space might be available. It would take a parking bay or something and put in um the storage capacity >> and we'll look into that and see the
state of the >> purchasing and installing solar. It's um it's a little bit in flux because of the policy that's changing around solar credits because that was part of it. >> Um so I don't figure out if that's something
but that is something that >> so you're not financing the solar. It's not one of those solar company come in. We'll put the stuff on your roof and it's your you're you're buying the equipment through a contractor but let's say but it's yours. you only you're not
paying making these payments. You're not >> paying 11 cents per kilowatt hour to a solar provider and it's you're if there are solar credits, >> they're yours to have deal with you're you're >> you're testifying that you're
>> essentially the solar provider >> and then you have grid tie. I'm just we're questioning the original said it wasn't feasible. That's why I'm just curious
>> as to what the toll cost would be. So don't to me it's an arrogance that you came in and someone spoke to Mr. Zaz so the rest of us don't need the information. I
Well, abruptly, what do you think? Just like a roughly solar installation costs. >> Yeah, I don't I don't want to speak. I don't want to get that bigger. No, you don't know then.
It's like 500 panels. These are like 400 400 watt panels I think or something like that. So again solar modules you received the original approval in October of 22.
When did you have the knowledge of the run? >> After we received approval 2024, we're amended for the land. >> So you didn't do anything in 22. We didn't do anything for the two years.
>> We didn't own the land and we didn't have we were financing everything for pre-development. So until we were further along in the financing, we couldn't >> So shouldn't the financing have >> Yeah, we were compelled to to to pass
this deadline. >> Yeah. Production plan funds that were that's committed to this project was made possible because of the >> those Yeah. 8.9 million. that the
applicant submitted for those artists based on the time was and these three >> yes they could have not been >> and those production fund it's because it originates from coronary funds there's a federal government so that was
that was the urgency and that urgency still exists um but but when 22 we didn't know about the Correct. Not not to this extent. Not this extensive.
>> I remember significant discussion about the >> bra. Well, not very much rock. It was built that had to be >> we would have to let it presume it was rock
because it wouldn't be there. If it wasn't rock, it would be would down the And part of the savings is is because we're we're doing blasting instead. And so part of the savings is also attributed to that. We allowed to do blasting and we got state approval to do
that. [Music] But you received cycl approval in 22 and then you you received final 24. So
>> between 22 and 24 you had no idea that there was Rob. >> We didn't know that it was this expensive. I'm sorry. I didn't hear that answer. >> We didn't know it was this expensive. and prices have gone up just by
>> Yes. that wasn't on her side. >> So, but so the delay could have been there could have been realized if you were if you started early. Well, some of that
was because the affordable housing production fund guidelines were not released and so and that was going to be the big key to making the financing work and the state had to really go because it is federal funds. So, they had to go through a whole process with their
attorney general to make sure that the guidelines fit the federal guidelines for the use of the coronairus funds. And so, they took a long time to come out with it and when they came out with it, they applied and they were oversurprised. Um but uh you know you got the financing that's the it's the
key. >> But you did that when you prepared the plan you paid for the plan right? You laid out the advance. >> Yes we borrowed. So could it be could the lack of finding
the rock be on your side? >> How many soilings were originally done on the rock? >> I don't know. I mean >> I'm sorry. I think >> maybe it's just me but or the acoustics in the room but
the >> and part of it may be that not everyone project the sand >> I think there were three boardings I don't have the report but I think it was >> and as far as the location of the borings would to the best of your knowledge would they have been at where
the repainting wall was proposed >> they would have been at least one there and then you locate um throughout the building and in a couple other various spots. >> And then how there I'm assuming there were more boring done or you just found
rock and that's >> we have a pre preconstruction director that handles the borings and so I don't have a sorry I wish I had that. I'm just I'm just >> again Yeah. wondering you have a property that's how many feet. What's
your frontage on that property? >> Um three a little over 300 ft. >> So 300 ft. And you did one in the maybe somewhere towards the middle of that retaining line to to get a budget or to figure out
>> the original. Yes. that would whenever they were first done. >> So you had time from 22 to in 24 to look at changing the shape of the building. >> The borings weren't done in 22.
>> When were borings done? >> 24. >> After the approval, I'm assuming. >> Yes. Amen. Right. 22 I think it was the preliminary approval. In 24 it was the amended,
preliminary and final approval. Correct. >> Yes, I believe so. >> Yes, that's correct. >> Okay. Just so we because sometimes people are throwing around approval. approval and we got you know just like sometimes people throw around the word site and they might we might not know if
that's you know just one lot or an entire area that could lead to an ambiguity which could lead to a generation of material fat. We don't want that. >> Those two points though were you using for an estimate of the cost of material?
Well, was it I mean we had an estimate before um going into it and the way this typically works is um especially early on we do estimates based on other sites on what our average per square foot costs are and that's it's while it's a
metric it's not it doesn't take into account unique site work and that's something over the years we just can't every site's a little bit different and that that figure can really change the math and so when we went in went in with initial financing. It was based on an estimate
and then um our director of pre-construction, Joel Wallace, he goes through and looks looks at the plans and bids them out and trades, gets their initial uh costs and he also does more geotech
uh on top of the initial uh just to reinvestigate areas that might need more clarity. And sometimes we get that from when we speak with site contractors, they'll say, "Well, we need more information on this." So, well, it's it's a bit of an iterative process. And so, as we go through that process, the
number continues to get refined. And um it was really in 2024 when we were able to get a more solid figure. And that process doesn't happen after just the So I guess to take a step back when you're filing applications for
affordable housing trust funds or production fund money, the the money that the state and federal government set aside for affordable housing projects. The reason that they're split in a preliminary only site plan and then subsequently applicants come back for
either amended preliminary final or just final site plan only is because preliminary is what's required in order to file the application for funding. So to get in line for funding that is limited because at this point some of those programs don't even have any funding anymore. Um the requirement is
to have preliminary approval. So after you know whether or not you're funded in that round and it's a an annual round, the production funds were on a rolling basis. So in theory you could potentially make more than one round in
the year. Um but after you find that out and you know you're going to be awarded, you know you have the financing um based on those initial estimates. That's when further testing, further um engineering of designs happen. So that which is why we came in for amended approval because
it changed from preliminary um to the time we had final. >> When you're putting in for that funding, are you specifying material and things of that nature or is it just a general number? >> It's a general number. >> So you're not specifying any material
any provide renderings and floor plans and the because this was initially n >> renderings like this that show materials or >> No, it's more visual. It's not it's not down to >> this materials this that standing with
not to that level. The 9% applications this was originally 9% until we went to four. Um it's a competitive process and so as as Nicole explained um you go in with estimated figures um floor plans preliminary approval. go in and get the
9% credits because that's a big financing piece and that's until you get that it's really you don't have a real project yet because that's a key part of the financing. uh but um you know co happened and the financing got difficult and then they came out with production
funds and as part of that um the state said that you can't use 9% with it you have to switch to 4% tax credit so we have to do the exchange and switch um but without the 9% we would not I don't know where we'd be because that was really the placeholder
>> so I you started off saying there was a $5 million gap >> and you valued an engineer through this design change to not block one. >> Yes.
>> How are you making up the other 2.6? >> That's that's that's getting bonded. The B6 the B's bonding for the 2.6 >> then it would be five to 2 would be 2.4. Right. They knocked off, right? They knocked out >> we went we went from five to 2.6.
>> Yeah. 2.1. So I was just trusting your mouth. I wasn't >> Don't Don't trust the material there. >> We don't have any calculations. We don't have any >> No, we don't. I'm sure. >> No, but there's still a gap regardless
of whether. So even though >> we compromise on the design standard, right, which as you can tell is important to this board, right? quality and you got longevity in the wall, right? You got, you know, 300 foot of frontage
pretty much in the entrance way of the town. You come in, I think there's concern that it looks last long time for us who been here want to be here long longer. Um,
but there's, you know, that there's still that gap anyway. >> Well, the 2.6 six. Um, it was originally supposed to be trust funds, but with the way trust funds work, it's relying on other market rate developments moving forward and paying into the trust funds. So, unfortunately, the there wasn't
enough to meet the full 2.6. So, there is a portion of that's getting bonded. I don't know what that portion is. >> No, I I want to make sure I understood that that >> remaining. >> Yes.
bond. Mhm. The other is >> Did your agreement with the burrow required certain time limit or time
points we received in the approval in October the initial preliminary in October 22 and and then it was two years later It's got the uh
the revised preliminary binding. >> Were there contractual obligations to to meet certain deadlines? >> Yes, they were in compliance with digital >> and what were they?
I don't have those details in front of me right now, but what I can tell is if we were in violation of the development agreement, I would give you a different story right now >> because obviously the time delay was
would create much of the additional cost >> two years prices went up. Actually, how he's not saying that what he's saying is it's the rock. This is what
>> the cost of the rock went bald. >> He doesn't know that because they didn't he doesn't have any numbers. >> Oh, no. The rocks are picking glass. So, here's an idea. >> Well, but he's
>> he can't give them to you, but does he know? >> But but they're presenting. >> Yeah. So, we want Okay, bye for again, you know, maybe I don't have a problem with changing the roof, but have a problem with changing the siding, but I don't know what that
impact is economically on the town because someone told you Mr. Zazarino knew what was going on and nobody else needed it. I'm having a really hard time understanding. We have a responsibility.
It is our town. It is our the economics impact all of us. >> But I I have no confidence in the numbers you're trying to present because I have nothing in front of me and when anyone asks you for details, you don't
have the information and nobody there's a report but nobody can pull it up on their computer. So clearly you didn't read the report or no one sent it to you or maybe they sent it to you. But I I >> well I would encourage you to speak with
Nancy because she's very >> there's some legal issues that come into play every now and again and that's when it becomes incumbent upon me to say something uh as the board attorney the the the um so one if I may Mr. here. One
thing is that um anything having to do with this pending amended preliminary and final site plan uh uh application hearing process will take place in an
open public meeting duly noticed for this hearing. Uh, number one, um, so I I respectfully no one should be told go talk to Nancy or Mel or Harry or Sally or anyone else. Um, but but it should
happen here. Um, because that's the law. Uh, number one. Number two, um it's a little [Music] less than garden variety
for our board when we're dealing with this issue. Because normally we focus on um site plan considerations and when there's deviations for relief, it's all focused on planning elements and zoning
regulations and benefits from a zoning and planning perspective. And often times cost is not part of the calculus when rendering decisions in land use on land use applications.
the primary decision. You're you're correct. But >> for generally, however, in this particular instance, >> the reality is is that the cost is somewhat of the driver of why in the context of a 100% affordable housing
project where it is now. Uh they've come uh uh I guess in essence not together with the burrow, but the burrow is involved. um and uh and are requesting these modifications. So that's why I think the
board maybe have just stating the obvious but uh and that's a forte as well but but but uh the the the uh that the transparency is is that there as we're encountering there may be some changes that may we may be struggling
with from how is that benefit >> zoning and planning perspective or you know how is that better uh but but the reality I guess we're hearing some of it is just a necessity at least that's the contention
uh uh from the applicant and I guess the applicant saying it's a necessity both to the extent it impacts the applicant and the bureau so it puts us in a little bit of an unusual position as board members I just want us to focus on that is part of it is that the the council
should be part they are the applicants as well through these and we need to get some clarity on that because of the not not just But you know, but the council Nancy or someone needs to be here representing the town when these things
happen going forward. When there's this agreement, whether it's Bomber or this or whatever, we're going to need council representation, not just the applicant just going forward because it's there's
too much at stake and too much money. there's long-term precedent for the minimalistic aspect of this request that they're making which is you're changing materials that comes before us and we decide whether they can change their
materials and they present the case for this is why I want to change the material which they're doing that's totally in our scope changing of materials absolutely >> okay with the guidance of HPC and so forth >> however I mean this is pretty massive this this
change, right? So, it's all it's serious. It's not just, oh, I've got this house that I, you know, you know, I want to change or this small project where I want to change. It's not just 18 mount area versions. It's it's much larger. Um, we're not
obligated to approve a material change for the profitability of the project, but they're two there there's a combined representation here. It's it's shooting at the home self, right? It's because it's the burrow and it's the partner,
the developer. So maybe we just have to ratchet it back to that and with a reprimand carried forward that we should have been involved as soon as the tech came back. Um, we should have been re-engaged
because one of the considerations should have been what can we do within the realm of the plan in terms of mitigating the tech as opposed to let's just pay more money for it, but figure out a even though it's plastic, figure it out, let's just charge ahead and knock out knock that stone out. There are other
choices that could have been made. Um and maybe the war and were dismissed, but we know that there are other ways to uh shifted the footprint to affect the amount of of build that had to be removed. And that's expensive. I mean,
it's I think it's like $40,000 a unit essentially in excess cost. No, it's not. It's because it's your yours is the bundle price for all three projects. So, it's not true. 20%.
Um >> there's also not a breakdown. One project is larger than another. Why do we have to change them all? You know, again, >> right? >> There's not enough there's not enough
granularity for us to decide whether we're willing to let the developer change the materials, which is our decision. And we just don't have that kind of detail that discrete our detail. We see that
when you mass it all together, it's something. Well, let's suppose the vinyl. Well, it's an extra hundred bucks. >> Well, >> it's not obviously. >> And we have to be recognizing it's the facade basically and and the shingles. That's the whole thing. It's
just different components of >> sar. >> But yeah, the stone I'm not sure that I don't know what the stone that's only in a couple little small places. I'm not sure that that's sort of >> but I there's a difference between the
two stone in fact. >> Well, the second one moves the third one moves. >> There's still stone. It's just stone along front here. I saw you doing the deer again and your trail again.
>> Still there's still stone on the front elevation. It's just reduced in height. And then there is also still stone on the um side elevation which is the western elevation. But again, it reduced from the window sill down to probably 5
ft off off grade. >> So not so not so sure we'd want to upgrade that for instance. Um we're fine, you know, vinyl led vinyl fine maybe put this off to the next meeting and we request specific information like all
the information we don't have anything. >> Well our next meeting is for the week. 13. And then this meeting would have been Thanksgiving.
>> Yeah, we can hear. Um, >> Mr. Chairman, if we're going to do that, would it make sense to get as far as we can so that we can get all >> I think make sure they know what we need. >> That's what I'm saying. made some there may be more questions
and requests coming from the board if they present more with the with respect to the other two projects I >> still question. >> So the building traditionally has four sides you only show side when you come back
>> check doesn't take much to make >> I'm curious what side looks like. So from the ask what you've already kind of agreed to consider is I would like you to consider where you would be placing a
battery storage room in your design. Um we we'd like break down by specifically like for that example or the percentage of reduction >> something that gives us a sense it's um some of this this photo volic
I don't understand how they can have almost 34 kW of DC power which inverts to 37 kW of AC power. Uh if you've got a way to do that, you shouldn't be doing that You're
doing something else selling free power. Um so building just kind of check that out. That doesn't seem I it could be well yeah of
course bodies don't know >> it it's more like I could see oh well it's 27 kilows of AC power but the inverters >> and it was all the one so the one where they were done and it was old
>> and the and the time Have you did did you price out the the fiber board? >> Yes. >> So you had that >> Yeah. >> Is there something the windows you're
not doing the trim on the windows or you are? >> No, I'm not. The window style changed. Oh, sorry. stayed the same from the previous designer, >> but not from the original. >> I think it's the same table. It's just I'm missing a column on the savings thing with the size, how big it was, and
percentage of the savings. Just a couple more columns in the spreadsheet would be acceptable for each project. >> And the changes in the other two projects are the same. Yeah, >> they're the same.
>> To what degree has the tectonic has the um I mean I can drive by and see the street but if if someone were actually said you don't have to do something there.
How far along are you in terms of cost of excavating that? It looks pretty thoroughly excavated. >> We're pulling ahead because of the federal deadline. So I >> like it's almost I mean you take a lot
of dirt. It isn't like oh we're like 90% done in terms of excavating but not not in I >> I don't want to give a number. I I we're we're pretty far along with excavation but I don't know if it's 90 or if it's 50. So >> it would be nice to just know that if
it's 50 or something, you know, because >> we might be able to fifth the building in one way or another. uh we did before. So in terms of removing rock, it's like oh man, it's that last 10% that you know that's going to really cost
if they're 90% along the side millions. >> Yeah, then what are we doing here? >> What? Well, it's not fun. Well, the extras were 5 million and exped.
But can you please have the information? >> Yeah, >> I said I know I don't want to give numbers. I don't have numbers. >> Well, I that just to be clear, I came because I thought the 5 mil to 2.6 would have been enough. I didn't realize that
you wanted a deeper breakdown. Couldn't provide that. That's not a problem. I just couldn't tell you about questions about the project. I mean the history of the project. Would it be helpful to have maybe >> I think the key is the substitutions. We need to know that the substitutions are
viable substitutions like I mean she's sort of gone through >> statirm that they're there. We could get 30 years shingles but oh well by the way we only priced in 25 years shingles. Um
there's that that the substitutions you're making are equivalent. I mean there's we'll we'll have the historic hopefully answer uh by the next meeting from u our historic in terms of anything
else. We've got the big deal is the sighting and the roof. uh just what are the sayings and and and the stone. I guess those are kind of the three if there's something else in there that were you know
how much was each one estimated and what did you and just show off what you did. I mean okay you knocked out that's that's great that's money spent. So >> true. >> Yeah. Once the solar system going
>> probably would be viable for the 5 million. >> Absolutely. So and that's one of the things I wanted to bring up the affordable housing process in my state is broken. And the reasons for it is that it puts you know a lot of pressure
on the local governing bodies board who you know back up these projects at the end of the day and you know I I I understand you know with materials and you know variety things. I
will any information I can and I do thank all you know for continuing to look to pursue the cost savings for the bureau here. you hear or two point you obviously all realize that that's you know serious and you know this you know later in the
process I understand everyone's you know breaking at that as well I mean your glory to have been um but I I do you know thank you for your question you know any information
we can get through all please request the product team here. I think, you know, this is something we won't say pursue these savings for the burrow and it's not something that I'm happy about and it's um again the whole I could go
all night about the whole system, but I you know I I understand your concerns tonight. Please let me know anything. Well, did the response whatever the numbers are that have been proposed or itemized
like that will show the panel some >> don't just give us >> since we're in trouble then then we're actually curious about this and someone say
whatever the real whatever the intended numbers are going to be as much as poss because it's kind of hard to tell the aesthetic differences from those little squares between the biggest material and the new material, but to the points that we've made on these are things that
we're going to be living with for 30 years or in main thorough bears coming into the town. And so if there's a way that you could give us a better sense of what the tradeoff is aesthetically by making these changes, it would be helpful. It's a standard requirement
from an architectural perspective in front of you're supposed to have samples of for that's the >> so to the extent you can do that instead of fiber vinyl um produce that a steel roof
versus a shingle I mean you can bring the shingle you know cheap things but that's that's the norm the norm is we want to change it. We look at the color. We look at the uh the facade that looks like it. We look
at the material. But if that's possible exhibit A to B1 to A1 to >> yeah going I guess that would be uh east to west
is very sharp. storage stack five or six windows whereas on they live it I'm sorry no the one that you're standing in front [Music]
>> yeah not the not the roof line the actual grade >> the elevation of this line was actually lowered >> nove Sorry. Are we looking back? >> Yeah. Yeah. The grade there start three windows in, >> but then you look at your next exhibit,
it starts six weeks changed. >> That was um >> that was part of the site change. >> That was actually a comment originally that it was not a depiction of the
show more of it. The actual >> Yes. Yeah. Um probably a sense of urgency, you know, like whatever, you know, we're used to it now and really urgent. We got to get this done. Are there any, you know, this car is two weeks and a little
more than that previous? >> So what are we saying here? Would it make sense for them to do a quick deal with the other two? Yeah. Is there any
question later? It's quiet. question. I'm just with me. No problem. >> Okay. >> I'm sorry. Did you move for >> Yes. >> Yeah.
>> Which box? >> 189. >> 189. >> Okay. Uh so we're going to look at the personally just a file name
and you're qualified for all three all three. >> Okay. >> Uh this exhibit A5 is dated 1214 2023 and it's a colored elevation. I'm sorry. >> 14 2001.
>> So, this board depicts the original approved elevation for building one, which is the building closer to Mount Barry Road. >> Um, again, these are all the same changes previous as we discussed previously for Mine Brook Road. Um the
the color scheme changed from the original approval to the HPC coordinated um set. >> Um >> well color change as you identify the same. >> Well, I'm just going from the original
approval to historic Yeah. >> Um >> the historic And this was the approval by the um >> HPC give more than HPC uh coloring one color
elevation and the date is 1118 2024. though again as part of resolution compliance we met with HBC selected these um colors the one other change
that happened between the original approval and HPC is the window style the window color changed the same but this window has three buttons on the top sash as opposed to >> I'm sorry this window is >> this window
>> section of the building >> oh all the windows on the building >> is that that's clear Right. All the windows what? >> All the windows on the HPC approved uh elevation are different from the original approved
and the fact that the top sash has three mines and the original approved has only uh one. This is actually a change suggested by the historic commission. And then as we go from the HPC elevation
to the evaluating weird elevation >> A7 and this is also building one color elevation with the date of 417 2025. So the changes between uh the value
engineered elevation and HBC and original is again we went from fiber cement to vinyl siding standing metal seam roof to an asphalt shingle and actually the stone veneer stayed the same on this one. There was no reduction in in the stone veneer design on this
building. What you do see now uh on this are solar panels which we're composing solar panels on this site as well and they will be visible because they're on the solar facade. There's no flat roof on either building in uh the M 18 site.
I think one one thing that we'll if Mr. Chairman one thing that we'll have to do uh since we have memos from our board professionals that relate to solar panels at least as to the one that they knew about before yesterday or today uh
because now all three of them have solar panels. So we're going to need to obviously have the memories. I think if the either now or next time you can just let us know if you can stick to all the items in all the memos or where you
can't what you can and can't stick to and and why just to abbreviate things expedite things make them fishing actually so that we can do that if that would be helpful and I suspect our board of
professionals may have updated memos with respect to the solar on the two projects that they only just recently found out about. But regardless, at the very least, I suspect they'll have the same questions that they had as to the one the other two if not more and or a
different question. So, let's just make sure we can get back next time. Of course, the more you can agree to the better for everybody. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think um Um, and then the last point I'd like to
make is, um, we tried to keep the color scheme similar as to the fiber cement versus the vine, but I do think they look very similar with the the color palette at least. Um, does anyone have any questions? >> So, is that Appalachian sky?
>> That is yes, Appalachian sky >> smoke. I didn't have that in my Crayola box. I I was thinking it should blue or something, but no, it's uh cold.
>> A question regarding the uh I guess would be the elevation on uh that's A7, I guess. >> A >> the upper elevation, >> the south side. >> Yeah. On either of the sides where it's the country beige.
>> Yep. Um, is that actually flat? Because you you have representation of like a vertical siding or horizontal siding, but there's no >> that's uh that that's going to be a combination of flat panels with trim.
So, there'll be some really >> there won't be a texture to it. Say it'll be smooth or >> It'll be smooth. Yes. >> Okay. So the solar panels I assume you would provide the drive a layout of the solar panels for that. >> I can pull that up if you want to.
>> It would be just that building. It would be what you you're looking at for the parking lot, right? Then that >> Yes. This is the parking. >> Yeah. And it would be on the what you see on the roof and it would be on the
said the dormers that are there that they would have >> they would they would have to >> on the south facing they would have solar panels but on the north York facing they would not >> we actually let me I can pull up the um solar
>> I believe it's on all bas I'm sorry. >> Yeah. A8. >> So this is uh sheet number PV2. Uh this is the solar panel >> total two
>> for 18 one and two as you can see or maybe I don't know you have >> the blue squares represent the solar panels that are going to be on groups
and they're on every every side each >> Yeah. Okay. you know one doesn't mount solar panels on a on group on every surface no
>> I will say for the architect >> so >> particular something with a generally generally southern exposure you're not going to put it on the northern expos Don't put solar panels. Nobody puts solar cables on
these radios. They don't do it. So this roof has pitch. Okay. The side that on this building, building one, the side that faces the train tracks, it's not going to get sunlight
for driving a solar. Now, anyone that does the analysis would would tell you that a solar engineer. >> So, that's and I'm just believing what you said. There's like solar panels on each of the roofs.
>> No, there. >> Do you have >> that needs to be engineered? Do you have the proposals that were given to you for sure for installing solar on these three buildings or is this just
cost? We think you can do it because originally you said you could do it. >> Yeah. I'm sorry. Crabr the detailed breakdown of each solar inflation. Now I was in on birth but yeah of course for this one as well.
And then there's obviously the problem with a like if you were a homeowner or a building owner and you said solar company would you come in and install my solar on a noise facing roof they would say you know who would
help. So anyway, um that's discouraging that hopefully that's out of date and someone did look at it. He's putting it in the right places.
>> Uh and the other building, building two, the front of it also is similar would be very similar. It would a generally southerntherly face saver. >> Yeah. uh northern side that should not have any solar panels on it.
>> Well, the good news is it'll reduce cost of pins and maybe but they may it may just be as simple as putting more handles on the surface that does something.
So that is and the original question is are there panels on the east far they've jump but that would probably be the best and that location for building one the side
of the eaves there on the left side of the eaves is probably solar Okay. >> So, um you said on the comparative stuff you said for this project or 18 the
sidings similar. >> Yes. >> The left siding is colors the same way. The board and diamond colors are similar but it's not the Bernard new trim. The
roofing is as well the same. >> Yes. Suppose the color is appellation instead of charcoal. >> And what did you say about the stone? You did mention something about the >> the extent of the stone stayed the same.
So the stones no change same >> which it was. And then the first one was the same material. model assistant kind of indeed side but it's more of an aesthetic maybe
deal with that one I think it's sign of the time aesthetically And close to what was originally >> I can't speak to that >> bank.
>> Well, when we get the details, we need details for each site and we need to see that you know it's >> it's like you don't want to leave any stone unturned when you're trying to save. So, >> okay, great. >> Is that good? Can we move on to burn?
>> Yes. What can we become burning? Oh, you hear me? [Music] Okay, this new exhibit or not new exhibit but
this would be A9. >> I'm sorry I might have missed eight. What was eight? Eight was the uh ED the PD the voltaic voltage for me.
>> Yep. >> And A9 is a colored elimination for six and three. >> Okay. So similar to the other sites >> and bear with me this A8 is the code of elevation uh last date and this
associates with the >> A9 A9 A9 >> A9 116 203 original I think the preliminary preceded that the original
preliminary environment. >> Um, similar to uh the other sites, we have the same original material proposed in the same color palette. We met with HBC. This is A10
and the date on A10 is 118 2012. Materials stayed the same, but the finishes were light production HPCA. And then the last elevation here at day 11.
Date on that is 417 2025. Again, same changes as the previous sites. We went from metal roofing to asphalt uh vinyl board and batten siding, vinyl lab siding. The window
style changes um remained the same from this design as opposed to the HPC approved design. And again, we tried to select colors from the the vinyl palette that reflected um what was selected as
part of coordination with HPC. >> And you architecturally, if you explain your choice of the Appalachian Gray, which I guess is darker than what like I see how dark that is, right? And the
mounta one was what? If you flip back to A3, which is on that easel, which is the original, which is the because that one's different, right? That one is supposedly charcoal. >> Charcoal. Yes.
And then can you explain the rationale for >> so the the charcoal selection is more of a bluish tone and >> the here is and including the gray is more of a kind of cool color tone. So
don't full color. >> Okay. >> Um the Appalachian sky. [Music] >> The Appalachian sky actually has a couple different color tones in it. It has some some browns, some greens to
kind of and a little it's a little more warm brown tone which complements the or sorry cobblestone trim and the graphite which is kind of like a gray tone. >> The cobblestone trim is new, right? >> Cobblestone trim is new. Yes.
>> I guess I just that's fine. It's aesthetic. Can we just make sure that Dan Lincoln particularly comments or resumes the choice of color or um the HBC or um
these two last doesn't point that out and make sure that he explicitly Denise that he stand that he explicitly knows to look at the the root colors
on the three projects. >> I'm sorry. >> Dan, >> just just he's looking at a lot of things. I just like to make sure he explicitly looks at the color choice of the roofs. It doesn't affect the aesthetic and um
to to see if you can hurt, you know, we have your opinion. I mean much like we coordinated got a lot to look at in a short period of time and I just want to be sure he explicitly looks at that. Okay.
>> So all of these drawings were completed more than six months ago. >> Yeah. >> Which Yeah. Six months ago. >> Yeah. >> And I'm just trying to understand the timing. You had to have thought about it and considered it and taken time to
create them. So 7 months ago So 7 months ago you knew that the the expenses were that much higher. >> I mean I mean you knew in the summer that's not for me. >> Well, but you knew in the summer but you
made these proposals back in April. I'm I'm very uncomfortable. >> Which summer? this summer or the one >> saying changing the materials >> for the
so I'm I'm just uncomfortable again changes are considered over the summer they're dated that's the spring >> yeah but it wasn't
>> no but the point is you're again just because you have no numbers and it strikes me that you're saying that we're running so much higher in cost because we have the rock issue, but you were
already proposing this before you realized the extent of your rock issue. >> Some said you said you realized the rock issue in June. >> Yeah. was driving. That's why we're here. >> We're asking you questions that you're
either not listening for and and not giving us the answer that we're trying to to get. Yes, you can be a little defensive with me because I'm uncomfortable with the fact that we're being given numbers with bill back up.
But but this was prepared. The changes were prepared and have been considered at least seven months ago and July, August, September, October, four months ago is when you realize you had the problem. So yes, I do question
>> and and just to share my perspective, I did not realize that this is within the purview of a of a so this is why the disconnect is here but as I said before I'm providers speak it sounds like what happened was you were you were going to be going to
have a gap gap was probably two million plus something like that you knew about it because it came out you know as you did the numbers First you planned to how to mitigate the gaps. You did due diligence through cooperative, you know,
optimizing the building materials and then wham, you got hit with the the the rock which just piled on instead of a $2.5 million gap, you got a $5 million gap or something. Sounds like that's what happened. But it's not like, oh, we
hit the rock and like now we have to change the the material. It sounds like no, the the intent was we were going to have a gap. Let's mitigate the gap. Let's change the materials. And then whack, we got hit in the summer. That's all we're saying in terms of the timing of the events and how we're making.
>> I apologize for being >> but that's conceivable. I don't know if that's the facts, but >> but that would have been prudent. It would have been prudent to say here's a gap. How can we change the materials? Do the plan. And then then then you got slammed, you know, with the Okay.
Anything else about this site that we there's probably a solar for this all somewhere. This this >> is this a similar one where similar to the first one where it's got a
>> Yes, but there's >> Yes. So, we had the So, there's two things. There's solar on the flat roof part. This also has the same carpet as Mineberrook Road, right? But there's also a few solar panels on the SL roof
facing burners have as well. >> We'll ask Dan about that and maybe not for the solar panels where you're planning to put them on the roof, but we can ask Dan too about that because it may be
ineffective too. >> The dormers just decorative would they function? >> The dormers are just decorative. >> Yeah. So, let's ask Dan. Dan's okay with like it's no big deal. Get rid of the dormers and >> Well, they're decorative, but it also rates up a
>> multiund foot expanse with him. Yeah. Making it work. >> Well, that's why we won't ask him, you know, about that explicitly. He hadn't gotten to this third drawing. He obviously worked with you heavily on the third one. >> He's comfortable with that.
>> I'm And there must be a cost savings. not building the dormer at all, but if it's just Oh, so we can put some solar panels there. >> That's the kind of detail. >> And just to confirm, so that that view of the building is a general view from
the middle of the building, right? >> Are you talking this is the front facade? >> We for record exhibit. Oh, I'm sorry. >> A1 is a different The front facade of A1 matches. This is the front facade as
well. These are the same elevations. >> Yeah, you're missing the door. >> Not in the top in that um I don't know how to describe it. First the first set or the second set of windows come from the
portion appears different >> there. the bottom. >> Yeah, you broke the window. >> This this whole section appeared different from that whole section.
>> Exhibit that was submitted. >> It's hard to see if you want to hear >> a HPC exhibit. >> We'll follow those. Second set of windows. Yes. >> From the left. >> From the left
is different than the proposed A1 front facade. Second set of windows. It's a third. >> Well, B. That's >> the same. >> Yeah. >> The key is on the third one which is a
11. You see the dark colored G7? That's that. No, next to it that >> this >> that's light on the other that's light on the other picture. >> Well, I see >> I think that's is
shadow >> but still it doesn't address the fact that structural >> dimension to the left of the ch. So just >> it's like I was saying it's like those
games like whatever. >> All right. Is there anything else about this? Uh >> yeah, >> we already reminded you and you agreed that cobblestone is infernob >> the the >> and what um
that's cheaper or like what >> it's just a different name >> justable before didn't supply >> so it was some other material material before, but now you've made it this material, so it's better.
It didn't exist in this than the center. >> It did. Well, it was a different color because it's a different we're going from cement to vinyl. So, it was called >> So, you can fix your chart. In your
chart, it says um the cobblestone trim, the trim itself does not exist in the new in the old draw. I don't know what chart you're looking at, but there >> and it sounds like it did exist in some
fact some material and you're altering the material to be cobblestone. >> We'll reconcile that. >> Exactly. Just point that out. Just reconcile it is identified as only for this project and >> Okay. >> No, it's
whatever the purpose was to for the change. That's kind of your when you reconcile it. Why why was that change? >> I'm getting confused cuz I don't think >> well the cobblestone trim something is off. So >> all right you'll figure out if there's a
difference just explain >> uh anything else on this project? I think that is the south sort of the south facing it is um exposure and I guess there's going to be wet right
north but >> one 8 12 uh 13 9 10 11 12 is the older This is a song. I thought you get it.
>> I didn't I can't see. >> I heard it. >> So, south is the bottom. >> So, south is >> that's the that's the primary thing we're seeing. Okay.
>> So, and then so there's solar panels slope. >> Yeah. as well. Um, and then the solar panels on the flat roof and >> and this is the same parapit that I showed you in the section for >> so the panels.
>> So there's no the eastern >> parapit or the western >> that's just on the >> southern parapet and or whatever we're calling it. And um on this one we want
Dan to opine on losing the gates or whatever >> dormers. I think it makes it a little more monolithic. That's why >> it's a very long. So I I think part of
the requirement should be that there was a cost avoidance of not doing the dormers I guess. But is it articulated? They were just they were just decorative sitting on the roof. It's not like the doesn't stick out.
>> Does what stick out? >> The building. The building's not straight. >> The building's not straight. >> So that won't >> it's just you're going to run the parap around instead of putting a dormer. I definitely want to we it'd be good to see the financials behind that.
But we're doing we're doing the many. So what and and because there's an aesthetic here, we want to know what was saved to give us that aesthetic. >> So yeah, now it's just burning.
>> Can't believe it's very functional. It's it's a fairly small area. Even putting cells in that area is doing great. You should ask them also just in solar engineering are the I could see the drawings and how much they're elevated sort of just that they're slanted. They
should have when you when you have a parapet like that. Should I have an opinion about whether the cells would be higher to the paruts, not shielding them, >> shading them? >> Um at least close to the parakeet that they should probably be elevated. Now,
as you go in towards the interior of the building, it's not that's not as important, but like I haven't looked at it in detail, but at least have them address that aspect of it. You want to maximize the solar area.
Anything else on anything else of note that on this building reconcile any any questions in this? No, I think I think I thank you guys for your
>> backision engineering. We just did a very short map to try to identify some of the changes. We did they took the dormers out on this site because the plans that were submitted to us had the dorm. So I would
request that we get we get a copy of all these exhibits. >> Okay. >> That they presented because we don't have that >> Mr. Chairman. We can submit the exhibits but it also sounds like they will be modified. >> I know
>> to some extent anyway. So we'll submit. >> We will submit the exhibits but in addition to that we'll have whatever changes need to be made. >> I think you're going to have some spares here. So why not just go ahead and get them? Are these staying with us?
>> We can easily I'm not sure even historic preservation show. >> So especially for Dan think this is submitted and I think for Dan, you definitely need the
set of the Yes. to the >> and we'll coordinate our so that she has a link to PDFs of all these >> and if Dan need paper copies, we'll get Dan paper. Yes.
>> That's a short is that you need access to >> not just public. [Music] >> Was that Were you gonna say some >> We want to have questions from the
>> We want to have questions from the public. >> That's what I'm waiting for. We certainly want to have our public have an opportunity to have breakfast tonight even though they'll be back. Um and then questionable whether you know it makes sense to have public comment or not. Well, they'll be back. We don't know if
our members we're hearing tonight may or may not be back. All right. So, we're going to progress to questions for we'll have two questions for these workers being there will be subsequently comments. You can make
questions. You just have to identify yourself but not use one. You want to go a short wall. You have to come down. >> Jeff C O L L A R. That's right next door to
189. >> It is. You remember? >> You did get the notice. >> Yeah. So, >> as far as questions, real simple one. Could you possibly when you come back show the second building so that we can see the side? That's the one. I do have it. >> Oh, you do have it. Okay. Yeah. If you
could share that just to say >> that building is location, it orientation and it proximity to number 20 was of an issue to the seven >> and and windows and their location.
These would be other windows. >> Well, So this will be a >> building number two 18 >> building number two elevation 18. No. Well, this or is this the correct the engineered version?
>> I believe the southside elevation, this one is the one that faces your property. >> The the configuration of windows or is stayed completely the same. >> I'm sorry. >> The configuration of windows or arrow the south elevations remain the same.
closest to his >> back window. >> If I may, the solar panels are >> I'm sorry. There are solar panels, >> right? That's what's the um but there's
no glare or any anticipated problem this house blocking from getting in the solar panels. I could right next their house. >> Well, we it's it's it's make sure the panels are
going to yield decent power. That's >> And I noticed they didn't take away the dormers here. Basically was different, >> right? >> So in 18 they didn't you didn't take the
dorm Bernard. >> Any other question? >> Good evening 141 Brook Road. First of all, thank you very much for all your time. I know it's a thankless job. You have a lot of time especially you Robert
been here for a long time if anyone absolutely thank you very much chairman uh just a couple quick questions um they do a quick study it's called a um declination of the sun like with your situation the sun just doesn't come like
this and go like this it changes throughout the year they do a quick study we did at Princeton University for some of the buildings we did down there cuz it will melt plastic it will melt cars Okay. It will change throughout the year. You know, we're seeing it now
changing uh especially near roadways like Bernard's Avenue. Just want to make sure when it's coming down, is it going to hit a car coming out on the uh intersection there? Just want to double check. It's not that hard. >> Talking about solar >> reflection coming in and heat also that
you picked up also. >> Um >> so that would be part of a solar engineer. Normally someone like this will be able to do that pretty quickly. It's it's not that hard. The other thing is the partnership is a little frazzled right now. >> It has to be
>> question sound a bit like comments. Can you raise your right again? I'll swear. >> Oh, sure. >> You swear to God or affirm testimony given that which you may have already given is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So we got >> Thank you. I had got in there already, but we but can't have too many.
>> You gave me my opinions. One of the things that you asked um board member Geller uh was a lot of information. I think what you should probably ask for is from the previous get a submitt
package. What were they going to give you here? It's a submitt package. Tell you what, you know, whether it's metal panels, whatever it was, how many year warranty, the whole thing. And get a, you know, a sample of it and you compare it to what they're doing on the new stuff.
This way they're going to tell you what kind of warranty was on the metal, >> right? >> This is what they're going to tell you on on this. So you have something in writing right there. It's this metal package. That's what we did throughout for everything. >> Okay. That's that's one of the big
things. The same thing with the vinyl. >> Go ahead. We >> meaning you should ask we being the burrow should ask for submitt packages. I would think
because right now it's like okay we we don't know what we're going to have here. We don't know what we're going to have here. You're going to have a package. This is what was proposed here. You know you have the actual document and now what the change is going to be
made to. So you can make a you know >> informed >> informed decision and you know what you can you can go to whoever in the town or whatever it says hey we had to do this for this reason x y or z but you have the documentation in your hands.
>> Yeah know we do want the I think we're going to make it simpler. We just kind of wanted a spreadsheet with a few more columns but that >> well cement package usually it's just like one or two sheets. It's like okay we're using this shingle here. you're using this. This is what it is. Boom.
>> This is what you have. >> It's It's really It's really pretty simple. Uh the colors it's I'm an engineer. So, >> make reference to a partnership. >> Well, the partnership is
Bernardville Burrow >> and and and affordable housing and everything. And what I'm saying to you is, okay, what are the books? mine made a, you know, perfect uh comic before. Um, when was the borings made, right?
And then whose decision was it just to go, okay, we're just going to blast? Who went out and said, "Yeah, we're going to lay out money." Okay. Was it made with the burrow as a partner? And is it a problem engineering wise?
you know, did they actually look at the the boardings which you had three over 300 ft and is it an ENO situation? Errors and omissions they miss something as a partner, you know, got to take a
hit sometimes. It's something to look at. Get the chronology down. >> You know, we need the house. It's required. Everybody's in a tough position, but we have to work together >> and we can't do Yeah. You can't, you
know, do things here and do things here. You know, you got to come to the board. That's what you guys are here for to get, you know, informed for us. And I appreciate all the time and effort that you're doing for it cuz you're not getting paid for it. That's for sure.
>> It's good to see you again, Steve. Good to see you, too. Good to see you. Um, I have a question not for you but for >> you. Um, and it maybe for you. Was it was it gone
kind of gone all through this stuff that somebody said, you know, you're going to need to come back for to the planning board for a supplemental, you know, police adjusted plan. Was it kind of the assumption going along that I'm trying to understand is it going along that oh
no one thought about the fact that if you change your materials you have to come back until like oh few months ago we'll figure this out that oh we're going to have to come before again before the planning board. answering your question, I was asked
approvals basically. >> Oh, like a field change basic or >> basically yeah but it was after we had gone through resolution components and at that point it's it's in
it's not in our hands. >> Yeah. So it's you so you're the the the the guy that had to raise his hand and say, you know, actually I can't do that. I you've got to go before the board and
that was a consequence of a discussion. >> Yeah. And didn't you remember when that happened? How long ago? How long ago did did the applicant know that we have to come before the bunning board? >> The applicant may be able to speak, but
not that we can't. I we could deduce it, but what's the reality? When did the when when did you realize you got all the monsoon? No, the last month >> as I recall was first the the changes
and then we were able to have discussions and conclude that the changes in and of themselves the the I should say the material >> changes >> uh uh prompted to know that that has to
be done by a man approval and then separately I think you there were going to be solar panels We had already included that come back to >> right and then it made obviously sense well the solar panel should be part parcel of the approval request along
with the material changes not material change or not >> someone would look up to solar as saying it's an a depre, you know, it's a re >> you're saving the money too. So, you know, it's always going to be one of those financial variables. >> Yeah. I don't know what would happen on
solar on solar on, you know, they built these things and came in. So, I don't know. It's just building the decision whe He
told it approval, >> right? >> It made sense to add it to the entire application, >> right? I just I'm not sure it's in our It does, but it's not in our turkey. If someone would just wanted to put solar
panels on, we we always suggest it. So, it's kind of like, okay, here put the solar panels on. It's not going to change the the design that one should change the design that it's been. That's why I'm curious because the
people who did the proposal, it doesn't seem like it was done with any seriousness. These are probably stuck things that they do on the computer. But if they're putting the panels on slow roofs, is that really who
you want to be doing this? So, this is a proposal that to me is just here here's something to bring to the board. But it could add I have no idea. I've never put solar panels. It what if it adds million dollars to the three projects that we
still have to float the bond for, but it's really not doing what it's supposed to do. Yeah, the point is to look at the financials of the seller. >> Here's the here's the whole thing. You don't do it.
>> It It's not like there it has to make sense financially. >> I'm going to get into finances differences. >> Finances we're talking about, >> right? finances for the solar or maintenance and long-term profitability
under some >> I think that's the point should not be part of any shortfall or bonded issue but it's like >> shouldn't be is that you added something when while you're changing a project to
reduce cost but at the same time you came in you added new things that incurred more cost So if your current shortfall is 2.4 and you eliminated all solar, does that increase the shortfall even more? >> Well, we don't know solar is included in
the short but I understand they're >> they should be treatedly. I think I get my board back >> and what is the fin? Who's who who fun it? They're probably going to come back
in the benefit all that stuff. So, um >> the next meeting is November 13. Are you going to be okay to get all that information? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's all already been presented and reviewed by people. So, it's just a
matter of taking it into a form that you're asking for. >> I think we need to get you we need to get Dan's opinion to you. Um because it could influence something that you're doing. And so, we need to we need
we request that he examine these. We have to get the color documents there. We have to request that he We try to make time to get to it. >> Correct. >> So, and another way of saying that it's even if we give you a November 13th date, you still have to get everything
to us and more importantly to the historic preservation committee so that they can comment on it. They've only commented in version two and not version three. So, we need to expedite that. There's a deadline for the meeting to get things posted, right?
>> Yes. Anything they create has to be >> 10 days. >> 10 days. So >> will to get these materials that the historic commission needs to review. >> Well, but question are they going to need to review the physical samples or
will they be at the meeting and probably bring them here? >> He probably knows what the physical samples would look like. I think the key is to get him the the two the VE drawings, you know, the two >> we can send them.
>> Yeah. And and then separately we need to let them know what the situation is. >> Yeah. The question is just do Eron and her team have coordinated directly with Dan previously when we were working on
this the exhibit twos. Do you want it to go be routed through you to Dan or do you want us to just >> they should be able to back and CC you? Yeah, as long as >> of course you can just directly communicate making
sure >> straight is the best the the I believe we have at least one member of the public who still wishes to make comment this evening at least one. So I think we're done with buckets now.
We're back at building and uh yes got a testimony about it and again for the record your name it's Jeff 18 there 20 m road B.
Um so just a couple of comments. So Bob, I think like you just mentioned about the solar panels and the kind of the role that you guys have from my understanding it's the visual impact as well that you guys are improving and all three of those
plans when you look at all of them independently only one has a large visual impact and that's a a man error in my opinion. until I ask you to go. Well, I can't ask, but my statement is this isn't really a a good-looking
improvement to the town. Everyone's going to come past this. It's going to be a double whammy. It's going to be vinyl siding plus the um the the solar panels on the top. It's going to be a significant degradation to the look of the building, which was a very good-look
building. So when the new plans come along, I think it should be I mean my statement is it should be rejected because this is significant downgrade to what we had before. So just commenting we could say to
whatever construction they could make it solar ready at your discretion at the applicant's discretion but not but I think that would be as far as we go because I still don't think we have heard you over so
>> not even from a visual impact >> maybe visual I if I were I would just not put the solar up and then I would that's just if it if if it relates
to the Dan questions. >> Yeah. But if if if in your determination an impact visually that is within your purview. >> Yes. If they're applying with the solar, then the visual impact is within the person.
>> What about the fact that it makes the units more or less expensive because the tenant has to pay the electric we're not that's not our know how they're doing. They're also planning that's not our that's why I expect you a
little on that even considering as a planning board as a basis the uh for the changes but it's a practical reality >> but costs and profits for the border
planning they're units if I remember correctly >> so the solar system solen too conversations going on in the >> use the tiny solar system the little individual solar. So ask Dan, let's make
a point. We did mention that that was one of the items we wanted to communicate to Dan the solar and um yeah if it's submitted with a request and it's visual and they they have a say in terms of how it's initially built.
The for clarification is the cost of the solar born as part of the whole project or is that separate a part the cost unassociated to the partnership that's on the developer who pays for that?
>> You need the answer to that. So they don't know but the answer is are the solar enhance yeah are the solar enhancements basically separately accounted for and funded especially from the standpoint of what Nancy I mean some of it the room accessibility
you know some of it is constructed but the rest with solar it's one thing to be solar ready it's another thing to actually put the solar panels up And the whole point is what's what's the
deal there with the solar? it and it could be something someone mentioned that it just makes the units more appealing rentwise because there is a retire solar system included in the
unit, you know, and >> yeah, it depends on how it's funded. It's their own they own it. So they can charge they can put the meter in and charge you whatever they want. Mr. Chair, I don't know if there was were any other members of the public
wanted to make a comment while they were here this evening or not. >> I do. Okay. >> With the chair's pervision, I Yeah. >> I'm Melanie D. Portier. I live on 141 Mine Brook Road. >> Please raise your right hand. You swear
to God the testimony about to give you some truth. Please. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Please proceed. >> I am not an engineer. Please tell >> um D E capital P O O R T E R E.
>> Thank you. I would not >> know. So, I'm not an engineer, but I would like to know that why do does the town have to change the aesthetic of building that you already
um approved approved um because they didn't do their due diligence and do the core samples. When you are across the street from aquar, what did you think you were going to
hit? I I I don't think the town should eat that cost. And now you're going to put up vinyl siding in Burnerville and and have the maintenance on vinyl siding and shingles
roofs. Shingles do not last as long as the the um metal roofs. Let's be real. We have to put a new roof on our house. I mean, it's it's it's not going to last 30 years. Shingles don't last 30 years.
Then you're going to have that and you're changing the colors and it it just it's not a good look for our town. Not a good look. And I know we have to do this. My husband struggled with it when he was on the town council. It's
something that the town has to do, but it has to match the town and and this isn't. And I don't think you should pay for it. I don't think the town's people should pay for it when you didn't do your due diligence. It's it's your fault. Basically,
I mean, you hit the rock, then you should have come back to the town and say, "I hit rock. We have to we have to do something." Not go ahead and blast. My house shakes from your blasting. I mean, I don't know if my well is going
to be damaged from your from your blasting. I don't know. >> I don't know. How you know? >> Thank you. >> Not happy. Any further comments from our
professionals? Okay. Um any discussion? Right now where we're sitting is we're suggesting that we're they'll be returning to
comments. >> We can't be here on the 13th. So, please make the right choices for us. >> That's bring a bag of gravel and the blast.
>> You can zoom. You can watch it. Watch. >> No, you better think it's good. >> Santa Claus at night. >> I wouldn't do nice things. >> I mean, the beard looks great here. Nothing. basically we covered a lot of
ground. >> Thank you all. >> Okay, nice. >> Our formal announcement, Mr. Chairman with Taran without further notice to November 13th. November 3rd
7:30 p.m. the same location. I think one of the key now I just the solar stuff kind of can use kind of challenging process here and it's kind
of importantize that perhaps present that important just the bot thank you very [Music] Thank you.
Thank you. Yeah. >> So that we know that it's from this year. >> Yeah. And then when you're finished, just call them. You want to [Music]
I didn't tell you.