filed with the clerk at the township of Bridgewwater and posted on the bulletin board in the municipal building. Please be aware of the planning board policy for public hearings. No new applications will be heard after 9:30 p.m. and no new testimony will be taken after 10 p.m. Hearing assistance is available on
request. Accommodations will be made for individuals with a disability provided the Americans with dis pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act or the ADA provided the individual with the disability provides 48 hours advanced notice to the planning department secretary before the public meeting.
However, if the individual should require special equipment or services such as a CART transcriber, 7 days advanced notice excluding weekends and holidays may be necessary. I would ask that everyone please rise to salute the flag. I aliance to the flag of the United
States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Miss have your roll call, please. >> Here. here.
>> Here >> thank you, Miss Propes. Okay. At this time, if there are any members of the public that wish to address our board in any matter that's not listed on this evening's agenda, please feel free to come forward at this time. >> Uh, incorrectly, there's no item on the
agenda for Cornell Boulevard this evening. If you would like to make a brief public comment, you're welcome to certainly, but this board uh does not have jurisdiction to debate that this evening. >> Good evening. If you can just state your name and address and a brief public comment regarding the situation, please.
>> Yes. Um my name is Moren Dwire. Um I live at 275 West Summit in Somerville. I'm here to oppose the Cornell Boulevard um redevelopment. I just had a couple questions. Um >> I'm sorry. Before you go there, we're
not permitted to answer any questions. This is a subject of active litigation. >> If you have a comment that you want to make as a comment then >> as a courtesy we will certainly allow limited >> comment but we we are not it is active
litigation. Okay. So, uh, there's no one on this deis that is able to answer any questions. >> Okay. Well, I guess my comment is that I would hope that Bridgewwater would come up with an area that would be uh more
suitable if it's for affordable housing for homeless veterans is what we read. Um, there's so many studies out there. Um, I would just hope that you all did your educa like looked it up and figured it out and I don't understand like why
this is the most suitable area. So, if this is something that you're going to go down, I would hope that you would maybe just educate the residents of Somerville and tell us why you think this particular area is like what where you think that it would be a suitable housing, affordable
housing because any way we look at it, it's not. And then as far as I guess you can't comment whether that it's already started. There was a bulldozer and everything over there. So I guess that's why we're all sort of up in arms because I thought we would get the answers to
our questions before it started. But okay. So my comment and is just I'm hoping that you would all go out take a look at it. It's hard to believe that that's the most suitable place to put housing. So thank you.
>> Thank you. Anybody else? >> How you doing? My name is Steve Moss. I'm a resident of 311 Ultimont Place. I am also part of the lawsuit of the the group of uh independent residents that
are suing you currently and we're opposing your AHA3 redevelopment amendment. Um, I'm sure you're aware that you had till today to respond. Of course, your attorneys responded at maybe 3:45 today and then we have this
meeting today. So, you know, in all aspects of politics, there's always things that are going on. You could have responded a week ago, you didn't. You waited till the deadline today. So, once again, dirty pool. Little bit dirty pool. Um, you've tried four different
times to get something approved there. You realize that the DOT will never let you enter the highway there because of the impact of the traffic. So you want to circumvent that because you split Cornell with us. So you want to try and
influx your traffic from this 20 unit building into our neighborhood which we don't have sidewalks, street lights. There's a problem with speeding now. Um, my office did a study in suburban areas of cities as Somerville, which
Bridgewater apparently doesn't have a city. And for every two family unit or home, it creates 9.8 vehicular traffic incidents a day, whether that's Uber, Amazon, the people who live there coming
home. So times that by 20, that's 100, let's just say 150 cars a day. 5,000 cars a year you're going to influx into our neighborhood. That's the most prestigious section of Somerville because you're looking for an avenue out
so you don't have to go on a 206 because you'll never get that. It's it's just wrong. Okay. We have bald eagles. The neighbor has pictures of bald eagles that hunt Peters Brook. Of course, you know, they're off the endangered list now, but they are a
species that we have to protect. They live in Duke Farms, possibly looking for a new home in Peters Brook. You're going to strip all these trees out, just like your tree gate that went on up at Vosler. You know, do it first and beg for forgiveness. You can't blame the contractor for that. I've been a
contractor for 40 years. You tell me I'm taking 67 trees down, I'm taking 67, maybe 65. I'm not taking 300. So, you're looking to strip a piece of land that buffers the most expensive houses in Somerville. Okay? Then you're going to
influx uh let's just say two 2500 cars a year. Cut it in half into our streets. They're not going to Bridgewater. They're going down Altimont down Prospect flying. It's
crazy. Okay. You have to realize what you're doing. I don't understand why your mayor and our mayor don't get together and talk about a land swap. We for some reason own the soccer field right next to the state police barracks and there's a giant piece of woods there
and behind that town homes that have the sewer capability right there. So maybe they butt heads, maybe you guys butt heads. Somebody's got to get together and say, "This is unrealistic to do this to a beautiful neighborhood of a street
that you're going to be coming in our street to turn into your development. I think you need our sewer, too. I'm not sure. We'll leave that up to our attorneys, but it's just wrong." And we're making you aware that you're doing these things this evening to try and get
your affordable housing redevelopment with that AH3 slipped in as this place isn't wasn't on your master plan and you're trying to get that done based on our attorney's letter to your attorney saying all the deficiencies in your master plan. So
you're trying to circumvent that. So something needs to be done guys because as privately we have unlimited funds. Trust me. So, Mayor Gallagher last night said that he can do nothing
right now until there's a uh site plan submitted at which point Somerville will come at you very aggressively. The guy was there doing percolation tests. I do them for the last 40 years. He's doing that to see the permeability of your storm water management. So, you
obviously have someone under contract for the property right now. If he's there doing perk tests, trying to get a development approved and figure out where his storm water management's going to be. He told this little lady here that he was just digging to check out where the sewer is going. So again,
dirty pool, you know, but I knew better. So please reconsider what you're doing and maybe try and do a land swap, which would be better for everyone. Thank you. >> Just want to state again for the record that this is public comment. We are incapable of responding.
Well, but there was some pretty inflammatory commentary made. >> State your name and address for the record. And please, let's try to keep the commentary brief as well. >> Cash 203 Cornell. I'm ground zero. >> So, I'm not going to go on about
everything. I just have a big concern that is eating at me. And I hope none of you are this type of person. You know where the property is. I think for most of you probably don't know physically you have the property you have time to eat diner you have the entrance ramp to
20220 206 you have 20220 206 right here the property ramp major highway you're proposing to put two buildings in here and then you're going to invite these families who will probably have some little kids to move into here and let
those kids suck up this exhaust 24/7 365 I have a Big problem with that. I can smell the exhaust in my patio. I live right there. My house is ground zero. On days in the summer when the wind is
blowing a certain way, I cannot be on my patio. Maybe an hour, two hours. I can smell the exhaust. I'm hundred and I don't know how many feet from the highway. So now you're thinking of putting two residential buildings. Veterans here, this is what we think of you. Breathe in the exhaust for 24 hours
a day. little kids. Yeah, we think this about you kids. We don't have a We disregard your lives. Breathe the exhaustion. We need to meet our quotas. Doesn't matter if we're going to jeopardize your health. We have to meet our quotas. The mayor has given us a directive. Meet the quotas. Who cares
about the kids? This is what I'm seeing. It really bothers me that my township is behaving like this with complete disregard for people's lives. So, >> thank you for your comment.
Anybody else? And for those of you that just walked in, I'll just remind what was just stated by our councilman, any subject matter related to Cornell Boulevard this evening is not on our agenda. As secondarily, it is a current situation that is under litigation. This board is
not does not have the ability uh to discuss this matter this evening. So, please feel free to comment on the situation with a brief com comment. However, we're going to limit it to commentary at this moment. >> The board has no jurisdiction over this matter. >> Thank you, board attorney. Mr. Peek,
>> I I did just My name is Gain New and I live at 291 West Summit Street, just around the corner from the proposed or from the reszoned area of the proposed building. And I would just want to register that I I'm opposed to it
because one of the things that strikes me as a bit strange that maybe people you can tell the other people the planners or whatever is that Somerville has five times four or five times bigger population per square meter or square uh
mile than Bridgewater does. But you want to try and squash that right on the side of our bit of land. Why would you do that? Why would they want to do that? Because it just seems unreasonable to me when you've got that much more space that you could put the put the um
premises on. And also, I don't think it would be very nice for anyone to live there either, especially if they've got any kind of handicap. and they're living right next to a roaring main road right next to the circle with all the alarms going off with all the police cars from the accidents every day. And also
because of the traffic around there, it's already bad down Route 28 going onto the circle. You get held up every morning. It's just going to make it worse. So, and it's not very nice for the people, some of them whom who live are Bridgewater
um residents whose properties are going to be affected by the noise because if you take trees out of that as well, the flooding is going to be worse. It's going to ruin their properties, devalue their properties for what? Just to squeeze it onto that little bit of land
when you've got all that extra land bigger than Somerville. >> Oh, sorry. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Yes. All right. Thank you. That's all. So, I just want to register mine and my husband's objection to it. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> So, again, I've been to most of these meetings and >> could you please state your name and address for the record? My name is Tim Cullen and I'm at 285 West Summit Street about a block away from where this uh project is proposed or looks like it's
being proposed. Um so I really just voice my opinion that I I I really would like uh to be I I'm stating that I'm opposed to having this uh project and the spot zoning being done in this area.
Um, you know, living this close to the Somerville Circle, I've seen so many people crossing these roads 2026 trying to get over to go shopping and stuff like that. And uh I cannot imagine
what this is going to do on these on-ramps that daily we see Raridan Bridgewater and Somerville coming there to see accidents where cars have been hit. uh the amount of traffic that goes
on in this these areas, especially this road. And I find it hard to believe that this development is going to have it where all these people are um going to be traversing back through Somerville, Cornell Boulevard, and not attempting to
cross 202 and 206 right at this road area. I find it impossible to believe it's not going to happen. So, I'm opposed to it. I'm asking the board if they have any opportunity to voice an opinion of um changing this ordinance
where it's for spot zoning of this development. And uh really just when I have my name put down that I opposed it and as a neighborhood I can't believe that we're going forward with this. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
Please state your name and address. Write your address for the record. >> It would be it would be preferred just so that we have both, you know, the verbiage as well as the written. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
It's for the completeness of the record. So, >> good evening everyone. My name is Brian Riley, 100 Prospect Street, Somerville, New Jersey. I'm also here to oppose the AH3 spot reszoning of block 406, lot 2.01. I'm sorry that there's more of us
here than you anticipated tonight. We were told that uh we needed to be here to to speak against the resoning. So, if you were surprised that we're all here, that's why. I won't add more. There's been a lot of great arguments as to why this is just a terrible location. I
never heard of the land swap idea before. I don't do what you do. Maybe that intrigued you, maybe it didn't. Uh, but it's a much better piece of property over there than squeezing this build into such a small piece of property. A lot of arguments already made. the
veterans in question. I thought I was a sound speak a sleeper until I moved to 100 Prospect Street. I'm awake throughout the night. Hydraulic brakes, motorcycles, traffic noise. I don't suffer from post-traumatic stress
disorders, but I know that some of our unfortunate veterans do. It just doesn't make sense as a location. So hopefully beyond you or amongst you, we can find a a different location for this build. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Mr.
Really. >> Hey, Don. Jim Cummings, 299 West Summer Street, Somerville. Um, obviously I'm against what's going on. I have questions. I'd like to have answers, but I know that's not going to happen. Um, I do have concerns and I have thoughts maybe for the board. One is, was there a
traffic study done to consider that? two, if I was a builder and I bought that property, I would only be limited to maybe a house, maybe two houses, not 15 units. And you're putting 10 pounds of stuff in a two-lb bag. And it's going
to affect the neighborhood. It's going to um you have traffic going down all the time, too. And we see it going down Cornell because it's a cut through and you're going to add more and it's just going to be tough. And yeah, you think about the kids playing there. I wouldn't
want my kid being on walking the sidewalk on 202 206 entrance. That's rough enough just getting across the Tim Hortons, you know, in his accidents there all the time too as well. But that's a whole thing. But just to consider and also an EPA study hasn't
been an EPA study with the Brook that, you know, anybody builds something like that, especially that larger building, they're going to do something like that. The EPA is going to want something like that. So that's my bottom line. You know, I I don't think it was totally considered completely and I
think it really needs to be rethought. Maybe downsize it if you want to get your points in with the federal government. Cut the put the veterans there or put maybe five families there. Fine. But be realistic about it. That's all.
>> Thank you, Mr. >> Thank you. Good evening. My name is Dave Neap and I live on 295 Alimon Place in Somerville. As everybody else is here, I not thrilled with this project at all.
I respectfully request that you resend the spot zoning ordinance on block 406 lot 2.01 which we refer to as Cornell Boulevard to AHA AH3 as is not consistent with the
single family residences in the area. The infrastructure doesn't support it. The neighborhood doesn't support it. And it doesn't make any sense for your town or for ours.
I respect Bridgewater immensely. I've been in this town. I've been in this neighborhood since 1978. I lived on this block. My sister lives on Cornell directly across the street from where your exit's going to come
into their front yard. Yesterday when I was in front of the property as the bulldozer was there, my sister's car is parked in front of the house and your bulldozers in front of directly across. Can't get through
there. Cars had to be pulled, moved so somebody could get down the block down Orle Drive. Makes no sense to me. If any of you even looked at this block and looked straight out towards Mr.
Cash's driveway. You're going to have to widen that street to have an exit. That cuts off his driveway. I don't know how he's going to get into his backyard. Or else you could have a horseshoe going
like that up Cornell Boulevard. It makes no sense. You may not care about Somerville, the neighborhood. You should care about the two residences of Bridgewater that have a big say in this. You need
access to this this lot. In ingress, egress from the plan I saw or the one thing I all hearsay, but the initial plan seems to be going right between their driveways because you believe there's a paper street
there, which is yours, but it's not. It's theirs. So, I believe You'll probably have to go through the eminent domain process. You'll probably have to sue them. They'll sue you. Whatever. You may not ever get that. So, what do you think you're going to do?
You're going to move everything down the block to come out on a little narrow strip of Cornell Boulevard in Somerville. A little culde-sac road. That's where that's where you're putting egress and ingress in there. I mean,
you're this is what your plan is for 20 units to come out on a little street in Somerville. It's beyond me how you could possibly think something like this works. Number one. Number two, the points that were made as far as putting veterans
and people who can't afford to live their American dream in a small little lot that's directly on 2026 is embarrassing to me. I would be embarrassed as a Bridgewater resident that you want to stick these people
here. And if and if you walked that block and you looked over that street to see the trucks coming down 202 206 all day long, I think you'd have a better opinion of what you're doing. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Just in case anyone is watching this video and and seeks context, I will once again repeat that this is a subject both of ongoing litigation which prevents us from commenting as well as uh this planning board does not have jurisdiction over this project at this
time. Are there any other comments to be made by our members of the public? >> Okay, seeing none, we're going to close that public portion of commentary and we're going to move on this evening. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much.
We do have a set of board minutes from March 18, 2025. However, it's been brought to my attention. I don't believe that everybody in the Dis has had a chance to fully review this content. Is that correct, Miss Propes? >> Press to table those, please. >> Very good. So, we'll be tableabling those till the next meeting then.
>> We'll be prepared for the next meeting to do that. >> Yes, they are on the D, but they >> Okay, great. >> Very good. Moving along. We do have a resolution this evening. That's application number 2510 PB. That's the clubhouse of Somerset County LLC, not
just golf. There any comments, questions, or changes to the record? >> Hearing none. >> I mean, I'll simply reiterate that, you know, the the hearing um was very productive. there was uh you know some
important uh concerns raised and and addressed and it's an it's an excellent application that received full support then and I will uh gladly move uh the resolution um tonight.
>> That's Councilman Kersh. I'll need a second. >> I'll second. >> That's Miss Charteritz. Could I have a roll call, please? For >> the record, Miss Sakura and Mr. Banga are not eligible. Okay. >> Vessio, >> yes. >> Councilman Kur, >> yes.
>> Mr. Papis, >> yes. >> Mr. McGor, >> yes. >> Mr. Wang, >> yes. >> Miss Chardawitch, >> yes. >> Mr. Chowdery, >> yes. >> Okay, moving along to our sole application this evening. That's the Wine Outlet of Bridgewater LLC, block
349, lot 5, commonly known as 155 Prominade Boulevard. And who will be representing the applicant this evening? Um, good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Jason Tuvel, um, attorney for the applicant. Um, this is an application for signed variance relief
for the property at 155 Prominade Boulevard, but more specifically for the one one tenant within the shopping center, the Wine Outlet. Um, as the board probably knows better than I, um, the bed bath and beyond used to occupy that space. The Bed Bath and Beyond um,
left and the space was then split into two tenants. one being the Burlington Coat Factory which is there and the other being the wine outlet. The Burlington Coat Factory um I would say occupies more of the original bed bath space but it was it was split it was
split up. So as of right now the wine outlet has one sign on the facade of the of the building over the entrance um that just says wine outlet and it does have a sign on the rear of the site sort of on the service area um that does say wine, beer, and spirits. Um, the reason
that we're here is that when the store first opened back in May, uh, the applicant had banner signs or temporary signs up that said wine, beer, and spirits and they were performing quite well. They took those down because they were temporary banner signs. Um, and
then they saw foot traffic diminish and the complaint that they were getting was that they didn't people didn't know that they sold other things than just wine. So, they actually put those if you went there this evening like I did before the meeting, they actually reapplied to the to the town and got permits for for
those temporary signs to put back up that say wine, beer, and spirits. And there's two of them. They're actually quite large on either side. So, the goal here is to remove those two temporary signs and just have one more permanent sign on the front of this facade that
says wine, beer, and and spirits. And as you'll see, and as our planning testimony um will show, the Wine Outlets sign that's currently there is much smaller than the existing um um signs in the shopping center. For example, Michaels, Bob's Furniture, Pets Smart,
and and many of them also have other I'll call itformational or wayfinding signs similar to what we're we're asking for here. So, Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I just have one witness that I plan on calling. is our professional planner. They'll go through the the one sign that we're seeking um the relief
for. Um I submitted my affidavit of service and publication to the board. So that should be in order. So um if the board doesn't have any questions, I'd be happy to call Mr. Flynn as our planning witness. >> Please bring him forward. >> Okay. >> Take the mic so you have it.
>> Raise your right hand. Right. >> You swear that the testimony you're going to give in connection with this hearing will be the truth and nothing about the truth. >> I do. >> Thank you. Could you state and spell your name for the record? >> Matthew Flynn. F L Y N. >> And you want me to go through his
qualifications, Mr. Pek? >> Please do. >> Yeah. >> Matt, if you could just give the board the benefit of your educational background, licenses held, and experience testifying before similar boards, including if you've testified in Brit as well. >> Sure. education comes from Ruckers University, master's degree in planning
and I'll I'll do it ma master's degree in planning and public policy. Um professional planners license in the state of New Jersey as well as the AICP license which is the national lensure for planners. Um both are in good standing. I've testified before over 100 boards across the state including I
believe this one but definitely the uh zoning board. >> Okay. Does the board have any objection to Mr. Flynn's qualifications? Your license is is current. >> Yes. >> No other question. >> So, what's the board's preference in terms of where I put my easel? Right
here. >> Maximum visibility. Either right here or on the other side of the >> typically in front of that service door is where most people do it. >> So, the board accepts Mr. Phone's qualification. Sorry. Yes. You said that. Sorry.
>> If you could move it to the table. Perfect. And are these just blowups of what was already submitted with the application? >> Yeah, there'll be one exhibit that we have that's in addition to that, but this what you're seeing right now is exactly what you have in in your packets.
>> So, essentially what we're looking at here um is >> Matt just just before you do that, just just the foundational questions. You visited the site in the surrounding area. >> Yes. And you reviewed all the application materials and you reviewed the review letter from the board planner as well. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Go ahead. And just indicate what sheet you're pointing
to. >> So this will be sheet one of two um prepared by Murdoch Engineering. Um basically this is what Mr. Tvel just explained to the board. Right now we have um a couple temporary banner signs that will be removed um subsequent to
this application. This main wine outlet sign is there today as was explained by council um which measures at approximately 127.9 square feet. And the reason that we're here this evening is because we are requesting this additional signage um off to the left on
this page which comes out to 110 square feet. Um and basically the reason that we're here this evening is we're seeking a variance for signage area. You have to take the aggregate of all the signs. Um, and there's also one in the back which brings us to about 310 square feet
whereas the maximum allowance is 100 square feet. Um, so basically what I want to do is just to sort of flip through this real quick is show the board the the other sign that's out there today. This is on the
back. This is again sheet one of two. I'm not sure how he's labeled these. Um, but this is again sheet one of two. So, it's the back of the of the building and that sign is 72.4 square ft. And so, as council mentioned, really the the point
of this additional signage is to add that descriptor in terms of providing customers better clarity in terms of the the products that are offered here at at Wine Outlet. Obviously, as the name implies, people may believe that we only sell wine here, but of course, this
additional signage clarifies that in terms of the other offerings. Um, a quick Google search will actually show you that most of the other wine outlets have uh description signs such as this one that say wine, beer, and spirits for the exact reason that council uh has
laid out. It's just a better um better it's a better descriptor of what the the uh this business offers here. Um, so with that, and I can refer back to this in as needed, but I do have another exhibit that has not been
submitted. >> Yes. So, we'll call this A1, I guess. So, exhibit A1 is a sevenpage exhibit uh consisting of some drone shots taken by my office earlier today, December 2nd, 2025. And just while that's getting uh
distributed there, um basically what it depicts is obviously the subject property as well as all the other signs that we have um on this on this building here. >> And Matt, that was taken as of today, so it's completely accurate as to what's
out there. Okay. >> So just to start off here, page one, clearly we see the existing sign. And if we compare that sign with just the immediate signage to the left and to the right, we can see that it is uh I would say somewhat undersized in comparison to
uh the Bob's Discount Furniture on the left of that image, as well as the Burlington Coat Factory signage that's over there to the right. And then sheet two just zooms in on some of these other signs here. Uh Bob's Discount Furniture. We actually our sign vendor took the measurements of that
sign. So we do have the benefit of that and al together we have uh we have the front signs and then we have the sign on the side there which I've put on the top left corner of sheet two and if this wants to load I had that
um so altogether in terms of the Bob's discount furniture we're looking at 337.1 square ft. Um, and that's again in terms of the front as well as the side signage. Whereas we're prepared, right? >> You said Bob's was >> 337.1
square feet >> total. >> Total >> front and side. >> The front and the side. And our 310 square feet is again the front and the back >> to your May I ask a question? Is that appropriate at this time? To your
knowledge and maybe this is also a question for Miss Sarmad. to your knowledge is is the signage at Bob's Furniture, Burlington Coat Factory, Marshalls, uh Michaels, and PetSmart. Are are they
conforming or at some point did they seek relief to be nonconforming? >> That I would defer to Miss Sarmad in terms of if they received relief, but based on my approximations, they are all well over 100 square feet. their their
building facades are larger, >> right? Their building facads are much larger in their square footage. And I guess Miss Sarmat, if you could maybe educate all of us h how do we calculate permissible uh signage? >> Sure. So, um in my review memo, page
three includes the section for um the signage requirements for the PRCPD zone specifically. So this was done all of these tenants were all done as one development and they did permit at that time when they were con when they were
coming for approval um not to exceed 7% of the total area of the building facade um and also uh would be designed to complement the building architecture. Um, and so what happened with those was likely that they were approved as part of a a site
plan or you know a development plan were approved and as tenants changed they were grandfathered into those sign areas. So Bed Bath and Beyond had quite a large sign area. As far as I know, Burlington Coat Factory did not come in with a variance for a sign before this board. Um, I think they they applied via
zoning permit and so I think they were approved because of what the sign that was previously there, the Bed Bath Meyond was pretty large. Um similarly um the change from the Babies R Us to the Bobs, I mean Bob's has a smaller sign than Babies R Us did. Um but those
I don't believe required any variance relief. This is unique because this was a a single tenant suite previously when it was Bed Bath and Beyond which has been now split into two. um the Burlington Coat Factory and the Wine Outlet. And so the facade area has been
reduced now by by virtue of the fact that there are now two ten suites rather than one. >> And and when you say split, was that split in half or some >> I can give you the approximate number, Mr. Kersh? So from speaking to my client, um the bed bath space was about
40,000 square feet. You know, those are pretty big stores when they were open. And now the bed the Burlington took 25. and our client I know how much our client has 15. So that's why I was able to figure out the the other is 25. >> So the vacant space is 25 and >> it's not it's not v uh it's not vacant.
Burlington is in the one space and our client wine outlet is in the other space. They're both currently operating. >> Oh, I'm sorry. You cuz what I'm seeing is your sign is above um you know what I guess I would call the right side entrance.
You have that full space between Bob's and Burlington. >> Burlington is on the other side of the wine outlet. Looking at the store, Burlington is to the right and Bob is to the left. >> And you have the full space between Bob's and Burlington. >> That's right. >> Okay. But your sign is it looks like
there's two entrances or could be two entrances. >> There's only one. There's only like if you go to the store today, there's one entrance. >> All right. Yeah. >> You can see from the rooftop where it splits between Bob's and Wine Outlet. Okay. >> Okay. Can I have Matt just is Did we
answer your question? I'm sorry. >> Yeah. So, so your total space is is how much? 20. >> The interior space is is 15,000. >> 15,000. And And what is the the this the space of the full frontage of the building square foot?
>> Oh, uh yeah, actually I do have that if you um it's I can tell you what it is. It's um it's 340 in by 970 in. So if you calculate that by 12, it's um
Matt, do you want to do that math real quick? >> Yeah, it's it's I got it. Never mind. I got it. I just want to be able to answer the question. >> It's 80 It's approximately 81 by 28. Our >> building that contains Bob's the wine
outlet in Burlington. >> No, just our space is okay. >> Yeah, I just have the measurements for our space. I thought >> So I get >> 2,290 square feet >> of the frontage. >> Yeah, >> of the frontage. Correct. >> What is the uh facade frontage of Bob's
>> front and side and rear? So the the number that you've just given us 81 by 28. Is that just the front? 81 by 28. Correct. The facade. That's what you would have to calculate to get our to get our number. >> But you're also including the square
footage from the sign to the rear. >> So, so Mr. Papis, the way that that I think this should be viewed, and I spoke to Miss Sarmat about it, is that the back of the building is actually a separate facade. And I believe that's why they got a permit for it because it
it conformed. The sign in the back conformed. And then the one wine outlet sign that we got in the front also conformed. So we're really just talking about this this one sign >> that >> so I understand. So but Bob's you know
you made reference Mr. Flynn made reference to the square footage of the Bob's sign as 337 square ft >> to total. Yes. We um one sign the one large sign that they have on the front that faces the parking lot
>> and the side. >> Yeah. No, no. I'm just giving you the breakdown so you have it. >> Go ahead. >> The um the the big Bob's Furniture sign that you see there, >> um we had our sign vendor calculate it and it's 196.3 ft. And then the mattress sign to the to the right of it, if
you're looking at the at the at the um exhibit >> is for sorry is n is 47.5 square ft. So there >> add those up, it's 243.8. >> The two of those together. >> Yes. Yes. And I earlier someone said
337. >> Yeah, I I we counted the the side. But if you don't count that side, if you just assume that that is a separate facade. There's it's just the 196.3 plus 47.5 for the for the facade that we're also talking about. >> And what is the uh facade of Bob's? The
entire facade of the store. >> Um I can I don't know if we've calculated that. I I could I could try to do I could have Matt try to do that. >> It is relevant. I think it's relevant. Okay. No, that's fair enough. >> Yeah, I I think all these calculus are
relevant because proportionality is is important. >> No, I don't I don't disagree. I think what Matt can Matt just go through his testimony and then if we have that maybe >> is is that okay everybody? Is that And then we can go back if the board needs clarity on some of these numbers we
could do that. >> Let's proceed with the testimony. >> Thank you. Yeah. And I I guess, you know, at the end of the day, that that's a calculation that I may be able to do on the fly, but I think it makes more sense to sort of wrap up the the testimony. Um, if I'm I think I'm still on sheet two here. Um, the important
thing to note here is, as we said, the front signage of Bob's comes out to approximately 240 square feet, which is pretty much what we're proposing for our front facade. The other important thing to note is that Bob's also has that descriptor sign which is mattresses um
off to the right there that we can see. So we are matching that sort of pattern of having the main brand name and then that description signage that describes the um the offerings in the business. So just flipping through here, you know, we
see Burlington on sheet three, which I calculated at over 200 square feet just to be conservative. um sheet four really all these signs again just to be conservative I I want to say with confidence that they're well over 200 square feet but of course I
don't want to give any exact measurements um just flipping along here really just to show um sheet five Michaels again they have that the arts and crafts store which is sort of a a slogan there um but again it is sort of that description um that we're seeking
here and then sheet six shows the pets smart at the other end of the of the building there. Again, this does have those descriptor signage. It says grooming on one side and then it says pet hospital on the other. So, a little bit of a description
of the offerings of the business. And then sheet seven just shows the back which really is not the subject of the of the application this evening but again we do have that wine outlet sign on the back there just to show the so
just to sort of sum up here uh from a planning perspective at the end of the day what the what the applicant wanted to do was to provide something that is consistent with everything that we see along this building in terms of the the area of the sign um in terms of the visibility
um really when we Look at this particular property. We see a very large parking lot and there is a certain amount of signage size that is is needed in order to effectuate safe wayfinding visibility. On top of that, also, as I said, a description of what's offered at
this store. We see the word wine. We automatically assume that wine is the only thing that's offered. If we're looking for other types of of of alcohol, we might uh not bother to stop in here. Um, so really I would say that any tenant that was to utilize this
space would likely be seeking a similar variance. It's not really um specific to this tenant per se. This is a this is a building that sort of requires that larger sign area for again wayinding across this vast parking lot. So again,
the the variance that we're seeking I guess specifically is the 310.3 square feet, but again that's including that sign in the back. But I believe that's how Miss Sarmad wants us to uh to phrase the variance relief. So just to tie all that into the
statutory criteria, I think we can look to the C2 balancing test. The benefits of the application as a whole substantially outweigh any detriment. Um in terms of the benefits, we look to the municipal land use law. The purposes of zoning uh set forth therein. Why do we have these requirements in the first
place? Uh purpose a promotion of the general welfare. here. As I said, this uh this affectuates safe and efficient wayfinding. It is a large parking lot. If the signage was at 100 square feet, I think that this tenant would be at somewhat of a disadvantage compared with
all the other tenants in the in the building. And like I said, this is typical signage. So, when we talk about brand recognition, um this is the signage that you would expect if you were looking for a a wine outlet. Um, again, a simple Google search will will show that this is the branding that is
consistent across all of their stores. Purpose G, variety of uses in appropriate locations, effectuating the success of a permitted use, an approved use in the zone with what I would say is reasonable signage again for wayfinding and visibility and more specifically
clarity of the services that are provided by the business. Purpose I, desirable visual environment. Again, I'll go back to compatibility here. I think that really none of the signs are compliant at 100 square feet. I understand the board's concerns in terms
of the proportionality argument. Um, but I based on my interpretation of the ordinance, it's a whichever is less. So, it's 7% or 100 square feet, whichever is less. Um, and so for that reason, I would say that all of the signs are are
um necessarily uh non-compliant in that regard. And Matt, just putting putting the square footages and the numeric calculations aside, do you think that this proposal blends in with the um with the facade of the build of the whole center there, or do you think it's out of or do you think it's out of character? Can you give an opinion on
that? >> I think it's in character, especially if we look at sheet one here, we can see that the existing sign >> is sort of dwarf dwarfed by some of these other signs in the area. by providing some extra signage, I think it does sort of bump this tenant up to par
with what we have um in the in the rest of the building there. >> And the sign doesn't face into any residential zones. It just faces into the shopping center parking lot. Correct. >> That's correct. >> So, in your opinion, would there be any negative impacts on the surrounding area? >> No, I would say in terms of the
negatives, this is a a modest, tasteful sign despite the uh despite the relief being sought. It's compatible. Like council mentioned, it doesn't face a public roadway. It faces a vast parking lot where people may be driving all the way from that Costco if we're familiar with the shopping center, which I'm sure
we are. Um, and I would say again that in ter impacts to the zone plan, the relief relates to a specific property that has compatibility with the rest of the building. Um, it would not make planning sense for this business to have substantially smaller signage than the
rest. Um, and so for those reasons, I would say the negative criteria is met, not the potential detriment to the public or to the zone. This is a property that's remote from residential. Um, and really it just serves the the uh the motoring public in the park.
>> Okay. And then just a couple other things just for the board's edification. Obviously, if this sign were approved, those temporary signs where there's two of them that they that is in in sheet number one would be removed. Correct. >> That's correct. >> So, the quantity would be reduced. Um, also the the the the timing of the
lighting of the signage, it goes off right pretty much right after closing. Correct. >> That's correct. >> Okay. So, in your professional opinion, the positive criteria is met as multiple purposes. We only need to uh advance one, but multiple purposes of the municipal laneous law are advanced.
>> Yeah. Purpose A, G, I, and M. >> Okay. And you also believe that the negative criteria is met. Correct. >> That's correct. and that there's no and that the benefits of of granting this variance would substantially outweigh any detriments. >> Correct. >> Okay. All right. I just wanted him to put the planning testimony on the record. We're obviously happy to answer
any questions that the board may have in in addition. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Fel. Thanks, Mr. Flynn. Are there any questions regarding the testimony just heard? >> Mr. Chowry, >> may I ask please? >> Please. >> Okay. I think uh my question my question is basically in line with what uh Mr.
Papas asked. Um, so obviously you don't know what the square feet of Bob's furniture is, right? >> I know what the square footage of the signs are. >> Signs you, >> but I did not You're right. I did not specifically measure the sign company did not measure the whole facade, but we could try to get that number for you if
>> Okay. So, the reason I'm asking I'm just estimating the number of, you know, space with yours versus Bob's. I think Bob has a less than yours. If I'm just assuming that you know just picture wise >> has less what what you're saying >> less square feet than yours.
>> I I let's if that's something important for the board we we should figure out what that is to be accurate. >> Sarm did you have a comment to add to that >> while we were while Mr. Flynn was finishing his testimony. I did do like kind of an off-the cuff calculation. Um so take it with a grain of salt but I
just did an estimate based on the panel lengths that they provided the dimensions on their plan. They have four kind of you'll see the way the building's broken up from the architecture. And so I did the calculation of their frontage with that and then I looked at you know Google Earth to see how many panels you know
that Bob's had. Um and they have Bob's has six kind of sections on the storefront whereas the wine outlet has four and not surprisingly Bob's has about 50% more uh frontage or sorry area on the frontage. So the facade area for
wine outlet is approximately I'm rounding up here 2200. I'm just trying to give a round number. Um whereas the Bob's also rounding up a little bit is about 3,800 square feet. >> Okay. >> And the and the B did you look at Burlington or can you do a quick estimate of Burlington? I'm not going to do the whole the whole complex.
>> Burlington's a little different because it's taller and I don't know how tall it is. I was basing the height off of the wine outlet from the dimensions we we have on their plans. Burlington does appear to be um a little bit taller and I actually don't know how much of the
the space Burlington has beyond that main storefront. Um if it goes up to the Marshalls, it looks like it goes past one. So, let me see if I can do that real quick. While she's doing that, I I would concur with what uh Miss Sarmad said about the Bob's frontage. And just based on my
I'll I'll wait for her response, but I would say that the Burlington is much closer in terms of the frontage length uh compared to the the wine outlet and closer to the frontage length. It's a little bit longer, but it it's
>> I'm comparing it to the wine outlet. Yeah. And another thing that was mentioned that maybe I should have mentioned earlier is that a lot of these tenants have if we see the Burlington on sheet one for example that sign panel sort of extends higher than the wine
outlet panel and that's actually sort of a recurring theme throughout this shopping center. So that does give again a somewhat of a benefit to some of these other tenants where the wine outlet does not have that sort of architectural feature as pronounced as some of these
other tenants. I'd argue though that the wine outlet rented that space knowing that ahead of time. >> Agreed. >> So I I think on an estimation um Nancy gave me the survey which does have some of this the front so I was able to do a better estimate of the frontage. The
length of the former bed bath now Burlington um from the darker part that's hot taller onto the edge of the marshalss is approximately 110 ft. I estimated that the kind of parapit of that portion goes up maybe three to four
feet higher than the building here here for the wine outlet. So I think the Burlington probably has about 3500 square feet of facade rounding up. So a little less than Bob's actually. >> So can I just ask a question just because this this is very important for
the applicant. I mean >> I could have Mr. Mr. Chowry finish his question. No problem. I interrupted him so I'd like him to finish his thought. >> Well, first of all, thank you for giving me some of that, you know, information. Anyway, I was about to go that direction. So, you already gave me the exact number. So, uh looks like that
even if you consider all the figures, you actually have Burlington has a 25,000 square ft inside based on your >> the inside. Yes, >> inside. at Burlington has a front side is 3500 like you know the the our
planner professional planner said. So they have got the sign is about 200 square ft based on what you just uh you know commented right about 200 square feet sign is for Burlington. >> The sign for Burlington um I I said it's
something north of 200 I'm not sure exactly. >> Well make it 250. So, so, so based on even that comparison, your sign is is uh much more than what comparison is uh
that's what I'm getting into it. >> Compared to Burlington, >> comparison to the Burlington at least and a Bob store obviously we don't know that square feet. So you know only things we know Bob stores that it uh it has got 237 square ft 243 ft on signage
against 3800 uh face square ft and your is two uh 237 square ft against the face square ft of 2200 and uh uh inside square feet of 15,000 square ft.
Yeah, I think you know I think the main point here is that despite the relative sizes of the tenant spaces, we see this sort of consistent theme of around 250 square ft going upwards of 300 square feet. And the reason for that again
despite the size of the tenants is that this is a large property and that that is sort of the the the size that is necessary to affectuate visibility. Again, despite the size of the tenant signs, we do see this consistent theme of all these signs are relatively large.
And so, you know, for that reason, I think it's not going to stand out. >> No, you're right. We're not we're not basically questioning about the signs are large or small. We're considering that comparisons wise, your sign has a
much at least somewhat larger square feet than comparatively others. That's what we are getting into it based on the figures that you have given. Now my question to you is is it possible that you can actually uh you could reduce the
what do you call wine spirit and beer signs somewhat less so that at least you can be around instead of 237 square ft you are around about 210 or something like that. >> I I would have to ask the client but I can ask that question. Yeah, that's that's one of the things
>> but I could ask the client that question >> that will basically match the proportional uh you know comments that Mr. Papas has made. >> Fair enough. >> Thank you, Mr. Chad. >> If I can add to that um why um when the
original sign that says wine outlet, why did that not include the words wine, beer, and spirits? >> Ask ask the question again, Mr. Pap, so I just understand. wine outlet um sign above the doorway. >> Uh why would that not have included the
words wine, beer, and spirits that you're here seeking permission to >> I don't know why the sign vendor doesn't you know put that at the your question is why wasn't that put at the bottom or why wasn't that somehow incorporated into that. I I I can't answer that for
the designer of the sign. I don't So why couldn't that be changed to uh add that instead of seeking this variance which >> it would still require relief if if that was added to the to the to the sign is because the sign's already up and
manufactured so it would but can I can I just pose a question to >> let me finish my thoughts go ahead please >> the existing sign above the door wine outlet that is 100 >> oh you want to know the total for that one >> what's the square footage of the wine outlet sign above the doorway.
>> Yeah, sure. I can give you that. It's 127.9. >> Okay. So, 127 and the new sign proposed >> 110. >> 110. >> And then the sign to the rear is 27.
>> Um the sign in the back is 79, I think. >> 72.4. >> 72. Sorry. Four. >> Okay. And then again the we've been talking about comparisons. Bob's has significantly more a larger facade,
right? And the sign coverage of the that sign is approximately the same, right? So the Bob's Bob's Furniture sign on the facade is similar to the two signs that would be on the wine outlet facade,
right? No, this if you just take the facade facing the um the parking lot, >> the the Bobs is 196 and 47.5, which is what, Matt? >> It's two It's substantially similar. It's okay. We're proposing like 247.
>> Okay. So, you're proposing a larger sign with a smaller facade. >> Larger sign larger sign coverage of your facade proportionately as compared to Bob's. Right. >> I would say so. Yeah. >> Okay. So, again, I'd go back to why
couldn't the wine outlet sign above the door be redesigned with the words wine, beer, and spirits incorporated into the same side? >> Okay. >> Sign. >> So, can I give what I think is the practical answer to your question? So, I think the practical answer to your
question is they've designed and paid for that sign that's up there now. So, they're not going to remove that. That would be a very expensive endeavor. But to answer to go to what Mr. Kahadri said earlier and maybe to what you're alluding to is perhaps they can do something that is not as substantial if
that's the board's concern to incorporate what the message that they want to incorporate into the facade. >> That's where I'm headed. >> Okay. So then can I can I ask this then? Um, I think it's I've seen from this board and all boards are different that
the um proportionality and the percentages of all the facads are critical to your thinking on this application. So, I don't want to guess. I know we've estimated some of the numbers, but I'd rather get them 100%
right and then see where we are if we can reduce the sign. I can't, you know, do that on my own. I have to ask the client if they're willing to do that. I do know that the wine, beer, and spirits uh sign is critical to their business. They have found an actual drop off from when they take down those temporary
signs. So, I would have to ask them if we could reduce the sign if that's what >> And your client's not here >> because of the weather. They they weren't able to to come. >> So, so it sounds like you're gathering homework. >> That's what I in trying to enter into a
productive dialogue with the board. I get the sense that that's what you're asking. >> No, no, we appreciate that. We we we appreciate that. So, I'm sorry, m Mr. um Mr. Papus, did you have anything else? >> Go ahead. >> I was just going to throw out a suggestion. I mean, you can't see the
fine wine, beer, and spirits from the other side. I'm drive by there all the time. I've been in >> You're right. You're 100% right. >> I mean, why wouldn't they just move that from the back to the front? It would it it would still require the relief though because of the because of the fact that
you would have over the hundred square feet on that frontage on one side. >> Yeah, it would it would still it would we'd still be here asking you for for something um on that the other but to that point and >> expensive and >> move 40,000 square foot uh 40.
>> Yeah. If you look at these three when I do a Google search because I did a Google search when he said to most of the wine outlets have it right underneath and it's about that size and not measure >> the the other thing that I just wanted the board to be aware of that I was going to ask Matt and I just forgot to when we're going in this discussion the
the the main sign the main wine outlet sign the way that it's oriented in the shopping center Matt right when you when the trees are in full bloom that are in the shopping center they actually obstruct that they actually obstruct that sign as you enter from Costco. Correct. >> Yeah. And you could see that on sheet
one. It's one of the few uh strips with trees that run straight up to our our tenant space. Oh, >> you mean the strip between the where the cars are parked? >> Correct. >> Right. So, when that's in full bloom, that obstructs the wine outlet sign. And I know Miss Sakor was right what she
said earlier. They took that space knowing that that was there. I I completely understand that. But if you by splitting that it is it does make it kind of a unique little space where having that signage to the left of the wine outlet does facilitate you know
identification for the for the business. But what I assume is that the board wants us to go do that homework and see if we can. >> My concern is that if this is approved, then you have these other stores that could come seeking larger signs because if this board approves a proportional
increase for the sign for the smaller facade of this store, what's Bob what's to prevent Bob's to come ask for a larger and to wrap around to the other side and then where does it end? I would actually venture to say that in
this case we're actually beyond the the proportional argument because we're beyond the 100 square feet. So the proportion requirement is actually not in play. >> Why is that? >> Because it it's whichever is less. So it's the 7% of the facade or 100 square feet. You're capped at 100 square feet
no matter what. >> Who is capped? >> The any >> board is not board is not could approve a larger sign. >> Of course. Yeah. But it would be a variance is what I'm saying. Well, that's what you're here for. You're here for a variance and other store owners
could come seeking another variance for a larger sign. My point is is where does this end >> and you're not in addressing that, Mr. Flynn. You're you're trying to avoid that point in my view.
>> Mr. Chairman, if I can follow Mr. Papus and if Ashley, are we done? >> Oh, I'm done. >> Okay. So, uh, I'm just curious, uh, Mr. Flynn, have you looked at the Tinton Falls, Palmdale, Brick Township, or Point Pleasant wine outlets? >> I have not.
>> No. Okay. So, what Mr. Papus brought up is that there's a consistency across the marketing where the fine wine, beer, and spirits are in yellow and they're all below. Um, so I would think as a marketer, as I don't know if this is a
franchise, I don't is Wine Outlet a franchise or >> same owner. It's the same. >> Same owner. So to keep consistency with branding that you would want to continue that, you know, you would want to continue that type of signage. Um I just don't, you know, I I just don't see the
um from a consistency perspective. You can take a look at Bob's, you can look at look at Burlington. I mean, you I showed us multiple different examples, but any of the additional wording that you're looking to, you know, create a buzz or
differentiation with the wine outlet from just wine, you know, it's all recognizable within the the confines for the most part below the the the main sign, the main facade. I think like I said before I think and again I know the response is
going to be you took that space so you knew where you were taking but I think the issue is the visibility of that of that one main sign some somehow gets obstructed much of the time but I let's do this let me get those all those measurements and percentages for the board so we're all talking about
everything that's accurate and then I will ask the client if there's any alternatives whether it be reduction of the sign that we've proposed or to to your question whether it could be modified as to where it is on the facade. I'll I'll I'll I'll do that because I clearly
>> I I I have a few other M if I may. I have a few other things to to add, you know, to to your um to your list and and thank you for um being um uh collaborative here. I mean, I think that's typically how we get our best
solutions. Um you know, Mr. Papus um you know, made an excellent point um which I was about to raise. Uh and while each and every land use case is different and one cannot necessarily be used as precedent for another, the reality is
one can often serve as at least a partial precedent for another. And one thing that we do not want to see whether at this um shopping complex or elsewhere in Bridgeor, we don't want to see a sign war going on. Um you know, we don't want to have you know, everybody trying to one up the most recent um you know, so
so that that's that's kind of the spirit. Um, now the other, um, the numbers I'm looking at, and I'm using somewhat round numbers, um, the Bob's uh, facade 3,800 ft. Your facade 2200 ft,
Burlington 3500. That's kind of the basis of my of my my thought process. Just focusing though on Bob's because there's some uncertainty of as to exactly what the size is of Burlington. So your frontage is 58% of
um roughly 58% of Bob's. That's 2200 divided by 3,800. So you're smaller. Um you know and again to me that doesn't mean you need to be you know that much smaller but you know your your area is
smaller. Now Bob's if the math is right is 244 of 3,800 which is 6.4%. 4%. So, it would appear as if they are under the 7% that's noted in Miss Sarmad's
um memo. Again, these are possibly rounded numbers. Your 238, and I'm only talking about the front. I I have no concern about the back. I'm only looking at the front. The 238 as a percentage of 2200 is 10.8.
Um, so 10 point, you know, you're So, you're you're smaller. You're at 10.8. 8. They're larger there at 6.4. So, so you know, those are those are numbers that kind of stand out to me. The other numbers that stand out to me is uh mattresses
um is 47 12. Their main what I guess I'll call their main sign is 196. So, their mattresses, their descriptor is like 24% of their main sign. your proposed descriptor is 110 ft.
>> It's almost equal. It's almost equal. >> Almost equal. It's 85%. So, you know, >> that's a fair that's a fair point, >> you know. So, so you know, I I think that there's there's likely willingness to to to work to work here. Um, you
know, I should have also stated at the outset, um, that we want to see this and every business in Bridgewater be wildly successful. Um, you know, it's in everybody's best interest for all of our businesses uh to to to operate at at
maximum potential. Um, but you know, the balancing that we're looking for is um, you know, look, feel, proportionality, um, not not getting into a sign war, not getting into an escalating sign. >> Yeah, I I I hear exactly what you're
saying. I do think that this w is specific just because of the confusion that they've heard from customers about, you know, when they first opened versus when they put up the temporary signs and, you know, there was some, I guess, uncertainty as to what was sold there. So, that's really what, you know,
necessitated this application, but I will go back to the client and we'll re-evaluate this and try to address the concerns that you have. I I mean, you know, I don't want to get into a deep, you know, philosophical conversation about marketing. Um, but,
um, >> I I do it for a living, but um, I understand the importance of branding and I understand the importance of wayfinding and all that other stuff. I I'm, you know, it's critically important. I I don't mean to diminish
it, but but I guess what I what I wonder is like people go to Bob people are are at Costco, you know, and and by the way, Costco sells same or similar products, right? >> Not in Bridge. You're correct. That's the one in North Planefield. All right.
Sorry. You're correct. It's the tire store that's off to the right. Sorry. Got I got I got the two locations mixed up. >> Addison. Um but um you know I guess what I also wonder is you know are people coming in there and like as an impulse they're buying they're like oh yeah I need you know
beer, wine and and uh and and spirits. You know is it really an impulse buy? >> All I would say to you just again this is not really a legal argument. This is just more like what I would give to you as a person is that they wouldn't pay for me and Matt to be here if it wasn't if it wasn't important. Well, I
understand that if and the sign vendor to create this if it wasn't truly a concern, but I also hear your your concern. I think the point you made about the the main sign and the secondary sign being somewhat comparable in size is it was a was a valid comment.
As much as the client would like it to be that way, I I hear what you're saying there. So, let me get the numbers on the on the rest of the of the facades. make sure that we're all not approximating that we're getting, you know, the real numbers and then I'll I'll I'll speak to the client about the concerns that you
had about the actual sign area. >> Thank you. >> Is that fair enough? >> That'll that'll work with us. Um at that point, if you could contact our office or potentially Miss Propes, what could we offer as a return date? >> Yeah, because this will affect notice. Yeah, I don't I don't and I don't think
it'll take us that long to figure this out and get you if we do revise the plans to get you a revision. And I don't think we'll be up here for that long either. If we come back just to just to >> we can >> can accommodate on the 16th of December.
Um we have a um sorry a um extension of approval >> and we can we can >> Yeah. And I would say this >> does December 16th work today? I think that'll work because I don't I think if anything we're going to make the the plans smaller. We're not going to come
back with anything bigger. So I I think our notice is fine in terms of the the magnitude because it's only going to be diminished. And if we have plans, I don't think they need to be on file 10 days because again, anything would would probably be reduced versus made larger.
So >> is that is that fair enough? >> That does. Thank you very much. I think it would be important to provide uh the staff copies of what you're proposing in advance though so they >> Yeah, no problem. No problem. >> Okay. >> Um Mr. J question. Yeah, >> please.
>> Um yeah, I'm sorry if I missed that part. Uh what what's the elimination levels of the the sign? >> My understanding is that the the um wine outlet now um is they close at 10:00 when I asked the client and my
understanding is it shuts off at 12. So the uh the wine outlet and and also >> I don't know about the rest of the tenants, Mr. Wang, but just the wine outlet sign um shuts down at midnight is my understanding. >> Okay. But the other the second sign is also illuminated, right?
>> Yes. And that would shut off at at the same time as the other sign if that was if it was approved. >> Okay. All right. So >> top of mind questions. >> Okay. Mr. >> So I have to I have to just just correct myself. Edison is the one that has the
Edison Costco is the one that has liquor. I I know there's one that's in the general >> and Playfield and Planefield, too. >> Oh, north. Well, all right. According to >> Yeah, usually superarketing to Dr. Google, there's only two. I guess there's three. All right. >> Only supermarkets, I think by liquor licensing law limited to how many of their stores can have alcohol. I
>> I knew there was a Costco somewhere here that I I'd seen it. Just the one item is um you know since you are going to be again I don't think that the existing signage needs to be replaced. So I would just be curious to see if you were to
put that row below. Um you know as you're doing the due diligence, you know, I don't think you need to replace the entire sign, but >> I'll I'll look I'll get I'll ask the client and the sign vendor. >> I think it's not being done because of the obstruction. I would be okay with it on the side as a descriptor like the
rest of them if it was just smaller. >> Okay. Okay. No, fair enough. I appreciate everybody being very candid with their comments. It's helpful to try to, you know, get to where we need to get to. >> Mr. Wang, did you want to close out with your comment? >> Um, yeah. I I I just see that, you know,
this one outlet for this uh cost in in in Addison had that store and this one going to be addition to this shopping center, right? So I I don't think it's going to be a concern if you put this um the second sign underneath the the main
sign there. People are going to know and there's a liquor store there. You know that won't be a you know to me I I don't know what what you know what what this this you know hardship if there any any any difficulties if we don't combine
these two things together you know. >> Okay. >> Yeah. It's just some of my my comment. Yeah. >> Thank you Mr. Wing. If there are any other questions, I think we'll save it for the next meeting. >> I do have one question though. >> Quick one. >> I see Costco, I'm estimating, is about
250 ft away from the signs. And for a person with average vision, whatever that is, what would be the letter height on the sign to be legible from Costos? You mean if you put a
>> some architect some place has that? >> Yeah, they always the traffic engineers cite the ASHTTO standards for stuff like that. Um but I I I don't know. Uh I don't know what it would be. You're saying what the sight line would be for a driver. What what would what would the readability of this letters be, what
distance and what size they would have to be? I I don't there is a formula for that, but I think a traffic engineer is somebody that would know that. I could I could try to find that out. I'm thinking that people come out of Costos, they've spent some money, they have some left, >> they look over >> at the wine.
>> Can they read that entire sign from Costco? >> Just uh a thought. >> Okay. >> How high the letters should be? >> Understood. Okay. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Tvel letting me know that this application will be carried to December 16th without further notice.
>> Yeah. Right. for for any public here or or watching uh online, right? There'll be no further notice given. Uh this matter is being carried to the December 16th meeting. >> Thanks everybody. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you very much. >> Same place, same time, right?
>> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Okay, moving along to our last item on the agenda this evening. That is our master plan re-examination for a public hearing on the township of Bridgewwater's master plan re-examination. Miss Sarmmed, would you
like to brief the board on the matter? >> Yes, Mr. Chairman, give me one second. Just >> I'll give you as many as you need. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, board members and members of the public. Just a a a brief presentation um or you
know, it can be as long as we need it to be, but um this what's been provided to the board um and what has been noticed for is a re-examination report of the Bridgewater Township master plan. I know we just adopted a comprehensive master plan uh on September 30th of this year
and the I just want to let the board know um particularly if you have not been part of a master plan re-examination report before what what it is. It's very different from a master plan. Um I like to think of comprehensive master plans as um sometimes once or twice in a lifetime documents where it's very forward
thinking. It looks out towards 20 years um or so. It looks comprehensively at a lot of different parts of the township as you saw in all those sections and um has a has a lot that goes into it as far as um you know thinking about everything
that's going on cohesively. A master plan re-examination report is a statutory requirement um that if you don't do a master plan, you have to look at your master plan every 10 years. And a lot of times, and Bridgewater included, municipalities utilize this as a way to make sure that they're staying
on their master plan, re-examining those goals and recommendations of prior master plans. Um, but not necessarily having to do a document that looks 20 years out every 10 years. Um, because it is a big lift both financially and timewise. Um and it's it's something
that um that document should represent or master comprehensive master plan should represent um all that time and input and to redo it every once every few years would be um kind of a a disservice to that documents the time that went into that document. So a
master plan re-exam does look a lot at a time and place. It is much more of a document that looks at what's going on right now, what's just happened since our last master plan and any recommendations that come up. As you know, that master plan, that comprehensive master plan included not
only goals and objectives townshipwide, but also included a number of recommendations in each of the plan elements. Um, so I think our land use element had probably 60 or more recommendations. Um, and as I mentioned when I was presenting that document, um,
that is a a planning guide uh, and a policy guide. Um it is not a document that um makes any changes, codifies any changes. It simply makes recommendations and it's really up to the governing body over time to utilize that document to u
make any changes or to prioritize any plans or you know planning analysis uh projects um etc. So um they utilize those recommendations and a master plan re-examination will make similar recommendations. It is also kind of a
plan a planning guide, a policy guide um but can hone in on some of those things and you'll see in this report uh and from my presentation that it does hone in on some of those recommendations that were made in our most recent master plan um comprehensive master plan. So some of the statutory requirements of a master
plan re-exam um are that you have to look at the major pro problems and objectives relating to land development in the municipality at the time of the adoption of the last re-exam. The extent to which such problems and objectives have been reduced or have been increased. The extent to which
there have been significant changes in assumptions, policies, objectives. Um and that can be at the state, county or local level. um the specific changes recommended for the master plan or development regulations if any. Um whether a new plan should be prepared.
Uh the recommendations of the planning board concerning um any areas of redevelopment and noting if any had been adopted since the last master plan. And then finally, a new recommend a new addition to the statutory requirements recently is that the planning board make recommendations regarding locations for
development of public electric vehicle chargers um and infrastructure. And so um this is intended to be a periodic um review of the master plan, but also can can take a look like I said at a point in time. Um and so the first few
sections just provide a little background, a little master plan history, and then as far as the major problems, goals and objectives of the prior master plan documents. Um this does note that the board, this board just recently adopted a um a master plan in September. It lists out all the
general goals and objectives that are in that master plan. um and also includes that there was another master plan element that was done earlier than that which was in June the June 30th um fourth round 2025 housing element fair share plan. So that was also a master plan element um that was recently
adopted and did include additional goals as well. Um and that was not part of the ma the comprehensive master plan. Um, as far as the extent to which problems and objectives have been reduced or increased, um, those goals that were and objectives that were all laid out in the
previous section are assumed to remain valid because they were just adopted about a month, two months ago. Um, and then in regards to the housing element fair share plan, um, the township has addressed its fourth round obligation um, and its constitutional requirements under the amended fair housing act um,
by adopting that housing element. Um the township is still right now going through the affordable housing dispute resolution program which is the program at the state level um that goes through uh with a judge and a special adjudicator um to to come to a uh consensus on the township's
certification of that plan um and any compliance that needs to happen as a result of that. And so um that involves any parties that challenge the township's housing element as well as fair share housing center if they did file a challenge. Um and that program's determination and
the recommendation of the program from that um from that process will determine if the township will res continue to receive immunity from builder's remedy lawsuits. Um certification of that plan per the state law does provide that the township will remain immune from anyone
um basically coming in and and suing the town to build whatever they want. So it keeps our zoning intact, keeps our immunity intact. Um and the certification our plan is important for those reasons. Um the extent the next section is the extent to which there have been significant changes in assumptions, policies and objectives. Um
I did um break some of these down by um the either you know the larger the more global state level. So the state development and redevelopment plan is currently in the works. Um it has been drafted at the state level. I believe a draft with certain comments has been
released. I don't believe it has been the full final plan has been adopted yet, but it is anticipated to be done by early next year. Um, some of these things might feel a little bit older. Um, but just because we hadn't had a master plan re-exam covered some of
them, I did include them. So, um, Governor Murphy signed into law um, the, uh, legalization of recreational cannabis. Um, I did note that Bridgewater did adopt ordinance 21103 in April of 2021, which prohibited all um, cannabis establishments within the
municipality. Um, the governor also signed into law certain housing exempt from zoning regulations relating to hospitals to uh, construct housing for individuals who are homeless or housing insecure. Um, the amended fair housing act was signed by Governor Murphy in 2024 and I just outlined some of the
changes to the amended fair housing act from what was previously in the Fair Housing Act. um and just noted the same thing I just mentioned about compliance with um the deadlines established by that um and the continuence of immunity by following those deadlines and and
adopting a compliant plan. Um and then the changes to the municipal land use law. Um the municipal land use law now requires that a change climate change related hazard vulnerability assessment be adopted which this board did adopt as part of the comprehensive master plan. Um that uh electric vehicle charging
space requirements are put into place. Um at a state level, it is state law and um municipal municipalities can adopt um or you know are still subject to them but can adopt local local laws with u minor variations to the state law. um
other circumstances just to cover uh the COVID 19 pandemic and some of the effects that it had um on um you know long-term effects that it has on the the importance of um health and mental health on infrastructure, public access to open and green spaces for gatherings,
events and recreational activities. um and some of the emphasis that has come in the aftermath of that. um the state of the commercial real estate market and trends of the New Jersey suburban office market um in general um decline for demand because of a change in workforce
trends, remote and hybrid options um due to CO 19 as well as um other opportunities for how those tra those spaces are transforming over time um to allow for um dining or more event spaces uh more activity- based things rather
than traditional retail sales. uh transportation modes. Um so transportation's been changing as electric and self-driving vehicles um have come into market. Um the uh New Jersey law that allows for pro electric bikes and scooters has also changed and
there has been an emphasis on local safety um from police departments and emergency services on on how those are regulated um and and that was is a continuing to emerge um issue and different public health and safety concerns with them as well as
e-commerce, same day deliveries, food delivery services which have all changed um how we all see um traffic on our roads on our residential roads. Uh a noticeable change in courier box truck frequencies um in in residential
neighborhoods um which is increasing every day. Um and then finally changes at the local level. Um one of them being that the township adopted a um updated master plan and included in that master plan in particular were certain recommendations. um one of which I I
just elaborated on here that did make a recommendation that the uh number 22 under um the land use element included that um zone districts along Route 28 and Union Avenue should be studied to determine the overlap between commercial residential uses as well as
non-conforming uses. Um this has been something that has been ongoing. We've been looking at um in particular the zoning map um as inquiries come in and um just looking at the zoning in general on route 28 um there was a kind of a brief analysis done that has been
incorporated into this master plan re-exam um this includes what is permitted right now um in the p primary um commercial zone on route 28 which is the C1 zone there also is the MPD zone which
is the medical per what is it medical park district zone. Um and so it really looks at what what are their the existing permitted uses in those zones. What is the existing character not only of the zoning but
what is actually in place and so I included on page 12 um uh what's called the land use land cover map um produced and publicly available by the D um on their GIS website. And you can see that, you know, while the zoning only includes pockets of commercial, um the
actual zoning, the permitted uses include pockets of commercial, there are um a lot of corner properties along these intersections along Route 28 that do that are, you know, developed already as commercial properties. Um and so in looking at keeping the
in looking at just at this analysis, it does provide you know you are able to see um the the kind of character of the neighborhood. Um and you know the this re-exam report includes that the zone could could include other conditional
uses that are more tailored to the zone. um because there are general conditional uses that are currently permitted that just will never work in the zone because of the conditions that are required. Um and so it's just um the results of the analysis and then it'll feed into the
recommendation section later on about potential um ideas for for how to um keep the keep the corridor with its character of being primarily or a mix of commercial and residential um and keeping it thriving. um a thriving area
of the township. Finally, um there's a section uh in the relationship to other plans. Um obviously much of this re-exam report is related directly to the most recent ME master plan efforts um including the um
2025 fourth round housing element as I mentioned and the importance of of that as well as the um the goals and I'm sorry the recommendations from the land use element for the analysis of the route 28 corridor. So those are direct directly linked to this master plan
re-exam. Um and so there are a set of specific changes that are recommended um as part of this master plan re-examination report. One of those uh or the first of those is that um just to emphasize the importance and prevalence of the amended fair housing act
requirements and the township's um commitment to its um its fourth round plan is just to reiterate that there is it is a significant priority. Um, so it does it does reiterate those um five
different sites that were all included in that housing element that was presented and adopted in June of 2025. Um it does also include um based upon uh feedback to this planning board in September um the ability to or
recommendation to include certain provisions that would would include adequate and appropriate access for um the Cornell Boulevard property as well as supplemental design standards to provide for buffering um that were all brought up by the residents in September. Um and so that was one one
change from what was included in the housing element. It was one addition um to to to respond to some of that feedback. Um because it is I think it was they were valid valid concerns um as it relates to the analysis of the route
28 corridor. Um the existing C1 is C1 zone. So, the residential zones are not recommended to be changed, but the existing C1 zone is recommended to be modified to expand the permitted uses um in the C1 zone to allow for a carefully
crafted mixeduse zone um that would not impose um any kind of impacts through those conditions on the on the neighboring properties. um the consideration for additional commercial uses under the conditional uses um that would provide corridor specific
conditions and standards that ensure that they remain within the purposes of the neighborhood commercial zone and that would have minimal impact on the adjacent residential uses. Um some of these uses include um a combination of entertainment and dining uses. So what we've noticed from traditional retail is
this is a switch to um you know more activity based things. We have the clubhouse on Route 22 and so to keep um strip malls and retail tenant spaces um active and tenited. Um that could be one option to include. Um so that would be
there would be conditions to that limit outdoor dining noise and activity. U maybe hours and things and light and things like that um to to make sure they're not a nuisance to the neighbors. um a combination of fuel and con convenience um sale of convenience items subject to conditions that impose
buffering and landscape requirements. um limit or prohibit truck traffic, include specific design standards, um specifically that would be on like corner lots or something that has access to 28 uh personal services um that explicitly right now are not included
under the C1 zone like cosmetic services which are very popular um and have a stricter minimum parking standard to um address the potential for for um parking issues. um co-working or flex office spaces that could provide a service for
freelance or remote workers um where traditional office space does not. So that's one consideration. Um and then any other similar uses that provide neighborhood scale commercial uses that could add to the C1 zone. Um since the C1 zone does exist in other places
outside of Route 28, um it's recommended that any ordinance specify that as a condition um for these considered uses uh they require on Route 28 and more specifically with within the corridor. Um and then
one second, there was one other change that I I missed. I jumped right to the affordable housing in the first paragraph. Um there was one other zone change that was recommended to the Bridgewater Regional Corporate Center zone or the BRCC zone. Um this was brought up at a council
meeting about uh a month ago, maybe less than a month ago, few weeks ago. Um it was brought up that um there is a potential for the Somerset Corporate Center just across the street um to consider a new use that would permit a
medical use um for um the for this for the zone. Um the corporate center is facing up upcoming vacancies that do present a significant challenge to find new tenants in the declining office market. And so, um, there has been a request for the township to consider an
expansion of the permitted uses that would allow medical office uses with ancillary support services such as diagnostic, imaging, outpatient services, physical therapy, radiation therapy, and laboratory and testing facilities. So, closer to a larger scale
um medical use um not just a you know a smaller um like urgent care or something like that. this would be, you know, more of a a sophisticated medical use. Um, and this amendment could also include and consider maybe pad sites within the
development um to help um separate from the medical use, but to help um keep the office uh amenitized and to attract office tenants for people that you know are feel stuck um in in a corporate office center could modernize it. Um,
and so there maybe limited food services, not um like a major restaurant or a drive-through restaurant, but something like a fast casual coffee shop, smoothie shop, things like that that are very limited in scope. Um, smaller smaller type um food businesses
that could help support the corporate campus. So that's one of the final recommendations. Um, and then in the last two sections, these are statutory requirements. Um the master plan re-exam just includes that um the township does have redevelopment areas and the most
recent of those um these are not new redevelopment areas these are the existing ones um are the Greymark office track um at 1200 Route 22 and then the Ethicon redevelopment area at 555 Route 22 and it just provides an overview of where those stand um and that they do
have they have been designated as areas in need of redevelopment um but that only the Greymark office tract has a redevelopment plan. The Ethicon does not yet have one that's adopted. And finally, um, and it does not make any recommendations to new redevelopment areas at this time. Finally, the final
section requires that the planning board make recommendations concerning locations appropriate for the development of public electric vehicle infrastructure. Um, this is now state law to allow for electric vehicles, but this section specifically includes um
recommendations. Um the 2022 September 2022, excuse me, master plan re-examination report included that um Bridgewater Township has does have some electric vehicle chargers that are located at private offices. Um there's been a
there's a bank of uh charging stations at the Wawa on 28 in uh Chimney Rock and Foothill. Um near the Prominade Oh, that's near the prominade shopping center as well as the Bridgewater Commons Mall. Um, I don't think there's any plans right now um for any township
based ones, but some of the recommendations that could be considered by the by this board or through this master plan re-exam is that the township zoning ordinances be updated to be consistent with state law um and and adopt that. That was also a recommendation from the um comprehensive
master plan. Um and you can modify certain sections for design standards um payments, things like that. um pro consider provide providing um make ready spaces in the municipal parking lots um or any other township properties as um improvements are being made. So that
some make ready spaces just means that the electric conduits put in. Um so if parking lots are being repaved or anything's being torn up to consider that on township properties um that the township should seek out any kind of grant funding if they are undertaking any of those improvements um for the
installation or the actual um the actual structures um and hardware. And then finally, um the township could consider replacing, particularly if there are charging stations, the addition of municipal electric vehicles to the municipal fleet as older vehicles are
being phased out. Um and so there are grant and funding opportunities that should also be sought if any of those are undertaken as well. Um that is the end of the report. Um I would be glad to answer any of the any of the board's questions.
very much, Miss Sarm, for that very thorough report and distinguishing it from the comprehensive master plan that we just recently adopted. I'd like to open it up to the board. What do we think? >> And I, >> Mr. Chowry, >> Miss Surman, you really do a fantastic
job. >> Thank you very much. >> Very nice, very thorough. As chairman says, I have a question actually on uh can we you probably have answered in a one way just in a few couple a few seconds few minutes earlier. Uh can we
have a electric charging? First of all, can we have electric charging in a township building or township basically in a >> second thing is that can we charged >> for anybody charging it because most people actually charged that and there
are a lot of money could be made. you you can the municipal pursuant to the ordinance though I think um it would require adoption of this that section of the state model ordinance there is an allowance um for the municipality to charge a certain rate or um to determine
if it's going to if it's going to offer it for free or not. >> Okay. So that already been considered or >> it should be considered in in that ordinance. Yeah. We don't we don't have an ordinance on the books yet. So we should adopt an ordinance that includes that.
>> Okay. One more thing since we don't have obviously bridge doesn't have a Oh, bridge do have a rail stations. Yes. Uh is there any way we can expand that one because there are lots of now residents who actually goes to New York City. uh
it is not convenient to everybody to go to D and uh is there any way you know you I don't know whether it is false under master plan or not at least expanding the bridge station itself and making sure that at least uh we could attract majority of the residents who
goes to New York City or at at least to Newark also have their rail as alternative transportation mode >> is this this is separate from electric vehicles You're saying >> yes. >> Could we add um >> Right. >> we
>> do something differently about the rail access we currently have. I think in recent years and I'm not up to completely up to date with it that the the train schedules have changed in response to potential I know it's still not ideal. Yeah. The train station is not that would maybe more of a question
or uh maybe a recommendation that the township work with New Jersey Transit who operates all of that. um from working with NJ Transit in the past, they care a lot about ridership. They care a lot a lot about um what the cost is to run those lines. And so I think
we'd have to have a deeper conversation and maybe even a township survey to better understand what people's um commuting needs are. Um I think that for a while there was not a lot of people that were going back to New York because there weren't requirements. And there are a lot of corporations, especially New York corporations, that are
requiring people to come back to the office at least even a few days a week. And I do think it would be a tremendous benefit to the township to have, you know, a fully scheduled, you know, train schedule to New York or even Newark. So, um, you know, I think that's a that's a good thing and that's something we'll run up
the ladder, too. I think it's always something that you the township has to work with transit, New Jersey Transit to better understand what their needs are. they may be completely unaware and maybe they need us to run a survey to the township. Maybe they need to have, you know, a sharet or something with the
township to figure out what what residents are interested in. So, um, you know, we'll definitely run that up and see if we can get a meeting with transit to talk about that. >> Actually, may I may I speak on that point? I I mean I think we should always consider the needs and the um the evolving needs of the community. But as
a former and I have to stress former commuter to New York City um before co um the Rarent Valley line is literally the worst line in New Jersey uh in terms of service, availability, reliability,
um you know, you name it. Um, and you know, I'm not sharing anything that anybody doesn't know or that New Jersey Transit probably wouldn't admit, at least privately. Um, so even at the heyday, um, you know, the commuting option, um, you know, in terms of
express service or semi-express service and having to switch trains at Newark and all the various other problems, um, you know, the the Rarin Valley line, um, is not a priority of New Jersey Transit. Um uh and and all you need to look at is
is why there is so little um direct service to Penn Station. Theoretically um New Jersey Transit could terminate certain trains on other lines at Newark and say, "Sorry, you're the ones that have to occasionally switch trains to go
into into Midtown and instead prioritize some of our trains." They just don't do it. Um they do it, you know, after, you know, middle of the day. They do it later at night. They certainly don't do it during commuting time. So, while while I think we absolutely should always have our ear to the ground for
for for changes uh and to service the needs of our community, you know, that that's not an easy fix. Um and you know, you know, I just think we need to manage expectations, you know, as whether it's the administration or the mayor or whomever, um you know, reaches out to
New Jersey Transit. >> Yeah. And I I'm sorry if I made it seem like it's an easy fix. New Jersey Transit is, you know, a lovely organization, but not one that easily makes changes. You know, they analyze everything to death. So, um, it certainly would be a long path ahead and a lot of research would need to go into
it. But, um, I think, you know, like you said, keeping your ear to the ground and, you know, keeping contact with transit is not a bad idea. >> One uh comment um I had been a participant over the years with the Ronin uh Valley Line Coalition. I forget it. It it was
an organization of municipalities and counties along the Ronin Valley line seeking one seat transit to New York on the Ronin Valley line. And I think this was just before the pandemic, but there was some analysis that this uh coalition had put
together and hired a consultant that um determined that the ridership of people running to New York on the Ron Valley line exceeded to New York pen exceeded the number of
riders on the North Jersey coastline from the shore. But the North Jersey coastline had previously secured slots running through the tunnels from New York to New York
pen and there was a political decision that needed to be made to shift those slots uh to correspond with the increased light ridership coming from the west versus coming up the shore. Now, um I haven't heard about any update
on that analysis since the pandemic, but that was the case and um uh certainly something like that would have to be updated. Just it was a very interesting bit of information that uh I was surprised myself. >> Uh I can I just add to both of you know
councilman cars and Mr. Papa's comments actually since I'm a little bit of knowledge about the transit systems. Uh you are absolutely right and one of the things that in New Zeal transit it's extremely difficult for managing in fact they're more they're probably diff
difficult than even New York City transits uh to change anything plus they have got too much of political pressures every time the new governor comes in uh money is a budget issue second most importantly the return line is considered by them as a probably the
almost thirdary line rather than anything secondary line like you said on the just uh you know the coastal line there but there is always a you know new management is here in New Jersey transit uh I think they're open to discuss
whether they will do anything or not that I don't know but at least you know like you said Mr. it is worthwhile to discuss about it. Um we I think we have got now weekdays three or four direct line if I'm not mistaken at least three I think direct line to uh pen stations
and as so does the evening also but whenever there's a rain comes or anything else that all messed up badly so I think we need we should push for more direct access to pen stations as well as have some frequent um lines for
the at least to attract more residents. I think it is worthwhile to consider this now. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Chowry. I just want to also say compliment Miss Harmed that uh uh you know so much of what you discussed were points made during the
master plan process and as she said there are numerous dozens of recommendations that were made uh that probably this board over the next few years and council will consider uh reports such as this that would advance
some of the goals that were identified by uh the public process. Thank you. Mr. Pavis, any other questions regarding the master plan re-examination, >> any questions? >> Well, I just I do have one question. Um,
because I, you know, I know this was discussed uh at council a couple of weeks ago. Um, and I think it was mentioned in passing. I just want to make sure that that there's no additional discussion required. um the expanded the potential expanded use of
medical um and um you know I just I just wanted your thoughts on that um you know and then and then perhaps a few of us could react. >> Yeah. Um, so I think you're you made a comment at the council meeting about, you know, medical seems to be the the
first step that some of these commercial office campuses take and it's not it can't always be the the fix to everything, right? Everything just can't end up being medical. And we've seen a few changes here. You know, the summit medical group took over the oldraton barrel within the prominade or the sorry the village the villages of Bridger
Commons. Um and um you know certainly I've I've seen it in my own town that there's been you know supermarkets turn into big urgent cares. It's the kind of the nature of how some of the hospitals that have now all consolidated are now working with these satellite basically satellite offices. I I believe that this
is going to be a bigger operation than than what your typical urgent care would be something like that. Um but I do think that there are other alternatives um that we've seen or are seeing. um our our housing element and fair share plan includes two office buildings to be
repurposed as housing. And so um there are you know there are uses that you know generally these these commercial office parks have been flipping to um and I think preserving the office character, preserving the office ratables, preserving that campus as it
is in the best way possible without any major or foreseeable impacts. based on the use being very similar to an office is ideal in this scenario. Um, and I think keeping the vitality of the Somerset Corporate Center um, and
keeping it alive and and tenited is is an important part um, part of it. So, that's that's kind of the thought process that I have behind the reasonzoning um, request. So, so what I what I think I heard and I think we're in alignment is um additional
flexibility within within um proper guidelines is good. Not putting our eggs all in the same basket is also very important. Um, and specific to medical, my comment at the council meeting, it sounds like we're fairly well aligned
here, is um, likely a continued important part of future planning and thinking, but each and every square inch of vacant space could not possibly be considered for medical because as as as
much as the field is growing and advancing and uh, our our our community needs needs, you know, has various healthcare needs. You know, you know, the answer is not take every office building, take every store, take every everything and and and it it just there
it just wouldn't work that certainly not in a short period of time. You know, maybe over a 50 or 100 year period. Uh it would, but certainly not in a short period of time. And and you know, I I use the phrase, you know, I don't think we can see anything as a single silver bullet. and and certainly you know wi
with sufficient respect uh you know and I'd also say R&D is the same thing you know R&D technology wonderful ratables great for the town great for uh our reputation great for attracting new residents um but you know again there's there's limits and and there's supply
and demand in play here and and you know you want to provide probably just a little bit more supply than than there is demand you know kind of very close, but you know, keep everybody, you know, wanting to be here. You know, if you put
a wild amount of supply out into the marketplace, the the demand will have a lot of trouble follow uh uh following it. >> And this is only this this zone is very specific to the property across the street. It's not like this zone is throughout the township. So, the permitted use does have kind of a I will
say a short leash on it because it's specific to that that office park. But you know I mean I just think it's important for us as a community to understand you know if everybody says well you know why can't we have more R&D why can't we have more you know the answer is we can roll out the red carpet and we can encourage those things but
ultimately uh it is the free market that decides um you know you know what is desirable and what's desirable in a reasonable time period. >> Thank you. >> Thank you councilman. Any questions from the deis? I had to step out for a minute, but I
missed that question about the Somerset Corporate Center. I had some questions on it too based on based on results of today or I guess what is our responsibility from the board today because this is something new to us that we haven't seen
before. >> Yeah, these are um I guess I guess sort of new recommendations on top of the comprehensive master plan. Some of them work out. So the recommendation specifically about route 28 was about doing an analysis. This kind of flushes out that analysis, provides a little bit
of ideas behind it. So it acts on let's say that recommendation to do that. Um the action item from the comprehensive master plan was not to adopt an ordinance but rather to do the analysis. So anything that followed this could potentially be an ordinance or something like that. That is it's just another we
don't this board will only take action on this is your responsibility. you adopt a master plan um and master plan re-exam reports. It's the council, it's the governing body that would take action on any any kind of master plans um I'm sorry, on any kind of ordinances and then this board anytime those
ordinances were introduced would always get them transmitted back. So, this board's job in any future ordinances would be to determine if they're consistent with either this master plan re-exam or the master plans that have been adopted most recently or if they're
not consistent. And so um again this is this is just another step in the in the process and if the if the governing body does take any action in the form of an ordinance you'll see it back here before before it gets adopted and you'll get time to comment on it. So something a
concern I have in mind of at medical uses there's things that are popping up and then there's law some laws are in place but not necessarily in place with IV medical centers and and things like that with us if we were to recommend a
change that it would have to come back to us for approval or if they weren't seeking a variance. >> So it it would be two things. So if because this because this zone does not currently permit that use, it would have to be adopted by ordinance first. So
this let's say the ordinance that was introduced said IV medical spas or whatever and then this board can say that's not consistent with the master plan. You know that's not what the recommendation was. Let's just say theoretically. But if it includes the medical use as described here in that ordinance, then this board would
transmit it. Anything that came before the board for a site plan generally would be a permitted use. But if you determined over the course of the hearing that it wasn't a permitted use, like it was something that was unregulated or something that wasn't really a medical use, um, or it was a cosmetic spa or some med spa or
something like that, you could absolutely determine that you don't have jurisdiction as permitted use. So, the first step is the ordinance and making sure that the permitted uses listed out protect ideas like that, that you make sure that they capture um, the correct permitted uses. In this case, what's what's recommended here is really
intended to be more of like a hospital level medical facility um with, you know, x-rays and and um labs and things like that and for blood work and whatever. Um it's not intended to be a more unregulated. This would be, you
know, a a bigger operation. >> There's things in here though that they're also adding things like limited food services, which makes me think different. >> Oh, no. that would be like a separate use entirely. So that that allowance for food would be like a pad site within the
parking lot. Like in if there was a parking lot, it would allow like a uh a pad site like a star like Yeah. As long as it didn't have a drive-thru or something. It would be a you know a tropical smoothie cafe or something. Just something to serve that corporate office park, office campus without
people having to leave because I think sometimes that's a barrier to um you know being able to amenitize an office park. So, it's just it's just another consideration. >> They have food in there. >> Some of them do, right? Yeah. >> All do. >> Yeah. So, yeah, it would be a another
option potentially for the board or for the council to consider as an ordinance. Just a recommendation. >> Any other questions? >> I just have one question. Um I mean, really great job, uh, Miss Sur. Uh, as usual, we've been talking about um the flooding
for at least um I've been on the board for four years now, I think. And um proactive management of like some of the most severely impacted areas. I know in like I think it's 13 number 13 part two
to protect the quality of surface and subsurface water through strong storm water management. Um I guess beyond that statement like what is the guidance that we should
be encouraged to pursue to reduce some of the impacts of in like some like I'm just thinking about find area the Bound Brook border I think the TD Bank ballpark was flooded
um and I don't know maybe Mike or uh Councilman Kersh can call out but I don't know if there's any proactive management like solutions that we've implemented in those areas. >> The um if I could um the council just approved a um awarding of a contract to
Collier's uh engineering. We received a grant for a universal drainage assessment and that um Mr. Bur actually found the grant and we were successful in obtaining it and it's meant to do a an overview the entire township and
identify you mentioned the Fendern ballpark the significant areas or areas of town where there are significant flooding u issues uh not go down to a specific mitigation plan for each but to
really identify I mean we have a list it's not that we're not aware where these issues exist. Um, and that is important as we are also looking at a uh storm water management plan that is required by the state and federal
government. And so these two things will be uh companion efforts to both look at it at a higher level universal drainage assessment and then storm water management plan that becomes very very specific. And um in fact there there is
was an RFP that the township issued for specifically identified neighborhood drainage issues. And there will be uh at I think the next council meeting a proposed award of contract for an engineering firm to look at a specific neighborhood that has had uh drainage
issues. So uh to respond to your question, I think the new storm water management regulations do re u provide opportunities whenever there are new applications, site plan applications,
subdivision applications to look at site specific issues >> uh or neighborhood issues that are impacted potentially by the development of a site. And then these other two, storm water management plan, universal drainage assessment, uh we're hoping
that will be a much more comprehensive look at this very very complex and potentially very expensive uh program. >> Yeah. No, and and I appreciate that, Mike. think my is the proactive management of of the storm water and and
I of course it will be costly you know for the township but you know if we're trying to provide quality of life uh it's extremely important especially as we see these hundred year floods happening more often and often so does that cover then the like I guess the
proact is that Mike that's more proactive on our part or is that a recommendation that we have in the master plan currently that is what you listed is is it where you noted the recommendation. So it's it's more general, but things like what
Mr. Papus just included are um all all ways that you know feed into that recommendation. The same way that if an applicant was here, you know, with a variance for impervious coverage, their consistency with the master plan when they have to note that in their variance testimony would be something that any of
these board members or myself could bring up to say, you know, you're violating the impervious coverage, you know, um how does that comport with the ability to um provide additional storm water management on your property or be proactive? you know, that's sight specific, but I think what you're noting
about being proactive as a town and identifying through a neighborhood plan or a townshipwide plan is going to be really productive. A lot of stuff's going to come out of that, right? There's going to be mitigation measures that can come out of that, but identifying them, doing that analysis first is going to be really important. Um, I think there's other things about
this recommendation that can be um utilized as well if there's an acquisition for open space. You know, keeping keeping places green is always a great storm water management technique. Um, you know, not having coverage um is one. So there are other things that aren't directly that don't
seem like they're directly related to the the construction of a storm water management or bio retention basin like you know acquisition of open and protecting open space or protecting farmland or whatever it is. Um that could be that could lead into this or feed into this. >> And I guess just pursuant to that that
piece of the re-examination there's no I guess solutions that are that have been proposed. I guess the the first step would be what Mike is mentioning in terms of the >> before we can actually implement some of those items like the solutions to sulfur.
>> There are you know right now we don't have anything in this master plan re-examination but there are things we can look at. There are specific ordinances we might want to consider. We have you know a hillside development calculation requirement for steep slopes. There are other similar ordinances we could include for critical
environmentally critical areas. So wetlands protection, flood hazard protection that would help um you know provide a similar situation to hillside development. Now it hasn't been discussed, it hasn't been included in this re-exam, but those are all measures that could could be consistent with this master plan recommendation.
>> Thank you. And one other comment, I think if Mr. Bur were here, he would be able to um elaborate on the new storm water management regulations that are much more stringent than in the past. And that so again when there are individual applications coming for this
board or the zoning board they have to meet those requirements where a few years ago they didn't >> any other question from the deis >> I mean my only well also I want to reiterate um uh appreciation for the
effort not only the big effort but now the the follow-up effort and I guess maybe I'll I'll steal your next question which is what is our our course of action tonight and and where do we go from here? >> I'd also like to give them >> Oh, public. >> Oh, sorry. Okay. Sorry. Okay.
>> If I if I could just uh I'd like to um give about a minute or so each uh to any member of the public that wishes to um comment on Miss Sarmmed's testimony. Uh please feel free to come up at this time. And once again, if you could just state your name and address for the record and we'll try to keep it about a
>> three Cornell Boulevard Bridgewater. Okay. >> So, I'm sitting here listening >> to your delivery and I'm thinking to myself, what a bunch of hypocrites. She's talking about flood water. Come to the property in question. Watch the flood.
I'll show you the $10,000 drainage system I put in to manage the water that comes off of the property in question on Cornell. And you talk about green space. We have all been saying why can't Bridgewater just turn this space into
green space. Here it is in the master plan and Bridgewater is fighting us on this when the master plan is talking about the very things we have been up here not in front of you because it's our first time here in front of the
council who we threw out of office as you know because we're tired of their dis condescending attitude toward us the way they just dismissed us at every council meeting. Well, guess what? Three of them are out. We told them we were coming after them. We did it. Okay.
Bridgewater is tied to this kind of behavior. Listening to you, which was very well presented. We'd like to know when we're going to get to see all this. And it's like what you're saying makes sense. We've been saying it. Turn this space into green space. You can't build
on this space. It is a flood zone. It is a swamp. I've been living there 13 years. I had one year the water broke through over my burm, crossed my backyard, coming down the driveway. The waves were hitting like this. The
freaking squirrels could have been surfing. Okay. The water coming from that property onto mine. All trying to get out to the road. And here you are making proposals that we have all been talking about for months and no one is like, you're so determined to cram these
buildings onto the space where I've already talked about the fact you're going to kill all the kids from the uh exhaust. You're so determined to cram these two little buildings onto this space because Mayor Mench needs to get his quota and instead of listening to
what this woman is saying about the master plan, floodwaters, green space, it just I'm sitting I'm really disgusted that I'm listening to our government and Bridgewater that is such hypocritical. >> Mr. Cass, thank you very much for your
comments. However, I am going to say one thing. I do not appreciate you walking up here and displaying and talking to this board as if we're a bunch of hypocrites as well as our board professionals. Each and every single member of this board is here tonight as a member as a resident of this township. Some of them leave their children at home. Some of them could be other
places, but they're here volunteering their time, volunteering their time independently of the administration, independently of the mayorship. So, I would appreciate if anybody else that comes up to that podium tonight, if you could please ask your comment, post your question, please be cognizant that
everybody here is giving their time and have worked for years now on developing a master plan that was recently adopted. This is a re-examination report. This this work takes time. It takes months, takes effort. It took many people, many residents of the township that have come
down and have given their advice as to what this township should do. and we all kept our ears open, kept an open mind. If I could just ask with a little bit of grace, please just ask your questions and be cognizant of the amount of the work that has been put into this
process. Thank you very much. I'd like to property documents from 198 One thing after the other, you can't put these buildings in here because of this, because of this, because of this. And now we know that they're going to fight
us. Learn that their heels in fight us. We're not all super wealthy. We have resources and we're going to continue to fight them. We made it very clear to the council many times that we're going to continue to fight. I appreciate that
you're listening. ress. I don't know if you're hearing us. We are coming in here continually telling you over and over the same thing. If you're listening to us, nobody's doing anything about it. One way
to give me a million dollars up the property that those lawsuits will go on and we'll One of them said, "Okay. We're pissed off." Okay. You say that
for the res the kids will develop asthma. We know that already. You're going to have all >> you you've made you've made your point. You've made your point. You >> say too and we can't comment on on that that's happening. So, I I'd appreciate
understanding that because there's litigation going on. I will say we met, a group of us met every week for what, the better part of a year, >> longer. >> Every single week. This is a volunteer board. I have three kids at home. I work in Bridgewwater. I live in Bridgewater.
My kids go to schools in Bridgewwater. I have a home that's in a flood area. I've had work done, too. I care about this town more than you think I do. And having comments like that makes people not want to volunteer. That has to stop.
We spent time and time and time again meeting every single week on this master plan. I spent nights up after my kids went to sleep reviewing the master plan. Then we did how many public hearings or and where we put we put up countless
comments and places boards and newspapers about how we were going to let residents come in. came up with whole new ideas with Scarlett Doyle and with with Katherine in here too where people could put in their commentary. We took every single comment and reviewed
it over and over and over again to make sure it was in here. The next time we had a master plan, we all got up on here and spoke about it. We don't all agree on everything. We don't all disagree on everything either, but we tried to make the decisions for the best part of the town. Doesn't mean we're going to make
all of them that you agree with or all that we agree with, but we worked really hard on it. That's what she she presented on today with some some updates, too. I just ask you to be more curious than to just assume we don't care.
>> Call us hypocrites. >> That is incorrect. And >> you're conflating two very different things. >> The master plan. >> The master plan. >> The whole town is in the master plan.
>> So, how can you be working? >> That is but one component. >> That is but one component of the master plan. I think what my colleague and I are saying here is that we are doing our best that we will always this board will always do what's best in the best interest of the residents of the
township of Bridgewwater. As Ashley Sakura said, we will not always agree. We will not always disagree and we might all come from different schools of thought, but one thing we have in common is that we all live here. We want we all want the best for Bridgewater, not for the state of New Jersey. What's best for Bridgewater.
We cannot control what the state of New Jersey does. Now, if I would ask that remaining comments, please feel free to come up. That is part of this process. The public input is first and foremost. Please feel free to come forward. >> I would also like to say that if you were actually listening, Miss Sarmad did
say that we took into account a lot of the comments that were brought to our attention and it was put into this relationship to other plans in this re-examination and that is specifically in here. So there were a lot of valid comments, a lot of valid points that were made and that was considered in
this. >> Thank you, Mr. Chowitz. >> Now once again, I will extend the offer for any member of the public to please feel free to come forward to ask any question or commentary on the testimony just heard. Seeing none and hearing none, that will close the public portion of the
commentary for this section of our agenda this evening. Miss Sarat, anything else? >> No, I would just respectfully ask that the um board consider the presentation and consider um voting to adopt the master plan re-examination report.
>> Thank you, Mr. Sarm. And if I could just have a quick closing comment, um I I appreciate the work that you've put into this and uh I think it's difficult for people to take a step aside and and think about that there are three major corridors running through the township of Bridgewater. Three, they are safe
four, potentially five. And I really do appreciate the history that you put into this little preface here because it's important to understand the amount of work and the safeguards that are put into a document like this to understand that there are corridors coming in and out of Bridgewater here and this matters. It mattered 50 years ago. It
mattered 30 years ago and it matters today. So, thank you very much on behalf of the board. >> Word attorney, Mr. Peek, I'm assuming we need a motion that um is that that uh Miss Sarmmed's report is not inconsistent with our master plan this evening.
>> Well, that just uh you don't even have to go that far. You just have to determine whether or not to adopt uh the master plan re-examination. >> Okay. So, I believe we'll have to have two. So, if someone would make a motion to that effect. >> Well, there's there's one very minor um
edit um just for the sake of completeness. Um are uh on page one uh or or Roman numeral one I should say. Uh our planning board members uh Mr. Chowry's name was uh inadvertently
omitted >> and I would ask that the board adopt with that one change that will be updated and I apologize profusely, Mr. >> And you know, I didn't mean to call that out and I thought, you know, maybe I'll just sort of whisper it to you later, but since since this is an official
document, um, you know, let you know, let's let's make sure that that one minor, uh, edit is that is included. >> He definitely deserves to be on there. Um, and I don't know how it got missed, so thank you for that. >> Thank you, Councilman.
>> No. Where is it at all, Mr. Chad? because I kept I kept I'm like, "Wait, there's 10. Who's missing?" Right. Yeah. All right, we got it. >> Very good. Who would like to make said motion? >> Mr. Chowry should make the motion. >> Thank you, Mr. Chowry. I'll take a
second to that motion. >> I'll I'll second. >> That's Councilman Kersh. Could I have a roll call, please? >> Chairman Besio? >> Yes. >> Councilman Kersh? >> Yes. >> Mr. Papis? >> Yes. >> Mr. McGora? >> Yes. Mr. Wang, >> yes.
>> Miss Sakura, >> yes. >> Mr. Banga, >> yes. >> Miss Chartich, >> yes. >> Mr. Chowdery, >> Matt, thank you very much. >> Attorney, Mr. Peg, just for completeness here, I do believe we also have uh the resolution as well. And do we need a
separate motion for the resolution or is it all-encompassing? >> It's I mean, I think the the motion to approve wouldn't the resolution just memorializes that vote. Very good for the record. Thank you once again, Miss Arma. Thank you very much.
Okay, that concludes our business this evening. However, Miss Pro, I'd like to ask for a quorum check for which date uh are we looking for here? >> The 11th, right?
>> Correct. If if uh this is for a tenative special meeting, I do have some feedback. Um, Councilman Kersh, and correct me if I'm wrong, Councilman Kersh, Mr. Papis, Mr. Mcora,
and uh Mr. Atkins, Mr. Wang said they would be available, so we would just have a quorum. So if any of those people were unable to attend then we would not. >> What is the anticipated uh agenda?
>> It is my understanding master plan consistency review >> for the 11th. Yeah, it's a potential need for a master plan consistency review. >> So if I'm hearing this right, we would just have five as of this evening.
>> Correct. I can be tentative. So if I if I know earlier in that day, I can leave earlier, but I'm I'm finishing up a work trip that day. >> So we have a few people that are tenative, including Mr. Sakura. Mr.
Chowder is tenative. Mr. Chairman, you're tenative. So we have five definite as of >> Okay. Would you seek a confirmation perhaps via email?
>> Yes. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> If >> Okay. If the members of the board that are um available that evening, if you could please confirm your availability for December 11th via email to Miss Pro, that would be great. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Any other questions or comments? >> I'm sorry. just that that's in addition to the meeting on the 16th because we have at the very least um this this case the continuation of the case from earlier
>> and on the 16th we also have a extension of approval time for AR Bridgewater they were here about 18 months ago they've made a request for an extension of their approval um as well as a potential likely open space and recreation master
plan element um it just needs to get in by Friday. So, um it likely will be heard on the 16th. That was prepared by CME. Um so, hopefully we can tie that up with the rest of the master plan and have that finalized as well. >> Thank you very much. >> I won't be able to make the 60.
>> Okay. Thank you, Councilman. Any other questions? >> I was just going to say if you wouldn't mind, >> not at all. >> Could just do a quick check for the 16th. Let's start from down here with Mr. >> Chadri >> free
>> tenative on the 16th >> Mr. Banga >> I should be able to be there. >> Okay, Mr. Chardwitz, >> I should be here. >> Okay, Mr. Core, I believe you said no. Okay. Um, I should be here.
Councilman Kersh, >> yes, I'll be here. >> Okay. >> Yes. Mr. Wang, >> Mr. Papus. >> Very good. Okay, Miss Propes, I think we have our answer for the 16th. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay, I'll take a motion to
adjurnn. >> I'll make that motion. >> That's Mr. Core and a second, please. >> I'll second. >> That's Miss Charteritz. All in favor? >> I I >> have a good night, everyone.