begin the public meeting that this evening anybody that's speaking please use your theater voices so this recording can catch all the audio this evening good evening and welcome everybody to the Bridgewater Township Planning Board special meeting agenda for Tuesday June
2nd 2026 this is an off-site meeting location at the Bridgewater Public Library at one drivewater New Jersey 08807 Seven. Adequate notice of this meeting has been given in accordance with the open public
meetings act NJSA 104-6. On May 6, 2026, proper notice was sent to the electronic news sources of record filed with the business clerk at the township of Bridgewater and post it on the Golden Board in the municipal building. On May 29th, an amended notice
was sent to the electronic news sources director filed with the clerk with the municipal clerk at the township of Bridgewater 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 upon request. Accommodations will be made for individuals with a disability pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act or ADA, provided the individual with disability provides 48 hours advanced
notice or 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
everyone to please rise to salute. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all please
>> chairman >> I'm here >> Mayor Mench Mr. Bonjouro >> here. >> Councilwoman here. Mr. Papis, Mr. McGora, Mr. Wang,
Mr. Kora, Mr. Banga, Miss Charish >> here, >> Mr. Mr. Chowdery Mr. Chowder just advised that he is on Mr.
>> Here, >> Mr. Peek, board attorney >> here. >> Mr. Bur here. >> Here, board here. Thank you, M. At this time, I'd like to invite any members of the public that wish to address the board on any matter
that not listen to tonight's agenda. Not listen, please feel free to come forward at this time. Okay, moving along. There are no board minutes up for approval this evening and I don't believe we have any resolutions this evening. Actually, there should be one here. That's a courtesy review for
pilot fiber 26-01- comments changes up for adoption this evening. So we'll move into our application portion of the evening. And the first application that will be heard is application 25p. That's New Jersey American Water 3421
commonly known as 100 slate. And who is here this evening to represent the applicant? >> Uh Neil O'Brien from the law firm of Barter and O'Brien are for the New Jersey American Water Company. Mr. Chairman also have a couple of witnesses who will will swear in here in due course in due course um and uh have some
brief testimony for you. This is a fairly limited um application in terms of the development that is proposed. But um as you referred to, Mr. Chairman, this application pertains to the RS and Milstone water treatment plant, which is the applicant's water treatment plant
right here in Bridgewater Township. It's on Polymerus Lane. It is known as lot 342, lot one of your township tax maps. Um the applicant is of course a a public utility regulated by the New Jersey boat court of public utilities providing water service to not just a lot of
places in New Jersey but um regionally through its affiliates in in other states. Uh this is a very large property about 132 acres. The water treatment plant itself occupies a fairly small part of it. Um there are reservoirs and
other water bodies uh that comprise the remainder of the property. property is located in an M2 general manufacturing zone and is permitted as an essential service use. Um, and for those of you who have been on the board for a little
while, you'll may remember that every few years we come before you when there are some changes needed whether in terms of water treatment or operationally at this important critical utility facility. So this evening, the applicant is asking for your approval for uh two
small buildings which we'll describe. Um and we're requesting site plan approval. There are no variances required. There is a an existing non-conforming condition on the property. We do not meet the 150 foot required setback. We're only about 46 ft away from it.
Nothing that's proposed this evening though is going into that front yard setback. until set back um from the uh from the property. You require distance and since even further so if I could I'd like to ask Mr. Frank Marasha to come
forward seat board attorney bring you in before you speak. Do you swear that the testimony gave in connection with this hearing will be the truth nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Thank you. Can you state and then spell your last name for the record?
>> Frank Marasha. M A R A S C I A. >> Thank you. >> What's your role with at New Jersey American Water Company? >> I'm the senior production manager and licensed operator for the water system. >> Um and so you have in-depth knowledge of this facility. >> I do.
>> Could you describe the facility for the board? Um and there is an aerial council. We'll we'll label that a a one on your leave. It's it's an aerial showing the overall property and the water treatment plant itself. So, um, Mr. Marasha, what what's the board looking at there?
>> So, this is an aerial view of the RA and Milstone water treatment plant located at the confluence of the Raritan River and the Milstone River. It's the Milstone coming in on the left hand side. Raritan River from top to bottom.
Our plan is located at that confluence along with our sister plant on the other side of the river on the Franklin side, the canal uh the canal road plant. these two plants together. Uh, this plant produces roughly >> Could you speak louder?
>> Sure. This plant roughly produces 130 million gallons a day of portable drinking water along with its sister plant on the other side of the river at the confluence serves water portable drinking water to approximately 74
municipalities across five counties in central New Jersey. Um this is in fact your your the water company's largest water treatment plant. Correct. >> It is. >> Okay. Um so in terms of operations of the site,
obviously people need water 24 hours a day. The site runs 24 hours a day. >> Correct. >> That is correct. The plant is staffed and operated 247 365. >> And how many employees in total? >> Roughly 55 totally employed. >> And how many on the largest shift? >> Usually around 30. And that largest
shift would be Monday through Friday, normal working daytime hours. We got a good volume. >> Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> Um, so there are 75 parking spaces on site. We we counted them during the week. So there's more than sufficient parking out
here for 30 employees on the largest ship. >> Is that correct? >> That is correct. There's no u public access here. There's no public component. You can't go here to pay your bill your bill. K stopped by to ask a question about the water supply. Correct. >> That is correct.
>> Uh how is the site secured? >> We have a perimeter fence that surrounds the perimeter of the at least the parts sides of the property that are not fronted by the river. River provides a natural barrier. So we have a perimeter
fence along with a flood wall completely encircle the property. We have a security guard at the front gate. There's only one way in and one way out, and that's traversing uh Bucklehead Road. >> And um the security gate also has
24-hour monitoring, right? It can be open or closed remotely by your operation center during any emergent events. Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> So, what are you proposing to do out here and why? >> We're proposing to replace our welding
shop where we do welding. We have a resident welder that's employed at the facility. It's a large water treatment plant uh with a lot of mechanical assets. Those mechanical assets break. They need parts. Some of these parts
can't just go to the store and get off the shelf. They need to be fabricated on site. So, we have a full-time welder employed that fabricates and fixes uh assets as they break. In addition, we're also looking to put a storage unit, storage shed on the
property to house uh various pieces of large uh equipment that we have, mostly large what we call Godwin pumps, uh portable generators, tractors, lawn maintenance equipment, stuff like like that. >> Both of the the buildings will have a
mezzanine. Correct. >> That is correct. >> And what will those be used for? >> Those will be used primarily for secondary storage. Question. Yeah. >> On the welding, um the tanks that are used, what chemicals are in those?
>> I believe oxy acetylene. >> And how many people keep on site? >> Typically, he has two tanks on site at one time. >> Thank you. >> So, you said that the u the proposed weld shop will replace a former weld
shop. So, this is a feature or a service that's already on site. It's been on site. >> That is correct. >> And then for the storage building, you said it's to store machinery that's currently stored where? Outside. >> Currently, it's stored outside. >> And you want to get it in out of the weather office.
>> That is correct. >> Mr. Chairman, we'll have our engineer walk through the site and the actual site improvements and the architect will describe uh the buildings briefly. Are there any questions for Mr. Marasha? At this time, any question? >> How about
um just a just a point of clarification, you had mentioned that the welding building is to replace an existing welding building in in approximately the same location or >> in the same footprint. >> Same footprint. It's just an upgrade. just an upgrade of what's there now. And
the storage building um that's nothing is there now. It's a gravel or paved area that >> it's a paved area >> and all of the uh equipment that would be stored in that new building is just stored on site and open now. >> That is correct. >> Okay, very good. Thank you.
If I could just uh turn the number of employees, you said 30 at the largest shift which was Monday, Friday during the day, but what was the total number of >> 55? Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> I had a quick question. So from the one
that um back in 2021 that has ammonia the previous um building that you developed have there been any issues with the type of chemicals that you're keeping so far. >> Are are you talking about the >> the previous one from 2021?
>> Yeah and some treatment >> that was gaseous and hydro ammonia. We have since ceased use of that chemical and that has been replaced with liquid ammonia. >> Okay. >> And no issues. No issues though. >> Thank you.
>> Mr. Char, >> are there any uh fire prevent fire protection uh measures in in place for any of the companies that are there? >> You talking about these buildings that we're building or >> the ones around where the storage of the
>> both buildings will have uh sprinkler systems? Will the sprinkler system put out a fire? If it's in a settling torch, start a fire. >> The welding will be done outside underneath an overhang. There'll be no
welding or cutting or burning inside the building. >> Mr. Marash, are there any other proposed utilities other than what's there today at the existing facility? >> No, there's not. >> Any other questions from our board?
Are there any questions from our members of the public? Mr. Marash, >> have a close question for Mr. Marasha. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, Mr. Styers. So, Mr. Styers, if you could state your name, professional affiliation for the
record, and council, >> do you swear the testimony to get in connection with this application will be the truth and the truth? >> Yes, I do. Thank you. Could you state and spell your last name for the record, please? >> Craig Styers. S T I R E S. >> Mr. Stars, could you give the board the
benefit of your educational qualifications that um you're offering to give testimony this evening? >> I'm a professional engineer in the state of New Jersey. Uh president of Styrus Associates uh in Summerville and I'm professional
engineer. I've testified before this board many many many many times uh as well as from central New Jersey. >> The board is very familiar with Mr. Styers board of the objections qualifications. >> Please proceed.
>> Thank you Mr. Chairman. So um Craig if you could referring to A1 again u just orient the board to the facility and and where in the world um this is. >> Okay. Uh Mark, this is uh labeled as rendering and says today's date. And
what it is is an aerial with the uh boundary of the property um overlaid on top of it. So the property itself is located at the southern boundary of Bridgeworth Township. Um if you were to look at this
map here, you have the like I said outlined in red is the property. Um, as Neil said is 130 acres. You have the uh Milstone on the south south side, the Raron on the west side. To the west of
the U RA is um Manville. To the south is Franklin Township. Uh, as Frank said, their sister plant is right across the street here in this facil uh vicinity. Um it is also surrounded by a flood wall
and or BM. So it's outlined in blue right here. Um this is actually the flood limit line that would you know still had if we were to have a 100year flood that would go against the limits of the burm and or the wall. Um the wall
is mostly up in the front on the north side and then it transitions to a a burm along the south. Um also as Frank said, there's one way in and out. Uh this is Bohemoth Lane right here on the north end and this is
a Conrail uh railroad. Um this would be the railroad that's also goes past the uh stadium for example to the east. So, you would come off of East Main Street, uh, come south on Polehemis Lane, work its way, it basically turns into a
gravel road right before the plant. You would cross over the railroad. Um, come there's a a gate here uh, through the flood wall and then the guardous is in this location right here. And then you see the various other um, either
lagoons, settling ponds, what have you. And then the main portion of the plant is on the north end. >> Well, Craig, just to the extent um maybe they're not discernible, both the the board planner and both board engineer asked for a general description of circulation around the site. Could you
point out those external roads and the internal um roads that that have crisscross the site? >> Sure. Um as you would come into the site right here um you would come past the uh the main building on at the north end
and there's a driveway in this location here and then essentially the main road uh kind of circulate. This takes you down to the low lift. Uh there's also some intermediate uh roadways in between the different lagoons. So obviously for
access to the lagoons themselves as well. Um, and then it does circulate back and around. There is a roadway along the top as well. So, you can see that the the assets, the buildings are kind of built off of that those major uh
driveways u access points. >> And the applicant actually has a traffic um flow control plan in place for um traffic entering and exiting the site, right? And and circulating around. >> Yes, that that's what Frank advised us of today. Um they've uh put a lot of
striping down, a lot of signage so that there's proper circulation uh to and from the different areas. >> Can I ask you a question? Um where will be your new building? Two buildings will be and what is the existing building? >> Uh we're going to get to it.
>> Any environmental impacts? >> No. Um as I said, it's basically self-contained within uh or outside of the flood uh flood zone. I actually did find a LOMA which is a letter of map amendment for the uh so when you have
the flood zone obviously this whole area floods and it for FEMA you can apply for what's called a map amendment so that essentially is saying that this area if you provide enough documentation is theoretic or technically outside of the
flood zone and you can go on the FEMA website and you can see there's probably a half a dozen or so of these um listed for this particular particular area and there is one for the plant itself. So this is essentially a donut in the flood zone. So technically anything inside the
plant is not in the flood zone. >> And so to answer Mr. Chow's question, um where in in the plant are these buildings going to be and and could you describe them? >> Sure. Um, in our minds, this is kind of one of the things that we think it's such a minor
project is the first one is right here. And this is the welding shop and it's approximately 1,000 square feet. Um, I do have a blowup of it with the aerial behind it. And it actually does show the former uh because they've actually t
taken down the welding building, the previous one. So, uh, the new one would be put in its place. And the second building is right here, just to the west of the, uh, sailing basin, and that's 3,000 square ft. So, this would be the welding building, and this is the, uh,
the storage building. Again, if you were to take this this image off, you could actually see the equipment sitting. There's a concrete pad there that's there. Now, the equipment is on the concrete pad exposed to the elements. So that is the reason that the storage
building is being proposed. >> And so both of these buildings are well outside that front yard setback that I talked about quite >> right. That's that's up in this area right here. Correct. >> Um based on Mr. Mash's testimony and and analysis, any additional traffic
concerns here? >> No. Um this again this is off the I guess the term is off the beaten path. It's kind of back behind uh other buildings. Uh, this one is adjacent to an existing building to the north of it with the roadway going by it immediately
to the east. >> And these employees are already on site, so there's no new employees, no addition, no increased parking demand. >> Correct. >> U, >> I have a question. >> Yeah. >> Um, I'm new to this particular
application, so I I'd like to know what the ponds and the lagoons are used for. I do that. >> Sure. >> So, it's a conventional water treatment plant, right? It's a conventional water treatment plant, right? You take water
off the river. We coagulate, fauculate, and settle the suspended solids, stuff that's suspended in the water that gives it the muddy color. Right? So, those basins right there, those four correct right there, right? Those are
our four settling basins. So we start the water treatment process down at the low lift. We start adding the coagulation chemical there. That causes the suspended particles to stick together to form what's called a flock. They then
grow in size and density and they settle out in those four basins there. >> Eventually you remove them. >> So eventually by gravity they settle to the bottom. It's a a sludge or waste what we call it or residuals. Water
treatment residuals is the best term. And then those that material is then removed from the bottom of those basins and managed in our three active sludge lagoons which craters right no to the south.
Right one that's lagoon one and two and lagoon five up. Yep. Yep. That's it. >> One, two, and three. So that material is then moved to those lagoons again allowed to settle again. >> Yeah.
>> Right. The clear water on top or what we call the supernate that is then siphoned off or skimmed off and that's recycled back through the plant. And then the mud at the bottom we have a dredging and pressing operation where that material is dredged off the bottom of those
lagoons. We have four belt filter presses where that mud is run through the belt filter presses. The water is squeezed out to the best of its to the best of our ability and then that pressed material is then trucked off site.
>> How often do you go through that process? >> It's done roughly it's weather dependent. Mostly the cold shuts us down freezing but roughly April through November. So, uh, one final question if I may. You
take all of your input from both rivers. >> That is correct. We take, we have the ability to draw off the Raritin, the Milstone, and the DNR canal. We primarily
withdraw from the Raritin River. >> Any limitations that put on you from drawing water? We have a water allocation permit from the state of New Jersey that stipulates our limits, our
daily limit, our monthly limit, and our yearly limit. And we also have a purchase agreement from the New Jersey Water Supply Authority. So, we purchase the raw water from the state of New Jersey. >> So, you're paying for the water that you're pulling out of the rivers.
>> That is correct. >> Wow. Thank you. >> Thank you. Journal, >> please proceed. >> Uh Craig, just briefly, can you uh describe to the board how um water runoff and and grading is going to work
with these two building additions? um for the um welding shop it would be what it did before was it basically drained to the pavement and there is an inlet just to the west and that is not
being piped in because there is a I think it's rough what a 30inch pipe that's right in that vicinity so >> 36 >> 36 and that's in this location right here so we prefer to maintain that same
water runoff direction and not play around with that pipe. Um, for the storage shed, there is an with the existing building to the north, the roof leaders are collected uh and um
collected into an inlet in front of the building. So, what we're going to do is pick up off of that. So the roof leaders for the storage building would be tied into that same system and I believe that drains out to the north and then ultimately I think they have a a pipe that discharges through but it's like a
controlled discharge through the burm. >> Anything else you want to tell the board? >> I don't think so. I hopefully it's straightforward and to the board is questions for Mr. Stars. Mr.
questions for more members. >> Mr. Chry, >> thank you. Thank you, chairman. So, rain water, you actually don't uh put it back in the pond. You basically drain it out. >> Yes, I believe. So, like I said, we're tying into the system here which is then
piped to the north and then there is a pipe that is have it has a controlled outlet that is through the burm in this location. So, correct. Is there any reason why you don't use the rain? >> It's not present sufficient quantity for
us to I mean we're using the rain water that runs into the river that we're picking up through our intakes. >> I guess theoretically if it did discharge here it would be to the rare and back in. So yes. >> Okay. Thank you. My son. >> Yes. Uh second question is since it is
in a flood zone although you got the Roma uh waiver u the current building that you have got the building that you are built for both of the building will it be on the pedestal or how high will be to overcome
the flood in case there is a flood comes in >> the flood does not come in so essentially it's protected all the way on around the outside so the the water will never come over the burn Okay. >> So, the burm is probably probably 10 15 feet high.
>> So, you have it's it's almost like putting a glass and the water filling up on the outside and the inside is protected. >> Right. >> Sorry. >> The flood wall completely encircles the operating area of the plant. This was built in the aftermath of hurricane
Floyd September 1999 when this plant was completely inundated and knocked offline. We built the flood wall. It completely encircles what I'll call the working area of the plant. So that flood wall is at the top
of the flood wall is at the 500year flood elevation. 48 ft above mean sea level is the top of the elevation of the flood wall. And there's four gates that are within this flood wall system,
right? And each gate is at a different elevation. And we know from historical knowledge if there's rain forecasted flooding forecasted we can the USGS gauge downstream the water elevation is
is forecasted in mean sea level. So we know based on the flood predict the hydra hydraologic prediction of the flood state we know what gates we would have to shut to completely we don't have to shut all four gates in a flood only
where we think the water is going to actually the water's going to come through at the lowest elevation first the last time we shut all four gates was in the aftermath of uh storm Ida was the last time we had all four gates shut and then those gates get shut up.
There's an inflatable bladder that goes around them. Gates get shut. Truck pulls up with a compressor, inflates the bladder that is now watertight. Basically, whoever is on the inside is on the inside and whoever is on the outside is on the outside. In Ida, we
were basically an island within that flood. And we maintained operations seamlessly through that event thanks to that flood wall. The storm Ida for your operations considered a 100year storm or a 500 year.
>> That was a 500year storm. So we actually wall was built in the aftermath of Floyd which was September 1999. Irene, whenever Irene was 2017, I think was either two 2007 or
2017. We have a famous the wall was origin the flood wall was originally built to to um the 100red-year flood elevation was the original height of that wall. In the aftermath of Irene, we came to about 2
in below the top of that wall. So after Irene that flood wall was improved and raised to its current elevation which is 48 feet which is the 500year storm which is what Ida was. Had we not done that improvement in the aftermath of Irene
that wall would have got over topped in the aftermath of IDA. Yeah. >> Is there any tree cutting here? The old building there is no tree there. So you don't cut any tree or >> again this is on the Yeah, it's pavement
and the the former built what's left of the building. And then this one uh the storage building is right now there's a concrete pad there. So no, there's no tree cutting. >> Okay. Okay. Fair enough. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr.
Mr. Um after you go through your process of cleaning the water, make it simple. Where does that water go? You have reservoirs to spread out anywhere or >> It gets pumped directly into what we
call the distribution system. We have four large mains that leave this plant. We have a 60-inch main that goes due east. We have a 48 inch main that goes due east. We have a 36inch main that goes due west. And then we have another 60inch main that goes south. So it's
picture the plant as the hub on a wheel. Those mains are like the spokes and that water goes out to the 74. >> I'm sorry. >> What is HV? >> It's going into large diameter pipes which are then going into smaller diameter pipes which are ultimately
making it to our customers houses, >> businesses, emergency services, everybody. >> Yeah. Right. The water that goes to the Bridgewater biohydrates, is that the same water? >> It is. >> So, it's been already cleaned and so on and so forth.
>> It It has. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> How long has the water treatment plant been at this site? >> This plant was originally built in the early 1930s,
the original iteration of it. You know, obviously the plant's been capitalally improved and expanded over the course of time to its current configuration, but they broke ground, I believe, in 1929. >> If you go back to historic aerials, this
sailing basin is probably the first thing that's there. Is it uh this basin and probably half of this building? So, 1931 photos shows that >> actually that that's the filter house up top. >> Yeah. So right to the right of that that small building that was the original
filters but we originally the plant was originally built with six filters. We're now up to 36. >> Show you how we've expanded over course of time to meet the growing need. >> And this plant you said serves portions of five counties.
>> 74 municipalities across five counties. Somerset Morris I'm sorry. Somerset, Hunter, Middle Sex, Mercer, and Union >> cover a lot of territory. >> Yes. Yes, we do.
>> Do you pay taxes? >> Yes, we do. >> There was a question earlier about storm water collection uh from roof leaders being discharged back into the river as a potential source. Now perhaps our report can help me just to clarify that. Are there different storm water
regulations for roof runoff being uh contained versus taking roof run off and putting it back into a a major body of water or or a river? >> Uh not really. I mean the roof runoff is technically considered clean and so you you know you wouldn't have to do water
quality treatment as opposed to you know if it were fall on the pavement then you would have to do water quality. However, this project is not a major project either. So, it doesn't increase by more than a quarter acre and it does not disturb more than an acre area.
>> Both building locations are are already impervious. Correct. >> Correct. So, theoretically, the water quality is getting better already because you're covering the ground surface by a building. >> Any other questions from the board?
Do you know how many fire hydrants we have in Bridgewater? >> Not off the top of my head. I I do not. >> How much do you charge Bridgewater for each fire hydrant per year? >> I I do not know. I I work strictly at
the plant. My My job and function is to strictly manage the daily operation of maintenance of this facility and the sister facility across the the river. It's a different department that manages what we call the distribution system. So I don't have that answer off the top. >> I was kind of hoping that maybe the
lawyer could help me out. >> I I would not I would not know that not know the answer to that question. >> Well, I was unaware that we were charged at all until we had one of the last planning board meetings where it was
stated by Mr. papis that we were charged per per unit. And I was just wondering what that might cost the town and if you'd be willing to uh give us a break. >> No, we can't. Our the water company's
tariff requires the water company to charge uniform rates for the various services that it it provides and doesn't permit that sort of um negotiation or or or discounted rates. So I mean in the h in the home
residential we pay for usage but the town pays for availability which is different right? >> No the water is consumed either way. >> The water that goes into the fire
hydrants is consumed >> if it's taken from the fire hydrants. Right. >> Sure it is. >> Not like the residential water gets used. I mean I don't know that. But um it would seem to make sense that
residential water gets used a hell of a lot more than the fire hydrants do. >> But neither here nor there. Um one last thing, would you be willing to um
walk someone through the plan? >> Yeah, I think we could make that happen. We've had the mayor, former mayor at the plan. >> We have a very active board. Occasionally >> if they would like a tour, >> if they would like a tour, I would love to accommodate board.
>> Perhaps we could touch the planning office. We could organize such a visit perhaps on two separate days. >> Great. That would be nice. Thank you. >> Certainly, sir. >> Just one last question for me. Um with the deliveries uh currently are they
still monthly and would this um new proposal impact um with the deliveries like the timing of everything the building will impact um all the residents getting water >> frequency though I think council woman
asked what how how frequent are deliveries >> well deliveries of what? So I I think your question was from the 2020 application which would have been the ammonia but sitewise there's a lot more deliveries than just the the ammonium right we have so the plant
utilizes a lot of consumables right water chemicals probably being water treatment chemicals being the largest so we get chemical deliveries literally every day of the week more so in the summer when the weather gets hot and we pump more water we're producing more water in the summer, people use
more water in the summer, treat more water, we go through chemicals quicker by treating more water. So, we get chemical deliveries pretty much every day. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, council. Any other questions?
Miss Sarm, any questions? >> I have a few. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I raised a question um just about if this would generate an additional parking need. I did a quick I don't think parking was provided and I guess my question is in previous applications was parking ever a topic of conversation
or parking requirements ever something that came up? >> I don't believe so to my recollection. I think this is the third or fourth one that I've done here and it wasn't because I don't think the number of employees has changed and I don't think the number of parking spaces provided has changed.
>> Okay. Thank you. And um and just doing kind of a cursory look because I don't think parking was included or parking counts were included. It looks like it's about 98 spaces and there's some pockets of striped spaces and improved plots around each of the buildings, you know, parts of the the site. Um I was just
curious because currently the the weld shop or is being is being replaced, right? There is no current weld shop on the site. It was demolished previously. >> Correct. And so is the weld shop or is welding happening anywhere else on the property?
>> We have a limited welding being done at a outside area that we set up temporarily. >> So it's outdoors. >> It is all outdoors. >> Okay. So it's so there's not going to be a space that is going to be repurposed
once the weld shop is re reconstructed. Right. >> Correct. that current temporary space that we're utilizing now as an area for welding and cutting to be done will be abandoned. >> Okay. So, the services are happening
right now. There's an employee who's working on site but not really in a formal location and this will formalize it. So, there's no new activity being added by the weld shop being constructed. Correct. >> That is correct. >> Okay. Um, and I just wanted to clarify that because, you know, from a building
square footage perspective, generally it generates parking. But in this case, it's a little bit different than, you know, a business, but I just wanted to clarify that there was an additional additional intensity that's being added that would require additional parking. Um, so I have no problem with the way
that it's strikes and laid out right now. Um, just one other thing. Um I just had identified um on the zone data sheet on the cover sheet of the site plans that there were um just some some errors
um and I would just like those cleaned up as a matter board does approve it uh as a matter for compliance >> and we would agree to that obviously. >> What's your anticipated construction time frame? as soon as budgets come in.
>> I'm gonna have Mr. Mccerna come up and testify. He's our architect. He knows a little bit about project scheduling, but his response was as soon as the budget permits that you're planning on having testify. >> Okay. >> Any other questions for summer?
>> I have nothing for Mr. B. Um just a few. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh Craig, we we heard your testimony about storm water and the fact that this is a minor development. Uh I agree with everything that that you testify to. Um the one question I have
though is I guess the collection system, the the existing storm system where where the roof leaders from the one building connect to and then I think the other building is just discharged to grade for runoff where that runoff leaves the site. any any issues any any
negative impacts any any pre-existing problems that you're aware of or is it gonna this is the way it functions today no problem and this is the way it's going to continue to function >> yes yes I mean it it even the u the
collection point I'm sorry here I believe that the pipe even they come up to the a common common point >> and like I said it it is a controlled outlet and there is a good size rip wrap that's on the other side of the of the flood wall
>> and then it's and then it's overland flow through that vegetated area into the river. >> Yeah. It's almost like you're getting water quality before it comes back into the plant. So, yes. >> Got it. >> Okay. And um as far as the flood wall and burm um understand the testimony
about that. Is it correct then that these projects do not need any type of DP permits, no land use flood hazard or wetland permits because of that flood wall? >> Yeah. And I think uh you brought it up in your uh comments. So that's why I looked for the LMA and I I think that's
kind of the belt for suspenders. I think that's the reason you submit the LMA is to pro prove that it's not in the flood zone. >> Can you provide a copy of that to >> I can give it right to you if you want. >> Yeah. Send give it to Nancy. Either give a copy of or send her for our record. >> Yeah. I mean I'll do it as part of the
compliance. >> Perfect. So yes. Um, only other question I have is, uh, the fire official issued a memo with a few comments, some of which may be building related. I understand that, but maybe this is more a question for your attorney. Is any issues with that or we're going to hear testimony you're
going to comply with with comments? Perfect. Yes. >> Okay. Very good. Thank you. >> At this time, I'd like to thank any members of the public question. Mr. Styrers hearing none. Now we'll close the public
for Mr. Styers. Who's your next witness? >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just one more. We have our project architect um Joe McCarnan. Joe, could you um raise your hand and board attorney will swear you in? >> Do you swear that the testimony you're going to give in connection with this hearing will be the truth but the truth?
>> I do. >> Thank you. Spell by your last name for the record. Joseph Mccurren architects >> RA or >> AI. >> Joe, could you briefly give the board the benefit of your qualifications for
testimony? >> Sure. I'm a graduate of Temple University. I'm a licensed architect since 1989 in the state of New Jersey as well as nine other states. >> Ask the board except Mr. Mccernand for architectural testimony. Mr. Please don't have any objection to Mr.
Recurrent's qualifications. Please proceed. >> Joe, you've got two exhibits there. Would you um uh tell council what they are and uh what they depict? >> Were these submitted with the application or these new exhibits? >> They were submitted with the application, but they were not colored.
>> Okay, then let's mark them as uh exhibit two and then exhibit 3. A2 and A3, I'm sorry. And with today's uh larger exhibit here directly on my right is in fact the metal storage
building that is encompassing over the existing concrete. Uh there is a somewhat identical storage coating right next door and we are matching the colors and uh finishes on it and completely metal.
>> You have um overhead garage type doors there, Mr. Kern. What What are they for, Joe? >> For bringing in material some of the pipe and the fittings are large enough that they need to be proed by equipment. And you have wall-mounted and downward
pointing lights, correct? >> Yes. >> What's the height of of this building? >> This one is 31 ft. >> Okay. >> And what is A3 showing us? >> A3 is depicting the uh depicting the replacement building
for the welding shop. It is uh of brick because all the adjacent buildings are brick and we're trying to match the motif, I should say. of the area. And once again in here at the overhang is here for the welding area. And then we
have two overhead drawers for storage. And we do have a small mezzanine of the main area. >> Questions for Mr. McCern. Mr. Chairman. Oh, sorry. The one question remain pending as scheduling of the project. Forgive me.
>> Okay. Uh it is budget driven but we plan to have it in the next two years. >> Very much. >> Any additional questions? >> Which one the principal building? I'm sorry. >> Yeah. Which one the principal building?
>> This question comes up a lot in this type of facility. So you have a water treatment plant and all of the buildings contribute to water treatment. So, I think there's a lot of principal buildings on this property on this type of property. I don't think you have just
one. I think you've got a whole bunch. No, I just wanted to see which one had the 65. Uh, obviously the pre-existing um let let me sorry let let me explain the the um the permitted principal building height
in the M2 zone and this is something that your planner pointed out is actually 45 ft. So this should have said um less than 45 ft. That's one of the corrections that she's asked us to make. But um Mr. Caran just gave you both the building heights and they're both
significantly below 45 ft. >> That's what I'm because I see here is a 65 ft less than 65 ft and existing non-conform confirmation. So that's what I'm asking. So there no building is specifically 65 ft. All are 31 32 or
less than 45 ft. That's what you're saying. >> Neither of these two is I I don't believe there's a taller building than 45 ft on site. The tall building is the original plant called the head house. Okay. And that had I think Frank
testified six filters in it and that has had additions multiple additions over the years and uh that is the highest building is the original >> and that is >> the house that's how high it is. Oh, approximate.
>> I've worked on that building for years, but uh I don't have that off the top of my head, but it is absolutely under 65 ft. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Mr. Any other questions?
>> How about from our professional? >> Are there are there any other structures on the property that are over 45 ft? the line building with the line tower is over 45 ft and I don't believe the head is over 45.
>> Okay. I I just wanted to clarify because my my comment was kind of related to are there buildings that are 65 ft that this is saying it's under. Um but I understood I just wanted the clarification uh because I understand that the proposed building will be under the the 45T allowance. I just wanted to
make sure um that we that was clarified. Thank you. >> That's all I have. >> I'll ask a very high level question on behalf of the board. There are two structures being proposed. One of them is essentially covered in brick. The other one's metal walls. What's the reason for the difference in these materials being used?
>> Uh the uh the first building uh the bone shop replacement all the buildings around it are brick and we're trying to match it. a line building. Uh the head house, the entire plant is in brick and we just
refurbished the maintenance building in brick and we're just trying to match. >> Okay. >> For me, right? >> The metal building and we're just matching the adjacent storage point. >> Very good.
>> Okay, Mr. Any questions? >> I do not have any questions, Mr. Chairman. You stole my questions. Apologies for that. >> Are there any members of the public at this time that wish to question Mr.
Mccernin on his testimony? >> Seeing none, hearing none, I'll close the public portion for Mr. Mccernin. There any other witnesses? >> Mr. Chairman, that's what we have for you in affirmative testimony. Thank you. >> Very good. Thank you very much. This time, I'd like to open up to any members
of the board have any questions or comments or deliberations? We all need water. Thanks. Thanks for the uh everything. So I understand now Mr. Atkins. Any comments? >> None for me. uh you know for all of our
residents even if you even if you have well water I guess you need fire hydrants. So uh yeah I see no reason to not go through with this. I would vote
affirm this >> based on the testimony and all of the evidence given in the facts provided and answering all of our questions. I'm inclined to support and have no reason to propose this. >> Muro, I think um everybody who gave testimony
was well versed uh very informed um knows their job well. They know what's going down. Um, I'm sorry. I'm not sure about your name with the beard. >> Me? >> Yes. >> Frank Marasha. >> Frank, great job. You seem to be on top
of everything. I appreciate your answers. Um, hopefully we can continue to get clean water in Bridgewater, and I'm in favor of this application. >> Thank you for your kind words, council. >> Yeah. And thank you for I want to echo
thank you for sharing the history behind it with some of the new folks like myself and I really appreciate that. Hopefully I think we can have a 100redy year anniversary coming up so we can maybe celebrate together. >> Got some really good old photos from when the place is built to share.
>> We actually have the um township historic meeting going on right now. Um so yeah maybe something to share with them. I will echo the sentiments that everybody's just given. Thank you very much for your professionalism, for the thorough presentation, and also thank
you for allowing uh potential tour for the members of the board. I am also inclined to support the application. Board attorney, Mr. Peek, have we satisfied all requests? >> Yeah. So, uh the motion, if anyone were inclined to make it, would be to uh
grant preliminary and final sight state approval. I did not hear any extraordinary conditions or anything like that being suggested other than the usual conditions that would apply to any applications. So motion would just be to
uh preliminary >> that's Mr. Chow making that motion would like to second Bruce >> Mr. Bonjouro have a roll call please >> yes >> Mr. Mr. Bouro. >> Yes.
>> Counciloman. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mr. I'm sorry. Miss Charitch. >> Yes. >> Mr. Chowry. >> Yes. >> Mr. Athens. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. Take care. Best of luck.
>> Thank you very I can easily Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. The board will be taking a two minute break. Okay. Do you have that?
Don't come on. We just continue to be alive. Excellent. We'll be taking just an additional moment. Thank you. >> Sorry. Take a deep breath. Okay, we will proceed with the meeting.
Just a reminder here, there is a signin sheet for anybody that's going to ask public question and for later commentary. So, please feel free to come forward and sign with your name and address. Once again, if you could just give your loudest voice for the exclusives of the room, that'd be appreciated. Move along this evening.
The application we have before us is 24-01 PB. That's for Rand block 405 block one, commonly known as 59 Cornell Boulevard. And you're here this evening to represent the >> Good evening, Mr. Chair. My name is Evan Pickas. I'm with the law of pick and
sponsor and I'm here tonight to advance the application of Rach at 59 Cornell Boulevard which is block 4051. Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, the board and tax of staff, I thank you very much for your time this evening.
We're looking at a lot here which we are requesting permission to subdivide into three single family lots. I have one uh witness who will I'll ask to testify this evening. Mr. Moshe is here in the background in case we have additional questions that he needs to answer for
us. My principal witness will be William Scott. He's our licensed engineer. Um before I begin, I just want to give a little brief commentary uh because in the notes I noticed that uh some of the uh commenters asked for a brief history
of this property. So the property uh right now as Mr. Scott will tell you has a two uh a twostory single family home on the property was built in 1925 uh by Jay Herder Quick. Mr. Quick lived
in that home uh until 19 72 when the property was sold to the Striker family. The Striker family maintained that property all the way up through 2006 when they sold it to Deborah Shapiro and
Deborah Shapiro sold it to my client Mr. Moshe in 2022. Throughout that period of time, it has been uh maintained as a single family home in separate garage. Uh I'll be honest, I don't know that the garage was constructed at the same time that the
house was. I've been able to find that out, but there is a separate garage on the property. So, that is the brief history of the property that I've been able to uncover for you folks. Uh, and if you would be so kind to swearing, Mr. Scott, we can proceed.
>> Do you swear that the testimony you're going to give in connection with this hearing will be the truth and what's the truth? Yes, I do. >> Thank you very much. >> Mr. Scott, could you please provide >> Oh, I'm sorry. Could you uh state and spell your last name for the record? If you can please provide the board with
a brief overview of your education qualifications testify this evening. Uh I have a uh bachelor science degree from the far university school of engineering. Uh I am a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey. Uh I've had my license uh
continuously in good standing throughout my career. Um, I've appeared before this board uh probably just over a half a dozen times, including my very first appearance 22 years ago, which I remember.
Um, and I've appeared before uh probably three to four dozen boards throughout regions. >> Does the board object Mr. Scott's qualifications? >> License is currently in good standing. >> Yes, sir. >> Mr. Scott, please proceed. Thank you.
>> So, Mr. Scott, um I gave a brief layman's overview of the property. Could you just reiterate uh you know what currently exists on the property? >> Yeah, so the property it's located at the corner of West Summit um West Summit Street and Cornell Boulevard. Uh it's
currently developed with a small single family home near the intersection. Uh has a fairly substantial front yard setback variance to West West Summit Street. Uh there's a small I believe a onecar gas garage which also has a small
uh front yard variance associated to it. Uh the area around the building is a generally long covered with some large trees. Uh the remainder of the property is is wooded. >> And how how wide is the total property?
>> Well, it's along the west summit uh street frontage. It's 330 ft and we have 100 foot depth or width along corner >> and our application is for subdivision of this property into three
specific three separate lots. Correct. >> Right. It's in the R10 zone which requires a minimum of 10,000 ft. So as we have the 33,000 ft we have three larger than required lots. So in fact um the request for the subdivision is a
request to create three conforming lots without any variances. Is that correct? That's right. So these lots would all meet the required front, rear, sideyard setbacks. Um the buildings that will be proposed will meet all of the bulk restrictions for poor area coverage.
>> Okay. And just from a very high level, have you had an opportunity to review the reports that were submitted to us? >> Yes, I did. So we got a report from the planner, the engineer, the fire marshal, traffic safety, health, tax assessor, sewage utility, zoning officer, EC code
construction, not the traffic engineer, but we received this whole package, correct? >> That's right. >> And you had a chance to read it. >> Yes. >> And through the course of reading that, did you note that various uh departments made certain recommendations that should be required as conditions of this application?
>> Yes, I did. And from again from the high level, is it your testimony that the applicant will indeed comply with all of those recommendations? >> Yes, that's our intent. >> So, um, if you could go up to the board and just explain the plan on, I guess
the next page, Mr. Peek, I just want to confirm with you that these plans were all submitted in advance. >> Then there's no need to mark them, Mr. Uh this first sheet I have up now is the existing conditions map just showing the and shading the existing house and the
detached garage. Um to the um west of the property we have an easement which runs across the property uh which contains uh a sanitary shore line and I believe a water line. This drawing is a diagrammatical uh
dimensional shows the proposed three lots. Uh we have um the smallest lot in the middle. We put more area on the corner lot just to accommodate u additional setbacks and we put additional area on the lot uh to the
west because there's an easement there. So the middle lot is the 10,000 one of the other lots is 12. We have other is 13. Uh we're holding the front uh of the buildings at the required front yard set back to maximize the uh rear yard for
the residence of the home. The next sheet is the lock grading plan. So to design these improvements, I first met at the site with our environmental consultant. The first thing we did was to check to see if there were wetlands on the site. He informed us there were
not. Uh I met again with our environmental consultant at the site where we performed soil logs where we tested for the groundwater elevation height and uh we tested for infiltration rate the soils. Uh our proposal is to curb the frontage
of the property along West Summit Street. There are uh existing storm sort inlets uh that are I believe they're E inlets which are flat inlets without curb. So we'll be extending the curb line basically over the existing inlets.
So all the runoff from West Summit Street will now be captured and directed into the uh township storm source system. Uh the drainage, the existing drainage is essentially everything from West Summit and a good
amount of the area to the north comes across our property and enters the rear and sideyards of the adjoining lots uh to the south. So those properties would experience uh a decrease in runoff from our site due
to the curbing. You said sorry you said that the adjacent property will see a decrease in the water flow. >> Yeah. The flow right now is from West Summit Street across the property in directly into their yards and the introduction of the curbing will direct
that water into the storm source system. Uh we are putting uh curbing in. Typically we would install sidewalk. However, there's no uh sidewalk in the immediate neighborhood and it's a very
uh low travel or it's a only a few more streets down West Summit uh with with homes. So, we're asking for a waiver for installation of sidewalk. Uh the applicant of course make the required contribution associated with that.
Uh the proposed grading of the site is to provide pitch from West Summit Street up towards the house. So the garages are set about 2 ft higher than the roadway. Uh and the existing grade falls
uh away from West Summit Street and the net result is the three homes will have uh basically walkout basement on close to natural grade. While you're talking about grading, Mr. Scott, um, are there any steep slopes on the property at all?
>> No. >> So, we're aware that the development on this property is going to be quite noticeable to the neighbors. Um, so I've taken what steps I could to try to mitigate that. We're proposing a small wall which will run along the rear
property line of the three homes which abuts the side property line of the two homes to the south. This wall will be about 3t high at the max. It'll be interlocking block wall. It will have a cap on it. The finished side of the wall
will be directed towards the neighbor's view. And the purpose of this wall is to create a raised planting bed along the boundary uh where we are proposing a 30 uh a mixture of 30 harbor viting and
leeland cypress trees. Uh we're proposing a swale across the rear yards of the proposed houses uh which runs at the high point which would be the westerly side of the the lot across towards Cornell Boulevard where
all the runoff from the site will be captured uh within a small detention pond which would be piped out to an inlet which exists uh on Cornell Boulevard. Mr. Scott, as far as the detention fund is concerned, um what would be the
maintenance requirements for that? Who would perform that maintenance and who would be responsible for maintaining the detention? So, our current proposal is that the pond will be owned by the owner of lot 1.03, uh who will also be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of that. Uh we're
showing a fence around the pond. Uh on the next sheet you'll see we're proposing uh landscaping around the pond from the the view of both roadways. Uh you see at the bottom these green
dots are the 30 Evergreen trees we're proposing. Uh and we're also proposing an additional 14 deciduous trees. I'm sorry 18 deciduous trees uh along the roadway frontage. So just as a note to the
board, if the owner of lot 1.03 is going to be responsible for that detention fund, obviously it would need to be a de restriction that would be contained in the view for that property, which I guess do you do you do um do you do subdivision by deed or by
>> uh usually minor by plat? So uh for this we want a deed. So yeah, we just want provision. >> Yeah. No, of course. Of course. So the the introduction of this detention pond was a a measure that we took uh just to demonstrate to the board that there'd be no adverse drainage
impacts to the downstream properties. Uh we're holding the runoff rate uh from the site to a rate lower than what occurs uh at the current condition. Uh again, we reviewed the letters from the uh project staff. We have no issues
complying with them. Um and I think that the Oh, there was a few items that I should just address from their letters. Uh there was a a question about the decks that show on one page in a different spot than another. Uh they're
both uh raised decks. um proposed. Um it's not our intent to to demonstrate that the deck will be built as shown on this plan. It's just to show that a deck which is a good size can be put on this
house uh for the residents to use. Um the deck will be constructed with um permeable uh brass below it. Uh the homes that we show on this property, uh I showed them at uh 50 by
35 just to demonstrate that the homes will fit on the lot. Um, my own personal opinion is they're probably going to be constructed a little smaller, but I can't not my expertise, but the footprint that we're showing is
around a 3,000 foot house, which I think is a little more than the neighborhood would bear. >> Can we talk a little bit about uh the the elevation of the house? Um, there was a note from one of the experts here
uh that they wanted some testimony about the height of the house and the walk out basement, how that's going to work and how that's going to look in the neighborhood. >> Well, I've noted on the plan that our height will be compliant with the township height restriction. I don't have a house design to share with you,
so I can't calculate an exact height. Um, they're two-story homes. Uh they're a twocar garage, >> but in so far as like how high the house is built on the on the there was there was not concern here some
>> again there's there's from from the west summit frontage the garages are set two foot higher than the roadway which is it's not atypical for you you want the home to be a little higher because it has a nice nice view. Um, but we're only
showing a couple steps out of the front. These houses aren't set way up as you look at them from the street. Um, the walkout basements are essentially coming out on the existing grade in the rear. I think that was all the points that I
recall from the me. Um, the township's flood damage prevention ordinance. How are we how are we complying with that? Well, again, we're we're restricting the
flow from this property so as not to increase the flow coming off the property post development from what occurs now. So there'll be no adverse impact downstream. >> All the three houses should have the same bedroom numbers. Two bedroom, three bedroom, four bedrooms.
>> I don't have a bedroom count. >> No, I'm just giving you the footprint. Um that size house could have could have a five bedroomedroom. I think >> probably going to be a four four to five bedroom home.
I just need some clarifications. You said uh one house uh one lot is 12,000 another is 13,000 and another is 10,000 in the center one is 10,000 my right side is at 13,000 and other is
12,000. Uh, but we also said that the total area was 33,000. That doesn't add up. Then I misspoke. >> So, our middle lot is 10,000. >> Our corner lot is 12,000 and 11,000 on
the Thank you. So, just to clarify, that's 11,000 for lot 101, 10,000 for lot 1.02, and 12,000 for lot 1.03. >> Yes. >> And just uh just for the record, um you
gave a lot of testimony about storm water drainage and the like. Um, that was all put into a storm water drainage report that we also submitted to the board prior to today's hearing. >> That's right. >> Mr. Can we open up to the board for any
questions? >> Be happy to try to answer questions. Perfect. >> Would like to begin? >> Mr. Chair, why not? >> So, uh, you may not be able to answer. That's okay. Um if these will be all uh
sold out or it will be rented or it will be basically decided by the owner of the house owner of the property. >> I don't have an answer. I I would assume these are going to be for sale. >> But yeah, the application is just for
the subdivision itself, not for you know >> they they get the lots so long as you know they intend to use them for a single family home and and they're proposing a conforming thing. just go and get a building permit from >> my my actually
related question was if the retention uh is basically the responsibility for a 103 then how can be documented so that whoever this law will basically maintain that point
>> we would impose a condition of approval that there be a notation on the deed >> okay >> that would say affirmatively state that the owner of that lot has the obligation to maintain whatever that would be Mr. and my satisfaction.
Engineering language make sure it's a clear obligation. >> A quick question. How many trees are being removed and how many will be replaced? Uh we did a tree count uh as required by the ordinance which is a count of
deciduous trees greater than 12 in and um evergreen trees greater than 6 in. So uh there were 14 deciduous trees uh in that range of those 12 are being
removed. Uh there were an additional uh six trees that are in the rightway uh and two of those will be removed. So that's uh 14 trees removed. Uh we're planting 18 deciduous trees and another
30 evergreens. >> You said 14. >> What? >> 14 total should be removed. I'm >> I'm seeing 16 here on on this tree removal and replacement plan with the red X's. total
street or just deciduous trees. >> So, no evergreen. >> Uh there was there was one evergreen tree I believe within the 14 trees it's showing as a six inches. So, that would have to be
the evergreen. So, that's saying there was 14 in that count. 12 of those are coming out and there's six trees in the rightway. Uh, two of those would be coming out.
So, I'm showing 14 removal >> and I just counted 14 red X's. So there's 14 on the lot and then two in the right. >> But you said you're planting new ones. >> Yes. >> How many are you planting? >> Planting 18 deciduous trees and 30
evergreens. >> So you're planting 30 evergreens in a situation where you're only removing one or two, right? One, >> right? Well, I wanted to to provide some >> No, it looks nice. So you're So in effect we're adding
>> you're adding overall trees. Yeah, >> we're adding overall trees at about a three to one. >> Yeah. >> Ju just a note on the trees. I I understand why you would be planting the trees towards the rear as you described with the wall. Um any particular reason
why I'm by no means an arborist just a home gardener as many of us but any particular reason why you chose a leel cypress and an arborite I'm aware of how the leelands grow I also know that you live in Bridgewater and the deer tend to love the arborites so I'm just curious if there are any other alternatives
perhaps working with our planner who would be happy to do that >> I'm I'm certainly open I I was told by the arborist of summit that there is a breed of arborite deer will not eat. >> I'd love to know what >> that's
>> Yeah. We'll just make that a condition that you review the the plannings and they get installed up to the satisfaction approval and satisfaction of the board. >> I just had another comment on the plan.
Um are any of these native trees? >> I can't tell you that. I should know that, but I I don't want to testify to it. Yeah, I I don't want to make it like a show stoper requirement, but I think it'll be important for us to know if they would be
already this environment. >> I mean, I'm showing red maples, eastern red buds, uh, which I know are native to this area. So, I would have to check the other ones. I don't have a green phone, but I
know that a lot of our residents love native trees. >> That could be something that Catherine and Bill consider when they proposal. >> Sure. >> Clarifying question. I heard you say
there's going to be a wall behind the lots and then the trees. Are the trees the wall or is there also like a retaining wall or wall? And so as you look at the property from the neighbors, you'll see three-foot wall uh raised and
then planted on that burm behind the wall is the evergreens. So we have the three foot and then I think I'm at five to six foot on the evergreens. >> So the neighbors will see the wall and then the houses will see the trees. >> Right. I heard very early in your testimony you
described that you had the testing done for groundwater height as well as the groundwater infiltration rate. Yes. >> What were your findings on groundwater height in this particular lot? >> Groundwater is high. Our initial uh proposal for was um to utilize uh
drywalls. uh our first submission uh we received a comment back from the board engineer that that probably wasn't going to work. So, we took a second look at it. Um and that led us to the um the proposal for the pond.
>> And as far as the infiltration test, >> yeah, again, the infiltration test um along with the high groundwater essentially you can't infiltrate on this site. And there's actually a mathematical argument that would say that the runoff from the site really doesn't increase if
you build. I'm not going to make that argument. >> But essentially >> it doesn't percolate. >> It doesn't percate now. So what we can do is store and slow it down. >> Mr. BMS
that impacts the plantings of the trees that are being proposed or the types of trees that are being proposed. >> If they had provided the the existing tree species, it probably would have given me a better indication. Um,
probably not. I know that a willow is good in a wet area. >> Yes. What I would say is that and I I'll have more comments on landscaping. >> Perfect. Yeah. Are there any other questions in the meantime?
>> I don't know whether it is appropriate question at this moment or later. You said that uh from the uh road elevations to the driveway is 2 feet. >> Yes. Uh do you any anticipate what's the
house floor height will be from the roadway? Okay. >> Uh they're about 3 ft higher than the garage. >> Yeah. And that's basically to bring the the base basement out on the front level. >> The overall two story will be within 35
ft for ground safe requirement. >> Yeah, we have we have to meet the 35 ft code. >> What will the proposed wall be made of or how will it look? Uh we haven't chosen the color, but I'm testifying that it's going to be an interlocking
block with a finished cap uh with the finished side facing the neighbor. >> And will that stretch the entire length of the uh southerntherly border of the lot or just >> and that's the that's the entire length
of of the three lots. Shows best Yeah, this wall is starting right here at the corner and continues down to the rightway line uh at Cornell.
And if I heard earlier, the lock the the wall essentially opens up every so often. Is that is that correct? Or is it a solid wall across the entire back? >> It's it's a solid wall. It it steps with the grade. >> So as the grade changes, you're going to maintain between probably two and three
feet. You'll see it's a virus. >> Uh board of attorney, Mr. Peek, keep me honest. Uh since this is a an application for essentially a subdivision, any comments about the the structure to be built obviously would be subject to a future site. Is that correct?
>> No. Um single family lots, they just get a building building permit. I mean, so long and so long as they the lots can accommodate their intended use, that's really the the limit of the board's concern with regards to that. Really the board's inquiry here is whether or not
the proposed subdivision complies with the township subdivision ordinance and you know the bulk standards uh there and and as well as considerations like drainage and you know those access points safe things like that.
So any discussion about whether or not there's a deck versus the patio that would take place any other lines of question. >> So basically your plan is to all the drainage water from the tree houses will be coming to the front side.
Nothing will be going from the west side. >> Well, any rainfall that would fall in the front yards would travel to the rear yards >> rear >> and then it would come down the swale to the pond. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> How deep does the pond? >> Uh the maximum is three foot. That's when it's the 100 year storm rolls in. It's three foot deep. Other than that, probably two max. >> When that pond settles, where is it
eventually discharged to? >> There's a a storm sore inlet right directly opposite on Cornell. So, we're tying right into that. >> And what will the pond be, I guess, lined with uh to hold the water there? Some kind of plastic sheet or how how
does that work? Well, again, luckily our our ground doesn't perculate, so we can use the natural ground. It'll be grass. >> And you're installing an inlet on Summit also. >> These are existing inlets on Summit. So, what we're doing is we're changing a
flat grate to a grate that has a curved piece on it. You mentioned earlier the neighborhood doesn't include any sidewalks that you know of. Um could you speak to the the greater neighborhood outside of the the
let's say six adjacent lots? Just curious because I'm not familiar exactly with the sidewalk representation in this area in general. >> The other side of Cornell is is Somerville Burrow and I believe the sidewalk hit Somerville there.
>> Okay. Uh, I don't recall seeing a sidewalk on our side. >> Okay. So, within the vicinity on the Somerville side, there are there is a sidewalk system of some of some nature. >> Yeah, I I know. I've seen it. I'm can't
where exactly, but I know it's there. We always look for consideration to see if there's any existing system that could be tied into especially in a residential neighborhood that could be walkable. >> And certainly we have to make a contribution or put the sidewalk in. So
we really go either way here makes a determination that it's appropriate. >> Okay. We'll we'll bring that up. >> Memory that. >> I was distracted looking at something.
>> I just had a general question to remind me. When we see that the owner of the property has to maintain their return, how do we ensure that they are retaining or maintaining? Well, um,
>> if it fails, >> I know, but >> if we get to the point where the board is someone's detention, >> yeah, if the board is entertaining an approval, then I would recommend a condition of approval be that the applicant provided annual certification
that they are in fact, they won't be able to see what's what's going on. So, >> yeah. Um it it's going to be an obligation on the deed that we also will need as a condition an operation and maintenance manual of that basin which spells out
the requirements and that's going to need to be recorded on the deed for lot 103. And there may also be obligations for 102 and 101 as well um which we can get to in a in a in a few minutes. So there there's a couple of checks and
balances that ultimately would would be conditions of approval. The enforcement of those conditions is what is always the tricky part. Um the township does not go around and police necessarily that every homeowner is or every you
know homeowners association is maintaining their stormware facilities but certainly they're required to. >> Daniel certifications are good. >> Yeah. It's a starting >> any other questions. >> Okay, we'll shift to our professionals.
M. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, back to the landscaping. Um so isla or council in Isla the most of the
um trees in the planning schedule R of New Jersey native species. They also happen to comply with the list of acceptable trees that the township has ordinance of which the subdivision is required to utilize as replacement trees.
with the exception of one which is the green giant arborite. Um that's the only species on that doesn't appear on that list. Um while the cypress does and other types of that's the only one. So um one thing and I know that I believe
Mr. Scott that the back row of arborite are are intended to be a mix of those two. I think it's it shows 1515. I don't know how it's but that's the intent intent, >> right? It was a mix. Yeah. So, I I'd be happy to work with the applicant. Um, I
do think that um I think they appear to be about 10 feet on center or so. >> Yeah, that would make sense. Three 30 and 300 ft count. >> Yeah, I think um you know because these trees can go pretty grow pretty quickly,
the cypress requires a lot of sun and I I'm afraid that they might shade. They might create shade and you see browning, you see issues. Um they actually they actually are kind of opposite trees that you know the the cypress is more heat resistant but works in the cold and the
green the green giant is good in the heat but not in the cold etc or vice versa whatever. Um and so I would be happy to work with the applicant to figure out a good mix. I also think that potentially um a mix of non arboritey trees in between might be helpful to
create a more natural looking screen other than just kind of a a big screen and green trees or sometimes um does its job as a screen but doesn't look all that great. So I think maybe putting some flower and trees or things like that to might be useful. >> For the purposes of the record, Mr.
Chairman, we're very happy to do that. >> Thank you. Um, Mr. Scott, I think you'd mentioned that there's a fence proposed around bas pond as you called it. >> Yes. >> Do you have the height of that fence?
>> Uh, my grading plan is going as a 42 inch uh picket style open. So should be enough to keep people away from it and you could still see through it if there's a issue going on that needs to be visible.
>> Can you describe open ticket if that is that just there separation between um kind of the vertical right slats? >> Okay. I I think where it's located in the front yard there. Um, I would just take a look at the fence requirements in the township code under section 196-2
because I do think that they're going to need at least 50% visibility through it um for the gaps just to make sure. Um, >> yeah, that's that's what I had in mind, but I don't have a detail on it. >> Okay. >> Yeah, >> that would be required, I think. Um,
otherwise the design paper need to be saw. Um and then the last thing I have and I had asked some questions kind of about um architectural sorry I wasn't sure if an architect was going to be present but um asked about the height and looking at the the the kind of
conceptual drawings that have been pro provided um many of them are not to the full extent of the setbacks and in in just calculating the the footprints right
Were they um were these conceptual dwellings put on the site pen to show what's possible based on the limitations of the bulk standards? Other bulk standards and setbacks like the F. >> I I showed these to demonstrate to the
board what I thought a reasonable house footprint for this neighborhood would would look like and the lots could accommodate it. So, we're showing about a 3,000 square foot house here. >> Okay. which I again it's not my expertise but I I don't I don't see a
5,000 foot 6,000 foot house going into the >> no and neither would it be permitted. Um and just so that's one of the clarification questions I guess I'd asked is right now the F which is one of the B standards and requirements if it's deviated from would require relief not
from this board but from the zoning board um was not identified in particular right an actual calculation wasn't provided um in the case of the smallest lot the 10,000 foot lot which I believe is proposed lot 1.02 2 that's limited to 2500 square ft.
>> Um and so if the basement is finished or depending on how it's configured for the ordinance definition, you know, the floor area could be exceeded on I guess that was the question I raised is is what you're showing right now compliant with the zoning regulations. Um or uh
will it be >> it? Well, in no way in what I what am I what what I'm showing is intended to demonstrate or show that we're coming in in the future with a variance. Um,
again, I probably should have come in with a little smaller house on on the initial lot, but really I thought it was more important that you see a big house here versus a small house, so you know that someone won't come in later and and it
won't fit. >> So, worst case is you're going to see a smaller home, not what you see now. >> Yeah. And I guess I guess that's one of the things. These are conceptual only, meaning that this is not how they need to be built. They can shift be shifted over more. You see the dash lines that
show the setbacks. Um they could be closer together one another. They be further back towards the real property line, etc. But what I would request one or let the board know and maybe it's memorialized in some way is that the floor area the the gross floor area
permitted on each lot is for 1.01 22,750 for 1.02 02 uh 2500 and then for lot 1.03 um 3,000 f feet which has its own other constraints as far as the basin that will further constrain it. But um in particular if the subdivision is
approved each of these lots could come in for building permits particularly if they're fully conforming and be built separately by separate individuals who may purchase them by the applicant. I'm not sure we heard testimony related to that yet, but um if any additional
relief based on what is submitted to the building department for building permits exceeds the bulk standards, the floor ratio, the setbacks, the height, etc., they could be before the zoning board in the future and that's their that's you know how they proceed. um the subdivision really is only related to
the to the lots that are being requested. And so um I I always say don't get too comfortable with what's shown on the conceptual drawings because it might not be exactly what's there in the future. These are just demonstrative of a a conforming um home on >> Yeah. Can you give me the maximum square
feet again for lots 1.01 and lot 1.02? >> Sure. The square ratio of 0.25 for each of those lots which is what's required in the R10 zone. 2750 for lot 1.01 01 based on a lot area of 11,000 ft.
We're proposed lot 1.02500 square ft based on a lot area of 10,000 square feet. >> And then for lot 1.03 3,000 ft based on a lot area of 12 12,000 square feet. >> Thank you.
>> You're welcome. >> That's all I have. >> Thank you very much. Mr. Bur. >> Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, a few questions. So, I want to piggyback on what Miss Sarn was was just speaking to
with the F, and I think it also um really relates to the impervious coverage, the lock coverage that's being proposed right now. You're showing much less or less than what's allowed in the zone district. My concern though is as that
coverage grows on each lot potentially if a different, you know, layout of a house came through, it's conceivable that you could trigger an enhanced threshold of your storm water management requirements. And what I mean by that is
right now you're a minor development because you're not increasing the impervious coverage by more than a a quarter acre, which is around 10,000 square feet. If you've ma if you max out these three lots in the future when it comes time for building permits, you
could effectively have triggered the storm water requirements. So, I think it's important for the board to understand that and as it crafts an approval, if it's inclined with an application like this, there needs to be some either notes or clarifications made
to the plans so that in the future when construction permits are sought out, it's very clear what the limits are on each of these lots because that's going to potentially cause some issue in the future. The first thing I would do at building permit phase is look to the
signed plans. And I suspect that at some point my predecessor would do the same is look for the signed plans and see what those requirements are. So that's that's really important to make sure that that we understand what's being asked for and what's potentially being granted by way of approval.
>> Moral comment. >> Yeah. Problematically it's going to fall to the the last lot to develop. That's going to be the most constrained. Yeah, >> in the future. >> That that's why I would suggest um to the extent that the applicant is
comfortable with identifying maybe some maximum thresholds per lot at this point. Um just like Katherine said, I mean the F is very clear based on 0.25 allowed per lot. This is the max F that you're allowed and I think that needs to
be spelled out on the plans. Same thing applies lot. Um I don't I don't know how you would do the first house and then second house and then say whoops the third house is is left with the leftovers and it you know that that
that's not going to be ideal for the neighborhood. So if we can establish some equitable maximums that keeps you below your storm water threshold um that's important. Otherwise we have a plan that we're looking at here that's not really viable.
So, I don't know what those what those maybe the maximum thresholds are what's proposed currently um or maybe bump them up a little bit. Um but but make sure you stay under that quarter acre. >> Well, we would certainly agree, Mr.
chairman to uh develop the calculations that the engineer is discussing and confirm them with the engineer and then add them to the to the plans you know the final filed set of plans uh as a condition any approved Mr. We could keep
that as a condition. What type of language are making that? >> That's what I'm trying trying to think. So provide calculations as to imperous cover like for each lot so as to stay within the non- major storm water development.
I mean obviously we'll have to play with >> but is that kind of the idea that we're looking at? Yeah, that's the idea because right now although the applicant is proposing retention basin, a storm water basin, um that's not to address formal storm water
requirements, it's to make sure that there's not going to be negative impacts downstream once a house get built, but you're not talking about um necessarily reducing the amount the amount of runoff or water quality uh enhancements that you would with a major development. So
the entire design changes if we bump up against larger larger impervious coverage numbers. >> To be honest with you, Mr. Chairman, I think it would be helpful to do this so that when the architect is making plans, you know, for these houses, he knows what he's looking for.
>> So I I I have no problem with that. >> Excellent. >> Good. >> And the existing impervious will be netted out of that as well. So >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Correct. Y um a few other questions, Mr. Scott. So along the lines of of storm
water and I understand your testimony about why you abandon the approach of the individual dry wells. Um but I think further discussion needs to be had sort of about the sequence of how these lots get developed because
since lot 103 is at the low spot and that's the lot that's going to be containing the receiving detention basin that really needs to be built first. Yes, the basin needs to be first and built, >> right? Whether whether the whether the the home needs to be built first, not necessarily, but the basin there needs
to be. >> So the condition being the basin has to be built before any CO is issued for any loss >> before any building permit is issued for any certainly CO certainly CO >> you may want to consider the basin part
of the improvements. I mean we are putting curving in. So if you wrap the basin construction into that, you'll have a basin >> before before any buildings are started. >> And that's certainly something we
>> And then and then along those lines, I know you have a swell on along the rear of lot 103. You show a swell into lot 102. Um but then the swell disappears on lot 101. So
I want to make sure You know, the grade of this property slopes down from West Summit, >> right? >> Downgrade. So, I want to make sure that any runoff that's coming through these properties to the homes to the rear gets
cut off before it reaches that retaining wall. And you've started to show that soil system. And I think that really needs to be extended. >> Yeah, we can do that. There is a portion the the very corner uh the southwest
corner it does uh drain off and it would drain off onto Northwood Avenue. >> Mhm. >> But we can change the we can tweak decorating and bring that water to to the basin if you like. >> Yeah. And then
we can discuss it. But I I also think those swailes should be captured in some type of of drainage ement or other legal mechanism to allow them or to require them to stay to require them to be maintained because they are critical to
the stormwater plan for the entire three lots. >> Sure. >> In the future >> that could also be a deed. So, I was the one that raised the question about the grading and the elevation of the homes because it wasn't really clear to me and maybe it was
because we didn't have architectural plans of of the proposed homes, but the way these houses are are situated and and graded with the proposed elevations. It almost looks like the basement floor is put on existing grade and then the
house is built up. And my fear is that you have a first floor elevation that in on some of these lots is is upwards of 7 to 8 ft above the elevation of West Summit Street, which to me says
you're going to be looking at a house at 25 ft above the street. Um, and I just don't know how that fits into the character of the neighborhood. So, it's something that that you know I would encourage taking a look at the grading and um it's
almost like the the walkouts were forced in a way and I don't know if that was because of downwater conditions. >> It it was to function with the pond essentially to keep enough separation from our pond high water to the basement. >> Yeah. Just something I mean our
ordinance doesn't speak to building up the elevation necessarily like that. I just I just fear that it's going to have an awkward look in that neighborhood because it's they're going to be perched out of the ground so much. I don't know if you have an opinion on
that or if I'm misreading the plan while he's looking. I mean, nevertheless, it's certainly a valid concern um that would be raised in the course of getting building permits. I thought you told us that it will be 3 ft floor level in the house will be 3 ft.
So, Mr. B, I don't know where >> Looks like I This one's 3.3. >> Well, I I think I I agree that three feet is to the garage floor, >> right? And then you have another four
feet, three to four feet on all three of these houses up from the garage floor to the first floor elevation. And then you're going to have two, you know, a second floor on top of that. Right? So, if your first floor is is already
7 to 8 feet above West Summit and then you add a second floor on top of it, it's going to it's going to look pretty tall. >> Yes. Well,
question stories the if the basement is and this I guess I had raised the same question less technical in the bill but I question how the walk out basement look because if it is a fully exposed story depending on
how it fits into the definition it could end up being a third story to the building which exceeds the number of stories >> for the for the zoning to two and a half stories and 35 ft. Depending on how that basement is, um it could end up being a
third story. >> I I'd just like to point out again as she said earlier, you know, these are illustrations of what the engineer believed was possible. um you know the principal applications
for the subdivision of the three at any time at any time uh when when uh my client goes to these houses is going to have to submit plans to the building department to be reviewed uh and if the building department feels that uh the
plans are submitted are inappropriate that's something my client's going to have to deal with. Maybe it's possible that a walkout basic just won't work once they get architecturals and once they, you know, get the the drawings and, you know, get the architect involved. Um, you know, the engineer
believes that it works. He's an engineer. He's not an architect, right? Um, so I just want to point out that, you know, we are certainly going to comply with all of our obligations to have any of our plans, you know,
reviewed by the the township staff, uh, to take their advice and take their comments and devising the exact houses that will be proposed for those lots. Uh, and if if if it brings us into a situation where they say, "Well, that's a three-story house." Well, we can't do
that, you know. or if it brings us into a situation where it's too high and we're above the 35 foot limitation. Well, we can't do that. These are illustrations of what we believe could be possible for the line, not definitively what we're planning on
doing. Miss Sarmat, to that point earlier about square footage, is it possible to say that maybe these homes don't end up including full basement? Maybe half of it's a crawl space to to account for the neighborhood look. Well,
>> well, they're gonna have to comply to grad. Ultimately, if if the grading plan, which you know, we're working off of where the dwellings are, what they've shown, and the walk out basement, we can infer that what's shown on the plan
right now probably could lead to a variance condition in which they still could come to the zoning board and seek that relief if they so chose, right? They could they would have an additional layer that they'd have to, you know, take on um in order to get that
approval. otherwise they'd have to abandon it, right? It's really a matter of um if they're going to do it, they're probably going to need the review. So, us imposing the condition is kind of like we need to go get a bearings anyway for it. That's my opinion and that's really just working out the importance again of
the information we have at hand. Um but I and I just think it, you know, if the site was created differently and they and the walk out was only partial, right? I I wouldn't want to impose that condition because it wouldn't necessarily be that character. But as we're seeing it, just from, you know, Bill's technical expertise and reviewing
the grading event and kind of the inkling that I got from reviewing it, um, you know, I felt that the way it was being proposed with the grading certainly wouldn't be in character and it was kind of strange the way it was, you know, um, the way it was proposed.
But this is again conceptual only and if this was sent to the building department right now if you approved it um the subdivision that is and they send these claims they would be sent back or the zoning permit would be denied because it would be a variance. So um you know
there's there's no way to capture that because they're not seeking the variance right now. It's just really something that we are going to have to make sure the building department and the zoning officer as they get these come or put a close eye on them, right? Just to put it, you know, pretty pretty frankly
that's we're going to have to make sure that the other departments um review these and they do they do their job. So, um it's not a concern, but it if the subdivision was approved, I think that there there's other departments that would would do a review um to make sure that no variances were kind of um
missed. I I'd also like to point out quickly, you know, this isn't like a single homeowner who's got a lot. He wants to build what he wants to build. You know, my client is looking to develop these three properties and he's going to put what fits there. Um, this
is not going to be spec homes where each homeowner is going to come and say, "Well, I want, you know, I want to raise this much and I want a full bed." He's going to put there what fits there. He doesn't want to have he I'm sure you folks have plenty of experience with developers. He doesn't
want to go through another year or two process of getting variances to build three houses that you know might be acceptable to somebody. He's going to build what fits there and try and sell it. So your points are extremely well taken. Um but I just I don't see it
going that way. What I see happening is God willing you folks give us the subdivision today. We hire an architect. The architect prepares a plan and we submit it to your building department and the building department will say, "Yeah, that works." Or, "No, that doesn't work." And if it doesn't work, we'll go back and revise it and we'll
make it work. Because, like I said, he doesn't my client's not going to want to go through another year or two of further approvals to try and build some kind of monstrosity, you know, pick what fits there and what's appropriate for that. I Well, and one question I guess
is if this board granted the subdivision, there's nothing that that stops your client from selling off each of the lots individually. >> That's true. >> Correct. So, so I just want to make the board aware that that while that is the
intention, um it's not always the end result, right? And so some of the questions we this board has asked in in similar subdivisions, you know, relates a little bit to the character of the homes in particular to make sure that um that it and no variances are being
sought here. So there are differences to those cases, but nevertheless, um it is a question that comes up. And so um the subdivision essentially is really limited to the lot configurations. That's what the board is being asked to look at. Um, and whether or not this
applicant is the one who goes and seeks the building permits and actually develops the homes or sells off each lot, etc. Um, is not something that this board really has control over. Um, and I think the biggest takeaway for the board
is to understand that anything that deviates from the bulk standards when they do come in for building permit, that will be another level of of variance. Um, and so ju just so you're aware, I guess what Bill and I have raised isn't necessarily how they're going to build it, but if it were built
this way, that it would probably lead to that scenario. And so, um, I'm hoping that the contrast to that is that these homes would not be out of character because, um, they wouldn't be following, you know, this this this plan conceptually um or couldn't based on the
other restrictions of the R10. Could could I suggest um as a condition of approval, we might submit a three lot revised grading plan uh to your engineer for review? Uh as I'm standing here thinking about the plan, if I put a
storm sore inlets in the rear yards uh rather than a swale, that's going to alleviate your concern about people putting fences and blocking the storm water. And it's also going to let me drop those rear yards and then bring the houses down.
So, uh there is there is a solution to this. >> Yeah, if the if the board is open to that, I have no problem with um that proposal being crafted into a potential condition. Um
I understand that this is conceptual in nature and things can change. I just think there's some better options. Uh and and it sounds like Mr. Scott is is is even that. So, I would have no problem with that. you know, anything we can do to improve this plan and provide
more protection to the folks that live downhill um so that they're not being impacted by look, you can't stop somebody from building homes on this property, you know, assuming the subdivision's approved, but we can do it in a manner that it fits into the neighborhood and doesn't cause any
negative drainage impacts and the like downstream. >> I have a practical question. And so we had discussed earlier in this hearing uh perhaps imposing some sort of conservation like not a total conservation ement but some sort of easement over the swale and
the burm to you know make sure that nobody builds over it you know cuts a hole in it whatever that maintained or preserved. So if instead we have a condition where they're submitting a revised grading
plan to your review approval, um what's that do to the swale? Well, I think that remove it or or should we have it the applicant shall either have protected swale or submit a revised
rating plan to the >> I I think it's probably both. and they're they're going to as a condition of approval, they're going to submit a revised plan, >> okay, >> to address some of the concerns that are being discussed tonight, >> but then in perpetuity, there's going to
need to be >> called a drainage easement, >> whether it's whether it's lawn inlets that are being placed with underground piping. >> Yeah, I just thought I heard in the testimony that if they did the revised grading plan with these inlets in the back that that could remove the soil. It
could remove the swale, but it doesn't remove the fact that the area of whatever that drainage feature is going to be >> gets protected in an easement. >> Whether it's a actual buried pipes or a surface swale, it still needs to be back
and forth. >> Yeah, >> not a problem. >> Mr. Chairman, I I I did have just two more followups real quick. Um, Mr. Scott, this township sewer utility issued a memo and there were a number of
comments and recommendations in that memo. Uh any issues with complying with that? >> No, we would want to comply with the the concept of standards for for construction. >> We would want you to do that. Yes. Good. Um and the last last issue I wanted to
raise is and I included this in my my review memo. West Summit Street was repaved by the township in 2023. That road is currently under moratorum. The township's uh road excavation
ordinance requires a 7-year moratorum where that pavement cannot be disturbed except for in the case of emergency. And if it is agreed to or allowed to be disturbed, the applicant would be responsible for milling and repaving the entire width of
West Summit Street along the front edge of the property. And I want to make sure that that the applicant and your team are aware of that and you have no problem with that being included as a condition as well. >> We have no choice. There's more to >> do not have a choice, unfortunately.
>> Yes. >> That's all I have. Thank you. How important. What are your thoughts on sidewalks in your neighborhood? >> Well, there's no sidewalks in that neighborhood now. Um, so it's not uncommon for the board to grant what I
would call a waiver from the requirement of installing sidewalks, but the board has always had a policy of requesting a contribution to be made and placed into the township sidewalk fund for future improvements elsewhere. Um, so I think
that would apply in this case. I don't necessarily know that, um, putting sidewalk on these three lots is really going to provide a benefit to anybody. I don't see sidewalk being installed in this neighborhood anytime in the near future. But I did hear the applicant or
the applicants engineer speak to a contribution. And I think if if the board is in agreement, I think that would be appropriate. Thank you. Sure. There any other questions? Okay. At this time, I'd like to ask the public if there are any questions regarding the testimony just heard,
please feel free to come forward at this time. >> Yes. >> Okay. Please feel free to come up and sign our sign in. And once you're completed with sign in, just state your name and address out loud for the record.
Steve Si s a r ai and uh the owner of block 15 um your neighbor next door. Um biggest concern for us is the big biggest concern for us is the uh rain off which has been the brunt of this
conversation. Um first I heard about the wall because we looked at the paperwork earlier and we didn't see any retaining walls but u um that's that's reassuring to some degree. the retaining wall which I would
probably define more as a little dam than a retaining wall. Um concern about the trees along this wall would be over time if the root system would compromise this wall. Um being that u we do have runoff
that comes through our backyard from the property which we've been fine with. Anything worse would be not um acceptable um or satisfactory. Um we deal with it
what we have so far with the woods where we're used to it. I'm over time I've been grading my backyard as well. Um but um just uh as a um just to express the this
concern about the wall along with the vegetation that you're the trees that you're going to be planting along the the parallel with the wall and how over time and with the with the three new owners over the years to come how they
would manage that wall if it is over time gets compromised because that if that wall is weakened over time, then we're going to get more water issues. Um, we're intrigued with this pond system. Is it an open water pond or like
a gravel like a a filled in? Is it an open pond? >> It's a open grass. Yeah. Next question. >> So, it's only going to see water. It's not like a gravel. It's not like a uh >> open dry well. It's it's not gravel. It's >> No, you'll see water when it rains and Okay. probably up to 12 hours after a
big rain. >> We did see that the free properties would have downspouts that um water gets towards my property. That's concern. And you guys talked about the uh additional addressing that
situation, which is fine, but that's my concern is the uh is the is the is the wall who's going to take care of that wall over time if it's if it's weakened. um the trees um whether it's trees and how how's that going to affect
the long term? >> Would that be something that we would add to the condition where you know they have to stay you know stay out of the drainage area in the rear of the property but also impose an affirmative obligation on the lot owners to you know maintain that
wall because it is an essential drainage feature. >> Yes. I think that >> even if it weren't part of the condition, I still think it would be part of the homeowner's obligation uh to maintain the structures on their property subject to any code enforcement officer, you know, coming by say, "Hey,
your wall's falling down." You know, I have no problem adding it to the conditions. I just think, you know, >> yeah, I just, you know, Bridgewwater's enforcement of a rear yard, you know, 3 foot wall, you know, like 1.01 internal lot, you know, rear a lot. >> No, I get that. If this guy decides to
call up the code off say, "Hey, this guy's walls falling down." That's an easy summon to write, but by all means. >> Yeah. I I just I can't vouch for the various property maintenance orders. I I don't know what the code says. So, >> well, and I think it if it fell under
property maintenance, maybe that homeowner would remove the wall, right? And just say, "Oh, get rid of it. It's a problem." >> Instead of if it was a condition, it' be something that they'd have to keep there, right? Uh same with >> part of the site plan, right? Correct. But a zoning officer who got a property
maintenance call might not it might not rise to that level, right? If it's just a property maintenance and then the homeowner might take into their hands to say, "I'm going to remove this thing. It's a nuisance to me anyway." Not realizing that's essential feature of the drainage. Or that could happen without a code enforcement call. Someone could say, "I don't like the way this
wall looks. I'm going to put, you know, a PVC p fence in instead," not realizing again that it's a drainage feature that protects the neighbors and and you know, it was part of a site plan. So I think it should be I think it should be part of >> I have no problem with that. Okay. >> Just just to amilarate your concerns a
little bit if I may. >> Sure. >> We have several levels of of protection that we're trying to use for the drainage. First is up on the street the curbs that are going to be installed. That's going to keep a lot of the water in the street going into the SW. Second,
the lot's going to be significantly graded in such a way that the water flows the way we want it to flow. Right? We're talking about swailes in the backyard that are going to take all the water and maybe go this way. Sure. >> Right. And then that detection pond back
there. Okay. Which is going to hold that water until it can seep out after a period of about 12 hours. As Mr. Scott said, you know, when we were developing these plans, um, you know, the first question was, you know, do we need to do something like this? Can't we tie into
usual the regular systems and just kind of make it work? And it was not to pat ourselves in the back, but trying to be good neighbors, you know, trying to do the right thing, you know, while keeping everybody happy, keeping our client happy. So that's why we decided to to,
you know, do these swailes in this detention basin. Um, Mr. Scott seems confident that it's sufficient. Um, we put together a whole storm water management proposal here which outlines all the technical numbers that I don't understand. Right. But by the same
token, as we just discussed, it's going to be subject to further discussion with Mr. Burke. So that you know, the degrading plan will be appropriate. The drainage in the back will be appropriate. We're not looking to cause problems right now. >> I understand.
But the the wall is is basically sanizos. The trees give me a flag as to, you know, how's that going to work? >> Over time, >> everything else is good on our end. All right. Great. Any other members of the public wish to ask
questions, please? >> Hi, I'm Robert Kogan. I'm at 55 North Avenue sign in over here. >> I will walk and talk. >> Um, a lot of my questions I think were answered.
The lot itself has just so many really beautiful mature trees. And if you know the area, uh, blocking the view of the Somerville Circle and Time to Eat Diner is pretty critical to maintaining the
like peaceful atmosphere of our block on Northwood Avenue. Um, so I'm happy to hear that more trees are being added than are being removed. Um, I sort of have the same
Uh I have similar uh concerns as my neighbor Steve. Um mine are with the front corner of that lot. Um Mr. Scott, who was actually my engineer when I stood before this board to get my
variances and I know that he knows what he's doing and he's a true professional. Um, you did mention that you were uh uh not planning to extend the swale, which might turn into a totally different storm drainage system
um out on that corner. I think it was lot 1.01 that's right there on Northwood. Um so my question was, you know, can we make sure that we don't forget about that corner so we don't get a river coming
onto our culdesac? Um, and also the wall that is being discussed, would that wall turn a corner onto Northwood and also provide the same kind of barrier and structure? Uh, I guess it would be the
side of lot 1.01 or would the wall just end uh at the street and that would be open? I think it's you know for again the exact same reasons our concern and our
wish would be that you know we that consideration would be taken to any additional storm water runoff uh uh onto Northwood Avenue and just you know uh the same consideration of privacy and
being good neighbors also extends around the corner and not just uh uh along the side. Yeah. So, just quickly, the the wall does corner uh at Northwood and it begins to travel up uh towards West
Summit and then if if you're familiar with West Summit, if you've walked up there, there's an inlet on the side of the road that doesn't really do anything. >> Yeah. >> All the water goes around it. So, we're actually proposing a pavement taper that extends beyond our property, which is going to bring the water into that
letter as well. >> So, okay. All in all, I don't think you're going to be seeing much in the way of any work coming along the west. We're stopping it there. And this this what we did along the rear lines that was more of a I want to do
something for the neighbors. So when I'm here, I can >> Yeah, I tell you I did did my best on this. >> Yeah. I mean, you know, sorry for speaking in layman's terms, but, you know, this is essentially going to be removing a ton of huge mature trees and
replacing it with what I I think everybody hopes is not a house that's way above grade and, you know, I think would definitely not look right in that neighborhood and it would also be directly in the view of our house. Um,
so we just want to make sure that the whole corner of the property is also being considered in the, you know, storm drainage, good neighbor, replacing more trees than we're removing, um, uh, part of the plan. Um,
and then I also, tell me if I'm completely off base, but this pond that's being created, is there anything we can do to make sure that doesn't turn into like Grand Central Station for mosquitoes or any additional insects
that might be, I don't know, propagating in a nice new marsh land that we're creating for them. >> Would that be included in that manual? making sure it doesn't become >> Yeah, it's gonna it needs to be mowed um
frequently. It it needs to be graded out and that's why soil testing was done to make sure that it it drains out in a timely manner and if it doesn't drain out that there's mechanical features like the outlet structure to allow it to flush out. It's got to really it's it's
got to be dry within 72 hours and I suspect it's going to be drier quicker than that. And that means that right they have to put together a whole maintenance program to the engineers review and satisfaction that gets reviewed with I mean recorded then with the county clerk uh so that any
subsequent purchase of the property they're on notice that this is what our obligations are and we also are going to impose uh an annual certification requirement uh on the property owner of that lot that they that they're in compliance with that manual to
>> prevent door from what you just expressed from happening. >> So, just so you understand, this isn't a pond where like the water sits and ducks sit, you know what I mean? It's not on the property. >> It's a depression in the property that forms a basin where water can collect
when it rains, but there's there there's structure to remove that water on an ongoing basis. And whereas Bill said, Mr. Scott said that generally within 12 hours the water will be completely gone. I think Mr. Bur said the the requirement
of the ordinance is 72 hours, but that's not going to happen. You know, the way he's designing it, the water will all be gone within 12 hours to disord. >> Absolutely. That's why I attest to Mr. Scott's expertise. I just, you know, I got to say something while I'm here to
make sure >> just like I said to them, just like I said to them, we want we want to concerns. You know, my clients my client's looking to be a good night. you know, who's looking to do the right thing. I absolutely appreciate that. I
think that it's reassuring uh to put some sort of something in place so that if your client gets the approval, develops the property, or sells the property, that whoever the new owner is is also
committed to ameliorating any of our concerns as neighbors. So that it's reassuring that that's something that's going to I don't know go on record that they need to be maintaining it, not tear down the wall that you guys are setting
up or or do anything with the trees. So um and then yeah, if we can get any sidewalks in that area, you know, we've got two babies, one of them is going to be here in three weeks. We would certainly appreciate making the
neighborhood more walkable and that's probably a completely different meeting, but I'm feeling empowered because I'm standing in front of I'm sharing a wish list. >> We're putting up the money whether it goes into the the fund or whether it goes into the sidewalks.
>> We're happy to do it. And thank you for your time. I I appreciate it. >> Thank you. Your questions are very important. Thank you. Thank you. >> Anybody else? >> Mr. Chairman, I just had one other thing is this has come up. I think one of the
the things maybe that wasn't entirely clear or I didn't bring up and I apologize for that is the western half of the property is pretty much wooded right now. Right. So even though 14 trees that are identified or 14 or 16,
whatever the number was identified to be removed, those are just the ones that were six >> six inches or greater in diameter. 12 in deciduous. >> Well, they he identified six or higher basically six
uh evergreen and 12. >> Yeah. >> And so um but there is dense denser vegetation I guess right now. So the ordinance does also require that to the extent practical trees that can remain do remain. And so what I would
request if possible is that there isn't just a clear cutting of the vegetation. That is just an indiscriminate clearing of the lot in order to make way for new improvements and even new the new trees. I would recommend that the placement of
new trees be um sensitive and the houses be sensitive to trees that could be preserved. Right? Doesn't mean the dead or dying one needs to be preserved. Doesn't mean that the you know that it's need to be preserved. But I think to the extent possible, those mature trees do add value. Um, you know that they're
doing well there. Um, and if they you can avoid the grading plan or the improvements um from removing them, I think that's a a benefit to the application. >> We would agree to a condition that the applicant would use reasonable efforts to maintain the trees to the extent that
it's reasonable. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Thank you. That would work. >> That's all I had. I apologize. >> Not an issue. Any other questions from our members of the public? Okay, that'll close a question from
members of the public for this witness. Do we have any other testimony this even? Mr. Pickis, do we have any other testimony this even? I have no testimony. Okay, very good. Uh, board of Mr. We have quite a laundry
list of conditions, but to get into those, I'll just ask to make sure that we have all our concerns that have been taken. >> Very good. >> And the public has no other general comments. >> I know technically questions witness.
>> Are there any general comments from our public? This would be the time >> question. It's going to be resubmitted, right? >> This plan is going to be resubmitted. He's resubmitting the plan. There was talk of resubmitting a grading plan.
Not the not the subdivision plan. I don't think the proposed lot lines are supposed to change, but he was going to resubmit a grading plan to show how they're playing with the dirt. >> That would be a conditional approval of this. So, if someone were so inclined,
the motion would be to approve the application for preliminary and final major subdivision subject to the following conditions and I won't go through that generally applications
keep up taxes. Um, okay. >> Uh, this probably doesn't need to be a condition, but we'll put it anyway that the applicant will either install sidewalks or make the appropriate contribution potential sidewalk fund.
Uh, there will be a deed uh notification on lot 1.03 03 uh for the maintenance of the storm water basement and to submit annual certification uh that they're complying with the stormwater operations and maintenance manual which leads to the next condition
which is that applicant shall prepare a report operations and maintenance manual for the storm water subject to the review approval of the uh attorney. uh landscaping uh both the selection of the type of of trees and the location of the
installation uh shall be to the approval and satisfaction of the board professionals. The applicant will comply with the township fence regulations uh concerning the uh fencer of the drainage basin.
applicant shall provide calculations to the engineer of the and again we're going to play language a bit as well but provide calculations to the engineer to show the maximum imperous coverage uh and caps of imperous coverage for
each lot so as to have equity between the three lots and so as to not trigger major storm water uh improvements. um that the stormwater basement and all such improvements will be installed prior to the issuance of any CO uh for
any of the locks. Uh the swale uh to the rear of the three property lines. We'll review that uh with the engineer to see if that can be extended in any way on lot 1.01. Uh there'll be a deed restriction for all locks to protect and maintain that
way. uh in the rear of the property of some sort of easement and that will also be whether it's a swale or any other drainage improvements in that area. That area will be protected and and will just be vegetated. You know, you can't dig it or change the topology. Uh and along
those lines, there will be dismal of a revised grading plan to the review and approval satisfaction board engineer. uh lot owners all will have an affirmative obligation to maintain the wall to the rear of each lot and finally
the applicant will useful efforts to protect and preserve mature and healthy trees on the law. So if I missed anything, >> did we have to be instructor of the wall? >> Yes.
>> Okay. I missed that. >> Wants to make that motion. >> Miss Chard, >> second Mr. Chowry. >> Miss P. Roll call, please. >> Yes. >> Mr. Vono,
>> yes. >> Council Misbla, >> yes. >> Miss Charitch, >> yes. >> Mr. Chowry, >> yes. >> Mr. Atkins, >> yes. >> Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. >> Best of luck to you.
June 16th is our next Any questions or comments? I'll take a motion for >> second. All in favor? >> I And I go sleep.