704 Bridgewater Township Zoning Board of Adjustment. We're going to come to order. Adequate notice of this meeting was provided in accordance with the open public meetings act NJSA 104-6 specifically on January 15, 2025. Proper notice was sent to the Courier News and the Star Ledger, filed with the clerk of
the township of Bridgewater, and posted on the municipal bulletin board. Please be aware of the zoning board of adjustment 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. If you're able, please rise for the salute to the flag.
Pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands nation with liberty and justice for all. Hi, good evening. Can we have a roll call, please?
>> Chairman Fouse >> here. >> Mr. Widelli, >> I here. >> Mr. Sweeney here. >> Can you hear me? >> Mrs. Amin >> here. >> Mr. Bonjouro >> here. >> Mr. Gayi.
>> Um, Mr. Fresco is absent. >> Um, Mr. CCAT >> here. >> M. Devesio >> here. >> Mr. Kulak is also absent. Uh Mr. Gabbit
absent. Um Mr. Aller, our board attorney >> here. >> Mr. Burr, board engineer. >> Miss Samard, um board planner. >> Thank you.
>> Rashad. Mr. Rashad, traffic engineer. We have a quorum. >> Thank you very much. Uh we're going to open up the meeting to any members of the public that would like to speak on any land use matter that is not on our agenda tonight. You can come forward, use the microphone.
Seeing none, I'm going to close that portion. We have no minutes tonight. And Rich, we don't have any resolutions, right? >> Resolution. >> All right. Uh we have two applications tonight. Uh first up, we're going to do Germunk Oil. They've been on our docket the longest. Uh we're going to hear this case till about 8:30. Then we're going
to take a break and then we're going to do Cafe Amelia probably around 8:35ish, 8:40. So, Mr. Simon, good evening, sir. Mr. Chairman, members of the board, uh, good evening. Good to be back here as always. Rob Simon from Herald Law here
on behalf of the applicant, Germuck Oil LLC. Uh just just to remind the board and reorient us, we're talking about um amended preliminary final site plan approval concerning property block 319
lot 8, 24 Find Avenue. Um, we require certain relief, uh, including some variance relief to minimally expand a pre-existing non-conforming gas station and Mayar convenience store use in the R40 zone that received a prior approval
uh, back in 2017. And now we're just going to be asking or have been asking for an update which also requires some variance relief that we outlined and uh set forth in detail during our prior hearing on this application. Um at this point where we
left off is that the the board asked us to get some additional information uh including from our professional engineer and come back and present that to the board. So, what um I plan to do this evening is to have our engineer, Mr.
Vandervog, uh come back and provide some additional testimony that was requested. We also then have Ben Heler, our uh landscape architect, uh in response again to some questions from the board at that initial meeting. Uh we have Mr. Burn uh the architect on the project. We
have Mr. Baja, the operator, who's here to answer some questions that were raised uh at the last hearing. and we have uh Mr. Mcdana, our professional planner. So, with that, I would ask that uh Mr. Vanderval uh come up. We'll
confirm that he still remains sworn and to provide some additional testimony and answer some questions that were asked of him of him at the conclusion of the last hearing on this application. >> Tyler, I will swear you again though.
Would you raise your right hand, please? Do you do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you God. >> Yes, I do. >> And again, for the record, your full name, please. >> Tyler Vanderval, Van D.
Thank you. >> Okay. Yeah, I have some here, too. >> Okay. So, Mr. Vanderval, you remain sworn and Mr. Oler also swore you in uh this evening. Um you were asked at the uh during the course of the last hearing and at the conclusion of last hearing to
answer some questions and provide some additional information and testimony regarding uh certain topics incident to our site plan application. Can you please proceed with those? >> Yes, absolutely. So just to bring some clarifying points to some of the questions raised at the prior hearing.
Uh why don't we start off with an exhibit that I've prepared here which is a swept path uh analysis. I think there was a question raised with the decrease in aisle width with the waiver we requesting in the circulation. Will vehicles be able to get in and out of
the parking spots uh with that configuration. So I prepared this exhibit. I'm not sure what we're up to. >> Yeah, I'm checking that. Hold on. I don't know that we have any. Right. This is A1. A1. Yeah. prepared on May of this year.
>> Could you make sure members of the public get a copy as well? Yes, >> and again what this depicts here is that >> so just first of all I we're we're marking that A1 and um just identify it by title block please.
>> Yes. Uh sweat path exhibit dated May 6 of 2025. Uh, and what we take here, uh, is an SUV we show parked at both fueling positions closest to the parking stalls as well as having cars, uh, accessing both the
handicap stall and the stall next to it, which are the nearest uh, to those fueling positions. And what we can see is the ability to back up at that 90 degree uh, and avoid the vehicles that are fueling.
And that exhibit uh depicts the fact that there will be no um safety or circulation concerns with regard to the movement of vehicles such as an SUV around the site. >> Yeah, certainly there's space to maneuver. >> So the site remains safe and efficient
for maneuverability. >> Correct. >> Thank you. And there was also um a question uh Mr. Vandervulk asked of you regarding um a drainage pipe that was that was at the property. >> Yes. The original site plan showed that
the roof leaders uh from the canopy as well as the roof leaders from the building which currently doesn't exist would be tied into the catch basin on the side street uh located to the south that's third street. I have confirmed that that pipe was installed. So when
the new building is constructed, uh, of course, we would tie in those roof leaders into that existing pipe. >> Thank you. And, um, there was also a question, I believe that Mr. Burr may have asked it, uh, toward the end of your testimony as to the size of the
shell signage that was previously approved in relation or in comparison to the Delta signage that's at the property. >> Yes, correct. Uh when the new ownership took over, there was a rebranding and the question was raised, well, how do the signs or the sign how does the
pylons price sign compared to what was approved? Uh I've taken measurements of the sign. The original sign uh was approved at 4T wide uh by about 20 and 1/2 ft tall. Um and
that left for 6T clearance beneath the sign. So overall we had 14 1/2 ft x 4 uh and then proposed or I'm sorry as existing out there today is is 5 by 9. So we actually saw a reduction in square
footage. Um the original approval uh was for 55 square ft. They received a design waiver uh and our proposal or the existing condition with the delta is 45 ft. >> So the the sign is smaller than even
what was approved. >> Yeah. smaller in area and um about 3 ft shorter in height. >> Um and um I think there was a comment about an advertisement on a fence and we're just confirming that that's going
to be removed. Correct. >> Right. Any temporary signing like that would be removed. >> And then um there was a question also about whether it was trip generation or just circulation um that's generated from this project. >> Right. So, we did take a look at the uh
trip generation based on um I'm sorry, the trip generation manual based on the IT Institute of Transportation Engineers. If we were to use the land use category of convenience store and gas station, which is this is that category actually only bases trip
generation on the number of fueling positions. So, we would actually see no change in trip generation. Um, seeing as that doesn't change anything, we've actually considered it as a standalone convenience store for purposes of determining how many additional trips we
would see. And the result was that uh during the morning peak hour uh we would see four additional vehicles to the site and in the evening peak hour we would see three additional. So in the morning
an additional car about every 15 minutes and then in the evening an additional car about every 20 minutes. So >> and and that's just based on a scenario where the only use on the site is a is a convenience store. >> Correct.
>> Correct. So that if in fact um as will be testified to the fact that most of the patrons to the convenience store or mini mart will be there primarily to fuel or initially to fuel um that number is expected to actually decrease.
Correct. >> Yeah. Correct. As mentioned when we considered both convenience and gas station there was no change. Uh so this was a conservative assumption to see that slight change. Um I believe that concludes the um the
questioning of Mr. Vanderval in terms of additional information that the board asked that we provide and um we open it up for questions of the engineer. >> Board questions. >> I have a question. You provided this turning analysis show we can back out a
car here. Now the spot near the convenience store that's an ADA a van accessible ADA spot. Correct. >> That's correct. Yeah. So what did the vehicle that you use an SUV? >> Yeah, this uh >> So does can you is the van
>> um have a larger turning radius than the SUV that you use to prove that the size of this parking area is acceptable? >> I I wouldn't anticipate so no. >> So the van would have the same turning radius as an SUV >> would be comparable.
Would that in any way not make this kind of what you're showing here with two cars at the pumps and two cars in the parking lot? Would that anyway have any issue a van having any issue
backing out? >> No. >> Okay, thank you. >> I had a question. You marked on the east side. I guess that's the northeast side. You marked it as brush. Uh when I was just at the property, there's two mature trees there. I think they they provide a
substantial vegetative buffer. You're not planning to chop them down, right? >> Definitely. >> Everything's going to stay. >> Yeah, the trees for purposes of this exhibit, the trees were removed from the survey. It wasn't the If you look at the original site plan file, they're they should be on there. >> I just want to make sure even marked brush and brush tends to get cut down. I
want to make sure that mature trees are not going to get touched in any way, shape, or form because they do provide a buffer to both neighbors on both sides. Absolutely. All right. Thank you. Other board questions, members of the public, questions on engineering.
>> All right, seeing none. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's time we'll call Ben Heler, our landscape architect, please. Would you raise your right hand, please? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So, help you God. And your
full name for the record, please. >> Ben Heler. >> And would you spell your last name, please? >> H E L L E R. >> Thank you, Mr. Heler. >> Mr. Dr. Heler, can you please provide the board with your occupation affiliation, areas of expertise and license and experience in the field of landscape architecture?
>> Thing uh I am a licensed landscape architect in the state of New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut. Uh I am a 2010 graduate of Ruckers University. I've been practicing landscape architecture uh since graduation. I've testified before various planning boards
and zoning boards across the state, Washington Township, Closer, Summit, Frankfurt, Tennifi, Mendum. I'm the previous chairman of the planning board in West Orange as well. >> And your license in New Jersey is current and in good standing. >> It is. Yes. >> All right. We accept you as an expert. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Um Mr. Heler, are you familiar with the application, the property, and the surrounding neighborhood? >> I am. >> Okay. And you prepared a uh landscape plan um in conjunction uh with this application? >> I did. >> Okay. Um I guess we're going to mark that as A2.
>> A2. >> Yes. Thank you. So again for the record uh Mr. um Eller can you just um identify what A2 is please? >> Yes. So uh A2 consists of the landscape
plan which was previously approved uh by the board and uh the proposed landscape plan uh for today. >> Yeah. So, if you would just go over because there were some concerns that were raised uh actually appropriately by the board at the last hearing about some
uh brush underbrush landscaping that may appear to be dying and what we're going to be doing to uh address that. >> Absolutely. So, what I've done uh at the top is the previously approved um landscape plan. It to the right of the
chart says 2025 status. Um, I went through the site, uh, took note of what was alive, what had, uh, not survived, and, uh, the the count was, uh, 28 shrubs that were previously approved that had not survived, uh, in addition
to three shade trees, uh, that had not survived. >> So, what did we do about that? >> So, uh, down below, uh, at the bottom of the page, you'll see the proposed landscape plan. Um, you'll see that what we're planning on adding is a substantial amount of landscaping. Um,
as you're aware, uh, sort of on my plan where it says block 319, it's a large lawn area. Uh, as the chairman had previously mentioned, there are substantial, uh, screenings that exist between the parking lot, um, and this this lawn area that I I, uh, just
mentioned. Um, we plan to remove anything that had, uh, not survived um, due to, you know, whatever the case may be. Uh we plan on adding 12 evergreens to the uh north side of the property to
assist with additional screening consisting of uh Norway spruce uh planted at 7 to 8 ft tall will grow anywhere from 1 to 3 feet depending on uh conditions a year. Uh in addition to arborvite green giant which will grow
two to two to four feet depending on the on the conditions as well. planted at six to seven feet uh initially. And in addition, we plan on uh adding five shade trees to the site um and 38 uh shrubs of of various uh of style.
And um I assume that by you putting these proposed plings at the um the type of species as well as the proposed height at the time of planting that you believe that this landscape plan uh will provide a an uh sufficient screen for
purposes of complying with the ordinance and also being true to the original approval that was granted for this project. >> I do. Yes. Uh I believe majority of the plant material that we used will get um larger providing even more whether it's shade or canopy or uh screening. Um in
addition to the shrubs that we proposed uh along Third Street, they'll get um anywhere from 6 to 7 feet tall which would also provide additional screening along that uh side as well. >> Nothing further from Mr. Heler.
>> The exact tree I just asked about >> existing tree to be removed. That's is that being removed? >> That is that is a that is dead. That one is not survived. >> To my knowledge, that was what was marked on that I believe is not the the
the tree that is alive. >> I'm talking to my teenagers. So So what is it, guys? >> There is there is one tree that's behind the structure that had been removed. That is just branches. >> Come on. I was just there. That is a very healthy tree. I don't claim to be an expert like you, sir. I was just
there. The tree is beautiful. This is >> Don't cut it down. >> I agree entirely. We're not cutting down anything that is alive. There is one There is one additional thing that's off to the side. >> Catherine, can we just make sure that the existing live trees are maintained and the vegetative buffer is maintained.
I understand if you're going to remove some brush and certainly there's a lot of shrubs on the property. Don't cut that tree down. >> We will not. >> Yep. >> Simple, right? The tree. >> We like trees. >> Answer. >> You like trees. You made your whole career on trees. Well, >> save a tree. >> Sure. >> All right.
Thank you. >> On your landscape plan, you're showing Where's the front door to the to the convenience store? >> It It's I'll show >> Well, is is it right in the middle of the plan things that you're proposing?
>> Based on the site plan that I previously seen, it was actually uh to the south side of that, but if it's >> that's an that's an ADA ramp where you're showing there. >> You need a sidewalk to the front door from that 88 ramp. So, we'll make sure there's a sidewalk and I will adjust the the plantings appropriately if need be.
But those are foundational shrubs that are intended to be along the front of the building. >> Okay. But you got mostly sidewalk there. >> Yes. >> Okay. Next time, review the drawings a little closer with the site plan and the architectural drawings before proposing landscaping in front of the building.
>> Anyone else? Um, do you have any kind of watering system? >> So, the question is about whether um there's a a plan uh to water the plantings or irrigation or otherwise. >> I would imagine yeah, we would be
watering this these plants for sure in order for them to be able to take >> I think we're going to have we'll have the operator answer that question when he when he comes up. Thank you. All right. Anyone else? >> I have one question. >> You know in in front of the building
that is proposed, you have 13 um some berry. Yeah. >> How tall are those? >> Uh 3 ft tall. >> And are they going to obstruct any windows or anything?
They're the the ones that are being proposed right now. They're they're planting at three gallons, which are only going to be about 18 inches, and they'll grow to a maximum height of three feet tall. That's what the foundational kind of planting is. It's an evergreen. >> Okay, that's all I have.
>> Members of the public, questions on Mr. Hiller's testimony. uh port professionals. >> Has anything on this landscaping plan changed um to remove any of the landscaping that was on the site plan that was submitted with the application >> or has it only added new at new
landscaping? >> The previously submitted application >> the previously approved application. No, no. The previously submitted the the original application that was submitted. >> In other words, from the time the original application was submitted, there were a few plantings that were
shown. The question is, are anything removed in comparison to A2? >> Right, Katherine? >> Right. Right. Yeah. Um, the original submission showed shown at the top here.
I'm saying the number of trees has it has it decreased in any way? >> No, >> they they've just moved around based on what's had to move. >> We're adding a total of two shade trees from what had previously been done and an additional 12 evergreen trees.
>> Thank you. Um, as far as you know, the chairman's um recommendation about the the tree behind the proposed um convenience store building, I would make a recommendation that that if the tree is alive and healthy that it be preserved. Um, there is your the
landscaping plant does show replacement trees in the back there. Um but if it is preserved and if it is in danger of of dying because its location and proximity to that building, I would ask that it be transplanted um in an adjacent area that would provide buffering and screening if
possible. >> But we'll we'll take a look at that >> addition of that tree. >> Um but would make that recommendation for the time being to make sure that it doesn't go away. >> I agree. >> Um and if if that is the case, um you know, we would work with the we could
work with them to figure out what's the best place for that trade. Great. >> And we agree with all those comments obviously. >> Thank you. That's all I have for this witness. >> Thank you. >> Just one one question, Mr. Chairman. So, Ben, the um the proposed landscape plan from a maintenance perspective, how
hardy are these plants that are being proposed? >> Yeah, I propose mostly or all Hardy plants purposefully for this uh application. It's these plants are majority of them are used in uh commercial spaces purposefully for for that intention. So adjacent to roadways
where they might be subject to icing if they're not being regularly maintained. Your testimony is they should still survive and correct >> thrive in these locations. >> Correct. >> Okay. And then um as far as the comment that or question that Mr. Vesio raised
about the the Inkberry Holly that's shown in front of the building, you'll be revising this plan to show those to be relocated. >> Correct. >> Out of the sidewalk limits. Okay. Very good. Thank you. And I just even though you'll hear it from the operator, I just confirm with him that an irrigation system will be
installed to maintain the uh all the plantings. >> Yes, >> we got a question from the member of the public. Come on up. Just get you into a microphone. We need your name and address, please. >> My name is Robin Glorino. Gu i n o. I
live at 625 street. Bridgewwater. >> Um, I kind of have a question about Let me get to show him. >> If we could just get you in the microphone because >> Yeah. Thank you. I walk through the neighborhood the days I can get myself
out the door and I go on third and the one thing in that particular area that's on the south I guess the south side there's always a lot of garbage which I know is something that obviously has to be excuse me maintained better now
whatever he's putting in here looks like there's an awful lot and how are you going to if you're putting all these bushes and I'm just >> Yeah. >> Um how are you going to keep the grass
underneath it clean >> if there's so much put there because right now there's that's not how it is. >> Yeah. Um so just so everyone's clear uh the question is in regards to >> so to spend just identify
>> directionally on what portion of the site we would >> Yes. This is the south side of the uh the third street fronting portion of the site. Um there are five uh viburnum that are existing there today that that have
survived. Um they are um doing well. The intention based on the original landscape plan was that that area was to be mulched and what has happened since then is that it is no longer mulched and it is lawn. The intention from us is that we would add uh significant shrubs to that area. We would mulch it and in
fact on my plan you can see two lines which would indicate our mulch lines um and we would be maintaining it by running through the the the bushes as as landscapers do and they they remove trash and they remulch areas. And I and I guess part, you know, the other part
of the question is who's responsible for going out there? Because let's be real, there is always garbage there. And when I walk past it, it's the last thing I want to see. So somebody has to on a regular basis, I would think, be responsible for going
out there and checking, making sure the air is clear. Mulch or not, you're still going to end up with garbage. and and we're gonna we're going to certainly of course do that, but we're also going to address that through the operational testimony which we anticipate. >> Okay. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Oh, any other members of the public? Questions for Mr. Heler. All right. See Oh, we got >> Okay. We got one more. If we could just get your name and
address, please. Janette Jardine, 614 Second Street. Uh my question is um what is the commitment to keeping the landscape and the trees and the brush uh that don't survive or that are diseased uh like the
tree that's by the back fence? Um it's been my experience that all the trees that are that were initially planted and have died or let's say the cover to the garbage that has flown off has been left unattended. So, what is the guarantee that once these things get put in that they're going to stay in, they're going
to stay healthy and they're going to stay addressed aside from being clean? >> So, so from my end, I think we just heard uh the irrigation system is obviously going to be something that's going to be installed which will help keep things alive. Um, in addition, I believe we're going to hear testimony from uh the owner who's going to talk
through his commitment on maintenance and what he plans on doing. We'll also add, we would stipulate it as as a condition of approval, that whatever is on the landscaping plan, should the application be approved, that is what is being committed to by the
applicant to be installed and to be maintained. And should down the road there be a dead tree, diseased, dying tree, that those would be replaced. >> And they're not they're not indicated on here. So the red lines are your
additions and if so there are dead trees that don't have a red line. Those will also be addressed. >> The the red lines are are what had what has died. >> Okay. >> And that's what's planning to be removed. So apologies. The the red is indicating removal of of something that
has died. And down below is the is the new plantings that are being planted and proposed. >> Perfect. Just to note behind the garbage tree there is uh a tree that has died and the one behind the fence um has significant decay. Yep. >> So it should also be addressed. >> Understood.
>> And we would certainly agree to work as a commissioner approval with the plan with the board planner to assess any dead, diseased, dying landscaping or trees and and and address all that. >> Perfect. And so long term, how is that going to be addressed? Let's say they're
watered about 30% of of greenery does not survive. What is the commitment to get that uh replaced, replenished, and redone to maintain um what you put in for the condition of approval?
>> Again, um anything that is on the plan >> as approved is being represented by the applicant as what is going to be on the site. short-term, long-term. There's not only warranties or guarantees that you have with the uh landscape installer,
but an additional commitment by the applicant that should any new plantings uh not make it, so to speak, that they would be replaced. >> Perfect. And are you going to have someone on site to bring that to the owner's attention? Is there going to be
a point person, a project manager, or someone who can say, "Listen, um this is going on on the site. it needs to be addressed or does that fall on the community? >> It well I don't know if you want to answer it actually falls on on both right. It falls on certainly the
operator because the operator has an obligation for any application that they receive approval for where there's conditions of approval such as this to make sure that they're complying with their resolution requirements. That's number one. Um sometimes neighbors, not just for this application, for any
application are, you know, the best eyes and ears and certainly um on occasion will bring to an operator's attention that hey look, you might want to take a look at this tree. You might want to take a look at >> You could always come back here because I open up the meeting early on. Anything that's not on our agenda tonight, you can come and speak about it. We're happy
to hear you. >> Thank you so much. >> You got it. >> Sure. I have one more question. >> Sure. Can uh would you accept the fact that you've got to mow the grass every seven to 10 days? >> You would accept that as a condition? >> Yeah, we can accept that as a
>> Yeah. 7 to 10 days. >> Yes. >> Dur during >> during the appropriate season. >> Absolutely. >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Heler. >> Thank you, Mr. Heler. Um let's um let me call uh Mr. Burn the architect at this
point. Bill, would you raise your right hand, please? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this uh board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, help your God. And your name for the record, please. >> Thank you. >> Uh Mr. Mr. Burn, could you please
provide uh the board with your occupation affiliation areas and expertise and license and experience in the field of architecture? >> Sure. I am uh a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey. I've been licensed since 1994. Um I uh appear before land use boards,
planning boards um twice this uh past week um throughout Mars and Somerset County and I've been accepted as an expert in the field of architecture. >> We accept you as well. Thank you. your phone on it. >> I think it is. I just >> Okay, >> hold it closer.
>> You have to eat the mic. >> Absolutely. >> As they say in the business. Um Mr. uh Burn, you um are familiar with the uh application materials, the project in the surrounding neighborhood. >> Yes, I am. >> And you prepared the colored elevations and the floor plan for this application?
>> These were prepared by our office. Yes. >> And these are the ones that are submitted to the board. Correct. >> That's correct. These were submitted. So, so please describe generally the proposed plan from an architectural perspective specifically addressing your floor plan, elevations, colored renderings, etc. And just when you do
so, just identify the plan sheet, title block, and the and the date, please. >> Sure. So, um, what's being proposed, uh, similar footprint to >> just interrupt one second. What you're showing on the on the easel is what we have before us. Is that correct? >> That is correct.
>> No modifications. >> No, no revisions or modifications. >> Okay. So then I'm not going to mark. >> This is sheet number one of the submitted set. >> Thank you. >> And so what this uh plan shows is the four elevation views of the building. Um as mentioned by our engineer, um the
building footprint has changed slightly from the prior approval. Um the the prior building was a bit of an L-shape. Um this proposal um has changed that to be a a rectangular shape. So it's 25 by 50 ft. Um we had reviewed the prior uh
plans and approval. we have the construction plans and um so some of what we thought to do with this design was to try to create something that we felt was a bit more um consistent with the neighborhood. The the building and the site exists surrounded by what appear to be residences um to the back
and to the sides. And so our feeling was to try to soften the very strict commercial look um and try to, you know, tone it down a bit, try to use materials that were a little bit more consistent and hopefully blend a little nicer with the neighborhood. And so, um, what we have here on the top left is the front
elevation. This faces the canopy. Um, we've got the main entrance door. We've added a stone veneer to the lower section. And to emphasize the front door, a treatment around that door with a stone veneer. The uh the stone veneer carries around four sides of the building. So, again,
not to dismiss the sides or the rear, we do have that stone band that comes up about two and a half feet and extends around the four sides. Uh the siding material that we're being proposed here is a fiber cement. It's a Hardy plank which most people know it by. It's a a a quality product. We use it very often.
Um and it would be a vertical siding and a traditional nature board and batten type siding. Again, uh we uh our office is in Chester. A lot of what we do is historic architecture and I think it's a a look that's that's very timeless and I think it's appropriate for this location. Um the roofing material that
we're proposing is a standing sea metal again to just try to be consistent with the uh overall architectural features and style of the building and uh we think it complements nicely. Um the height of the building proposed I think is similar or identical to the prior approval. It's 19 foot 11 in to the
highest point from average grade uh from finished floor that is. And um the only addition to that height would be this center coupoopa that we've proposed just to try to create a little again drama and a little balance to what's now a fairly symmetric building. Sheet number two of our set again
unchanged and unrevised. So this is exactly what what you guys have have gotten to see. Um represents the floor plan that's proposed. And again you can see it's a fairly simple building. It's 25 ft front to back by 50 foot in width. Same essential envelope as the prior
building, but but the prior building just had that cutout on the one side that we've infilled here. Um, so again, a fairly standard design. We would uh enter into a market area for product display. We've got some coolers to the side. Uh, we do have an ADA compliant
laboratory that would be uh for the patrons of the store or for customers of the gas gasoline fueling. And we've got a cashier area and a small office to the right side. So again, a a very simple um design and a very standard design for this type of of use. Um and lastly on
this design, we've got the signlight detail, which is just a goose gooseeneck light that we would be installing over the front building mounted sign that we have above the door and that would be located in this location in the gable. We are proposing
one sign that indicates the name of the market as Pleasant Market. The sign dimension is 2 and 1/2 ft in height and six feet in width roughly the width of the front entrance doors. So essentially that that is what we're proposing. >> And and you believe based on your
experience and architecture and familiarity with the area that the proposed design is appropriate and would blend in well with the neighborhood? >> I I do feel it's appropriate. But I did notice that the prior approval had a building that was primarily masonry with cement, plaster, or stucco on on the
back and sides. I don't find that to be particularly consistent with the neighbor neighborhood. So our our goal here was to try to create something that was I think a little more compatible and I and I think we've done that. Okay. >> I have nothing further for Mr. Burn. >> Questions?
>> Question. Um, are there any other structures planned like an enclosure for garbage or if there's going to be propane sold there that that would be enclosed as well? >> To my knowledge, there's no other structures proposed.
None that we were involved with um designing. So, I I would think not. I mean, the canopy exists today and I don't think there's any proposed changes to that. >> I'm sorry. So, but the garbage is going to be just a dumpster. I I would defer that question to our
site engineer. >> There is aval is just going to clarify. >> There's a masonry enclosure that exists today. They do need to repair and replace the doors on it, but that was constructed as part of the last approval. Um I have a question not exactly for you
but uh the landscape architect has shown uh shrubs all along the front and he shows the double door at one corner of the building whereas your drawing shows the double door entrance is right in the middle of the building where he has the
shrubs. So he has to coordinate that drawing with with you so that the shrubs are not on the entrance door. >> Yes, Min. I actually have that noted as a condition if this is approved that the landscape plan would have to be uh
coordinated with the site plan. >> You can't have shrubs entrance door. >> I would agree. >> Yes, there's no no issue with that at all. >> That all right. Any other board questions?
Board professionals. >> Just one question, Mr. Chairman. So, um, Mr. Burn, there's a couple of conditions of the original approval. One of which prohibited um window signage, the other being the hours of operation
from 6:00 am to 10 p.m. Monday through Sunday, and the third being no exterior ATM machine. You have any issue with those conditions? I >> I would have no issue with any of those conditions. I think those are very reasonable. >> Thank you.
>> And and well, I'll wait for the operator. Hey, hey, I'm sorry, but um Bill, could you just What was the first one you had there? >> Uh it was condition 27. The applicant shall revise the plans to indicate that there will be no window signage.
>> Right. No window signs. And then the testimony previously was that the operating hours were going to be from 6:00 a.m. to 900 p.m. 7 days a week. >> Correct. uh with the one caveat that and I'm going to have the operator confirm this that I think on the weekends may
not open until 7 a.m. >> Okay. But >> but but that's fewer hours than than the prior approach. >> The prior resolution was till 10 p.m. But now we're going to go to 900 p.m. >> Correct. We're going to reduce the the hours. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Um, I think I think the the building architecture um certainly looks looks nice um and would be an improvement to the site. H have you um seen the the the existing canopy in relation to where it will be located to this building?
>> I I have. I I think I actually have a photograph that shows that. This, of course, is the prior building that was taken down. >> Is this um this has not yet been presented to the board. >> I believe that's correct. So, this would be >> Okay. So, we're we're going to mark this as A3.
>> Okay. >> Okay. And Bill, can you first identify what is A3? >> Yes. So, this is a uh a street view from I believe it was Google Maps that showed um >> and what what's approximate date.
>> Uh this I took January 9th, 2024. It's listed as >> 2024. >> Yeah, I do believe though this goes back in time. It doesn't say exactly when actually it does say July 2021. the this condition existed July 2021 according to the Google Maps
uh shot. So obviously it includes the original station, but the canopy I do believe is essentially um what's there today. So to answer your question, yes, I see the relationship of the canopy in the building. >> Thank you. I I actually yeah, I was there today. It looks fairly fairly
similar to that if not the same um from the photograph. And I just wanted to I only highlight that because the canopy has more modern materials, more brighter colors. And I just want to make sure that from a perspective of design that these these two elements aren't clashing. And I'm not not to be nitpicky
or overly critical. I just want to make sure that they are complimentary to one another so that there's not kind of two separate elements competing on the site. Um because I do think the building is has been designed very nicely >> and we we took that into account to some extent and agreed that the canopies especially this type of canopy um you
know tends to take on more of a streamline clean look and and the and the branding of the color I mean is is what it is for the Delta. So what we tried to do is just uh implement that stone detail that's on that canopy and bring that into the building again without many other options. that was, you know, what we felt might really
create that continuity and and I agree. I think the building is an attractive enhancement to the site. >> Uh, can you do me a favor? Can you just turn that around so the neighbors that are here can see that it's the first time? >> And Bill, if you haven't already, would you mark that as A3? Physically mark it
with today's date. I'm embarrassed to say as an architect I don't have a pen which has never happened. >> Lawyer to the rescue. >> When's the last time that's been stated with regard to um A3, Mr. Burn, just
just clarify for the record and because I we see the canopy and as was stated it's in the condition that's in in today, but there's also a building that is shown there on the property. >> Yes. So, it looks to be um what I would
assume was the original kiosk. It looks like a Hest station. I think that's what they always looked like for so many years, at least as I recall. And it appears that that is what was there. Again, a fairly small um building, probably included some restrooms and an area for the attendants. >> That's going to be removed in favor of
the proposed building that you've designed. >> That That's correct. That my understanding it has been removed already. that that I only meant to verify that the or clarify that the canopy is still there there today per the picture. The building is no longer there. That is
>> just want to clarify that for the record. Yeah. >> Um as far as the I appreciate that all four sides of the building have the same architectural materials um and design. Um I think that's very important for the neighboring residents. As far as the back of the building, is there any lighting or any building activity
proposed in the rear? So, so there is none proposed on the building itself and we purposely didn't um in include obviously windows or other things that would shed light out the back of the building for for obviously respect of the neighbors.
So, the back of the building would would simply be that just just the siding material, the stone material, the standing seam metal roofing. >> Thank you. Um and then as far as the the copala which is proposed on the on the roof of the building, do you know the height of that? It isn't I don't think it's dimensioned on the plan on the
elevation. >> It's not dimensioned, but the height from the highest ridge point to the top of the Koopa I I I would say would appear to be about 4 and 1/2 ft. >> Okay. >> And we would be willing to work with that as a design limit if that was important. >> Okay. Thank you. And that's not proposed
to be lit in any way. Correct. >> As nice as they look when they're lit, we wouldn't mind lighting it if the board preferred, but it doesn't need to be lit. It does create a nice look. Obviously, it's a nice ambient look, but >> I think with the residential neighbors, I would I mean, my personal recommendation would be that it could
potentially create a nuisance because it is the highest point of the the site and the building. Um, so I'll leave it to the board though for their >> I I think this is on you. >> So, my recommendation would be not to light it um unless anything changes in the future, but for now to be respectful
of the residents and not create additional light um that to to not light it. Um, other than that, I I have no other questions for this witness. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh, members of the public, questions on Mr. Burn's architectural testimony.
>> All right. See none. Thank you, sir. >> Welcome. >> Um, I'm going to before I get to the professional planner, I'm going to briefly call Mr. Baja, the operator. Great. Would you raise your right hand, please? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony
you will give to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So, help your God. And would you give us your full name, please? >> And your first name. Spell it, please. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Elder. Uh Mr. Baja, um
what is your relationship with the applicant? >> I'm the owner. >> You're the owner. Okay. And um I assume by you being the owner, you're familiar with the application uh that we we have presented and you've been present during the hearings, correct? >> Yes.
>> Okay. Um, and you also, I know, operate other gas stations uh with convenience markets around New Jersey. Correct. >> That is correct. >> Okay. And and how many do you currently operate? >> 30 gas stations. >> 30. 300. Okay. And um
the you've heard the testimony, for example, from Mr. Vanderval in terms of the circulation on the site. Um, is that consistent with what you experience in your gas stations around the state? >> Yes.
>> Okay. And in terms of, um, folks going to, let's say, the convenience store, uh, those who have pumps and convenience stores um, on the site, is it typical that the patrons of the convenience store are those that are also going to
get gas? >> That's correct. Yeah. >> Right. And it's rare that somebody comes in just to go to the convenience store and then leaves without getting gas. Correct. >> Okay. And um with regard to the number of employees,
there was a question last time as to the number of employees. Can you just verify there's going to be two employees? >> Two at the time. Yes. >> What's that? >> Two employee at the time. >> Okay. So there won't be more than two employees at a time and one will be basically outside and one will be inside
in the convenience store. >> That is correct. >> Okay. Um and you have told me from your experience with your many other um operations around the state that typically when you have uh two employees at a time that they will typically
carpool and so therefore they will only take up one parking space at the most. >> That is correct. And um with regard to uh the hours of operation, I had test I had stated represented to the board that
the hours would be 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. during the weekdays and 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on the weekends. Is that accurate? >> Yes. >> Okay. Um and in terms of the uh fuel deliveries typically um takes about 20
minutes for a fuel delivery give or take. >> Yeah, approximately. Yes. >> Okay. And um in terms of the frequency, just a few times a week. >> Yes. And typically, um, you don't have deliveries come in in any of your
stores, I I know, during any peak hours, like, you know, 7:00 to 9:00 a.m. or 4 to 6:00 p.m. Correct. >> That is correct. Yeah. >> And there will be no overnight deliveries. Correct. >> That is correct. Yeah. >> And in terms of deliveries
uh for the convenience store, those are typically in smaller box trucks. >> That is correct. Yes. >> Okay. And and how often does that happen? >> Usually once a week. >> Once a week. Okay. Um and
do you anticipate that by because right now there you are you're not in operation at this site. Correct. >> That is correct. >> And you don't have any employees at the site. Correct. >> Currently. >> Currently the gas is we running the gas. Yes. There's one employees working there. >> Okay. But you don't have anybody
obviously. No. >> Right. Um, and so by having more than one employee at the site, you anticipate that you'll have a better opportunity to constantly, for lack of a better word, police the site and make sure that
you're continuing to up um to maintain the site and clean up the site. >> That is correct. Yes. >> Okay. And you heard my statement to the board earlier about the fact that if there's trees or shrubs that are dead, diseased or dying that you will have
those replaced. Correct. >> That's correct. And also I will I will add that the town can yearly inspect and we can take two-year warranty like if any die >> we can replace it. They can inspect you know zoning officer anybody from the
town. >> Okay. And I I represented to the board that you agreed that as part of the landscaping plan that you would install an irrigation system. That is correct. >> That is correct. >> I have no further questions for Mr. Baja.
>> Mr. Baja, you weren't the owner operator at the time of the last resolution. When you came in front of when the last owner came in front of the zoning board, it was a different owner. Correct. >> Yes. >> Want to clarify that for the board. Thank you. >> Other board questions. All right. board professionals, members
of the public. >> All right. Thank you. >> Uh Mr. McConna is our professional planner. Saved a tree or two. John, [Music] sorry. John, would you raise your right hand? You solemnly swear that the testimony you'll give to this board will
be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, help me out. >> Your full name for the record, please. >> Sure. >> Hi, everyone. My name is John Mcdana. It's spelled MC capital D O N O U G H. And I'm the project planner. >> All right. We just heard from you in another case. It's good to see you again, John. We accept you as a
professional planner. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Mr. McDonald, you're familiar with the application, the property, and surrounding neighborhood? >> Yes, I am. >> Okay. Please describe to the board uh the proposed plan from a planning perspective focusing on the variance and exception relief required in connection with this application.
>> Um I Mr. Chairman I will be very brief. This is a pretty straightforward application. I do have some visuals just to help answer some of the questions from the board about what the site looks like. Now we did the usual drone shot. So you've got that. I know some of you have gone to it. But um I think this
will just establish a predicate for the conclusions that I've made regarding the >> we're going to mark this whole set A4 and John will go page by page. >> Let's just make sure members of the public get a copy as well. >> Yes, >> we actually have we have plenty.
>> We have plenty. >> Oh, you have some too. >> Yes. >> And as what number is this? >> A4 A4 it out. It's going to be five pages. We're going to start with an aerial satellite photograph and then you'll get a couple of uh fresh drone
photographs that were actually taken in May. >> May of 2025. >> Correct. >> Okay. So, we've marked A4, like you said, consisting of five pages. Why don't you orient the board? >> Sure thing. Um, again, just to highlight
the salient points here from a planning standpoint, it's a single tax lot, block 319, lot number eight, a little more than half an acre. We've outlined it in yellow on exhibit A number four on the first sheet, the satellite image. It's got sort of that L shape. Um, I applaud
the chair um for bringing up the issue about the trees in the back and for our applicant responding favorably. There's a nice locust back there. There's a a nice gigantic oak. Um, I think it's good planning to keep those and again I compliment our applicant for for keeping them in place. They're going to frame
this very nice building that you just saw through Bill's testimony. Clearly, the building is going to be an upgrade over that which has historically been there. The old style Hess building with all that glass and the green band across the front being replaced with a nice
building that's reflective of the rural character of your area. uh the Pleasant Market as it's been called on the on the plan. So certainly a nice visual accent over that which presently exists. Essentially the building is being positioned as a replacement in kind for
what was historically there. A slight increase over the prior approval in terms of the square footage of the building. 1,250 square feet is what's proposed. 1,097 square ft is what was originally approved here for again a retail use um
on this former Hess site. The canopy is there, the gas component is there, basically working with what is already established on the property and an excellent complement to that which is there as a as a service station use. The next four frames simply show the
condition of the property as it presently exists. As you can see, the surrounding land use context here is mixed. We've got some residential, we've got some non-residential. This is a service use along a service corridor, and we're adding a complimentary service
use in the form of retail that will complement the auto fueling component that's there. Now, what's nice about this land use in this application is the building is small in scale. It's 1,250 square ft, which is on the small end of
the scale from a convenience standpoint. This is not your 5,000 6,000 ft quick check or WAWA. It's not even your 2500 square foot 7-Eleven. This is a small, modest building that is going to be retrofit into the
site itself. Um, in terms of the justifications for the relief, again, we're looking at D2 use relief for expansion of a non-conforming use, the legal basis for the relief is actually site betterment, taking what's there, making it better, um, not whether
the use belongs in the first place. In terms of the project positives, we see promotion of purpose A under the land use law, the promotion of the general welfare with a complimentary use that provides customers and patrons with basic access to everyday goods.
Additionally, purpose I, which is our planning goal for promotion of a positive aesthetic. The building will speak for itself. Um and then lastly, purpose m our planning goal for efficient use of land. Uh essentially replacement in kind for
what has historically been there. We think the application has evolved through the interactive process with the board to the extent that relief can be granted without any substantially adverse impacts to the public. You've got good predicate testimony that this is designed in accordance with sound
engineering design and also architectural design. And I would offer that the degree of departure from the zone plan is not substantial considering what has been previously approved here. With respect to the sea relief, your planner Katherine as always has given
the board a good road map on page four of her report. Um, as you can see, most of the variances were previously granted as indicated in bold on the table. There are a few new variances which for the most part are improvements over the existing or previously approved
condition for with respect to lock coverage. 48.8% is what's proposed. 48.9 is what exists. So that's an improvement with respect to the front yard setback. It's a new
variance where 75 ft would be required. 39.3 ft is what's proposed, but that again is an improvement over the existing condition of 35.6 ft. This all relates to the fact that the canopy was constructed at a somewhat
different position relative to the approval. Um, so there's also relief related to the front yard setback from Find 10T is what is actually being asked for. That's what was constructed. 10.9 is what was previously approved or
existing. Um the requirement is 52.7 feet. So again, degree of departure from the zone plan not substantial here. All of this sea relief is justifiable under the flexible sea balancing test as a better zoning alternative for the
property and necess necessary to effectuate those deed proofs that I gave you as part of the D2 testimony. Well said. I think it's a pretty straightforward application. John, >> before you sum up, um you could als given the existing uh construction and structures that are on the property,
some of the variances can also be um based on a C1 analysis because >> very good point. Yes, it's relief that relates to the land and the structures lawfully existing thereon. Um certainly the board well knows you can move either under C1 or C2. We don't have to meet
both, but both are actually met here. Sorry to interrupt you. Go ahead. >> A very good point. We'll put both in there. Um that said I believe the criteria are met for the D2 relief that the applicant is seeking at site betterment being offered here visually and functionally and also under the C
criteria either C1 or C2 or both >> and and to the extent that there's any um exception or waiver relief in connection uh with the site plan um due mostly to existing conditions that receive that exception relief. Uh you
believe that given the existing conditions of the property that can be justified as well under 51b in the municipal land. >> Yes, we've got good predicate testimony there from our professionals before me. >> This one better. Pick me up. >> Sorry about that. We've got good
predicate testimony from the witnesses before me that the design relief is reasonable and appropriate and can be granted in accordance with sound design principles. And certainly there's an element of impracticability here, meaning that uh denial of the relief, the design exceptions in my view would
create impracticability or serve no practical planning purpose. >> Hopefully she got the rest of the testimony. >> You you were projecting pretty good. I I think you were doing all right. Um and and so John, based on uh the prior testimony
before you as well as your review of the application in terms of the positive negative criteria for both C and D variance relief, do you believe that the um application should be approved? >> Uh in short, yes, this is a good application. This is a good fit for this site. Um it's evolved. I know there was
a hearing before this last time and I think the uh issues that the board had have been cleaned up. So, um, I think the application as it stands now warrants approval. >> Thank you. Nothing further from Mr. >> Uh, John, I got a question. On page six of Bill and Catherine's report, um, it
questions. The rear yard setback is noted as 80 ft on sheet one of two, but is required to be 85 ft. Did we get a definitive answer on that? >> We're waving for the engineer. >> Okay. Yeah. Just want to make sure there's not
another variance that's required here. So, so, so the question I think actually you you raised it appropriately at the last meeting too. We just neglected to touch upon it. So, there was a question as to whether the setback um for the rear yard I believe is at 80 ft or 85
ft. Yeah, it 80 foot setback line is is well short of that building corner. So, we're definitely clear of the 80 ft. >> Right. But, so Tyler, if even whether it's 80 or 85, you're showing 86.9 on
your zone chart, right? >> Correct. So, I believe that would be the >> So, we're good. >> We comply there, >> right? >> Right. >> Correct. >> All right. So, one one less variance, potential variant. That's good. >> That was my only question.
>> Anyone else? board professionals. >> Thank you. I think Mr. Mcdana did a good job covering all the required proofs for all the relief that's being requested. Um, one thing I will ask um and it may be more generally for the applicant team
is that from the the photographs you can see that masonry crash enclosure. Um, I would ask that the applicant dress that up a little bit maybe to match that really nice architecturally designed building. um and either paint the the
stone to match the color of the proposed building and or um clad it with a similar material. And obviously it needs doors. So um yeah, and that was mentioned as part of the testimony. So I would recommend that the detail for the doors just be shown on the on the plans if they are submitted if this is
approved. >> That is all acceptable. >> Thank you. Um I don't I don't have any other um any other questions for Mr. McDonald. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> No questions, Mr. Chairman. >> All right, members of the public, questions on the planning testimony
you've heard. >> Hi there. I just need your name and address again. >> You or we could just get your name and address again. Oh, >> I'm sorry. Borino 6252nd Street. My question has to do with and I don't know if you Okay. It just seems like
everything's really tight. Like in terms of here's parking spaces. People are going to back out. Cars are right there. This looks like it's not all that much bigger than the width of a vehicle.
And then we're also talking about when deliveries are made, which I'm assuming are going to be when it's hopefully, you know, least amount uh not a busy time, but how is a even a box truck coming in? It just seems like
everything's really tight and compact and it kind of leaves it open to I mean I'm not going to be driving in there but and going to the convenience store but I kind of fear for people who would like somebody's coming around this person
doesn't see it. I mean know we have all have backup cameras but even so it just seems I don't know what the the spacing is. >> It's your lucky night. We happen to have a traffic engineer for our board here. Maurice, you want to chime in on anything? I hate to put you on the spot there. Good evening.
>> Should I show him what I'm talking about? >> Good idea. I descriptive enough. >> So, if I'm not mistaken, by the way, thank you for the question and thank you for appearing here tonight. You're asking about the ability of a box truck
to come onto the site and negotiate the site. >> Well, that and also, can I show you? Yes. So wait just to hold on. >> No, you did nothing wrong. But because we have a court reporter, it's important
that we have to speak loud and clearly so that she can take that. >> And some of us are deaf. >> I get it because half the time I don't hear it. Um, I was talking about vehicles that would be passing through
and on one side you have the people at the pump. >> Mhm. >> And then you have the parking spaces over here and it just seems like it's really tight. So like anybody coming in or even going out, it seems like it's dangerous. So I don't
really know what the actual footage or yardage is. Well, we've got a pro here that can help us out. >> So, let me explain to you what was done on this plan and how it works. >> Uh, normally when an engineer does a simulation plan to identify the path of
a vehicle, they use 19 ft as a standard design for a car and they use 30 feet as a standard design for a box truck that delivers goods. Now, let's go to the car. 19 ft is a pretty substantial
vehicle. The average vehicle is between 14 and 16 ft. 19 ft would be like a Suburban or a large vehicle. So while this plan did not identify that vehicle but normally from practice we
know that when they when you go to the software and you run a vehicle you would run the 19 foot vehicle. So that's one thing you have to keep in mind when you look at at the um exhibit you're looking at with all the colors. So they're using a large vehicle. Number two, it looks
crowded because they're superimposing several maneuvers on top of each other. So, let's crowd it. But if you pay attention to the car, for example, that is between the canopy and the two parked cars, you
can estimate that there is a space between that vehicle and the line separating the two parked cars of about I'm going to estimate maybe six, seven feet. So, the crowdiness is because of
the way the um the the plan is drawn. They superimpose many maneuvers on top of each other. The maneuvers coming into the parking into the two parking areas. So that's two and the maneuver going around. So there's three maneuvers that have been superimposed on top of each
other. >> So I could I'm almost done. >> So I could tell you that looking at this, yes, it is not a wide facility. I agree with you on that. But I wouldn't say it's tight. I would say it's workable.
>> Okay. The only reason I'm I'm asking is like you're saying it's three things being shown at once, but there's a good possibility that that's going to exist several times a day. And no, I mean, not my No, >> no, let me explain. >> I don't think so. >> So, these three maneuvers are Yes, they
will happen, but each car will have its own path. The cars will not be on top of each other as they're making this maneuver. This exhibit actually shows the cars or the maneuvers on top of each other and that's why it looks crowded. In reality, there'll be one car going to
one space, maybe 5 minutes later, 10 minutes later, another car going to a different space. So, it will not look the way you see it with all these lines and and all the crowded looks that this plan portrays. >> Okay. I mean, I guess when I look at it
and I hear the size of vehicles and box trucks and so on and so forth, >> and again, it's not going to be me in there, but I don't want to see >> Yeah. >> those patrons have that kind of >> Simon, if it helps, we did run this past our police. Uh, they had no comment.
Usually, when there is a situation with an applicant where there's excessive police reports being generated, they would let us know. So, there's just nothing in the report in the file if that helps. >> All right. >> All right. >> Thank you. You're welcome. >> Thank you. >> Now we got one more question.
>> Janette Jardine, 614 Second Street. >> Yeah, that's that's uh what they were referring to before was A1. >> Okay. >> Janette Chardine, 614 Street. So, uh, regarding the traffic patterns that are
there, um, I had brought up before that, um, we were interested in getting a traffic study done and, um, you had mentioned something about, uh, input from the police. Um, I think that one of the things that should be brought up is that one of the main, uh,
uh, companies that stop at at this gas station is Carvana, also known as the Adessa, the car auction. And very often, uh, it's not just a 19 foot car or 14, 16 foot SUV. We have tractor trailers that have eight, nine vehicles on two
different levels that Bailey can get in and make the turn. Um, we have the parking spaces that are right in front of the garbage area. And very often, this is not like one car going through. This is their main spot of gas right before they get into the to the auto
zone. That being said, I think that um it's very important to get a traffic study done because we're not taking that into consideration. These tractor trailers go into the lot. They can only go into the main lane and they're so big that no cars can pass them around to the
second, third, or fourth bay. Um and so we're not talking about just, you know, average cars coming in and out. >> You're you're kind of in the area of something Mr. Mcdana didn't testify on. He's he's a planner. His testimony was on planning. So I I really >> So my question one of my questions are
um how do we account for that on this this is best case scenario but very often on Fender Avenue being a hightra area being uh a area where there's lots of accidents without a traffic study how do we know what the worst case scenario
and what impact it has on the public. >> So again from a planning standpoint the departure from what was previously approved here is not substantial. We're talking about 250 square feet if that above and beyond. That's not a substantial change in traffic from from any benchmark
>> for this size uh location. What is the normal uh amount of parking spaces that usually um should be sufficient for this size uh property? >> The applicant's not asking any relief for the number of parking stalls here. >> Well, my question is if you don't have sufficient parking spaces, you have no
place for these cars to park. So now you have an overflow into Finder which causes uh an issue with traffic. We don't without a traffic study, we don't have crosswalks. We have kids in the neighborhood. They're going to want >> What I think the planner is saying is
that the applicant has satisfied the town ordinance with respect to parking. >> But what I'm saying is without a traffic study, there are risk variables that we haven't uh put forth. We have kids in the area. As you know before, we have
lost a child in our neighborhood. And these are variables that we'd like to be proactive in addressing instead of reactive in addressing because um we want to keep our children safe. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Chairman. May I ask May I ask a question?
>> Sure. Sure. I don't think we went over this because the canopy exists, but do you know the clearance height of the canopy? >> I I don't I know that they're typically 14 ft minimum, but I'll get I'll get confirmation. >> I also don't have a measurement, but I
will say that every application that I do with this applicant, they're either 14 feet or 15 feet clearance underneath. And that's specifically so that the delivery vehicles can can circulate. >> Now, and that is that also so that trucks can fuel at this location.
>> I don't believe there's any high-speed diesel here. So, if they did choose to do that, it again, they typically wouldn't want to because the time it takes to fuel a vehicle of that size without highspeed diesel uh being available, but again, there wouldn't be
anything prohibiting them if if it was something that they were willing to wait for. >> Would would the applicant be amendable to uh prohibiting truck fueling to address the concern of the the spaces being parked by a larger vehicle?
What do you What do you I'm sorry. Just if you can just clarify when you say truck fueling. >> Sorry. No, like no tractor trailer fueling. >> One sec. I'll do my best. So truck is a broad term. Uh you may get uh commercial
vehicles in there, but I think we're talking about a restriction on a tractor trailer, the big 55 footer. Um this applicant does get deliveries from let's say a car carrier or a smaller vehicle, the the flatbeds that may carry some cars. So um again, we're not looking at
a a prohibition on that, but from the fullsize tractor trailers. Yes. Correct. There are deliveries on a on a flatbed. >> So, Mr. Baja, a question was asked by the the board planner um regarding
restricting tractor trailers to fuel. Can you respond to that? Yeah, because of the auction there uh there is like you know small tractor with the long cars on it those those kind of vehicles comes over there the big tractor till
barely comes you know I >> how many vehicles are on those trucks how many vehicles >> uh from the auctions >> I don't know I didn't count I don't much there but there's I know there's come they come you know m
>> Mr. Simon, would you stipulate that your business will not allow spill out spillover into the highway? And if that happens, we're going to have to bring you back here. Yes. And talk about this. >> No problem. >> How do you want to word that? >> So certainly we would agree to a
condition that there will be no backups into Find or or any >> any adjacent >> any adjacent street as a condition of approval. And I would also recommend in conjunction with that, just to be more clear, that there will be no blocking of
of the vehicle parking spaces as well. So both of those things can happen. >> Yeah. >> Uh Mr. Mr. Chairman, if the board desires, there is a way to identify exactly a tractor trailer and uh we can
refer to them as a WB 62 and a WB67. These are the large tractor trailers that have the 53 foot uh trailer in the back. Yep. >> And and I think it's a reasonable
request to prohibit these trucks because they're very large and it would be very difficult to negotiate the site. But the trucks that the applicant referred to, I believe they can negotiate the site. And by making that specific prohibition, I
think that would be a good solution for the site and for the community. >> And the applicant would be amendable to Maurice's recommendation. >> Great. I'm glad >> as as long as there's a distinction and I'm glad he did made the distinction between >> I have it as a WB62 and WB67.
>> Yes. >> Wonderful. Thank you very much. And uh you know that the whole reason we spent so much time here is because you know a child did die in that neighborhood and we're very sensitive and we want to make sure we do this right. I we've really taken our time on this case and we've
been here four meetings now. Four. So um thank you very much Mara. I'm glad you were here tonight. >> Thank you. All right. Um, I think that's it from the public. Do you want to wrap up? >> Unless there's any other questions or comments from the public. We're we're we're getting the
>> timing is good because we're we're good right against our >> Well, then uh with the timing be short, I'll be super short. Um, and all I'm going to say is that regardless of the reason why we got here to in essence represent to the board, it
does provide the board, the public, and actually most importantly the applicant with an opportunity to actually take an approval, a recent approval and actually make it better. So this is certainly,
you know, we believe the quintessential example of an applicant who just a few years ago received an approval. And usually when you grant an approval, you don't usually see an applicant come back again for for quite a while. They're
done here. because of circumstances, we had the opportunity, right or wrong, to come back here, whether it's for a dimminimous 155 square ft uh addition essentially to the conven store, but it also provided us an opportunity to make
the site a ton better, to make the conven store look a ton better, to make the landscaping improvements a ton better. So we believe that through the testimony of our engineer, architect, landscape architect, operator and professional planner that we have
satisfied a burden of proof with regard to the positive negative criteria for all variance relief both C and D that is required for this application as well as satisfied our obligation uh regarding pling and final amended site plan approval. So we ask for a favorable vote
for this board and we thank you for your consideration. >> Thank you Mr. Simons. Um, any members of the public that would like to speak for or against this case, you can approach, you can speak into the microphone. All right. Please, sir, could you get your name and address?
>> Willer Bhusen, 618 Street. >> Would you raise your right hand, please? I am going to swear you in for your statement. You solemnly swear that any statement you make to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, hope you got Can I have your name again, please? >> Wahian. B A H O S H I A N.
Now, if you're coming out of Second Street, I mentioned this before, not up here, but if you're coming out of Second Street, I don't know how they got a permit to put that fencing all the way to the sidewalk, but that last section of fencing, you can't see unless you pull out really close to Fender Avenue
to see what's coming from Anvil. That section of fence should never been there in the first place. Now, there are two trees, the oak trees that are in the open lot. They're both dying now. They're about I
planted them about 50 years ago, and they're dying now. You can see the branches. So, what are they going to do about those two big trees that block everything from that gas station? >> Well, right now it's time >> I came here late. No, I and but right
now I have to follow kind of the rules because this could end up in front of a judge in Somerset County. So, right now is a time you can make a comment. I can't have a dialogue with you and it's kind of >> Well, those are the only two things. >> All right, you're on the record. Thank you very much. I wish you were here sooner. >> Any other members of the public like to
make a comment for or against this case? Hello. >> Hello. >> My name is Carrie Jardine. I live behind the property, 6142nd Street. >> And would you raise your right hand, please? You solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
>> Thank you. >> I don't want to sound repetitive, but I just wanted to read something that I was writing. Comments. There are no questions. Okay, so I came in late as well and I just wanted to say there are rusty dented metal bars along Third
Street parameter. Not sure if there was a plan made for that. They're painted white, but they're all rusted and dented. They look horrible. Not sure if that was spoken about, but I'm not going to ask a question. And okay, so once again, there has continuously been garbage on this whole property. There is
garbage blocking the street drainage and garbage in their empty lot, which backs into my property. the grass growth has reached the height of their privacy fence which is backed up um again once again on my property.
It has reached that high as well. I used to walk my dogs there with my four children but now there are mice in the area because of their neglect of property grounds. I believe the gas station has been owned
by them since 2017 or maybe 2018. I'm not sure how long that is. But these seven to eight years, seven to eight years of neglect speak for themselves. And now they want to add a new store if
they prove the area will have even more junk and garbage in our streets, which will increase the mice population within their neglected property. And once again, those beautiful oak trees that you just spoke of are dying. It's right there on my property. They're
dying. So, they're not beautiful anymore. They're dying. And that's all I have to say. Thank you for listening. I appreciate it. And you know, I wish I had faith in this process, but I not the process, but I wish I had faith in the owner, but I
actually don't. I have lived there for many years now. Um, and so as you can imagine, I am upset about it. And just so you know, I am upset about it because he does the property does nothing for itself. There is no maintenance there. Two people working there. One person
right now does the gas. Is that person supposed to clean your whole property? I don't know. But they cannot. Another person working in a store. How is that other one person supposed to clean the property? So you're telling me that one person's going to come out the store, clean the whole property, then who's going to manage the gas and the store?
It doesn't make sense to me. There are a lot of blank open spaces. And that's all I have to say. And thank you again. I appreciate it. >> Thank you. All right, Mr. Oh, >> yeah. We're we're we're butting up against the time, so if you could just
approach get your comments on the record. >> Would you raise your right hand, please? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes. >> May we have your full name, please? >> Janette Jardine. >> Uh, my name is Janette Jardine. Um,
construction. I am in opposition of approving the um application for many reasons. Um, first and foremost, as the person before me said, uh there's no confidence in the maintenance of the
property. We bear the the brunt of that very often from vermin to uh poison ivy that spill over uh rodents, animals, garbage. Um one of the main things uh I
opposed to is that this prop this property doesn't have enough square footage to safely support the proposed expansion. Like I said before, large trucks regularly enter the lot causing traffic to back up into the fendern. This creates unsafe conditions for both vehicles and pedestrians. There are no
sidewalks. We have many children in the area. There are no traffic lights getting across Finder Avenue. And if you're trying to get across Finland, it's like playing a game of Frogger. We don't want to put our kids in that position. It's amazing that there has not been a
demand for a traffic study. It has not been done. It's essential to the understanding on how this development will impact the nearby roads and intersections. the traffic circulation, the site access, trip generation, so this could be reasonably managed.
Moving forward without this analysis is reckless. Danger is not hypothetical. Our community has already suffered tragic incidents. We've seen a tractor trailer crash in a two-story home, trapping a woman and damaging several cars in the
area. We've seen uh two people in a collision right on Fendern where two people had to be uh extracted from the vehicle. And again, we saw one of our own neighbors killed right on the corner around the corner from our block.
This site was never meant to be a food mart. It previously sold soda and basic auto products like oil, windshare wiper fluid, and it had one singular refrigerator of cans of soda. no item that required people to leave their
cars. Turning this into a full convenience store will not only increase foot traffic that would include deliveries, garbage, and noise all on site that simply can't handle it. I was surprised to hear that the
applicant had 30 other stores considering we had a stop work order because the construction had to be stopped due to the fact that there were no plans or no approvals. So we sat for almost two years
behind a dump of debris and garbage floating around. The claim that one or two employees will manage everything, food, maintenance, safety, and service. This is definitely not realistic or responsible.
Any of these variances shouldn't be issued just to squeeze an oversized project into an undersized lot. We cannot put profit over people. Our children's safety must come first. I respectfully urge the board to deny this application
until a full traffic study is completed and all compliance and safety concerns are addressed. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> All right, Rich, why don't you take us through the stipulations and we'll open up deliberations.
>> We had some discussion on several conditions. First, um any conditions from the prior resolution would remain applicable unless they are specifically altered by u any approval from this board.
Applicant would provide and some of these may have been addressed already, but some of uh the applicant will provide a supplemental landscape plan to the township planner satisfaction and maintain the landscape buffer. Um applicant has agreed to replace any plantings which may become diseased or
um or die. Uh, no construction permit shall issue until the applicant has removed the trash and debris on site to the township engineer satisfaction. Hours of operation will be 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Monday to Friday and 7:00 a.m.
to 9:00 p.m. on weekends. Um, applicant will remove any non-approved signs. There'll be no window signs. All installed roof leaders will be connected to the inlet on Third Street
and will uh you'll confirm that this they are sized appropriately for the additional runoff. All proposed lighting will be downshielded to eliminate light spillage on uh Third Street, Finderan Avenue and adjoining properties.
Um Bill, I need a little help with this one. So, we talked about the spill containment tank. Is that And Rob, is that going to still remain? Is there going to be one on site? Not at all on site. Okay. So, there'll be no spill containment tank on site.
Okay. None of the mature trees will be removed from the site. Um if necessary and in accordance with the township planners direction, uh trees may need to be transplanted. Um if it appears that the
site the building location uh would inhibit their u their growth. We'll have to modify the landscape plan to be consistent with the site plan. That's where remember the front door was not shown in the same location.
You will include an irrigation system to service the landscape plan. Again, we'll perpetually maintain the approved landscape plan. Uh the lawn areas will be mowed at least every 7 to 10 days during the growing
season. Again, no window there'll be no window signs. There'll be no ATM machine at the on the exterior of the building or on the site. Could be inside the building but not outside.
The Koopa should not be lit. With respect to the trash enclosure, you'll repair the doors. provide a door detail in your plans and um paint the enclosure to match the building. No tractor trailers known as WB62 and
WB67 will be permitted to fuel at the site. Uh there'll be no blocking of passenger parking parking spaces and that was all I had. Thank you, Rich. >> Okay, >> Jim.
>> Um I was on the board uh many years ago when we heard the first time and like again we're back here listening to the same property again to put a a convenience store there. Uh, one of the things I agree with in the testimony is
that um, actually I have a friend of mine who owns um, several gas stations that are small and has little stores and I would say and who's testified here that um, the majority of the people that
go into it are customers who are getting gas. I would say he gets a few here or there. They'll come and get ice, get cigarettes or something like that or water during the summer. So you're not So he really doesn't generate a lot of extra traffic and I don't believe this
would here either. Um that's what we were talking about before. Um my biggest concern is that the owner has not kept the property maintained. I think that with all these restrictions that were putting in conditions into the um
tonight he sort of has to do that. I hope he does. um whether the rest of the board goes for it or not, you have to maintain it to make it was embarrassing when I drove past it the first time and it is looks a bit better now and I hope
that if it gets approved that you maintain it and make it look like a professional place to want to come in and get gas and or buy something. Um so I'm uh right now in favor of the application. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Bessia. Your thoughts?
>> Sure. Um, we've heard testimony on this case. Uh, we've raised number of concerns with the parking, uh, the relatively tight site, uh, the condition of the property. Uh, I think through our questioning,
public question, we've we've, um, I've satisfied my concerns with with this site. Um, I've thought if we did not approve this application, what would that do for the site? you know, would we have a an improved site? Um, how would
that appear to the neighborhood if it was not approved? Um, so I'm in favor of approving this application. Um, because I do agree with the planner that it is a site betterment. Um, I would welcome if they do repair and replace the existing guardrail that I
know one of the residents has mentioned. I would I would welcome that as well. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Sweeney. Um, this this application isn't significantly different from what's been
on this site in the past and what's been approved in the past. Um, I I I think the current proposal represents a significant improvement given the new building that's proposed. Um,
and I I think that the conditions we've talked about in terms of maintaining the the new landscaping, replacing any of the new landscaping that doesn't survive. Uh, I I think those those conditions and
the others that we've mentioned are sufficient to protect the neighbors from the problems that could otherwise pop up. But I think if it if that's not the case, if the owner screws up and
doesn't maintain his property, come back. Tell us, let us know. All right? Don't sit and stew over it, but please come back. But given all of that, I I think this is represents a significant improvement over what's there now, and I
will vote to approve. >> Thank you, Mrs. Amen. Um we had approved uh the gas station in 2017 and there is not too much of change from
what was there at that time. At that time they had also included a building in there and uh other than a few more trees or whatever else there's not too much change. So, I'm in favor of
approving this application. >> Thank you, >> Bruce. Welcome back, sir. >> Thank you. >> Good to see you. >> Thank you. Um, when I first went to visit this site, right before it's the first time the application was presented, the place was a disaster. I
think that when I drove by today, I think it's significantly improved. And I think that the conditions that Rich went through that will ensure that the site
is maintained and as uh Mr. Sweeney has said if you got an issue with something come back to the board and we'll address it. So having said that I'm in favor of the application. Um, my personal feeling is that this
site is too small for this type of store. There's not enough parking. And Mr. Avesio has brought up um the handicap spot with a fairly large vehicle or handicap van. I I drive a large vehicle. I don't think there's enough space to to get a large vehicle
in and out of that handicap spot. Um, I hear what everybody's saying with, you know, without approval here. there was maybe no oversight. Um, and I get that, but I don't feel I could support the
application. >> All right. Thank you. Um, I was tough on this applicant and I'll continue to be tough. If you come back and tell us there's a problem in this neighborhood, you know, we're very sympathetic to that. Voting no and shutting this property down, that's going to make
things worse. Um, Mr. Burn has designed very very nice building here. I think it's going to be a massive improvement over the last resolution that was passed by this board and they're really not asking for much. They made a mistake. They ripped down the wrong wall. We delayed the hearing twice because I was
so upset at the condition of the property and fellow board members agreed that we do that. Um to demand a a traffic study, which ordinarily I think we would do, but there's there's no traffic component of this case. So, you know, I don't know what legal bearing I would have other than if this went to
court on a denial, we would instantly lose. So, I I I want to help your neighborhood. I want to do everything in my power to make it better. We have irrigation. We have new landscaping. Um, and we have the power of the microphone. You get back here and you tell us if it's dirty, if they're not maintaining
the property. I want to hear from you. This whole board wants to hear from you. I'll give you as much time as you need before the meeting starts at 7:02. Um, you come here, you let us know. But I I'm going to vote in favor only because I haven't seen anything here that's different than the last approval. And
like I said, I think Mr. Burn, I hope he does more work in Bridgewater. Thank you, sir. I think that was a beautiful building you designed. It's not going to look like a typical convenience store. Um, and I want to thank you for for doing a great job. So, with that, uh, I'm going to seek motions. You know, there was a motion to approve. >> Conditions pages.
>> Okay. Do I have a second? That was Mr. Bonjouro. These are motions to approve. We'll put that to a vote. >> Mr. Widelli, >> yes. >> Mr. Sweeney, >> yes. >> Mrs. Amin, >> yes. >> Mr. Banjono,
>> yes. >> Mr. CCAT, >> no. >> Mr. Vesio, >> yes. >> And Chairman Fouse, >> yes. >> All right, Mr. Simon, congratulations. We hope we don't ever see you again. No offense on this matter. I hope we see
you in another matter. Good night. All right, we're going to take a very quick break. 5 minutes. Uh the time is 8:47. So, let's call it 8:50. Let's try and get back and we'll get started on Cafe Amelia. >> I will need
Hammond Fouse. >> I'm here. >> Mr. Widell >> here. >> Mr. Sweeney >> here. >> Mrs. Amin >> here. >> Mr. Bonjouro >> here. >> Mr. CCAT >> here. >> Mr. Vesio >> here. >> Mr. Aller
>> here, >> Mr. Burr >> here, >> Mr. Mod >> and Mr. Rashad >> here. All right, we're all here. Uh, good evening, Cafe Ameilia. >> Thank you. Good evening. For the record, I'm Donna Jennings from the law firm of
Lent Goldman and Spitzer. On behalf of the applicant, as the board is aware, the applicant is here this evening seeking preliminary and final major site plan approval, a D1 use variance, a D4 floor area ratio variance, several bulk
variances, and design waiverss to construct a new two-story addition to the existing Cafe Amelia restaurant to add a banquet hall, courtyard, and rooftop bar area on property located at 705 Route 202 and 49 Charlotte Drive,
identified as block 163.02, lots 17 and 9. The new building will comprise of approximately 16,749 square ft. Lot 17 is developed with the existing cafe Amelia restaurant and lot
9 is developed with a vacant church. The lots will be consolidated and comprise approximately 38,952 square ft. Both lots are located in the R20 zone where restaurants, bars, and banquet halls are not permitted uses. Therefore,
the applicant is seeking a D1 use variance to add the proposed use on lot 9. The record will show that the applicant is entitled to use variance relief because they satisfy both the positive and the negative criteria under the municipal land use law. The positive
criteria is satisfied where the proposed site is particularly suitable for the proposed use. here. The proposed site um is located along Route 202 and it already has a restaurant on the site. We have a commercial corridor and therefore
we believe it is an appropriate location for the expansion. >> Miss Jennings, if I can interrupt you, I apologize. We we got to check notice and we got a couple house cleaning things we got to take care of first. >> Um >> Rich, where do we stand on on notice? >> Yep. So, I I did review the notice and
um it's in proper form. It was sent by certified mail on time and published timely. So the board does have jurisdiction. >> Okay. Um yes ma'am. >> I haven't notified. >> Okay. >> Never notified. I'm not even
>> So the applicant is entitled to just go by the list if you're not on the list. In other words, it's not the applicant's fault. They go by the list that they get from the municipality. Um, and they as long as they follow that list, which they did, then uh that's all
they have to do. They have to mail it. And as as strange as this is going to sound, there's no requirement that you get it, just that they mail it. Okay. >> I didn't get >> uh um right. You you may not have, but they've mailed it and they presented proof of mailing.
>> I'm not even on the list. >> Okay. If you're not on the list, then they don't have to send you a notice. >> You're probably more than 200 ft. >> So, yeah. >> Okay. But fortunately, you're here.
And now you're aware. Okay. But again, they have to go by the list that they receive and that's what they did. >> Okay. >> Okay. Now, the second notice, I went there tonight. I went there at 6:15
on the church lot. So, that's lot nine. >> The garbage is overflowing. The garbage stinks. Okay. So, I guess my first question, and I'm being consistent because the last applicant had a lot of had a myriad of problems. I didn't hear their case until they satisfied those
requirements. Why is garbage on the vacant church lot? Why is that garbage spilling over? And it smelt bad. Now, I will say to offset my comment, I've eaten at this restaurant. It is wonderful. I had a great meal. Had a delightful time. That parking lot stinks
and it's not fair to the neighborhood. and you have to do something. We have to address it. I'm not going to hear this case tonight until you talk about how we're going to remedy the current situation. >> Sure. Not a problem. I don't think that that's typical, but I know that the applicant is well aware that the garbage has to take out. They have a private
hauler. They'll just increase the number of >> Why is the garbage on the vacant lot? >> I don't know why the garbage is on the vacant lot. Uh >> why isn't that on on lot 17? >> Well, well, if it's on lot 17, you know where the dividing line was? I mean, I don't I believe >> it's in the church. It's in the church
parking lot. They had they had an event tonight. It was overflowed. There was a gentleman outside that was directing traffic down Chambers up into the church parking lot. So down and around um I'm sorry, Charlotte Drive. When I
pulled into that lot, I couldn't pull into the parking spot because there was two trash bins overflowing that smelled terrible. So I guess the first question is why aren't those dumpsters on lot 17? And how are we going to remedy this situation?
>> Well, one of the re we're here, right, to modify the site plan, >> but we you just said it was a vacant lot and you have garbage on the vacant lot. >> I didn't say it was vacant. The the church is there. It's a vacant church. >> The church building is there. >> Does your applicant own this property?
>> He does. He owns both the lots. >> Okay. So, what are we going to do to make the trash enclosure compliant with Bridgewater health standards? They'll make sure that it somebody is brought there tomorrow and have it cleaned up and we'll make sure that the dumpsters stay on the lot until we get approval.
>> Okay. So, they're the dumpsters going to be moved to lot 17. >> If you're telling me they're not on lot 17, then yes. >> Would you like to see a picture? >> You can show us a picture. Sure. >> Okay, great. There's the fence. >> There's your garbage. Well, I don't I
wouldn't know if it was on lot 17 or nine myself personally. >> Well, it sounds like maybe you should take a drive over there. >> Well, how do I know which lot that's on? That's just a picture of dumpster. >> Well, the gentleman that was directing the traffic said it was on the church lot. >> Again, I I don't think that shows
anything but a dumpster. >> Okay, let's show you. >> Okay, let's go to the next. So, you're going to remedy the situation, >> correct? >> And how are you going to do that? >> I just said we'll make sure that someone's there tomorrow to get the garbage pitched up. And if it's on lot
nine, which I don't know from that picture that it is on lot nine, we'll have make sure that it's on put on lot 17. But he does own both the properties. >> Okay. Does he have permission to keep trash on on lot nine? >> Sure. the church property had a a dumpster. So, they had a dumpster.
>> But there's no dumpsters on lot 17 is my point. >> Well, that's what you're saying, but I can't affirm that because you just showed me a picture of a dumpster. You didn't show me where on the lot it was located. >> Is your applicant operator here tonight? >> The applicant's here. Sure. >> Why don't you ask him where his dumpsters are?
>> You have to come in and get sworn in. You'd have to get sworn in. >> And you got to speak into a microphone. Stay there. You can speak right there. >> Would you raise your right hand, please? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth. So, help you God. And your name for the record, please. >> Joseph Natali. I'm speaking on behalf of my daughter, Nicolet Natali. That's the actual owner of the property, but I'm qualified to speak on her behalf. So, the question is, do you know where
the dumpsters are located? >> I'm sure it's exactly where the chairman said it was. Took a picture um physically on which property. I'd have to go by and look. I'm happy to have it moved. I also um instructed uh our manager to have the garbage picked up
three times a week so it doesn't have an opportunity this time of year to smell or be overflowed. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> You're very welcome. All right. So, we have good notice. We have the the trash situation taken care of. Please continue.
>> Sure. Thank you. So, the second part of the analysis deals with the negative criteria, and that's where the applicant must demonstrate that the variance can be granted without causing substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the zone plan and zoning
ordinance. The uses omission from the zoning ordinance must also be reconciled. The record will reflect that the applicant satisfies a negative criteria because the site will be able to operate safely without substantial impact to the surrounding properties. Also, other assembly uses including
country clubs are permitted in the R20 zone and the master plan recommends commercial development along highway frontages. The applicant is also requires a D4 floor area ratio variance as the proposed ratio exceeds the maximum permitted. And pursuant to a case
entitled Randolph Town Center, the positive criteria requires the applicant to show special reasons to grant the variance by demonstrating that the site will accommodate any problems related to a floor area larger than the ordinance permits. The site accommodates the proposed floor area because the
development satisfies the parking demand and provides safe circulation patterns even given the additional floor area. Second, the negative criteria requires a traditional two-prong test which the applicant satisfies for the reasons previously delineated. There are several bulk variances and design waiverss that
the board planner will uh talk about more specifically. Uh we are going to rely on the testimony the following four witnesses. Tom Donnu, who is sitting to my right, is our site engineer. Craig Kishan is the architect. Jay Troutman is the traffic engineer. And Andrew Janu is
our professional planner. As a matter of recordkeeping, the applicant acknowledges it is in receipt of the following reports. The board planner report dated July 14th, 2025. The board engineer report dated July 18th, 2025.
The health officer report dated July 14th, 2025. The fire official report dated July 11, 2025. Traffic safety report dated May 28th, 2025. Sewer utility dated June 13, 2025. the tax
assessors dated May 21st, 2025 and a memo from the zoning office undated. Each of those reports have been reviewed by the professional team and we will be addressing all the comments raised by your board professionals and obviously any other questions or issues that are raised both by the board, your
professionals and the public uh hopefully as best as we can. So with that, I'd like to start with our first witness, which is Mr. Donahue. >> Mr. Donghue, would you raise your right hand? You solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
>> Your full name for the record, please. >> Thomas, D. >> Thank you, Mr. Donnu. >> And if you could for the benefit of the board, give your background and qualifications. >> I have a bachelor's of science in civil engineering from the New Jersey Institute of Technology. I'm a licensed
engineer in the state of New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and Florida. I have over 35 years of experience in practicing civil engineering and I have prepared these site plans. I have testified before over a 100 planning and zoning boards throughout New Jersey
>> and your license is valid today. >> Yes, it is. >> Did the board accept his qualifications? >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> If you could, Mr. Donnu, for the record, just confirm that your office prepared the site plan. >> Yes, it did. And if you could describe the existing site conditions and if you're going to rely on exhibit, if you could please mark that into evidence,
identify it first. >> Yes. Uh I will be discussing the site plans which were submitted uh consisting of eight sheets uh dated last revised April 3rd, 2025. And I also have an
exhibit, a few exhibits. >> Do you need to have the site plan set marked or No, just >> No, we don't have to. I'm not going to mark the site plan that you submitted as long as you haven't rendered it, but I don't think we have what you're about to talk about. Right. >> This is a
>> Why don't we mark that A1 and then you can just identify what that is for the record, please, and put today's date on it as well. >> This is a Google map aerial photo uh dated
what they provide is 2025. Um it indicates the existing uh properties surrounding uh US Highway Route 202 and the surrounding streets. And I'll describe
um what this exhibit consists of. Um so uh two properties block 163.02 02 lot
17 which is uh known as whoops which is known as um 705 US highway 202 is developed with an existing two-story approximately 3,675
square ft. The cafe Amelia restaurant block 163.02 02 lot 9 known as 49 Charlotte Drive is developed as a existing one-story approximately 1,418
square foot church which is to be removed. Lot 17 is approximately 352 acres and lot 9 is approximately 0.543 both combined would total 0895 acres.
The property has three frontages, one on US Highway 202 and the other two on Charlotte Drive West and Charlotte Drive East. The property is located in the R20 zone and the surrounding uses include
residential and commercial uses. As previously mentioned, the applicant is seeking preliminary and final site plan approval, a D1 use variance, a D4 use variance, bulk variances to
construct the addition to Cafe Amelia, both on lots 17 and nine, and to which will include a banquet hall, courtyard, ground level bar, rooftop bar, and related site improvements.
The building will be comprised of 16,773 square feet with a maximum height of 20 feet. The existing building on the existing restaurant building is 25 ft in height and the architect uh will later
describe those in detail. Uh the existing restaurant has a total of 144 seats. Currently there's 72 seats inside. 24 in a private dining room, 42 in the main
dining room, and six bar seats. Additionally, there are 72 outdoor seats, which if you could see my cursor on the screen, um, right below the covered patio area,
there are 72 seats in that location. The church has an occupancy of approximately 40 people and the architect will also describe those in detail. So a total seating
combined for both uses is 184 and the applicant is proposing a total of 180 seats spread across the restaurant, bar, banquet hall and rooftop bar. The banquet hall would have 100 seats.
The restaurant would have 50 seats and the bar area would include 30 seats. The D1 use variance is required because restaurants, bars, banquet halls are not permitted in the R20 zone
and the use is now proposed on lot 9 currently existing on lot 17. The D4 FR variance the maximum permitted F is 0.16 and we're currently.3
exists on lot 17 um excuse me.3 exists uh for both lots and the applicants proposing 43
bulk variances required for this property would include a maximum improved coverage. 25% is maximum where 94.48 exists on lot 14 >> 17,
>> excuse me, lot 17, the current uh restaurant property and 41% exists on lot nine, the church property. A total of 89.9% is proposed for the proposed project.
Going to switch to another site uh plan. And this is the existing conditions plan. >> That's part of the site plan set. >> Yes, it is. >> You just identify which sheet you're looking at. >> Sheet two of eight. This uh indicates the existing survey of
the properties. Um so I will talk about the front yard setback from Highway 202. Um there's a requirement for a 200 foot building setback requirement from 202.
Uh currently on lot 17 uh the existing restaurant there is a 33.99 foot setback and on lot 17 the church has a setback of 35.22.
Uh proposed for the application the front yard setback would be 28.9 ft. The minimum front yard setback on Charlotte Drive East which is the to the
existing building right now is 27.39. Um there is a variance for the expansion and what I will do is I will switch to the site plan at this point >> and is that part of the site plan set? >> Yes, it is. This is sheet three. Sheet
>> three. Okay. So along Charlotte Drive East, there is an extension of the existing restaurant which is approximately 10 ft in width and that would also um extend the uh
front yard variance requirement for uh this application. just just for that 10 yard uh excuse me that 10- foot uh location. Um existing days and operation hours of
operation Monday through Friday for the restaurant is noon to 1000 p.m. Saturday is 3:30 to 11 p.m. and Sunday is 3:30 to 900 p.m. Current
>> Sorry, could you just repeat those times again? >> These these are the existing the current hours of operation. Monday through Friday, noon to 1000 p.m. Saturday, 3:30 p.m. to 11:00 p.m.
and Sunday 3:30 p.m. to 900 p.m. And the current peak hours are Monday through Saturday 6:00 p.m. to 900 p.m. The applicant is proposing days and hours of operation for the restaurant
and banquet hall. Monday through Saturday noon to 11 pm and Sunday noon to 10 pm. Rooftop bar
hours and op u excuse me days and hours is Monday through Wednesday noon to 11 pm Thursday through Saturday noon to 12 a.m. and Sunday noon to 1000 p.m.
If there are any tastings or tours at the facility, that will be conducting by appointment during regular business hours before 5:30. Currently, the existing restaurant has 11 employees
and the proposed facility will have 20 employees. >> Is that 20 additional or 20 total? >> 20 total. Is it going to be live music? >> I'm sorry, I can't answer that. >> We'll get you an answer for that.
>> Thank you. >> How did you get to 94% impervious coverage? How does this even happen in in Bridgewater? >> Well, the existing is 94.48 on lot 17. >> Okay. How did you get to 94.6? 68% impervious coverage. How did you get a
CO? >> I don't know. They've been there. They've been operating for 26 years. So, I I don't know. >> Okay. So, who approved it? So, they must have been in front of a land use board at some point. >> They must have. >> So, can you show us that, please?
>> Uh, not right now. I can, but we'll uh do an open request with your records. You would be the keepers of the records. So, we'll see if you guys have the original resolutions >> and you haven't done that yet. Uh, we may have done an Oprah request, but I don't have it with me now. I don't bring the entire file with me.
>> Dog ate your homework. >> No, I don't bring old resolutions with me normally to uh board hearing. >> So, how did you get to 94.68%. >> That's the way it is. I can't give you the past history. I wasn't here 26 years ago, but we'll find the answer out for you. You would probably know better than
I. You guys sit on the board and uh >> I haven't been a board member for 26 years. So in the last 26 years, this board certainly has not granted a pretty wild impervious coverage ratio like that. >> Okay. But it's been there and that's just a fact that we're presenting that's an existing site condition.
>> So it's your answer that you don't have an answer how you got to 94. >> I don't have an answer what happened 26 years ago now. >> Yeah. But it's a fair question as to are you there going out now or >> it's a very combative answer because I mean the theme tonight and you sat in the audience was about being good neighbors and we're trying to figure out
a way to be good neighbors and to be combative certainly is not a good way to be with the zoning board. So >> I feel like you're actually the one being combative. >> Yeah, that's very possible. But you don't have an answer. >> No, I but I said I would get you one. So I think that's a fair response. So to
find the history and to know where we're at, to make a, you know, a judgment on a piece of property, you have to have all the relevant facts. And to come in here and and not have a history on the property is pretty incredible. And then you tell me I don't know where the dumpster is. And your own exhibit showed exactly where the dumpster was I showed
tonight because you don't have a dumpster on the exhibit that's on the TV right there on lot 17, but you do have two dumpsters that I saw tonight overflowing on lot nine. So yes, I'm quite combative because you're you're you're not answering in a in an honest
manner in my opinion. You have on a straight >> I take offense to that. I've answered your questions. >> Please take please take all the offense you want. >> Yeah. And I will >> this this board is entitled I don't know >> why you're being so combat. We're trying. >> This board is entitled to a history on the property, >> right? And you are the keepers of the history. So >> I'm not the keeper of the history.
>> Get an answer for you the next time we're here. >> Okay. >> Give you the complete history lesson. Is it normal that Bridgewater properties have 94.68? >> I don't know anything about all the properties in Bridgewater. I don't normally do an analysis of every site in a town when I come to a hearing
>> and I'm the one combative. >> I'm just answering your question honestly. >> Thank you. Can I ask some questions? So, you gave us some data points with existing seating. You you're fig you're throwing
out some numbers. You're saying in total existing seating is 184. Did I hear that correctly? >> That's correct. Yeah. With both uses >> with the exterior use of 72 seats. >> 72 seats within the restaurant itself.
72 seats outside under that covered patio area. And then the church has an occupancy of approximately 40 people. Um so total would have uh those three numbers added together 184.
>> Mhm. Is it your intent that I take those existing numbers when weighing your proposed number of seats in your restaurant? >> Like is is that a data point that you're presenting to us to consider? >> Yes. >> Okay. I just I'm not sure in terms of a
restaurant. It's not a very large building. I mean, are you allowed unlimited number of seats on the exterior of a restaurant? >> I don't have an answer for that. >> Right. Because you're using we're getting that data in terms of here here's what's existing and here's what's proposed and look we're reducing four
seats. So I need to understand how to use that data you're presenting in granting you know approval of this application. So are you permitted? I mean, h how do you I'm just not sure how to handle the 72 seats that are currently outside that you're stating.
>> Were those 72 seats created during CO? >> Correct. >> And CO's over, right? >> True. >> So, what happens? What's the town's policy on COVID seating? >> They've allowed it to continue. >> Who who exactly has allowed it to continue? >> The town.
>> Okay. Katherine, maybe you can help us out there with that. So, the 72 seats of COVID, what's the current Bridgewater policy on those? >> I in my time here, I don't think it's come up. I will check with the zoning
officer to see um how we've treated temporary structures, particularly tents. I believe what's out in the in the park. Is >> that what this is now? Temporary structures. >> Yeah, I believe they are tents like temporary tents. They they look nice, but I think they're still temporary. Okay. >> Um so I will check with him to see how we have handled that from a violation
perspective. Um and if any any approvals were granted or anything informally was done before the planning board or something during COVID to provide some relief. I'll I'll look into that. >> Thank you. >> I have a question. Um, if we were to
treat lot 9 and lot 17 as one full lot with the current building as it stands right now, what would the F be without the new addition? Just as with the current building as it stands looking at it at a combined lot, lot 9 and 17.
Taking the lot 17 principal building that's indicated on the site plan which is 1,851 square ft. dividing that by the total proposed area of 38,952
we have a F of 0480 okay um and if that was in compliance across the board what would that number be the total what would you be able to go up to if if it was treated as one you're going
for so 048 to what would it be? >> What we're asking for right now is 43. >> Okay, thank you. >> Okay, continuing on. Excuse me.
Continuing on um as shown on the aerial exhibit A1 on lot 17 there are approximately 25 parking spaces and on lot nine there are
approximately 13 parking spaces in the lot and the proposed number compliant with the ordinance is 46 uh parking spaces required with the EV credit. Uh we are proposing 50 parking spaces and that's
calculated on.7 spaces per 2.5 seats with 180 seats that are provided. Uh we are going to designate the eight parking spaces that are along Charlotte Drive East as employee parking.
Circulation at the proposed site would be entering from either Charlotte Drive east or west since there's a two-way um driveway area 24T wide. Um circulating the
property in a clockwise manner. Uh if you see that my cursor on the screen, you'll see we'll come to a onedirection traffic lane with angled parking and then parallel parking along the front up
to 38 ADA parking spaces near the front entrance. Again, there's parallel parking on Charlotte Drive East and parallel parking along the rear property line of 25 parking spaces.
During events at the facility, uh the applicant will provide valet parking for pickup and drop off behind the building. Uh that'll take place uh in the rear. So, Anyone coming to the
location would drop off their car and walk down the sidewalk to the front entrance or around through the front sidewalk uh to the front entrance of the facility. Additionally, pickup and exiting uh the the site would take place
in the rear of the property and the uh the um person attending the event would have a direct exit to Charlotte Drive West and then to 202 exiting the the site.
parking setback requirements for uh properties along 202 there's a 100 foot setback uh currently on the on the uh lot 17 there is a 3.7 foot setback and a 70
foot setback on lot nine the church property uh the applicant is proposing a 10-foot setback to the uh north western corner parking space uh on the oneway aisle direction.
There's also a minimum uh rear yard uh setback requirement of 10 ft. Uh currently on lot 17 uh 3.7 exists
and on lot 9 15 foot setback exists. The applicant is proposing an 8-foot setback along the rear property line to the proposed parking spaces. A design waiver is requested for the
size of the parking space where 9 and a half time 15 is required and the applicant is proposing a 9 by 18 foot parking space size. Are you sure this parking space size is
not 9 and a half by 18? 9 and a half by 15 sounds too small. >> N I said 15. >> You did. >> I'm sorry. It would be 9 and 12 by 18. My apologies. The applicant is also proposing to close off the driveway entrance that currently
exists from Route 202 entering the facility of the restaurant on lot 17. Um that would be closed off and the existing depressed curb along Charlotte Drive east would remain and that would
provide access. Additionally, the driveway access to the church, which is on Charlotte Drive West, would be slightly expanded to provide the two-way movement pattern going out and in at
that location. As I mentioned, there are three ADA parking spaces which are proposed um near the front entrance to the restaurant. uh clockwise circulation around the parking lot.
Um deliveries to the facility would be by box truck and vans only and those deliveries would be one to two times per day and would last no more than 15 minutes. And those deliveries would be
to the proposed loading area which is in the rear of the building. A design waiver is requested for the loading space size of um 11 by 24 is what's proposed where
12 by 50 is required. Additionally, a design waiver for the number of loading spaces is required where two are required for this facility and one is being proposed. Garbage pickup would be to the uh refuge
collection area which is uh in the center of the dry vial um along the rear property line. That would take place a few times a week uh before business hours are open. The enclosure would be
modified to what's shown on the site plans so that the exterior of the enclosure will match the building facade. Snow removal for the property will be handled by a private
hauler, excuse me, a private company and snow will be removed uh which is will be more than 3 in from the facility will be plowed, shoveled and salted and there will be no stockpiling of snow on
the facility. There is an existing sign uh along the frontage where the cafe is. That sign will be relocated. And this uh is a an exhibit which I will
mark >> should be A2 >> and just put today's date on that as well and then just describe what A2 is for the record please. This is a revised site plan which indicates the relocation of the existing
sign to the northwest corner landscaped area. It indicates that on this site plan with a four um US highway 202 and a 16.2 set back to Charlotte Drive West.
There is a requirement for the setback to be 20 feet from the highway. So a design waiver is required for that. >> I'm sorry. 20 feet. And what are you proposing? >> Four. >> Four. >> Four.
>> What's the existing setback? >> The existing setback is six. Um for the sign area of the existing sign um the requirement is 5% of the maximum building facade uh front building facade. So the
building facade is approximately 3,464 square ft. So that equates to 173 square feet for maximum sign area. The existing sign is 4T by 7 1/2 ft in
size. So that's 30 square ft. So the existing sign complies with the new building facade. I will also talk now about another exhibit and it'll be A3 >> and again I guess put today's date on
there. as today's date and again just describe what A3 is please. >> A3 is a colored rendering of the landscape plan. It indicates um areas that will be uh lawn landscaped
and also it indicates uh pavement in a different color. the building itself, proposed addition and a colored area for the existing building and another area for the
courtyard that's being proposed. So, the applicant is proposing five shade trees. Four of those trees will be along Charlotte Drive West as indicated on the plan. uh 40 feet uh
as a separation and one tree on Charlotte Drive east in the location of the exit driveway area. Uh there will also be 35 6 to 7 foot height arborvite trees which
will be proposed along the rear property line and also there is a 6ft high white PVC fence which will be installed on the rear property line. There'll be some smaller shrubs and
ground cover which will be added to the landscaped islands that are throughout the parking lot area. The requirement is 5% of the parking lot is to be landscaped which is approximately 1,36
square ft. The applicant's proposing 3,437 square feet which equates to 8.8% and meets the requirement. Next, I will switch to
the lighting plan. lighting plan is sheet number five of eight. Uh the applicants proposing nine LED lights that will be attached to the building walls. Uh those will range in
15 to 18 foot in height. The wall-mounted fixtures will point the lighting directly to the pavement below. And as indicated on the analysis, the lighting plan conforms
with the ordinance requirements. The lights will be turned off at the close of business with the exception of security lighting which will be on site and this will be uh also set by timer. Lighting design indicates a zero foot
candle along the rear property line where the um arborite trees and six foot high sense PB fence will be attached and um
installed. Next I will talk about the grading and drainage plan which is proposed. >> What sheet are we looking at now? >> This is sheet four of eight.
So currently both lots, lots nine and 17 slope in a west to east direction. So from Charlotte Drive West to Charlotte Drive east.
uh all current roof runoff, pavement areas, lawn areas, sheet flow to Charlotte Drive East, and then discharge into an existing
street drainage system. That's in Charlotte Drive East. There's no on-site storm drainage structures on both properties at this point. And the applicant is proposing to install a new
storm water collection drainage system on site which will collect runoff from the pavement areas. It'll go into a new drainage system and then into an underground detention basin
which will collect water from the roof along with the pavement areas. The detention basin is sized to reduce the pre-development 2, 10, and 100year peak storm water
runoffs by 50, 75, and 80% respectively, which complies with the requirements. The detention basin will discharge through an outlet structure and be connected to the existing drainage
system in Charlotte Drive East. The applicant at this point is not proposing any new water or sanitary sewer service. The existing services are adequate for the new use. Uh an
additional power supply will probably be required and that'll be worked out with the utility company. Uh the existing sprinkler system that's in the restaurant will be expanded uh may be expanded to the new addition.
>> Would you like to uh you had an opportunity to review the board's review letters? >> Yes, I have. And I I believe I've addressed most of their or all of their questions. Um, I'd like to talk about the fire marshall
uh report which was received uh and dated July 11th, 2025. Uh the fire marshall is requesting a knockbox be attached to the front of the building which the applicant will comply
with. Uh he's asking for a 20 foot 24 foot wide drive aisle around the entire building. Um the applicant has the 24 foot wide aisle way in the rear of the building.
And I have another exhibit That'll be A4. >> Yes. >> Just identify that for the record. >> And remember to put today's date as again, please. >> This is a firet truck turning movement
plan. It indicates the size of the firetruck um that is requested. So, it provides access uh and the ability for a firet truck to drive along Charlotte Drive East, enter the rear of the
building, and then exit out onto Charlotte Drive West. >> And what is that plan dated? >> It is dated 7225, sheet 101. So, the applicant would be proposing um
the 24 foot wide aisle way to the rear of the building of the building to um satisfy the requirements of the fire marshal. >> Okay. But he asked for it around the building, right? >> They asked for it around the building.
Yes. But this is what we're providing and we'll have discussions with uh the fire marshall about that. Uh they're also asking for a fire hydrant to be installed um along Route 202 near Charlotte Drive West, which the
applicant will comply with and um have a fire department connection within 50 ft of the fire hydrant on the building. Uh the applicant will comply with that. And if there's any other requirements that the fire marshall would have, uh, we would have those discussions with
him. >> Uh, the are you going to do that before the next meeting? >> It has to be done for the next meeting. I mean, this is I can't believe you're here. [Music] The Somerset County Planning Board has
reviewed the plans and we received a letter dated June 5th, 2025, uh where the planning board does not have any um comments and approves the project. the Bridgewater Township Police
Department uh the traffic unit had no comments or objections to the proposed site plan. That was via an email uh dated 528 2025.
Uh there is a comment from the tax assessor uh where the two lots will be consolidated by deed within 60 days of the approval of the project that will be done. >> It's all the direct testimony for this
witness. >> Couple of questions. Um I have a couple of questions for you for the parking lot. The uh parking lot in the back has a lot of spaces.
To enter the banquet hall, when you park the car there, you have to come all the way to the front and to the side. That's where the entrance to the banquet hall is. So, it's a long walk. So, you don't even have any sidewalks
along the western side of the building. How how does someone walk with the cars coming in and out? >> Well, they would walk along the um the pavement area. We have a sidewalk along the front. >> Yeah. But on the western side of that
building, >> yes, we have no sidewalk proposed along. >> Someone has to walk along that to get into that building from the front. Get into the banquet hall. They have to go all the way into the front and the side, right?
>> Yes. to enter the banquet hall, which the architect will talk about. Um, it's through the proposed uh courtyard area is where you would enter the banquet. >> If you parked in the back back of the building, you have to take a nice long walk to get to that point
>> and there are no sidewalks on the side of the building. That's a question I have is will uh will that be safe for people to walk. We'll take that under consideration. >> Do you have another question?
>> Really didn't answer that question. The question put to you was, is it going to be safe for the people that are parked behind the proposed twostory building addition >> to walk around the side of the building, get to the front of the building, and then find their way inside? Is that
going to be safe? >> Um, it well, it's through a parking lot. >> That doesn't answer my question. Is that going to be safe for those people to be wandering through the parking lot that's behind the building,
then wandering further through the parking lot that's on the western side of the building to get to the front where there's finally a sidewalk for them? Is that going to be safe? >> It's not the best situation. No.
>> Thank you. It's really not any different than going to the grocery store and parking your car and walking to the grocery store. It's a typical parking lot. Most parking lots don't have sidewalks all through the parking lot. >> You've already answered the question. >> Okay. >> All right. Any other board questions?
>> Yes, >> I've got I've got a question. >> Mr. I'm trying to understand size, relative size. And I think what you what you threw out earlier was that there's 144 seats in the existing cafe. Is that is
that did I get that right? >> Yes, correct. >> How many seats are going to be in the banquet hall? >> The banquet hall would have 100 seats. When I look at your your diagrams, it appears as though
the proposed twostory building addition, which is the banquet hall, it's two to three times the size of the existing cafe. Yet, it's going to hold just 100 seats compared to 144 in the cafe.
>> The architect would provide a better description of the interior of the building. Thank you. For events, you you mentioned that you'd have valet service in the back of the building. Where are they going to park the cars? >> Valet would would park their cars in the
parking spaces that are provided. >> Okay. Your calculation shows I think you provided 50 spots. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> And you have 180 seats. >> That's correct. and 100 alone in the banquet hall. I'm
assuming the clientele for the banquet hall could be corporations. When you have that type of person attending your facility, I mean, how many people would be driving in each car? >> I I couldn't answer that, but it
complies with the zoning requirements. >> And where would there be overflow parking? Because I mean, I understand it complies with the zoning. This is an R20 zone. Um I don't really know many people that commute to work
as a group. Maybe there are very very few understanding this is an area with many corporations but okay if there's where would the overflow full flow parking go? >> I'm not sure if there would be overflow
parking. project plans comply with the requirements of the zoning ordinance. >> You closed off the entrance at 202. So now you're forcing 100% of the traffic to use residential roads. How do you
in your professional opinion do you think that is a a good way to manage traffic? It's um just entering and exiting onto uh the
area that's currently used by both the restaurant and the church. >> And how is it beneficial to close the entrance currently on 202? because it it um does not direct uh
traffic coming directly off of uh Route 202 into the site. It provides uh a means to direct traffic onto Charlotte Drive east and then into the uh rear access way.
>> Okay. My last question on the detention basin, are there any requirements from offset distance from property lines to detention basins? >> Not that I'm aware of. >> Okay. And currently, how far is it from the property line
>> to the rear? It appears to be I'll take a measurement. It's approximately 10 ft to the rear property line and 15 ft to the right of way over at Charlotte Drive East. >> Okay. Actually had one more question. Sorry. on the rooftop bar. You mentioned
there's 30 seats. What's the occupancy load for these bars? I mean, is everyone assumed to be seated? >> That would be a better question for the architect. >> We'll do. Thank you. >> Any other board questions? Board professionals. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um
as far as the parking calculation um did you derive that those numbers um yourself or were they given to you from the architect about the the number of seats >> that was by the architect? I I had raised in my review memo that a count of
the seats um from the architectural plans does not comport with the 180. The catering position part alone um just so the board knows doesn't show 100 seats. It shows 104. So I mean it's it's only four seats but that compounds
with the other areas. Do you know if the courtyard areas were included in the in the seating calculation? No, I don't believe so because that's not included as u a specific area. It's more of an area that uh if anyone was in
the restaurant or in the bar, they would go uh there temporarily or when they entered the facility, they would meet people in that courtyard area. >> There's multiple court there's well there's a courtyard area and then there's the rooftop bar that has seating
away from the bar. Um like lounge style seating. Was that included? Again, I I believe the architect would be able to provide a better answer for the where he calculated a number of seats from. >> Okay. Um I just want to make the board aware from a count of the seats
including the lounge seats, including the bar seats, including the waiting area seats and the banquet hall facility that alone shows probably 200 seats. And that and I raise that in my memo because the the restaurant is shaded out in that portion. I don't even see the restaurant
seats to count those. And so I did question the validity of the parking count in in relation to the ratio used. Um so I I think that needs to be clarified. Um hopefully you know if this is continued to another meeting that that question is answered because it's a
very important one. Um I think beyond that as far as the calculation used for the parking there are multiple um options in the off- streetet parking requirements that may com that may apply here. Um the applicant's attorney had
mentioned something about country clubs. I don't know if that's applicable. Um there are also social halls and places of public assembly. There's and then there's restaurants with catering halls. Um do you to the to Mr. Donahghue, did did you look at any of the other parking
calculations to see if any of them would be more appropriate um or maybe a more conservative estimate of how many spaces might be required for this use? >> I did not. did your do okay I'll I'll save that for the traffic engineer if there is a traffic question um as far as
and I think that parking issue is a big one so again I I hope that's answered at the next meeting um you know I'll let I'll let Mr. ask his questions. That's all I have to ask this witness. >> Thank you.
>> So, I'm going to I'm going to just maybe just add on to what Miss Sarma mentioned about the parking. So, and again, this may this may be deferred to the architect, but when I take a look at the parking calculation on sheet three of
your plan, it mentions that there's 50 existing seats in the restaurant, but we heard testimony that there currently now is 144 total seats. I understand 72 of which may be exterior seating that could
be modified with this new plan, but um definitely something that needs to be looked at because the numbers don't seem to be adding up and that's a critical component to this to this plan. Um the parking shows 100 seats for banquet,
50 for the existing restaurant, and 30 for the bar. So definitely take a look at that. Have you taken a look at the current functionality of of the existing restaurant? Have you been on site to see how the existing restaurant functions?
>> Yes, I've been on site. >> So, I only asked that because I'm curious what your opinion is. If there's 144 existing seats and I took a look at the the aerial, it looks like there's only 26 or 27 stripe spaces. Does that
lot function now or is there occasion where there's overflow parking onto the adjacent residential road? Do you know that? >> I personally do not know that. When I was there, uh the parking lot was not filled, but that was the time that I was there.
>> Okay. >> You gave a little bit of >> Bill, I'm gonna interrupt. I'm sorry. It's 10:01. >> I love hearing from you, but >> I'm falling asleep here. It's it's it's past my bedtime. >> Um Mi Miss Jennings, this restaurant is
a victim of its own success. This is a wonderful place to have a meal. I was there tonight. I was flabbergasted how busy it was. And to Joe's credit, it's an amazing restaurant. There's some fundamental problems I think that need to be
addressed. Always safety comes first with this board. You know that in your solar case, we spent a lot of time on safety. You addressed it. We approved it. You got to talk to our fire marshal. I mean, there's just no other way around it. We have to first thing in the next meeting. We got to talk about that. >> Absolutely.
>> Um I will go back to the restaurant, make sure the traffic is in comp, the the trash is in compliance. Um why don't we find you another date where you can come back. Um if you could bring Mr. Donahghue so members of the public can all question uh on his testimony and any additional testimony. We'll pick up with
Mr. Burr, our professional. Um, and if Maurice has any questions, by all means, we like hearing from you as well. But members of the public, I know you've been here all night. I apologize. Um, I know you want to ask questions. You will definitely have the opportunity at the next hearing. So, with that said, u, Maria, maybe you can help me out. We can
find another date for Miss Jennings and Cafe Amelia. Um so we have right now there are um the next available dates um happen or that only have one application on them
are in October. So October 14th and October 28th we have application one application on each of those >> residentials >> one is residential one is Bridgewater self storage. >> Um the former being the homeowner and the latter being the self storage in October. Um thereafter, the next
available full night we have is November 25th or December 9th. >> So we leave it to you. Which would you like? >> October 14th. >> October 14th. That's a night with the residential to clarify. >> Okay, great. So members of the public,
Rich, why don't you announce it and make it official? >> Members of the public, this meeting is going to conclude for now. Uh it will continue on October 14th at 7 pm in this room. There'll be no further notices from the applicant. >> All right. And for the board, our next
meeting is August 12th, 7 p.m. this room. We're going to hear 8:21 uh JCC case. And with that, I have a motion to adjurnn, please. I move. >> Mr. Okay. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you, board. Have a great evening. Members of the public, thank you for coming out. Good night.
Welcome back. >> The big