##VIDEO ID:_WRwJsKbTA8## this is's a an amended agreement between the parties to provide for a reciprocal Public Access uh for safety uh over the uh JCC property and over the uh the residential development property so it's reciprocal in that sense okay so reciprocal means thumbs up both sides words it benef it benefits both sides both parties okay so you do you have an area designated already you can be able to show that to yes we'll show that we have an exhibit great thanks for working on that it's great news um and the last thing um in bigger cases I just kind of go back and I watch the Youtube video to kind of find out where we left things off at the 29 minute Mark of our last meeting you had mentioned that this property in the 1990 master plan was zoned for M multif family and I I was a little surprised by that so I reached out to kathern Shad our our planner and I said could you kind of look into this and see what Mr kley meant by this because I always thought this was an R40 or you know at least a resal Zone our 40 Zone just that the master plan back in 1990 uh talked about perhaps using properties in this area for uh multif family use okay hi what what are your thoughts um I I I didn't necessarily I think with the statement that was made at the last meeting was that the 1990 master plan um made recommendations related to utilizing the property as multif family that's not as I read the master plan um the master plan actually in the land use element included specific study areas along in the Foothills um and it sectioned it off there's there's four or six different study areas of which this property is included in study area C of that which was the the boundary was the north the PS psng transmission lines The South was talamini Road uh the East was 202 uh 206 uh and the West Was uh 287 which was the boundaries it went beyond this property but it was generally that area um the master plan change included in that in that study area said none no master plan changes recommended and it said retain existing lowdensity residential zoning the there there were other sections of the master plan that talked about the route 2022 Route 202 206 Corridor more generally and talked about how property should be looked at but that was outside of the study era of which this property was included so the specifics um of that study area did not include this property as I as I this has been zon residential since 1990 yes this has been R40 this it throughout the ma the 1990 master plan which is the last comprehensive master plan um it includes a lot of indications that the Foothills area shouldn't see any recommended zone change as far as the residential character that should continue to exist as a low density residential area in the township I just wanted something on the record to clarify it all right well my my uh planning expert will be here later this evening and I'm sure he'll address that and and I may have misspoken in terms of uh overstating what he was saying but there was some indication that the 2026 Carter could be changed to to multif family use I think that's that was the point I was hoping to make fair enough thank you for letting us get these points in and uh please all yours okay thank you than you uh so as as indicated uh we're here tonight on behalf of 821 um Bridgewater LLC as well as the the Jewish Community Center of Somerset hun and and Warren counties um regarding a 15 acre property along Route 202 206 southbound uh between that roadway and the existing JCC uh facilities which uh join Route 287 North um this is a bifurcated application I'm sure you remembered some of those discussions that means that we're seeking the variances that are within the jurisdiction of the board the the use variances if if the board grants those Varian we variances we would come back to the board for the bulk variances and uh the uh site plan approval and subdivision approval that you know would would Implement these these variances and the whole reason for that is is there is an effort to to maintain uh the ability of a of an applicant to seek the principal variances that they need without you know spending an enormously more money on this application until those variants are granted so that's that's why we're here in that that limited sense but we've uh turns out we've provided a a lot of information and uh and we've addressed all the issues that were raised at the last hearing so um just to just to refresh your recollection a little bit we we had uh Laura Friedman who's the executive director of The JCC here she testified at the last hearing about uh how The JCC operates the people it serves the extensive community outreach that it has and and basically told us how important it is to the community and as as I think pertinent here for your consideration this may be the only opportunity The JCC gets to expand their area of operation by this by this uh unique Arrangement that has been made by someone buying the 15 acres and then conveying the three acres uh back to the JCC so that that's uh an essential thing I think to remember when we when you consider this um uh The JCC uses are permitted in the R40 Zone um except they must be on a roadway that's designated in the in the uh zoning ordinance and in fact it's not on one of those roadways so we need a use variance for for this activity by JCC on their property you could look at this use variance both as a pure use variance under D1 you could look at it under D2 as an expansion or D3 as satisfying a a condition of the ordinance so it as a lot of grounds for the for the jccc variants both legal grounds and and factual grounds and uh we hope you consider those as as you hear the rest of the case um we will also present again Mr Rob Mello uh the uh PE for the project uh you'll remember I think that Mr Michelle testified at some length previously he left with a a laundry list of uh items that he should investigate he has investigated them all and and we've presented some revised plans and other information about the project if you if you look in your package there was a a letter from Mr michelo dated October 11th 2024 which outlined the various items he's looked at and changes to the plans made uh during that period of time um um one of the big changes is that the the uh size of the project in terms of residential units has been reduced from 64 to 60 and this allows the uh uh setback from the uh residential house on the on the property that the JCC intends to maintain it it it creates allows the creation of that setback so that's a an important attribute of of change that's been made since the original hearing um and that was that was in response to uh comments from the board um we have also as I indicated before to Mr fuss that we we have reached an agreement with the JCC regarding a emergency access easement which would uh be uh in the uh the southernly end of the three acres that will be conve conveyed to The JCC um and it will will hook up with the uh driveway from The JCC property um and it will uh also allow if there was ever a need for emergency access from The JCC property onto the uh onto this development um and uh and allow would allow the um emergency folks to get out to 202 so that's a big uh a big step forward in with respect to the application um one of the issues I think Mr fous you you raised it was was to have a soil soil report which we have um and you wouldn't believe sometimes how hard it is to find people doing soil work now they're very busy but we we did and we have a soil report it's been transmitted to the board and Mr michella will testify about what the so report means um so um that that has been done as well um I would like to clarify one thing that I did and that was I I wrote a letter to the board about what it means that a 55 and over project I think my my Rec my letter was accurate in that it says that uh you know you have to have one person who's 55 and over for 80% of the units which you know uh authorizes 20% not to have a person 55 and over but that's not our intent here our intent here is to have uh no 20% exception so every unit will be occupied by at least one person 55 and over and there will be no uh under 18 children allowed in the project so that's a that's a something that I didn't state in my letter I should have but that's that's the plan here and and you can condition this approval on on that type of uh activity um me see if there's anything else so I think that's that's pretty much it as far as a Rec recapitulation of um we have three Witnesses tonight we have uh Mr Eric Keller who's our traffic engineer um he he'll be followed by uh Rob again we'll be back uh kind of testifying about the matters that are listed in that that letter and then finally um if he arrives here from another testifying situation um that would be Mr St who will will come and and give the planning testimony um we we hopeful he'll arrive by about 8:30 but get me our fingers crossed on that one that's that's our plan for the evening any if there's no questions I'll call Mr Keller all right I make sure everybody's sworn in and what there I'll swear in Mr Keller when he comes up I think we did everyone initially but let's do him again as it comes up 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 go I do Mr K would you state your qualifications in the field of traffic engineering to the board certainly uh let's get the wireless mic there should be floating around thanks yeah I got this one uh Eric Keller U Bowman Consulting Group I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey since 1987 I have prepared uh traffic studies for a variety of different projects uh residential commercial uh throughout the state and other states I have appeared in Bridgewater before but it was before the planning board I don't believe I've appeared before the zoning board but I have been qualified in many municipalities throughout the state as well as Superior report my license is in good standing and current the board certainly accepts you as a traffic expert thank you so um Mr Keller did you prepare a report on this matter we did our our original report was uh dated January 29th of 2024 which included traffic counts and assessment of the existing and future conditions uh without the project and with the project uh based upon comments that we had received from the board's traffic consultant Mr Fishinger um we revised our report and submitted an amended report that was dated October 29th of this year and really the the main difference in that was uh we utilized NJ do traffic Counts from uh February of 2020 um which will remind everybody if you haven't forgotten was before covid um traffic volumes have continued to be below those standards so uh and in fact the traffic counts for do were 33 to 38% higher than the counts that we performed in January of this year then you just mentioned that report dated October 29th oh did I you correct October 9th yeah let's keep the record straight and have the right date so what what roadways you interest I'm sorry we're gonna need Mr kley if you would speak into a microphone what roadways will you principally interested in stud so our primary focus obviously is route 20226 which is the access that this development is being uh proposed to we also looked at the next intersections both to the north and to the South which is Foothill Road with West Foothill Road and to the South uh talamini road which is a signalized intersection um and what determination did you make as to the efficacy of traffic on those roads if this project were to be built certainly what we found um first we determined what the peak hours were uh when we do a traffic study we're looking at that 60-minute period when traffic is highest during the weekday peak hours an hour in the morning an hour in the afternoon and we found from our accounts uh that that peak hour was from 8:00 to 9:00 a.m. and from 4:30 to 5:30 p.m. um and what we found is that both of the those intersections operate at an acceptable level of service levels of service range from a which is minimal to no delay to F which has a lot of delay congestion um and what we found and that all of the intersection approach movements operate at level of service d as in David or better the do in their state highway access management code which will govern the the site access for this in addition to the board's jurisdiction um finds that level of service D is an acceptable level of service along a state highway and does not require any mitigation measures to be implemented and that's the existing intersections uh that we studied um we found when we looked at the uh DOT traffic volumes as well that those same levels of service uh were achieved as consistent with what we found based upon our counts in January of this year um we then standard practice in preparing a traffic study is we look at what will the traffic conditions be in the future analysis year when this project is anticipated to be constructed um and occupied uh we selected the year 2027 for that future analysis year um because and when we did our original count we applied background growth factors which is a standard practice for do and other jurisdictions is that we look at what growth is going to occur in the region as a whole because Mr Fishinger had asked us to use the preco traffic volumes which as I said 33 to 3 8% higher than what you find out there today we did not apply a background traffic growth rate because those volumes are already well in excess of what we found out there today from our accounts but what we did do is that we added other specific projects that have been approved in the township those were projects were identified in conjunction with Mr Fishinger that includes the petersbrook Innovation Center Center the uh reoccupancy of three existing Office Buildings to the south of us along Route 202 206 and also a proposed manufacturing facility located at 721 Route 202 206 so we added the traffic from those three uh developments and I'm going to lump the existing Office Buildings all together um and we added the traffic uh from those uh developments onto the highway Network and again analyzed the operations of those two intersections um without our project being in place and what we found uh again there were only some minor changes in the level of service during both peak hours but all of the approach movements using the highway capacity software that we used to analyze operations all remained at level of service d or better um we then look at what is the incremental impact of in this case Now 60 age restricted town homes on those intersections and how does the site intersection operate um our original study obviously was based on 64 units um with the latest change that was reduced to 60 now we have also used let me take a step back The Institute of Transportation Engineers the it for short publishes the a a a document called the trip generation manual uh we're currently using the 11th Edition do because we're on a state highway still uses the 10th edition we used do data for our trip generation the 10th edition has actually higher volumes uh for this type of residential use than the 11th Edition so again it's it's a conservative approach um and we also used standard uh the rates for a non-ag restricted low what they call lowrise multif Family residential which is what a townhouse is um we did not take any consideration of fact that these being age restricted there might be different travel characteristics of the age restricted units we wanted to be conservative and we used this as if there was no age restriction just using standard it rates so it's a conservative approach in my opinion um that data is contained in table two of our report um and what that data shows and this is publish data from similar type uses throughout the C uh throughout the country that is accepted by the do and by all the agencies that we work with and what that found was during the morning peak hour there would be 35 peak hour trips from this development eight of those would be inbound into the site 27 would be outbound leaving the site and in the PM peak hour there would be 41 trips 26 entering the site and 15 exiting the site um and in accordance with the do and other the it and other Publications traffic uh that or projects that generate less than 100 peak hour trips are not considered significant when it comes to assessing the impacts of traffic um regardless we looked at what uh the operations of this would be on the existing intersections and as well as um the site driveway um that yeah okay so um let me let me just uh ask you one question the chairman raised a question last time about what whether it would be safe to Ingress and egress the site did you look into that specifically yes we did what did you find um couple things one when we look at the operating characteristics the level of service that would occur at the uh site driveway and this is contained in table three of our report the driveway would operate at level service c um which is a very good level of service along a principal arterial like root 202 206 this site because we have located the driveway opposite the existing Veterinary Hospital driveway which already has a southbound left turn excuse me we're anticipating and we're planning on the dot requiring us to have what I call an opposing left turn lane for Northbound traffic so the left turns into the site will be separated out from the through movements going northbound um which creates a a safe haven for those uh vehicles uh wishing to make a left in to the site we also excuse me I'm sorry to interrupt you but would you go over that last part again how we've got opposing left turns and how it's going to make it safer I didn't follow him okay I'm I'm sorry um there is an existing if you've been by the site if you go to the vet hospital there's a left turn lane um like there's a left turn lane at Foothill Road so if you're in that left turn lane make waiting to make a left you're out of the through traffic so somebody coming this is approaching this is coming north to south this is north to south and you would be making left into the veterinarian which I've been there many times yes Mr chairman I'm sorry you've been there a lot I counted for you I've been there 47 times so so I can talk about that all in one day well I pulled all of my insurance claims with trupanion so we'll talk about this more but I've been there 47 times I'm not nearly your qualifications but I I have a lot of experience in this facility but for Mr kulak you're driving north to south on 202 206 to make a left in the Veterinary Hospital you have your own lane correct all right and then so what we're going to do is we're going to create a a striped out left turn lane so that when you're coming from the south to the north wanting to make a left into this proposed development you'll also have a separate Lane and you won't be have somebody behind you who wants to continue straight you'll be separated from the through traffic on 202 206 just like the other intersections that as you come South now so you'll be out of the main flow of through traffic thank you and was your testimony you think that the New Jersey DOT is going to require traveling south to North that there would be a left-hand turn lane added in addition to the veterinary Lane on the opposing side correct be there's enough room in the existing pavement of the roadway um because there's already a left turn lane coming southbound they'll want one going northbound for this development because it's already striped out right now Mr chairman as you well know if if you were in that left turn lane and you look across you see that there's a painted median there that then tapers back to the just one lane in each Direction headed north and south so that would be restriped to create a left turn lane and there would be a taper beyond that and the dot could require you to do nothing right they could but I I've dealt with the dot for a lot of years um and they're going to want a left turn lane because there's one for southbound traffic would they take your recommendation on this or is this something they would require review um I'm not sure I follow sounds like you're recommending that this Lane be added my recommendation is yes it should be added and I think the dot will agree with that okay and even if didn't recommend it they would say you need to put a left turn lane here and it's wide enough to accommodate both of these Lanes yes in southbound correct thank you you're welcome a quick question yes you know the distance between the traffic light and where you plan to put the opening to the development the talamini traffic light yes yeah I don't know off the top of my head how what that distance is um it is um between the beyond the frontage of our property there's the corner lot and I believe two or three other uh Lots beyond that it is a fair distance between I don't have an exact distance um Mr chairman I can probably just help um based on a quick measurement it's about a th000 ft between the signal at talamini and the veterinary driveway thank you Mr F so thank you if there's a red light on the North to southbound traffic how many cars would back up to block need would would be there to back up to your entrance in other words how many could it handle that particular traffic light well th000 ft I mean 1,000 feet that would be assuming 25 ft per vehicle which is conservative would be 40 vehicles but when we looked at the level of service for the southbound through move through Right Movement at talamini that operates at um I'll tell you in a second southbound it operates at a level of service B in in the morning and C in the afternoon so there would not be that kind of a of a backup you know it would be a couple of vehicles um at any given time thank you very much you're welcome how does your your striped median impact somebody leaving the development looking to make a left turn to go northbound on Route 202 206 it wouldn't impact them at all because you already have the southbound left turn so when they came out of the site they would cross over the southbound lane cross over the southbound left turn lane and then make the left to go north towards Foothill Road and and uh uh towards pluckin we've heard from we've heard from residents at the previous meeting that making a left turn for example from West Foothill Road which is not there's no traffic signal there it's Slightly North of the Veterinary Clinic yes is very difficult if not impossible to do at the peak hours so now I've got new people coming in pulling out of the age restricted development looking to make a left turn they cross the median and they're trying to go north but the line of sight it seems to me is pretty limited because there's almost a a curve that you can't glad you brought that up Mr clock I was just about to get to that um and we haven't specifically looked at West Foothill Road I know clearly where where it is um we did count that intersection ction but what we did to because we understood that there were concerns and valid concerns about safety is we did two things one uh we filed an Oprah request with the township uh to get accident records within this stretch of roadway for a period from give me a second January 1st of 2020 up until September 9th of this year we picked September 9th because that's when we filed the Oprah request um they came back with uh there were only two accidents in that four over four well yeah over fouryear period uh in the vicinity of the vet hospital um and were because people weren't paying attention they were distracted they ran into somebody um it was not because of uh roadway conditions or anything else it was driver error um and uh the other thing that we did um because of you mentioned sight lines uh in conjunction with Gladstone design the civil engineers uh we put together a uh sight line Prof profile um and we did it twice because when I do this I base the inter the site distance on stopping sight distance stopping sight distance is that a vehicle approaching the intersection has enough time to stop their vehicle in case somebody stops dead in the middle of the road leaving the site Mr Fishinger asked us to look at intersection site distance and the different difference is intersection sight distance if I is the distance that I can see that that vehicle approaching if somebody pulls out that vehicle approaching from either direction doesn't have to slow down um when they see a vehicle coming out of the highway so we reran the um analysis we did profiles and from our site driveway we satisfy the intersection site distance in either direction I know the people I was here at the last meeting on West Foothill that Crest um in 202 206 is just I shouldn't say just it is north of West Foothill but it is more than 670 ft from our intersection the 670 ft is the distance um that a vehicle travels at a design speed of 55 M an hour and because that stretch of 202 206 is downhill people it takes more for a car to stop so that sight distance extends even further so it's um a very conservative approach in looking at it and we have more than adequate sight distance um from our site driveway and really it's the same thing when you're pulling out of the vet hospital you have that same view of the highway you're just on the other side of the road and I think that's backed up by the lack of an accident history from the vet hospital so in your opinion the the new development should have take place people pulling out making that left turn it's going to be something they can do safely absolutely and that does not however speak to the challenges faced by the residents of West Foothill unfortunately that road is located that much closer to the crest and they have a much shorter period of time in which to view traffic headed southbound and that creates issues and the traffic generated by your development this as you made all your assumptions and looked at all the tables was I'm going to say incidental to the experience that people have pulling out of West Foothill that's correct that's a very good word to use it's incidental nominal um it is um and I think we've taken a conservative approach in that you know we haven't treated this as an age restricted community you know we've treated it as just a regular anybody can live there you know so um Eric oh I'm sorry what do you mean by that comment well age age restricted community you know you have people that may be retired maybe working uh you know part-time um or making their own hours they may be snowbirds they live here in New Jersey part of the year and and another part they're someplace else um so I'm 53 in two years my driving habits are going to be different that's why I didn't that's exactly why there are some exceptions I'm 65 all right I'm still working I'm still going to meetings at night you too and you know but I don't necessarily and and this is has nothing to do with my age or anything there's days I don't go to work I I mean I don't go to the office I do go to work I just sit in my house and work now you've thoroughly confused us all so you're your comment about 55 answer Mr all's question 55 and over is is just that the demographics the travel patterns of the people that can be in that community may be different but because I can't guarantee that Mr all and I can both be living in there and we're still working so we treated it as if there was no age restriction so I have some questions on that so are you suggesting people only travel to go to work I mean what about grocery store running errands I mean did you evaluate that do you have real data at the show well that's what we look at the peak hours we look at for residential projects such as this we look at the commuter peak hours so we're looking at the highest volumes on the roadway and assuming that people are based upon the it data are leaving their homes at that time and entering the roadway I'm not saying that people aren't traveling during other hours of the day whether it's age restricted or not but the volumes on the highway are lower than the morning and afternoon commuter hours certainly on a road like 20206 which is very much a commuter route okay and you have data to prove that as far as as far as 55 and older communities travel off peak hours let's put that aside I didn't analyze it as a 55 and older community all I'm saying is that it's likely in practice this community gets built we go out there and count how many people are leaving during the peak hours and I bet it's going to be less than what we see here what I've analyzed but I didn't do any of that because I didn't want to have this kind of a debate well what was that based on have you done studies of other age restricted communities so we didn't use that we used standard data for a non-ag restricted community okay so it could be conservative or maybe not conservative we don't you don't know well the yeah it I think it will be but we analyze it based on the data available for a townhouse Community right and regarding the covid PE you know and changes in society how people work I mean we we we don't we can't say if you I don't think you can say if it's conservative or not conservative I mean do we know if those are transient or do we know if those are permanent people's travel power I mean or what what would your be your thoughts on that well alls I can say is um we did the we used at Mr Fishinger request we used the do data from February of 2020 and when we analyzed the two intersections using that data for 20226 it confirmed the the levels of service that we found based upon on our counts that we did in January this year okay so whether there's travel patterns or not we've done a lot of traffic studies since the pandemic has eased you know and travel patterns have returned to what we see every day now um and when we compare them when we've done studies traffic counts in the same location in 2024 and compare to what was in 2019 anytime before the pandemic um the couple years before the pandemic they are always less than what we used to have so that has been borne out can ask Mr Fishinger I'm sure he's seen the same thing but the bottom line is because we've used the traffic volumes from February of 2020 and the results have not changed I think that validates uh and supports our findings that these intersections operate safely and that this site driveway will also operate safely let me I have a question for an age restricted community there is you don't have any of that well I I I don't like to use it for the reason that Mr Aller asked the question of well how do we know that that's what the Dem demog Graphics are going to be for this you know I've I've done traffic studies for a lot of years um I've stood before a lot of boards and I probably shouldn't even have brought it up because we get into this debate well how do you know what that age restricted community is going to be like people you know don't travel out so I don't even do it anymore because I'd rather use the base data and not have to explain well why' you picked that number maybe it could be more no it I data you know Bears it out I I need a little clar clarification here so if I understand you're right the study you did was for during peak hours correct correct right I don't understand why you didn't include other times because I live not too far from there and most days I'm there midafternoon after I pick up my son and we're on that area and it's not a fun time to drive either so why we're just limited to a study of rushia hour I don't understand and you ever drive that Saturday morning up that road Saturday morning no it's not fun either so I don't understand why it's so restricted your study when I probably travel that area probably 15 to 20 times a week and maybe a third of the time it's not too hard to drive but the other times it's pretty heavy traffic standard practice in the industry for Corporation of traffic studies is we look at the commuter peak hours because that's when the volumes are the highest your traffic consultant reviewed that um I you know and if you look at the do data which I don't know that we put in a report but you'll see a clear peak in the morning not that there's no traffic during the middle of the day but there is traffic but it's lower than the morning and afternoon peak hours that's why we look at those two periods uh and that's standard practice that's what the do requires us to do other agencies require us to do that's the standard yeah but if you were putting an office building there you'd be concerned about the peak out was a 9 to5 people coming in 8 to 9 and then leaving between 4:30 and 600 here you talk about potentially people coming in and out all day long but at at lower at lower levels and and like I said we're concern we're treating this as you know a non-ag restrict Community from a traffic perspective so people are going to work in the morning in the afternoon they're coming home from work they're coming home from shopping um they're you know probably not coming from school or anything like that because there are no children as Mr kley indicated no children in this community unless somebody's dealing with grandkids um so it's still looking at the A and PM peak hours so we had no indication that there was a concern about Saturday and generally for a residential Community we don't look at you know other hours we don't look at Saturday Peaks um certainly when we're working with a retail Center we would look at a Saturday uh because the shopping centers have higher traffic on a Saturday um here you don't the traffic volumes for a weekend uh from a residential Community um are you know not as significant as they are during the commuter Peaks okay um let me just ask you a question about JCC traffic yes did you look into that at all we we we did um the while a portion of this property will be dedicated to The JCC um and other than the emergency access between the two properties The JCC will continue to be served from their existing driveway in talamini so any change if there were any change from The JCC would be using talamini and not coming through this site and really as um M Mrs fredman indicated when she testified the last time this land is to better serve their existing programs and to provide more space for what they already uh operate there so there would be no increase in the traffic generated from The JCC either now now did you look into the question of whether or not uh there might be Place sidewalks along 202 206 from the project yes we did look at um the uh Mr Fishinger raised the question is you know we provide sidewalks within the community allows the residents to walk around the community and he questioned well why don't we have sidewalks along Route 202 206 um and we looked at that there is are no existing sidewalks anywhere in the area um we're looking at a state highway that has a posted speed limit of 50 m an hour um it's not really a great location to bring people out to um besides the fact that it would connect to nothing um I will put my Municipal Engineers hat on for a moment and say well somebody always has to start but there's not not even anything to in anywhere near this to to lead to furthermore um Mr chairman since you know the area from being at the vet hospital you have there there's a stream Crossing there's a bridge um right near the existing Farm Stand um you have uh shoulders you have a guide rail that is attached to the bridge abutment so there is no room to to place a side walk and from that bridge going south along our Frontage the stream actually runs parallel to the roadway um and under D regulations that's within a reparan Zone they don't want you to improve things besides and Mr michella can answer this better but there's an embankment there so there's not a good place to provide a sidewalk and no place to lead somebody too but apart from your comments you and Mr finger agreed that the better course here would be to defer this issue until site plan approval and also it would be an issue that do would have to consider so you that your suggestion that is my suggestion that we defer this I don't think do is you know even if do is not going to want to see sidewalks out there um and I won't speak for Mr Fishinger he's very capable enough to do speak on his own I don't think that it you know it's something that we can consider at a later point but I don't think do is going to want to see those I don't have anything further if you but just to just to conclude one point so so the the means of Ingress and egress the design of it the layout all of that is ultimately up to the Department of Transportation is that so that is correct that is correct no further questions I have a question on you can help me out with height and slopes and that would lead to some questions on site distances and basically you can describe to the board from West Foothill Road down to talamini approximately how many feet does that drop traveling north to south we do have an exhibit showing the uh okay great please yeah that would be great call Kevin I don't think we marked an exhibit at the last hearing right so this is A1 A1 was one exhibit the there was okay so what do you want to call this oh I'm sorry you know what I'm actually I'm actually looking at your areial that I have marked A4 so give me one second let me just this is this is a I think you had some exhibits pre-marked that's why we started with A4 instead of this being one thank you so why don't we just skip one two and three we'll go to Five with this right because we have a four so this will be A5 for the record Mr all do you want me to mark this as well yes with today's date please A5 just if any members of the public want to see one yeah make sure they have some copies so this uh exhibit A5 entitled site distance plan and profiles dated October 11th 20124 um I have a full-size one so this is at a scale of 1 in equals 40 it was prepared by Gladstone design uh in conjunction with my office um they they prepared the plan we reviewed it um we Mr chairman we don't have palamini is not shown on here I know 202 206 flattens out so at the far Southern edge of this exhibit U which is one property to the south of the subject site the elevation is approximately 140 at West Foothill Road it is is the intersection the middle of the intersection is at approximately elevation 181 so there is 401 ft of elevation change um and where that where are we measuring again okay1 from West Foothill two which to 140 which is at the far left side of the exhibit which is at the far south end so talamini road is in that same general area because the road really flattens out as you head south so I I see the number 5% floated around happen to know a thing or two about mathematics and if I take 181 minus 140 and take the differential of 41 and divide it by 181 it's certainly not 5% no the the 5% what we did is we took the elevation at our site driveway okay the reason that the percent slope of the roadway is important is only in the fact that the intersection C sight distance that I testified to before if you're above 3% and you're headed downhill you have to increase that number because gravity is pulling that car down and it's harder to slow it down so from our site driveway to the Northern end of our study that portion of Route 202 206 is at 5% from our site driveway towards talamini it's much flatter it's less than 3% so we did not have to adjust the intersection site distance to take account of grade that's the only reason that 5% there okay well listen like I said the the differential between 181 to 140 ft that you've mentioned here is much larger than 5% let's just agree on that that point it's it's 40 41 feet over yes about 1,200 feet okay so 40 divided by 1,00 3% what he said 3% I had those NS they me those numerals you yeah pesky numbers all right so again I'm not going to give testimony and I I want to put on the record I'm certainly not an expert in traffic movement but I've been to the Veterinary Medical Facility 47 times over 10 years my my dog has issues um but nonetheless I do consider myself a residential expert in that intersection so Mr Keller I can tell you firsthand I have seen unbelievably bad traffic at that intersection all times of days I I I don't know the times of my 47 visits to the veterinary facility which lies directly across from your property um but it's covered it's safe to say it's covered all times of days I have I have witnessed personally Incredibly Close calls so my question to you Mr Keller is what is the incremental additional trip that causes an additional set of accidents so you've testified that you oad the police department you've come up with two accidents over four years at what point what's the additive number what's the incremental number of trips that turns that two accidents into 20 accidents it it's not necessarily related to volume okay it's related to operating conditions to characteristics as I said those two accidents that were reported that all I can get from in the police department um had nothing to do with the roadway itself it had to do unfortunately with society today and Driver behavior um that is there could be one car in the road there could be 100 cars in the road the chance that you have a driver who's not paying attention you know doesn't make a difference it's a matter of a driver not doing what they supposed to be doing which is watching the road so again Mr Keller what's the number of trips that incrementally changes this intersection from a two accident per fouryear ratio to a much dangerous more much intersection me it's not related to volume so there is no number we could add 500 trips and it won't change the incremental risk level of that intersection of from an accident perspective no it's going to change the levels of service and at some point if you add enough traffic again it comes back to driver Behavior driver behavior is going to say I'm you know I can't I want to get out into the roadway um and I'm going to accept a gap that I shouldn't but that's not the condition we have here um and you know we're looking at a very low traffic generator from this community so there's no number at which in incremental trip a plus one trip changes the risk profile of this intersection no testimony Mr pman I I thought you were doing a Mr Keller you're doing a great job here and I'm I'm trying to understand you know at what level does this become more than two accidents and and you won't give an answer and I'm going to accept what you've put on the record um we've had situations the zoning board where you know frankly the traffic engineer has been wrong not you but we've had people that have described conditions something's been built and the it just didn't work out we we built a WWA a few years ago um eight years ago and you know the traffic just didn't shake out the way that the traffic engineer for whatever reasons it could be demographics could be changes at the county level it's a much more dangerous condition than was described by the traffic engineer and my question to you is what happens when you're wrong what do we do who do we come back to who do we we go and say hey you got this wrong and we need to fix it and then compound that with what if this living situation with the 55 and older is changed in court what if you know something happens at the state level which they say 55 and older communities doesn't matter anymore now we have anyone can live here we have children we have buses we have dump trucks we have all new things happening what happens to your testimony today because the approvals run with the property forever forever understood Mr chairman and and I think you can take a track at that the important thing and and this comes back to we didn't analyze the traffic based on this being an age restricted community we based it upon a non-ag restricted kids everything else because that is the conservative approach that is the data that I feel more comfortable on and I don't have to defend why we used a lower trip rate um I think you're you know I think the likelihood that a residential Community is going to have a sign significantly different traffic pattern than you know a retail use uh is a lot less likely um so uh there's you know we as Traffic Engineers and I've been doing this for a lot of years um you know we base it on the data that available to us the data that is in the Publications that we use data that's provided by do um it is not an exact science um and I think because we've taken a conservative approach um with the amount of traffic using as Mr Fishinger suggested the 2020 traffic data for 202 um and not our own counts um and showed that the level of service still operates at an acceptable level I think that provides at least from my perspective as a person who put my signature on this plan on this report um that I'm comfortable that this is appropriate now we also you know have to go to do you know we still have to it because it's their Highway they control the access uh we have to get an access permit from them so we have to go through another round of review um to to make that happen we've reviewed the state access uh State Highway access management code believe in our analysis of the regulations that this is a conforming location this is an appropriate location for this intersection and it's one that the state do will provide an access permit to Mr chairman I understand your you use the mic because a lot of people are watching at home thank you understand your line of questioning but in in events such as this before boards in in this state and probably every other state you know expert testimony of of your your own expert or the applicant's expert can be relied on perhaps more uh readily than our own individual experiences I agree with that and I think that's an important fact and I certainly don't want to take preference above your experts and nor am I qualified but I I have visited the site 47 times over 10 years and have witnessed some incredible fascinating events from drivers that were probably very distracted like you mentioned right it's unfortunate but that's I have a question please Mrs Z you know the the traffic on 202 206 sometimes gets so bad that it's very difficult to make a left turn on to 202 206 because both directions the traffic is bad cuz I live on Arthur Road which is like a block North of Foothill Road and I avoid going on to 202 206 During certain hours because the traffic is so bad I take the back roads then get out so is there a Prohibition that this complex can have a second uh location from which they can come out and go into talaman road or something like that uh would that we we only have access to Route 202 206 we have provided um an emergency access Through The JCC and it's reciprocal to both parties um but under both DOT regulations and under the res residential site Improvement standards this development doesn't require a second means of access I think my testimony is shown um that the intersection can function safely um and uh you know it's appropriately located um and will operate at an acceptable level of service um I have a question if she's finished whoever's ready ready go no go ahead go ahead yeah um you keep referring to a conservative approach with your numbers correct I'm I'm just curious how things would have been different if you did it with an AG restricted app as opposed to a non AG restricted development um because volumes would have been lower Mr bonjourno if we had used AG restricted I didn't analyze the traffic using age restricted data I used I understand that M and I guess my question is wouldn't an age restricted community have more seniors maybe people not the best drivers I'm a senior myself so I so the question is what would have happened you keep you're gonna your position is that the numbers would have been less and safer well the volumes of traffic are separate from safe operations the safe operations I think are best given by exhibit A5 our sight line profile that shows that there are hundreds of feet of sight distance for a driver to observe a vehicle coming you know um when you have this even if somebody is you know slower reacts a little bit more slowly this still shows that there is more than sufficient time for that movement to occur coming out of the development and not impact on the flow of traffic along 202 206 thank you okay so um Mr Keller just a few questions I I try to wait to the end I you know just to give you an opportunity to kind of say you're you're part of this I honestly I wasn't even aware that this this uh development was going to allow a left turn out of this space was there a time with your conversations and meeting with your client that you suggested maybe that's not a good idea or were you always wholeheartedly thought that it was safe to pull out and make a left I I never suggested anything else I always felt that a full movement intersection was appropriate right even though it's across directly across from the the the Veterinary Center I mean right now currently there's a there's a lane there so so they're actually going to cross a shoulder uh as you say I think through traffic then there's a I don't know what you call that that the left turn lane that cigar well no it's actually not on this plan it shows as a a thick um space it's got lines in it so they're going to cross that you can take a look here this was this was provided they're going to cross that and then they're going to face the that that right there what's what's that right there looks like a cigar got oh um what you just showed me Mr Fresco is currently there's a painted median there as I described to the chairman because once you go past the vet hospital heading south you need to take that left turn lane that was provided for the vet hospital and bring traffic back it down to to to the center line so what we would what we're proposing with this is that that painted median would be removed a left turn lane similar to what is provided for the vet hospital would be provided right for Northbound traffic I understand so so someone is going to be traveling from the south to the North they're going to make a left in while meanwhile somebody's going to be exiting and they're also going to be going north and and on top of that on a 50 mile hour Lane there's going to be Mr fous pulling out of the the vet center and he could potentially be making a left or right North or South as well and you thought that and you I mean your professional opinion and again Mr cookley he is the expert your expert opinion is that is good in its current state that's acceptably safe it's inappropriately designed intersection let me add to that that's fine you can just simply say yes or no I I I I accept that that's fine okay I think it's it's appropriately designed oh no go ahead I I don't want them to feel like I'm grilling them on it I just want it here yeah no no not at all that's what I'm here for all right awesome um is when you're on the side street when you're pulling out of the vet hospital or you're pulling out of this development um whether you're making a left or right you have to wait for all the traffic on the state highway to clear so if there's if Mr fous is waiting to make the left into the vet hospital and I'm waiting to come out of this development I have to wait for him to clear the intersection before I can go that's the the order of travel at an unsignalized intersection okay I have to wait because I have the stop sign all right who who wrote the conclusion I did you write that yourself okay yes so in the clusion you I'm going to quote you you say more than adequate sight distance is provided at this proposed Highway and perm safe movements into and out of the driveway on the route to it you you actually wrote more than adequate more than more than you wrote more than I did yeah and you didn't just write adequate you wrote more than adequate I you you're exactly even with the slope that we spoke about and the speed and the fact that there's an opposing intersection another intersection 670 ft from what you refer to as a Crest you feel like there's more than adequate yes I do okay now with that being said sir you also said and I am going to quote you again you actually said that regarding the left turn lane you said there should be added so you felt like the left turn lane is should be added almost as it's a to the safety of this is that true do you feel that way um it it should be added because for two reasons one there's already a southbound left turn lane and I believe do will require it and it also providing a left turn lane provides for safer movements because I've removed that turning traffic out of the flow of the traffic that is headed north right and I think that is a safer approach um to to do that uh and it should be added which is why the plan show it obviously what I say should be added has to be agreed to by the do that's right and and Mr Ki stated that the do it's up to the do it's their roadway right ultimately they have to approve the access for this site so I think they willco may I just say one yes please you have two expert reports here not just not just Mr Keller but your own expert report all right I'm I'm just drawing a connection between his conclusion which coincides with his ultimate findings right but his conclusion does not say anywhere that a left turn lane should be added or that he's making a recommendation that the left turn lane is essential to this he doesn't say that in his conclusion his conclusion says more than adequate not adequate more than adequate not with a left turn so that's all I'm saying I just want the the site distance is a separate topic and issue as you know to the left the provision of left turnl okay well I'm led to believe by reading the conclusion that there's more than that that there is no issue that there is no that we're not asking for a left turn lane that but you actually are saying you think it should be there those those are two separate the the site distance is for the side the traffic coming out of this development to be able to see in either direction along 202 206 in order to make a safe decision to enter the traffic stream the left turn lane is really is not related to that same site distance it's to take you know if there were let me put it this way if the vet hospital did not have a left turn lane I would not recommend one okay but they've the dot obviously approved the left turn lane for the vet hospital um and because of that I think we should have one for this so that we have matching C roadway crosssections for both sides both directions of travel all right that was all thank you I'm curious I'm just going to throw this out and it's it's more rhetorical than anything but you know trying to hedge and protect ourselves if your your analysis was done on the 55 and older but you used standard residential demographics basically to to to rephrase what you said that you used a more conservative Benchmark here would it be appropriate to hedge this risk and legal risk and legal drift and project drift down the road to say this has to be a 55 and older community forever would that be a way to make sure that your conservative numbers and Analysis hold up that's a legal question I'm I'm I'm throwing it out I don't even know if this board has authority to ask for such a thing but if that was to be stipulated that would make your conservative numbers relevant and in the future and prevent mistakes that other Traffic Engineers have made in front of this board and and you don't have to answer it but maybe that's something in the back of our minds as we go forward we want to talk about because Mr Keller he did his analysis off of these conservative numbers let's protect the demographics and keep it as 55 and older to prevent a Court ruling or any legal drift that happens in the future so there's no other board questions oh yeah just one clarification on the two accidents that you identified what were the limits that you actually asked for data on limits of the Oprah I believe it was from Foothill Road to talamini okay from intersection CU I wanted to make sure that I got everything and then I reviewed it and and called it down to the area related to our site okay thank you are you going to um present us with a copy of the Oprah results well the the accident reports are contained uh in in the uh in appendix part of part of his report of the report they're in the report but in the scope of your request for accident data that was only Foothill Road and South it was the stretch of 202 206 between the two intersections right so it did not include West Foothill nor did it include talamini no because those those are not related to our I just want to make sure we're no apples apples thank you that's correct all right Mr finger good evening sir I know you've been patiently waiting um I won't bore you with too much um generally speaking I agree with Mr Keller um he went back and revised the report to my satisfaction added the developments that I wanted um the important thing with the traffic analysis is what I had make sure he did is look at not only the volumes now but I said well the highest volumes that we had which happen to be just before covid in February of 2020 to make sure that should traffic volumes return to preco levels that ever that the level of service is still acceptable which he did he did at my request and added the other developments as well we also did go back and forth with the the sight lines where I insist as far as I'm concerned this if it looks like a street it acts like a street we want intersection site distance like it's a street and they and Mr Keller's office did provide me the updated site profile in advance so I did have a chance to review it ahead of time and the numbers are correct that they have enough sight distance that if you're looking up and down you can see a car coming in enough time to make the turn without a as Mr Keller said without them needing to slow down now keep in mind that is and you can look on the figure there is a height of ey and a height of object all of this assumes that you can see something that's 3 and A2 ft above the roadway gr the roadway and unless you're driving some Italian Supercar that's probably not even legal in the US all cars are over 3 and 1/2 ft high so you may not see the wheels or the entire car but you'll see enough of the car to know it's coming and decide to make the turn that's why you have the line on this figure that's above the actual grade of the road as we're looking that you're not looking right at the road you're looking to see a car coming if somebody 700 ft away rolled a ball across the street might you see that no but you're not going to be worried about it that hitting you as it comes at you so I did review the site distance and reviewed the traffic volumes and I'm in agreement with Mr Keller's conclusions after he's made the corrections that we said and with regard to the age restricted Mr it took a while to get there but Mr Keller's correct the it numbers for an age restricted community are lower than they would be for traditional market rate units I I agree with Mr Keller that the amount that they're lower may depend on the size of the development where it is how long it's been there as you could like like any other community as it develops people will age in place and maybe when this first opens more people are working but 10 years later more of them will retired but generally but since he used the market rate units that is the more conservative approach and the important thing to remember is we look at what the it does is it it looks at traffic from a residential Development Across the the entire day and says at this time it's the highest in the morning and this time it's the highest in the afternoon and residential almost every single time peaks in the morning peak hour area and in the evening peak hour area and what we do is we take the highest hour of the development and the highest hour of the road which might not occur at the same time but we assume that they do that the most people are coming out of development at the same time there's the most traffic on the road and the presumption is if that will work if the levels of service are acceptable than any other time during the day one or the one or both both of those numbers will be lower so the level of service shouldn't won't be worse and to answer your question about where that when do you start adding more accidents generally speaking and telling you a number of cars is kind of hard to do but that's why we do the level of service analysis is that EF threshold when you hit Level of service F the historical research is that's when drivers start to get frustrated and start to take gaps that they're not used to so that's why a d level of service is okay and an F level of service is not is that threshold once you cross to F is when people start to accept smaller gaps take more risks and that is the threshold we try to use as to what's acceptable and not acceptable we don't really like to say safe and unsafe because it's not a you know a hard line in this sand but why why wouldn't you say safe or unsafe at what point does somebody get hurt and and you feel bad I mean that that's my question as an expert you know I'm just throwing it out to another case I'm thinking on Route 22 you know I basically chastise the applicant you know at what point do you start to feel bad when a traffic expert comes before the board you know to build a WWA and volume is 40% above what they predicted for whatever reason in this example the veterinary just got purchased by a private Equity Firm they've essentially doubled their patients there is a number and you guys don't have to agree on it I don't have to agree on it but there is a number at which this intersection becomes unsafe and it's I'm disappointed and that that we can't come to that number but I think that we need to find a way that we can lock in this analysis and be very sure and be very clear that going forward we have minimized potentials for accidents and if that means we're going to lock this down as a 55 and older community maybe that's the path that we should take so there's no incremental number that you think that makes this go from two accidents to 60 accidents no I mean we can we could back into a num to when that level of service hits that F threshold you we can keep adding numbers to the driveway until it hits failure we we are a board that is comprised of laymen we are not experts we don't pretend to be experts on any day of the week we are residents of our town appointed by the township Council we are Layman I've asked you both for that number both refuse to give it I hope it's reflected in the record that at some point this board asked for what level number of trips does this does this intersection become unsafe and both experts that have degrees and and fancy things from the state of New Jersey have refused to give that number to this board it's left an interrelated I can spell that if you want an interrelated issue that the board cannot reconcile I cannot reconcile and my question hasn't beened Mr chairman I will will just ask that it's not refused it's just we're not able to give you that number it's not that I have it and refuse to give it to you I just don't have it and I'll let Mr Keller speak for himself but I agree with Mr Fishinger it's not that we refuse to it's that do you guys work for the same firm do you work for different firms we we we work for different firms yes okay um are you done with your questions Mr finger yes I don't have any questions for Mr Keller he addressed everything we're for members of the public we're going to finish up with our planner and our engineer we're going to take a break and then you can ask questions and all the fun things you've heard in the last 90 minutes so um bill or Katherine whoever's ready um Mr chairman I just have one actually two questions about for the traffic experts one is you mentioned that you could potentially uh add numbers to change the D to an F I was a pretty good student got mostly as's and B's but occasionally I might have gotten a d and if I did I was wondering how close to the f I was or did my teacher promote me from an F to a d so what separates the D from the F here how close are we or how far away from the two grades are these intersections I would have to plug it all in the computer to give you an exact number but I would think if put on the spot I'd say you're probably you could probably increase the numbers by at least 20 30% before you would get that far but it's we would have to have the analysis do the math we it's not simple enough math that I can do in my head okay the second question I have for you Mr finger is do you agree that the left turn lane is necessary in order to provide safety on the highway for people or heading north to make a left turn into this development I think it's a it's a safer condition and yes that it should be there that the St not withstanding the fact that I agree with Mr Keller the state is going to require it the having that left turn is a safer condition we typically will put left turn Lanes in to improve the capacity of the intersection and make it safer to get those cars waiting to make a left turn out of the full traffic Stream So if somebody's coming up behind them they're not slamming on The Brak because someone's sitting there to wake make a left turn and suppose the state doesn't approve it then if they're then it's possible they're coming back to this board since since this is a bifurcated application I think they're coming back to this board regardless and that's something the board would need to address if the state said Mr Fishinger they wouldn't come back to this board if it was denied I'm sorry they wouldn't be back in front of this board if this was denied you're right if it was denied they would not be it's not automatically coming back to this board you're correct thank you assuming there's an approval okay thank you I just have a handful of questions um back to Mr Fresco's uh note and question about the conclusion including more than adequate what is the what is the basis for more than adequate well to me the minimum and and this is borne out by what the uh industry publication say the minimum site distance required at an intersection is stopping site distance that is the minimum required that has to be provided because if it's doesn't meet stock in site distance then it is an unsafe location um because we meet and actually exceed the intersection site distance then it in my opinion that makes it more than adequate site distance because we've met the highest standard and then there's still visibility beyond that point when this when was the what was the date of the traffic report the updated one October 9th what was what was the date of the original sight distance plan that was prepared and submitted uh I I'll tell you this is dated October 11th October 11th the traffic engineer the board Traffic Engineers in their review included that the site distances were not adequate as designed and then we received tonight an updated site distance that actually then met the requirements as noted under the ashto standards that the board's traffic engineer included on a plan dated October 22nd so at the time of the conclusion where you found it was more than adequate it didn't even meet the review standard that our board engineer included so is it just adequate because it now it beats it meets it exactly or is it still more than adequate I think we issued the report Mr Fishinger was prompt with his review looking at when we first prepared this based upon stopping sight distance and I knew that concern from the last meeting was the perception of where that Crest in the roadway of Route 202 206 was and when we first prepared this using stopping sight distance I could clearly see from the profile that we still had distance to go um and it's borne out by this exhibit which no we did not have this exhibit that's marked as A5 at the time that I wrote the report however looking at the data having the profile that was prepared by Gladstone I knew that the and I had gone out to the site myself marked where the crest was in the roadway and that that Crest was well beyond the stopping sight distance and I once Mr Fishinger asked for the inter section site distance I knew we were more than adequate So based on the ashto standards are you more than adequate or are you adequate we're more than adequate so ashtro requires according to Mr Fisher's calculations 610 looking South and 671 looking North what do you provide and that's what we're providing and more I mean we stopped at 671 because that's the outer limit of what any criteria would be if we continue So based on the sorry to cut you off based on the design standards are you adequate and you meet the design standard we're more than adequate okay thank you um as far as the uh the requests for the traffic uh Collision data from the police reports um that was just from Bridgewater Township please yes would there be any other crash data that that might exist from State police because it's a state highway would there be any possibility that there would be other records outside the township it's possible but I mean the most complete records would be from Bridgewater because they would be the ones who would respond to an accident on that roadway State Police typically only respond to ones on interstates you know they can respond to ones on state highways but usually that's a local police department so this these uh crash data reports are uh in your opinion uh complete they they represent the all crashes that happened in all reported crashes all reported crashes thank you um and I just had one other question about the design just looking at the the site distance profile there's an existing left turn lane um that kind of goes head-to-head with the proposed left turn lane that's proposed over the the existing hashing in the in the median uh in in 202 206 itself in 202 206 going south into the veterinary driveway correct um the the I don't know if it's just visually um but it it appears to conflict a little bit with the proposed driveway into the site it creeps in you know quite a bit which I think is I don't know if you're proposing to amend that left turn into the Vet site but I think that it probably needs to be amended for where it is located in proximity to the proposed driveway into the site there may need to be some adjustments to the to the striping of that that would be handled with uh the dot review but it doesn't impact upon the functionality of the existing southbound left turn Lan okay thank you very much that's all I had thank you Mr Burr thank you Mr chairman um Mr Keller a follow-up question to Catherine's about about the stopping sight distance profile intersection sight distance profile thank you want to be clear I think you had indicated and what your or Gladstone's profile shows is 610 feet to the South 671 to the north is what is required correct and it's what we are providing but you had started to indicate that the profile actually shows that that distance is actually more than than those distances right we didn't show anything beyond what was required so you didn't did you run a profile or did you check what the actual distance is where it's no longer viable or no I mean I when I was out in the field and and visited the site I know where the Crest is but we didn't run it Beyond this point where is the crest in relation to the profile can you describe it uh I don't recall off the top of my head there's an existing driveway further north um for uh a home I I don't remember the specifics um but it is beyond the limits of this profile okay and in your revised evaluation maybe it was in the original one in in your conclusions paragraph you indicate that the permit that would need to be the access permit that would need to be obtained from do would be a minor access permit is that correct no it's a major because it is yeah our our report uh indicates uh I thought I saw that it said a minor it does say minor does it driveway access I was going to ask you to differentiate why why this wouldn't be a major the difference between a minor and a major is if you exceed 500 trips in a day then it becomes a major um and the other main difference um is that uh um you you have to deal with the major access Bureau for a major permit whereas a minor is handled by the operations group and will this gener more than 500 um I have to check because I don't we don't normally look at Daily traffic volumes um because they don't really have any purpose in an analysis other than establishing a threshold so we'd have to look at that as to whether it would be a major or a minor um but it's the main differences or which Bureau approves it um because we're looking at a left turn Lane the operations people typically kick it up to major axis because they don't want to get involved in that um uh so um but from a process regardless of the type of permit it still meets a state highway access management code requirements it's a conforming lot it's a conforming intersection um and it complies with all of the requirements under do minor and major is is is a matter of process in your experience I think you had mentioned the left turn lane heading Northbound turning into the site would be something that you recommend and I think Mr Fishinger even went as far as to say it's something likely that dot would require I I agree in your experience could there be any other improvements that Dot may require through this Frontage unlikely project like this no for a project like this no unlikely and um if the board was inclined to require sidewalk even if it was at a future phase if this use variance is approved would dot opine about the sidewalk or would that be solely a municipal decision um they would most likely opine upon it one way or another one way or another yes have an opinion on what that might I don't think that they would be in support of it earlier in your testimony um you had mentioned I think in your analysis the adjacent intersections were level I think you said level of service D I think you said the adjacent talamini and in your original testimony I think you had indicated level of service D is for the adjacent intersections was that correct would be level service D or better this is all summarized in table three of our report um for talamini the talamini approach operates at level of service D while Route 206 202 206 operates at uh level of service C uh or level service a um depending on the time frame uh and the direction of travel obviously to 202 206 is directional as far as the traffic flows um and what about the Northerly intersection Foothill Road um it it uh in the morning peak hour the Foothill Road approach operates at level service D um at an unsignalized intersection there are no levels of service for the through traffic because they're unimpeded so we look at the side street traffic and we look at the southbound left turn traffic which is impeded by Northbound traffic um all the other the left turn lane operates at level of service B and the westbound Foothill Road approach operates at level of service B during the PMP hour based on the volumes and can you just explain to the board how then with this proposed driveway how that intersection would function as a c how would that actually be an improve I think you said the proposed driveway would function as a c correct just curious how you would be C here and just a few hundred feet North at Foothill it would be D can you explain that for the board the main reason that Foothill operates at level of service B is most of the traffic coming out of Foothill Road makes a right-hand turn right-and turn only has to enter the One Direction of traffic there are very few left turns a based upon the counts that were done I interrupt to you did you say b as in boy as in boy it was not D no at any point oh I'm sorry in in the morning peak hour uh um it's it's a level service D um and the reason for that is the morning peak hour even though again it's predominantly right turn movements there's a much higher North Earthbound flow on Route 202 206 and a higher right turn movement than in the PMP C when both of those numbers are lower in than the a peak hour which is why it goes from a d to a b now at our site driveway we have a mix of left-and turns and and rightand turns so and they're all being made from a single Lane so the left turn movements because there are a higher percentage of the total traffic on our site driveway and there's also the vet hospital across you know when somebody's coming out of that there is a a greater you know there's more decision making that has to occur because I have to look in both directions Along 2 206 and then I have to check if Mr fous is coming out of the vet hospital so you know there's that added movement um at that location but level service C is still a very good level of service for an unsignalized intersection on a state highway um let me go back to one or two more questions let me go back to the do permitting process and I think we heard at the last hearing with Mr michelo that there are some environmental constraints along the frontage of this property can you just describe for the board the interplay between when the deal application would be submitted in relation to the D permit applications who takes precedent uh as far as where the driveway ultimately would be positioned and and approved um I I I will defer to Mr Michelle about the D approval the do approval um they will look at it from an operational standpoint they will look at it in the context of the uh State Highway access management code um and the D will look at it from a flood Hazard perspective you know they're separate um paths that we have to follow um and there's really you know no interplay between the two agencies on uh on the approval of that intersection let Mr michella you know talk about you know the D we wouldn't have proposed a driveway in this location if we did not believe that it could be approved by both agencies my my role on this is dealing with do I think they will approve it and I'm sure Mr Michelle is going to say based on his analysis of the D regulations they will also approve that location for this site driveway so do in their review of a permit wouldn't necessarily look at the fact that there may or may not be a flood plane there or areas that are prone to flooding that would be more of the D permit it would be more D but the do does look at drainage so they they will look at it from a different perspective but they will look at it from a drainage perspective did you um did you review the site plan as a whole in terms of the internal circulation I did proposed yes do you have any concerns from a safety efficiency perspective as far as um circulation the the ADI the intersection abilitys Etc to navigate through the site I I don't I I've looked at it I know that Mr Michelle's office prepared a a truck turning template shows that the site circulates we reviewed it for compliance with rsis standards in our opinion it satisfies those um in general from a traffic circulation perspective it's welld designed and will function uh and meet the needs of the residents visitors and emergency services and delivery vehicles I I don't remember seeing a memo from the Fire official or Fire Marshal but the absence of that I did see on the the truck turning movement there were some intersections where a fire truck would encroach over the center line into oncoming traffic is that is that a cause for concern for you not from emergency vehicles perspective I don't believe so and do you do you happen to know if if garbage trucks or other larger trucks that may navigate the site would they be able to stay in their landan or would they encroach as well I I don't uh I don't know I don't know that that analysis was uh performed um we did get a letter from the uh Fire Marshal did you yes you know the date of that uh the revised letter was dated October 25th fourth and it says the turning radius for the green oil fir Tru has been addressed and shows on the plans um he didn't see the fire hydrants but that's more of a site plan issue and obviously we can put fire hydrants in whatever manner that meets the fire Marshall's requirements did he raise any other questions or concerns no he did not okay good last question we heard that there's an exhibit that will be presented tonight showing the new emergency access the reciprocal emergency access with JCC correct have you reviewed that exhibit yes and do you have any concerns with that exhibit in terms of the layout no no I don't Works vertically it's it's uh you know it's got some sweeping curves to it but they're all of adequate Dimension to accommodate should a firet Tru need to come in that way thank you you're welcome thank you Mr all right thank you we're gonna take a break the time is uh 856 let's call 9:00 let's let's reconvene at 9:15 thank you easy e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e that's test we're gonna come back in session it's 9:17 Nancy could you call the rooll please here here yes here here here here here here here all right thank you Mr kley Mr Keller is here for questions of the board and questions of the public wonderful uh members of the public if you'd like to ask questions of the traffic testimony from Mr Keller or from Mr Fishinger please come on forward we just need your name and address and you can take the mic Robert C 775 westw Hill Road did you spell your last name please a u r z no T just gotcha no matter how many times I try to spell people s me a t k I have a question for you yes sir you can just get a little closer to the mic please thanks we have people watching at home P them too loud anyhow thank you um as far as the um statistics for the accidents correct you're saying that that's between Foothill and talamini the the segment across our site front we we used each Road as the outbounds of of the request so that should Encompass something at the traffic light for a southbound traffic no we said between those two intersections so you don't count the traffic L correct okay and at the time that that the town gave you the statistics what businesses were there that would have generated any kind of traffic at all well we gave him a four-year time frame from January 1 of 2020 to September 9th of 2024 okay so as your comment which I can understand it's not a traffic construction issue it was more of a drivers in in in attendance or correct just general traffic conditions so really you can't use that as a number now because now you're making traffic coming out sorry traffic coming into the roadway whereas before the traffic was just doing this well you have the vet hospital across the way okay that's one right so I mean that's right opposite ours so that's it can be indicative of the likely traffic or accident pattern that may exist at a driveway on the other side of the road a business that's open just during business hours would generate the same traffic as the residential area that's we're talking about accidents not traffic volumes not traffic volumes but the traffic that could cause an accident let me ask you it's part of the analysis I can only ask the police department for activities that occur in that stretch so um we also it's not the only aspect that we look at sorry I never have know what to do with my hand it's okay that's why I'm holding this um but we also looked at from a safety perspective accidents are one thing do we see any repetitive pattern of issues um with no business there there would be no repetitive pattern well there's a business there that yeah but that operates you know whatever their hours are five six seven days a week um if there was a operational issue with the roadway it would appear from that um we also look at the site distance that's another Factor when you look at safety and then we look at the intersection operations which is a level service so we've looked at three components of the traffic Spectrum as to what the operational issues would be and that's how we make our conclusions so encompassing your driveway in the red hospital hospital only glow or you want chaining subjects right there you you would take no effect of Foothill Road or talamine well we did from a traffic volume perspective but I'm asking for accidents right so accidents that may occur at Foothill Road or accidents that may occur at talamini are a function of each of those intersections operations the amount of traffic that we're adding to the roadway system doesn't materially impact the operations of either of those intersections so whatever the accident patterns would be at those locations are not relevant to this application and how far is your line distance-wise I know you threw out some numbers I might have missed exactly C facing north there was look I'm I'm in the site driveway and I'm looking to the north towards West right to towards West foot Hill Road we have at least 671 ft of sight distance do you know how far that I mean your foot and my foot could be totally different unless get well foot's still 12 in no but I mean your perspective of what a foot is I mean do you know how far that would would go to it goes um go past West Foot Hill yes it goes saw those lines but was 225 ft 225 ft past W West Foothill Road and at the posted speed limit of 50 mil an hour which we all know Nobody Breaks that but a car coming south on a downward slope how far would that car that car not your people pulling out if they saw the car coming out how far would that car travel before it would stop and not have an accident as you were saying people's perspectives are different as you get older maybe perspectives get change and stuff so when we do sight line profiles one we don't use the posted speed limit we add five miles an hour because that's what the industry guidelines say Plus in this case because it's downhill grade we added distance because vehicles take longer to slow down um the stopping site distance which was what our first exhibit was and I apologize for turning my back to you um what is something less uh I don't remember what it was but it takes ballpark around 500 ft for a vehicle traveling at 55 miles hour on a 5% downhill slope to stop from the point if they see a vehicle pull out and it stops in a roadway they could stop well before they ever got to that vehicle you're saying it was 680 some odd feet for the line of sight but 500 and some odd feet for for them to physically stop the vehicle and the other thing is when we do these analyses These are based on wet roadway conditions not dry roadway conditions so if you if you went out in the past two months when the road's dry you would stop less than in less than 500 feet and that does take your when your number there of your stopping distance and perception distance I'm trying to say that if unless you live in that area Mr chairman you're coming south on 206 the Crest is right at the nursing home there yeah I I I couldn't remember exactly but it's it's it's it's beyond this I did a personal study on it once before and it's right at that you know okay actually was on the ground and laid there and looked like this and so how far I could go but not neither be that what I'm asking is that car coming over the crest has got to navigate the West Foothill intersection looking for traffic there got to navigate the left turn lane there to see where the people are actually going into the lane or they're still going straight got to navigate the left turn lane all this is in that mix of the person coming out of your development to make a left-hand turn is that correct not exactly the person coming out of the development is looking at an approaching vehicle right which is doing this well they have the opportunity you know the they can see a vehicle and at least 670 fet away if that vehicle then goes into the left turn lane then they and there's no vehicle behind it then they could pull out so um but this shows that there is the more than adequate dis distance um to see a vehicle and make a informed decision and a safe decision to pull out of the say triway provided there's nobody making a left into the vet if there's a vehicle making a left into the Vet Hospital somebody coming out of the development has to wait because the left turning vehicle has the right of way and I whether it's related stay close to the like sorry uh there was some discussion about the fire trucks into the thing I think the gentleman here Mr bur had to ask that question and it was answered by the the attorney no I answered it you answered it okay yes I read the fire Marshall's report that said it was adequate for the green noes fire uh apparatus okay we're going to ask their their designer as well that same question we're going to ask the designer that same question because there was a a remark made at the first meeting which I was at that the green fire department has a tiller truck which is an articulated vehicle and they do not and I did check with the past fire chief of the green fire department he says we do not have that truck I don't want that to be taken into perspective that they have something that they don't have but now if the there is an amended I understand yes it was an updated report correct that's all I can think of now thank you sir thank you Mr Kur other questions we just get your name and address address please ferara 788 West Foothill so just continuing on the um the conversation of the accidents that happened yes don't you think it would be much better um to assess the accidents that happened North like you're just looking at accidents that would happen in front of the vet right in that stretch of rout 202 206 between the two intersections right so not the intersections not turning left on to West Foothill I am sure that if you just expanded that area a little bit you would see way more accidents I know that if you walk down West Foothill and just talk to people on West Foothill everyone knows somebody who was in an accident there have have they've witnessed an accident I have personally almost been hit multiple times so I it's it's it's impossible that I mean I just I'm sure that if you expand that area you'll find a lot more accidents ma' the the point is not that there aren't accidents at those intersections or your intersection but the operating conditions at West Foothill Road are different than what they are at the proposed site driveway we're looking at what are the operational factors that may be in play in the area where we're putting a proposed driveway I'm not I would I'm not commenting on what may happen at West Foothill or at Foothill Road or talamini because there are other factors you're much closer to the crest of the hills so you're pulling out of West Foothill you don't have 671 ft to see an approaching vehicle much different condition I am referring to um going northbound and trying to make a left which I think would be a lot closer to what we're proposing you know with with in this site I have been almost hit multiple times trying to turn left onto my street traffic going North not I mean there's issues with the traffic going south as well I mean my son I've seen cars go around buses in the morning I'm I'm telling you it's it is a bad intersection Miss Ferrera they used an Oprah request anyone can do an oper request I think you may have a valid point but we have no way of substantiating that but you're welcome to go and and file that same opah request just like the applicant did and you would get that data and I will give you ample opportunity to present that data at the end of this case all right um so another question um we're talking about the visibility right between the site and the and the top of the the hill we're looking at is there adequate site distance for a vehicle coming out of our property to see an approaching vehicle in either direction so yes do you consider all of the different entry points like so there's the top of the hill where a car could be coming down and that's the 670 plus feet but you also have potential right for vehicles to be coming out of the Foothill and out of the vet and out of West foill and down the crest and up from 206 so there's a lot of different there's a lot of different places cars could be coming from and now there's could potentially be one more is that a consideration it it is um but it's we look at the outside perimeter now we looked at traffic headed north on 206 202 206 um to make sure that there was adequate sight distance of people coming from the south and and the ability to see a vehicle coming out now let's take West Foothill somebody that is between our site driveway and the 671 ft but that person that you know somebody sitting at our site driveway um looking to the north waiting to make a right or a left um looking for any traffic coming out if somebody pulls out of West Foothill Road they're not doing 55 miles an hour so the you know they will accelerate um but there is not that same you know the person coming south um is already at 55 miles an hour so we look at that that is the limiting factor when we look at safety so it's not that we didn't look at specifically West Foothill or Foothill um but the speeds of those Vehicles making those turns onto the highway are lower so and as long as we can still see those intersections that's you know accounted for in our analysis yeah I mean I I bring this up because it it's challenging for me to pull out of my street because again you know you're looking to make sure that there's no one coming over the crest so then you have to also look right um and then you look right and then there's somebody coming out from Foothill and then by the time you look left again they're coming over the crest so I think yeah that I wanted to it's challenging to to consider all of those entry points as well as not just you know the the distance and I think that's why it was a valid reason for Mr Fishinger to ask us to look at intersection site distance beyond what i t typically do which is stopping sight distance so it's a more conservative looks at a broader reach of roadway and takes into consideration all those different factors very good question um thanks and I I think it's a similar question to the the rating D um to try to understand when you go you know what it takes to get to that next level of a of an e or an F or how how many more people need to be in the area or what when do you kind of you know move into the next threshold of a lower letter well I mean one thing we did analyze at Mr Fishinger request that we analyze traffic volumes that were from early 2020 um and they're significantly higher than what we see today but we still found the same levels of service um which gives us that to me uh a validation that our findings that if traffic does increase um from where they are today back to those levels we still have an acceptable level of service provided at this driveway now the one thing with a residential Community is that we're pretty you know there's a lot of data available um and the amount of traffic that's going to be generated by a residential development is based on the number of units um there aren't other factors that go into that so I'm very confident um that you know there our analysis is you know valid and will um provide for safe operations of this intersection now and in the future do you think if you add 160 people right there it'll stay at a d well we're adding 60 units bedroom units with people 55 and right so they all drive at some point of the day yes but the data from it you know you you know and I get this a lot you know not everybody leaves in that one hour and you know we look at the data that is published in this case by the do um for a residential development of this size um and you know again it's based on restricted community we use the standard non-age restricted community to generate our trip generation so um you know these numbers have been vetted by the it by do um and that is the peak hour traffic that would be anticipated from this I think even if we doubl the the site traffic and I don't know for sure I think even if we doubled to say traffic which would be unheard of um because it's just not going to generate that much traffic we would still have an acceptable level of service that's the closest you've come to answering the question that I've asked Mr finger I've asked you twice Mr Fresco asked it and Mr kulak asked it all in different ways that's the first time that you've given an answer and I thank you for that but I asked Rich five different ways to ask you that question and it sounds like Miss Ferrar was asking the same question so now we have five people all asking what is the incremental trip change that has to happen to make that intersection unsafe I didn't say that it was unsafe I said it would still operate an acceptable level of service but because we're Layman and we're not Traffic Engineers we need to know that and you need to translate that that's your job that's Mr finger's job is to make Layman me a board member understand a complex a complex calculation that you are paid to do but if you can't convey that complexity back to the general public and to a zoning board because I'm not trying to be a villain I'm not trying to stop your approval I want to approve you I just want the community to be safe that's your job to translate it so we've had five people ask it rich maybe you can put that question on the record and maybe you can come back with an answer answer because now we've had five people ask it and earlier Eric you indicated that you couldn't do the math in your head but at some point there's a number of vehicles that would go through that intersection from this property and others that would make it unworkable unsafe level F I think the word is acceptable level of service or not right unacceptable level Mr no I don't think it is I think it's with Point can you tell the public that this is safe I am not a traffic engineer I am a Layman I trade oil for a living I have no idea what an acceptable level of service said to you in one way or another that they can't give you that absolute number why can't they because that it's a number it's a disc number it's it's not a number that's meaningful it's meaningful to me because I need to know that it's safe not in the TR yeah that's not the that's not the criteria the criteria is accept able level of service and they've said that this provides an acceptable level of service what does that mean acceptable level of service when I go to Starbucks and I get my coffee in less than minutes that's an acceptable level of service of B C D E and F what does that mean does someone get run over at at level F Mr mean the wait time how long you'll wait to go into traffic and when you go beyond that period of time your frustration builds so Mr cley are you a traffic engineer at level F I'm trying to at level F does someone die at the intersection yes or no you're an expert I'm no I'm no expert but I been Mr Keller at level F does somebody die at the intersection no okay so at what point do we get to level F or where it becomes unsafe how many trips just because an intersection operates at level of service F does not mean that it is unsafe I do believe the record very clearly shows that this question was asked multiple times in different ways and it was unanswered the should both experts said the same thing in essence that there was no answer for your question and members of the public then asked the question again and Mr Keller put on the record that if it was to double perhaps it would suffer in service was was that what you said no my my my response Mr chairman was that I believe it would still operate at an acceptable level of service even if we doubled the traffic coming out of our development okay which is highly highly unlikely to happen now what is that in probability terms highly unlikely if the vet doubles in service and puts a an additional Wing could that happen well they wouldn't put a wing on without coming before one of the boards in this town for an approval and then you could ask that I don't know that I don't know you know they couldn't expand their site without their building they could expand their business but they couldn't expand their Building without coming for a site plan approval right you would have the ability to ask them the questions about traffic flow so you know the we're we're trying to what I have heard from the board and from the public is that you know we're trying to is this intersection unsafe and I have said multiple times the intersection operates safely there is adequate more than adequate site distance available for somebody a motorist to make a decision as to whether to pull out of that intersection or not um there is no record of accidents from the police department that shows that there is some factor in the roadway that would create a hazard to the motoring public the only two intersections were both related to driver and attention um and the levels of service which we as Traffic Engineers use to evaluate the quality of movement at an intersection which is based on the average delay that's how the uh level of surface is categorized it's the amount of delay that is expected for each vehicle coming up to that intersection how much they would experience is in a level for our site driveway is in a level of service C range which means that there is not a high level of average delay which means that a driver is not going to get frustrated and make a poor decision the intersection is safe A lot of times accidents are a result of the person behind the wheel making a decision or not being aware of the situation that they're in so it doesn't mean that the intersection is unsafe it means that the driver has made a poor decision I would say that most are most accidents anywhere are the result of somebody making a bad decision right um but my we as Engineers I'm I'm sorry to interrupt mayam our job as Engineers is to provide a roadway design um in this case I'm not putting my my signature on site plans or on a roadway design I have done it hundreds of times over the 37 years I've been licensed um and I don't put Mr kley knows if I don't think something is safe I'm not putting my signature on those plans he's heard it from me I I just think as an engineer for you not to have a number you know a substantial you know because that's what Engineers do they they create numbers based on evidence and based on the information that's available and and and the five people that asked it and the members of the public were just trying to get to that number so it's good to hear that if the trips were to double you in your opinion the intersection would still be safe is there any is there any industry standard that would you answer question no it it varies by intersection based upon the specific characteristics of that intersection in the operations at talamini Road in 202 2 206 are different than at um Foothill Road you know I could add 50 Vehicles down there and have no impact I could add 50 vehicles at Foothill Road and it would be a problem you know it depends on the specifics of each intersection so it's not like there is some uh you know set number that if I add that to this to an intersection it's going to fail depends on on the traffic movements can I ask a question of course I'm just I'm following the train of thought from back and forth and it doesn't feel like it's getting anywhere but I I think there's a distinction that Mr Keller provided a traffic report that detailed the level of service and so he did an analysis on basically the operation the free flow of traffic that's what level of level of service doesn't measure safety so Mr Keller did you conduct an analysis of the safety of the roadway yes you did yeah the traffic the traffic study includes the safety of the roadway as well that's why we collected the accident records and we did a sight line profile that's a part of the and and we looked at the dimensions the geometrics of the intersection and found that this complies with the applicable standards related to design of intersections may I ask I ask this question question earlier about if additional records for the traffic crash data from the police were were um if there were others that were not included um I'm going to ask that question again because I want to get to the safety Point here as well what was the parameters of the Oprah request that you made to the police department testified to that several times I your planner is not a traffic expert remind you of that Mr I have a question she can ask the question we don't have a copy of the Oprah request so what did you ask the op request was actually not included as theendum only the police reports were so I want to know what the parameters were because this woman had just asked as a resident that other crashes she has witnessed and other residents have witnessed so I want to know what the parameters were because Mr Keller did say that it was only for a specific location that were included in the report so I'm curious about what the op sections about eight times go ahead Mr K you seem angry and we're we're not trying to be a villain hostility that's un that's okay and that that's okay but you got to remember as a zoning Board member we're just residents we're volunteers we're not getting paid the big bucks that you're getting paid cens of the township of bridgew who are in this audience an interest in this yes and and they deserve to be treated with respect absolutely that's why we're here for for them treated with respect why aren't they tell you well I want to make sure that they're treated with respect because we care a lot about them we care about everyone's safety because they're going to drive through this intersection too you're going to drive through it my teenagers are going to drive through it and frankly I want to make sure everyone's safe that's all this comes down to we're neutral we just want to make sure that safety exists you shouldn't get angry over safety not getting angry over safety it's the matter of of the of these questions and the way people ask them this is not like uh so maybe we should take a break and and come back in another meeting when we all calm down we can do that okay because it's it's getting late it's 10 to 10 and when we reconvene would you bring a copy of the O request that that'll speak volume didn't mean to interrupt you and if you want to finish by all means and we're gonna we're going to pick up at this point and members of the public can ask questions and I I want to make sure everyone feels they got a fair Shake on both sides of this and you know again we're neutral and we want to make sure everyone gets their their chance to speak all right thanks so much so what do you propose Mr kley want to wrap up for the evening have Mr Keller still on on uh examination by members of the public okay presume or or your planner has questions I'm sure well it sounds like her question was the parameters of the Oprah were not released and Mr Keller responded he did not respond to the question yet and I only bring up the question because of the question from the resident and then we will provide we will provide a copy of the Oprah request okay thank you all right thanks I did testify to what the Oprah request included which was the segment of 202 206 between the two intersections um for that time period okay so Mr cook you want us to continue with questions if any other members of the public have questions on traffic love to have Mr uh Keller get finished okay great move on to another witness okay any anyone else have more questions come on down just need your name and address Tom magero 771 West Foothill Road did you spell your last name m Mary a l i a r o thank you question I have is related to when you come up with your safety parameters for your intersection it sounds like a lot of it's based on the like the physical geography of the intersection correct okay but you also bring up a point that traffic safety isn't necessarily based upon that it's based upon the drivers and the conditions well the cause of accidents are as Engineers I can't design for somebody who is not paying attention right what I do as an engineer is design something that complies with the applicable design standards of the township of the residential site Improvement standards and of do and do we meet this the design criteria associated with an intersection so um so that's what we look at and why we've looked at all of the different components that we did and part of that analysis is does the intersection operate at a safe level of service so my my question though is is yes you said that but do you look at intersections in terms of not just that but like what the intersections involved this involves a Veterinary Hospital it's going to involve an over 55 age related Community do the do the types of drivers and all that come into consideration when you're looking at safety standards for intersections in other words if you have a predominantly older population who's going to be coming into that traffic making these left-hand turns going up north on 202 206 which we've all kind of agreed on that going north or going the opposite way on that Highway can be a little dicey at times and so my my point is what I'm trying to say is you know it's it's it's a safe intersection but do you look in do you take into consideration though the types of drivers that are using that intersection whether whether it's by a high school an adult community a playground whatever those things come into do they come into play in certain circumstances they do um not for age restricted communities I mean you you know there can be other conditions where you would look at different driver de demographics in this case I think we've you know Mr Fisher's request that we look at intersection slate distance which increases the perception time the reaction time all those different factors um you know are providing additional safety factors in does this intersection operate safely you know it's not just can a vehicle who's that's approaching this uh intersection stop in time it's can they see it can they modify can both drivers modify their decisionmaking I can't in a as a designer as an engineer I can't change your behavior to say ah I don't care I'm just going to pull out in front of this car and make a decision but I can design it so that they have every opportunity in which to make the right decision but my point is is that you're taking a population of drivers whose reaction times D judgment may be a little bit slowed physical things and you're taking them into a you know a Highway 50 miles an hour is the suggested speed limit which you said you go up to 55 I guess by your when you do your studies correct and if people stay 50 55 coming over that hill and coming up that way we'd all agree that' probably be a lot safer but but my my my point being is that when you're doing a safety study it it's the unknowns like I said the drivers you can't say like okay if everybody drove perfectly well and had good reaction times and all that but how do you take those into consideration though when you're taking safety into an intersection or or or you know some kind of a roadway well again I think we have accounted for any potential perception you know longer perception times of an older population I want to be careful because I fall into that older population i' like to believe that my reaction times are not that much slower um but it also I think on the flip side makes the average person more cautious about making a decision well you know I all I can you know we have done everything within the parameters of the engineering practice to be able for me to stand here and say that this intersection will operate safely said that multiple times because I believe that um no I believe you believe that um but my point is that it's there's the there's the there's the unknown of the driver especially like I said if we're looking at a population a bit older concerns and once again safety comes down to are these turns that they're going to be able to make like somebody suggested maybe they should only be a right-hand turn coming out of that so they take away that more dangerous left-hand turn coming out that's up to you guys I don't think it's a dangerous left-hand turn to to put that on the record I don't think it's dangerous to make a left out I don't think it's appropriate to prohibit left turns out when every design parameter that we follow shows that there is the ability to safely operate and navigate that intersection the other question I had was when you of people who would be exiting that in the morning you came put them like 28 or 27 but there's 64 units in there 60 60 I'm sorry they change I last time 60 it's still less than half is now how do you come up with the number of 20 something when you're saying what if all 60 people were going to work you know go to work every day or you know those kind of things so so now you've doubled the you've doubled the amount of traffic if I if I can go to the extreme so I'm say these numbers you come up with sometimes how do they arrive how do you arrive at these first off I don't come up with the numbers these for this study we took them off of the do uh traffic generation they have a table for all different kinds of land uses because we're when we file this with do you know we have to use their numbers so they have a thing when there's a 60 unit development y i i take 60 units times whatever the the number is and act tells me how many trips will be generated by this development in the morning peak hour they have the same thing for the evening Peak hour they have it for daily and they have it for Saturday amazing yes thank you I have no more questions thank you very much I have a question absolutely go ahead um let's assume for a moment I'm going to try to present a scenario for you sure that there no traffic going south no traffic going North on 202 206 and you got cars coming out of the develop the new development cars coming out of the vet who has the right away whoever got there first both cars are sitting there because traffic just cleared up so neither one of them was first they were sitting there in that potential that both vehicles operated first it's going to be up to driver courtesy who's going to wave who on but if you have a always stop intersection you got stop signs in every corner the rule is whoever shows up first and then you go around in a counterclockwise Direction That's the Law of the road so if they both showed up at the at the same exact moment Which is less than 1% chance that it's going to happen you know if they did then they both look at each other across the road and somebody's going to go we or they're just going to jump we hope right that's but you know so in in in this situation traffic just cleared up from the North and the South if I'm sitting in one of those locations do you think I know because I've been watching left and right and left and right to see when I get a break you think I know when that other person showed up whether I should be first or I should be second I don't think I would take that into account then you have to defer you know and you both look at each other if there was no traffic generally when you scan from left the right you know you may not consciously say you know you're going to see your eyes are going to register that there's a vehicle across the way you don't necessarily know when they showed up but you're going to see it um I mean it's an extreme condition that something happens like that oh and if you're Bo and say both of those vehicles are making a left then they don't conflict it only matters if one's making a left and one's making a right would it be a factor thank you all right real quick let's just make sure the public got to ask all questions you guys are good anyone else all right it is 10 o'clock thank you Mr Keller you're welcome Mr chairman all right and I hope your dog's doing okay or your cat she getting older I'm sure I'll be at the vet in the next month so I'll let you know how we do I know how that feels yeah um Nancy our next meeting is November 26 I believe absolutely y take your time for which date okay okay so this will be carried to the reorg meeting because we don't know our schedule for 2025 and we'll we'll parse them out once we reorg we have our dates okay okay so Mr Ki this will be carry to January 14th 2025 the night of our reorg meeting at which there are many other cases and uh we'll publish our dates for 2025 and we'll work with Nancy the boss here and we'll get you on the docket for next year thank you sure I just want to be clear for the public that this meeting is adjourning now but will continue January 14th 2025 in this room at the board's reorganization meeting for the sole purpose of assigning a date going forward into 25 um there'll be no further notices from the applicant thank you all right thank you all right can I have a motion to adjourned Mr W Deli Mr bonjourno thank you gentlemen thank you board have a good night yeah happy holidays H January 14 yeah