Big Ben is has rung. >> We're live now. >> We're live now. Okay. >> Good evening everybody. Could you please stand and join me in the pledge of allegiance? >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Statement of adequate notice. Under the Sunshine Law, adequate notice in accordance with the Open Public Meetings
Act was provided on January 5th, 2026 of this meeting's date, time, and location. The agenda was mailed to the Cranberry Press and Helm News Tribune, posted on the Township Bulletin board, mailed to those requesting personal notice, and filed with a municipal clerk. Roll call, please. Miss Anderson,
>> here. >> Miss Albadawi, here. >> Mr. Giddings, >> here. Um, Miss Conram is out, Mr. Mildenberg >> here, >> Mr. Mucelli >> here, >> Mr. Pulk >> here, >> Mr. Stewart is out, and Mr. Whitman >> here.
>> Okay, thank you. We have a quorum. >> Thank you. >> First item on the agenda is the approval of of the minutes from May 7th. Are there any questions or comments or adjustments to those minutes?
Okay. Hearing none. Can I have a motion to approve? >> Can I have a second, please? >> Second. >> Okay. Roll call for the May 7th minutes. Miss Anderson, >> yes. >> Miss Albatawi, >> yes. >> Mr. Giddings, >> yes.
>> And Mr. Pulk, >> yes. >> And Mr. Whitman? >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. Motion passed. >> Okay. Next item on the agenda, once I turn my phone to silent, is uh public comments for non-aggenda items. Are there any public comments for
non-aggenda items? Okay. Hearing none, I'm going to close the public comments for non-aggenda items out and go to first item on the agenda is extension of approval request PB378-23
Arie Associates LLC. >> Yeah. >> All right. This is from uh Arie Associates and uh they had gotten preliminary final site plan approval and a variance. Um the resolution was adopted in May of 2024. Um and if the B
board recalls, they were um seeking to construct a 94,000 square foot plus or minus a two-story warehouse building. Um etc. in the light industrial zone. Um they wanted to get a one-year extension of their period of uh vested rights. Um
and then uh they're allowed to get the three one-year in extensions. and uh they if the board finds they're moving along and it's appropriate, you can just grant it by a motion. Um so the reason that um they've they've has they said
they've had some unanticipated circumstances, but that they expect them to be uh resolved pretty quickly. So, they're asking for a one-year um extension from the time, let's see, the um of the adoption of the memorial resolution so that it would expire May 2
in 2027. >> Does anybody have any problems with granting that extension? >> Okay. Um can I have a motion to approve the extension request?
>> Motion. Can I have a second, please? >> Second. >> Okay. Roll call for Arie Associates extension request. Miss Anderson, >> yes. >> Miss Albadawi, >> yes. >> Mr. Giddings, >> yes. >> Mr. Mildenberg, >> yes.
>> Mr. Mucelli, >> yes. >> Mr. Pulk, >> yes. >> And Mr. Whitman, >> yes. >> Okay, thank you. Motion passed. Next item on the agenda is two consistency review documents. First one is Cranberry Township Ordinance 0526-16,
an ordinance of the Township of Cranberry, County of Middle Sex, State of New Jersey, adopting an updated zoning map. >> Okay, >> Liz. >> Sure. Um, so the zoning map for Cranberry had not or has not been
updated in over 10 years. And the issue is that in the interim, there have been affordable housing resonings. There have been developments on different projects. For example, the High Point project that weren't reflected on the zoning map. So, this ordinance uh
essentially tries to I think and does capture all of the changes that have happened since the last time the map was updated. Um what we're looking to do tonight or the board's charge tonight is per the municipal land use law um this
as you know the zoning map is adopted by ordinance by the township committee and so the township committee prior to they've had a first reading prior to any adoption of the zoning board a zoning map or any ordinance they have referred it to you the planning board to determine consistency with the master
plan. I would recommend that you do find these consistent because essentially what this is doing is updating the map to reflect the zoning changes that have all occurred in accordance with the master plan. >> Are there any
questions or comments from the board on that map change? >> Yeah, just uh I have one the uh and just a clarification really uh Looks as though the spa property is
Mount Laurel 5. >> Which one? >> Mount Laur uh the spa property that's being redeveloped uh for the senior living. >> 1274. >> 127. >> Oh, 1274. Yeah. >> Yeah, that's Mount Laurel 5. >> I believe that is what it was. Yes.
>> Okay, that's it. >> Okay. All right. Any other questions or comments? When when this is adopted tonight, um do you foresee a need to change it again in the near future?
>> No. And we're a we're not adopting it tonight. We're just doing the consistency review, but it'll be adopted at the township committee when it is this um is intended to reflect all of the pending resonings.
>> Perfect. Thank you. Any other questions or comments by the board? Okay. Hearing none, can I have a motion to approve that consistency review? >> Can I have a second, please? >> Second.
>> Okay. Roll call for consistency for ordinance 052616. Miss Anderson. >> Yes. >> Miss Elbadawi? >> Yes. >> Mr. Giddings? >> Yes. >> Mr. Mildenberg? Yes, >> Mr. Mucelli. >> Yes, >> Mr. Pulk.
>> Yes, >> and Mr. Whitman. >> Yes. >> Okay, thanks. Motion passed. Second item on the uh consistency review section is Cranberry Township Ordinance 0526-17, an ordinance of the township of
Cranberry in Middle Sex County, New Jersey, adopting an amendment to the amended redevelopment plan for the High Point track designation as a portion of block 20.6 lot 7.01 1 on the township on
the Cranberry Township tax mat pursuant to NJ SA4A12A-7. >> Okay. >> Okay. Yes, Liz, you're on. >> Okay. So, this um is an amended redevelopment plan. There has been, as I'm sure the board is well aware of, the
Highp Point development, formerly called the what is it? The Kushner Hagerty Fiser. I can't remember whatever those three names. >> Kushner Hagerty. Yes. in Fiser property. Uh it was a designated area need of redevelopment over 10 years ago. There
was an initial um redevelopment plan that divided it into a residential subdist which is where you see the townhouse development and then the northern uh I call it northern but adjacent to um old Trenton Road and South Main Street which is the mixeduse
subdist. Um there have been amendments with regards to that mixed use subdist a couple of times since the original plan was adopted in 2015. This is the latest amendment and what this amendment does is it reflects um that the township
committee uh reached a court approved uh settlement agreement with Fairshair Housing Center in a year ago in 2025. Whereas the township agreed and the court required that um the to reszone
this portion of the site to permit 24 affordable housing units >> up >> up to 24 affordable housing units. So essentially this is part of a court process where uh the township in order to not be in violation of their
settlement agreement has to adopt implementing zoning. So this is the implementing zoning um because the redevelopment plan has the same function as a zoning ordinance but for this particular site. Um, one thing to note
is that if if you recall this board when we uh or you adopted the housing element and fair share plan last June, this site with this number of units was in that plan. And then when it was the housing element was adopted by this board in
March of this year, those 24 units were also in this in the plan. So I say all that because the housing element is an element of the master plan. And so what we're here tonight to do again is to review the consistency of this, you
know, amendment which is functions as an ordinance. Um what is it consistent with the master plan? And I think we could say it's substantially consistent with the housing element of the master plan because this site was uh specified in
both of those. the initial housing element adopted last June and the amendment in March, it was specified for this number of units. So, I would recommend that's my finding. I recommend to the board um that it is
substantially consistent certainly with the housing element uh of the master plan and I don't know I hope uh everybody got a chance to read the document listed around back this up because it's it actually was very well written and um
quite extensive in and in in compreh um addressing a lot of the needs for the site. What I would like to do is have any comments because I do have some comments, but I would like anybody from the board if they have any comments or questions on that consistency
review. Mine's more just wanted to make sure um I think it was well written. I think it was very thor I think it was well written. It was very thorough. um looked like it took the design standards from the previous >> correct >> redevelopment plan. Um I I just wanted
to make sure it talks about a three-story building, but it also talks about matching the lines of of other buildings, you know, along the street. So I imagine and it also talks about the roof slopes. So I imagine we're going to have a corners line that will match the
other um eve lines of the adjacent buildings. so that it stays within the scale of everything on Main Street. >> That was the intent. >> Yeah. >> If anything could be added to that to clarify that, I think that would be good. >> Okay.
>> I think the only other comment I had was on lighting. Um and I it does that lighting I don't that was actually installed in that redevelopment plan. I don't think really met the intent of our um ordinance because you a lot of exposed bulbs. But I think you do just
say to match the style or similar color and type, but uh you do reference the illumination part of the code which says, you know, which refers to not having direct light. So I I think this building could be a nice opportunity to
kind of screen some of that lighting that is kind of glaring from Main Street. We just want to make sure we don't match that same type of lighting, but we do provide indirect lighting where you don't see the bulb and a little bit more subtle lighting along Main Street, more consistent with the rest of the village. >> Got it. Okay.
>> Any and any other comments from members on the board? >> And again, as Bill had mentioned, the the design actual design in the building is supposed to mimic the rest of the buildings on the residential portion of the site. It can't be something
abstractly different than >> No, it it it should blend with um not only not only the town homes but also the retail that has residents above that's on that northern portion. >> Right. And that's number one. Number two, and as I me as when you brought it
up, >> um this it's up to a it's up to a maximum of 24 >> um and and that will be depending upon dependent upon the final design which we are not approving here tonight. >> No. >> Right.
>> And that's a point I want to make to the board members and the public. We are not approving any kind of final plan or plan for the site. the applicant has to come in with a plan that has to be, you know, gone over with the board. So, all this
does is saying it's consistent with what and and it is consistent with other affordable housing projects in town with the density on on on that amount of >> it's not uncommon for it's not uncommon. It's not uncommon for a 100% affordable
housing project to have greater density, even greater height than may be permitted for other types of buildings. The alternative is it's less dense and you have more of them, >> right? >> So, it you know it it you you still have
to meet your number. So, um but this is actually very consistent or u with the other fourth round sites, correct? And actually some of the earlier sites that exist in Cranberry. >> Okay. >> For example, the Willows uh project are,
you know, Yeah. >> And actually what we just approved for 1274, >> right? Exactly. 1274 1260. >> Uh it's it's fairly it they're all in the same range. >> Okay. So
if the board approves this tonight, um that goes back to the township committee. Is that what the process is, >> Sharon? So, you're Oh, I'm sorry, Sharon. Yeah, they they will have a hearing on the ordinance. I don't know if you're if you're asking them to um revise the ordinance to include these
comments or if you're just um relating >> I think we're revising it to include those comments or making sure that those comments are clarified and and Liz is Liz. So, so what you can do is uh you know Gina has noted what they are and
then um the you're going to make a motion to find it substantially consistent or not with these comments the board would like to see blah blah blah incorporated into the ordinance. You know that's what you want. >> The blah blah blah part. >> You know what you said. I wrote notes.
>> I could do that. >> Make sure that it matches the roof. >> I don't know what I'm remember. I I >> Okay, there you go. >> And the lighting matches a similar style, color, and type. Um actual design of the building mimics the residential
portion of the site and and it's up to a maximum of 24. I think I think you were just trying to >> Yeah. And the height and the height matches the existing structures too. So, >> okay. >> I would just change what you just said though that that the lighting is similar to what's there, but is it indirect
lighting >> that? >> Yes. Well, because I think the lighting you're talking about which is along um the road between uh four seasons and that that was added later, right? And it was very bright >> and it and it got a separate approval. It wasn't ever in the plan.
>> Okay. >> Yes. >> So, we're we're looking for the new lighting to meet the ordinance. >> Yes. >> Not match what's there, >> right? Okay. >> Did everybody understand and hear those comments?
Okay. Um All right. Um, I'm I'd like to have a motion to approve based with our recommendations back to the township committee uh to move this. >> So moved.
>> Can I have a second, please? >> Second. >> All right. Roll call for consistency for ordinance 052617. Miss Anderson, >> yes. >> Miss Albadawi, >> yes. >> Mr. Giddings, >> yes. >> Mr. Mildenberg,
>> yes. >> Mr. Mr. Mucelli, >> yes. >> Mr. Pulk, >> yes. >> And Mr. Whitman. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. Motion pass. >> And good night, Sharon. >> Oh, man. >> Good hands.
>> We're changing the ship. Changing We're changing the flagship. That's what we're doing now. So, >> I was here before. I know. I'll I'll get you know Yeah, I'll move that over and Yes. >> See you, Sharon.
>> Thank you. Okay, here we go. >> Oh, I love the colored prints. >> Exactly. Just brings things to life. >> Yeah. Yes. Okay. Next item on the agenda is
PB419-26 Granberry Family Apartments LLC. Please take it away. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good evening everyone. My name is Damian Deluca. I'm an attorney with the law firm of Deluca Louis. >> How's that better?
>> I'll start over. Damian Deluca with the firm of Deluca Lewis and Bur representing the applicant Cranberry Family Apartments LLC. Good to see everyone again. I was here not too long ago for a different application with the same same applicant essentially. Uh tonight we're here for a different property as you know. It's
block five, lot 18, which has an address of 1260 South River Road. I have on the easel an exhibit marked A3. I'll identify all the exhibits in a moment. That's an aerial. Uh, north is to the right of the page. So, we are on the east side of South River Road, 1260
South River Road. >> Mr. Deluko, one second. Should I mark this already? 8. >> They're all pre-marked. I've handed out three exhibits. >> Okay. >> U, you should have a copy, I hope. >> Lovely. If just reference the number and I'll make it exhibit A3 which uh is the
last page in the package that you have. >> Great. Thank you. >> The uh so that is the subject property. Uh it is a property that's mostly unimproved. There are I think two buildings on the property and some other related appro improvements. And the proposal is to redevelop this
site for a new municipally sponsored affordable housing community uh that we're here to talk about tonight. Uh, the applicant, as I mentioned, is Cranberry Family Apartments LLC. That's an entity that's affiliated with the Walters Group and an entity called
Walters Cornerstone Development LLC. That Walters entity has been designated as the redeveloper by the township uh to redevelop this site. There's been several different steps along the way to get to where we are tonight. I'd like to briefly review that background because I
think it's important to provide context for tonight's proceedings. On April 27th of this year, Walters Cornerstone Development LLC entered into a development agreement with the township pursuant to which the township and the devel redeveloper agreed that
this site that we're here for tonight, which is about 11.9 acres, would be redeveloped for 165 affordable apartment units that would be occupied by families. In other words, not age restricted. that's different than the
senior community that this board has heard in a separate unrelated application. That was April 27th. Uh on April 27th, the township adopted an ordinance 042609 which approved a redevelopment plan for
this property. Uh and that redevelopment plan establishes various standards that govern the development rights on this site. And it is that redevelopment plan that governs the site plan and subdivision proceedings primarily uh that we're here for this evening.
That redevelopment plan envisions the redevelopment of this site for 165 affordable apartment units as shown on the site plan that you're going to see uh momentarily which actually I'll put on the board. This site plan is exhibit A2
and that is a color rendered site plan dated today, June 4th, prepared by our civil engineer, Mr. Schulov. That shows an aerial zoomed in with the proposed site improvements shown on the lot. This is the fully engineered site plan
because we're here for site plan approval among other things. But in the redevelopment plan on page 21, a conceptual version of that plan is included in the redevelopment plan. And I mentioned that because uh when the redevelopment plan was adopted earlier this year by the
municipality, it was specifically to facilitate this plan, this layout, this density, uh this plan, albeit it was it was not as fully engineered at that time as it is today. Uh the
town has also adopted a resolution of need uh which is a prerequisite for an application of this type. And this application in this proposed community will help the town fulfill its fourth round obligations, fourth round
affordable housing obligations. As you may remember from the senior application, these types of communities are funded through state programs or really federal tax credits administered by the state of New Jersey, specifically the Housing Mortgage Finance Agency, better known as
HMFA. And in order to get a community like this funded, we have to qualify for tax credits. We have to apply for those tax credits by July 1, on or before July one, I believe. Uh in order to apply for
the tax credits, we have to have lots of requirements fulfilled. We have to check a lot of boxes. One of the boxes is getting a resolution of need from the municipality acknowledging that there's a need for this use, these units, these affordable units in this location. And
in addition, we require preliminary uh site plan approval uh and subdivision approval. And so that's prerequisite. So, we're here tonight to present uh an application for preliminary and final site plan and subdivision application. There is a
timing constraint. For that reason, uh we we in order to apply for the next available round of tax credit financing by July 1st, we have to obtain site preliminary at least preliminary site plan and subdivision approval. Um, so
the application is for preliminary and final major site plan and subdivision approval. I think it's fair to point out that the point and purpose of site plan and subdivision approval is really for a planning board such as yourselves to
review your redevelopment plan and any applicable ordinance provisions in order to confirm if we meet all the applicable requirements. And if we do, it's what we call a byite site plan or subdivision or both. And if we don't, if we need relief, whether it's a variance
or a waiver uh or some sort of deviation under the redevelopment plan, the applicant, which is us, is required to establish its in its justifications for that relief. In this case, we're going to present testimony tonight. And I think uh ultimately although there's
some possibilities of waiverss called out primarily Miss Laney's letter, I don't think we're going to need any design waivers. And if I'm wrong, we'll make sure that's clear in the record. Um so I don't think we're going to need any design waivers ultimately, but there was one variance called out uh in the review
letters relating to your riparian buffer ordinance, which is section 150-39.1. And in summary, that's a separate set of riparian buffer requirements that the township adopted whenever you adopted it. And in this case, it requires a 150
foot riparian buffer. Mr. Schulo, who's our engineer and planner, uh, will address that. And though technically, as the lawyer for the applicant, I don't believe we need that variance because I believe the redevelopment plan supersedes the ordinance and and I'll reserve that right. But that said and
that aside, we're we're prepared to address that that need for variance. And I say that need for variance because we don't meet those buffer requirements entirely. What we propose is better than what exists today. And you'll hear evidence about that and we think we can easily justify the variance. So we'll do
that with that qualification that I mentioned. I don't think it's required, but we're prepared to do it anyway. Uh so we need preliminary final major site plan and subdivision approval. we need that variance as a result of my discussions with uh the board professionals
and to the extent we need any design waiverss then of course we request those and those will be evident in the testimony we have your professionals review letters uh Mr. Hoder's letter dated May 28th uh Mr. Firanda's letter dated May 29th, your fire letter dated
undated, and uh Miss Laney's letter, which I think is dated May, no, excuse me, June 1st. Uh, generally speaking, we don't have any objections to the comments and recommendations in those letters with a few exceptions that Mr. Schulo will
cover in his testimony. And so, we'll call those out uh so that your attorney can keep good notes of that and so the resolution, if approval is granted, can reflect that. But by and large, we're fine with the comments in the letters and we've had discussions with your professionals and uh we will work with
them as we have in the past and other applications to address those comments and do our best to address those comments. And in the unlikely event that we can't address any of those comments with your professionals, we will just reserve the right to come back to the board and put it before the board and have you resolve them. I would be very
surprised if that's necessary. I just want to reserve the right to do that. But other than the few comments that we can't address for the reasons that we'll testify to, we'll work out the rest of the comments and work with your professionals to work out the rest of the comments. U exhibits
I've already addressed identified exhibits two and three. Exhibit A1 are three pages of architectural renderings of the building. Uh those are exhibits A1 and I've handed out 11 by7 copies. That that's A1. A2 is the rendered site
plan dated today. A3 is the aerial photograph from Mr. Shulo uh also dated today. There's a fourth exhibit that will uh we'll mark during the testimony testimony of our traffic
engineer, Mr. McCormack, but I'll I'll put that on the easel when John comes up and I'll identify it and mark it at that time. So, those are the only exhibits. So, Mr. Chairman, that's the extent of my introduction unless you have any questions for me. Uh my planned witnesses tonight are uh Jay Schulo, our
civil engineer and professional planner, Ed Spitel, who's with the Walters Group, who testifies to the operations of this community, uh our architect, Michael Bohan, and John McCormack, our traffic engineer. We also have with us Grace Herman, who's our licensed
landscape architect. I don't have any plant testimony for Grace, but if there are any questions relating to landscaping that Mr. Shulo or others can't answer, then Grace will answer those questions. >> Should Martina, should we swear them all? >> Let's Let's do that. If If anyone who's
going to testify tonight could just stand up, raise your right hands, um, and swear or affirm that the testimony you will give tonight will be the truth. >> So, sworn. And as you come up, if you could just state your name and and spell it. Um, and I'll take a note, but we don't need to swear you in again. Thanks.
>> Great. We're going to start with Mr. Shulo. Oh yeah. >> Yep. Sure. I will swear the the township um professionals in as well. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you shall give is the truth? >> So sworn. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Uh Mr. Shoul, can you spell your last name for the record, please? >> Sure. It's Jason Shulo. S C I L L O. >> And what firm are you with? >> Shulo Engineer. Can you briefly review your professional background? >> Sure. >> I have a bachelor's of engineering from
Stevens Institute of Technology. I have been practicing professionally for 27 years. Licensed since 2005 in engineering in 2015 in planning. Uh focused on land development projects such as this. I've been before this board um last year I guess it was with
senior um and all over New Jersey doing you know exactly this. >> And your licenses are in good standing. >> Yes. >> Mr. Chairman, we'd ask that the board accept Mr. Shulo is an expert witness in civil engineering and professional planning. >> So accept it. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Uh Mr. Shulo, were you present during my introductory comments? >> Yes.
>> Were they factually accurate to the best of your knowledge? >> You did a very good job. Yes. >> Thank you. Uh is it correct that you have personal knowledge of this site, the surrounding area, and the plans that are being presented tonight for approval? >> That's true. >> Did were the site plan and subdivision
plans prepared under your direct supervision? >> Yes. Using the exhibits that I've marked, A1 and A, well, actually A2 and A3, can you give the board an overview of the proposed site plan? >> Sure. >> We'll start with the site plan and uh then I'll cover the subdivision after that, Jay.
>> Okay. >> All right. So, I'll start out with uh which one? This was exhibit A3. >> Yes. >> The aerial. So, this was prepared uh specific for this hearing and it shows existing conditions in an aerial photo
from that D provides from 2020. So, maybe hard to see from the distance, but the site I'm outlining here, it's in yellow on the uh on the rendering. It's block five, lot 18. It's a little under 12 acres. It's on the east side of South River Road. So, again, north is to the
right towards me. It's right at the intersection of Day Road. The next major intersections we have Prospect Plains Road to uh to the north and then heading south is 130 where it splits off. Um surrounded uh by other or industrial
development, a parking lot on one side and across the street with some commercial development. The existing site, as you'll see here, there's a farm field on the northern side of it. And on the southern side, there's an office building with a garage with a driveway, paved driveway that's close to the
creek, which is known as Cedarbrook, which is just off site to our south. And then there's a uh storm management basin, farm pond, irrigation pond that's in the corner of the site there. You'll see that it's mostly cleared. There's a little bit of landscape buffering that wraps the edges, and that will remain as
part of the application, which I'll show on the next exhibit. and the existing development that's um just to the the south side of the day road intersection with the existing improvements close to the creek that's all going to be removed as part of the application.
So in the proposed condition which is shown on exhibit A2 all the brighter colors are the proposed features which I'll touch on briefly. I mentioned that the existing development is in the southern section here. So all this area that we show in the brighter
green uh is being disturbed for the purpose of removal of those improvements. And what you see is the darker gray is proposed driveways and parking. The uh lighter brown are proposed buildings which I'll touch on in a little more detail in a sec. The mustard color areas are sand bottom in
storm water management basins. And you'll see the brighter green circles. That's all landscaping. So the proposed development proposes a connection to day road at the intersection. And I should explain to back up a little bit. In 2022, there was an application approved here for an
industrial development that had a much larger building proposed. It had a quick check or 7-Eleven or some other gas station in the front and a large intersection improvement here for tractor trailers to enter the site. The roadway improvements we propose are not that extensive by way of a smaller
driveway. We do also propose a left turn lane and all of that work is under jurisdiction of Middle Sex County. In addition to that driveway, the main two-way driveway coming in, we have a one-way driveway out that's a right only on the north side of the project that's similar in location to what was approved
previously. On this plan, you'll see there are multiple parking areas. There's a total of 248 parking spaces proposed, a total of 165 units in three buildings. In those three buildings, uh they're mix of units that'll be described in more detail, but they're compliant with
affordable housing controls. And they're also on three separate tax parcels at as three separate phases. And it's not for the purpose of separation for anything other than really financing because of the way the HMFA will have us do it. So those lot lines that are here are interior lot lines, we'll call them.
You'll see that this one lot here, the lot line goes up to the corner and down. It doesn't actually front the road. It's just again for the purpose of financing. So the way the redevelopment plan was structured, those internal lot lines, although important for financing, don't mean anything from the purpose of zoning control. So it doesn't have a bearing on
setbacks or coverage, right? It's all full track analysis, which is what's in the plan, and it's fully compliant with those bulk standards. In addition to those driveways and parking areas, you'll see some landscape islands. There's accessible parking. There's electric vehicle parking. We have um
recreation amenities including a tot lot in the corner here of the open space area, an open green um tucked in between the buildings. There's a basketball court on the other side of the driveway, small gazebo, and a lot of passive space that'll be created with the removal of all of that improvement that's currently
in that repairing zone area. and of course extensive landscaping. In addition to the existing buffer that will remain, we're going to supplement all those plantings to create more buffer, a heavy buffer against South River Road and then, you know, street trees and shrubs that will surround the
site. Uh utility services are public. Uh it'll be New Jersey American Water will own water mains and easements that will go through the site. Public sewer will come from the intersection of Day Road and into the site. Um the other underground facilities including electric and gas will be as typically
constructed. Um public improvements include a sidewalk that will now connect frontage. There's already sidewalk towards um the neighboring parcels to the north and south. We'll continue that connection along with curb. Again, all under jurisdiction to the county. Um there's a maintenance building tucked
into the corner as is a bulk trash enclosure. Typical trash service. This this is for bulk waste such as uh like larger uh things that aren't frequent. For typical municipal waste or household waste, there's going to be trash rooms in each of the buildings that'll be serviced with shoots and then picked up
on trash day by a private hauler or the township, whatever is preferred by the township from those trash areas that are in the corners. Uh they're going to be um facing away from the road so you don't see them. And internally they're buffered with landscaping and you know nice garage doors that won't make them
visible. Um Damon, I don't know how much more is. It's it's large site but relatively simple by way of what the arrangement is. >> Okay. U a few follow-up questions. >> Sure. >> First, along South River Road, one of the comments I think in Miss Lane's
letter was was asking us to consider burming and some additional screening along the road. Is it correct that we're willing to introduce a burm with landscaping on top of the BM? >> Yes. So, the landscaping that's shown we can put onto a burm that's probably in the neighborhood of three or four feet high. Uh we are restricted with the
amount of fill we can place for both the dimensional restriction of the width but separately flood hazard standards too. We can't fill too much but we can get some in there. Can you explain the flood hazard and any other environmental constraints that affect this site?
>> Sure. So I mentioned Cedarbrook is along our southern boundary just off site. There's also a man-made ditch that runs from this stormwater basin that's up in the corner here on this other parcel out to that Cedar Brook. And there's another one similar to that on the other side of that building, not impacted by us. So,
generally moving south to north, the regulated features are there's a couple small wetland pockets that we have no we're not even close to getting near. From that, there's also repairing zone that D um regulates. There's also a township repairing zone, which we'll get into a little more detail. But beyond
that D repairing zone, there's also a flood hazard area that's on uh FEMA flood mapping. There's also a flood hazard area that we had to calculate as part of a DE D application that's being made. And then from the 100-year flood plane, there's another called a buffer.
It's really not a buffer. It's a stream corridor that the Delaware Raton Canal Commission regulates. The previous um approved site that our previous approved projecting, the industrial project uh was approved by those entities and it had more impact to that regulated area than we do. And again, we're working
with D right now to get through that process. So, while we're on that, let's talk about ordinance section 150-39.1. So, to the extent that the redevelopment plan does not supersede that ordinance, is it correct that that ordinance, that
township riparian buffer requirement requires a 150 foot buffer here? >> It does. >> Where would that buffer where would that required buffer be using exhibit A2? >> All right. So the the way that the standard reads in the township code is it's from surface water bodies and
surface water bodies are defined as perennial streams, intermittent streams, lakes, reservoirs, uh wetland areas that are ponded and potentially man-made features if they're regulated by D. So this farm pond is a man-made structure
that's a stormwater basin specifically excluded from the definition in the rank. So, we're talking about the natural waterway that Cedarbrook and then unfortunately also this man-made ditch that runs along this side because that is regulated by DP because of a drainage area. So, in the D standard, if
you have more than 50 acres draining to a feature, they regulate it. So what happens is the repairing zone is extended from that top of bank and it goes partially into the site down here and it goes into the site from Cedarbrook in the existing condition
which I'll go back to this. I don't have it graphically depicted but I'll do my best to describe it. I think it'll pretty simple to figure out. >> So is that the aerial exhibit A3? >> This is A3. Back to A3. So again the existing conditions you'll see the development here. So when you extend the 150 foot repairing zone from Cedar
Brook, which again is just off our site, more or less on the property line, a little bit outside of it, it extends into the site and catches the edge up to more or less the edge of this garage building here. So all of that existing pavement and development is within it. It's about 22,000 square feet, a little
more than that, 225. That is unobstructed storm water runoff that goes right to Cedar Brook. >> So So that's 22,000 square feet of impervious coverage today. That's within the required municipal >> that's within the required 150 foot repairarian zone in the municipal ordinance.
>> Okay. >> And then from this man-made ditch when you extend that up there's no pavement in there but it's all this active farm field or area that's adjacent to it. Very little vegetation within it which again the purpose of a repairarian zone is two things. To protect the vegetation
adjacent to the ditch or the stream the regulated feature and to also make sure that any pollutants are potentially removed by that vegetation that's preserved. In this case, there's not much vegetation here, and up here, there's really hardly any, but also there's development within it. In the
proposed condition, we're removing that 22,000 square ft of imperous surface and replacing it with lawn. There's no proposed improvement from our project in that repairing zone that's against the natural waterway repairing zone from Cedarbrook on the
man-made ditch that runs to our east. Right now, again, there's no pavement within that. And in the proposed condition, that 150 feet extends to more or less the back of these parking spaces. And the impervious surface in here is less than 16,500 square feet. So we have a reduction in overall impact
from removal of this pavement and placing of that pavement. To be clear, it's in a different place. That's obvious. But this space here, as mentioned in that farm field, drains directly to this ditch, unobstructed. Whatever's on it just goes straight in, whether it be nutrients, you know, sediment, whatever. In the proposed
condition, we have a storm water basin that intervenes, catches runoff from the area that would and did previously go to this ditch or does currently. We're going to pick that runoff up, put it through this basin. It stages to this basin, then stages to the pond. We remove all of that direct runoff from
this ditch. We also have now a fully treated, fully compliant stormwater management system that goes beyond what actually the regulations require and definitely improves from existing conditions. So, we have 22,000 ft of unobstructed pavement that goes into the repairarian zone being replaced with
grass in that area and 16,000 ft of pavement that now will be controlled by storm water and directed to the other location. So, the purpose again of the repairing zone is protect that waterway from discharge of runoff from this area through that section. We're pulling that runoff out, we're treating it, and we're
leaving all the vegetation that's there. Net environmental benefit. This is very similar, almost identical to what the DRCC approved previously and their core stream quarter actually does the same thing. It wraps right around that same area. Um, so we anticipate the same level of approval as previously granted.
>> So in your opinion as an engineer and planner, is that a is the proposed plan a better plan from the purpose of from the in the context of the purpose of the riparian ordinance? >> Absolutely. >> Than the existing conditions. >> Yes. It's an environmental benefit and it also advances multiple purposes of
zoning overall and not just the repairing zone disturbance but the project as a whole which as you know through court well I should say you know but maybe the board doesn't through case law the um variances are anticipated and generally required to be reviewed on the
whole of the project but we will hit it both ways. So again, it's from 15039.1, which is for improvements within 150 ft repairing zone adjacent again to just this man-made ditch that runs along our eastern boundary. So uh the MLU states
for bulk variances, which is what this will be or is considered there two ways to address it or two sections of the reggg that that describe how to address bulk variances. The first one is under C1. You've probably heard this terminology and that's termed the hardship variance where if there's hardship that exists and having to
follow the rule completely creates a hardship um it would be potentially um justified in that way. We don't have that. The other one is a C2 which is termed in in you know regular parlance the flexible C variance where generally we have to show the benefits of granting
the relief outweigh substantially any detriment um created by granting of that relief. And in this case again we have a net environ environmental benefit from removal of pavement that's unobstructed into the natural waterway and replacing it with pavement
offsetting it with pavement that is to a man-made ditch but also collected and directed away from that ditch before it has a chance to contact it. So I think it qualifies under the flexible C criteria. Um and when viewed on the whole, just to make sure it's clear, um we feel this relief is not only
relatively minor, but this project overall is inherently beneficial use, which under the regulation says that you're presumptively addressing the positive criteria. But for the actual disturbance to the ditch, I feel that that actually advances a couple purposes of zoning because again we will have
removal of pavement to the extent of again 22,600 ft coming out and approximately 16,500 going back in a different location but again an offset. I feel it's like a double benefit really because we're taking pollutants away from that manmade ditch, sending them into storm management features that will
treat them and send it out indirectly back to Cedarbrook where you know that runoff can be um accommodated. >> Let me ask you a question. Sure. You you've referenced the farm pond a couple times. One of the questions in in that came up in our preparation for tonight is whether we're using that farm pond as
part of our development. Are we? And if so, how? Also, yeah, in the existing condition, runoff goes to it. We can't prevent that from happening in the proposed condition. But what we do is treat it for water quality in these upstream basins before it gets to that basin, that existing basin. And now in the existing condition, there's no atlas
structure here. So, it just has a BM on this one edge and the lowest part of that BM acts as a rear. So, when this fills, if it fills, it over tops and goes into the we're going to control that with an atlas structure that will be placed in the corner of the basin. have the discharge point far at the farthest upstream corner to slow it down
as much as we can into that corner. So, it'll be used as a storm water management feature. Um, and again, in 2022 when this was approved by this board and by DP, uh, very similar approach. So, it's not um, nothing new, I should say. >> Okay.
uh in that area to the south, that uh passive green space or passive recreational area. >> Yeah. >> Are we willing to consider adding walking pass there if it doesn't run a foul of any D requirements? >> If we can do it, we will do it. Absolutely.
>> Okay. Um >> now there's negative criteria is why I wanted to >> we've covered I think we're okay. Um, so there were some comments about pedestrian uh circulation. Mr. Shalo, is
it correct that the applicants willing to add both speed bumps and midblock crosswalks in the parking areas? And if so, can you show everybody where they will likely go? >> Sure. So we recognized after a discussion with the professionals that
these are relatively long runs of driveway unobstructed that you know makes sense to put pedestrian crossings to get between buildings and out really to this recreation area. So you see these islands with trees in them. Uh starting on the the north side we will connect on one we'll pick a side after
talking with the professionals to remove two parking spaces and put in a crosswalk with a speed hump right on the side of where those landscape islands are. Similarly on this other aisle, we'll move this landscape island down and do a similar crossing probably on the the uh west side of it to get closer to the basketball court, but again
remove two more parking spaces to make that crossing. So I mentioned we have currently 248 parking spaces being physically constructed with removal of those four plus also a request that Mr. Fandanda made in his letter to put an accessible space closer to the
basketball court. That'll likely result in removal of a space to put in the accessible aisle that's required. So we'll have a total of five spaces being removed from the currently or submitted version of this. So it goes from 248 to 243. We still have more parking than required
by ordinance because of an electric vehicle charging space credit um which far exceeds what the minimum ordinance standard is um with that credit. So removal of those spaces is a benefit for the the crossings that'll be created >> and doesn't create any relief for parking. >> No sir.
>> Okay. One of the other circulation questions or comments is comment three uh excuse me, comment 5D on page 13 of Miss Laney's letter and she notes
that the site plan shows an entrance exit door to a proposed mechanical area along the phase 3 building and no sidewalks provided. Can you point to that area, Jay, please? >> Sure. So that's a mechanical room service door that's on the side of the building in the corner here where I'm pointing.
>> So we don't propose a sidewalk there because it's just a mechanical room. Correct. >> Yeah. Infrequent um contractor visits for maintenance. So no sidewalk needed. >> Can you please discuss the loading and delivery needs of the proposed development? >> Sure. So I'll start by saying that the um arrangement, parking lot, driveways,
parking, everything is compliant with RSIs. Um, having said that, the radiers are a little larger than what we typically put in on a parking lot just because we wanted to accommodate larger loading vehicles, even though there's really no requirement in the rules for
it. So, uh, typical smaller deliveries, you know, Amazon, SU30s, whatever, UPS trucks, um, can stand shortly in the driveways with no issue. The um trash loading has its own dedicated space which you'll see in these white boxes that are in the corners that are near
the trash areas for pickup on those days for larger deliveries like if someone orders a bed set or a couch or something from Raymore and Flanigan. We I shouldn't say there any furniture place. Um we have run a template for a WB50 tractor trailer to come through the site and it will be able to circulate through
the site and exit with no issue. Um, so again that's that'll be standing in the driveways temporarily with no issue. Cars can go right around slow traffic generator. >> Uh, utility structures. Comment AAA Miss Laney's letter notes that the ordinance
requires utility structures to comply with the bulk requirements for principal structures >> or uses. >> Is it correct that we will comply? We'll move those utility structures to comply. There's one that is in the corner here, a transformer that we can slide over to
get behind the 30 foot or you 30 foot sid set back. So yes, we will be compliant. >> So we don't need a waiver for the comments comment 8A in Miss Laney's letter. Correct. >> No, we'll correct it. >> Comment 8B asks us to address whether the location of the equipment adjacent
to phases one and three could be screened from public view from either the road or internal common areas. Can you address that? >> Sure. So I want to make it clear first that uh typical HVAC equipment for the buildings air conditioners and things like condensers will be on the roofs of these buildings which will be talked about a little more later. The comment
pertains to generators and transformer pads that are outside the building that have to be on the ground. Uh the generator we can control completely. We can place it wherever we want. That will be screened adequately. the transformers. However, I don't want to sound like we're sidest stepping it, but if the utility company will allow us to
buffer it to the extent that maybe the board professionals would want, we will absolutely do it. The only reason we probably or may not be able to is if they require space for working on the equipment and it doesn't physically fit, but for sure we will be able to screen it from the road and probably from the
driveway. It just may not be able to be screened much more than that. But we will do our best to screen as much as we can. >> Great. Uh, comment 8D in in Miss Laney's letter uh states that we propose little to no landscaping surrounding the proposed
utility structures. It's the same comment, I guess. Is it it's correct that we will screen those to the extent the utility companies do not object. >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> Uh, so if the utility companies won't allow us to screen them, we need a design waiver for not screening the
utility equipments under the ordinance. Uh I suppose not positive. >> Well, the ordinance doesn't say they have to be screened unless the utility company says no. So we should assume I guess that we'll need a waiver if the utility companies say no and therefore we seek that waiver from the board. But
obviously the applicant has no objection to screening those waiver screening those utility structures. Y uh comment nine uh discusses a fence. Can you clarify which proposed fencing within the site? >> Okay. Yeah.
>> Is associated with a construction detail in your plans that shows a 4ft high PVC fence mesh? >> So, we don't propose that that 4ft high PVC fence detail was um inadvertently left in the plans after discussion about another project and bringing details over. um we will remove it. There's no
proposal to use that fence on site. >> Okay. >> What we do propose is a black vinyl coated chain link fence that was requested I guess at a site meeting and some of the discussions earlier with the committees to create a a barrier against the waterway um from the project site and also wrap
it around both the south I'm sorry the east and north sides. Um and we're proposing blackcoated vinyl chain link because we want to make sure it's not visible. You've probably seen if you have a different color fence, it's very much noticeable, especially when we look
towards the creek. If anyone's had the opportunity to do that, it's the the scenic the vista is really nice. It looks good. We don't want it obstructed with a fence. You can notice. So, the black fence will blend into the background, really go away, which is why we propose that a little more expensive than typical chain link fence. Um, but
it's a benefit to the project. So, that's what we propose. >> Comment 17 in Miss Laney's letter. And there's also a similar comment in Mr. Hoder's letter. uh discusses whether there's any dredging of Cedarbrook proposed. Can you address that?
>> Yes, we we do not propose to change the hydraology or hydraulic condition of the the ditch for two reasons. Uh D won't let us, but more importantly, it's not on our project site. It's offsite. So, this man-made ditch for sure is owned by
the um industrial development next door that goes from their basin. Cedarbrook itself is just off our property line. You can maybe see close the little black dots that run through here. So that ditch is that dark line that runs through there and that's off our site. We don't have access to it to clean it even if D or you guys would permit us.
So we can't. >> So comment 17 in Miss Laney's letter and comment 11 in Mr. Hoder's letter is a comment that we're not complying. >> We're not able to do that. No. >> Okay. Lighting. Will this plan comply with all applicable lighting requirements?
>> Yes. Is there sufficient lighting in your opinion for the proposed pedestrian walkways? And if not, will we make them safe? >> Anywhere that we have a potential for it not to be compliant, we will make it compliant. That's the intent. >> And that's not just walkways, but you know, >> parking lots,
>> play areas, parking lots, any areas. Correct. >> Correct. >> Um, is it correct that the applicant agrees to add seating in the open space areas of the plan and work with the board's professionals to do that? Yeah, we do show benches now, but not all that many.
So, we will add some I guess the satisfaction of the board professionals. >> Okay. Is it correct that we intend to preserve the existing landscaping to the extent that we practically can? Yes. >> And and supplement it with the pl the plants that are shown on your
>> Yes. plans. >> The only vegetation that will be removed is a uh a row of white pines that runs on the I guess generally to protect this office from the farm field that runs more or less through where our parking lot's going to go. All the other trees that are around that existing facility
and then again all the buffer plantings that exist on the edges are going to stay. So yes, we will retain just about all of it. >> Comment 21 in Miss Laney's letter correctly points out that our construction details on your plans shows a clubhouse sign. Is it correct that that detail will come off the plans? It
shouldn't be there. >> Yeah, we this the clubhouse in this or the community room is part of this building. In some other projects, it's a separate structure. That's why that sign was there. It's our fault for leaving it on. It will come off. >> Okay. >> Not needed. >> Now, in in phases one, two, and three,
there's different units in each phases. Correct? >> Yes. >> Let's talk about the subdivision plan. >> I know it's not a separate exhibit, but using exhibit 82, >> just show everybody where the three lots, the three proposed lots will be. 801, 802, and 803.
>> Okay. So, they will be structured to contain the buildings and parking associated with each of those phases. So, phase one, which will be lot 18.01, >> oh, I said 801. 18.01, excuse me. >> Will contain the main driveway in and then the building that's the L-shaped
here. That's the phase one building. And then the parking associated with it. >> Phase two will be this larger building that's on the north side. It'll include that building and that parking associated with it. So the phase 2 lot is on that side. Then lot that's 18.02. 18.03 is the balance which will be
between the driveway and the corner of the property. This third building, phase three building along with the parking associated with it. That'll be phase three. To be clear, those lot lines are drawn for simplicity. They don't actually follow where the constructed improvements that will be done in each phase will follow. So there will be easements between them. as an example,
we obviously need the driveway to come through and go out for the first phase, even though it's in that phase two and phase three lot that'll be constructed in the first phase, but it is part of through an easement those other lots. >> Okay. Is it correct that phase one will have 62 units, phase two will have 60
units, and phase three will have 43 units? >> Yes. >> Is it also correct that those three lots and the proposed subdivision comply with all applicable requirements of the redevelopment plan? >> They do. and the unit mix within them each stands alone compliant with the
uniform housing affordability control standards for bedroom mix >> and each of those phases will be separate phases for uh tax credit financing purposes >> that's the only reason >> is it also correct Mr. Shulo that the proposed site plan meets all applicable provisions of the redevelopment plan
>> it does >> okay in Mr. Hoder's letter, there's a few comments I'd like to address. Uh, first comment D1 on page three. D1A uh, notes that some areas of the north and south along South River Road don't
have adequate buffer landscaping. Can you clarify that or address that, please? >> Mr. Hoder and I spoke about this yesterday because it it wasn't clear to me either. What he meant was near the driveways there should be some supplemental plings added to continue the buffer. The only place that we
wouldn't is probably around the site ID sign. It'll be lower, but it won't be the heavy thick buffers. You'll be able to see the sign, but we will add landscaping to those corners to to meet that standard. The next comment number two relates to uh buffers on the north and east, excuse me, the south side
needs, excuse me, it states the southside needs additional landscaping, including evergreens. The 10-ft buffer line should be shown on all landscape sheets. Can you address that? Yeah. And um I'll say just an overarching comment that we'll work with your board professionals to address the landscape
comments because there a lot of stuff that's subjective and we have no issue with it generally. Um for the landscaping on the southside, again, that's towards the the uh the ditch towards Cedar Brook. Um to the extent additional plantings would be needed or or requested, we'll we'll add them, but I don't know that they're actually all
that valuable. But either way, we'll we'll figure it out with the professionals. >> Okay. Uh, I know you've answered this question generally, but specifically, do all the off- streetet parking and loading features meet the applicable requirements?
>> Yeah, to be clear, there are no loading requirements like we don't have to have loading spaces or anything, but we do meet the parking standards and both um geometrically, you know, shape and size of the spaces and the total number required. >> Okay. Now, comment
D15C on page five of Mr. Hoder's letter states that no building mounted signs are shown on the architectural plans. Um, is it correct that we're just putting building numbers on the building? >> Yeah. And they're required by building code for fire protection to have the
identification of the building somewhere on it, which we will have. >> Now, Mr. Hoder's letter, as you would expect, contains numerous stormwater management comments. Is it correct that you'll address those comments and work with Mr. Hoder to address those comments? >> Most of them say that we already comply. Um, so it's just mostly statements, but
to the extent any potential revisions or clarifications are needed, we will address them. >> Is the storm water that flows in the basin included in the calculations? That's comment E9 on page eight. Yeah, the the routings um include these basins
in series together, all connected to the farm pond before it ultimately discharges to uh the Cedarbrook. So, yes, they're all included. >> Comment H1 on page nine uh states that setbacks should be shown for all buildings adjacent to the property
lines. Is it correct, Mr. Shulo, that the redevelopment plan doesn't have required setbacks for the internal lot lines, i.e. the lot lines between the three phases. >> Yes. And when I spoke with Mr. Hoder, I think the that's that's the expectation. It's just the perimeter lot lines that
have to be respected relative to setbacks. And we showed the lines, didn't label them very well. We'll update the plan to show them clearly. >> But is it correct that we comply with those setbacks that we do have to address? >> Yes, absolutely. Comment H5 on page nine states that the
basin entrances are too steep and should be brought down to less than 15% grade. Can you address that? That's H5. >> Yeah. Uh we spoke about this yesterday too. So um I mentioned in previous testimony that the project's compliant with New Jersey's residential site improvement standards. The RSIs RSIS has
within it that the basin maintenance access ways which are how we get equipment in potentially to man or to maintain these basins can be at a five to one slope. So five horizontal to one vertical so 20%. Um it's also again we're going to own these basins. It's privately held, privately owned,
professionally maintained. We have that same size and slope basin maintenance access in every development that we do with Walters and it's never an issue. So um I guess to the extent if that is a township standard or whatever RSI does supersede but if I guess a waiver is
needed we respectfully request it but what we have is adequate and safe. >> So comment H5 is one of the few comments that we're not going to address. >> Yeah it was uh the one about the dredging that we mentioned. >> I have it that's >> the next one is actually H8 which states
that the ownership of the sanitary sewer system and the water system should be by the developer. Is it correct that New Jersey American Water will own the water system? >> Yes. >> And the sanitary sewer system is a public system, but the applicant will own the lines on its own lots. >> It's to be discussed more with the
governing body and the sewer department. But yes, so a New Jersey American will own the mains in easements and um again the sewer definitely the portion that's going to be in the public rightway has to be owned by the municipality. When it gets into the site, it may be owned by the developer or the municipality.
>> Okay. Comment H16 on page 10 asks us to submit a phase one that is sat satisfactory to the board. Is it correct Mr. Shulo that in the context of the development agreement between the township and the developer we've the applicants provided a phase one and a
phase two to assist the applicant and the township to assess the environmental condition of the property. >> Yes. So in that context the governing body and the township has the phase one phase two. We'll provide a copy to Mr. Hoder and the board for uh the file. Fair enough. Uh the redevelopment plan,
this is comment 18 on page 10, uh requires the applicant to consider installing solar panels in the parking lot. >> It's my understanding from speaking to the applicant that the applicant uh does not intend to install solar panels. Is that correct, Mr. Schula?
>> Yeah, simply due to budgetary concerns. Um first phase especially, we have all the infrastructure that goes in to service it. The budget won't be able to to handle it. If there's contingency money available, it will absolutely be explored. We can't commit to it. >> But is it your understanding that that's considered cost generative because the
the HMFA uh program doesn't include uh or doesn't permit those to be included in the budget? >> That's my understanding. Yes. >> Okay. All right. That is all I had for the Mr. Hod's letter. There was one or two in Mr. Fand's letter which of course
Mr. McCormack will principally respond to, but I think I had a comment or two in there for you. Just give me one second, please. Uh, comment five on page three of Mr. Fanda's letter asks us to consider reinforced grass emergency access along the north side of building 2. Can you
address that, Jay? >> Sure. So you'll see on the plan here on again exhibit A2, there's these um shaded areas that come off of the end of the driveway at the um northeastern corner and then one off this access
driveway that wrap around. They go, you'll see they only go a portion of the building. Uh the reason for that is there was discussion and um coordination with the township fire official about needed access and the standard that was required is the end of that reinforced
area which is where a fire truck potentially would pull up has to be 150 ft from uh the nearest doorway or point where someone may have to be pulled out of the building. So both ends of it are extended to that point where there's 300 feet between them. So it meets the standard and has been discussed and
coordinated with the fire official and it's acceptable to them. So what we show is what they want. >> Uh thank you. Next there's a comment Mr. Fenda's letter about it's comment two at the top of page four
which uh talks about the required number of parking spaces which you've covered >> and it states in there that a dimminimous exception from RSIS parking requirement is required. Is it correct uh Mr. Schul that RSIS has been amended to to clarify
that the maximum number of park RS RSIS establishes the maximum number of parking spaces that a municipality can require and they can require fewer than the maximum. Correct? >> Yes. >> And it it also states in that regulation and this is relatively recent that
approvals with fewer parking spaces shall be exempt from the dimminimous exception process. Is that your understanding? >> That is the law. Yes. Okay. So, that is comment two on page four of Mr. Firanda's letter. Uh, will we address the fire comments?
>> Yes. And I mentioned that we've already had discussions um with fire officials. So, um, this the letter that came out or that was released that would you mention is undated, but it's part of the application um has the I guess general
requirements that apply to every project and we we've addressed them already. So, they it wasn't necessarily stating that we didn't address them. It's just pointing out this is what we want. So, we have addressed and we will continue to work with them to um address any other future concerns.
>> Mr. Chairman, that's all the questions I can think of for Mr. Shoul. Um, Martina, can we ask why Mr. Schula is up? Can I just instead of asking all questions at once, I think it'd be better to ask him questions and we'll go
with each professional as as we is that all right with the board. Is that okay? All right. So, with that in mind, if any of our professionals would like to answer ask any uh questions of Mr. Schula while while he's standing here
patiently awaiting for any of your questions. >> Mr. Chairman, Dave Hoder, engineer for the board for the record. Um, just a couple comments and two additional items. Um, they uh did a very good job of of going
through the ordinance and the redevelopment plan because this is sort of the second bite at the apple. They had they had done a plan last year. I had a lot of comments on that plan. They actually carried those comments through to this plan. So, most of my items in my
letter have been taken care of. It's very good. The items made my job easy. We went through a lot of them yesterday and uh the engineer went through those tonight except for two. One is that I asked for a table for
the lighting minimax and averages as per most ordinances. Will you do that? No problem. We will do that. >> And the second thing on on the subdivision, um will you do >> Yeah. >> Uh monuments uh at the locations near
the roadway as per the title recordation law. >> Yeah. So um in the in the review letter too, Mr. Hoder asked if we're going to file by deed or by map, and it wasn't clear at the time we were discussing it, but because the Cranford or sorry, Cranberry Man, I'm sorry, that was a slip. Cranberry's ordinance says that
any more than two lots is considered a major subdivision. and this is three. So, it's a major subdivision. By state law, the subdivision has to be filed by map. And also with major subdivisions, the exterior corners against the rights of way of lots have to be placed uh in the field. So, they will be done
pursuant to the law. So, yes. And then the last thing is um while it's not in the redevelopment plan, our e our ordinance uh requires um durable markers at the at the location of all corners of conservation
easements either DRCC state or cranberry repairing. Uh I call durable markers iron pipes. >> Yeah. Pipes and caps. Yeah. So um >> through the D process there will be areas that become restricted. Uh there
are also going to be areas that are described but not restricted. So anywhere that easements for conservation are required we will place um as you as you put resilient markers or whatever okay cap. >> Mr. Chairman that's really all I have because he went through everything else. >> Thank you.
>> Andrew would you like to >> uh Andrew Fanda traffic consultant to the board. I agree with what was stated that they addressed the items. A lot of the items um that had been mentioned in a previous application were addressed
and taken care of. There are some items here uh specifically for the roadway and the intersection, but I'm going to hold off until the traffic engineer discusses those. >> Um >> they did go over the parking. Uh I did put in my uh letter about the
dimminimous exception for the parking. They are correct that uh the DCA came out with a update amended uh to allow for uh that being a maximum not have to provide those parking spaces. I wanted
to make sure it was in my letter just that uh it's for the record um that they do uh meet the redevelopment plan and that redevelopment plan certainly supports uh any uh parking that they have uh provided for the site which is
less than what the RSIS states but again if that's a maximum requirement they can certainly uh be below and meet the redevelopment plan uh which they do. Do you agree with the uh applicant um wanting to put in speed bumps to for
traffic control at the crossways there? >> That would be up to the board to go over that. Uh there are pluses and minuses for the speed humps. Uh they are straight shots down the parking area, so there could be higher speeds. Uh and
there are going to be crossing. Uh I did request for the crosswalks to be stried uh anywhere between handicap ramps that you would cross a circulation aisle. The issue with speed uh bumps is it could get noisy. Uh if there's cars that
run over the speed humps uh at something more than the lowest speed, uh cars do bounce and anybody who lives in the area of the speed humps will hear this. If there's landscape vehicles, you'll hear this. Uh, so
pluses and minuses, it's really up to the board to >> it. It all and again, it all depends on the the width of the speed bump and the height of the speed bump. If it's a lower speed bump at maybe where the intersection is, where the crosswalk is,
it it doesn't have to be this high. It could be just a few inches. Just in other words, just to to let people know to slow down. >> There's speed bumps, speed tables, speed humps. there's different heights that it becomes a standard um type of device
that's used. It's it's a typical device. Uh and they have optimized it to minimize a lot of that bounce. Um but still you will get that bounce in the vehicles and hear some noise from it occasionally when vehicles aren't aware
and they hit it at speed or >> but that's the point of the speed bump. >> Correct. Correct. Absolutely. >> You might do it once but you won't do it again. Correct. Absolutely. >> I'm not sure where that comment was. I thought I saw it somewhere. The applicant's willing to install them if the board doesn't want them. We'll do
what the board prefers. >> I would leave that up to the board to decide because there are the pluses and minuses in this case that is the long straight shot past the parking areas. And if somebody is going at a higher speed and somebody's backing out, you you could have issues in that area. So
>> right >> there are pluses and minus and I I can see the benefits of either uh way. >> Okay. >> In route >> and and to be clear we were thinking just along the two outer >> correct not not behind phase three. >> No.
>> Um Liz, do you have any >> just a couple of uh additional comments as the my colleagues both said they answer just about everything. I just wanted to uh make get an assurance that the utility hot boxes that you'd be
willing to either paint them panone 17-0230. >> Yeah. Yeah. We won't I wouldn't let you have to go through it. We won't have them because the easements that the water man will be in that be owned by New Jersey American. The reason hot boxes are proposed or required is when
the fire protection backflow pretor is less than 100 ft from the main. We're going to be closer than that because the mains are going to be in the driveways and the fire protection will be within that distance. So, we won't have any hot boxes. >> Oh, that's that's great. >> If we turn Mr. Shulo turns out to be
wrong, we we'll paint the hot >> and he's painting them. Um there were a couple of like minor um cleanup items in the zoning table which I noted in my letter just I there was something about
>> um minimum distance between buildings. Yeah, just a slight >> to the extent we didn't address any Miss Laney. We'll certainly agree to address them as conditions of approval. >> Then I have one question that's just it wasn't in my letter but it came up in your testimony. So this existing uh
basin that's there will that have water in it always? >> They actually dug it below the seasonal high water table. It's lower that's lower than Cedar Brook. >> So it will always it'll be essentially an irrigation pond a pond 247. Okay. And
does it have um circulation that sort of thing? You know like uh to you know >> mosquitoes whatever. >> No, it hasn't been an issue. Um, and we're going to have more water going through it in theory than the farmfield did. >> Okay. >> So, no, if it becomes an issue, Walters
will absolutely do something about it, but there's no intention to need it >> at this point. >> Okay. Those are my only comments right now. >> Okay. Um, can I just say one quick thing? >> Sure. >> On the repairing zones, um, at first I
thought that the pond was a repairarian zone, but it's not. and Cedarbrook is, but it's far enough away and they're not disturbing that repairing zone 150 ft. But the repairing zone in the back for the drainage ditch that runs to Ted
tension basins uh to the to the north uh is um subject to our ordinance and this board will have to we'll have to grant a variance as the testimony went u which um be one of the few times that that has
happened in Cranberry. So the zoning board did grant one the other night uh for a environmental reason. This is not that case, but maybe it's a different case.
>> Yeah, we'll definitely we'll we'll in fact we'll talk about that probably right now. Um but I want to get comments from other board members real quick um about anything that for Mr. Schuler here. So, anybody can go ahead, Iman.
Let me go this way. >> Just because we're still talking about the um that irrigation pond, >> do we plan on using that for irrigation of the landscape that's there? >> So, the um it's very likely going to be investigated, assuming that it can
produce or provide the amount we need. It's a very good chance we'd be able to. Yes. But we're not positive. >> That's a good point. That's a really that's a really nice um I mean if if it happens that's that's really cool. Very nice. And you mentioned a word you said it it um over tops like does it often
over top? Does it does it spill over this particular irrigation pond when it floods? >> There's really no evidence of it having been over topped. So I think they it's pretty enormous. So probably not. Okay. If ever it were to, that's the only place it could is on that side. >> Okay. Very nice. Um
just to clarify for myself, we have these three lots and three phases. And with regards to the tax credit rounds that we are applying for, it's not three separate rounds, is it? >> Uh Mr. Spitel would probably be the best
person to answer that, but my understanding is we're only applying for phase one in this round, but he'll confirm that. >> Okay. Okay. Um what else are we This question is a little bit for you, Liz. Didn't we talk at some point about um
suggesting a stream restoration? >> That was the question, the dredging question. >> Well, that was the dredging question. >> Yeah. So, we had added language per our discussion. Uh if it was possible that they could dredge uh the stream and I I guess their testimony is it's not on
their property and D won't let them. >> That's interesting. So, but less than dredging even that would probably not be allowed, right? just even removing wood that has fallen. I don't know. >> If it's not on their It's not on their property, that's the point. >> Yeah, that's interesting. It's It's so
funny how just optimizing flow of a structure like that is not a priority necessarily. We're finding this with a couple of different sources of water. Um not just in town, but around. >> Um and this is more of a comment. when there was a mention about solar cells,
Cranberry uh participates in what's called solar landscapes where we it's a solar farm that we get we get to buy into that would be available to this particular property. if it could be worked in financially. I
mean, you you have a different financial structure here being set up that I don't think it's going to I don't think it's going to work financially for the project to put that in. >> I don't think it's anything that we put in. It's just people when they reside there, they're apply for the solar
landscapes and they get to they get significant decrease in their in their bills without having a solar cell attached to the roof because I see what you're saying. >> I see what you're saying. >> I mean, like I know I've participated. I don't know if anybody else here has
participated in. >> There's a program where you could buy into lowcost uh power from local solar farms and everything. So, it's something that you can investigate for the project. >> And that's it. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> I'm going to talk last. So, I'm going to turn the next to Bill and then go around. So, with the standing water uh in the pond, what I know I know that pond on Plainsboro Road, they had to add um you know, little fountains because the
mosquito problems. You know, we have very bad mosquito problems here in town when the season hits that standing water for how long does I don't know what what the standard is for. >> We were so we're really surprised how deep that pond is. The guys had to get a
boat to survey it. >> Literally like carried it down. So, um, the mosquitoes become a problem when it's shallow and it doesn't move a lot. This is deep, so it doesn't have that issue. But if it does, we will have to address it >> because Yeah, because when I saw it, it was totally dry. So, I imagine sometimes
it's going to be dry. >> That pond there was >> We walked there in there was water. All right. >> Yeah. It's I mean, legitimately over 10 feet deep. >> Yeah. So, if it is an issue, then you'll add absolutely. Yeah. It's It's
>> Why don't we just stop one second here? I think we're we're we're we're we're um I don't want to say mixing terminology here. That >> is not the original farm pond for the property that was put in by the previous owner or the excuse me, the current
owner for the quick check. >> Oh. >> So that it's it's not the old irrigation. >> It's really unusual to put a pond like that in for because I actually have the approval plans here. Um in the 2022 plans that existed and they were
modifying the edge of it to square it up, >> right? >> I didn't see that they were So that you think that they did that work or they dug it? >> I think they dug it and they modified the edges because no farmer would ever put a pond like that in that that's modified as
>> for more of a detention basin. >> And so I think we I don't I think we're just we got to be careful of our terminology. I think this has been modified. It's not the original farm pond as we've seen as this board has seen elsewhere on other properties that
we had to make a determination on whether it was a pre-existing farm pond, you know, um, abandoned or whatever in place. Sure. >> This thing has been severely modified. Like you say, you had to carry a boat down to get into this thing. So, I think
we we just have to be I I don't want to say careful how we label this thing, but it it's not it's not the original farm pond. >> The existing pond is >> Yeah. The existing pond on the site we should call it. Yep. >> Okay. And just related to that, you know, I
have to say, you know, this board's been very, you know, strict in general for the repairing zone, but I think this is the first time I've heard >> a good technical reason to not
are repairing. Thank you. >> You know, the first time I've heard a good reason for granting a variance for not following it. Usually it's just because somebody wants to get rid of it and >> you have no idea how many clients potential clients I turned down because
their justifications I want it. So it sounds like, you know, I thought that was a very good explanation of why it's being improve that it's an improvement of what's there and better environmentally, >> right? They're actually removing they're removing um
>> uncontrolled. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Um bike racks, grills, any other public amenities, you know, gardens. Um, >> we'll work with the with with with the board staff to to do what we can there.
Yes. >> Just I think the bike racks are really important here to put them. >> Absolutely. >> Outdoor grilling >> instead of a big pile. >> Yeah. The outdoor seating, you know, it's a great >> view. Um, you mentioned about I was
curious when I read the comment um about more more landscaping to the south. I'm not sure if you meant plan south or if you meant um actual south because those are two different things. I I I agree with your comments that, you know, the
views to the west are very nice and don't need to be overly landscaped, you know, because I think that's where you could have seating. >> Yeah, this edge here. Yeah. >> And you know, kids could play in there when it's dry. And I think that's that's an amenity that personally I don't see a
reason to spend more money on landscaping there. But I but I do think having the grilling areas, the seating areas, the bike areas, wherever you can work in any type of amenities, you know, I I think that uh you know, any any type of of garden
space, pet areas is, you know, um is so essential to this community being a success and making it as good as we can for the people that live here. Thank you. >> I had more time than that.
>> All right. I uh the first thing I'd like to uh just kind of touch on is the pond and the application of the 150 foot buffer to that pond. In my past experience, uh surface water bodies were
identified using the NJD uh GIS and uh that GIS identifies that as a reservoir. >> So is there a particular reason why uh it's been identified as not applicable to the pond?
So the when you you're talking about scrolling through the layer information in GIS. So it has it as a reservoir and then below it says it's manmade. >> So the we haven't really restricted our I mean if it was a farmer or pond you know that was left for 100 years when does
something stop being >> what the chairman just mentioned is interesting because it kind of goes in that direction. So at the very end of the definition of surface water body in the township ordinance where it says what's regulated, right, it says stormwater basins are specifically excluded and if that was modified and it is now a stormwater basin and we're
going to keep it as a stormwater basin. >> I mean I think you made your point for you but I >> that was my question before you said that. >> Right. Gotcha. >> Yeah. >> If I could add something to that. Our ordinance uh says a blue line on the state >> GIS.
This one's a brown line. The pond is a brown line. I'm not sure what that means. >> GIS when they switch it over last year. >> Yeah. Well, and then it's interesting. There's two different layers. There's a 2002 water body and it doesn't show up. Shows up in 2020 and it's brown because it's man-made there. All the stormwater
basins show up. They have blue line for all the lowflow channels in this basin because a kid up at D was just looking at aerials going blue. It's Yeah, it shouldn't be regulated. It's man-made. It's clearly going to be maintained and uh yeah, that's the position.
>> All right. Thank you. >> Um, now in that top right hand corner of that pond, you have a fence going across it. I assume that's you're going to fill. >> We're showing um a black vinyl coated chain fence that runs along that edge to prevent >> Well, it goes through the pond.
>> Well, it's on the corner. We're going to wrap it around that corner. We're not going to fill it. That'll be corrected. >> Thank you. >> I'm not being picky. I was just me. >> No, you're right. I saw it, too, and I didn't want to point it out. Yeah, you're right. We got to move it around that edge. Now, um, another question I had here and I thought was interesting
was the, uh, the introduction of the crosswalks, which I think is a great idea. >> Yeah. >> Now, those crosswalks are going to extend from bumpouts >> that you're going to fill the space with. >> We're going to pick a side and then put it on the side of that landscape island. So, >> it's going to run along the landscape
island or is it going to be in a bump out? >> It won't be through it since it's shorter. >> No, we want to Well, we don't want to take out the landscaping. So it could be if you you're saying make the landscape island larger and put the crosswalk between it rather than paint the pave. >> Right. Yeah. Because otherwise you'd
have you know if you bump it out people have a shorter crossing distance and they can be in front of whatever vegetation is in there. If we do it to either side of a tree or something like that people are appearing out of the vegetation stepping into the road. >> Yeah. We can make the island larger and put the walkway through it. Now, um to
uh Andrew's point, you know, I I do agree that uh speed bumps can be noisy, but would uh would there be consideration to maybe a race crossing at those crosswalks serve the purpose of raising pedestrian uh but also slowing traffic?
>> I think we kind of have to in that it's either paint and then a speed bump next to it. You're not going to walk two foot wide speed bump. We got to make it a speed hump or >> raised crosswalk. Yeah. >> Yeah. And I I mean a raised crosswalk is just fantastic way to accomplish better.
>> Yeah, I think that's that's going to be the option we have to go with. And if we're going to shorten it, like you mentioned, um the one of the things about speed bumps is maintenance like right >> clouds hit them and stuff and we don't love it, but to accommodate the request, we'll we'll figure that out. >> Yeah. Something more like table
concrete. >> Oh, we got you know drainage goes by. We gota we'll take care of it though. We'll figure it out. Okay. >> Now, um Now, I don't know if this is the right time, but uh maybe uh is the architect going to uh testify as well?
>> Yes, I'll save this question for them. >> And then so my last question is regarding the phasing and what is the anticipated total time for build out phase one through three? Is there a timeline at all? >> Well, I'll ask Mr. Spiteel to answer
that question. >> Okay. But usually these rounds are annual and so if it's one phase a year, that's three years right there. But we'll ask Mr. Spectel to answer that. >> Okay, >> that's it for me. >> No, he's going to be my next witness.
Yeah, we'll just finish with any questions for you if we can. >> Absolutely. >> Deanna, >> as usual, you know, as we get down to here, everybody else takes the questions. Um, and typically I talk about fire safety and stuff, but I feel like you've addressed that well. Um,
we've never brought we've never had to bring this up before, but who does the planning for school bus stops and school bus traffic? Is there any >> in our experience, the school districts do that? >> School districts. I'm just, you know, I
think that that needs to be um considered because of the speed bumps, which I think are a great idea. what no matter how you do it, I think you have to slow that traffic down. Um, but yeah, I think we need to be aware of how many pickup spots they're going to be and the
flow. >> Well, that's an interesting question and whether they're they're not >> personally they should come into the site to drop and pick up. >> Yeah. >> And not not pick up on >> and we've accommodated that from a
template perspective, but it's up to the school district. Okay. Well, I think if that's communicated, they would be open to that, I would think. >> Okay. But you can accommodate for that for a school bus to come in there. Sure. >> Yeah. The turning template shows we have a a tractor trailer going through with
no issues. School bus will fit with no problem. >> That's really up to the school board, but they have a good location behind the phase three building, right, where it comes right in. You don't have to go deep into the site. Let the children come towards the front and it can go in and out that way.
>> So, you're saying at this intersection here? Yeah. No. >> Yeah. Somewhere up front behind the building. Uh it doesn't have to be at the intersection, but the intersection would be fine, too. >> Yeah. Well, whatever they want will accommodate, >> but again, the board will have the final say, the school board.
>> Um I know we mentioned that it's not our decision right now about um screening transformers and boxes and such, but typically this board is very um involved in how we want that screening to look. So, I know we can't make that decision
right now, but I just want to make sure that we know we will have screening if it's allowed. >> Yeah. We just didn't want to be caught in a situation where we didn't disclose that and then the utility says you can't screen it. Now, we have to come back to the board for a waiver. We're happy to screen it. It's just
>> it's just if they say no, we don't want to be caught in a procedural switch. >> If they tell you no, you can't screen it, you can't screen it, >> right? I just wanted to cover that tonight as opposed to have to come back to cover it. And you mentioned something in passing um about conservation easements.
Where would they be? >> Uh so >> of curiosity, >> D would potentially put like there's a a little bit of wetland pocket up here and there's a buffer that wraps around it. They may make us deed restrict that. Another little one down here. Uh the repairing zone that runs along this edge, that's the D version of the
repairing zone, which is 50 feet. They may make us also put a restriction on that. Um, but that it'll all be adjacent to this ditch here, Cedar Brook. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you, sir. Thanks. >> You also >> Okay. Thanks. My turn. Um, we talked about the area next, this is kind of a followup to what Iman said, the area next to the
called Shadybrook. Shady Brook is no bigger than this table, unfortunately. And then the last time it was there, it was dry as a bone. It looked like a just a ditch. Um, is there you have basically nothing planted along there. Is there any
reason to that you might want to that you may consider that we should consider any wetlands trees to be put in that area or anything or just leave it all open grass in that on the other side of your fence there
>> through this section? >> Yeah, between the fence and the brook. >> Well, there's a little bit. >> Yeah, they're existing, but they're garb. They're really garbage trees. They're just they're all >> Well, that that kind of tells you what's going to happen if we plant it.
>> Yeah. Well, I'm I'm saying there are trees that are more that are ornamental trees that are more conducive to wetlands um that could potentially be planted in there, but I don't know. >> I my if I understood Bill's comment earlier, I thought you thought that
would be a more appropriate place for some of the passive recreation. >> Well, that would be on the other side of the fence. He's got a fence that's going down that's splitting the the brook area from am I correct? Where's that? >> We would put the fence along the lot, but that's in the repairing zone. So, we
have to put it outside of that. So, it's 50 ft 45T off of the lot. >> Now, could we put anything in the repairing zone or nothing? We can't plant anything. >> Well, what we're going to do is right now they mow it because it's gone. We're going to let it go. It's gonna turnow and whatever wants to grow there naturally that can handle wet feet or
whatever, you know, demographic wants to pick up there, that's what'll be there. But we're not gonna >> we're not going to mow it. >> Okay. Or plan it. >> No, we're going to let it go. So, it's probably going to turn into what you see on the other side,
>> secondary successional wetlandish. >> All right. Um, regarding the variance, I I concur with Bill. That was a very good explanation. Um on the um eastern side of the property that it is less of a ditch there that think it's
even narrower than the stable that's in there. So there to be to to to classify that as a waterway would be an insult to waterways. Um it it's it's it's nothing. Um, so you know, I think you've
addressed that and and and the reason for the variance makes sense in this case, whereas in the past the board has not granted a variance on two properties that we uh reviewed in the past. Um, we did not grant that. We made the applicant put a buffer around that. But
in this case, I see no reason for that. But that's, you know, we we and if the board concurs, I' like to kind of get that off the table now. I I think we I think I don't see the need for for making that happen here. So,
um you talked about the fire company. Deanna talked about the fire company. Uh oh, you talked about the phasing of the plan. Now, you said there's funding for each year. So, each year you would apply. Is that what you're >> Yeah. So, each phase you can apply for
more than one phase at a time theoretically, but it depends on a lot of different factors. But you can apply for each phase and if you if you if you win that year, you get the funding. If you don't, you don't and you can apply in future years. The fact that phase one
may win doesn't mean that phase two or three will win because it depends on who else is applying. And there are tiebreers and I'm not an expert in that area. Mr. Spitel knows more about it than I do for sure. But uh the fact that phase one wins doesn't mean the other
phases will win. And uh so they're there they're often separately applied for. >> Okay. >> Which is why we phased it. >> Okay. Um just out of curiosity and you address a number of these. The internal
roadways are they going to be named? Are they actually considered township roads? If there if there are >> if the town is going to be Now who maintains this? Are you maintain is the >> These will be private driveways. >> Okay. So, they're not there's >> they're not proposed to be public streets.
>> Okay. >> I can't get my name on a road yet. >> Yeah, I know. >> I've been trying for 30 years here. We'll put my name on a road boulevard's all over. >> Okay, that's it for me right now. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Schul.
>> Mr. Spitel. Yes, sir. >> Come forward, please. You were sworn up. >> I was just really hard to hear. >> I support >> I support that movement.
>> Otherwise, >> Mr. Spitel, why don't we start with you spelling your name, please? >> Sure. First name is Ed, last name is Spyel. S Pi Tel. >> What is your position with the Walters Group? >> I'm on the development team with the
Walters Group. I've been in that role for 22 years. >> And can you give everyone a very brief overview of who the Walters Group is? >> Certainly. Uh we are we do several things, but primarily we are an affordable housing developer in the state of New Jersey. We handle
everything from the development such as this evening um to construction to property management. We do it all under one roof. We have about 2,000 units uh that are open and operational and another 1,000 or so units in our
development pipeline. And yes, like I said, we everything that we develop, we construct. Everything we construct, we manage. >> Okay. and you operate known as opposed to construct and sell. >> That's correct. We have never seen a community.
>> Uh will this be a typical Walters affordable community if it's approved and built? >> Uh yes in if you mean high level construction and and like all of the other communities we've done. Yes. >> And how will this community be staffed?
>> Sure. We will have a we'll have a property management. We'll have a property manager um there during business hours. Uh we will have maintenance staff there during business hours as well. We'll have a part-time social services coordinator.
Um to the extent that uh there is an emergency maintenance issue that happens in off hours. We have an emergency number where someone is dispatched in an hour and comes and addresses the uh the issue. Can you give us a brief overview of the proposed
amenities for this community? >> Certainly. Um, so as Mr. Schulo went through on the site plan, uh, we have the large green space area that's kind of central to the community. We have
the, um, approximate to that is the tot. Um, we have the, uh, full basketball court on the other side of the drive aisle near the riparian area. Uh there's the gazebo. Um so those are some of the exterior amenities that we have on the
interior side. So in the phase one building that houses our property management offices um as well as there's a large fitness room. There's a large community room. Um and I believe actually not I believe
every floor has uh a lounge. Some of them have outdoor areas. And I know for a fact that there's some as shown, not sure which exhibit this is, but you'll see some of these outdoor porches that kind of overlook the um uh the tot area
and the green space. >> Those are community spaces. >> Correct. >> Okay. And all the residents can use the community spaces. >> Yes, they can. >> And is it correct that the applicants amendable to adding seating, uh grills, bike racks, and similar features in
available spaces? >> Absolutely. And we'll work with the board professionals to do that. >> Yes. >> Will this community comply with all applicable affordable housing requirements that are promulgated under the uniform housing affordability controls and all the other rules that go with it?
>> Yes. And the 9% tax credit rules. >> Okay. And those rules relate to income restrictions. Correct. >> Yes. >> Bedroom mix. >> Correct. >> Unit sizes. >> That's correct. um you know other things
like lead you know how energy efficiency all the different requirements that that go along with with the tax credit rules. >> Will this be elite certified community? >> Uh yes it will be. Um we believe it'll obtain lead platinum. We've obtained
lead platinum before. I cannot guarantee that but my bet we always go for the best that we can and I would venture to guess that it would get lead gold uh if not platinum. Okay, there was a question about the expected buildout time for all
three phases. So, first, can you either confirm that I correctly explained or clarify how the phasing works and how the tax credit application process works and then address the expected buildout time? >> Sure. The one thing I would just like to clarify is in this particular type of
funding that is the 9% uh tax credit funding, they actually do not let you submit two phases of the same community in that funding cycle. So, uh the application that we will be submitting by July 1st will be for phase one,
that's the 62 units. Uh our expectation is to submit uh phase 2 next year. We don't know when exactly that funding cycle, that application cycle will be, but I would anticipate that to be somewhere around somewhere between July
and Labor Day. Um, the third phase, if the town was interested, we could submit the following year or, you know, it depends on where you are with your plan and when you want us to, but we would be happy to submit that the following year.
Now, there's a development agreement between the township and uh Walters's Cornerstone Development LLC, which is affiliated with the applicant. Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> And is it correct that we will comply with the applicable requirements of that
agreement, including things like the control period, i.e. how long the property's deed restricted? >> Yes. and uh the percentage of units that must be set aside for occupancy by people facing or experiencing homelessness or special needs. >> That's correct. Okay.
>> Um if I could expand on I can give you the anticipated construction timing if you it's a little bit murky as to when HMFA would announce the tax credit awards, >> but just giving >> It's a good word, >> right? But just giving our my best guess
is we would probably be in a position to start construction on phase one towards the end of 2027, beginning of 2028 with first occupancies somewhere around just say
somewhere in in the 2029 to 2030 range. Is it correct that HMFA has a requirement that you put the units in service within a certain time frame after you get the award? >> Yes, it is a it is a mad dash to perfect your approvals and get to the closing
table and start construction. There's a shelf life on the tax credits. >> So, it's hurry up and wait, see if you get the tax credits and then hurry up again to build the units. >> That's correct. And we get to do it over several phases. >> That's all the questions I had for Mr. Spitel. Mr. Chairman, members of the
board, any questions? Yeah, I have just one question. Um, but is it your intention to go through a full compliance review for preliminary and final for all three phases right now? >> Get So, with the township, you'll be done and you'll be ready to submit to
the building department for um for phase one. >> Yes, that's correct. >> But but phase one, two, and three will all be done in terms of uh the chairman, myself, and the secretary signing the plans. That's our intention. Yes. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you, >> Liz. Nandrew, >> am I remembering wrong? Didn't we talk about way back when um when you apply for these tax credits, you really have like two two goes at it.
>> Do you remember anything like that? >> If you don't receive it again, >> right? if correct if um if ever you don't score um and and achieve the award you can always apply the following year. Um so I mean we are very confident that
we will succeed in getting the funding but yes there's the opportunity if a certain you know we'll just call phase one one particular project if for some reason that one doesn't get funded you can you can go after it the following year. >> Okay. And
when we're when we're done with all of this, we would have applied for tax credits like four times totally. Three times? No, three times for this. But then the >> three times for this community, >> right? And then and then another one for for the other community. >> You already have that one, right?
>> Yes. So it would be four times. And that doesn't create any situation. You have the same town applying for similar. Okay. That's good. Good to know. Thank you. >> You're welcome. So when we were meeting in the subcommittee, you know, my understanding
was that, you know, phase one and phase two would would meet this round's requirements. Phase three we would be hitting at the end of this, you know, term, kind of going into the next term. So that would be built out for, you
know, toward the toward the next um phase. Is that where we're still thinking? >> Well, it's a it's a conversation that I think we need to continue to have with with you as a town and you as a subcommittee because our responsibility
is to kind of look at the tax credit climate, see how competitive it is. It's incumbent upon us to continue to give you information and say, "Hey, listen. It might make sense for you to go into this round because the rules have stayed the same and they're favorable or for
some other reason." So, um, I'm not gonna, you know, say for sure this is what we're we're going to work in concert with you and what your needs are to do that. >> I just can I just one thing is that we're nine years until the next round and it the way the timeline was just
articulated, it's three years from now until the first building. Yeah. >> So, you know, potentially if if it all worked exactly the same way each >> each each funding round, they would be finishing the third building just when the four fifth round be starting,
>> right? So, you're not are you you're applying for the first round. It's going to take two or three years to occupancy. You're going to be applying to for the second round strategically when you know you're ready to build that in occupancy, but not necessarily. >> No, they'll apply next year. >> We'll apply next year for phase two.
Okay. And then you'll just keep going constructionwise. >> Yes. And I think we'll be able to there will be a way to kind of sync up our construction efforts with with one and two. >> Okay. >> Any other questions down that?
>> I have a quick question. Um, you know, standard condition is that the board attorney would would prepare the deed restrictions. was the thinking that that would be for each phase. Um, >> so for these communities, it's been my experience. First of all, it there are
specific required forms that the state uses and we'll obviously share those with you because the town has a vested interest in making sure we properly restrict these so that you get credit as a town for the units. So I think the condition in this approval should be that the property will be restricted in
accordance with all the applicable rules and that we will uh submit that to you for approval. >> Great. Yeah, I I haven't tangled with the new forms much yet. Um but what we typically do and it's because our administrative um um housing agent
usually requires a schedule that lists the units just to help keep track. Um I you know the U-Hack provisions and also the local ordinance have these rounding provisions that can get kind of thorny. It would be very helpful if when we get to that point you could provide that
schedule that lists the breakdown by income and by bedroom >> income mix and bedroom mix. I don't think that's a problem. We can right we can certainly do that and we're we're used to in all the towns that we're in uh working with all the affordable housing liaison and providing that
information on an annual basis. >> Thank you. >> I'm good. >> Bring on your next. >> So thank you Mr. Spel. >> Thank you. Uh our our next witnesses are architect
uh Michael Yuan. We have some very brief planned testimony for him. Of course, you can answer any questions that you have as well. I'm gonna help you, Michael, with your exhibits. Why don't we take down? >> So, just while he's getting situated, this is what you see is exhibit A1. The
exhibits are backwards because my parallegal marked them backwards. I apologize for that. But the architectural exhibits are exhibit A1. Mr. Bruhan, good evening. >> Good evening. Is it correct that your firm is the project architect for this community? >> That is correct. >> And is it also correct that your office
prepared the uh the color renderings which are three pages marked exhibit A1? >> That is correct. >> And you're personally familiar with this proposed community from an architectural perspective? >> Yes. >> Is it also correct that you're a professional architect licensed in the state of New Jersey?
>> I I am. Yes. >> Okay. And have you qualified as an expert in architecture before other land use boards? >> I'm sorry. >> Have you qualified as an expert in architecture before other land use boards? >> Yes. >> Uh, and your license is in good standing. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Chairman, we'd ask the board accept Mr. Bhian as an expert in architecture. >> So accepted. >> Thank you, sir. >> Sorry, sir. Could you just spell your last name, please? >> Yes. It's Bhan Bin Boy. Uh I O N in Nancy.
Using exhibit A1, can you briefly give the board an overview of the proposed primary architectural features on the exterior of the buildings? >> Yes. So, we'll be uh using uh exterior materials will be uh use the
board and the microphone, please. So, exhibit A1, you'll see that the exterior materials we'll be using will be real brick. We're not going to be using any foam materials and uh it will be fiber cement sighting uh fiber cement
uh board and batten panels and uh with regards to uh fiber cement trims all around all the our vertical materials. Um, we've broken down the uh the m the
length of the the uh the buildings uh which all had the uh the architectural style with the uh balconies uh where we have all the balconies on the units which have all
the protrusions and depressions. So we we broke that down and then each balcony has a gable roof on top of it. Our building is capped with a slope roof with a flat roof in the middle creating
the flat roof will be lower creating a tub. So the gable roof will uh function partly as a screen. All our fenestrations will be uh hung windows at our uh units. Uh our
community areas right now will be large uh storefront windows like uh Mr. Spy said these area on the on the rendering the bottom part would be the community room. These three floors will be the uh
lounge areas and adjacent to it will be outdoor balconies and Just to go go back one step. This is the uh uh view of uh building one for phase one. Uh all of
the buildings will be four stories. Uh like I said, all the architectural features are all like taken uh uh into all the buildings. >> Uh that's the first page of exhibit A one. Can you show us the second page?
And and I'll ask you, are all of the elevations for all three buildings similar similarly treated? >> Yes, like I said, all of the treatments, uh, the materials, the architectural features are all typical to all the
three buildings. >> Okay. And will all of the rooftop units be screened? >> Yes, they will be. Now, there was a question that was raised in some discussions about whether there will be I don't know if I'll get the terminology
right, but basically access to the rooftop units with guardrails that may be required under OSHA standards. Will all that be screened? And if so, how? >> It's like I said before, all the uh the roof system will be a flat roof in the middle of the building. It will be
surrounded by slope roof creating a tub. So the flat flat roof will be lower than the highest point of your slope roof. >> Okay. >> Like I said before, that's going to be part of your screening. Access to the roof will be through ship's ladder on a
uh the top floor uh one floor ship's ladder. There's going to be a roof hatch. >> Do the proposed architectural renderings and plans that we've submitted comply with the redevelopment plan? Yes, we
work closely with the uh uh with the team to comply all with the redevelopment plan. >> Now, there are some comments beginning on page 15 of Miss Laney's letter about architecture and uh I just want to run through them quickly. Is it correct that
we agreed to add a window in the stair area stair area and consider breaking facade of the storage area to address comment 11 of that letter? >> Yes, we will do that. and we'll work with Miss Laney to to address that comment. >> Yes, we will. >> Okay. Uh my understanding is that
comment 12 is no longer applicable, so I'm going to skip that. Someone will correct me. I'm sure Miss Lane will correct me if I'm wrong. Um comment 13 asked for testimony about certain uh facade areas. Is it correct that we're going to add foundation plannings to address that comment?
>> Yes, we will. >> All right. Comment 14 uh asked for clarification regarding windows. Is it correct that we're going to add windows to the interim stair landing area? >> Yes, >> to address that comment. >> Yes.
>> Uh, comment 15 talks about the use of faux treatment materials. Is it correct that we're not using any faux treatment materials? >> That is correct. Like I said before, these are all going to be real real materials, especially the brick. It will be a fullsize brick.
>> Okay. Um, I feel like I'm forgetting something, but I think that's all the questions I have for architect. Mr. Chairman, >> thank you. Um I had a conversation yesterday with the applicants architects um and they as
they noted they in order to address my comments for number 11 they were going to add an additional window and where there was sort of a greater expanse of uninterrupted facade with no windows they're going to uh work on a treatment
to break that down. Um my uh question or comment number 12 was regarding the doorways on the sides and basically there was a little bit of a signals cross with this comment which this
comment really was relating to main main entrances and that's not what is contemplated at those doorways. Um then again in terms of breaking up the facade where there's our internal mechanical and utility rooms where I didn't think
it made sense and I'll divorce a vertabil but that to add windows it made more sense perhaps to on the ground floor to have more foundation um plantings and landscaping because I thought it would it would probably look
better um than trying to put you know windows or whatever. whatever on mechanical mechanical areas. Um and then 14 is essentially kind of a similar to uh point 11 which had to do with
>> they had windows on I guess floor four three and two. No, what did I It's four and three of of the stairwells and so we said can you just also do two? It just seemed like it was missing. Um where there's stairwells and
then um uh we just had asked it to the you know if the brick was going to be fake and actually I learned it was not going to be a fake brick. They're using using realistic refresh. So those were my main comments which I they addressed to my satisfaction.
>> Nothing. Just a couple questions or comments. Um, so mechanical units on the roof, these are going to be what what size units? Um, they're going to sit on a 12 inch curb. They're going to be three feet, four feet tall. How how tall are the
units going to be? >> Typically, uh if you have the the doa what we call doaz units for the for the common areas, like I said, it's going to sitting on a curb. These units are typically four four to five feet high,
>> including the curb. >> Well, plus the curb be six feet. Yes. >> Okay. So So how tall is your tub going to be? >> Well, right now what we have we've designed is almost like six six feet high. Okay. So, it it will be from
I think we'd ask you just to do sight lines so that the mechanical equipment isn't visible from you know the street lines you know um not necessarily that you have to make the tub five foot deep but just that it's reasonable from from
you know um your main pedestrian you know areas that you're not seeing the equipment. Um the Can you go back to the other rendering?
>> Yeah. >> Which one is this now? >> Yeah. Well, >> which sheet is that? Just >> that sheet one. >> Exhibit A1. >> Okay. >> A1. Sheet one. >> You know, aesthetics are are personal judgment. I would just want just want to
say that I personally wouldn't be uh against if these were flat roofs. I think it's very common. You know, it fits into the context of the other buildings in the area. It's modern. That's what kind of young families like
now. Um, just from experience, those you got to be really careful with those dormers, how you do the gutters and diverters because it you get water overspilling and rot in those types of areas.
Understood. Um, but that's just a personal judic judgment, but that might actually save you money, too. So, I would encourage you to, you know, consider or think about it. >> Okay. >> Um, my one concern is that, you know, this
facade that's kind of rendered with sun really is the north side. So, that's that facade's never going to see, you know, direct sun. Um and the patio along there is also totally on the north side. Um
>> for the common area. >> Yes. So well the light the sunlighting here is already a simulation >> I know >> of the Y. >> Uh like I said this is the community. This is our patio. >> Yes. Uh, >> I guess my point or my question or
comment for you to think about is if you flipped your fitness area from the end and moved your common area all the way out, now the common area would have both the north facing and the um uh the west
facing. So, you know, it wouldn't always be as dark, but also you could wrap that patio around. So, that patio would then get southern light. part of the patio would get southern light, part of it would get would be the northern light. So, all different times of the year,
it's it's a more usable patio. Um, so I would just ask you to think about that, you know. >> Sure. As you develop the plans. >> That's it. >> Thank you. Uh, so my my question because I I see a
lot of buildings that look like this these days. It's kind of like all of the possible sidings on one building. You got the you got the horizontal, you got the board and bag, you got the brick. >> What What exactly is the aesthetic now?
I mean, I've noticed this throughout the winter, East Windsor, West Windsor. And my my big fear is, you know, by the time you get done building this, it's not going to look like what people want. It, you know, it's my, you know, it's not it's not a more classic facade. It's
it's it's basically what people have been building for the last 10 years. I don't I mean, to his point, you know, it's personal taste. And I do I do have a fear that yeah, you know, for you I guess that uh it's going to start to
look dated by the time it's done because this is yesterday. You know, is there is there a thought to a more classical finish or is this >> Well, the uh the redevelopment plan says a neo neotraditional. >> Okay. >> With a suburban style
this is >> right. We're not all traditional. like say new new traditional uh like you said uh >> I think brick is has been used all the time so I don't think that's going to go
go away uh like the uh durability of course we're using fiber cement >> great materials don't that I'm not I guess I'm you know it looks like and this happened over at Princeton where it kind of looked like we'll take one of these and we'll take one of these
and we'll take one of these and slap it all on the same building and now you know when I drive by that I'm like make a decision and that's kind of what I look at and again it's not personal >> it's it's just a thought and so it looks
a little uh sporadic to me >> because we just didn't want to use uh there if you look at it there's three materials that we're using the brick the siding and the panels whether it's board and b siding panels with trims
>> so there's three materials that we that we were able to inter interchange and create the pattern. Uh we just didn't want to have all the top portions put all board and valid, >> right? So, this is going to be some some
some sort of like flavor sort of like trying to try to uh uh separate uh uh one material at the top because the the base basically is brick. There's there's
a few areas where we pick the brick the second floor, but that's that's just like in small portions. Majority of your >> you broke it up vertically along. >> Correct. Yeah. Okay. And so that's why you have different types of windows throughout. You have the storefront windows and
>> storefronts in more common areas. Uh the hung windows uh uh these three three windows. These are typically in the living areas. Uh get more sunlight in the living areas. These hung windows, two double two hung windows. Those are the bedrooms.
And I guess to Bill's point again, um yeah, my uh my deck's on the south side of the house and all winter long it keeps the snow nice and frozen. So or on the north side of the house. So it's, you know, it is an issue. Uh if you're going to have uh public spaces, things
like patios that people are supposed to enjoy, if it's never going to see the sunlight for twothirds of the year, you may even run into issues with icing and things like that, making it completely useless. So getting some sunlight on some of those public areas. Um you know
and the first thing I did was kind of draw an arrow as to what I was looking at here. >> Sure. >> And you know it's just a thought, but it it you know you don't know and you build it and all of a sudden you're like well these uh these patios right here are
never going to see the sun uh in that uh in that corner there. So, I I thought that was a great point. And, you know, as nice as that area is, if it's cold and shady all the time, I can't imagine outside of maybe August people being
happy about that. >> Understood. >> I'm I'm okay with with all this. I don't have anything further to add, but I did want to go back one step and we're talking about amenities. Um, I know that you have tot lots planned and such, but
perhaps there could be an adaptive element to that in the t and in the playground areas adapted for uh children with special needs. You know, just even a little piece of the of the the equipment itself. >> That's a good point. >> You know, just it's comes up quite a bit
these days. So, >> we'll look at that. comments. >> Believe it or not, all my questions have been answered. Um, >> okay. >> So, we're good. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Our final plan witness is John
McCormack, our traffic engineer with Dynamic Traffic. >> There you go, Andrew. >> You've been waiting all night. >> He's still with us. I usually never go left. >> I never either.
>> Yeah. >> You want to talk? >> You got it. Why don't Well, John, why don't you spell your name so that we have that for the record? >> Yes. John McCormack. MC C O R M A C K. And I'm a principal with dynamic traffic
in Lake Ko. And is it correct that you've qualified as an expert in traffic engineer engineering before many boards throughout the state of New Jersey for many years? >> It is correct, >> Mr. Chairman. We'd ask the board to accept Mr. McCormack as an expert traffic engineering as it has in the
past for other applications. >> So accepted. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you. Is it correct, Mr. McCormack, that your office prepared a traffic report in support of this application? >> Yes. Dated May 1st, 2026. >> And what was the purpose of that report? just to go through the traffic impact
and parking uh evaluation of the project. >> So, I want to cover three topics with you tonight. The traffic impact, the proposed traffic the uh proposed intersection improvements and parking. Why don't you talk start with uh either the traffic impact or the traffic improvements?
>> Can I start with access? >> Well, if you insist. >> I I I would like that. D start at the beginning. >> I know you long enough. You let me do that. >> Yeah. >> Um Okay. So, >> I consider that part of traffic, just so we're clear. Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Certainly.
Okay. And we have to mark we have to >> Yeah. So why don't you identify what we'll mark as exhibit A4. >> So A4 is is titled traffic signal plan uh intersection improvement. Um it's under my title block dynamic traffic. It is a draft
>> is so it's not dated. >> It is well it is dated. I think the revision is May 4th. Revision May 4th, original date of April 20th, both of 2026. >> Thank you.
>> Um, this plan was prepared because we are going to the county in a week and a half to discuss the improvements to the intersection. Um, and that's why I wanted to start with access because the access to this property is being significantly improved. It's it's almost
overdesigned, right, for this type of a use. It was the access to a to a a major traffic signalized intersection was designed for something bigger than this. So, we are taking the benefit of that quite honestly. Um what as you as Jay
mentioned, there was there's a driveway existing to the property um a little bit south of the existing signalized intersection. Um and we are going to be the fourth leg of the signalized intersection. And then you see here plan right we are going to be a uh we're
going to provide another exit only right turn exit only. So let me just describe very briefly the improvement to the intersection and and how how the fourth leg all fits in. Um basically you'll see we're proposing a left turn lane off of
South River Road. So a dedicated uh left turn lane. Uh plenty of storage actually almost too much storage for our site. That left turn lane is also going to have a dedicated phase of the traffic light. So, you're not going to have to worry about getting across South River
Road. You're going to have a green arrow to get you into the site safely. Um, coming the other direction, obviously, it's a right turn in. Uh, as you go north on South River, we're just converting what is now a through lane to a through and right lane. Uh, coming
from uh Day Road, you see that's a double left movement. uh that approach has its own signal phase, has to have its own signal phase because it's a double left movement. So, one of the outside uh left turn lane will also
allow the through movement into the site. And then the fourth leg uh the fourth leg is our is our primary driveway. Uh obviously, it comes right into the intersection. It's going to require traffic signal upgrades. It's going to require probably two onethird
of the equipment to be improved. uh relocated, updated, etc. In order to get the signal head placements correct, get the pedestrian amenities correct, etc. Um that driveway is not only the fourth leg, it's going to have its own phase.
So when the driveway exits, it will be the only thing moving, the only green light. So it has its own dedicated phase. And that's the benefit of this double left. The double left has to have its own. Therefore, we get our own. So uh it's a it's a fantastic access. uh
for this for this development. It's going to be very efficient. It's going to be extremely safe because all of our movements are essentially protected and within their own phase. In addition, uh we designed a right turnout only um at the north side of the property. Not only
is that going to alleviate a little bit of the of the right turn, you won't have to go to the traffic light if you're headed north. So, it takes a little bit of pressure off of that. It's also uh a very good design and it helps us with our larger vehicles. that helps us with our, you know, delivery trucks, trash
trucks, fire trucks, school buses, etc. So, um, all of this stuff you see on here is under the jurisdiction of the county, which is why we have a meeting with the county. Uh, we're going to discuss all these different changes and improvements, uh, including the write
out. Um, I I don't think they're going to have any issue. There's obviously always design um you know uh little specifications we have to do but but it was a really clear design very easy to fit the fourth leg uh into this existing signal.
Okay, with that um I'll just touch on the traffic generation. Uh traffic generation for this type of site is is rather minimal. Um this is obviously a lot more so than the senior development down the road but um you know an affordable apartment complex 165 units
is going to generate approximately 50 to 75 trips in an hour right so that's like one trip every minute or so it's it's two trips during the cycle of the light so someone might be coming out someone might be in the left turn lane coming in but it's really a drop in the bucket
when you think about there's 1,800 vehicles driving through this intersection currently, we're going to add 60 in an hour, right? So, that's that's the that's the magnitude uh of what we're doing and and what's going to be added to this intersection. Um,
obviously, you know, we all know it's significantly less than some of the other uses that were considered up, you know, on this property itself, the warehousing with the trucks and the convenience store with the gas. It's this is a whole different animal and it's very light in its intensity. Um, as I mentioned before, the
intersection, it operates very well today. This is a this is almost an overbuilt intersection even for what it serves today. Uh, you hear people talk about levels of service. The levels of service out here right now are in the B and C range, which is fantastic. It's
very dynamic intersection. It's got vehicle detection, so it extends phases when there's more cars. It shortens phases when there's cars when the car line dries up. It's just it's very interactive and and has a lot of uh you know all the newest design features and
we're going to add to that obviously with our fourth leg. Um when you add the 60 trips in an hour as you can imagine you you almost don't feel it in the analysis. The levels of service stay stay exactly the same. Uh and this intersection is going to operate very
efficiently. Um and then I'll just touch on the parking really quick. I mean, it can easily said we're we're satisfying the redevelopment plan, right? We're providing 1.5. You heard Jay mention we're going to adjust a few of the spots uh to make a handicap spot or to make
this ped crossing, but essentially we're we're satisfying a redevelopment plan. We far exceed the IT parking generation uh estimate of parking demand. It estimates one parking space per unit. I think that's a little bit light. Um, but
we far exceed that, you know, industry standard. Um, and we compiled data at various other Walters sites throughout the state and and for our family jobs, we're at about 1.3 is the actual demand of these types of developments. So,
we're way in excess of of that at 1.5. We probably have 25 to 30 additional spaces uh over what we're going to need. So, we are very confident in the parking supply uh that's being provided. Um and then I'll just touch on the the
crosswalk and the speed humps a little bit or something. >> So, um uh as Andy said, speed humps have pros and cons. It it's up to it's up to the jurisdiction. Some jurisdictions love them and and want them all over the place. Other towns and county
jurisdictions hate them and don't want them anywhere. So, um I do agree that these aisles are a little bit long. Um I like the idea of the crossing uh in the middle of the aisles. I think that's a
no-brainer. I think we incorporate um a crossing in an enhanced landscaped midblock type thing. I would almost recommend against the speed humps for the various reasons you've heard. I think the crossings
provide enough visual and and friction there that okay, this is, you know, I'm in a neighborhood here. I I need to be careful. You're going to have high intensity striping. You're going to have signage. It is going to be narrow, right? It's going to be in um you know, installed in conjunction with I won't
call it a bumpout, but it's a bumpout. Comes out to the edge of the parking so the pedestrians will be visible. I think that's a really good start and you don't have any of the negatives of the speed bumps. Um, that would be my recommendation. >> The only other thing that I wanted to
cover, unless you had anything else, John, was there was comment number six at the top of page three of Mr. Fanda's letter, >> okay, >> states that all proposed handicap ramps at the signalized intersection >> and for crossing driveways shall be ADA compliant. Can you address that?
>> Absolutely. I agree. Uh, we will do that within the site. Absolutely. They will be uh ADA compliant. I think Jay mentioned the intent is for them to be there. he didn't put them on. You know, the detail is not there yet. Uh and the county is going to require it at the traffic light. Um there's going to be
push buttons, there's going to be the ADA ramping, there's going to be obviously the crosswalks. It's going to be a fully compliant signal. It's going to be more compliant than it is today because we're going in there and we're going to we're going to improve it. So, as it relates to at the signalized
intersection, we'll do what the county requires as far as ADA ramps. >> That's right. >> To be specific. >> That's right. But within the site, we're going to add ADA ramps at the crosswalks. >> Yes. >> Thanks. That's all the questions I had for Mr. McCormack.
>> You're okay. Uh I haven't seen the signal plan yet, but that's okay. It's a draft and you're going to the county's county's jurisdiction. They're going to have a lot of input. I I know uh they will have some say if you could provide uh a draft after the feedback after you've revised
it. Again, the county is going to check that. But >> absolutely, we'll give you a copy all the the whole step of the way. Every step of the way. >> Okay. You had mentioned that uh other uh development that was proposed at this site um would be much more intense and
probably uh make use of that signal a lot more. the the trips from this site, what what is the roughly comparison to say like gas with convenience? >> Uh I mean it it's I I don't want to say
it's probably 10 times the the convenience is probably 10 times greater, but it's it's s it's a significant difference. I mean, these are these are residents that, you know, they're owners that occupy the site. the convenience store with the gas is is a whole different animal. That's more of a
highway commercial use. There's hundreds of trips in an hour, whereas this site is going to be say 50 to 60 trips an hour. >> And this site has the ability to make use of something. The signal that's there,
would the site even warrant uh based on the trips would even warrant a signal? >> I would no. I would say no. Depending on its location, etc., etc., This could most likely be an unsalized type intersection in most other locations. So, yes, we're gaining the
benefit now, we're gaining the benefit, but upgrading that signal is not inexpensive. >> And that's where I was going for the next point that yeah, it's it's not going to be cheap to do all the things that have to be done, adding the lanes, changing the signals, adding pedestrian. >> Right. Right. I Yeah, I I failed to
mention um there's even a slight widening across the entire frontage. Unfortunately, it's probably 2 to 3 feet, but it needs to connect the the traffic signal all the way to our other driveway just to make the frontage wide enough to fit the the new lane. So, yes,
it looks like just striping, but it's unfortunately it's not. >> So, you can take advantage of a signal and it'll be great for the development. It might cost a little bit more to make these improvements, but again, it it will be uh a very good improvement for the area and for the residents of this development. obviously with pedestrian
provisions to cross. I know there's other development along South River Road that didn't have the option of a signal and pedestrian crossing >> of South River Road. So, >> yeah, absolutely a benefit. >> Um, let me see. Let me go to that
existing driveway which is just south of the signal that's going to be removed. Obviously, it has to be done to county standards. The depressed curb has to be removed and >> Yep. that might be shown on the plan. I don't know if it's
>> maybe the aerial John. >> Yeah, the aerial easier to find. >> That's exhibit A1. >> Where I'm going, >> there is guide rail in the vicinity of that driveway. And that guide rail may have ended to allow for that driveway. Check with the county, get their
feedback as to how that guide rail should end. I think it might be even damaged and might need some replacing. So there might be a different end treatment uh for that, but that should be something discussed with the county. >> Yeah, we're going to start with can we remove it? Is it is there still a need
for it? Um and if the county determines there is a need for it, then absolutely we'll replace it and end it properly. >> And if it's not needed, then it can come out. >> Yes, we would love that. >> Okay. Um is there public transit in the area of
this site? And >> yes, >> buses run up and down the road. Could this potentially become a bus stop? Could that be a request made? Um because you're at a signal. I don't know if they
>> I guess that would be the township. I know the township has dealt with other bus locations. Um But >> I don't know about there may be >> okay that wasn't a comment my letter but as
we were going through actually when we talked about the school buses I started thinking buses and what other buses might come through especially for residents that might make use of mass transit um at this >> that's a good point I don't know transit of that
>> there is some kind of a bus line, but >> yes, Middle Sex County, the Middle Sex County movers >> visit that they have a >> it's like a mini bus. >> It would be >> that they go throughout the whole county.
>> It would be nice if it connected to the park and drive the uh lot of um 130 and 33. >> I know they go into town. I've seen it go through town and everything. So >> yeah, >> I'm not sure the existing route of that,
but that's something. >> Yeah. So in in general, the guidance was that when you have a development and you have you can establish a need, then you can guide, you know, where that bus could go, should go and and and if it's not active to reactivate it.
>> Yes. >> Yes. >> And that would be done through the county, I believe, because I think the process in the past has been done through the county. So maybe something to mention when you meet with the county is where I was going with something like that. >> Yep.
>> We'll do absolutely. >> Um the parking you had mentioned the uh parking demand for the site uh by it is uh less than even the redevelopment. Redevelopment required 1.5 spaces. Uh peak parking demand by it is one space.
I will note and I've done many parking studies of low to moderate income housing. Shift work offsets peaks. Typically you have uh peak demand through the evening. In uh this case you
might have um residents who work during the evening who don't park where there might be some uh other developments would be a peak parking through the night. So I I agree with that one. I don't think you'll have a problem with
the 248 spaces provided for the 165 units. So, >> agreed. >> Just supporting that IDE information especially for this site. >> Okay. >> And I agree the levels of service look
very good at the signal. That's something again that the county will go through the traffic report when they look at the traffic signal. Uh the timings obviously will have to be adjusted and that will be uh in accordance with county requirements. >> Exactly. Y >> um I don't have any other comments.
That's it. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Chairman. I just have one question. The crosswalks, um how are they going to get designed or that there was some testimony before about putting the crosswalks adjacent to the islands?
Wouldn't it be better to make the island bigger and put it right in the middle of the island safer? >> I think that's where we >> Is that what you're going to do? I just wanted to clarify. >> Yep. Yep. >> Thank you. Um I I think your explanation about
considering Steve versus I think you have right cross with bumpouts for lack of a better word that's that's basically the common scenario probably you know which slow cars down.
>> I think it will >> instead maint your pedestrians too. >> Well, yeah. your pedest. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Exactly.
>> Yeah. Uh I I agree. U speed bump would probably be overkill in that situation, especially if you're already narrowing the uh the roadway uh visually. So, I'd be on the same page as uh Wayne
and and you, John. >> Great. Thank you, Jack. >> And well, I do I do have a question about the interse. >> Is it connecting to an existing uh uh curb ramp there? >> Is that Yeah. >> Yeah, it's existing. It It'll probably
have to be improved, >> right? uh push button wise, ADA accessibility wise, but >> if you're doing all that work, is there any chance you can make it perpendicular and short? >> Well, the the problem is the the traffic alignment >> which sets this it's setting this radius.
>> So, you know, I have to get from this far outside right lane to come in, >> right? >> And then I need to get I need to get all the way over here >> to get out. So, >> yeah, >> you know, I have a a a tiny little two-way driveway here and I have a
monster >> the one that crosses the >> Yeah. >> Yeah. But that's what's happening. >> So, you're running it along the traffic. >> Yeah. I you know, this corner and this driveway has to be where it is for the car alignment. And that then basically sets >> it puts it there, but you can't fix it
on the floor side. >> No, you're already doing some work. >> Yeah. No, it's just >> Yeah, I know what you're saying. I'm sure the county will look at this corner. >> Yeah. Well, that's all right. George gives me a hard time all the time. >> Yeah.
>> We do not I'm making this kind of motion take and I'll go to commercial break. Thank you. Is My first argument
But let's Yeah. I would never Come on. This is the original. I mean, it We'll ask that. Yeah, it doesn't I'll do this. calling us back to order. So,
I think we've heard a vast amount of testimony tonight from everybody and I appreciate our professionals comments. I appreciate the comments of our board members and the presentation by the Walters group. I think everything was uh
very well said. I know we've been going at this for a few hours, but that's okay because we're planning a major development here in town that's going to include a lot of people that um we're going to welcome into our community. So, what we're doing here is important because we want to make sure that we
have the best community possible for the new people that are coming into our community. So, with that being said, I'm going to turn it over to Martina to try to codify this together so we can come up with some kind of a resolution because I'm going to move that we
approve to move forward with this plan, but there's >> with with a resolution tonight. >> Excuse me. Oh, can we open it to the public? We I know there's mirror, but >> just want to make sure we do that. >> Did you want to make the We'll make the resolution after public comment then. Is
that okay? We can do that. That would be the the appropriate way to do that. >> All right, >> we're going to open it to the public for comment >> here. No comment from the public. I'll close the public comment period on this applicant.
So now we could kind of craft something together. >> Sure. So the board tonight is considering preliminary and final um site plan approval and subdivision approval for phases one, two, and three of the application. Um the relief, the
specific relief that's being granted in terms of waiverss and variance, there's a variance um being considered from section 150-39.1C2 um which requires no improvements from uh within the 150 foot buffer. Um the
waiver that's being considered tonight is from section 150-11c4D um which is that um utility structures will be screened if that's permitted by the uh utility company. Um what I thought in terms of the conditions
rather than going through every single report is to just do as follows which is first I'd just identify the the conditions that the applicant for various reasons is is not agreeing to and there's only I think five or six of them. um then go over the additional
conditions that may not have been in the reports or maybe they were but I I didn't quite follow there's a sort of discrete list um and then to um frame it that the applicant is agreeing to everything else in the reports to the
extent that the the comments or the conditions haven't already been um satisfied which I gather many of them have um but but since since we didn't go through each one and itemize Um I think that would be the best way just to frame this. So the the conditions um that are
not being agreed to um was that the uh Cedarbrook dredging cannot be done. Um there's no need to show the setbacks and this is Mr. Hod's um memo H1 and that's because um the uh redevelopment area is
being considered as a whole. Um and this >> the internal setbacks >> the internal setbacks that's correct. Um the grading is, how am I phrasing this? There's not going to be any change to the grading. This was Mr. Hodz's page 9
um H5. Um the owner of the sanitary sewer system in the water system will be um not by the owner, but by New Jersey American Water. That's required. Um, finally, there's no RSIS waiver needed because the applicant is um meeting the
requirement and the the ordinance permits um the requirement to be less than what's required by what's uh the maximum >> on the water and sewer. Yeah. >> Um the water lines will be owned by New Jersey American Water Company. >> Oh, okay. >> The sanitary sewer will is yet to be
determined. >> What the ownership will be. >> Okay. But it won't be the owner. >> Well, it might be it might be the owner. It might be these guys or it might >> it might be the township. >> Yeah, we're not sure. >> Oh, okay. >> It all depends what happens at mayor and council committee level.
>> Okay. Okay. Um so in addition to the the uh the conditions uh or the the recommendations in the reports, what I have is the following. So um the applicant will consider um providing
walking paths along the eastern border. This came up early on. I don't know if I got that right. Um, >> southern border >> or the southern border. Um, the applicant will provide cross pedestrian crosswalks that will be
striped to connect the recreation areas. Um, and in doing so, we'll remove four of the 248 parking spaces that have been proposed. There's one additional parking space also being removed. Wasn't sure what that was for. What was >> for an ADA space near the basketball
court? >> ADA space. Uh so the parking count is going down from 248 to 243 as a result. Um I'm not doing speed bumps. Um the applicant will
cons will install durable markers. Um durable markers will be provided for the easements. >> Conservation easements. >> I'm sorry. the conservation residence. >> Um the applicant will consider adding grills, seings and a seating and other
amenities in the community spaces. Um the applicant will provide forms of the deed restriction um prior to occupancy and include schedules with the breakdown of um the uh bedroom types and the income levels in accordance with uh hack
and with the local ordinance. Um, the applicant will consider, this was Mr. um, Gidding's comment and request, will consider um, a change in the configuration of the patio to optimize sunlight on the north and west um, uh,
sides of of the site. Um, this was a general sort of comment condition. The applicant will work with the township staff on developing or adding landscaping where possible. Um the applicant, this is a traffic condition, the applicant will provide a
copy of was it the updated plan uh following the county >> the updated signal plan. Correct. >> Signal plan >> after the county provides feedback. Right now it's in draft and the county. >> Right. >> Uh the applicant will remove the guard rail if um if that's agreed to by the
county >> at the old driveway. >> At the old driveway. Um, and in terms of the bus stop, I don't know if if you wanted to propose a condition um and how that would apply to the the applicant, if the applicant
would work with the township to try and install a bus stop. Um, >> it is a township item to address, but if the applicant works with the township, it's also county, so it's it's going to be a tribe part agreement.
>> Okay. I yeah my my inclination would be to put it in just to keep to keep it in the resolution compliance and to the extent that that will >> perhaps c the applicant will cooperate with the township's request to the appropriate authorities to consider adding a bus stop.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. Which would sort of shift the burden to the township to make that happen but that's that's fine. Um, I think that's all I had in, you know, as far as additional conditions. Um, >> yep. >> When you're ready, I'll I'll just have a
couple clarifications. >> Sure. >> Now. Okay. >> Yeah. >> In Mr. Feranda's letter comment six on page three, the applicant agreed to add >> ADA compliant ramps at all internal crosswalks and at the signalized
intersection if the county requires it. or as the county requires it, I guess, is probably the better way to say it. And comment five in the circulation section on page
three of Mr. Frera's letter, the applicant is not proposing to add reinforced grass emergency access along the north side of building 2, I think. But if you give me one second, I think that's it. But I just want to
check my notes. Um, >> I has I can go through the reports. I I didn't mean to omit other conditions. >> No, no. I just noted conditions that came up during the discussion that weren't in the reports and I I think you've covered them all. I just if you don't mind, I'm just going to check my
list. Um, oh, that we're going to the crosswalks that we're going to add are going to be through widened landscape islands. I think it's a good idea. >> Um, and you may have mentioned this, Martina, but we're going to provide you
with the schedule of bedroom mixes for the deed restriction and provide you with a copy of the proposed deed restriction. I think you did mention that. Oh, and we're going to consider adding some adaptive features in the play area. And I think that that was all I had, which was consistent with what you had.
So, thank you. >> That's all I had. >> Huh? >> I'm going to try to. So, based on the synopsis that Martina just gave us, I'd like to propose
feed glasses on here. Um, I would like to propose a resolution approving preliminary and final site plan approval pending what Martina said and everything that
was in our professionals letters and recommendations and comments and any additions that were talked about tonight. Um, I'd like to have that, um, as the resolution that I'm putting on the table to move forward.
So, can I have a motion to approve Cranberry F Cranberry Family Apartments LLC, block 18, lot uh, block 5, lot 18, 1260 South River Road. >> So, moved.
>> Can I have a second, please? >> Second. All right. Roll call for PB419-26. Miss Anderson, >> yes. >> Miss Elbadawi, >> yes. >> Mr. Giddings, >> yes. >> Mr. Mildenberg, >> yes. >> Mr. Mucelli, >> yes. >> Mr. Pulk, >> yes.
>> And Mr. Whitman, >> yes. >> Thank you. Motion passed. >> Great. Thank you all so much. We really appreciate your time. And >> yeah, we do have a house. >> Is for your financing application. Do you need is the approval sufficient or
you need the the resolution? So, we'd love to have the resolution, but if you're not going to meet again before the end of June, we've already given Gina a letter that we used last year, which is a letter from the township to HMFA saying that it's been approved >> and that you're in the process of adopting a resolution and that you would
adopt it no later than >> uh your next meeting >> u which I think we said in the letter no later than August just in case there's a problem in July. >> Okay. >> So, that will suffice. If you have a meeting another meeting in June, then we'd love that would be great. But if you don't, there's no need.
>> I think there's not another meeting in June. But >> well, all we need is the letter, which Jean was kind enough to give us last year for the senior >> our application. >> Do we have an idea who's going to be at the next? We have to have a before. Either that or we're meeting in another couple weeks or just before the end of
the month to get you a resolution. >> It's the week after July. >> 4th. It's >> It's July. >> I think it's the 9th. >> Yeah. July 9th. Looks like we'll have a quorum as of now. Are you going to be here? Probably
here. So, okay. So, you can for housekeeping reasons, you can go with >> a hand basically a handshake. >> HFA wants confirmation from the municipality that it's been approved. >> Well, we've given you >> supposed from from me, right? But uh uh
so we it worked last year. We've used it in other towns. Should not be an issue. >> Okay. >> We don't think it it doesn't necessitate a special meeting. Now, if you know you're not going to have a meeting in July, then it gets a little >> No, no, no, no. We're we're we have other things on the agenda for for July. So, we'll be here.
>> Thank you all very much. >> Thank you. Thank you for putting up with us. >> Okay. Uh >> old and new business. I I do I do have some new business. Um I have to go in
for unfortunately for an operation in October that will take me out of commission. I will be here at the October meeting but probably not for the November meeting. I am also not going to be here for the September meeting. I will be somewhere
in the middle of the desert in Arizona. So uh so I will not be here then. So, um, but the latter is, um, I'm going to be out of commission for this operation. So, um, I hope to be back in December
with no not too much difficulty, but um, so more more to follow on that, but I just wanted to give everybody a heads up and down the road. >> Does does the deputy know? >> Yes. Or does she? I don't know. I think
>> No, no. Uh, Mr. Stewart. Mr. Stewart. >> No, he doesn't know. No, because I thought he was going to be here tonight. I will let him know. So, >> September. >> I told him about September, but um and I guess that's a that's a if
if Jason's not here and I'm not here, then we're going to have to have somebody run the meeting here. So, I don't know how logistically we do that. Yeah. Somebody over that now. >> Some somebody over there. You're running. You better pull short straw,
high penny, whoever, you know. But then they'd have to be they'd have to we'd have to swear them in or something then because they're not I don't know the logistics of that. Can you have a vice vice chair or something? I don't know.
>> If they have to be sworn I'd have to check the procedural requirement, but >> don't you bring someone from the zoning board for that? No, I don't think you'd need to do that. >> Okay. >> Well, just think about it. You know,
>> there's going to be a lot of absences next week. >> Yeah. No, no, no, no, no, no. And again, I want to thank I want to thank the board tonight for um this was a you know, a lot going on tonight and a lot more um coming down the pike that
you'll hear about things in you know with our affordable housing plans and things of that nature. But this was very important tonight for a number of logistic reasons to move both the consistency plan and this plan forward
tonight. So we are on schedule and in compliance with our agreed upon plan from the state that we said we were going to comply with. So it means a lot right now for especially for the township committee and everything else too that we move these
things forward and we did it with the best of interest and I think we come come away with a good plan for what's going to come down the pike here. So if anybody else has any comments or questions. If not have a motion to adjurnn.
>> All is in favor. >> There we go. >> Meeting adjourned. We're going.