right going to call this meeting to order this zoning board meeting is being held on March 5th 2025 at 7 o'clock pm statement of adequate notice under the Sunshine Law adequate notice in accordance with the open public meeting Act was provided on January 14 2025 of
this meeting's date time and location the agenda was mailed to the cranber press and home News Tribune post on the township Bolton board mailed to those requesting personal notice and filed with a municipal clerk roll call Mr bonab balanta yes Mr Callen yes Mr McGovern yes Miss Parker yes Mr Schwarz
here Mr gari yeah Miss kittens here and Miss Diamond here Mr Diamond swur thank you okay uh before we start um I want to do a quick introduction to the board sitting over here is uh Shan shanu and she's going to be joining us uh starting
next month so uh she's sitting in this meeting so uh okay first we need to do the approval of minutes from February 5th I'll make a motion to approve those
minutes second I second it okay roll call for the February 5th 2025 minutes Mr bavant yes Mr Kalen yes Mr Parker yes Mr Schwarz yes and Miss kittens yes thank you motion passed okay uh we have one item on the
agenda that's the application of chinai mission um on crabberry Neck Road for uh roof over patio patio Renovations and a canopy so uh you have to swear some folks
in swearing before an introduction or would you like an introduction first thank you thank you very much counselor good evening members of the board Matthew Flynn from the law firm of savos shock Corsini Warner gespo grodnick and fiser
Somerville New Jersey here tonight representing the applicant chimaya Mission Tri-State Center uh who's here to install some modest improvements at their existing house of worship uh the lot is designated as block 22 Lots 16
and 18 in your Municipal tax maps and more commonly known as 9395 cranberry Neck Road uh you'll he from our Witnesses but the proposed scope of the work um tonight uh deals with three areas of the site one is to install an
ADA accessible ramp and sidewalk as well as improve a outdoor porch for the clergy residents that is on the property one such Improvement is to remove a Bilco basement door access and construct
a uh improved access to the clergy house basement and third and finally there's a existing patio we're going to put a roof if approved put a roof over top of that patio and in close it as a as a sun room
Edition um for as you'll hear um parents and uh congregates to socialize and wait um while they wait for um the children's classes to conclude uh on the property so we're here tonight because we need a
D2 expansion of a pre-existing non-conforming use variants um no matter how modest the improvements are because originally this application was for a permitted use in your a100 Zone houses of worship were
since removed as a permitted principal use in that zone and such any expansion even as you'll hear as limited as we're proposing tonight we must still meet the D2 use variance criteria and in connection there with there is a few
modest bulk variances as well that we'll be applying for so with me tonight I have four Witnesses I have a representative from the applicant who's going to come up and introduce himself and for those of you that maybe weren't here when the
application was approved in 2008 remind the board what they do there um what their programs are like um what Outreach they do in the community and just give you an overall sense of who the applicant is uh I have Jay Patel our
civil engineer to provide engineering testimony we'll have him qualified um I have uh yida andj who's our architect uh and finally I do have our planner Ed coing who will um describe his planning analysis to um demonstrate
why we meet the criteria for the variances that we're requesting tonight as counselor mentioned notice has been provided uh mailed and published pursuant to the municipal land use law so unless you have any legal questions of me I'd like to get our Witnesses
sworn in and start our direct presentation great bab you want to come up raise your right hand you're going to be swor in you about TOC thank you very much please have a seat and you give us your full name for last
sure Mr chairman good to be back um my name is babo first name is babo B A Buu last name uh I go slow v v e e r e g
o w d a d like David like Anthony appreciate okay Babu could you give your uh relationship to the applicant and and what you do with the organization yes sir for the last uh 15 plus years I've been there uh Prof
professional adviser as well as a key volunteer and um you you're licensed a civil engineer in the state of New Jersey is that correct yes sir but you're but you're not testifying in that capacity tonight you're testifying as a um representative of the applicant
that's right okay why don't you take the board through some of the things that um your organization does okay so as you know the temple uh was under operation uh since uh
2012 and since then it has been you know very successful and it's a integral part of the the community um in terms of the uh operation uh Monday to Friday we open at 900 a.m. and we uh closes in the
afternoon at 12: noon and then comes back and open up at 5 and then uh closes at 8:00 p.m. this is Monday to Friday um on weekends we open at 9 same as the the weekday instead of closing in the afternoon we go all the way up until
8:00 so 9 to 8 both Saturday and Sunday in terms of um the exact you know the operation um during the weekday it's open for all the public same as on the weekend and mostly it is uh limited to
the religious uh uh celebrations celebration in the sense the people will come they do the prayers and they go home and on the weekends uh there is a Sunday classes weekend classes both on Saturday and uh Sunday and Saturday
there's only one batch I'm sorry let me take it back and and no on Friday there's only one batch uh 7 to 9 and Sundays we have two sessions uh 9 to 11: and 1 to 3 and plus
or minus there's always you know uh depending upon what day it is 150 to you know 200 you know kids uh coming into the you know the class and uh can you describe what sorts of um community outreach or charity that your organization does sure so we do uh
quite a bit of uh charity work as a part of our organization uh first of all we have heavily involved with the uh community in terms of uh um charity work you know such as U during the Thanksgiving you know we uh normally conduct a huge you know food drive we
work with the local church in the Main Street uh we provide them um food whether it's a caned food or you know cash flow and the clothing and other things and we also work very closely with him with them uh in terms of organizing uh other you know uh events
such as you know um quat events um broken cars or you know repairs you know we do that you know quite often you know with them and if there if there's any you know need you know for them in terms of uh for example you know couple of uh months ago they asked whether there's
any automobiles that you know we are able to you know loan them donate them and we did and addition to that during the co time we open the door for the people to come in and you know if they wanted to you know use the facilities
and uh uh any uh uh food not cooked food any packed food that's made available you know uh we did that and uh so in community voice you know we take an active participation in charity charity World quite a
bit my last question is um you heard me in my opening outline the three areas of work um that you're proposing with the basement the porch and the sunro just in a general uh fashion can you describe for the board sort of the need for each of
these improvements yes so the main tempo right now we do have a patio it's open patio and during the summer time when the weather is good you know people wanted to especially the parents on the weekends they wanted to
sit out but they cannot do that primarily for two reason number one is you know weather doesn't permit because there is no roof and secondly um it is surrounded by a tillable you know land use when there's a tillable land use there's a lot of dust and you know chemical inflow and people literally
cannot you know sit there especially you know the kids okay we don't let them so basically it's not you know usable you know for us right now so we wanted to make it somewhat you know usable so um the best way for us to do that is to put
it in a roof uh if you recollect uh back in 2012 we got a building permit to put a a roof okay it's a slope roof made out of you know the glass and we didn't do that because it was in a cost prohibited okay and now what we wanted to do is put
a simple you know pitch roof and and also the sliding the doors windows so that you know if it's raining if you know the farmer is King the land we could able to close it and we could able to use it effectively so that's number one uh number two uh in front of the
existing house we do have a porch and there's a two thing we wanted to do uh there's a retaining wall and there's a parking so people cannot park even myself you know I dented my car backing into the you know
wall so we want what we wanted to do is we wanted to reduce the footprint of the patio and we wanted to you know cover it okay that's number two and the third thing is uh as you said the uh bore door there's a lot of you
know leakage of the water and we try to you know grade them but doesn't matter because it's open-ended and the water seps into it and we wanted to put a you know roof on top of it is there anything else you'd like to add for the board no now I unless if you have any questions
Mr I have no further questions thank you cover patio on the um adjacent to the temple is is there going to be heating or air conditioning in there or you know anything you know uh we are thinking of you know movable uh heater
during the you know severe winter where you cannot really you know sit there that's what we're planning to do anyone else okay thank you great my next uh witness is our civil engineer Mr
Patel grab me if you need to whisper yes raise your right hand Mr P be in you raise your right hand you the test about to give his thank you very much if you can have a seat and could you uh give us your full name by your last name for my name is j Patel j a y e s h last
name p a TF I'm working with the crest engineering I'm a licensed professional engineer as well as planner in state of New Jersey I have given testimony to various uh Planning and Zoning Board including I believe with this
particular Township the planning board when the original application was heard I offer him as an expert in the field of engineering we accept it great uh Mr Patel uh can you go through what your civil engineering design and um I
notied you have an exhibit up there if we want to get that marked at some point as well yeah we just uh go over to the exhibit so what I have here is the side which is sewn with the yellow boundary it's along
the south side of the Cranbury Neck Road the site is about 7. 0 1 Acres lot 16 and lot 18 uh covers the total 7.0 Acres
7.01 Acres uh surrounding the property it's all farming uh filled actively farmed except couple of dwelling units across the cranberry necro um for the existing site the
existing development there's a uh driveway that comes uh that's an provides an access to the site uh and then it loops around from the in the front of the main temple building and comes on the other side and
uh provides the exit there is a the building main Temple is located in the rear portion of the site on the uh West Side uh there's a clergy uh residence
and couple of parking lots are provided one is near the clergy residence and the other one is the main parking lot on the other side of the temple building there are overflow parking spaces are provided
connecting two excess uh drives and a storm water basin exist in the front near the cranberry Neck Road the site is uh landscape around the perimeter as well as some scattered landscape that
were uh proposed during the original s plan site is served by the public I mean the well as well as the septic system before we go further we want to mark this as A1 coloriz well this is a it's a hybrid
it's a colorized site with the site plan shown as a separate uh inserts so I'm going go to now going to uh explain the proposed development uh
is uh shown on this right top corner there are two construction areas shown area A and B area a is mainly uh what was described earlier is the um existing
patio that is providing it's connected to the parage building what we are proposing is to provide the handicap accessible route uh through the patio to
the uh residence building and uh that's that's the construction area a which is shown in this little bit darker pink shade uh area B which is a very small uh
box that is shown in the back of the residence which has a bodor and because as uh the water is sipping through and coming into the basement it's uh proposed to provide the uh uh
covered door with the walls to uh stop the leakage coming in the number three which is the construction area C which is shown in this circle on this side is uh on the back side of these two uh
existing patio which is created between these two wings of the building we can say which is shown in this uh uh inser the brown color is what is the covered
uh roof uh which will provide the um cover for the sundrome and uh that has the existing concrete uh uh you can say the patio which so that means the there's no other Improvement other than
providing the wall and the roof to that area uh the access to the building there are few doors uh from the building and as well as from the back there are steps uh which will provide the access to and
from that uh proposed sundrome area no other improvements proposed uh storm water or any other uh Utilities in the sense of uh because there are no uh
additions to the building in the sense of the occupation and wise um so what uh is going to happen with this roof uh it might just get the roof connected to the
nearest Inlet for the storm water uh discharge which goes and discharges into the existing storm water basin here um now because this proposal requires uh
um the D2 variance uh additional testimony will be provided by the planner uh if we talk about the variances there are couple of uh bulk variances which will require as part of the approval one
is the under a 100 Zone minimum rear yard uh for this proposed sundrome is required is 150 ft uh because of the the existing building and where the existing
uh patio uh is located uh the the proposed Rea setback will be 77.2 ft uh Which is less than 150 however the existing building has
the setback of 75 ft so it sets back the sunro sets back at least couple of feet uh uh from the building Corner uh regarding the floor area U the maximum allowable floor area is
06 under the existing condition it is currently at 0614 under the proposed condition it slightly increases to 0.655 that is due to the approximately 1200 square ft of sunro which becomes as
you know part of the building uh the third one which is the imperious coverage the permitted imperious curve coverage is 20% uh under the existing condition it's
25.8% which already exceeds the requirement of uh uh maximum requirement of uh 20% under proposed condition because of slight addition to this uh uh
sidewalk area it's increasing to 26 so it increases from 25.8 to 26 uh and the last one is the minimum side here for the accessory structure which is in this case the covered roof
uh provided for the porch uh it is 76.8 Ft versus the sidewalk for the accessory structure is 100 ft uh so additional testimony regarding the variances will be provided by the planner um no other
design vors are uh proposed at this time um regarding the other permits if it is uh required we will uh reach out to middle sex County planning board and Freehold Soil Conservation District if
there's an exempt later is needed um regarding the review provided by the township Consultants we have received Township engineer uh planner as well as environmental commissions uh later and
um the regarding the township Engineers comments we will address is uh to the satisfaction of the engineer planner uh there are no engineering comments and environment commission does not have any comment that's including the increase in
impervious C they specifically said that they had no objection correct correct and you're offering on behalf of the applicant as the engineer as a stipulation to a condition of approval that we will comply with the uh hoder Associates Consulting Engineers letter
dated February February 25th that is correct yes okay um I have no further questions of this witness this time okay I'd like to call our architect thank you thank you Mr raise your right hand you're going to
be sworn in you very much can have a you can give us your full name as by your last name for the right my name is yoshita chandrani y o s h i t a last name is c h a n d r a n
i can you give the board the benefit of your professional credentials please right um I a li I'm a licensed architect interior designers certified inter design in the state of New Jersey I hold licenses in uh New Jersey and in
Pennsylvania and I have given um testimony in quite a few towns in New Jersey and in Pennsylvania as well and those certifications are current and in good standing yes I would offer her up as a expert in architecture thank you so I know you
brought an exhibit with you do you want to start there yeah and we'll have this marked A2 councel and once you have it up if you could just describe to the board what they're looking at it looks perhaps like a colorized version of the plan that was submitted
yes yeah this this is just I put the colors so that you know uh what's happening here so you've heard testimony from the prior two witnesses about the three areas of improvements yes that are being proposed why don't you take board through uh what you worked on for those
three aspects of yes so this is the existing building uh the outline and the green area is the covered area which we are proposing the patio goes right up to the
top line and uh it's existing Pao so we are not putting any more uh concrete or any other uh uh floors we the uh proposed uh canopy which is going to be covering this area
we already have columns in the the footings because as uh we said it was building permit had approved the glass uh roof over it so what we have to do is just put the columns in there and then
put the uh uh the uh Timber roof with the uh shingles which is matching to the existing uh building uh we are also proposing uh a glass uh enclosure wall there with the
doors so that people can open it in when when we have good weather condition they can be opened up and uh they can go out so this is the first thing the you can see the elevation and the slope is also very minimum whatever is required it's
not very elaborate uh uh elevation of the the roof you can see the angle and uh the existing building at the back the second one uh what we have uh
is [Applause] the the second one is the bill Cod door here there is an existing curb and the bco door is over there uh recently we had to change the door because it was leaking very badly and we are trying to
see till we get the approval to just put up on the curb we are going to put up the wall and just cover it put a roof on top of it and put a regular door rather than a bco door that way we can at least uh control because there's a lot of
leakage coming in into the basement all this area have been badly damaged so plus the stair and everything was completely rotten so we are going to put everything again new so this was the third one second one and the third one
is the the existing patio the existing patio was right up to the edge of the the curb and as the previous um uh board I mean the uh clients they explained
that there were a lot of problems while backing up from the parking area we trying to reduce it put a new retaining wall here and have a a ramp going up to straight into the
house the patio will remain as it is but we are going to change the the the flooring it's all completely uh there's a tripping Hazard there people have fallen there we want to re remove everything put new concrete and new tiles there the the roof is on top of it
we are not providing any coverage wall coverage it's just the roof with on the columns and we'll provide some skylights to give light into this area otherwise it's open on the sides so this is the third
uh Improvement we are looking at the project so it's a mix of an 8A Improvement access into the home plus the recreational space for yeah and we would agree as a condition that it would never be enclosed as additional living space is that correct oh yeah yeah yeah
we are not going to cover it yeah I have no further questions of this witness will Mark all of the arit the series okay great okay2 okay problem sure
so I can't see very clearly over there yes so the question I have is you were talking about backing up and B backing up into that retaining wall or is there going to be protection for pedestrians along that ramp and sidewalk Etc like ballards or we have a proper railing we
we will be going to have railing all over you have Railing at the curve line yes yes I will show you just so that a car doesn't someone mentioned backing up and hitting the wall I don't want to see someone back up and hit a person no no no this this side also has a railing all
the way okay throughout and we are moving it almost like 2T 6 7 Ines inside so that when they are backing up they are not hitting the wall so that's what we are trying to do right right I got it okay and then the ramp everything has their own railing is all Ada component
okay great fantastic all right thanks anyone else I had one question is the sun room going to be heated permanently heated or is it going to be a you want to address that yeah space so it's going to be space heater okay we not putting any electric
space heater right yeah okay thank you okay thank you thank you so B and clean up I have our planner at coling yes I do my name is uh Edward coing k l l i n g I'm a licensed professional planner in
New Jersey I'm also certified nationally by the American Institute of certified planners um I graduated from Ruckers in 1974 so I've been doing planning work for 50 years now uh testified all over the state of New
Jersey in the Wayback machine I was director of planning in Jersey City I was also economic development director later in the city of Elizabeth later on I was a a minority owner and principal in fellows reading Associates based in Tom's River more recently I was a
principal in The Firm of uh drna Robin in Jersey City and for the last few years I've been semi-retired and doing testimony like this from time time to time and your licenses are current in good standing yes they are I offer them as an expert in professional planning
thank you uh so uh Mr coing have you had the opportunity to re review the uh plans that have been submitted as part of this application uh yes I've reviewed the plans I've had conversations with the architect and with the engineer I visited the site reviewed your um your
master plan and your uh your zoning ordinance and um so I'm prepared in that way so could you provide your planning analysis and um in your opinion uh does this application Advance the criteria necessary for the applicant to be
granted the variances which we noted um in this application yes I would I would agree with that that comment and I'm not going to go into a lot of additional detail because you've heard the presentation uh already I think just cutting to the chase uh as you know that
this the temple was built at a time and and approved at a time when it was a permitted use within the a100 zone and it has since been removed from that zone so that is why why we're here um and it's been operating since it's
construction um the variances for an expansion of a non-conforming use which this is the D2 is somewhat held to a lesser level of proof than if we were coming in with an entirely new use and I think your planner actually has addressed that in in her her
report um the uh improvements that envisioned you've heard that so I won't go into a lot of uh detail on that um the one of the things I'll point out though is that the improvements on the temple as was
pointed out as well is that are more or less completing a portion of the building that was previously envisioned but never constructed due to um Financial considerations cost concerns Etc uh it's not intended to increase the
intensity of the temple use the any of the worship space whatsoever um and the way that it's situated it's actually recessed a bit between the two wings of the building that come out that way one I think is the house of worship side the other side
has some religious classroom types of things so it's it's tucked in there and it's actually set back a couple feet further from the rear lot line then the temple as a as a as approved and I think that's going to show in the in the negative impact that it's really not
going to increase or uh any impact from setback it's actually a little bit further setback um I think that the D2 variance uh can be granted because the proposed project does promote the purpose of zoning related to section 2A and that
the proposed improvements will promote the health safety and General Welfare by in in the case of the uh residents it will in uh improve handicap access to the facility it also decreases water um intrusion into
the into the cellar uh the roof as well over the over the patio helps to make for a better better access safer access uh into into that particular pH facility um not only for the priest who lives there but also for visitors to the site
that come to see the priest and to you know conduct business with him um so I think that case that we've we've we've met the two two-way criteria for granting this particular uh variance um I think that uh when you also look at
this type of um inherently beneficial use you look at the the seek test and you look at first identifying the public interest in uh at stake and this is an inherently beneficial use and it's been functioning there and it was approved there so I think allowing it to continue
is is is in the public interest um you also then have to identify what detrimental impacts there will be and in in my opinion it' be very very little in terms of the detrimental impacts um I'll get into a little bit more we discussed some of the bulk SE the bulk variances
that we we talking about but none of the things that we're talking about here in terms of improvements really make make it the varying situations any greater in terms of setbacks and it's been the property lined rear or side or that that that sort of thing so there's really no
detriment in that regard so there's really no need to try to even reduce them because they're so they're so limited so on balance I think the positives significantly outweigh the detriments so I think we've met the criteria for granting a D2 variance uh the other D variance we have is a Flor
area ratio variance and um that is created in part because the applicant wants to seek is seeking to retain a small Brad structure that's in front of the of the uh Temple right now and that's used for storage
yard equipment things like that but also because of of enclosing that sun room it does increase some floor area but it's a very very limited increase um and we exceed the 0.6 criteria by
0.55 so it's so so very limited the proofs in terms of a D4 variance is that really goes to can the site support extra floor area without detrimental impact and without making a big you know change in how the facility would operate
would operate safely so I think with such a limited expansion and the fact that the site is actually an acre greater than uh is required I think that really goes to show that yeah the site can accommodate this very very minor
expansion so before you move on to the bulk variances just a little bit of cleanup so you testified that you believe that the application um advances a few purposes of the municipal land use law is that correct and one of those that you mentioned specifically was the public health
safety and Welfare is that correct would you also agree that um specifically with the sun room Edition uh that it promotes a desirable visual environment under purpose eye yes because I think that's the way the building was envisioned from the beginning and it was designed the
way it was do design so in this case by putting the sun room in where it was anticipated it's so more or less Contin it completes that facade and I think it completes that facade in an aesthetically pleasing way so that I think that does go to to the uh I guess
that's paragraph 2i I believe right uh in terms of promoting that purpose of the municipal L law as well you've mentioned that it promotes purposes of the municipal and use law but we also have uh some inherently beneficial aspects of this application as it
relates to the positive criteria in that houses of worship have been found to be inherently beneficial uh and we have the Ada accessibility component so would you agree that to the extent that the variance is also have this towards the positive criteria this inherently beneficial component that that would
also help uh further the positive criteria well exactly because it's inherently beneficial it's already you know serving the public good because it's inherently beneficial and these these improvements I think better facilitate that purpose so I think
therefore yes it promotes that purpose as well and with the um detriment to the public good I mean you mentioned there is a modest expansion of this facility but it certainly doesn't rise to what the statute calls a substantial detriment on
any of the surrounding properties is that correct correct all of these improvements the uh slight expansions here and there are so minimal that it in my opinion it could not possibly rise to a substantial detriment and with the floor area ratio I think you touched on
this but it's your testimony that the 0.55% increase in the floor area ratio considering the size of the site it can certainly accommodate that deviation is that correct right it should be imperceptible okay great so um I know we have a few bulk variances if you want to
hit on the proofs for those in your professional opinion certainly we uh we do have a small increase in impervious coverage uh it's an addition we we previously approved that 25.8% um so .2% is being added and
that's really in terms of the creation of the the ramp um you know the ramp needs to it has to have a certain slope so it has a certain length to it it needs to double back on it on itself in order to keep maintain a proper proper slope so that added a certain amount of
additional coverage in in gaining access to that uh existing patio uh or or Side Porch open Side Porch such such that it is but I think in this case the benefits substantially outweigh any detriment because certainly uh allowing for
greater handicapped accessibility to uh a facility such as this an inherently beneficial facility for the priest and the visitors to the facility I think is uh definitely Pro promotes the uh the purposes of zoning um and there will be
little or no impact really from uh this such a a minor minor increase again be it's imperceptible so I think in this case you could grant that variance under the C2 CR criteria where the benefits would substantially outweigh any detriment um the rear setback variance
that we that we're asking for is related to the sun room and I touched upon this briefly as I mentioned the the sun room is tucked between these two wings that come out the rear uh the building was originally designed to accommodate that
um we're asking for the rear setback because technically it's 150 fot required uh the sunro will be bet setback 77.2 feet is the way I saw it on the plans uh existing today it's 75 feet so this is actually 2.2 feet a little
bit further recessed so the fact that it's it's even lesser of an impact on the rear lot line um I think you know just shows that there's no substantial detriment to the intent of the Zone plan and granting this variance nor would there be any substantial detriment to
the public good it would be it's it's more or less a hardship in that because the building exists where it is you can't put the on room anywhere anywhere but within 75 feet of the of the rear lot line and they've done the best they could I think in terms of making it a
little bit further back so I think uh if you take that into account and you take into account also the uh beneficial aspects of this use that you could Grant this variant either under the C1 hardship criteria or under C2 where the
benefits outweigh the detriment uh the side setback is very very similar in that regard the um side setback is 100 100 feet the existing home that's there uh and my understanding it home predates the uh um the temple it's probably been
near 100 years um the um and that home's always been in that same location so that's when so when you go when you when you make these improvements to the porch and you want to put a roof on the porch of course it's got to be within the the that that setback which is existing
today is 76.3 feet um so by putting the roof on it's been designed in such a way the architect mentioned we're bringing the build the the porch a couple of feet in from where the rear lot line is but there's not even a variance there for that regard but also the way the roof is
situated it will be slightly greater set setback than from the building so the let any impact on the side Lot line is going to be less than what's already existing so again similar to the rear setback variants that we're requesting uh it will have a
lesser impact than the building itself has at this at this particular time um I think that the improvements slated for the porch uh with the covering over it to help facilitate handicaps accessibility and to make that that porch useful for the uh the priest to
use for the visitors to use and for the purposes of uh uh the house of a house of worship and um really accommodating what their what their intended purpose is um I think shows that we promote the purposes of
zoning um and that that variance too can be granted either under the C1 criteria because of the pre-existing situ situation of the building being where it is or under the C2 criteria with the benefits uh of this use and and the uh
and the improvements being made would outweigh substantially outweigh any detriment and did you have the opportunity to review Miss lean's uh letter dated February 28th 2025 yes and um she provides the proofs
and the statutory criteria um for each and every variants that were requested here tonight do you have any uh exception to anything that's provided in that report or essentially did we attempt to address all of those planning comments as part of your test right I don't have any any comments on it I
think that she covered it all very very very well and I think that we have addressed the her concerns I don't have any further questions this a year about to give this truth I do could you introduce yourself okay so I'm Liz Laney the board planner um the
question I had actually as we talked about there being potentially space heaters in that um spe particularly the um the temple uh sun room and um is there going to be I guess that means there will be lighting too there'll be
electricity you know it's probably better answered by the uh by the architect I know there skylights there so there'll be natural lighting but I'm assuming as you are that there' probably have to be some amount of lighting you can address so the simple answer is yes
because the only detrimental effect the reason I'm asking is the only detrimental effect I could possibly identify was that it is very glass you know which is very beautiful for them because it's overlooking the Farmland but it has the potential
of standing out because it because if it's bright and so I'm just curious as to what maybe the existing Landscaping is along that property line or or is is there um you know if the if the lights are on in that room would they be off by
a certain time yes yes it's going to be turned out number one and number two if you prefer in a landscap you know more densely than what I mean it's a it's a mixed bag
because their view is really nice right you know looking out you don't want to landscape it so they can't see the the Farmland but at the same time it's you know it would be a certain Mitigation Of of um potential detrimental impact and so I I maybe just
saying you can't have don't Li plan I mean let me tell you this is not going to be disco okay it's going to be recessed like you know very okay uh and most of the activities you know access to the day time very s
and if there's no activities there's any person there you know turn any so it's not going to be catching your attention or you know disturbing and there are no you know
back I understand it's just sort of a light pollution sort of situation you understand what I'm saying yeah not something all right it's up to the board you discussed the hours of oper
thank you you discussed the hours of operation could you repeat what what are the closing times on soor yeah can everybody hear me yeah okay um during the weekday Monday through Friday uh it closes at 8:00 p.m.
period okay and the weekends is closes at you know 9:00 p.m. period okay so maybe we could uh put something in the if we accept this we can put something in there that the lights need
to be off when when the facility closes yeah yeah yeah would you accept a condition of approval that the lights in the Sun Mo would be turned off within a half hour after your closing time okay theer my only questions
okay thank you I do thank you Dave hoer engineer for the board Ed I apologize for calling you Sharon on my letter I didn't mean to do that uh somehow it slipped through I did a letter on the 25th of February um
first first thing that I want would like the board to think about is um there were three items from the checklist that the applicant asked on asked for waivers on uh drainage calculations item 40 drainage area map item 58 and item 59
environmental impact report um I don't have a problem with them not providing that I know there was one question Robin had talked to me about um someone who uh from the public who was uh concerned about whether environmental impact report is needed or not this application
is mostly putting roofs on top of impervious so I'm not sure if you really need it the the do the things that I do uh think that they need to do is and I I put this in my letter and I'll just uh talk about it quickly um
they need to like darken the lines up for the proposed information um it was hard to see kind of figure what was new what was old and so I mean you can see it from the AR plans but I'm sure Mr Patel could do that easily um and then the second thing is there has to be some
kind of a a method to get rid of the drainage off the roofs um if they're not large roofs but but at least the two that are on the parsonage and on the back of the the temple um we don't want to have icing up in the winter I've experienced that this year already
because it's been colder uh and um so we need some kind of connection to a storm drain uh for those uh otherwise um I think that the they should get a u they should send the application into the planning board for Middle sex County uh
but not necessarily uh I I don't know if they'll even have any comments they probably have nothing but you never know but that's the only outside approval that I would really look for and would you accept um if we agreed to add a detail to the plan to your satisfaction
for how the roof drainage is addressed yes we would be willing to do that thank you Mr chairman okay great um any comments from the public um could you use the mic and yes
state your name and you sworn in would you raise your right hand please you SAR the test you're about to give his truth yes sir thank you you give it full name is by your last name please yes my name is Roger jany r o d g
e r j a n y uh my father and I own the farm across the street uh from the entrance to the temple um I want to raise some issues I'm going to apologize if this should have been previous in the
process I didn't know anything about this until I got a certified letter last week that this was occurring um when they first built this facility um there was significant
drainage issues that were raised and never thoroughly addressed um the county came out and fixed with a Band-Aid the drainage problems because
the drainage basin that was installed drains to a swell which goes direct of the street um I'm going to pass around I did not I apologize I bring enough copies of this with me I wasn't sure how make but I
pass okay so I'm going to show you a map that I drew just retailing some dreams that exists with my farm and how things have
been addressed to um the drainage on this entire area drains the north of cranber Neck Road um my family has owned the
property since the I believe the 19 mid1 1950s um the two red lines on the map indicate two privately owned drain pipes that are not on any County or town
movements um there's been periodic flooding problems on George Davidson Road when we've had major problems initially when this facility was built the drainage basin drained
directly to the road and in the winter time we had numerous issues with uh completely ice covered roads they were coming out literally every morning to Salt the road in order to prevent
traffic issues um at some point I don't know the history on it these drains were installed I believe in the 40s or 50s um they are large drains they're like 14inch diameter or they're about I
I can't say definitively but it's in that ballpark the county tied in as well as Plainsboro Township because George Davidson road is on is a town owned prop uh road but the county installed
drainage boxes as depicted with the green boxes um when the issues arose initially the county came down along the I I appreciate the resident's concerns
but I think we're we're a little far a field of where the application has gone I'm going to object on the basis of totally outside the scope of our presentation tonight and we've agreed as a condition of approval that any the
0.2% increase in impervious coverage that will address with your board engineer through tying into the existing system I'm not sure that this board should be getting into um drainage issues that date back to unregistered or unrecorded easements
back in the 1950s I've deferred a board counsel but it seems very outside the scope of our presentation tonight well I I mean I think the board should hear what the current problem is and maybe or maybe not relates to the 2008 approvals I
don't we don't know maybe there were conditions at the time that haven't been met and if that's the case this is our opportunity to catch up on that if that's not the case I agree with you it's something over water over the dam but I I do believe that we should hear the rest of the
story basically what I that the county at the time and I believe it was the winter of 12 13 time frame installed a little 6-in poly pipe with essentially a French drain along the
side the south side of cranber Neck Road to alleviate the majority of the water problem that then ties into the whole drainage system to your comment um I'm not opposed to the project what I'm
concerned concerned about is additional water from the impervious coverage and direct tie-ins from the root system that were just requested to go into the drainage system which is going to increase the whole capacity I I'm not
the engineer who designed any of the the drainage basin I don't know anything about how they work than how supposed to work I may have a solution for the resident is cranberry Neck Road a County Road yes sir so if if one of the things that we're leaving here tonight is that
we have to uh apply to the middle sex County planning board they're going to app as to any impact on County Drainage facilities that's part of their jurisdiction so if indeed there is county-owned infrastructure as part along the road as part of this application that's within the County's
jurisdiction to vet so we'll be happy to submit an application uh to the County planning board because if it is indeed their facilities uh they have jurisdiction to pass over that question in 2008 did they do what they said they were going to do I don't have
an answerers that I so you don't know if this is right or wrong or nobody has any I I don't know I'm raising the question now because it was the first I knew anything of well because you first said that it wasn't done years ago you don't think it it was done I wonder it was
done right or it was done wrong I don't know who installed the drain lines that come across our har I kind of think my grandfather did but I don't know I'm just my grandfather passed away in 1991 I was 11 years old right um I don't know
who installed them my point is there's drainage issues along the road that were band-aided together by the county nobody wanted to talk about it when I brought it up I I brought it to the town hall here back at that point
and got nowhere um and at this point I personally can't accept any additional point source water coming through that
drink it's if it's as law states I'm obligated to accept Jeep flow but I'm not required to accept Point um
I believe I covered everything I wanted to raise um at this point um there any other questions I'm not sure what direction I need to go as an own land Mr chairman hi
I'm I'm Dave hoder I'm the engineer for the board I believe I started in 2010 so I wasn't here back then in 08 um unless you remember me then I don't think so I I wasn't part of arm to
the extent I am now I see okay and so um I think what happened was whoever took care of it at the time uh decided that A detention Basin should be built and and then they asked the county if they could connect to the county drain or at least to the county Swale to the road there is
no Swale on the road right but that's what you know that's kind of what happened okay and and then and then the county must have figured out that there was some kind of a mistake made or something with the the fact that there was no swell or no no drain on the road and put that I suppose the the purple
and yellow is what you're talking about that was put in later on right the purple is the outlet of their Basin of the Chaya Basin yeah and then it runs down the road yellow was added right by
the when the major issues I mean it sounds like to me what happened was the county allowed for them to exit the water out onto the road and then they found out there was a problem the county found out there was a problem so they tried to put a bandaid in and um maybe I shouldn't say this because their
government they did it inexpensively uh with the public works people that actually worked at the county and didn't do maybe the right thing and do a design and hire a consultant and all that stuff because that gets into a lot more money um so one option would be to if if the
board thinks this is the right thing to do is we could we could always take the flow off the roof okay instead of running it to the storm drains into the Basin and I'm gonna be honest it's it's so small I don't know how it'll ever
affect you but but let me give you an option the option would be to run it to either some dry Wells or out to the back to be absorbed uh in the grass areas adjacent to the you know to the church
or to the um Temple so that would be one one possible thing that myself and the engineer can work out so the extra water doesn't run to you you still have what you have whatever that is it may not be good it may may be okay it may be something you can live with uh what are
the condition of the pipes underneath the the fields you know well and that's part of why I'm I'm sorry that's part of why I'm raising this is because they're 70 whatever your old you said got to rep 14 in you said yeah it's a big pip yeah
they're probably clay tile type well it's a it's some sort of a concrete type material it's not it's not the old clay tiles oh it isn't okay it's not but my point i' I've got I had to repair one three or four years ago I got another one I got to repair now I
believe it's just the joints that are starting to fail but I can't answer that until I get dig it out that's often the case point of the matter is additional water flow is going to cause additional issues as time passes why don't we talk after the meeting meeting and maybe we can uh get you hooked up to the county
and try to figure out something a little bit better okay Mr jany will also Mar Mark your exhibit as part of the record okay and as Mr Flynn indicated this matter will go to the county so you know it's going to go there so I guess our
recommendation would be to send send a letter ahead of that or with that and then when the matter is heard you'll be have an opportunity to talk to the county sounds like it's a county problem not their problem okay so it's for Mr Janny Mr Janny you with me hey we had we just had a
question you don't mind sorry so are you saying right now as we sit there there's a drainage problem across that road there can be yes no there is like when it rains crazy heavy like today there's a problem is that
what you're saying I'm not trying to challenge you or give you a hard time it will pond on the south side of the road the very does it pawns when we have heavy range it pawns now until yeah until sufficient time passes that the drains pull the water
away okay so and has this been an ongoing argument with the applicant I haven't brought it up in quite quite some time it was simply I brought it up years ago when when we had the issues but with the changes in our weather patterns and the significantly
larger rainfalls we keep getting right it's becoming more of an issue so I haven't seen it but so you're saying there's an outflow pipe that actually drains into the road it's it exits what 20 20 30 feet off the road it comes from
the Basin it just comes from the detention Basin so the Basin fills up and then it slowly in theory goes out to that Swale or whatever it is to the side of the road that Swale is perpendicular to the road and goes straight to the road but so nobody has ever looked at
the base and said it was it built properly is being maintained blah blah blah I can't answer that okay all right because Basin funky things happen with Basin over time for what it's worth I'm not aware and from speaking to my client we're not
aware of any issues being raised from the prior approval yeah fair enough so we're here today thinking that we complied fully with the o08 approval we've never heard otherwise yeah so the guy's here so we can ask him questions so we're just asking him yeah sure right
because if if if he saying he's testified he's been sworn he's saying there's a problem when it rains heavy right so part of the stuff we got to think about is does it make sense to deal with it or not like I don't know I have a suggestion yeah okay the the possibility could be that what we do you
know what happens is the the town engineer at the time uh is the person that actually certifies that everything's been built correctly in accordance with the plans and the resolution of the board you know and that was planning board back then uh and then um and
then yes plan it's built the Basin could deteriorate over time and it's been a while it's been over 10 years easily so um you could put a resolution you could put an item in the resolution to say that when the town engineer does his
final inspection of this property he pulls out the old plans from 80 from 08 and he reviews The Basin to make sure that it is what it's supposed to be and if there's any maintenance problems because today we make people do operation and
maintenance plans for basins back then they probably didn't do it right it's it's a kind of a whole different thing I mean I've seen them silt up yeah the capacity goes away that's correct and so what we can do is ask the applicant to take care and maintain their Basin and
bring it back to the original design if necessary it may be may not be necessary it may be that I mean if it if it silts up that could bring more water out onto the road usually that also makes the outlet silted too which means less water on the road so there's a couple things
that could be happening and and I'm I'm sure the town engineer Tom Decker could easily figure out what's going on there and make sure that uh the applicant's Basin is working right as least as good as it can be compared to what was approved way back
Mr shmear should we label should we Mark the exhibit yeah we o o Das one okay a photograph of the the adjacent form we'll get this to have nothing to Losee Rob can I ask
the question uh I'm curious to know if after this examination it is found out that the applicant equipment or whatever you want to call it is fine is functioning correctly you know it meets the 2008
requirements but it's found out that the Cy's section is in poor condition now what happens I mean the county may very well go ahead and look this application and just
say you know you are absolutely correct it it may very well happen that way but I'm going to talk to the adjacent neighbors and and we'll see if we can figure out a way to get to the county so they understand what the situation is because I basically have a problem that it's it's a shame that when an applicant
comes in here and makes an application which changes the impervious coverage by 3/4 of 1% which is you know pretty small number and you have to take that this
applicant's application as the only opportunity to speak out and voice your grievance I mean I think that's a pretty bad sad State of Affairs that you had no other recourse than to come here because all
other possible Avenues of grievance were not open to you for what it's worth my client is fine with the post ha looking at the old approval and ensuring that the Basin is functional as designed yeah and it wouldn't be it wouldn't be a bonding thing or anything like that but it would
be you know the the co would contingent on making sure it's in accordance with the o08 plans that's all sure which is the right thing anyway sure it's Maines in addition to that would you be willing to do what David suggested about the
discharge into the grass spine the buildings instead of tying in because that would I mean it's not much but it'll red it'll it'll mitigate the 0.5% whatever it is yeah and that's that's the best we can do here at this board we can have our professional work with
you're professional and accomplishing that the client's find with it okay we're not trying to make a neighbor's flooding problem worse so it sounds to me like it probably is an issue with the county and not us but we'll make sure our Basin is functional
sure see in truth if we um um if if we if we make the water that comes off these roofs go to the back you're going to actually reduce the amount of flow that's going to that detention Basin in the front that's right because the patios normally go to the Basin in the front right and if they go to the back it's it's sort of going
to you know spread it out in different directions right so it's a good thing I I I drive that way almost every day uh and uh it it floods um you know the road floods it's gotten much better since it was repaved uh but it's not
only that point I mean it it floats at a two or three spots on the road yeah okay uh anyone else from the public yeah Brian Sals former testimony about to give us truth thank
you uh just I wanted to stand here just to be on record to Echo everything that Roger had said that there is a drainage problem and um I back everything he had to say um I just want to make you aware the drains you know were put in for agricultural use only and obviously in
the 50s that's all was out was forms uh put in stop erosion on Farm fields and uh not to take water away from facility so I just want that thank you thank
you did you give permission to the county to use the pipes like I know you said I'm just wondering like how did they tie into your pipe that you put in I can't answer that again it was put in those pipes are more than likely put
in doing a car share program I'm assuming those don't even exist on any any Maps so for us as Farmers watching our Fields blow because off facility kind is
erosion everything else and we never had that problem was built and we really all can't believe that it wasn't addressed way back then and they just the water out on the side ofar I know we can't fix what we have to deal with what we have now but that was
really a Big R every rainstorm my lawn gets flooded like that they just molded the road there's no anyone else from the public have anything no okay so anyone uh on the board like
to say anything about the obligation uh I went ahead and reviewed in detail the U letters that were written by the um by
David Liz and the Environmental commission and going over the information I came to a conclusion and before I heard what was just
presented at the flooding uh I'm inclined to approve um the application with any conditions stipulated you know as set forth by whatever you have written down there
right okay and that and that's my position thank you got look a motion so are you making a motion to approve I make I I make a motion to approve the
applicant um application uh with any conditions that have been so set forth we before we um I didn't hear a condition sure uh before
we let's hear the conditions oh the conditions well the one we have to clarify is do you want the the new little water to go to the backyard yes and not tie into the to the down spouts absolutely okay right bab well it's any area that will be from the roofs the new
roofs of the two the parsonage and the temple you don't have to worry about the over where the Belco door is that's not right but the those two will flow and mitigate the drainage coming off the site and actually will will reduce the flow going to the Basin which will
reduce the flow going to the road not by a lot but it'll it's a start and we'll work that out the engineers will work that out so that there's no erosion or any problems it's like a roof Gutter and leader right so we'll direct those to
the area that and describe the other conditions you have to decide if you want to approve the three uh checklist waivers drainage drainage area map and environmental uh report I think I'm G urge that you do that you do I don't
think it's a big deal the B verification part yes so the motion would be to Grant preliminary and final major site plan approval the two use variances that are required the both variances which are
reflected in the plan subject to the conditions that were put on the record we just repeated some of them but we'll make sure the last bigger condition is is having to do with um no I was going to say the county but I
the county approval uh yes it'll be subject to the county approval and we'll work with we'll work with the engineer to to make sure the the county understands what's going on out there right that language will be in the resolution those those two guys get
yes all right so roll call for approval Mr Bon valant yes Mr Callen yes Mr McGovern yes Miss Parker yes Mr Schwarz yes Mr cathari yes and Mr Diamond yes thank you motion pass thank you for your time
when when they when they yeah you you can take them I mean say hello to Chris was it corini yeah and you know Chris Mr Salo I work in bridge for a long time okay yeah yeah uh Bill Bill's great he's uh semi
retired I know but we're going to wait we're going to wait until they do a resolution and then we we'll talk it's good to see it it's a nice surprise see skating that's not you
yeah po Chris I mean it's probably a common name right yeah uh we folks thank you motion we need a motion to adjourn make a motion to journ I I have a question I do not not to do with this
sorry I I have a general question so there was the application for the place on the corner right on Main Street so next month so I guess the question I had was isn't that a jurisdictional issue because when we went through that before
that never hit zoning it was it was it was part of a Redevelopment plan uh planning and the township committee took jurisdiction of that exclusively of us we were not involved they rejected it why doesn't it stay
there is is they were given I mean it it has been zoned by the D committee and that and now they're asking for variance from what was so I don't but I don't think it should be here I don't think well the the reason it's here is Judge
bua in middlex County they filed a lawsuit against the township committee not you but the township committee indicating that they wanted to relief to do something then offer and they went to a case management conference with judge
bua up in new bruny and he directed that they have to exhaust their administrative remedies to see if they can get a variance from the the zoning board to do what they want to do before they can go back to court so so let take a step back so when was the lawsuit uh
lawsuit was filed maybe three four months ago so they sued the township committee to do what we not allowing not agreeing to amend the Redevelopment plan to let them do something that office in that building but something other than
office right in other words the Redevelopment plan now says that 9,000 foot building has to be an office building yes okay that was approved some time ago back in 2017 I believe fair enough times have changed so they went into and talked I believe to the
township committee to see whether or not they would amend the Redevelopment plan and the township committe say declined said no says no or says no we don't have we don't want jurisdiction anymore no no nothing about jurisdiction they they were asked to change the plan to
something other than office and the committee I understand declined to do that okay substant they filed a suit to say that was arbitrary capricious and unreasonable got it to to deny us doing that okay and they went to court on a
case management and judge buer looked at it and said listen you you have to try to get a variance to do what you want to do from the Redevelopment plan and the underlying zoning which is the Redevelopment plan but with all due
respect to judge bua we never had jurisdiction over this ever well you do now I don't I don't know that I agree with that well I would we can have a whole discussion I no I know but it's going to be an agenda and we're going to be talking about agenda
and I'm gonna say at least from my perspective unless you School me I I and I'm fine to listen but I don't it was never here and I didn't like when it was never here right I felt it should have been here but that's a issue that's long over the Dan
so being that it was never here I don't think it should be here right does that work if the board if we discuss it next week as a threshold issue if we discuss jurisdiction we have jurisdiction over threshold issue we can't agree as a you can discuss the issue of jurisdiction
you could do that right up front I I just don't want to waste everyone's time if I don't think it belongs here I my my decision is not finding with anybody but but I don't think it belongs here I think if if the township committee wanted to take ownership of this which
is fine we don't have we can't stop them from doing that and then these people come back and I don't even know the applicant or whatever and they go hey Township committee we want to change this thing and the township committee says no they've exercise their jurisdiction with the township committee
right they've asked them to amend the Redevelopment plan to do something different they declined to do that but when they went to court and again they didn't sue you they SU Township committee and the judge had it together
and he said that before this is right to come back to me on that issue you need to go back to the zoning board and to see whether or not the zoning board would Grant permission because it's a zoning issue about what what you do
there I understand that but I don't think judge bua can grant us jurisdiction well he did no well no he can say whatever he wants he's a trial judge right right right right he does and but but we have never had jurisdiction I don't think he can just say you have
jurisdiction well but but he he he's trying to take it serious in other words normally you have to exhaust whatever remedies you have before you get to court understood understood and and in his vision his idea was that you should
go back to the zoning board they never had jurisdiction before he knew that but you ought to go back to the zoning board and make your pitch and to see whether or not the zoning board would perhap disagree with the governing body and say you could do a b and c there not not uh the uh office
that they want to do okay I no I hear you and I'm not trying to give you a hard time I just think I would say never did don't and I have no I have no argument with judge bua right he's he's suggesting uh an approach but I don't
think it's appropriate that's all well and and that could be a part of the discussion next month all right fair enough when they come fair enough gentlemen one one comment is that cranber com has tried to go to the uh development Review Committee now two
months in a row and then have canceled twice right Rob so what okay so what's happening they're applying to development review yeah and they know they just wanted I guess maybe they want to air their grievances I
don't know okay who's who's member of this board that goes to it yeah but yeah but because it yeah but you can't talk about it no no we can't even attend and neither can the head of the zoning the planning board because she's within 200 feet oh oh oh okay so then I just to add
to the fun so I I I may have a conf I may have a conflict here because we represented uh Gateway cranberry Association we don't anymore up until about a year and a half two years ago we represent the association
okay and there's a basin that drains all three properties so I don't know if that kicks me out in any case regardless of whether I mean I don't think it matters because as far as I'm concerned we don't have jurisdiction but substantively if we get to the substance of it we're gonna have to talk
about it Fran I tend I tend Fran I tend to disagree with you because I know you're a lawyer and I'm an engineer and now and we will never agree but uh but the zoning board actually has the legal
right to override what the Tanto committee wants mean they could technically say yes we heard what you said but we are going to Grant they could they can do that the the committee may not like it but they had the legal right to do it and that's reason why I'm thinking whatever the judge was thinking
he says look let's give these people their best shot at whatever hearings or whatever you know they can Avail themselves of the the judge wants two things once he wants it resolved number one without it going to court and he wants to as you said exhaust
administrative remedies and and what I'm saying is that may be well and good I'm not disagreeing with the judge in substance I'm just saying that this is not an administrative remedy here we never had it we should never have it it
is it belongs to the township committee no no we had a similar to come to this court and say we're putting in an application please take jurisdiction because the township committee again I was told this quite
assertively in whatever it was 2015 or whatever this is ours right and we experienced the same thing out on 130 when we have a Redevelopment right situation right deemed deemed and necessary for redevelopment right and and I couldn't believe at the time how
much Redevelopment and blight we had in cranber right I I I was shocked at the amount of blight we had in cranberry and what it did was it took these questions from this table right and my view is still
and gosh knows what a judge would say ultimately if it w up in front of a judge but if they have jurisdiction and that's what these resolutions kind of say hey the township committee and the planning board this is our baby it shouldn't it they they own it the applicant's attorney decided to go
to the cranbery I hear first I hear you and I think was the right thing to do he got a big no out of that here exactly that may be the definition of forum shopping I just don't know that this forum is open to him and I argue it's not but you know okay that's for someone
more powerful and knowledgeable than I but it's a dear so we shouldn't be talking Fran I see this no I see this issue as no different when they wanted to put up a warehouse at the corner of 130 and half acre road and they wanted
us to change the zoning to allow warehouses yeah okay we dealt with that and I see that this thing is under the is is very similar I mean no difference so Richard this this is and and just so you understand you don't have to agree
with me but so this just so you understand in that situation the township committee didn't say hey the liquor store is in need of Redevelopment we're deeming it in need of Redevelopment we're taking jurisdiction and it's hours because if that happened
that application would never have come to us you see what I'm saying well it would went to the funding board prob it would have G to planning and the township committee sure are you saying that if we accept jurisdiction over it we'll basically be challenging a decision that the a committee made I
just no but you're allow I mean you're allowed to do that this board can hear so yeah you're you're said you're going to have to educate me I just as as far as I was told from whatever it was 2015
forward planning and the committee are taking jurisdiction of this right and in including this resolution which increased the number of Apartments upstairs and all the other stuff I don't see how it comes back to us especially after they sub
substantively said no they've considered it and rejected it I don't think judge bua again I got no problem with the judge right and I got to appear in Middle sex all the time right but but I don't think the Judge after a
substantive rejection over the body that had jurisdiction can say yeah that's nice take a shot elsewhere when they have exercised jurisdiction over it and rejected it the applicant's got the right to do it unless the judge tells them he can't well we'll see but we also
we also have to assess our own jurisdiction Z at the time yes when it happens I think you know how I [Laughter] feel okay are we supposed yeah sorry for I didn't mean to
keep you all that's my fault motion to adjourn [Music] second hi hi to make this Rob Diamond you didn't have