WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=7E_qqb7I0sk

Part: 1

1
00:20:53.120 --> 00:21:14.240
represents us. He represents us. >> Yeah, cuz he lives. >> Yeah. Township of Edison zoning board of adjustment special meeting of July 7th, 2026 is now in session. Adequate notice of this meeting as required by the open

2
00:21:14.240 --> 00:21:32.480
public meetings act of 1975 has been provided by the annual notice published in the home news trabune on December 4th, 2025 as imposed in the main lobby municipal complex on December 4th, 2025. Please join me in the pledge of allegiance to the flag to the flag of the United States of

3
00:21:32.480 --> 00:21:51.360
America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all. >> Madam Secretary, roll call, please. >> Mr. Carly, >> here. >> Miss Knight, >> here. >> Mr. Sammon

4
00:21:51.360 --> 00:22:07.120
>> here. >> Mr. A >> here. >> Mr. Johnny >> here, >> Mr. Chabra >> here, >> Mr. Certo >> here, >> Mr. Patel >> here, >> Mr. Schneider >> here, >> vice chair Gorman >> here, >> and chairman Gumba >> here. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. This is a

5
00:22:07.120 --> 00:22:22.799
special meeting of the township of Edison zoning board of adjustment. The board is composed of Edison Township residents appointed by the municipal council who volunteer their time and service to the board. Municipal land use law requires a member successfully complete a land use training course ministered by the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs. This board also

6
00:22:22.799 --> 00:22:38.240
holds in-house training conducted by our board professionals. The zoning board abides by the provisions of the municipal land use law in addition to our board's bylaws. The zoning board is a quasi judicial land use board which differs from the township planning board. Under mipal land use law, board members are required to be impartial and

7
00:22:38.240 --> 00:22:53.440
are not allowed to discuss any case prior to being considered at a hearing. All applicants will have the opportunity to present their case before the board along with the opportunity for board members and board professionals to question the applicant and their witnesses. At the conclusion of the applicant's presentation of the case, the case will open to the public.

8
00:22:53.440 --> 00:23:09.679
Residents within 200 ft of subject site will be heard, followed by residents from outside 200 feet. All residents will be sworn in. They'll provide their name and address, and they'll be given six minutes to comment on the application being considered without the opportunity for rebuttal. Residents may ask questions of the applicant, the applicant's professionals, and board

9
00:23:09.679 --> 00:23:25.200
professionals. The board requests that these questions are as priority commentary being made on the application. Once commentary begins, the resident's timer will begin. The applicant will be allowed the opportunity for cross-examination of their witnesses. Under the law, the chair is allowed to stop any commentary which is repetitive or an attempt to

10
00:23:25.200 --> 00:23:41.120
filibuster the board. Further, the chair is allowed to stop any commentary that is irrelevant to the case or prohibited from the board's consideration. Once public portion is closed, all public comments are ended unless new testimony is presented by the applicant. Following the closure of the public portion, the applicant will have the right of summation on their application.

11
00:23:41.120 --> 00:23:56.960
Following summation, the case will go to the board for decision. This procedure has been followed by the board and is similar to procedures followed by boards of adjustment statewide. Miss land use law requires the board engage in a balancing act is not required to strictly apply township ordinances zoning plan or master plan.

12
00:23:56.960 --> 00:24:13.039
As a board of adjustment, variances are granted when appropriately necessary following all legal considerations. I ask that all applicants, professionals, and residents show respect each other and be civil throughout all proceedings. I ask that you withhold applause, booing, or interrupting of anyone while they are speaking. The chair will not

13
00:24:13.039 --> 00:24:29.120
tolerate tolerate outbursts by applicants, professionals, or the public. Further, since most cases are being recorded by a court reporter, I ask that speakers do not speak over one another. Madam Secretary, first case on the agenda, please. >> Case number Z8 2024, ultimate collision

14
00:24:29.120 --> 00:24:45.919
at 115 US Route 1. Applicant is seeking bulk and use variances for the addition of 22 exterior car lifts and to permit two sheds and two trailers installed without prior approvals. Standards have not been met in accordance with the master plan. Auto repair shops are not a

15
00:24:45.919 --> 00:25:02.400
permitted use in this zone. Accessory building in the front yard is not permitted. Proposed is 5.5 ft. Max fence height required is 6 feet. Proposed is 12 feet. Max building coverage required is 25%. Proposed is 26.4%. 4%. Affected

16
00:25:02.400 --> 00:25:19.600
property is located in the GBH zone designated as block number 2011, lot number 17 on the Edison Township tax map. All noticing paperwork is in order. >> Good evening, Mr. Shar. >> Good evening, Mr. Chairman. Members of the >> Mr. Sher, I'm going to stop you short. I need a we need need a microphone.

17
00:25:19.600 --> 00:25:40.000
Your fans at home need your your fans at home need to hear you. I could hear you, but the people at home, they want they want to hear Skip SH. Good evening uh Mr. Chairman and members of the board. My name is Bernard Shire with firm of Conv Convary and Shire uh representing the applicant ultimate

18
00:25:40.000 --> 00:25:56.480
collision repair. Uh this application involves a uh a facility that was approved by this board uh over 20 years ago. Uh the uh it was probably the first

19
00:25:56.480 --> 00:26:13.440
modern uh collision repair facility in the certainly in the township of Edison, maybe in the county of Middle Sex. Uh it is uh far from what your uh old vision of a of a auto uh collision repair shop

20
00:26:13.440 --> 00:26:30.080
would look like. Uh the uh business uh has been there successfully for over 20 years. uh at 11:15 US Route 1, block 2011, lot 17 in the GBH zone. Uh this board

21
00:26:30.080 --> 00:26:48.000
approved uh a uh an addition uh some 12 years ago uh for rooftop parking uh and uh a slight increase in the size of the building. Uh and uh due to uh the nature

22
00:26:48.000 --> 00:27:03.520
of the business changing uh over these years, uh my client uh is seeking uh to uh essentially create more parking uh for the vehicles that he services uh as

23
00:27:03.520 --> 00:27:19.520
well as some uh relatively minor changes uh to the facility itself. Uh the business has changed substantially uh especially since co uh in that uh

24
00:27:19.520 --> 00:27:36.880
insurance companies take their sweet old time getting somebody down to examine the vehicles uh in order to authorize their repair and come to an agreement on price. uh once a car is delivered uh in undrivable condition, of course, it has

25
00:27:36.880 --> 00:27:51.039
to remain on the property in a safe location. Uh the uh applicant in order to remedy that situation is proposing uh 22 car lifts uh which essentially turn

26
00:27:51.039 --> 00:28:07.440
one parking space into two. Uh I have provided to the board uh previously uh the specifications for these uh and I uh gave the secretary a copy for each board member uh in case there weren't enough

27
00:28:07.440 --> 00:28:25.360
originally submitted. Uh the other problem in the business that has arisen is obtaining parts for vehicles. Uh I can tell you that uh my partner had his vehicle repaired and it took weeks to

28
00:28:25.360 --> 00:28:40.559
get the parts in. Uh that is just simply a a problem that can't be remedied without keeping the vehicles on the premises longer than normally would have occurred 15 20 years ago. Uh these car

29
00:28:40.559 --> 00:28:59.919
lifts are rather unique uh and uh they will greatly alleviate the problem. Uh they have already been installed uh based upon the fact that these are not fixtures, they're movable. And it was

30
00:28:59.919 --> 00:29:16.559
believed uh by my client that this did not require any approval from the board since they were not fixtures. Uh however uh Mr. Big Nell determined that it does require board approval and therefore we

31
00:29:16.559 --> 00:29:32.240
came before the board to seek approval. Uh the uh other uh aspects of the application will be described by the architect. Uh the trailers uh in question have been removed as Mr.

32
00:29:32.240 --> 00:29:48.559
Bignell asked. Uh they are not on the property. Uh there is no barbed wire which I saw mentioned in one of the reports. Uh I I that's that was resolved many years ago to my knowledge. uh the

33
00:29:48.559 --> 00:30:07.039
uh variances or a D2 use variance for slightly increasing uh the size of the facility. Uh there's a variance for fence height uh we were proposing a 10-ft fence uh

34
00:30:07.039 --> 00:30:24.159
for better screening if nothing else. Uh however, it should be noted that there's nothing around this facility which would cause anyone to even see uh any of these uh improvements that are being made. Uh

35
00:30:24.159 --> 00:30:41.200
the uh Mr. McNe will testify as to what he's surrounded by. Uh and very very frankly there essentially is is nothing. Uh he's set way back from Route One, so you can't see it from the highway. Uh

36
00:30:41.200 --> 00:30:57.520
he's bordered on one side by the 287 offramp. Uh there is uh uh a Wawwa facility that was originally an office depot when this uh uh was approved I believe uh it was approved together with

37
00:30:57.520 --> 00:31:15.760
the office depot which now is a Waw Wa gas station uh over the last year or two which was approved by the board. Uh the uh uh other side uh there is a a restaurant and uh uh motel facility

38
00:31:15.760 --> 00:31:34.399
offset quite a ways and also uh a uh I'm not sure if it's a uh parking lot or a junkyard uh but Mr. McNe can tell you what that's about. But certainly has nothing to do with ultimate collision application. Uh unless there are any

39
00:31:34.399 --> 00:31:50.640
preliminary questions by the board, I'm ready to proceed. I have Mr. McNe the principal of Ultimate Collision, William Lane of Menllo Engineering, Charles Deetsz, the architect, and John McNunner, our planner. >> Board have any preliminary questions of Mr. SH? Seeing no, you may proceed.

40
00:31:50.640 --> 00:32:12.720
Thank you. >> Well, Mr. McNe, >> could you raise your right hand and repeat after me? Do you swear or affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth? Can you state your name and address for the record, please? >> Gerald McNe, 5 Casey Court, Somerset, New Jersey.

41
00:32:12.720 --> 00:32:29.200
>> Mr. McNe, you're the owner of Ultimate Collision. >> Yes. >> And location. Yes. >> And how long ago did you actually construct the business there? >> I've been at this location for 26 years since 2000.

42
00:32:29.200 --> 00:32:46.720
>> And was approved by the Edison Township zoning board. Correct. >> Yes, it was. >> Uh over the 26 years, uh the nature of the business has changed dramatically. Is that correct? >> It is. Uh you heard what I indicated to the board as far as time that is

43
00:32:46.720 --> 00:33:01.679
consumed getting a car actually repaired and getting authorization and parts to get it repaired. >> Yes. The the the average time the average time to actually repair a car and turn a car nowadays about 25 24 days

44
00:33:01.679 --> 00:33:19.279
uh opposed to the original 7 to 10 days that had taken place previously. And of course, a damaged vehicle that's brought in that is not operable can't be put back out on the street. Correct. >> That's correct. >> Uh now you're uh

45
00:33:19.279 --> 00:33:35.600
just briefly describe the area around uh your facility. >> So if you were facing the building, standing in front of the parking lot to the right hand side is is the off-ramp or on ramp from 287 to Route One, which is a wooded area uh probably about 20 or

46
00:33:35.600 --> 00:33:52.640
so feet. pretty dense. Um it's it's a good buffer zone there. You have a state fence there. You also have my fence there as well. Um behind me essentially is the dead end street um which leads to a trucking company and the lot that you

47
00:33:52.640 --> 00:34:08.399
called um which is rented to multiple tenants along with the restaurant and caddy corner behind office depot is is the Knights of Columbus. Other than that, there's there's that's the whole neighborhood.

48
00:34:08.399 --> 00:34:25.320
>> How how far back are you set from roof? >> I say the the building is probably set back around 200 feet. >> Not visible from angle around the property. Is that correct? >> No.

49
00:34:28.639 --> 00:34:45.679
>> To add 22 car limits. briefly describe for the board what these are. >> Uh, essentially it's just that I guess the best way of putting it is a New York style city parking where if you were going to the city and you were looking for parking

50
00:34:45.679 --> 00:35:02.320
of space, they would double, triple, or stack them. This is a single stack. So essentially, it's a platform that lowers down to the ground as a lift. You back the car on it, you raise it up, and you park another vehicle underneath it. So in essence, you're turning one parking space into two.

51
00:35:02.320 --> 00:35:17.680
>> Yes. >> And this is a necessity for your business. >> Have to keep vehicles on the property longer these days. >> Yes. >> Uh these these are movable. Correct. >> Yeah. They're not permanent structures. They required no footings and I know you

52
00:35:17.680 --> 00:35:32.960
alluded to it earlier that um I didn't think I needed permits based upon the company. It's the double or triple stackers that would require uh some type of footing or foundation anchor, not not the single. >> Right. Now, there was also reference

53
00:35:32.960 --> 00:35:50.560
made to trailers that Mr. Those were removed. Correct. >> Yes, they were. >> Also, there was reference to a 10-ft fence, which is above what is generally permitted. Uh where was that fence proposed? It's it's the same location

54
00:35:50.560 --> 00:36:06.320
outside the front of the building. Um I think we had scheduled or I'm looking to put a generator in front in the event of power issues which we've had over the this weekend and has caused me a lot of harm. Um essentially that that's the only one that that's going to extend to

55
00:36:06.320 --> 00:36:22.240
the front of the building. Other than that, the the fence is just going to be replaced and in order to give it a little more buffer from the surrounding neighborhood. Uh now actually need this fence. Correct. You've done it just to try to make uh

56
00:36:22.240 --> 00:36:39.800
greater. >> That's correct. >> Also a reference in a report to barbed wire. There's no barb wire. >> No. The bob wire was on that property for 20 plus years and has since been removed.

57
00:36:43.839 --> 00:37:00.480
I have another question. >> Does the board have any questions for Mr. >> Mr. Chair? I have a question for the job. >> So, you mentioned that these are not permanent structures. Um, what are they just bolted on to the ground? >> They just sit on the ground. >> What is it? Asphalt? >> Just on the asphalt on the parking lot

58
00:37:00.480 --> 00:37:16.160
in on the on the pavement. Yes, >> it sits on the asphalt. It just anchored in or how? >> Oh, it just just sits on the just sits there. There's a little platform. Uh if you look at the the plans itself there, they just sit on top of there. >> There there are a couple anchors that go

59
00:37:16.160 --> 00:37:32.320
into the asphalt, not in every location, just preventing from sliding if somebody was to bump into it or something like that. But yeah, they're they're not permanently mounted to the ground. >> I'm just trying to figure out like what's holding it in. I mean, asphalt doesn't hold anything. You're not you

60
00:37:32.320 --> 00:37:47.680
can't screw it into >> it's a frame that sits on on the asphalt and they're all tied together. All the units I think there's uh six units in one area, seven in another, and nine in another location and they're all tied together. They're all bolted together.

61
00:37:47.680 --> 00:38:06.640
So, it's one structure. They're really individual structures, but as bolted together, it's one chain. >> Okay. And when when was this installed? 2023 24 I'm I'm not sure >> the first when's like the first lift that you had installed.

62
00:38:06.640 --> 00:38:21.440
>> Yeah, that that's all at the same time. Yeah, I guess it was about the same time as the construction and demo started on the office depot. That's really what the lie of this this this parking space came about. >> Okay. And when this premise was approved

63
00:38:21.440 --> 00:38:37.760
in 2000, um this is a GBH zone. So, general business highway. So at that time when the office depot was approved that was a retail this was be approved as a variance for auto body shop. Um what were the conditions for what kind

64
00:38:37.760 --> 00:38:54.400
of vehicles would be serviced here? >> I'm not understanding about the conditions. What do you mean? >> What were the conditions set by the board at that time in terms of hours? What kind of vehicles can be there? >> Yeah, I mean we we still have the same amount of vehicle or the same type of vehicles there. The hours have not

65
00:38:54.400 --> 00:39:10.880
changed at all. Um, in fact, we're working less hours now um than we were prior to that. We we don't work Saturdays. Um, it normally staff ends probably 4:00. I have a few that'll work to five, but um before the hours I think

66
00:39:10.880 --> 00:39:27.599
were 8 to six, my understanding Saturdays uh half a day >> cuz I've driven by near in that area and I've seen the garages open 8:30, 9:00 and I've seen cars being worked on with lights on inside. So, um that is one

67
00:39:27.599 --> 00:39:44.400
purpose. I I have one employee that starts probably 11:00 and he's the only one there at night unless these guys are working on their own personal vehicles, but we're not working that late. >> Okay? Cuz my biggest concern is this. Um so the variance was issued 26 years ago

68
00:39:44.400 --> 00:40:01.119
for a auto body shop. The reason why auto body shops are not permitted is because this is more like an industrial size job. Intensive noise, repair on cars. It's a lot of noise. Um it's not like a typical retail store or something that's where people are coming in and

69
00:40:01.119 --> 00:40:16.160
out. There's car station there. There's dust, etc. Um so I just feel like you're intensifying that non-conforming use. So hopefully your planner could elaborate on it more in terms of why it's being more intensified.

70
00:40:16.160 --> 00:40:33.359
>> Well, I I I could say that the auto body came first and then the retail center came second. I had a deal cut with the owners of Office Depot and they had changed it to the the zone the current zoning with my place being a permitted use. I was zoned first and they actually

71
00:40:33.359 --> 00:40:48.640
came second. >> But the GBH zone stayed the same since then. >> Since then. Yes. >> Correct. So that office depot was permitted in that zone. >> Yeah. after I was approved for uh business, I I worked a deal with them to

72
00:40:48.640 --> 00:41:04.319
move over on the property so they could develop the rest of the property and that's how it ended up changing unbeknownst to me. That's a sore subject between me and the the owner next door and the issues that I've had with them. >> Okay. Thank you.

73
00:41:04.319 --> 00:41:20.079
>> Does the U board have any other questions for Mr. McNe? >> I do. Mr. Mr. McNe the um is there truly a need for this many of car lifts on your site? >> Yes. Uh essentially I was I was talking

74
00:41:20.079 --> 00:41:37.440
to Skip earlier today of about 65 cars on on the property and only 15 of of inwork in process. Um the rest are either waiting for parts ultimately becoming a total loss waiting for insurance approvals. Since COVID, things

75
00:41:37.440 --> 00:41:53.839
have changed. There's no more or very little personal interaction with an appraiser coming out. Everything is done virtually. Um they're running into the same issues that everyone else is. Is the staff is is um is not educated to

76
00:41:53.839 --> 00:42:10.079
the point to write a proper repair. The technology in the cars have changed. the the advancement of ADAS and and self-breaking and pedestrian u um uh assistance and and night vision. It's it's it's beyond a rolling computer

77
00:42:10.079 --> 00:42:25.599
anymore. And as I as I alluded to earlier, it's about 24 25 days to turn a car. And as as Skip had mentioned, Clark Convery's vehicle was two months before we can get the bumper for his vehicle.

78
00:42:25.599 --> 00:42:41.680
At this point, the car is disassembled. We don't have something to put back on it. We have to disassemble a car completely, do a full blueprint on it as if you were planning to build a house or anything electronical. Um, you know, whatever you need. We have to fully

79
00:42:41.680 --> 00:42:58.720
blueprint it. That's every nut andbolt repair procedure um from the manufacturers. It's got to be researched. It's there are no more 15minute estimates and there it's it's no such thing as just a dent anymore with the advancement in in the vehicles today. So, the time frames have have

80
00:42:58.720 --> 00:43:15.119
lengthened. Um, something that I thought I've never seen in the 49 years being in business, but it's it's it's the the tsunami wave of technology is is here. Whether you're driving a vehicle that has this or or not, it's here. Thank

81
00:43:15.119 --> 00:43:31.920
you. And on the site, uh I've noticed there are quite a number of uh Amazon delivery vehicles parked. I know that you had previously been approved for a location down the road um which the purpose was for these Amazon delivery vehicles. Is the plan still that once

82
00:43:31.920 --> 00:43:48.640
your site is operational your second your auxiliary site is operational that the Amazon vehicles will go away? >> Well, this will happen currently there's no Amazon vehicles on on the property. Uh essentially what happened is Amazon at their their warehouses because Amazon owns these vehicles at their warehouses.

83
00:43:48.640 --> 00:44:06.000
They put um a drive-thru system in that will will digitally enhance and photograph the vehicles and they started rating the vehicles. They lease those vehicles to the DSP um locations. There's three of them here right in Edison. Um and what happens is they

84
00:44:06.000 --> 00:44:22.640
flagged them from one to five. So, anything over a three has to be taken off the road. And when they put that new drive-thru in, we just got slam with them. Um since then, um you know, we've weeded through all of them. There there's no more. And essentially, yeah,

85
00:44:22.640 --> 00:44:39.119
parking them down the street would have been the ideal scenario. However, that's we didn't have approvals on them. They were some of them were warranty work. Amazon had 10,000 vehicles throughout the country that needed warranty work where the steps had to be replaced, but

86
00:44:39.119 --> 00:44:54.079
they have to be approved to be replaced. Currently, there are none. But yes, there was a moment where there was probably about 16 of them on site and based with the Wawa and the limited parking, you know, we did the best we could with with juggling them around.

87
00:44:54.079 --> 00:45:09.280
It's like Tetris and at the end of the day, we we you know, we parked them and and then moved them accordingly. >> So, problem solved. They're no longer an issue. >> They're no longer an issue. Yeah. >> All right. Thank you very much. Um, does the board have any other questions for us?

88
00:45:09.280 --> 00:45:42.079
>> Seeing none. Okay. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. for Mr. Bill Lane. >> Could you raise your right hand and repeat after me? Do you swear affirm uh do you swear affirm to tell the truth in your testimony here tonight? >> Yes. >> Um state your name and address for the record, please. It's William Lane, uh,

89
00:45:42.079 --> 00:45:59.680
261 Cleveland Avenue, Highland Park, New Jersey. >> Mr. Lane, you've previously appeared before the board. Uh, if you could please give us a brief summary of your background, back background and qualifications. >> Yeah, I've been with Menllo Engineering for over 41 years. I've been a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey for about 29 years. Um, I

90
00:45:59.680 --> 00:46:16.240
probably testified in front of 100 100 or so boards throughout the state. Uh, many times in front of Edison, both zoning and planning boards. >> And your license are current in good standing? >> Yes. >> We'll accept you. May proceed. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Mr. >> Yes.

91
00:46:16.240 --> 00:46:37.359
>> Uh could you please >> Yeah. Um currently right now the existing auto body shops uh approximately 12,323 ft footprint. Um what occurs right now is there's 10 parking spaces in the front. In the rear, as mentioned, we

92
00:46:37.359 --> 00:46:53.119
have 22 spaces with 22 lifts. I'm sorry, 16 spaces with 16 lifts, and there's additional six spaces that face uh route the 287 ramp and also six additional lifts. So, there's 22 lifts and 22 spaces back there. Um there's a an

93
00:46:53.119 --> 00:47:10.400
existing dumpster back in the corner. Uh the site is accessed off of Patrick Avenue, which is a shared access between the Wawa now and Ultimate Collision. um what the applicants proposing again as we mentioned to get the approval for these 22 uh lifts. Uh additionally, we're looking to get a propo approval on

94
00:47:10.400 --> 00:47:27.599
the generator which will be in the southeast corner of the building. Um and that'll be encompassed behind the proposed 10-ft fence that we're proposing around the rear and the eastern side of the property. Um that'll have a slats screen to help uh provide some uh screening around the property.

95
00:47:27.599 --> 00:48:01.560
Um, I think that's pretty much what we're looking to Oh, and additionally, the sheds that were previously put out there years ago, looking to get the approval on that. And as mentioned, the um two trailers that were previous out there have been removed. >> As Mr. our lips

96
00:48:02.880 --> 00:48:28.559
parts for the people for screening. No other purpose. Correct. >> Correct. >> Does the board have any questions? Mr. Flynn, >> Mr. Chairman, >> vice chairman, >> were you involved? Did you look at these uh double stacker two-level parking

97
00:48:28.559 --> 00:48:44.400
systems? Have you looked at that? The weight of them that there's they're sitting on the Macadam. >> Yes, I've seen the plans. Yes. >> And and you're comfortable with that? >> I mean, it's it's standard like like uh Jerry McNe had mentioned that they're using the city all the time on on on pay parking lots.

98
00:48:44.400 --> 00:48:59.440
>> I'm talking specifically on this this lot. >> Yeah, it's a normal. >> Let me ask my can I can I ask my question? you're you're comfortable as the engineer that with the weight and they're not anchored and you're you're comfortable that the weight on the madam

99
00:48:59.440 --> 00:49:16.480
that it's going to be no issue. >> No. >> Were you involved with this in the beginning when when they went up? >> No, they were put up before we got involved. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Is the board any other questions? Mr. Wayne?

100
00:49:16.480 --> 00:49:32.480
>> Yeah, I just I have a question. >> Mr. Sure. >> Are you sure it doesn't have to be anchored as engineer? I don't mean to harp on this. >> Yeah, but like >> the weight of it keeps it in place. I mean, nothing's going to there's no movement. It's it sits in there. It lifts it up and the weight of the system

101
00:49:32.480 --> 00:49:47.119
itself and the car is going to keep it in place. >> So, this this was entered into evidence, right? And then it says like the second paragraph, it says stackers designed to be mounted on grade concrete or asphalt.

102
00:49:47.119 --> 00:50:03.680
>> Yes. Mounted to me means maybe mounted is not synonymous with anchor, but mounted doesn't mean place. >> Mounted on the ground. Yeah. I mean, it has these long extended arms. It has a big solid arm. And like I said, I mean, you can go out there and see them. They're you see them in the photos.

103
00:50:03.680 --> 00:50:19.280
>> So, let's just say somebody was at Wawa. They got a coffee and they walk by these things. You're comfortable. >> They're not walking by there. They're behind the fence. >> All right. So, they're not So, if they fall, so under oath, you're these do not have to be anchored. No, if I Googled it, it would say

104
00:50:19.280 --> 00:50:35.440
>> again the arms that are that are there keeping these in place. That's why they designed them like that. They're not going to design something for a faulty system. The these >> Well, no, because I mean the way I see it, it's designed to be anchored, but everybody keeps saying it doesn't have to be anchored. So, I just I just wanted to make sure that you guys as experts Yeah. So, like I said, as the arm goes

105
00:50:35.440 --> 00:50:50.960
out, it it it holds it in place, and you got two of them on each one. So, it's it's it's held by itself with the with the arms or the legs that are out from it. >> Thank you. Can I add to that M? >> It's a two- post can of levered. So it's

106
00:50:50.960 --> 00:51:06.880
not even like a four post. It's two post and it's canlevered. >> Correct. >> So I mean that makes me more worried than than anything. >> Like I said, these have been used for parking. >> They're used on concrete footings. >> No, asphalt just on asphalt pavement.

107
00:51:06.880 --> 00:51:25.520
>> Asphalt does no compression. It cannot physically hold anything in when tensile strength. >> Well, I mean these been out there for a couple years and there have been no issues. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Lane. The um

108
00:51:25.520 --> 00:51:42.640
when it says that they are movable, is there any plan to move these? So, so here's what I'm saying, right? So, if if they're movable, so what's to say that you can't go out there and say, "Oh, well, you know, I don't want them in this spot. We're going to move them to this location." Would you agree to a

109
00:51:42.640 --> 00:51:56.960
condition that that any any moving of the if so approved that any moving of the devices that you'd have to come to the board for approval? >> Absolutely. >> Thank you. Um and then with regard to the 10-ft fence, would the 10 10ft fence

110
00:51:56.960 --> 00:52:14.160
would it shield the uh vehicle like on the upper level? What? So the the arm the the arm that comes up that's 9 foot 6 in. So it's 9 and 1/2 ft. So the fence will cover that. When the car sits on the deck, depending on the height of the

111
00:52:14.160 --> 00:52:31.040
car, that sits about 11, 6, 12 feet. So you'll see the top of those cars over the fence because the fence is 10 foot. So it's about a foot and a half, two feet that'll be over when they're raised up. >> Okay. Are you proposing any landscaping on the outside of the fence? >> No. The fence is going to go up to

112
00:52:31.040 --> 00:52:46.720
basically the property >> fence is going to the property line. Okay. And then there's no space for because so then then the the vehicles are up to the fence. >> There's no space for any landscaping along the >> There's a there's a few feet in there to get if you look to get something. But um

113
00:52:46.720 --> 00:53:03.760
I know along 287 especially that's probably where your biggest screening is is you have a big um swath of like landscaping all along that ramp there. Grass coming down Route One. >> It's grass, Mr. Lane. It's grass. >> Oh no, it's not landscaping. No, I I see it. There's trees up there. There's

114
00:53:03.760 --> 00:53:18.880
trees along that. >> There's trees. They're not They're not at all shielding because you could see the vehicles very clearly when you're on the on the ramp coming from Main Street to head on southbound Route One. >> Oh, if you're coming down the I'm talking about if you're coming down Route One because you're >> Yeah. No, I don't I don't That's That's

115
00:53:18.880 --> 00:53:35.280
not my point. I'm talking about when you could see them. They're most not in my opinion, they're most noticeable when you're coming down that that southbound ramp. >> Oh, yeah. Because it's up higher. >> Correct. Correct. >> Okay. Um, have you received the um, now this is a little bit dated. You may have

116
00:53:35.280 --> 00:53:50.880
made some changes uh, in the interim. There is a letter from Edison Police Department uh, July 10th, 2025 from Sergeant Winters. >> I did not see that. >> Okay. Uh, it was in my file. I was hoping it was yours. Uh, so the officer

117
00:53:50.880 --> 00:54:08.319
reviewed the above state application. The proposed plan does not directly affect traffic flow and meets ADA parking requirements. Any markings or signage should be in compliance with the manual on uniform traffic control devices. No further devices as per the manual on uniform traffic control devices and assigned by Sergeant

118
00:54:08.319 --> 00:54:24.160
Winters. Um and then also there was a letter dated September 2nd, 2025 from Fire Chief Andy Toth. Did you receive that? >> I did not see that one. >> Okay. So this one um has reviewed this I've reviewed the submission division of

119
00:54:24.160 --> 00:54:40.480
fire finds a proposed site plan to be missing a fire plan to include the required items for review S47 truck turning radius compliance as well as all existing proposed fire hydrants on and surrounding the site to meet a requirement related to Jersey Uniform fire code regulations.

120
00:54:40.480 --> 00:54:56.559
Do your plans reflect this? because I know you had to revise your plans in the interim so as to reflect Wawwa being adjacent to the property. >> Yeah. No. Uh we never received that letter so we didn't address it. Um I know they as a far as far as a fire truck they can come in off of Patrick

121
00:54:56.559 --> 00:55:12.559
Avenue and come down that that drive to fight anything that they need to along there. Um that was something we looked at way back when when we did the original plan, but we we didn't address that letter. >> Okay. We're gonna need something to be submitted to the fire chief because I'm not going around him any way, shape, or form. >> Okay,

122
00:55:12.559 --> 00:55:28.839
>> we can read that. Yes. >> Okay. All right. Um and then have you received um the Delaware Baron Engineering report dated June 29th, 2026? >> Yes. >> Okay. Um Mr. Carly,

123
00:55:31.119 --> 00:55:46.720
>> thank you, Mr. Chair. You know, I'd like to dovetail on some of the commentary for from the board members relative to the structure of the the parking and I want I want to ask a question. Uh, Mr. Lane, does does such a structure because it's going to be modestly high,

124
00:55:46.720 --> 00:56:01.680
right? It's four levels of automobiles. It's going to be 24t tall or it is, right? That that's a question. How tall is the structure in Toto? The structure you're talking about the >> the parking structure.

125
00:56:01.680 --> 00:56:17.119
>> It it's uh the arm that comes up is nine nine and a half ft high. >> But how many times are you going to level it up? >> Only the one. >> Only the one. >> All right. So, I'm assuming that you have a manufacturer's cut sheet for the thing that was produced.

126
00:56:17.119 --> 00:56:31.920
>> Correct. I I would suggest you enter that into evidence with the testimony, but I would think uh as a brother engineer, you can uh produce maybe not tonight a competent analysis of the subs

127
00:56:31.920 --> 00:56:48.559
soils because as Mr. Chopper, Mr. Gorman suggested asphalt is a poor medium for structure and uh the subs soils will determine the loadbearing capacity of the asphalt

128
00:56:48.559 --> 00:57:05.040
over top of it and I understand you're talking about a compression force not a tensile force but as was pointed out you have a canal lever and canal levers do require a little bit of tensile strength so I think it'd be prudent for the board

129
00:57:05.040 --> 00:57:21.200
to ask you uh to put your license to use and give them an an a thoughtful analysis. >> We'll have to get a soils engineer then to review that in the field. >> That's meal engineering has been around for a while. Uh that's uh in in regard

130
00:57:21.200 --> 00:57:39.200
to that and I think the board uh is uh recognizes the format of my reports and I'll ask Mr. lane to go at the speed of lightning if that's possible through the bolded and

131
00:57:39.200 --> 00:57:56.000
italicized comments which are very few. Those are the action items that remain right now and for the board's edification. Our first review was some time ago and so Mr. Lane has done a pretty good job uh addressing most of

132
00:57:56.000 --> 00:58:13.760
the comments. Our first review was in May of 2025. And so, as uh Mr. Cumba uh relates, we got some rep uh some revised materials in June of 2026 and issued a report. And so, I'm going to ask Mr. Lane to go through uh really a handful

133
00:58:13.760 --> 00:58:32.079
of comments. Uh Mr. the bolden and italicized. Uh, one of them is the last comment in section one uh, which really just describes the relief uh, which is actually Miss

134
00:58:32.079 --> 00:58:48.559
Knight's uh, uh, thing. Item 4.1 talks about lighting and the need not to have light trespass on your adjacent properties. I expect that you you can confidently

135
00:58:48.559 --> 00:59:04.000
testify that you can assure that you're not going to have light spillage onto the adjacent properties. >> Yeah. I mean, currently it it spills over into the rightway. Um and when but there is lighting that's spills over onto the Wawa property, but that was an

136
00:59:04.000 --> 00:59:19.760
existing condition that was sort of uh set up when we did the original um office depot with the ultimate collision. >> Okay. and the uh and comment 4.3, right now it looks like

137
00:59:19.760 --> 00:59:35.520
you have a deficit relative to trees and that also speaks to Mr. Cumber's comment about some areas being lawn areas, not landscaped areas. Uh you can address that. >> Yeah, I mean we could either I mean if we're as we're short, we could either make a contribution or we can look to

138
00:59:35.520 --> 00:59:51.520
add some more trees or landscaping as needed. >> Okay. Comment 9.2 too just uh uh speaks to uh the board's instructions from uh spring summer of last year saying that your ser the survey that had been

139
00:59:51.520 --> 01:00:07.680
provided wasn't up to date because the Wawa indeed had been built but that's been updated. That's just a statement of fact in section 9. So is there anything else in the report that gives you pause? >> No.

140
01:00:07.680 --> 01:00:27.839
>> Okay, that's it for me, Mr. chairman. >> Thank you, Mr. Carly. Miss Knight, >> thank you. Um, so my first question is with the addition of these lifts, is there any need, this might be a better question for the um the business owner, but with the addition of these lifts,

141
01:00:27.839 --> 01:00:45.079
has it increased the need for additional employees? I know you said that there's actual less time being involved um with the hours of operation, but just seeing if it contributed to any additional um kind of exacerbations of workforce.

142
01:00:46.000 --> 01:01:03.760
>> Mr. McN, you have a microphone, please, sir. >> There are no additional employees that are required. >> Got it. Thank you. Um, and then in addition for things like deliveries, um, the deliveries of parts, how are those delivered to the site? >> Well, behind the building there's a

143
01:01:03.760 --> 01:01:19.280
parts room, receiving room. So, normally they would pull into, uh, the parking lot and unload there and the parts team would, you know, accept all all all the deliveries. Got it. >> And they're normally minor deliveries, small parts, fenders, doors, hoods, you

144
01:01:19.280 --> 01:01:34.480
know, windows, things like that. It's really nothing major. Once in a while they'll come in a ballot and then we'll we'll have to unload it. >> Got it. Um yeah, because there's just noting for the board um there is no loading zone, but due to the nature of what's being delivered, it doesn't seem

145
01:01:34.480 --> 01:01:50.960
like a loading zone or a loading dock would be necessary. >> Correct. >> Um next is um I know we went over the height. Did by any chance did anyone take actual images of the site showing the height of the existing lifts in

146
01:01:50.960 --> 01:02:07.359
relation to the existing building or the existing surrounding areas? >> Yes. >> Thanks John. Um so that'll be presented I guess with the planner's testimony. Um and then finally, I think if the board was to look favorably upon this application, I

147
01:02:07.359 --> 01:02:31.760
would recommend additional landscaping along the um property lines. Mr. Lane, the um I'm just reviewing the application. So, the application uh is for a maximum fence height of 12 ft. Um, but everything that I'm seeing

148
01:02:31.760 --> 01:02:47.119
is referring to 10 feet, >> which is it, >> Mr. Chairman. Uh, originally we did apply for 12 feet. Mr. Big Nell asked us to reduce it to 10 ft. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. I just wanted to make sure we're clear on that. Um, so you would agree to submit a

149
01:02:47.119 --> 01:03:02.480
revised uh application? >> Absolutely. Revised compliance plans. >> Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Uh, is there any other questions for Mr. Lane? Mr. Chair, I have a question. Mr. driver. >> Uh what's the current existing height of the fence right now? >> I believe it's 6 ft.

150
01:03:02.480 --> 01:03:28.280
>> Okay. And then um on the spec sheet that you gave um do you know which model it was particularly that you guys have installed? >> There's four different models here. There's a CC, there's a CS, SS, there's different ones on here.

151
01:03:48.720 --> 01:04:18.400
is that just like the general height that it's giving you if it's that kind of vehicle or the the system is the is the DP 003. Those are the clearance heights depending on what's sitting on top of it. So a compact sedan will be 10 foot six off the ground and then you go up to

152
01:04:18.400 --> 01:04:35.319
a standard SUV which is 14T 6 in. >> But the the the model is what the width determines, right? So, like which one out of the the five that are listed, is it like a variety of them or is just like one lift that you guys installed for all of them?

153
01:04:43.039 --> 01:04:58.960
>> Saying it's the smaller ones, the 7 foot 11 foot 11 inch wide ones. >> Okay. >> All right. Thank you. >> Any other questions for Mr. Lane? Yes, Mr. J. >> Mr. Johnny, >> uh what is the protection on the top

154
01:04:58.960 --> 01:05:16.559
layer of your uh stack lay uh on this uh level parking system on the top layer? How do you protect your car? If your base is not proper, I understand. I have seen the locking mechanism on this. It locks your system locks it. But if if in case of land is not supporting your

155
01:05:16.559 --> 01:05:35.280
system, how do you protect your top layer? Do you need any extra protection other than your system? Not that I'm aware of. No. >> Okay. >> Any other questions, Mr. Lane? >> Yeah. Mr. Chairman, if this application

156
01:05:35.280 --> 01:05:55.039
got approved, would you would the applicant agree to put the trees in and not put the make a donation to the tree fund and do the landscaping as requested from the professionals? >> I I would say yes. Uh there are 39 trees on the property. So I'm not sure where

157
01:05:55.039 --> 01:06:10.160
the the count came from because I physically counted the trees. As far as the landscaping is concerned, if you if you have a suggestion, I'd be open to it. And um quite honestly, in the front of the building, if you're driving by currently now, the building is almost

158
01:06:10.160 --> 01:06:25.920
hidden from Route One due to the trees, you know, covering the the front of the property. You have the entire buffer down the side on on the ramp coming down. And again, nothing behind us at all, but if you have suggestions, I' I'd be open to entertain them.

159
01:06:25.920 --> 01:06:45.520
>> I would rely on the on the township ordinance and the professionals reports. That's what I would rely on. Thank you. >> Thanks. >> Mr. Carly, >> chairman, come back. What I'm relying on is uh uh your site plan uh that describes uh the uh the 24 shade tree

160
01:06:45.520 --> 01:07:00.799
requirement and the 10 that you're providing. I I see, you know, intuitively you're looking at your property and you're saying there's a lot of trees, but the ordinance is based on the trees that you remove or you have removed in the past for replacements. And so that's what Mr. Lane site plan

161
01:07:00.799 --> 01:07:16.160
reflects. Thank you. Any other questions, Mr. Lane? >> Okay. So for matters, Mr. I think before the board moves forward with a decision on this application, I think there are

162
01:07:16.160 --> 01:07:32.480
some engineering questions that we're going to need answered um in terms of the soil analysis uh as well as the fire plan. Um, so it's your choice if you want to continue your case um or carry. But the before the board makes a decision on this. This is something that

163
01:07:32.480 --> 01:07:58.960
we're going to have to see. And where actually then also your soils your soils analysis will have to be submitted to Mr. Carly for his expert review. >> Correct. Absolutely. It's your It's your >> No, no, it's your it's your it's your

164
01:07:58.960 --> 01:08:42.640
case. >> Whatever the board wants to see before it makes a decision. >> And I appreciate that. It's your case. I just want you to quarterback it the best way you see fit. Thank you. >> That's something to be I want the black. >> Do you swear affirm the testimony you

165
01:08:42.640 --> 01:08:58.159
give tonight will be the truth? >> Yes. You say your name and address for the record, please. >> Charles P. Deetsz, Die TZ, managing member of the Deetsz Partnership LLC architects. >> Mr. Deetsz, I believe you've appeared before the board prior. If you could please give us a benefit of some of your

166
01:08:58.159 --> 01:09:13.920
back if you could. >> Uh, yes. I have a uh bachelor's of architecture degree from the New Jersey School of Architecture at the New Jersey Institute of Technology. I have a professional license in architecture for the past 37 years and my license is in good standing. and I'm also licensed in 14 other states.

167
01:09:13.920 --> 01:09:28.880
>> We'll accept you. May proceed. I know that you have uh some exhibits. So, what you'd like to do is when you walk over the exhibit, you could either take the microphone from the podium or you can take the microphone from the other table. Um because then the problem is that we can't hear Mr. Sh. So, you could so you can your choice, but don't take

168
01:09:28.880 --> 01:09:50.319
Mr. Sh. >> I wasn't really calling them exhibits. They're the black and whites that were present were submitted as part of our package. >> That works. >> So, nothing has changed what you received previously. >> All right. There we go. Thank you. Yes, I was.

169
01:09:50.319 --> 01:10:12.880
>> And you're familiar with the facility? >> Yes. >> Well, just to give you the history of the project, I was the original architect in 2010 that designed the building and got it built for Mr. McNe. I was then hired again in the mid- teens

170
01:10:12.880 --> 01:10:28.159
maybe 2014 and 15 to do the addition in the rear that was approved by the board and for the third time I was hired again a couple years ago uh for a very small part in this whole process and application uh due to the the nature of

171
01:10:28.159 --> 01:10:44.719
the business as Mr. McNe explained uh parts and vehicles and the systems used to uh repair these and the volume he needs to store vehicles for a longer period of time. We took the existing uh roof level that we did during the

172
01:10:44.719 --> 01:11:00.719
addition that's covered. It's filled with a a block wall that goes all the way to the ground up to a certain height, but it was open for the top four feet. weather, rain, snow, if it was coming down sideways, could come in and fall onto the the concrete slab that

173
01:11:00.719 --> 01:11:15.920
that second or higher level roof was uh designed for. Uh Mr. McNe again, because of the types of vehicles and the type of equipment that he needs, he needed to store certain pieces of equipment to fix certain cars in a more controlled

174
01:11:15.920 --> 01:11:33.199
environment. So basically my task was to follow the line around that wall where the block wall stopped up to the roof height and we're installing new storefront aluminum framing system with glass. The storefront aluminum will match the same storefront aluminum

175
01:11:33.199 --> 01:11:49.760
that's on the front of the building and any other windows. It'll match in color and style. The glass and the windows will match what's on the front of the building as well. So what that does that allows Mr. McNe to provide some manageable heating in there just to keep it temperature controlled because the

176
01:11:49.760 --> 01:12:06.080
parts and the equipment are sensitive to very very cold or very very hot temperatures. So we're basically taking and there was a typographical error on the application. There are actually only 14 spaces on that roof. That's the 14 we did when we did the addition. They're

177
01:12:06.080 --> 01:12:21.520
staying as is. But now he's going to place certain vehicles with certain types of repair equipment in that area in a temperature controlled environment so that these processes can be done per the manufacturer standard. The only other thing we did, there's a ramp that

178
01:12:21.520 --> 01:12:37.040
you drive up from the parking lot up this ramp, make a turn, come up to get to this roof level that's remaining, but for security reasons again because these are expensive pieces of equipment and expensive vehicles, we're putting a coiling door at the top of the ramp that

179
01:12:37.040 --> 01:12:53.679
could be closed at the end of the day when business is done and locked. So now you have a nice secure uh area for him to do what he needs to do for these specific vehicles. So, that's really been the extent of my scope of work as the architect.

180
01:12:53.679 --> 01:13:09.800
No other building changes, no other colors, nothing's being done to the facades. We're adding storefront and glass that matches what's on the building already. And we're putting an overhead door at the top of the ramp for security and to close that area off for temperature control.

181
01:13:10.960 --> 01:13:29.920
maximum building coverage on the property >> defer to Mr. Lane. We're not change I mean I'm not doing anything that changes that the footprint of the building is the footprint of the building. Nothing's changing. We're working on an existing roof level that we built in 2014 or 15 when we did the

182
01:13:29.920 --> 01:14:01.600
addition. There there was a question of maximum building coverage on the property. Uh what was the building coverage of trailers on the property? >> Yeah, originally with the trailers I

183
01:14:01.600 --> 01:14:26.320
believe it was 26.4. The trail has been removed. So now it's down to 25.8 with the sheds. The building itself is at 25%. >> Talking about either >> correct due to the sheds. Yes. >> Okay. Does the board have any questions

184
01:14:26.320 --> 01:14:53.199
for Mr. Deetsz? Seeing none. Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Deetsz. >> Thank you. by our planner John Mcdana. Can >> you raise your hand? Do you swear affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> Can you get state your name and address

185
01:14:53.199 --> 01:15:08.480
for the record, please? >> Sure. Hi everyone. My name is John Mcdana. That's spelled MC capital D O N O U G H. And I'm the project planner. >> Mr. Mcdana, you have previously appeared before the board. If you could just give us a brief summary of your background qualifications.

186
01:15:08.480 --> 01:15:25.040
>> Sure thing, Mr. Chair. So, I am a licensed professional planner here in the state of New Jersey. I'm also a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners. That's a national certification. Both are current and in good standing. >> We'll accept you. Thank you very much.

187
01:15:25.040 --> 01:15:44.560
>> You've been retained by Ultimate Collision, correct? >> Yes. Uh the variances requested uh are uh essentially uh the D2 use variance for the extension

188
01:15:44.560 --> 01:16:02.320
of the project. >> Yes. uh the maximum fence height uh which 12 ft recommendation of >> correct >> and the maximum building coverage which was at 26.4%

189
01:16:02.320 --> 01:16:20.320
has now been reduced to 25.8% >> correct >> yourself with the project as testified >> yes I did >> you please give the board And I I I I do want you to assume uh

190
01:16:20.320 --> 01:16:40.719
that uh applicants will comply with the fire department recommendations writing uh to the board the subs soil analysis requested for the asphalt under the limits. >> Yes. >> To the satisfaction.

191
01:16:40.719 --> 01:16:55.360
>> Yes. >> Could you please give your test? >> Sure. I'll cut to the quick and then I'll I'll follow up with some of the more substantial planning proofs that I I have to go through. But um I always like to cut to the core here. Um certainly we always look at the

192
01:16:55.360 --> 01:17:11.920
positives and the negatives. On the positive side, these are going to be enhancements to an established business with a long-standing commitment to the community. It's going to take what's there and make it better. And really site betterment is at the heart of good planning. It's what we all do all the

193
01:17:11.920 --> 01:17:28.159
time. I'm going to give you some photographs. Miss Knight asked about it. Um, I think the board has asked some good questions about the functionality of what's happening there. Safety concerns, obviously. I think the question about the sinking into the pavement is a good question. It sounds

194
01:17:28.159 --> 01:17:44.159
like you're going to get some engineering back up in in that regard. Nobody wants these structures to fall over, not the least of which is our is our applicant here that has a a very heavy investment in its business. So, you're going to get that functional backup. I'm going to give you some

195
01:17:44.159 --> 01:18:00.719
visuals here that will show from a visual standpoint. This is not going to have a substantially adverse impact uh on the site or the surroundings. And I think our applicant has done a real good job here of retrofitting within the existing site, tucking these structures

196
01:18:00.719 --> 01:18:15.600
in the back. They're lower than the building, so they're really not going to be out there, I'll say, biting at you in the public eye. uh well concealed, well camouflaged, a nice row of plantings that are already established there to give the site a

197
01:18:15.600 --> 01:18:32.400
nice soft edge. And basically what's familiar in the public eye, the longstanding identity of this site in terms of the local landscape is not going to change as as part of this application. So I'm going to give you those visuals now. Um and again reminding the board that um these

198
01:18:32.400 --> 01:19:01.920
photographs are fresh and should I approach Okay. >> Okay. >> And Mr. Chair, as it's being passed around, you want you want me to have these marked as one exhibit? >> Council?

199
01:19:01.920 --> 01:19:35.760
>> Yeah, that's fine. Three items. A1 first exhibit. >> Okay, looks like everybody has A1. It's three photographs, aerial photographs. um somewhat of a challenge even to find where these lifts are in the context of

200
01:19:35.760 --> 01:19:50.239
the site, but we'll take you through each sheet. The first page, and by the way, these were all taken about a month ago. I can get you the exact date that they were taken, but um when we started the application last time, that's when when they were taken. Um it's a single

201
01:19:50.239 --> 01:20:07.679
tax lot, block 2011, lot number 17. It's a little more than an acre. It is developed with this longstanding auto collision repair shop. We're at a transportation node. We're at the junction of Route 1, Route 287 and Main Street. And suffice it to say, as this

202
01:20:07.679 --> 01:20:23.760
photograph shows, we are completely surrounded by commercial and industrial uses. No residential within eyesight. What the applicant is looking to the board to do here is to essentially validate what's there. One of the nice things about this application,

203
01:20:23.760 --> 01:20:40.000
notwithstanding how we got here, is that you do actually have something in the landscape uh to prove what what the applicant's points are. Um the subject building is right in the middle there with the ultimate collision uh logo in the front. You can see the red roofed

204
01:20:40.000 --> 01:20:57.040
edition structure in the back. And those lifts would be tucked behind that. Uh again, those parked vehicles that you see on page number one in exhibit A1 are where those lifts are located. They're not standing out like a sore thumb and actually well integrated into the site

205
01:20:57.040 --> 01:21:12.000
surroundings. Um also towards the point about the landscape, you can see that nice edge, that nice green edge complements the good planning uh that has um manifested along the off-ramp from Route 287 as it

206
01:21:12.000 --> 01:21:29.600
works its serpentine uh form off of uh 287 onto Route One. Second page is sort of a reverse view. Takes you from the front to the back. And again, you can see those double stacked lifts well below the roof line of the building. well tucked into the

207
01:21:29.600 --> 01:21:46.320
the landscape, well buffered with the landscaping that's in place. Um to the extent that we can supplement it, we certainly will. Uh we certainly don't want to kill a tree to plant a tree. Uh you have a real nice landscape that's established there right now. And then

208
01:21:46.320 --> 01:22:02.800
finally in the third, we give you a closer view of uh that double stacked system uh that's now there in place. The key point here visually innocuous. It is not going to have a substantially adverse uh visual impact in terms of the surrounding landscape

209
01:22:02.800 --> 01:22:18.000
and again as you've heard operationally it will improve the overall site functionality. Um in terms of the justifications for the relief here and reminded the board that the applicant is asking the board to move on a D2 use variance uh which has a lesser burden

210
01:22:18.000 --> 01:22:35.360
than a D1. um it's not within the purview of the board to take a look back and and evaluate whether the use belongs there in the first place. This is not a wholly prohibited D1 use variance. It has been permitted uh by variance in

211
01:22:35.360 --> 01:22:50.960
the past. Again, this is really an enhancement to we technically call it an expansion of a non-conforming use. Uh but in terms of uh the board member's question about intensification here, we're not looking to expand hours of operation. We're not looking to expand

212
01:22:50.960 --> 01:23:07.760
the employee count. And most importantly, we're not looking to expand, I'll call it, the development footprint or the the limits of disturbance on the property, but actually a retrofit in a pocket on the site working within the confines of uh the boundary that's already there.

213
01:23:07.760 --> 01:23:24.080
In terms of the positive criteria for that use relief, that D2 use relief, I see four purposes of zoning advanced here in the land use law at NJSA 405D-2, including purpose A, the promotion of of the general welfare with those

214
01:23:24.080 --> 01:23:40.400
enhancements to an established business that I led off with. Uh, purpose M, which is our planning goal for efficient use of land. It's no secret here in New Jersey, we have run out of land. We have scarcity of land. That's why we call our state plan the redevelopment plan.

215
01:23:40.400 --> 01:23:55.679
Repurposing land that has already been developed. It's exactly what our applicant is doing here. Not expanding onto another site. Not increasing the limits of disturbance disturbance, but working within the confines of the site and at the back of the site, not the not

216
01:23:55.679 --> 01:24:12.639
the front of the site. Also, purpose I the promotion of positive aesthetics. What's nice about this application, as I said at the start, is the applicant is retaining what's familiar in the in the public realm in the local landscape. This is tucked in the back where it will

217
01:24:12.639 --> 01:24:29.520
not have a substantial visual impact. Lastly, purpose G to provide for a v variety of uses in appropriate locations. The uses there, we're at a transportation node. We are surrounded by other autocentric uses as well. So I think this will actually be a pretty

218
01:24:29.520 --> 01:24:46.080
good blend with that which is around it. In terms of the negative criteria, I think you have a good body of evidence now as a predicate to conclude that from a functional standpoint with those good safety concerns that the board asked um I would say as as a condition of uh that

219
01:24:46.080 --> 01:25:03.440
the applicant will demonstrate the uh conditions that the board had asked for relative to the soils uh relative to the manufacturer specifications. Um, in that regard, relief can certainly be granted without any substantial detriment from a functional standpoint.

220
01:25:03.440 --> 01:25:21.520
In terms of visual impact, I think you've got the evidence in front of you with A1. And lastly, with respect to the zone plan and the ordinance, uh, we turn now to your 2024 master plan, which talks about the need to balance future growth and the

221
01:25:21.520 --> 01:25:36.960
development of Edison's tax base. Good planning is all about balance here. What's nice is the application is to retain what's there, maintaining that stable ratable base without overly intensifying the site. So I think the applicant has struck that good balance

222
01:25:36.960 --> 01:25:54.480
here to meet that 2024 master plan goal and objective. There are some subsidiary C variances under that D. I think the board can certainly if it wants move them all in as as one package uh subsumed within the D. Uh the sea relief for the existing

223
01:25:54.480 --> 01:26:13.040
front yard setback 46.4 where 50 feet is the minimum that's required. This is an improvement off the back not the front. Uh SE relief for the building coverage uh which is at 25.8% 8% which with the change above that 25%

224
01:26:13.040 --> 01:26:29.840
that is the maximum that's allowed that is mitigated by the overall lot coverage which does comply and is in fact 10% below what the ordinance would allow. So we have a site that's greener than what the ordinance would contemplate. And then finally that accessory building

225
01:26:29.840 --> 01:26:45.600
setback of zero feet versus 5.5 feet minimum required is justified under hardship here showing you the visuals again from the from the site that we do have triple frontage here. Uh so it's a somewhat uh unavoidable or at least a

226
01:26:45.600 --> 01:27:00.960
practical difficulty relief that the applicant is asking the board to move on. Taking it all together, I think this is a positive application. And I think this is consistent with good planning and most importantly meets that statutory criteria for the D2 relief and

227
01:27:00.960 --> 01:27:19.120
folding in that subsidiary C relief as well. That's all I have on direct. >> I believe your opinion and zoning in light of the fact that this has been approved by the board for the last

228
01:27:19.120 --> 01:27:42.159
and also This is a nice boutique expansion here. I I think the board member that let off with the question about concern about overintensification has been well addressed here by the exhibits and and the testimony. This is not overintensification of an

229
01:27:42.159 --> 01:27:59.840
established site. >> Thank you very much. Does the board have any questions for Mr. Mcdana? >> Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman. >> Yeah, the question is on parking. I'm not sure the exhibit one that you just submitted. Not sure if you can answer it, but I'm looking on page one. There's two cars parked right in the front.

230
01:27:59.840 --> 01:28:17.120
And then when you go to page three, there's one there's several cars parked along the building and also along the um on the entrance way there. And they're not parking spots, right? >> No. Oh, I and I'll defer to operations,

231
01:28:17.120 --> 01:28:35.120
but it looks to me like that's some shunting of vehicles on the property into and out of the repair base. >> I drove by there today. It was the exact same setup. >> So, so if this got approved, then that would be a condition you wouldn't you would you would park in the parking spots and not park

232
01:28:35.120 --> 01:28:52.719
>> throughout the lot. I mean, that's that's a fire hazard right there. We we would we would accept the condition that there's there's not parking there shuttling the cars in and out of the bays, but we would accept that these should not be utilized as

233
01:28:52.719 --> 01:29:10.600
parking spaces. >> Again, so the again, if this got approved, the condition would be no no cars whe whatever you call it, they're not going to be be allowed to be there along the along the uh building and along the medium right there.

234
01:29:11.440 --> 01:29:26.320
We would agree to that condition. >> And I have another question. On the second page on the street, there's a bunch of cars. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine. Is that in rep in reference to your

235
01:29:26.320 --> 01:29:43.760
establishment? >> I'm I'm sorry. The >> on the on the third on the second page, right? So, when you look on it, and it's actually right behind the the convenience store there. There's one, two, three, four, five, six, seven,

236
01:29:43.760 --> 01:30:00.719
eight, nine cars parked. >> Oh, on the street? Are you talking about on the street behind the Waw Wa? >> Yeah. >> I don't know whose cars those are. I I don't know. >> I'll yield to our operator. >> Uh, I have an answer for that. That

237
01:30:00.719 --> 01:30:16.000
That's a combination of some of the employees. Uh, Waw Wa. Um, Wawa, I've noticed overnight parking. Um, there's a vehicle that's been there for about two weeks that comes and goes. I've seen people

238
01:30:16.000 --> 01:30:31.280
camped out there in their vehicles, tractor trailers parked back there. Um, so it's a combination of some of the employees and just people visiting Wawwa or dare I use the term camping out back there.

239
01:30:31.280 --> 01:30:47.360
So they're they're not your employees. >> Some of them are. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any other questions for Mr. Mcdana? >> Yes, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chopper. >> Um I would assume the Amazon vehicles, the ones on the road are yours. >> Yes.

240
01:30:47.360 --> 01:31:04.480
>> Okay. And as uh Mr. Gorman had mentioned, uh I mean you guys have the lifts already set up and it seems like the aisles and everything are being used on the road. How does your applicant intend on removing those vehicles on the road and refraining from parking there considering that the lifts are already

241
01:31:04.480 --> 01:31:22.800
in place? >> I'm sorry, asking for the condition. >> No, I'm saying that the condition even if the condition was in place, where would you guys park these vehicles? Um, it seems like all your lifts are full and there's the lifts are installed there. So, and there's still cars on the

242
01:31:22.800 --> 01:31:40.560
road. That's my concern. I mean, if you look back there, there's a restaurant there. There's a hotel back there. If a fire lighter truck were to come down this road, I mean, this is a fire hazard completely. >> And I'm going to have to respectfully

243
01:31:40.560 --> 01:31:57.679
disagree. There's a trucking company back there that has about 30 or so tractor trailers with tanker trucks that make that bend and turn 30 times a day. So, if you're concerned about a fire truck coming down there and those uh I

244
01:31:57.679 --> 01:32:14.440
don't even know what's 60 40 foot uh trucks with the tanker trucks that haul gasoline back and forth all day long. Um it's it's there's no restrictions on on movement back there whatsoever. >> Okay.

245
01:32:15.360 --> 01:32:31.199
All right. Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. McDana? Miss Knight? Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mcdana. Mr. Chair, >> that's the applicant's presentation. I'm assuming that the board before voting

246
01:32:31.199 --> 01:32:48.960
wants to see compliance uh to the satisfaction of the fire marshal number one. Yes, correct. >> And uh I have not received that report. If I if I could. >> Sure, absolutely. The board secretary will provide copy. The other item is you

247
01:32:48.960 --> 01:33:05.920
would like subsoil analysis by the engineers uh to determine that the asphalt can support the uh car lifts. Correct. >> That's correct. So if Mr. Lane can put that analysis together and then just submit to Mr. Carly for his expert

248
01:33:05.920 --> 01:33:20.400
opinion um in advance of uh a rescheduled date and then once the secretary gets back to her seat uh we'll we'll consult on a um next date and then make sure that works with you and your

249
01:33:20.400 --> 01:33:50.639
team. Okay, madam secretary. >> We have August 25th available if that works for you. Skip. >> August 25th. >> August 25th. >> That's fine. Okay. Mr. Lane, does that give you enough time? It's August 25th. >> We'll we will we'll take the August 25th

250
01:33:50.639 --> 01:34:06.719
date. If there's any difficulty, we can consult with the >> That's fine. We appreciate that. All right. >> I assume no further notice. >> Yeah, no further notice. So, what I'll do is I'll put it on the record now. So, if you are here for this case and you received the notice, uh you will not receive another notice, this case Z8

251
01:34:06.719 --> 01:34:23.280
2024 will be carried till Tuesday, August 25th with a meeting beginning at 700 p.m. here in council chambers. Uh if you receive the notice, you will not receive another notice. This will serve as your notice. Uh thank you so much, Mr. Sh and have a good evening. Thank you so much. The board is going to take

252
01:34:23.280 --> 01:52:14.800
a fiveminute recess uh to allow the next case to set up. Thank you. The board return to order. Madam Secretary, next case on the agenda, please. >> Case number Z46, 2017, K1 at Birwood,

253
01:52:14.800 --> 01:52:31.760
1350 Inman A, settlement of litigation. This is a hearing held in accordance with the requirements of the whispering words versus Middletown Township 220 NJ Super 161 for the board to consider, review, and vote on the terms of the proposed settlement where

254
01:52:31.760 --> 01:52:48.719
applicant will attain preliminary and final site plan approval along with a bulk and use variances to construct a three-story 114 unit assisted living facility on the property located at 1350 Enman in the township of Edison. Affected property is located in RA zone

255
01:52:48.719 --> 01:53:05.040
designated as block number 410, lot numbers 27, 28, 30, 31, and 11 C on the Edison Township tax map. All noticing paperwork is in order. >> Thank you, M. Shim. >> Okay, so before we begin, I want to briefly explain what we're doing here

256
01:53:05.040 --> 01:53:20.320
tonight because this is not a normal land use application like what what you uh heard earlier this evening. This hearing arises from a lawsuit that was filed by Care1 at Birwood against the township and the zoning board after the board denied Care 1's prior

257
01:53:20.320 --> 01:53:37.040
applications. The parties have negotiated a proposed settlement agreement and because that settlement involves land use relief. It has to be considered by the publicly by the board at what is commonly called a whispering woods hearing. hearing is called a Whispering Woods hearing because of a

258
01:53:37.040 --> 01:53:53.119
case from 1987, a lawsuit from 1987 called Whispering Woods versus Middletown Township. It is a process that is used uh when a land use board is asked to approve a settlement of litigation that involves a land use application. The public has to be given

259
01:53:53.119 --> 01:54:08.080
notice of the proposed settlement. The uh matter must be presented at the public hearing. The board must hear testimony and public comment. and the board must vote publicly and memorialize its decision by a written resolution. The board is simp is not simply

260
01:54:08.080 --> 01:54:24.560
rehearing the original application exactly as it was uh first presented and then denied. The application has been modified in this case significantly as part of the proposed settlement. For example, and you're going to hear uh uh about this in more detail as it goes on,

261
01:54:24.560 --> 01:54:40.159
the application is changing from an assisted living facility to a memory care facility only. It is being reduced in size including its height and number of beds. The generator is being moved farther away from Lewis Court etc. Uh most importantly I want to make it clear

262
01:54:40.159 --> 01:54:56.719
that this is not a formality or a rubber stamp. The board must consider the settlement the revised plans the testimony the professional reports the proposed conditions and the comments from the public before deciding whether to approve or reject the settlement and related related land use relief. The

263
01:54:56.719 --> 01:55:13.360
board does not have to simply appro approve this. It is their decision. And before we begin, I believe we have some objectors that want to raise some issues before we get get into the get into this. >> Thank you, Mr. Solomon. Uh Mr. Chairman, uh members of the board, my name is

264
01:55:13.360 --> 01:55:28.480
Richard C. Lelay Jr. I am an attorney from Seagurt, New Jersey. I represent Kevin Catel, a 200 foot resident both individually and as a member of Care One opposition group. We are raising the issue of the board's jurisdiction to

265
01:55:28.480 --> 01:55:43.840
hear this matter based on uh insufficiency of notice. Uh according to the published uh notification, the notice was published on June 27. Uh we don't know what time. Uh and this

266
01:55:43.840 --> 01:56:00.960
meeting is being held literally uh 10 days later to the minute almost. Um it provided the uh interested parties less than three working days to obtain information with regard to this application. Understanding that the

267
01:56:00.960 --> 01:56:19.520
notice has um been uh provided as a modification of a prior application which was denied. uh a lawsuit being filed more than three years after that denial which is in violation of court rule uh which

268
01:56:19.520 --> 01:56:37.360
provides that uh suits must be filed within 45 days of such denial. Uh no party here tonight has either seen the settlement uh uh provisions, knows anything about it, was allowed to participate in it. Uh many individuals

269
01:56:37.360 --> 01:56:53.520
uh according to information and belief never received certified notice of this meeting. Um and we we uh are here tonight to advise that we are uh challenging the jurisdictional uh authority of this board. That's all I

270
01:56:53.520 --> 01:57:09.679
have for now. >> If I could uh really briefly, good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. For the record, my name is Peter Flannry with the law firm of Pisg Hoff on behalf of the applicant care one at Birchwood LLC. Um, regarding notice, of course, the the board and its

271
01:57:09.679 --> 01:57:25.840
professionals have weighed in that it's proper. And I also want to confirm that uh the applicant did comply with all the requirements of the municipal land use law in terms of publication and online publication at least 10 days before the hearing and uh uh certified mailings to all property owners and other uh

272
01:57:25.840 --> 01:57:42.400
required parties, person to a list provided by the township. Um and I ask that the board move forward um with uh with this hearing. Um I do have with me uh the attorneys who are handling the litigation. If there are questions specifically regarding the litigation that the board has or the members of the

273
01:57:42.400 --> 01:57:57.920
public may have, I can certainly bring them forward to discuss. Um but uh you know these these individuals who are objecting tonight were not uh part of the litigation. They're certainly welcome to ask questions and and present testimony tonight as part of this public hearing. um but they were not involved

274
01:57:57.920 --> 01:58:12.880
in litigation and and in terms of settlement um you know the terms of the settlement agreement will be discussed as we move forward uh through this hearing. >> Mr. Chairman, if I may, >> Mr. Gazerowski, please. >> My name is Ron Gajeroski. I was in fact

275
01:58:12.880 --> 01:58:32.239
the attorney who represented the residents who opposed this. >> My my name is Ron Gajeroski. Uh I was in fact the attorney who represented the residents at the last hearing I believe when the vote denied the application for

276
01:58:32.239 --> 01:58:49.440
at that time uh the assisted living facility. Uh that was probably five or six years ago. I was contacted by them again to appear before this board to once again raise objections to this proposed use. My main argument in the

277
01:58:49.440 --> 01:59:04.480
very beginning is that the notice in question which was sent out is both inadequate and improper. And I would like to read just briefly from that and that will be the summon substance of my comments. It points out in paragraph two of the

278
01:59:04.480 --> 01:59:20.639
notice that the applicant and the board seek to conduct a public hearing in accordance with the procedures of whispering woods. It says based upon a modified development plan and with the applicant relying on the hearing record

279
01:59:20.639 --> 01:59:38.080
created with respect to the original application. It then goes on to say that the applicant seeks preliminary and final major site plan use variance and other variance approvals and it modifies the original application as follows.

280
01:59:38.080 --> 01:59:54.400
First of all, this is not a modification of the original application. The original application was for an assisted living facility. This is a completely different separate use.

281
01:59:54.400 --> 02:00:10.239
And it's I find it difficult to believe that this board can rely upon a transcript of a hearing in which that application was denied. uh not only was it denied, but the applicant upon

282
02:00:10.239 --> 02:00:26.960
hearing or receiving that notice never filed a prerogative suit pursuant to the municipal uh land use law. So, here we are today, years after that denial. And what I find striking is they're saying

283
02:00:26.960 --> 02:00:43.760
they're going to be relying upon relying upon the hearing that took place where the application was denied and they want to enter into evidence before this board presumably a copy of that transcript or portions of that transcript. Well, my

284
02:00:43.760 --> 02:01:01.360
clients, nor have I ever seen a transcript of that hearing, and I would respectfully argue to this court that going forward, this matter should be adjourned at this particular time with the applicant to come back with a revised site plan application seeking

285
02:01:01.360 --> 02:01:17.520
the variances that he is using, as well as an application for a quote new use end quote. not a modification of a use that was denied, but a new use. And I would respectfully say to this board, you do not have jurisdiction at

286
02:01:17.520 --> 02:01:34.159
this evening to hear this application. Thank you. >> Just like to say to that, um, this board did hear extensive testimony at the original application. The memory care use that's proposed is is somewhat similar to the assisted living facility use. We're going to have testimony on

287
02:01:34.159 --> 02:01:50.400
that. We're going to show that although there are some significant changes um which are beneficial to the public um the general footprint is is similar the general orientation of the project is similar um and there are a lot of similarities to the prior application.

288
02:01:50.400 --> 02:02:05.280
So we maintain that this is an amendment uh to the original application at the board has jurisdiction. >> This argument of similarities it's just difficult to comprehend. It is a new use. No different than if a person

289
02:02:05.280 --> 02:02:21.440
was coming in for a use of, let's say, a carell or a food store and a new application came in uh for a a a automobile use and whatnot. They're just different. And the public has not been

290
02:02:21.440 --> 02:02:37.840
given proper notice of exactly what they're seeking. and they're relying upon relying upon testimony and hearing for an application which was denied. How is this board supposed to sift out from that denial? Sift out from that

291
02:02:37.840 --> 02:02:54.960
resolution what's to be considered this evening and what cannot be considered. Uh I've been doing this for a long time and I don't want to sound like I'm pontificating. But this issue having a new use predicated upon an old use that was denied I just simply think is improper. Thank you.

292
02:02:54.960 --> 02:03:10.480
I just want to add to that uh the memory care use is part of the umbrella of uses that are under the same license as an assisted living facility with the state. Um it's just simply a slightly less intensive use with respect to traffic and that there are um no uh independent

293
02:03:10.480 --> 02:03:26.480
living uh opportunities with the memory care. Um you don't have residents who have their own vehicles and are um uh parking or uh traveling to and from the building on their own. Mr. Sim, you want you uh we're going to

294
02:03:26.480 --> 02:05:50.800
take a two-minut break uh break before we continue. We have a a technical thing that we need to figure out and then we'll resume in like 2 minutes. >> Okay. Board will stand uh in recess for 2 minutes. board return to session. >> Oh, we're missing something. We're

295
02:05:50.800 --> 02:06:16.760
missing something. Where'd he go? >> Where did he go? Oh, maybe you want another come back. Okay. >> All right. We We have a board member in the restroom, so we're just going to give him a minute. Mr. Fing, I apologize. Stay back in

296
02:06:38.079 --> 02:08:02.639
Yeah. >> Never mind. That's >> a few more things I'm going to say. They're going to >> No, I don't. No, thank you. All right, the board returns to session. Okay, so as the proposed settlement

297
02:08:02.639 --> 02:08:17.440
agreement requires, we're going to enter a copy of the settlement agreement into evidence as exhibit A1. We're also going to mark the engineering plan as exhibit A2 and the architect site plan as exhibit A3. And then depending on what the board does at the end of the

298
02:08:17.440 --> 02:08:33.840
meeting, they those may be uh entered into evidence as well. Um I'm going to pass this over to Mr. Flannry in a moment and to put on to put on his case, but he's going to my understanding is that care 1's engineer is going to uh present the draft site site plan. The

299
02:08:33.840 --> 02:08:50.239
board engineer is going to provide some com comments. Um and then if care one has any other uh has any other testimony to provide they they may do so. Uh after they're done putting on their case the member members of the public uh or their their representatives will have an opportunity to give sworn comment on the

300
02:08:50.239 --> 02:09:06.159
application which should be limited to the settlement agreement and the final site plan proposed site plan. Uh you'll each have five minutes to speak. Uh because we are relying on the uh recording here. Uh we don't have a core reporter here. We ask that you speak loudly and clearly directly into the

301
02:09:06.159 --> 02:09:20.960
mic. If we interrupt you because you are not doing it, we're not trying to be rude. We're just trying to make sure that the record is clear as to what everyone is saying. So, if we're interrupting you that you're not being clear, we just That's the That's the reason. >> I've never seen a cop. >> Mr. Gazowski, we need you on on a uh

302
02:09:20.960 --> 02:09:38.960
microphone. >> I need you on a microphone, too, sir. >> My name This is Richard Lehey speaking to the record >> again, sir. I need you on a microphone. >> Go to the mic. Richard Lehey. Uh again, uh for the record, is that microphone

303
02:09:38.960 --> 02:09:56.400
working? Uh is the board intending on voting on both uh passing a resolution approving the settlement and passing a resolution approving the application this evening? Because it would require two separate resolutions. So this would be uh it depends on what

304
02:09:56.400 --> 02:10:11.360
the the vote is that the board wants to do, but they need only agree approve the Whispering Wood settlement agreement which includes in it the um the I'm lacking on the word the revised site plan.

305
02:10:11.360 --> 02:10:26.719
>> The board is intending on passing >> Mr. Ley again the microphone please. >> The board is intending on passing both resolutions this evening. >> I don't want to say the board is intending on passing any any resolutions. the board's able to make it whatever decision it wants to make, but they will uh they will they'll they will

306
02:10:26.719 --> 02:10:41.599
they will vote either in favor or against the uh the settlement agreement. >> Okay. So that the only issue tonight is the validity of the settlement agreement. Is that my understanding? >> The validity of the settlement agreement contains all the terms and conditions of

307
02:10:41.599 --> 02:11:01.199
the approval. So they're they're I'll call them essentially one one and the same by by approving a settlement agreement. So the settlement agreement already contains >> Can I Can I be heard? Can I be heard >> now? You can. >> Okay. I'm sorry. So the settlement

308
02:11:01.199 --> 02:11:17.599
agreement already contains all the uh uh requirements for an approval on this new application. Is that correct? >> I'm not sure what you mean when you say contains all the requirements of approval. the approval. It contains all

309
02:11:17.599 --> 02:11:34.400
the terms and conditions of what could be approved by by the board. It lists all the changes, for example, uh between the original application and the new application. So, I'm not sure exactly what you mean, but that's that's what it contains. And I believe that's what Mr. Fliner is going to go into in a little

310
02:11:34.400 --> 02:11:54.880
bit. >> Copy of the settlement agreement. >> Can you speak into the microphone, please? >> Mr. Gazerowski has requested a copy of the settlement agreement. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, we're going to give you copies of them. Yep. Okay. So, uh, as I was saying, members

311
02:11:54.880 --> 02:12:10.880
of the public will have five minutes to speak. Again, I know we've already heard it now, but it's important that you speak loudly and clearly into the mic. We're really not trying to be rude. If anyone interrupts you, we just need to be able to get the reporting accurate. Uh, at that point, the after after all those comments, the board can consider

312
02:12:10.880 --> 02:12:27.040
the application and decide how they want to proceed. And so, with that, Mr. Mr. Flannry, the floor is yours. >> Thank you. Um, just for the record, >> just not for the record that we have not seen a comment. >> Mr. Gazerowski, again, if you could please speak into the microphone. I'm tired to keep interrupting you, but I

313
02:12:27.040 --> 02:12:41.840
need you to speak into the microphone. We got you a working microphone. Need you speaking to it. >> I'm sorry. >> Well, this so the record is clear. >> I'd like the record to reflect that neither I nor council have seen a copy of this settlement agreement until 30 seconds ago.

314
02:12:41.840 --> 02:12:59.760
>> We understand. Thank you. Again, for the record, uh, the property is located at block 410, lots 28.01, 30,31, and 11.03, formerly known as lots 27, 28, 30, 31, and 11 C. It's located

315
02:12:59.760 --> 02:13:17.360
at 1350 Inman Avenue in the RA single family residential zoning district. It's currently developed with a skilled nursing facility and two residential structures. Um originally before this board, the applicant had filed an application for preliminary and final major site plan D1 use variance and

316
02:13:17.360 --> 02:13:33.199
other variance approvals. Um application file uh number Z46 2017 to construct a three-story 106 bed assisted living facility with signage on the property to consolidate the lots constituting the property and to make certain

317
02:13:33.199 --> 02:13:48.560
improvements to the skilled nursing facility on the property uh known as the original application. Uh approximately seven hearings were held before this board from December 18th, 2018 through December 17th, 2019. Um the board ultimately voted not to approve the

318
02:13:48.560 --> 02:14:05.119
original application and adopted a resolution of memorialization regarding this denial at its meeting held on May 12th, 2020. Um the primary concerns of the board were the visual impact of a three-story building for the new proposed assisted living facility um on

319
02:14:05.119 --> 02:14:21.520
the eastern portion of the site and potential impacts from uh trash and recycling and a generator being on the eastern portion of the property uh near residential areas. There was also concern regarding potential traffic and and other um impacts from the uh

320
02:14:21.520 --> 02:14:36.079
specifically the assisted living facility use which had a potential for residents to uh be utilizing uh vehicles. Um applicants subsequently filed two lawsuits against the board. Uh one was a uh progative writ New Jersey

321
02:14:36.079 --> 02:14:52.560
Superior Court docket number MIDL 4382-20 known as a state action. The other was a federal lawsuit filed in the United States District Court um docket number 220 CV7976 BRMJSA.

322
02:14:52.560 --> 02:15:09.840
Uh the state action was dismissed by consent uh subject to reinstatement uh pending the outcome of the federal action. Um the applicant subsequently filed a motion for summary judgement in the federal action uh which the federal district court granted in part. Um this led to settlement negotiations between

323
02:15:09.840 --> 02:15:26.159
the board uh and the applicant. Um and uh that brings us to uh this evening, the whispering woods hearing in which applicant is proposing certain amendments um to the original application. Um still seeking preliminary final major site plan D1 use

324
02:15:26.159 --> 02:15:41.679
variance and other variance approvals um regarding the uh the property um but modifying the original application as follows. And I will have of course our professionals, our engineer and our architect speak on this in greater detail um with exhibits. Um but the

325
02:15:41.679 --> 02:15:57.360
applicant proposes to provide for a memory care facility in lie of the assisted living facility. Uh to provide for 114 units consisting of 122 beds in the memory care facility. um to reduce the memory care facility building height

326
02:15:57.360 --> 02:16:13.599
uh to two stories nearest uh uh Lewis Court and along the eastern side of the property. Um to locate the generator for the project uh furthest from Lewis Court and to place that generator uh between its existing skilled nursing facility

327
02:16:13.599 --> 02:16:29.520
building and the new proposed memory care facility building uh to provide a shed on the western side of the property along with the generator. uh to place a trash and recycling enclosure on the western side of the property uh along with a generator and a shed and to

328
02:16:29.520 --> 02:16:44.399
provide a memory care facility building footprint of approximately 37,447 square ft and a total building area including basement of approximately 95,059 square ft. Also to provide 104 parking

329
02:16:44.399 --> 02:17:00.479
spaces with approximately 40 of those spaces reserved for employees and to modify the building footprint and length such that the building setback would be approximately 73.96 ft from the rear property line and approximately 82.94

330
02:17:00.479 --> 02:17:17.599
feet at its nearest point to the Lewis Courtzside property line. The applicant also pro uh proposes to provide improvements to the existing skilled nursing facility uh to permit the utilization of approximately 11 uh banked parking spaces to add four new parking spaces to confirm the current

331
02:17:17.599 --> 02:17:34.080
dumpster location to approve an asbuilt rear sidewalk uh and to permit the existing 6 foot 10-in uh high signs. Uh as part of this application, the applicant is proposing a D1 use variance for the memory care facility. variances

332
02:17:34.080 --> 02:17:49.760
regarding building coverage, uh, lot coverage, floor area ratio, building height, and, uh, stories. Um, as well as continuing certain existing non-conformities with respect to the skilled nursing facility that exists on

333
02:17:49.760 --> 02:18:05.280
the property. Uh, and there was a catch-all provision in the, uh, notice as well for any other uh, variance or site plan exceptions that may be required as part of this application. Um, I'd like to present our first witness, uh, our civil engineer, uh, Brian.

334
02:18:05.280 --> 02:18:20.960
>> May I comment as to that representation? >> Not at this time. Let him get through the presentation, then after that you can make your point. >> Let me just for the record. >> No, I'm sorry. I just I you just >> No, you just asked me if you could speak and I said you will have an opportunity after the presentation's made, but let

335
02:18:20.960 --> 02:18:35.519
him make the presentation and then you can make your objections, >> but they can they're entitled to make the presentation without being interrupted. a presentation based upon the settlement or upon the new application. >> I'm sorry. The it's it's the same. It's one of the same. >> Pardon me.

336
02:18:35.519 --> 02:18:51.679
>> The settlement is the is the revised uh the revised application. >> No, the the settlement has to do with the initial original application, not with this new application. What am I missing here? >> You will have an opportunity to make your objection after they're able to put on their presentation, but they are

337
02:18:51.679 --> 02:19:07.040
entitled, the applicant is entitled to make their presentation and then you can comment and object. Thank you. Uh so I'll first for my witness I'll have our civil engineer uh Brian Wazer from Langan. Um his firm was involved in the original application materials. >> Could you raise your right hand?

338
02:19:07.040 --> 02:19:23.120
>> Do you swear affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth? Do >> Yeah. Can you state your name and business address for the record? Brian Brian the mic >> Brian Wazner Wis N Langan Engineering

339
02:19:23.120 --> 02:19:38.719
300 Kimble Drive Paripony New Jersey >> and Mr. Wazner if you could please give the if you could please don't interrupt me if you could please give the board the benefit of your uh background and qualifications. >> I'm a professional engineer in New

340
02:19:38.719 --> 02:19:55.280
Jersey. I have a bachelor's of science from uh Lehigh University in civil engineering. I've been uh working on land development projects such as this in New Jersey and the tri-state area for approximately 30 years. I've been accepted as a witness before other boards providing expert testimony.

341
02:19:55.280 --> 02:20:09.040
>> And your license is current and good standing. >> It is. >> We'll accept. You may proceed. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Wner, if you could I believe you have uh an exhibit. This was submitted uh to the board previously

342
02:20:09.040 --> 02:20:31.080
has been marked as exhibit A2. >> And Mr. Finer if you could also speak into the microphone as well. >> Sorry, we speaking uh sidebar there. Um yeah, we were just uh preparing the exhibit to show the uh the board and public

343
02:20:34.319 --> 02:20:55.120
Mr. Wazer, if you're going to speak to that, you could actually take the microphone from the podium there just so that or actually No, Mr. Carly is going to just return to he's got to bring it back to the end of the night talking to the mic. >> Yes, sir. >> I'm sorry. The

344
02:20:55.120 --> 02:21:16.560
>> report >> of the report. >> Which report are you referring to? Um, so this uh exhibit I believe is marked in evidence as A2. >> A2. >> It's uh the first sheet of five sheets that were submitted uh by my office

345
02:21:16.560 --> 02:21:31.439
lying in engineering. Uh this sheet is sheet CS 101 titled site plan. Uh last revised 1217 2025. Uh, I have 11 by7s. Would it be helpful to hand that out?

346
02:21:31.439 --> 02:22:52.240
>> Yeah, let's let's hand those out. Yes. Shall I continue or wait a second? >> I know that. Okay. >> Thank you. >> So, this is an exhibit of the proposed site plan uh for the new building that

347
02:22:52.240 --> 02:23:09.359
would uh go on the eastern portion of the site. And again, it's the 10 acres uh on the north side of Inman Avenue um adjacent to the existing skilled nursing facility. Uh it's in the RA zone. The site's occupied by the skilled

348
02:23:09.359 --> 02:23:25.359
nursing facility which is on the left side of this page. uh as well as two vacant uh residential structures uh that are situated where the proposed building will go. Um the existing access points to the

349
02:23:25.359 --> 02:23:41.200
existing nursing facility will remain as is. Uh there will be some parking adjustments that were covered in the prior testimony and application. There's no proposed changes to that as part of this amendment. Um but as part of this amendment the

350
02:23:41.200 --> 02:24:02.319
building was modified and I'll explain that as follows. Uh so aside from the change in the use from assisted facility to a memory care facility uh which will have 122 beds in 114 rooms or units. Um the building

351
02:24:02.319 --> 02:24:17.760
footprint was updated because the interior had to be reconfigured for that. And the east side of the building, and the architect will go through this in a little more detail, the east side of the building, so that's closest to Lewis Court, has been reduced to two stories, and the west side of the

352
02:24:17.760 --> 02:24:32.880
building is going to remain at the proposed three stories. Uh the footprint is 37,477 square ft. So that's the ground floor when you walk in. Uh all of the floors,

353
02:24:32.880 --> 02:24:49.439
the first floor, second floor, third floor for a portion of the building as well as a basement total 95,000 and 59 square ft and that includes the basement area which is for storage and mechanicals. The driveway from Inman is in the same

354
02:24:49.439 --> 02:25:04.880
location as previously proposed. It's approximately at the location of the existing driveway for one of the residential structures. The drop off in the front of the building remains as previously proposed. Uh there's a spot for an ambulance to

355
02:25:04.880 --> 02:25:21.439
park there. Uh there's ADA parking along the front of the building. Um and that's really where the primary parking is for visitors and for employees. You've got the front of the building uh near Inman Avenue. You've got the west side of the building between the new building and

356
02:25:21.439 --> 02:25:38.240
the skilled nursing. You've also got parking in the rear similar to what there was proposed before. Uh and there are 10 parallel spaces proposed on the east side of the building that are tucked closest to the building along that drive aisle. We're keeping the full

357
02:25:38.240 --> 02:25:54.080
circulation around the building for fire access uh and any kind of circulation that's necessary on the site. Similar to before, uh the total number of parking spaces proposed uh for the entire facility, that would

358
02:25:54.080 --> 02:26:10.720
be both the new uh memory care as well as the skilled nursing. Uh we're going to have 26 spaces total and that is compliant with the regulations which calculate one space per two 100 excuse

359
02:26:10.720 --> 02:26:27.840
me one space for every two beds plus one space for every employee. So there's 122 beds in the existing facility, 122 beds in the new facility, 41 employees on a peak shift in the existing facility,

360
02:26:27.840 --> 02:26:46.080
and 40 employees at the new facility. And so that totals 203 spaces are required and 206 spaces are proposed. Um, one of the enhancements aside from lowering a story off the building was

361
02:26:46.080 --> 02:27:04.720
the reconfiguration of the service area, which is the loading area, the trash, the recycling, uh, an equipment shed, generator, transformer, all of that to the west side of the building. So, that'll be between the two uh, nursing facilities.

362
02:27:04.720 --> 02:27:21.120
Um, again, we think this is an enhancement compared to the prior uh layout which had most of that on the east side of the building closer to Lewis Court. Um we have identified where the generator uh and the transformer will likely go but of course we'll have

363
02:27:21.120 --> 02:27:36.880
to coordinate that with the utility company and we will provide adequate screen screening for noise and of course for aesthetics as it's now close to the front door uh certainly closer to the front door than it was in the prior rendition.

364
02:27:36.880 --> 02:28:00.960
I'm going to move to page two in this set of drawings. which is titled grading plan CG 101. It's got a 1217 2025 date on it and really this shows the proposed grading schematically for this new layout or

365
02:28:00.960 --> 02:28:17.200
this updated layout. Um uh topography still runs uh from the north west to the souththeast of the site. Uh we have lowered the floor, the finished floor, the lowest floor, so all

366
02:28:17.200 --> 02:28:33.600
the stories come down uh by 18 in, a foot and a half to make it closer to Inman Avenue and reduce the general appearance uh compared to uh the grades around it, which do drop off as it goes down to Inman Avenue.

367
02:28:33.600 --> 02:28:49.840
Um doing so will require more earthwork uh for the project. So more soil will have to be dug out, removed and exported as a result of dropping this. But it's a benefit uh that the applicant would like to make uh to facilitate moving this

368
02:28:49.840 --> 02:29:11.920
project forward. Uh the storm water management system and I'll move to the third sheet in the set. This is titled drainage plan CG201 dated 1217205. Uh we have uh run preliminary

369
02:29:11.920 --> 02:29:27.120
calculations uh based on the current regulations which do require adjustments to the rainfall intensity. Uh and it does require green infrastructure. A few years ago the rules changed. You used to be able to put pipes below the parking lots and

370
02:29:27.120 --> 02:29:44.000
store all your water that way. Now you have to treat the water and infiltrate the water. and we have made uh plans to do that. We've shown schematically how big and where these elements will be. We still have to run through the final design and submit it for a final review.

371
02:29:44.000 --> 02:30:00.640
Uh but preliminarily we've done that. Um, we also have completed testing in April of this year during the seasonal high groundwater period to make sure that the depths of our basins are not going to be in groundwater because obviously we wouldn't be able to

372
02:30:00.640 --> 02:30:25.680
infiltrate if we were in groundwater. Um, so we did not find groundwater which is good, but we did find the soils percolate very slowly which means we'll have to dig out some of that soil and replace it with sand so the water can go into the ground. Uh lastly uh or not lastly but uh next

373
02:30:25.680 --> 02:30:40.880
uh utilities we did provide a schematic utility plan. I don't have a lot to go over with you on that because the utilities do have to be redesigned. All the service area which is where the utilities come into the building has been switched from one side of the building to the other. So we'll have to

374
02:30:40.880 --> 02:31:15.399
run through all the agencies to confirm the utilities and the new connections and routing. But preliminarily we've shown how we intend to do that. And lastly, landscaping. One sec. Landscaping is the last plan in the set.

375
02:31:20.720 --> 02:31:43.359
Landscape plan LP 101 dated 1217 2025. Again, similar to the previous layout, it shows an intense uh landscaping scheme uh with additional planting along the eastern side and the northern side

376
02:31:43.359 --> 02:32:00.160
uh of the site uh which is where the property abuts uh residential um property. Um the sizes are the same as proposed previously which are larger than I would say typical on most of our projects. Um,

377
02:32:00.160 --> 02:32:15.200
the site will be irrigated. All the planted areas will have an irrigation system. We are proposing an 8- foot high board on board fence along the residential property to the north and on the east. And I do believe that requires

378
02:32:15.200 --> 02:32:30.399
relief that we're seeking to get to put in that 8 foot high board on board fence. Um, and I would point out there's also the benefit uh of a landscaping that is along that eastern buffer uh that was put in I think about eight

379
02:32:30.399 --> 02:32:45.840
years ago. And having driven the site today, uh I can tell you that it's there and it's pretty tall. It's probably close to 20 feet uh out there along the property line today. So um that's really the changes. I'll

380
02:32:45.840 --> 02:33:16.880
just run through the zoning compliance changes in the chart. uh which is the last point I would like to make before I answer any questions you have and that's on the first sheet. I realize this is probably too difficult for you to read on an 11 by17 on the

381
02:33:16.880 --> 02:33:33.680
handout, but on the full-size sheet there is a zoning compliance chart. Uh the items that have changed, the minimum front yard, 35 ft is required. 41.2T is existing to the existing nursing facility. Uh, and this project proposes

382
02:33:33.680 --> 02:33:50.800
84.97 feet to the canopy, 111.15 feet to the front of the building. The sideyard, 15 feet is required. 82.94 ft is proposed. The rear yard 60 ft is required. 73.96 ft is proposed.

383
02:33:50.800 --> 02:34:08.080
For the maximum building coverage, 15% is permitted. Our plan uh identifies 16.1%. However, that is a typo. As I recalculated myself, the uh building coverage is actually 17.4%. So, we would

384
02:34:08.080 --> 02:34:23.439
amend that in any revised submissions uh to the entity. But for the record, the proposed building coverage is 17.4%. The maximum lot coverage is 30% permitted, 43.2% is proposed.

385
02:34:23.439 --> 02:34:41.040
Uh the gross floor area, a minimum of 1,400 square feet is required. 134 254 square ft are proposed. Uh F 0.25 is permitted. 030

386
02:34:41.040 --> 02:34:55.439
5 if you want to take another decimal place is proposed. And again the maximum number of stories 2.5 ft is permitted. A portion of the building is twotory. A portion of the building is threetory. Other items such as lighting, which was

387
02:34:55.439 --> 02:35:11.920
called out in um DNR's letter, has not been recalculated yet, but our intention uh is to have a design that's fully compliant uh with all the regulations. Dark sky, cut off shields, zero light, overspill.

388
02:35:11.920 --> 02:35:26.479
I think the rest of the numbers are unchanged or they speak for themselves. Be happy to answer any questions you have. >> Thank you very much. Does the board have any questions for Mr. Wisner? >> Mr. Sure, I have a question. >> Um, Mr. Wisner, is this a prelim

389
02:35:26.479 --> 02:35:43.040
preliminary and final site plan >> from your office? >> Yes. >> Okay. I'm just curious why it's not signed or there's no stamp or anything. >> So, these plans were prepared in December as part of I guess settlement discussions and

390
02:35:43.040 --> 02:36:02.800
>> I was told these are the plans that have to be presented because they were part of settlement discussions. Eventually signed sealed plans with additional information will be provided. >> Okay. But this was prepared by you and your team. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Board have any other questions. Mr.

391
02:36:02.800 --> 02:36:25.920
Wazer seeing none. Mr. Carly, I don't want Mr. Willie to yell at me. Uh thank you Mr. Chairman. Uh we had the opportunity to review uh application materials and the basis of

392
02:36:25.920 --> 02:36:43.680
our application or review of that was uh to hue to what I believe is our direction from the settlement agreement. And so we looked at the current uh iteration of laws that

393
02:36:43.680 --> 02:37:00.479
applies to the site layout uh predominantly the New Jersey administrative code as expressed in the storm water management rule at 788 78 and the residential site improvement standards which is applicable here at 521.

394
02:37:00.479 --> 02:37:16.960
And so my report as Mr. ways they're testified does point out those instances on a technical for just from a solely technical perspective where the design should be improved the

395
02:37:16.960 --> 02:37:34.080
hue to the administrative code uh but also the standards for soil erosion and sediment control in New Jersey and of course uh Edison Township's uh land use ordinance uh I offer any number of comments in my

396
02:37:34.080 --> 02:37:52.160
report. Uh, but I'm going to ask Mr. Wazner, is there anything in my report that you can address over time? >> I believe we can address all your comments and work with you to address your concerns over time. Yes. >> Okay. But this this bad boy is going to

397
02:37:52.160 --> 02:38:08.240
be the record, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Uh, one exception though. I think we're going to request a uh a waiver of the EIS which was set forth in the report. >> That's not my decision. That's the board's decision. >> No, understood. I I just want to point that out. >> Okay.

398
02:38:08.240 --> 02:38:28.640
>> Correct. >> Duly noted. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, Mr. Carly. Miss Knight. >> Um, no. The questions I had for engineering were answered during testimony. >> Great. Thank you so much. Uh, Mr. Mr. Ways, before I let you go, I'll just go to the board, see if any other questions

399
02:38:28.640 --> 02:38:45.040
came up. Seeing none, thank you very much. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> I'm sorry. Are we permitted to cross-examine the witness? >> That going to be done after all the witnesses? >> I mean, it's it's up to it's up to you if you

400
02:38:45.040 --> 02:39:01.120
>> I'd like to bring him up and you do them all and then they can call them back up >> and then we could have maybe cross examination after that. >> Okay. So, >> he will have an opportunity. They're going to finish putting on their case. >> Thank you, Mr. Solomon. >> We'll have the opportunity after all the

401
02:39:01.120 --> 02:39:32.399
witnesses have testified. >> Uh my next witness will be uh Mr. Michael Pomerico, our architect. >> You could raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth? >> Yes. >> Can you say your name and address for the record, please? >> Michael A. Pomeico, architect, 19 Front

402
02:39:32.399 --> 02:39:49.680
Street, Newberg, New York. >> Mr. Pomerico, you have previously appeared before the board. If you could please give us uh a brief background of your summary. Excuse me, brief summary, your background qualification. Thank you very much. >> Mr. Chairman, I've uh I've presented in front of this board in the past. I'm a

403
02:39:49.680 --> 02:40:06.240
licensed architect in the state of New Jersey, New York, Connecticut. uh Massachusetts, South Carolina, Louisiana, and Montana >> license current good standing. >> It is sir. >> You may proceed. We'll accept you. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um Mr. Pomeico, uh you of course had handled the

404
02:40:06.240 --> 02:40:22.319
original application and had worked in the architectural uh designs for for that application. You've also prepared uh some amended plans which were previously submitted to the board. Um if you could just briefly go over those plans. I don't know if you have a uh any

405
02:40:22.319 --> 02:41:07.160
handouts or >> I I have presentation boards. >> Yeah, let's Is that just the one that >> I have and I have handouts for the board members if need be. >> Let's do both. >> Okay. Hold your hand.

406
02:41:49.040 --> 02:42:05.399
This one might be included already. I think we did 11 by 17s as well, but we'll see. >> Thanks. >> So, what we just handed out was exhibit A3, the architectural plan previously submitted to the board.

407
02:42:29.760 --> 02:42:45.520
Okay. Ready. >> So, is this the sheet that you're showing right now? This is part of the the plan set that we just passed around. >> Yes. And uh for the board, I I'm going to start with the exterior elevations and then we can review the plans because

408
02:42:45.520 --> 02:43:05.760
I think that's most relevant to the discussion. >> Sounds good. >> So, uh if the board would reference, uh drawing SK7 and um should I enter these in as exhibits?

409
02:43:05.760 --> 02:43:25.720
No, I think the the entire plan set is just exhibit A3. So, we'll just reference to each sheet. So, >> all part of exhibit A3. >> There there was I'm going to grab my notes. There was a number of modifications that we made after the previous

410
02:43:26.319 --> 02:43:44.240
design was submitted and and reviewed. and all of the the primary changes were done to try and mitigate the exposure of the building on the Lewis Court side of the building, the east side of the building. So, we did a few things. We

411
02:43:44.240 --> 02:44:00.960
took the elevation, the floor plan. I'll show you the floor plan in a few minutes, but I have this elevation SKO7 that shows the east side of the building is now a twostory structure and the west side of the building remains as a three-story structure. So, what we did

412
02:44:00.960 --> 02:44:18.640
was we removed an entire floor off the east side of the building. It reduced the elevation of the building and height so that it's no longer visible from the Lewis Court side the east.

413
02:44:18.640 --> 02:44:34.399
We also modified the roof lines. And if you note the the gable ends that projected out, we've we've chered those now so that we reduced the amount of the

414
02:44:34.399 --> 02:44:50.800
roof that it ex is exposed and and viewed from all elevations of the building. We took the rooms that were located on the third floor and those were redistributed throughout the building.

415
02:44:50.800 --> 02:45:06.720
That necessitated some dimensional changes to the structure of the building which are shown on the drawings that were submitted. And we also reorganized the services in the building. These are the support services, the kitchen, the dining areas.

416
02:45:06.720 --> 02:45:25.120
We moved some of the elevator locations around and all of that was done to support flipping the service entrance from the east side of the building to the west side of the building. So what that did is supports the Langan site

417
02:45:25.120 --> 02:45:41.840
plan of moving the generator and moving the waste and the support services that were previously on the east side of the site are now all on the west side of the site. and all of the internal services that

418
02:45:41.840 --> 02:45:58.399
are connected to those that the the waste and such and the service entrance for food deliveries. All of that now happens on the west side of the site. So, we've eliminated all of that traffic and all that exposure on the east side

419
02:45:58.399 --> 02:46:14.720
of the site. So, there's very limited activity. There's actually no activity happening on the Lewis core side of the site. Um, so let's just take a look.

420
02:46:14.720 --> 02:46:30.000
SKO7, you see, is now a two-story elevation. Was previously a threetory elevation. This elevation two shows the the lowered roof elevations on the east side of the site. Elevation one shows the lowered

421
02:46:30.000 --> 02:46:47.920
elevations on the east side of the site. So it was a really significant reduction. The west side of the site you can see remains the same but this is the side that faces the existing care one building. So there's no change there.

422
02:46:47.920 --> 02:47:05.359
And the front elevation from the street you can see that the the east side of the building is now two stories and the west side of the building remains as three stories. the floor plan. And I'll start at the top

423
02:47:05.359 --> 02:47:44.560
and we'll kind of work our way down. So you can see there's a roof plan and on the roof plan you'll see there's we've just highlighted this darker line here that is the west side of the building which remains as three floors and the east side of the building now is

424
02:47:44.560 --> 02:48:14.800
an entire story lower. So it sits below the height restriction that side of the building. you look at SKO4, you'll see that the east side of the building now shows a roof where

425
02:48:14.800 --> 02:48:32.560
previously those were resident units. So, we've eliminated all the resident units on the east side of the building and the residence units are now on the third floor only on the west side of the building. There's still the internal courtyard that remains so that the

426
02:48:32.560 --> 02:49:00.479
residents have access to daylight and we have internal space inside the building. If you look at SKO3, this floor plan stays the same. This is now the second floor. Again, this is a roof now on the east side as opposed to

427
02:49:00.479 --> 02:49:15.760
the west side where there's resident rooms above the second floor. The remainder of the arrangement of the building remains the same with the neighborhoods and the common services in the front, the country kitchens and the

428
02:49:15.760 --> 02:49:41.760
support spaces for the residents. All that remains the same. And SKO2, which is the ground floor. Again, the main difference here is that points of entry that were previously on the east,

429
02:49:41.760 --> 02:49:59.439
have now been changed and they're now on the west. Board have any questions? Board have any questions, Mr. Pomerio? The uh the only thing Mr. Chairman left that I have um on this diagramming is

430
02:49:59.439 --> 02:50:16.560
SK1 which is the basement which is not visible. It's underground and that's really is 4,000 square ft and it's just service space down there. >> It's a support from my review is uh supports services and laundry. >> Yep. SK1.

431
02:50:16.560 --> 02:50:33.520
>> Okay. >> There's just some dry storage. It's it's just support space. >> Okay. Does board have any questions? Mr. Rico. >> Now, a few other things that I want to bring to the board's attention. >> The and this is important. I believe the

432
02:50:33.520 --> 02:50:48.960
the building is designed um to meet the criteria for the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services for licensing as an assisted living facility. Now they are memory care units and these

433
02:50:48.960 --> 02:51:05.439
are memory care residents but from the state's point of view and from the point of view of lensure this is assisted living and it's identified under chapter 4.1 of the guidelines the

434
02:51:05.439 --> 02:51:20.000
2022 guidelines for the design and construction of residential healthc care facilities all of the planning standards all the design standards assisted living. There's nothing in the code that speaks

435
02:51:20.000 --> 02:51:38.359
to memory care. So as as as a type of alternative design or a different type of lensure, it is 100% assisted living. It's just that they're memory care residents.

436
02:51:42.479 --> 02:52:00.640
I don't have any other material to offer to the board. >> Talk a little bit more about the memory use. >> Okay, that's very good. So, yes. So, just so we understand, I want to be clear the the entire building is under

437
02:52:00.640 --> 02:52:16.319
access control. You can't get into the building and you cannot leave the building without going through an access access control point. All of the elevators and access into the elevators is by an access control. If

438
02:52:16.319 --> 02:52:33.359
you don't have an ID badge, you don't have the ability to be able to access and use the elevators. Right? So, there's controlled movements in and out of the building. As you get deeper into the building and you get off the elevator, the elevator opens into common

439
02:52:33.359 --> 02:52:48.319
spaces, the country kitchens and the living room spaces. And then as you move from those spaces further into the building, you go through additional access control points. So each of the neighborhoods has access control.

440
02:52:48.319 --> 02:53:05.600
So there's it's really virtually impossible to be able to elope out of this building because of all of these security provisions. In addition to that, when the patients are in their rooms in the evening, the patients are are locked in their rooms, right? So there's there's access control

441
02:53:05.600 --> 02:53:21.920
at that level. Care 1 has in their other facilities very sophisticated means and methods of monitoring how patients move. They have camera infrared camera systems that monitor the movements of patients. They

442
02:53:21.920 --> 02:53:37.960
track the move movements of patient patients. They always know at all times where the patients are inside the building. This is what they do and they do an excellent job at it.

443
02:53:39.760 --> 02:53:56.880
>> Absolutely. To ensure the safety of these residents. Right. Right. >> Does that uh conclude your direct testimony? >> Do we have any other question? I think so. Unless there's any questions on it. >> Okay. Uh, so I was going to go to the board. I just wanted to make sure. I didn't want to cut you off short. Okay.

444
02:53:56.880 --> 02:54:11.760
Does the board have any questions for Mr. Pomerio? >> Mr. Chair, >> Mr. um the your F, if I may. Um 23 is required. You're asking for 3

445
02:54:11.760 --> 02:54:29.520
includes the third floor. >> Yes. Yes. >> That hadn't changed from the original submission. I I I would defer >> Mr. >> Mr. Wazner on

446
02:54:29.520 --> 02:54:46.240
that's his >> Mr. Wazner if you want to just use the the podium up there that'll make it a little easier. >> Yeah. I'm not sure if that one working right now. >> Uh the uh the F includes the third floor, the second floor, the first floor, and the basement. Um so that's

447
02:54:46.240 --> 02:55:04.000
how you get to 30. Um the prior application find my note right here uh was um 284.

448
02:55:04.000 --> 02:55:27.120
So it's slightly larger. >> If I need to repeat I'm okay. >> So the large amount is due to the third floor addition. >> Right. So what we had to do to be able to absorb the movement of the beds from the third floor to the other floors,

449
02:55:27.120 --> 02:55:43.040
right? So we had to change the format of the building and elongate the building slightly to be able to reabsorb those units into the floors below. >> I'm not concerned with that. I'm concerned just with the F. So the F the

450
02:55:43.040 --> 02:55:58.880
increase in the F is a result of the third floor only. Is that correct? the the third floor was the third floor was previously proposed. It's changing where those units fall in the building to make them in module. So, it's kind of reorienting the space.

451
02:55:58.880 --> 02:56:14.319
>> Got it. Okay. All right. Thank you. Any other questions from the board? Mr. Pomerio? Seeing none. Thank you very much, Mr. Prico. >> Thank you. >> All the witnesses I have this time I mentioned before I I have the attorney

452
02:56:14.319 --> 02:56:40.439
who had Okay. >> Yeah, we can we can turn over to the uh the objectors. Just if you could just also again uh clearly identify who you're the attorneys representing. We'll hear from the attorneys first and then we'll hear from any members of the public.

453
02:56:40.720 --> 02:56:57.920
Uh again, Richard Ley on behalf of a a 200 foot resident Kevin Catel uh individually and as a member of Care One opposition group. I guess we'll go in order of uh planner first and then >> Mr. Lee, I'm sorry to interrupt you. I

454
02:56:57.920 --> 02:57:17.279
just I'm going need you to make sure you're on mic. So whether >> I guess we'll go in order of how they testified. So I'll direct my cross-examination to Mr. Wazner first. Mr. Wazner, uh you m you made a comment that uh you

455
02:57:17.279 --> 02:57:32.399
were told to prepare the plans pursuant to a settlement agreement. Is that your testimony? >> Uh I modified the plans uh at the client's request as part of what I understand were settlement discussions.

456
02:57:32.399 --> 02:57:47.600
>> Okay. And who gave you that instruction? >> My client. specifically who >> care one >> is there an individual's name that you can give us that from care one who gave you the instruction to modify the plans

457
02:57:47.600 --> 02:58:06.319
pursuant to the settlement agreement >> uh I don't see how this is relevant is my question >> yeah I'm I'm not sure I see the relevance to it either >> fine um Mr. Mr. Wazer, do you have any familiarity at all with the terms of the settlement agreement?

458
02:58:06.319 --> 02:58:22.640
>> I've read them. >> Okay. Are you aware why the uh planning board in the township of Edison bound itself to uh conduct this meeting within one meeting and and approve both the uh uh settlement agreement and the

459
02:58:22.640 --> 02:58:39.520
application within one meeting? >> Again, you know, relevance here. The relevance here is that it might be in violation of both Whispering Woods and the Open Public Meetings Act. That's the relevance, >> which are all points that you can make if you decide to challenge this in court.

460
02:58:39.520 --> 02:58:56.880
>> Question question regarding Mr. >> Well, so just for just for the record, this is a zoning board, not the planning board. The planning board has better look. >> I'm sorry, zoning board. I I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. I apologize for misidentification. Um, Mr. Wisner, are you are you aware as

461
02:58:56.880 --> 02:59:14.960
to why uh uh the township of Edison is paying over half a million dollars to the applicant as part of this settlement agreement? >> Yeah. Not within the scope. >> Well, he can answer whether he knows or not. >> Have Mr. Nagel >> if he doesn't know, he doesn't know.

462
02:59:14.960 --> 02:59:34.479
>> Do you have any idea why? >> No. >> Okay. Now, you uh as part of your testimony, um I'm sorry, as part of your preparation of the plans, did you uh review the zoning ordinances of the

463
02:59:34.479 --> 02:59:51.520
township of Edison? >> Uh I reviewed them. Yes. >> Okay. Um within that review, did you find a definition of what is an assisted living facility? >> I don't believe so. >> You did not find such a definition?

464
02:59:51.520 --> 03:00:08.439
I don't believe so. >> Did you review section 30-1 of the zoning ordinances of the township of Edison? >> I've not reviewed it recently. >> Well, this application uh is for an assisted living facility, is it not?

465
03:00:09.040 --> 03:00:26.160
>> Is that And you didn't review the ordinance regarding the definition of an assisted living facility. I'm here to test on the changes to the plans that I made subsequent to the original application.

466
03:00:26.160 --> 03:00:44.080
>> Okay. And so you're not an expert in in uh behavioral health or Alzheimer's or mental disorders in any way. Is that true? >> I'm a professional engineer, not a health professional. >> Very good. Okay, that's all I have.

467
03:00:44.080 --> 03:01:01.760
I I'll Mr. got asking questions. >> Could you stay your state your who you're representing for the record? >> Okay. Let let the record be reflect as I earlier did. Uh >> my name is Ron Gazeroski and I I have some brief questions. Uh were you the uh

468
03:01:01.760 --> 03:01:18.000
>> I'm sorry. I we need to hear we need to hear who you're representing. That's fine. >> We need to hear who you're here representing. >> Who I represent? >> Yes. >> Amodel Sagali. S Y A L E. >> Okay. and she is also uh a member of

469
03:01:18.000 --> 03:01:33.920
other uh citizens but she is their uh spokesperson with regard to this. Uh I want to kind of just clarify a couple of things. As I read the application as

470
03:01:33.920 --> 03:01:50.319
well as the notice, there's reference to the prior application. Are you familiar with that? I've read some of the transcript and materials. >> Will you speak up a little louder, please? >> I've read the some of the transcript and reviewed the materials.

471
03:01:50.319 --> 03:02:06.960
>> Okay. Now, in this uh notice making reference to certain uh engineering data uh with regard to the first application that is being incorporated into this

472
03:02:06.960 --> 03:02:23.920
application, are you aware of that? I'm here to speak on behalf of the modifications I've made. >> I'm sorry. >> I'm here to speak on behalf of the modifications I've made. >> Well, wait a second. Uh, you're in other words, you're only speaking in terms of

473
03:02:23.920 --> 03:02:40.479
the modification. You're not here to in any way address the original application drawings as they would apply to this application. In other words, you're completely unaware of them and you didn't consider them.

474
03:02:40.479 --> 03:02:57.520
I've reviewed the prior drawings. I've made modifications to them. I've presented the modifications and that's tell me and I apologize for interrupting you. Okay. I I'm sorry for that. Can you tell me what part of the original application

475
03:02:57.520 --> 03:03:15.279
is being incorporated into this application? >> Well, that's really a question for me. >> It's a question. It's a question to the witness, not to you. If he can't answer it, he can't answer it. >> I'm going to defer to the attorney to answer that. >> I'm I'm sorry.

476
03:03:15.279 --> 03:03:32.560
>> I'm going to defer to the attorney to answer that. >> How can you refer to the attorney? He's not the question. You are You're the engineer. >> I want you to tell me what parts of the original application that you incorporated into this application. If

477
03:03:32.560 --> 03:03:47.520
you can't answer that question, you can't answer the question. I can't answer that question. >> Are you also aware of the fact that with regard to that initial application in all of the engineering data which was included in application,

478
03:03:47.520 --> 03:04:04.160
this board denied that application? Are you aware of that? >> I am. >> Are you also aware then by denying the application they denied the efficacy of all of the engineering data that was included in that first application?

479
03:04:04.160 --> 03:04:20.880
That seems like a legal. Is there a question? I don't I'm an engineer. I'm not a >> Look, and I don't I apologize if I'm badgering you. I'm just a badgering guy. Having said that, you can present or give no testimony with regard to the

480
03:04:20.880 --> 03:04:39.279
original application and the engineering data that was included in that application that is incorporated into this application. >> Okay. Okay. Is there a state? Is that a question? >> Yeah, it's a question. >> Can you restate the question?

481
03:04:39.279 --> 03:04:56.000
>> Pardon me. >> Can you please restate the question? >> I'll restate the question. Now, in the original application, as in all applications, it's filled with engineering data, is it not? >> Yes. >> And you have no idea what was in that original application

482
03:04:56.000 --> 03:05:11.200
that was included in this application. >> I reviewed the prior application. I've prepared modified plans and I've presented those modified plans tonight. I will need to continue to update these plans.

483
03:05:11.200 --> 03:05:28.000
>> What parts of the original application as it pertains to engineering data that you modified and what parts you did not modify? >> So I modified the building footprint, the building layout, the grading, the

484
03:05:28.000 --> 03:05:43.840
drainage, the utilities. I've essentially re-engineered the site. >> Pardon me? >> I have essentially re-engineered the site. >> So then you didn't rely upon anything from the first application >> in my presentation tonight? No.

485
03:05:43.840 --> 03:06:00.720
>> Okay. Let me uh let me if I can refer to the uh review letter which is dated May I'm sorry, July the 6 of 2026 that was prepared by uh Neglia and refer you to page uh four of eight. Do you have that

486
03:06:00.720 --> 03:06:28.640
before you? >> Yes, I have it. >> You have it. >> Page four. >> Page four of the Okay, let me just if we can go through this now. In preparing

487
03:06:28.640 --> 03:06:44.880
uh an application, you of course have to work with the uh dimensions of the property in question, do you not? >> Yes. >> Okay. And at the very bottom of that letter, it says the applicant shall

488
03:06:44.880 --> 03:07:00.960
provide a calculation breakdown of the proposed lot coverage not including the existing nursing home. Now, are you aware of the fact that there is a nursing existing nursing home on this site? >> I I'm not I'm not seeing this question

489
03:07:00.960 --> 03:07:15.840
in my letter. >> What page? >> Pardon me. >> What page? >> I'm sorry, it's page four of eight. Let me show it to you. >> I have a nine-page letter from DNR. >> I'm sorry.

490
03:07:15.840 --> 03:07:48.600
>> I have a ninepage letter from DNR consulting. >> Okay. At least >> I don't have any other review letters >> sent to the board. It's dated July the 6th of 2026. >> Thank you.

491
03:07:49.840 --> 03:08:03.600
I have a copy of the letter you're referring to now. >> Take time to consider your >> I gota speak into the mic. Okay. Do you have it before you? >> I have the letter that you're referring to now. Yes. >> I'm looking at page four of eight of the

492
03:08:03.600 --> 03:08:21.359
review letter prepared by Neglia. Uh and he lists the bulk deficiencies uh that he observes. Now, there is in fact a second building on this site, is there not >> the existing skilled nursing facility?

493
03:08:21.359 --> 03:08:36.960
>> It's the intention of the applicant to have that building remain, not to demolish it. Correct. >> Correct. >> Uh, can you give me an approximation of what the square footage of that building is? >> Approximately 39,000 square feet. >> Pardon me.

494
03:08:36.960 --> 03:08:52.720
>> Approximately 39,000 square feet. >> Okay. So if we're talking in terms of the total forro of buildings which are on that site that 39,000 square ft would be added on to the proposed building would it not

495
03:08:52.720 --> 03:09:06.960
>> for the total F. Yes. >> Okay. Fine. Now once again uh where it says maximum floor area ratio uh permit required 0.25% 25% and with regard to just the memory care

496
03:09:06.960 --> 03:09:21.840
facility, it's 30%. Now, as an engineer in conjunction with the architect, you could in fact reduce the size of this proposed building so that it beats the 25%

497
03:09:21.840 --> 03:09:38.319
uh uh maximum permitted. >> I'd like to correct something you just said. The30 F is the new building plus the existing building. >> Pardon me. It's the new building plus the existing building.

498
03:09:38.319 --> 03:09:55.359
>> Yes, it's the entirety of the 10acre. >> Why? Why does it say then? I'm sorry. Why? Why does it say then? Uh on number five, it excludes the existing nursing home. >> I didn't write this letter. I don't know why it says that. >> Wait a second. Okay, look, I understand.

499
03:09:55.359 --> 03:10:11.200
Would you agree with me that right now the letter reads and says what is permitted or required is 25% and what is proposed is 30%. But what is reflected also in this

500
03:10:11.200 --> 03:10:30.399
letter it says that that 30% does not does not include the existing nursing home. So if we were to look at the total uh floor a area ratio on this site, it would have to be that 30% plus the

501
03:10:30.399 --> 03:10:47.279
existing nursing home. >> And I'm saying on the record that the 30% F the.3 includes the existing nursing home. >> Okay. So you know mistakes happen. You're saying that Neglia was just

502
03:10:47.279 --> 03:11:02.640
simply incorrect in the figures they give. >> They may not have understood that that was our calculation. >> Now, having said that, you could reduce the size of this proposed facility so that you did satisfy uh the 25% regardless of what buildings were

503
03:11:02.640 --> 03:11:15.760
considered. >> Any change to the area would change the calculation. >> Pardon me. >> Any change to the area would change the calculation. >> Okay. Now looking at for example the maximum building height it says that

504
03:11:15.760 --> 03:11:33.760
required or permitted is 40 ft or 2.5 stories. Now what is proposed is 47 ft but you could reduce that to 40t could you not? >> It is less than 40 ft on the eastern

505
03:11:33.760 --> 03:11:49.760
side of the building. >> It is less than 40T on the eastern side of the building. What about the western side? >> The western side is 47 ft. >> Don't you don't you have to consider both sides of the apple? >> It's the building and its entirety.

506
03:11:49.760 --> 03:12:06.640
>> Okay. Uh also with regard to stories, a portion of this building is three stories high when only 2.5 stories is permitted. >> I understand. Now, as I recall your testimony, you also said that with

507
03:12:06.640 --> 03:12:23.920
regard to the initial proposed building, you reduced the three stories on one portion of the building to 2.5 stories. Well, you could do that on the entire building, could you not? >> That's not the proposed application. >> I understand. But you could do it, couldn't you?

508
03:12:23.920 --> 03:12:38.479
>> Could do lots of things, but it's not >> I don't care about that. But if you can reduce one half of a building to 2.5 stories, you could reduce the remaining balance to 2.5 stories, couldn't you? >> In theory, you could, but you could also increase it back to three stories.

509
03:12:38.479 --> 03:12:55.279
>> Let me ask you this question. Uh, when a municipality passes a zoning ordinance, they're relying upon guidance being given to them by the master plan. Is that not correct? >> I'm not a professional planner. Okay. I

510
03:12:55.279 --> 03:13:11.200
think this is heading into planning territory. >> I'm a little confused by number three which says minimum rear yard setback what is required or permitted is 60 ft and what is proposed is 40 73.96

511
03:13:11.200 --> 03:13:31.439
ft. Uh pursuant to the zoning ordinance should that setback red be reduced to 60 ft rather than 73.96 ft? The rear setback requirement is 60 ft. The existing skilled nursing home is

512
03:13:31.439 --> 03:13:47.520
less than 60 ft today. I believe I believe the comment is noting that our table refers to it as existing nonconformity and is suggesting that we need to get relief as opposed to calling it an existing nonconformity. Are

513
03:13:47.520 --> 03:14:01.439
>> you saying it's an existing nonconformity, but the entire site is being expanded, is it not? So therefore that existing nonconformity uh must be remediated but you're seeking relief for that. >> Yes.

514
03:14:01.439 --> 03:14:18.080
>> Okay. Also then you say a maximum building coverage is 15% and I believe you testified that it has been increased to 17.45%. >> 17.4% correct.

515
03:14:18.080 --> 03:14:33.680
>> Now does that include the existing building? >> Yes it does. So when you take the existing building and the new proposed building, it totals coverage of 16.5%.

516
03:14:33.680 --> 03:14:49.680
>> 17.4%. >> Pardon me. >> I'm sorry, 17.45. But you can cure that, could you not? By simply reducing the size uh of the care facility. That would obiate the necessity of

517
03:14:49.680 --> 03:15:09.760
getting a variance. I'm sorry, I heard another voice. >> I I'm saying that if you wanted to, with regard to the proposed building, if you reduce the dimensions of it, you could bring the maximum building coverage to

518
03:15:09.760 --> 03:15:26.880
within what is permitted by 15%. >> Changes to the building would change the coverage, which would increase. >> Lastly, we're talks in terms of maximum lot coverage. What is required or permitted is 30%.

519
03:15:26.880 --> 03:15:42.640
>> Correct. >> That's correct. >> And you are proposing 43.2%. >> That's correct. >> Now, does that include uh the existing building? >> I believe it includes the existing building and the existing parking around.

520
03:15:42.640 --> 03:16:00.800
>> You believe or you know that it uh does. I calculated it to include the existing building and the existing parking around it. >> Okay. Now, having said that, once again, when you take the 43.2% if you reduce the size of the proposed

521
03:16:00.800 --> 03:16:16.800
building, you could satisfy what the ordinance requires. >> Reductions would reduce the number. Yes. >> Funny. >> Reductions would reduce the number. >> Okay. Now, just so we're clear, I mean, a municipality

522
03:16:16.800 --> 03:16:33.600
when it passes an ordinance, it does not simply pick uh numbers out of a sky, does it? >> I don't know. I don't create ordinances. I'm not >> Well, okay. But our zoning ordinance made up of guidance being given to it by

523
03:16:33.600 --> 03:16:51.279
the planning board, by the engineers, by the zoning officers and the like. And they are saying to the world at large, this is the way we want buildings to be built within our community. >> Is that a question? >> Yeah, it is a question.

524
03:16:51.279 --> 03:17:08.800
>> I agree. There's an ordinance that the municipality sets. >> Okay. Now also uh just I have just a few more questions. Now uh I think it's be a proper question

525
03:17:08.800 --> 03:17:39.279
for the planner not for you. Uh just a couple quick questions perhaps. Now I I'm looking at the uh settlement agreement which I would represent to the uh board that I've just seen for the first time this evening. Uh were you a

526
03:17:39.279 --> 03:17:54.399
participant in the preparation of that document? >> I reviewed some of the numbers in the document to make sure they matched my plans. >> Pardon me. I reviewed some of the numbers, the dimensions in the agreement to make sure

527
03:17:54.399 --> 03:18:12.000
that they matched my plans. To make sure they matched on the plan, >> they matched the plan, >> but they did not match with regard to the ordinances of the community of the or the zoning ordinance. Did they? In other words, you prepared, not you,

528
03:18:12.000 --> 03:18:28.000
but the applicant prepared a document which he wanted signed by this board, by the township committee and whatnot, which was contrary to the existing zoning ordinances. >> We're asking for relief. >> I'm asking that question.

529
03:18:28.000 --> 03:18:45.200
>> We're we're asking for relief on certain items. >> What? >> We're asking for relief on certain items from the zoning. Well, tell me tell me please if you can as an engineer when does the township council committee

530
03:18:45.200 --> 03:19:01.279
where do they have the authority to give relief to a zoning question? >> That's right. I think this is a legal >> Well, he said they g he said they he said they put together a document which granted relief. Fine. I want to know if

531
03:19:01.279 --> 03:19:17.359
he knows whether or not there's a provision wherever it may be that says that a township council can grant relief to a zoning board. Isn't that the proper function of this board? >> Pardon me. >> Planning questions.

532
03:19:17.359 --> 03:19:36.319
>> Are you going to call Are you going to call planner? >> We do not have a planner this evening. We'll rely on the planning testimony from the original application which I respect it. So at a later date, you're going to call a planner. >> No, he's relying on the original >> relying on the original application, the

533
03:19:36.319 --> 03:19:50.800
testimony by the planner, Paul Phillips, which requested very similar variances. I >> I apologize. You know, I'm an old man. I can't hear that. Good. >> We are relying on >> You're going to call a planner to testify. >> No, we are not >> listen to me. Relying on the original

534
03:19:50.800 --> 03:20:14.000
application planner. Just so it's clear in my mind, you're relying on the testimony of the original planner who gave testimony and this board denied that application. >> That's correct. >> Can I be permitted to uh cross-examine

535
03:20:14.000 --> 03:20:30.239
the architect? >> That's fine. >> And sir, I'm sorry I I didn't get your name. I apologize. Michael Pomeico. Now I'm hard of hearing. Michael

536
03:20:30.239 --> 03:20:45.520
Pomeico. >> Pomear Rico. Mr. Pomear Rico. Mr. Pome Rico. Uh you testified to what? >> Tell him to step to the >> Okay. Well, when you you can when you

537
03:20:45.520 --> 03:21:03.520
testified, you made a comment that uh you installed certain security devices or you designed certain security devices within the building that are intended to prevent residents from egress from both

538
03:21:03.520 --> 03:21:19.760
their floor and the building itself. Is that correct? >> That's correct. And uh you made a statement that uh uh according to design these uh um um blockades if you will

539
03:21:19.760 --> 03:21:36.720
prevent the residents from leaving the facility. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> And you made the comment that uh um you were familiar with Care One and that Care One was great about it. Isn't that what you said? Care 1 utilizes very

540
03:21:36.720 --> 03:21:51.120
sophisticated technologies to monitor their patients within their facilities. >> Okay. >> And do you have any data or or statistical studies that show Care One is is better at preventing residents

541
03:21:51.120 --> 03:22:08.080
from uh uh egressing the building than any other uh uh memory care. >> That is outside of my purview. >> No. And um you're again you're not a behavioral uh scientist or a a

542
03:22:08.080 --> 03:22:24.479
psychologist or psychiatrist or mental health specialist. >> The only thing that I can tell you is that I'm I I've been a healthc care architect for 45 years. >> Mhm. >> And um this is not a behavioral health facility. Behavioral health facilities

543
03:22:24.479 --> 03:22:41.279
are identified as an I2 occupancy. >> Okay. And this is a residential occupancy. Behavioral health facilities are completely different typology of patient. It's a different typology of care model. And this is not a behavioral health facility in any way, shape or form.

544
03:22:41.279 --> 03:22:56.800
>> But you have no >> it's not it's not identified as such by the state of New Jersey and it's not licensed as such by the state of New Jersey. >> You've made very clear that assisted living facility uh does not differentiate between memory care and

545
03:22:56.800 --> 03:23:13.439
non-memory care. Is that correct? >> The the state of New the Department of Health and Senior Services in the state of New Jersey follows the 2022 guidelines section 4.1 which is assisted living facilities under the residential

546
03:23:13.439 --> 03:23:28.880
code. >> Okay. Do you have any statistical data that shows Care One is better than any other memory care facility? >> I I told you already that that's outside of my purview. >> Okay, very good. So your opinion that

547
03:23:28.880 --> 03:23:43.920
Care One is great about it is a lay opinion. >> It may be a lay opinion, but I've worked with Care One for many years and I've worked with them on developing these models and how these facilities function with these types of neighborhoods and how these patients interact with these

548
03:23:43.920 --> 03:23:59.760
neighborhoods and these care models. And in my professional opinion, this model that you see here of using neighborhoods and how they process patients and manage patients within this environment of care

549
03:23:59.760 --> 03:24:17.920
is in my opinion a superior model to other models that I have seen >> from an architectural point of view. >> Yes. Yes sir. >> Not from a human behavior point of view. >> I am an architect. What other what other entities have you designed buildings for compare uh other than Care One uh that

550
03:24:17.920 --> 03:24:34.399
implement these um blockades and and devices to prevent egress? >> Well, I mean we do all types of health care facilities all over. We do skilled nursing facing people who have memory care deficits. What what other entities have you

551
03:24:34.399 --> 03:24:49.279
designed buildings for? The only health care client that I work with in the behav in the assisted living space is Care One. >> Care one. Okay. Very good. >> But I've >> So you you have nothing to compare your

552
03:24:49.279 --> 03:25:06.399
statement that care one is great at it any other. >> You're intruding into my ability. >> That's all the questions I have, Mr. Chairman. That's all the questions I have. >> Ju just really quickly on redirect just to clarify, Mr. Rico, when you say neighborhood, you're talking about the common space within the building.

553
03:25:06.399 --> 03:25:22.560
>> No, the neighborhoods are the areas within the building where the resident rooms are. So, >> but we're not talking about outside. >> The patients the patients reside in their neighborhoods and that is a access controlled area within the building.

554
03:25:22.560 --> 03:25:40.479
>> Thank you. >> I I have a >> Yeah, go ahead. You're allowed to cross examine. >> Um I I want to just if I can uh reflect on a comment. So I I want clarification

555
03:25:40.479 --> 03:25:55.840
from the attorney for the applicant. Is it your representation to this board that you did not intend to call a professional planner to give testimony before this board with regard to this application?

556
03:25:55.840 --> 03:26:11.200
It's my intention not to call a professional planner tonight, but it's it's my intention not to call a professional planner for this evening, but we are relying on professional planning testimony from the original application which had very similar variances. >> Do you intend

557
03:26:11.200 --> 03:26:28.080
>> We're proposing less intense variances. >> Do you intend to call a professional planner to present testimony before this board? >> We've already called a professional planner. >> Okay. Do you that if you're not going to call a professional planner, who then could I cross-examine with regard to the

558
03:26:28.080 --> 03:26:44.560
planning testimony of a hearing that took place six years ago with a different use? >> It's a similar use, and you already had the opportunity to cross-examine our planner at that time. >> Who Who is your professional planner to say that the uses are similar? >> We need to get past this because you

559
03:26:44.560 --> 03:26:59.840
keep drilling down on this. This is the exact same use. It's the exact same use. there. >> There's no diff. We've already I've already testified. >> Can we let the witness uh answer the question, please? >> I've already testified that this is

560
03:26:59.840 --> 03:27:17.040
licensed as an assisted living facility, which is the exact same license as the original facility. There's no change in use. >> Did you Did you read the review letter uh from the board professional, Nolia? Did you read that letter?

561
03:27:17.040 --> 03:27:33.200
>> No, I did not. >> Didn't read. But yet appeared to give testimony and comment with regard to that. Now he said on page seven of eight, the applicant shall provide testimony addressing the proposed D1, D4, D6, and C variances as illustrated

562
03:27:33.200 --> 03:27:48.720
in this review letter. You are not qualified to give testimony with regard to that, are you? >> I am qualified to give testimony. >> Answer the question. >> I am now trying to answer. >> You're not a profession. Are you a professional player? Mr. >> Chairman, I'm I'm not going to >> He's not a professional. This is this is

563
03:27:48.720 --> 03:28:04.239
not unproductive. No, >> I I I I really and no, I don't want to say really and truly here's a letter from your professional is telling you they have to provide testimony as to this application, not as to an application that took place six years

564
03:28:04.239 --> 03:28:20.960
ago with a different use. Also, let's go down further. Applicants professionals are provide testimony addressing positive criteria. They may show that the proposed use promotes the general welfare or that the specific side is uniquely qualified. He wants he's saying

565
03:28:20.960 --> 03:28:37.279
to you, I'm going to rely upon testimony going back uh six years, which by the way was denied by this board. >> Sir, do you have questions for this witness? Do you acknowledge the fact that you are not qualified to give testimony with

566
03:28:37.279 --> 03:29:05.359
regard to the planning criteria or the satisfaction or provide as to planning? You're not, are you? >> I am not a professional planner. >> Well, then fine. No further question. >> You have any? >> No further questions. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Pomerio.

567
03:29:05.359 --> 03:29:22.319
Open up to the public then. >> All right. So, we now going to open up to the public. Um, you want to just go the parameters to the uh Yes. So, we uh everyone will have five minutes to speak. Um the comments should be uh limited to the settlement agreement to

568
03:29:22.319 --> 03:29:38.800
the final site plan. Obviously, as we've all repeatedly heard, please speak loudly, clearly into the microphone so we can get so we can get it. I'm going to you're going to be asked to be um you're going to be sworn in. We're going to ask that you state your name uh name and address for the for the >> presenting each witness a copy of the

569
03:29:38.800 --> 03:29:54.000
settlement agreements. They can refer to it since no copy has ever been provided to any of these individuals prior to right now. >> Thank you. >> Also, I'm sorry. Point of order. I just want to clarify that each member of the public who's going to be speaking or

570
03:29:54.000 --> 03:30:10.319
asking questions is not represented by a council. Just want to make that clear. >> That's fine. No, no. I want to make that clear that you're not having your clients ask questions. >> No, I'm not asking for the attorney's client. >> Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth? >> Yes, I did. >> Can you state your name and address for

571
03:30:10.319 --> 03:30:24.880
the record? >> Pat Carol, 85 King Street, Edison, New Jersey, 08820. >> All right, proceed. >> So, we are within the affected rate. We did receive a notice. Um, it was a holiday weekend, so we didn't receive that notice right away. We were provided very little time to get ready for this.

572
03:30:24.880 --> 03:30:41.279
This is my first time ever seeing the settlement agreement. I would also like to officially request copies of the drawings be sent to the public so that we can understand what's being proposed right behind our houses. My address, if you look at it on Google Maps, backs up directly to the nursing homes property. I am currently bothered almost every

573
03:30:41.279 --> 03:30:58.000
single day by loud noises at their facility. And by building a larger facility, these noises are only going to get louder. Their current generate their current generator on site is already a noise disturbance for the entire block. Um, and I understand that this was addressed for Lewis Court, but nothing has been addressed for King Street. And

574
03:30:58.000 --> 03:31:14.720
it appears that they're planning to move the generator closer to King Street. So, I would like to also request a sound report. And I would like that sound report to be committed on site so that it can deal with real field conditions such as, you know, the barriers that this generator is going to be facing and not just the perfect scenarios inside of

575
03:31:14.720 --> 03:31:29.760
uh the manufacturer's warehouse or something like that. Um, I think we should also have new safety and traffic plans drawn up because as was discussed, all this information is being uh based on information that was given to you guys 6 years ago. Those traffic patterns

576
03:31:29.760 --> 03:31:46.239
have changed drastically and traffic has gotten worse, not better in our neighborhood. Um, another thing I wanted uh to the nursing home to consider as well is the potential cost impact. I'm not sure. I haven't seen any drawings that show there is a golf course that's right

577
03:31:46.239 --> 03:32:03.120
across the street which would lead to potential harm to your patients should a golf ball go through the window. Are there any reinforced windows or any sort of netting or anything that's being proposed in order to protect your patients from such health hazards? Um, and another thing before I wrap this up,

578
03:32:03.120 --> 03:32:18.960
I have a feeling there will be another meeting and I'll be able to address more points then. Unfortunately, we don't have a lot of time today. It's already past 10 o'clock and a lot of people deserve to get home. Um, I did reach out to one of our council members for Edison who was able to reach out to the assemblymen and one of the public members here was also able to reach out

579
03:32:18.960 --> 03:32:33.920
to the assembly men who you might have seen earlier in the uh room. Robert Carbenchuk, he had to leave because he had other professional matters and wasn't able to address this, but he's fought this case in the past and is willing to continue fighting on our behalf. Also, I spoke with Bill Jenkins

580
03:32:33.920 --> 03:32:48.960
who is the assistant head of schooling for Waldler Hortridge. They have not received any sort of notice that this um proceeding has begun again and they are completely against this. They told me I have the right to speak on their behalf at tonight's meeting, but the school does not have anybody that they could

581
03:32:48.960 --> 03:33:04.560
send here. Um but they would request to be present at the next meeting so that they can address all of their concerns with the Care One facility, not just with this expansion, but with other current problems that they're experiencing with their facilities. And last thing I'll end this with is uh

582
03:33:04.560 --> 03:33:18.720
the land that they're proposing to build this on. This is a map from FEMA. I can provide it to the board. It's all protected wetlands that surround the nursing home. So, I'd like to understand how these civil drawings are not going to impact the protected wetlands that

583
03:33:18.720 --> 03:33:34.800
the uh existing facility is already established on and it should also violate EPA standards that were recently passed not long ago building on wetlands. I'll end with that. Thank you and I hope you all have a good night. >> Thank you very much. Next member of the

584
03:33:34.800 --> 03:33:51.840
public. >> M mr chairman. >> Next member of the public, please. >> Mr. Chairman, uh I want to apologize, but I'm looking at this document. It is called a settlement agreement and it calls for the signature of members of

585
03:33:51.840 --> 03:34:12.720
this board as well or the whatever it may be. H how does let me now let me just take one step back before I put my foot in my mouth. Where's the settlement agreement? I I I should have raised this in the very beginning, but my question is I'm

586
03:34:12.720 --> 03:34:30.479
looking at this settlement agreement. Was this settlement agreement reviewed by and agreed upon by the zoning board prior to this hearing this evening? >> If so, how how can you in fairness to my clients sit in judgment of what they're

587
03:34:30.479 --> 03:34:45.920
proposing? I mean, think about it. Sir, your questioning the concept of a whispering woods, which No, excuse me. Let me You spoke. Let me answer your question. >> Let me answer your question, please. >> You're questioning the concept of whispering woods. What a whispering

588
03:34:45.920 --> 03:35:02.640
woods does is allows us to tentatively negotiate the parameters of a settlement agreement. Nothing has been agreed upon formally. That's been it's an understanding uh between essentially council with with the consultation guidance of our clients. the settlement

589
03:35:02.640 --> 03:35:17.120
agreement and the terms and the proposals for what the uh the applicant is is seeking to do come before this board as part of this hearing. Nothing has been signed yet because it all depends on whether or not the board approves or rejects the the

590
03:35:17.120 --> 03:35:34.319
>> approves or rejects the settlement. So has not been has not been signed. It will not be signed unless the board approves the H >> having said that and and I'm I want to speak respectfully because I've been doing this for a long time and and that's why we have courts and that's why we have hearings. This zoning board six

591
03:35:34.319 --> 03:35:51.040
years ago denied this denied an application that they're relying upon. Okay. And uh that was based upon and there was no prerogative writ. If there was one filed, then this board

592
03:35:51.040 --> 03:36:08.000
would have had to defend their action and the objectors would have been able to participate in that progative red suit. That was not done. So now, six years later, we're asking this board to enter into

593
03:36:08.000 --> 03:36:24.319
negotiations to basically settle this case. And I and I think that everybody acted perhaps innocently in this matter. But I I'm respectfully stating to you I think it's highly improper and I think

594
03:36:24.319 --> 03:36:42.960
that it should be rethought. >> Thank you. >> And I can assure you that if in fact I receive an adverse uh decision from this board that will all be a part of a prerogative rit suit which I will file. >> Thank you. Go up to the next. Yeah.

595
03:36:42.960 --> 03:36:59.840
>> My name is Parth Sha. Um I am living at 74 King Street. >> Sorry, I just need to swear. >> I swear. >> You swear. I got to say for the record otherwise for the prerogative suit challenge. Do you swear affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth? >> Yes. >> And now can you state your name and

596
03:36:59.840 --> 03:37:16.000
address for the record? >> Sure. Thank you to the board and I appreciate everyone here. My name is Parth Sha and I live on 74 King Street. But before I give a testimony, there are a number of young ladies here, as you can see, it's past their bedtime. They

597
03:37:16.000 --> 03:37:32.880
wanted to say a few words. So, if would you allow for them to say uh they'll come up, they'll swear, and they'll state their names and and state their >> We have no objection to that. Perfect. Thank you. >> But you're on the clock, sir. So, if you want to state your case, so this way we don't. >> Okay. So, that's fine. And then Okay.

598
03:37:32.880 --> 03:37:48.239
So, I I'm not a lawyer, but um a quick u examination um of some of the things that I was listening on what the the various uh professionals were talking about. And um

599
03:37:48.239 --> 03:38:04.399
I just want to respectfully um disagree uh of the val validity of this hearing because under New Jersey case law, a whispering woods settlement hearing requires a dedicated standalone

600
03:38:04.399 --> 03:38:19.760
agenda to ensure a clear public awareness and focused deliberation. mixing this massive zoning meeting shifts with unrelated municipal businesses which we were just the first

601
03:38:19.760 --> 03:38:36.560
two hours of our meeting today was with an another entity uh and that I believe is unfair to the people here and uh what we're trying to achieve. Uh the next thing I wanted to discuss here

602
03:38:36.560 --> 03:38:52.800
um is that uh perhaps the board um needs to um the board has possibly no legal authority to settle this matter because the underlining lawsuit and

603
03:38:52.800 --> 03:39:07.760
jurisdiction uh under New Jersey court law developer had only has 45 days to challenge the board's original decision. waiting uh approximately 3 years means their legal claims are completely

604
03:39:07.760 --> 03:39:24.399
timebarred. The board uh should consider not uh reviewing any of this and legally this the matters that they're uh the developer is uh putting together is invalid. uh it expired the lawsuit as a

605
03:39:24.399 --> 03:39:47.279
is doing this is like something of a backdoor and bypasses local zoning ordinance. Another thing I wanted to discuss here the public due process rights have fundamentally been violated tonight. The

606
03:39:47.279 --> 03:40:02.880
proposed settlement agreement was never made uh available for the public inspection prior to this meeting. Even these various uh gentlemen here to my right had just got their uh the documents in front of them. They no one got a chance to really prepare the

607
03:40:02.880 --> 03:40:18.319
settlement or see the settlement. I think that is absolutely unfair. Um and I want to state that for the public. Prior to this meeting, we are being asked to comment on a rushed secret agreement without being given the

608
03:40:18.319 --> 03:40:35.600
statutory time to review the text, consult with our experts, formulate a meaningful questions. I request immediately to postpone this vote until a full settlement documents are made public for at least a minimum of 14

609
03:40:35.600 --> 03:41:08.880
days. And now I would like to thank you for listening to me. I would like to ask the young ladies to go ahead and say a few words. >> Do I have to swear? >> I don't. Okay.

610
03:41:09.520 --> 03:41:27.680
Okay. My name is Sori Sha and I live on 74 King Street. Um, we are focusing on how the expansion of the settlement directly threatens public safety, which is a court um duty of the zoning

611
03:41:27.680 --> 03:41:45.439
board to protect. All right. My name is Samira Tube and I live on 26 Morning Glory Lane in Edison. And um we think this is a real concern because we're worried about the pedestrian safety and the safety of children, especially um us and many of

612
03:41:45.439 --> 03:42:01.120
our friends as we're always biking in the King Street neighborhood and in that area and it already has quite windy and narrow roadways. Um, and another example of this is one of our friends who actually got hit by a car and got involved in a car accident in Edison.

613
03:42:01.120 --> 03:42:18.160
So, we're worried about our safety while we bike and the safety of all of our peers. >> Hi, my name is Envy Patiel. I live at 5 Foley Avenue and I'm an upcoming 9th grader at John JP Stevens High School. Um because of how Inman is built,

614
03:42:18.160 --> 03:42:33.680
there's not a lot of sidewalks for us and many other children to walk, which is like a big safety hazard in my opinion because well, we're walking alongside vehicles and it's a burden on us and it just makes us feel unsafe while we're trying to get around our

615
03:42:33.680 --> 03:42:49.680
town. Um my name is Samira Sevita and I live at 160 Westgate Drive and I'm an upcoming 9th grader at East Brunswick Magnet School. I think safety should come before development because as teens we often use our bikes or walk around as

616
03:42:49.680 --> 03:43:05.359
our form of transportation and I think having a commercial expansion would take away what we have and how we use um >> sorry speak into the mic as best you can. >> Yeah. Children like us, we are exploring our

617
03:43:05.359 --> 03:43:24.640
com community and foreshadowing potential accidents is and this foreshadows potential accidents and tragedies. Good evening. My name is Ana and I'm going to 8th grade at John Adams Middle School and I live on 97 King Street. I'd

618
03:43:24.640 --> 03:43:41.120
like to start off by saying this construction project would be almost directly in my backyard, posing a significant risk to young children, basically me and my friends who frequently play there. The building would be directly seen for my brother's bedroom window and would be a huge distraction. If it were to proceed, it

619
03:43:41.120 --> 03:43:57.520
would not only endanger the safety of us kids, but also disrupt the peaceful residential environment, ultimately making it a loud area that is not ideal for children of any age. Furthermore, this is a zone residential lot which was a major consideration for my family and many others when moving here or into

620
03:43:57.520 --> 03:44:13.199
this area. Moreover, construction such as a large hospital compromises the public safety of the property, the entire neighborhood and its residents. Essentially, I strongly believe that this construction project is a recipe for disaster in such an active and

621
03:44:13.199 --> 03:44:37.920
child-friendly area. Thank you. Hi, my name is Rava Pangiar. I'm going to be a seventh grader at John Adams Middle School and I live on 101 King Street. This project is very close to my house. So, while younger children do play in the area, a lot of people pass

622
03:44:37.920 --> 03:44:54.720
by on walks like me and the area is like primarily used by pedestrians. So occupying the area with a building will not provide a space for people who walk like me. I think that this area was is a good place for people like me to go by

623
03:44:54.720 --> 03:45:16.520
and pass by. So using that area and filling it up would not be a good idea. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Next member of the public. Next member of the public wants to be heard.

624
03:45:20.960 --> 03:45:36.800
>> You swear affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth. >> Yes. >> Can you say your name and address of the record, please? >> Sure. Um, hi everyone. My name is Ankit Majmudar, 89 King Street. Yeah. Uh, Ankit Majmudar, 89 King Street. Um so I

625
03:45:36.800 --> 03:45:52.800
moved into this neighborhood last year and we fell in love with wonderful neighbors. We saw children running around taking school bus and we this is the kind of neighborhood we really wanted our son to grow up and he goes to jams. Uh he's going to be going to the

626
03:45:52.800 --> 03:46:07.840
seventh grade. Uh so today I'm here I cut short my vacation because I got this notice on July 1st that there is a hearing there's a big construction project and we have great neighbors who told me about that just few days ago. So I'm here to raise awareness. My

627
03:46:07.840 --> 03:46:24.000
neighbor, my backyard faces directly to caravan facility. So some of the scenarios that you are hearing today, it's a reality for me, right? I'd see there were two two trees that fell down, right? The gentleman you mentioned the landscape is up to date, but it's not.

628
03:46:24.000 --> 03:46:39.040
Two trees fell down. I can see the vehicle movement. I can see the dump truck making noises. I can see uh all the workers working on the backyard. And when I reached out to care one, hey there is an issue the response I got this was again without me knowing any of

629
03:46:39.040 --> 03:46:55.680
this going on that we are going to take care of in future we are not going to do about anything about this right now. So that's a concern that if you you have a corporation doing a business already not considering a residential request that there is a trouble right so that's the

630
03:46:55.680 --> 03:47:12.640
one nuances the other concern I have is the whole process to me looks a little bit lack of transparency right just few days no details I'm hearing that uh request for planner is being denied that it's already done six years ago I just

631
03:47:12.640 --> 03:47:27.279
moved in last year I want to know I want to hear from planner Why why are we not bringing planners on site for this hearing? It's a very it's supposed to be a transparent process. Right? So that being said, I think it's a reasonable request to the board who has been doing

632
03:47:27.279 --> 03:47:43.680
this for years. Give us more time. We want to hear more from both sides. We want to see all the documents, right? I think it's unreasonable to just vote today and have a decision. So that's a request. Uh also the facility was

633
03:47:43.680 --> 03:48:00.560
probably built 25 years ago. The case was last case was 6 years ago where it was denied. The reality today is different. Road is busier than ever. Today if you go to the school in the

634
03:48:00.560 --> 03:48:19.199
morning or rush hours you will see it's not the same road probably it was six years ago. the flood waters, traffic, concerns from the kids, right? Concerns from the new neighbors who are hearing this for the first time. I think it

635
03:48:19.199 --> 03:48:36.840
needs to be addressed and uh I have full faith in the board that they will do the right thing, give us more time to understand this better and and uh take this forward. So, thank you. Could

636
03:48:42.479 --> 03:48:58.479
you Yeah. Do you swear affirm tell the truth in your testimony here tonight? >> Yeah, I swear. I'm Rajie Pangar. I'm resident of 101 King Street right behind the K1 facility. Uh like many things have been said. So I would not repeat that and I would say I'm a software

637
03:48:58.479 --> 03:49:15.040
engineer by profession but I'm a dad of two kid. I have to drop my kid every day like they are one is in high school another one is in a uh like middle school like the traffic pattern has changed a lot today the the the road near where the careman facility is way

638
03:49:15.040 --> 03:49:31.760
too thin like it's when you are coming back you can't reach home to drop your another child there's not enough time like so it's already so bad if such a big facility is coming in it will make it so worse that it will be blocked all the way up to a Martin Luther King school it will be really bad like the

639
03:49:31.760 --> 03:49:47.439
nearest big facility uh on Inman uh Avenue is the shopping uh area which is now like the stop and shop which is closed. The the width of the road there is way too big. This area is like way too thin like it's barely there are like

640
03:49:47.439 --> 03:50:03.199
two cars they can get stuck like this is and all the time the trees are falling. This is like having something like three times bigger than what is there today will make the traffic pattern way too worst. That's what I would like to add up. Thank you very much. Next member of the public,

641
03:50:03.199 --> 03:50:20.160
folks. Um, as we we said in the ground rules, we don't allow for any applause, booing of interrupting of anyone. I when the kids came up, they're a totally different story, but let's just be adults. Just just keep the the proceedings civil. Thank you so much. Good, sir. Our turn. >> Do you swear from they the testimony you

642
03:50:20.160 --> 03:50:36.880
give tonight will be the truth? >> I do. >> You state your name and address for the record, please. >> My name is Sanjay Amin. I live on 1368 in Man Avenue. um right facing the actually I live right facing the inman avenue where the where the whole traffic line basically gets queued up every

643
03:50:36.880 --> 03:50:54.399
morning so I was part of this whole proceeding 5 years back and I attended each and every meeting one thing I'll tell you the inman avenue 5 years back it hasn't gotten one inch bigger and the queue of the of the all all the cars

644
03:50:54.399 --> 03:51:10.640
which gets queued up which is probably goes way beyond the caravan facility Right? That hasn't basically decreased at all. Right? Only thing which has basically changed is the people who are sitting in front of you. Our problem has remained same. Our ask has remained same

645
03:51:10.640 --> 03:51:26.399
and and the desire for carbon to make more money basically has that aspiration has goes beyond the limit that if I remember correctly this used to be the 90,000t facility. They basically Mr. Architect said oh we have significantly

646
03:51:26.399 --> 03:51:42.239
reduced the building. they have how how could they reduce the building from 90,000 how could they reduce the size of the building significantly if the size square foot goes from 90 to 95,000 ft I think I may not have been good in the

647
03:51:42.239 --> 03:51:57.680
math but at least at least I know that 95,000 ft² is bigger than 90,000 square ft so whatever these people are saying it is just the for them for them it just that they'll go home you all will go home and all these people have a

648
03:51:57.680 --> 03:52:15.040
generator humming like a like a like a massive massive machine which is going to basically kill that sleep at night. 114 people bed only the exhaust from the kitchen will basically wake you up. Forget about the generator. So I really want you to think you all are going to

649
03:52:15.040 --> 03:52:31.359
go home. Think about how it would feel to all these people. Excuse me to to when we go home. So, and I I basically I I I'm right next I'm I'm right neighbor right next door neighbor to them and I know how how this care and I'm not

650
03:52:31.359 --> 03:52:46.399
basically blaming you all but there are at least four or five times a year I go to them and tell them that hey there are so many dead trees please cut nobody even care to come now I'll give you another example so now they're building

651
03:52:46.399 --> 03:53:04.239
what 200 car facility now their employee comes 7:00 in the morning. So they in the snowy days they really have to make sure that they start cleaning that whole parking lot 5:00 in the morning. Now I know precisely how those those those

652
03:53:04.239 --> 03:53:19.760
snow thrower comes and basically hit the ground because I hear them every snow day 5:00 in the morning and with this 7 200 car garage it is going to become nightmare for each and every every neighbor in the in in the in that

653
03:53:19.760 --> 03:53:35.199
vicinity. So please think about this thing and I know what what basically behind the door settlement you guys have done it but think about all these people sitting here and there are so many people who wanted to come here but but but be the way this whole thing was

654
03:53:35.199 --> 03:53:52.160
planned they basically sent notice on 26 majority of the people were actually outside and when we are coordinating there are certain people in Washington certain people in Dallas we were coordinating over the phone and they basically cut their plan to basically be here and there at least 20 other people

655
03:53:52.160 --> 03:54:07.760
who could not make it today just because they basically planned it in such a way that let's plan it around the 4th of July weekend. So we have a least amount of people who basically will come and they will have a easy way to basically get through it. So so please be a human

656
03:54:07.760 --> 03:54:33.520
being and be just think of a human being and think of a family person living in this area. I I'm I'm not making any emotional speech. I just want you to be the fair to all this additional township. Thank you. >> You swear affirm the testimony you give

657
03:54:33.520 --> 03:55:05.040
tonight will be the truth. >> Can you state your name and address for the record, please? into the mic, please. >> Hold on. Sorry. I think the microphone may not be working. Frank, you just want to check that one. >> Hello. Is it better?

658
03:55:05.040 --> 03:55:20.000
>> Okay. So, there are two ways uh we can go to our offices or drop our kids. One is in Man Avenue. The other one is Woodland Avenue. There is already construction going on. There is a big community coming. So the the traffic is worse that side. And in Man Avenue also with this construction is going to go

659
03:55:20.000 --> 03:55:36.080
over. So as Rajiv said, right now when there is a peak hour, it takes approximately 5 to 20 minutes. There are 10 to 50 cars in queue that we have to cross. And with this facility, it's going to go worse even more. I have my six year 5year-old old son who I drop

660
03:55:36.080 --> 03:55:50.720
almost every day and there is no pedestrian traffic. the road is really narrow and uh it's unsafe for the kids as well. You would you have heard the other kids also talk about that. That's all I have to add. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Next member of the

661
03:55:50.720 --> 03:56:14.399
public. >> Do you swear affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth? >> I swear. >> Can you say your name, address the record, please? >> Uh my name is Vive Desai. I'm the resident of 87 King Street. So I'll so I live right uh in so the the care facility is on the my is on my backyard

662
03:56:14.399 --> 03:56:31.680
every morning around 6:00 the truck comes the generator sound I do wake up I just moved into the uh neighborhood like one and a half years uh back uh you know just because of the backyard is so beautiful is a luscious green tree but the sound of this generator uh you know

663
03:56:31.680 --> 03:56:47.600
the sound of the truck always wakes me up. So today while I was listening and making notes all I could hear was that there is a revised plan there is a revised plan and all I could understood was they have taken the problem of the east side and they are moving everything to the west side. So there is no plan

664
03:56:47.600 --> 03:57:05.040
right that's what I understood what I see is that uh you know after few years when I'll wake up I'll have this 33 floor building there would be a much more bigger generator there will be truck sound coming around right so and there is this is not what I expected you know when I moved into this amazing

665
03:57:05.040 --> 03:57:21.680
place so my request to you guys is one is give us more time right do take a look at there is no transparency that was offered to us and this whole challenge of moving everything to west side. They are still saying that we'll have a three-story building on the west side. So nothing has changed for the

666
03:57:21.680 --> 03:57:38.239
west side. So they went back they they they came back on the drawing board and all they did was they took the issues on the east side and they are pushing it on the west side. So I I'll request the board to take a look at this uh you know think more from a resident resident point of view right and that that would

667
03:57:38.239 --> 03:57:57.520
be it sir. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Next member of the public. >> Uh hello, my name is Rafrit Tali uh from 97 King Street. >> You swear from the testimony you give tonight will be the truth. >> I do. >> Okay, you can continue. Thank you. >> Um so my primary objection is really to

668
03:57:57.520 --> 03:58:12.160
the use variance itself um that to keep it designated as residential and um uh not put a commercial flag on it. Uh the next is the height of the structure. As it was also mentioned by a couple of my

669
03:58:12.160 --> 03:58:27.279
neighbors, the adjustment of just one side is not something that should be accounted for a significant adjustment to the overall uh plan that is being proposed. In the previous hearings, the height of this structure was almost a

670
03:58:27.279 --> 03:58:44.720
standing uh objection that was resonated on most of the board members uh during the vote. the such a minor change or of the facade to make it look like they're actually um doing something about it should should clearly be discounted. The

671
03:58:44.720 --> 03:59:00.239
height was for the whole structure. Any point of the structure exceeding the height is a violation of the ordinance. Um on the safety side, this is something which is very close to my heart because I have two kids and um to state the

672
03:59:00.239 --> 03:59:16.960
obvious, people with severe memory loss are known to get disoriented and violent. There have been plenty of incidents where patients have wandered off premises and either caused harm to themselves or to others around them. Um while the applicant has uh displayed

673
03:59:16.960 --> 03:59:32.239
certain security measures in their u architect and uh um the discussions and uh exhibits that they've shared uh the the approving the uh this plan basically is putting the residents within few feet

674
03:59:32.239 --> 03:59:48.960
of this danger like based on this um I I just want to have a a quick question to the applicant or if anybody has an answer to is what happens if there's a fire in the building? Where do those patients go when they are put out of

675
03:59:48.960 --> 04:00:06.640
harm's way? What security measures are you going to have that all of the patients that are now putting are now circulating around the property are not going to cause any harm to the to my kids or me. I I have absolutely no assurances that there will be enough

676
04:00:06.640 --> 04:00:23.920
security measures in place within the time that it takes for within a evacuation where the emergency personnel is probably looking at containing the fire or the emergency itself where there could be another one happening right under their nose

677
04:00:23.920 --> 04:00:41.520
and that that is putting me at harm's way. I do not accept that. The last thing which is probably much minor much more minor than this is the light and sound uh nuisance that this this poses. This this will become a 24/7

678
04:00:41.520 --> 04:00:57.439
operation. It's and a threetory. I live on King Street. King Street should also be given the first class citizen treatment that you gave to the east side. Lewis Court is not the only one facing this. Inman Avenue will still see three stories. King Street will

679
04:00:57.439 --> 04:01:14.080
still see three stories. the the height alone goes over and beyond what I can see from my building my the highest point from my house. I will be able to see just a building in front of me and and that completely

680
04:01:14.080 --> 04:01:29.600
changes the landscape that I bought in this is my current view and my house is actually shown in one of the exhibits that uh that was presented earlier. my view changes from a green landscape

681
04:01:29.600 --> 04:01:46.880
to a hospital in front of me and and that just completely changes the quality of life. There's there's so many reasons so many more reasons that my neighbors have also brought up and I completely agree with them. Uh but I strongly uh suggest that you you reject this

682
04:01:46.880 --> 04:02:11.520
proposal and add its merit. We had a good run eight years back. I really would expect the same outcome of this. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next resident wanting to be heard. >> You raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you give will be

683
04:02:11.520 --> 04:02:26.319
the truth? >> I do. >> Say your name and trust for the record, please. >> Uh my name is Neil Jarth. I live at One Lewis Court in Edison, New Jersey. Zero8. >> Thank you. >> 08820. Um, so

684
04:02:26.319 --> 04:02:42.399
>> to the mic. Thank you. >> So, uh, it's been established that this is a residential area and this project will negatively impact all the surrounding neighbors and the quality of life. Uh,

685
04:02:42.399 --> 04:02:57.359
we obviously need a copy of all the documents that were u discussed. Um, so I'd appreciate if we could get copies of the documents, the drawings, and um, you know, keep in mind that this is a 9-year-old case and others have already

686
04:02:57.359 --> 04:03:15.840
said that uh, a lot of things change in 9 years and if things haven't been uh, uh, recent traffic studies, etc. haven't been conducted, I don't think this board would accept a 9-year-old uh, uh, 9-year-old outofdate um, results. So uh

687
04:03:15.840 --> 04:03:31.600
that's something to consider. Uh so we also need a comparison from the original design to the revised design. Um we need to make sure that the uh applicant has reintroduced the revised projects with all of the expert

688
04:03:31.600 --> 04:03:49.040
testimony. As has been stated tonight, not all the experts were here. I know that they were relying on uh previous testimony, but um you know there are aspects to this that need to be um heard. U

689
04:03:49.040 --> 04:04:05.040
there should be no variance granted for this project and we need to make sure that this traffic study is as I said is current. Uh again it's 9 years old. Um if a traffic light is needed then the applicant must pay for it. The uh

690
04:04:05.040 --> 04:04:21.120
applicant must meet all the current uh all of current day laws in Edison County state uh all regulations by the state, the DP, the EPA, DO um and must meet all current storm water management laws have

691
04:04:21.120 --> 04:04:41.199
uh and the uh applicant hasn't uh uh testified as to why this will help Edison and all of its neighbors. Uh we've heard some of the testimony of the security uh that they're planning for this facility, but as some of uh my

692
04:04:41.199 --> 04:04:59.000
neighbors have said, um you know, a plan is great until something goes wrong and everything goes out the window. So uh there's a fire or something as was mentioned in by the previous uh uh neighbor that what's going to happen to the rest of us?

693
04:04:59.199 --> 04:05:15.680
uh what protection um uh protections are provided for safety fences uh etc. What kind of monitoring, gate uh entrance, etc. Uh I really haven't heard too much about that in the applicant's uh testimony

694
04:05:15.680 --> 04:05:33.279
and you know the the the sound testing has to be uh has to be done uh with regards to the uh um to the applicant's proposal uh during various times uh you know as has been said many times already. I

695
04:05:33.279 --> 04:05:49.840
don't want to repeat too much, but uh these these sounds are going to be there forever. You everybody here else gets to go home. We live there. We're stuck with the results. We have to live through it. And once these things are done, they're not going to change. I mean, it

696
04:05:49.840 --> 04:06:07.040
it so we're stuck with what happens. We have to live with it. I ask that the zoning board not uh vote on this application tonight so we'll have adequate time to review all the documents that this should have been offered to

697
04:06:07.040 --> 04:06:21.760
all the residents and rather than uh sneaked in um and tried to uh hoodwink us by uh uh pushing this through without giving us a chance to review anything. Three business days, that's it. That's

698
04:06:21.760 --> 04:06:44.160
all we were given. And as has been said, uh, many of our neighbors are away on vacation because of July 4th. And some came back early. They shouldn't have had to do that. Others are still away and they won't they won't have the opportunity to

699
04:06:44.160 --> 04:07:00.720
testify. Today's the uh uh last day and the decision is going to be made. There should be consideration for the conditions and even if this project or proposed expansion goes through, there must be significant uh

700
04:07:00.720 --> 04:07:26.960
curtailment of what they can do and restrictions and oversight because we're stuck with the results. >> Thank you very much. Next member of the public, please. Thank you. Do you swear from the testimony you give will be the truth? >> I do. Can you

701
04:07:26.960 --> 04:07:41.600
>> say the name and address of the record, please? >> I'm Susan Dylan. I live on 90 King Street. I lived there all my life, 71 years. And this building shouldn't even be put up. In the 70s, they had a big

702
04:07:41.600 --> 04:07:59.600
fire in Birwood. They took the oxygen tanks down and then they had took the people out. They were all over the lawn. They used our water. They had to get our water from King Street to put out the fire. And then you have Martin Luther

703
04:07:59.600 --> 04:08:16.560
King there. They have autistic kids. They have a few that ran out. It's dangerous. You have another school there. It's just dangerous. It doesn't belong on Emman Avenue. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Next member of the

704
04:08:16.560 --> 04:08:36.000
public wanting to speak. >> Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear affirm that the testimony I give today will be the truth? >> I do. >> Can you say your name and address for the record, please? >> Kevin Dylan. >> Mike. Is mic good? Everybody can hear me. >> Um, speak to the mic, please.

705
04:08:36.000 --> 04:08:52.720
>> Yeah. Is it good now? >> There you go. >> Yes, it's good now. >> Thanks, man. Should get a new microphone amplifier. Um, good evening. My name is Kevin Dylan. I live on King Street, directly behind the Care One facility. I lived on that street for 37 years. My mom, who just spoke, has lived there

706
04:08:52.720 --> 04:09:08.640
since 1955. We've seen lot a lot of changes in this neighborhood over the years, some good, some bad. Given that history, I could tell you with confidence that this facility will have serious negative consequences for our street, especially when it comes to safety. Over the past

707
04:09:08.640 --> 04:09:25.199
decade, the biggest problem has been massive increases in traffic and the danger it brings to the intersections around our street. I think the town recently acknowledges acknowledged this when they approved the lights at Tingley and Rawway. That may have been Scotch Planes, but um but nothing has been done

708
04:09:25.199 --> 04:09:40.960
for imminent old Raridan. That intersection is extremely dangerous. 10 to 15% of the time when I drive past West 9 towards my street, I have to slam on my brakes for someone coming off Iman, ignoring the stop sign or assuming I'm turning right. The added traffic from this facility, its employees,

709
04:09:40.960 --> 04:09:58.239
deliveries, ambulances, etc. will only make this worse. And if there is an accident, will emergency vehicles even be able to reach the intersection? I believe that there Sorry. Um, with more traffic, it becomes more likely it happens again. So, I'll

710
04:09:58.239 --> 04:10:14.520
ask directly, have Care 1's engineers completed any new independent traffic studies for IM in the affected intersections um since the previous ones? Um or has the town evaluated the risk of imminently?

711
04:10:14.880 --> 04:10:31.199
Um, every day during the school year, I watch kids trying to cross while cars fly by, dodging drivers who pull around um backed up traffic and drive down the shoulder while others make dangerous left turns through the crosswalk. And people walk up in around blind curves near the current facility with no

712
04:10:31.199 --> 04:10:46.720
sidewalks at all. Teenagers on ebikes and scooters. Um, you know, they're zipping around. It's dangerous even without this expansion. And while I focused on mostly safety here, um, the concerns are environmental, too. Just the other day during the storm, I spent

713
04:10:46.720 --> 04:11:01.760
multiple days listening to Care One generator rumbling behind my house. Now, there will be two generators or a louder generator. um you know, will they be bigger generators or or what? And then there's also the runoff stream behind the houses at the end of our street. I've personally seen that flood into

714
04:11:01.760 --> 04:11:18.720
people's backyards. I don't know how the paving will affect the the runoff water if it will also go down there or be handled some other way. Um you know, I'm all for companies expanding and I understand the need for more elder care, but this location isn't it. It's dangerous. It's disruptive and it

715
04:11:18.720 --> 04:11:34.800
doesn't solve any of the problems on this side of medicine. It only makes them worse. In 37 years on King Street, this is the first time I felt the need to show up to one of these meetings. That should tell you how bad I think this will be for our neighborhood. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next member of the public

716
04:11:34.800 --> 04:11:59.439
board. >> No, there's someone. >> There's someone else. Hang on a second. There's someone. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear affirm the testimony? Give 10 time will be the truth. >> Yeah, I do. >> Can you say your name and address for the record, please? >> My name is Sunil Bandari. I live in 95

717
04:11:59.439 --> 04:12:14.560
King Street. >> So, apart from all the things other people said about traffic, I just want to say one more thing. They are bad neighbors. My backyard touches their backyard. The trees in their yards in their yard are not maintained. They have

718
04:12:14.560 --> 04:12:31.520
been fallen. They I see them fallen trees for years. They just did some cleaning a few weeks back. Now I know why, right? So I don't think Edison should allow people to convert their single family homes to commercial properties. This will set a bad precedent. Thank you.

719
04:12:31.520 --> 04:12:55.600
>> Thank you very much. Anyone else from the public wanting to be heard? Let's call. Anyone from the public wanting to be heard? >> Please approach. Richard Ley for the record in summation for my client. Mr. Le, if you just bring the microphone up a little bit.

720
04:12:55.600 --> 04:13:12.479
>> Sorry. Richard Lehey uh uh Secret New Jersey in summation on behalf of my client. Um, I'm not going to repeat the uh argument for jurisdiction and insufficient notice only to say that the worst uh uh consequence of the uh what

721
04:13:12.479 --> 04:13:28.000
we are considering insufficient notice is uh we don't have the ability to call our own expert at this uh extremely constricted uh notice time which was uh can only be

722
04:13:28.000 --> 04:13:45.600
conceived as by design. Uh, I graduated law school in 1998. 1998, 1988. A and in 1986 I worked for a firm called Meel and Michelle

723
04:13:45.600 --> 04:14:03.120
who were counsel on Whispering Woods and I helped write the brief. This settlement agreement and this proceeding is the worst perversion of the ruling in that case I have ever experienced.

724
04:14:03.120 --> 04:14:19.199
To allow a settlement agreement to dictate how this board operates down to how long a person can speak. The fact that you have to make a decision tonight is unconscionable.

725
04:14:19.199 --> 04:14:42.159
unconscionable. That's not what Whispering Wood stands for. You cannot zone for fear of litigation. I understand you're under marching orders. I understand the township is paying an enormous amount of money to

726
04:14:42.159 --> 04:14:58.399
the applicant for some reason other than the fact that they were denied their approvals six years ago, but you're an independent board and you have an independent moral obligation to do what's right for the township of Edison.

727
04:14:58.399 --> 04:15:27.760
So, please do that. Thank you very much. uh want to thank you for your attention. Uh let me just first say that the settlement agreement that you have before you this is an unexecuted

728
04:15:27.760 --> 04:15:44.439
document. Not executed. It is not signed. And we are here today uh for you to independently assess what is before you. >> So please

729
04:15:44.880 --> 04:16:00.399
>> pardon >> closer yet maybe I'll okay uh I would also as my colleague has done incorporated the portions of the prior hearing when this matter was voted upon.

730
04:16:00.399 --> 04:16:17.600
I will do likewise and I would like to have marked into evidence the transcript of the prior hearing. Also at the prior hearing uh I did present witnesses who testified as expert planners and I want to specifically incorporate their

731
04:16:17.600 --> 04:16:33.040
testimony uh as well. uh nobody has the authority to simply arbitrarily uh decide a case such as this. I I respect board members. I've appeared

732
04:16:33.040 --> 04:16:48.720
before board members throughout the state and I'm asking this board to respectfully if you were present at the prior hearing five or six years ago, jog your memory, think about it, and remember this. The

733
04:16:48.720 --> 04:17:04.159
testimony that was given by my experts six or seven years ago was adopted before this board council is repeatedly said to you. He is incorporating what was presented to the board six or seven

734
04:17:04.159 --> 04:17:20.319
years ago. Well, guess what? You denied that application then. After hearing everything, after listening to his witness, after listening to his experts, you denied the application. And what they're saying to you today, this is a

735
04:17:20.319 --> 04:17:37.439
modification of the earlier application that you denied. Having said that, how could you possibly approve this? Now, I know that often times people look for compromise and seemingly there was a document prepared

736
04:17:37.439 --> 04:17:54.880
that was a compromise of some sort which my client did not have the opportunity to participate in. uh when I listen to my uh representatives and listen to the community, I understand now how this

737
04:17:54.880 --> 04:18:10.000
country works. We're here to listen to these people. You've listened to them and I would urge you urge you to s your conscience and deny this application. Thank you. >> Is there anyone else from the public that wants to be heard? Sir, please

738
04:18:10.000 --> 04:18:28.800
approach. You could have a seat, Mr. Gazowski. Thank you, Mr. Ley. >> Do you swear or affirm the testimony gave tonight will be the truth? >> I do. >> Okay. Can you say state your name and address to the record, please? >> Sahil Shaw, 78 King Street, Edison.

739
04:18:28.800 --> 04:18:43.840
>> Mr. Shaw, you can bring that microphone up just be so you comfortable. There you go, sir. >> Can you Can you hear me? Okay. >> Yes. Perfect. Thank you so much. >> All right. I just want to say I opposed to the project. Um I've been I think

740
04:18:43.840 --> 04:18:59.279
it's especially being near schools and and other facilities. It will just not only um bring down the value of the houses but also um will just make it more chaotic at the at those intersection areas as well as the schools. I've been working in schools

741
04:18:59.279 --> 04:19:16.840
for 15 years. I have been seeing I work with autistic students and students with difficulties. I just think that um bringing this project will um bring everything else down. So I oppose a project.

742
04:19:16.960 --> 04:19:33.279
>> Thank you very much. Anyone else uh from the public wanting to be heard? Last call. Okay. Can I get a motion to close the public portion? >> Motion to close public portion. >> Second. >> Motion made by Mr. Schneider, second by

743
04:19:33.279 --> 04:19:49.279
Mr. Patel. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. I oppose nay. The eyes have it. The public portion is now closed. Um there was a question that did come up during uh one of the attorneys. Miss Knight, um from your review, uh they the one of the

744
04:19:49.279 --> 04:20:06.479
attorneys had raised the issue that the applicant did not present planning a testimony as a professional planner and given that you had given a report on it. Would you mind just shed your opinion on this? Sorry to put you on the hot seat at 11 o'clock at night.

745
04:20:06.479 --> 04:20:23.920
It's okay. Um, so in my professional opinion, I mean, I was not given the testimony from the previous hearing that was provided by um, the previous planner. So, when I produced my letter, I did not include any of that

746
04:20:23.920 --> 04:20:40.880
information because I didn't know what was put on the record at that time. Um, and I know Mr. Carly and I both received all of the information late last week for this um application. So I think that also presented a bit of a difficulty in, you know, drafting the letters and and

747
04:20:40.880 --> 04:20:57.600
making sure we had all of the information at our disposal to be able to contribute to that. So a lot of my comments were meant in terms of clarification or needing additional information. Um, so had I had the testimony to review, um, it would have

748
04:20:57.600 --> 04:21:14.560
probably assisted with clarification, especially determining the Dvariance criteria. >> Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Flannry. You're >> Yes. Um, I have a few things to to comment on. I want to turn it over first though to Bruce Nagel, who's uh,

749
04:21:14.560 --> 04:21:30.760
attorney representing uh, the applicant in the litigation. There were some questions during the course of the hearing regarding the the nature of litigation and just want to have Mr. Nagel just briefly uh summarize litigation for the benefit of the board and the public.

750
04:21:34.399 --> 04:21:51.040
>> Everybody, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, thank you for uh your patience tonight and listening to our presentation and the objectors. Um, what I'd like to do is very briefly put in context all of the discussion tonight

751
04:21:51.040 --> 04:22:06.720
and the issues um, and put a legal framework on what we're doing tonight. And in a significant way, I want to educate the object the objectors and the public about why it is so important in our view to adopt the settlement

752
04:22:06.720 --> 04:22:25.760
agreement uh, and grant the uh, the Whispering Woods application. Okay. So, the starting point is what is it that we're settling and and and how did we arrive uh at the point of the

753
04:22:25.760 --> 04:22:42.239
settlement agreement. So, number one, what hasn't been mentioned today is what happened in federal court approximately two years ago. >> And what and what happened? What what is the purpose?

754
04:22:42.239 --> 04:22:58.319
>> If if you don't mind, I'd like to outline where I'm going. >> Just giving his closing statement. He's allowed to get they're allowed to speak. >> I'm doing it I'm doing this in broad terms and I'm happy to answer questions as soon as I'm done. So, what happened in federal court is after the initial

755
04:22:58.319 --> 04:23:13.840
zoning application was denied approximately six years ago, there was two separate lawsuits filed. one, a state court action and two, a federal action. In the federal action, the argument was made that what the board

756
04:23:13.840 --> 04:23:29.199
did approximately six years ago in denying the zoning application, that act was illegal. And the federal judge in a long detailed opinion ruled in March of 2024, approximately

757
04:23:29.199 --> 04:23:45.520
two years ago, that the denial of the initial zoning application violated federal laws and discriminated against elderly people and disabled people. Now, that is the framework that

758
04:23:45.520 --> 04:24:02.560
we have to live with. That's a ruling of the federal court that stands today. It was never vacated. It was never appealed. So now what what did we do in response to that? We have been reporting to the federal court for the last

759
04:24:02.560 --> 04:24:18.000
several years and my firm has been litigation counsel in the case and we have reported to the federal court for the last several years almost on a monthly basis over the last year that we all want to resolve the case. And what

760
04:24:18.000 --> 04:24:36.560
did we do to resolve the case? We came down here with our team of experts and we met with the professionals of the town and we met with council and we listened to what the town wanted to be done and we accommodated that. We met

761
04:24:36.560 --> 04:24:52.080
time after time. We spent hundreds of hours accommodating what the town wanted by way of design, by way of height, by way of setbacks. on and on and on. And all of those

762
04:24:52.080 --> 04:25:08.479
accommodations and compromises in the settlement process were set forth in the notice of public hearing. So when I've heard council get up and say, "We didn't know what this is about." Please, in the notice of public hearing that was

763
04:25:08.479 --> 04:25:25.680
approved by the town before it was sent out, drafted by council, Mr. Flannery with approval of the town. We set forth the listing of the material terms of what is here today and we reached a

764
04:25:25.680 --> 04:25:41.439
compromise over the course of a year and even as late as this afternoon with Mr. Sammon's very important input. We worked on getting the terms of this agreement

765
04:25:41.439 --> 04:25:57.520
resolved and I compliment Mr. salmon and I compliment council before Miss Bavveni Shaw because they acted with utmost concern for the town and in the most professional possible way and we worked

766
04:25:57.520 --> 04:26:15.279
together to get this settlement done and it's done and it's before you before the board Mr. Chairman of the board for a vote hopefully tonight. Now, we are hopeful that you will find good reason to adopt the settlement.

767
04:26:15.279 --> 04:26:33.600
And I I preface what I'm about to say to advise the c the court advise the board, Mr. Chairman of the board, that we do not want the alternative. We are here to get the settlement done. But I need to be real. And if the board does not

768
04:26:33.600 --> 04:26:48.960
accept a settlement, I need to outline for the objectors and counsel what the alternative is. And I need to make it I need to make it factually clear. The alternative is we will be forced to try the case. And as Mr. Sammons will tell

769
04:26:48.960 --> 04:27:03.439
you, because he's been on those calls with the magistrate, we are under a real difficult timeline. We have to check in virtually on a monthly basis and let the court know where we stand because this case is now

770
04:27:03.439 --> 04:27:20.399
six years old. And if we try the case, we are starting, the applicant is starting with a ruling of the federal court that the prior board violated the law. And I'm going to have to put proofs in of damages.

771
04:27:20.399 --> 04:27:35.760
And those proofs will be about $40 million. I don't want to do that. My client does not want to do that. We want to build the project, but if the settlement is rejected, we have no choice but to try the case. And the

772
04:27:35.760 --> 04:27:52.720
juryy's going to be, it's a jury trial. The juryy's going to be instructed that the federal court has already ruled that you violated the law by denying the last application six years ago. And I'm going to be able to put in proofs of approximately 40 million in damages. I

773
04:27:52.720 --> 04:28:09.680
don't want to do that. I don't want to put this town in a situation where it affects the budget or requires a bond or requires increased taxes. That's the last thing we want. We want the settlement. And we walked away

774
04:28:09.680 --> 04:28:25.920
from that claim to make the settlement. The only thing that we negotiated, and I want to make it very clear, we negotiated a payment by the insurance carrier, not a dime out of your pocket, to reimburse my client for six years of

775
04:28:25.920 --> 04:28:42.479
litigation following the improper denial many years ago. That's the only thing we negotiated. And that will not be paid until the project is started. So, we're not getting money outright. That money is going to be held in escrow for many

776
04:28:42.479 --> 04:28:58.800
years until potentially for many years until the project starts. So we're here today to urge the board to accept the settlement that has been worked on so diligently by Mr. Sammon, by prior

777
04:28:58.800 --> 04:29:16.239
counsel, by your engineers in conjunction with our professionals who worked arm in-armm to make this work and avoid a trial. The last thing we want is a trial, but that's the only other pathway if the settlement is rejected.

778
04:29:16.239 --> 04:29:33.279
We also urge the board to understand that by providing this service to the community, it will enhance Edison. It will allow people to move here with elderly or disabled parents,

779
04:29:33.279 --> 04:29:50.560
friends, family members, and be close to them so that they can live in a facility that is run by an extremely wellrespected company that has these facilities throughout the East Coast and give access to

780
04:29:50.560 --> 04:30:11.120
wonderful care for disabled and elderly people. Thank you very much. and I'm willing to answer any questions Mr. Chairman of the board may have of me. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Nagel. Does the board have any questions for Mr. Nagel? >> Thank you very much, Mr. Nagel. >> And if I could just add really quickly,

781
04:30:11.120 --> 04:30:41.760
Mr. Nagel's comments. >> Not a witness. Is >> He's not a witness. >> Can you speak into Can you speak into the microphone? really need better mics. >> Microphone check 1212.

782
04:30:41.760 --> 04:30:57.920
>> Is council for the burrow here to to explain the burrow's side of this case? No, I >> It's a township. >> The township. I'm sorry. I understand council for I I understand council for uh I assume it was a an ADA action that was brought or something along those

783
04:30:57.920 --> 04:31:14.800
lines, >> but uh is council for the burrow here to explain what the township's sorry the township's position was with regard to this lawsuit and was it a summary judgement motion ruling or >> was it it was

784
04:31:14.800 --> 04:31:30.399
>> okay I respect I have a questions. >> When a judge bangs a gavl in a courtroom, do you stop talking or do you continue talking? >> I have. >> Then show me then show me the same respect because council asked a question and I'd like to get an his question answered.

785
04:31:30.399 --> 04:31:48.880
>> I shall. >> Mr. Keter, um, if you could just put your appearance on the record as representing uh, the township's insurance company. Yes, this is uh Scott Keter on behalf of the township of Edison uh from Meth and Wble. I'm happy to answer any questions

786
04:31:48.880 --> 04:32:04.319
you have. >> Mr. Ley, you're you're going to Mr. Le, you're Mr. Le, hang on. You're going to need you're going to need a microphone. You got to you got to borrow that back from the microphone. >> What was the nature of the uh claims brought by the uh applicants uh back in

787
04:32:04.319 --> 04:32:19.840
whenever it was 2020? >> As as Mr. Negle explained it was a uh civil rights action based on uh desperate impact uh due to there not being an ordinance that would allow for such facilities in this

788
04:32:19.840 --> 04:32:35.520
>> in a residential zone >> in a residential zone and there was no other zone in which uh such a facility could be could be constructed. >> Well well no the ordinance is what it is.

789
04:32:35.520 --> 04:32:52.239
>> Yeah. Okay. >> Uh, I I do have a question or two of the witness who just testified. >> He didn't testify. A statement by an attorney. Wait a sec. Could I finish, please? >> He's not a w he's not a witness. He's attorney.

790
04:32:52.239 --> 04:33:08.160
>> He's not going to answer my question. So, just let the record be that he presented a series of issues to the board. I'm not being allowed to question him. And what and what I want to ask council is if in fact this board were to

791
04:33:08.160 --> 04:33:24.879
approve this application, which of course it has the jurisdiction to do. Is it your position that my client would be denied the application to appeal this to the Superior Court of New Jersey? >> I don't think we can take I'm sorry. So

792
04:33:24.879 --> 04:33:41.680
that's a that's a legal question as to whether your client has the right to challen challenge it. I don't think we're in a position to give an opinion on that. That's a that's a a decision for a judge to make, not not for us. >> So, you're basically saying, why why are we here then? My kind my cl I mean, isn't this sort of just like a show? Why

793
04:33:41.680 --> 04:33:57.279
are we having a hearing? Why am I being paid to represent them when you're saying to me they have no say in this matter? Couldn't participate in settlement negotiations and now they really have uh no right to participate in decision. What's going to happen if I

794
04:33:57.279 --> 04:34:13.439
file a prerogative suit? Uh, you're telling me that a superior court of the state of New Jersey would have no jurisdiction to hear the case? >> At no point did I say that. And in fact, I specifically said I cannot say that. >> I'm sorry. >> At no point did I say that. In fact, I specifically said that we cannot tell you that the answer to that because that

795
04:34:13.439 --> 04:34:29.520
is a decision for a judge to make, not for us. So, I can't give you my legal opinion. You're not my client. My clients are up here. So, if you're asking me my legal advice, I would tell you to find a lawyer. Well, my qu my question of view would be that as council based upon what you're saying

796
04:34:29.520 --> 04:34:47.359
that this board is duty bound for some reason to approve this application. >> No, in the settlement agreement itself as as in every whispering woods the board the board is obligated to consider it. The board is not obligated to approve it. They can approve or disapprove. It's in their discretion to

797
04:34:47.359 --> 04:35:08.320
do to do that. So, um were there more questions for Mr. Heder? Miss Cutter, you're you're good. Thank you very Do you have anything else to add? >> I do not know. >> Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Flannry.

798
04:35:08.320 --> 04:35:24.959
>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ju just really quickly just uh two three points. One, I just want to say again that um notice was proper. It was provided pursuant to the MLUL. There was no conspiracy on the part of the applicant um to arrange this uh over the July 4th holiday. This was

799
04:35:24.959 --> 04:35:41.520
um a special hearing that was arranged um at a time when the board could meet um and around uh certain court deadlines. Um second, I want to for the record incorporate um uh all of the uh exhibits in the hearing transcripts as

800
04:35:41.520 --> 04:35:57.359
well as the resolution under the original application. Um that would be exhibits A1 through A45 for the applicant, exhibits 01 through 03 for the uh objectors and um exhibits R1 and R2 for the residents as well as the

801
04:35:57.359 --> 04:36:13.439
seven hearing transcripts December 18th 2018, February 26, 2019, June 18th, 2019, September 17th, 2019, October 29th, 2019, and December 17th, 2019, as well as of course the board's resolution

802
04:36:13.439 --> 04:36:30.240
uh adopted on May 12th, 2020. Uh and then finally, just want to reiterate that um this uh is an amendment to the original application which had been filed back in 2017 2018. The applicants relying on the testimony that was provided as part of that original application as well as the testimony

803
04:36:30.240 --> 04:36:45.680
here tonight. And and tonight's testimony is uh consists of amendments um to the materials that were presented under the original application. Um and they essentially rectify um uh issues that the board had in denying the application originally. Uh specifically

804
04:36:45.680 --> 04:37:03.119
respect to uh building height on the eastern portion of the property as well as locations of the uh uh garage, sorry, the the trash and recycling and the generator. Um and the memory care use is is a is a type of assisted living facility per the lensure. Um and it's

805
04:37:03.119 --> 04:37:19.520
not a totally separate use. Um it's just not a general assisted living uh facility use. It's a specific type of assisted living facility use uh but essentially the same use. Um and uh finally with respect to special uh planning testimony in particular uh we

806
04:37:19.520 --> 04:37:35.920
rely on the planning testimony of of the applicant's planner. Um with the original application uh the proofs were given for the same types of variances. Um what we're uh providing now is something that's less intense. Um and so we uh would rely on that plan testimony.

807
04:37:35.920 --> 04:37:52.000
And then finally, I just want to make it clear that most Whispering Woods hearings, such as what the board is hearing tonight, are based on prior denials of of a a planning or zoning board application. There's nothing novel about the board hearing. Uh the application tonight was based on a prior

808
04:37:52.000 --> 04:38:13.760
denial. Thank you. I ask that the the board um grant this application. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Ch. Do you have anything to add before? I do not. Okay. All right. So, we'll go to the board for any uh motion or discussion. Mr. Chairman, Vice Chairman, I >> I have a question. So, we have to make a

809
04:38:13.760 --> 04:38:30.160
decision this evening, right? Either approve this or deny this. And if if we deny it, what happens? That's really going to our attorney. >> If the board denies us, the litigation continues and will eventually, as uh was indicated before, will go towards go to

810
04:38:30.160 --> 04:38:46.719
a trial. I believe um vice chairman also had a question that this had to be decided this evening. >> Yeah. Under so under under the ter terms of the proposed uh settlement agreements to be decided this evening that those are those are terms that have been negotiated between the parties.

811
04:38:46.719 --> 04:39:04.000
It's not been signed yet. So they're not it's not necessarily binding on on you. But that is the that was the intention here was to have this resolved this evening. >> Okay. So if we deny it then we we go to trial. Would there be another meeting on this?

812
04:39:04.000 --> 04:39:21.160
>> There would only be another meeting uh before this board if the if the count the attorneys are able to work out a I'll say a new arrangement, a new deal. Uh otherwise, no, it would not come back before to the board. >> Thank you.

813
04:39:21.199 --> 04:39:37.440
I'm going to make a motion to deny this application and that's based on the positive and negative criteria not being met. There were some concerns brought up about the uh the planning and and and the professional backed it up. So, um and also there were some concerns from

814
04:39:37.440 --> 04:39:52.798
the the residents in reference to the some noise and some uh traffic and trees. >> Second, I would also add a few items. Mr. Chair, >> please. >> The variance standards are not satisfied. The proposed application

815
04:39:52.798 --> 04:40:09.600
undermines the township's residential zoning is not consistent with the master plan and conflicts with the O's and lighting standards for RA residential zone. There's not as mentioned there's not sufficient testimony from the planner. Um like to mention that the drawings that were shown to the board

816
04:40:09.600 --> 04:40:26.160
are not signed or sealed. um does not match the characteristics of the neighborhood and um the variance sought for this non-conforming lot has a negative direct negative impact to the quality of life for the residents.

817
04:40:26.160 --> 04:40:42.718
>> Motion made by Vice Chairman Ogorman, seconded by Mr. Chabra. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Schneider, >> yes to the motion. >> Mr. Chabra, >> yes to the motion. >> Mr. Ser, >> yes on the motion. >> Mr. Johnny, >> yes on the motion.

818
04:40:42.718 --> 04:40:58.560
>> Mr. Patel, >> yes on the motion. >> Vice Chair Gorman, >> yes to the motion. >> And Chairman Gumba, >> yes on the motion. This whispering wood agreement is denied. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> We're still in We're still in session. Uh Madam Secretary, any additional business come before the board.

819
04:40:58.560 --> 04:41:13.080
>> That'll be all for this evening. >> Can I get a motion to adjurnn? >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Motion made by Mr. Patel, second by Mr. Johnny. All in favor signify by saying I. >> Oppos? Nay. The eyes have it. We're stands adjourned.