Good evening. This is the Tuesday, December 16, 2025 regular meeting of the Flemington Burough Planeport zone with board of adjustments. Uh this meeting is being held pursuant to the provisions of the Alpha Public Meetings Act. adequate notice of this meeting has been posted on the Burough
website outside Bur Hall here at 38 Park Avenue and in the newspaper of record for your news on or about January 16th or something and subsequently posted after that and >> at the reorganization meeting >> at the reorganization meeting.
>> Okay. Uh uh this is uh >> and all handicapped entrance >> and all handicapped are there too and then a notice provided to anyone requesting notice of same. Um the uh this is a judicial proceeding tom appropriate for for judicial proceedings
should be maintained at all times. This meeting uh this inerson and virtual meeting is being recorded for both video and audio and may be rebroadcast. Did I miss anything? I'm doing this by memory folk. Sorry. >> Oh, absolutely. That's good. Um, please
rise as your table for the flag of pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God indivisible and all
the role mayor. >> She's here. Can you guys hear me? >> I'm here. Thank you. >> Champion is absent. Miss Gen is Weissman
>> here. >> Miss Wimble >> here. >> Mr. Schlanger is absent. Mr. Dasha >> here. >> Mr. >> Mr. And then the fourth
attorney Kazinski >> here, >> engineer clerico >> here, >> McManus >> here, and engineer >> here. >> Thank you. Good evening everyone. Um I am vice chair sitting in sitting in for uh Karen Gibbons. Unfortunat emergency
tonight. Uh first item on our agenda as always is a time for public comments for items not currently in front of the board and on the agenda. Are there any members of the public wish to speak? >> Seeing nobody in the room and nobody online, we'll move to item two. Uh, mayor comments.
>> Other than wishing everybody a happy holiday and I don't have any >> record. >> Did you hit transcribe? >> I forgot to hit transcribe. Sorry. >> Now, thank you. No, no, it's good. >> You got >> Okay, that's it. I'm done. Happy holiday.
>> Wait. I told you. >> Oh, I said yes. I have other than wishing everybody happy holiday. I have no unfortunately. >> Thank you, mayor. Uh, Councilwoman Fisaro, >> I have no re no report. However, I would like to express to the planning board how much I've enjoyed sitting on this
and working with you all for the past two years. It's been an absolute pleasure and you might still see me around at planning board meetings on occasion. So, thank you. >> Thank you. Uh, HPC comments, Dennis, >> comments tonight. We have our meeting
tomorrow. Excellent. Professional reports attorney. Nope. Engineer. >> Uh just before the board that we have been contacted by the U and we're going to have a preapp meeting with the U Flemington Rescue Squad uh on S. I'm not
sure what they're doing, but they want to get together something they're doing over there. And I received a call yesterday from an engineer from Western Pennsylvania is working. I believe he said with the YMCA regarding the old swimming the old common swimming pool site. Um, and I think they want to file
and do some sort of informal get. >> Yeah, they're scheduling a previewing to just see what kind of rest they need. >> Excellent. Thanks, Bob. Um, Beth, anything? >> No, not >> Thank you all. Um, item six on our
published agenda is approval of minutes from our October 28th regular meeting, October 20th executive session. Did we approve this last >> We didn't. It's my fault. She had sent them to me. I did review them, but I never responded back if they were okay. So, you don't have them in front of you. So, we'll adopt.
>> So, as well as no last as well, November 25th, and we'll adopt we will put those to our next meeting. >> Yep. >> Okay. Thank you. Item seven on our agenda for this evening is Spark Pearl Wash LLC application 2025-2 block 49,
lot six. Uh, I'm going to ask if we could open up that laptop. I certainly can. >> Uh, so that I don't know if that one's logged in when not. >> And while it's doing >> Okay, we're going to get that on so that our remote folks can if you need to
share anything remote folks can see it, but they can also see you from the side camera so we can get started while that's going on. Okay. >> Um, this is uh for first for completeness um where we're at. So Eric, I have >> Yeah. No, that's all I was going to say.
I just wanted to make a note for the record that we do have to do completeness first and then we can filter. >> Well, good evening everyone. Happy holidays. My name is John Wascala on behalf of Spark Car Wash LLC. Pleasure to be here this evening. Uh this is an
application pertaining to the property at 294 Route 202. It's identified as block 49, lots five and six. Clearly the application pertains to lot six but a portion of lot five is in Cleveland as
well. When I was last here I know it was a lot warmer uh than it is uh this evening. uh we come in on completeness uh and the board may recall uh at that time we actually had a a partial survey of the property
uh which really focused in on lot five and that or lot six in that portion of lot five and ultimately was determined um based on Mr. clear up those recommendation and and the board agreed and we did as well uh that we should do a full survey of the property because
while we're focusing on lot six which is TGI Fridays and and later the uh the Red Crab restaurant um you've got a number of other properties or another a number of other leaseold interests that are included the mattress factory the uh
power sports etc. Uh we've made a number of submittals since uh including two out to surveys. I believe we've addressed all of the completeness items uh that would allow us uh to proceed to hearing tonight. Uh and maybe I'll just leave it
at that for the moment. Then we can talk about it as I try to figure out how to turn this computer on. If you unplug it, hand it over here. I could walk it over. I >> don't know why I'm not seeing the on button. >> Oh, feel like it. I I can I can work I can I can do the
geek squad for >> All right. So, uh Oh, I turned it up. >> It wasn't that hard. >> Um so, uh Mr. Clerico, if we could I think it might be useful if you could walk through where we stand in terms of the
completeness items. Looking at your letter from December 15th. Does that need to get marked? Uh >> we're not going to mark it now. I'll mark it once we start the public hearing as one of our uh many planning court exhibits. All right. So, um, what I attempted to
do, uh, in this review is kind of go back through the history of the project. Um, as the applicants indicated, the they've been here for quite a while. Their last of them was sort of 5th of July. Uh, when you when they were here for completeness, um, there was a number
of incomplete items. There were a number of those items were identified for potential waiverss. Uh, at that particular meeting, the board just deemed the application to be incomplete. you didn't act on any of the requested waiverss. Uh they came in with a subsequent submission. I believe it was in September, maybe it was really
September. Uh we did a uh an updated report at that point in time in which um we addressed the new items that came in, made some recommendations again for some items that would require waiverss. We also raised a number of issues relating
to just alluded to earlier. uh the subdivision of the property. Additional information that came in is related to lot five. Um and as as a result of that um the applicant um uh was scheduled that for for public hearing on October
7th and for I guess reasons related to security issue with the title of the property, they would uh would not do that application. They postponed that application to the 28th of October and they subsequently post postponed that uh that hearing that night to uh uh to to a
later to a December meeting. They made a resubmission of a second what was the fourth revision of their plan in November. Uh and that's the document that's before you tonight. So the first four pages of my report kind of goes through the history of the documentation
you originally received. on the subsequent documentation the additional third generation report documentation that you receive and can starting at the bottom of page um four going to an assessment of where you are right now
which is basically what you you're doing right now to complete I've outlined on there checklist items that have been been addressed under sub paragraph A uh checklist items um 10 C 10D and 18 of which I was recommending a temporary waiver as they related to showing
documentation 200 feet beyond the area of disturbance and a permit or waiver relating to documentation extending 200 ft beyond the property in question. Uh sub paragraph uh C which dealt with checklist item 32B. Um that dealt with
outdoor storage uh information outdoor storage on the property. Uh there is now been documentation of outdoor storage that is actually permitted through the zoning official. Uh and you'll hear probably testimony about that tonight. That is al there also was uh out storage
of outdoor material that was not permitted and the owner has either has or is in the process of removing that uh from the property and that's no longer item on the table before the board. And then under sub item D uh some checklist
items relating to uh soil groundwater uh elevations and ultimately an asbuilt survey. The applicant is applying for both preliminary and final. One of the checklist items on final is that they submit an as survey before they receive this occupancy.
So we recommending temporary waiverss on that. I also went through some items that were previously listed as being incomplete and updated the board as to the fact that they're now complete. That's in sub paragraph E. Having said all that, your action tonight, unless
you have any questions on any of this, your action tonight would be to grant temporary waiverss uh as they relate to information extending 200 foot beyond the area disturbance and permanent waivers as it relate to uh showing information extending 200 ft beyond the property for checklist items 10 C, 10 D,
and 18. uh and granting a temporary waiver for checklist items P as in Peter 23 and 24. >> Okay. So, I'm gonna see does any do any board members have questions for Bob on any of this? I'll start remote. Anybody
online have questions for Bob? No. Anyone here have questions? >> No. >> Okay. >> Thanks. Okay. So uh uh is there a motion to deem this application complete uh
with temporary waiverss for 10 to 18 uh and permanent waiverss beyond 200 ft and a temporary waiver between 20 f4. >> So any further discussion?
>> Okay. Yes. Yes. >> Councilwoman Basora. >> Yes. >> Miss Whitman. >> Yes. >> Miss Wingle. >> Yes. >> Mr. Sh. >> Yes.
>> And Mr. Josh. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Been a good evening. >> So again, good evening everyone. I think we know we're we're heads of the public hearing. Appreciate that. Again, my name is John Wiscala. I'm here tonight on
behalf of Spark Car Wash. Uh my client does have a leaseold interest in this property. Again, it's 294 Route 202. It's identified as block 49, lots five and six. Uh again, the majority of this property, it's really focused on lot
six, but we've got additional lands on lot five. Uh it's a property that is located in the Burough's Highway commercial zone district. We are here before you this evening receiving the preliminary and final site plan approval uh with variance relief to permit the
development of a spark car wash facility on the property which is an express car wash. Uh as you're going to hear and you know see him here shortly. It is a modern uh high techch environmentally friendly car wash. Uh car washes are
permitted in the zoning district. Uh this is a proposal that does include an overall decrease in impervious coverage what exists out there today with the restaurant use. Uh we're actually decreasing coverage both on on lot six
which is the restaurant as well as lot five. Um, and we're putting a property that's been sitting vacant for quite some time back into utility of this board uh is inclined to grant approval and we think it is a use that is compatible uh with some of the other nu
numerous other commercial land uses that surround us. Um, as indicated this this application we've been kicking it around for a little bit uh on uh over time. Uh we've made a number of revisions and a lot of it was really just dealing with
lot five as Mr. Clerico indicated uh part of our revised submitts it was brought to our attention uh that there was outdoor storage actually considerable outdoor storage uh that was associated and or is associated
uh with the uh with the power sports uh uh business. Uh, I know our landlords uh moved on that uh had those uh had that tenant uh remove all that outdoor storage uh which was sort of just parked in the back parking lot area between us
and and the shops at Flemington. Um and the result of that is construction official uh issued a memo that did acknowledge they are allowed to have outdoor storage within a particular fenced in area as well as one trailer. So part of those plan revisions were to
to address that. There was another question uh for whatever reason when it was originally Commerce Bank I believe it became TV bank uh there was a subdivision that was done more than a decade ago. Uh we went through a fair
amount of title work though again had nothing to do necessarily with this application. Uh but we wanted to clean that up. uh and we came up with the uh with the documentation and the deeds and so forth. May very well be that your tax assessor needs to uh correct the the tax
map on it. Uh but I think we've addressed that uh over time. Um so with that uh I have five witnesses I intend to call this evening. Uh back will be first is this park car wash. I'm going to have him run through uh the
business, the nature of the operations and so forth. Uh after that, we'll turn it over to our civil engineer, Doug Wolf with Bowler. He'll go through the plans. Uh what's existing out there today, what we're proposing. Uh we have our traffic engineer, Matt Seckler.
We'll will speak to the traffic impacts associated with this project. Uh we have received a DOT letter of no interest uh with respect to this project. He'll speak to that. Uh we have Oliver Young, our project architect, even though I have not seen him. Perhaps he walked in
while I've been sitting up here. We've got our pliner John Mcdana who'll come in and speak to the uh to the varances I believe itself. Unless anybody has any questions. >> Before we go there, thank you for the introduction. Cara, do we have proof of notice? >> Yes, we do.
>> Do we have jurisdiction to proceed? >> We have jurisdiction to proceed. And I'll mark a couple uh preliminary uh exhibits. We'll mark as A1. the application and all supporting documentation submitted by the applicant in connection with it. Uh A2 will be the proofs of notice and hearing. And then
we have a number of planning board uh exhibits. Uh we'll have as PB1 uh Mr. Clerk's letter of March 23, 2025. PB2 will be the environmental commission's letter of April 8, 2025.
PB3, another comment letter from the Environmental Commission dated July 7, 2025. PB4, another letter from Clerico dated July 14, 2025. PB5, Clerico's letter of October 3rd,
again, 2025. PB6 is our Flemington Burough Fire Safety uh fire marshall's letter of December 4. PB7 is Miss McManis, the planner's letter of December 14th.
PB8 is Mr. Clergo's letter of December 15th. And last but not least, PB9 is Mr. Chapman's letter of December 15th. So, we are now ready to proceed. We could swear in >> before we conflict. >> Oh, yes. If there is anyone on this
board uh that has any conflicts either direct or indirect or feels that for any other reason either uh financial or otherwise they would be unable to render an unbiased determined vision with regard to the application. >> Thank you.
>> Terrific. One more note. I did hand out packets to everybody. Uh we'll we'll be marking them in. I don't think we need to market it, but I just wanted everybody to have the exhibits because sometimes it's easier just to take them as they go. >> Terrific. Thank you very much.
>> Um, should we swear in everybody? >> I don't see John. >> McDonald is not here yet. Send him a text shortly, but >> he's the testimony you're about to give this course. The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
>> All right. Terrific. Now get up. Yes. >> So So let me ask if there's going to be many presentations of materials. Um let me ask are these all things that were part of the initial >> we're going to mark them. We'll mark them as we go. Anything that isn't we'll I'll indicate.
>> So So we have remote both folks who participate remotely. So if you have these digitally on a thumb drive, we can put them on the laptop and share it through Zoom. If you don't just make sure your boards are visible to members of the public as well as the camera >> where there's one up there and then
there's we can get the one on the laptop working also. >> I have mine on a thumb drive. >> Okay, it's perfect. It's perfectly fine to just as long we need to make sure that the remote participants have have people uh view of all the stuff. Okay.
And just so I understand, it's your intention to mark even uh items that were submitted with the application just as you go along or just the new ones. We don't typically mark the new ones. We were only mark the new ones. >> That's perfect. No, that's good. I just
That's usually how we would do it, >> which is all we're going to probably just want to make sure that everyone knows exist. All right. Thank you. visible. Well, no, because the laptop's not logged into Zoom. So,
>> okay. >> So, if can you hand me the laptop and I will get it logged in. >> I should have done that to you. I was gonna hand it to you earlier. >> That's okay. I've got it. >> I turned it on. >> I will get it. >> What? >> Not a problem. We can we can we can
start going on there. >> All right. Terrific. Um, Mr. Canal, can you please identify yourself and what your role is in project? >> Yeah, spell spell it for the rest of >> Matthew Canali. CN A L E. >> Thank you.
>> I am the director of real estate at Spark Carash. Um, been working with the company for about three and a half years. Um, I will start give you an overview of the business. Uh, I'll go walk you through the operations it'll say. Um, and then happy to answer any
questions that you guys have. So, um, Spark, um, currently, first of all, New Jersey based company. Our our home home base is Summit, New Jersey. Um, we are a privately owned and operated company. Um, we currently have 10 locations that
are open and operating and we are in growth mode. Um, opening, um, another three in the next few months and, um, quite a bit more next year. Um, earlier stage development pipeline as well. Um, >> all in New Jersey, >> excuse me, >> all in New Jersey. No, it'll be uh
Eastern Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and like Ocean Valley and not >> the 10 that you currently have, are they in New Jersey? >> Uh seven of them are in New Jersey. >> Um so other states as well, but the
primary focus is New Jersey. Um so the uh the company itself is a modern express car wash. Uh we utilize state-of-the-art equipment and car washing technology. Uh we have a very highly trained and professional staff.
Um and we invest quite a bit of money into the overall aesthetics and design of the the building and surrounding site. Um the as as evidenced by some of the exhibits uh behind us here, um the business model is membership based
model. We offer memberships to uh each location that we have and um it's also open to the public. So um but the the membership ultimately is um you know why we paid such close attention to operations aesthetic and so forth driving that membership business is a
key focus of our success. Um the uh the operation is environmentally friendly. We recycle up to 80%. We we recycle up to 80% of the water we use and the cleaning agents um are uh
environmentally friendly friendly and biodegradable. Kitchen grade is the term that we we use to um describe them. Um and you know the recycling of the water is both good for the environment, the load on the public systems and also just
the general efficiency of the business operations itself. Um the uh the operations of the site I walk through as well. >> So we should probably we're going to make reference to these exhibits. We ought to mark both of them and uh probably pick up whichever one you're
going to refer to first. Second, I don't know if you're going to refer to the existing one. >> I refer most of this one. All right, Mark. This is exhibit A3 with today's date. >> And that can for the record. >> Uh A3 with today's date is a plan
prepared by GP and Annie architects. Uh it is uh titled proposed site image and it has a drawing number of R3.1 and it has a date of 12525
R3.1 you said it 404 it does a great >> Can I Can I ask that you position that a little bit this way and a little bit this way so that that laptop can see it? >> Oh yeah. Yes. See if
>> um >> little bit. >> Fantastic. >> Okay. So, um operationally, uh we have three to four employees that are on site in any given time. each of these employees with a very specific duty and
responsibility on site. Um I'll walk through each of them done which which each of them do um in relation to this site. So you'll enter the site um from this direction. You'll circle around the back and you'll enter the the Q- line here. The Q- line is to um sort of
vehicle to go to the pay kiosk. The pay kiosk is where you you found your first um employee. that employee is there to engage with the customer. Um, make sure they're facilitating a smooth uh, transaction at the pay kiosk and to engage with the customer to make sure they understand, you know, uh, how to
use the facilities and so forth. Um, as they pass through the kiosk, um, and I'll I'll back up for a second. There are two pay kiosk. One is membership um, membership customers only. Um, this kiosk is outfitted with a license plate reading technology that allows you to
pass through seamlessly. um similar to an easy pass um and the other is um a paper wash kioat to the public and that's sort of customer service associated is to help facilitate the actual transaction. You pass through the pen kiosk you will start going around um
the bend here into the site into the tunnel entrance. At the tunnel entrance you'll encounter your second customer service associate. This individual will be there to help load the vehicle onto the conveyor. The car will get onto the conveyor. The customer will put the car
in neutral and at that point in time, the conveyor will take control of the car and the conveyor will pull the vehicle through the tunnel. Um, at the end of the tunnel, we have state-of-the-art blowing um, uh, air blowers and drying equipment um, designed to all but completely dry the
car. Um, there's no manual labor at the tunnel exit. Um, it's it's a fully automated system. Um at the um at the end of the tunnel the customer will regain control of the vehicle and then at this site they will have the optionality to at that point in time to
enter enter the vacuum park if they choose to enter the vacuum park. Each of these uh parking stalled routed with um redundant vacuum uh cleaner equipment on each side. um giving the customer uh you know the optionality to clean um you
know one side of the vehicle without having to drag it across the the hood of the car which could be inconvenient. Um in the vacuum park at all times is another customer service associate um this individual is there very specifically to make sure customers understand how to use the equipment.
They're um uh making sure the the area is clean, making sure any trash that customers are disposing of is um not just blowing around the parking lot, it's being put into the trash recepticle. Um and also engaging with the customer. It's a a common theme across um all of our employees. They're,
you know, trained not only to just do a job, but to engage and, you know, uh be personal and um you know, ultimately engaging with with our uh membership base. Uh, a design feature that I like to point out is that our parking stalls are a lot wider than uh a normal parking
stall. This again is I think these ones are 13 feet. Um, again, that's so people can open up their vehicle doors and you're not knocking into the person next to you. You can take your time without feeling rushed because you got somebody actually waiting to use um the vacuums on that side. It's a it's a design
feature that's you know uh you know put in place to make sure we're giving the customers a good experience really. Um the uh reclaimed tanks that I referred to earlier where we have um you know the ability to recycle the water are located
um under the parking lot um on the the uh side of the parking lot where this building is here. So there's three 2,000galon tanks that are designed to recycle, clean, and put us give us the option to or not the option but give us the ability to reuse the water. Um, and I'll walk you through the hours of
operation are 8 am to 8:00 pm. Employees arrive on site um about an hour before we open. So 7 a.m. get there to prepare for the day. Um, and then 8:00 p.m. um is when we close and then they'll they'll be on site about another hour afterwards um to make sure the
facilities clean and the operations are shut down and the they're ready for the next day. Um essentially the uh we do get deliveries deliveries twice a month. Um no large truck. It's a sprinter van. It comes to give us new cleaning um
cleaning uh soaps and there's no disposal of any containers. They'll give us the new drums. Then they'll take the empty ones with them, bring them back to the facility to uh recycle themselves. So we don't we don't really generate any trash. The business itself doesn't really generate any trash. The trash
that we have is all from the customers that we we uh we serve. And trash pickup um once a week generally. Uh and we we also do that uh between generally between the hours of 7 and 8 a.m. Um it could be kind of
scheduled accordingly. Um but that >> private wings call. >> Yeah, private wallet. Um I think that summarizes you know the business itself, the operations and I'm certain certainly happy to answer um any questions at all.
>> So the way we usually do it is we have questions of our professionals, questions of board members and questions of from the public for each of our witnesses. We go one by ones just makes it a little bit easier. So uh start with Bob. >> Sure. Um, so the prototype building
you're putting on here is pretty much consistent all your other locations. This is like a model. You basically you have no variations on this model. >> This this is our ideal model. Correct. We do we do have other locations that we weren't as fortunate to be able to build ground up. There are retrofit of a different pre-existing car wash. Um, but
this is the ideal prototype model. So yes. >> So if you're building from scratch, this is the building you build. There's no alterations on this building. There's minor alterations like you know uh that could be uh sight specific. We need to go a little bit shorter a tunnel. Sometimes we do gen our ideal is 135
length. I believe this one is 135 length. So um this would be the ideal. We got a complete blank canvas. That's what we're building. >> But if you didn't have a blank canvas, you have some other you have some options uh to to make some modifications in the size of the structure.
>> Just the length. The width is modifiable. Correct. Uh and I maybe perhaps you're not the witness. I I raised a number of questions in my report about uh easements that affect the property and impact on easements. >> Which one are we talking about? The last
report from >> my last report my last report is all encompassing. >> Okay. We're referencing PB8. Just for the record, >> are you the are you the witness? >> We will not be the witness on the easements. So we'll we'll hear the question anyway and I'm happy to speak
to it as well because I know I submitted the legal documentation in that regard. >> Okay. Well, I think as far the operations concerned, I think uh I don't think I have any questions at this point.
>> Okay. The uh the sprinter van deliveries you said were twice per month, right? >> Correct. >> Where does that operation take place? it. So, it'll be before the hours of operations and they'll they will come in here and they'll pull right up to the building in one of the vacuum stalls.
They'll load out the drums we're getting and take back in um the ones we're we're giving back. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, I just your layout plan as you approach the I guess you called it the tunnel. Uh you have an escape lane at that point. What's the purpose of that?
So, the escape lane is um is a seldom used um uh exit way in the event we have a vehicle that breaks down or um has modifications that don't allow to safely go through the tunnel without damaging
the vehicle or equipment. Um it's it's seldom used. Um it's not it's it's by no means an active driveway. Beth, >> the only question that might be for you is I want to talk about the vacuums and uh the timing, the lighting, and the
hours. >> Sure. >> Uh or uh the noise rather. Is that a good question for you? >> Yeah, sure. I could speak I could speak to uh depends how much detail you want, but I could speak to what I know. Certainly. >> Yeah. So, I'm interested to understand the I know there's lights on it. I just wanted to talk about the hours for the
lighting. I also want to talk about the the noise generated by them. >> Right. >> So, if you can share some detail. Sure. Absolutely. Um, so in regards to the noise generated by them, um, we do I could talk to the generality uh, behind how they operate and I do think that our
architect has an actual noise study he could speak to more specifically, but I'll give you the the overview. So each individual um, arm does not have a motor. It's there's a central motor system for the entire row. And that's
the same case for both sides. Um this is important because you don't have your um you don't have redundant machines working at the same time. So it helps it helps um limit the uh noise that we're making really. Um
so that's that's the the noise making um element of the vacuums is largely this central vacuum um the central vacuum system that you'll see here and the other one I believe is on the other on that side as well. Um, so that's the noise. And I said, like I said, Mark has
a study that can speak to much more much more detail. Um, the lights themselves, those are downwardfacing strips. Um, they're intended to give a focused illumination to customers that may be vacuuming this time of year. Um, you
know, when it's, you know, 6 pm and and dark. um they have the ability to see what they're doing and um you know utilize the the facility you know in a meaningful manner. Um they we do generally keep them on overnight and the reason for that is just it's simply
safety. Uh it's a it's a way for us to just keep the parking lot somewhat eliminated um without having much um outspilling light. Again, not to get technical with the light at the engineer. I think we'll speak more detail on the light. Um, but it's not intended to, you know, um, bounce
outwards. It's more supposed to be just for safety after hours and to be more specific for the the individual using the facility, like I said, like this time of year at this time. >> Are they dimmed? Are they dimmed in the evening? >> Um, >> or during
I believe there is a dimming option. I'm going to defer to my architect on exactly what that >> probably Yeah. All right. I think that's all for now. >> Sure. >> Did you have questions for this? >> Uh, just a couple. Um, the said the hours of operation are 8 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Is that Monday through Sunday?
>> Uh, yes. Sunday week. >> Um, you said you have three underground 2,000galon tanks under the parking lot. How many gallons of water are you used on average? Do you know? So, so I can tell you per car because it's very it fluctuates uh from you know it depends
on the cars we're washing. So it's uh it's a little under 20 gallons per car while use comparatively you know if you watch your car in your driveway it's like over 100 right so it's actually an efficiency in that set and >> I guess your traffic engineer look for the number of vehicles that'll come to
the facility each >> yeah they have I think they have certain standard numbers they use again each facilities it it's definitely variable um but I think there are certain standards that are accepted by uh traffic uh the uh um traffic engineers.
>> Okay. And then you said that you recycle up to 80% of water. I'm not quite sure what that means. Do you have an average like on a daily basis? Is it usually 20? Is it usually 80? >> It it fluctuates with um the equipment and how we're running it at that time.
Okay. >> The um it's generally less than 80. 80 would be the max. um it is it is generally less and um I can give you a range of uh it's we'll call it between you know 40 and 60%.
on average. >> Yeah, exactly. >> Okay. >> The applicant in this case, you're you're uh purchasing this lot >> and you're you're you're also leasing elements of the adjoining property,
>> correct? >> And those limits are what's shown on the your plans that are before the board. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Same control. I think they may be two separate entities, but the the owner is the same. Um, thoughts and seats.
>> Any other questions from our professionals? >> Okay. Um, board members, let's start remotely. Questions for this witness, Dennis? >> Yeah. Um, you you mentioned that on average 40 to 60 60% uh recycled. What is the industry
standard for new car wash? >> I think I think it's, you know, um it's it I don't know if there's been a standard that's been established. You know, I think when we talk about recycling, a lot of what we talk about is, you know, been established by the
equipment manufacturers and the the um the general um you know, commentary around that is that, you know, it's up to 80% depending on how exactly and in what equipment you're using um during
each individual wash. So is 40 to 60% average for car wash or you know is that really an average for the industry or um just trying to understand what that means because at first I thought it was
80% but now it sounds like it runs 40 to 60%. >> Yeah. So I'm speaking um when I'm when I'm giving that range I'm speaking to what we know about our operations. Um it's it's tough to speak you know with standards amongst other operations. You
know each every every car is created a little bit differently. There are different providers of equipment um different ways of operation. So it's hard to address that that specific question directly. >> So and just so I'm clear if it's 40 to
60% on average that means 40 to 60% of the water is going into the sewer. The other piece. So I don't want to I would I would prefer to defer specifics on you know how much is being discharged um to
um our engineers if they they may have that data with them specifically. Um I don't want to misspeak because there there's there's loss factors in there that gets a little bit technical um with water that either evaporates or dissipates into the pavement so forth. >> Okay, I'll wait. Thank you. That's it
for me. >> Thanks Dennis. Uh, any other remote participants with questions? >> I I have no questions, Jeff. I'll wait for their engineer. >> Thanks. >> Dennis beat me to it about the water, so I'm good.
>> Thanks, Melissa. >> I think we're all concerned about the water. >> Oh, wait. >> Um, if you could just clarify for me. So, are you saying then based on hot in the water that the busier you are, the higher the percentage of recycling would
be or >> No, no, not necessarily. It's it's more um how the equipment is um set up and what we have running during that time. So, there's there's nuances to it. It doesn't have to be volume, it's more equipment.
>> Okay. >> Yeah. Exactly. Um then in terms of operation, so people are staying in their car going through the car wash. They're not coming out. >> That's correct. They're staying in a car the vehicle the whole time. The only time they'd be exiting the car is in the vacuum park um where where it's it's,
you know, self selfs serve vacuum equipment. >> Okay. >> And then um so you're saying there's an attendant in the front that helps direct people into there, especially in the colder months. I know like from my experience in car washes and things like that sometimes there's like an easily
accessible place for them to go stand inside. Is there a place for them here that they can do that between cars kind of >> the employees? >> Yes. >> Um yeah we do have we do have an office um that is you know accessible to the employees you know uh >> is that like kind of behind that signal?
>> Correct. >> Yeah the office is is is at that right in front of the sign there. So that >> I mean obviously they would get an indication too of someone coming to the kiosk. >> Exactly. Yeah. Good advantage went to the vacuum park as well. It's it's a good um well-designed location.
>> I think that's what I got. >> Thank you. >> Sure. Um so on the water, you're aware we have our own water department here with our own wells and that we currently are you aware of that? >> Yes. Thank you.
>> Okay. And we currently have 10 wells uh preparing to drill I'm sorry 11 wells we're preparing to drill a 12th well um because technically for the D we're
out of water. We have the location for a 13th well uh which we're not sure the D is going to allow us to do because it's in a flood plane. And then we have no more locations for wells because we're one square mile. >> Uh and you're aware we've had droughts
both this summer, last summer, the summer before that. So water is an issue here. We're not American water. We're Flemington water and have been for 100 years. So, you started out by saying they're
environmentally friendly. Modern, high-tech, in environmentally friendly is what Mr. Wishikawa said. Did I get that right? >> Yeah, mostly. >> Okay. >> And then you said your >> uh your modern
express car wash uh you invested in aesthetics and design and you recycle up to 80% water. Then you change the number to 40 to 60% water. So water is an issue in this town. Back in
oh see um August of last year I had our water department write to your engineers to find out exactly what you tuck in 2024 what you recycle. They couldn't answer the question.
um wouldn't issue the permit the reservation. So they wrote to us in November of last year, a year ago and again wanted to follow up on the permit and our border department reached out. Now, I don't know exactly who I spoke
with in writing to Courtney Abbott, but on the email is Doug Wolf um NJA230266.00 um and Rachel Fisler, all from Polar Engineering.
At that point they responded on November 18, 2024 that you used 20 to 40% new recycle. 20 to 40%. That was what they responded to. This is a real concern I have I think
since I'm the last person to ask to talk tonight. Um, >> so I just would like to know what the real number is and how you can represent yourself as environmentally friendly when that's what you're recycling. >> Yeah. So, the
as we have grown and opened up new locations, I mean, we've g we've gathered more and more accurate data. Um, I think the best way to answer that would be to provide you with, you know, the exact number based upon our existing locations. I will also say that
some of the locations that we had early on didn't have the same they were more retrofit as I mentioned earlier. So they didn't have the same equipment that we you know would be building here. It was more of a an older car wash that we u bought existing and retrofitted and it didn't have the same technology that we
would be putting in here. Um so yeah to answer your question the the the number um may have fluctuated and it was it may have been hard to grasp an actual uh exact number which is why I try to give a range because you know as as we we do build more we get more data and we can
better you know assess assess exactly how much we're utilizing and how much of that is getting recycled. >> So we have a shamshine in Ron Township right on our border and a shamshine in Flemington Burough. >> Sure. >> They both recycle 80%. >> Mhm. full 80%. And they also told me
that there are car washes out in the west now that recycle 100%. I don't know what kind of equipment you're using. The the youngest of the two Shammy Shines is over a decade old >> and they are recycling at 80%. >> Because I mean I can't speak I can't
speak to another business. We would love to know what technology that, you know, they they're utilizing and how they're reporting that information because, you know, um we certainly would look to operate the equipment within the car wash that does regulate the water usage as most
efficiently as we can to make sure we get as close to that number as possible. >> Maybe you should look at the stuff that they're using out in the west. >> Yeah. like in California where there's full-blown >> drought there there's the equipment manufacturer that we use does also serve
the west coast um it's the largest equipment manufacturer uh in the United States and again there is ways to um calibrate the equipment to make sure that it is running the most efficiently um as possible and we could certainly you know make sure that at this location
it is you know dialed up as much as it possibly can to make sure we are being as efficient as as the equipment allows us to fit. >> Well, that's different than looking at buying a system that's suited for drought locations in >> Well, we're always looking to get the
best equipment available to um it's true. I think we're actively doing that. We have somebody internally that works as directive product and make sure that we are at the forefront of all this technology. Um and again there are nuances that that exist within the
operations of the business itself and the equipment that you're utilizing. Right? There's nuances and um one location could be you know uh you know not not being the equipment could not be calibrated the same way as another location and therefore you just have
like a different reader. So again trying trying to use as accurate average as possible. Sometimes we play a little bit more conservative um to make sure we're not, you know, overpromising and underd delivering. But at the end of the day, the the
recycling technology we use is, you know, best-in-class from a equipment manufacturer offering standpoint. And I I don't think that there is equipment on the market that can
uh operate more efficiently than what we're installing >> been 20 to 40%. >> Again, that where that where that reading came from, I couldn't tell you specifically right now. It may have been a conservative estimate to make sure we're not underpromising or overd
delivering. Um I think maybe the best way to address you know this is to give you the the exact data you know from from comparable locations which we know that might >> where would you consider a comparable location or
>> what what I mean by that is a comparable facility >> one of yours right >> where would you consider that like >> it would be any any of our new build facilities so um you know there's there's Lyndon New Jersey there is at
least New Jersey. Um either one of those and it's not it's not location specific because we would look at it on a per car basis to make it apples to apples because it's it's ultimately driven by volume when you look at the facility, right? So it's really it's more it makes more sense to do on a per car basis. So
you're you're seeing like the true the true read um because if we watch you know 200 cars here and one 100 one 100 cars there obviously you know there's going to be more water usage as a whole but it's more about the efficiency per >> what is the the average any of your car
washes in New Jersey get per day in cars look what's your number >> 200 to 500 >> 200 500 depending on location >> location that. >> So if ballers is telling us it's 20 to 40 and you're saying it's 40 to 60, it
sounds like it's 40% recycling on. >> So because um I think my engine better try and answer it as as accurativesly as I can based upon, you know, my knowledge of the um what I know about the
operations and so forth of the utility cost. Um perhaps the you know engineer can speak in more specifics on you know how we arrive at the numbers and how it makes sense. >> Just one more question. >> Sure. >> Um since you said it's 200 to 500 depending on location. Obviously Lynon
is a very populated town. Lacy Township not as much. What are you expecting in Fington? >> It's it's it's tough to say. I would say within that range. It really is tough to say. There's a lot of elements that go into population density. you know, the the retail generators, how far they pull from competition.
>> You guys cited location in Flemington. Obviously, you thought it was worthwhile putting one here. >> Yeah, it would be successful at 200 cars a day. We would be more successful at 500 cars a day. >> Okay. So, I just building on the one question, could you point out on that graphic
where the kiosk is? Um, >> it's uh >> shaded by this tree here. Um, so that's where I've learned from that. >> So maybe I don't know this question for you or for Nathan, you're a traffic person, but um this time of year when
everyone themselves off their cars, car washes stack up. So do you know how many cars can stack up there or is that a question for your traffic person >> specifically? Doug can answer it. >> Our civil engineering. >> Okay, that's fine. That's fine. I I will I will defer the question. What I will
say just that may be relevant that that if I tell you that you know um we're built uh for efficiency. We want we'll make our money on these busy days. The last thing we want is you not to be able to wash a car because we don't want it out here. So we we're built to process
cars very quickly. We can do it as quickly as a minute and a half from from kiosk through the tunnel. And there's even the ability there's the ability to speed up the conveyor um being putting us in a position to process the car um quicker. And you you could also have
three to four cars in the at the same time. We don't always do that because it's a it's a load on uh the equipment one um and also the utility cost with the power. It's expensive to run run the the conveyor like that, but it's an operational uh um solve for this busy
day because the last thing we want is to lose customers because they're back here, right? >> No. Yeah. I'm not I'm not worried about losing customers. I'm worried about the impact on Jason uses. But that's an >> same. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Um are the members of the public with questions for this witness on the
testimony given? Yeah. Um, so I mean I understand you have a variable capacity here for the for the facility. Generally, what how how many cars an hour can this thing accommodate? It's built. This specific facility can
process up to 125 cars an hour. At no point in time do we expect to have that volume. It's probably half that at our peak hours. And of the customers that go through, you obviously have data on this. Uh what how how many typical
customer comes through? What percentage uses the vacuum versus don't use the vacuum? >> It's about it's about 50/50 at any given wash >> and you're proposing um 25 vacuuming
stations here. Um hey, why I'm asking this question? impervious coverage is a uh an issue that's before the board. Why the 25? Do you have what what data empirical data do you have that says you couldn't get by with 20?
The more the better. Um and and the re the reason for that and you know like you know we have data because we have locations that have less than 20. We have locations have more and the more the better. the offering that we're giving the customers is um you know
they're paying us you know a flat fee whether they use the facility or not. We want to make sure that there's availability to the vacuums um even on those busy days right and we don't want what you don't want is people sitting here like waiting for a vacuum to like
free up it just causes unnecessary congestion and so forth. So um to answer your question 25 25 is the ideal um number and we we actively try to accomplish that. >> You have facilities with less than 25.
You say this is a prototype facility. >> We have we we do have >> you experience problems at those locations? >> Yes. >> Problems if people are waiting that >> more frequent issues with there being at capacity people waiting and it's a less
pleasant customer experience. Correct. Okay. >> I'm sorry. What was the number? Uh 125. You said an hour. >> 125 in an hour at max capacity. >> Okay. Seeing um any more no more
questions. Thank you. Testimony. >> Thanks. >> Thanks, Doug. Doug Wolf, >> civil engineer. Leave it. Leave it also. Do we have a thumb drive? Okay. So, >> they would prefer
>> it would it would certainly be easier because not so not only would they be able to see it but members of the public can see on that screen and we can see it on that screen. So let me give you the share. >> We didn't mark the other one that was put over there. Just say we'll get back to that one.
>> Okay. I'm sorry. and only 300. >> You are about >> Okay. So, I have my exhibits on here. How you? >> So go to the green button at the bottom of the screen.
Green button share. Click share. >> You choose whatever window it is >> and you are good. Just make sure you're sharing the right. >> Is that what you want? >> Do me a favor on click the max on the all tools on the left side of Adobe
there to give us a little more visual. And on the bookmarks, close that bookmark window also. So most screen is mostly draw. >> Is that clear? >> I think so. That's easier to see. >> And then let us know we're looking at so I can mark that.
>> And before we do that though, do you want to qualify? >> N name for the record. >> Doug Wolf W. >> Mr. Wolf, can you please provide the board with an overview of your educational and professional background and licenses you? Sure. So I work at
Boulder Engineering at 30 Independence Boulevard 200 in Warren, New Jersey. I have a bachelor of science and civil engineering from Virginia Tech. I have a PE in the state of New Jersey. It is active license. Um I testified before multiple boards in the state of New
Jersey before and was before this board at the prior completeness hearing uh back in July I believe. Any other questions from professionals? Objections board members questions for
members. >> Right. So, >> so he's an expert in civil engineering. >> That is correct. >> You're not going to provide testimony on anything else? Uh, traffic engineering. Thank you. Yep. >> All right. Um, this is exhibit
>> should be A4. 4 just describe that. >> So this is the aerial exhibit prepared by Bowler dated 129 2025. Um the address of the property is 294 highway 202 in the burough of Flemington, New Jersey.
>> Really really quick. Um just for purposes of the record, it's the exhibit and the number there is seed C-01. >> Yes, correct. Y >> again, we're at 294 Highway 202 in Flemington, New Jersey. Um there are two lots that are focused of this
application. First, lot six is the primary focus shown here outlined in yellow. That's approximately 0.85 acres. Also, lot five is the larger lot shown in yellow and borders the outside there. That's approximately 3.32 acres in size.
Um, I want to note the revised boundary here. At the last completeness hearing, we were showing that line directly through the TD Bank. It's now been figured out that that was actually relocated and this is the correct lot line which is going to be reflected in
all of my testimony moving forward and has been reflected on the revised site plans that we have submitted um to you and your professionals as well. Additionally, we are acquiring a small lease portion of lot five here shown in red. It's 0.2 acres in size and that
brings our total for Spark Car Wash to 1.06 acres in terms of the lease area. During the zone, we're highway retail zone. We are permitted use. In terms of existing conditions, existing use is a Red Crab. It's approximately 7,700
square feet with associated parking and is no longer in service at this time. Existing site on lot six is little to no existing landscaping. It's really a sea of asphalt. There's no I think there's five trees with three shrubs is really
all that's out there right now. Um and besides asphalt, it's really in need of much of a refresh. Spark car wash is here looking to do that. surrounding uses. First, they'll orient you to north, which is top of the page. It's only a couple minutes from here. I
passed it on my way in. Um to the north, sites bordered by Dunkin Donuts. Uh Flemington Powersports is here as well. And Route 202 beyond. To the east, we have the shops of Flemington. That's in this location here with Raron Township Beyond. To the south, we have Reville A
down here with Taco Bell and Shopright Beyond. And lastly to the west we have Route 202 with Chick-fil-A in this area here. All right, I'm going to move on here to my next exhibit. This is
William A5. This is the overall site plan exhibit prepared by Bowler sheet number C303. Ship that on the screen. I know it, but I don't want to mess with sheet 303 and it is dated 129205.
So again, existing condition, there's a 7,700T red crab restaurant being proposed to be removed. We are proposing a 4,432 foot car wash with 25 vacuum stalls, excuse me, drive aisle, signage,
utilities, and a kiosk and drive-thru. As Matt discussed earlier, I'm going to walk you through the site real quickly. Matt did it before on the other exhibit, but I want to make sure from a 2D view you guys understand where we're at here. So 202 is down here, Reville's along the bottom. A couple access points to the
site. First would be off 202. you'd enter and make a right in in this location here. I want to note that this an existing condition is a ingress only. There is no egress. Um it's a do not enter. However, you can right now drive all the way down to this point where you
would then see the do not enters and realize that you need to turn into this red crab area. So, we're improving upon that condition. I'll get into that a little bit later in my testimony. Also, additional access points are off Reville AV at the bottom. primarily this point here. It's an intersection which you can
go up to to another intersection point, make a left into the site. Once you're in the site, you would make a right here or a left here. You would travel to this point where you would then travel up and then make a left into the what we call queuing area where cars
would begin to stack at this point and then have an optionality whether you're a member or not a member to enter the pay station area. If you're a member, you pull up, the gate, license plate reader reads your car, it'll open automatically. If you're not a member, you pull up, there's a person or attendant at the kiosk. You can pay for
a single car wash. He'll guide you through the process uh efficiently and get you moving on to the tunnel entrance. Once you get to the tunnel entrance, you'll enter the car wash. There's actually also that optionality bailout lane. Like Matt said, this is in a seldom event. If a uh like dually
pickup truck for some reason gets to this point, it allows them to exit out because they can't get through this car wash properly. Um so once you're in the tunnel, you exit at this point. There's another optionality point here. You can turn left into the vacuum area. Turn
left into there. At this point, you've already paid for your car wash or you're a member. The vacuums are free. You pull into a spot. You can use the vacuums, wash your car down, do whatever you need to do. Or if you don't want to do that, you just want a car wash, you could take a right, you would stop at the stop sign pier, and then you can exit back to
either Revo A or eventually to Route 202 over here. Um, okay. Only other point I wanted to hit on this was the stacking. I want to briefly show it. Um, traffic engineer
will get more detail in this. It's not black on the sharing. >> It looks good. >> Yeah, just close the tools window. We'll get more realistic out that turned on pretty bad. >> All right, here we go. All right, A6.
>> A6. This is uh site plan rendering queuing exhibit prepared by Bowler sheet C-302 um dated 11212025. >> Okay, 301 is on the screen. 302 is on your board. I don't have that one. That's one that
did not make it into my pro set. >> No, there are one or two that were added last minute. Apologize for that. >> I have a fifth. >> Oh, there. Okay. >> All right. Here we go. Is
>> that something? >> That was part of the plan set. >> All right. So, >> the original plan set, >> but this is colorized. >> This all this is is what was submitted with cars colorized to show the stack. >> So, we'll mark it as A6, but we will
need a copy. >> Yep. >> Just for the record though, what's the sheet number on that? >> This is titled sheet 302. >> And what's the title of the sheet? >> Site plan rendering queuing exhibit. It's different. >> That's not the 302. That's part of the set plans. >> Correct. >> That's a different 302.
>> Yes. >> All right. So, the one thing I wanted to note because I know you had a question about stacking. I just wanted to share this um for a visual. So, 19 cars can stack up to this point prior to entering the tunnel.
I wanted to note that so you could see how many cars there are, how many we can get to this point here. There's also the optionality to if needed additional cars, two can go here, more can go here. We don't feel that that's going to be needed. The traffic engineer will get into this a little more detail, but I
just wanted to show that for you guys. >> Excuse me. The 19 is all the way up to the tunnel or the 19 is before the page came. >> 19's from this point to this point. So, right here. >> Is it both? Is it both lanes along the front? >> Uh, I'm I'm counting it. Everything in
red you see is 19 minus this one. So I'm going to go back now to my next exhibit which is so this all right. So this is a site plan. This is what was submitted. >> We can mark it anyways.
All right. So this is site plan uh prepared by Bowler. This is sheet C-301. It's what Bob had set as well. Prepared by Bowler dated 129. >> This one. >> What? I'm sorry. Dated when?
>> 129 2025. >> So the handout we have here is is provision 4121. So this is a different version. >> Oh, nope. I apologize. The exhibit is when we colorize it, we make it into an exhibit and date it. But the revision date correct is revision 4121.
>> Got it. >> Okay. >> All right. So, I'm going to reorient this. >> A7. >> Yes. >> 87. Yep. So, reorienting you to the improvements a little bit here. Um, like I said, this is the entrance off 202. down here. You would enter through Revo
Lab, come up to this point where you would then have the optionality to get into the queuing lane. Stacking starts here, comes into here, exit the tunnel, enter the vacuum park or exit depending on what you want to do. Um, I'm going to get into the bulk requirements here and the criteria. Um, like I said before,
it's in it's consistent with the revised alt survey that we submitted showing the relocated lot line in the proper location. Um, so starting with lot area specific, I'll back up a little here. Starting with lot six, I'm going to cover this first, then we'll get into
anything regarding lot five. So starting with lot six, um, lot area 0.85 acres where 65,000 square ft. I should start with square feet. Lot area is 37,41 square feet where 65,000 ft is required.
Is an existing non-conforming condition. We're proposing no change there. In terms of lot width, 137.4 feet where 150 ft is required and is an existing non-conforming condition. We're also proposing no change there. Just want to note it for the record. Uh lot
depth, we're at a compliant 229.1 ft. This is to remain unchanged. Minimum front yard setback is 75.1 ft where 35 ft is required here. So, we're compliant there. Minimum sideyard setback is 33.8 ft where 25 ft is required. So, we're
compliant there as well. In terms of minimum rear yard setback, we do have an existing non-conforming condition of 37.8 ft and we are requesting a variance for 20.3 ft where 50 ft is required. That's along this portion back here just due to the overlap of the property line and the extension of the lease premises
there. In terms of maximum imperous surface area ratio, we have an existing non-conforming condition of 0.81. We are proposing 0.75 which is a reduction and are requesting a variance for this where 0.7 is permitted even though we are
reducing this. I do want to note we are reducing impervious coverage on this lot here. >> What's this lot? >> Uh lot six. We're reducing it on lot six by 2314 square ft and providing substantial green space throughout. As you can see and I outlined earlier there's basically
no plantings out there right now. We're proposing a ton of landscaping that I'll um get into later and provide the specifics on that. >> What was the square footage of that reduction? 20 >> 2314. >> Thank you. >> And that's just for lot six.
>> Moving on to floor area ratio. We're reducing the floor area ratio of the existing building to the smaller building from 0.21 to 0.12 where 0.2 is permitted. In terms of of accessory buildings, excuse me, we are requesting a variance for the accessory building
located right here um in a front yard with a setback for the kiosk and canopy equal to 18.9 ft. That's this setback shown here. As Matt testified earlier, this kiosk is required operationally um for the attendants to assist new
customers and not members through the site um quickly. Help them out if they have any questions there. Terms of minimum landscape buffer, we have an existing non-conforming condition along the frontage here. Um 14 feet in the existing condition and that is proposed
to remain at 14 ft where 35 ft is required. One item I do want to note at the beginning of this process, we did have a preapp with the professionals and I don't think any board members were on but they may have been. Originally the layout was pushed even further towards
Route 202. uh the professionals made a point that they'd like to see that increased and at least maintained to the existing condition. So what we did is we revised the layout. We pushed everything this way which enabled us to hold that buffer
that exists out there now and we are adding additional plantings there that don't exist in the existing definition. I just do want to note that because that does cause the layout to shift this way and cause us to add additional leasing area which is shown here. Um lastly, in
terms of minimum open space ratio, we're increasing and improving upon this ratio from an existing non-conforming condition of 0.19 to 0.25. So we are increasing the open space on lot six in the propo in the proposed condition. Um well 0.3 is required and we are
requesting a variance for this as we're 05 short of the requirement. Moving on to lot five. So lot five again is the larger portion over here. Uh most bulk criteria for this lot is to remain unchanged. Um the one item that is changing has to be the maximum imperfect
surface area ratio. There's an existing non-conforming condition on lot 5 of 0.85. We are reducing this down to 0.83 and we'll be requesting variance due to the permitted ratio being 0.7 for this lot. Like I said,
>> can you go to the lot again? >> Yes. So, um here's a better idea. If you look at this, this is lot five down here. >> Yep. >> And then just to reiterate there, we are increasing the square footage of landscaped area on lot 5 from 20,771
square ft to 24,696 square ft in the proposed condition. And this is an increase of 3,924 square ft across this lot. So if you combine that with the number I provided
previously, you're you're looking at about 6,000 square feet doing the three steps increase in landscaping. That is >> what's the total number again? >> 64 696
>> 3924 for lot five and 2314 for lot six. I can add those up on my calculator. in total. All righty. Uh moving on to parking here. Again, we're going to start with lot six and then we're going to move to
lot five. Technically, they are two separate lots. We also analyzed it as a whole. I've talked to Bob Clerico about this um earlier today as well. >> Can we ask a question here? >> Sure.
Lot six is is the one with with the with the building, >> correct? And that's a pre-existing non-conforming lot essentially in terms of what area. >> So pre-existing non-conforming lot in terms of area, width, rear yard setback, impervious surface ratio,
landscape buffer, and open space ratio. >> And the title on lot six is held in common with the same as the title on lot five. >> Yes. So, isn't there something in the I don't know what what law it's in whatever the planning laws or whatever
that a non-conforming lot held in in same title as an adjoining lot is by definition merged. I don't believe this falls under the doctrine of merger clar >> because >> it has functioned because it it has functioned as its own lot um designation
has functioned in terms of its development uh and I'm going to confirm that they're both actually in the same title. I know I know it's common ownership. I'll double check that lots five and six are still separate.
Yeah, we should definitely get a definitive determination as to whether they were merged again for zoning purposes by operation of law pursuant to that doctrine. >> May not be that >> it might not be that.
>> All righty. Um I'm going to move on here to parking. So starting with lot six again. Existing condition, we have 22 spaces existing. uh proposed condition, we're proposing 25 vacuum stalls in a vacuum court here. Um in terms of required number of parking, the or the
ordinance, excuse me, does not have a step fur. Um so we deferred that to the retail requirement, which is one for 250 square foot gross floor area. That lands us at 18 spaces required if we were to go back to that definition. Um so with 25 vacuum
spaces for closed, we are in compliance there. And lastly to note, um, as Matt said earlier, there are three to four employees that will be on site at any given time. Those employees will park in the excess parking area over here on lot five.
>> Not merge possibly same owner lots. >> Yes, we will get the owner's permission to do that. >> All right, moving on to lot five. Again, this one over here, in terms of parking, existing condition, we're at 242 stalls.
Proposed condition, we are at 175 stalls. There's a few reasons there's a reduction here. First, 35 stalls are vacated due to the Spark car wash. Primarily, this area right here. So, we're adding some landscaping here. We're doing some drive aisle improvements, and we're reducing parking
in that area. Also, in this area up here, there was parking previously. We're making that entire thing green space. Also, there are 32 stalls. Um, should probably show them on this page. Back to my first exhibit. So, right here,
there's 32 stalls that fall under a McDonald's lease agreement. We did not include those as part of the proposed parking calculation. And then lastly, there are six stalls up here which are occupied via a permanent trailer
structure that we have received an email from the um zoning official who framing that that storage is permitted and we've removed that parking from the uh proposed parking requirement. back to my original exhibit.
And then just to reiterate on outdoor storage, um all non-permitted outdoor storage on lot 5 is to be removed. We've already been working on this with property owner. Um it's it's nearly done, but the only thing that is permitted is that trailer I just talked about. And then this area enclosed on
this fence right here. There's no parking here. It was it was striped out um and wasn't being used at a point in time. All right, moving on to loading here. Um, in terms of loading for the Spark Car Wash, one loading space is technically required and we are
requesting a variance for this as zero loading spaces are proposed. As Matt outlined earlier in testimony, um, only a sprinter van comes, I think twice a month. It'll pull in, come in, drop off what it needs to, that stuff will go inside the building. He'll leave. So
there's no need for a 60 70 foot long loading space that if you were to look at the requirement that's that's what's required typically for heavier use commercial facilities that are getting tractor trailer drop offs and whatnot. Um and then any loading operations on
lot five or three management fans were not changing anything there. Just to hit home on circulation again um we talked about the entrance here. I want to discuss a little bit what we're doing here. So existing condition is a
right in only. That's to remain unchanged. There is no ability to exit back onto this road here. There's do not enter signs out there at this time. >> This road is >> uh Route 202. Sorry. Um what we're doing is right now you were to pull down this
road. You'd get to this point and then you'd see do not enter signs. You would then have to turn into TGIs, circulate around and somehow get back to where you came from. We're taking that do not enter. We're shifting it from there over to this point.
So, that would not allow cars to go past this point. You'd have to enter circulate through here. If you want to get to the area down in this uh portion, you do that or you would see it beforehand and you would turn right and go to Flemington Powersports or wherever else you're going in this area.
Um I am going to show my next exhibit here which is not part of your packets or available on PDF but it's it's just very quickly it was a comment from uh Mr. Troutman regarding this entrance and the ability of existing are you able to
see that? >> Yes. >> So the he had a question about >> hold on hold real quick. So this is going to be A8 >> A8. >> Yes. >> And it will be just give us the name and we need a copy of that as well. >> Yes. So, this is truck turning plan. Um,
sheet number again is C-01. I can I can modify that if we need to, but the date is 1216 2025 and it's titled truck turn plans. >> Thank you. >> Okay, so Mr. Troutman had a question about what can get in here in the
existing condition, what can get in here in the proposed condition. The reason he asked this is because we're tapering this entrance down outside of the property line. we're tapering the entrance down eventually to um 15 feet in the proposed condition and we're not starting that till after you know 10 or
15 feet or so. So what we did is we ran an analysis in the existing condition and the proposed condition of what's the biggest truck that we can get into the site what's happening there now and what's going to happen in the future. So I tried a WB67 that didn't work. I tried a WB50 that didn't work. The biggest
truck in the existing condition that we can get into the site is a WB40. That's what's shown here. And we ran the same truck in the proposed condition. That's what's shown now as the proposed condition. A WB40 can enter the site in both the existing and the proposed condition. So for
>> those of us who don't speak fat, what is a WV40? >> Sure. So I have a spec here. This this might give you a little bit better of a picture. It's like a midsize semi truck. So it's not the longest ones you see with the tri triple wheel axles and all that. It is back of it 33 feet long.
From there, you got another 10 or so feet. So, you're talking it's about a 40 foot long tractor trailer, but it's not, you know, rough. >> Have you looked at a fire truck? >> More like a Excuse me. Is that more like a a Lori or a box truck? Oversized box
truck. >> It's a little bit bigger than a box truck. Yes. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you. >> Have you looked at a fire truck and had you gotten any input on this project from the fire mode? >> Yes. Great question. And I have I have an exhibit for that.
>> By the way, it is common ownership. NJM Associates does own lots five and six. We just wanted to verify since I looked at that. >> All right. So, I think we're on A9. So if you would since you don't have this digitally if you wouldn't mind
>> this one actually go dig. >> Okay that would be great. Thank you. Fantastic. All right. Um okay. So this A9. >> Yep.
So this is A9 titled truck turning plan parentheses fire prepared by Bowler and that's dated 129 2025. >> That's also CO1, right? >> Yes, it's also CO1. >> That is or is not part of the set? >> Nope.
>> This I do not think is part of the set though. >> Okay. So to Bob's question, yes, we've ran this turn. Yes, we've sent it to the fire chief. And yes, he has given us his approval of the turn and he's issued any comments. We've
addressed everything and we have an approval letter from him. So what we did is we ran the truck spec that his office provided us through this entrance and this shows that it adequately does circulate fine and in fact can get all the way over to here where he was
questioning if we could. So, we showed it all the way to this point and into the vacuum area as well, and he's more than satisfied with the ability to navigate this site. >> That's not in the letter of December 4th, right? That's a different letter. >> Um,
>> I thought we had submitted it. >> Fire chief. Sorry. again. >> Yeah. From Ken McCormick. >> Marshall. >> Yeah. >> The letter the letter the letter that we had >> address was talking about building
conditions and trainings. So, we're asking where you have confirmation from. I >> I have email confirmation here from Ken stating that what we sent him, which is this is adequate. I can provide that to record. >> Date of the email is Tuesday, October
21st. >> More than happy to provide that. Yeah. And if you can just identify what he looked at and so we can have an email that says he looked at that plan that date. >> Thank you. >> All right. That's it for this one.
>> Questions? >> Sure. >> What's preventing them from going in through where the vacuum? >> Is there like a Is there >> Where are you talking ex? Are you talking past this point? >> No. Like so even before that. So like >> identify where we're talking about just
for the >> C C301. >> 301 on Rayville and they start to go into the queue. >> How do they not take the left into the vacuum area? >> Yeah. >> Well, they they can take a left into
here if they have to. >> So there's nothing like barricading on them. All it is is a do not enter sign. In the event that emergency vehicles need to get into that area, they can just >> So, so, so a person in desperate need of a vac,
>> they want to break traffic and get >> quick. Just making sure I understand. There are there are um nearby car wash facilities that have gated access and lane controls so that of the routing through the
tunnel to the backend facilities at one of two paths in. And that's what you're describing here is that the the only thing is the stop bar and a do not enter sign above pavement. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Yes. And that is a design consideration
we make when designing these facilities. We if we can we direct people into the tunnel and then to the vacuums because if you let them just you know willy go into here they'll they might not be a member. They go and use it for free and
it just it creates they don't know what they're doing. They haven't been there before. So we we try to avoid that house. I'm gonna go back to >> back to my exhibit day seven. >> I think I covered everything in terms of
circulation that I wanted to here. All right. Quickly to move on to drainage and storm water. Um, this project is a major development. Um and we will be decreasing regulated imperous and motor vehicle surface area in the
proposed condition. Uh proposed limited disturbance is 1.04 acres uh which exceeds the 2,000 foot requirement um and attach ordinance and requires us to adhere with development criteria. >> Before you continue, do me a favor, please on can you change what you're sharing to be back to the exhibit that
you've got up on your board? No problem. >> Hybrid meetings. I know. This is it real. Thank you. >> Okay. Um the requirements for major development criteria are met through nonstructural strategies in this case such as reducing and disconnecting
imperous cover throughout the site and maintaining natural drainage features. We are doing that primarily by adding landscaping in this area and this one as well. um the peak flows for the proposed condition are less than the peak flows in the existing condition for the
210year storms. So really in all cases we are reducing flows across this site due to the decreasing impervious area and proposing landscaping. Uh in terms of conveyance we're proposing some inlets and pipes for storm water conveyance that will tie into the existing system down here.
Really what you're looking at is catch basin here, catch basin here. Water's going to travel from here, go to this point. There's a few other inlets proposed as well, but this is really the main system which are eventually going to get down to this point. There's an existing infiltration basin down on lot five in this area which we are tying
into. As I noted, we are reducing flows in all scenarios and will not be impacting the functionality of this basin. Uh per recommendation from Mr. Clarif Co's office, we do agree to providing snouts, which are water quality units at
a few of the um discharge locations downstream of these pipes. So, we are agreeing to do that. Um, and I just wanted to make one note because there was a comment in Mr. Clerico's letter regarding groundwater contamination. Um, we did perform a phase one and a
phase 2 environmental site assessment. Uh, this is prepared by Whit Stone. It has not yet been submitted, but we're more than happy to submit it to your office. This ESA outlines that there is no contamination found on um either of the sites here. Um so I just wanted to
clear that up and make sure that um no one thought there was groundwater amination here. >> Yeah, we'll definitely want to see both of those reports if we're going to rely on it for purposes of that comment. Thanks. All right. So, now we're getting into utilities, which I'm sure everyone is
ready to to discuss here. Um, so quickly, Will Service, we have Will Service from JCPNL, Comcast, Elizabeth Town Gas, and RVE, who is the water and sewer reviewer for this um this area. In terms of proposed water, gas, sanitary
storm, electric, and telecom, all um tie-ins are going to be into the existing service points on site from the previous restaurant. I do want to note two items in terms of relocations that we're proposing. One being the sanitary line. Um in the existing condition,
there's a sanitary line that runs through this area. After further coordination with the water and sewer department, they recommended and requested that we relocate this sewer line out into the drive vial here and then back into where it originally ties
in in this location. Uh the real reasoning for that is to make sure there's no structures within this new relocated easement. Um you don't want any, you know, maintenance issues or anything like that down the road. So that's item one. And then item two, there's a small portion of a gas line here which runs through the site to this
facility. We are relocating a small portion of that just to avoid any um utility conflicts here as well, but that one is minor. Um and like I said, I mean all all approvals for these utilities will be will be gained um as needed. We'll get
consent from who we need to in terms of relocating these utilities. So now let's talk a little bit about reclamation system. So Matt hit on it a little before. I'm going to try to reinforce that. Um, as I've been
involved with Spark Power Carwash projects for probably the last two or three years, um, I preface it by they're they're a newer company. Like you said, there's only 10 or so facilities now um, that
are in actively getting customers to the site. So, a few months or so ago, you could call it 6 to 12 months ago. There's limited information. Yes, we originally did request lower flows and then requested
higher flows and higher flows and you feel like this numbers just keeps going up and up and up and it's never going to stop. That's not the case. We've gained more information through the last six months than we ever had. So what we're at now is a conservative number that
we're using in requesting will serves for all projects in these type of areas. So in this type of area, I mean northern New Jersey or in this area, it's southern New Jersey. You kind of put a dividing line based on like Matt said, how many cars do you think you're going to have at this facility? So it's a it's a projection.
In this case, it's a conservative projection. So the latest numbers that we requested and that we are more than comfortable with and we think are very conservative water is 15,894 gallons per day. I want to note this is
an average. So that's an average number and for sewer our request is 11,553 gallons per day. I want to explain a little bit on how we got to these numbers and the exact, you know, what are you going to be looking at from a
sewer discharge and all that sort of thing. Um, so as we started to increase these numbers and gain more information, specifically utility bills in terms of water and sewer bills that we obtained from
existing spark car wash facilities in the state. So, we were able to analyze these bills from existing facilities and determine that at a site like this, for example, gallons per cars. So, I want to start
with gallons per cars. One car is going to use approximately 28 gallons of water. 28 gallons per. And this is all on average we're talking here. Um, and then if you're looking at it from a really we're talking, you know, on
average highest highest scenario on like a rolling six-month period. So, we're talking 28 gallons per carb for water and 20.89 gallons for sewer. So, there is a deficit there. That's approximately 7 to 8 gallons in between there. That's what
we're comfortably utilizing as the reclaim figures. And that does not align with the um the up to the 80% for example for for many reasons. When we request these will serve letters we want to go in
conservatively and we want to factor in say down the road if for some reason there was an increase. If we were able to get 500 cars per day, you know, consistently at this site, we want to make sure we're covered there. So, we don't want to come in at say, you know,
7,000 gallons per day and then two, three years from now you're seeing 11,000 12,000 on the water utility bills. There's also a uh you need to obtain D permitting at a state level when you hit certain
threshold for water and sewer. Um, so that's another item that we don't want to cross later on. we feel that we should just go ahead get ahead of it and obtain those permits now just in case in the event that we do need them. Um, so
like I said, we have information from existing facilities that are in use and we have this, the DP has actually required us on a handful of these spark car watches to submit backup data for existing facilities and we have
that information and we can provide it. Um, a few sites like I think you said Lacy and another one we have for example that shows on average You know, I I'll give Lacy as an example. I think we're at eight or 9,000 gallons per day. So, we looked at all
these different sites and we figured we should conservatively ask for more water than we think that we will be using in the end. So, that's where we came to these numbers of 15,000 and 11,000.
What questions do you have for >> We're not going to do it like that because we we >> You want to come back to it? >> Well, no. We were going to go to our professionals and then we'll get to board members like if you want to it would be better if you get your testimonial on the record and then us to
because we want to go through the review letters from our professionals and then we can get all of those. I know we've been a little bit less formal in the last but let's get all your testimony out there. >> That that works. I would I was getting highly technical so I wanted to make sure we didn't want to jump into that.
Um all right so that's really the gist of the the water and sewer there. Um, we can I'm sure we'll come back to this with questions later. Um, but like I said, I'll I'll reiterate the reclaim system. It's up to 80% of the water in ideal conditions. That's what we would
look to do if possible. Um, I think Matt said you're probably looking at realistically 40 to 60% there. Um, again, products are dishwasher safe. There's no POS. That's the forever chemicals and they are biodegradable. Um, and lastly, Spark employees are trained for standard maintenance of the
system as required. All right, I'm gonna move on quickly here to lighting. Uh, lighting across the site. We have seven area lights proposed at a compliant mounting height equal to 20 ft high. Uh, 27 vacuum lights are proposed in the vacuum area. Um, I think the the planner did make a
make a note about this on whether they would be on or off. Um we we would agree if you feel necessary that these could be turned off after hours. Um however we feel and we've approached this on other sites that there should be you know
lighting for safety reasons to within the vacuum area. So at this time we're proposing to keep that lighting um on during after hours but we can we can discuss that further if needed. Um and then lastly three tape lights are proposed at the tunnel entrance exit and office. All color temperatures are
proposed at 3,00 Kelvin, which is a whitish yellow. It's a nice color. Um, the following waiverss are requested for lighting. We have maximum illumination at the property line. 0.1 ft candle is required where six foot candles are proposed. That's really this property
line right here just because we have to light this area and there's a property line that cuts through it. Uh, because we are encroaching on a lease premises here. Uh we're requesting a waiver for maximum illumination within vehicular use area which is high activity where two foot candles are allowed and we're
proposing 5.1 specifically just right at this entrance tunnel here. We are also requesting a waiver for maximum illumination within a general parking and pedestrian area. A 0.9 ft candle is allowed where 19.9 ft candle is proposed. And that is the only reason it
is that high is because of these vacuum lights. Like Matt said before, they do have a shield on top of them. They only shine down. You really can't see them from too far away. Um, and those are only within the vacuum park uh in this area. All right, moving on to landscaping
here. Uh, like I said before, existing site is majority impervious. There's five trees existing on lot six with three hedges, three hedge rows. Um, there's no landscaping proposed along this route 202 corridor. Uh, we are proposing five street trees and over 20
shrubs in this area. Um, uh, Beth the planner made a comment about the spacing here. Uh, due to the limited width availability here, we are requesting a waiver for a spacing of these trees. We need 40 ft on center. However, we can't quite get 40 just due
to the width uh, you know, limitation here. There is an existing driveway that we we can't really do anything about there. So, we do agree that we can we can increase this. We could slide them down a little bit. we can increase the spacing here to try to get as close to 40 feet as possible, but we're just hoping to be able to get that that full 40 feet there.
Um, and then secondly, we're also requesting a waiver for parking area trees um being proposed on the perimeter. There are a handful of parking trees for proposed on the perimeter here. However, they're not interior to the lot. really this requirement is is more for you know
large seas of parking that need to get broken up with um you know a landscape area every 20 spaces or something like that. So in total we're proposing 16 shade trees where 16 are required um 262
shrubs or 26 are required and also 16 grasses in addition. Also we'd like to note that irrigation will be provided throughout the site. Um, so you're not going to see these plants be installed and just die six months later. They're going to be watered. Everything's going
to look really nice. Um, >> they're going to use a lot of water. It's enough. >> M, could you go us back to those numbers, please, on the plants? >> Yes. So, 16 shade trees where 16 are required. 262 shrubs
where 26 are required. So, 240 or so more than required. and then 16 grasses additionally where I don't believe any grass is required. All right. Uh moving on here to ancillary approvals. Um couple I want to hit on here. We have Hun County uh SCD
certification dated 412025. We have county planning board approval dated 212 2025. We have a DOT loan received November 17, 2025. We have fire marshall approval dated October 21, 2025 which we
will provide to your office and confirm that you know in fact did review and confirm this exhibit is acceptable. Um all right and I'm going to get into outstanding review letters here a little bit to start. We've reviewed the latest traffic letter prepared by Dave Troutman
dated 12:15 2025 and can comply with all of his comments. Um, the exhibit I just showed should satisfy the one at the entrance. We reviewed the latest water and sewer letter prepared by RVE dated 94205 and we'll comply with all their comments as well. We've actually resubmitted and
hopefully have addressed all their comments at this time. Uh, we've reviewed the latest planner letter prepared by KMA dated 1214 2025. Uh we'll work with Beth's office to address all uh comments other than what was previously outlined in testimony
including um to start number 4.4 which is relating to signage and the architect is going to touch more on some signage related to the application after me. And then 4.5 has to do with eliminating this Q- lane. As I talked about earlier, we did have a
preup with the town to discuss this. We moved it back as far as we could. We can't eliminate uh a Q- lane and go down to one. Just operationally, we can't have a single lane because you need a members and a non-members lane. If you
don't have that, the operation doesn't work and there'd be no benefit to getting a membership. Um moving on to the engineering letter prepared by Bob Clerico with Van Clee dated 1215 2025. Um, we'll continue to work with his
office to address all comments other than the following items I'm going to outline below starting with A4B B4 C2 AI1 and this is regarding a further
reduction in impervious surfaces. Um, as I testified to, we we are reducing impervious on lot six and lot five. um in the proposed conditioning. We we believe we're doing what we need to there. Next, A5B.
Um this is regarding uh water and sewer department review. I just want to note that we we have received letters from them. We're working with their office to address all comments. Um sounded like the board may not have received a copy of their letter, but you may have that it sounds like now, which
is which is good. Um, so again, we're working with them to satisfy anything they have concern of. We can get them a report outlining more of this water and sewers if we need to. Um, and we can detail that. >> What was the date that you
>> It's 94 94 2022. >> That's a letter from >> That's from RP >> RV water and sewer department. Yes. >> RV is the entry that work. Yeah. something that they assess.
Um and then next here B1 I I I B2 and B3. Um these are regarding existing easements on the site. I'm going to pick this one for John. >> Right. So you know,
>> excuse me. I don't understand what you're trying to accomplish here, but I think it would be more complicated. >> So So if if if if that's if your testimony is just going to be on those review letters, do you have any other testimony there? >> I got one more page. It's uh it's a
summary, that's all. >> Okay. So So do the do the summary. We're going to go through the letters, but we're almost looking at the clock. We usually take a break. So to do your >> All right. I'm trying to go. >> No, no, no. off fast. Want to get this right. So, >> did we get a copy of the November 9th or something? We still a lot of
>> Yeah. So, the RVE letter is something we're going to need to see. >> I have a copy. >> So, that's why we're going to >> So, why don't why don't you um >> Sure. Then we're going to have a break. So, if do all that. >> You got it. >> All right. So in summary, Spark Car Wash is excited for this opportunity to
revitalize the tired vacant site with many improvements uh to the current conditions such as green space, landscaping, lighting like I talked about and site circulation. Um and we look forward to working with the bureau in the future. That concludes my testimony. >> Thank you. So, like I said, we usually
take a break at around 9. Um so we're going to pause here. We can get that documentation if you have it. That'd be fantastic. Um, and then when we come back in, we'll have questions. We'll go through the review letters, the testimony of the engineer from our professionals. We do questions for
members of the board and questions for members of the public. Um, and we'll see where we are timewise. >> Okay. >> So, we're going to come back to order. Um, it is 9:05. If, uh, we could just retake the role to make sure everyone's
here. >> Sure. Yes, >> council. Sorry. >> Adrian, are you there? You have to muted. >> I'm here. I'm sorry. >> I don't have to call Mike here.
>> Miss Weissman. >> Yeah. >> Miss here. >> Mr. Show. >> Yes. >> Thank you. So, um, want to thank the applicant for giving us a copy of the RBE letter from September 4th, 2025.
>> We mark that as 810. >> Let's mark that as A10. Um, we just appreciate the extra minute or two to make copies and email the digital version. So, the board members who are remote, it should be in your inboxes. I probably just sent that out to you as
well. Um, just so you have that. Um, so let's let's go through the review letters. Um, it's probably best to start with Mr. Darko's letter because I think that'll do the bulk of it. Um, and I know that uh that Mr. said that comply with most but not all. So, what we tend
to do is let we'll let our professionals walk through the letter on the areas where there are some discussion items. Um, and so rather than read off a whole bunch of letters that we're not going to remember, we're just going to we're gonna we're going to let uh we'll let we'll start with Bob and then we'll look
up at the other hands. All right. So, we'll we'll start then on page five of general comments. Again, this letter uh there was a prior letter I wrote back in October and we're going to have this hearing. Um
and then as I indicated at the beginning of this subsequent information came in a result of their additional certainty factory relating to the TV bank issue although there was other elements that were incorporate the same time and then it was and the board never discussed or
uh considered any of those original comments. So now that we have new com new documentation coming in, what I did here is I repeated in itallic font the original comments from report number three and then added and hopefully
that's a bit too confusing in bold the the new comments that are coming in as a result of so you can see what was originally said things that are no longer applicable. I caught them all. I tried to cross out in the original comments. I added new comments. So, if we start basically on the top of page
six, this is the first comment dealing initially with what we thought was an issue with the TD Bank. Uh, and I'm indicating on here we have the revised map. Now, you heard from the attorney that they did further a title search. Uh, they apparently found a recorded
copy of the deed that did transfer title on that. You heard from the engineer that they revised the survey to reflect that. Uh so what you're looking at now and the and the the two witnesses can the attorney and the engineer can confirm this but what they're now
representing is that the boundary of lot five that they're reflecting on the maps that are currently before you is in fact an accurate representation of what's out there. >> Correct. >> Okay. Um, and I believe and I I know John you
submitted the letter referencing this, but it was to the extent that there are documents that you're referring to like the deed of record and Carol might end up asking for this anyway. It would probably be beneficial to actually attach the quote evidence with that to say, "Yeah, here's the document that
essentially did." >> Sure. Only only from the standpoint that we were presented with one set of facts and now we're presenting with a different set of facts. Yep. >> Um item two goes into just an assessment of what's on this particular property.
Uh and you've heard the testimony on this. You have the 15,000 foot retail center. You have a 30 foot wide common access road easement uh which was described as coming in from Route 202 through this site and actually connects with the shops of Flemington. It's it's the shops of Flemington. I don't want to
say it's their major access, but it's it's it's where they put their sign out on 202. It's their one of their main entrances into the shop. Albeit it serves up this property and other properties, but it's the main entrance into the shops at uh shops at Bloomington. You have this 32 car
parking lot that the is on this particular lot, but the applicant is not counting it toward their interesting parking because they it's it's leased to McDonald's. And I'm assuming that's an exclusive lease of some sort. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Do we have is it can you provide documents?
>> We we submitted with our last submittal memorandum of lease as a correct. >> That was the amendment, right? Is that >> it was the amendment. Correct. >> Yeah. It wasn't the original lease. >> Not the original. >> Yeah. Which we can't find.
>> I think uh that was what was uh provided to me >> and I thought I thought it reflected the appropriate terms. It's only about two and a half pages. I think it just dealt with uh the revised description >> revised description and it just extended
it for >> what the period of time. >> Yeah. Till 32 with a five couple yearensions. Correct. >> We don't normally go into the weeds like this on it, but there's such a varied history with this particular property. There's so many things that have occurred.
>> Some may be recorded properly, some maybe not recorded properly. different parties with different interests and elements. I think it would be helpful especially since this applicant is relying on a part of that that particular property of this for this particular lease as part of this application. I think I think this is an
well more than an opportunity. I think we have an obligation to try to dot the eyes, cross the tees and have a record here of what's actually going on out there. Um item D is now off the table. But what we did is originally we thought the TD Bank because it was represented as such
was actually on this property. They never sold yada. So that that item is crossed out because they've now again documenting that that in fact that that title transfer actually did occur. Um we have a 24 foot wide common access easement which ties into the 30oot
easement goes through the ple bank and goes out to Rayville Avenue. Um we're going to probably want to get to other >> talking about that. Doug, I don't know if you want to point that out since we're since we're talking about it probably on the uh
>> so the eman mentioned earlier was this >> let's just reference which one >> I guess we probably need to put it on the screen too looks like a Yeah. 105. >> Here's the exhibit A5. Um,
this is a 30 foot easement to the shops at Flemington. Bob was talking about >> I was looking on screen. I'm just moving the cutter center through there. >> Yeah. And then the second easement he's talking about is uh is here through into TD Bank. That's the second ement >> and it's a common ement that works both
ways but actually effect factually benefits this particular property. >> And then we have the issue with parking. I'm going to skip over parking because we have a bit of a factual dispute here that we're going to have to resolve at some point. So item two is just kind of going through the history of what we
have here. just kind of documented what we're dealing with from the title standpoints on the product. Um, item three, most of that is gone. I'm indicating it was going to be a challenge to assess this because the TD Bank was actually thought on this property, but turns out that it's not.
So if we just go to the papus page seven and just look at the new comment uh that the site plan is reflecting uh is now consistent with the survey the updated survey that reflects the boundary of lot five which removes the area of
McDonald's um is actually removes the least area for McDonald's as well as the um the the portions of of the bank on TV bank which was actually merged with the adjoining lot. So, this property now no longer has title uh um out all the way
out to Ravenville Avenue. It has access rights through TD Bank um through the what was just mentioned earlier, but they no longer own out to uh and that land is now no longer part of the property in question, lot five.
Again, I think we heard some testimony on this uh earlier. Um item six, um we're dealing with the parking. This is where we get into a little bit. I I went through this several times. You know, we did have a conversation earlier with
Doug um on this and he says his office went through it several times. We we have a discrepancy in how many parking spaces are actually out there. I think we eventually just have to get together and count them together and come up with a common thing on this. I went through and I'm only doing this not from the
standpoint that we lack parking. It's actually the reverse situation. We have excess parking here and I'm just trying to document for the record what exactly is the excess. Um I think at the end of the day when you go through all the gyrations here I was saying there's 76 extra spaces. I believe in your count
you said there was 80 something. >> Yeah. What whatever we we have a and it's should be it's it's a it's a factual issue. we'd have to get together and figure out back, you know, count them and and agree that yeah, this is the number irrespective there's an
excess amount of parking on this particular site. Um, between what's existing uh what's proposed and in the proposed condition um again they're they're losing spaces as a result of this particular construction um with the
access lanes and and whatnot. Um, and then we went into what's required. Again, the requirement here is is a very low threshold based on what testimony you heard earlier. But we do have other uses on the property which have to be taken into consideration. And then
again, you take the difference between what's um what's out there and what's required and that gives you your excess. I say at 77 came up with a a slightly higher number. Um, irrespective there's more parking here. We both agree there's more parking here than what is otherwise
required for any of the existing or proposed uses um that are before the board. I had asked at the bottom of this thing they actually we don't really have a plan as part of the set that actually shows the overall site with the parking. We have a survey we can go to. We have
sort of a site plan here. We got I think we need as part of the site plan something that shows the overall site. Whatever it's going to be um >> we could include this into the set and add some notifications and not >> I I prefer larger scale and smaller
scale, but be that as it may. Uh um in item B, we're getting into imperous coverage. Again, I'm going through the zoning criteria here. Impervious coverage. Uh you heard testimony and again there was a change in the numbers from the plan we had
earlier that I initially reviewed in report three and report number four. And that's not necessarily from a change in the plan. It's just it's a refinement of the calculation from what what I gather. Um and you heard earlier um I'm coming
up with on um the what I'm calling the impervious coverage ratio um for lot five is u is um is 83 along with the new surface features for lot six which is 75. Both of those existing condition existing conditions are still exceeding
the ordinance standard. uh for uh 70 uh under this particular zone. We have this other standard in the background of 0.5 which is the the section 26 whatever it's called >> 37. >> Yeah. Um I guess like 2637
u but that may get overridden on the stormwater side since they are now a major project and we're dealing with the um the D standards. um go on here in the third checkpoint to say that the indicates that the applicant has reduced the purview rate as a result of the extensive landscaping
on both lot five and six. However, upon comparison of the current to the versus the prior plan, it's not it wasn't clear to me exactly what areas of additional landscaping you added and I'm not just talking about how many more plants you may have put in thing. I'm actually talking about open imperative surfaces.
it just wasn't clear to me where where these where you actually added um between the plan we initially saw and reviewed and the plan you know we're reviewing today. Um so in that regard I highlighted this that the in that regard the applicant is not addressed. My original comment which was highlighted
above the original comment was that given the amount of uh given the existing imperous coverage situation that exceeds the ordinance given the fact we have an overabundance of parking here uh that we really should make an effort maybe we can't get down to the 70% threshold but we should make an
effort to reduce this in whatever ways uh seems to be practical. Beth had certain ideas. I threw out some other issues in later in the report where you know we may deal with this. You are dealing with some conditions um like the the setback condition on on the
road that's in albeit it's existing painting today. We are totally redoing this site effectively. Uh and you know that might be an area if this thing got pushed back where you might be able to pick up some uh pvious areas and thereby reduce imperous coverage. So before
before we move on to the next part of of B, do you do you have a kind of a response to to what you know because we've got comments in two professional letters about potential over parking and potential impervious. Is there some something you want to add to that? >> Yeah, so I could talk about that a
little bit. Um to clarify from our initial submission to what you're looking at now, there was no further quote significant reduction. the number changed merely based on the the constraints of the lot. Um so that's why
we said it didn't change. We didn't further decrease impervious area but our initial submission like I outlined before we are decreasing impervious by almost 6,000 square feet across this development and and we believe that that
is adequate in this case. >> Yeah. I would just add in we've got a leaseold interest for that area that's basically outlined. Um, so we're doing we're doing what we can there. Now, we don't control of the
remainder of lot five. We're obviously here though as an applicant. If there are thoughts or suggestions, uh, if we were to do anything outside of our leaseold area, you know, that's that's a discussion we're going to have to have with ownership.
Um, right now we're saying there's an abundance an overabundance of parking, but they may have changes in tenency and use and their other buildings and we're cognizant of that. So what so let me just if I could ask a clarifying question then have you calculate what's
the square foot of your lease area if I if we were to take all of lot six and the lease area control of lot five what's the total amount of lease area and then what is the total I know that's not how zoning works but what is the total impervious coverage of that
combined lease area >> so the total lease area is 1.06 06 acres and that's again that's lot six plus what's shown in red correct >> it actually if you look at sheet well not the sheet if you look at sheet 301
is actually documented on sheet 301 and that number that we just quoted um is is is listed there the 1 1.06 >> right so that's so I see 1.06 6. It's 45,956 currently property less. Okay. So, but what so have you done for the
calculation? If you were to balance the full lease area as opposed to doing it lot by lot. >> I have a lot by lot on the plan. I can run a quick number and get you that right now. That's what you're looking for. >> I would love to have that number. >> Yeah. Sure. >> Well, this is going to again go back to
the, you know, you're doing impervious coverage based on property, not based on leasing. I I understand but the board is being asked to grant relief on this and I think if we if the site is functioning as a lease area and the applicants made the attorney has made uh given testimony
that they're not the owner and they're operating within lease area ownership he's got question with ownership it would help us I think understand or at least adjudicate the um relief that's being requested for this if we think about this this as the lease area
operating as as a unit even though I know they're looking for relief broken up by lot side because that's a lot >> or possibly broader depending on the answer to emerging >> merging question which I know is is out there as well >> we'll talk more about that >> lucky
>> let me let your own calculation on that can we can we come back to that >> we could absolutely come back to it I I just I think that and and I'm just going to warn you I guess my other questions have to do with like what does that mean for your setbacks what does that mean for your loss size. What does that mean for your
park that for um the lighting? Because one of the things you you give testimon is lighting because you're above the foot candles at the border of the lot line between six and five because so that you're you're you need relief from
the design standard. But if we consider this as a lease property, what does the foot candle look like in the B? That's I'm I I I I'm going to ask a bunch of those questions. So, I'm just letting you know >> if uh if we don't if they can't answer
all the questions tonight, it might be a great follow-up submitt to the board. How would this if you assumed the lease area was a were lot lines for the sake of your testimony? How would the site comply or not? >> Perhaps it's more compliant if you think about the the two lease areas together.
>> And and again, I'm not asking this for you to say that these are emerging lots. I'm saying that it would help us understand the context of the relief that that we're being asked to grant. >> Their their lease area unless they renegotiate something is what it is. >> Correct. >> The lot areas in the zoning associated
is really affected by whether we're dealing with two lots. >> Right. Right. Right. Right. So I'm just put that. Okay. So there so the the engineers answer I think is inappropriate. So Bob, if you want to go to >> Yeah. I'm just I'll continue on. So outdoor storage, you you there was an
issue here initially with existing outdoor storage. Uh they did work it out with the owner. The owner is going to remove what was uh I don't call it illegal. It was it's not unauthorized outdoor storage on the parking lot. Apparently the zoning
official there is one trailer um that they're showing on the plan. Again, if we go back to as part of the submission, something showing the overall property, showing the trailer, showing the area that it's going to be occupied, show the rest of the parking on here. Um, I think
that would they they seem to have solved the problem. I just think need some sort of a plan sheet that's going to show, you know, collectively what what what that is. Uh, existing easements and modifications. Um there and this is
where this site gets to be a bit of a quagmire. Uh there's there's 48 recorded easements. Well, as part of the initial title search, they found 48. Apparently found others now because there's other recorded documents uh that weren't revealed uh initially. Um and you know
the easements, a lot of them deal with utilities, a lot of them deal with the access we referred to earlier if if we in fact caught them all. Um, as I was indicating on here, as part of processing the application, it would be appropriate for the bureau to determine if any of the easements um granting
utility rights used to be relocated or vacated. Now, I wasn't aware that they were having a separate approval and conversation with Burough Waters. So, apparently they've made progress there. I just saw the letter. I just was handed the letter tonight. So, I'm not exactly sure where they are in that heard
testimony about how they're u relocating the sewer line at the request of the burl. I don't know we heard necessarily about water water even affected those water lines on here but again the site is kind of riddled with all kinds of easements uh that are probably someone
probably should have been extinguish irrespect of that um just trying to get the record straight as to what's on this property and and what's uh affected by what's being proposed so that we get the right parties who have any vested
interest in those easements to sign off. So, we understand that the board's approving this that there's other entities other than the applicant or the owner who have some say in in what's what's being proposed here. That was item A. Item B. I was asking just again for better
clarity and detail on the plan. Uh again, this was an older comment. U we've gotten additional information on this. So, the new comments on here that we have a revised sheet 501 which indicates easements that are being removed and uh and replaced uh including
the sewer line and the gas line. Um again, that's going to require any approval that the board might grant here would have to be conditioned on ultimately documenting the proper vacation and rededication of easements uh associated with with the with the
approval process. Um, second check mark on here was um, uh, there's an existing drain pipe on here. Um, perhaps Doug, you may want to just test that there's an existing drain pipe is being relocated or repositioned.
And I what I was saying here, I didn't quite understand why that was even necessary. >> Yeah, sure. And this is not a burrow drain pipe or anything. This is an on-site private line. >> Okay. Private drain line. So the underground pipe is this is
>> J7. >> All right. This is A7 shown on the screen as well. Um simply there's an existing drain pipe here. We're proposing to reset it. It's a storm water drain. We're going to lower the invert about an inch. Um the reason for
that is we need it to be a little bit lower at this point to tie. >> So it's a vertical adjustment you need to make in order to get your proposed on-site system. >> Correct. Yes. Thank you for clarification. Um, again here I was asking if you're
dealing with some relatively smallcale plans and I there's a benefit to what the applicant did and there's also a detriment there in all their plans they're leaving the underlying image photograph there. It's it's kind of nice, but in in many
of the plans when you're just dealing with proposed conditions, it's really superolous information and it makes the plan hard to read as to what really is going on as in the proposed condition because effectively in the existing condition, they're pretty much ripping everything out anyway. So, how what's
proposed relates to what's there is is really not in my opinion not really useful. And in this case, it kind of clutters the plan up. >> We could preset, >> I would think. Yeah. I think a lot of this would be a lot clearer just by by doing
um again I was going to the issue that the board shouldn't vote on this until they had border and border and so again I was working on the premise that there was no contact here whatsoever but again I think you need to we need to see what the comments are so far today we need to have a good sense that the bureau can at
least in principle is accepting what they're proposing because without these relocations they really don't have a project. Uh so again now that we have the correspondence we can read you if you have any questions uh on the bur we can certainly ask those and
unfortunately we don't have here with us tonight but do that as may um that was the last check mark there um again I don't I don't think the board should vote till we have some some clarity uh on on at
least the public client for that will relocate which in this case be a sewer. Uh going on to page 10. Um again I was asking the the applicant uh attorney to review the findings of the additional title document search that was provided and how carer advised him
how to prior approval should be taken into consideration regard the review of the new proposal. I don't know to what extent we want to go deep with that tonight because I know that you guys are going to have to talk about the other issues. >> Yeah. Um >> can I get copies of all the documentation referenced in that
November 24th memo so I could take a look at that. There's a lot of comments and I and I don't >> it's about this h >> I know sort through the you really should just sort through what you found that that is applicable. >> Yeah. Exactly. because I mean I think there's a lot of findings here and I
really don't have any reason to deny that what you're saying is true. For instance, none of the documents appear to be relevant. >> You're probably absolutely right. Um I think the most important things that we'll need to see are the access easement comments um just to double check, you know, whether any consents
are going to be necessary from any other parties to the easements, property owners for the relocations. Um but you know, I just want to board identification double check that. So maybe if it's really just the the portions that we're talking about here.
>> Yep. We'll go over it. >> All right. Thanks, sir. >> Uh item five being top of page 10 topics going on. This was definitely the environmental commission. It was suggesting originally get comments from the environmental
commission. Uh and I was in more recent asking for clarification on the underground water contamination. You heard that tonight and I guess there's some supplemental documentation that's going to be provided to kind of confirm what you said. >> Yeah, we can submit the ESAS
>> and I don't maybe I missed it but is there do we have comments from the environmental commission on this project? Yes. >> Yes, we I guess >> again this has been going on for a while. There's a lot of I try to keep track of what we have but if it's not listed in my report that mean either >> I don't have it or I in real life I
don't have it. Got you. Yeah. All right. um parking uh and and site circulation as item V. Uh again the original comments here dealt with um and then we should talk about this a minute. You this project
by constructing this building they actually need to build into what is right now a 30- foot wide common access easement. It's again it's the main e coming in from 202 that goes to the shops to fling. It may benefit other properties besides them, but it it certainly it's an encumbrance on this
particular property. Uh but it provides access to adjoining properties. Um there's two elements of that. There's the intersection with the state highway. uh the applicant is physically not making any physical changes to the
intersection itself which is why I assume DOT issued a letter of no interest because you're physically not working in the you're not ch it's currently an entrance only and you're not physically doing anyone the right >> um but you are encroaching into what is
now a wide a 30 foot wide ease that benefits others >> I think the board needs to know and maybe this go back to discussion you're going to car. If there's other parties that have some say in this who are benefiting from this easement, I think we need to know if it's not just your
not just your the owner of the property you're dealing with um that we >> Yeah. our position in that it it is an access easement. We're continuing to provide the same access that has been provided essentially from the outset.
shops at Flemington continue to have unfettered access off of 202 into their site. >> We'll talk about it. >> I'm not arguing the point one word. I'm just saying we just need to know if there's another entity that >> this is the this is the entrance by the um
>> by the big sign >> by the sign that changes >> the shops the 202. >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> The 30 foot or the 20 or the 28? >> That's the 30. It's it's it's identified as a 30 >> foot east >> and it's pretty wide
>> and again as they indicated with the restaurant there it was a two-way driveway. I I gather when somehow when they did the 202 circle it used to be an entrance and exit but when they did the 20 circle it just became an entrance. >> Correct. >> Um and and but it is an access into the
shops at Flemington. I think if we're acting on this, we I think we either need I think Cara needs to be convinced that either the shops in Flemington have no say over this or if they do, you may want to maybe a condition approval to get something from them that they have, you know, they're
okay with it. Can I just make a comment on that, please? Because I I I've been looking at this, too. And to me, that two-way section carry carries so close to Route 202 now because Red Crab needed to get
people in and out of the front parking lot. With that no longer being necessary, uh I I think it's a better traffic flow situation to have that oneway section elongated because people should not be coming that close to 202 and then
finding out they can't get out. So, I kind of like the circulation change and making that a oneway for a longer stretch just from a a functional standpoint. And then the other thing I noticed in the traffic report, while you
might think this is a very primary ingress, they're only counting seven cars turning in there in a weekday PM peak hour and 17 on a Saturday peak hour. So it doesn't seem like right now
a lot of existing tenants are using it. I I believe I'll obviously meet the car wash. It'll get much more active. But just just two comments from a traffic standpoint on that that help avoid them. >> Again, this the site has a lot of history to it and a lot of things have
happened and a lot of conditions have been imposed and easements dedicated. Again, we just need to sort through it. If they have no if they no longer have any implication, that's fine. We just need to check them off and make >> So your concern, Bob, just make sure I'm hearing this. Your concern is that at
some point and some prior approval, maybe it's the shop of Flemington, maybe it's somebody else adjoining the property, that this access, this easement was part of that application, part of that, maybe even part of their approvals. there is a change to this and
so you want documentation suggesting that we need some documentation on who might have you know the applicant testimony here is that they're still maintaining access but >> but there may be language in the ement itself that says no beneficiaries of the
easement like it no the meets and bounds of the ement should not be changed or the directional of the ement shall not be changed in any way without the consent of all beneficiaries of the ement >> right >> it Good. I I don't know. It probably doesn't based upon John's representation, but you know, I think
maybe it's just something you want to we'll go over. I think we've actually sub I think I think it's >> in the uh share file and stuff. >> Yeah. >> But I'll I'll resend it. Okay. >> So, you're in township's traffic
engineer, right? >> Yes. So back in the day there was always talk about making where the shops of Flemington enters behind McDonald's on Razel Avenue. That was supposed to be a frontage road running all the way down
>> the four corner. >> Is that still on their plans? Because they also have >> it. It's still on their >> wide. >> Yeah. >> This wider road and we also have to I think we have an obligation to protect that. Yeah.
>> Um, it was supposed to go >> not on our master plan. >> It's not on our master plan, but it takes traffic. It was It does serve our businesses like the shops of Flington. So, it is not on our plan. I just want to know if it's still on there and if that has any bearing to why you know
anything about this road and the east building. >> I think it's more of a north south connector from the signal at Rayville. >> Yes. through that main aisle that's kind of to the east of this area >> bridge.
>> Yeah. And then um I do know on the properties further north in Ron there are some environmental issues with feasibility of ever making that connection and some county issues with ever >> getting an access to Holy Spirit.
>> Uh >> yeah, exactly. Exactly. It was always a long-term plan of the townships. >> Correct. >> And so when they, you know, with all the planning that was done on some of these other sites, they always protected. I know they that was always being protected.
>> That's correct. >> Right. >> And it's an ancillary easement. Probably has less significance, but nevertheless, it puts in the same category that goes through the TD Bank, goes around the front of the TD Bank. I I tend to think that was to benefit this property and not necessarily TD Bank, but again, it
it it's it the changing of the u what is now as Jay said a partially two-way access road to a oneway somewhat affects that again no one may have any interest in it they may not care but we just need to know that if there's they have some sort of a sign off if there is a there's
a box that has to be checked we have to make sure the box gets checked um the item uh one item double iron here was the the truck turning you saw in exhibit is going to become part of the plan. Um, and we actually saw an another exhibit
relating to the fire truck which is also going to become part of the plan. Uh, July encroachment. >> Same thing as okay. Um, and these are all different items in different elements of the site that we have with a
common theme running through it. Um, >> yeah. He has gone on to two. >> Okay, that's that's the again the consent issue relating to a different aspect of the project. Item three is probably something similar. Um
uh not again consent from from the owner on whatever that specific item related to item four. Um again this goes into the parking count. We're I'm saying they have 77 more spaces. Doug in his count was coming up
with I think more than that. Um uh >> significant reduction in impervious. We're back to this issue of what's a significant reduction and whether there's some things there's some elements of this plan where removing
some impervious coverage actually has an alternative or alternate benefit. And I think I I have one of these pro in the letter. Uh item five. Um uh okay. Yeah. Item five is is I think
and I think um Jay had this mentioned earlier and maybe Doug you could point this out. Um on lot five in the area where you have the dumpster and the entrance into your your lane. Uh in there you actually have and maybe you can point this out. You actually have
traffic from the adjoining parking lot comes out crosses and kind of goes in a different direction from the traffic coming in. You have like a cross circulation movement going on in there. What I was suggesting
here is I think Jay brought this up as well that it would probably be beneficial to all parties if that were closed off somehow. Uh and maybe perhaps in a closing off that would come become an island, a landscaped island. It would sort of separate this major access point
coming in from um from what's existing on the remaining property. Um maybe that would help reduce some perus coverage in that area to help uh put you know clear up some of the traffic circulation in that particular area and sort of isolate this element of the site which is going to be
a major from a traffic standpoint at least the major traffic uh generally from the other elements of the site which essentially is the back of the retail center. >> Can you put up the car stacking exhibit instead please? >> I'm just gonna piggyback when you
respond. >> Sure. Um, >> there you go. This one. >> Yeah, >> this is a six. >> So, th this uh this area I was going to ask you when I had a chance to ask a question what the purpose of all this
switchback is through here because to me this wants to be just a line of cars one way like this just in case it gets a little longer. you can stack cars like this and if you could somehow like cut close that off like Bob's saying and just give them like a cut through there instead.
>> Yeah. So, we understand your comment. We think it's fair and I've talked to um Spark about this and we can make a modification here to improve this access, eliminate a conflict point, you know, maybe add a little bit more green space in this area, move this trash
dumpster up here. So effectively this would become you'd come down hit a trash enclosure and then what I think we would need to do you'd still need to maintain some sort of traffic flow here. So we'd likely lose four to six parking stalls in this area.
So you come down, you'd still be able to navigate down this way if you need to rather than you don't want to create a dead end scenario, right? So >> you could come to this point instead of having to turn around and go back here. We could modify this area, come through, and then there could still be a two-way,
you know, somewhere in this portion, but it would separate basically car wash operations from anyone coming this way, and then they can they would essentially come down here. If they need to enter the car wash, they can do that or they can continue straight. And I think this would this would definitely increase the
the stacking. Um, so we agree to comply with that. comments. >> Yeah, >> I'm just on this maybe on this exhibit if you can just explain that up on screen. >> So for everyone on the screen, that's this area right here. Essentially what
we would be doing is we would be extending a landscape island and placing the trash enclosure towards this area and it would separate the the spark facility uh entrance from anyone coming southbound down this drive aisle. we
would be redirecting that traffic um along these existing parking spaces. We would lose approximately uh probably four to eight parking stalls in lot five um in this case and and and this further I
think agrees with Bob's comments regarding reducing uh more impervious adding some more green fix trying to you know bring that bring that non-compliance down a little bit more there. So that impacted a lease area. We have to expand that a little bit to
relocate the dumpster. >> We'll talk about >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. When I'm doing this report, I'm not advocating just to remove parking spaces for the sake of removing part. We can see a benefit someplace where there's a benefit to be a good spot to
pick up some coverage. >> Uh item six. Um, again, this is going to go back more to the board. Some of the var some of the relief you're going to be uh asked to approve in here was I heard relief on the buffering along Route 202. The applicants indicating
that they're maintaining what is currently there in the way of a buffer. Although it they're basically taking the whole site that's there out of commission and putting something new in. They're trying to basically trying to hold the proposal to kind of hold the boundary of what's there and ask for
relief associated with that. uh and in the in the same se in the same element there was also a variance from the I guess there were a kiosk or whatever what do you refer to structure >> accessory structures another variance associated with that >> again I was just pointing out that that
might be the area again the board's map will vote on variance or design waiverss or whatever category it falls into but that might be an area where if if this and we heard reason I asked the question earlier about this prototype they're dealing with a set building here that they're essentially trying to position
on a lot within existing conditions. Hence, their need to encroach into the 34th easement, hence their necessity by trying to stay within the property lines of the current lot and minimize their lease area is to push this thing up closer. That's that's the driving
elements here of what's driving. >> If to the extent that this could be shifted back a little bit, they might be able to meet the buffer. They're going to probably still need relief on the kiosk in the front, but it might be less, you know, might be less of an intrusion. Um, and this thing may have
to shift. Again, if this lot, if these lots don't exist as lots, then we're really kind of tying ourselves in a Gordian knot here trying to deal with something that may not even be an issue necessarily. Um, but again, that that was the intent. That was another suggestion under item six. again only
because um it's something the board I think is going to have to grant relief from and you may want to take that into consider the advocate may want to take that into consideration. Um stor I'm going to kind of skip over storm water management. There there are some things they're going to do. Uh
there's some things in here that we had suggested. I think just going reducing impervious coverage to some extent uh start to help lessen the impact. Again, we're still dealing with our section 26, whatever it is, um
>> on on the on the alternate side of this where they're, you know, they're supposed to irrespective of the state regulations on the local level, you know, they're supposed to make attempts to, you know, to reduce coverage or improve um, you know, water quality. I think the only question in here I asked
Doug and maybe a document I think it was under uh the third top of page 13 is to document you're actually reducing motor vehicle service. It wasn't clear to me that you actually are. Um but you say you are and I think we just need a doc
and I don't I'm not sure that's documented. >> If you look in the revised storm water report I submitted it should be documented on >> well tell you what I'll do that tonight. And part of your response to this could be look on page whatever you
>> yes it is a reduction >> um most of these storm some of these storm waters they address some of they partially address um and uh some I think we just need the water quality standard you're I'm not sure what what the the element you suggested but you say
there's a mechanical device you could use to improve water quality. Yeah, it's a it's called a snout. You put it at the discharge point. It basically collects um any you know oils or things along those lines. >> So you can provide you know you provide details on it. So there's on the stormwater stuff there's stuff they have
addressed. There's things they could better enhance by reducing some impervious coverage. There's elements that they they could provide. Uh ultimately as we act on this application we have to say they've complied with the state stormwater regulations. We have no ability to grant relief from those. So
it sounds like they're on the path to do that. This has to be documented. Uh I was adding there's are there is existing infrastructure on this site. I I don't know that again as an owner of the property they're supposed to be documenting their
maintenance and um uh functioning of those with the burrow on a yearly basis. I don't know whether they are or not, but they certainly need to know that that's that's going to certainly be a condition of this. Uh even though you're not owning the property, you >> we have our own.
>> Yeah. Uh standards. Uh we break down chart again on the values. That was that's documentation issue. uh groundwater recharge standards. Um
uh we heard you testify about ground water. So you say you're going to give us documentation saying there is no groundwater contamination or it's not affecting the property. >> Correct. Based on >> uh maintenance requirements um this person wants to address partially addressed again document. There is
existing storm water infrastructure here. the owner is supposed to be filing um there should be an operation owner and manual um filed with it. I think you're providing one it's going to need to get recorded um and henceforth going forward whoever the entity responsible
for the maintenance that's going to have to be the maintenance logs and documenting that with the burrow. for uh the perfect page 13 page. Uh a lot grading. Um I'm sure you're looking into this. I'm
sure you're not creating a problem, but we are putting curbing and we are a little hard to tell how this existing lot drains through this particular area. Uh especially the area to the north of you. Um, you do have some spot grades in certain areas. Again, I think with that
photograph underneath, it makes it really hard to understand what's going on. We need to know that whatever water is flowing from this this site that what you're doing in here is not going to block something off or if it is, you're going to put it have to make sure you put an inlet in or something along that line. >> Yeah, we can freeze that off. We'll add
additional spot shots, arrows, and all that sort of stuff that can help depict exactly >> more just so we can see that you're not creating a problem. >> We'll comply with that. >> Yeah. Um, lighting and landscaping deferred to Beth and the agency. You heard where they stand with us.
>> Thanks, B. Um, so let me let me go to Jay's letter next. Um, testimony already given by the applicant sent that they're going to comply with the letter. Jay, do you have other questions? >> No, I only had two things left. Um,
which has already been said they have excess parking. They have a parking utilization study in the traffic report that has actual counts of how little that parking is used right now. And um and then just talking about the the car
stacking storage capacity. It sounds like we're going to be improving that. Um, and maybe just for the traffic engineer, the one that's up, he could maybe give us some maximums a few observations from some of the existing sites to see how that matches up with
the 19 or the more we're going to get. >> That's it. Uh, that was the engineer, your your letter. >> Sure. Uh I think a lot of my comments have been uh addressed already and I think some of these others are going to be better for the architect Brexit followup hearings but not withstanding
we just take a look at you know memory season I had some uh comments in regard to the that may be for the architect. Um I had some comments regarding your signage. I suspect that may also
determine uh for the landscape plan item 4.6 on page six for those that are following along. I had a handful of comments in the landscape plan. I heard you say that your list is sweet spacing. Are these
other items that well? >> That's that's correct. Yes. If we can address A through >> um I do want to let before I skip over this uh and get too far away. I want to recognize it on 4.5 and that's something that was talked about uh from Bob's
meadow. Essentially, I'm looking for a greater setback. I thought eliminating I heard the testimony uh eliminating a drive a really just doesn't work for the function of the car wash facility, but I think there's an opportunity to eliminate perhaps a row of uh one row of
the uh vacuum cleaners. So, essentially those parking spaces that would give you an additional 13 ft. >> So, are you talking right here? Yeah, it could be those first two. Yeah. >> So, I would say yes, we can do that. However, there are um dimensional
requirements at the entrance and exit for the car wash that we must hold. Um really comes down to as these cars make their turn into and try to straighten out, they need to be able to get straight so they can enter the tunnel correctly and catch their their wheel
properly. Um and then same thing with this on the exit point. If you if you pull this in too much, it it it makes it really hard to makes it near impossible to turn out. >> I can understand that. Um but I would still ask you to take a look at it um from the perspective of maybe there's
something that you can do to adjust the landscape uh islands at the rear just to allow uh everything to get pushed back a little bit more. Maybe there's something in the lease area. Maybe there's a smaller prototype of the building. Uh, I think there was testimony that the width
is set, but perhaps the length has some has some play that can be utilized. So, I would still ask you to take a look at that because I think it's going to be really helpful for addressing some of the overall concerns I have. Uh, while I recognize that this is a permitted use,
the reality is that the there's going to be a substantial change in terms of how this property is going to look from Route 202. uh whether you like love the uh uh the red crab building, it was a building that had uh a substantial presence along the road and I think it
was consistent with what folks expect to see and want to see along this highway corridors and that's going to be replaced by a much smaller building particularly from the perspective of width along 202 and the dominant view as as a result is going to be those uh
vacuum cleaners. So, I think there's an ability to to make the the front edge of the property look look substantially nicer with a little bit of additional setback and pull on the front. >> Okay. We could take a look see if there's anything possible we can do
there. >> Yeah. Uh let's see a couple of the other comments we had in here. Um I think you talked about the lighting. The one thing I did want to circle back on, and this is for you, is the potential for turning off those
vacuum lights in the evening. I've heard you say that you may be willing to, but you have a security concern. So, I I wonder if it doesn't necessarily need to be all or nothing. How about dimming the lights, bringing them down to security level? >> We'll talk about it. We circle back in that.
>> Okay, that's great. Uh, and then uh I have comments about the noise, but that's for the architects. And I think my last comment that's not been addressed is I'm looking for a dumpster uh detailing detail. I'm sure
you can. >> We actually have one on sheet C904. You look at that. Basically, what it is is it's a block enclosure retail with wood slatted gates. Um, if you're looking for something else there, I'm sure we can
can work with you. >> I just point >> I just on the dumpster. I think it's going to be fine. On the plan that's that was submitted. It's substantially screened. So, I'm not necessarily looking for enhanced uh materials, although in general, they should be
consistent with with the building. And if that's done, I'll be satisfied. Just to send you back on that, given the testimony earlier that this site, aside from the the customers who are cleaning out their cars and stuff, that's the only waste that's generated by this
site. >> Oh, yeah. >> I guess question is, do do you need as large a dumpster thing you're proposing here? >> I mean, you're proposing a pretty standard thing. >> I I believe so. Due to the >> due the amount of cars coming in, the trash does fill up. They you don't want
to propose something smaller than what's required. Then you got overfill and it becomes an issue >> right next to us. >> Question. Where do you uh if if you're out there cleaning out your your car that maybe has a ton of trash, what do you where are you taking the trash on the side?
>> So, actually on every one of these vacuums, there is a little um I guess you would call it a trash can attached to it. Um it's I don't know about this big or so. when the employees come through and they will empty those out and that's when they will bring them to the dumpster. So, as a customer, you're
never going to this dumpster. It's only the employees. >> Okay. That's everything. If >> you could stop sharing so I can see the remote, folks. We're go to questions from members of the board um on the engineering testimony given. So, Dennis got his hand up. He's unmuted. He's on
the top of it. Sir, >> I I want to talk about the water. Um, so if I understood you correctly, you gave two different uh amounts. They're very consistent. Um, that on average roughly
16,000 gallons a day of water, of which 11,553 gallons would go to the sewer. So about 27% would be reclaimed. And then on a car basis
28 gallons per car uh 21 20.89 would go to the sewer and 7 to 8 would be reclaimed. So it's about 29% reclaimed. Do I have that correct? I know you said they're conservative, but
do I have that correct? >> Yes, you have that correct. So water and this is I'd like to note this is for will serves and connection fees and this is a conservative number but we have data that we can provide to back these
numbers up showing that existing facilities in use are less than this number and we are willing to provide that to your office. We're willing to provide you guys with hard data that we have from our existing facilities across the state and we know you're concerned
about the water and we we want to make you as comfortable as possible with with what our numbers are actually going to be moving forward and we are more than willing to provide this data utility bills. We provide a sewer report to the D basically with this information
outlaying how we get to these numbers showing that we are conservative. Um, so we are willing to do that, but yet yes, what you've outlined is correct. >> Can I I'm sorry. Can I just piggy back on you for a second? I don't understand. You're saying that's conservative and you're saying it's will serve. Once that
allocation is given to you, you've got that allocation and you waste all the water you want because you've got that allocation and we can't use it anywhere else. >> That's a fair point. >> Okay. Do I? Sorry.
>> No, no problem. Um, and so using your numbers though on the 15,894, that's 5.8 million gallons a year, right? You're open 365 days. So that's almost 6 million gallons of water,
uh, of which using those percentages, over 4 million gallons are going into the sewer. If you were to take that number and apply it, it sounds like what you did was multiply by 365. >> Yes.
>> Yes. But that in reality is not the case. >> It is not the case. >> Well, well, it is 5.8 million gallons, right? I mean, I'm using your gross number of gallons per day. Yes, you're taking
>> you're taking the average cons very conservative calculation and you're making the assumption that that is going to happen every day on a daily basis for 365 days. >> Let me let me clarify. I thought your numbers were the water is not conservative. The amount that goes in
the sewer I thought you're saying is conservative the percentage. Okay. very nature and we >> and I guess we need we need the real numbers but I understand what Marshia was saying that if you're allotted it
then we can't use it. I think everyone agrees that's correct >> Dennis they can waste it all they want. >> Yeah. Okay. These are huge numbers that are very concerning. >> Well, we we're gonna we're gonna be back and what Mr. Wolf said as well is we'll
come back in with that. Why don't we just revisit this? We're certainly not looking to waste water. We're and and we do have systems and we'll speak about our systems a little bit more too that are intended to reclaim. We're certainly
not looking to spend more on water or any other utilities for that matter than than we otherwise need. So, if we could just why don't we just hold that for now? >> Well, so I I I understand what you're saying and I understand you want to move forward with with with with the rest of
the hearing. However, it's going to not be anyone it's not going to be in anyone's best interest if the questions don't all get asked right now so that you come back. >> You do I want you to have all of the the answers ready to go. Yep. >> So, clearly we need we need the data that you're relying on that you referred
to a few times to will provide it. We're not we are in present tense. That needs to happen immediately. We can see the data. >> That's fair. >> Okay, that's fine. >> Um Dennis, do you have other questions that we know? >> Oh, that that's it for me. >> Okay. Um Melissa or Adrian, do you have
questions? >> I have none. The water issues, I think, have been have been uh reviewed in depth. Thank you. >> Uh Melissa, >> um the water obviously was one of my issues. And I had a quick question
regarding the garbage cans that you mentioned on the vacuum islands. Are they going to be open topped? Is there going to be some kind of top to prevent garbage from blowing across the site? >> It's a so it's a closed top. However,
there's a small hole four to six inches in diameter I would say that you can place your garbage in. So it does prevent um you know wind blowing spillage out of the of the can. >> Okay. >> Uh
you kind of were talking about some storm water. Is someone going to go a little more detail on that or is it >> if you have specific questions? >> The drawing you showed you had two great two grates that picked up in the main park lot between the two vacuums. So, if
you're pulling out of the car wash, like you just got your car wash, you're coming around, they're curbing all in there that because I've seen other car washes and it puts water all the way down there 20 or
Route 12. >> Yes. So, primarily all storm water's contained within the site. Um, yes, there's curbing on the extents of this vacuum area if that's what you're talking about. And the drainage patterns are directed towards um these inlets in the center. So
>> So that if you're coming out of the wash where you have the red Yeah. So like that T track over there where the cards are coming out still wet but even though the tops are blowing off but the bottoms >> there's an there's a double inlet system right here that water's directed from
the tunnel and would flow into your through a cut. >> Okay. >> Yes. Uh, that was one of them. The with the owner of this property, I'm just thinking like snow like because you're kind of using all
this parts for vacuums and stuff like that. So like snow removal, do they take all this off somewhere or like is it pushed somewhere? >> You lose vacuum spots or >> So there is snow removal areas. I would say this is probably primarily one of
them. Uh we do not have them denoted on the plans per se. Um but yes, the lot will be plowed. >> Okay. It was just for >> where that is is put if it's on your property if it's off. Not that you're putting on somebody else's property.
>> No, it'll it'll be stored um on site. >> And then just a general question, I don't know where you're coming off the drawing 3.1. >> Is that the rendering? That was one of the ones previously. Yeah.
>> Uh so like if you're coming off of 202 turn in, you had that gravel area where hey, somebody had to get out. What's stopping somebody from the way this is shown here? It's like they could kind of just
drive right into the car wash. >> Are you saying basic coming in and driving this way? Yep. >> So there's a full height curb here. um as well as a minor grade change in this area. So you you would hit the curb if you were to drive straight in.
>> Okay. So there Yeah, because just when you're looking at this one, it kind of looks >> it's it's a little more delineated than that. That's a >> Yeah, I just wanted to make sure somebody just can't and go, "Oh, look, they're alive." >> No, they cannot make that maneuver.
>> Might not. And then just that chemical or the water storage tanks that were under the ground, >> they're I guess supported in a way that if if a fire truck went into the vacuum lanes, it's not going to >> Yes, they're they're HS rated. They not
collapse. >> And uh chemical storage in the area. Is it there's like no open floor drains that if something happened, it's gonna go into the s go into the sewer? >> No. So really with the you're getting to
like deliveries and kind of that >> whatever your chemical delivery >> got basically grade soap set used on this. So they're biodegrad biodegradable. There's no POS that was
actually one of the big main uh comments. So you know we don't we don't have any contaminants that are part of our system and they're stored in the building. >> Yeah. >> Okay. What's it
>> uh I think my only real clarification was just again was my fault for not fully reading the fires are um and that we're assuming that the fire truck will not be able to pass the kiosks. >> That's correct. >> Okay.
>> That fire truck cannot pass determined that more than likely he'll be able to go in through the vacuums that he needs to >> he can't go through the vacuums. This is this is more of a worst case scenario that was run, >> right? >> Yeah. >> Or got to >> or something's blocked or you know something.
>> So yeah, redundancy access. >> Um >> um so the vacuum area there's no there's only one way in and out. There's no emergency escape route. >> So in terms of access point, yes,
there's one way in and out here. So >> technically it's only an exit. I will I will say that. >> Right. But I mean if a car was on fire or something, people can't everybody's got to go out the same way that the fire truck has to go in.
>> If a car was on fire, this this is the only exit point for um people if if they were inside. Yes. But the fire truck can enter here and extinguish the fire. He can be over here or he can pull in here.
Like I said, if it's blocked off for some, there is also a no uh no block zone here. So, no one can park their car here and block that entrance. >> What is the material used on the outside of the vacuum area along the
northern area row of vacuum slots? >> Are you talking right right here? >> Black. Yeah. What is that? >> So, we propose Riverstone as a maintenance um consideration. However, uh Beth made a comment that she'd like to see some sort of landscaping or
plantings there, which which we can comply with. >> But I mean, is there a a fence? >> No, there's no fence. >> So, people can drive through there? >> No, there's a curb on both sides. >> But is it an emergency? People could drive through there.
>> Not >> easily. >> Legally, >> not legally and not I would not recommend it. You'd have to ramp your car up on a curb. Um, >> okay. Okay. I mean, I I was trying to get some clarification like people are going to
get stuck in there or not. >> Um, getting back to what Mark was talking about with the snow. So, that whole area with the vacuum area, the snow is going to get pushed out of that area into some other place.
>> It'll get stored up on where grass is uh available to be stored. So, you'll see. So like show where these >> uh for example you could put some in this area here. You could put some likely um in this area here. The issue
with that is we propose so many plantings um for planners request and whatnot that snow removal areas are limited. Uh we we can box these out on the plans with our revised submission. Um, and if if you guys feel that additional areas are
warranted, we can maybe reduce a few shrubs here or there to make sure there's adequate storage space. >> Okay. And then guess I'm looking at Cara or your attorney for clarification regarding this merger. >> Yeah. >> Law rule, whatever it is.
If hypothetically you're right that this is now emerged or should be treated as emerged property, what does that mean in terms of what they're asking for? What would change immediately?
I would say the calculations of all the bulk conditions potentially. Now, we've talked a lot about looking at it from a lease area perspective versus a lot area perspective. um for purposes of the board understanding what it's going to look
like um in realistically. But if that doctrine applies, again, John and I will work through the whole thing. But if that doctrine does apply and effectively the lots of merged for zoning purposes, then you're looking at this as one collective lot square
footage, for setbacks, for width, for everything coverage, for landing. >> In some instances could help and in some instances could not. So, I think between the two of us, we'll have to come up with hope what is hopefully a a mutually agreeable determination and then if not,
we'll have to see what happens. >> So, if they have their employees parking on somebody else's lot and they think that's okay, that's basically possibly merging lots versus trying to pocket snow on top of grass.
>> Um, it would I would say both of those could be if you're going to use an adjacent lot that is merged or not merged to park or store snow, they're going to have the same potential. I think that's your question, right? >> Well, yeah. I mean, Mike, they're
they're they testified that they're willing to use another lots parking spaces for employees. But then when I asked the question about snow removal, >> oh, I we're trying to to put it all over the place on grass and pile it up.
>> I'd like to add to the snow removal. So if if we do make this modification like we said we comply with that actually opens up some more landscape area that would alleviate that concern I believe. >> Okay. >> For for snow removal that is >> okay.
So if I if I could the letter that you provided thank you um from um RV the corros engineer. So I'm looking on page five. Um
there's a note in here on paragraph E um says based on an anticipated demand of greater than 12,000 gallons per day it'll be required from NJT's Bureau of Water Systems Engineering. So can you talk I'm gonna
have some follow-ups but can you talk about what that means just like what what that means? What's that process? What are they going to be looking for? What are you providing? Of course, >> timelines, all that, >> of course. So, there's two permits required. One's through water, that's
PWSC, one's through sewer, that's TWW, right? Water. If you have over 12,000 gallons, you have to submit uh to the state. Sewer, if you're over 8,000 gallons, you have to submit to the state. How that process looks is first we go to you guys. We go to Flemington Township. We need to secure,
>> I'm sorry, Flemington Burough Lake um for your approval, which we're actively doing with that letter. and our responses which I also have to let her hear. So right now and this is probably the long lead for us determining we're looking to get Flemington Burough's
approval on the sewer and water and make sure that they are comfortable number one. >> From there it then goes to the D or their approval. The D will not review either of these permits without sign off from the burrow. >> Okay. But so if I go down past the the
the checklist of cluttered items at this time, RVE does not recommend allocation of temporary reservation for water and sewer until such time as the applicant has addressed all the comments listed above. Um so on so forth. So so I'm I'm
making my understanding here. If approvals were granted and because you're asking for this much water and this much sewer, you have to go to D. correct >> is a car wash doesn't operate if there's not enough no the water isn't approved right it's >> there's no plan B >> we cannot construct anything unless we
get those permits >> right so then you're at risk right if like if if D says sorry we're not approving 15,894 gallons per day on water you're you guys
are you guys are coming back to us right for a smaller project or what like what's the so Yeah. When we submit, assuming we we received approvals and you are comfortable giving us the application,
municipality is going to endorse the applications. That's really requires municipal endorsement. Um, generally speaking, would I foresee that the DP at these levels would deny a water connection or a treatment works
approval for a store connection if the burrow approves it? not likely they deny it. we have to go through the process um significant in this realm but in in the D world it's we're not talking about
significant numbers here but uh but yeah there's there is the risk uh that they don't approve it >> just like any outside agency approval >> but you're talking about a bureau endorsement and our engineer is saying don't give them the capacity so >> oh I think that was until it's reviewed
>> so we go through the review and so >> not approved that's what they Okay. So, so, >> okay, >> we need to address their comments and secure approval from you. >> When you say burrow endorsement, I want
to make sure. Are you talking about planning board approvals? Not approval. You're talking about approval of the water. >> Yeah, that's that's comes the water authority. Yeah. So, we Yeah. board approval be first, >> right? >> Then the water authority and then ultimately it's an applications. One's
one goes to BSDW. Yeah, it's two different departments within the state. >> Two different departments. You got the water department FP and then you have the sewer department. The TWWA is treatment works approval. It's a sewer extension permit. >> So that or if it's greater than 8,000
>> so and then convers I mean this is from RV and we've got as the mayor said we have our own municipal uh water department but it's also our TWWA for sewer. So like what they've had capacity issues. There's been classification of their
facilities over the years that they've had some concerns. What are your what have your conversations been with them like? >> So Flemington's the first stop and I believe with the sewer in this case we would need to get Flemington's approval first and there's a couple signatories that are required. Typically it goes to
the burrow or the township first and then to any MUA after that and then the third stop is DDP. Some cases it goes straight from say the burrow in example straight to the D but most times it's three stops and in this case it sounds like that would be the second stop in the line.
>> So I understand the the formal process. Have you had preliminary conversations with the with the with the sewer authority? >> We have our bureau engineers are going to talk about capacity and conveyance but they're not going to talk about the treatment piece which is coming from the
utility. I I believe we have I don't have a copy of the correspondence with me, but I can dig that up and make sure we have >> I I'm I've got I've got I mean, everyone's been around talking about the water supply concerns. I also have a concern on the sewer side of it. um
because there has been issues because of classifications of the throw go back a few years but reclassification of south branch of the raridin has led to RTMA having some issues about capacity and expansion and things over time and so I'm want to make
sure that we're talking about again we're not talking about a restaurant use it's not res and we're not talking about a thousand residential units we're talking about a car wash >> where we've got ving data about how much water you're going to keep on site
versus not keep on site. Um, so like I think the board would benefit to hear please from like what if you've got any even if it's informal correspondence like what what are they thinking about this? >> I'll have to dig up my files on that. Typically always in due diligence people
will reach out and gain you know approval and capacity and whatnot. So we should have had that. Um, however, ultimately they will need to be the ones signing off on this. If they don't sign off, we're not boards. >> Um, other questions for members of the board.
>> Yeah, I have one other thing going going to original uh not veric letter December 2nd, 2024. They wrote in that letter which is not in this colonel letter and I just want
to get a comment from that. >> I'm sorry. Mayor, what letter are you looking at? >> Oh, okay. >> It's the original will sir from last year prior to that coming for us. >> I'm not messing this up. >> No, you're not. It says um however concerns regarding the proposed
20 to 40% recycled water used in the process will require additional discussions. According to National Car Wash Solutions, a leading supplier of car wash equipment, car wash standards for recycled water can be up to 80%. So,
I just want that that air. They did highlight that in their original letter to um so this not a super big issue. Um >> we we would like to note the the
manufacturer since then um for their recation facilities has changed. So there there has been some changes with that and and as time has evolved things have you know we've adopted new um specifications and things are in manufacturer.
>> Well I would Right. And I would suspect that things have gotten better. >> Right. They've improved. >> Yes. >> But yet your numbers haven't >> Well, I thought you stated it went from 20 to 40 up. Now we're saying up to 80. >> That's what they're saying. Your
numbers. you're still talking about the numbers that you know you're still talking about needing almost 16,000 gallons and on and then pouring 12,000 of those gallons into sewer system. So, we can all agree technology gets better
and whatever they've they're creating out there in the industry has to be more more um ergonomically environmentally friendly. Um and yet your numbers are though you're saying they're
conservative, they're not good. >> We can provide our backup data that >> but then you won't need those. If you have that backup data, then you shouldn't need 16,000 gallons of water in your well serve letter or 12,000 gallons of sewer. If you have those
numbers, >> that is potentially true. >> One of those numbers is right, one of those numbers is wrong. They can't both be right and they both can't be wrong. So, either you're efficient and you need less, or you're not, and you're going to waste your water. I I don't know how
else to put it. just >> I'm not >> no just come back with like real numbers >> hopefully a reduction of what you really need. >> Uh are there other questions for members of the board? >> Yeah, quick question. Uh drawing that
you have up right now uh corner of uh where you're you would make your turn. You got like a crosswalk and sidewalk >> before the kiosks >> left. Yep. over over here.
>> Will that connect over to the main sidewalk? Cuz all the drawings show it not, right? >> That's correct. This connects to the main sidewalk area. Um the I believe the conceptual rendering you're seeing is entirely accurate.
>> Yeah, I just we're not going to leave a sixoot landscape. Yeah, it connects. Yes, >> I did see that when you held it up. >> No, I just didn't know if it was like >> the state said you can't no >> go there because like a rightway but just Okay, good.
>> But then that didn't make sense. >> It's it's ADA accessible. Y >> I'm just checking professionals any other questions testimony given any of the remote participants? Everyone's asked questions. Okay, thank you for your testimony. Uh I'm looking at the
clock. It's 10:27. We we don't do new business after 10:30. So I think calling another witness now would not be appropriate. Um so um we are we can carry this. Now the >> our next noticed our next our only next
notice meeting legally is the reorg meeting on January 13th. Um we tend not to do business on the reorg meeting as you can understand. Um right that's not what we that's not what we do. Um so uh so what I and I'm the vice chair so I'm speaking
completely out of turn here but um what we can do um for the purposes of notice is we can carry it to the January 13th meeting and then >> make it another carry announcement at that meeting to a date certain um so that you don't have to be noticed or
anything like that. That's typical practice for us. um it may be January 27th our next hearing meeting but I that's nothing is real until it's adopted by by the resolution at the re so but generally where the second and
fourth please so that's our >> I was >> and we've got we have another application that we need to carry into there too so I think we will be we can be in touch um >> and what I'll do after this is kind of
sort of wasting time now I'll go through and just kind of send you a list of the things I think you need to either plan amendments or what we need to work out. That may also impact timing of those things. >> So if you need more time to have everything ready to go, we understand. And so we have no problems announcing
carrying um to keep the thing moving. Um we have no issue in terms of time to act, right? Because we've got >> uh Carla, you tell me. I don't know. >> Just extend to the end of February. >> That's okay. So >> February 28th. >> Good. Okay. So that's
>> I was just wondering if it's not >> so. >> All right. So So the end of February. So that's good. Um thank you to all and we'll see you soon. >> Thanks for the time. >> All right. So then uh item eight on the
agenda is chair items. The one thing that was in packet that we sent out were uh proposed dates. Although I don't think that this looks as normal conversation. >> I don't I don't think so. I think we
should just ask the board. >> Yeah. Regarding the last two meetings of the year in December, you have a meeting scheduled under this 24th >> November November 24th >> which is the normal meeting date. And
then the question is we meet the 1st and 15th which is only a week apart from November 24th or we meet the 8th and 22nd which is Christmas week. when we just say one meeting in December like
>> so I was just gonna say I like the one meeting in December option meeting is always on so >> so it feels like the consensus is keep you know 24th and then two weeks later
would be the 8th December 8th is So we picked December 8th through December 15th to be one of December. It was there. It's about the same. >> Yeah, it really doesn't matter. So maybe
>> so >> we don't know >> it'll be >> why >> we're only having a meeting on the first >> so so I I would say maybe maybe we keep it for keep it the eight so it's two weeks and if we have to have a special meeting for whatever reason we give
ourselves to be there if we need >> that's actually a good idea that >> so it's the 8th with 15th of >> we should reserve we should all reserve Yeah, >> notice for both. >> Okay.
>> One of those two. >> The other thing is on this list needs to be the reorg on there. >> So, um again, assuming that council is going to reorg on the
>> would be the Monday. Then the 12th we are 127 second Tuesday. >> How about the May October? >> Yes. >> So if we go to May,
April's got two meetings and 28. Um we would normally have a meeting on May 12th, May 12th. So it's May May 26th is the day after Memorial Day because Memorial Day is the fourth Monday the council 26 their meeting. So
one option is to attend a public week and have you know a second meeting else today or just have one out and we could do the same we can notice for the 12th and 19th and that's all
>> okay >> because I think it ends up being cheaper right we just do one notice with everything as opposed to then going back and renoticing it changes when you go on the website >> oh good That's right. >> Well, I mean, not noticing is post we're doing it in one shot and then if we
cancel for lack of agenda items, we just cancel. >> Yeah. What if we do that here as opposed to then having to put that back on the website or renoticing it? >> So then the same the same situation happens in October. So we have meetings on the 8th and 22nd of September,
regular 2nd and fourth of the of the month. And then so um October there is um the second the second um Tuesday would be the 13th but because
the day before is a holiday counsel take the 13th. >> We could take the sixth. >> We could take the sixth because that'll be two weeks after last episode. >> Um good. So, I think we've got a plan for that and you've got what you need
for the resolution for the reorgation which is on January 13th. >> Are there any other chair items? >> We have a chair. >> No, I'm just All right. When I was chair, we used to like use this space if anyone had anything else they need to bring
support. So, I'm just throwing it out there. Um, item not We'll move on. Item nine. Were there any bills? I didn't see any bills. >> There's too soon. No bills to audit. Um, we need to go to executive session. >> Is there a motion to adjurnn? So, move
>> Yes. Mark. >> All in favor say I. Hi. >> See you next resolution. I did.