In accordance with the open public meetings act 1975 chapter 231. Adequate notice of this regular meeting of the planning board of the township of Franklin has been provided. If everyone could please stand for the pledge. I pledge algiance to the flag to the flag of the United States of America and
to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Councilman Embarson >> here. >> Theodore Chase >> here. >> Robert Leort >> here. >> Mark Dansancy >> here. >> Jennifer Ragnau
>> here. Mahir Rafi >> here. >> Charles Brown >> here. >> Robert Thomas >> here. >> Sammy Siobhan >> here >> and chairman Rini >> here. And uh just before the meeting Sammy took the oath of office. So welcome back Sammy. >> Very very excited to have you back um on
the board. So um minutes we have two sets. Um I'll make a motion for the regular meeting of January 14th, 2026. Uh, Councilman Embarrison, Mark Dancy, Jennifer Ragnau, and Charles Brown cannot vote.
>> Second. >> Theodore Chase, >> yes. >> Robert Lort, >> here. >> Mahir Rafi, >> here. >> Robert Thomas, >> yes. >> And Chairman Rini, >> yes. >> Um, I also motion the regular meeting minutes from January 21st, 2026.
>> Same group can't vote either. >> Second. >> Theodore Chase. Yes. >> Robert Lort. Yes. >> Mah Rafi. >> Yes. >> I've read the >> What happened? >> No, just keep going. Keep going. >> Oh, sorry. Robert Thomas.
>> Yes. >> Chairman Orsini. >> Yes. Um, okay. So, a number of resolutions. Um, all but one of which should be familiar to all of you. So, the first one, amended affordable housing development fee ordinance. I assume Mark, this is what you read to
us. Uh, and we um we we did last last meeting. So, um move move to approve that. >> Uh just Mahir cannot vote. >> Second. >> Councilman Embarson. >> Yes. >> Theodore Chase. >> Yes. >> Robert Lort. Yes.
>> Mark Dancy. >> Yes. >> Jennifer Ragno. >> Yes. >> Charles Brown. >> Yes. >> Robert Thomas. Yes. >> Chairman Thomas. Uh Chairman Norcini. >> Yes. >> Just you can do that tomorrow. Um uh ma uh move the uh master plan
re-examination report. Second. >> Who was that? Bob Lort. >> Councilman and Barson. >> Yes. >> Theodore Chase. Yes. >> Robert Lort. >> Yes. >> Mark Dancy. Yes. >> Jennifer Ragno. >> Yes. >> Charles Brown. >> Yes. >> Robert Thomas. >> Yes. >> Chairman Marcini.
>> Yes. >> And um the fourth round affordable housing obligation. Um move to approve that. >> Second. >> Councilman Embarson. Yes. Theodore Chase. Yes. Robert Lort. Yes. Mark Dancy,
>> Jennifer Ragno, >> yes. >> Charles Brown, >> yes. >> Robert Thomas, >> yes. >> And Chairman Arcini, >> yes. Uh, and this last one, what's that about? >> Um, that is in front of you as well as was um added, this is um special counsel
whenever uh like B9 since Pete could not do it, we have a special counsel and that would be the zoning board. >> Yeah. Um Eric Bernstein. Okay, that's what I figured. Just wanted to make sure. So, I'll move to approve that. >> Well, no, that's >> Oh, what? No.
>> Why don't you move to appoint him and then you'll move to memorialize it. >> Okay. So, you're not going to adopt. >> Got it. Got it. Got it. >> All right. So, I would move to appoint Eric Bernstein as special counsel, who by the way has been doing that. >> I'll second it.
>> Okay. Councilman Embarison. >> Yes. >> Theodore Chase. >> Yes. >> Robert Lort. >> Yes. >> Mark Dancy. >> Yes. >> Jennifer Ragno. >> Yes. Mahir Rafi, >> yes. >> Charles Brown, >> yes. >> Robert Thomas, >> yes. >> Pete, can Sammy vote on this even though
he's an alternate or is it just the main people? >> Typically, it's just your your if you have a full complement of members in the >> I do. I was just making sure. Thank you. Chairman Arcini. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> So then, um, in line with what Pete said, I would then make a motion to
memorialize that, um, per the resolution before us tonight. >> Second it. >> Councilman Embar. >> Yes. >> Theodore Chase. Yes. >> Robert Lort. Yes. >> Mark Dancy. >> Yes. >> Jennifer Ragnau. Yes. >> Mahir Rafi. >> Yes. >> Charles Brown. >> Yes. >> Robert Thomas. >> Yes. >> Chairman Rarcini.
>> Yes. >> Um I was remissed at the outset to uh not mention that the hearing for Concore Realy LLC PLN2300006 uh which was going to be heard tonight is now carried to April 15, 2026 with no
further notification necessary. Should they carry a second time without actually appearing, they're going to need to renotice. >> Um so, uh that brings us to we have no discussion items, so public comments, u move to open to the public for any um
general planning comments. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I. >> Any member of the public wishing to come forward to make any planning comments not associated with the Odin Dune hearing tonight, which will have its own public opening. Seeing no takers, some move to close.
>> Second. >> All in favor? >> I I >> All right. Um we um have one hearing tonight and then we'll go through our our master plan priorities after that hearing is done. So um that's the rest of the business we have tonight. So uh
without further ado, um call uh Tim to um Odin Dune LLC PLN 24007. Not usually. >> You're supposed to just wait for it to tell you you're talking to the mic. >> See, wait a waiter. Try my soup.
>> You can't make sure you're not Oh, that's loud. >> Hello. >> Okay. Uh, good evening. Uh, thank you members of the board, board professionals. My name is Tim Arch. I'm an attorney uh licensed in the state of New Jersey here representing Odin Dunn, as you're aware.
Um, you'll remember we had two prior hearings. Uh, one uh not too long ago, I think back in February was the last one. Um, and at that time, uh, we didn't have our our engineer present. Um, and I know that the board had some, uh, some additional questions and some additional
quest, uh, requests for some exhibits, uh, which, uh, we hope that we can provide you with, uh, tonight. And, uh, and hopefully that will, um, uh, show everybody the the efforts that we're taking, uh, to really preserve, uh, trees on the site. Um we were uh uh
given some uh some updated and revised uh reports uh from your planner and from your engineer um as well as from your uh environmental commission. Uh and I will just uh I just want to note that as part of that the environmental commission um has indicated that the applicant has again significantly reduced the number
of trees on site to be removed. um and also indicated that the environmental commission is pleased to find that the number of trees to be removed and the deficit deficit in actual planting of required trees is significantly less than what was proposed in the previous submission. So I I thank the environmental commission for
acknowledging that. Um I do have uh uh my witness here tonight is uh Mr. Greg Oman who's a a principal of Menllo Engineering. Um and unless the board has any preliminary questions of me, I'm ready to uh have him sworn in. >> I don't think so. ago.
>> Raise your right hand. You sure the testimony you're going to provide is the truth, all truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> If you could state your name, spell your last name, and give us your address for the record, please. >> Sure. Gregory Omen, OM an address, 261 Cleveland Avenue, Highland Park, New Jersey, 08904.
>> Uh, Greg, I I don't know if you've testified in front of this board in the past, but if you can please just give us a little bit of your background so that you can be potentially accepted as an expert. >> I am currently president and owner of Menllo Engineering Associates. I've been with Menllo coming in April 28 years, licensed engineer in the state of New
Jersey now for 24 years. Also licensed in the state of Pennsylvania. Uh testified across the state uh in front of this board numerous times, but it's been a good 10-15 years since I've been here. And I do recognize some of the faces. So I know there's some people that have been doing this as long as I
have. >> Um Greg, you're accepted. >> Thank you. Uh, Greg, if you can please uh just uh explain to the board the uh the exhibits that you brought and uh and then after you're done your presentation, if you can just answer any questions that the board members might have.
>> Certainly. So, I had the opportunity of watching the videos of the first two uh public hearings that occurred for this particular application. Uh especially the last applica uh last hearing in which there was some requests by the board for certain exhibits to be
brought. So, we're we're going to start with basically the aerial photo. We found an aerial photo that was about a year or two old. Uh pretty clear and basically superimpose the property outline over it. Uh shows what exists
today, the single family house with the access out to Cedar Grove Lane along with the wooded areas in the back that has been discussed with the board for the past two hearings. The next exhibit entitled limit of disturbance exhibit is
basically the same aerial photo uh with a red line which basically shows the limit of disturbance and that limit of disturbance follows the 40ft landscape buffer on the north and south sides along with the 25 foot buffer on the
westerly side. It also shows the 16-in or greater trees that the applicant's arborist had highlighted and identified on site, showing the ones within the red line to be eliminated and removed and the ones outside of the red line along
the buffer and along the property lines to remain. We can we can probably stick with that one. Um, so after the last hearing, my office started to update the plans based on the expansion of the landscape
buffer. The original application had a 15-ft buffer along the property line where we expanded that to 40 ft and that was testified to at the last hearing. We started with looking at the arborist report because the previous plans that were submitted did not have the arborist
report at that time and the arborist actually found a few additional 16inch trees on site that weren't picked up on the original survey. So the first thing our office did was reanalyze how many existing trees are on site today. And based on utilizing the arborist updated
numbers, we have a total of 2,649 trees on site. 95% of those trees are 4 in to 15 inch in caliber with the remaining 140 or about 5% being 16 inch or larger. So now that we knew how many
existing trees there were located on site, we then looked within the limit of disturbance of how many of those trees were going to be removed. And our calculation shows based off of the trees within that red limit of disturbance, we are removing 1,597
trees, approximately 60% of the existing trees on site. The previous submission plans showed an 82.4% removal rate showed over 21 almost 2,200 trees being removed. So, we've reduced that by approximately 600 almost 600
trees we've reduced uh to be shown to be removed. Now, we have the number of trees that are being removed. So, based on the township ordinance, we ran through the numbers to calculate what the tree replacement requirement would be. And based on the requirement, we are
required a total of 1,230 replacement trees to be planted on site. We then basically updated our landscape plan, eliminated any of the proposed trees that were previously shown within
that 40ft buffer area and then looked along these 40 foot buffer areas, especially to the north side, and found that there's a lot of gaps within that tree canopy. Uh the aerials kind of show it at the northnortheast end. You can
kind of see where the tree canopy kind of falls over the property line but not fully into the site. So what we planted and showed on our landscape plan was an additional approximately 75 evergreen trees to be supplemented within those gaps of the existing trees to help
enhance that buffer and bring it to a full 40t along the northerly and southerntherly sides. We're showing that we're proposing a total of 895 trees on site. 30 of those are required based on the township ordinance, two per lot. So
you remove the 30 from that. We are proposing 865 of those trees to be counted towards our replacement requirement. It's a mixture of deciduous trees that have been upsized to 2 and 1/2 in caliber. The evergreen trees are at 6 to 7 feet in
height and the flowering trees have been upsized to a planting height of 12 to 14 feet. So that leaves us with a deficit of 365 trees in which the applicant would have to pay towards the township tree fund
>> in between the if we can go to the overall >> just while while we're running through these these were these supplied ahead of time. Correct. So they're not really exhibits. They're >> the first three were submitted. >> Right. Okay. When we get to one that wasn't if we can then just mark them as we move along. I just wanted to say for the record that we're calling these
exhibits, but they're actually copies of plans that were submitted in advance of the hearing. >> Correct. And I believe one of one of these that we have not gotten to yet was already identified, I believe, is A3 at the last. >> So, we'll identify that one, then we'll move on from A3 from there. >> You got it. Thank you. >> Just scroll down a little bit.
>> All right. So, this is one that we would like to mark in. >> It's entitled overall plan exhibit. It's a revised exhibit. It was one of the first exhibits that we had at the first hearing. This is dated February 12th, 26. And and what this is, it's it's an
updated aerial photo and development plan that changes the 15oot buffer to to the full 40t on the north and and westerly side. >> And just for the record, that'll be A4. >> That'll be A4. Correct. >> Thank you. >> Well, actually, was this the one that I
believe this was the one that we showed uh for A3 last time, or was this created in between the last? >> This was created in between. >> Then I am wrong. Don't listen. This >> do good. >> This includes the supplemental planting that I had just testified to along the norly within that 40 foot buffer. The
evergreens to help enhance that buffer along the northerly side >> doesn't show anything on the southern border. >> The southerntherly side is is pretty dense. We didn't find many gaps in the southernly side to have to fill in. >> Well, but if we believe that picture,
there are no trees there in the buffer. Uh if we can zoom in on that because uh I believe you can see from there there there are trees amongst that >> southerntherly area. It might just be hard to to see that some of the shading in the overlay
>> and I think the trees that are circled those are the ones that are over 16inch caliber. >> That's correct. >> So there are trees in there but those are just happen to be smaller. >> The rest are the 14 to 15 the 4 in to 15 inch calipers. That's correct. So, the proposed landscaping, I don't believe that was provided any testimony
at the last hearing. In between the buildings, uh, is something that we we do on typically larger homes. Uh, you find it very often up in Bergen County. Franklin has it in in several areas. Uh, I lived in Franklin Park for numerous
years right off of South Middleush over there off of Butler. A lot of those homes have instead of fencing in between that kind of designate the lots, they actually have landscaping in between them. And and that's kind of the theory that we were going with here. Uh fully evergreen planting, you know, Norway
spruces, uh east red cedars kind of in between to help provide shielding in between to provide a nice buffer. So they didn't have a need uh for fencing in between. In total, we're proposing 895 trees, 392 shrubs, and 939 ground
cover, combination of dlies and grasses. Most of the shrubs and and the ground cover is being promoted along the right ofway of Cedar Grove Lane to kind of give a nice visual aspect as you approach the subdivision. My only other last remarks was that in
terms of outside approvals, uh we have obtain the sign off from the police, from health, and from fire. We are required to submit an application to Somerset County Planning Board to Somerset County Conservation District because we are disturbing over 5,000
square feet. The Delaware Route and Canal Commission who does have review over the drainage for the property. And depending on how the applicant decides to go with the sewer, I know that was discussed. There was two options. If they tie right into the system that goes out to Ammo Pump Station, they will not
require a D permit. But if they do go out to the Wilson Road pump station, they will require a treatment works approval from the DB. >> And one of the things that we may uh just want to mention in terms of it, and this didn't really occur to me as potentially being a concern of the board, but one of the things that we do
want to highlight is that until we get those outside agency approvals, obviously that's that's kind of built into the to the conditions of every approval, but I just want to assure the board that we're not going to clear we're not going to grade the site if we don't have those approvals. we won't we we won't be able to. And so that we're
not going to have a situation where trees are removed and you have a a site where trees have been removed and then all of a sudden turns out that Somerset County or Franklin Township Sewer Authority says actually no, you can't build this and then we're left with a site that's been previously cleared. So I just want to make sure the board is
aware of that that we're certainly happy to have that be a condition if the if the board looks favorably on this. >> Yeah, you can rest assured it will. Uh sewer. Um do you so you you're familiar with the letter from the sewage authority first of all that you need to replenish your escrow.
>> Yep. >> Are you also familiar with given the options you you you just listed right? Uh whether you go to Amwell >> you go to like I guess Wilson Shrepto area whatever. >> So with the Amwell that would require an upgraded pump station and you So I just
want to make sure you understand that. Um okay. So, um the only other staff reports though, um I think the environmental commission report speaks for itself would be Mark Healey's and Darren. Um and so Darren's here and he
can um guide you to the right ones. When you're ready, you might >> That was going to be my last comment. We we've reviewed the February 26th letter uh that Darren from Center State and the February 10th letter from Mark Healey and the applicant can comply with all
the comments noted in there and any discrepancies on the plan and details provided as necessary. >> Mark, let's start with your report. Is there anything you specifically would like to call out to the applicant that you would like to see revised? Um,
now I think I mean I think a lot of the stuff um a lot of the stuff in my report we've discussed to one degree or another. Um, so let me I guess maybe I'll just run through a few of them. Um, under the title of tree preservation
replacement, I made a few um, suggestions. So perhaps I might be suitable to get the uh the response from the applicant. Um, well obviously I'm assuming the first comment about putting a note on the plan
that the fence will be adjusted in the field around trees. I'm assuming you agree to that. >> Um, >> one of the comments that I made was, again, I think this is a no-brainer. >> You're basically reflecting a certain amount of trees that are going to be placed on each one of these lots. So, if
this was to be approved and these lots were already kind of come in for building permit, plot plan review, the board was to approve this, you'd have they'd have to show those trees and the tree preservation that's reflected on this plan that you're showing to the board. >> Correct. Um I did suggest that to the
degree that this buffer is being um you know proposed as I think the intent uh is that this is going to be a perpetual buffer to remain. Um so there there might be suggested the board consider some type of easement a conservation
easement to to make sure that that remains. So >> we'd be happy to do that. >> Okay. I with respect to the and I know we've talked a lot about the size of the homes and the coverages but I think generally you know the intent seems like the
intent of the developer is to to build large homes and to the degree that they approach those coverages you know I recommended that there be some note perhaps in the in the chain of title alerting future homeowners if if if if this these homes are built at at max
coverage both building and impervious those future homeowners need to know that then they're they're locked in. >> So we we don't have we don't have I don't have a objection to that. The only issue that I have with deed restrictions that talk about current zoning standards
and if this is a conforming, let's say they're built and it's conforming and in there there's a deed restriction that says, uh, you should be aware that you're right at the limit of the, you know, coverage. If those standards ever change in the future, then they're at odds with the deed restriction. I think
I'm always hesitant to help. >> It wouldn't be a restriction so much as a notice. So it would be something that advises that you know at the time this is being filed the um the coverages are X and Y the standards are A and B. Um
you know this places you want notice that should you wish to exceed those coverages or any applicable coverage at the time of your you know at the time you wish to do the improvements you may need to file for a permitted approval or application approval to the zoning board of adjustment. just something that lets
people know because I think what um the staff has experienced over the years is you know um properties get built out to the standard and then homeowners buy them and real estate attorneys are are great but they don't always look at everything and frankly generally you do
real estate I do real estate I'm always looking to see what the coverage is on the lot my client's buying and see if they could put a deck on. Yeah, understood. I No, I I certainly understand that the I just don't know. I I would just defer to you as to what the best method is to do that so that we're not tying hands in the future if the board ever or if the ordinance is >> No, because I've experienced what you
had before where it's, you know, municipal uh sale of a lot. It subjects it to the zoning that at the time and then they change the zoning and you don't know if you can work with the existing zoning or you got to still stick with whatever they had the deed restriction on. I just I just had a very interesting one in South Brunswick where
there's a 1968 resolution that said you can keep cars on the lot and they had to try to interpret if car means motor vehicle or if car means car and what that intends and so I I always try to avoid having those fully understand >> those be in there. >> Well, yeah. Well, something that'll be
um beneficial to avoid problems in the future but not ty anybody. >> We' be happy to have a question about that. >> Could that could that go on the HOA bylaws? uh attorney. >> When you say the HOA bylaws, >> I live in a little 55 plus community and we are restricted
by what we can do on our lot. So because everything is governed by the HOA bylaws, >> I mean I I would >> except that that would mean having to get the HOA's approval to exceed the
coverage where it's really a matter of the township regulations which really would direct it to the board of adjustment. The thought I had was if at least if you're sort of pre-elling the houses
before they're built, the the buyer should have a choice whether to have that large patio and no flexibility or not have the patio and have flexibility. Cor >> correct. I think and I think what Mr. Vnola was was was saying is that as each
individual house is then put in for permitting, we would then know exactly what the what the uh you know the the floor area ratio, all the coverage requirements, and then that could be reflected in a deed notice for that specific lot. That way, if it's ever sold, the next buyer would know to that
if they want to put in a shed, they're restricted to this size, or else they would have to then go in front of the board. So, we would be agreeable to that and I think that probably is the best way to reflect it so that the uh the township still has the authority to grant or deny those variances and it's not really the HOA's purview to say can
you build a shed or can't you build a shed? >> Well, because the HOA would just be another level of bureaucracy. The the zoning board of adjustment is always going to be the one that has the ultimate authority to hear it. And by just adding that in, it's it's another chance for you know uh regulations on a particular piece of property. And I
think if the HOA in the future decides it wants to do that, they can that'll be their right. It'll be their HOA, but I don't know that we want to do it at the outset. >> I have a question question about it. I think that's, you know, a good suggestion to handle that. I don't think
there's as much of a problem when the development's being built and you're u dealing with the original first homeowner, but h how do you make sure that that's passed on those that
information is passed down on a resale? >> Well, that's that's why we would put it in as a deed notice. So whenever the uh new buyer did their title search, that would be one of the things that came up uh in the exceptions and easements and and other documents associated with the property. It would then be incumbent
upon that attorney to read that. You you don't necessarily as a real estate attorney go out and do research for a client on what they can or can't do by way of improvements on their property. But if there's something in a particular title search that calls it out, typically that's something you really it's incumbent upon the attorney to
point it out to their client. And if they don't, then their their beef is with their attorney, not with the township for not letting them know. >> Okay, that's good. >> And Mr. Chairman, as far as the rest of my comments, I think um they weren't um I think they're more detailed in nature.
So I think it would be, you know, if the applicant has any objection to any of the rest of my comments. Um otherwise, again, if the board was inclined to approve it ordinarily, that those comments would be conditions of approval. Yeah, I think under your additional comments, it's more kind of uh what do
you call it? Maintenance stuff. Extra kitchen can't happen, right? Um things like that. Um what about fencing? You you mentioned fencing and and I know at the original hearing, the first hearing, we had a talk about fencing and now I'm
hearing more or less that the fencing is basically now the landscaping. So, is that that what we're >> just in between the the homes? There's still going to be a perimeter fence around the rear of the yards. Oh boy. >> Okay.
>> And I think that if I remember correctly fence. >> Yeah. And if I I remember correctly, I think we're proposing a a solid uh uh PVC fence and I believe that there was a comment from a individual that they wanted a that they would have preferred a chain link fence. And I think we're we're essentially agnostic to that. It
would be up to the board if you I don't know if there's specific design standards uh in the town, but uh we would we would be agreeable to >> So this fence would be before you got to the 40ft buffer. >> It would be right on the property line. >> So >> so behind >> correct >> the 40ft buffer. Correct. So you
wouldn't basically you're looking out your rear window there. You're not seeing the fence. You're seeing trees and then the that's very much behind and I think that's what that gentleman at the initial hearing was talking about cuz he lived on Como Drive, right? That was my understanding. Yeah. So, um,
>> as far as fencing goes, uh, is there from my point of view, maybe no one else agrees, but I would prefer to see anything other than a bright non a bright white
PVC fence around an area like that >> that will stand out. >> I like to see something that fits in with the the surroundings. They they have many colors now, earth tones, stuff that can kind of blend in better. We could certainly work with staff to to pick something that would be acceptable.
>> I would think that a chainlink fence would be less visually intrusive because you would see through it to the trees beyond whether you're whichever side of the fence you are. >> Yeah, I think that's what that that
gentleman referred to. that cuz I think I think his problem with the PVC and and I've seen it in various developments is we have a snowstorm like we did last weekend. >> This seems to be just a distant memory. But if you if you you know something
like a tree falls right the whole couple of panels out. So it's a little more I think a chain link fence maybe black coated chain link fence that kind of will blend in with the woods and fairly nice looking. >> Yeah, I I would go with that.
>> Okay. I note and this is at the end of nearly the end of Mark's comments on page four. It's the one with the biggest lot of comments. He says the board may wish to require placement of a conservation easements in
the area of the proposed landscape buffer prohibiting future tree removal and limiting modifications to the proposed fencing and tree plantings. In other words, the the homeowner can't go out and cut down all the trees.
>> Yep. >> Correct. And we would agree to that. We we certainly would. >> Okay. No, I think that's a good idea because I I experienced that in my neighborhood. I It was a buffer between residential uses, which it maybe is not as I guess
high value is a buffer between a residential use and a commercial use or something, but it was nonetheless a buffer of very mature pines >> that somebody just like cut down to put up their their fence. Um and um
unfortunately there's Mark tells me there's not much I can I can do about that. But um yeah, this would this would have >> hence the conservation ement. >> Exactly. What's important? >> So I think there's a comment in there somewhere that you can shift the fence slightly to
avoid cutting down any trees. >> Yeah. One of one of the things we would certainly agree to is to work with the township professionals to make sure that if there is a situation where something can be, you know, jogged over a foot and that preserves a tree, we would certainly jog it over a foot as opposed to, you know, going right through
something. So, we'll work with them to try to >> some of the trees might want the fence, but they're still on the property. The other thing that I seemed to be unresolved was the
operation of the gate and there's quite a few I think there were quite a few comments about that somewhere. I I will say we do have uh the applic uh my applicants uh uh who do want to address the board as to the uh issue of the gate and they've definitely
heard your feedback and they want to make sure that they can answer any of the questions uh that you may have uh and again and and talk through if there's any potential conditions that can be added on there that can maybe um satisfy some of your your potential concerns about the case. >> All right. So why don't we hold hold
that question until we have that witness. >> Okay. >> Um don't let me forget. 10. I I don't think you will. Um Darren, let's go to your report. Mark, if you're done with yours, then I think I think we've got that covered. Um and we understand the
key points. Um Darren, anything you want to bring up in yours? >> Sure. Before I get to my report, one thing I did want to mention with the wall they're putting in. That's also going to require a fencing or a guard of some kind. Just want to make sure the the board's aware because it's over 30 inches in multiple areas, such as
building code. So if you are at this site at a certain time, you look at that area, you may see an additional fence or guard there required by the building. >> Darren, you're talking about the retaining wall. >> Retaining wall. >> Yeah. So So what? So you're talking about just so you're it's you're talking about the retaining wall that's on the edge of the 40 foot, >> correct?
>> Okay. >> So there's going to be a there's going to be some kind of fall protection >> that's required by code. >> Would a fence need to be put on when the buffer is the high side? >> It does by code, but it doesn't necessarily need to be a fence. It could be there's multiple opportunities.
>> Okay. >> But it's something you're going have to work with the building department. Okay. >> I just didn't want to be surprised to board members if they go out there at a certain point if this is being built and they see that. >> Understood. >> In terms of my report, one question I do have and I know the planner had
mentioned the rear patio is going to be an atgrade patio. The site plan still shows it as a below grade with stairs down. >> It'll be revised. It's an at grade patio. You're right. Forget the architecturals. If I I know that we said said that forget the
architecturals. >> Yes. And one one thing I mentioned for the board was if they were to act favorably here that the uh uh all approvals including FT the sewage authority would be required before
signing of any flats just so wouldn't want the lot subdivided until we're sure this is going forward. >> Correct. No, we we readily agree to that. >> And then just one more of a minor comment with the redesign of the area and bringing down and revising the basin
your mounting analysis changed. So it would be a minor revision. I think you guys could work critical test, but I wanted to mention that as well. >> Yeah, there's one one test bit shows that it's deep enough and I think the other two may just have to go down another two feet. So we'll either get the geotech back out there to redo those
two or we'll reconfigure the basin slightly to get them out. >> And you're close. It's >> it's probably more semantic, but we still need to get it done in order to meet regulation. >> Let me get a little closer. >> Okay, sorry about that. So, yeah, I just think just for the record, the mounting
analysis is going to have to be addressed to comply with D regulations. It's close just with the redesign. There was a minor change and that's actually the last of my comments. Um, thanks Darren. Um, like questions from the board for for
Greg. I mean I do I do have one um and this is like longstanding. So at the very outset and as stated in Mark Healey's report multiple times, we have asked you to at least consider a cluster
and the applicant has said they didn't want to. Um, and so where I stand on that is that in one of the staff reports, Darren actually provided a cluster. All I have to do is overlay. And what I'm kind of
getting at and why I'm beating this so hard in terms of uh this point is that can you show us can you I know you can tell us you have told us that what you're doing in terms of extending the
buffers essentially accomplishes what a cluster would in terms of preservation of trees etc. um in accordance with chapter 222 of the development ordinance trees. It would have been nice if you had shown
us right like taken a doable reasonable single concept cluster that didn't have to be like you know a thing just an analysis very much like what you've done already multiple times because this is
your revision to your original plan where you extended these buffers quite a bit which as the environmental um commission acknowledged was was appreciated. What still is lacking for me is if the evidence necessary to prove to the board
that guys, you know, we're we're accomplishing essentially what a cluster will and I know you've given us that testimony verbally. Is there anything else you can give us in terms of evidence, actual evidence that shows that this is really
equivalent to the kind of preservation that you would see if you did uh cluster um the homes. >> We can go to this one. >> And before Greg answers that, I I I can add maybe something to that as well. And that is and I think what you've heard uh
here tonight and what and what we've agreed to uh thus far is that really this is a approach where we're taking a much more I think cultivating step towards the trees. I mean, we're actually going in there and and plotting individual trees and we're and we're
agreeing to go out with your professionals and and make, you know, individual site, you know, uh um modifications to move one thing one way or another to to save individual trees and to really assess those trees in a in
a much more um I think comprehensive way than even a cluster plan would because a cluster plan would essentially carve out a large swath. Mhm. >> And then you just don't touch that. And there's really not the same level of >> um again going through and and and
looking through everything and and making sure that you're really going and saving, you know, a tree here or a tree there. Um, and so I think what you get with this that you don't get with a cluster option is really the attention
to individual trees on sitewide as opposed to just a, you know, banked area of trees that that's 40% of the of the growth that's on the site and just, you know, we don't know really what the condition of those trees are or if there
is the more potential to save individual trees um that that are throughout the entire site. Right. So that's the only thing that I would add from from my perspective, but I'll certainly turn it over to Greg. >> So we we looked at the plot that accompanied the arborist report and
looked at the front I'll say even half up on the screen. >> If we were to do a cluster basically all the dots and the dots represent the 16 plus and you know they they go up to there's a 41inch tree on site. >> So they're they're the larger ones. The
front 50 60% of all those dots would be eliminated basically with our grading because we would go full property line to property line. The rear portion would be preserved. And if you can you maybe zoom in to the back half of the property
with the exception of the ones that kind of hug the property line to the north and to the westerly side. The large bank is that that area in between the purple and the blue. And of all the 16-inch trees on site in that location,
there are the highest amount of dead trees, critical trees, and really poor trees according to the arborist. So when we kind of looked at that, we said, well, what are we preserving? Doesn't it make more sense to look at the fair trees
which are the yellow ones which are more along the property lines along mostly the northerly side and then the westerly. It would make more sense to keep the healthy trees because if we left the ones in the back, they're not going to get better unless you try to
help. Okay. Um that was that was one issue. The other was a lot of the examples. Um I'm familiar with the cluster locations that were marked, you know, in Mark Healey's ex with the exception of the one across
from Cedar Grove. All of those were constructed approved prior to 2002 2003. In 2004 in April, the D released the BMP manual >> which started making our lives hectic
for storm water. Then in 2009, the Delaware RA and Canal Commission updated their regulations and so on and so on. None of those sites as constructed would be even close to coming in conformance with the stormwater management. The
latest which was the 2023 and 2021 March 2nd of 21 D regs in which green infrastructure was was kind of implemented. clustering would kind of, in my opinion, go completely against what the D regulations have forced down on people
and and basically putting everything into a small area. The D regulations want things spread out. They don't want just one basin. They want areas around the site that in case the one area fails, something else can can continue to function. They want extended time of
concentration and swelles around the property, which is what our plan has submitted provides. So, in my opinion, the cluster, I'm not saying it wouldn't be possible, but your lots would probably still be over half an acre, probably 3/4 acre in order to make that work. And it's not much different than
what we're submitting in my opinion. >> Thank you. I mean, that was, I think, a very fair explanation of how things go versus regulations, right? How the regulations have changed. And, you know, your argument is is value, right? Right. you you're picking out a
value on the site where if you were to just preserve like you said the rear part maybe that wouldn't be as of high as value it would be preserved but it would not necessarily be preserving the highest value trees is that what I'm to
understand yeah >> correct correct >> so thank you thank you for that explanation that that helps me a lot >> I have one question Jim >> please >> uh so are you going to do poor porous uh driveways or >> so there are five or six driveways in
which we were showing a porous area and in our review and I believe it was brought up by Mr. Healey's report those will be pa driveways that will allow the water to percolate into the ground. We're not going to have a combination of of three/arters asphalt and then a
porous strip because that becomes a nightmare for for somebody to maintain. Those will be >> pavers >> papavers and we provided the detail for those papavers that allow the water to per >> Okay. So as I saw Darren's comment if it is porous driveway then you should let
the HOA maintain that. So that's >> and they and they will. >> Okay. >> We Yeah, we wouldn't expect a homeowner to do that. You could try but I know they're not. We all know they're not. >> Yeah. >> I would just ask if uh you are going to favor the site plan reflected still as
>> Yep. We'll do >> I have two questions or considerations. Um the first one is in regards to I can only imagine the parties that will be had uh in this community. So how are you
accommodating for on street parking alongside deliveries in emergency? >> So the on street parking based off of RSIS complies with the amount of garages and the driveway length. So there is actually enough parking in the driveways to have guests and still comply with the
requirement. But we are doing slightly oversized width. RSIS requires a minimum of 28 feet in width. We're doing 30 feet. So we will allow on street parking for for any guests. >> Yeah. So the the reality is that a lot of people still don't park in their
garages even with sufficient width. But I I respect that answer. The other piece is um lots 1201 and 1202. Uh have you considered flipping lot 1202's driveway entrance because there's a lot of
potential queuing with on street parking should it happen at the entrance. I'm just thinking about the the conflict points of uh resident in lot 122 and 121 leaving at the same time and how close they are to the entrance. not knowing
how the gate is going to function, you could shoot through and there could be a a really uh hectic conflict point there. >> So, so we would probably mirror 1202 that would then be opposite of 123, but that's further in, right? That that's a
great great suggestion and I think yes, that's something we could definitely do. >> All right. Thanks. I would just like to say you going back to the question of clustering versus uh what you have your 40 foot buffer and
I think the 40 foot buffer of course will buffer much better than a 15 foot buffer and the neighboring property should appreciate that. it won't be as good for habitat. But uh one thing that
came out of careful reading of the arborist report is that that big green area without any big trees at the rear is essentially red cedars. I mean
what you get after you let a field lie fow long enough in Franklin Township. So that's not it's not like having a mature woodland back there. It's much less worthy of
preservation. It's not without value, but it's much less uh than what we think of in the way of woods. Final comment I'd make. I think this may be the property where when I
first came to township, they said they used to raise rabbits there and all of those, you know, remnants of buildings probably go back to the raising of rabbits. I mean, the rabbits weren't even there when I came 55 years
ago, but u that's why those remnants of buildings were there. >> If I if I'm right about what property it is, >> maybe we can incorporate that into the street names.
>> I was just thinking rabbit run or something. I mean, >> think about it. >> All right. Um, you want to bring up your last witness and we'll Yes. You get Greg remain sworn in in case we have any um
comments as we go by. But um yeah. >> Uh yes, my last witnesses would be we do have uh um VJ Raju and Ash Jooshi who are representatives of the applicants. >> So I'll swear you guys in one at a time. If you can both raise your right hand. Do you swear the testimony you're going
to provide is the truth, all truth, and nothing but truth. Yes, >> you have to share the microphone. So, starting with the gentleman on my right, your left, if you could state your name, spell your last name, and give us your address, please. >> Akshi Johi, J O S H I 29 Willocks
Circle, Somerset, New Jersey, 08873. >> Super. And sir, same question to you. >> VJ Raju, uh, R A JU, address 36 W Circle, Somerset, New Jersey 08873. Perfect.
Um Ashay and BJ um you've heard all the comments from the from the board members and I know they had some uh and I think they still have some lingering questions as to how the gate will operate. Um if you can I'm going to turn the mic over to you guys and um you know if you want
to address the uh address the board and uh answer any questions that they may have. >> Sure. Yeah. So um we are the residents of the Franklin Township for 20 plus years you know uh kids grew up here
wonderful town um and we decided to uh purchase this property and make a very signature product uh given the R40 zoning and a beautiful uh Cedar Grove lane great access. So we decided that um
I think this is going to be one of the signature product with the 40,000 you know square foot lot uh big homes about 5,000 4500 to 5500T homes that we all can uh look back and
be proud of that we we build it. Um so with this kind of signature product we feel that the gate is going to be a essential part of this product you know is going to provide a sense of safety
security to the residents. Um and we actually went and last couple of times when we were here and we heard all those wonderful comments from the board members and we appreciate that. It gives us a lot of insight into how you guys think and you know how you think about
the town, how you think about the residents, everything and we really appreciate a lot. So we went back to the whiteboard you know and we said what can we do? Uh I know the gate was uh you know not desirable in the first hearing
that I we were here and then we said what can we do to actually make it more uh you know approachable and um you know so we went to the uh multiple agencies like USPS you know we went to the Amazon
uh and as we all know the Door Dash and all kind of delivery services uh we looked at drove around uh all over 55 5 plus active adult communities and uh we also actually searched a bunch
of other states uh where there are gates and you know unmanned gates. So we found that this is something uh even the fire department we we you know talked to them and we said this is something doable and
this is a desirable uh feature for this you know subdivision the residents future residents you know. So we feel that you know there is a gate and when we talk to the vendors and we feel that this vendor has been used at multiple
properties on our in our township as well as other states and we feel that this gate can provide a failsafe operations and hence we request all of you to kind of reconsider and see if you guys can
allow um unmanned gate for this property. >> Just carrying on to what Ak just mentioned. Uh know we've been residents here. I myself unfortunately I have had uh the experience of being a victim of a
carjacking incident in Somerset here. So these things definitely help because you know when you've got these kind of homes uh you know large size homes this is going to add value to have that kind of level of security which would make it more uh you know palatable to the
homeowner. Uh, also like you said, this is going to be one of our signature products for the town and we hope we can impress upon all of you all to see the value ad that this is going to bring and hopefully we'll all be very proud that we actually brought this uh subdivision
to this township and we look forward to other townships looking at this as an example. So we truly uh we we went back like he said we've we've seen uh what are the areas where it could if uh there was any chance of it to break. We've we've done that multiple times. Uh we
both come from IT backgrounds. We've done everything to check on where things can fail. But we we're convinced after multiple uh validations that this will work. And uh you know we in fact uh told Tim that you know if if there were only a situation we would be happy to accept
you know uh an override at that point till uh the situation ever arises though. >> Yeah. And just to just to add to what was I think mentioned at previous hearings is that uh there are fail safes built into this gate where you know if there is power loss if there is um any
issues like that the default is that it will it will it will remain open uh to allow ingress and egress. Um, we also talked about the possibilities of of adding conditions where during the day we would keep the the gate open because really it's for security overnight and
so only overnight would the gate be uh would would the gate be come down and be utilized for security purposes. But we would also be agreeable to if the board were to look favorably on it to any condition um that would again give give control and give power to Franklin Township to be able to dictate what
happens to it so that if there is ever any sort of concern or issue that the township or the fire department or the police um uh will have a mechanism to be able to say you have to keep the you have to keep the gate open. You have to keep it unlocked and and open and we
would abide by that condition. So um essentially what we're asking for is I think the opportunity to show that it is uh that it again it's a value added feature that it is something that is going to work and is going to work well and is not going to cause any issues. But we also want to give the board and
give the township the ability to uh step in if they feel in in their in their discretion that that it is not uh uh working uh to be able to dictate that that it be uh kept in the uh kept uh always open. Um so you know we we want
to we're essentially asking for the opportunity to show to the township uh that it will work and uh and if the township believes after a uh you know after some you know small period of time that they don't believe it does work that they will have that mechanism to be
able to say we we want to keep it unlocked and open all the time and we would abide by that and uh obviously if you have any questions uh any other specific questions as to the gate A and VJ are here to answer those. >> Yeah. I mean, if
>> if the board has any technical questions, I don't really want to get into a back and forth with the applicant and the merits of having it versus not having it. Um, but I just want anything in the record um in terms of the technical operation that they addressed in their testimony if we can confine to
that. So I I have a question and I'm not too sure if it's on the technical end but I can appreciate all the details that you both a few mentioned including the carjacking. So in your have you done a study of the crime rate in that area or the carjacking in the
area that was taken into consideration which um >> to your point u basically uh we're well aware in the township we approached the police department as well there have been uh multiple the subdivision that we
live in Summerfields also uh they they have actually added now cameras in our subdivision which captures the uh number board of every car because we just had so many uh you know especially it's pretty rampant in the months of uh
September, October, November and you know every in fact in our subdivision we had it every third week. So the commissioner was kind enough to be on a conference call uh week after week educating us to be safe and if necessary why don't you all get together and build a fence on on the on in that
subdivision. So to answer your question, uh we haven't gone to the agency to get that specific data, but we know it's pretty high because I myself have been on multiple calls with the uh police commissioner because they were kind enough to be on the they used to schedule these calls every two weeks to
make sure that you know the uh the uh people could bring up their points and say so it has been significant in the last you know I would say two to three years at least. I've been living in this property from tw for the last 12 years. The last 5 years, 3 to four years at least have been you know every time
during that period we have these kind of things. >> Yeah. So I have one additional question. Sure. >> So have you done any followup or study on equivalent uh square footage large homes that are down on 27 the Princeton
Highlands the Princeton to see >> if there have been any carjackings there. This has been any crime because those are not gated, >> right? But they're not a subdivision either, right? I mean, most of them like I mean, but these are the newer ones like look at the one we have the u uh
opposite art 55 adult community that's that's gated. The one on Davidson is gated. >> So we're comparing apples to apples, right? The larger homes, not senior gated communities. >> Yeah. So I >> I think just to answer your question, we haven't done any specific studies as to
that. Um, again, I think I think it's more experiential and anecdotal evidence as to as to what my clients experiences have been. I I can indicate to I'm a Franklin Township resident as well. Um, I know that I get uh Nixl alerts and I get neighborhood alerts occasionally of,
you know, of people that are either stealing packages from porches or possibly going around and and and uh grabbing door handles and things like that. It happens. It's not just in Franklin Township, obviously. It's it's it's all over. I don't think it matters where you live. I think it's unfortunately a a something that's going
to happen whether you live in, you know, the nicest neighborhood or or not the nicest neighborhood. It's it's just I think it's more of a matter of opportunity and whoever happens to be walking by that particular place at that time. Um but in answer to your question, we don't have any specific studies. Again, we're we're I think we're we're
coming at it just more from a a an anecdotal and experiential side of things >> for that particular experience resulting from that particular area. You know, I have no issue if you want to.
I I'm not typically in favor of gates. I don't think they're necessary there. I've lived in that street for 50 years. I don't remember anybody getting car hijacked or virtually much of anything else. If you
want to do do it that bad and and you think that there's that high a need for security in that area, I don't think it it's illegal. I don't to we we can't really stop you, I would think. But I
just think that that's kind of presenting a bad image. you know, not quite the same thing, but kind of like a development years ago on Eastn Avenue uh that we made. There was a a a chainlink fence uh about 8 ft high
on the front of the property on Eastn Avenue that also had a barb wire thing around it. We made them take it down. If historically we have discouraged
gated communities, it's like you're separating people from other other people and and it's not community. Um but and we certainly we we certainly appreciate those concerns. I I do want to just state for the record, we're certainly not proposing a chain link
fence with barb wire just so the record reflects that. Uh and and again I think and again I think the the the condition to only utilize it at night when when uh you know after dark for security purposes and to have it open during the
day I think that does mitigate that that sense that it's cutting anything off from the community. It's really, you know, it's it's again, it makes it clear that it's for security purposes at night um and not for uh and not for during the day to
keep people out. And it and again, it might not be sunrise to sunset. It could be we could we could set specific times. It may be after 10 p.m. or something along those lines that it would be utilized. Again, it's it's more so for that the the overnight security concerns
when everybody is asleep and not paying attention and and you know that's generally when these things happen. >> So that does make it more palatable from that point of view. >> So to Mi's point, so I am on the HOA of Princeton Highlands and my car was stolen from my driveway. So just as a an
anecdote and we do suffer from I would say once every few months random folks coming the license plate thing won't work by the way because they have it >> because because the people who usually come steal the car that they're coming in so all you're going to find is that
that car was also stolen. Um, so for whatever it's worth, I actually don't see like actually our H our entire development which has 500 homes is contemplating some type of similar but like because we're doing it after the fact. We don't have such a wide entrance and there's a whole bunch of
complicating factors there. So I just as anecdotes I don't have any evidence otherwise but I just know personally my wife actually was opening the window 8:30 in the morning and saw four thieves come and steal my car right in front of her. Um, so, uh, the question I did have
was the one that you were sort of leading towards, which was the hours because when you said night, I thought, okay, you know, I I'm breaking my fast today and it's at 5:30. That's like not probably practical because then if you have like a big, to Charles point earlier, if you have like a big party, you're going to have a huge queue on
Cedar Grove and that's not going to be great for us, right? So, I would probably suggest that if it is going to be automatically down that it would be limited to like, you know, 10 10:00 or something after that because anything before that would just probably not be practical from the queue that might
arise on Cedar Grove, which is already a pretty, you know, tough road in the in the rush hours. So th those are just some of my thoughts. >> Yeah. And we we would be readily agreeable to that and thank you for for sharing that. And if if your HOA needs any literature about any of these gates, um, OJ and VJ has a lot of it. Actually,
I'll follow up with you. No, it's it's a serious thing. It's a serious thing. >> Yeah, I have a I have a comment. Um I I certainly uh sympath empathize and sympathize also with, you know, any sort of crime against persons and property. I
I understand that. Um, I think it's a contradiction though to have a fourc car garage, a huge driveway, and then park your car outside and expect it to be be be um be safe from those activities. If you're going
to have so many garages on these homes, you should uh at a minimum, especially with these expensive cars, park them inside the drive inside the garage. Um, I also the attorney stated that you don't have evidence to prove or evidence
from this area to show that crime is a problem. It's all anecdotal. Um, I drive a very expensive car and it has never been stolen. Knock on wood. And I don't live in a gated community, but I do live on a cold sack and it's just as open as
open can be. And there was no crime uh against my property. Also, without the evidence, as far as we know, the crime could be happening within the community. It could be your neighbor. And so, what does a gate do then other than lock you
behind a fence with your with a thieve themselves? So, I'm not in favor of the fence. I think it's a bad look for the community. Had you said you've seen breakins to homes uh in that area and provide evidence of that, it would make sense. Otherwise, protecting a car and
cars get stolen every day. Um, I'm not in favor of it. I think it's a bad look. >> Thanks, Charles. I I just want to put one thing on the record to correct Bob. Um, there is no residential de development requirement
in our ordinance for a guard house. We do not have to approve this. So, there is very much something we can do about it. If we don't favor it, we don't need to give it to them. Um, it's it's not it's it's silent as as to that. that it's a feature that the applicant is requesting. So, just wanted to clarify
that. >> I have a question. It's more of a question to our staff. Um, is that the access road? Is that a public road or a private road? >> Their application is that that would be a private road. >> It is a private road. >> That's their proposal. Yes.
>> Okay. So, the township is not responsible to maintain it and it's not clearing and all that. >> So, they're allowed to have a gate. >> Well, no. I don't think it's that I don't think it's that simple. I mean, they're before you. I mean, this is just like an application that's going for
site plan approval. I mean, the design and the layout of that is subject to your approval. And part of the part of the concerns that have been raised, and I'm not advocating one way or the other, but I I think the board does and the applicant's attorney agreed with this last that the design of the of the of
the road is within the jurisdiction of this board. If the board is concerned that it's going to um not allow sufficient access by emergency vehicles, that's a completely valid concern. If the board is concerned, it was just mentioned a few minutes ago about if
there's going to be visitors or parties and queuing in the design was going to possibly result in queuing onto Cedar Grove. That's a legitimate concern that I think can be considered in the design and review of this application. Notwithstanding that, it's a private road.
>> Yeah. Just just to echo that and I I did I we did address this I think at a previous um I'm not suggesting that obviously the board has to grant this and I think we did did say the board can approve with the condition that the guard house or that the not guard house that the gate uh not be uh included in
it that that be that that not be included in that and uh and you would well be within your rights to do so. Again, we are we are uh trying to present to you reasons why we feel that it is uh that it's justified to have it and to show you that there are that
there are conditions that you can put that would still allow us to have that and still address your concerns as to uh the appearance or as to uh issues that may arise during the day and still be able to have that uh deterrent quality
overnight. Um because I think again I think it is it's it's a lot of it is a deterrent quality overnight to be able to have it because as I said a lot of these are crimes of opportunity. It's basically somebody walking by. They're not going to take the time necessarily
to to try to get through a gate if they can walk down the street and maybe there's a car down the street that they can try the handle on. Uh so a lot of these are, you know, they're not necessarily thought out and pre-planned. It's not a heist. It's a it's a crime of opportunity. And so really, it's the
deterrent effect. But again, the board I I would agree with uh uh with the chairman and I would agree with Mr. Healey. The board certainly is well within their right to condition uh if they were to approve the application, condition it, uh that the uh gate not be included in that approval. Uh however,
the board would also be well within its right to say that they approve it and that they impose conditions related to the gate uh to address any of their valid concerns uh about that. And again, one of the conditions that I would suggest is that uh to allow us to show
you, you know, that it will that it will work, that it will not uh you know, that it will not uh um uh cause any of the concerns that you're rightfully concerned about. and to give a fail safe to the township to be able to say no, you have to, you know, we don't we don't
like it. Uh, you know, queuing has become an issue and so you you therefore you have to eliminate the gate. >> What what was the technical solution to a police officer needing to come at midnight? >> So there's uh so there is a uh I'll let
Ash and VJ address it, but there's a a siren um uh sensor that it automatically opens for emergency. So, they would need to have their sirens on. >> Uh, they would they would either have their sirens on or they're I believe >> or they also have >> they also get a a code that is provided
that all emergency services can use. So, if it's not an emergency that warrants a siren, they can pull up and they can have access to it by utilizing the uh I think it's similar to like a box situation on a uh on a gate where the fire department and the police and emergency have access to that gate. They
can always unlock it. But if it's if it the quickest option is if it's an emergency that requires lights and sirens, the siren sensor will allow it to uh to go up. And uh and that's a that's something that's been utilized. I believe that this same system uh we testified was the same system that's being used in the
>> uh in this uh uh Somerset run. >> Somerset run >> and also the canal walk. >> It's one that it's one that the emergency services. >> Please note those are man gate houses in both of those communities. >> Very different story. No, the uh the the software the butterfly MX >> it's the same it's the same software but
when you have a manate house it's a different conversation 55 >> question >> okay um you guys have articulated that the gate is a benefit to selling your product
>> within these 14 developments can you articulate for us the benefit to the larger community of you having a gate on this property. How does it benefit the larger Franklin community? >> Well, yeah. >> Go, go, go.
>> So, well, again, the 14 homeowners, right? They are basically becoming part of the township, right? Um, just like we are 20 years ago when we came to this town and we have seen all the great things happen to this town, right?
Obviously we love this town and um and we made so great friends and obviously you know we figured out that many people wants to come in this township you know it's a one one of the desirable you know community uh having said that you know
we based on our analysis you know and we figured out that this is kind of one of the you know product that many residents wanted. Obviously we don't have that much space or we don't have that many opportunities to develop but uh that's
why we think that you know this even though 14 homes uh and again we are not building like uh you know too close community here we are just providing one additional safety feature you know that
can be manageable if township uh wants us to kind of keep it closed from 10 to 6 you know in the just like the the uh Somerset run, you know, they there's no nobody at the man uh in the gate house, you know, they
still keep the uh doors, I'm sorry, the gate closed actually in the night, you know. So, >> but to your question about a larger community, right? I mean, this is all fine like I mean that also is a a valid point, but again, we're bringing in a product which is going to add value we
believe to everybody else's property. uh with this subdivision coming in here. A lot of other subdivisions also uh you know would like to have it but they have different restrictions. Case in point which uh the gentleman brought up that even our subdivision we would like to do
it but it's after the fact and so uh most subdivisions would love to have it. It's just that it it wasn't there. Uh >> so my question though is you're talking about the value to your specific area of this property. I'm still asking the
question, what's the value of a gate on your property to the larger community? >> Your answer, the way you're explaining it to me is saying it's it's causing envy from other property owners that they wish they had in retrospect.
>> Maybe it came across necessarily see that as a larger community. >> That was definitely not the not the not the if it came across that way, my apologies, but that was not the thing. It's adding value to the whole uh town for a signature uh subdivision of this
scale. But again the gate it gives an aesthetic look. It gives security. It gives you know it it gives a premium feel for the township. So I look at it as it's giving value in that way. Uh you know a premium product has come to our township. I would look at it that way. But if you say, you know, how is it
going to? It's not a point of envy or anything. That wasn't uh for the record, that was not my intent at all. >> I I think I would just say at this point, and I'm I'm definitely interested in the larger conversation, I I I can
concede your point that I as a consumer of product in this particular area, I could see it as a benefit. I don't see it as a community member in Franklin Township as a larger benefit to the community as a whole. >> Respect.
>> Respect that. Thank you. >> Thank you, Jen. Uh, good question. Um, so I think I think we're at a point where we can probably wrap up. Um, um, maybe let me open to the public and Tim, I can um, ask you to if you want to make
any summary before we u make a motion or whatever. Um, I assume you have no more testimony. >> Uh, yes. No. Uh, no more testimony. Uh, the and and I won't belabor the point because obviously we we've we've all gotten to know each other over these last three hearings. So, I don't think I need to do any sort of long summation. I
I will just say that I hope that the board uh appreciates and sees that uh you know, we really did uh I think work with your professionals and and take your comments to heart and and I hope that we have answered all of your questions uh to the best of our ability. Um, uh, maybe not all of them 100%
satisfactorily, but I hope that you could show that we are really interested in, again, these are Franklin Township residents, current Franklin Township residents, um, who who want to stay in Franklin Township, who want to provide, uh, you know, more more opportunities for people to to live in Franklin
Township. Um and uh I guess just just to get the technical stuff out of the way, um we meet all the bulk requirements except for those frontages uh which I believe was explained uh through our planning testimony uh and uh last time that uh that those are really necessary
to accommodate that uh that 50 foot um uh half width of the uh of the roadway and the turning radius. Um and that uh apart from that uh there's really no other uh relief that uh that we are asking for except for obviously your
discretionary uh uh ability to to uh hopefully allow us the opportunity to show Franklin Township that this is uh going to be a a community that works, a community that is uh really uh something that that uh people in Franklin Township
could be proud of. Uh, and again, I thank you so much for your time over these over these three hearings. >> Thank you. Um, I'll make a motion to open to the public for any comment on this application. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I.
>> Meeting is now open to the public for any public comment. Seeing no takers, I'll move to close. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Okay. Um, >> could I clarify something? Sorry.
>> Before we meet, >> I'm well aware we can pass a resolution approving this project and just leave out the gate. When I mentioned it being uh questioned about it being illegal, it's not from a point
of view whether it's it's not something that's against the law. It's not something we have to do. And uh at this point there they haven't convinced me that there's
benefit to anyone else except that development to having a gate. And I would hope that we can continue the years and years long policy basically of not having gated developments.
>> Thanks Bob. So, um I I have uh with the help of Peter here uh to my left um crafted a uh a a motion um a motion to approve uh the development
um with uh the two frontage variances uh as well as the uh variance for lot coverage for the lot containing the roadway. In addition, um we would um and I'll I'll take these
in no particular order. Um a blackcoated u chain link fence uh would be the fencing type. We would have the changes to the lot 12.01 and lot 12.02 driveways. We would have the buffer be contained
within a conservation easement. The homeowners association would be responsible for maintaining porest pavement in the driveways. The tree plantings would be approved by lot. There would be a deed notification for
um what a homeowner can do given the particular coverage uh on any given lot. Uh there would be no site work, clearing um or signatures on the final plot until all approvals, including Franklin
Township Sewage Authority and all outside approvals were secured. Um and lastly, uh let's see, the the conditions in Darren's report uh for the basin, the mounding analysis, the test pits, etc. Um
I think that is all of the um basically the staff reports. Lastly, I would propose that the the site have access via a regular uh two-lane full movement um road uh similar to the other roads on
uh Cedar Grove Lane uh with no guard house um and no additional width to the road. So it would look like any other road on Cedar Grove Lane that leads to um a similarly sized subdivision, for example, on a Monae Court or whatever the French Renaissance painters courts
are down a little bit way. Um you you you kind of get the idea. So >> no gate to I mean yeah no gate >> and yes and and that's I think I said that but yeah to guard house gate however you want to however >> you want us to do the barb wire then is that what you're okay sorry
>> and and and let me say that that one of the things I I well I'll leave it I'll leave it for comments. So uh that's my that's my motion. >> Flip you got to flip um lot 1202. Oh, I did say something about 1201 and 122 driveways, but I didn't. >> No, it's flipping the entire It's
flipping the flip one of them. So, 122 flipping 122. >> 122's design gets flipped so the driveway is to the west. >> Mhm. >> Roof on the bottom, basement on the top. >> Exactly. >> Gotcha. Amended as such. So, that's it.
Second. >> Councilman and Barson. >> Just can I step in just for >> sure? Go ahead. I'm sorry. >> This this matter's been heard for a number of hearings. Just for the record, do we have confirmation that the individuals who were not present during
the previous hearings have listened to the relevant testimony? >> Yes. I always send an email to you and the chairman for any individuals that have not. >> Just wanted to confirm it for the record so that the applicant was aware as well. Thank you. I appreciate it. >> Can I ask one question the deed notice
for the property for was that covered? >> Yes. >> Yeah. There'll be a deed a deed notice for every property so that the whoever in perpetuity as it changes hands knows what they can build. >> Is that okay now? >> Yep. >> Okay. So, Mike uh first the motion and
Charles second. Uh Councilman Embarson, >> yes. >> Theodore Chase, >> yes. >> Robert Lort, >> yes. >> Mark Dancy, >> yes. >> Jennifer Ragno, >> yes. >> Mah Rafi, >> yes. >> Charles Brown, >> I'm going to say yes. I'm also going to
say I I really appreciate your attempt at the gate. I thought you all were well well prepared and we do understand the concerns around crime. For me, it just doesn't go with the overall feel of what it means to live in Franklin. But much respect,
>> respect, >> Robert Thomas. >> Yes. >> And Chairman Arcini, >> I have to say that until tonight, I wasn't no and and really it's it's stuck on the the l the resistance to cluster, but um you convinced me tonight that um
perhaps you did something better than that. uh given the value of the trees and the differential value um that they had. Um and so that uh that swayed me more than anything um and and and at least um gave me the uh confidence to
say that um I'm I'm convinced based on the fact that you did do more than I've ever seen in terms of uh of what an arborist would do on a given development to actually go out and find those trees. I I would hope that over the years um
it's it's maintained as well. I mean that's really the hang up to most of most every development. Yours is certainly not unique is you know um it it's easy to go after shopping centers and things like that that the plan must look like it did
20 years ago and that tree must be in that parking lot island. Um it's not quite the same from a residential site improvement. Um, and so I really do appreciate the fact that you guys have um done as much as you have done. Um, and again um I think I think tonight you
swayed me. So I appreciate that. And you know the guard house I I just I agree with what everybody said. I also think that any machinations in terms of hours and things are just uninforcable from 25 years of doing this and watching Pete
Lanford come up, bless his heart, right? and saying, "I swear to God, the the the the the the the garbage trucks are not going to come anytime before 5:00. You try to enforce that." So, I mean, that's that's where I stand when it comes to enforcability. If it can't be done
through planning, then um it might not be able to get done. So, that's that's where uh with all that said, I'm a yes. >> Okay. >> Thank you, gentlemen. >> Thank you. I appreciate everybody's comments. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. All right, Gord.
>> You can blame me for this, but >> you can blame me for this, but but by God, we're going to do it. Um, >> so I'm going to walk you through, and I'll do this as quickly as possible, and this won't be the last time, but I took a stab at prioritizing
Mark's um Mark's matrix. All right, >> so and and so let me try to group these for you. So, there are a number of zoning changes which are either low or high or me medium priority, but they're
generally easy. All right? And I believe they can be sent to council as a package as a package deal because as we work through this in the next number of years before the next master plan examination, what concerned me is council
desensitization, right? you know, here comes another bunch of ordinances from the planning board. So, let's try to bundle bundle and save as they say, right? Um, and so I would like to try to bundle all of the and there's nothing wrong with easy wins. I mean, we don't
have to do um, you know, the high priority necessarily first just because it's high priority. Easy wins are have value. So, easy wins to me or zoning ordinances like uh you know this the anything that Mark has provided
with a basically a picture in it um that says you know properties that are you know preserved that should go back to a or R40 or we're an overlay that or can't be overlaid anymore uh to to do those as
a bundle. So that was one tier. Um, so starting on on page one, I I'll walk you through these fairly quickly and and I'll I'll I assign them different tiers in terms of and then there's a couple that I don't think I want to like third rail things that I don't want to touch
right now. Uh, so loading dock depth absolutely it's an ordinance that I think it's easy. I think that can be bundled as part of um >> a set of easy ordinances >> design modifications to allow that. um sidewalks. All right. The second
thing um it's a high priority. Changing the ordinance is easy, which so I think we should do it. Developing design criteria is takes more effort, but I think let's do the easy part and work on the effort part. So I still think we should change the ordinance first. Parking lot drive aisle. Um I had that
kind of as somewhat of a um I don't know where we stand there. I somehow I like the flexibility sometimes um if they can provide a bigger drive aisle and I know we always fight with fire prevention on this or not fight but
just they ask for the widest part for reasons obviously that they're concerned about. Um so I think we could make that a somewhat of a lower priority. Not to ever not say we wouldn't do it but maybe not the highest. I think all the stuff
that says and you'll see a number of comments that say this is important to staff. this is important to staff. That could be bundle number two where Mark gives us a bunch of ordinances that are fairly fairly I think easy to do definitions
um uh standards or or things that there's like one on the last page that says something about oh parkland dedication like eliminate such ordinances were found to be invalid years ago. it's low priority, but it's easy, so let's just
do it. Get get it off. And and it's it just builds momentum to kind of get get that stuff done. Um, so that's kind of how I how I looked at this. Um, and that's really kind of it. Those were the thing kind of the priorities. There
were there were a couple things that I I don't know. I don't know that I wanted to. I think anything that comes from the Renaissance redevelopment plan, the Hamilton Street business district design standards, they need to do that lifting um and come to us and and work with us
and if we need work session to do it with them, that's great. But I think that needs to be either generated by them or collaborative signage that's a third rail. Um I remember trying signage three year 10 years ago multiple times. Um and you you know people get down and
you actually know what what's the definition of a sign and Christ if you're there I I don't know that you have any hope at all. So um that I would kind of like I don't know leave because you can do it right. Um you know you can do it application by
application and um it's a pain but um it's it's actually been proven to be more of a pain. I don't want it to get bogged down. clustering. I think we should do it. Maybe not the highest priority, but we should re redo the standards. Um, there's way too much
density bonus in some of this, and I think Mark has a good handle on that. That doesn't need to be the highest priority. Um, indoor recreation uses and commercial zones. I think that's on page five. I think that's I think that's fine. I
mean, we we obviously sort of have that coming with the bounce house, I think, and the 11 shopping center there, but stop and shop. So, um, nice to consider that. It's a low priority, but it's easy, so why not do it? Um,
outdoor storage. I know Bob's on that. I think again, we should we should have something there. um you know doesn't need to be high priority but I think it's something that if we have standards for it um it's
always better um than if you don't um I don't know there's a couple of things on here where where is it that I really didn't want to touch. There's this one comment about I can't find it now. Oh, here it is. uh
appeal of zoning board adjustment approval to council and you know whether council should you know be there when a variance is granted by the zoning board and and and should be deleted. Um you know I don't know that's that's a road I want to go down at the moment like to do
what they say politics is the art of the possible. So let's let's do that and let's not do get into that. I think at the end of the day if that were to happen um and a p a person were to challenge the courts are always there for that. So um that will that will be
the case no matter what. So probably not a road I want to >> that's very rarely used. I can remember maybe two instances where it was used and council turned the appeal down in both cases. >> Yeah. So again but anyway those that I
think I'll just stop there. I mean that that's kind of the way I've been these in my head. Um just because even though the things that are like you may say oh just what's the practical use of reszoning something a because it's farmland preserve probably none is is
the most important thing we'll ever do as a board. Nope. But it's an easy win. It's one less thing we have to look at. God, you know, God willing and the creek don't rise. We're here for the next master plan examination. more like we we you know we actually did this just the
way and so I'm open to hearing whatever you guys think if you like that if you don't like that if you have other ideas or other priorities that you'd like to see further up the line and again this doesn't have to be the only conver it and won't be the only conversation we have about this god help you all when I
retire >> so what I'm hearing basically is that your you take this in several steps and maybe that initial step is go through and and and put an ordinance
together that gets the easy stuff out of the way and if there's some, you know, high priority and not too difficult, also put that in that first batch just to get and and I mean that seems to be the gist of what you're saying and then
we'll tackle the medium stuff after and then down the road get to the more hard stuff. So my question for you, Mike, is um how do you want to I mean I'll be doing the work obviously as far as you know writing the ordinance and stuff which I'm happy to do. >> Um do you want me to just you know I
need guidance from the board obviously of exactly what you want me to do. >> We had talked about perhaps having a a like an ordinance subcommittee. Do you want me to put something together with them first? >> I mean I think it's a really good idea. So Mark Mark and I did have this
conversation where he had suggested maybe a a subcommittee much like our, you know, minor subcommittee um of folks who would just kind of work with him and and get a first pass, right? Yeah. >> U before we brought it to the board just to make sure that it was kind of with
our intent and and things like that. And I thought that was a fantastic idea. So um yeah, I'm willing to do it and I mean we don't have to you can think about it. Um, if you would like to volunteer, we don't necessarily have to appoint the the members tonight, but I think it's a great idea. Um, and I' I'd love to have
folks do that with Mark. We just nominate like four people, keep it under a quorum. And yeah, >> and I think the first step would be to again make the the final, you know, decision. Okay. What which which ordinances are I really going to, you
know, again, my first >> glance at that was kind of my opinion. Mike's given his a little bit more direction of what should be kind of the first priority. First, decide as a group which ones to move forward with first. I'll do the draft. We can talk about it at the at the at the committee level,
get your input and then present whatever that is to the planning board and then again what happens I think as you know the planning board doesn't adopt ordinances. You know you this would be ultimately the planning board would be recommending something offering to the council for their consideration and
they'll do with it what they what they wish but ordinarily when things come from the planning board when they're well thought out ordinarily the council in my experience has has very rarely tables them I'll just say that. Yeah. And I mean we have Ram here.
So Ram would definitely be our RAM. You'll be our council trans translator or our interlook. >> We're going down some road. You can tell us don't bother or whatever the whatever the whatever whatever guidance you want to give us. >> No, that sounds good. And I also didn't
want Mark to get bogged down like straight off the rip in terms of like doing some I don't know hard stuff that might take him a year before we get and then we lose momentum. I want to build momentum. I mean, it's kind of like Jen,
you know this, right? When you little kids, right? You give them a little sticker, right? And and they might not have done too much to earn that sticker, but it motivates them to do more. And they choose two stickers the next time. I look at it kind of that way. >> We're getting stickers. >> Sure.
>> Particular similar nature. >> Yeah. >> And not having different ordinances. We did do it in five to 10 over the years instead of every single issue being one. >> Yeah. Yeah. And I'm, you know, I'm also
al also appreciative that, you know, council uh has more to do than uh on a given night than just our, you know, ordinances. Try to make it easier for them so that they're maybe thematically related. Like some of these resonings are thematically related. um some of the
other things that are thematic related thematically related and it just makes it easier to understand when you're not living it on a day-by-day basis. So, think about if you want to be in the subcommittee. We'll we'll just uh we'll we'll uh we'll go with that that in the
next meeting um since we're all right. If any anybody has any suggestions, comes up with anything, let Mark or I know, please, because everybody has things that they like the most. Um, and so I um I just want to make sure that
everyone has a chance to um voice them. Um before we adjourn, any um board comments? Um Sammy, welcome back. Um again, um and just uh I just I just did
want to say one thing before we adjourn. Um, so my environmental steward course last night covered um, environmental justice was the topic and um, it brought me back to a lot of what we talked about at the last meeting and a lot of what you had brought up in terms of
overburdened communities and things of that nature. And the person who gave the talk was from Newark and she works with a nonprofit. Um, and so, you know, I learned a lot and and and a lot of the themes that we talked about putting in the master plan, uh, of where you can
have like outsized impacts on communities by putting open space, even if it's just an acre of open space in a very densely populated community, has a multiplier effect that you don't see if you preserve, not that you shouldn't preserve 20 acres when a farmland, you
should, you should really do both, but it has an outsized impact on those people And um you know I think we talked about the rails to trails and I really would like to see Charles if you can get somebody from Blouseine to look at our East Milstone line and and just see
where it's possible where it's possible to park a car get on that rail line and get yourself down to Colonial because as you know if you can get you're not going to be able to back it up all the way to Churchill right or or Route 27 but you
will be able to do maybe something to get you close. You might be able to start a railroad avenue and get through where you're not actually going through people's backyards, but um the the the rail line has been deeded to some of those people like on Gary Court behind
L'Oreal. >> Um that's actually somebody's backyard. It used to be the rail line. So to say that the Conrail or whoever owns it um can't get it to us is not true because they got it to that person. So you know
it it can be done. So I I really think that the fact that we put that specifically in the master plan was um I don't know whether it was preient or just um you know but it it really um I think it will have a have an impact and it may not necessarily be a specific you
design standard but just to say thematically we want to make sure that development and open space and things are not just done in places where um overburdened communities can't access them. um you know is is not doing our job. We need to make sure everybody has that access to the greatest extent
possible. So that's what I learned last night. So any >> good teacher >> anybody else have any board comments? >> Can I just say I live in a 55 plus community and our community loves the gates
>> and and you know in a 55 plus I get it. I get it. I get it. You know, if you had a 750, but if you're if you're at a 14 I mean, Sammy, I mean, I'm pretty sure like if you had like a camera, right, or whatever ring or might, maybe you would
have gotten notified. I don't know. But I don't I don't see a gate doing it. And if I just hop over that chain link fence, which is all everywhere else but that gate, I have unfettered access to that development. So, I just I didn't see it. But anyway.
All right. Well, thanks everyone. Um, I will move to adjourn. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Have a good night.