All right. In accordance, this is the zoning board meeting of November 6, 2025. In accordance with the open public meetings act PL1 1975, chapter 231, adequate notice of this regular meeting of the zoning board of
the township of Franklin has been provided. Board members, applicants, professionals, and members of the public, please speak directly into the microphones so our recording secretary can properly process minutes. Applicants and professionals, please fill out the
sheet on the table. When you've completed your testimony, please call the role. Okay. Uh, Shep Shependu Singh has to be excused. Cheryl Bethia here. Richard Brokanic
>> here. >> The same Verdas. >> Alan Rich >> here. >> Gary Rosenthal >> here. >> Robert Shepard >> here. >> Faras Khan >> here. >> Uh Faz there's a paper in front of you to sign to. Uh Michael Dy >> here.
>> Kunal Lakia >> here. >> And chairman Thomas >> here. Uh minutes the regular meeting se September 18th 2025. Um, Cheryl Bethia, Richard Proanic, FZ Khan cannot vote.
>> I'll move. >> We need a motion and a second. >> I'll second. >> Second. >> I'm sorry. What are we mumbling? >> Mr. Rosenthal and Mr. Mr. Rosenthal made the motion. Mr. Rich seconded the motion. >> Thank you. Oops. Got it. Thank you.
>> We got the third. >> Alan Rich. Yes. >> Gary Rosenthal. >> Yes. >> Robert Shepard. >> Yes. >> Michael Dy. >> Yes. >> Kunalia. >> Yes. >> Chairman Thomas.
>> Yes. Regular meeting October. Mike October. >> Faras. Mike Dhy cannot vote. >> I'll move. >> Gary. >> Second. >> Bob Cheryla. >> Yes.
>> Richard Proanic. Alan Rich, >> yes. >> Gary Rosenthal, >> yes. >> Robert Shepard, >> yes. >> Kunalia, >> yes. >> And Chairman Thomas, >> yes. Moving on to the hearing section.
>> Bob, your mic's not on. >> Here we go. and Rainder Cower ZBA 2411 site plan with used varants and C variances in which the applicant's proposing to convert the existing repair
garage into a convenience store 339 Elizabeth Avenue Somerset block 493.01 1 lot one in the R10 zone. Uh this is going to be carried to December 4th,
2025 if you're here for that. And there is a renotification needed. >> All right, Christine, are we getting an extension also on time of decision? >> Yes, for this one they will send an
extension. Yes. Thank you. Okay, moving to the business of this evening. Ukrainian Orthodox Church of USA ZBA 25008 minor subdivision D2 variants in which the applicant's proposing to subdivide
the existing lot into two new parcels at 135 Davidson Avenue in zone B. Uh this was carried from September 18th with no further notification. Do we need to read the other ones? Yes.
So we're also involved the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of USA ZBA 25007 D2 use variance preliminary final site plan with variance C variances in which the proposal consists of site
modifications associated with the retention of certain existing church and seminary facilities at 135 Davidson Avenue Somerset block 469 lot 1.06 06 in the B1 zone also
carried from September 18th and Syracuse 1950 Eastern Avenue ZBA 25009 D1 use variance preliminary and final site plan with C variances in which the
applicant intends to build a 258 8,50 ft warehouse at 135 Davidson Avenue, Somerset, block 469, lot 1.06 in the Bzone again carried from Sep
September 25th. And uh before we start, uh I believe you wanted to go over some ground rules. Before we even go over the ground rules, can we get for the record
attorney for the applicant? And I believe we have an attorney for objectors. Record Peter Lanford appearing on behalf of the applicant. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Peter MacArthur um 75 Lane Road,
Fairfield, New Jersey, on behalf of um Spit Spidok um NYC Inc. For the purposes of the record, Mr. MacArthur, can you indicate who you are representing other than the than that
entity per se? There are people who are part of that entity. Correct. >> That's that is correct. >> Could you for the record place their names on the record? >> Yes. And um may I say in advance if I if I don't do the best job with their names I I apologize in advance. Um Alexander
Tran he spoke at the last hearing. Uh Merrila Havlio Leon Gristto Svetlana Malanova Makita Stayeno and Yuri Wel.
>> I'm assuming Mr. MacArthur and for purpose of the record, you have advised these individuals that you are representing their interests and therefore by doing so as an objector. They are not permitted to speak or question witnesses during that process. That's why you're here.
>> They have to do it through me. Yes. I I advised them as you know in writing >> and therefore will not be permitted to speak at any time other than through you >> unless they unless they fire me. >> I'm cautiously optimistic. Okay.
Um, Mr. U Bernstein, would this be the proper time to raise some procedural concerns or or should I wait? >> Why don't you wait until the your until your presentation, per se, if you've got issues?
>> All right, then. Um, now that we've got the prelim the early preliminaries underway, let's talk about some of the ground rules for this evening. Uh, it is my
understanding that Mr. Lanford is going to call his various professional witnesses, one witness at a time, covering all of the applications that the chairman has just discussed to the extent that their
testimony applies to the specific application. You will indicate prior you will indicate during the testimony where we stop on one application and start on another. Mr. Lanford. Is that correct?
>> That that is correct. >> Once the testimony of the witness is concluded, it will then be the board's opportunity to question the witness, then Mr. MacArthur's opportunity to question the
witness, and then anyone not represented by Mr. MacArthur's opportunity to question the witness. As I believe for those of you who were here at the last hearing and for those of you who are not, this is not the time to discuss the propriety or impropriety of the
application per se. That will come at the end of the hearing whenever that will be doubtful this evening. Uh the process will be Mr. Ellanfort will do his various witnesses. There's
plenty of seats. Make yourselves comfortable, folks. Um once he is done once all of his witnesses are concluded whenever that will be then it will be Mr. MacArthur's opportunity to make his presentations
present any witnesses he want to present etc. Mr. MacArthur, just ratification. If you're planning on presenting professional testimony, you're going to need to submit any reports at least 10 days in advance to
Miss Woodbury. >> Unfortunately, it's it's it's >> just just for clarification. Um, m Mr. Bernstein, I uh would that apply to all of my experts? They would have to submit reports. That's the actually the law as you know
in the state of New Jersey postco that all >> well to the extent that there are reports they have to be >> if they don't have if they if they are going to testify they need to have reports. >> Okay. >> So that includes the planner, the engineer, etc. Your traffic person if
you're going to have one. >> Um would that also apply to the applicant? Because I don't I don't believe I've seen a a a planning report from the applicant. the applicant. I don't know. We have a plan I think we have a planning report from the applicant.
>> There's a there's a planning review letter by Mr. Healey. I know that. >> Okay. I assume if there's going to be a need for a planner, we'll deal with it accordingly, but they'll have to present at least 10 days in advance. >> Fair enough. Thank you. >> I will folks, you're speaking. You will
be asked to come to the mic. You'll be asked to state your name, spell your last name for the record, your address, and you will limit your questions to the witness at issue.
If you deviate, I have been given the unenviable task by the by the chair and the board to stop you in mid-sentence and ask you to please move on to the other. All the things I don't get to do at home. Uh
so therefore please understand this is a quasi judicial board. We are here to hear testimony. There will be an opportunity at some point during the proceedings for you to advise us what you think or don't think of the application per se. But for the time
being please limit yourself to questions directly involving the testimony of the witness. >> Okay. Mr. Lanford. >> So, Mr. Chairman, real quick, I just
want to give a another just update on the way these mics work. So, again, Bob, so just just now, Bob, you're sometimes too the mic will turn itself off. >> So, you have before you speak, you have to look down and make sure that red button. Um, and also again, just a
reminder. So, Bob, I noticed your mic is was on. When you're done speaking, you need to turn it back off. And the reason is that apparently if there's more than three mics on it like shorts out the system. So and the last thing I'll say again for the for the folks that Mr.
Lamford's going to present again make sure that that button is on the red button is is is the red light is on and speak like I am directly into the microphone. These microphones are very directional so the closer you get to them the louder they get. So don't sit a
foot back. speak right into the microphone so everybody can hear. Thank you. >> Wait a minute. I need to understand something. The chairman's um microphone seems to go off after he
speaks, but mine stays on. What's that all about? >> We're We're in a home away from home. I can't tell you why. I could just tell you that they are weird. So, you have to make sure that that the red light is on when you're about to speak. And you also I guess we have to make sure that the red light goes off when we're done
talking if mine's staying on. >> Okay, goodbye. >> Okay, if we can get started, uh maybe you could just bring us up to date and then continue with your presentation.
Now it's on. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Peter Lanford appearing on behalf of the applicant. Uh Mr. Chairman, you did briefly outline the nature of the Okay.
All right. Let's try again. You briefly outlined the nature of the applications that are before the board. Uh as I indicated at the previous hearing with respect to the site plan for the warehouse, we are only at this time seeking preliminary site plan
approval and not final site plan approval. Uh the other applications that we are seeking are the site plan approval for the church uh on the remaining 13 acres of the church property, subdivision approval for which
we presented testimony at the last hearing. And just for the record, at the last hearing, Mr. Miola, who was our project engineer, testified as to the subdivision and testified that it was a fully compliant subdivision. Uh also at
the last hearing, Mr. Zean testified uh as a representative of the uh applicant on the warehouse project giving a history of their company tonight. Uh I'd like to start well first of all before I call my next witness. uh
after the hearing last month and I had indicated at that meeting that I intended to call Archbishop Anthony to testify. Uh after the meeting in the parking lot outside the municipal building, the members of the clergy that
were at the meeting were in fact assaulted, spat upon, cursed at by certain people who were sitting in the audience. Uh the police had to be called. Uh the archbishop is 78 years
old and has a bad heart. I chose and elected and after discussion with him not to bring him here this evening to testify. I am going to call as my first witness this evening David Lansky.
>> Thank you. Good evening. Raise your right hand, please. >> Raise your right hand, please. Testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, help you God. >> I do. >> You got to say yes. >> Yes. >> State your full name. You got to move the mic closer.
>> Yes. Uh, David Lansky. L O N S K I. >> Mr. Lansky, you're an attorney licensed in the state of New Jersey. >> That's correct. And you represent the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. >> I do.
>> And can you indicate to the board the history of this property uh as you are familiar with it based on conversations with the members of the clergy? >> Yes, I can. Um I have a brief statement uh that includes that information that I
think will be informative for this board and frankly for the the people uh members of the public that are here. Has any >> Has anybody else been given a copy of that statement you're about to read? >> It's his it's his statement.
>> Okay. The Ukrainian forces. >> Just make sure you get keep close to the mic. That's all. >> I'll try. I'll do my best. And if I uh fall too far apart, nudge me. Um, the
Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the United States of America was incorporated in New Jersey on September 7th, 1951 as a notfor-profit religious corporation. Its stated purposes are and
were to erect and maintain a church and to carry out other religious works in accordance with the religious doctrines expoused and maintained by the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the United States of America and to acquire hold and dispose
of real property. Its governance of the corporation rests in 19 trustees. Archbishop Andy served as the chairman of the board of trustees. Archbishop Daniel as the vice chairman of the
board. With respect to this application and and the sale of the property, there are formal actions that were taken. The board of trustees, all 19 members are comprised of the council of Metropolia.
Um that is in essence the um cardinals of the church for those that are familiar with an analogy to a a Roman Catholic church. So the the metropolitia of the uh uh church, all 19 board of
trustees voted unanimously at a meeting on May 25th, 2024 to enter into an agreement to sell approximately 17.6 acres of land. That dis that decision was recently
ratified unanimously in October of 2025, last month, not just before that uh council of Metropolitan, but all of the um Orthodox diaspora and um the uh all
of the clergy of the church uh that met last month in in a big formal meeting, a big setting, and they were All ratified unanimously by every member present. The officers of the company corporation
are constitutionally and now specifically authorized to execute all necessary documents to effectuate this sale. The history of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA in Franklin Township. So parcel one, the first parcel, the
Ukrainian Orthodox Church purchased 50.2 2 acres of land from the former Fiser estate in 1951. The entire purchase price was paid by the church through the Ukrainian Orthodox Church parishes. In 1960s, in
the 1960s, approximately 14 acres of land from that parcel was condemned for the construction of Interstate 287. 18 acres were orphaned on the other side of 287. across from Eastn Avenue.
Uh on the side remaining nearest Eastern Avenue, construction of the St. Andrew Memorial Church was initiated with the condemnation proceeds from I287. The project took 10 years to complete. The other improvements on that property
were the original Fiser family residence which is said to be the oldest existing structure in Somerset County and is present the presently the residence of the church hierarchs. The Pocrova Social Center and another
small residence for the property manager also rest on that site. The balance of the parcel is a cemetery with approximately 11,000 burials plots. Parcel number two, and that now is the
the parcel that we're talking about. In 1972, the board of trustees and sober clergy, leoty congress, that's the group of all of the clergies, approximately 100 members, uh, approved the purchase of 50.5 acres in Franklin Township from
the Heathering estate. Aside from a garage building, the only improvement was the actual Heathering home on that property. In 1974, that house was converted into the St. Sophia Ukrainian Orthodox Theological Seminary which
opened in November of 1975, coincidentally 50 years ago this month. A small chapel is also located in that seminary building. In 1978, plans were developed to construct a church hall for
religious gatherings such as wedding receptions and banquetss for parishioners. While budgets were being finalized, a developer came forth seeking to purchase approximately 16 acres of uh the property at the um at the Heathering
Estate. Uh and that's the land that borders I 287 and Davidson Avenue. The sale was approved and the proceeds were used to cover most of the construction costs for that church hall. The church hall, of course, is also known as the uh
cultural center. The balance of the funds needed to construct the church hall, the um cultural center was paid for by the Orthodox parishes and the Ukrainian Orthodox Diaspora.
In 1988, plans were developed to construct a new administration concistory building along with a library. Those buildings were funded primarily with the proceeds of the sale of the 18 acres that were orphaned on the other side of I287.
And that property was sold to the Rotor Clip Corporation, also located up at uh on the other side. Uh the that church hall, also known as the cultural center, although construction began in 1980, suffered various construction related
issues in that the building did not meet building code. The CO was not issued until almost 3 years later. When completed, a church library was initially moved from the seminary building into a
conference room in the cultural center. However, due to inadequate moisture control and persistent roof leaks, the library books and records were being compromised. The books and records were removed and housed in the new library building that was constructed in about
1988. A museum was initially designed and approved in a moselum which was constructed in the basement of the St. Andrew Memorial Church. However, humidity control conditions proved detrimental to those historical literary
collections. They were moved to a mezzanine section of the cultural center where church archives were also stored. The space proved to be inadequate and too small for all of the collections and records. So in 2002,
construction began and was approved on the Ukrainian History and Education building on the front portion nearest Eastern Avenue on the property. The plan was developed to relocate the museum and archives from the church hall
cultural center into a new modern building that would also house a new education complex. It is a state-of-the-art facility located adjacent to the administration concistory building and the library complex that are now there. The church
went through government approval process to have the new building approved with facilities for religious archives, museum collections, exhibition galleries, a gift shop, educational space, and more. All to be housed in this modern facility. And although the
plans were approved and construction began almost 20 years ago, the interior construction has still not been completed for financial reasons. Upon the sale of the now obsolete cultural central property, funds have already been earmarked to complete those
facilities to house the museum, art exhibits, educational program, and other missions of the church. All cultural material, educational programs, and events now uh at the cultural center building will
continue on the site once it's completed. The Ukrainian church, which formerly used the cultural center, has already relocated to another New Jersey community where most of the students and their families live.
As the financial issues arose for the completion of the new state-of-the-art buildings, the church decided to entertain the sale of the church hall/cultural center so funds could be made available to complete the construction of the new museum building.
I note that the sale of the property construct this building that serves as the religious corporate that serves the religious corporation's purposes is repeated throughout the history. New sales proceeds like in this case are
earmarked for completion of the new history and education complex. Repairs to the St. Sophia Seminary building, repairs to the consistator administration building, the museum and library buildings along with several
other um smaller projects and also to expand the Pakova social center on the memorial church parcel. So there's clearly no intent here to remove this church's history and culture only to preserve it for future generations.
Thank you. I have no questions of Mr. Lansky. Are there any board questions? All right. I I have I have one or two questions. Um it it sounds like the a lot of the money
uh that uh was used to purchase property or facilities uh was raised by uh the church uh the members of the church. She spoke of the das diaspora
and also uh the many priests that are involved. Were any promises made uh to the uh people who are contributing uh the money?
There's none that I'm aware of. >> Okay. >> Or that I've been told of. >> What was that you said second time? >> Or that I've been told of. Okay. by the right sir could you sit down? Thank you. Um
now when the properties in particular the properties that are in question here when they were when those purchases were made did you represent um the the church at that point? So I
did not the the first purchase was made in 1951 uh and the second was in 1972. So uh I was not an attorney uh during these guys seemed whippers snappers. Really? Youngsters. >> See the white hair?
>> Yeah. Um okay. I guess that's all the questions I have. Thank you. >> Any other board questions? Yeah, I have one. Uh, is there
and I'm just trying to understand this. Um, if the land and everything was bought from with the money from uh the people who kind of go and worship there, do they have any ownership in
there at all? >> They don't. The corporation is the owner. A and and the his testimony was that the lands that were purchased part of it was as a result of the monies they obtained from the
condemnation from 287 not necessarily from the funds from the parishioners. >> Now >> I have a question if I may. Um the the Metropolia that you spoke of um seems to be made up of um church leadership ordained members.
>> That's yes. >> Is there any um I guess nonordained lay person if that's the right term for the Ukrainian church that has any input or any representation in this body?
>> Not not in the board of trustees of this church. But the board of trustees of this church has conferences with additional priests and members of the public. And that one of those took place last month at which the sale uh
was unanimously ratified by that entire group. >> Thank you. Just one quick question uh in regards to the development of this property that's part
of the application where the warehouse goes. It's being sold to a quote outside group I guess you call it. Was the same procedure followed for this as for all the other historical purchases that you
that were made? As far as I understand, yes. But again, I wasn't okay. >> Involved representing them at the time, so I can't speak from personal knowledge, but my understanding is that it went through the same approval process um which was governed by their corporate uh documents.
>> Okay. >> Yeah. In 1979, the church sold the 16 acres on the other side of Executive Drive between Executive Drive and 287 to a company from Maryland who I happen to represent
at that time. And at that time, I know the church went through the same procedures that they all met, got authorization to sell the property, and then the closing took place. And that's the site that is the IDI site which this board heard a couple months ago.
>> So what's happening now is consistent with what's been done before. Thank you. >> Okay. Any other questions? >> Yes. Um so this is a corporation. So you have corporation bylaws and articles of incorporation.
>> Correct. >> When were they last updated? >> Uh I don't I don't I'm not their general counsel. I I do the real estate work, but um I can tell you that I've seen the minutes uh approving the sale. They've been supplied to the purchaser and the
title company, and they feel comfortable that all the appropriate procedures were followed in order to execute the contract and to consummate the sale. Any others? We will now entertain the attorney for the objectives. >> Mr. Lansky, was were the formal actions
taken in connection with this sale? Were they memorialized in in resolutions? >> Yes. >> Pursuant to the bylaws? >> Yes. >> Um may I ask uh Mr. Lanfred if you could produce um the bylaws of of the company as well as the uh resolutions that
authorize this sale? >> I don't think the board is relevant to this application. uh the church signed the application as the owner of the property. Uh I think the board uh does not need and has never requested
anything other than the church signing the uh application to indicate that the seller has the authority or needs approvals in order to sign those applications. >> Well,
Mr. Bernstein and Mr. Chairman, I I think the I'll make a pro offer here because I think what you know the the number of people that are here tonight, okay, this is the most transparency they've had ever since this saga began for them, they've been left in the dark.
I I I last evening I was reviewing the traffic report for this and I sent an excerpt of the executive summary which described what was going to happen to this property and I asked my client have you ever heard of this before and she said no. So I think my clients are
entitled and I think it comes down to it it is it is a board issue in in terms of standing because I think as all board members you want to ensure that the applicant has standing to bring the application and if there was a problem
in the process of of you know authorizing the person to sign this contract who who did sign the the the u the contract Mr. Ski, >> I believe it was Archbishop Anthony. >> Archbishop who? I'm sorry. >> Anthony.
>> Anthony. And so there would have been a resolution which authorized him to do that. Correct. >> The resolution authorizing the sale is dated May 25th of 2024. >> Right. And it and
>> and authorized him to execute documents necessary to effectuate the transaction. >> Okay. So um I again um to ensure that this this application this applicant has
standing I think I think the board would need to see that because if and it goes down to the definitions of what's in the municipal land use law. when you look at sections three and four, the the the definitions of of applicant and and developer and a developer is defined as
someone who's a contract purchaser. So I assume that that's what you know we would consider Mr. Zean and his company would be a contract purchaser. However, if there weren't proper authorization for the for um the Archbishop Antne to
sign that to sign the contract, well, then we don't, you know, have a contract, which means we don't have an applicant, we don't have a developer, we don't have an application. So, it it it it's a matter of standing. And I think I think it I I think um my
clients and and the public in general should, you know, uh you know, let the sunshine in. let let them see these documents because um I I think it's I think it's highly re relevant to this proceeding.
It shouldn't be a secret. >> Well, the issue of whether or not the church had the authority or not to sell this issue or this property to Mr. Zean is really not within the purview of this board. The application has been
submitted with an affidavit that in fact the party has the right to bring the application. However, this is one where nobody's going to be happy. Mr. Lansky testified before this board as to certain actions taken by the
church related to this application. I believe at least two resolutions, sir. Is that correct? the like I said the the resolution authorizing it was May 25th, 2024 and there was a um ratification uh just last
month. I'm going to suggest to the board the board received copies of those two resolutions for the purposes of the record. Um the standing issue may end up being litigated or dealt with separately. Mr.
McCarth necessarily here, but for the purposes of this application, I think at least those two items should be in the record. >> I agree and I would appreciate if if if the board would share them with me. >> Uh Mr. Lanford will share it with the board secretary. The board secretary
will distribute and you'll be copied. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Anything else, Mr. Mars for this witness. You don't have to get up. The the the lack >> Well, I mean, I have a big mouth, but it's not that big. Um,
>> I'm I'm assuming if you have no other you have any other questions, Mr. Lansky? >> I don't think so. I think I think the issue has has been resolved. You know, you know, we're letting the sunshine in and I I I think that's a good thing. And I think I think the folks in this audience that are standing behind me, I
I think uh you know, that's what they need. That's why they're here. That's why they're here. So, >> thank you. >> Does anyone else from the public wish to question Mr. Lansski
on what he testified to? I would ask that you please get up and stand by where the photography gallery currently is and come up one at a time. No, not from the you got everybody's
gota from the nobody from the audience. Everybody's got to come up to the mic, state your full name, spell your last, ask your questions. Good evening. My name is Eagle Krepek.
K H R E P. That is good. Could you hear me? Good. Thank you. Can we get an address? >> Much better than previous time as well. Thank you. >> Full name. >> Full name, sir. Spell your last name and your address for the record.
>> Eager. K H R E P T YK K. And I'm 17 Majestic Drive, Freehold, New Jersey. I have a few questions about excurs of the history which was just
given to us and just want to let you know Ukrainians have a long history in education and the first ABC book was done in 1574. Church play a big and huge role of
actually educating people. They have a lot of school to support. They actually support book printing and a lot of good different activities which actually raised. >> Do you have a question of Mr. Lansky as to his testimony sir? >> Yes. >> Please ask it. >> Do you mind if I finish my excursion
history first? >> Quickly. >> Okay, I'll do it quick. Anyway, so what happened is when churches was formed that actually they form schools in the villages, towns, they filled them with monasteries and different areas to bring education of
nation up. They prepare teachers. They prepare actually well educated >> question. Okay, we're here today because we failed to communicate and church as actually was mentioned earlier did not put a lot
of light on what they're trying to do. So my question was with all this history church was presented to us why or what was done in order to save buildings or areas without doing sales.
all actually church to show us in order to resolve their issue they have to sell sell and sell and it's much easier to sell if you didn't actually buy it you know if somebody else raising money to buy some properties or build something it's much easier to sell it actually and
close or cash on in on it so I just want to know what was done on the church side to I want to see steps which was done what they did or they did not do in order to fix it without cell >> objection that's not within the
jurisdiction of the board to make a determination as to what process the church >> it's clearly under that because what happened is what you're telling me we have to sell because of shortfall on actually church behalf to handle
maintenance or upkeeping of the property I want to see what was done or what was not done >> let separate you don't get to see anything per se other than what's in the public record if you wish to obtain additional
materials from the church. That's an issue you're going to have to deal with the church. That's not an issue before this board. To the extent that Mr. Lansky in his testimony can answer that question, I would ask that he can't. If he can't,
he can't. Or if he's going to be advised by Mr. Lanford not to, that's up to Mr. Lanford. It's related to his testimony. >> I I I think it goes beyond his testimony. His testimony was the procedures the church
uh took over the past few years to get us to where we are today. The reasons behind their decisions is irrelevant to this board and and I'm asking Mr. Lansky not to answer the question. >> I believe so. It's just putting a smoke
in front of us because if you tell them a church has to sell it to fix their financial issue, you better tell us what's financial issue is. And do not hide it in the store, please. >> I'm I'm I'm think stated this earlier.
I'm going to state it again. The church is not, and I put this in quotes, on trial here. The church is here for three applications related to the ultimate sale of property for the purposes of a
development. Why the church did what it did, what the church did or didn't do with the money, what the church plans on doing or not doing with the money it's going to make from these sales is not an issue before
this board. It may be an issue before another entity, but not this one. So to the extent that Mr. Lansky's testimony and he's been advised not to answer relates to that issue, he may be at some point eligible or able to
answer. But we are not going to folks, we are not going to sit here tonight or any other night to discuss why the church did what the church did. That's not before this board. But result of this committee which is
you represent will be covering things what church did because they did it. They come to you telling they have to fix their holes. >> No they came here to ask for this board to approve or not approve
>> land. one of the rare places I get to have the last word to approve or not to approve the applications they have before them. The underlying issues as to how we got there or what they're going to do after is somewhere else in another forum in
another place but it's not here. Okay. >> And if you >> I heard that. Thank you. >> Thank you. This may not be the place. Let's start from the beginning. Get the mic closer to you or get yourself closer to the mic.
I need your full name, last name spelled and address for the record. Name is Yuri Wedmond, last name W D I D. The address 1890 Woodland Terrace, Bbrook, New Jersey 0805.
>> You don't need the zip code. Now, you have a question relative to the witness's testimony. >> Yes. Someone asked the question there on the board. Was a promise made when the monies were raised for the building of this cultural center for what were the
promises made? The promises made were to uphold the culture Ukrainian culture in America. And someone said, "Well, that's not important." Well, I think it is important because that's why all of this started in the first place. >> Well, but I want to go back. Let me just
question. >> Okay, here's the question. Uh, we heard a very nice history of the construction projects year by year. This is what happened in 1979, 1980, 1990 year, whatever. These are construction details
that we can look up in Wikipedia. Uh, did anyone put together a history of what the cultural events that occurred in this particular location over the past 40 years since 1980? >> That's not >> No. Well, that's not his testimony.
You're right. He gave a timeline describing the construction, the purchases of the land, and the development of the property. That's what your question needs to deal with. The conclusion made was is that everything was done possible to maintain the
culture that the events of the cultural center. >> That wasn't his testimony. >> That was what >> his testimony dealt with a historical timeline of the property development, >> right? >> That's what we're dealing with now. He
made a conclusion that all efforts were made to move things from one location to another location to whatever was required to maintain the integrity of the cultural events that were going on there. And I dispute that. I think that things are just being dropped and
they're not going they're not being continued. the fact that the construction projects went A B C D the big gaps were are there and the biggest gap right now is is this whole project has been dropped and >> but the reality is whether they m made
that effort to maintain the culture is not our issue we're as the our attorney said we're dealing with three applications for development >> okay the nation >> that's what we'd like to limit the discussion to >> but should they strike those words from
the conclusion of his presentation that everything was done to continue it. >> The board will take your comments accordingly. >> Okay. Good.
No, that's fine. Do you hear me? Okay. Hi, my name is Victor Victor Boranenko, 11 Sherburn Street, Somerset, New Jersey. V is in Victor O R as in Robert O and as
in Nancy E and as in Nancy Koen. >> Good enough. Okay, I have a question to the witness. Uh my question is uh the witness mentioned that
uh the church was actually built in 1952 and he also mentioned that uh the board of trustees consisting of 19 members something like that approved all the requests which are
a matter of consideration today. However, does the witness understand that in 1952 most of the members, most of the trustes
have been like about 4 years old and in this matter I need to know how the board of trustes trustes are built because again the trustee uh I'm
A witness mentioned that the parishioners took part. He called it diaspora. However, I prefer to term parishioners took part in collecting money
to build the church and all other properties on this land. So my question is are the board of trustes do they really represent the owners of
this property? Is there anything in the bylaws saying that the parishioners who basically finances this construction and whatever other things transactions are they represented
in this board of trustes? I expect the answer. I I'm not sure I'm understanding the question, but I'll try. I think you're asking who the members of the board of trustees are. >> Yes. >> So yes and no.
>> I don't have all their names here but they're the metropolitan of the church in essence the like the cardinals if you equate it to the Roman Catholic church. >> Are the parishers in any way represented
in this board of trust? >> Objection is to the relevance. It is very relevant because this is a matter of the ownership. The question is are the applicants have a right? Do the applicants have a right to submit this
request? Do they really have are the owners of this property? Let me short circuit. This board is not empowered to determine whether or not the parishioners
or the board of trustees are the applicant. I know Mr. MacArthur sort of raised it, but this is not really within the purview of this board. This board is to hear the application based upon the submission of an application from what appears to be a
legitimate applicant. If the parties believe that the applicant is not, and I put this in quotes, legitimate or that it doesn't represent the interests of the
parishioners. That's not this board's situation. It may be somewhere else to deal with, but not here and not tonight and not this application. whether it finishes tonight or it doesn't.
>> If you due respect, sir, the witness actually told us all that the parishioners parishioners took part in financing the old transactions, acquiring the land, construction and
whatever. I can say more. There is actually a memorial board on a wall of the cultural center saying who was the actually the initiator of of all this uh transactions and all constructing the
>> I'm not disputing what may or may not exist. I'm trying to simply indicate for the record. >> Sir, you're interrupting me. You interrupting me for the second time. But I have a question to you then. is if this board will discover that the
applicants are not the actual owners of this property, will it be a legit base to reject this application? I'm not going to advise my client in
anticipation in an anticipatory manner if something is different than what is brought before. If that ultimately gets proven, we'll deal with it at the appropriate place in the appropriate time. But the board is not going to engage in anticipatory actions.
>> Well, this you you just told me I had interrupted you twice. Congratulations. We're now even. The fact of the matter remains is that if a party or parties brings information to the board that
addresses the standing issue that you all have raised at the last meeting and again tonight, the board will have to deal with it in the context of the application. But in the absence of proof,
it's all anticipatory and the board does not engage. and this application or any other in anticipation of or what speculation as to what might be. So >> can I say no? >> Your term
>> we will get we will have an answer to this question actually once we learn once we get the bylaws and read it properly and and our lawyer probably will make a decision and disclose it to
board. But I want to say about something else. At the beginning of this meeting meeting, you actually mentioned that this board acts as sort of quasi judicial um I don't know equity. However,
um as far as I know the court of laws, they are make rulings based on the legislation, criminal legislation, civil legislation. I don't know what your rulings are based on but
I want to ask you what is actually what would be the basis for you to reject those applications what are the main probably basis the major basis >> the board the board's determinations are
based on its review of the application in accordance with the municipal land use law it is considered to be quasi judicial because it is making determinations based upon evidence and testimony. That's why it's considered to be quasi judicial. That doesn't make it
a court of law. >> Testimony or what? Actually, >> what's proving what? >> The proof that's placed before this board into evidence. You and others have come up here and talked about the standing issue. The standing issue
doesn't get addressed here. The standing issue may get addressed in another location. I'm not going to give legal advice. >> I've done everything but I've done everything but draw the stick figures for you. >> The point is this board will not
determine whether or not Mr. Lanford's client has standing. It believes it has standing based on the application before it. In the absence of something contrary, it still has standing. Actually,
he didn't answer my questions. However, my last questions to you, sir, and and the board, respected board, >> sir. Sir, the question is for the applicant. We've gone beyond where it necessary. I'd ask you to to remove yourself from the deis for the podium
and let the next individual come up and ask her his or her questions relative to the testimony. We're engaging in a legal discussion. Okay. Uh, hello. Uh, my name is Valeria Balakiran. I'm from Dellan, New Jersey.
>> B A L A K I R Y E V A. Um, so my question uh is to Mr. Lens, right? >> Lensky. >> Lensky. Um, you mentioned uh in your testimony
um that the cultural center that used to be um a home for uh Ukrainian school and for Ukrainian dance school that those schools are already relocated to
different locations, right? >> Yeah. My understanding is that the educational school left. I'm not sure about the dance school. Okay. But you mentioned that they did relocate to where the most of Ukrainian community
members live. So can you please provide the addresses of the their new locations? >> I I hon I don't have it. That's what I would >> Why did you put it in your testimony then if you don't have these addresses? Because as I indicated, I was basing my
testimony on information that was provided to me by the um uh Archbishop Anthony as to the administration of the school coming to him saying that they were no longer going to be located the cultural center because they wanted to move to a location, another location
closer to where the people lived. >> Uh who said that the school wanted to move? Is it just your understanding or or whether the school indicated that they want to move? >> That was not his testimony. His
testimony was that the school was relocated. It wasn't a question who wanted to to relocate it, who decided. >> He just said that the school wanted to relocate. >> That was not his testimony. >> Okay. So I need the addresses of new
addresses of the school because otherwise it looks like somebody told you that the schools are taken care of and you just believe them without any proof >> because those 200 children who used to
go to school do they are homeless right now >> ma'am >> my question is what the the addresses of of new locations of two schools that used to be housed in Ukrainian cultural
center. I don't know. >> Folks, pretend this is a court. You wouldn't dare do this in court. Any other questions, ma'am? >> My question is um to Mr. Ladsky again.
Um, you tried to um for the members of this committee to have a perception that the Ukrainian Cultural Center is basically not used and empty as of now.
That everything is relocated. That it doesn't have any use because there's something else inside of it. there's like there's place for the school to to gather. There's there's places for the um you know for Ukrainian
weddings and stuff. So if if your testimony that you know all these comm uh community gatherings have a a different location, give us the addresses of those locations. >> He's asked and answered the question.
Ma'am, >> it was not a question for you. It was for Mr. So can he ask he >> he answered the he answered the question I don't know asking the question another time isn't going to get a different answer >> my first question was about schools now
the question is about community gatherings where are they going to to happen now >> Mr. if you can answer. >> Yeah, I can. What I indicated and it's still my understanding is that the
cultural material and um uh museum artifacts are being relocated to the building that's already built but not finished uh in the front of the property uh closer to Eastn Avenue. the remaining property which is the subject of the
application tonight for additional parking um and some of the exterior site improvements so that the public can access the museum and uh those various other facilities. >> My question was not about museum or
library. My question was about public uh community gatherings. Where we supposed to together now that the cultural center would be unavailable? >> I I can't answer that other than u and
knowing that the the footprint of the museum and the building that's built includes open space like this area for gatherings. What events may take place there in the future? I don't know. So you're basically stating that um
you're taking away the space from Ukrainian community without any guarantee that we will have such a you know space in the future. So all your testimony about, oh, you know, we're doing this to make it better for
the community, for for the Ukrainians to have a better place that doesn't have a leaky roof, it's all it's nonsense. >> Ma'am, you have a question? >> Yeah, my qu my question is why are you lying?
>> Why are you lying about something that you know is not true? Two things. Pause isn't going to get you positive or negative. It's only going to drag the meeting out longer because we're going to have to remind you not to applaud.
This is not a place to applaud. This is not some theater. The point is you got an answer. You may not like the answer. You may not agree with the answer, but you have an answer. The board is going to take everything into account. Let's get this all on the
record and we'll deal with it accordingly. If you have ultimate proof down the road once Mr. Lanford's applicants are done, that's the time to put that proofs on the record. And what I mean by proofs is actual proof, not
conjecture and not theory. Anything else, ma'am? >> So, yeah. What is the proof that uh the schools are now relocated to new location? Where where is the proof? Like this committee is to um like
>> this board is not empowered to determine what the church plans on doing with the situations currently going on on the grounds. That's not the purview of this board. >> I understand that. So the answer of
where is it and what's the proof that's an ultimate determination is going to have to be submitted by people who are either have the information or who have gained the information and wish to place it before the board's edification as to why the church should not be allowed to
develop the property in the manner in which it seeks to develop. >> So are you representing the community interest as a board? >> I'm representing the board's interest. >> Oh, the board interest. >> That's correct. I'm the board itself >> and the board interest does the board uh represent the community interest.
>> The board represents the board under the municipal land use. So the community interest is all part parcel of everything but we are not the community's representatives. We are here to listen to an application on land use matters.
>> So whom exactly do you represent? >> I've answered the question. Next >> the board. So yes, the next person >> just all these people >> the next person. >> So there's nothing I'm sorry. I I want to ask you a question. Is there anything that um the community members can say
that can influence your decision on whether to approve the this project or not? >> The community and I think I stated this earlier and I've stated it before. The process is that the applicant places his
or her testim professional's testimony on the record. Objectors deal with it. People question the application. Once the applicant is completed and if Mr. MacArthur has presentations he wishes us to make on behalf of his clients. Once
they are completed, it will be the public's opportunity to comment on the overall application, including many of the issues you people have raised tonight and before. That will be the time frame upon which that can be presented to the board and the board
will take it into consideration as part of the overall application. where we are this evening is questioning the witnesses relative to their testimony. Do you have any other questions of the witness? >> Yeah, my question is stands the same. >> You got the answer. You've gotten the
answer, ma'am. Twice the answer. The answer is we don't know. >> Ma'am, >> it's not the answer. >> We don't know is his answer. We're not going to end up in a debate of whether you like the answer or not. That's the answer. The board will take it in. And I demand for this information about
schools and the use of Ukrainian cultural centers to be taken out of the his testimony. If he cannot prove it with any factual documents, >> then let the testimony like don't have it. It it doesn't have to
>> the board is going to take the testimony into account including what does have basis and what doesn't have basis. And if we can move along, the board may have a better chance of doing that at some point. Next m next person who wishes to question the uh the witness. Ma'am. Uh
>> okay. One more question to Mr. Lin. >> Uh Lansky. Um is there any documents that prove that the roof of the Ukrainian cultural center uh was leaking and u no repairs would fix it?
You test you you you you put it in the testimony that um the reason why the Ukrainian cultural center was not having much use is because its roof was leaking >> worms. We have information concerning the
status of the building, but quite frankly it's irrelevant. If the building was a perfect building in pristine shape and the church decided for whatever reason to sell it and they have the authority to do it, they can do it. So I don't think it advances the application
one way or another as far as the conditions of the building. >> Um, do you approve this answer? >> Mind to approve or disapprove? That's the that's the applicant's contention. If the public wishes to show a different
contention, they will get that situation at the time and place. >> Um, I have a question to the uh board. >> You don't get to question the board. Thank you, ma'am. Next person, please. >> Okay. Thank you,
>> Mr. Chairman. Before we get to the next witness, I know uh boards don't like to normally do this, but in the effort to try to move this along, would the board consider curtailing, not curtailing, but allowing a maximum of five minutes for
each of the people asking questions so we can get this thing moved this evening. The board has that authority. >> Not not at this point. I think that that could be a consideration at some point. And I I
also think I can't help but saying this. When you come up to ask your questions, a lot of these questions seem to be questions that you should be going to the church leadership and talking to. They're not board questions for a
development project. That's all we're considering, you know. Maybe I'm too old, but back in the old days, you go to the church and talk to the people and express your all these feelings that are coming out
about where the schools are going. Uh, is the building in bad enough shape or good enough shape. That's not our issue. Our issue is whether this development is appropriate for the site. and we're supposed to be dealing with
this witness's testimony, nothing else. So, let's try and limit it to that. Um, good evening. My name is Arena Chica. Uh, C H I K E R I N E Ts. The address is 26 Northfield Avenue in East
Brunswick, New Jersey. Uh, my question is sort of a follow >> closer. Okay. All right. So, should I repeat myself? >> Okay. So, Arena Chakarinit, C H I K E R I N E Ts, 26 Northfield Avenue, East
Brunswick, New Jersey. My question is a follow-up question to what one of the members of the board asked. So, my understanding is that um the church proposed to sell the property at some point in May of 2024 and then it was ratified just recently in October of
2025, last month. at some point in between um I believe there was some sort of a trusty meeting. >> I am just following following up on a question that was asked by one of the board members and there was some sort of a members of the public present. I
wanted to know when was that meeting and what notice did the members of the public have in order to attend it? I'm afraid that what's happening is your your not only your question, but your
preamble to the question is has been lost because you're not keeping your mouth close to the microphone. You're wandering away and you're speaking softly and very quickly. Neither of those things is helpful. So, slow it
down, make it louder, and stay close to the mic. >> Okay? So, my question is a follow-up question to what one of the board members asked earlier after Mrs. Mr. um Lansk's testimony. Um
so, the church proposed to sell the lot at some point in October of 2024 and it was ratified in October of 2025. There are 19 members who are trustees of the board. At some point there was some sort of a meeting as my understanding
according to question the testimony and there were some sort of members of the public present. When was that meeting? How many members of the public were present? What notice was given to the public to attend that meeting?
Because this has been a topic of the discussion for the community for a while now. And for some reason, as you can see, people are lost and people are confused. There's no transparency. So my question is, when was that meeting?
Which members of the public were present? >> Do your questions one at a time. >> Okay. So when was that meeting, sir? >> You're talking about the meeting that occurred last month in October. I'm I'm still >> I'm not sure whether that meeting was or not because I am I'm just not clear on
the answer that was given. um when one of the members of the board asked so that's why I wanted to know when was that meeting were members of the public present the when you say members of the public there was members of the parishioners
uh that were uh invited that had um titles u like priests and and bishops that type of clergy members where the leaders of the church participated last
month in a meeting at which um the prior action was ratified. That's my understanding and that's the the document that I've seen is the U resolution from 2024 and I'm waiting on
the formalization of what happened last month. >> Okay, sir. I'll follow up on that. So, members of the public were you said priests, right? Well, I mean, how many of them were actual people who actually coming to church like regular people,
not priests, >> someone other than has to do anything with the church. >> Yeah. >> Objection. Council uh for some of the objectors asked and Mr. Bernstein has required us to provide both resolutions which I think will answer those
questions and we'll provide them before the next meeting. I don't think further questioning will advance our application or their issues. >> I do not agree with the council's objection. I believe it's very relevant.
It was mentioned >> we wanted >> and it may be relevant ma'am and the indication is that the resolutions will be made for the public record and at that point you may be able to either have your questions addressed or you may have more questions once you see the
resolution but you Mr. Lansky's testimony is this is what he was advised as to what will come out of it is yet to be determined. >> All right. Okay. Um All right. So also I do not agree to the fact that you know
uh questions of the members of the public need to be limited to a certain amount of time. This is a public meeting. >> Well no ma'am excuse me ma'am >> I okay >> I I understand. >> The request was made. The chair
indicated the board would consider it potentially at some point. It is not a subject for public discussion as to whether or not the board is or is not going to place a time limit on test on questioning by the public. If
you have a question of Mr. Lansky's testimony beyond what you've asked, time is now. Otherwise, next person. >> All right. Also, I would like to request Mr. Lanski that he actually does produce um his client to be present because
clearly people have a lot of questions and if the and if the um his client is concerned for his security maybe he should have some sort of a security detail escorting him but you know given the fact that he is the person who signs the contract it comes with the territory that he should be facing the people
instead of a hiding. Thank you. No more questions. Good evening. My name is Mark Bukachevski. That's B U K A C H E V S K Y. I reside in Edison, New Jersey. Just
a quick preamble, couple sentences. I've grown up in this area. I was born here. I've lived here all my life. I've gone to this facility as long as I've been on this planet. I apologize to the board and to you, Mr. Lotsky. I arrived late. So maybe my
question was already answered. But I have only one question. When you entertained presenting this application to the board, how was ownership of the property in question verified by you?
And who is the person that explained to you that they have the authority to sell the property? And may I a follow-up question part B to that question? >> Why don't you Why don't you see if you can get an answer to part one? >> I I Why do I think
>> No, why won't we get see if we can get an answer if there is going to be an answer to part one before you ask part two? >> Okay, part two is related to part one. Is this information available to Oprah? >> If let's get an answer to the first question.
>> Okay, >> Mr. land for it. >> Can Can he first of all repeat part one because I quite frankly didn't understand the >> Is he asking for a copy of the deed to the property? >> I I I'm asking for whatever instrument
you may have that shows that the authorities that you represent have rightful power to place these parcels under sale. We do have a deed to the property and a title search to the property which I
would be happy to provide to the board. >> I would like to see that. Thank you very much. Do you do you off the top of your head know who's listed on that deed or or that instrument? >> I don't have that information with me this evening.
>> Okay. Okay. Um, >> I I I I'd like to help everyone. As you can see, for folks on the board, this is a very emotional issue. It's an emotional issue. Uh, uh, for most of us, I don't know about the folks here, for
me personally, I between my wife and I, we have over 20some members interred in the cemetery there. the roots of the community go deeply for all of these folks. And what is a question for me and
I again I apologize because I arrived late. I you may have testified and I didn't hear it. To me the question is because I grew up with a different understanding. To me, the question is, as I said part one and
part two, who has the actual authority to sign for the sale of that land and start this process rolling? If that is Archbishop Anthony, then uh that should be recorded on the deed. I'd like to see the deed and the instrument that is
being conveyed. Please, >> why don't we stop with the question you asked who had the authority >> to sign the deed? That's the question. Yes, that there has been no deed signed by anybody. There's a contract that has
been signed uh on behalf of the church and I believe Archbishop Anthony signed the contract. You mentioned a title search. In the title search process, we should be able to determine the transfer of all of the
I did arrive for that part where you listed Mr. Delansky the different transfers of properties that should all be listed in the title search right correct >> the sir the title search will states what the title search states >> okay he will make that available uh
>> I believe the applicant has indicated he will make it available >> okay thank you very much when will I be able to uh get a chance to see that when will it be available please >> I I am sure by >> I am sure by early next
It'll be made available to the board secretary who will then place it on the board website. >> On the board website, that' be your board. >> That's the Franklin Township zoning board's website. It will be made. It will be part of the record. >> And a procedural question. I won't need to go through an OPAR process to see
this. It'll be out there visibly on the internet. >> If if it's not there, you can go through an OPER process. You can go through an OPER process separately, but that's not what we're here for. >> Okay. Thank you for your time and >> please just a a quick question on the materials
that Mr. Lanford has been asked to provide and he's promised to provide. Um so Mr. Bernstein indicated that it would be put on the township website which is fine but the request to Mr. Lanford is to make sure to redact necessary
information that you know there's dollar amounts and things like that that are not necessarily because whatever you provide to us will be put on the public website. >> Yeah. We we were not >> social security numbers, you know, things like that. >> And we were not asked to provide a contract or anything of that nature, nor
would we provide >> I may have misspoke, but whatever whatever you indicated that you provide Hi. Uh, my name is Olak Matvishin. Uh, Matvishian is Mat V I Y H Y N 15 Yates Avenue, South River, New Jersey. Um, I
just asking for a clarifying question. What specific documents will be provided? So, it's going to be bylaws, the resolution, the title, the deed. What else? >> Not the bylaws, the the two resolutions, I believe, the deed and the title. >> Uh, what about the bylaws?
I know. >> Okay. Is Okay. Um because bylaws would would likely have the construction of what a board of trustee might have to or what the trustee board might look like, the voting powers.
>> Sir, I would you testifying A and B. If there's a desire to get the bylaws, it is the church upon whom you get the bylaws because the bylaws at the moment have no bearing on this application. >> Right. But that's where we circle back to the standing issue.
>> And and I'll and I feel like I'm having deja vu all over again. For those of you who recognize the quote, the standing issue is not an issue before this board, >> right? >> The application is before this board. If
there is a question as to whether or not the applicant has standing, the place to raise it is not before this board. >> Right. Um, and then just one final thing I want to let note for the record. I forgot I didn't see who asked who said that they're, you know, an oldfashioned
guy. They can just walk up to the church and ask these questions. Well, this these people have been trying to do that. And obviously, nobody's been asking or answering any of our questions. They've been running away. When people go to church and try to ask questions, they've always been avoiding the questions. So, if it were that simple, you know, we wouldn't have many
of us standing up like here like this and pastoring you guys. But, this is where we were looking for answers. But we're in no better position in that case than you are because it's not our responsibility to review the bylaws.
>> Right. Um right. We just on behalf of everybody here, we just, you know, ask uh her the church's attorney for transparency because clearly there hasn't been any. Thank you. >> Good evening, gentlemen.
My name Mquala, last name K O V A L E A V. According to 2024 New Jersey title 16 section 16 owners of the place Parisians, not the archbishop and not the Metropolitan.
Okay, that was lie and I have question to the board. >> No, let's let's let's stop. Okay. >> Citing a state statute which has no relevance to this board is of no relevance to this board and you don't
get to ask questions of the board. You get to ask questions of the witness relative to the testimony. The board is not on trial. >> Okay. Uh what the percentage in board of trustees clergy and it was built in corrupted manner.
Metropolitan just put clergy in in a you know board of trustees those people dependent on him you know. Uh no let's stop with the question. The question is >> do you know how many members of the board of trustees are clergy and are
otherwise >> if you know >> my understanding is that there the board of trustees consists of members of the clergy of the church. >> Next question. >> Next question. Can we uh postpone all of
this and >> can you suggest those people? >> No. >> To do >> Hold on. You didn't hear the question. To do just a ballot with the with the anonymous ballot. >> No, >> because Parisians the owners of the
place >> St. Andrew Church supposed to vote. >> Folks, we're not. >> Yes, we can postpone and this is in your power. God, I wish I had that kind of power. >> You can suggest them to to fix it.
>> No, first of all, I'm going to say that folks, stop the applause. Stop the comments from the audience. Part one. Part two. This board is not here to take a poll on
election though this was election week for to determine whether or not the people had the authority or didn't have the authority. This is not the place. I don't know how many times I can say it
without treading on a problem that Mr. Lanford, Mr. MacArthur and I know all too well. giving legal advice to people who are not my client who are not our clients. You're looking for legal advice, sir. You're not going to get it from me. You're not going to get it from Mr.
Lanford. And as for Mr. MacArthur, I'll leave that to his own situation. But the fact is, this board is not going to give you legal advice. And this board is not going to postpone a pending land use application to determine whether or not
the people who may or may not be selling the property have the right to do so. It's not within the purview of the board. I don't know how many times I have to say that. >> I know you're many of you are frustrated. I know you are not feeling particularly happy about the church,
>> okay? But this board isn't going to solve that problem. >> Then question um in this uh situation clergy, not the owners of the place. They just contractors. They just
contractors there. >> Sir, >> the Metropolitan change jurisdiction already three times. Archbishop Daniel changed four times how they can sign any papers. >> You have a question?
>> Now they Turkish priests. They they just a contractor. >> Do you have a question for Mr. Lansky relative to his testimony? The issues of whether or not you all have issues with the church are not here. I apologize to
the fact that you feel frustrated that that's occurring, but that's not the purview of this board and asking the question 14 different times in 14 different ways isn't going to get the question answered. >> I just bring it to your attention. >> Don't bring it to my
>> Those people cannot represent Ukrainian Orthodox community, New Jersey Ukrainian Orthodox community. >> They can represent own LGBT community. Okay. Excuse me. I think if you're not going to cooperate with the process, you
need to sit down and let the next person Naz Ruk 16 Dortmund Manalopan New Jersey. Please clarify for me your answer about
uh promises. Was it no or I don't know? >> Member of the board asked you if any promises were given to community and you said no I don't know. No I am not aware. So it was was it no or I don't know?
>> There's none that I'm aware of. >> So it it wasn't no you just don't know. All right. Second question, you testimony implies that majority of the funding came from proceeds from I27,
right? Not from community. Do you have any particular numbers? How much money was raised by community and how much money were obtained from selling? >> Objection as to the relevance. >> It was directly said from testimony.
Maybe it was other way around. It has no relevance to this pending application. >> That that may be the case, but you open the Pandora's box. If you can answer the question, Mr. Lansky, if you can't, you can't state it on the record. >> I don't have the the exact numbers. >> Next question.
>> That's good. >> Thank you. Okay, this uh session is now closed the public and we'll move on to the next witness. >> I'd like to call Mr. Miola. It can't be any colder here. Mr. Miola, you testified at the were
sworn and testified as at the previous hearing. >> Yes. And you are a licensed engineer. Uh >> for the purposes of the record, can you state your name, full name, spell your last for the record, by whom you're employed, and your credentials? I know
you previously testified, but I believe there are people who were not present the last hearing. And before I end up having to deal with that, let's just get it on the record. >> Sure. Daniel Miola, M I O L A L Langan Engineering, 300 Kimble Drive, Paripany,
New Jersey, >> as professional engineer in the state of New Jersey. >> Yes. And my license is in good standing. >> Thank you, Mr. >> Okay. Mr. Miola, last uh at the last hearing, you testified as to the minor
subdivision that we are seeking. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> And very briefly, do you have an exhibit to show that subdivision uh just to refresh the board's recollection and for the members of the public who were not at the previous hearing?
>> I do. I'm pulling up uh a drawing entitled minor subdivision plot drawing number CB102 that was submitted uh as part of the the subdivision application. >> Okay, >> we're going to mark that. I don't know
what the exhibit number we're at, but for purpose of the record, wherever it is as of tonight, >> I I think it was part of the application. So, >> I know it was, but we're separating it out for this. We'll we'll assign it a number accordingly.
>> Okay. And for the record, Mr. Miola, >> for the record, Mr. Miola, the the exhibit which is on the board shows two parcels that are being subdivided. >> Yes. Okay. And can you describe the two parcels? Which parcel is being retained
by the church and which parcel is being sold? >> Uh, sure. the the parcel on the right side of this exhibit uh is the parcel that will be retained by
the Ukrainian church. Uh that parcel will continue to front on Eastern Avenue and Davidson Avenue and will be approximately 15 acres. Uh the second lot uh which will front on Davidson Avenue and it's on the the left
side of this exhibit uh that will be approximately 17.7 acres and that is the the parcel that is proposed to be sold uh to the applicant for the warehouse.
>> Mr. me. Do you have a a like like a light pen or something so you can show the people in the audience what you're talking about? Because uh it's a lovely drawing, but it's hopeless to to me to understand which is which.
Ah, there you go. Now, where's the dividing line? >> The dividing line is down the center uh of the parcel in that um east west direction. uh assuming you know uh with
north being to the right side of the page uh for ethn reference. So this parcel at the intersection of of Davidson and Eastn Avenue is the parcel that will be retained by the church and this back
parcel further south is the parcel that is proposed to be sold. >> Okay. And thank you. And for further reference, because you'll be testifying a little bit later, the to the south of the parcel that is being sold is is Executive Drive.
That's correct. Executive Drive, uh, which is a public right away. Uh, I'm indicating with with my pointer, it's on the the left side of the the leftmost, uh, lot proposed to be subdivided. >> Okay. And to the left of that, south of
that, is the property that is uh was the subject of the IDI application, which uh this board heard a couple months ago and and approved for a warehouse. Is that correct? >> That's correct. And I'm I'm indicating that with the the laser pointer right now. It's uh located to the left of the
executive drive right of way. >> Okay. And based on what the testimony you've heard and conversing with the church, that was property that was formerly owned by the church and sold in 19 approximately 1979. Correct? >> Yes.
>> Okay. Thank you. Now, we are here this evening to review two site plans. one site plan for the remainder parcel of the church and then one site plan for the uh warehouse.
Can you bring up the site plan for the church? Sure. Uh I what I have uh that I've just toggled to is a rendered version of the site plan for the improvements proposed
on the lot to be retained by the church. >> Mr. Mol is this previously provided to the board? >> Yes. >> Thank you Mr. Mol. I was impressed by the >> other than the colorization. >> Thank you. So the so this is exists in a black and white version. And this is a
colorized version of a previously provided exhibit. >> And this is part of the the slide deck uh that was introduced as part of the the applicant Mr. Zean's testimony from last hearing. >> Thank you. So
>> uh yes just to uh describe the site plan application uh on the lot to be retained by the church just to indicate uh the two existing buildings on the church.
Uh to the to the north side is the existing seminary building and then south of that is the second building uh where the administrative office for the church exists. There's also a chapel
there and a museum. That second building to the south currently has 20 parking spaces. Uh and the church has indicated uh that that building will need a total
of 80 spaces uh after the property is subdivided. Uh we are proposing uh to fill in uh on the west, the north and the east
uh of those existing 20 spaces uh an additional 62 spaces which would bring the parking total up to 82. Uh some of this museum this building is a museum uh and the museum use has no
parking requirements in the town ordinance. In absence of a requirement, the ordinance allows for the submitt of documentation that confirms that the number of spaces is adequate. Uh this applicant's traffic engineer,
Mr. Lotheian has submitted a parking evaluation that does just that and it confirms that the proposed 82 spaces is an adequate number based on the parking demands of this building.
The 82 spaces will include four ADA accessible spaces as well as three electric vehicle make ready spaces both in compliance with state statutes. Parking space dimensions will be 9 ft
wide by 18 ft long, which will meet the minimum space size requirements by the township ordinance. The drive aisles will be 26 ft wide, which also meets ordinance requirements, and parking setbacks are also compliant.
5-ft sidewalks are proposed approximate to the parking areas that will connect the to the building's doors. And the sidewalk is also proposed from the intersection of East Avenue uh to to the south along the entire
Davidson Avenue frontage. Uh a new sidewalk which will ultimately connect to the sidewalk uh that is proposed for the warehouse application. The 82 space lot will be accessed by two driveways
that will connect to the parking lot of the warehouse. The access was previously proposed through the existing driveway down to Davidson Avenue. Uh but in response to comments from the board professionals, we've removed that
access and revised it to be through the warehouse parking lot. Therefore, the vehicles accessing this parking lot will all come through the warehouse parking lot. And we are proposing a gate at the
existing driveway by the seminary in order to restrict access to this parking area from Eastston Avenue. Uh that gate will be uh operable for emergency vehicles. Uh but again will
not be open for regular traffic. that that driveway uh that connects the Senate cemetery will be increased to 12 ft wide in order to comply with town standards and a circulation plan uh will be provided that confirms that a town
emergency vehicle can navigate that connecting driveway. In connection with the increase in imperous coverage proposed for the parking spaces, we performed a stormwater management design. Uh that stormwater ma management will
consist of two above ground basins to the north of the parking lot. Those basins will provide the required water quantity, water quality and groundwater recharge management for the parking lot. The site design also includes a
landscape plan that proposes trees around the parking area as well as along the driveway down to Eastn Avenue and along the whole frontage of Eastston Avenue. And and those additional trees are
indicated on this rendering mainly flanking the Eastern Avenue frontage as well as the driveway in off of Eastn Avenue. Additional trees and landscaping are provided around the new parking area as well. In total,
29 shade trees, 38 ornamental trees, and 110 evergreen trees are proposed for the church lot, as well as approximately 200 shrubs and various grasses and perennials to round out the landscape design. A tree removal and replacement
plan has also been provided that shows that the required amount of replacement trees are being provided on the site. Additionally, a L lighting design was performed for for the 82 space lot. That lighting design includes 19
polemounted LED lights at 14 ft heights and the design fully complies with township requirements. Uh I am in receipt of the board planner and board engineers comment letters and overall I can agree to comply with the
comments provided in those letters. Uh one of the items required in the letters was testimony regarding trash collection. A dumpster pad and screen fence are proposed along the west side of the
parking lot. Uh, and that dumpster will be serviced by a private waste hauler. >> A couple quick questions. Uh, this application was reviewed by the Franklin Township Historic Commission. Yes, it
was. >> Okay. Actually, we were there on more than one occasion. >> Three times. >> Okay. And they reviewed all of the landscaping and a lot of the landscaping that we are proposing was based on their request. Is that not correct? That is
request that that is correct. They were particularly particularly sensitive to the view of the site from the tow path along the Ritan River and that is the reason for the the landscaping along the eastern avenue frontage.
>> Okay. And with respect to the staff comments, with respect to the staff comments that you agreed to comply with, uh, in complying with those staff comments, do they in any way significantly alter what
is being reviewed by the board this evening or what is on that exhibit? No. With respect to the site plan for this site, the only improvements then are landscaping, parking and storm water
management. There are no buildings being proposed, no new construction being proposed. Is that accurate? That is accurate. Uh there are uh some utility improvements as well in order to uh separate this site from the
site to the south. >> Okay. >> And so there are some new new utility connections proposed. >> Okay. But there are no new buildings as part of this project. >> The site to the south is ICI or is it >> it's the proposed warehouse application
that you're hearing tonight? >> And I'll get to that next. Okay. Uh and there are no variances in conjunction with this site plan application. Correct. Okay. The second application that you
prepared is an application for site plan approval for the warehouse. Yes. So, I'm going to flip to my next exhibit, uh, which is a rendered, uh, version of the site plan that was submitted in the application package for
the warehouse. >> Oh, you're flipping. The application number is for this application. >> Now, you're testing me. >> That's the objective. >> The application number for the warehouse is ZBA25009.
and the application that Mr. Miola testified to >> 2500 07. Thank you. Uh so as I uh introduced this next
exhibit uh it is reflective of the site plan that was included in the the planning board application uh for the warehouse application at the the application number referenced earlier. >> Planning board application. >> Oh, excuse me. Um zoning board of
adjustment. >> If you'd like it to be before the plane board, we can we'll send you right over. I I think we're I think we're before the right board. >> Mr. Miola, is this a colorized version of a document previously provided?
>> Yes. >> All right. We'll mark that as the the next exhibit thereafter. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh as I indicated, the site plan application on this site, which is to the south of the the site we were just talking about, proposes to redevelop the site for a warehouse
facility. The building will have a footprint totaling 258,150 square ft with ancillary office space which is shown in in three separate pods of the building. Uh to the northwest, to the center, and to
the northeast. Uh the office component of the building will total 10,500 square ft with the remainder being all warehouse space. This building will have one car parking lot to the north side of the building.
Wait, wait. You have to stop with the north and south stuff cuz I didn't bring my compass. What I need you to do is I need you to take out that little thing. And first thing I want to find out is where is the space that we just
reviewed? The space that's being kept by the Ukrainian church. that is at the top of the >> Okay, good. Now, you're just talking about places where the the uh offices are going to be located. Do it the same
way. Don't tell me north and south. Show me where it's going to be. >> Just for reference building, >> we can't hear you. Oh, >> the museum building uh is directly to the top of this slide.
The executive drive is uh shown to the south and being pointed to with my laser pointer. Uh and the IDI site uh which is known as um with the three office buildings is to the south of that
executive drive. The three office components of this building are proposed on the side of the building that will face the museum building. The car parking lot for this warehouse
is will be located to the north of the building between the building and the church property that will be maintained. >> The cemetery is to the west on the other side of this
tributary that is located along the property line. So, now that I've oriented everybody, uh, to go along, uh, >> let me Daniel, let me say, >> folks, no calling questions from the
audience, no interruption to the testimony, please. If you have questions of the witness, when it comes time, you can ask him the questions you have from the audience. Thank you. So, so I explained the car parking lot
which will be 151 spaces. Uh the loading docks will be on the part of the building opposite >> uh facing
executive drive and the IDI site. We are proposing a total of 35 loading docks to the west. We are proposing a total of 19 trailer parking spaces.
Again, that that's just to the west of the warehouse building. This building is designed on spec, which is to say there are no tenants that are identified at this time. While a use variance is required, the
project is compliant with most of the bulk standards set forth in the BI zone, including building setbacks, building height, lot coverage, impervious coverage, and floor area ratio.
Three C variances are required uh which I will touch on throughout my testimony and our planner will also provide proofs proofs for to discuss circulation. Two driveways are proposed.
First, a driveway out to Davidson Avenue for the car parking lot. This driveway will be 26 ft wide and it'll be utilized by passenger vehicles only. A second driveway is proposed off of
executive drive which will connect to the loading part of the building. This second driveway will be used primarily by trucks. The width of this driveway is 66 ft wide.
that requires a variance that width from the town's maximum driveway width requirement which is 36 ft. The 66 ft width at the mouth of this driveway is the minimum width necessary to accommodate truck turning movements
into and out of the driveway. And for that reason, we're requesting relief for that driveway width. The loading area depth, which is the dimension from the loading docks to the opposite
curb is 130 ft. This also requires a variance from the town ordinance which requires a minimum dimension of 147 ft. We've provided truck turn templates uh and submitted that with our
application package that show how vehicles will access the docks. And those templates show that 130 ft is enough room. And in addition, based on my experience laying out warehouse sites, 130 ft is a standard dimension that the industry uses.
We also require a variance for front yard loading as the pavement for the truck court is within the required front yard setback of Executive Drive. Uh both the driveway width and the front
yard pavement setback uh given that they are required relative to Executive Drive. Uh we are un of the understanding that Executive Drive is proposed to be vacated by the township
and if that uh does indeed happen uh both of those variances would not be required before you go further and just so I can uh clarify that issue. The township council introduced an ordinance uh
last uh >> Tuesday, I think. >> Yeah, last Tuesday to vacate executive drive. That ordinance was introduced as a result of the actions of this board in the IDI application wherein this board
requested that IDI vac uh request a vacation of executive drive. IDI in compliance with the board's request has done that. Uh in addition, part of the resolution of the IDI
application is that uh once Executive Drive is vacated that they would have to provide to us an access easement uh so that we can gain access to our property. Uh we are in discussions with IDI as far
as the language of that easement, but that is being accomplished and to so that Mr. testimony is based on the application that we submitted at which time executive drive was a public rightway
and the reality is that if the resolution of the council to vacate is adopted which it it should be within the next couple weeks all those variances go away. Thank you. Uh just to explain some other
aspects of the site plan. Uh I had stated before in introducing that the church application that they were proposing a sidewalk along Davidson Avenue. This application proposes to pick up that sidewalk and carry it along the the frontage
of Davidson Avenue ultimately terminating at the Executive Drive Davidson Avenue intersection. Also, the Executive Drive Davidson Avenue intersection will be upgraded. These intersection improvements will be
will include widening the curb radius to better facilitate turning movements as well as ADA ramps, crosswalks, signage, signals, controls, and new striping. Several retaining walls are proposed on
the site in order to support the grading plan. Uh first, an 8- foot high wall is proposed to screen the truck court from Davidson Avenue. In addition, uh a 4ft high walls are proposed around
some of the basins for stormwater management as well as between the car parking lot and church. Two monument signs are proposed. One by the car driveway out to Davidson Avenue and the other by the truck driveway
at Executive Drive. Wall signs are proposed on the building to identify the building's tenants. The monument signs and the wall signs will be fully compliant with township requirements with respect to their number, their setbacks, and their sizes.
Other components of the site plan include waste management which we will expect will be done through the use of a waste compactor that will be in one of the loading dock positions. The exact location of the compactor will be determined by the tenant. Uh this will
be this this compactor will be serviced by a private waste hauler. Stormwater management has been designed to meet the water quantity, water quality and storm groundwater recharge requirements of the township. This site will include eight storm water
management facilities which includes three pvious pavement system and and five bio retention above ground basins. These facilities after providing water treatment will ultimately discharge runoff
to the ditch on the west side of the site which is a tributary to the rare river. The storm water management design was done under the in compliance with township DRCC and NJD
permit. NJD has in fact issued uh their permit or their permit for the project and DRCC has indicated that they have no more technical comments to that design and that they will be issuing their permit once all other approvals are
received by the township and the county. the outfall into the Ritan River or into the Ronin River tributary uh requires relief uh or a hardship waiver from section
112- 228B of the ordinance be due to its presence within the stream corer to justify that waiver I can state that most of our disturbance for the outfall is within previously disturbed lawn areas
Uh and there will uh really only be a small section of the installation, the downstreammost part uh closer to the riverbank that will require some clearing. That clearing has been approved by NJ and the area will be restored with
indigenous non-invasive vegetation. uh to touch on landscaping next. As shown on the exhibit, the site design included a landscape plan that focused landscaping around the perimeter of the site, in particular the street frontages
of Davidson Avenue and Executive Drive. In total, 54 shade trees, 53 ornamental trees, and 126 evergreen trees are proposed, which totals
233 trees. In addition, 241 shrubs are proposed as well as ornamental grasses and perennial plantings. >> Where are they going? Where's everything going? >> Uh most of the shrubs are going directly next to the pavement areas.
Uh the most of the trees are going along the street frontages as well as the rest of the perimeter of the site. Um the landscape plan meets the tree planting requirement of one tree for every 2,000 square ft of pavement.
>> We've received a comment from the town planner to add more trees in every island throughout the car parking area and we will agree to do that. A tree removal plan was prepared as required by the township. Not all the required replacement trees are being
proposed on the site and therefore the applicant agrees to contribute into the town's tree fund for the remaining required plantings as allowed for by ordinance. for lighting. LED lights will be mounted on the building.
For the north side, which is the side that faces the church, the church retained property in the car parking lot. The lights will be mounted on the building at 20ft heights. The other building mounted lights on the opposite side will be mounted at a a
taller height of 30 ft. And in add in addition, some polemounted lights are proposed which will also be 30 ft. Lighting design fully complies with ordinance requirements with respect to light levels for parking lots, property
line spillover, and other requirements. Couple more items uh for the record. First, uh a Buckeye pipeline is located to the west of the site along the the ditch on that western side. Buckeye has
a 30-foot easement over the pipe and we've had multiple discussions with them regarding the work that impacts their easement which really just consists of that storm pipe crossing. Uh we will ultimately provide uh appropriate documentation from Buckeye to the
township that allows for our proposed storm crossing. In addition, we had three meetings as I testified earlier with the township's historic preservation advisory commission. Uh throughout those meetings, we made several design
revisions that they recommended and ultimately they have issued letters uh support supporting both these applications. And lastly, I'm in the receipt of the comment letters from the board professionals including most including the board planner and the board engineer
and can agree to all of the comments contained within those letters. Now you had reference there was a question asked about the cemetery. Can you indicate to the board where the cemetery is located? >> The cemetery is located uh uh on the
left in the top left side of this exhibit. It it it shows a little bit of it is shown on this view, but most of it is not. But it's it's >> most of it is most of it further uh up.
I I don't want to use the word north, but I almost have to. Is it further >> into the >> I'm going to pull up another exhibit that I think shows >> All right. >> the overall picture here. >> Oh, there it is.
So this exhibit shows the cemetery property which which borders both the the the church parcel and the proposed warehouse parcel entirely and extends from 287 to East Avenue. And is is there
any connection between the warehouse parcel and the cemetery? >> No. Yeah. >> Is there a connection between the church parcel and the cemetery? >> Yes, there is a pedestrian foot bridge
that crosses the the the stream that divides the cemetery from the the church site >> so that so that the warehouse has no impact or connection. I don't want to use the word impact. No connection between the
warehouse and the cemetery. >> Correct. And it's the tributary that allows for that condition to occur. In other words, that's why there's no connection between the warehouse and the
cemetery. It's because of the tributary. >> That's correct. >> What a sentence. Okay. Okay. And you had indicated that there were some tributaries. There were other are there any wetlands on the site?
Uh yes, there are along the the tributary bank. >> Okay. And we've accounted for those and we are not impacting those wetlands. Is that correct? >> Uh we are we are doing work within the buffers of the wetlands and we did
obtain a permit from NJD in order to perform that work. >> Okay. And that's what we're requesting a waiver for the township for >> for that that stream carter uh ordinance. Yes. Okay. Okay, next question. Um, there's a hotel
around here. What's it called? >> The the Delta Hotel? >> Delta. Yeah, that's it. Where is the Delta Hotel? >> It's on the other side of Is that Davidson there? >> Correct. >> Okay. So, it's on the other side of Davidson. And what kind of what kind of
of vegetative buffer is on that side of the warehouse property? We have uh plantings, tree plantings along Davidson Avenue on our side uh of Davidson Avenue between the warehouse
and the curb. Mhm. >> Uh >> can you be more specific? We'll give you time. Uh yes. Um so so we're pro providing uh two rows of trees. one pretty close to the Davidson
Avenue curb and then the other uh pretty close to the the warehouse wall. Uh and I can pull up the the landscape plan or I can zoom in to show you that. >> Okay. Could you do that? >> Okay.
Hi And is there And where's the 8ft wall? >> It's not on that side. >> The 8ft wall. >> It's over Yeah, it's over on the executive drive side. Okay. >> 8 foot wall is right here like an L protruding out from this this building bump out and and then wrapping around
>> the the pavement. >> Okay, great. Thanks. I have a question about uh the driveway. Uh maybe I understood that or not. I'm not 100% sure, but to go to the museum
or you know in the property that would stay with the church, do they have to use that common driveway to get in there? >> Uh yes. Uh cars that want to access the
82 space parking lot uh that wraps around the museum building uh will have to utilize the Davidson Avenue driveway for the warehouse and then turn into that parking lot. >> And whose ownership would that driveway
be? >> Uh it it will be uh it the ownership will be uh dependent on this subdivision line. Uh there will be an access easement executed between the parties that allow for this access.
>> And how easy or hard is it for the future owners if all of this gets approved of the warehouse to back out of that? >> It would be a it would be a recorded easement which would be binding on all
future owners. It would be a permanent uh access easement. Thank you. >> Just double checking and all of that traffic has the benefit of the uh traffic signal remaining as part of the executive drive improvements. Correct.
>> The the traffic signal will remain even though executive drive will be vacated >> but the light will stay. >> Correct. >> Mr. I just forgot. Did you indicate that you reviewed both Mr. Healey's and Mr.
Mazy's report and that you could comply with those? >> Yes. >> Okay. Old age. I I forget these things. >> I have no further questions. >> Anything from the board?
>> Uh I just have two questions. Um and excuse me if you answered this the um that you've submitted to the DNR canal commission. Um yes we have. >> What's the what's the your overall uh status of their review? Uh they have they have indicated via letters for both
the improvements at the church site as well as the improvements at the warehouse site that they have no further technical comments and that uh as soon as we evidence county and township approvals that they will uh be in a position to grant us approval. Okay. Um
and then my other comment is um in my report I basically um figure five on page nine I I provided an um a comparison of this site plan to the IDI logistics um warehouse application
that's on the south side of Executive Drive and basically showed that on on that application uh there was a a much uh much wider uh landscape front lawn. Um, and that plan,
if the board recalls, had an, you know, a very robust landscape plan um, between Davidson and and the warehouse proposed on that site. This site, the building is basically right up to the 50 foot
required front yard um with far less uh, landscaping. Uh, is there a reason for that? Is there a reason why we're complying with the ordinance? Mr. Lanford, you are seeking a use variance as well as your site
application and the board felt it appropriate to grant the use variance for IDI. Some of the discussion that was before the board on that was that buffer that was provided on that application. That's why I'm asking that question. >> Okay. But just to make the record clear,
Mr. Hilly, we are compliant with the forget the Dvarian. We are compliant with the setback requirements of the ordinance. Correct. >> You are not >> you are not asking for a front yard variance. That is correct. >> Mr. Miola, can you indicate the
difference between our application and the IDI application and why they have a greater setback? uh the IDI application had a a a different lock configuration. I I actually believe we have a slide that
shows uh this in context with their application. Uh, if I can scroll to it. Yeah. Oh, there it is.
Uh the IDI lot uh h had the benefit of of their long access access on the 287 side of the property uh which allowed them uh to use that
access for the building uh in this in this layout. I will add that the IDI building proposes a driveway within uh the area between the
building and Davidson Avenue for their car parking lot. Uh so while they do have a buffer uh between the building uh they they they have both a a detention
basin as well as this driveway proposed for for circulation. Um, so, so it's really a a function of the lot area that that the two developers have to work with and the layouts that
they've advanced for approval. >> Well, well, wait a minute. Um, could you make the building This is on the the Davidson the Davidson Avenue side of the building we're talking about. Yes.
>> Couldn't you just make your building a little smaller and then put more match up with the buffering that's being done by ICI? >> If I zoom in here on the the IDI >> IDI, I'm sorry. >> Uh
their basin is as close to Davidson Avenue as our building. Uh so so it's not like they have a a a a landscape uh planted burm buffer. Uh they're doing
storm water management there for for their project. In addition, just to the west of that, they have a a drive aisle for circulation. Um, so I I believe if you if you match
up how close their basin is to the Davidson Avenue curb, that looks about the same distance as our building to the Davidson Avenue curb. >> Okay. So >> So they're hardscape and your building
are at about the same line. their their basin and our building is about the same at the same line. >> Their basin does that mean it's part of the storm water management? >> Correct. >> Then it's green. >> Correct. >> Um
>> yeah, M I don't want to argue with this point, but that that basin is landscaped with trees and shrubs. I mean, that's what's on their plan. So, I just want the board to it's not a heartscape. It's a landscaped retention basin. Just for the record. We we we didn't say it was
hardcape. >> No, that was >> is trying to make a comparison between a setback of a 50ft tall warehouse and a landscaped retention basin. >> He is testifying to what our plan shows
and what ID's plan shows. >> Both of you are right. >> Any other board questions? I just have two minor questions. First, for the sidewalk along Davidson Avenue, portions of it get out of the rightway. Just want to make sure you'll be
granting an access ement of perpetuity for the public. >> Uh yes, we we agree to that. >> Okay. Also, the one retention basin in the let's say on the IDL side, I know that there's some comments in my letter regarding raising the top of wall. Just
want to make sure that you know you address out the board cuz that section almost ends up being a bowl. So we want to flatten it up. So it's going to be more than a 4ft wall there in order to uh flatten out the grates. >> Yes. The basin you're referring to is uh
the basin near the Davidson Avenue Executive Drive um intersection. Uh and that we have a 4ft retaining wall, but we do have a a a 5ft vertical slope down to the top of that wall. You've asked for uh a just a
to a wall for the entire 9 ft which we can agree to do. >> Any other questions before we open to the uh public for questions to the engineer. I want to mention that uh any
questions will end at 9:55. We do no business after 10:00 and we have uh leave some time for scheduling and I guess we will start again with Mr. McCarthy. Mr. Miola. Um, with respect to the
parcel that is being retained by the church, I believe you testified that there were no variances required on that lot. Yes. Although uh as you'll hear from our
planner >> because we are subdividing the property and there is a uh an existing church. I I don't Is that a technical devariance? >> We will present testimony. There are
some a devariance required for that site. There are no bulk variances that are required and we will present planning testimony to that effect. All right, then. Um, Mr. Mayol, did you as part of your preparation for tonight,
did you review the zoning ordinance? >> The the what ordinance? >> The zoning ordinance for Franklin Township? >> No. Um, are you familiar, sir, that according to
the Franklin Township zoning ordinance section 112 hyphen 37E, the majority of the parking shall be located at the rear of the main structure for this is for a church, churches and similar places of worship with no more than 10% of the total
parking located at the front entrance for handicapped accessibility, weddings, and funeral services. Were you aware of that, sir? >> I'm not aware of that. >> And uh that would require variance, wouldn't it? >> I I I'd have to review it in the context
of this uh this application. >> Well, the context of the application um shows that around the front of your building, you've got more than 10% of the 80 82 spaces, and it's kind of wrapping around the whole property.
Uh, can you read the ordinance again? >> Certainly, I'd be happy to. We're at 11237, Churches and Similar Places of Worship. Section E. Can everybody hear me? Parking location. The majority of the parking shall be located to the rear of
the main structure with no more than 10% of the total parking located at the front entrance for handicap accessibility, weddings, and funeral services. So, so while this building has a chapel, it also has administrative offices as
well as a museum. And so, I'm not sure that that ordinance applies. >> Well, this this is a church, is it not? Is it St. Andrew's Church? >> It has a chapel within it. The the main church is is not on this property.
>> So, is your testimony of the variance is not required? Uh, I I would have to review the ordinance. I'm not sure. Now, um, talk to me about the easement. Is that the or the cross easement? Is
that for access only? >> What easement are you referring to? Well, you you you testified that there was an easement between the property to be retained by the church and the property that's going to become, you know, hopefully not the warehouse
on the other side of the subdivision line. Is that right? You Okay. So, please help me understand where where that is. Is it simply the the the drive aisles? >> Uh, yes. the
the easement would have to cover access to both driveways into the the parking lot for the museum. >> So, it would it would go from the property line down the driveway in front
of the warehouse and out to Davidson Avenue. >> Okay. So other than the access and and egress drives around around the church um or the ch what we'll call the chapel um
the the um the the access easement will be in no other location. >> Uh I I don't believe so. I think it would it would be where I said it would be. >> All right. So, so this cross easement is is not for parking, is it?
>> No, it's for access. >> For access only? >> Yes. >> So, when did did you have um a hand in in preparing the parking study or is that the traffic engineer? >> That would be the traffic engineer. >> All right. Then I'll I'll ask him I'll
ask him the next series of questions. Just make a note of that. You had a a a section of your testimony, sir, that referred to the, you know, the landscaping that was to be provided. Um, I thought I saw on your landscaping plan
that there was a 577 tree shortfall of what you're providing. Is that correct? Uh you're referring to the the tree replacement plan. >> Yes. >> The total replacement trees required is 577.
Of that we are proposing 232 trees which makes the shortfall not 577 but 345. A shortfall nonetheless though. Correct. >> Yes. On your site plan, there's a darkened
area indicating a Township of Franklin stream corridor preservation area. Is that correct? The darken area is with respect to a conservation restriction area
uh proposed for that western part of the site where the the river Carter is. So there's no there's no improvements that are that are in that conservation area. >> Uh we we have the the storm sewer
improvements that I testified to earlier. Now, with respect to the tributary that's and I'm going to I believe it's to the north of of uh the site is um
are there wetlands associated with that tributary? >> Uh the tributary is to the west of the site and yes there are wetlands. >> Are those wetlands ordinary, intermediate or exceptional? Hey, Exceptional.
>> Exceptional. So that would mean that there's a 150 ft buffer from um from uh the I believe it's the the the top of the stream >> from the wetland limit. >> From the wetland limit. Okay. 150
>> foot buffer. Now, on your site plan, I noticed that there was a notation which I think is for that that wetland and it's it's it is entitled anticipated. Is that right? That's correct.
>> Okay. Why is it anticipated? >> Because at the time of this at the of the submitt, it was not confirmed. >> Has it been confirmed since >> EP? Yes, it has. >> And it is exceptional. Yes. >> And it is 150 ft buffer. >> Yes.
>> Okay. Now um in looking at where you have this um at you know this uh you know the I I'll call it the limit of the of the 150 ft wetland buffer.
Um I'm seeing that it is cutting through certain improvements on the uh site plan. And I'm seeing it cut through a basin, um, a sliver of impervious cover, a second basin and related infrastructure,
uh, three parking spaces. It looks to go through part of a third base. Am I correct in that assumption? >> Yes. >> So then this site plan that you're showing us tonight that this isn't really what it's going to end up looking like, correct? Because you can't have
you can't build in a in a wetland buffer. Correct. uh you you can uh due to a a policy at the D known as transition area waiver or transition area averaging uh which we received via permit from the DP.
So so all the improvements proposed on this plan with respect to the wetland and the wetland buffer have been approved by the state. >> Can you provide a copy of that uh that transition area waiver please? >> Yes. that that that's not that was not
part of the the file. Um now the tributary when you prepared this site plan is is this tributary have any other um u you know environmental designations? Is it a C1, C2 or C3 stream? Did you look into
that? Uh it has been assigned a uh a 50 foot repairarian zone. Uh which means it is not a category one stream.
>> Is it a C2 or a C3? >> I'm not sure. >> Can you find out for us, please? >> Yes. Okay. Can I ask if I can ask a follow-up question? Was the 50-foot Riperian zone was that part of a submittal to the D?
And did they confirm that that >> That's correct. Yes, the D uh had confirmed a 50-ft repairing zone off that stream. >> But nonetheless, you'll confirm what the designation was, >> what the category is. It's either a two or a three. Okay. Either way, it's a
50ft repairing zone. on your landscape plan. I I believe it's LP 101. Um are any plants on that schedule considered non uh non-native? the the species we select are always
either uh native or adaptive. Okay. So, so they're native >> or adaptive species. >> What's the difference between an adaptive species and and one that is non non-native? Adaptive was not originally native uh
but has uh been in the region and adapted to the climate and the conditions and therefore will will thrive. Looking at your lighting plan um around the site which is which will have the warehouse or which is proposed to have
the warehouse, does any of that um the lighting on your on that plan on the lighting plan does it spill? Does uh any of it spill over? Is it more than a say a 0.1 of a foot
candle at the boundary lines around the around the parcel? Yes, >> it it is more than Is it one or is it more than that? 0.1 or or more than that? >> It's less. It's less than one foot candle. >> Less than one. Okay. Less than one foot
candle. Is it more than.1 foot candle? >> Uh I see some fours, >> right? Some 6s. >> Uh possibly. I I can see a point 4. uh in
particular where it spills over to the the driveways that are located for the 82 space parking lot. Doesn't the um ordinance indicate that it can't be more than 0.1 spillage at at the at the at the um
boundary line to another property. It it the ordinance I believe states that lighting fixtures shall not exceed 0.1 ft candles at the property line adjoining residentially zoned property. Sir, did you design the size of of the
of the the uh the truck base in the warehouse? >> Do do you mean the loading docks? >> Yes. >> Uh can you What do you mean by size? >> Well, what I'm what I'm talking about is
how big of a tractor trailer will be able to fit in one of those bays. So, yes, uh, we did circulation plans that were included in the submittal package, >> right?
>> That show a a New Jersey Title 39 tractor trailer can access that truck yard. >> And And how big is that? Is that a WB70? >> Uh, no. that is a a more akin to a WB67,
but it does represent the largest truck uh that is permissible in New Jersey. >> Okay. So, so nothing bigger than a W a WB67 will come to this site. Is that is that your testimony? >> Nothing bigger than a New Jersey title 39 truck
>> and it's not design and and it's in fact not designed for it. Correct. The bays aren't designed for a WB70. Correct. I I didn't run that truck turn template. They they may work if if I if I did run the template, but there's no point
because they're not allowed on the streets of New Jersey. >> Okay, that's all I have for now. any uh I think uh you have a limited time right now tonight for questions engineering uh
testimony is pretty specific so I'm telling you now I'm entertaining no church politics like the last time we want to hear questions you want to help us get information to make a decision.
Questions concerning his testimony. Uh Yuri Woke WK 66 go some New Jersey 08873. >> Mr. Wal, are you represented by Mr. MacArthur? >> I am represent myself
>> and you cannot ask any questions of Mr. McCarthy's responsibility. >> But I'm on the board. I'm on the board for these questions. Last time, last meeting, you allowed me because I be short. It's important questions.
Rock coming here. Rock is coming here. And here is the part, right? And we visit. Okay. Is your What are we doing here?
>> I need I need you up there. >> No, he's he's either represented or not. >> Can I just One short question. >> One short question. Let's let's get this let's get this resolved. >> We're still democratic state, right? >> No. >> Am I wrong? >> Can we >> you call hearing public hearing? Just
one short question. >> Well, no. Before you >> any single any single Ukrainian soul agree with all this mess, >> sir. >> We all oppose this guys. Let's vote.
>> We all oppose this. Again, we're not interested in in elections here elections. It's just why you call them public hearing. >> I have to ask you to sit down before I wouldn't want to have to do it a second. >> Thank you, Mr. Miola, but we don't need
all of this. This is the owners of the place. >> It's not appropriate for this part of the meeting. >> Good or any part. Good evening, honored chairman, enlightened board. Mark Ditski, D A TC Kiwi WSKY, National
Agitant of the Ukrainian-American Veterans who have our national monument at St. Andrew Cemetery. I ask you enlightened board to please delay the vote and let's get this properly done. I was just in Ukraine and I missed your September 18th meeting. So I came back.
People in Ukraine know about this. This is an international issue for them and they believe that everything has to be and I'm asking you to delay your vote. See all the people here. Thank you as a veteran and as American Mr. >> Thank you. I'm asking the chairman. You're the attorney for the group
directly to the chairman. First of all, there isn't a vote. >> We're nowhere near taking a vote on this application. As the chair indicated, the question the the situation time is to ask Mr. Miola questions regarding his
testimony. If you have a question regarding his testimony, please feel free to ask. Otherwise, board's not taking any actions tonight. Okay. Thank you for that reassurement. We heard it. The board isn't taking any action tonight. Thank you.
Good evening again. Could you hear me? Great. Thank you, Eagle Creptic, 17 Majestic Drive, Freehold, New Jersey. >> Thank you, sir. >> Mr. Mela, what's a great design? Thank you.
I want to ask specifically about 82 parking spots as those were given to you by whom? You understand current building which was actually planning to be demolished or removed had much higher amount of parking spots. So
what did you derive was a 82 spots needed for this application? >> A a parking evaluation was done for that existing building uh which confirms that 82 is an adequate number. >> Adequate number for what? based on the
the amount of people uh expected in that building. >> Expected by whom? >> Who gave you those numbers? >> Uh you you can you can refer to the parking evaluation that provides all the the details of that. It was authored by
our traffic engineer and he will provide more testimony on it later in the the proceedings. >> Okay, I will check. And you also mentioned level will be adequate. What are we talking about? Like on the parking level, what's level of the
lighting will be adequate? Would you be able to recollect that? >> Are you talking about illumination levels? >> Yes. Luminance. Uh the parking design or the the illumination design is done in
order to uh uh disperse light so that it's uh in accordance with standards uh that are applicable to parking lot design and so our our design is in accordance with those levels.
>> So what what levels are we talking about? Do you have that data available? Uh, yes. We did a whole parking or we did a whole lighting plan that show >> that's in submission. >> Yes. >> Okay. I'll check it myself then as long as I have it there. >> Yep. It's in the package. >> All right. I have all questions for now.
But traffic still will be reviewed later on. Am I correct? >> That's correct. We have a traffic witness. >> What? I have enough question for you. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. This will probably be the last question. Matt, one more. That's it.
>> Mark Bukachevski, Edison, New Jersey. Mr. Miola, quick question. Uh, you mentioned it's a spec warehouse, but I think I missed what are the dimensions of the building. Is that a is that a true rendering or is that a artist rendering or do you have some dimensions
of specific? >> Oh, no, that that's a true uh representation of what's proposed. the the length uh the length of the building kind of in this in this direction end to end is 818 ft.
Uh the depth of the building is in in this direction is about 360 ft. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh you have listed as a height.
The height of the building is uh complies with the 50 foot height requirement. Uh the the height of the building along Davidson Avenue is reported to be 44 ft and the height of the building along Executive Drive is reported to be 46.76 ft.
>> Okay. You use the term it's a spec warehouse. Am I correct? >> That's correct. And can you elaborate on what the term spec entails? In other words, >> you mean speculative. >> Speculative. Okay. So, uh would you be at liberty to tell us what type of uh
lees would be able to occupy that space? >> Uh I would object. At the last meeting, Mr. Zean testified. Those questions were asked and answered and and Mr. Zean was the appropriate witness to answer those questions, which he did at the last meeting. I'm sorry I wasn't at the last
meeting so I wouldn't know that. Thank you for your clarification. Uh at which one final question at which point in the process you testify that you do not have any uh clients to occupy the building at
this time. When do you foresee I where there would be a client available to so we could know who might be moving in >> again. Mr. Zean testified at the last hearing and indicated that until the
building is approved and construction is underway, they probably will not have a client until that time because clients do not sign up until they know the building's going up. Thank you for your time. >> Okay, last questions
16 Dortmund Drive, Manalopa, New Jersey. regarding that ement. So if I park towards the new building warehouse, will it be trespassing? I exe executed
executive drive between uh new building and uh chapel and whatever museum. Yeah. Will it be trespassion or is it easement?
>> There there will be an easement that allows >> No. Yes. Can you please explain what does it mean? It's only drive or for to cover the park. >> An easement will allow folks that are parking uh in the parking lot around the museum building to utilize this road in
order to access it. >> Yeah. What about the other side along the new warehouse? Can we park there? >> No. There's no car parking proposed there for the warehouse employees or for for anybody. I >> I think the question is and and correct me if I'm wrong. I think you're asking
if somebody was to park in the parking lot next to the warehouse. >> Yes. >> Would that be considered trespassing or could they park there because there's that easement? >> It depends on the terms of the easement which has not yet uh been agreed to.
So I the the only thing that I understand is agreed to is an access easement that the church will will use their 82 parking spaces uh and we will use the parking spaces for the warehouse. Uh we've had
discussions that if there's a need on an occasion for the church to use the warehouse parking and it's available, we may provide it to them. But basically at this juncture it's an access easement only. >> So we don't know yet. Right.
>> I think I've answered the question. Right now we are providing an access easement from the driveway on the warehouse site to the church. >> So it will be a trespass, right? Yes or no? What is the I don't know what what
does it mean we provide any >> let's let's try the third answer it hasn't been determined yet >> okay >> and the the second question if you would have a chance to plan it from scratch would you place such beautiful building
which has museum library to the edge of the property and surrounded with one car drive way around it or you would Place it in the middle a little bit further away from the edge of
the property. You just chopped entire half of the property and put it at the edge of the referring that uh there is it satisfies the official offsets which is designed
to for every uh house. I think it's will I think there is no room enough. You you're leaving not enough room around this building.
>> Again, that's an opinion. Uh he's not asking a question. >> Ask the question was if you had a chance to design it again, would you place it that building in the corner of the property? This is where I designed it. Uh
do you think it's normal to put it at the edge of the property? >> It it is not on the edge of the property. It meets all of the setback. It >> is one car away from the edge from the border line of the car.
>> So I assume no, right? Or yes. >> Thank you. Okay, that's it for this meeting. Save your questions for the next one. Uh we have to reschedu for another uh
hearing. Let's come to a date like it convenient for Mr. Bernstein's uh schedule to be here. Want to keep the same attorney for consistency. He he deserves it. >> Eric, that you want to be on the second
meeting, right? >> No more questions, sir. We're close. Preferably, there are no more questions. >> The next meeting that we have available is Thursday, um, January 8th. >> Um, I'm refereeing elsewhere.
>> Right. So, I'm saying you wanted it to be the next one that you're available. And I think that would be the 22nd is yours, right? I'll make myself available. >> You want to make you want to make a >> That's okay with you. >> Yes. >> If it has to be if that's the first
available date. >> One minute. Let us decide and I'll I'll make the full announcement for you guys. Just >> what date is it, Eric? >> January 22nd. >> Right. Because first hearing will be January 22nd. It'll be >> All right, Bob. I'll I'll do it as soon
as Is that what you want, Eric? Okay. that will be here in this room and there's no further notice. Correct. >> We're seeking a motion, Mr. Chairman, to continue this application without further notice to Thursday, January
22nd, 2026 at 700 p.m. or as soon thereafter the matter may be heard at 2301 Route 27 in Somerset, New Jersey without any further notice. >> Is there a second? I need >> second. >> All in favor?
>> I >> record. Mr. Bernstein, if you need an ext if the board needs an extension, I will grant it. >> I would suggest you grant a nice long one. >> Now live long enough to see >> based on tonight. I s you got how many
more witnesses? >> Do we have a motion to adjourn? I move that we adjourn. A second. All in favor? I >> oppos.