26. In accordance with the open public meetings act 1975, chapter 231, adequate notice of this regular meeting of the town of the zoning board of the township of Franklin's been provided. Board members, applicants, professionals, and members of the public, please speak
directly into the microphone so that our reporting secretary can properly process minutes. Applicants and professionals, please fill out the sheet on the table when you've completed your testimony. And I guess uh first we have uh
administered the oath of office to Mr. Sheepard. Uh first is nomination selection of a chairperson. >> It's my honor to appoint Robert Thomas as the chairperson for 2026.
>> And is there a second? >> Second. >> Any other nominations? Is there a motion to move? Motion to close the nominations. >> Moved. >> A second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I
>> opposed. >> Do I have to call them individually, Brian, or they can? >> No, they >> Oh, okay. I was just making sure because yesterday we did individual. Sorry. Okay. >> Okay. Nomination, selection of vice
chair. Open. It's my honor to reappoint uh Bob Shepard as the vice chairperson for 2020. >> Is there a second? >> A second. >> Any further nominations? All right. Uh
move to close the nominations and again be the same thing. That's the no opposition. So congratulations to Mr. Shepard again. Board attorney interviews, planning board council, ZVA council. I believe we
we have one applicant and uh >> yes, that's correct. We have one uh one application that was received and that was the uh board's uh current firm which is Eric Bernstein and Associates. >> And you're representing the firm?
>> Uh I am uh Mr. chairman and uh although the competition was fierce, I'm uh very appreciative of the opportunity to serve as your board of attorney for another year. >> Any members have questions? >> Yes, as I always ask, uh I presume that
your attendance to this board of adjustment does not conflict with any other appointments that you have. >> No, it does not, Mr. Robin Rosenthal. If there no other uh questions or comments,
we'll entertain a motion. You want to make it? >> I'll move to okay the board council Bernstein etc. as board attorney to the board of adjustment. >> All right. Second.
>> Okay. Uh >> no other nominations. So welcome aboard again. Thank you very much. Very much appreciated. >> Witness oath. Uh and we can add Darren to this too, right? >> Yeah.
>> Uh for the year, Mark and >> Darren. Raise your right hand. Repeat after me. I >> I >> state your name. >> Are we at the same time? >> Yes. >> Darren, >> do solemnly swear or affirm
>> doly swear or affirm >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States of the United States. >> The Constitution of the State of New Jersey >> Constitution of the State of New Jersey >> and that I will bear true faith and
allegiance to the same. bears to faith to the same >> and to the governments established in the United States >> and to the government established in the United States >> and in this state >> in this state >> under the authority of the people >> under the authority of the people >> and that I will faithfully
>> that I will faithfully >> and partially >> and justly perform >> and justly perform >> all the duties of >> all the duties of zoning board >> got it of the township of Franklin zoning board
>> of the township of Franklin zoning board >> according to the best of my ability >> according to the best of my ability. >> So help me God. >> So help me God. >> Congratulations. >> Harmonize that. >> Moving on. Uh we can have a roll call now.
>> Okay. Um Allan, thank you. Alan Rich and Cheryl Bethia asked to be excused this evening. Richard Panic >> here. >> Basim Verdas >> here. >> Gary Rosenthal >> here. >> Robert Shepard >> here. >> Michael Dhy >> here. >> Kunalakia.
>> Uh and Chairman Thomas >> here. Uh minutes regular meeting for November 6. >> Uh Basim is the only one that cannot vote. >> I'll move. >> Second. >> Richard Proanic. >> Yes. >> Gary Rosenthal.
>> Yes. >> Robert Shepard. >> Yes. >> Michael Dhy. >> Yes. Chairman Thomas. >> Yes. Moving on into hearings uh valued you Udhan ZBA 24002
applicant request requesting a relief of condition from the previous approval with regard to the height which was reported incorrectly for 21 Highland Avenue Somerset block 194 lot 20.01 in the R seven zone. This is carried to
February 25th, 2026. No further notification. First hearing, actual hearing this evening. Ram Kamar Venetaramman ZBA 250023
applicant is seeking permission to build 414 square foot sun room. Well, I just lost it again. Bear with me one minute. uh 414 square foot sun room addition to
the rear of 1712 street lot 424.02 to lot 2911 in the R20 zone and you are the applicant. >> Yes, I am. >> Okay, >> sir. We'll swear you in if you can raise your right hand.
All set. >> Go. Yeah. >> Raise your right hand, please. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give before this board is truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Can you uh just re restate your name and spell your last name for record, please?
>> Ram Kumar Winkut Raman. V E N K A T A R A M A N. >> Thank you. >> You're going to need to speak closely into that microphone. Pull the mic toward you a little bit. It moves. There you go. Thank you.
>> Would you give us a quick overview what you want to do? >> Yes. So, I have a raised deck in a backyard with a walkout basement and I'm looking to build a sun room. Uh I have beautiful backyard that opens opens into the woods. I want to create a build a sun room there. Uh replacing the deck
and extending some of the living living space. >> Okay. It it appears that you're here for a rear yard variance. 50 ft required, 45 ft proposed. Is there anything we can do
to cut down that? >> It's a very uneven lot size. Uh even the 5-ft extension that you're asking is only for one/ird of the space because the line goes pretty uh across my backyard and it's makes it a little
tough to have anything less would not be optimal. Uh so just trying to make it even the issue is only because of the very odd size of this lot more trapezoidal. It's >> I mean I'm I'm doing I'm extending this
for about 36 ft. It's only about 12 ft that goes beyond the setback. The rest of it is well within the setback. >> Okay. Any uh board members have other questions? >> Yes. I'm very curious about this. Uh the plans I'm looking at your your looks
like the sun room is going to be elevated about well a whole story, right? >> It's Yes, I have. Yes, it'll be a raised I have my architecture. They can give you details if you want. Uh but yes, it's going to be I have a walk out basement. Okay. I have a raised deck. So
the the entire walk uh sun room will be raised. >> So So the deck is the deck itself is raised. And is the is the raised deck going to incorporate the already existing part of the deck?
>> The sun room will replace the deck. Yes. The raised bed. >> See, that's the part I didn't understand. So, you're going to get rid of what's there and you're going to put in a a large sun room which will deal with the temperature fluctuations, etc. >> Correct. It's a all all season sun room
as they call it. It'll go a little more than what the deck is today. That's why I did the variance. Yeah. >> Okay, I get it now. Any others? Any comments from you? Okay. Uh, we'll open to the public. Is there anyone in the public would like to ask a
question or make a comment about this application? Then we'll close. And if there are no questions, I'll be happy to entertain a motion. Uh, I move that we grant the applicant um a uh variance uh to extend
his uh uh sunroom uh pass the um uh back setback line um for uh block 424.02 lot 2911. >> We have a second.
>> A second. >> Richard Proanic. >> Yes. Basim Verdas. >> Yes. >> Gary Rosenthal. Yes. >> Robert Shepard. Yes. >> Michael Dhy. >> Yes. >> Chairman Thomas. >> Yes. Okay. Good luck. You're free and clear and legal.
>> Thank you. >> Looks like it's going to be nice. And Brian, for the purpose of the uh the record and the I think the the materials they've been that have been supported uh submitted I should say uh reflect um the fact that as the applicant said the
majority of the sun room is in the compliant situation. It's yeah kind of just that rear left corner, >> right? >> Um and that that there is no neighbor to the rear. >> There's a forested area in the back and then it's basically open space beyond that. >> Right. So, in terms of community impact
or what have you, just just for the record, but again, that's all part of what's been submitted and part of the application. Yeah. >> And in the TRC report. >> Okay. JCIOS acquisitions ZBA 2520 D1 use varian.
>> Wait, wait. >> Yeah. >> Apologize. I was gonna ask this question. >> Use the mic so we can >> mic. >> Yes. My name is Brian Adams. I'm the technical director for NJ Sunroom. I
just have one question. I've been to many of these, probably hund years I've lived over here. Am I right in saying that uh the resolution will be read out of the next month's meeting and then any any permitting uh could be applied once that resolution
is um forwarded to the I mean we obviously can't apply for per now we have to wait for that resolution to be adopted is that correct >> that that would be correct >> I thought so yes thank you very much >> you're welcome
>> okay again we'll go to JC iOS acquisition ZBA25 O20 D1 use variance preliminary major final major site plan with C variances in which the applicants applying to develop
the site with an outdoor storage facility at 945 Route 27 Somerset block 88.01 lot 7.01 in the B1 zone. >> Good evening Mr. chairman, members of
the board, Simone Cali of Cali Law LLC. On behalf of the applicant, um before I get started, I I have to um say thank you to Miss Christine Woodbury. I'd be remiss if I didn't. Our firm, I have known her for 10 years, and this is my first time meeting her in person. It is
such a pleasure doing business in a township with such a competent and of course kind SE secretary. um like Christine, she shepherd us through this process um making it virtually painless uh from an administrative standpoint and
I just have to say um how wonderful she is and and thank you. >> That's good. I'm sure she appreciates that. We appreciate that. >> But back to >> still probably not going to get you a raise, >> but but back to business. Um Mr. Chairman, uh, as you, um, summarized, we
are here tonight seeking site plan approval, use, and bulk variance relief to modify and expand the existing outdoor storage use at the subject property. I have four witnesses with me this evening um, that will present our
case. First, I intend to call the vice president of the applicant entity. He will discuss the proposed operations. Second, we will call our project engineer. He will take you through the existing conditions on site and describe the proposal.
Third, we have our traffic engineer to discuss site circulation. And last but not least, our professional planner to take you through the planning proofs um for the requisite planning uh variance relief that we have. Um unless there are any preliminary questions of me, I would
like to just dive right into it. Since we have a few witnesses, we will be as brief as possible, but we do want to make a thorough presentation to your board. >> Go right ahead. >> Thank you. >> John, can you please um state your name and give your business address for the
record? >> Why don't we swear them in first? Uh sir, if you can raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give before this board is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Now, what you need to do >> now, you can state your name and
>> is have that microphone like as far as is from my mouth. That's how far yours should be. Pull it toward you. >> Okay. Uh, yeah. I'm John Gri. I'm with uh JD and IOS and my address is 330
Madison Avenue in New York, New York. Thank you. John, can you please provide the board with your um affiliation and title with regard to your applicant entity? >> Yes, I am a employee and vice president at JD and I
>> and the applicant entity is the contract purchaser of the subject property. Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> Uh Mr. Chairman, I present Mr. Gribs as a lay witness with regard to operational testimony for purposes of our presentation tonight. I don't think there's any issue with
that. So, >> thank you, councel. Um, John, can you please provide a overview of JDN, the applicant entity? >> Sure. Yeah, JDN is a natural national purchaser and operator of industrial
outdoor storage properties. Uh, we've been around for three years and manage over 900 acres across 140 plus properties nationally. We also own three properties in uh New Jersey. Uh one in Elwood Park, one in um Trenton, and one
in Sarville as well. >> And you also have um properties outside of New Jersey. Correct. >> Uh that's correct. We we buy nationally um as far as west as Seattle. >> And with regard to this subject site, you would retain ownership of the
property. Is that correct? >> That is correct. And we would be responsible for the approvals if granted. So, you would um oversee day-to-day operations on site. >> Yes, that's correct. >> Have you identified a tenant at this time for the property?
>> Uh we do not have a tenant at this time. Our plan is upon acquisition uh marketing this to you know local, regional and national tenants. >> Is that standard for your industrial sites? Have you identifi the tenant uh
post entitlement, post approval? Uh it can go both ways, but this is not regular. >> Um please describe to the board what uh day-to-day operations would look like on this site. Uh should the board be inclined to approve the proposal? >> Uh day-to-day operations would be
ensuring that the site improvements that are planned for the property are installed properly and up to code. uh we would be having on-site presence with a prospective tenant ensuring that everything is being complied and all the items on the property are being stored
and also up to code. Um and we would also be doing um any maintenance when it comes to you know future developments on the property. Um, and then also we would be working with the the local, you know, utility providers and making sure um all
the, you know, bills are being paid and that the property is being serviced properly. >> So, >> you're going to have some, excuse me, you're going to have somebody on site doing all that. So I'm in in the area and I stop by the properties that we own
on a on a by So it's sort of more like a uh a rotational uh come and take a look and make sure that nothing bad is happening. >> That's correct. >> How often do you think you'd be doing that? >> So we typically do it on a bi-weekly basis.
>> Okay. Thanks. >> Just wanted to go back to one thing that you said to the board. Um you're aware that the current owner's prior approval um had certain details and that were
never implemented with regard to their approval. Is that correct? >> Uh that that's correct. So >> you you will make sure that should you obtain an approval on the site, you will correct that and make sure that everything is implemented that should have been from that last
approval. >> That's correct. And during our engineering testimony as well, we will be doing additional site improvements on top of those prior uh conditions. >> Sure. Um do you plan to source to local businesses?
>> Yes, that's correct. I would say over 75% of our current portfolio is leased to, you know, local um tenants that benefit the the community. Do do you are you going to be leasing
space uh on this property to different people or is this going to be a single tenant? >> So how I foresee it based on experience that we've seen for irregularly shaped properties like this with one point of ingress egress. Most likely it's going to be a single t tenant property but I
don't foresee it being any more than three. >> Okay. >> And what would the hours of operation be proposed here? Uh typ typical tenant operations for outdoor storage sites nationally is 24 hours, seven days a week. >> Are there any types of tenants um that
you would not look at? Is there anything excluded such as um a tenant that would have hazmat materials, anything like that, or do you look at everybody? >> Uh no, we would we would never have hazardous materials, combustibles on
site. Um we historically there's been a concrete plant on site. Uh we would not have I guess react those operations. Um and we would also not have truck terminal operations on site. >> Um do you anticipate that your site
users will require frequent movements to and from the property? >> Uh the the activity in and out of the site will be infrequent. Um as stated in the name outdoor storage, the operations are principally on a storage basis. So
there will be minimal circulation in and out of the site. >> You know what? That's uh all the questions that I have for you, John. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> What are some of the materials that they bring there to be stored?
>> So from m materials, it's typically on the building u material supplies. So think um you know granite um your your tiles, your um you know cobblestone and stones of that that effect. Um but it
really varies depending on the tenant. >> Any other questions? How do you I don't know if if you get into this later with another witness, but h how do you maintain order within the site and and organization
and ensure that it stays that way? I mean, you you're talking about three different kinds of stones, you and what it say 98 storage bays or something. Are they self-contained containers of some
kind or is it just uh 98 spots lined off on on the ground and things placed there? Um I don't understand that part of the operation. >> Yeah. So for the striping standpoint that is u for the the vehicle component
of the uh application. So all the vehicles I guess historically without the striping which was a condition of the prior approvals kind of been scattered throughout the site um and it's actually um hindered the conditions of the property the way it was operated.
Uh to answer your question directly, when it comes to the equipment and the materials and supplies, those would be stored over the striping, but it would be in accordance in accordance with the ordinance where uh those materials would
not be um of a make that would be easily um I guess transportable off the site. Um and a lot of the times they're organized and concealed. Um but yeah, it's typically in an organized manner where
these are heavy um institutional grade materials that are stacked um and laid throughout the site. And then I'm assuming that there are steps taken that there's no danger of since it's
outdoors, things being wind blown to offsite places or uh objects that might become airborne or you have to excuse my ignorance in this is the first application this of this
kind in about in all the time that I've been here. So, I don't I don't know anything about your operation. So, you're kind of starting at ground zero, >> right? So, I would say on the materials basis, it's less so those that you
attract dusts um and stacking of soils and stuff and and sediment that could be easily, as you you mentioned, blown off. Typically when we're partnering with these materials groups um think of your you know QXOs um that are doing a lot of
the the construction throughout the country um it's more of your you know concrete blocks um and those type of materials that will be stored and not as we talked about the the more hazardous combustible um and things of that
effect. >> So anything that's stored would be secured. >> Correct. Oh, you know that's a I don't understand what you mean by you said anything you stored will be secured and you said yes but I don't know what that means.
>> Secured I meant with regard to the chairman's question not something that can blow away. >> Okay. Uh I think um how is it going to be secured?
So, it's going to comply um with with the zoning ordinance when it comes to um outdoor storage where our whole site um is going to be fenced. And part of the site improvements that we're doing for the property, uh we're installing a 6ft
high gate that is going to be closest to uh New Jersey 27. So, um the viewpoint from the street into the property will be adequately screened. Um during engineering testimony, we'll also speak to this. the landscaping will have
additional buffer. Uh but within it's to answer directly, it's going to be in compliance with ordinance from a a fencing and security standpoint. >> Mr. Vice Chair, I think our project engineer can get into more details for you. >> Okay. Because I have some questions for him.
>> How high would things be stacked? >> Uh so it would be um under 8t >> and the fence would be six feet. uh the the fence that we're installing is 8 8 ft. >> So, in other words, the the materials would not be stacked uh any higher than
uh the the fence that you're putting in. >> That's correct. >> Okay. I I'm with him. We've never seen an application like this before, so we're kind of like stumbling along. >> We'll we'll take you through good in
significant detail with my next witness, Mr. Vice Chair. U any other board questions? I'm >> just who's the next I'm over here. Who's the next witness? >> Our engineer will be next. >> So, okay. So, I guess these questions can be um directed at this gentleman.
So, the site plan, again, this is just to give the board a better idea of what outside outdoor storage is because we just haven't had this. So, the site plan, well, let me take a step back. I think just I'm not sure if all the board
members know the exact site location. So this is the site that's it's on Route 27 south of Church Hill just north of the Terara Greens property. Historically it was a concrete plant as me as as mentioned it was approved about 10 years ago for bus storage. Uh basically right
now it's it's a big open concrete uh broken up asphalt and they're basically showing in the exhibits there. Um um so that's the location. Um the site plan shows 98
like striped storage areas. I I don't know what else to I mean I look at they look like like like trailer spaces. >> Yeah, that's what I thought they were when I first looked at >> Yeah. So So what what are those depicting? I I guess those 98
spaces in terms of potential users and why why is that from your perspective on the site plan? >> Yeah, it's it's on the site plan because our our tenants range across industries. So from logistics, transportation, construction, landscaping, contracting,
etc. And so um historically one of the more heavy industrial uses um is is trucking. And also it's the the largest vehicle that can be stored on site. And so we showed uh the striping for the the trucking um because from there
everything else um would be even easier um whether it's a short bed truck, automobile vehicle, uh things to that effect. Um so we showed the striping on how that would play out because the trucking was um intended under the the vehicle component of this application.
Um, but then on top of that, since our typical tenant base also stores, you know, materials, supplies, and equipment, we have labels on that site plan that speak to those components. >> Okay. So, you had mentioned when the board was asking about the types of
tenants that would not be there, you had you had mentioned that one of those would would be a truck terminal. Um, can you just describe what what is a truck terminal? Um, I mean, I've heard the term, but I'm not exactly sure what that is. Um, and how
that would not be operating here because again, I look at a site plan that shows 98 trailer spaces. So, it implies that this is going to be 98 trailers with trucks going in all day long. >> Yeah. So, yeah, I can speak to that. So, so a truck terminal, it's a last mile
facility. So typically in the logistics um I guess industry you have you know product come in typically um to a port on the containers that inventory is brought to a distribution warehouse and
that's where the general inventory and products are stored from there once like an order is placed those that warehouse inventory is taken from that facility to a truck terminal which is the last mile which is servicing the immediate
townships and and counties. And so what happens is that um inventory is dropped at that terminal and then uh trucks typically dock to those facilities, take those specific items that were in that order and then ultimately drop it off at
the um you the purchaser whether it's a you know residential consumer or a business. And so why this won't be on site is because we have a very small building on site. Um we will not be having u specific in inventory in the
building stored. Um the inside of the building would be for um any sort of minor or soft maintenance and repairs of items but we would not be storing inventory there. So that's why we would be we're showing the striping more for
the storage of trucks which are the ones that are facilitating the inventory from warehouses to last mile to the the end consumer. >> Okay. And then just just to give the board some idea from your perspective. Um
you had said it could be one user, it could be you anticipate a maximum of three based on your experience based on this site, its size, location. If it was to be one tenant, what types of uh tenants might that be?
And then I then I'll ask you to answer the same question. If it was going to be a mixture of uses, what would you think would be that those mixture of up to three uses, three tenants? >> Yeah, I would say the tenant pool u would probably mirror our existing
assets. So, um for our one property in Elwood Park at 19 Wall Street, we have a lease with Senzary uh construction. um they they're a pretty big construction company and they use the property um to to store a lot of their equipment and vehicles when it comes to that business.
Um our second property at 301 Hardle Street in Sville, uh New Jersey, uh that's currently leased out to White Cap. Whitecap's a national company. Uh they mainly provide contractors, construction companies with highway and
safety materials. and they're currently using our site to store uh rebar metal um and also accessory uh vehicles and equipment that go to that business. And then the third property that we own is 47 Yarville Groville in Hamilton
Township. Um that property is currently vacant, but historically it was owner occupied by a lumber company. Um so they were storing uh throughout the yard um trucks, cars, uh lumber materials and there was historically also Ace Hard
hardware in the building. Um so those are the typical type of uh tenants that we we work with and most likely um if I had to guess today what would be in sight. >> Okay. And that those were all single tenant. Did you have any if it was going to be a mixture of tenants what that
mixture might possibly be? Uh it's it's really dependent on tenant demand um in the area. So um I I can't really speak to that right right now. Um but it it it's probably going to be a mixture of the industries that I
mentioned of uh construction, building supply, landscaping, contractors, logistics, transportation. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So if you had a landscaper in there, would he be storing giant piles of
mulch? potentially, but it would have to be obviously in in accordance with your ordinance when it comes to those items. And that's something that we would hash out during the pre-screening process that we do for leasing any of our property. There's another uh there's
another thing. Um as I read the your plans um uh there's a a picture of your property uh with a proposed stockpile location and then it also says proposed
salt fence. What are those two things? Am I Am I waiting too far into the engineer testimony or >> I was going to say I think Jeff can probably speak to that. Just have a quick question for Mark along.
Do we do we have any standards or ordinances regarding mulch storage? >> I don't believe so. I I'll look through our ordinance um uh you know during the course of this
hearing. Um, if if I don't find any, that might be something that the board might want to talk about. As far as if at the end of the hearing you were inclined to grant an approval, we might want to set up some parameters. >> I could I could say um, generally
speaking, anything that's proposed will comply with your outdoor storage ordinance, of course. >> Yeah. Well, that's I understand that, but right now what I'm hearing is you have nothing to comply with as far as mulch,
something like that. >> We may not have standards because it's not a permitted use. So, >> I mean, we don't regulate something that's not permitted, but I'll look to see if there's something we can point to. >> Could Could we just limit it to no loose items? >> Well, I think you want to hear the whole
test. I'm just saying that point. >> Yeah. I mean the board would have to talk about you know whatever at at the end of the day what the concerns are. Um you may want to have a discussion of of again perhaps having some parameters on how they have that the loose materials
have to be enclosed or maybe at the end of the day you're not comfortable and prohibited alto together. I I think we have to go through and have that discussion as we go forward. I I think our next witness will lay out in much further detail, you know, get get down in deep into the nitty-gritty
of our proposal and we'll answer a lot of your your questions. >> All right. Any other is it his completed right >> for my direct? Yes. >> Any other questions? >> I just have one quick one. What about general security and fear of theft? How
do you address that? Uh typically you you address that like like we are doing with the new gate which will have a lock on the outside. Um additionally we're going to be making improvements um to the the building. Uh right now the the doors are are pretty
loose and so we're going to be solidifying those. Um and typically um you know the valuables are stored in the building and then the whatever is on the yard it's up to the tenant um that we'll work work in lock step with. But between
the screening and the security for the fence and from the street, um, you know, that should be satisfied. >> You haven't had any issues in that Hamilton location with theft? >> No, I'm just curious. >> Well, we bought to be candid, we bought the property vacant. Um, we did put new
new fencing around it with privacy slats. We have security cameras that we put on every property once we acquire it. So, that's that's how we go about it. >> Yeah, I'm sure you've done your due diligence on the area. I just just curious. >> Yeah. Actually, one last question, Mr. Chairman. Um, yes. So, I think that was
one of my questions. So, that you you may have multiple tenants. There's a gate. So, how does that how does that work in terms of if somebody comes in at different hours, how are they let in, you know, how do they get into the site? >> Yeah. So, they're all going to have
access via, you know, key to the gate. Um, but it's actually pretty unique for the industrial outdoor storage uh tenants across the country. um they have no problems, you know, working and locked up. Uh there's different type of properties. You have, you know, managed parking sites where you'll have over
100, you know, trucking tenants, uh working together. Obviously, we're not doing that at this site. Um but it typically people just have a defined area in the lease and they stick to it and then any any issues that pop up, we we address it as a landlord. Okay.
>> But there's isn't there a main gate across the driveway proposed? Correct. On the on the entrance. >> Yeah. Okay. And Okay. So, they use they they would use a key. >> Yeah. So, if they were to lock it,
there's going to be a key and and Jeff, our engineering um representative can speak to it, but yeah, they'll have specific access to the site um and defi define premises. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Yeah. Is there an average number of of trucks
that you have in a typical site? >> Uh, it really comes down to the the acreage and the configuration of the site. >> All right. Any other questions? All right. Uh, all of the people seated in the audience are connected with your
application, I think, except for our our reporter. >> Yes. >> Okay. So I guess there is no need to open to the public. >> Well, you should go ahead and >> All right, we will open to the public for questioning. >> Obviously, >> I actually do have a question. You said
something about uh your potential tenants could be landscapers. So what about any chemicals like fertilizers or something? Will that be? >> You said no. >> There won't be any uh like landscaping chemicals storage. >> Yeah. So, we pre-screen all the tenants
on what their their plans for the property are, what they're going to be storing, both when it comes to the what the item is and the quantities. And so, we also have um an in-house environmental council that we screen everything through. Um, and we make sure
that, like I testified earlier, that nothing's going to be hazardous um or or flammable to that effect. So, none of these people store cans of gasoline or u you know things like that.
>> They have historically, but that's why we we come in, we clean up the sites and we make sure those are removed. >> But your tenants wouldn't be. >> I I can't say because I don't know who the tenant is. But yeah, most likely we will not be storing um ga gas and and
things to that effect. >> Okay. Again, we'll try this uh we'll open to the public that is not here. So, there's nobody coming forward. We'll close. Go for your next witness. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Our next witness is our project engineer.
>> Sir, if you can raise your right hand, please. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give before this board is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes. >> You state your name and spell your last name for record, please? >> Sure. It's Jeffrey Haberman. It's H A B
E R M. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Jeff, can you please uh take the board briefly through your qualifications and experience? >> Sure. So, I'm a licensed professional engineer in New Jersey. Uh my license is in good standing. Um, I have my bachelor of science in civil engineering from
Ruckers University. I'm a principal at Dynamic Engineering Consultants with about 13 years of experience in the land development engineering industry. Um, I've been accepted as an expert in numerous municipalities and provided professional testimony before uh dozens of planning zoning boards throughout the
state. >> Thank you. >> I'll accept you for that. And with one question also, have you ever uh participated in this type of an application? outdoor storage >> an outdoor storage um you know I
participated in assisting with designs in the office I haven't testified to an outdoor storage proposal I understand it very well um my firm has done uh dozens of outdoor storage projects though yeah >> you're a witness >> thank you Mr. Mr. Chair, >> thank you.
>> Um Jeff, the plans that were submitted in connection with this application were prepared by you or under your supervision. Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> Please take the board through the um existing conditions on site and then our proposal. >> Sure. Um so thank you for your time, Mr.
Chairman, members of the board, council. Um I'll I have a few exhibits here to present tonight. I'll start with and if this is an okay location for you, if I could if if would you prefer I move it or is that acceptable then? Um, >> we we should just mark them though. So, how many exhibits do you have there?
>> I have I could say three or seven. So, there's an aerial map exhibit, there's a site plan rendering, and then there's line of sight profiles, which which consists of three sheets. Um, >> so we can mark those together. So, we'll
do this one A1. >> Yes. >> We'll start with that. Yep. >> I'll mark it. Right. >> Right. >> Yep. All right. Great. Thank you. So, um this first exhibit here is entitled Aerial Map Exhibit. Um it's prepared by my
firm. It's dated today, January 8th, 2026. Um the for the board's orientation I'll consider the north arrow pointing towards the uh right side of the page even though it's really to the top right corner. Um and for that purpose
considering uh route 27 is uh traversing north south at the bottom of the of the subject parcel which is outlined in yellow in the middle of the page. Um the property itself is identified as block 88.01 lot 7.01 01 with an address
of 945 New Jersey State Highway Route 27. So that is under NJ DOT jurisdiction. To the north of the property are industrial uses um in or in commercial which could be classified as including um the public works building um within
the CMMU and CMR zones. To the west is undeveloped land um in the GB zone, general business with industrial uses beyond that. Uh to the south is the existing golf course and and driving range also within the GB zone. And to
the west um or to the east, sorry, is New Jersey State Highway Route 27 with other industrial commercial uses beyond that. Um so as you can see, the subject parcel outlined in yellow is in a regular shape. It's triangular um which which somewhat limits
development potential as you as you travel further west into the site due to the setbacks that come to the pinch point on the property. The frontage itself is biseected by the family dollar store. Um on the southern leg, if you will, the that's where the
full the existing full movement driveway is currently located. >> Now is you're going to have to work with me on this. I'm okay at left and right. I'm not that great with north and south. >> Okay. >> So, what you're saying, I think, is that as I look at this, the leg that you're
talking about, the southern leg, is the thing to the right side. >> It's the thing to the left side, the small strip of >> Oh, okay. Right there. >> See, that's why I hate those things. >> U So, yes, that's where that full movement access driveway is on the left
side of that uh Family Dollar store. Um on the right the right frontage on the right side of the store are is is generally wooded areas. There's also a wetland area low-lying wetland area that we um currently have an application into the NJP for a letter of interpretation
to verify those wetland bounds. Um so that um that's submitted to the D. The property acreage is 5.21 21 acres in size and the property itself is located within the BI the business industry zone. Some of the
permitted uses within the zone include general professional offices, laboratories, banquet facilities, hotels, data centers, light manufacturing, self- storage facilities um as well as childcare centers.
In terms of the existing improvements, as you all all are aware, it's currently developed um and was previously approved as a an outdoor bus storage uh use and office use back in 2017 and operated for a few years in that manner. And before
that, it was a concrete plant for for a number of years. There are four existing structures located on site currently. Three of the structures are on the south or on along the left property line and the fourth structure is at the top of the property
um which actually uh straddles the property line and is on the adjacent property partially. Another important item as you can see in this image is with with regard to circulation patterns. There essentially
is no traffic control on the site as it is currently shown. I believe that would be um uh the matter related to the prior applicant not installing certain improvements on site um including striping uh circulation to make it effective for bus storage.
On top of that, the site is is certainly not not kept that well at all. Um there are portions of the existing concrete surfaces on site that are that are um dilapitated and the northern half of the site under the prior approval was supposed to be paved. It's currently it
it wasn't paved and it's currently just compacted gravel at this time. Um other site elements that are lacking um include lighting. There's no real lighting on site to um um assist with any um vehicular
circulation. Um there's also no true landscaping uh screaming along Route 27 to shield the view of the site from Route 27. Now, on the north side, I did mention that there's that low-lying wetland area and and you could you could see that there's vegetation there, but
the understory isn't isn't great. You could you could see under underneath the the vegetation, especially during the winter months. Um, the majority of the site is current. >> There's no fence there. >> There is no fence along that. That's actually a wetland area with a a transition area, a 50-ft buffer. It
encompasses essentially the entire frontage right up to Route 27. So presumably any any anybody who wanted to put a fence there wouldn't have been allowed to without a permit from the state. And it's also has a a a pretty steep drop into the wetland channel there. So
it's not really a safe to navigate anyway. It's almost like a an acting fence if you will like next to a busy road. So yeah, >> a moat >> a moat if you will. Um a majority of the site is is currently paved. Uh the
number is 78.6 6% of the site. From a a storm water management grading perspective, everything drains from the top of the page uh to the east or the towards the low-lying wetland area that's along
Route 27. In addition to that, the prior user did stockpile a number of gravel material, sandy material, um other soils along the wetland embankment, which is causing
error or issues with the drainage. Uh as it's it's it's impeding storm water from being able to drain right into that wetland area. So, that's an issue that the applicant will be looking to correct and I'll show that on the next plan. I did drive by the site recently, too,
and there's essentially no inlet infrastructure in the back of the Family Dollar store. So, there is there's pretty pretty uh good amount of ponding occurring in in the current condition behind the Family Dollar on on the subject property. So, that's a condition that we would also the applicant would
also like to correct. With that, I'll uh move on to my next exhibit. Mark A2's record. So this exhibit here is entitled um the site plan rendering. It's prepared by my company again, dynamic engineering data
today, January 8th, 2026. So what you are seeing here is essentially a colorized rendering of the site plan in the site plan package that was delivered to the board as part of the application. So my role I've been retained by the applicant to review the existing
conditions and the constraints and prepare the layout that you see here uh today for the repurposing of this parcel from an outdoor bus storage or a vacant use now to an industrial outdoor storage use. In preparation of this design, I've been to the site on numerous occasions.
I've reviewed the property survey, the township land use ordinance, have copies of all the township professionals review memorandums and reviewed them in depth, and I've also reviewed the prior 2017 site plans and the resolution of approval that was associated with that
outdoor bus storage approval. So, we're here tonight seeking preliminary and ma final major site plan approval and D1 use variance relief along with a few Z uh C variances and design waiverss. As I mentioned, the improvements consist
of repurposing the currently vacant site, which was previously approved as a bus storage depot with an industrial outdoor storage use. Since outdoor industrial outdoor storage is not a permitted use in the B1 zone, we this project will require D1 use variance
relief. So, when we first approached um township staff and professionals about this project back last year, um we were advised and and and um Oprah, you know, the prior approval documents, reviewed them, and we understand that the prior
applicant didn't construct many of the site elements that they were obligated to construct prior to their operation of that bus storage um operation. JD and iOS here is a national vendor um who is very familiar with these types of sites as he's
testified to. They they have well over a hundred of these sites nationally. They clean these sites up, repair repair portions that are dilapitated and require repair. Um, in this current proposal, they'll they'll be proposing to pave the the currently existing
gravel areas with asphalt pavement, provide screening along RE27, um, illuminate the site properly with LED lighting, and overall just operate the site in a safe and efficient manner um that was previously not recognized at this site.
And that's what they do for their their dozens to over a hundred sites nationally. Um first from really from a vehicle circulation perspective. I think that's probably the most important aspect as um Mr. Healey here um was speaking to
earlier questions about how um vehicles maneuver the site. What's the point of the striping? Why is it striped in that manner? And all great questions. Um so first I I'll really start from Route 27 where the existing driveway is the full movement driveway which is at the uh
left hand side of the site. Um it's it's full movement. Um, all concrete. All concrete actually coming right up into the site where the gate is. Um, I might get up in a minute just to point that out. Um, the >> the proposal >> do that. Okay. The
>> the proposal right now. >> No. No. >> Okay. >> There's a there's a mic up. >> There's a mic. Use the mic on the stand. >> Okay. >> Okay. Sorry. >> It's okay. >> Is this working? >> Yep. It's good.
>> It's good. Yeah. Great. Thank you. So, I was mentioning that's this is where the full movement driveway is located along Route 27. Uh, this driveway, we're not proposing to modify it at all. It encompasses almost it's essentially the
entire uh width of the right of way that leads up into the site. Um, as a recommendation from the township engineer actually or your board engineer, I should say, um, you recommended that we repair the the driveway to a better condition as it is a little beat up. Repair the sidewalk
that crosses over the driveway um, parallel to Route 27 and we are certainly amendable to doing that as a condition of approval. Um, and we'll need a, you know, a small permit from this from DOT, but it'll it's a pretty quick permit to pull for that type of
replacement and kind job. Um, as you travel further into the site, we've employed in our design, uh, striping improvements. Essentially, what you see here is, uh, islands that are striped out in the
middle here, um, and along the outside. So, I want to focus really on where the storage areas will be located on site. >> Okay. Wait. So, so I'm sitting here and my curiosity is killing me as to why one side of it is gray and white and the
other side is white and tan. What's what's going on on the left hand side there? >> It's a great question and I I should have explained that before. So, on the left hand side where the the beige color is, that's existing concrete, concrete surface pavement. on the right
side where it's it's a you know black color if you will, dark gray. That's newly proposed asphalt pavement. That's where the existing compacted gravel is located. Supposed to be paved in the prior approval. Now the applicant is coming in and and we are designing that section to be entirely paved so that
it's a more efficient um pavement, stronger pavement and it can withhold the materials that'll be stored in that location. Um, as for the striping that we're employing, we do have a uh roughly a 35 foot drive aisle that we're striping um
on either side throughout the site to provide proper circulation so that vehicles understand where to travel as opposed to the free-for-all condition that it's currently in. Now, um the majority of the storage areas are going to be located on really the right hand
side of the site. And I believe that was a question asked by Mr. Healey earlier. um why they're striped in a manner that it would seem like you're you're parking tractors or something. Um why when we had originally designed the site, it was presumed that we would possibly have a
trucking operation here, a trucking terminal. And that striping methodology would be the most restrictive type based on the length that you need to park a tractor trailer. Now, that that is not actually a contemplated use here. as the as the actual applicant had spoken to
earlier, we're gonna we're keeping the striping on here for now. It's not the final condition of what that striping will look like, but that is exactly where the the outdoor storage area will be ultimately. So, these vehicular um there's a there's a circular vehicular
um drive around around the site that's going to be uh constructed and proposed there. And the storage areas will be located along the the northern property line at the right side of the site as well as behind the the Family Dollar store.
Um there I did mention the buildings in site before. There are currently four buildings. The one closest to Route 27, you'll see that dark gray color concrete. That's one of the buildings that'll be demolished. So, the one closest to Route 27, it'll provide better visibility from the roadway.
That's that'll be removed. The next building further into the site, that will be a small office building use for for their employees or and their the tenants to to occupy. The building further into the site um will be a a
quasi either maintenance facility or uh a general office use as well. Um, these typical outdoor storage users do want to have the ability to have um a building on site to they they they may even store other materials inside of the building
themselves, but they want the ability to be able to maintain any vehicles that might be on site that their contractors might be might be storing. So, they're someone is maybe going to be changing
the oil in these trucks or doing some kind of maintenance on them. >> Maintenance is the right Yes, maintenance is the right word. Changing oil, not really. It's not a car, you know, an automobile facility or or, you know, an automobile shop. It's it's more
just a maintenance shop for um their tenants to repair any of the vehicles that they might be storing on site. landscaping vehicles might be stored on site. Um, and they'll bring them into the shop. There are overhead doors on the building. Bring them in there, repair them, bring them right back to the outdoor storage space that they're
allotted under their their tenant contracts. >> Huh. And there is I I did mention earlier there's a fourth building that straddles the property line on the top of the site that's also being removed. It's obviously a nonconformity because it encroaches on the adjacent.
>> Now, it looks like you it looks like you're going to be uh leaving the uh there's this green space down at the bottom on the right. Looks like that's gonna Is there Is that gonna be
trees or bushes or or what? It's green now. >> It's It's green. That's And that's remaining. I I have landscaping test. I was going to get into that in a little bit. Okay. Um and >> I'm sorry if I'm jumping in. Right. >> It's okay. No, I'll I'll explain that. Same as the top of the site. This
actually was all concrete before. Yeah. >> Removing that because it's not really an optimal storage area then. So, they're removing that concrete portion. that's all dilapitated and and putting in lawn and >> so so even with those two pieces being
re returned to a green state um we're still at 80% uh impervious >> we are a reduction in impervious coverage about a quarter acre of redu of of a reduction of impervious coverage so
pretty pretty significant amount um it was 78.6 6 in the existing condition. We're bringing it down to 74.5%. >> All right. >> Tell me about the um I'm I'm jumping you again, but the dog house the dog house.
Uh >> there's a there's a they talk about a about something that has to do with drainage. Oh yes. So the entire site now from the top of the
page or the west side of the site drains down towards that wetland area that's that's at the corner. >> Right. >> There are a bunch of stock piles. The prior owner or the current owner or prior user stockpiled ton of material over here that's impeding drainage
getting into its natural >> pattern where it should be going. There's also no infrastructure to collect storm water runoff along the back of the store. So, there is a significant amount of ponding occurring in that location. Now, the doghouse is a is a it's a structural term for a type
of inlet that you place over an existing underground storm water pipe. Essentially, you place you because there's there is a storm water drainage pipe that drains into that lowlying wetland area. We're proposing to install
an inlet over that pipe so that we can and and planning to regrade the property so that it drains either towards the wetland area or into that inlet that we're that we'll be installing over that pipe. In addition, we'll be removing the stock piles over here. when we submitted
applications to the state because it's technically a disturbance in a wetland buffer but it's an enhancement to the condition um because it's it whether it should be there legally or not um we want to enhance the drainage condition on site. So we went ahead, the applicant
let us or advised us to file that application to the state to get a um a transition area waiver to remove those stock piles. So in addition um just really wrapping up the circulation um we are also proposing a parking scheme around the
existing building and the office building. It'll include um you know parking striping but also an ADA stall so that we comply with the the American Disabilities Act and the uh the spaces themselves will comply with the Franklin Township Code 9
ft in width by 18 ft in depth. Not going to be much in andout traffic at all these tenants come in. You know there's 13 park or 17 parking stalls that are proposed which is compliant with the ordinance. Most stalls probably will not even be used on a normal operation.
These tenants have a few folk on site to either handle the operation inside the building, make sure everything's flowing smoothly in terms of where their tenants should be putting their outdoor storage materials. So, it's um these JDN operates a very nice clean site. And that's um this this proposal will help
with that. See, that's one of the things that that concerns me is that you're taking a site that was poorly
um revised and maintained and then they put all kinds of piles of stuff all over the place and they were just supposed to be doing. What is to keep that from happening
if we give you if we give your client uh uh the use variance that he needs here and allows him to go ahead and do this project. I'm concerned that you know it'll look nice in the beginning but then things will
deteriorate. >> It's it's a great question. I I believe that's almost really a legal question in terms of how violations are handled. >> Um >> Mr. Vice Chair, you know, any condition of approval should the board be so inclined, it would really end up being
an enforcement issue and zoning violations would issue against the applicant and and that's how it would be controlled really from your uh township zoning officer. >> Okay. So the the and the way that that would work is that any any approval we
give would have to detail all of the things that would be of concern to us as as violations. And I guess my problem is is it's hard for still after asking all the questions I've asked, it's hard for
me to grasp how this whole thing's going to work. I have a question I guess for Mark and our attorney concerning what Mr. Shepard brought up. Is it possible feasible to work if this is approved a condition
into the approval where there would be a township inspection say every six months and I'm just I have no idea if six months is the right time frame or not. I'm putting it out for purposes of the question.
>> I I think we can put in as you can put in as a condition of approval that would be subject to periodic inspections to confirm that it's operating the way it should be. I I'm only trying to circumvent the the typical problem where a violation
would probably not be picked up by anybody unless it's reported by someone and turned into the town who would come out and inspect it and and find a violation. >> Purpose here would be to
keep them from happening consistently. >> Yeah. I mean, if if Brian think that's a condition that you can impose, then I certainly would be in favor of it. I mean, it's if the first when anytime there's going to be a new tenant, um I know this is somewhat of a unique
use since it's these be these would be outside tenants, but usually whenever there's a new tenant in a commercial site, you have to get zoning approval. Um, so I would think that it's certainly an appropriate condition of of if a board was if the board was to grant the
approval that anytime there's a new tenant uh or user on this site, they have to go through zoning approval. Um, and you know, we could certainly, you know, we may want again, as we um talked a little bit more of trying to fine-tune
the different types of users and things that might be stored there. um we might want to set some parameters of what they um may or may not do and then the zoning uh department would then have to implement that each time somebody comes
in. Um I I do uh I did have the Darren found it as well. We do have a section on outdoor storage. So it's not a standalone uh permitted use, but I guess this section is in there for I guess if there's a a warehouse or light manufacturing use that happens to have
some accessory outdoor storage. And I think some of the language may be helpful in this discussion. Um, so it's section 112123. Uh, section A says that no flammable or explosive liquids, solids, or gases shall be stored in bulk above ground.
Um, personally, I I I think it's it's useful to stress the word in bulk. Um, I I think at the end of the day, if the board was to grant an approval, you know, if there's going to be landscapers and that landscaper happens to have a gallon of gas on his trailer, I don't
think that's what you're you're concerned about here. I think this is somebody's going to have 100gallon tanks of propane and 20 of them. You know, that's that's not permitted even as an accessory use. Certainly, language to that effect would be would be
appropriate, I think, as a condition. Um, all outdoor storage facilities for fuel, raw materials and products and all raw materials and products stored outdoors shall be enclosed by a fence adequate to conceal the facilities from
from adjacent properties. So again, the board has already been talking along those lines about what type of screening uh they'll have to provide. materials or wastes shall not be deposited upon a lot in such form and manner that may be
transferred off the lot by natural causes or forces. So again, the board's already started to talk about some of these issues. You know, if there is loose material, uh how are they going to make sure that it's going to be contained in terms of I mean, what are we talking about in terms of natural, you know, forces? We're talking about
wind and rain, right? So if there is going to be allowed to be mulch piles or other things, how are they going to contain that on the site so it doesn't blow away in dry weather or during the rain doesn't get washed, you know, off
the site? Uh all materials or wastes which might cause fumes or dust or which constitute a fire hazard or which may be edible or otherwise attractive to rodents or insects shall be stored outdoors only in closed containers.
Again, that seems like a pretty reasonable condition to me. >> The word waste keeps showing up and I I keep wondering about when people have something in the in the in the facility and they say, you know, I don't I don't
want this stuff anymore. This stuff got wet and it got ruined and they just take it and cast it aside. Is there one that deals with when people just leave crap around? Well, that's I mean, yeah, it does use the word waste, and I don't know why that word is in there. Again, I
think this language is talking about the accessory uh outdoor storage for light manufacturing or warehouse uses uses and for for some reason waste, but they they do talk about materials. So in that same language. So again even if we take out the word waste materials shall be
deposited upon or or stored materials shall be stored upon a lot in such form and manner that may be transfer that you know that may not be transferred off the lot by natural causes or forces. So they need to contain those materials in some appropriate way uh from from wind and
and drainage. um all materials which might cause fumes or dust or be you know attractive to rodents what have you have to be stored in enclosed containers. >> Um so again I think I think the this language certainly is um we've already
started talking about some of these things and um I would suggest we go back to this perhaps as the conversation continues. >> And Mr. Mr. Chairman, at the beginning of um our first witness's testimony, the applicant already indicated that we intended to comply with all of the township's outdoor uh storage ordinance
requirements. >> Yeah, I understand that everybody everybody does, but we still have problems and and I I agree with 99% of what Mark said. might,
you know, having an inspection every time there's a new tenant is a good idea, >> but if you get a one tenant person who or company that doesn't move out, that means in three years nobody or two years
or however long they're there, nobody nobody's accountable for anything in terms of site management. So, does the township have a um change in tenency ordinance that your you know perhaps like a minor site plan committee oversees a change in teny?
>> Well, that's yeah, that's what I was kind of that's what I was referring to. And again, you know, anytime there's a new tenant, somebody's taking a new office in an office building and you know, shoe stores going in a shopping center. It it it there's a you need a zoning permit and we review it to make sure what's what's that handles, right?
Yeah. What about the person who's there one year for a year or two years? >> Yeah. >> But let me clarify that again since we don't permit outdoor storage that's never been applied for to outdoor storage. I think certainly again if the this board was to approve it, I think
you would probably want to make that it put it that in the resolution just to make it clear that anytime there's a new tenant on this site that they need to go through our uh zoning approval process. And if the board was to place conditions, and I'm just, you know,
bringing this up as a a potent, let's say there was a a user that was going to have um just as part of their operation was going to have involved the storage of mulch or gravel or something like that that they would have to show the
town how they're going to contain those outside materials. You >> know, phys, you know, show us a plan how they're going to do that. >> Okay. All right, let's move on then. >> So, uh pick off
see from I think believe I was on storm water uh management uh speaking to that. So, storm water on site I I had mentioned before drains to that low-lying wetland area. Um the proposed development is proposing to reduce impervious coverage by roughly a quarter
of an acre um down to what I say 74.5% which is down from 78.6%. Um therefore this development is considered a a minor development um pursuant to the township ordinance as well as the state regulations which is
78. Um and we're the the development is not required to address what are called the storm water runoff rate control requirements. Um in furtherance due to that reduction impervious um water water quality and groundwater recharge um also do not need to be addressed because
we've reduced the impervious coverage on site. >> So So what what I guess you're telling me what makes a minor different from a major. A major is when the impervious coverage increases
>> increases by over a quarter of an acre. So we're reducing by a quarter of an acre. >> Okay. So because you're reducing by a quarter of an acre, you're
not obligated to do anything else with even though 60 60% is what's what's permitted. The fact that you're reducing from 78 to 74
means that you don't have to explain why You're not concerned about meeting 60. >> I'm sorry if that was not articulate. >> No, no, that I appreciate the comment,
Mr. uh vice chair. Um, so reducing imperous coverage increases water quality, provides a benefit to water quality in its nature. Yeah. >> Um, we're just simply as as the engineer of record for this, especially for this project. We're following a set of rules,
you know, 7 colon 8 township ordinance, they simply do not require you to implement any storm water management strategies to enhance water quality beyond you reducing impervious coverage on site. Um if we were to increase impervious coverage by a quarter of an
acre say we would have to put in a storm water basin or something to provide additional water quality measures. Um but because we are reducing that's not required here. Yep. >> I I think the I think the I think it's two different ordinances and two
different requirements. So there is a cap on the amount of impervious coverage that you can have but that doesn't address whether you need to do storm water. storm water kicks in with the net increase. >> All right. >> It's good. You did fine. That was good.
>> And just to clarify a little bit, I know it looks like there's an existing gravel area, but this site was actually a full concrete plant. So that's what's going is the existing condition. Yes. >> What was removed. So that's why you're seeing a lot the impervious might look a little larger because you're looking at the gravel, but it's really the old
concrete plant. And there are two triggers that would make this a major and they don't this project doesn't trigger them. One would be the increase in the purpose area by a quarter of an acre. The other would be if there was a land disturbance area of an acre but that's not this case is underneath that too. I believe it's like the point 6 to
7. >> Correct. >> Correct. >> Yes Mr. M. Thank you. >> I have a question I guess maybe more for our engineer. Um, so how long ago are we looking back like in terms of years to that concrete plant?
So just so um I know the D the DP has the five-year window. So and I know you're looking at that. So in this application they actually were making the the argument originally that the gravel was impervious and it was in an 80% coverage. So, I reduced that down to
the 78 since it was the more restrictive of the two. And that's the kind of the way I interpreted it because they could make the argument that the gravel is an impervious surface if it's compacted and uh and it's no longer recharged. So, I went with the two most restrictive of the two in that method because I didn't
think they should be granted additional impervious offite plan that wasn't finished. Well, I just because something isn't fully constructed and it sits for a period of time, I'm I'm not sure the site should get credit for that, particularly when the stormwater
regulations have probably changed twice since that point. >> Well, they're not getting credit per se because we didn't accept Let me let me try to think how to word this a little differently. the site. We'd either have to evaluate
it as one of two conditions. It would either be as is today with the gravel, >> which I didn't accept because I didn't believe it was the full final buildout or we'd have to accept it previous to that. I don't think we could have accepted it as a grass or or as an imper
a pvious surface just because of what was there. There was it never changed back to a pvious surface. It was either always concrete or compacted gravel. >> Okay. Um, but I I guess my other question would be the determination of what's considered disturbance. I mean,
so that entire asphalt area today is gravel >> in the disturbance. >> I I don't think it is. >> Um, if you let me go to the plan sheet >> because in on your soil erosion plan, you just have a small little pocket next to the Dollar General. identify that as
disturbance being point whatever acres and then you have another number for total asphalt overlay. >> Correct. So >> and then in that asphalt overlay area you're also grading. >> Correct. So the way that and we actually have a a certification from the soil
conservation district um and they've accepted it in this manner too otherwise we would have been tripped into other regulatory standards. What we did was instead of land disturbance is considered what? Land disturbance. What we're doing is building the section up. >> Well, we're you're also talking two sets
of regulations entirely. So, the soil conservation district doesn't have any jurisdiction on storm water management. Correct. >> They do. >> In what regard? >> If you disturb more than 5,000 square feet, you have to >> But does the soil conservation district
that goes to the Department of Agriculture? >> It does. Yes. >> And that has nothing to do with the NJ who publishes the stormwater regulations. >> I mean, I'm obviously going to defer to our board engineer. >> Speak on the DRCC uh interpretation you received as well.
>> Sure. Yeah. With the we've also submitted to the Delaware Red and Can Canal Commission. They've seen the project too and they've issued an exemption for the project. So, um there's there's they're a state agency agency that's actually with the D. So they they have the same regulatory storm water reviewers
>> and and then with the the storm water in general, you're you're adding that e inlet. >> I mean are there pipe or capacity calculations for that inlet? It just seems like a lot of runoff going to one inlet. But again, I I'll defer to our engineer.
>> So there that there as part of the other design that inlet's leading right to the head wall. So it's all basically making to this to the basin and there's a break point in the grading. So, it's not all getting into that e- inlet, but I thought that I saw we can we can we can uh discuss the capacity of that if that
pipe needs to be upsized, but I believe uh from what I looked at at the old application there, that pipe was pretty underutilized. So, >> yeah, I I guess my overall concern would be the Dollar General just taking on runoff that is not being collected by
the E inlet. I I'll have to look at the grading, but I don't believe that there there's a lip right behind the family dollar. Um I'll have to take a look at the grading plan. Um but in essence, I believe we'd have to it sounds like as a petition, we'd
have to work with you to provide the proper pipe sizing calculations. If not, we would have to just upsize the pipe and construct it accordingly. >> Well, and maybe additional inlets >> or or that. Well, yes. So, there's certain flow restrictions. You're right. With with >> in the capacity. >> Yes. So maybe it's a a double E inlet
head and Yeah. >> Or you could split it, you know. >> Or you could split it and put a couple in there. Yes. No, that's that's a great point. Um we'll work with with with the board engineer to make sure that we can enact that as a condition of approval. >> Thank you. >> Um I just have some questions if nobody
else does. Um, I guess the first uh question I have is the concrete that is shown saying I know we had a conversation that you would provide a as if this was approved a repair plan because can you describe the condition of that concrete as as of today?
>> Sure. So there's certainly sections of that concrete that are in need of of repair. Uh um I mean >> absolutely. So you know I've been to the site um there are portions that can be preserved. I I believe that if we work with with your office, we can put together a very specific concrete repair
plan instead of ripping everything out and and replacing it in kind. Um it's been operating in this manner for for many years now, but and I think there's a way that we can clean it up and make sure that it's um not only presentable, but but structurally um integrated into
the outdoor storage use. >> Another comment is I know you mentioned that there was going to be potential that the striping is going to change there. I would say that if that's the case, there needs to be designated no uh no parking fire lanes so emergency access can enter the site because if you start if anything starts moving here,
I'd be concerned that a fire truck couldn't make its way around the site. So, just something to address. You know, we might we're going to want to see some just striping on that and potentially signage. >> Absolutely. Yes. And we can work with your office and and the uh township fire
official um on on a preferred striping and signage plan for that. >> Okay. Now, you didn't touch on what type of vehicle was going to be entering the site. I know we had a lot of conversations about a WB67. That's part of the site plan. Is that still the intent of a vehicle that size to be entering the site?
>> I would say that. So, when we had first been talking, we were talking about this potentially being a tractor trailer storage site. Um, that is not what the applicant is intending to have here. So, that will not be, you know, they won't be storing tractor trailers on site. They won't be coming in and out. Um,
predominantly. There may be a stray, you know, tractor trailer coming in and out once in a while for for a drop off. Can't say that that won't happen. Um, but they will not have storage of trailers on site. So, that driveway will mostly be utilized by um you know, your
WB40 um semi-trail or or any smaller vehicles, sprinter vans. Um >> I mean, as we discussed, just for the board's knowledge, I do have concerns of WB67s entering the site. This driveway is not if you look I can you do you have
uh that circulation plan available from >> I do um I do and and we can if if we we could talk about an hour we could let traffic engineer talk through his testimony too. >> It's up to you how you guys would prefer >> I don't know what makes sense but >> I'm happy to show it. Yeah.
>> Yeah. If you could So just for future reference because I know Dynamic does a lot of applications and I pretty sure the Cali law firm in our correspondence we told you you need to come with a laptop to project to
these screens. So, I don't know if the board can see that, but just again, both my report and Christine's correspondence said you need to come with a laptop to project and this the board put that in their bylaws.
So, luckily there's no public here, but if there was public here, the board the chairman is within his has the ability to basically send you packing. >> So, just understand that on future applications. >> Understood. Mr. Thank you. >> That was going to be one of my questions
after the meeting. Why we certainly couldn't if they were public? >> So I've se I saw this on a conference call yesterday and the concerns I do have with the movement is it takes the full driveway to get into the site. So if there's ever a conflicting movement,
there's a potential for car for vehicles to back up on 27 with a busy road like that. I know that the testimony is that there's limited truck traffic, but anytime a truck does come in, it almost seems like there needs to be a coordination here. So, I I do have some
concerns with this type vehicle coming in. Uh the old approval with a bus, a bus could make the turn in and out free flow. This is going to act in free flow. you're going to have to have some kind of staggering system or making sure that you know the truck there's somebody who monitors this because what you wouldn't
want is a truck leaving or car leaving and then a truck wanting to come in but they're going to have to wait for that vehicle to leave before they enter the site. >> So that was the concern I've had on this. >> Yep. And and understood Mr. Mass. I think one of the, you know, when you hear some testimony from our traffic
traffic engineer, you'll hear a little bit about the, you know, the trip generation, the the low inensity use of the site, um, again, the applicant is is is not proposing, um, any tractor to trailer storage on site. So, the the frequency of those vehicles would be
minor, um, infrequent. I think once you hear some of that traffic testimony, we could revisit that circulation plan. Um, essentially what that plan shows is that 67 making the maneuver into the site um without impeding into the the left lane. Um, staying entirely in the right lane,
maneuvering the driveway, isn't hitting any curbs. It swings a little far on the left side. Um, again, it's in a frequent movement that we would expect um into the site, particularly since it's not a tractor trailer storage lot. But again, you know, we'll we'll have some traffic
testimony as well and and can further elaborate on on trip generation uh specifics. >> If we go uh back to your other exhibit, >> the colorized one, is it absolutely
necessary to have all of the 100% of the concrete in brown that's in tan. For instance, the the whole section to the west going up toward the triangle.
Is that concrete necessary? Not that. The other side. The other end. >> This side. >> Yeah. >> So, this this actually is necessary for turnaround movements, especially for emergency vehicles. If a fire truck comes in, you'll want that truck to be able to make that maneuver circular
around around that portion. That's why we left that clear of any outdoor storage so that the larger emergency vehicles can make that maneuver. >> Uh well, I asked because going back to impervious coverage,
you're you're starting in a sense with a clean slate. So why explain to me why we shouldn't expect much closer to 60%. I I'm not sure what, Mr. Chairman, by by clean slate. Um,
>> right. You're redeveloping it >> the whole parcel basically. >> Sure. Sure. Um, why is it assumed that 78 or 74% is okay? Why not closer to 60? Well,
that's that's, you know, that's another part of there's more testimony to be heard on the planning side. We, you know, I believe we do need to see variance relief for that impervious coverage increase or decrease even. Um, you're
going down from 78 to roughly 74. Um, is there are there other areas that we can reduce impervious on site? I hear that question. Um, we could visit that and and look at that. Um, I believe that section is not a great area to remove impervious just because of the need for
emergency vehicles to maneuver, but there may be a few other areas that we can um, and I would be happy to revisit that um, to get closer to that, you know, 60% mark, such as maybe some of that area right next to that wetland area that's in that gray color. We can
remove that and plant that with lawn area. That'll bring some of your impervious down. Um, maybe a small portion of the the driveway leg coming up on the side where it's strike. >> I wouldn't do the driveway after
listening to Darren, but you know what about a little of the storage space behind the dollar store. >> So, we are actually removing some of that already and putting in um evergreen plantings which will help with the screening into the site. So, we're
removing a little bit of that that impervious right in that location. >> All right. We're also removing some of the impervious here. I think this this is all impervious coverage right next to the wetland area. So, we would be willing to remove that and plant that in lawn. >> Um,
>> we'll see with the rest of the testimony. I'll I'll keep an open line, but it it kind of looks like you're approaching a a pretty crowded site >> from an impervious coverage perspective. Well, from uh even from the driveway
perspective, uh you know, if everything is is uh occupied, all those spaces get occupied, it's going to be pretty crowded. And part of the reason for the impervious is
you really have a need to pave everything because of of what you're doing. So, I don't know. I'm just kind of thinking out loud. Maybe I shouldn't. Uh, it seems to be a seems to be a tight
site. >> Yeah, >> to me, maybe it doesn't anybody else. I >> I hear your concern, Mr. Chairman. Um, I believe we're working with what we have right now. Um, being it being in existing condition, um, already having
lacking a lot of site elements that should be in place now. There's no circulation elements in place. Um there's no lighting, there's no screening from RE 27. Um we're we the applicant is willing to decrease the impervious coverage and we're willing to even work further to decrease it more.
Um and working with you know the board engineer to find areas that we can reduce that impervious coverage more. Um I agree with you that that it's it's beneficial just to from a water quality perspective. Um we are doing a benefit to the site in my professional opinion um by creating this
proper circulation plan. Um the storage of materials I believe you know it takes up maybe a third of the site as well. It's not a large area. Much of the area comprises of you know there still you know the 25% open space there the
buildings um there's the wetlands area. There's vehicular circulation aisles. Um, so I I in my professional opinion, I believe that this plan is is organized um for this specific type of use. It's it's an unusual use. I I'll give you Well, not
unusual, but it's it's it's not typical >> unusual for us >> for you for for it's it's not a typical it's a newer type of use for sure. Um, >> and we're willing to work to to help to reduce that impervious, you know, a little bit more to help satisfy your concerns with with the impervious
coverage. I think our overarching theme, Mr. Chairman, is, you know, it's a, as you're going to hear in further testimony, particularly from our planner, it's a it's a tough site and what's there today can remain. I mean, this board approved that back in, you
know, 2016, 2017. This applicant is proposing >> significant improvements. >> Many of us want what what's there to remain in its present state. Uh there's certainly some there are certainly some elements
of improvement in this site plan. Uh I just don't want to leave with too much for the site, but maybe we should hear the rest of the of the testimony and you can think about impervious coverage. >> So
you can think about impervious coverage because he's concerned about it and I think you can tell I am too. And Mr. Chairman, one more thing, and I apologize. We can project. We do have a laptop here. So, if you would like us, as we're switching um witnesses to to
plug in, if that would make it easier for the board to see on your screen, we we could take a couple minutes and do that. >> Well, I'll leave it to the board if they have any thing to say. Right. Right now, I think as Mark said, you're lucky there's nobody here. So probably what
you're using is is is sufficient but uh with the new rules we probably would have sent you back but let's let's move on. Any other questions? >> Yes. I just have two more.
>> Uh the existing basin I know we've touched base on it. >> Do you maybe want to give the board a discussion of where we came to an agreement on the phone? >> Sure. So, um that wetland area, excuse me. Um we discussed, uh some
enhancements to it, um to help better facilitate the drainage through it. There's a concrete channel that runs to a culvert that goes underneath Route 27. Um so, we've discussed cleaning that out um making sure that the the the pipes aren't clogged, that that drainage is
effectively going through that channel to get to Route 27, underneath Route 27. Um, removing the stock piles around the outside is a big part of that. Um, regrading that outside with with proper lawn to make sure that that wetland buffer is is acting as it should be. Um,
and I believe we touched on that and and and right now we do have an application into the state into the D for a transition area waiver. um should it be needed, we could always supplement that while it's under review now with a GP1, which is a pretty basic maintenance permit to do some maintenance work in
there to make sure that everything is cleaned out um and it's functioning as it should be. >> And then just the last question I have, is there anything in my letter that you don't think you can address or I know we've t I think we've touched on everything, but I just want to just check one more time.
>> I believe that we've I believe we've I I believe we've discussed everything here. Uh Mr. Mazi, um I don't have any other issues here addressing >> your comments on number eight a little bit more. >> Number eight,
>> and we spoke >> Oh, sure. Yes. Yes. So, we first we spoke about the concrete pavement section. Um preparing a specific concrete repair plan. >> I mean the asphalt >> the asphalt section. Um we are going to perform some uh geotechnical testing
just to get a little bit more characteristic of the underlying soil so we can provide a proper detail for that asphalt pavement section. Um and just so the board's aware I had recommended a uh section of 2 inches of
asphalt 6 in of asphalt base and and six inches of DGA. Now what we've entertained in the past is if a geotechnical engineer comes in with a specific design designed for the site we'll entertain it. So that's where we had left off but I just wanted to make it aware that the one and a half inch
surface course is something I wouldn't recommend accepting on the board level just because any turning movements that asphalt wouldn't remain. >> Okay. Any anything else for this witness? >> Yeah, I have a few questions Mr. Chairman. Um,
so just a clarification on the testimony. So you you said something to the effect that you're not proposing tractor tractor tractor trailer storage. Does that mean you're not proposing it throughout the whole site as originally
apparently originally proposed or you not proposing it at all? Um, yes. Not proposing it at the whole site. Yeah. >> So, you could still have some you could have some you could have tractor tractor trailer storage on the site to some degree.
>> You could have like a semi-trail um like a WB40. Um, you could have landscape vehicles, construction vehicles. I believe that was part of the testimony about um from the from the applicant about their some of the operations and and and tenants that they could have on the site. Um but
the larger tractor trailer, they wouldn't they wouldn't have those 53 foot beds stored >> at all. >> At all. >> So no none of the larger tractor trailers. >> Correct. >> Okay. Um I I believe there was testimony
previously about uh fencing 8oot fencing around the property. Could you show the board where that fencing is going to be provided? >> 8 foot fencing. Um I >> think the original gentleman spoke about fencing of the property. >> Uh I believe the only fence that we're
currently proposing is at the entrance gate which is an 8ft chainlink fence with with privacy vinyl slats so you can't see into the site when it's closed. Um we don't have any other perimeter fencing up. There's existing fencing along the Southerntherly property line. Um and then it's all
essentially woods. Um, >> oh, okay. Perhaps I misheard. I I thought the testimony was that the site was going to be fenced in with an 8 foot fence. >> That's what I thought I heard, too. >> That's not currently proposed on our site plan. I mean, right now, um, let me
I I believe um, the applicant was speaking to with the 8ft fence is that there's a coming into the site that there's a gate here with a chain link fence with a the vinyl privacy slats. Can't see through
them, opaque. That's 8 feet tall. Um it's connecting into an existing fence that runs along the property line. Um but then it terminates somewhere over here because this is all wetland area and transition area. So we aren't proposing any other fences over here. It's all all wet woods. Um on the
northern side, there also is existing fence up on the top end of the site and it terminates at a landscape wall that straddles the property line. That landscape wall is not 8 feet tall. Um, but it's also all about 40 feet of woods
between the applicant's property line or what they're under contract for and um, you know, the adjacent users, which is the the public works uh, facility and and another storage site, I believe. Um, and then again, that's a low-lying
wetland area that has uh, pretty steep terrain uh, going down into the channel there. So effectively, you know, putting a fence in there, um I I don't feel it would be warranted, especially with how Route 27 is a heavily trafficked corridor. Um
that but you know, to answer your your main question, we do have that 18 foot gate in the front entrance. >> Okay. Okay. And then one kind of a detailed question I just kind of noticed and maybe I'm reading the plan wrong. In
the the rear left corner of the dollar the dollar store, it looks like some of the pavement associated with this site encroaches on that property. Am I reading that right? And is the plan to remove it?
>> That's correct. I let if if you mind, I'll just open up my plans and and take a look at that. I believe it's an easement. >> Yeah. So that >> rear left the rear left corner. >> Oh. So I'm looking at the site plan page. the rear left of the family dollar. I
see a notation for a mailbox. Is that the location that you >> It looks like that's pavement. Or again, maybe I'm reading it. Maybe I'm reading it wrong. >> I'm not entirely sure on the on the Family Dollar lot if if that's pavement
or not. Um I believe there's landscaping right along the that straddles the property line there like and there's there's a few trees. So I'm not entirely sure that would be a paved section. Um and if it is that certainly wouldn't be an area
that that you know JD would propose to occupy for any type of storage. >> Mr. Hilly, I think if if we are over the property property line and we do not have an easement or any other right of access, we will pull whatever's over the property line.
>> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Actually, and and to your point, Mr. Healey, we're doing that on the top of the page as well. There's some existing imperous coverage on the Conrail property uh to the north and we're proposing to remove that impervious surface from the adjacent property. Um, so that's another water quality benefit
that I probably should have mentioned earlier um that we're not even including in in the impervious coverage calculation for the overall development. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> Yeah, I'll just make just somewhat of a
statement as far as my position in, you know, as the planning director and enforcing zoning in Franklin Township. um generally and and my opinion is I think there's still in my opinion if the board
is inclined to consider the use I think there's details to work out I I think generally the the use of having an area where people can have out outside storage
from my perspective is a benefit. Um you know I think this site is probably I mean there is access issues and that's been the big part of the discussions frankly that we have had you know if this site was going to be used for tractor trailers you know that was a big
issue of discussion with staff um but there's there's not a lot of uh sensitive land uses adjoining this site um I can tell you that we have had problems
um every day with landscapers popping up in residential areas and it's like whack-a-ole. Um so, you know, if there was a, you know, having a location or locations where landscapers can go store their
vehicles, store their materials in a responsible way. Um, I think perhaps other outdoor storage uses like that, having a a location or a few locations in town where they can go is is definitely a positive as opposed to them popping up all in different residential
areas and us chasing them around town for years at a time. Um, so to the degree that this this would incorporate those type uses and allow them and again control them is if we're going to talk about fencing and enclosing the areas of
outdoor storage. Um again generally I think if we go in that direction that this could be a positive and uh perhaps reduce some um impacts to that we see in the planning and zoning department. U so I'll just leave it at
that. Again I think there's still a lot of details to work out but if we can move in that direction I I think there is an avenue for some positives. >> Okay any other questions? They'll make the token of opening the meeting for
questions which there are none. So we'll close next. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman. Our third witness is our traffic engineer. >> Are you refer to A3? Okay, >> sir. If you can raise your right hand.
Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give before this board is truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> Just state your name and spell your last name for record, please. >> Sure. My name is Craig Paraguay. P E R E G O Y. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Craig. Can you please provide your qualifications and experience to
the board? >> Uh, sure. I have a bachelor's degree in civil engineering from Virginia Tech. I'm a licensed professional engineer in New Jersey. Been a traffic engineer for 25 years now. I've testified here many times and throughout the state. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh,
Craig, uh, you, uh, submitted as part of this application a traffic impact study. Is that correct? >> We did. >> Um, can you please take the board through your your findings? >> Sure. Uh, I I'll give you the the brief summary of how we put our our traffic study together. Um, we took traffic
counts at the existing location. Obviously, there's not much going in and out of there now because it's it's vacant, but we also picked up Industrial Drive, which is across the street. Kind of acts like a four-way intersection. Um, and obviously, we've got the traffic volumes along Route 27. We take those counts and we're looking at the weekday
morning and weekday evening peak hours. because that's when obviously the roads busy and you're going to see uh potentially busier activity coming in and out of the site at the same time. Um so we isolate the busiest hour in the morning and the busiest hour in the evening to get those peak hour volumes
and then we grow them by a rate that New Jersey DOT puts out for this area of 2.75% per year. Uh we did that for two a two-year period. So you got the future volumes as if this project weren't there. That's the baseline. Now, in terms of what's going there, I had, it's
funny, when I first heard about industrial outdoor storage, I had the same questions that you all had maybe two or three years ago when these first started to come out. Exact same questions you were asking. What goes on there? What is this? You don't realize they're everywhere. You just they're kind of you don't see them. They're like this kind of behind things and everything. I first heard iOS, I thought
I was getting an Apple update on my phone or something. But >> this is uh you know the these have become um you know um quite popular uses and the IT that we usually use the Institute of Transportation Engineers numbers that we usually use to forecast
traffic numbers really hasn't caught up to that yet. There isn't a land use for this. There's a few that sort of fit. One is truck and trailer storage which you heard from the prior testimony isn't going to we're not going to be doing that. Uh here they also have a category for a general light industrial which is
you know it's it covers a lot of different uses and then they have specialty trade contractor which would be like plumbers, HVAC, that sort of thing. So all those sort of fit as possible uses for this site and they all generate in those peak hours on the
order of about 10 to 15 vehicles which is which is nothing. Usually you look at a traffic study when you generate a 100red or more peak hour vehicles. um if you generate less than that, you don't you don't necessarily look at it. But we wanted to dig a little bit deeper considering that information isn't
really as is as comprehensive. You heard from the prior testimony, there's three other sites in New Jersey that this applicant operates. As soon as I heard the one in Elwood Park and Szer, the construction company, they do all the work on the turnpike and the parkway. So they're they're said that's the one that's going to be your worst case
traffic impact. So we went up there and we counted it in the peak hours. Now, in the roadway peak hours, like your typical rush hour when we're all going to work and school and things like that, they're already out. This place empties out about six o'clock in the morning and they're all back by about 3:00 in the
afternoon. So, it doesn't really match up the same, but I use the numbers that I got from that yard and from that SZA site, assumed they were going to go here and I assume they were going to peak at the same time as the road. So, I'm looking at a worst case scenario from a traffic impact. It's still not a big
traffic generator. If I use their uh data, they had about 40 vehicles uh per hour. So, you're still less than half of what you'd call a significant increase in traffic. And that's what DOT uses. They use a 100 trip threshold. In fact, they already looked at this and said,
"You don't need a permit. Doesn't generate enough traffic for us to bother with." Um, but I use those numbers anyway and prepared an analysis with and without this project going in. Obviously without there's nothing coming in and out of the driveway so it's not an issue
with it. Um we operate the the driveway itself coming out would operate at a level of service D which is acceptable. That's actually pretty good for the the peak hour time periods. Uh and that's based on the delay exiting the driveway coming out of that industrial drive. We
don't degrade that intersection at all. So no impacts there. the only um uh impact would be coming out of our driveway obviously because we're adding traffic volumes to it whereas today there's we have maybe one or two cars going in and out of that uh driveway. So from a traffic impact perspective
looking at the worst case scenario this certainly uh fits and can work and can work. It's a low traffic generator. The issue that we talked about earlier that was coming up at the end of uh the civil engineers testimony was the tractor trailers. 53 foot tractor trailer, the
big WB67 tractor trailers. The smaller trucks going to get in and out of there no problem. But because you don't have a shoulder on Route 27 there, it opens up just before the family dollar, it opens up to two lanes. So the rightmost lane is right against the curb. So the truck has no room to swing out. So he can
either swing out into that newly formed left lane and pull in or he's going to have to go all the way across the the driveway. So, your engineer and rightfully so, pointed out that if you're going to be storing tractor trailers back there, truck and trailer storage and having a lot of that
activity, that's not going to work. So, in talking to our client, that wasn't even a tenant that he envisioned would make sense here. We're far from the port. Usually get those more in Hudson County. Um, so that's no problem to to take away that truck storage. You still would design the site the way we did
because that's the most restrictive use in terms of site maneuverability. So those striped truck spaces are basically the designated outdoor storage spaces. Now, now can a truck can a tractor trailer get in there? Yes, it is going
to need to to swing across the driveway, but that's the same condition that you have at any other typical commercial driveway. Uh probably the Family Dollar right there when they their delivery comes in. I'm sure he takes up the whole site. So you we're not going to say there's never going to be a truck that goes in there, but if it were, it would
be a one-off delivery sort of like that. It's not going to be a truck terminal where you have trucks coming in and out um at one time. So I hope that that sort of covers I think which was, you know, from our discussion yesterday was probably the biggest issue was what about one truck going in, one truck
going out. You're not going to see that with it with it out with it not being a truck terminal type of facility. If a truck pulls in because it has to drop off an AC condenser unit, it would be one in the middle of the day and it'd be one in and one out. You're not going to have um significant large tractor
trailer deliveries. And that goes to for when I did the counts at the Sanzer yard. Not one single tractor trailer. A lot of lot of dump trucks and that sort of thing in and out. Uh but not one single tractor trailer stored on that site. And again, about 3:30, the guy locked the gate and the place was done.
Dead dead quiet. and they were all out of there by 6:30 in the morning for the most part. A few stragglers after that. So, it's it's really it's a good fit in terms of traffic because it doesn't it's not coincident with the peak time of the roadway. And if we get what I think is probably the worstc case traffic
generator of the of the various types of uses that were uh discussed before it it it works that based on our analysis. Um, I think that's it. >> Pretty much covered the report. >> Hopefully without boring you too much.
>> I I have a few questions. Um, in your report you identify trips, cars, and trucks. >> Yeah. >> Um, what would a truck be considered? >> Uh, anything bigger than say a van. So, a dump truck, uh, a box truck, even a
Sprinter van. I think our guys count as trucks. >> But it wouldn't necessarily be indicative of a WB67. No, the it's broken out if you look if you look at the fine print and the counts of pages >> single unit trucks, tractor trailers and tractor trailers zero.
>> And and then I I I guess maybe some of the I guess confusion or ignorance from from this side is not fully understanding how this site is going to operate under full buildout. So the the tenant spoke about
renting space to building material, construction companies, so forth, so on. What when studying the other sites that you're referring to, what types of vehicles would you anticipate coming in and out if they're storing construction
vehicles would a low boy be expected to come in here, or is it at a much smaller scale where a Home Depot is going to come in with one of the little trucks and and offload some 2x4s? I I I mean it would depend obviously on the ultimate enduser. Like I said, I think the
construction yard contractor like SZ area would be the most intensive and um like and the trucks that we identified. Uh dump trucks, quite a few of those. Um flatbed truck that maybe has something strapped onto it, some sort of piece of equipment. Um the the the flatbed trucks
with like sort of the the fences on the side to hold signs like that that sort of truck. I don't even think they had a single articulated like a tractor trailer, but sometimes you might see like landscaping like mulch delivery. Sometimes they come in a like a smaller tractor trailer,
>> but not not like the the you know, prime Amazon truck the big WB67s. >> We we keep hearing the word landscape companies, which which is fine. Um, but as soon as you say that, I just think of the the very large trailers that are
being hauled around town and blocking every pump at Wawwa in the mornings. Like, it's not a 1967. I understand that. But would that type of vehicle with the trailer be able to maneuver in and out without causing a substantial detriment to a vehicle trying to leave?
>> That absolutely no problem. That that driveway is wide enough to accommodate. I mean, realistically, there's a 53 foot. If you go on Google Street View, there's a 53 foot trailer parked on the site, so we got in there somehow, you know, so they it it can accommodate that, but it's an ug it's it's a tough
return. Anything smaller than that, it's >> it's no problem. >> Yeah. Just trying to avoid conflicts. Um, so I I did notice on the survey and the site plan on we'll say the right side of the Dollar General near the wetlands, there's an access easement. Has there been any consideration to
utilizing that >> for circulation? >> Just to make sure >> you're talking about somewhere over here. >> Oh, for further left between the Dollar General or or maybe the access easements for that. >> I think that's for the Dollar General. >> Okay. >> But but putting any We thought about
that. You know, could you put any access here, but we can't take any of this vegetation out. So, you'd have no sight visibility. It would be >> I understand. I just It's got to be there. All right. Thanks. Yeah. Any other questions? All right, we'll open to the infamous
public again and close. And I guess you're ready for your planner. >> Last but not least, Mr. Chairman. >> Fasten your seat belts now. Now the fun starts, >> sir. Uh, do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give before
this board is truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> State your name, spell your last name for the record, please. >> It's Paul Ricky, R I CCI. >> Thank you, >> Paul. Can you please take the board through your qualifications and experience? >> Sure. I'm a licensed professional
planner. >> Microphone. Microphone. There you go. >> Sorry. >> It's okay. >> I'm a licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey. I've been licensed since the year 2000. also a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners or or national
certification. I have a master's degree in city and regional planning from Ruckers University which I received in 1997. I'm currently a municipal planning consultant in six towns. Uh I testify regularly in front of boards. I I actually testified in front of your planning board. Uh last night I've been
qualified um approaching 300 uh towns throughout the state. >> We're fine. I just was interested in listening All right. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Uh, Paul, uh, what did you review in preparation of your testimony this evening?
>> Um, I I undertook a a site visit of of the area on on two occasions. I reviewed your your 2016 master plan re-examination report. I looked at your uh master plan amendments in 2020
uh 2023, reviewed the application materials, had several conversations um calls, professional calls uh with the team. I reviewed all the professional letters um viewed pertinent sections of your
zoning ordinance and and and the like. >> Thank you. Uh take the board through your planning proofs. >> Um sure. I mean, I I'll try not to be repetitive. Um, I know some information, a lot of information uh was given this evening, but clearly here we are seeking
the D1 use variance uh to allow this industrial storage office and maintenance facility as discussed by the applicant. We're also seeking an imperous coverage variance uh to allow as as submitted by the applicant uh
74.5% where 60% is is permitted. I note that the applicant did agree as part of his direct testimony that they would look to maybe cut that back somewhat more. So I think that would be um the the worst case scenario as presented uh this
evening. Um, and as part of our application materials, we indicated that we required uh variances uh for buffering. Uh, I do not believe that those variances are required because when you look at your your zoning ordinance um, excuse me, your zoning
map, there's some thick line weights that that kind of depict the area. The way that your zoning ordinance works is is that if the site adjoins a residential uh use or district, then those those buffer provisions would kick in. That is not uh occurring here. And
if you look at the site plan as well, um if you look at the property lines in addition to what you're is this uh is this exhibit marked here that's up? >> Uh yes, that was A3. Um, exhibit A3 that was marked that shows the site plan in
the aerial uh looking to the the right of of of the site. Um, there's a there's a rail right ofway that that that runs or old, but it's still there in terms of a tax map form that runs. Then you have your existing DPW facility and your your
Somerset recycling that's in the lower right portion of that diagram. You have the golf facility on the other side. So that the site does not um um um um the site does not encroach or touch
upon any residential uh district. >> But wait, you know, uh I'm okay. >> You're correct. >> But I don't think that the people who are playing golf want to be observing and and focusing on the the type of
project that we're talking about here. >> Okay. >> And what's that? Yeah. a driving range, right? And the the other issue that I have, and this is I
I think that those fences are needed. And when we first the first witness talked about a fence going all the way around the >> the property, and I appreciate what you're saying, but it's not consistent with the previous testimony.
>> Okay. Understood. Um just to distinguish um between buffering and fencing or or can be um there could be two things that are that are correct here. Buffering also would suggest additional area for landscaping and additional to potential
fencing. Fencing could be applied or installed without the need for a full buffer as well. Just to clarify that. Um I I did look from and I do have a picture if you want to show it from the the golf driving range and those driving ranges have you know significant netting
that's going up on that property line that is it is today obscuring the view. It's not a full uh you know opaqueness to it, but it does obscure the view onto the site at least person at least from the distance that I was looking at it
from where you would be driving the ball, not right up against that that fence line. Um um I I I did look at the I did look at the land uses uh in the area and I know that the board is is is
familiar with this area. Um so the site um being located on on on route uh 27 it it's it's approximate to to Churchill Avenue which is generally in the the northerly direction as we
look at the uh site plan >> um to the to the A3 to the to the right side there. Um and then we're at the municipal border here as well. So across the street we have uh New Brunswick and and then if you even go down a little
bit towards Veronica Avenue you have the the intersection with with North Brunswick. So we're kind of close to to three municipal borders here. Um so clearly we know that um the site on one side uh it joins a driving range and I believe it's a pitch and putt uh
facility uh where the triangular tip of the piece uh on the on the top of exhibit A3. It doesn't exactly uh make it all the way, but there is a there's a warehouse um that is back there that that generally encompasses the majority
of very large lots um on that portion of the property. And then on the the opposite side that the left side of or excuse me the right side of of the um of A3 you have that rail right ofway and then followed by at close to the
intersection of of Churchill Avenue you have the Somerset recycling facility um which is a fairly intense use when when I drove by it it it does have some it does represent it some itself somewhat as a junkyard in some respects.
There's a lot of material being stored out there. Um, I also saw across the street of the recycling facility, uh, an impound yard that exists. And then, um, as you move adjacent to the Somerset recycling facility, there's a township
DPW facility. So, I think, um, Mr. Healey was recognizing somewhat without saying it that this is an area that isn't located approximate to residential uses and it's an area that can accommodate this type of use without being a substantial change to the
character of the area here and you know I'm a municipal planner as well. Um, I like to hear I liked what I heard the applicant that they agreed not to stack materials high. They said to eight feet and that they were looking to address sight lines coming into the property as
well. >> That was part of the discussion about the 8ft fence. >> Mr. vice chair, we're going to call him back up to address that with you as soon as I mean I think that's an outstanding issue that's going to have to be resolved um as as part of uh potential
deliberations on this application, but point of the matter is is that there's there's limited visibility um into this site the way it exists today. Um which I thought was a is a positive. And I you know I was out in the area um you know I
did look at the site coming in. It's it's pretty much uh the subject property is pretty much bare today. There's there's no activity occurring on there. I looked at the access driveway, the family dollar. I looked from the golf course where that that tall netting uh exists on on the one property line
that's obscuring uh visibility in to the site. And I and I did observe the land uses that I um that I just mentioned. Um, in in terms for a D1 use variance, we we need to demonstrate that uh the use is particularly well suited at this
location and that the variances can be granted without a substantial detriment to the public good, namely the surrounding property owners without a substantial impairment to your zone plan and with the enhanced u quality approved to reconcile the emission of this use from your munipal master plan in zoning
ordinance. Um, you know, this is a a slightly oversized 5.21 acre property. Um, I I I did speak with the site engineer and we we we're were clearly in agreement that the triangular shape of
this property uh does significantly limit its future development uh potential for the reasons of its irregularity. Um I I also recognize as a planner that that while this is we're not proposing a
bus storage facility which is its own land use of record um to for a way of speaking that's different than outdoor storage. Um it's functionally the same use that's being proposed that this property has has transformed to today.
And you heard and there's some discussion about again impervious coverage. The applicant is proposing to decrease the size of that imperous footprint from the state in which it exists today. Um, my review of the
previous resolution was that the site was approved for up to 180 uh buses on on the facility. Um uh I I did find it again appealing
associated with the the the streetscape improvements that the applicant was proposing that the fencing, the additional landscaping and the like which is going to help to better harmonize this use as as viewed from from Route 27 uh as well. And then
when when you look at the site overall, uh it exists today with with no real needed improvements to for this use to to occupy this site. If anything, the applicants looking to pull back um that intensity. Um as a planner, um I'm the
planner in the city of Lynon for many of years. Uh I'm aware that's a heavy industrial city. uh essentially 52% of the land area, everything in the eastern side of the turnpike in the city is zoned for heavy industrial land use. Um
I've seen um a significant amount of industrial land use applications uh over the last 20 years. So I know from my own practical knowledge as as the planner in Lynen um as well as my own additional
research as part of this application that there is a a significant need uh for this type of land use. I think your own planner recognizes it because um we created a land use for them in this city of of of Lyn and this may be a little
bit um larger scale but there's the significant need in the marketplace today for everyone that's in a electrician to the like that wants to have maybe a group flex building to to accommodate someone that wants to write bills, store some of their equipment outside for for type of trades people to
everything from um facilities like this because it really also started um my I saw the the major change when uh when you started to move from that e-commerce warehouse boom um that number
one um essentially began and to buy up any industrial land that converted it into a warehouse. So, a lot of these facilities that existed have been replaced with warehouses. Ironically, the creation of the warehouses and the storage of goods closer to home today
rather than very large distribution centers throughout the nation. So, because people want their goods very quickly also created a greater need for facilities like this uh as well. Um and the other thing that's occurring here
that and you're seeing a a transition in the land use field where these facilities were were commonly uh owned and occupied by you know just everyday business people. Um um they weren't run by large companies
and corporations that have the the wherewithal and and the the monetary ability to to run and and and regulate these facilities. and operate them as a as a true business model. If I'm it's even to a point where if I'm an old person looking to sell my business
today, there's an opportunity for me that did not exist uh years ago for that purpose. Um, so I saw it as a or I continue to see it as a as a municipal planner as very positive when you see applicants such as this that that own
and operate I think it was around 140 facilities throughout the state. And I think that can help ensure I know Mr. Hel is concerned about is in and and part of that is is having the materials and the documents if this is approved that you have the regulatory documents
that you can regulate this facility moving forward. And I think he he indicated the ability to come in through a a zoning tenency change where they would look at how each individual is is operating that that their portion of the
space or the user occupying the portion of the space. But you'll have the the the regulatory control of this site that uh I'm not sure whether that exists today. Um
re regarding the impervious cover. Um traditionally when the impervious cover exists on a site, it's an existing condition and the applicant and if it's a legal existing condition, the applicant suffers from a a a C1 hardship associated with a lawfully existing
pre-existing condition. Here the applicant is trying to make that better and to reduce that existing condition that promotes the the purposes of zoning. uh also improve results in improved storm water management as testified uh by the site engineer as
well. Um so for for the reasons that I mentioned I I believe this application advances uh several purposes of the munish law uh because the site is particularly well suited for the use essentially it's it's close to a
continuation of how it exists today. it meets purpose A. Um because there's strong need and demand for this type of use. This advances purpose G to provide sufficient space in appropriate locations for variety of industrial uses. And I do believe in this context
that this results in an efficient use of land, land that's already been disturbed and occupied that's looking to be repurposed in a manner similar to it has been utilized um in the past. Um, regarding the negative criteria, um, I
believe that this use can be this varian or the use variance can be granted without a substantial detriment to the public good. Again, this property is is well removed from residential land uses and and it joins uh similar land uses and we're not looking to encroach an
existing use any closer or expand this use in in in any way in terms of how it's historically ex existing. Uh the applicant has has also demonstrated that the trucks entering the facility can adequately
ingress and egress onto the site. The applicant agrees to stack materials less than 8 ft in height. Um so the board can feel secure that you're not going to have um equipment rental in here with cranes, you know, flying 45 ft or
whatever in the air or any other uh type of of storage. I believe that this use is again um compatible with the in industrial character of the area. I thought it was also very positive the applicant agreed
to fix any for lack of a better word promises by the the previous applicant as part of um as part of this application. Uh and also the applicant I thought was positive agreed to meet the township's performance standards where outdoor
storage is permitted within the already established uh setbacks of the site. They agreed to no truck terminal, no tractor storage of the like. So um the the way that the project is being delivered, it's not going to be overly
tall. Um it's going to be with the type of land uses that were discussed by the applicant which are all industrial in character that fit uh for this site. We also heard from the site engineer regarding
um 88 access improvements in parking and some of the storm water improvements um that were mentioned. Um, regarding the enhanced pardon group, I do believe that here we have a change circumstance with the creation of a bus
storage facility resulted in a significant change in the site's character which makes the current use variance consistent with the prior use of the property. And I also did speak to to need of this facility that that did
not exist at least in in 2016 uh when you did your last full master plan re-examination report. I know that you've amended your master plan since then. You've eliminated warehousing uh from this zone. Um and you made another master plan amendment in in 2020. Um but
for those reasons, I believe that we also meet our enhanced quality of proof uh as well. That's largely my my direct testimony. >> Thank you, Paul. >> Any questions? >> Yeah, I have a question about your experience in Lynen. So,
Do you have such facilities in Lynen? >> Um uh yes in and in Middle Sex Burrow uh as well. Yes. >> Okay. And do those towns have I think you said that they have ordinances that address them? Uh I just wrote an
ordinance in in in Middle Sex for that and the master plan um in terms of the smaller flex buildings those have been approved by uh variance but the recommendation is to is to create additional ordinance language uh for
them. But in the heavy industrial district, um these are essentially permitted because the way that the ordinance was amended, uh I've interpreted that these are permitted land uses. >> Okay. So,
okay. So, and what what what municipality is that? >> Uh in Lynon in in Middle Sex, I just wrote an outdoor storage ordinance. I'm not sure if it was adopted or not. >> Okay. I guess what I'm what I'm getting to is um in in in those towns in the
ordinance that you wrote in in Middle Sex, I believe you just said, >> uh what types of standards did those towns have for uh outdoor storage? >> Well, in in Middle Sex, I might have to bring it up. My memory is not always as best as it it should be, but um
limitations to the to the the size of of vehicles coming onto the property. um you know locations rear where where the storage can occur, not in front yards, things of that nature. Um the height of the of the storage of the
materials, not stacking it at certain heights, screening. Um um the the one of the main concerns at least that I have is that I think that the town has as well is that that you have a regulatory document that you can
use to enforce um that site plan. So if if anything goes ary that you have something that you can cite the applicant for any non-compliance with a with a condition. I think that's probably one of the most important aspects. Did do you happen to
know on on those sites in those towns where that use outdoor storage what what type of users? >> Um in terms of the um the smaller ones the flex buildings those were like trades people that wanted to have
>> flex those are buildings right. So >> yes with outdoor storage as well though. So they they would keep their their more expensive equipment in the building and then they would have an outdoor yard for their trucks and other type of like materials.
>> So I guess specifically if if are are there do the towns those outdoor storage areas have in addition to vehicles do they store materials? Um in in Middle Sex we specifically wrote that in but um
Lyndon's a little closer to the port. So we have like a lot of you know rider pensky type uses rider rental pens um fleet operation type uses. Um everything from um like sprinter van
storage things of of that nature. Um um in in Middle Sex you see more I saw more of the landscaping type storage and they've historically allowed landscaper contractor yards by right or all
contractor yards by right they actually changed to clarify that without a building actually and I've I've recommended for years that they should encourage a building >> and by right is that just by permit or do they need site plan? >> No, they would require site plan approval. >> Okay. What kind what type of controls
did that board incorporate into their site plan approvals? I'm sure some of a lot of these same issues came up. >> Well, um some of the things was makeing that there's um I think your engineer mentioned that there's circulation on the site. Um and this site is paved.
Sometimes when you have sites that aren't paved, how are those those circulation aisles going to remain open and clear? And we've gone through different ways with the town's engineer to make sure um in terms of how they would be different each site was different how there was some way of
identifying those travel lanes so that they would remain open and not be clogged. Clearly the last thing that you want to see is a site that just coaleses all together and fills with random supplies. So by having those adequate
sight lane uh those adequate circulation lanes and and having a site plan depicting you know you know where that storage is going to occur I think is critical. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> I I guess I I I'm want to follow up on
what Mark was saying. you. He asked you what what things the the ordinance contained or from your experience that dealt with the not so much with the vehicles but with the the storage of
materials and especially materials like mulch and stuff like that. Do they did the Middle Sex especially since that was more of the landscaper business. >> Can I pull that up? Can I pull up the ordinance? >> Yeah. My memory is not as good as
I think it may have been recently adopted. Sometimes I don't always check. Uh I submit it the the board will submit it to the council and you know I don't always follow through. uh in in Middle Sex, the first thing we we defined what a contractor storage
yard is. Um and it was was it was um because that was a longstanding permitted use that was unclear. Uh in this case it was a designated this is for the middle section a designated indoor and outdoor area where construction and trade businesses stored
vehicles equipment and materials serving as a central operational hub for a contractor's activities rather than temporary on-site storage for a single projects. Uh such facilities include administrative functions and organizing staging of resources for future job
sites, providing a secure and controlled environment for manning the business's assets. Um this was located in an industrial district. Um so we um we do here
we permitted it as a as a conditional use uh and also in the in a heavy industrial district. Um we first thing a site plan approvals required for all contractor storage yards. Um you got to understand that
Middle Sex is a smaller burrow. It's not a um so required a principal building having a gross hab at least 2500 square feet. required materials to be stored within required with a really no closer to 15
feet to to property lines. Um rest restricted it to like the rear and sideyard area had a restriction of 30,000 pounds for for vehicles. Um and they tried that it was written to
exclude like heavy commercial equipment. Um so like like heavy real heavy commercial type stuff and this is meant to be a contractor yard. So this is on smaller sites uh required sites to be screened and and
to meet performance standards in the town which this application is doing. Um it allow light vehicle maintenance within the confines of a building which is being proposed here. Um uh
it also prohibited uh hazardous or toxic materials which your outdoor storage ordinance does. Um it said also that u contractors can conduct light maintenance or minor repairs on tools or equipment.
Um, so to recognize that there's, you know, there's some, you know, something breaks, you know, you're going to be able to do some light maintenance. Um, they already permit storage containers um in the burrow. So, it it recognizes that they have to be um
um stacked or or or met their their their um their container ordinance. It had a material stacking height of of 8 feet in height as well in the ordinance which is proposed here. Um adequate drive aisles and vehicular
circulation shall be demonstrated on a site plan. Um and that's pretty much pretty much it. >> Well, thank you. Thank you very much for that. Any other questions? >> I will open to the public for comment or
questions. There's no public, so we'll close. Anything you want to sum up? >> Uh, Mr. Chairman, actually before I uh give a very brief summation, I want to address vice chair's concerns about screening of the site. Um, with regard
to the testimony that you heard at the beginning where we said that there wasn't an 8ft fence and there there was a little bit of confusion there. >> Yeah, >> we were not proposing to to screen the entire site with an 8-ft fence. Correct, Paul? That that's my understanding there
because you know it is a pretty large site um on one property line. It it does join a a rail right away and then some pretty more intensive commercial uses some or industrial some of the township and that recycling facility and then the
opposite yard had the the main two yards had that large netting associated from the golf driving ranges that's already obscuring the view. So the then he comes to a a point. So the applicant looked to focus on the sight lines coming into the site.
>> So this applicant, Mr. Vice Chair, um the way we've worked with the other outdoor facilities that he has, this is our first opportunity to come before this board. I'm aware of your concern with regard to the screening. Um I'll be frank with you. Do you want to see 8
foot fence around the site or do you want to address or discuss other screening because the applicant is agreeable to provide screening if if that is what this board is looking for. It's just a matter of what's reasonable
given the shape of the site, what's around the site as you just heard from our planner. Um but but I did want to come back because I know that's a concern of yours and while we've worked with the board professionals, this is our opportunity to address your
concerns. >> Well, you think I I brought it up um strictly for security purposes. >> Okay. >> I I would just hate to see someone come on to the site, steal some power tools, and then leave. Like my my concern was never visibility. It was only security. >> Okay. I I I interpreted Mr. Vice Chairs
to be visibility, but maybe I >> interpreted my I had heard that that's what they were going to do >> and now and then they said, "No, they're not going to do." So, where are they going to put the fence? Where are they going to put fencing? >> The the the fence.
>> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Let me recall. Um >> Good. >> Our operational our vice president. >> He's still under oath. Yeah. So, I apologize. I uh probably misspoke. Uh
the current plans only contemplate uh putting up that 8 foot high uh entrance gate. Uh we we consider doing screening around the full site, but as our planner mentioned um and also our engineer uh we have, you know, adequate uh existing fencing on the the west side and then
you also have the driving range uh net. Um and then we're also budding uh wetlands and some green space as well. So, uh, we >> What are they going to see from Route 27? >> So, we have renderings, but what they will see is that they're going to see a
privacy slat a foot high in the um, uh, drive aisle, and then you have the frontage of the family dollar. Uh, we are putting in additional uh, greenscape and landscaping as a buffer. And then you have the the current uh
buffer in green space in that uh southeast corner >> and that that buffering in green space is higher than 8 ft. >> I don't have the exact measurements. >> We could engineer confirm >> the engineer is shaking his head. Yes.
>> U I'll say at time of planting um we can procure plantings that are at 8 ft tall. then they'll get significantly taller than that as they grow. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Good. >> Just for your uh consideration, I understand, you know, the the screening
fence along public works along the junkyard may not be, you know, that important. But once you get to the other end to the end of your property past the public works, it's a church and then it's
all residential which is a lot closer to your site than maybe has been observed by your team or or contemplated. And you might uh want to consider a security something in the way
of security just to keep people out, not so much to screen what we're looking at. And that is a railroad right away. There is a little bit of a woods area there, but there is a warehouse that was built behind that
whole area that you mentioned, which does have a wood solid wood fence, a million square foot warehouse that backs all goes along the railroad and is at the back of all those residential
properties. Uh, >> I don't know if it does it doesn't do anything visually as much as as it does for security, put it that way. I don't know. I'm not going to make if it's an approval. I don't
know that I would make it required, you know, but that's something you might consider. Uh, Mr. Chairman, I hear understand your concern. Um, let me speak to the board rendering.
There is an existing fence up along the back of the public works building. Now, what we can do is extend that fence along the um westerly or or the left property line um at least until it gets to the point near the building where the wetlands are. um which will deter really
anybody from traversing at least coming down from the top end of the site into the site. If they'd want to come into the site, they have to come around, trege through wetlands, thick vegetation, woods, which I don't think anybody would do. So that extra security I think would be beneficial to your point, Mr. Chairman.
>> Looks like it. Yes. >> So we'd be willing to install that, too, as a condition >> of approval. Do we need to get involved with sidewalks? >> Um, Darren, did you bring that up in your report? >> I didn't. And the reason why I didn't
was because the last application with mom talk, the DOT had issues with sidewalks once you start getting closer to the railroad tracks because of clearance and the guide rails. I did bring up sidewalk within the front of the driveway itself and they had agreed to replace that portion, but I didn't
recommend sidewalks through the whole frontage because of the last application with DOT's negative feedback. >> And I'm assuming that if the EP ever does anything with Route 27 that that would be their domain, >> correct? It's in there right away. >> Okay.
Any other questions, comments, whatever you want to sum up, >> if I may, just very briefly, um, Mr. Chairman, uh, you you heard extensive testimony tonight regarding our proposal. Um, our proposed upgrades really improved existing conditions on
site. They complete prior approval requirements that were never implemented, and they introduce a controlled use and and an established operator. Um the impacts we think can already be known from the current operations. While not the same
uh a bus storage versus industrial outdoor storage, it is similar and the site has proven suitable for this use. Um the proposal is tailored to the site's layout and we've addressed all of the township board professional concerns. We've agreed to um comply with everything in both uh the board planner
and board engineers reports. We are proposing to modernize, screen um this property and have a well-managed oversight that has not existed previously. Um we've discussed tonight reasonable
conditions if you want to consider the the change of tenency via zoning permit even though that sounds like it's already a mechanism in your your ordinance. Um so we have to comply with it. It wouldn't be necessarily be a condition of approval. Um we've discussed potentially having uh the ZO
or code some kind of code enforcement mechanism every six nine months a year um coming to check the site if your concern was if there's a longstanding tenant they then they would not trigger that minor site plan change of tenency
res review. Um and we even discussed we're already decreasing impervious coverage. Well, not in compliance with the code. We are decreasing and to the extent possible it should this board approve our
application. Our engineer can work with the board engineer and see if we can pull up anything else to get even, you know, further towards compliance. um it's a new use to the township or or perhaps to this board since you do have
a outdoor storage um ordinance. This user this applica applicant and the proposed user um has done it before and knows what they're doing. Um and I I couldn't quite frankly think of anything more that we could do to this
site to make it better than what we are proposing tonight. Uh, it really is as simply stated as that. Um, I think we've addressed every board concern and and if we haven't, please tell us. Um, but otherwise, I I rest my case and we
respectfully request that you act favorably on our application and thank you very much for your time. >> Okay. Any comments, questions? >> Yeah, Mr. Chairman, if I may, I'm going to speak a little bit more than I typically do at this part of the meeting. Um, and I I did make a
statement before and I'm going to expand on that a little bit. Um, so first I I'll I'll uh identify um again if the board was inclined to approve um some conditions and again if we get to that I I may not have all of them. Um but again, so we
heard no truck terminal, no tractor trailer storage, um compliance with staff reports, and I'll defer at the appropriate time to Darren if there's anything specific in his report that he'd recommend be a specific condition. Uh stacking no less than 8 ft. Um I
think the applicant did mention the possibility of cutting back to tractor trailer. Well, I'm calling them tractor trailer areas because that's what's on the site plan right now, closest to to route uh 27 and putting landscaping that he mentioned that. I don't know if that would be a condition. Uh eliminating any
pavement encroachment on the dollar store. Um compliance with section 112123, which is the outdoor storage, periodic inspections, fencing as testified. Um I think that captures at least the conditions that I had. Um, I
made the statement before, um, and I'll repeat it that, you know, I think if you're there is a need for this use in in in this town. Um, as I said before, we're constantly chasing landscapers. We're
we've had issues with essentially I I'll call them construction staging areas popping up in random areas. Um, our ordinance doesn't accommodate for those uses, but if there were appropriate locations for them in the town, whether
by variance or, you know, we're working on our master plan re-examination, and frankly, some of the draft language addresses landscapers for this reason. Um, you know, if there are some appropriate locations in the BI zone to accommodate this type use, you know, we
need to accommodate it because otherwise because they're not going to go away. They're going to pop up and they're probably going to pop up in our residential zones where we don't want them to occur. Um, with all of that said, I'm I'm I'm still a little we have a site plan that
doesn't match the use that they're proposing. You know, the site plan is showing whatever it is, 98 tractor storage areas, and we heard that that's not the use that they're proposing. You know, they're proposing an unspecified mix of
outdoor storage uses, but we don't have a site plan that addresses how that would be done. So, and and then if there are different things that we would want to implement for those different types of outdoor storage uses, we have nothing in the site plan, it's great that we will
enforce it. We could enforce it during the tenant um you know, change of use thing. We don't have any parameters to review at this point. You know, if it's an outdoor, if it's a landscaper, what are they required to do? If it's a contractor yard, what are they required to do? There's no parameters for me to
enforce. Um, so that's that's where I stand uh on this. I I I wonder if you might want to have a discussion generally if the board is you where the board stands on this use. If you have,
you know, if you agree with what I said, if you disagree with what I said, if you have additional comments do you want to give the applicant and maybe the applicant needs to come back and refine their proposal if the board was inclined to consider it. the capital can come back and fine-tune
it to match what their proposal is right now. >> So that that's my overall suggestion to you. >> I think I agree with much of what what you said. I think there is a need. I think if this application gets some of the box trucks out of
people's driveways at night and cleans up landscaping, it would be an extension of uh would be an additional good to it. I'll be very honest though about another part of this and you were there last
night outdoor facility and maybe this is for the board too. You talk about them popping up places where people never knew they existed. Well, the one at next to 230 Davidson Avenue last night is
absolutely disgusting. There isn't any other way to put it. That's my fear. When I saw this, I'm I'm much more comfortable with this than I was before the testimony. But
that facility on Davidson Avenue is an absolute embarrassment to everybody. And if that became if that happened at this site on Route 27 with a half a dozen half of a few thousand
people every day driving by it, we'd all be embarrassed. Those are my real concerns. I I think that we need to refer this use to the planning board since we're in a review. come up with the standards that you're talking about
dealing with this. Maybe you're right. Maybe we need to ask them to adjust the site plan to make it fit what they're, as you said, the use that they're making at of it. at this
point the concept I have to tell you the concept I think is is is valuable and it's and it's good and we probably need it be a couple of the self storage facilities that we've approved asks
asked for uh some permission to do outdoor storage for boats. I remember the one that was approved where uh basically where the shopping center is at shopite before it changed to a shopping center had permission to store
outdoor out to store boats outdoor. So there is a need and I think it's been been documented but I but after last night honestly and seeing that facility I think we have to be able to move have
the ability to move carefully and I would uh I I've been looking at um this coming to a close. I thought you did a great job presenting that many witnesses in a very efficient way. That
was great. Unfortunately, I said, "But I'm not ready to draft any kind of an of a uh resolution because they're just so many things. You went over them at the end of your clothes. Mark went over them
and they're just all I'm not I'm not feeling like we're ready to do that." But I would agree with both what what Mark said and what and what Bob said. It's it's something that the town needs. So, I think we're generally in favor,
but we're not uh ready to sign off. Plus, your engineer was saying that they were going to look for some additional uh green space to add to that. So, that picture doesn't really reflect where
we're supposed to be either. So, it's a little it's a little difficult at this point to move forward from where we are, but I think that uh generally speaking, we're we like the idea. We're just not
comfortable with the the way it's it's presented tonight. >> Maybe some of the comfortable with some of the details. >> Mr. Chairman and Mr. M vice chair, if I may, we hear we hear you. We hear you loud and clear. I think it's most prudent if um we can tweak our site
plan, get it a little bit more detailed. As Mr. Healey indicated, we what's shown there with the stalls might be confusing since we aren't proposing that anymore. Uh we we can do better. Um and that's what we would like to do and have the opportunity to tweak our site plan and
come back. That would be good. And it might give us a little more time to consider some of the things that we need think that we need to put into a into the master plan to think about. And
I'm not talking about taking six months or something like that, but it it might be wise for both of us to back off a little bit and consider a few a few other things. Um, we would have to request, Mr. Chairman,
in light of the um my client is under contract to purchase the property and under their contractual obligations, we would have to um come back no later than next month for a determination by this board. >> All right. First of all, is that enough
time for you? >> It's enough time for us. I'm concerned that it's not enough time for you. >> Does it work for us in terms of schedule? >> Yes. So well that's yes what I think what we have we have
two meetings where you know obviously the the second meeting is not going to work with their time frame and that that was if they were going to revise their site plan entirely get new staff reports um and then go that way u that would have been March 5th um that doesn't work with
their timing um the uh the January 22nd meeting is full. That's not happening. Um, February 5th is also full. Um, but the one application
might might end up the main application may not occur. Uh, and then we'd have two smaller ones. Um, but the two smaller ones are going to be first. So, this would be third on the agenda. Um, if we went with that February 5th date, what I would suggest is, you know, the
applicant's not going to have time to do new site plans and get new staff reports, but I think that's enough time for the applicant to come up with exhibits, perhaps meet with uh Darren and I and talk about how they might um,
for example, I I would like to have a discussion with them on what are the different the nature of the different types of outdoor the mix of different uses and how they might screen those uses, how they might contain the materials associated with those uses,
how are they going to keep um open Darren had mentioned and and Mr. had mentioned that, you know, keeping open travel lanes through the site. I think those things they can they can present to the board through exhibits on February 5th. Um, and again, I think if
Darren and I were to meet with them, we might be able to give them some guidance, maybe maybe anticipating what the concerns of the board might be, we heard the board tonight. Um, so that would be my suggestion. But again, um, as of right now on the 5th, we're very busy over the next two months. The fifth
is the only date that's possibly works. And you're third, if not fourth on the agenda. >> Yeah, we we'll we'll take it. Okay. >> And un understood that you might not be able to reach us. >> Okay.
>> And uh >> February 5th, >> we can give a notice for that now. >> Yes, you could. You could carry it verbally right now at the meeting. >> Thank you, Mr. Application will be carried to February 5th. Do we need a
deadline extension? I didn't look on the sheet. >> I will send one in. Unless you want it just verbally on the record that we grant an extension of time. >> Okay. >> The applicant will grant the extension of time and I'll send in a letter. >> Okay. >> All right. Do we have any other issues
to tie up? All right. Then we'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> I move that we adjourn. >> Thank you very much. >> All in favor? I I meeting a journ.