of the board. For the record, my name is Michael Floyd. I'm an attorney with Archer and Grinder appearing on behalf of the applicant uh which has submitted a request for a second one-year extension of a minor subdivision approval previously granted by this board. Uh the applicant is requesting
this extension due to delays beyond the applicant's control uh in finalizing its NJ DOT permit uh and the construction all u in connection with a full movement jug handle uh at Lawrence Boulevard and Route 38. And Mr. Flood, you have a
revised letter dated July 10, 2025, which which supplements your previous May 29, 2025 letter to corre correct what I take it you could call uh fairly as a typo. It was a typo referencing uh November
2025. It should reference November 2024. Right. Let's uh we'll we'll mark that please. Uh the um the cover letter of July 10. uh along with the um the the
May 29th letter uh together as exhibit A for tonight. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I'm passing out now incorrectly marked as exhibit A. Uh this will be exhibit B. Um is the first minor subdivision plan that was granted
by this board to create lot 1.05. That lot is where two new industrial buildings have been constructed. It would help, Mr. Floyd, if you just uh give us a a physical description of of the jug handle we're talking about. I
think most board members know, but maybe the public doesn't. Yes. And actually, I do have one witness this evening, Joe Fiero. Uh Joe is a vice president with Aries Management that controls uh the urban renewal entity that is the applicant uh in this matter. and Joe can provide some
testimony about the ongoing construction activities at the jug handle and communications with DOT. If we could have him sworn in at this time we're going to share and I'm also passing out now um a copy of the most recent subdivision approval.
This would be exhibit C. And this is the subdivision approval that we are requesting uh an extension of this even actually I think that was also attached at least to my copy it was uh to your
May uh May 29th letter. That is correct. Okay. And I know it's difficult sometimes to see the details uh on the board. That's why I passed out produced copies. So has the witness been We haven't sworn the witness. Not yet.
Joe, good evening everyone. Uh Joe Fiero with Aries. where our firm testimony. Yes. And just in summary, it is laid out in our application, but uh this subdivision
that we're requesting an extension of time to perfect uh involves the creation of two new lots. Uh one of those lots is going to be conveyed by the applicant to NJOT and the second lot is going to be conveyed from NJ DOT to the applicant.
The entire point of this land swap in connection with this minor subdivision approval uh is to effectuate a brand new full movement jug handle uh at the traffic signal on Route 38 across from Lawrence Boulevard apart. Uh but there are some ongoing uh ongoing work that
needs to be completed with DOT. Uh Aries is moving forward as expeditiously as possible to get everything completed. Uh and Joe, maybe if you just speak to what those outstanding construction items are and then when you when you expect to get the closing.
Sure. Um so we have we just energize the traffic signal today. Um so I'll have some you know minor signalization, timing sequencing to work through with DOT. Um we have to mill and overlay
what's left in the shoulder on Route 38. Um and finish up some curbing. It's very minimal work. And then once that's all done, we'll get a punch list from DOT and they'll likely need two to three months to review final ass. So expecting
final close out from DOT sometime before the end of the year um in late fall. Is the is the jug handle now operative? No, it's not. It has not been open. Okay. Do you do you expect do you have an a date when it may open? Sometime in the next 60 days, we expect that to be
open after you finish all these punch list items. Correct. Okay. And Joe, just for the sake of clarity, once the drug candle is open, will then be in a position really there hopefully to actually close. Correct. On the land swap. Correct.
There will be delay there. Uh the agreement of sale, it's been approved by the state, the state house commission. Uh but we want to go through that closing process with the state. That will take some additional time. Yeah. DOT will not perfect or accept the improvements until they're complete and then at that point we can perfect the
land swap and record the subdivision. Um I must say the jug handle uh is is an improvement great improvement over where what was there before. Thank you. Any other uh testimony?
That's it Mr. Chairman for your recollection. uh parents the applicant has been moving forward uh with all due diligence. Uh and these delays are just typical with NJ DOT. It is a large project. Um otherwise we would have been in a position to protect the
subdivision. So through no fault of its own, we're asking for this one year second one-year extension. Right. Thank you. Mr. Kingsbury, would you advise having public comment on this or not? Not not necessary. Uh two things. Whatever extension you
grant would be retroactive to April 3 of this year and you can grant an extension to compensate for their delay time. Uh it can be one year but it doesn't have
to be one year. Uh whatever time you think is appropriate to allow them to obtain outside approvals. That's the amount of time you're allowed to create an extension. You're seeking, Mr. Floyd, one year. We've asked for a one-year extension
until April of next year, April 2026. But as Joe just testified to, we're anticipating having the drug handle open uh and accepted by DOT in the next 60 days. Let's say there's a hiccup there, 90 days, and thereafter it may take two to three months to have uh the ultimate land swap perfected and go to closing.
Uh so that's why we're asking for the one-year extension. Again, Mr. inquiry point retroactive to April of this year. All right. Uh All right. I'm going to open it up to the public for any public comment. If anyone in the audience wishes to ask a question or make a
comment on this application, please raise their hand. Mr. Chairman, we have If there's someone behind the sign, I can't see them, so maybe stand up. All right, Mr. Lawrence, why don't you come up to the microphone
and all testimony? Yes. All right, Mr. Lawrence. Uh, what do you have to say about that? Uh, my name is Charles Lawrence. I received this notification today and that's why I'm attending the meeting.
Um, sent to uh Christian Faith Assembly Church, which is right down the road. So, I guess I'm trying to understand what this project has to do and how will it or will it not affect church property?
Well, Mr. Mr. Floyd, uh, this Why don't you attempt to uh respond to that question? Yes, sir. Mr. Lawrence, when you come around, this is the subdivision plan that was previously approved by the joint Navy's
board. What we're talking about is existing Lawrence Boulevard. This is the bypass. Keep your voice up, Mr. Floyd. I'm sorry. I'm just pointing out to Mr. to to Mr. Lawrence where the junk handle is where the full moon jump handle will
be proposed. This traffic light was energized today. So you can see where this traffic light is in relationship to the to the bypass. Where's your church located? I think they're on the other side of the railroad tracks.
So we're on this is the Colorado. All right, gentlemen. We can't the record can't pick up here and their heres and theirs. So let me let me jump in. Uh Mr. Lawrence. Uh uh Mr. I'll ask Mr. Floyd to uh uh or
the witness best. How how long has this project been under construction? Uh we broke ground in the spring of last year. So this is not a new development. Correct. And how long has the jug handle that we're talking about been under construction?
We broke we started the off-site work in the fall of 2024. Has the warehouse work been essentially completed for the most part? Yes. We're working through punch list and close out and PCO and CO process, but the buildings are up and we're just really on one building.
We're just waiting for it to be energized. All right. And you told us previously in your testimony that the jug handle has been essentially completed except for a handful of punch list items. Is that correct? That's right. So, Mr. Lawrence, this been this has been there for two years. Um it's about
finished and um they're just trying to iron out some final details as Mr. Floyd has explained uh so that the jug handle can be opened and the warehouses can be open for business.
Okay. But I understand I'm just trying to wrap my hands around why my church received the notification because you were Mr. Floyd. As a matter of law, by statute, the applicant has to provide notice to all
property owners within 200 ft. 200 ft. Correct. And because this property is so large, that is why the church got notice. Uh we received the address for the church from uh the township. It's a certified list. So by statute, we have to mail notice to everyone on that list.
But again, the important thing here is this property is very large and this subdivision that we're talking about is on Route 38, the traffic signal. So there won't be any impact to your property by the subdivision. Okay, that's the right answer. Thank you. All right, Mr. Lawrence, did we answer your questions?
Yes, you did. Thank you. Anyone else public have a comment? Seeing no hands in the public here in the room, I'll turn to the online. Anyone online? Do you have a question online? There's no one online.
There's no one online. All right, we'll close public comment. All right. Um board want to take up this application for uh an extension that that is requested retroactive
to April for one year. Uh I'd like a motion please. I'll make that motion to grant the extension. Do we have a second? Second. We have a second.
Uh, all right. Roll call. Miss Costco? Yes. Mrs. Tory? Yes. Mr. R. Murphy? Yes. Mrs. Luton? Yes. Mr. Novarita? Yes. Mr. C. Murphy? Yes. Mr. Mai? Yes. And Mr. McKay? Yes. Thank you very much for your time this
evening. Thank you very much. Thank you. Uh the next matter we'll take up will be case 257. The the sing uh case uh involving u I guess you call a sun room
at 126 Pisley Place. Good evening Mr. Sing. Good evening sir. And who do you have with you? I have uh Mr. Dom. Um he is the project manager for uh Tri-State
um Sun Room. All right. Could he please use the mic and state his state? State your full name. We'll swear you in in a minute. Okay. But your full name, please. Uh my name is Dominic Ronco and I'm the project manager for Tri-State Building Specialties, the proposed sun room
contractor. Okay. Please be sworn in. We swear we're affirming the testimony you give tonight. Swear refer the testimony you give tonight the truth. Full truth. Nothing else. I do.
I do. Okay. Dominic, what's your last name? Uh, it's spelled W O N KO. W R O N KO. N KO. Yes, sir. Ronco with silent W.
Ronco. All right. Um, Mr. Singh, uh, just explain to us, uh, in a few words what you're looking to do. Uh, yes, sir. Uh, we, as you can see, are fairly elderly.
Um, my wife and I downsized. We moved from Virginia to New Jersey back. And um um the reason for the move basically is number one to downsize from a bigger place to a relatively smaller
accommodation and secondly we wanted to be close to our daughter, our son-in-law and our family and our grandkids. Um uh the place we have moved to is two-bedroom place, smaller place than
what my wife and I are used to. Uh especially to enjoy our grandkids little better. We thought we could use a little bit more room. The only thing we could do is add a sun room so we could uh
enjoy the company of our grandkids especially. All right. And um so this is a sun room to be built on the back side of your house, a back of the house. Sure. All right. And is this is this sun room to be built on a on an existing concrete
patio or there's a concrete slab going to be All right. And is Mr. Ronco who's standing next to you, is he the general manager or contractor for the project? Yes, sir. All right. Mr. uh Mr. Mr. Ronco, why don't you take
the microphone and explain to us what uh you're contracted to do? Okay. We're we're under contract to build a a threeseason nonhabitable sun room to the rear in an area where uh there is uh an existing concrete pad.
Project's going to be a little bit larger than that. Um, and um, we're going we're also under contract to match the siding and match the shingles so it's more aesthetically pleasing to the to the community.
All right. When you um uh when you say the ex the the the sun room will be a little more than the existing patio, do you have dimensional information you can put on the record? Uh it I I think I provided a copy of a survey that reflects Oh, you want to know the size
of what we're doing? Yes. Yes. Oh, I'm sorry. Um so my glasses on here. Uh the proposed structure is to be 12 ft by 16 ft. And and and uh how roughly how high at
roof peak? Uh it'll be 10 feet at peak. You want to mark that? um marked up survey as exhibit A for tonight. I I I think the board it's it's already part of the application. It's in his application. All right. Fine.
And uh when you say three seasons, is that spring, summer, fall, or is it That's correct. brand name? No. Uh the ter terminology usually is is accepted in this industry
is that basically three season means it's not going to be habitable. It's not going to we're not going to introduce any heating or cooling. Okay. All right. Um we have a bulk variance here
application. Um, so we have issues with regard to the uh rear setback. Kathy has handled this one as it's an individual homeowner. All right, Kathy, just go over for the
board what the uh what the encroachment is into the area that's supposed to be set back. So, this is one of the smaller lots. The uh senior citizen zone has uh several different requirements for different size lots there. Um, this is one of the
smaller lots that exist. The 12 x6 threeseason room, um, as stated, it's not going to be heated or anything. Um, the only request, uh, there's no imperous coverage. Uh, there's no sideyard setback. It is a rear setback
which is required of 20 ft in this zone. Uh, they are asking for 8.10 setback. Again, there's no impervious coverage issues on this lot. He's well below that what's required there. Um, so
it again, it is a pretty simplistic um request. Uh, one of the things that I did speak with the project manager was um to ask him to explain uh about the water runoff where that was going to be
taken to on the lot. um as this particular area um in the Glenn uh homes are closer together. Um so that was one of my questions that I had asked him to uh bring the information about water
runoff there, how that's going to be with the drainage and has that been uh explained? I'm going to let um Dominic explain that. All right. So, um there are a gutter there is a gutter on either side of the structure with down spouts that run to
grade which will uh force that water towards the rear of the property. Um, I did provide photos to show um where what that looks like beyond the homeowner's property and there is a um
there is a row of well uh grown bushes to the immediate area. Uh I also confirmed with Mr. saying and you can ask him as well if he has experienced any um sitting water or sponginess to
the grounds that are in in that area and he's he has explained that there has not been um I think that answers that this is one of the drier areas in uh the Glenn uh the perimeter areas of the
Glenn are very very squishy so to say um it doesn't affect in the sense there's no sideyard setbacks. It's it's lining up with the existing home. Uh the only setback again is toward the rear. Uh and then um I mean we can certainly make any
kind of condition if the board were uh to look favorably on this is to make sure that where the runoff is going to uh on the final inspection from myself as well as my construction official. Um I'm not quite sure. I didn't see any
pictures in regards to the drainage or anything. Um, but we did this recently on one of the properties where we did an addition. Uh, we made sure that the runoff was going
um where it needed to. So, it didn't affect any of the neighbors. Okay. Uh, I know that our environmental commission had a comment or two about this application. Can I ask Um,
sure. Uh, you answered the one question. I I couldn't tell from the things provided whether there was downspouts or not. And then our only recommendation was that maybe some plantings or something be done near where the runoff comes that will help to infiltrate the
water down into the ground so that there won't like native grasses or something like that sometimes um, you know, in a small area. Um, so I I I'll address that in two ways. Sure. Um, just reiterating that there are already bushes that are that are in that area.
Okay. They they belong to Mr. Singh. Uh, I think I think they're in the general common area. No, they're not in the common area. They actually are in the rear of his back neighbor's property. They run along that back line and then
there's a few on each other side, but I don't believe there's any on Mr. Singh's property. There there there is not. Correct. Um, which case I mean that's relying on the neighbor to to take up his extra. The one other thing that we can propose is at the end of each one of the
downspouts and if the if it pleases the board and if the association allows us to, we can introduce dry wells to address that non-point runoff. You could address uh dry wells in the ground. We did that over at 74 Easton. We did
the dry wells there. Um but again they have an association so some of this stuff does depend upon whether the association would approve certain plantings, dry well things such as that. So obviously yeah I would prefer plantings over any
dry well. Um um and I know that they that the Glenn has put in um you know a rain garden um already there. So um but it's just a suggestion. It's not a mandatory thing, but um anything that you can do to help? If it would please the board, we we we
can certainly introduce um you know, are there suggestions there, Janice, of what may work for them if they choose to plant? Is there I can certainly provide those. Um so that may be the case if Yeah, unfortunately that's not our that's not our forte.
Yeah, it's landscaping usually. So that was it just with the Okay. not knowing how the water how much water was going to be there. And one of the things, Janice, that if they do decide to prove it and you want to send that to me, I have Dominic's um we go back and forth with emails. I'd be more than welcome to send it.
Sure. Uh so, so Mr. Singh, I I address this to you. Um, are are you agreeable to having um the uh inspection, the final
inspection or on final inspection to um uh to make a good faith effort to try to comply with any suggestions that um Kathy makes with regard to
uh handling the water from the down spouts. Yes. I Mr. Singh, what would happen is is that if they choose to approve this and you agree and uh Dominic's company does what is required of them with the downspouts
and the blocks and everything, would you be in agreement with what they would suggest? And at the end, prior to a CEO on this, I would come out and make sure that would be in compliant. No, I will agree with if this is just
something that's remedy the situation. Definitely. Yeah. All right. I think I I think I heard a yes to that. Yes, please. Yes. Thank you. Uh is there I'm going to open this to
public comment. Um and then I'll do that and then then I'll have the board make any comments. Public comment. Anyone here wishing to say something? No one's raising their hand. So, we'll close that. Anyone online at this point? No one's online.
All right. Members of the board, any questions on this application? I'd just like to make a comment, please. I'd just like to say welcome to Hannesport. We're happy to have you here. I can Oh, she's she's welcoming you to the to the community.
Thank you very much. You're very welcome. I started in New Jersey in 65 years ago. My first job was here in in Summerville, New Jersey. So, we're coming back home basically. Well, we're happy to have you here.
Thank you very much. Appreciate that. Anyone else? All right. Um close uh close comment area. Um, uh, Bob, we have a motion, uh, and perhaps you can frame that for us for,
um, a bulk variance with regard to the rear setback on this proposed sun room addition. The motion would be to grant a rear yard such frame to allow 8.1 ft
setback and subject to compliance with presenting officers recommendations regarding drainage. Okay. Uh may I have a motion? So move. So move. We have a second.
Second. Roll call. Mr. Mai, yes. Mr. Narita, yes. Mrs. Tory, yes. Mr. R. Murphy, yes. Mrs. Lutin, yes. Mury Murphy, yes. Miss Costco, yes.
And Mr. McKay, yes. All right, Mr. Singh, your your relief has been granted. And um thank you, members of the board, and have a great evening. Thank you, Mr. Mr. McCay. just want to um make a
statement is that what will happen is is that you're more than welcome to submit the application to my construction office yet we have to wait for the following meeting for the resolution to be memorialized before we can release that permit to you folks. So we'll be looking at the following month.
Okay, understood. Okay, thank you. Appreciate you. All right. Thank you. All right. The next and last and last case uh on the list tonight is 25-01A
uh Palante LLC. This is uh the proposed development at Route 38 in Laurel Ridge uh for preliminary and final major subdivision. Good evening, Mr. Singer. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. For the record, Jonah Singer
from Wells and Singer appearing on on behalf of the applicant F. Palp Palante LLC. As the board may remember, we were before you a few months ago uh and we obtained a use variance to allow for the
subdivision of three or four lots um to create three building lots and one lot dedicated to uh uh to be owned by an association for the retention basin and the private road that's being uh
proposed. Uh we've submitted plans, subdivision plans. We've received uh comments from both your planner and your engineer. Um I have this evening um Mr. Romero Romero who is the project
engineer to respond to those comments. Our request this evening is to re to ask for preliminary and final uh as we believe that most of the comments uh can be handled administratively. They were mostly planned adjustments. Um, and Mr.
Reero will testify to those facts. Um, I can have him qualified again if you wish. U, but he was qualified previously uh during the use variance. No, I recall that. There's no need to re-qualify. Um, before you start though,
there's one is there a lot of issues involving trees on this property. uh the removal of trees, the location of new of replacement trees, size of the replacement trees, variety, etc. uh and to some extent um
I want to ask our our planner to address this. Um some of those tree related, as I'll call them, issues may be uh not within our jurisdiction to deal with tonight. And is it
possible, Scott, that you can uh talk to the board, Mr. Singer, and the applicant about the issues as you see it? Yeah. So, as the board may recall, uh I believe it was last year in 2024, the
township was required to adopt the new tree removal and replacement ordinance in conjunction with statemandated uh other storm water management ordinances related to renewal of their
MS4 permits from NJD. So, we adopted those ordinances. They are not adopted under chapter 104, which is our land use code. They are under a township code much like the affordable housing code requirement. So in the review of this application, we discussed the issue with
Miss Costco and also with the township attorney, Mr. Gillespie, relative to any relief. The applicant is is proposing a number of trees that complies with the total number required under our couch ordinance. They are proposing a mix of
some trees that are oversized, but some trees that are undersized. because technically that would require relief under that. We talked about that jurisdictional issue with Mr. Gillespie and he concurred that it would be outside much like an affordable housing
waiver or a an accessible hand got parking waiver. It's not really under the purview of the board to be able to grant that kind of relief or a wetlands for example. Um so I think they can present what's here. The board could potentially make some suggestions, but
it's it's our understanding that the ultimate relief of that calculation uh will lie with Township Committee. Mr. Kingsbury, are you in agreement with that assessment? It's not part of the zoning or
it's outside the program. So, uh based on that your advice, uh this board could if it wanted to um make recommendations or uh suggest
uh that some procedure plan be followed with respect to the trees and then that relief on that issue would have to be from uh committee. The board can always make suggestions
and It's um your attorney to know what to do about deviate from the ordinance. Okay. But it's not it's not before this. Right.
So Mr. Singer, with that we might be able to carve out some of these tree issues. Okay. Tonight. I understand. I It's treated as an approval from an outside agency similar to an outside agency. So, we'd have to present it to the council committee.
Right. There there are quite a few tree issues in here. Right. Um, if you could, I'd like to try to address the Alimo letter first because that's a it's a pretty long letter, a
lot of issues. Um, but if if you have met with Alimo, as as I suspect you probably have, and u perhaps ironed out most of these or many of these, um, it would save us all a lot of aggravation
if we could refer to the paragraphs by number and indicate that there will be compliance or there has been some compromise, whatever it may be. Understood. Yes, I've spoken to the applicants engineer uh went over the letter with
him as well and uh looks like he would like to comply with most of my comments I believe and especially my storm water comments uh to make sure that the basin design is up to current storm water regulations. So he and I we've been talking for the past week on this and I
believe that you know in good faith he will comply with everything I put in my letter. All right. Well, we'll hear that from uh the applicant's engineer, but uh thank you very much for that background. Raise your right hand, please. I do. Sam Raero with SR3 Engineers. I'm
the civil engineer for the site. And Sam, before you start reviewing the letters, why don't you just give an overview of what we're doing? Sure. The project is located on Route 38 and L Ridge Road. The property is bounded by Route 38 on the north, Lidge
Road on the west. On the east, it's bounded by the vac the U paper street Sandra Lane. It's an extension of existing Sandra Lane and on the south the Laurel Ridge development. The property is 3.8 acres. As you know, it
did receive use finance approval in uh spring of this year. The application is a four lot subdivision, three homes. The the fourth lot, there's three lots that are single family homes. The fourth lot is for the shared driveway and for a lot
at the corner which will include our storm water management. That was at the suggestion of board professionals. And uh we our layout also is uh was prepared with the input from Mr. Taylor and Mr.
Desside with Alimo and there will be a few more little changes to that layout at the suggestion of the professionals. But I think um Mr. Singer, we we I think the the board would like to hear about some of our storm water um how we're going to address the storm and our
comments. It sounds like Mr. Chairman, is that correct? Well, it's part of it, but let's go through the u Sure. Mr. Le July 2, revised July 3. Let me uh Mr. Mr. Singer, if I might just uh because some testimony is necessary in this regard and I don't
know whether Mr. Singer, you have to bring Mr. Plany up for this or not, but um who will be responsible for uh the maintenance of the storm water facilities that you're going to be discussing in a minute? The homeowners association.
All right. Okay. the one we discussed previously. I I wanted to clarify as we go through the letter that I think we can address all of of Alimo's letter. I think he said most we we believe we can address all of the letter except for the um few
items where we're asking for ordinance relief. Other than that, uh I'm confident looking through this letter that we can address all the concerns of the board professionals. There are uh waiverss that we will be requesting that are relatively more administrative
in nature. Um number one is regarding the location of buildings is checklist item number seven. We will uh ask for a partial waiver on that item. We we will show buildings and structures within 100 ft of the tract. Um and we just may not
have all the detailed survey for the properties surrounding the site, but we will show the buildings adjacent to the site, especially um one of the residents had significant concerns for the project. So, we will show their buildings for the adjacent site, the
adjacent neighbors. Checklist item number nine is I do not believe a waiver is necessary. Uh but it is it asks for any isolated trees over 5t in diameter. I'm sorry, five inches in diameter. Uh, but there are no isolated trees on this
site. We do show the tree line and we have done an extensive tree survey of any trees 8 in in diameter or larger. So, we believe we comply with that. We also will show proposed utility cross easements uh on the plan. So, we believe we comply with checklist item number
nine. Uh number 10, a checklist item number 10, number three on page two, uh we're asking for a partial waiver in addition regarding topography 200 feet from the site. Uh we will we will propose showing it 50 ft uh around the site and um so it would be in effect a
partial waiver for checklist item number nine. Our application previously included waver request for checklist items 11 and 18. Those are for uh typical crosssections of existing streets. Uh since we're not changing Laurel Ridge Road, we did we asked for a
waiver of a of the uh profile for Laurel Ridge Road and Route 38. Uh next is the location name and proposed cross-section centerline profiles of all new streets. Since this is only a shared a shared driveway, not even sure it's a street. I guess it does comply with some
requirements of a street, but we would ask for a waiver from a from that level of detail since this is a shared driveway. So, those are the those are the uh waiver requests for the checklist. All right. Well, let's deal with those right now. Sure. Um Mr. comments on on their position on
this these waiver issues. Uh, well, I spoke to them about this and I'm okay with everything that that they mentioned in this for the partial waiverss and for complying for the tree survey and then the two waiverss requested for four and five. So, all right. I know it's an engineering issue, but does our planner
have any comment on this? Yeah, no issues with any of the requests. Okay. Thank you. All right. Are you moving to the site plan uh section? Well, I believe we can I'm happy to go through every comment, but I believe we can comply with every item on the site plan section.
I I think uh the easy way to do that given what you just said is to just go headnote by headnote and say everything under that headnote that we agree with or if you don't, we can then focus on the one item. So under the site plan
headnote on the alimo letter of July 2nd, you're in agreement with 66 6 through 10 under site plan. That is correct. Okay. Uh so now moving on to grading plan and items and similarly yes with grading plan. Um
these are all relatively routine comments that we can address and have no problem complying with those comments. So, uh, you agree to comply with grading plans, uh, number 11 through 21. Correct. That is correct.
All right. So, moving on now to page four of the Alimo letter, the storm water management, which you previously addressed briefly. Yes. Thank you. Uh, for management, I also could say we will comply with all of the comments, but there probably
should be a little more discussion about how we will do that. Um there are uh comments and a lot of them really center around the soil test we received for the site. Um they showed good soils at different elevations than we anticipated.
Uh in addition seasonal high water was shown at an elevation that was higher than we anticipated. So, we did some analysis since at since the time of receiving this letter and now and there are two scenarios. We're
going to send the soil test group out there again regardless that's going to happen uh regardless of what happens at this meeting. Um, and they are going to retest not only the area of our basin, but also areas to
the east and west of the basin with the goal being to keep the basin where it is. Uh, that would be our end goal. If the tests show that that is the best location for the basin, we will have to raise the basin bottom a few feet, I would say 2 and 1/2 ft, and the base
will have to get a little wider. So visually, in some ways, it'll look a little better because it's not as deep, but it will have to be a little wider to comply and have the same volume as it does currently because the B the basin's shown a little deeper right now. So, but
if those tests show some slam dunk areas where the seasonal high water's deeper, where we have better sandy soils, we will use that area as long as it doesn't significant or change really at all the layout of the homes that we've shown before you this evening. Uh go to the
east or to the west a little bit. I think that would be uh preferable. If we could keep the basin kind of the depth that's shown, minimizing the footprint of the basin, that would probably be a better solution. uh for all of us. But that's the way we're looking at it that we can make this work. It's a matter of
how. It's definitely not a matter of if we can make we can make this work one way or another. I did go over this with Mr. Desai and I think he pretty much agrees with our methodology. Um I can show an exhibit showing roughly what that would look like, but that may be something that's
the level detailed not necessary this evening, but I'm happy to do that if the board wishes. And ultimately whatever you wind up doing has to be approved by Mr. Desai in any case. That is correct. Mr. Desai um what is your response to uh
what uh what's been laid out as their proposal? Um so I agree you know everything that they are going to propose the new basin design new storm water uh management you know we'll have to go to me again for additional comments and review. Uh and
then after that probably another one more round of comments and I think uh everything should comply. There should be no problems. So if granted it would always it would be subject to further review by Alimo for compliance with storm water management issues as Alimo sees them. You
agree? Yeah. And uh on this because they're talk there's some talk about changing the shape depth of the base and I want to ask our planner to weigh in on this. Yeah. Uh so two things. One would be that
uh the relief any relief on the reforestation from the governing body should wait until the basin is reconfigured and signed off by Mr. Desai. So we only have to bother mayor and committee once with a request because that number will
likely change as the basin gets bigger. That's logical. Yes. Um, the second is you would mention possibly extending the basin to the west or potentially to the east. Um, if you extend it to the east,
would the basin actually go onto the residential lot? No. If we extended it, we would make sure the basin stayed on a common lot. So, we would we would adjust that property line as long as it doesn't create a variance, which it would not. the the properties
are each are all oversized. Okay. So, I just wanted the board to be aware of that. So, that lot in the top right basically, you can even just point to that lot. Point point that lot out on the on the diagram referring to the site plan.
Point to that lot line. That line right here. that line may have to shift to the right or east to some degree. It wouldn't trigger any variances. My preference would be that it not be on the private property by the
question. Thank you. But wholly within that time and it's our it's our preference also. Um, in some ways that's almost preferable because we are doing some tree preservation along Laurel Ridge Road,
which was part of the testimony. So, it would be my hope that the basin expansion doesn't extend all the way to the Laurel Ridge right ofway. If for some reason that vegetation does need to be removed, we would suggest that that
area be replanted and buffered. Uh so that we don't have a large visible basin right up against the Laurel Ridgeway there. That's fine. All right. Um does that conclude the applicant's
um response to the grading plan portion of the Alimo report? I think I'm sorry. You mean the stormwater management portion? uh uh phone order management portion. I'm so sorry. No, that's no problem. And that that is items number 22 through 33
including sub letters A through F. All right. Construction details. We com we will comply with number 34 through 37. Good. General comments just a very minor
comment is that uh individual lot grading plans should be submitted for review at the time of building permit that will be at a later date and we do agree to that but it would not be part of this application. All the other items 38 through 49 we will comply and I see no concerns.
Okay. It's actually 38 through 54 if you turn the page. Oh, thank you. Yes. 38 through 54. So, you will comply with uh general comments 38 through 54. Yes. All right.
All right. Um Mr. Singer, um do you have an expert that's going to address the tailor design comments? Yes, he does. Okay. He's back.
Let's uh let's go to the Taylor letter of June 25, 2025. And can we deal with this letter in the same way that we dealt with the Alimo letter? Yes.
So, uh let's go to the general comments on page three of five. It's on section C 1 through look like it's 1 through 11 comment comment number C1 asked for
testimony and the as we testified earlier the HOA will operate to maintain the basins and handle trash pickup. This is not my area of expertise. So if uh the board would
wish to have some specific details, but I can say from an engineering standpoint, the basin, maintenance of the driveways and trash pickup uh will be handled by the HOA. Mr. Singer, has the HOA agreement been been submitted yet? Jeff,
no. The typically it would be a declaration of easements covenants or restrictions with respect to the uh owner ownership of the basin in the common area. Um and the members of that
association would be the homeowners. The covenants would run with the land. We would set up a nonprofit for the association. That's a corporation. It's very uh similar to other small associations.
Um about the budget, Mr. Plenty has investigated the cost on an annual basis for the trash, maintenance of the roads, snow removal, cutting of the grass uh within the basin. So, he's prepared to testify to that if
the board wishes to get into the uh costs of that. Uh but it would say there would be a treasurer secretary of the association which would be the homeowners. Mr. Kingsbury with regard to the HOA
documents are these matters that um as a condition of approval you should approve you should review and comment on reading the resolution. Yes. Yeah, and that's comment C5 of our report that
Ryan, Bob, and I all take a look at those to make sure they're consistent with the use variance for maintenance and all other issues. And just two other points to clarify, all trash pickup will be handled along Laurel Ridge Road and there will be um
pads out there for the trash cans. Yes. and that there's no expectation and it should probably be in the HOA documents that school buses will not come down common driveway either everything will will handle will be handled out at Laurel Ridge Road. Yes,
including I have a question please. So there's these there's just going to be three homes in this HOA, right? Just the three of them. So all the fees, all the mainten the the fees that they will be
charged is going to have to take care of all that maintenance, right? So it could be a little expensive for them. Um because it's only three homes. Am I on the wrong track here? No, no, it's only three homes. Um but the maintenance is is really the cost is
is is really minimal. You know, the grass cutting for the basin, uh the ceiling sealing the road. Uh we uh we have estimates of every 5 years. Uh McAdam replacement 15 years. So there is
you know it's not it's not going to be too expensive. Okay. You're probably more um familiar with smaller HOAs like this size than I am, I'm sure. Okay. Thank you. Uh Mr. McCay, can I ask a question? I don't know if it's too early and if it is, please let
me know. So, we're talking about the HOA. Um, from a zoning officials point of view, is that because this is actually in the professional office zone, there's a use variance here. Is the HOA and the township, how are
they going to set the standards for is it shed, what size sheds, style of fencing, things such as that? Because again, it's not in a residential zone per se. Um, it's a use variance issue.
Um, again, I may be misunderstanding something, but when if this moves forward, how is our office in the zoning office going to handle this and not making people come back to the board for pools, sheds, fence, things such as
that? I think at the time that the use variance was approved that we designed it in in accordance with the R1 zoning stand. So, is that how we're going to handle it then? That's what I just need to know. Then will that be in the HOA? Does the
HOA have any say like a size shed, a style fence or I we weren't going to get into that nitty-gritty. I think I think we would leave it up to the homeowners and uh as long as it complies with the
setbacks and and within the R1. I'd be happy that if they didn't have any say in anything. Yeah. Yeah, I don't think we're going to get into restrictions. If we're going to use the R1 zone as a reference, that makes the our office a lot easier then. Okay. And I think we that was in our use
variance letter. I believe it was adopted as a condition of approval. It probably makes sense for the board to reiterate that. The reason I say that I I don't recall it, so I apologize. Um, but I think it it's a good idea then, Scott, to state that as well. Yes, I think we did have
testimony previously about this being treated as if it was an R1 zone. Okay. In fact, perfect. Correct. Uh and so that's just that fact is just being reconfirmed by you again tonight, Mr. Singer. Correct. Correct. Okay. The reason I need to know that is even
though there's only three houses, fencing is going to be a big issue here because in the R1 zone, there's no front yard fencing allowed in that zone. So, whatever the setback is, let's say 30, 40 feet, whatever it is, the front yard setback, they cannot have any fencing in
that area. So, I just want to make sure that when I'm talking with homeowners is that, you know, they're aware of that. Okay? And I'll put that in the governing documents. Okay. All right. Um, let's get back to the
general comments. Um, Mr. Mr. Singer, perhaps uh your engineer could discuss items seven and eight a little more specifically. Um those have to do with um
setback issues and um this is I think some of those are just labeling issues um in terms of how certain yard areas would be defined under our ordinance that I think are relatively minor administrative issues. And then we have talked Mr.
O about uh some possible minor rotation of the home sites which I think they had agreed to. Yep. Yes. Can we see what those look is is this does this have the rotations this thing or is this what we have? No.
Can you show me what what the rotations are? Sure. Um I'll verbally explain Yeah. the revisions. There are two rotations. One would be this house rotating approximately 30 degrees counterclockwise so that the
side wall is parallel to Route 38. Second, and that is um that is the lot on the northeast corner. What is the proposed lot? Um lot 7.02 and then lot 7.0
Uh one, we would be proposing rotating the side, rotating the building so that it faces north with the idea being that it would be uh facing the road directly and then the driveway would come out to the
side to the east and that would fit a little better in the in the site. So it doesn't change the amount of trees removed. It's really just rotations, rearranging. there's more to provide some better backyards. These are sort of nice large estate lots and just a minor
tweak. So there's yeah, they can take advantage some of that larger space. And the final change would be to lot 7.04, moving the property line about 20 ft to the north to give that lot a little bigger and better front yard. So we
didn't talk about that with Mr. Taylor, but that is a change we're going to make. Very minor, obviously does not create variances. It makes the lots about the same all the about the same size. They're all about.7 acres. Thank you. All right. The balance of the general
comments that would be 8 through 11. Um is there agreement on compliance with those? The uh we do have a request for variance for sidewalks along Route 38. We don't believe they're really necessary and they also would not be
connecting to any other sidewalks within 2,000 ft of the site. So, uh we would be asking for ordinance relief from that provision. Another sidewalk another sidewalk issue. We've had the sidewalk debate before. Yeah.
In various places in town. Yeah. Um what are our professionals advice particularly uh our planner on on this sidewalk issue on Route 38? Each site is unique. We we have we have learned that
um experience. Another more recent application there are some sidewalks in existing neighborhoods that are much closer. I know that we have I believe we already have existing sidewalk uh on both sides of Laurel Ridge Road
that lead out to Route 38. Uh as we go east of the site, we have sort of an odd roadway and intersection configuration, but as a general rule, the ordinance has a preference. We know that some folks
walk and ride their bike along Route 38. So it it is a it is a difficult decision. Obviously it's always safer for folks to not be walking on the shoulder of the road. Um but really the
in the board's discretion. The other application that we have more recently had a couple of was located right between sort of a high volume commercial area and a bus stop and another senior neighborhood. And you know that was
um slightly different. Yeah. Well, let me make a comment. Uh maybe Mr. Singer would not be aware of this nor nor his professionals, but um just
east on Route 38 beyond this site is a potential site for uh multi-unit affordable housing. So, and that's uh already been publicized with the housing plan that
this board recommended to the town recently to adopt. And so in my mind as one member of the board, sidewalks would be potentially beneficial on this site because they lead to the affordable
housing possible affordable housing site and the population there is larger and therefore the uh the argument for sidewalks on this particular
property subdivision uh is is supported by that. I don't know whether our planner would agree with that analysis, but if you do, uh please speak up. Obviously, the increased population
needs an increased immediate demand for that. Um we know that there are some expansions uh proposed at the uh intersection of Haynesport, Mount Laurel Road, Route 38. Um, we also know that the Wolfington bus
property is up for sale. Um, and potentially there could be a a commercial lot located there. It could be a draw for pedestrians as well. Um, th this what Mr. interesting. And
what I'd like to do is get a sense of the board on this sidewalk issue now so that we we dispose of it one way or the other. May I ask how far that pro the property is that uh with respect to the affordable housing?
It is uh it is nominally referred to as the Hitco lot. if you go up to the um Creek Road intersection on Route 38. So, if you walked east on Route 38 from uh from um
it's not Sandra Lane, but uh the the uh the other Yeah. Um if you walk east on Route 38 heading toward Mount Holly, you come up to the next intersection and right there there's a there's the start of a triangular lot that's basically cleared
right now. and and and the the project would start there and continue up Route 38 for a couple of lots. So, it's quite quite close. Um, Mr. McKay, it's actually you could see it on on your site.
Yes, it's the very corner. Yes, it is. It's just barely visible, but there it is. That's it. So, uh, can I have a a a roll call, please, on the the the sense of the board with regard to, uh, the sidewalks
on this? And, uh, just a roll call and yes for sidewalks or no for sidewalks. Mrs. Terty, I know last time you started with me, I said, I don't know. Remember that. You want me to start? I'll start. Okay, you start.
Yes. for sidewalks. I would say I would say yes too, Paul. Yes. Mr. Novarita. No. Mrs. Luten. Yes. Mr. C. Murphy.
I think you have to keep your option open. I would said yes. Miss Costco. I think um in keeping in mind all of the concerns that were expressed in the applicant's previous application and the concerns for safety
and the dangers of Route 38 as well as the connectivity for future um opportunities not only on the east side but potentially on the west side. Um I think having a sidewalk would be a great benefit to the community.
Mr. Mcai. Yes. Mr. R. Murphy. Yes. Okay. So, we have an overwhelming sense. Yes. 7 to one. Uh, yes. For the sidewalk.
So, uh, you know where the votes headed in that regard, Mr. Sing? Uh, yes, Mr. Chairman. Where would the sidewalks go? It would be within the rightway, I assume. Yeah. And I guess they'd go from the the cross street,
name of which I keep forgetting, uh, Laurel Ridge Road. Laurel Ridge Road. Go from Laurel Ridge Road to um along Route 38 all the way to the end of the property. Correct. Which is practically to the corner.
Now, I guess that raises an interesting question. Uh Scott, you have um the uh Paper Street Sandra Lane at that end of the property. Does the sidewalk stop at the edge of Sandra
Lane or does it go through the Sandra Lane property? It actually, Mr. McKay, it actually goes around all of Sandra Lane at the end of the culde-sac. It goes around
Okay. Um maybe can you point out Sandra Lane to us on the Sandra Lane is the paper street along the east property line and then the road I believe it's Creek Road comes in at at a slight angle near the end of the property.
Right. So where does we know where the sidewalk starts, but where does the sidewalk stop? You mean along I would assume you would end it at a handicap ramp at Creek Road. Scott
thoughts. Um yeah, we obviously if that portion of Sandra Lane 88 that would become part of this property, part of the frontage on Creek Road. So I I think it might make sense. Route 38 is really the larger share of
that, but I agree that there could there would likely be a requirement or a depress curve there. There's a very short segment that would take it to where Sandra Lane is vacated.
maybe another 75 feet or so, 60 feet. Um, if if we don't make that turn down Creek Road, if sidewalk ever comes up Creek, we'd have a 60oot gap forever. So, I think if we're going to do it on 38, it
should extend that short section of of Creek Road as well. tell you that this is angled right here. Yeah, that stub. I think that that stub is what what he's talking about. So, Scott, that's the county side of Creek Road, right? Do they have to give an approval on
that? That's the county side of Creek Road. Yeah, they'd have to send they'd have to get a letter. You're going to need a letter from the county and from the state anyway. So, it'll at least have to be sent to them. Are we in agreement with this now, Mr. Singer?
Uh, we are. Um, the applicant indicated to me uh just now that, you know, his concern that it's going to attract children onto the sidewalk, you know, with their bikes better better there than the street.
Well, I agree, but I they wouldn't be in the street, but now they're going to be on the sidewalk. And where do they where do they get off from there? because it's, you know, it's a sidewalk starting somewhere, starting and ending without connecting. And so that's that's the concern.
Who maintains that sidewalk then when it snows? That would be Township. The owner. Well, you would the HOA. Yeah. Yeah. Well, we have to shovel our sidewalk in front of our house. But it would go within the rudder,
right? It's not going to go on the private It's not going on private property. Sidewalk would go on within the township right away. Sidewalks are commonly in the rightway. This is NJ DFT right
so it wouldn't be wouldn't be the association. there would be whoever I don't know but along a development in the state highway there's typically lawn area within the right of way uh driveways
sidewalks and other required improvements and I've yet to see DOT shovel a sidewalk or mow the lawn in front of a develop you know a developed site they'll do an undeveloped right away
Whereas woodlands they'll come in once a year but typically in front of Wawa or any other site that that land owner generally maintains that area. I mean for example the point made by the
Wawa across the street there's sidewalk that runs from the traffic light corner in front of the Wawwa and all the way down quite a ways down before it stops. So I suspect I don't know but I suspect
that was maintained and shoveled if you will by the Waw Wa people. I mean I think that's one of the reasons for our request for a ordinance relief on this matter. If the if the plumbers association is burdened with shoveling sidewalk that's really not even near their house. I think that may adds a
little burden to the HOA that we would prefer not to have. Well, like the Glenn, they have a contract with a company that does maintain their right of ways and sidewalks. Who's going to plow your street? Homeowners aren't going to do it.
Yeah, we're we're we will use outside contractors. So, that the the maintenance of the sidewalk or the upkeep can be done through the contract. Sure. Which is generally done with other HOAs, right? and and the HOA hires hires the
the shuffler. How does a board work with just three homeowners is like everybody has to take a position or Well, it's usually majority. It's not unanimous. It' be a majority vote, but they Yeah, there'll be a president
and vice president and you sell your house and it's like, "Oh, by the way, you're the treasurer." That's right. Yeah. Okay. One of the pleasures of uh living in a small community. Gotcha. as a just curious just as a as a to take up on that and not to get
diverted to HOA minutia, but what would happen under the proposed HOA agreement if all three of the homeowners refused to participate in the HOA? Said they they don't want to serve.
Well, then one would serve. One homeowner would serve. If none of them would serve, then they would hire an outside management company, but it's would be required as part of their deed. It's deed restriction that
runs with the land. And so they know going in because they'll they'll have the documents along with the contract. They know going in what the what their obligations are, what the responsibilities are. And who would be the plaintiff taking the recalcitrant
three homeowners to court to hire a general manager or somebody like that? Well, they one of the homeowners would if if if to enforce the rules of the association.
I believe that the township would from a stormwater management standpoint. the township under the stormwater regs has the ability to site an entity for non-compliance with their required stormwater management maintenance
practices. Um, and I think similarly through a violation issue, if one of their requirements is property maintenance and that's obligated to an HO HOA, then the township would have enforcement
uh powers for non-compliance with their use subdivision approval. So that would eventually trickle down to Kathy's office. I don't think so. No, that wouldn't it mainly something like that is really kind of um
combination of zoning as well as code enforcement. It's kind of a dual action there that should be provision in the HOA documents to attention authority to enforce it as
well as any of the members of the H. So make a note of that Mr. S. So, I have a question. Because it is so small, is it better off to initially have a management company do this
compared to three homeowners? Well, my experience is that most management companies don't want to get involved with three units. Okay? Just, you know, typically it's a $105 a month charge for a management company, you know, so they're not going to do it
for $100 a month. That's just I just feel like it's less ana for three neighbors to have to deal with it. It's up Well, there's really not that much to deal with once you set your contracts in place with the uh your outside contractors. Yeah.
All right. Ask me that question later. Mr. Singer, we we this whole debate for the last 10 minutes has been on item nine in general comments, the sidewalks, but 10 and 11 uh is that agreed to?
We uh are requesting a variance as pointed out by Mr. Taylor regarding one lot which does not have frontage lot 7.04 I believe. Um this lot does not have frontage route 38 or Lidge Road. So just the technical
variance because I said I stated earlier that we didn't believe the driveway was a road that also implies that we would need a variance for that reason since it doesn't have frontage on an actual roadway as Route 38 for Larage Road. All of the other lots do. So we would ask
for that technical variance for lot 7.04. What number are you referring to in the letter? In Mr. Taylor's letter. Uh, item three on page two.
Page two. Item three on page two. Yeah, we're going backwards. Okay, I see. But it was related to the uh setback issues in number seven. Right. I understand. Understand. And this was contemplated during the use variance that that would be a private
share drive. It's just a technicality in the municipal land use law under chapter 25 that this would be an isolated lot. Well, I I think we have completed the responses to the general comments.
Correct. Um Mr. Singer, you agree? Yes. And then building design, they the planner comments that they haven't received uh architectural designs. You're going to submit those, I assume? Yes.
lighting. Um, aren't there going to be some street lights on this private drive? No, there's an existing street light at the corner of L Ridge Road near where the driveway comes out onto the street. Uh, that light will remain, but we're not proposing any lights. We want to keep this a small residential look.
These are just shared driveways, so we're not going to line it with large uh large lights. However, we would propose small lanterns, say about 6 ft tall at each driveway. At the at the end of each driveway, you know, out where the driveway driveway meets the street. Correct.
So, where the driveway where the the where the individual driveways meet the shared driveway? Yes. So, one at this corner of the driveway, one at this corner of the driveway, and one at this corner of the driveway. So, we'd have three lanterns proposed, once one for
each house where the driveways meet the shared driveway. Well, would that trigger a lighting plant still? No, these would not be intended to show like isol lumens and and foot candle levels. The purpose of those are more decorative and visual so they can see
where their driveway is. I think they could just show and label them on the landscape plan. Is the builder providing them? Yes. Yes. So, they're all un they're going to be uniform. Yes. And I I'll show a detail of it on our plans.
Right. And I guess you'll part of the the HOA agreement is that they'll be maintained, too. Well, they would be owned by each individual property owner. They would not be HOA maintained. They still would be maintained. It would be maintained by the property owner, not the HOA. Right. Okay.
But yes, it would maintain. Yes. All right. And then we have a series of landscape comments F starting on page four and going all the way to uh page 12. Um comment 12, not page 12.
Comment 12. Comment 12. Um and you agreed to comply work through those issues. Yeah. The only item that we would like to add is we're considering a fence
along Route 38 to help with the buffer. We often I know the applicants maybe can speak further, but often we do add fences along the rear of our properties. So, we're proposing a fence, an opaque fence along the along Route 38 and along
the side property lines uh for the residents. So that would add in additional visual buffer and uh we also we also think that would help with um the aesthetics from Route 38 and blocking the view through Route 38. We also thought there was a practical
improvement where where people would be wandering through on Route 38. Perhaps it would save a child from running out in the Route 38. We thought a fence would be a better option. I know earlier to discuss that may be a variance. So we wanted to bring that up this evening.
Is a conservation. So, so with that fencing then is that is that part of the HOA's require I mean maintenance and the reason I say this especially if it's going to be any form of vinyl fencing um is that we know when they maintain
um the yards or outer areas they have a very bad habit with their weed whackers to destroy these vinyl fences over a period of time. So who will be maintaining that fence for any form of like slat replacement or anything such
as that within the common area within the uh basin lot? It would be the responsibility of the association. Okay. What is the proposed Mr. Singer? What is the proposed material that fence is going to be made of and and how high is
it proposed? Mr. Pali, you want to be sworn? Yes, sir. Please swear or affirm the testimony you give the truth. Yes. Name uh Frank Palante.
Question is, uh what would the material and the height of the fence be along the rear side? It would be the the standard 6T uh vinyl fence. And then in I do it with with all my houses is the sixoot uh vinyl fence. Um just aesthetically it looks a lot
better. And then with each house that would be um you know obviously within the setbacks each house would have that um you know the backyard enclosed so that way if they have a kid or a dog you know they know they can let the back door open and let them go and they're not going to you know run away and you know
so that way the the three lots their their fencing that they propose would be able to tie into the perimeter fence of their lots. Right. Okay. Um are we looking at a certain color Scott? maybe a mute color, tan
versus white, or what what are what are your thoughts? I I think something that's not white would probably blend in better. I know we're saving some woodland and vegetation out there and the white may be a little less or a little too stark. So maybe a tan or tan.
Yeah, I mean a tan would look good. Something that ties it whatever color the homes are. I would I would probably pick one of those colors and then sort of carry that through at least the Route 38 and the Creek Road frontage. Those were the ones and I know it was raised a little bit for safety during the use
variance discussion. Yeah. Whether or not those other rear yards, I think it's really up to you. Um but I think because that is a street frontage, the board should probably at least evaluate
that as of areas along there. um and grant that variance for a 6 foot high front yard fence along 38 frontage, right? Because that's 35 ft is that front yard setback on the R1 zone if we're going by those guidelines.
So the variance is requested and it would be Mr. Singer, do you agree subject to uh or conditioned on um approval of u type and color by the planner? Correct. All right. Have we covered the landscape
issue as much as we can? I have a question tonight. Yes. I'm a little confused. So, I need a little items three, four, and five. We talked about this thing was part of the tax committee. So, should that be removed from this letter or removed from our
consideration or is it I I that's part I'm confused about. items three, four, and five under landscape. Yes, sir. Existing trees. Um I think we can make and uh Mr. Kingsbury
tell me if you if you agree we can make recommendations uh in this resolution. You can make recommendations. Yes. And so we could ultimately it's well five is under your jurisdiction
that is the tree protection fencing. So that and they had already agreed that they will comply. Um there is some relationship between comments three and four that are from a site design standpoint and buffering
standpoint that they've agreed to comply with. What we're saying is the ultimate calculation of their reforestation ordinance under um ordinance 2025-24 or 2024-25 I think it is um that final calculation
will be established in any relief considered by mayor committee but they've agreed to to try to increase some of those buffers and try to make any of those changes and then wherever they have a deficit they were required I believe under the current calculation
before the basin reconfiguration to have to have a planting requirement of 199 trees any additional buffer trees or anything else that they provide um will count toward that requirement. Um but then
ultimately the governing body and committee would have the decision on yes we think that some of these trees being slightly oversized and a certain percentage being slightly undersized is acceptable or is not acceptable.
So we're not deciding on that. Yes. So that's that's okay. That's all we needed. Did we talk a long answer? Did we talk about any fencing around the basin? Is that going to be required? Yes. And we will show fencing around the basin.
Okay. We'll we'll show the material and Yes. Okay. Thank you. What is planted in the basin? Is it It'll It's an infiltration basin. So, it'll be sand bottom, but along the sides we will be showing some vegetation, some shrubbery. Will there be any? So, it's sand in the
bottom, nothing growing in the sand. Right. Because because of the infiltration, we had to show sand. We had a very significant infiltration requirement for this project. So Sam in terms So we know that on that top right lot we're planning to do a 6'
high fence on the residential lot around the basin lot. What what size or height or type of fence are you contemplating for that? So along
along Route 38, um we would we would probably end the fence, but we're open to suggestions on how that fence is configured. We would probably end the fence at the end of the residential lot. And then the basin fence, we normally show a split rail fence with black um
black grading on the bottom to avoid trash blowing around. And that that's usually a split rail fence around the basin for safety purposes. It does have uh it it does provide good protection around the around the fence around the basin. So that's what we proposing there. But we would end the vinyl fence
at the end of the residential lot. Okay. I just wanted to be clear to that only because I think having a 6 foot high vinyl fence that close to Laurel Ridge. Okay. Yeah. Would be a little severe. And we don't we're not protecting any residents here. So I think we agree.
Okay. We believe that with the fence shown um along Route 38 that we believe the 25- foot conservation area is um uh generous and and um adequate. U so I we believe
that that should remain as if if uh if the board agrees. I don't believe the 25 foot conservation area is required by the ordinance. So we would uh we would request to keep that uh conservation area the width as shown on the plans. Can I ask a question regarding that because I'm not seeing that. Is that is
that 25 foot conser conservation area going to be with inside the lot lines of the homeowners? Yeah. So what I would request because we've done this through the years here is that because they're not supposed to be doing anything back there. No clearing, no planting, no anything in some of our
other builders have defined the space with um markers. They've actually put some forms of like corner fencing in there to show where that is. Just like maybe a piece like this. Because what
happens is through the years um I've had to put people on notice about these things due to the fact is that they slowly go into these conservation areas um because they it's their yard and they slowly disturb them. they solely, you
know, remove things, put things in there, kids swing sets, things such as that. So, in defining those corners there up front when the house is being sold that they know exactly that this area here is established.
That's fine. Okay. Thank you. All right. So, that suggestion is agreed to. Yeah. I think Sam, wasn't that part of the use discussion that there would be a 25 foot And we agreed to it. Conservation area. We agreed to it.
Yeah. But the markers are a new Yeah. Or a new issue. Yeah. I think there was comments in the letter asking to increase the size of the conservation area and that's what I was reacting to to earlier. Right.
I think in both the uh environmental commission and in Mr. Taylor's letter. So that uh yes, tree protection. So then all the other items in the letter uh we would agree to between uh items 6 through 12
of of comp of landscape part F of the last that is correct that's the last section right all right and if the board pleases I can go through the environmental commission's comments. Yes. I was going to ask you to do that
but you took the words out of my mouth. Go ahead. I can make this short. We agree to all the items in the in the letter except that's it the exception of what I talked about with the width of the conservation area. We would request to keep that at 25.
Right. It's A through F um of the environmental uh commission's letter of July 1, 2025. Um on on the diagram that you have there, there's I guess those are trees right on the thing. Yes. Can you show me
like there's a looks like there's a line. Is that just a is that where where the 38 comes into this that property there next to the storm water basin? There's a lot of trees in in that area. Where is the 25 foot conservation buffer
on that front property compared approximately this location 25 ft from the right of way at Route 38. Okay. So where it the line sort of goes down. It looks like there's preserved trees. Is that not part of conservation? would who owns that part right next to the shared driveway before you get to
that other house. Um that's all that's all on the lot and those trees would be preserved as part of uh our tree our tree protection plan. Okay. But they would the homeowner wouldn't have to con conserve those trees based on the 25 foot and all the
if it's a straight 25 ft they could cut down those trees and under our ordinance or whatever is subject to subject to the town ordinance on tree removal. Yeah. Um so they're not in the conservation area then that where that one line goes where you're preserving. They're not in
the 25 foot wide formal conservation area that's that's maintained, but those are trees that are preserved on the plant. Does the conservation area extend along the basin up to the street corner or does it stop where you
propose? There's a pause in the location of the basin because the basin has to be large enough to handle all the volume. So that basin does good near Route 38 and then the conservation area begins again along Laurel Ridge Road
uh both sides of the driveway on Laurel Ridge Road and then along the southern property line. Right. Okay. All right. Um I think that covers all the comments,
but I'll just ask the professionals. Uh did you um do you have any further comments to make on this? Do they miss anything? Did you miss did we miss anything on the first round? Everything's covered. Not that I'm aware of, but if I did,
we'll make them better than anyone. All right. Well, let me then ask the board's asked some questions here and there, but let me open it to full questioning by the board. Uh Mr. Singer or the engineer or Mr. Palanti.
I I'd just like to um go back to the sidewalk again. I think that like as our board here, I think we have to start being a little consistent. Like I think that if we are going to put sidewalks on 38 and ask people to do that, then we
have to be consistent with the properties around it. And um and I think that depending on what goes on in the Wolfington area, it might be nice that people could walk hopefully if they had a crosswalk or something to walk over there, back, whatever. But um and I'd
also like to know if there's any information on the safety of like putting a sidewalk along a busy road like that. Is there anything out there or any statistics? You're smiling. Um there is. I don't want to cite them
now, but generally speaking, having somebody walk on a sidewalk behind a curb is safer than having someone walk in on the shoulder and in the right way. Okay? And as a general rule,
God forbid something happened, it's it's easy to be able to say, you know, we did everything. Yes, a child was hit on the sidewalk, but trying to explain to a parent, yes, sidewalks were waved. We didn't raise it. That's why the child
was riding on the shoulder. That's much more difficult. Um, so that that's the reason that we have sidewalks is so folks don't don't have to walk on the shoulder on the edge of the road. We all know that people look at their phones and they swerve over the
white line. we we see it happen in front of us and behind us. Uh so whatever we can do to make this safer forever is uh is probably a good thing. So you're saying obviously there's no
guarantees, but you're saying from the way you can look at it now, you think that sidewalks are safer? Absolutely. Okay. And I think then we need to be consistent and connect them. you know, we can't say no on this property and yes on another property. If they're going to
have to do it, then everybody on the sides of them, whatever, need to do it as well. That's just my point of view. All right. Other comments or questions by the board, please? I do have Bob. Do um these are CO is
required on these. Um so there will be because it is less than five units none of these units will have to be affordable but yeah the township code uh will impose a an affordable housing payment in lie of
construction. I just want to make sure that that's in uh this project would uh be 6%. For each house Paul 6% of construction the fair market value or the assessed uh equalized assessed value for each of those units.
because it's a change in density. So I want to make sure that that's in the resolution. That's why I'm asking. What's your equalized assessed values you 100%. I don't think no. No, it's 70
70.69 around that. That was 20 24. All right. Um hearing no. And I just want to make um it's not to do with this plan particularly, but I is gas planned for the houses. Are they going to have gas appliances?
I'm sorry, I can't hear. Gas appliances. Is that most likely it'll be service by gas? Um can I request when you're making the plans, I don't know how far along, that stoves or ovens are vented to the outside, not just back into the house. Absolutely.
Okay. Is that a is that a Mr. Palani would know the answer to this? Is that a kind of a standard way they install uh gas appliances these days? Um not my well no these days now but now for president's
in the gas range it can whether it's electric electric or gas can you know the vent can come out of the back and then into the uh uh back into the house but typically there is a um a vent fan you know vent above it that can either
recirculate back into the house or be vented right out of the back of the house or if you have a microwave same thing can be vented out of the back of the house or recirculate back into the house. Obviously, going out of the house is better. That way, you know, you're cooking something and, you know, especially if you see something, it's not recirculating back into the house
and, you know, so yeah, going outside and betting it outside is is a better option. I guess the environmental commission is recommending that future future application. All right. No. Um, all right. I'm going to open it to the public
being Can I just jump in real quick? Oh, absolutely. Just want to jump in and say, look, you know, some of us have been here for a long, long time in Hesport. It's a small town, you know, and I kind of this this whole sidewalk thing, you know, one part of you wants to say, you know, keep the small town feel.
The sidewalk seems like it's a commercial feel. It brings in the whiteness and it turns gray and eventually, you know, and that's how I feel personally. But also though, times change and I don't think we can afford not to put sidewalks in and make everybody put sidewalks in with the way
38 is in these highways and these roads. So, I just wanted to say that I agree with, you know, Scott and Karen Bell as a board member that we shouldn't let anyone uh we should draw a line in the sand and say from this point forward, we be consistent. We be consistent.
I agree with you. So, I just wanted to say that. other board comments. Actually, if I could just read a comment from Mayor Gilmore because she's uh she's watching from YouTube uh from home recovering. Um she just wanted to offer that the Kidney Center across the street
which is in front of the Glenn at Mason's Creek, the senior community has a management company and they do take care of the hiring of a landscape and snow removal company as far as well as paying bills and things like that. So,
okay, that's helpful. That's helpful. All right. Uh members of the public sitting in the meeting room, if you have any questions or wish to make any comments about this application, please raise your hand.
I see no hands. So, we'll close public comment in the room. Uh has anyone online? No. Unmuted? No one has No one's online. So, we'll close public comment.
Mr. Singer, any final comments before I ask for a motion? Uh, just briefly, uh, Mr. Chairman, um, the applicant has submitted an application for construction of three homes. Your professionals have issued its review letters. U, we've addressed
those uh, comments. Our engineer indicates that he is in agreement and the applicant is in agreement with it with responding in uh, to those comments. Um and we've agreed to the comments of the board and its recommendations with respect to
sidewalks and venting and uh trees um and landscaping and we would respectfully ask that uh the board approved for preliminary and final subject to re final reviews by your professionals. Thank you Mr. Z.
Thank you Mr. Kingsbury. You comment before the motion. They're asking for preliminary and final and I'm wondering from a planning and engineering perspective if final is
appropriate and we don't know where the bas well we've indicated that if we have to uh tweak the basin, it will still be within the lot that's
being created and it will not affect any bulk requirements in within the R1 zone. Obviously, uh if we are incorrect and it proves otherwise, then we have to come back. Uh but we if we shift it to the
right or to the left or go down uh or have to fill it and come up and make it a little wider, it's it's not going to affect the the zoning requirements and it's still with it will be within the design standards of of the statute. So
we would ask that the it would still I I don't think it would make a difference to the board. It would be up to the professionals to confirm that it meets the state statute and the state requirements. Our engineer have any opinion on that?
I think uh Scott, you agree? I think preliminary final. Yeah, I think I think final is fine. The roadway access is not going to change. If this required anything greater than a shifting or an east west elongation,
then Ryan and I would bring them back to the board for an amended. Um, but but as long as it was sort of as presented based on the characteristics of the soil unless the board feels a need to see that revised basin length and I believe
Mr. Renaro even had is actually has an exhibit up there that shows that. Um, Unless the board sees a reason to pulling Grant Coin out, I think both could be appropriate.
Any member of the board uh want to discuss or feel strongly about this issue that's just been raised by Mr. Kingsbury? We ought to talk about it. If no one has a strong feeling that
final would not be appropriate uh given the tweaking that might be done with the basin, please say so. Otherwise, we'll proceed. Um the appropriate motion would be to uh
grant preliminary and final subdivision approving with the waiverss that were requested and as recommended in the engineer letter um to grant a variance for
uh one of the lots not having access immediate access to public street. uh for any positioning of the houses uh as determined appropriate by the planner
uh subject to professional review of all the uh HOA documents, installation of sidewalks where appropriate as approved by the plan. um
and compliance of course with all the terms and conditions of both the engineers letter and the planners. Um I would include with that uh provision to permit a 6 foot vinyl fence
in a color approved by the planner. Um and uh compliance to the extent possible with the HTC recommendations. Uh would that include the bulk variance
for any fencing along Route 38? Yeah. And I would and maybe we specifically addressed that that will be a six foot high fence on the residential lot and then to the extent necessary a an up to 4 foot high three board fence
with wire on the basin lot because that's still sort of technically in a front yard also. So just so it's covered and they don't have to come back. Uh I think that's good for the thing that they have to go before the committee with the trees. um
depending on how they vote on that, what does that affect? Is that just yes, they've met enough of the tree ordinance that we're happy or if they say no, what is that just money in a pot or is that um change to the plans or? So, those are all part of the things and
options within the ordinance, the the governing body would have the option to say yes, we approve your modified size configuration or no, we don't. You have to fully comply and plant all trees
on the site or plant x number of trees on the site and for the deficit provide a payment in l thereof. Okay. But whatever in theory wouldn't affect it really doesn't it really doesn't affect what we're doing here. They've agreed to make some of the landscape
changes and buffer planting requirements. So that will actually reduce their reforestation obligation because those buffer trees and the other things that get added count count toward some of those requirements.
Is there a time frame that they have to go to the township committee for that with this application for the trees? um should probably happen prior to the signing of the plans. I mean, I think it's fair to the
applicant to give them a guideline for that. Again, like you just said, I don't want them not knowing where they should be at with this because there's an agenda that they have to get on. So the easiest I would say the easiest thing would be because
the last thing we want to have happen is we get resolution compliance and we sign off and the governing body says no change your plans and then you have to resubmit to us and again. So I would say that we sort of do an an
informal resolution compliance that we sign off you know preliminarily on those plans and then you take it to the governing body. So the number that they see is the real number based on the final design.
Um but prior to the signing of the plans, they'll meet the comments of our reports through resolution compliance and get a determination from township committee and then make
any modifications to the plan triggered by what mayor and committee say. Yep. That way they don't get stuck having to Right. I I think that's a fair way to handle with the for the applicant. Okay. Makes sense. I hope you wrote it down, Jonas.
I did. I did. I All right. So, we have the motion framed by council. May I have a motion? You want me to repeat what I said? No. No. No, I do not. But you have you have framed you framed
the motion and there's a member that wants to advance that. The motion was for preliminary and final site plan approval sub conditions I recited basically compliance with the engineer's letter the planners letter installation
of sidewalks uh waiverss submission waivers as recommended by the engineer and uh homeowners document review and uh approval by
regard to Three removed. I'll make a motion. You say subdivision or site plan. We have a second. Second. Roll call. Mrs. Tory. Yes. Mr. C. Murphy. Yes.
Mr. R. Murphy. Yes. Mrs. Levven. Yes. Mr. Novarita. Yes. Miss Costco. Yes. Mr. Mai. Yes. And Mr. McKay. Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Want to thank the environmental committee for their input on that last application. All right. Um we're down to meeting minutes. uh from the last meeting, May 7th. Uh can I have a motion to approve the minutes as written or uh any
comments on the minutes? Motion. Motion to approve the minutes as written. Second second. Roll call. Mr. Mai, yes. Mrs. Leon, yes. Mrs. Tory, yes. Mrs. Mr. Noita, yes. Mr. C. Murphy,
yes. Miss Costco. Yes. And Mr. Mai. Yes. Uh, and then we have um a couple of resolutions. First is 25-21. That's JDEV M Highway LLC
uh granting a continuence. Um any uh any comments on the form of the motion? Otherwise, a motion to approve is drafted. It would be in order. Um I'm just curious if they've submitted the plans
for who? JDB. Yes, because it has on here deadline of July 1st. Yes, they did. Okay. You guys got them? I got the claims. You got them. Probably. I'll make a motion to approve the resolution tomorrow.
Second. Second on the second on the uh motion. I'm sorry. Who second? I made the motion. She made the motion. Second. Now you have a second. Uh roll call. Miss Costco. Yes. Mrs. Leon. Yes. Mrs. Tory. Yes.
Mr. Noita. Yes. Mr. R. Murphy. Yes. Mrs. Mr. C. Murphy. Yes. And Mr. McKay. Yes. Yes. Next we have um a resolution item B on the under resolutions that's uh
resolution 2025-22 the Hannesport Family Apartments LLC. Um can I have a motion to approve that resolution as drafted? So moved. Second. Roll call.
Mrs. Tory. Yes. Mr. Narita. Yes. Miss London. Yes. Mr. R. Murphy. Yes. Mr. C. Murphy. Yes. Miss Costa. Yes. And Mr. McAd. Yes. Uh the next resolution we have
is uh 2025- 23 uh the Royal Plaza Group uh approval. Um motion to approve is drafted. Please moved. Okay. Second.
Second. Roll call. Mr. C. Murphy. Yes. Mrs. Lein. Yes. Mrs. Troy. Yes. Mr. Novarita. Yes. Mr. R. Murphy. Yes. Uh, Miss Costco. Yes. And Mr. Mad? Yes.
Uh, we have a series of correspondents all listed on the agenda A through D. If is there any board member that wishes to address any particular one? If not, then a motion to receive and file the correspondence would be in order.
Motion to receive and file. Someone so moved. Second. Second. All in favor? I. Any opposed? None. All right. Um, professional comments.
Got a lot of professional comments already. all comments in but helpful. Well, the the the the explanation of the inner workings of this board and the and the committee on the tree ordinance is
very helpful with it in a few towns and trying to sort it out. Uh any general board comments? I have one. Scott, do we do we have a circulation plan as part of our master
plan? Would it behoove us as a board to review that in terms of our these applications and see how sidewalks future sidewalks connectivity um correspond to the circulation plan that we've adopted?
Yeah, we can we can brush that off. And I do agree, you know, the comments we've talked about. We're really trying to revitalize. We have more density coming in in those areas just off of Route 38. So, we know that's going to create more
pedestrian like on Route 38. Um they're likely to Mr. No's point there will be very rural farm roads where we just don't get pedestrians but for
that for the major commercial core and corridors it's uh it is always safer to have sidewalks. Well, especially as you guys talked that right next to it, it's going to be that affordable housing. All of a sudden, now
you're going to have more stuff coming. Now, from that bank, the old bank to that uh Laurel Ridge, there's not a sidewalk. Correct. So, so it'll end right there. And you hope that whatever comes in that area puts a sidewalk
or at some point if DOT does any intersection improvements. You know, we were just successful a couple years ago in Wall Township in Mon County where developments had come in and the town had gotten several connections and the town petitioned the state and said we
need some additional crosswalk and signage and striping and some sidewalk in a strategic area. the state actually came in and installed it because there was sort of a missing link there. They're not in the business
of providing sidewalks for us, but if there is a gap in a location and especially if they have a project going on, sometimes they will sometimes do the right thing, right? Do Scott, do you happen to recall who
who is responsible for the sidewalks that run from what is it? the coffee shop, whatever, Starbucks, all the way down to now to the the new jug handle in front of the warehouses and in front of Nissan and others.
So, Black Creek was required to install them as part of their NJ do approve NJ DOT approval. Most municipalities hold the position that along the
landscaping and the sidewalk that is in the right of way immediately in front of a property is the responsibility of the property owner to maintain that. So much like at your own homes if there's a little twoft strip between the sidewalk
and the curb the homeowner ms even though it's in the municipal right away. It is the subject of considerable case law and considerable debate uh because some people don't want to be responsible
for the street trees or for the sidewalks or for any of those improvements. It's the one area you'd like to see a sidewalk from Foster Town Road to Hannesport Law Road. Whatever is going to go in there. I mean well those are areas they are in front of
Eric's property there. Yeah, they should because that's and if that happens then it should just keep going because it does look good by the coffee by Starbucks going towards that new it looks nice. I mean it's dressed up and that's not the rural part of our
community. That is our route 38 frontage and to have that be a clean pedestrian friendly. It actually helps economic development. You know, being able to to say to your 13-year-old, "Yeah, you can ride your bike up to whatever or so and so because There's a certain degree of comfort that
they can manage that through crosswalks and sidewalks as opposed to riding along the edge of the shoulder. We're cutting through people's properties, which is what my son does in tabernacle so he stays safe because we don't have sidewalks. But we effectuated that on M
Highway. I mean, the warehouse on the corner of the bypass in MRN, we mandated that they put a sidewalk in. We also did with Christian Faith Assembly. Correct. And Franklin Estates has I believe St. Paul's Church has sidewalk in front of it
and Franklin Estates has sidewalk and that provides connectivity all the way to here the municipal park and um you know there is opportunities to continue that you're right on Foster Town Road to Hannesport Road as long as we can get rid of the
graffiti on the old Volkswagen dealership. Okay. I'd like to ask um Paula, can you just bring up to speed on that 6% affordable housing for this project? Like Sure. I don't know anything about what you just said. Are we as a township and the
taxpayers of this town, we're the ones paying the temp? What is it? No. What you say? No. So the the developer because they're installing um new homes in a in a different zone, it's an increased density for homes.
Yeah. So the we have an ordinance that mandates that any new development that ch that provides market rate housing and there's an increase in density that they have to pay 6%. Typically it's 1 and a.5% for residential new residential but
because there's a change in density. This was general office or professional office and now it's R1 that is a change in density. There were no homes permitted there. So, it's an increased density of homes. And you understand? And where does the money go? Question.
The money goes to the affordable housing trust fund, which is what the municipality utilizes per the state statute and mandates to um for affordable housing projects in Hannesport Township. And he's paying that.
He pays it just as the any commercial or business new development, they pay 2 and a.5%. any new bu new um additions on properties they pay 1 and a.5%. So any new development residential is
typically one and a half commercial it's two and a half but in this situation because it's change of density we have an ordinance that mandates that they pay 6%. And it's equalized value is what that number is based on. I may correct you on that. Sure. um is residential additions it
doesn't if there's an existing house in addition doesn't have to pay that. Okay. commercial say they have a warehouse now they want to resist home that wants to do an additional suite whatever the case may
be a new single great thank you does that any other uh any other board comments or we can close up tonight because I don't think there'll be any public comments
But I will ask, is there anyone in the public seating that wishes to make a comment or have a question of the board? If not, raise if so, raise your hand. Seeing no hands, I'll close public comment. And can we have a motion to
adjourn? Second. Second. All in favor? I. Any opposed? No. We'rejourned. Thank you.