6:30 August 5th, 2026 convening the Hannesport Joint Land Use Board for tonight's meeting. I'm Tom McKay, the board chair. First a order of business will be a flag se please to the flag of United States of America
to the stands one indivisible for all. Paula, would you >> I'm sorry. >> Um would you read the sunshine law? >> Notice that this meeting was published in accordance with the open public
meetings act. >> Uh we'll have our standard um rule. It will start no new business after 10:30 p.m. We'll finish business started before 10:30. >> A roll call, please. Mrs. Tory. >> Yes. >> Mr. Novarita
>> here. >> Mrs. Leen >> here. >> Mr. Morelli >> here. [clears throat] Mr. >> Coochi >> here. >> Mr. R. Murphy >> here. >> Mr. C. Murphy absent. >> Miss Costco >> here. >> Mrs. Gilmore >> here. >> Mr. Holden >> here. >> Mr. Mai >> here.
>> Mr. Porto >> here. >> And Mr. McKay >> here. >> All right. First matter on our agenda um will be case 24-24A Terresa Loreno. This is a request to
grant an extension of a variance for a new home over on Ark Road. Mr. Craviac, >> good evening. >> Good evening. Um could you uh provide us your firm association and
>> absolutely um I couldn't have said it uh said it better myself Mr. Chairman. My name is Luke Rabbi. I'm with the law firm of Delugala Louisis and Burr and we represent the applicant Theresa Loreno who owns the property located at 1903 Ark Road designated as block 110 lot 12.01 in your tax maps. Uh I just want
to give a brief overview of of of where we stand today. Um, back in I believe it was February of 2025, we appeared before this board. Well, let me just say the property is it consists of about 5.85 acres of of residential land. It's got an old dilapidated single family dwelling that the intent is to demolish
and construct a new single family dwelling. And to that end, uh we appeared before this board in February 2025 seeking one sideyard setback variance for the construction of a new home 30t from the right sideline where 50 ft is required. the board granted that application um and it was memorialized in a resolution adopted by
this board on March 5th, 2025. Now, since then um and and we're before this board for for one limited purpose, and that's to seek an extension of the time to file a building permit. What that resolution said, I believe it's on page four or five of that resolution, which is standard for this municipality, is
that the applicant must apply for a building permit within one year of the granting or the the memorialization of that resolution. That was March 5th, 2025. um otherwise the variance expires. Now since that time the applicant well Teresa I should say um has suffered some
some pretty significant personal issues. I did prepare a letter which I believe was circulated to this board. You know she she wants to keep her personal issues somewhat private. I can get into it if the board if the board requires. Uh but she suffered some personal issues that that really prevented her from advancing this project. Um so fast forward a year March 5th 2026 passed. No
building permit was applied for. I should say she's obtained almost all I think all outside agency approvals for the construction of of the new single family dwelling. Um but now it's August 8th and and she still has not applied for a building permit. I'm told the building permit applications are are all but all but ready to go, all but ready
to submit. Um and so we're just seeking a short extension of the time to file the building permit. In other words, an extension of the variance approval that was memorialized um on March 5th, 2025 um to give her a little bit more time to file those building permits. Um and that's really all I had by way of opening comments. All right.
>> Happy to answer any questions that the board might have. >> Mr. Graiac, um your June 22nd, 2026 letter to our construction and zoning official >> um appears to set forth the uh personal
conditions that uh >> you mentioned in brief. Yeah. >> Is that correct? >> That's correct. Every every letter in that information in that in that every sentence in that in that in that letter is accurate. Excuse me. Um and and I'm happy to to to go through it with the
board. Um the applicant would like to keep her, you know, her private life somewhat private, but but happy to answer any questions about that that the board might have. >> No, I I think it's sufficient that it's in the document. Um but if there are any questions from the board, we can deal with that. Are there
any questions from the board on that particular issue that you can't can't perceive by reading the the applicant's letter? >> No. >> All right. The other thing, Mr. U uh >> Graiac
>> Graviac, thank you. Um I was thinking it would be helpful for the board >> uh newer members of the board to um to point out the peculiarities of this lot >> in terms of its dimensions.
>> Yeah. >> I don't know whether you have that committed to memory. I I have sort of round numbers in mind. >> I I do. I know it's it's like what you would call maybe a cigar- shaped lot. It's very deep. It's I believe it complies with the minimum lot area um in the zone that it's located in. But it is a narrow lot, right? And so there really
is no space to construct a reasonably wide single family dwelling and also comply with the 50ft setbacks. I think it's 127 ft wide um where I think you have 50 foot setbacks on both sides. Now, we're going to comply on the left side, but we this board did grant a variance for 30 feet on the right side
where 50 ft is required. And that's really a result of this narrow lot, right? It's 127 ft wide where you have 50 foot setbacks on both sides. So, that was the justification for the original variance that was granted. >> What is your request if you have one for
the time of the >> Yeah, you know, so so it's actually good round numbers. March 5th was the date by which the variance expired. March 5th, 2026. It's now August 5th, 2026. So, it's been five months. You know, we've been working through this application
for a few months. Um, you know, I I would be comfortable with maybe an additional 90 days. I'm told that the building applications are ready to go. Um, of course, you know, there we'd like a little bit of a buffer period in case, you know, there there might be errors or or changes that
are required um in those building permit applications. So, you know, we would be uh more than happy with a 90-day extension from from today's date. >> All right. Um without attending intending to be critical of Miss Loreno,
Mrs. Loreno, uh is 90 days going to be enough given her >> she's her situation and her health. >> You know, you know what's happened has happened? Um she's fully committed to moving this project forward. Um, and and what I'm told is that the building
permit applications are ready to go to be submitted maybe, you know, this week. Um, so so I mean, you know, may maybe we seek 120 days, a four-month extension from today's date. I think that would be more than enough time. Um, and you know, you you won't you won't see me again on
this application. >> Okay. September, October, November, December, December 31st. >> December 31st works works great. Yep. before the end of the year. Um, you know, and it's just to submit the building permit application. So, I don't
I don't imagine there there will be too much of an issue with it. So, um, I mean, if you're willing to grant till end of year, that would be my understanding is that would be more than enough time. >> Uh, I'm going to ask for public comment on this just >> absolutely >> just in case. Um, Bob, do you have any
thoughts on the extension request or the timing? >> Well, uh, you can extend it as you wish. as long as the zoning doesn't change. I don't think the zoning has changed on this lot. It was uh
it was it's a 5.85 acre lot and it extends back over 2,000 ft. The board also required a relocation of of the new house. >> I'm sorry.
>> The board also required re relocation of the house. It's not going to be built in the same location. >> Oh, no, no, it's going to be built much further off the the the front uh the front property. Correct. >> You can do up to a year or something less.
>> Does our planner have any comment on this? >> No, sir. >> None at all. Okay. Thank you, >> Mr. Chairman. So what I would suggest if the board decides to look favorably on this and grant them uh normally what happens is that under UCCC guidelines
even if you don't have the whole house saying the electrical plumbing things like that you are allowed to ask for footing and foundations only >> at that point then that would justify getting a permit to our office and being
able to say yes we've given them that and then the rest of the house can follow. >> Uh cuz it is it's going to be a tough, you know, if the winter rolls in like it did last year, you definitely want to at least get those footing and foundations in before that that time frame. >> And at that point, we make that a
condition that obviously the rest of the house comes after that. >> Yeah, I think that's a no no objection to that plan. >> Okay. >> All right. I'm going to open it up to the public. Any public members present here that wish to comment on this
request? Hearing none, seeing none, we'll close this portion of the meeting. Um, panel members, questions, questions of the applicant, questions in general on this issue.
All right. Um, can I uh can I have a motion to grant the requested extension for good cause shown for uh the period uh from today through
December 31, 2026? >> I'll make that motion. >> Second. >> Roll call. Mrs. Tory, >> yes. >> Mr. Noita, >> yes. >> Mrs. Leon, >> yes. >> Mr. Morelli, >> yes. >> Mr. Ji, >> yes. >> Mr. R. Murphy,
>> yes. >> Mrs. Gilmore, >> yes. >> Miss Costco, >> yes. >> And Mr. McKay, >> yes. >> Thank you very much. We appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> All right. Our next matter is going to be Seagull Holdings, also known as uh
Mount Holly Nissan. Case 21-06A. It's a bulk variance for signage. >> Good morning. Good evening, Mr. Eisner. >> Good evening. Chairman McCay for the record, Steven Eisner representing the applicant. With me this evening are Teal
Jeff, our design and consulting engineer, and Tina Wright, who is a principal both of Seagull Holdings, the property owner, and Mount Holly Nissan, which conducts its business on the property.
As both individuals may give testimony during our presentation, I'd like to have them sworn with the chair's permission. Why certainly both come forward and first we'll go one by one. State your name sir.
>> Sure. Teal Jeffris principal engineer. >> Would you raise your right hand and be sworn by our council? You swear or affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth, full truth, and nothing but the truth. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Risner. You want to qualify now your engineering expert,
>> Mr. McCay. Um, members of the board. Teal appeared before the board just about almost exactly a year ago discussing an amended site plan. He was accepted by as an expert at that time and I would ask that he be considered an
expert witness. Uh all your testimony then would be the same today in terms of your background and qualifications. >> That is correct. Yes. >> All right. And we'll accept you as an expert for purposes of the signage uh placement and
other variance of issues. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members of the board, if I can explain our application briefly, there are presently four freestanding signs of the property.
They are all referenced in last year's site plan application. The fourth sign is actually what we would call a directional or monument sign, but under your ordinance, it is considered a freestanding sign.
and that is not up for review this evening. There are three other freestanding signs along the property fronting Route 38. There is a Nissan sign,
a brand sign which is approximately 132 square ft. Our proposal is simply to replace that with a similar sign that is right around 100 square feet. So it will be made smaller, the same height and the
exact same location. Mr. Eisner, can I interrupt you? Uh does does the applicants contractual arrangements with Nissan, whatever they may be, um mandate this anything with
regard to these signs, their size, their shape, their color, anything at all? >> The size and shapes are pretty much dictated by Nissan. Um the design of the sign is dictated by Nissan. And if we
put up signs, they have to be those Nissan signs. And that's what is there now. The signs that are there, we believe, date about 20 years ago to when Classic Nissan owned the property.
And they were the Nissan Sign program at that time. I can call Mrs. Wright to testify as to that because she has another dealership in Woodbury. And um those signs have been there about
20 years. The second sign is now 48 square feet in area. We propose that the sign be 45 square ft. The actual lower structure of the sign will be retained. The only
thing that will be changed will be what's called the light box. >> What's the light box? The light box is actually the sign area which will now be lit by LED lighting. It was fluorescent lighting previously, but the bottom structure of that sign as
opposed to the first sign will remain. >> And do you have bigger pictures of those signs? >> Yes. >> They were distributed I believe to the board in your packet when you file the
application. This is That's the second vehicles. And this is the third sign. >> All right. That's That's a two-part sign. >> Yes. Yeah, they are. They are in this
they are in the packet, but uh they're like post postage stamps to be honest. >> All right. Sorry to interrupt you. Okay, >> we'll get you a larger >> That'd be that'd be helpful and I could look at it and pass it around.
>> Sure. >> The third sign. Okay, these are these are postcard sizes. So, it's an improvement. >> It's also in the >> Yeah, in small version. Yeah,
>> but these are these are a little bit bigger. All right, go ahead. The third sign um dates to around we know was put up between 1965 and 1970. It's currently faced with um a vinyl
facing that was used by the prior owner and our proposal there is to reface the sign with an acrylic lens on each elevation and that once again will be back lit by LED lighting.
The small sign which we undoubtedly dates to the Holly Bowl that says food on it will be removed. That is about eight square feet and the lower sign will also be refaced and with LED lighting.
So we we >> this is third sign and Nissan mandated sign just seems sort of homemade compared to the other two >> it's been there. Um it clearly important
to my client and our proposal is really to keep it approximately the same size just to update it. And I would agree with you and my client would that the vinyl coating which has been there for around
20 years is not the most professional looking thing. We would have come in before to do it, but we were waiting to come in um to see what Nissan was going to require on the other two sides. >> Yeah. Um I mean, one could make the
argument I suppose that this sign is sort of redundant. Look at look at it comparison to the pillar sign. One of the one of the issues is that due to the reconfiguration of the property, we have
two driveways. Now, this large sign, the only indication of that driveway. Our monument sign, which I mentioned to you, is really a directory sign so that once people come in the driveway, which
we share with the warehouses, they're directed to make a left to get to the Nissan dealership. But that sign's necessary to locate that driveway.
And that's as a result um at one time we actually had three driveways into the property. We gave up one of those in order to share that driveway with Black Creek the warehouse people. Was it ever
considered by the applicant that of this I'll call it the third in L of that [clears throat] retaining and refreshing that sun that a pillar type sign like first sign
would follows requirements just smaller would serve just as well. It's really a sign pointing out driveway as opposed to
the location of the building dealership. >> In other words, in other words, there already is a small pillar sign for the I guess it's the warehouse. question is had you considered pillar
sign in of this third sign a little more a little smaller a little more discreet but in keeping with the Nissan sign the main Nissan sign that that's under application we frankly did not because we were under the impression
this sign and the other two signs were approved when the site plan was approved and what we're trying to do is to dress this up as much as we can, but the height is very important to us. One of
the reasons is that when the warehouse was put in, there was a huge piece of what's it called? >> A hot box that was put in that really blocks our driveway. Makes visibility very difficult when you're coming in.
>> Is that that I'll call it aluminum color rectangle that sits there. I guess it's electrical. >> It's electrical and fire alarm and fire pump material. That's how it was explained to us. And neither we nor the
warehouse people had any choice in the location of that. >> Did you I just want to make sure I get my notes straight. Did you say you thought that the three signs got approval previously? Yes, they were part of our site plan application and I know that
>> did your notice request a variance or did the board grant a variance for those? >> I do not know. I know that there's a reference in the resolution that all variances listed in a certain paragraph were granted and I know that
I believe one of the review letters um I think it was yours the letter of let's see I think it was your letter of July 25th July 14th 2025
references four freestanding signs and that we were given a variance for the fourth sign. Well, that implies that those other three signs were permitted. >> I mean, they were part of the site plan application and not called out.
>> But I think your testimony was very clear on this point and I think the board's understanding of it. The redevelopment plan specifically allowed two signs along the site frontage. Correct. >> I I take that. >> Okay. >> Sure.
>> One one at each driveway. When it came time for your site plan application, you requested of the board. Can we please just leave the three signs? We don't know what we're going to do. We're not going to make any changes to the signs. We would like to allow three existing
signs to just remain. We're not putting a new one. I don't We don't need a variance. The board allowed those three existing signs to remain because they were being completely unchanged. You came back later and asked for a fourth sign, a new
sign on the warehouse driveway. The board granted that. At that time, you said there were no changes to the other three signs. And now you're coming back to the board after saying we just want to leave three. We're not reconstructing them to
say we do want to reconstruct all three signs. We don't want to just do the two signs that are permitted by the redevelopment plan. >> Well, my our point is this. >> No, I I just want to make sure I I understand what your point is. I just want to make sure we understand. >> I think that's accurate. And I think
that the fourth monument sign, and I understand that it's called a freestanding sign under the ordinance, but it's really a directional sign. And it is not visible from Route 38. It's simply a sign to direct people to the
dealership once they are in the driveway. I think it's all a >> Where is Where is that sign? >> It is it's approximately right here. >> And that sign is not visible >> from Route 38.
>> No, absolutely not. >> It's only visible. I know that that placement as I remember the resolution was your operation your office that you wanted back and thought it was most near his driveway and that's where it
>> we just wanted on the far side of the driveway because it was obscuring it was in the sight triangle before so we said move it to the far side of the driveway >> Mr. I'm sorry >> yeah I just wanted to make >> Mr. Mr. Riser, where if you we have this
the sign location we just talked about indicated by you. Where is that? Um the utility control box. The utility control box is in this area right here. It's right there. And so
that you say from route 38 screens your s your >> It screens it screens the driveway. is also 60 roughly a 60 mph road you know and our point is that if we could leave
those signs the existing signs we certainly think it's a benefit to make them led to bring them up to date and to make them as aesthetically pleasing as we can particularly on the
larger side and that's really the rationale for our variance. We're also decreasing the total sign area and you're reworking on the third side and bottom. Yes, we are. And we are
getting rid of this sign that says food sign. I was wondering whether you were serving hot dogs. Sometimes we do. But all these signs are now and have
been faced in time which does not last. It's not aesthetically appropriate. And what we want to do is reface those with acrylic lenses and illuminate them with LED lighting. Um
I don't know whether your your remarks at this point are concluded or you want to have your expert testify at this point. >> We can if the chair would like that. I wanted to try to just give you an overview. Well, I don't want to cut off anything else, but if your preliminary comments are done, let's hear from your okay
>> your expert. And I ask him >> to um please address the general comments in the tailor design letter uh dated July 29th, 2026.
>> Okay, this would be on page 505. I might add for the boards, if it assists the board at all, uh, Mr. Taylor's letter does include diagrams of the signs that may be easier to
look at. Tal, so we can move this along. As Mr. McCay requested, would you please address the um general comments in Mr. Taylor's
July 25 29th letter which appear on page 505? >> Sure. First, good evening. With regard to number one, I'll just quickly go through and talk about the three signs. As mentioned
pylon sign number one existing sign will be replaced with a new pylon sign the the difference there is sign area will be reduced by approximately 33 square ft reducing from an area of 132.4
to 99.4 its location will remain the same. to the existing setback from the property line. Uh it's approximately 5T where 15 is required. Um
that will remain at the same location and the same height will remain [clears throat] maximum 30t is permitted. Um it is I'm sorry 18 is permitted 30t exist and 30t is proposed
the sign. So, the sign will be replaced with a new sign, slightly smaller area, same location, same height. The sign will be internally illuminated. The top portion of the sign has the classic red box with the white on circle. The
lettering in that white circle will be illuminated internally as LED lighting. Final sign number two. This is currently says pre-owned vehicles. The sign box at the top will be replaced. Uh the
existing sign box is 48 square ft. It'll be replaced with a box slightly smaller at 45 whereas 125 square ft is permitted. The height it's currently 21 ft in height which maximum of 18 is that height will
be maintained at 21. in the setback currently it's 0.9 rightway whereas 15 is required that setback will be 18 that sign will also be illuminated so the letters are what type of lighting
>> it'll be an LED lighting so it'll be new controls new LED lighting to replace the old fluorescent fixtures in there third on the third actually consists of three signing panels as mentioned a few moments ago.
Um the first sign panel at the top was 144 square ft that will be replaced uh with a new sign panel same size at 144 square ft. The food sign which is 8 square feet will be removed entirely.
Sign panel number two which is 72 ft will be replaced with again another sign panel at the same location. The height of that sign currently is approximately 26 ft where 18 ft is required. That maximum maintained
the size areas will be maintained. Also be maintained. Currently it's about 6.4t set back to the rightway that will be maintained. That's not condition. And both of those sign panels will be internally eliminated. So you have an internally eliminated sign pan.
They are the changes to those pylon signs. As mentioned a moment ago, the monument sign, the fourth monument sign which was added to the access driveway. Um there are no changes proposed to that was approved by the planning board will
be installed in accordance with the fire. So that is a summary of the changes to the signs themselves. Number two with facade signs. There's no changes proposed to the existing facade signs on the existing building.
>> Number three, there are certain requirements with of the township. >> Mr. Taylor, anything specific that you address? >> Um, based on what you've described, yeah, I don't think any of those are uh
are applicable >> until I think for number four you said that the signs will be >> elimination lighting >> and is there any advantage to LED lighting as opposed to incandescent or fluorescent lighting
>> uh first off it's a lot more energy efficient on it is a lot more energy efficient >> do these will these signs be eliminated 247 [clears throat] or cut offs for late evening
>> usually 247. >> Is there a Nissan requirement that requires that or is that just your business personal? >> No, that is all mandated by Nissan. They are the ones that wanted to update the signs. I didn't want anyone to be
confused thinking that I just building willy-nilly. Nissan does require the update because of image. It's a Nissan just like Dunk Donuts, Starbucks,
whatever. The other sign was sign >> the other sign being the third sign. >> Correct. Correct. That um that is me. So I would like knows about it. It's not
mandated but okay. So they they approve of more or less they might have to be very of what I can put the font any logo. So that is
Nissan. So that could be dimmed if that's something that um the town would like to see. Nissan I would check if you want. I'll check and make sure that it's um their requirement, but we've always had
those are always gone through that process. Correct. I'm sorry. >> Nissan has Nissan has signed people basically do this for you. >> Correct. The company AGI and that's that's who normally does
everything start to finish. Um, comment number five by the planner talks about this site being a little unique in that uh with the number of freestanding signs on route 38 position to address that.
>> Sure. If I may, Ford can recall back the time application in the original dealership composed of two separate parcels that separated by driveway that diagonal
driveway back. >> And this like this property was the former bowling. It had its own sign out of the street next to it. When the Black Creek application was approved, these two lots were emerged with the
elimination of the diagonal drive which then resulted in this this property having three pylon. Classic Nissan initially on this parcel to the west of the diagonal driveway had
applied for an application in 2006 for these two pylon signs. They were installed for the original Nissan. This sign in those lots What is why are those three signs
necessary on the bar considering >> took the question right right out of my mouth from starting from left to right on number one is located next to the existing driveway next to the existing dealership that's pretty straightforward in terms of identifying the driveway
into the the dealership when it was classic Nissan that was necessary because that was the only entrance into that into that property. Secondary sign, if you will, somewhat midway, is located adjacent to the old diagonal driveway,
but that was to identify the certified premium. Uh, again, that's not a sign or I was going to say that's not out of place or out of its dealerships. They will typically have a sign for the main identification, then secondary sign for
identifying uh used vehicles or some other subsequent subsidiary element to the to the dealership. This third sign here becomes unique from the standpoint that with the creation of this driveway access to
Black Creek that was established uh basically with the DOT limitation on the elimination of the driveways moving our point of access which was originally a 38 over to the Black Creek driveway. Now this movement here 38
an access point for traffic heading westbound 138. This sign is located in proximity to that driveway and provides evidence or identification that's that's an entrance. This monument sign number four back here
when it was earlier when it was saying it's visible not visible from 38. You're driving down 38. They're not looking some feet back this driveway for an identification sign, especially given the fact we have uh the motel, the hot
box, and some other features here that really is obscure and it's not meant to attract traffic off. It's meant to identify where to turn once somebody turns into that driver. So, the three signs have their purposes. This third
sign is to really identif this Black Creek driveway as an an entrance into the east and then item number six reflects the removal of the existing nonconforming conditions from the sign.
Those existing non-conforming conditions were referenced in the site plan application pertain to the existing three pylon signs and again they are existing conditions nonconforming so we do identify them as existing non-conforming condition
that's it questions and Um, just in terms of our professionals, Joe, do you have any our engineer for tonight? >> No. You have any questions? >> No questions.
>> Questions? >> Um, I guess chairman, I would almost I would ask Mr. Jeffris uh sort of a followup when this and for some of the new board members this project is several years old. We
eliminated the driveway that went back so that the Nissan site would become one site because they had no access between there no legal access between the two. As part of that, the property was reszoned to allow car dealership here. Part of that discussion was our
ordinance only allows one freestanding sign. They specifically requested to be allowed to have two freestanding signs, one at each driveway. And um the governing body agreed to amend the redevelopment plan to allow for two signs
along the frontage. During the site plan application, they said, "Well, we have three. Can we please just keep three? We're not going to touch them. We're not going to do anything." the board acknowledged that the that the three were existing. So, and I know this is a little bit of background, but I would ask the question the same question
that the chairman asked. If the third sign is not dictated, and a lot of the Nissan sites only have one or two freestanding signs along their frontages, um, can sign number two simply be moved down
toward the other driveway to provide that traffic calming, identify the turn for people moving in, and then instead of having four signs where you're allowed to have two, you would have three signs, three freestanding signs on your site. So the chairman had asked
that before and I wasn't sure whether or not that had really got answered. >> You bring up a good point to go back on that when this conversation started. I think it started back 2024 at time
at that time. The objective was to build a brand new dealership service. But with that entire configuration was changing in terms of point of access where as you know we had asked for
integration of two sign the site would have been reconfigured to allow that to occur. However, uh when the conditions of Nissan changed and there was not the need for new dealership and we looked at improving
the existing site, that condition somewhat changed because we were now adopting two existing conditions rather than a new site layout that had um to answer your question with regard to whether number
sign number two slid down replace number three sign number two is really more of theformational signified uh it does not have the brand on it doesn't have the logo
number three does incorporate that logo in the name simply for the identification so with regard to that I don't think from a very practical or a technical perspective Sign number two could replace and serve as sign number
three as that direction or that location just simply because this is identifying certified. So sign number two then is superfluous. Sign number two is and I'll let this
talk about this if necessary but these two signs number one and two are requirements of they're the Nissan standard signs that they require from the dealership. Sign number three here is the unique aspect
because we have access to >> but you just said the moving the number two sign down wouldn't suffice, but most of them only have to have one. They only have to have one by Nissan, right? There are there are Nissan dealerships that only have one freestanding sign along
the roadway. Correct. >> Uh that I'm not sure. I'm just not. But not every Nissan dealership has multiple drive. >> Understood. >> This is kind of a unique situation as well. We have three points of access, three drive,
>> right? Um but one is off of someone else's driveway that you have an access >> two >> right >> um but the public access is all at the single essentially the single point of access
well two points of this access but that's not on your property. Well, this is an area >> to use somebody else's driveway to get into your site. >> Right. As you know, you know what?
>> That's all I have. Mr. All right. Questions off of the black. Is that the pre-owned car lot? >> Okay. So, the back parking lot there. >> This would be all new. Most
car dealerships they always say even though they're used because basically I might carry a Jeep or a Dodge or something like that but mostly I have certified premium Nissan for sale
because that's kind of what people want to come for new is a little bit certified warranty so that's why >> Mr. Chairman, I I have a question. >> Sure.
>> And please forgive my ignorance if I don't know the answer, I don't remember, whatever the case may be. This week in my construction office, I received from an easy sign uh out of Pennsylvania signs for the Nissan dealership.
So what my question is, again, I don't recall most of the approved site plan. They are asking for one, two, three, four, five, six ground directional signs, one customer parking sign, and then one
main brand monument sign. Can you let me know? Were all these interior signs approved at the previous site plan? >> So, we'd have to evaluate that against the approved site plan. There were other
in addition to the the four freestanding signs along the site perimeter, there were internal wayfinding and other signs to identify specific areas. So if you send that, we can compare that >> to the uh resolution compliance plans. >> Okay. I was just curious because they
sent it in before you had any approvals for coming to the board. Uh I just want to bring that to the attention and I'll go back with with Mr. Taylor and we'll check those signs on the approved site plan. >> Okay. >> Okay. All right. I'll follow up with
that then. All right. Thank you. >> Other board questions. >> I have a question. >> Yes. >> Go ahead. >> If um if you were not going to update these signs and they are like they are,
we would not be having issue with the tonight. Is that correct? >> But the reason we're having an issue of it now is just because they want to re redesign their signs. >> Yeah. So, they're reconstructing their signs. The signs are only allowed to be 18t tall and they're permitted to have
two. Um, their signs are 30 feet tall. They're totally reconstructing sign number one. They are requesting a setback of five feet where 15 feet is required. So the location, the height,
the number of signs for each one of these um requires that relief. >> Okay. And did they have permission? Did we give them that relief before with these signs? >> So I >> they were okay until now. >> So the the board acknowledged that there were three signs and they the applicant
requested to allow them to stay because they have been there in that state. >> Okay. um previously, but no changes were proposed to those signs that so they would like to leave them as is and then construct a fourth sign. And the board did grant that relief.
And now we're back again asking for the signs to be refaced, reconstructed. Again, all um different from what was initially requested and presented by the applicant as part of the resoning and the
redevelopment plan. Can I may I comment? We are not asking for anything different than what we could continue to use. We're decreasing the square footage on each sign. Certainly the majority on the
first one by about 33 square feet largely because the sign foundation and the electronics after 20 years have deteriorated. And we go from something like this to that. The only change to this sign
is this box here. And the only change to this sign is that these will be in acrylic. They will be illuminated. The sign will be repainted and this food sign.
And while I understand that technically Mr. Sailor is correct with the setbacks. We're not changing any of the setback sizes or heights of anything. They are identical to what's there now. >> And that was approved before. That's my
question. uh they were acknowledged before because the applicant was not you know had stated that there were no changes proposed with pylon sign numbers two and three because they are somewhat being refaced but elimination
and other things are being changed. Um pylon sign number one is being removed in its entirety and reconstructed. So any existing nonconforming height or setback is lost and any sign should be
set back 15 feet, a maximum of 18 feet in height. And they're requesting to keep it up at 5T and to be 30 feet in height. drive down east pass. So what they're putting up is
for me and everything. >> And if we could have done anything about that, we would I would offer if they wanted better visibility of their signs, they would reduce them to a compliant height that hang under utility lines
>> andor and or move them back slightly from the road. accomplish on the third sign where there's two signs on that sign is the bottom one going away or it's still
going to have I can't see >> this one will be and that will be >> so it'll still be two signs on the one side >> right this little sign that says really jumping. It looks like a man
>> just And is there signs too on the building? >> Yes. >> Is there Mount Holly Nissan also on the building? >> Uh the signs signs on the building. >> Yes. >> But there is no request, >> but they're existing.
>> Yes, they are. Another another comment from just point out the board's latest comments indicate their perception I think that there is
maybe maybe unnecessary sign that you're asking for that's not it's not necessar unnecessary >> but there was another question. >> Yeah I have a bunch of questions. So the sign number one that is that height dictated by the design from Nissan as
part of the branding. >> So they require a 21 foot high sign or >> is that the standard sign for them? >> What they did was try to they have standard signs and that's why this was a standard Nissan sign. >> Right.
>> And what they do is try to match what was there and that's the reason. >> But does Nissan have other prototypes that would comply with this sign? I really don't know. So, so clarity on whether or not branding would allow them and I my wife
works for home so I understand all your branding challenges that you're dealing with but the um understanding whether or not you can make that sign 3 feet whatever it is to get it in compliance would be one question that I would have But I do understand if they require it
to be that size, I get it. Um, the other two signs, from what I understand, from what you testified on, is that the top of the sign, the white box itself, I'm assuming you're taking the whole box off and you're putting a whole new box in. >> That's right. >> The middle sign is already lit up today
using incandescent or fluorescent, whatever lighting is being used. The third sign, is that lit up today the same way or is it You say this side. >> Yeah. The third. Yeah. Third. >> That sign is not is lit, but because it's got vinyl facing,
>> so it's lit from the outside. >> It's really not visible. >> So that's why we're replacing that with an acrylic lens. So what would preclude you from lowering those two signs down to the 18 foot requirement?
If you're taking the whole light box off, there's two poles and three poles. Just bringing that light box down. just a pure mechanics perspective. Can it actually be lowered to meet the requirements on those two signs? >> Once again, this sign is the height that
needs sign. >> This matches what was there now. So on the third sign, >> so if the second sign has to match the same height as the first sign because of branding understood, the third sign is uh the dealership's owner's decision to
put that sign up or change that sign. Can that sign be lowered to the 18 foot mark? >> It can't. From a practical financial standpoint, it can't be >> because of the cost of doing. >> Okay. And then um
what is on the corner there to the right of that third sign? There's another sign there. Is that how big is that with that sign on the corner? >> The fourth one. Yeah. >> This sign right here is a directional sign. It's about a little over 4t tall
and less than 32. >> Which one does it match on the plan top or the >> It is sign number six. >> Yeah, it's just hard to read the printing on what we have. >> It is a basically it's a small
it'll say customer entrance. >> Okay. So that's not the branded one. >> It is not a branded. >> All right. That's all >> I want to buy.
>> No, it's basic. And you once you're our customer, you know, you come right to the main entrance with the tall pylon sign right by the building because you're coming to the building. But a lot of people come in that first
entrance because they see our sign there and they'll come in and then they'll just drive around. Is there any >> correct concern sign we've been over the years we tried
to eliminate sign repeated high school type signs across the street from there grocery store
back. Those who developed tried to keep their science [clears throat] becomes kind of an outlier. Two reasons. We want exceptions for height reasons car
seems It's an old trying to rejuvenate new less violent less less intrusive
three It's been seems to be seems to be along with even though it was there. both as height and as to the number. So guess
maybe maybe rethink that third ask. Can I speak to my client? [clears throat] >> We require A little more. Mr. What my client would agree to do is um
eliminate I think in response to Gilmore's comment eliminate So that sign on top is dim at night so that there is no discussed.
Uh well I I was questioned by that how you going to work the lights >> but they would be they can be controlled separately and that sign can be turned off when the dealership closes. [snorts] >> I mean I
have a reaction to it. I can appreciate what you're saying on your side. I don't mean to be a Debbie Downer here, but me personally, I'm speaking for just me as a member. I kind of feel like a business should have the right to
advertise that I'm here. Here I am. And it's up to me as a customer to say, "Okay, I want to go to that business." And business offers more than one thing, you know, like a grocery store sometimes has a has a pharmacy.
I would think that I'd get on a business property and then the business would tell me if it has multiple things to offer me would then tell me where to go for these multiple things on the property. But we're like displaying all the options on the roadway.
And u I just kind of feel like it's an abuse of the an abuse of the citizens that live here to say, you know, we're we're not we're not we're not, you know, I'm not saying you guys are doing this attention. I'm not but it almost makes
you feel like, you know, like what like you need to know all the options that are available. Most people buying a car know if they're going to buy a used car or a new one and they know the lots have these. But yet when you get on the lot, then you can be directed to go what
you're the service that you're looking that that's kind of I you know, like I said, I don't want to throw a wrench into things here. But that's how I personally I feel like it's your responsibility to direct people once they're on your property to the services that you offer, not display all the
services on the main work. members. >> So, the modification that you're suggesting is on sign number three. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, on here, it says removal of one sign with what you're proposing right now. How is that different than
what's already marked on the plan? >> It's when you look at the plan, you see that small sign >> that says food bear. >> That's Okay. >> And then there is a sign further down. >> Okay. So, you're proposing removing that further down sign.
>> Yes. >> Would you make any modifications to the design of the top sign that you're advertising on the bottom, the bottom sign, you're advertising, you know, factory train express service available and then all
banks and models. That sign is the one you're eliminating based on what you just >> and then the top sign would say >> Holly Nissan with the logo and >> and that would be turn.
>> So this middle tile on sign number two that was in existence when there was an access road. Correct. There's no longer an access road there because of the land swap and the DOT approval mandated that
you shut that one down because you're creating another >> not the sign that has three signs on it. You mean in the large one? >> Yeah. In front of it would be the
diagonal entrance. [clears throat] >> Which no longer has access. >> No, the access road is right there. >> Okay. So the diag. >> Yes. >> Which is where the Nissan vehicle sign
is. >> And that diagonal was used by um Atlantic Wood in the back. The wires are blocking that view. to lower that sign. So that's on the
highway. Now you got a sign below the visual of the road and then you also separate units. I think it's a little more we're not going You're eliminating this sign and that sign
>> and you are putting it into one illuminate sign, >> right? >> And what was your logic for? I mean, your reason not being able to lower that cost. >> I understand that, but you know, I know a little bit about construction and I
just don't see a huge amount of money in that to take that drop down, cut the pipes, move the electric, >> right? 26 12 signed. >> I agree with you. I think it should be in compiance. It should be put into
compiance especially additional signs >> and the and the setbacks should be adeared to more closely. I recall I recall during site planner the site application we relieve on how close the vehicles
>> we got an existing setback of 6.4 The only issue with the you got two signs this way and a third one. Right. So, >> Mr. Chairman, >> exactly. If I may, >> um I know this is a difficult issue for the board. It's been difficult for my
client and um we appreciate the cooperation we've gotten. We would accept approvals of this sign, that sign number one, and number two, right? and latitude here
to put up a sign similar in design to sign number one with maximum height of 20 ft and that will replace this sign that sign will come down. So the sign at that location would be
look like sign number sign >> right. We're asking that you allow it up to maximum of 20 ft is we're unsure exactly what Nissan
manufactures and has available and the us to trim it. Those two feet can sometimes be broken. So that's why I'm asking for that. And we will eliminate this entire
pedestal sign. It's a 9 foot wide wide. Just trying to get the dimensions in my head. I have to find out >> small >> it is small >> and the only reason I
get not sure what it would be because your thoughts They're all right with all Right.
But I would still recognition on that corner because you have We always have to go around. >> It's not for lack of seeing us. You got signs. >> [snorts] >> your reaction?
>> It It's definitely a move in the right direction. I think it reduces some of the visual clutter. >> Um it it cleans it up and it's an effort it's direction towards better compliance and less clutter. You know, as we indicated, the ordinance only allows
one. The redevelopment of plan allowed two. We're at four. So, whatever can be done for height and size. Unfortunately, I don't think the sign can comply with the setback because of where the um display cars we gave them relief.
>> They moved those closer uh than permitted. Well, we want you to wrestling with personal preferences or years ago to wrestle with this whole signage issue.
And then with this, just one follow-up question. This third sign would not that could also be extinguished overnight. There would be no need because you're getting your advertising in front of the store and no one needs to find that driveway after hours. Correct. >> Well, we have trucks that come in there.
If we're doing what we're doing, I would rather leave the illumination on overnight. It's just really our logo, >> right? And I can't imagine what issue there would be on a road like Route 38.
Can I can I have a sense of this terms of the compromise that they have the whole lot beginning? [laughter] >> I'm just kid I'm just kidding.
Um it is it is a is a significant step toward us on this issue. And I think it makes your signs look a whole lot better because you know that that number three signs [snorts] in this day and age of a homemade sign
with all the text we have making signs fancy and that one stands out against your other ones. But any sense of the board on this? >> I I agree that it definitely makes it more uniform and It takes away that used
car feeling sign that that three posted sign is on the on the end. And even if it is illuminated at night, um all driven past those signs, they're not >> super bright. Subtle. I mean, it's literally just the white that that you
see in red, which really doesn't light up the area. And it is 38, you know, 100 down that door. >> I want to emphasize, I know it was mentioned, the only thing that you see is the logo at night.
The red area is blacked out. So, it's just the logo that's illuminate. >> Would you say, do you guys have an idea of the percentage of cars that turn into your lot off of the driveway to the right with driveway in the front? >> Like, because you we're all talking
about the speed of somebody said 60. It's not 60, it's 50. But if everybody's racing down the road, right, and they're trying to get into your business and we're all on their phones and we're busy, everybody brought up things and uh if you say, "Oh my gosh, there's the Nissan,
>> right? Your your final chance to get to the Nissan dealer is the driveway all the way to the west." >> Right. >> And that's where the big sign is. >> That's right. >> And people have said, "Oh, but now
entire But I'm saying if if everyone no matter what service they wanted from whe service, used car, new car, they could get there by going the western driveway. >> Yes, they could. >> They pass that they
pass that they have to turn around anyway. >> When we went down this road with the board, Mr. Taylor, we were promised two of our own access points on Route 38. Originally, we were promised three. I
was on call with the DOT and the DOT brutalized everyone into this driveway and it's been a problem for us because we have only this way. So, I'd ask that
the board keep that take that into consideration. I think I do appreciate I've seen the other details of the compromise on the third. >> The third sign is going to be a
replication of sign number one. No more than 20 ft high, >> right? >> And it will be reduced proportionately. >> So that it's not going to be 20 ft high and 9 and a half. >> It'll be reduced proportionately. >> Okay.
>> And we'll have to have it >> right and we'll have our other request to be clear is that we're allowed to put it in the same area as the president. So whatever setback is necessary on
these three signs we would have to have and as I said the first two signs are not being moved. They will be placed exactly where the existing signs are. >> So new sign number three will have a conforming setback.
>> It will not. No, >> it will not. >> It will not match existing. >> So we'll have to >> it will be the same as the existing setback. >> The same general area. will be able to show that >> and that's the sign that will be lit all the time.
>> Yes. All three will be >> right. But the testimony the the red panels themselves are opaque. >> Yes. >> And only the white. >> That's correct. involved set. >> It's going to look like sign number one or sign number two.
It's going to look like >> what are the current? >> Well, I can tell you here it's existing as a 30 foot tall 5 foot back. set back the width looks very big but I
don't have the width information on this >> 16 what are what are our request requiring that they 18 ft height
15 and they're proposing >> 20 >> not to exceed 20. >> Not to exceed 20. That's on the third. >> Yes. That's because we don't know what's
available. >> All right. Look, I appreciate >> we can take a vote on this. >> Yeah, I appreciate the patience of the chair and the board. We're not trying to be obstructionist, but this has been a very difficult process for everyone involved, including your professionals.
So, we appreciate >> you have a conversation. >> Thank you. >> All right. Um, can you just motion on this. >> Open it up to the public first. Any members of the board have any other
questions? Members of the public are presenting to this board. public meeting. >> You're granting you're considering granting the necessary variances for sign number
one as it exists with refurbishing. Same thing with sign number two. Elimination of the existing sign number three and replacement with a maximum 20
foot high sign and the dimensions will be reduced proportionately from the existing signs. I just wanted to clarify because I may have misunderstood this sign will not be refurbished. will be replaced. >> Okay.
>> And the same on number two that will be the light box will be replaced. The structure will remain on number three that will be assigned not to exceed 20 and the design will be as sign number
and we will need existing setbacks for signs numbers. number two and sign number three will be placed in the same spot [clears throat] as the existing sign number. I think the chair said that setback was about 6.43.
>> So I'm looking at the chart and it tells me 6.4. >> Yes. >> All signs will be in their existing location. >> Yes. >> Number three will be in the new sign. Number three will be in the existing
location of the sign. >> Thank you. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. Morali. >> Yes. >> Mrs. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. Ar. >> No.
>> Mrs. Gilmore. >> Yes. Yes. >> Yes. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you for your cooperation. Appreciate >> Thank you. We'll sub we will submit a uh
a sketch of the sign plans to sign to Miss Taylor's office to your Thank you. Good morning. >> [snorts] >> All right. Next we have uh case 26-03A. Um before we take that uh for an
interest to the board take a five minute break. >> Good. We'll we'll we'll stand a journ for five minutes. Five. F3. Okay, >> back on the record.
>> All right, we're back after a break. Um, Mr. Gri, u yours. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Give us an overview of uh what's what's proposed here? >> Sure. Will. >> Yep. Um I just wanted to point out I
just handed out a couple of exhibits. A1 um is a copy of the site plan that I believe is the same site plan that was submitted with with our application. A2 is uh just a a kind of um it's a it's a color version of that same site plan with the removal of some of the
notations just to make it clear. Uh and A3 is an aerial of the site and surrounding sites as well. So I just wanted to make that clear. I did pass out pass out those exhibits while uh while we were on break. So, >> do you have an engineer or a planner? >> We do. We have an engineer. Yep. Um and and we'll we'll address that in just a minute. Let me just give a few opening
remarks. Again, my name's Luke Gra. Go ahead. >> Do you have one more of these? >> I don't. I copies. >> That's right. Bob and I can share. We can >> um So, do you Are you good? >> Yeah, we we'll share one. >> Okay. Sorry about that. >> Thanks. No worries. >> I should remember to print. [snorts]
>> That's okay, Luke. [laughter] >> Don't Don't do that. I'm used to it. >> Um, >> so my name is Luke Grabbak. I'm with the law firm of Deluca Lewis and Burn. We represent the applicant this evening, Creek Turn Coffee Company LLC, which is a prospective tenant, actually a tenant of the property located at 1366 Route
38, designated as block 100.18, lot three on your tax maps. Uh, here with me this evening are Chris Brain, the principal of the applicant and his wife, um, and his engineer, Joe Otime from Cers Engineering. Uh Chris and Joe are going to be providing some brief testimony in just a moment, but just
briefly by by way of opening comment. Um the these pro there are actually two properties at issue in this application. Um the two properties are somewhat intertwined. They're 1366 uh Route 38, which is really the the subject property that that the applicant is is leasing. Um but also an issue is
the adjacent property, which is uh block 100.18, block 1.02, that's 1364, Route 38. You know, these properties They're equally sized. Um 1366 the property that my client is leasing. Um he's proposing to convert it, but I believe it's
currently improved with a two-story building and then a smaller one-story building that I believe were used as previously used as a small antique shop. Uh currently vacant. Um and the adjacent lot 1.02 is current it's a it's improved with a I believe a two-story building that currently houses an acupressure
business. Um and they're somewhat intertwined. They share access to an extent. They share they share to an extent. Um and and so what we're proposing here, you know, of course there there there's no memorialization of um how these properties function together. Uh but we're going to address
that this evening hopefully if this application is approved. Um but but really the purp we're before the board this evening seeking minor site plan approval, some bulk variances, and some submission and design waiverss for the conversion of the building on lot 366 Route 38 um to what I would describe as
a combined coffee house, social hub, welcoming space, and social gaming use um with offering limited food service, some coffee and related drinks, um social gaming and the like. social gaming, including shuffle board, pingpong, uh, darts, pool, and and those
types of indoor recreational games. And my client will get into that in just a minute. Um, so ju just to be clear, we're not proposing any changes to the existing buildings on lot 3 or lot 1.02 for that matter. We're merely proposing some u some replacement of signage and
some additional uh parking area improvements um which our engineer will get to in just a minute. Now, um the the the property the the subject The main property of issue, lot three, uh, does have several existing non-conforming conditions. It it doesn't comply with
lot area frontage. Uh, I think it's it doesn't comply with the front setback. I think there's a sideyard setback deficiency, impervious cover deficiency. None of those are changing. None of those are are proposed to change in this application. We are seeking a few new variances um, as a result of this
application. One is a bulk variance for the number of parking spaces. Um now now we did submit on our plan a parking calculation based on office indoor recreational and personal service use we in response to or um in reaction to
the review letters that we've received um you know that that parking calculation for a use like this it's really hard to nail down um you know a parking calculation based on the proposed use. Um our engineer is going to touch on that in just a minute. But for lot three um we're proposing 17
spaces where based on a restaurant, indoor recreational and office use um you know we believe something like 47 spaces are required. Uh nine spaces are required for lot 1.02 um which you know will comply with the ordinance but we are proposing um some additional parking
spaces for lot for lot three the property issued it application on lot 1.02 and we're going to get to that in just a minute. Um, and we'll address that with a with an access and shared parking easement um that that the landlord who owns both properties has agreed to execute. Um, and and and really, you know, just briefly by way of
overview, and you're going to hear about this in testimony in just a minute. Um, oh, I'm sorry. I should note the other variance. The other variance is for parking setback. I believe your ordinance requires a 20 foot parking setback um to rear and side lot lines. I think the review letter noted that we're proposing zero feet and that's mostly a
result of the fact that these properties are intertwined and they're going to share drive aisles, they're going to share access and they're going to share parking. And so, as you can see on the bottom of this plan, uh the same plan that you have in front of you, the the parking setback here, here's the lot line here, separating the two properties
because we're going to share parking. You know, there there really isn't going to be any parking set back to the side lot line on that side. Um but we do need a parking variance for um the setback the proposed parking area at the rear to the rear lot line. I believe we're proposing something like 12 and a half feet. Uh again, our engineer will touch
on that in just a minute. But just briefly by way of overview, you know, we think these variances are justified uh based on, you know, the the the undersized nature and narrowness of this lot in combination with the existing conditions on this lot. Right? You have a pretty large two-story building as
well as a smaller building on this lot. you know, in order to utilize this building to the maximum extent. Um, the building is simply too small to provide enough parking. And, you know, we're trying to resolve that with the sh with with additional parking on lot 1.02, additional parking at the rear of the
subject property. Um, you know, I I believe we're going to fall short in terms of total parking spaces. But the variance can be justified just based on again the undersized nature of this lot, the narrowness of this lot, as well as the the lawfully existing conditions thereon. Um and and and again we're
going to touch on that in just a minute. Um and so let me get to my witnesses. Uh we are re in receipt of two review letters. One from uh Taylor Design Group dated July 29th, 2026 and one from Remington and Vernick dated July 30 30th, 2026. You know, we're largely in agreement with most of the comments in
those in those letters. Uh some of them do some of the comments do ask for some testimony which we're going to address and we are going to push back on a few of those comments which uh we're going to address in testimony. So, unless the board has any questions for me, uh, I'm going to call my first witness, uh, Chris Braining, the principal of the applicant entity. Um, and then we'll
have Go ahead. >> Before you do that, questions. >> Yes. >> Um, who owns lot 1.02? >> It's I don't know if it's owned by an entity or an individual. It's the same owner. He's actually sitting in the back
right here. His name's Kevin. Tang Tang. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> And you got uh in order to fill out your parking requirements, >> correct? >> You're using um an easement parking easement.
>> Mhm. >> Uh for that property, >> correct? It's it's going to be a shared parking easement. So, I mean, I imagine based on on what I understand about lot 1.02, they don't utilize most of their parking. So, you know, I is going to
largely benefit the subject lot, but but it will be a shared parking space, >> right? And there are parking spot. I was there walking around the site today. >> Okay. >> And there's parking out front of I'll call it the active function building. >> Y
>> um so you would include those spots and then uh there's spots behind the active puncture building. You include those. >> Correct. >> And then there seems to be a good portion although I couldn't find any markers delineating the west side
property line on the acupuncture building. Um, seems like there's a lot of overgrown wood wooded area along that. >> Correct. That's back here. >> Right. >> Are you are you are you going to have to clear some of that or all of that in
order to put in your parking spots? >> Correct. And I'll have my the applicant testify about the plan to do that. But but yes, if and to the extent that we are paving additional spots here. Yes, that that some of those trees I think
it's you know a lot of brush and and trees will have to be cleared. Correct. >> You have a term that you use on plan >> those parking spots we're just talking about >> as banked parking spaces. What What do
you mean by banked? my my my client will address will address all of that in his testimony if if if he may. >> Okay. >> Last uh last area. >> Um what happens when
when and if uh the owner of lot 1.02 decides to sell? >> Well, I mean, they're going to be bound by by the shared parking and and shared access easement. Um so >> you and you think that easement will follow the when it's sold that if it's
sold correct it it will it's going to be recorded in the county land records and it will run with the land correct and I mean you know I don't think it's a detriment to to this property right you know additional parking on this property you know uh broadens the potential uses
for the property and you know you walk today these properties largely function together already right so you know they they they share access they share the drive out between the buildings Um, and so, you know, we we think this would largely be a benefit to both properties. But you're right, to answer your
question, yes, the the recorded parking and access easement will run with the land. So, any future owner of lot 1.02 will be done by that. Again, we don't think it's necessarily detrimenting this property or lot 1.02. Um, but you know, it's going to be
recorded in the county land records is the intent. >> Um, you're going to hear from the applicant first and Yep. That's right. >> Sir, would you be sworn >> sir? Raise your right hand, please. You swear or affirm the testimony we give
tonight will be the truth. Full truth. Nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> Good evening. >> Thanks, Chris. So, I'm going to guide you through. Okay. So, so were you present for my opening remarks? >> I was. >> And you sure to speak. Okay. Were they true and accurate to the best of your knowledge? >> They were. Yes. >> Okay. And you're the owner of Creek
Turner Coffee Company LLC, correct? Which is the proposed tenant at their property, correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. Um, and can you just give the board a brief overview of your own words of, you know, what what you're proposing for this property for the library? >> Sure. Um, good evening everyone. Um, I'm
Chris Bryan. I'm a 20 year resident, 21 year resident of Hannesport. Um, my wife Lisa and I, we've we discovered Hannesport in 200 2005 and we've fallen in love with the town. Um we've raised four children. They've all gone to the Hannesport Elementary. Three, three have
graduated. Those three have all gone on to the Rancokus Valley um regional high school. One of them has graduated. So we still have one at at the Hannesport Elementary School and then we have one going off to uh North Carolina State next this well next week. Um I've coached on the soccer fields for that
for the majority of those 20 years. I've coached in the uh Sacred Heart um baseball league. We've been a part of this community since we moved here. My wife runs the healthy kids running um series. She's so active here on Sundays in the fall and spring. Um hundreds of kids who go and run a mile around our
track getting them engaged with the uh community, getting them, you know, active and healthy. Um so the the property that we see at uh 1366 Route 38, um for 50 years it was the browser round shop. Um it's a beautiful building. If you've ever been
inside, it's a unique space. Um, it's a space that I I discovered um, shopping with my daughter. We were browsing the shops and fell in love with the uh, grand staircase that goes around to this atrium and we thought about what a great place this could be. Um, the the um, owners were retiring and it's been a
dream of mine to um, sort of open, you know, a what I would call an old style maybe European cafe. A place where you're not being raced out with a to- go cup. It's a place where you want to linger instead. a place that you want to
like, you know, have um a coffee, a book, you know, encouraged [clears throat] basically to stay and enjoy a ceramic mug versus a uh to- go cup. Um and so that's the vision. That's what kind of inspired us with the the um the impetus of the Creek Turn Coffee Company. Fell
in love with the property. Um it's been obviously a place where people have discovered antiques, discovered treasures that we brought back to their house. And what we want to do is we want to sort of preserve aspects of the building as we're converting it to this, you know, this this community space. Um
a a coffee house that's different than um different than Starbucks, different than Dunkin Donuts, different than Wawa. Obviously, if you need a fast cup of fast cup of coffee that you're going to drink in your car, they might be the best options for you. We're not going to have a drive-thru. If anything, we're not going to have a to-go menu. I mean,
we will have cups that you can take to go, but we're going to have a four here menu. you know, we want people to really come in and, you know, um, spend some time, meet an meet friends, meet colleagues, and maybe, you know, share an experience. I call it a social cafe.
Um, as we talked about, we're going to utilize the space where we do have traditional cafe style seating, you know, where you can come in um enjoy a pastry, enjoy a breakfast sandwich, enjoy a um a yogurt bowl, a salad, light fair as far as the foods that we're
going to be um planning and proposing to serve. Um but we're also going to have some uh gaming elements. Uh Luke mentioned we have four interactive dart boards that we're proposing. Uh those are similar to um things that you would find in like Las Vegas or Philadelphia at a place called um Top Flight. Uh we
have two ping pong tables. We have a couple um electronic shuffle board as well as some other gaming elements that way, you know. So there's hours where you're going to be there, you know, looking to have like a quiet time in the morning eventually maybe get knocked out work out, but in the afternoon and into
the evening. We want it to be a place where it's an alternative to going to a bar. It's a place where my wife and our children can spend some time together. It's a place where you know friends and colleagues can meet and it doesn't it's an alternative to having a alcohol centered experience. We want a place
where people can come and you know spend time together. Um and then you know so certainly that's the impetus of it. It's a modern gathering place. It's a social hub. Um, it's what I think Howard Schultz wanted to do with Starbucks when he came back from Milan when he first
um, you know, kind of took Starbucks from Seattle out to the world. He wanted a place that he called a third place. It wasn't work. It wasn't home. Um, it was just another place where people could meet and eat and spend time together. So, our our vision of the Creek Turn Coffee Company is just that. It's a
third place for you. It's a place where you don't have to um you have the elements of a bar without it being alcohol centered. It's family centered. It's something that we think is um could be a nice um place for the community. Um and there's some really great aspects of the building and the property and so we
look forward to you know bringing that vision to Hannesburg. >> Wonderful. >> Mr. Bry couple questions. What are your proposed hours of operation? >> Sure. So, we are um proposing to be open seven days a week from 6:00 a.m. to 10 p.m.
We'll be closed on certain holidays throughout the year. So, but you know that is our plan. >> Um has this building been examined by the fire marshals yet? >> It has. I'm sorry. >> It has. >> All right. And what is the occupancy
approval by the fire marshal? >> I looked at his letter wasn't Notice I mean the reason I ask is the relationship between that and the parking situation. >> All right. Well, I think that um
It's important to answer that question. >> Tag off of that like birthday parties. You guys plan on having birthday parties here. >> The space certainly can can cater to a number of those types of events, whether it's birthday parties, whether it's um you know um companies that want to have
a gathering in our in our location. Um you know, we are certainly building and kind of partitioning sort of the seating and some of the usage for you know, for those types of events. Um but certainly I mean you know we will be compliant with um you know the occupancy
that's set forth by you know the fire marshall um as well as any of the health inspe health inspector. So whoever sets the occupancy we will be compliant with. And are you proposing in your business plan
outdoor events or service outdoors as opposed to every everything being contained within the four walls of the building? >> So, um we do have an out an outside patio that we are um we we foresee um as
part of the application. Um it's at the rear of the building. I believe it runs along the back of it. But from a standpoint of like service, we're going to have tables. We're gonna have tables out there. Um we certainly um will anticipate having seating out there as well so people can come and enjoy, you
know, nice spring days, nice fall days. Um you know, just a couple other parts I think are important. You know, we we we named um the company Creek Turn Coffee Company sort of we embraced um you know, when with the Big Turn Park um the renovations any that are going on at Big
Turn Park. um the um Big Rusty that was done by Thomas Stanbo. You know, those were certainly inspirations as we were thinking about what do we want the what what do we want this coffee house to feel like? So, we do want it to be part of the outdoors. We are a short seven minute walk from the back door or the
front door of the cafe to the um Big Rusty. So, I certainly en envision a number of people coming in, grabbing a um grabbing a beverage or a beverage of choice, whether it's coffee, tea, or a refresher, and making that seven minute stroll down to the park, what I call a
sip and stroll um that they can enjoy as part of the community. So, um so yes, we will have aspects outdoor, but the part that I think I you're asking for as far as like noise, I don't envision like events. I mean, I don't envision like music on the patio. It's a It's a place
where somebody wants to they're on a walk with their dog, they want to have a coffee or a bowl, they can sit on the outside patio while they're doing so um as opposed to having our live music um events outside. >> Well, that's that led me to my next
question in terms of um music being pumped in outside either either electronically. >> Yep. I mean, we we >> Yeah, we 100% want to be compliant and respectful of our neighbors. Um, we have
a good relationship with our closest neighbor um immediately to our left side looking at the building um which is the chiropractic office and I know there's a residence above there. So, we we're completely respectful of the any of the noise ordinances on the
town as far as music that's um being projected outside the building. Um as well as any noise that would spill over from the inside of the cafe. >> All right. And then separate from that, there was a letter that we received from Mr.
about a tenant. Has that been resolved? That issue. >> I'm sorry. >> The tenants in the ups. >> Oh, that issue has been resolved. Yes. I believe >> or known or even known to the township. >> Sorry. >> Not even known to the township.
>> Right. That's you know we're just not part of our application. I know I in my letter but the tenant has been removed and Chris plans to utilize that portion. I believe that's just >> correct. the original the the lease agreement includes that space in our in
our in our plan proposal and it's going to be utilized as um basically business office a business office not a tenant a place where somebody can reside. >> All right. Um while while we have the applicant up here um members of the
board we have questions. How do you plan to tie this building to >> the Little Red Schoolhouse? >> Yeah. So, the Little Red Schoolhouse is another aspect of So, I I I view it as a an ancillary um component of our of our
main operations. Um think of it as a um as a as a as a private rental space. Um my wife has a book club. Um they can have their book clubs. Anybody in the town can, you know, reserve it for for that purpose as well. So, you know, we can provide food um and drinks from the
main cafe into that private space and it just gives a a nice private space for about I think it's about um 12 to 16 people from from the sizing of it. Um I also see it being utilized for a few other um kind of events that we run. So
within the coffee world there's cupping events where there's tasting. So I'll use it for our training for training our baristas learning different techniques cupping new um beans that we're bringing into the main cafe. that way they can get get a good um safe taste profile
from it. Um but it's a it's a space that we'll utilize for you know smaller little more intimate events as well as some of the parts of the um cafe operations. member questions. >> If I could share something about that. So I do and I agree 100%. I have my my
youngest uh son um is a sixth grader and so you know riding their bicycles or encouraging anybody in the Creek View community or Lakeside uh to come. There is the um municipal has the fire access road as well as I believe it's a um an MUA um access road that runs behind the
property and that connects in off of Bankroth Road. So there's a there's a really nice stroll right down that fire access road that ends right in um right at our on our propert. >> You can get to it right off the Bankraftoft Road and you can access our
property um from that fire access road. And so when I think about, you know, how will the community utilize the space, um there's a number of people who currently walk their dogs along those along that fire access road that are coming in through the community already um along that path. And it just gives a nice
addition where people can walk down that way. So when I talk about like a sip and stroll and not >> it is not down Route 38, >> it is definitely not down Route 38. Um that but that >> that's what I was picturing. No, no, that fire, but that fire access road right into the community. It creates a
very nice creates a very nice path to to the um to the park. >> Um I I do a little concern about the use of that of that fire access road for just general I'm sure people do walk dogs on it. I've seen turkeys running
down that road, things like that. But there used to be a chain across that road. that it's >> I believe that fire I believe the chain was to prevent cars from going down because it is I mean it is it is it is
narrow for for vehicular traffic. Um >> is the chain still there? >> No, it is not. >> It's gone. >> And the chain's not on Route 38. There's two points of entry into that fire access road. One right off of Route 38, one right off of Bankrooft. Um the chain is no longer present. Um, and it has
been extremely well groomed in the last two weeks because there were some trees that had fallen over the hot over the winter. And so it is it is perfectly um navigable right now. >> Well, I'm sure the MUA was has some hand in that.
>> Yes. I'm I'm just trying to pull the members while we have the applicant up here to get the questions out of the way. Go ahead. Go ahead. >> Yes. Yes. I went upstairs. One of the things that
I would ask for my instructions office. >> When I say office, meaning for operations of like for my own personal usage. building a lot of discuss.
I just want to make sure There is no intention of having a resident residential use of that of that space. your arct. to get into the office area. >> Um, so
the originally there that door was intended to be utilized. I was going to put a sort of a a code on it that only I would have the ability to go in through. Um, but I wasn't trying to change the throughput of that space. um not not
know not knowing some of the things that you just stated about the architectural components, but just knowing that yes, there was a bathroom up there, there was a small kitchenette, and there was those two rooms that were there. >> Okay. Um,
>> so the reason why I'm asking >> I had a question. >> Yes. >> Um, the acupuncture um location. Do you know the Chris? Do you know the business hours that they >> they're I believe they are seven to to
10 I think 9:00 a.m. to 10 p.m. >> My obser my observations of um sort of the occupancy of that of the business. I've been there throughout those those hours. Typically, there's maybe one to two cars at at the most I've ever seen
was four cars um for that business. Um but not commenting on, you know, the usage of it, but that's sort of been the the number of cars that I've seen on the property. >> I am. owners. >> There's there's another ley that is in
the occupressure business. Um the property is owned by the same um corporation. >> So that is the same owner for both >> for both buildings. Yes. other members of the board.
I still stuck a little bit on this issue. Mr. Grac, have you spoken at all to the MUA on what their view is of encouraging public use of that easement as a thorough affair?
>> You're talking about the rear >> talking about the rear. Yeah, the fire you said was recently cleaned up and I suspect the MUA people did that because they visited frequently with vehicles, >> right? >> But the question but the question is
have you talked to the MUA and I asked this question out of ignorance. I don't know the answer but have you talked to them about what their view is of uh someone along there encouraging customers and to be and would be
customers. I I have not spoken with the NBA regarding that issue. I mean, it's going to be up to them to that fire, right? That's not our property. That's not our responsibility. I don't know if there's anything that we can do to stop, you know, walking down that business. He's certainly not going to
encourage that, but >> that was my question. >> Yeah, we're talking about the business owner encouraging use of an easement that is not his to start with and might be considered uh not not public property and therefore
trespassing. >> Right. Right. I don't think what intended to say was that he's going to be encouraging that you know but it's just not his responsibility. Right. That's the responsibility responsibility for that property. It's just
not his responsibility. >> Okay. >> We also own the flag. We own the parcel behind. >> We own the parcel adjacent to it. The municipality does. >> But you would do you would agree that you're not going to encourage people trespass along.
>> I had a conversation with uh Kathy um I made maybe a year and a half ago about that with understanding that certainly not um it's not integral to our um business plan to have the usage of that that access road. It's a nicity that you
know from the standpoint of like encouraging the active use of it from the community. An easy way to stroll down to the property. Um, but I'm certainly not advertising it um or creating maps that show my property with a with a with a walking path down there.
How nice that would be, however. >> But you're you're acknowledging the fact that people from the community use it often as well as build ports and yes, walk their dogs. There are there are new there are new door there are new there are new paths being created weekly. There are new
entry points off of multiple roads throughout the different communities to get onto that that access path. And there's a gorgeous well I don't know it's a cat cat hotel at the end of it which >> my dogs go nuts about [laughter] >> 16 cats.
>> Nice job. What part? What does the town own? >> We own the flagship lot that runs between that access road and the uh Baker res.
>> So the 38 side or We own the narrow strip as well as a lot that runs to Route 38. >> So that's considered public. >> It's considered township property. >> Yes. But it uses
generally public uses identify how it's being used, but it's pretty much natural. We don't go out there complaints, >> but yes.
Yeah, it I think it remains an issue out there that needs to be clarified much like the fire marshals occs >> and wouldn't that also be predicated by the the tables or the chairs and the furnishings. I mean, doesn't isn't that
part of the fire officials calculations? >> We'll get that number. >> Our marshals have calculators. >> They run the they run the square footage through their calculators and comes up with a number. other member questions.
I had a couple additional questions that have no additional questions just to clear up a few comments which I'll cover right now. Okay, just just run through this real quick. So let's talk about the load. proposal loading. Correct. Um and and so
you know the justification there is number one there's simply not enough space on the property for loading. But you don't imagine that there's going to be large truck deliver. Correct. >> Yeah. So one of the things as as noted we are not a we're not a we're not the we're we're the first um entity for the
Creek Turn Coffee Company. So we're not part of a franchise that requires deliveries like whether it's a Waw Wa or Starbucks that are coming from um from a central shipping point where they only have one So they have to have the loading zones. So all of our deliveries are essentially um you know small small
vans that you know we're picking up at you know the restaurant depot and other places and bringing those in um kind of on our on our schedule. So we don't have um we don't anticipate and we don't see large deliveries from Cisco or or forced
upon us by by those franchise vendors. And you'll do your best to make those deliveries or you know pickups or deliveries not >> correct from you know for pickups and deliveries. We can control the contracts that we make and how they how they access our our facilities. >> Okay. Comments C4 in Mr. Taylor's
letters you know request that you know trash pickup be done during daytime hours in order to neighbors 100%. So >> no outside storage on the property. Correct. >> Um there are two that are represented on there. I mean outside storage. Yeah. No
outside. >> No objections. >> Number C number that is required. You are requesting a waiver for the sidewalk and that's largely there are no other sidewalks in the neighbor. Correct. >> Correct. So on that on that side of
Route 38. So on the on the other side of from off of Bankraftoft where the burn boot camp, Bat Boys and the Diner, there is a very nice sidewalk that goes towards the um to to u Creek Park. However, on this side of Bankro, no
other properties um along that stretch have a sidewalk. So the or where the audience recommends a sidewalk along Route 38, um I not see value [clears throat] in creating 125 ft of sidewalk to nowhere. Basically, that's
not connected to any other properties along Route 38. >> Great. Um, let's talk briefly about signing. So, what you're proposing, there's an existing frame for freestanding sign, correct? >> Yes. >> And you're just to that sign. You're not changing the size or shape or location
of that sign, just >> correct. And you're also proposing sign building to be the same size area of sign that was previously there previously. Correct. >> The previously approved sign that was there. >> So you're not doing three signs along
the frontage. >> 25. >> Sorry everyone. >> Well, I didn't know I could get a 30-foot sign. >> [laughter] >> So, so the freestanding and facade signs will be refaced in their existing size
>> location. Right. And one last question. There's a comment in the burning review propos you know work with the board to figure out what you know what type of barrier they really
>> correct we we had discussed um um barriers whether they are cement planters or a combination of the cement planters and ballards to you know certainly protect the patio and allow you know sort of um access onto the patio from the rear parking.
>> And you know one last question the chairman did ask me about this idea of bank. Could you just explain that concept? >> Yes. So the um so there is there is there is a uh u there's land behind the acupressure b building that clear will
have the ability to add um and I'll let Joe comment on the number of spaces that we have there but I believe it's a 15 additional parking spaces it is our request to bank those spaces you know so allowing us to open the doors certainly [laughter] feel the the um how the how
the the current parking is being utilized Um once you know we we we certainly establish ourselves and start seeing like we have no parking which is certainly a detriment to any business. You know we want we we we have quotes to clear the you know clear that land
additional parking to kind of bring us up closer to the um the requirement. Um but we were looking to have those banked so that way you know we can at least get the business open and then recognize that you know we will certainly we certainly hope to have the demand and we certainly want to um that space to add
more parking. >> Well, we'll ask your engineer to do the math for us in terms of >> these bank spaces which savings account for parking spots, >> right? Well, I think the idea is he wants to get this business, right? And it's going to start, you know, it's
going to grow, right? So, so you can testify to this, you know, it's going to start as more of like a Starbucks kind of coffee shop type business and hopefully grow into, you know, a larger business offering, you know, addition to the extent that
addition he wants the flexibility you know we want approval for those cases tonight but he's not necessarily going to be clearing those correct >> I mean that is that is what we're that is our request >> so on the plans something anything that
is called a banked parking spot is um to be developed parking spot. >> Correct. >> Essentially, >> that's correct. So, there is a vinyl fence that runs along here. So, what we are proposing is that you know we are we
are improving the front parking area. Uh we are um adding removing there's a number of structures on the back of the property container and sheds are being removed. We are creating the new spaces
along the back of the property up to the final fence and all we were asking for is that we haveed that we want to bank those and then certainly as demand justifies it.
>> How many spaces are there without the banks? I've asked him to do the math when he gets up. >> Is the intent in terms of the trigger because the the parking lot design doesn't show existing trees to be
removed. There's no lighting. It's it's really just a dashed in placeholder. Is the intent to come back for minor site plan for that if it's needed in the future or are you requesting that? >> We're seeking we're seeking site plan
approval for the additional area this evening and we would hope that you know to the extent that you know maybe those spaces aren't constructed for six months or a year from now to maybe office or you know some sort of condition that would allow us to um to proceed with you
know paving those spaces clearing those that administration of approval in the event that we get approval tonight showing you pointing out those trees you know addressing lighting in that area. We did provide a lighting plan for the
rest of the parking lot on that just a minute. Um but but to the extent that that you you require or have to submit a revised plan, you know, showing lighting, removal of landscaping, parking in that bank area, >> you think it'd be fair for you guys to
expect as a business of what you're saying and then expand into the games >> gaming all those aspects of the business will be day one. Um, when I talk about the the the request for the bank spaces, you know, we're we're operating from 6:00 a.m. to 10 p.m., you know, that's
that's our that's our our plan. Um, for the most part, you know, you're going to still see the sort of way any sort of cafe restaurant um has occupancy. Morning traffic is still going to be people kind of coming in, you know, grabbing their coffee, eating a pastry,
having a breakfast sandwich, occupying some of our restaurant seats. And so we I believe that throughout the day, you know, we we have somewhat adequate parking, but we recognize that, you know, certainly as the patio gets um say the patio is activated, there's if
there's multiple events where something is running in the red schoolhouse and in the main cafe, you know, we will be certainly we can see ourselves being stretched without those bank spaces. So if that is occurring sort of on a regular basis or people are complaining
that there's never a parking spot there, we want to activate those spaces, you know, sooner than anything. But I mean, our goal has been just to convert the convert the property, open the open and establish the business and then recognize and, you know, make the
enhancements to it. So we want, you know, want to be here for, you know, if the browser shop was here for 50 years, we want to make sure that we can be here for 50 years. You brought up the ping pong table. >> Yeah, that's going to be their day one. All those >> you see this building like you know you guys are looking to get the audience of younger people to
>> Yeah. So when I when I when when I think about the um why why what attracts me about the space and what we're trying to build is for a place that I'll try to try to not talk negatively like like Funpex is great, right? But I don't want it to be an arcade. Like if anything I
want my kids not to be on a screen. I want them to be, you know, sort of enjoying, you know, enjoying being out with your family. So, you know, ping pong tables will will certainly create leagues so people can encourage to come and play. The dart boards are fantastic because they are, you know, they do the
automatic scoring as well as do some enhanced um kind of gameplay. So, it's a great place for, you know, families to come out to. um you know sort of what my wife and I have have always looked for a place where you know we could sit quietly and let the kids be run about a little bit a little bit loud and so
those spaces on the uh second floor of the atrium where the dart boards the shuffle boards and the ping pong tables are it encourages absolutely um and the same thing with um I have teenagers now that are constantly complaining about being bored they don't have a place that they can just go and you know be
themselves at and we certainly see that being a a potential destination where it's it's um being together in real life and hopefully enough distractions to put the phones down and get off of Tik Tok and um make
real life experiences with each other. >> Any other any other questions? Tony, any questions down there? Um we'll hold up the professional questions,
but can we hear from the engineer? Absolutely. >> Sir, do you swear or affirm the testimony you give tonight will be the truth of truth? Nothing of the truth. >> Yes, I do. >> Have you been uh you've not appeared before this morning? My memory, but maybe my memory is shotty.
>> I I did appear a little less than a year ago. >> My memory sh >> CBS warehouse project. >> Oh, you were on CBS? >> Yeah. Okay. >> Well, I should remember that. >> That's okay. That's okay. >> He didn't remember himself. >> Yeah, I told him. >> Yeah. >> Um,
>> all right. Give us give us your full name, your professional association, and your credentials. >> Yeah. Uh, Joseph Odenheimer with Collier's engineering and design, licensed engineer in the state of New Jersey. I have a bachelor of science degree with civil engineering technology. My license is active and
current and has been for over 20 years and I've been qualified in front of this board and dozen others throughout the state. >> Well, we'll find you qualified for this matter. >> Thank you. Proceed to testify. >> Thank you. >> According to your area of expertise,
were you presents? >> Yes, I was. >> Yes. >> Can you just And you prepared a plan? >> I did. Yes. >> Okay. Can you just give the board a brief overview of what exists today and what we're proposing? >> Sure. Um so this is again just a colored
picture of the overall site plan of the site. Um the main building in question lot is the ground brown buildings. Um the existing site has has actually has five of these sheds in the back. We're
removing three of them. There's three that are located in this area. So they'll be coming out which will actually um there's a building varants building covering condition. So those three sheds will actually bring us in
performance with the building coverage requirements. Um we have three access points out on state highway 38 um that serve both again lot 1.02 and lot three. It's kind of as discussed a little bit intertwined
as far as the access goes. What we're proposing from a a circulation point on the site is the east side of the building would be a oneway directional towards the rear. So, anybody that would come into the site that would be a
oneway direction to get towards the rear and then we would have a a two-way access in the middle that would allow to come to the rear and then and obviously to exit once you're on back there. How do you propose to
>> people that this is the way to go? >> Well, this will be a oneway. We do have a one-way sign proposed. We do have do not enter signs proposed in the rear so people don't go out that way. Um it's quite frankly it's generally wide enough
if somebody did go that way that two cars could pass. Um but there would be both signing for oneway direction, do not enter signs so that people wouldn't go that way. And There wouldn't really be any signage just in the in the sense that it's two-way um two-way access
>> that whole path aside from what's immediately in front of the building is all is all got to be is proposed as as gravel not paved. >> So the different I don't know if you can tell the different colors in the gray. The darker gray is the existing paved
areas. The lighter gray is the existing gravel areas. Um and we were proposing to maintain that. Now there will be some reconstruction of the pavement along the front bring the space to ADA compliance. The sidewalk along the front is going to have to be torn up just just really for
the ADA compliance piece of it. And then there will be some repaving in that area for the handicap spaces. the back of the site and and the lighter gray areas on the plan is existing gravel generally in
you know good condition more than sufficient for what we're proposing here which is passenger vehicle um traffic uh for the most part. Um so that would be that's the plan at this point is is no additional paving in the rear
behind this door. This red symbol is traction closure. Um, so it's it's kind of oriented in that direction. So the trash truck would circulate, come down the oneway aisle, be able to pick it up, has the fors in the front um to be able to lift that. There was a comment just
about it exact location. So we may tweak it a little bit, reorient it slightly, but that would be the intent. >> There's what looks to me like a propane tank back there. What uh what's what's going to happen? There is a tank there that that is remaining. It can be
relocated and and rotated as needed. >> Is it is it an actual gas supply tank? >> It is >> or just a relic but it's active. It's servicing. >> Usually when I see those I tend to see ballards around them
highly protected from vehicles. Right. And the uh the mixing of the of the tank in close proximity to the garbage refuge disposal area.
Could be could be a Could be a recipe for an accident as in trash truck gets tank tank explodes. Yeah, we again with the ball protection
we can look to reorient that tank in its location. Um we're under pressure that can be moved and rotated and then again if we have to reorient the track closure slightly and if we have to move it we will. I mean we was some of the comments in a professional letter about its
location and the orientation. The intent is that the track would come into the rear and have direct access to be able to to pick that up. So, if it's exactly there or if it ends up being moved kind of as we speak throughout, but it's generally
and it looks like, you know, I don't know if it's going to be I assume it's going to be a dumpster. It's going to be enclosed with the final closure and From what I can see on the plan, it looks like the tank is largely behind it. I don't see any track
is I I got the impression and correct me if I'm wrong and I could be wrong that that there were there of course a number of sheds back there and maybe one seat container that are going to be proposed to be moved but there's is there going to be
uh one or more sheds that are proposed to be maintained? There's we're keeping two. There's five total. There's three in this location here and then there's these two. These two are remaining. The other three are are being removed as part of plan.
>> These two being um the ones in the beige light color darker >> darker than [clears throat] not not brown. >> Yeah. >> And what are they being used for? Please continue.
>> Um Joe, just on that point, do you do you know if permits were ever granted for those sheds or are you requesting variances for those now? >> Are they not? Are they not in compliance? >> Uh, I don't I don't believe they are. It looks like you're It looks like one
is within the accessory structure setback and for a commercial site. I don't >> know. What I found more than just one
of the things as well as 200 square ft. I was out there today. Okay. So those are going to go as far as we
did allow at one time. So way back then they were 15 >> and you have issues. >> Well, it looks like both are into the 10 foot. Oh, no. I'm sorry. Yeah. So,
the one >> the one is >> the one looks compliant. The other one is in the side and the rear. >> Yeah. This one This one is more than 10 ft from the rear. approaching 5.
>> So the was it product storage car Kathy on the other one? I know one one of the sites already had a use variance. So we had talked about it needing a use variance. on 537. >> Yeah, that one already had a use
variance. So, the additional building. Um, >> yeah. And I think there's some penalties on on that one and some differences that we may uh without getting into it because standard devarian is
for a principal use or principal structure. So, if it's a second building that is still part of the like if they wanted to build a shed and put a ping pong table in there, that would be part of the principal use and it would be an
additional principal structure without questioning the use variance. >> Um, you know, if it's a log mower and something else, we may want to circle back and have Bob double check the case law on that. Um, I think we need to talk
about the parking and see whether or not we get through everything tonight and that may give us an opportunity to um address the issue. >> Yeah, I think I think we have to put these sheds down. We'll put
several other areas, the tank, the garbage container in the same area down for some further discussion. But let's continue. Um so as part of the parking circulation. Um
we're proposing the parking spaces that we have proposing parking bumpers along. I know there's requirement for a lot. We're seeking a design wiz. Um
there was also a discussion in or a comment in one of the professional letters that talk about two-way access in the middle drive. >> I raised that question earlier >> because of the configuration [clears throat] of what's out there with the existing buildings and so forth. We
get a little bit of a pinch point in between these two buildings. There's a small curve that comes out from this building. Um there's a small curve that comes out from this building and we're about 22 ft of separation. Typically you would have
24 ft or 25 ft. Um 22 feet in my opinion is more than sufficient for two cars to pass. There are residential streets that are 20 ft wide that you know can pass two cars that are permitted on the RSI. So it's not unheard of especially because we don't have other maneuvers in
this area. We don't have cars backing out at the pinch point location. um the parking space is here and every day we back down go that way. So having a 22 foot um kind of pinch point there I think is still sufficient for two cars to pass. Um so that's why we propose
that remains as two-way drive. >> Can I ask you a question there? >> Yeah, >> I go to that parking lot once a week >> and those spots right there between the buildings that a lot of people want to use to get into that, you know, >> chiropractic,
>> right? Everybody wants to get in those spots right there because the entry Yeah, because the entry is right there. >> Okay. Is there any chance that like and that's really tight like like at night like you know pulling in and out of there like so if you pull in there >> and you go to back out and there's cars
and you're in the last spot there's cars to your left >> is the chiropractor the next >> What I'm saying is that with all the parking that you're trying to build around the place >> you think that it might be worth it to
just like get rid of those few spots right there so then not a problem. There's more cars going to be coming in there and it's tight. Now, >> um I'm going to address the parking count issue separately. Um from an
maneuverability standpoint, we have over 26 ft from parking spaces to the building typically. I mean, 24T drive 25 ft is is permitted. So, we're at 26. So, I would indicate, you know, in my opinion, there's enough maneuverability
there to that maneuver to back out without issue. Um, you know, and it's compliance with, you know, driveby requirements and so forth to have that. Um, have you given thought to [clears throat] reversing the travel direction to avoid the pinch point as a
two-way street? In other words, you come in off 38, you make a right hand turn after the acupuncture, you were down next to the little old schoolhouse down past the building and you go out the other side. >> Yeah. My biggest two-way traffic on the
on the pinch point. >> My biggest concern with that is [clears throat] well, two points. >> One is that pinch point width is very similar to the width that we have over here because the building is 25 ft from the property line. The gravel is off the
property line just a little bit. So we're in that same 23 foot range for the gravel. Number one. >> Yeah. But the pinch point, that's the left turn and the right turn, too. >> And the the second reason that we kind of opted for this direction is if you
come across the park here and there's no spaces, there's no point. The relief is you have to leave or now you got to back up and try and come to the rear instead of being able to circle the building and access the other that would be available.
>> All right, I hear you. Not sure I'm convinced by it, but go ahead. >> Um, >> I think that that's all we got on circulation. Why don't we talk about parking? >> Okay. So, so parking count. So, on our initial on our application that we have put
forth and and and on the plans that were submitted, um, and again, as you kind of heard, it's it's similar to coffee shop, but it's not exactly a Dunkin' Donuts or or something. So, we used a a parking category um of really the indoor
recreation. Indoor recreation is a is a category in your ordinance. And we kind of take took the whole building um not counting the office uh but as as indoor recreation instead of um a restaurant use. Um some of the comments in the
professional street letters indicated what what would be the difference if we use Um so um on our plan that we submitted initially with the indoor recreation use, we anticipated that we needed 46 parking spaces
um as part of the the plan from a parking standpoint. counting, you know, since we have this this intertwined using this this um agreement cross agreement that we have 30 spaces that would be constructed as part of the plan. And then that gets us into the
bank spaces where we show that when we demonstrate that we can add 16 additional which would bring us into the compliance of the the 46 that we initially calculated. So the bank spaces as shown as has been discussed just showed that we have the ability we have
the location to add more as needed um but not on day one to help preserve some of the green space and then as the demand um builds up for the business then they have the option to do that expansion. Um because of the comment about the
restaurant we did go back and um evaluate what the what the parking requirement would be with the restaurant. We had anticipated um we had calculated 46 being required and the if you use the
restaurant portion which is based on 90 seats of restaurant um and then the recreation is broken out separately. The total required would be 56. So um using restaurant we would require 56 bases.
We're proposing 30. We have bank 16 which would give us 46. So, we'd be seeking the um seeking relief for 10 spaces. Now, that parking count also includes, you know, the parking requirements for the acupressure site. So, everything's been included, the
acupressure site, the buildings on there, the um recreation restaurant, the number of employees, the office space within um within the proposed building and um and the acupressure place. So, that would be the parking for the whole
site. 56 required. We have 46 under recreation use, 56 under reference reference use and that provides spaces for the acupuncture as well. >> Correct. That includes
>> what are the acupuncture numbers standing alone? >> It's it's nine and that's a se completely separate use we um from the ordinance that we put there. How are the ones on the gravel delineated? >> Um
primarily with the parking bumpers is the clearest indication. Um that's why you know well number one we use them to protect whatever but also you just have an open gravel lot. Those people tend to take up a lot more space. So using the parking bumpers will help
these these concrete varieties. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Getting back to your comment about I was out there today and it was pouring rain. Yes. And um there were a lot of puddles
in that gravel. I mean I I didn't even didn't even uh count the number, but uh just you said that you thought the gravel was uh was adequate. Today's lucky day for me it was pouring rain.
You could see the grading issues that exist out there in that kind of weather. And so I'm wondering how you propose to address that if you are. So I as well was out there this afternoon. Um I did
notice there is a puddle in this, you know, southeast corner of the property. That was the >> that was the one that I would consider a ple >> another another big one back by the tank. Um so you know as far as addressing that why don't we remove the
the sheds and that are out here. I mean, you know, as part of the clean up, we are going to redress as needed the gravel areas if you're doing lowlying things, but the the gravel itself isn't in bad condition. There's a lot of rudding and it's it's not stable. It's
it's compacted. It's been there for a period of time. So, based on that, I think it's sufficient. and without, you know, with the the redressing, regrading a little bit that needs to be done, just to touch up, which they'll be out there doing anyway. Um, you know, they would clean, you know, we propose to clean up
those uh those locations. >> Is there any requirement for charger? >> So, retailers with less than 25 parking spaces would be exempt. So they would have to comply once they exceed 25
spaces on either lot. A question on the parking as well. So hopefully business takes off and is crushing it. Is there a potential to go even further past that bank parking lot to go up towards
>> going towards 38 where the light gray is in the picture where >> so um at this point? No, I mean, uh, a couple reasons. Number one, and even as far as, and I I guess and Chris would have to address this. I would think if there's an absolute demand that that
would be an option, um, we'd have to evaluate her coverage that's on this lot. I think we're up against it. Um, with the proposed uh, lot that we have. So, that we would have to come back and and address that. And then as far as it, you know, I know we talked about the bank parking support too and as far as
the lighting and stuff, we'd be happy to provide, you know, again, just just to show and demonstrate that we can meet the lighting requirements and things like that or the bank parking if needed. You know, if that were granted as part of the approval, um we can demonstrate as resolution compliance that that we
would meet everything that needs to be met as far as that would go. Um since I kind of just mentioned lighting, we do have lighting. Time to move on to lighting. >> Yeah. Although my observation, you're probably halfway through, not even halfway through the comments of the
engineer and our planner. >> Um, we're Yeah, we've been through quite a few. There's a few that were just asked we agree to comply with certain things that we object to, you know, and discuss. The point this point I'm going to make is that this
we see a lot of plans here and uh this one is not a fully formed plan my my personal one member's view there a lot of the issues that we've been asking you about um just as simple as what's the occupancy
for fire purposes and how does that relate to uh to uh to the parking. There's a lot of 100 people in there. What does that do to the parking lot requirement? >> Parking lot requirements per the ordinance.
>> Yeah, I understand that. But uh but at the same time if you uh if you've got a large capacity or large volume that that is going to reflect on parking situation. You've got issues with the
gravel that we've already talked about. We've got parking flow issues that we've talked about. Got signage issues that we talked about and um issues with the with the gravel or the pavement in the front. None of these are directly addressed
in your report or your presentation, but they are subject to questions by our professionals. What I was going to suggest is that It would benefit both sides
to take a 30-day journey and to sit down with our professionals in a serious way and hammer out a clearer plan than the one that's here because we're talking about, oh, we'll we'll
we'll throw some ballards in here. We'll we'll we'll address we'll figure out a way to address the tank issue. will figure out a way to deal with these sheds. These should be items that are already on a plan that we can stamp as
approved and not have 50 changes that have to be put on the plan. We we we're entitled to see a plan that is fully formed and reasonably close to
a final product. So there's to be done. Uh they're easily understood and I don't I don't see that at this point. I mean I see that disagree. >> You can wait till I finish and then you can speak. Um
this plan is a very difficult plan to to look at because it isn't fully formed. doesn't really address the questions of our engineer and you're trying to address some of them tonight and I appreciate that but that isn't
reflected on the plan that we have and so the the need to have an accurate plan is is is of utmost importance as you know that's why I think we need to take time to sit with professionals and
work out all of these issues that we're talking about. Um, and I'm not sure we even understood the bank parking area plan until now. I certainly didn't. That's why I asked the question, but that's just one example. I I think
first of all, the banked parking um is a I don't want to say it's a standard, but it's an industry we it's done. It's not it's not out of left field something that's completely the fact that it wasn't necessarily under >> it might be
>> but but we proposed it that way >> it isn't a common >> and that's why we explained it and that's why we tried to explain it I think you we talked we don't 100% see an issue with the tank if it's something that the board has a concern with we're happy to address that so the fact that
the tank wasn't necessarily addressed on this plan we didn't have a proposal to do anything with it because based Bas on the location of the trash enclosure, based on the fact that we could add the ballers as discussed or mentioned, we
felt that this is pretty well identified as to what's proposed. We're not we're we're also up against it ourselves because we have substandard lots, we have existing buildings, existing parking, like we're trying to conform to
something that's existing. This isn't a groundup, brand new, fresh site, right? So, we're trying to fit into what's already existing. I think we have it identified on our plan. We talk about the reconstruction of the
sidewalk up front of the pavement in that area. We show the gravel maybe, you know, we have the outdoor seating area. Um, we can add ballers. I don't think adding ballers is a deficiency in the
plans, >> right? Like like in other words, I think the plan is is approval, right? There are a few tweaks that we're going to make, but you know, for example, you know, you mentioned the gravel area, we're seeking a design waiver for that. Sidewalk, we're seeking a design waiver for that. You know, to the extent we have to add ballards, I don't think
that's something that, you know, needs to be necessarily seen, but of course, we'd like to see it, right? >> Yes, we would like to see point. We don't want to we don't want to waste another month, you know, just to add some dollars to a plan and come back 40 dollars on a plan, right? Like I I genuinely believe I think Chris,
>> Mr. Graia, you know, I'm talking about more than a few dollars on on a on an outdoor debt. I'm talking about numerous issues that have not been developed on
this plan. And we're entitled to see that level of detail. And we're not we're not forced to say, "Okay, we'll put some ballards on the to use the Ballard example again." We're not forced
to put the ballards on there. You put five and we've come out and look at it and say, "No, you should have put 12." you know, >> that's that's why I'm suggesting for your own benefit,
not ours, for your own benefit, to sit down with our experts and come up with a a a final hopefully [clears throat] plan that is fully detailed, which this is in this me board member's opinion not fully
detailed. >> That's what I'm asking you to do. >> Would it be helpful to The difficulty I have with that um is that it's still not on the plan and we're we really need a document at the
end of the day that has all these agreements on it. Now it's we often look at a plan and tweak it, but this is more than tweaking. We're talking about some numerous things here. Um we have
three three six pages from our engineer and uh similar number of pages from our from our um planner. Um and those numbers should be reduced by a
meeting with your engineer to come up with these things. And then your engineer can produce a plan which incorporates all those things and theoretically should breeze through at the next meeting, shouldn't it? >> But this one doesn't have that that that
level of detail. I think it'll also give us an opportunity to address the shed issue and if they want to request relief >> course of course >> for those to remain and then whether that is >> if there's additional variances or move a shed to avoid a variance problem or if
you have one you can't escape it because it's it's just not allowed. >> All of those things can be discussed and this is not the this is not the forum to do that kind of engineering and and we have And then we have you
producing a plan which they've already blessed and agreed to by virtue of your meetings as opposed to us going through and trying to imagine on the plan what is necessary. Where's the tank going to go? Well, you
told me they'll you'll find a place for it. Not not good enough. It needs to be placed. needs to be put in a place where our engineers agree and our planner agrees that it's an appropriate place, appropriately protected
and so on. That's what I'm asking. >> Sure. How does somebody >> Yeah, there would there's a rear door that would Okay. I guess Yeah. This
So that's not days. >> Just real quick, as far as DOT, we did submit a submit a letter of no interest based on the trips that that are generated from this use. Um, we submitted a letter of no interest to DOT and um just waiting for the for the
response from them that there should not. >> What are the trip what are the trips generated by since you raised the issue? So, our office put together a trip memorandum um [laughter]
and the trips generated um as a comparison to the from the existing the existing site had a trip generation of of 81 uh peak hour trips. Uh let me re um for the weekend peak
hour the existing [clears throat] shopping center as it's classified uh code 820 in the IT manual um weekend peak hour was 81 trips and again for it which is you know tells tells you the the rates of the trips
this category is difficult to to um pinpoint. So we utilized um a brewery tap room. So code 971 which is a brewery tap room which is what we thought kind of had the similar function um on a
weekend peak hour that's 176. So weekend peak hour is plus 95 trips um in the peak hour. PM peak hour is minus 5 and AM peak hour was a was a a zero um net
net change in the trips. I'll let the I'll let the engineer the planner think about the impact of those numbers. >> Again, I'm a big advocate Um business has Is this
place I just want you understand that these things and I'm just I have all my approvals from them but understands outside
all the time. Mr. Brac, my my question still stands. >> What are we going to do? Um, let me >> and board. So, what I think I started to say while you were still speaking and I apologize for interrupting. Um, so I
wanted to politely disagree with your interest of delaying for 30 days. Um, >> I guess against the >> delay delay would be the wrong word to use. >> Well, to put it on the calendar for 30 days, however that um I recognize that it's
>> use those 30 days. >> No, no. And I want to I want to address some things that I want to just make sure are clear to all the board members. So we met with the EDAC twice um leading up to the to the application submission. So we had conversations about the plan
um including the idea of the banking of the parking spaces. So that was discussed with your professionals and that's where we were proceeding forward with that. We had discussions with professionals about you know the different buildings that were on the premises and we certainly agreed to remove the ones that you know certainly
to enhance the parking. Um there are two once again that simply stated could we remove those possibly. Um you know we kept one because part of the discussion was hey tell us about everything you might want to do in the next 10 years
this business and so the ability for us to potentially become more of a full service kitchen. We may need an external u refrigeration system. So keeping the footprint this is a potential location where that refrigeration system might go to. kind of as the lessons learned from
a loss on Martin Highway. So certainly there was there was multiple discussions leading up to what was submitted. Um I would also mention that our submission was um in advance of what we were hoping to
be on a I think a June potential meeting or a July meeting. So the um committee has had access to our um information and we certainly didn't receive the professional letters until last Thursday. So I think the attempt was let's address these in meeting and
certainly through conversation things were highlighted that were not certainly not represented but we had discussed what we could do. So certainly reotating the tank moving for certain things um you know the whole idea of the bank parking spaces came out was was an
output of the evac meeting. So, um, so I did want to certainly push back on that while it may not be shown and I I do agree with your your statements that it was thought out, it was discussed with the professionals and um, you know,
certainly you know there are certain things that you know from the meeting we are in agreement with. We want to proceed forward. We want to um, improve this property to the best of our abilities given the constraints of the property. Um, and you know, certainly we're trying to show that um, in the
conversations that we're having today. >> And we want you to do all of that and but uh, at the end of the day, we're going to need a we're going to need a plan that's going to be on file and it's going to be the basis for construction.
>> Yeah. But the only >> that that covers all the bases. Now, you may very well have I'm sure you did meet with and maybe even professionals, but Despite that, the professionals have a
multitude of questions which many of which need to be uh the resolution of these questions needs to be indicated on the plan and there are so many uh for this particular
plan that it causes me to suggest get together with the professionals over the next 30 days and production by your engineer of the final product which shows everything. What to do with the pavement problems in the front, how to
deal with this debate that we've had about parking, uh the debate about circulation. >> There's no debate about the circulation. Sir, >> if you and you think what was person the way they are oriented by the time
that they realize there's no parking and circulation idea as far as should we consider this it was very well considered. So this is the ideal circulation both from the truck as well as a natural progression of traffic through the property.
I don't think anyone's going to go that way. When you come in the middle driveway, you will see whether or not any of those five spaces are open. >> Proceed straight down the middle. Everybody's going to come everybody will come straight down the middle which is that area that is slightly narrower than
required by ordinance and that was a topic of conversation but if I can just I was just going to I'll just finish mine >> to the chairman's point and we did have meetings and we said listen >> putting things in three months six months from now you need to put
everything on the plan identifying the sheds aren't identified there was no relief requested for those aren't. We found out tonight, yes, we are proposing to keep those. We went through and discussed it. It wasn't until about 90 seconds ago that we found
out that there's some potential for that to become a remote refrigeration unit at some point in the future. That is not referenced in your application. It's not shown on your plans. You would have no vested rights in your approval for there to be a refrigeration unit in that
location. So, it's those and we understand that you are not CVS. You are not Starbucks or WAWA. This is not something that you do all the time and that's why we've tried to walk you through this. But the only things that you get to do in that building and on
that site are the exact things that are shown on your site plan. It is a contract between you and the board. Nothing more, nothing less. The board can't after the fact change it and say, "You know what? We think you should only have nine ping pong tables if they
approve 10. It is it is what it is at that point. So I I think it's fair if the chairman and the board members have questions to try to clean the plans up. If you do have a potential expectation that that may be a refrigeration unit,
then it should say existing shed to remain potential refrigeration unit and then it can be evaluated accordingly. >> Mr. So um certainly we have no intention of this refrigeration and I would be happy to come back to the board at the
time that that we are warranted to do and sit through the process. I was responding to comments that were made about future potential asking for everything now which creates the illusion that there's no plan. >> Right. >> Right. But I think we're just trying to
get clarity and help walk you through the process of well, you know, in a year or two we may want to do this. And Kathy and I and Paul and we all said show those things now because this is as you're finding out this this process is this. Unfortunately, you
have to go by the same set of rules as a Waw Wa because the ordinances, the driveway widths, the lighting, the storm water, everything else. This is an odd and unique site that is trying to host
an odd and unique use. None neither of these fit into a a neat category. So having there be nebulous provisions and site features I don't think is fair to the board. So I think if we give it its due time, this can get worked out into
into a good solution. >> [clears throat] >> No matter how much that is not presented to these folks and if they're not comfortable with something that's their choice%
We're looking out for your best interest whether you recognize it or not. >> Understand Mr. McCay and their professionals. We do appreciate the time. We do appreciate um the audience that we've received. Um it is challenging as a small business to deal
with government. I'm not I recognize that we're not CVS, we're not Starbucks. We certainly anticipate growing, but I certainly don't want the reputation of Hannesport to be not friendly to small businesses that are trying to enter and create a market here. >> And you should uh you should know that
we are quite friendly to businesses. All you need all you need to do is look at the auto dealership and how we tried to deal with their business plans and other small business. And I think if the if we had been in front of their on the agenda, we
may have you may have more energy to keep going through the plan as we were discussing. >> Let me tell you something. We've sat here till the we hours plans time of night which is quarter to 10 on the clock
here. Has got nothing to do with the suggestion that [snorts] I made. did it for your own good, for your benefit, so that we can get you a plan that you can live with for a lot of years forward.
So, what shall we do? Yeah, we'll we'll uh we'll table um if the board would make or if one of the board's professionals would make an announcement so that we don't have to renotice to the extent that the relief that we're seeking is not changing. Um would the board be willing to make a you
know a notice at at this meeting here tonight um to any members of the public that we're tableabling our application for 30 days to next month? >> Do that. >> You need to make a motion to continue the to whatever the next meeting date is.
>> September 2nd and 6th. >> Yeah, they don't have to renotify. >> All right. So, may I have such a motion? >> So, move second. >> Roll call.
>> Second that was >> uh Mrs. Gilmore. >> Yes. >> Mr. Ji, >> yes. >> Mrs. Yes, >> Mr. Narita. >> Yes, >> Mrs. L. >> Yes, >> Mr. Morelli. >> Yes, >> Mr. R. Murphy. >> Yes, >> Miss Costco. >> Yes.
>> And Mr. McKay. >> Yes. And before you go today, I'm I'm happy to take a break if you want. If you want to or call our professionals in the morning to set up, >> we do Zoom. Whatever works best for them. We're happy to respond and help
move it along. All right. >> All right. Thank you. Appreciate it. All right. Um the board uh the Paula the EM Motors versus Hesh
EM Motors Hannesport matter 26-05. Uh that is at Mr. Le's request. >> Yes. Um well on to because we have the polic to dismiss without prejudice. Uh but he also
requested that it be dismissed without prejudice. And he does have an appeal of the uh uh zoning permit denial that could not be heard this month and shall be most
likely heard in September also. >> All right. We'll try to put that on the agenda for September. And his site plan >> approval is withdrawn. >> Yes. >> Um without prejudice. >> And if he gets his
be successful on his appeal of the violation, then he'll move forward, he says, with the site plan. >> Correct. >> Okay. Everybody understand what we're doing there?
This is the old Red Cross motor building. All right. >> All right. Um let's move along to um to minutes. >> There's no minutes. I was not able to finish them.
>> All right. >> Resolutions. Uh we have resolution 2026 18 which is a resolution denying use and preliminary site plan approval on
the application uh for stack outdoor storage of pod containers um at the applicants uh industrial berry site and lot
excuse me block 96 lot 2.04 resolution is rather lengthy, but I'm assuming everybody's read it. And um can I have a motion to approve it as drafted or if there are questions say so
just so I can make it clear the vote who can vote on this is Mr. R. Murphy, Mr. Mc, Mr. Holden, and Mr. Mcai. C >> uh okay, C Murphy is here. One, two, three, four, five. Okay.
Roll call. >> Need the motion. >> Motion. Motion to approve as drafted. >> No, it's got to be >> got to be one of the people who voted >> that I just voted that just stated. R
Murphy Mccay, Mr. Holden, or Mr. McC Thank you. Second. >> I'm sorry. >> And you Mr. Holden? >> Yes. >> Okay. Mr. R. Murphy.
>> Yes. >> Mr. Holden. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mai. >> Yes. >> And Mr. McKay. >> Yes. >> All right. The uh next resolution and last resolution is 2026-19.
This is a resolution granting front yard fence height setback variance block 100.05 lot 21 the residents of Mr. and Mrs. Ch. And I have a motion to approve this
resolution unanimously granted. >> So move call. >> Mrs. Leen, >> yes. >> Mrs. Gilmore, >> yes. >> Mrs. Tory, >> yes. >> Mr. Narita, >> yes. >> Mr. Morelli,
>> Mr. Tracoi, >> yes. >> Mr. R. Murphy, >> yes. >> Miss Costco, >> yes. >> And Mr. M. >> Yes. And Mr. Vay, can we amend the agenda to include that resolution 2026-
20 for the dismissal without prejudice for EM voters? >> Yes. I guess we can have a motion to amend the >> the agenda. >> The agenda. Can I have that motion?
and second >> and move. >> Mrs. Leen, >> yes. >> Mr. Narita, >> yes. >> Mrs. Tory, >> yes. >> Mr. Morelli, >> yes. >> Mr. Traco, >> yes. >> Mr. R. Murphy. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Gilmore.
>> Miss Costa. >> Yes. >> And Mr. McKay. >> Yes. >> All right. U correspondence. There's two items. Is anybody interested in talking about either one? Otherw otherwise a motion to receive and file would be in order.
>> One more second, Mr. McKay. We have to vote on the resolution. That was just voting on the add. >> I'm sorry. I should have just uh should have should have asked for a roll call. >> Um I'll make a motion to approve uh
resolution 2026-20. Yes. Second. Now, >> Mrs. Costco, >> yes. >> Mrs. Gilmore, >> yes. >> Mrs. Tory, >> yes. >> Mr. Novarita, >> Mrs. Leen, >> yes.
>> Mr. uh Morelli, >> yes. >> Mr. Tracoi, >> yes. >> Mr. R. Murphy. >> Yes. >> And Mr. McN. >> Yes. >> Now, correspondence. Um,
motion to receive and file as an order. No one wants to talk about either one. >> I'll make that motion. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Second. >> Uh, all in favor? >> I against hearing none.
>> All right. Professional comments. >> No chance. [laughter] >> No chance after tonight. >> More. You have board comments. just asked a question about sidewalks.
We've discussed >> holding the line on sidewalks on sidewalks. >> A timely question. >> Are we holding the line on sidewalks? Is there >> I was trying to look at the map and my question would be is there anything and
I know a small business like that is not wa affordability for him to put sidewalks in there whether you can even do it with the elevation that he has there. something because we are you look at the town as a
whole you know you take creek creek road where the starts there kind of we're establishing that front and we own that lot next to it for low in so we can get them to do that then move it down to them other lots are
available it's going to make them lots more attractable for business to come in that they have foot traffic and all the buildings coming in, all these apartments coming in. If we can link somehow to 38 down, it makes perfect sense for our business to come in. But
it's it's just difficult. And I don't know, it's you can't make somebody that's selling coffee, for example, >> to put $100,000, >> especially when there's an alternative mode of transportation at the rear of the site and he's leasing the site.
>> Exactly. Lisa, >> if this was Starbucks, if this was vacant and it was Starbucks with a new parking lot and new grading and DOT improvements, >> even though there aren't sidewalks on either side, >> it's almost a no-brainer.
>> My question, that might not be the right place to [clears throat] ask this question, but is there I don't know. I >> pay for it yourself and install it. >> Yeah, you don't [laughter] record. >> My thought was He needs to bank use
those banked parking spaces that maybe that was conditional on the business is doing so well. You need to expand your parking, cutting down trees. Now you got to put in some kind of sidewalk. >> But how does that work? He's renting that that space. Shouldn't the owner of
that property be responsible for making that type of improvement? Because when Chris >> Absolutely. when Chris grows out of that space and now moves the correct >> the owner now has so it's it's the guy that sitting in the back of the room's responsibility in my opinion but to your
point the question I have is we have these developers that are going to come into town and build low low income housing or housing in general is there a way for us to say hey part of the agreement is you got to give some improvements to the town outside of your
little space. Is that something that's >> to your point feasible? >> I I don't know that that's going to be in this room. It's probably your township committee or if it hits the state for a grant or something. I don't know. >> So, the the board can ask anybody to put sidewalks in in front of their site. And
when they're developing a new site and they have new DOT curb and driveways and they can make the grading work, >> it almost becomes a no-brainer. We want to have sidewalks everywhere eventually. A very small site like this, the slopes, it wouldn't be accessible.
I I don't want to talk specifically about this one, but a small infill site where they're just changing it from one thing to another. Sometimes it's really impractical. There are occasionally grants that come along for sidewalks to be constructed in key areas. When I look
at this and we've actually the town has talked about doing some rehabilitation or or redevelopment designation in this vicinity part of that equation to stimulate some reinvestment here may be actually a defined public path in the
rear and I haven't that has never been discussed with anybody but I know that township committee this board everybody is focused on parks bikes walkability economic development and they can all be a win-winwin. So, I think keeping it in
our forefront and as grants come along and other opportunities, we try to nibble away at some of those missing pieces and get it everywhere we can where it makes sense and somebody's developing something new. >> If we have a developer that's on the southern end of town that's building 10
houses, 50 houses, we can't say to them, "Hey, we want you to put a sidewalk in over here." >> No, that's called an offtrack improvement. And the municipal land use law doesn't doesn't allow for that. >> But we make them put in their sidewalks in front of their property.
>> Sure. >> That part I got. I just meant >> Yeah. >> Is there a way to leverage >> endowments and donations and stuff from developers for big
>> build from a developer? I mean, so there are ways to creatively come up with these solutions, but yeah, like Scott, >> you can't take fall. >> I have to say just for me, I kind of
feel bad now a little bit >> because he's just a guy with a plan that wants to help. And I like his plan. I like his ide. It's a great plan. >> And I feel bad that he left thinking that we're not on the side because we
are on the side again. Scott's absolutely right. He knew what the expectations were when we had our discussion to put it on the plane. He needed to update the plan
>> and his professional should >> they at the meeting >> this is an active application. Going back to the pedestrian county network is being developed by the county regional planning division with
the county department. So if you have ideas about fire approval form should occupy
>> you know eventually believe my understanding is that all fire marshals will will issue occupancy permits for for public spaces. It's a different use >> and in most cases occupancy is a separate
it is a it is a UCCC a building code issue that really is normally not a board issue because for 99.5% of all projects we don't even need to know occupancy
because if if Our ordinance for a bar says one per three seats. We just count how many seats there are. There can still be standing people, but our ordinance says
for retail it is this many spaces per 250 square feet or this many per thousand square feet. So whether there are 85 or 105, it's not actually part of any of our land use or zoning
requirements. We asked specifically because his business plan said 100, an occupancy of at least 100, and we have a really weird site and a weird mix of uses that don't fit neatly
into any of our categories. If this was a another antique store or an art store. We have our retail standard. Parking wouldn't have been any issue, but it's it's weird. >> All right. I think we ought to terminate
the discussion. >> Yeah. Sorry. >> Um All right. Any other comments? U there's no public here. The record can reflect to offer any public comments. And so that leaves a journal. >> I'll make that motion. >> Second. >> Second.
>> All in favor? >> Hearing none.