Sir, whenever you're ready. All right. Call to order. Uh, in accordance >> in accordance with the open Public Meetings Act, NJSA 104-10, I hereby announce that adequate notice
and electronic notice of this meeting was provided in a notice dated January 14, 2026 that was sent to the Asbury Park Press, Two River Times, posted on the bulletin board, and on the main access door town hall, filed in the clerk's office, and
posted on the township's website. Uh www.homedelltownship.com. Uh please rise for the pledge of >> allegiance. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God
indivisible with liberty for all. And remain standing for a moment of silence. Honor the military police and the first responders. Thank you. >> Okay. Um, >> first order of business.
>> Uh, there's no resolutions. >> Roll call. >> Oh, sorry. >> Mr. Connelly >> here. >> Mr. Krian >> here. >> Mr. Vanderham >> here. >> Mr. Fagen >> here. >> Miss Plauses.
Miss Plauses is absent. Uh Mr. Bell >> here. >> Uh Mr. Man >> here. >> Mr. Sberman >> here. >> Uh Mr. Dors and is absent. And Mr. Rob Robbins >> here.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. Um All right. First order of business, we have the the meeting minutes from 113 2026. >> Um, >> any comments or um any corrections?
>> No. Then if none and second >> motion second >> eligible to Mr. Connelly, >> yes. >> Mr. Vanderham, >> yes. >> Mr. Fagan, >> yes. >> Mr. Man, >> yes. >> Mr. Antinucci. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Bell. >> Yes. >> And Mr. Sberman. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Uh, minutes are accepted. The next minutes are from the site visit at the Vonnage property at 117 to2026.
Um, is I wasn't there. Is anyone there have any questions or comments on the minutes? >> No. I don't know what you're referring to, but um I have some uh photos from the site visit that I'd like to share. >> Well, right now we just talk about the
minutes. We'll get to that after. >> No problem. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> All right. Anyone uh you have any questions or issues on the minutes? Wes? >> Oh, okay. Motion to accept. >> Motion second. >> Eligible to vote. Mr. Fagan, >> yes.
>> Mr. Man, >> yes. >> Mr. Antonucci, >> yes. >> Uh Mr. Robbins, >> yes. >> And Mr. Under for the record, minutes for January 13th and January 17th, 2026 were successfully adopted. >> No. Well,
>> she's here. Yeah. >> Do we need to announce that she's here now? Roll call. >> Yeah. One will make a move. Uh for the record, 7:05, Miss Plaus walked in. Thank you. Okay. Okay.
Item one, PB number 2025 G23 Main Street Urban Renewal LLC. The applicant 23 Main Street, Homeell, New Jersey, Block 13, Lot 15, has applied to the planning board for the property located at which is the former Vonnage headquarters. the
property which is owned by 23 Main Street uh Propco LLC, an affiliate of the applicant for preliminary and major final major subdivision, preliminary major site plan and final major site plan for phase one known as Azora at Homeell.
Uh at this time, I'm going to give the mic to Carl, the the attorney for the applicant. >> Yes. Good evening, Chairman. Carl Ken on behalf of the applicant. Um, thank you. And again, appreciate everyone showing
up for the site visit. I thought it was rather productive. I think people got a good view of the property, better understanding of this layout and and some of the features that were of concern. Um, do you want me to address the letter, Marty? >> Sure. >> Okay. Um so as everyone is probably
aware because everyone's been paying close attention this application um at the council meeting the town council meeting on Thursday there was a discussion about alternatives to using the wastewater treatment facility on the property. Um we have been working with the town committee and there is an
agreement uh which is a an amendment to the redevelopment agreement that anticipates putting in a force main to connect to the beayshore uh system. Um, and that has been submitted to the board. Unfortunately, didn't get the document to me until late this
afternoon. That was submitted by a letter from myself to the board. Um, that has the details of the um potential I'm sorry, the proposed force main from the property. Um, that would also include the decommissioning of the uh wastewater treatment facility. Um, when
that is force man is in place. And we um again anticipating that we would want some degree of a a condition on the record relating to this um we uh in the letter and I'll just read it into the record. We propose the following condition of approval.
>> Oh, I apologize. I forget this mic doesn't pick up well. Can you hear me better now everybody? Sorry about that. Please remind me if you can't hear me. Sue the the letter says uh the condition of approval is quote the redeveloper shall comply with the redevelopment agreement dated July 1, 2025 between the
township and the applicant as amended by the first amendment to the redevelopment agreement dated January 26, 2026 which provides that in lie of utilizing the on-site wastewater treatment facility and discharging wa waste water into the
tributary to the Willowbrook the applicant andor the township as described in the agreement. ment shall collect and pump the waste water from the project into the force main or into tanker trucks in accordance with the terms of the condition of the agreement. Um that is the the condition that we
propose um for the application in regard to the wastewater treatment facility. Um again the entire first amendment to the redevelopment agreement was submitted with that letter for the board's review. Um, if there's any more detailed
questions regarding the entire project and program to install the force main, that's really something we would direct to the town council. Um there's, as you can see in there, there's um provisions for financing and and like contingencies. But again, um and I know
people don't want to hear me say it and I don't want to repeat it, but to the board's involvement in wastewater on this property, uh involves h how are we going to get rid of the waste water? Just like we have to show we have the ability to get water to the property. There's enough water for the site. We
have the ability to have electric to power the site, we need to show the board we have a legally permissible method to handle our wastewater. And we submit that the redevelopment agreement as amended will address that and the condition will be sufficient for the
board in the opinion of the applicant. So that's kind of where we stand from our last uh hearing here in this room versus the site visit on the 26th. >> Okay. Well, I'll just add that um so the
agreement clearly makes a significant uh change in how they're treating the wastewater. It doesn't change this board's obligation because regardless of whether they have the wastewater treatment plant or this this forced sewer main, it's outside our
jurisdiction. Uh but it is with that condition, if the board is agreeable to the condition as read by uh Mr. Cam as well as any other conditions that our professionals think are appropriate. Um that would essentially take the treatment plan offline and they'd have
to come back if they ever wanted to use it for some kind of amended approval. prior to it being decommissioned. Uh I will say, correct me if I'm wrong, Carl, uh at some point you're going to have to come back for an amended approval and that should be a condition if there's a resolution on this favorable resolution
that they're going to have to show where their pump station's going to be and connection to the if there is one and a connection to the force main as well as the formal decommissioning of that treatment plant. But since the treatment plant pieces may need to be used
until the sewer mains up and running as far as getting the stuff to the trucks, we can't have a decommissioning of it. Now, >> correct. >> I don't want to misstate it. I'm not we're not part of that agreement, but that's my reading of the >> That's that's a good synopsis of it. So,
we will um have an amended site plan at some point. Um there's still quite a bit of work to get this closer to realization. There's there's a lot of permitting that has to go on. My understanding is Beayshore has been contacted. They had a positive review of
it to date. There's financing issues. So, we're not at the point yet to uh revise plans to show that, but that will happen. When that time comes, we will have part of whatever phase we're we're coming for. We will also show a an amended site plan to show the
decommissioning of the wastewater treatment facility and the route and method to connect to the force man in Homeell Road. So that that that will come in the future when we have the details ironed out. >> And I would recommend that be a
condition if there's a favorable vote regardless of whether it's part of phase two, three or four or separate. It needs to be done at some point when within a certain amount of time of connection to the force. Well, we we probably do it before we connect, but um once again once everything is is finalized, we'll
be in a position to amend the site plan. >> Okay. Do our professionals have anything to add as a result of that amendment. >> Mr. Chairman, if I could >> Yeah, just use the mic. Make sure you speak into the mic. >> This is your first time here, right?
Speaking. So, >> yes, it is. >> Swear you for the record. You just want to tell the truth about the truth will help you guide this application. >> I do. >> Okay. For the record, our professional has been sworn in Mullen. >> Uh Fran Mullen, the township engineer.
Um, I would uh suggest that we ask the applicant and and their uh engineers or professionals to um just further describe the uh conditions or the steps that are being uh committed
to by their team if this were to go forward uh in this manner. What I would ask is that um the applicant's team, the applicant acknowledged that what is being contemplated is that the existing
sewer package plant on the property currently, which is the all the facilities we saw on the sitewalk, would be uh decommissioned, but also um specifically uh removed and eliminated from the property. at the
milestone uh dates uh that are spelled out in the first amendment. >> So the first amendment doesn't have that level of detail as when that's going to be decommissioned, but we we agree once the force main is is viable. We will
decommission it. We'll obviously have to go through extensive review with you as well as the board engineer as well as D because D may have certain requirements. But that is the intent that is what is in the first amendment is that when the force man is viable that the the existing wastewater treatment facility
will be decommissioned. It will be for those in the public it'll be physically removed from the site. So all the structures everyone saw out there the lagoon that will all be removed in the method that D wants and whatever else D may want. So we we agree to that. We
just don't know exactly when in the time frame but that is absolutely part of this um proposal. >> Okay. That is the clarification I was looking for. Um, >> so can I just jump in? So if that will be a condition of this board, >> realistically once you connect to the
sewer, what time frame would you need to come in? >> I I the answer is again >> months, six months. >> It's I don't mean to give vague answers or or non-specific answers. Just we're very early in this process. We just don't know. I'm >> talking about after you hook up to the force.
>> Sorry to interrupt. I'm looking at the redevelopers. does say de it shall be decommissioned. Sorry. >> Yeah, it it I'm looking on page five of the document you shared, Carl. >> Right. >> Second paragraph, full paragraph down, it says the it says shall decommission
within three years of the connection date. >> There you go. Okay. >> Right. So, I mean once we connect, we have three years to to decommission it. Um so, that that time frame is in the redevelopment agreement. So right >> again as far as the board goes >> no it doesn't affect the board but I
just wanted to be sure that we had that you know because I don't you know so we have that already so the board doesn't need to go above and beyond in a resolution right yeah >> I I agree with you yes um >> that's all I want >> but again the the exact time frame but that that's an outside time
>> the the exact time it will happen will be determined as we get closer to the force main coming online and the final design and things in D review and approval of the method to decommissioned all of those issues. Again, that's anticipated to happen within the three years.
>> Yeah. And with what case? We were just looking for an outside date. >> Oh, okay. We just want to make sure that you're obviously going to you have to comply as part of our resolution with obviously the amended redevelopment agreement. >> So in that same uh context uh I I just wanted to be clear uh for everybody's uh
purposes that the existing sewer plant and all the facilities related to it will be ultimately removed and eliminated from the property. They have no future use. They will not occupy any space and you will do everything in accordance with township, county, board
of health and D regulations and requirements. >> Correct. Whatever D tells us we need to do, we'll take care of. >> Okay. So, the other the other other things I just want to mention and and uh for the board's consideration as specifics and and actually a request for
clarification from your presentation, uh the first amendment already stipulates that there'll be no further discharge into the brook. So that's already been uh stipulated in writing. I would suggest that uh something be considered in writing that's that stipulates that there shall be no
further wastewater discharge to the existing lagoon or the spray field facilities. Um, if this were to go forward, >> unfortunately, I don't think we're in a position to agree to that because we haven't gotten into the details and the
time frame as as much as we need to to agree to a condition of that nature. Um, because if we don't hit the three mile, threeyear mark, we might have an issue with that. So, what we've agreed to is all we have available now to inform us
for conditions. So again the intention is within three years this the force main will be built and we connect to it and everything gets removed but as you and I know that's three years from now and a lot of things can happen there's a lot of permitting
to go on etc. So, and again, we haven't designed everything to the tea um at this point. Uh so, we don't have that level of detail to be able to commit to a condition of that nature. But again, the ultimate condition is as as Kate
pointed out, once the force man is is there, everything will be to commission. Nothing will be used. It is the anticipation of the town and my client. We're all working very hard to make sure that within three years that force remains active, we're connected and the wastewater treatment facility goes away
and at this point I think that's that as much as we can do. >> So I let me jump in there Carl. I'm going to cut you off. So when we get to the end of the process, if there are is a vote if there's a favorable vote obviously if there's safety related issues or health related issues that
this board can still consider even though the applicant's not agreeing to it. I mean, I think the intent is that the waste water is not going to the stream part and parcel that it's not going to go to the lagoon. So, I don't think they're giving up anything. So, I kind of disagree with the objection, but that's for the board to decide at the
time we get if it's a favorable vote as opposed to a denial. And if I could, I just would uh lend my support to that approach. uh because I would uh suggest to the board for their consideration that we not leave open the prospect that
3 years goes by the force main is being designed or permitted and it should be built within 3 years in everybody's estimation. But I would not uh suggest that we I I would I would suggest that the board consider a requirement that
says you will not use the lagoon or the spray field even if it goes past the three-year threshold that you would continue to truck the wastewater offsite indefinitely until the new sewer connection is up and running. Um so that
the the board and the town does not uh live with the prospect that the land you know the developer could revert to the lagoon or the sprayfield treatment uh you know three years from now. That that's just my suggestion to
the board for consideration. I I respect the response and the position of the applicants but that's my um suggestion to the board. Another uh point of clarification, I just want to recite this and see if this is suitable for a condition language as
well. Um that there would be no further use of the existing on-site wastewater treatment plant facilities other than the temporary use of the existing equalization tank as a temporary holding tank to facilitate the trucking of all wastewater offsite until
the new quote limited sanitary sewer system, i.e. e the new force main are constructed and fully operational. Um I think it just uh I I'm I'm asking the design team. It seems the equalization tank would need to be uh perhaps
utilized unless you've already thought it through and it's not necessary. U but it seems that we should be very specific about whether or not that tank would be used. And then a follow-up uh provision in the conditions would be that your engineering team inspects it, evaluates
it and certifies that it is you usable and suitable for that purpose of temporarily storing waste water so that the uh tanker trucks um basically draw from it uh when they look to uh truck
the waste water offsite. So we we can agree if we need to use that tank that we will confer with you, make sure everything is is correct and proper before it's used to temporarily store before it's pumped to the tanker trucks. >> Okay. I I appreciate that. I think that
addresses uh my concern and uh I I think that's uh acceptable from my perspective. Uh, another clarification uh and provision would um express that and and this is a little bit redundant,
but that all waste water must be trucked off site on a regular basis by a fully licensed and insured tanker truck sewage waste hauler and disposed of at a fully licensed and approved disposal facility.
We would also uh ask that the trucking, logistics, routes of traffic, uh routes of travel, um days and hours of operation would be spelled out in some type of operation
manual or sequence. Um so that the town has some notion of when they would expect those trucks to be traveling to the site, how long is it going to take for and how many trucks per day or per uh disposal uh activity um is spelled
out in some form of a written outline so that we have something to monitor uh and accept or uh modify uh on a mutually beneficial basis. Um yeah, I understand your point and
certainly we would have to use licensed haulers and disposed of in accordance with all D regulations and health regulations. So that condition I think we can agree to because the law provides that. We are also already obliged under the redevelopment agreement um even the amendment to work with your office
specifically regarding any information and details may be needed regarding the wastewater treatment facility decommissioning it and the new force main. So, we will certainly work with you to provide the information regarding timing, routes, frequency of pickup, and
things of that nature. Um, so we can agree to do that. Again, subject to whatever D may impose the county and others, but we'll certainly work with you as we've already agreed to do. And for the board, I don't have any real concerns about it, but I think it's uh
in the town's favor to understand from the beginning when is the sewage sewer going to flow and when is when are the trucks going to enter the site and uh dispose of the wastewater offsite. Um and then maybe we'll get a quarterly update from the developer based on the
progress uh of the development as well as the uh sewer system that's going to be built. just so the town is not left to wonder, you know, quarter after seasonally, you know, what's happening, uh, how many trucks are removing waste water from the site and where are they
traveling, uh, to get to the site and leave the site and and the municipality. So, it's just a point of reference that I think will be helpful for you, the town, to monitor uh, should this go forward. >> Okay. And lastly, >> and Fran, so Carl, you're aware we what
we normally do here is information conditions like that. We just normally leave up as postclosing for I mean post uh approval for the applicants to work with our professionals. They obviously don't come back here and submit O andM manuals and stuff like that. You just directly deal with France team.
>> Yeah, agreed and understood. E especially as this is, you know, more of a township council issue than the planning board issue. So we're really reporting back to the township engineer under that >> and he's township engineer for this issue. So >> Sure. Understood. And that that was
always the case. And of course when we come in for you know phase um review for site plans for different phases we can give you updates and status on all those issues at that time. Mhm. And in addition to that, uh it is normal practice of course for us uh the town
engineers office but also the planning board engineer is going to go through resolution compliance. So everything baked into your resolution approving a project or an application uh is going to go through a very detailed uh scrutiny
by the planning board engineer and he won't sign off on these plans until uh each one of those conditions are fully satisfied, met and spelled out on the approved plans. So, it's really a matter of recordkeeping and crossing cross-checking everything to make sure
anything committed to and presented to the board uh is recorded uh either in plan notes, note uh plan revisions and so on uh and reviewed by your planning board engineer as well as your town engineer. So, it's it's kind of a um a
little bit of overlapping uh process. And then lastly, I just wanted to uh stipulate that uh it is acknowledged that all costs associated with the temporary holding and off-site trucking and disposal of the wastewater as well as the removal of all the
existing sewer facilities that are going to be eliminated uh removed and eliminated shall be funded only by the developer with no cost to the township. >> That's not what the agreement provides. The agreement provides we are to um we
are to decommission the wastewater treatment facility and the the cost of trucking in the interim until the force man is ready is either provided by the town or the redeveloper um gets reimbured for the cost of that. That's what the agreement provides and I think
we should leave that in the agreement because it's not a planning board issue. >> Okay. I just wanted to suggest it to the board. >> Okay. battle control >> that was I just wanted to suggest that to the board that that has been uh thought through and if that is the
provision that's been agreed to I'm okay with that I just wanted to bring it up uh from our perspective >> I would say whatever that condition is they have to follow >> okay so those are uh the specific uh comments I wanted to uh make tonight uh
for the board's benefit or consideration um so uh I think otherwise is uh I don't have any further comments. >> Yeah. One one thing I'd like to just ask is I'm a little confused on the lagoon
and sprayfield which you brought up. You're saying that may not be removed in >> Oh, no. Those those will be removed. The question is when >> Right. But you outside three years. >> All right. So, I just want to make sure there's no
like time frame where things if you miss the date all bets are off that uh the intention is not to utilize the lagoon for wastewater purposes or the spray field. Is that correct? >> That that's the intent. Yes. And then and again once the force main is operational it'll be shut down and
decommissioned. >> Right. So I'm just asking like what what Fran said about you said before about removing it. >> So why what's the issue with removing it if it's there's no intention to use it? That's what I'm a little confused on. >> But can I if I could, Mr. Chairman, just
to clarify, I I was not suggesting that they be removed immediately and before the sewer connection is available to the applicant. I'm I'm okay with waiting until the new sewer connection is available before they are compelled to
remove the existing uh unused uh package plant and the lagoon. What I didn't want to leave open-ended was if year three ends and the sewer the new sewer connection is six months away or it takes another
year. So it it gets built and it's operational at the end of year four. I was raising the position that I wouldn't want it to be that the applicant could start using the lagoon three and a half years from now
if if we needed it if we were waiting until 4 and a half years from now for the new sewer connection to materialize. I think I would prefer a condition that says we will not use the existing lagoon or
spray field now or in 3 years or any time after that. We will not use it. We will connect into the new system when it's available and we will truck the wastewater off site during whatever
interim duration there is in between. Is that acceptable, Carl? >> I I think that's what the agreement provides. The the the amendment to the redevelopment agreement that was submitted, it provides that there will be no use of the system. It will be
trucked off site until the force main is available. So, as long as the agreement's in place and everyone's doing what they're supposed to in the agreement, that will be the outcome. But again, the agreement addresses these issues. No offense. It's not a planning board issue. It's an issue between us and the town and DP. It's outlined in
the agreement. The town has a lot of enforcement mechanisms in the redevelopment agreement, including the first amendment. And I think we should leave it in there. >> You know, I agree that it's not a planning board issue, but because it's a hot topic, I want people to understand also that there's no intention or no
plan to reutilize anything that's there that's been >> That's correct. I'm saying that's that's what the agreement provides for. And as I indicated earlier and and and not to avoid the issue or move off topic, but again it's more of a township and applicant issue and a lot of these
questions and issues should be addressed to the town council. >> Yeah. >> So speaking of, you know, what the board's jurisdiction is, my my opinion reading the condition that Mr. chem provided that offered for this board. I think that this that it covers that you
know that condition clearly says that they'll abide by the re redevelopment agreement and the first amendment and it also says they shall collect and pump waste water from the project into the force main or into tanker trucks in accordance with the agreement. So from the board's perspective I think you're I I think that you know you're that that I
think is about as far as you can go and I think it meets your your goal here. Okay. Um, anyone else? >> Yeah, just one question. You had mentioned that there's going to be a use of the equalization tank to help feed into the tank, the tankers that will
take away the the sewer water. Is that correct? >> Again, it's premature to know if we're going to do that. We we may need to do that as everyone's recognized because we need something to >> we haven't figured out >> and talked to D because D makes the
ultimate decision on this the tanker truck issue. So we may not be able to have tanker trucks as frequently as we need. So we may need to store temporarily in the tank and pump from the tank to the to the trucks. >> Well, that was going to be my question.
Does will DP provide any oversight into the equalization tank whether it needed to be upgraded? There was a list of items that needed to be upgraded for the treatment plant. Equalization tank was one of them. >> Correct. >> So those improvements would potentially need to be made by the DP's guidance uh
before you start using it to move into the tanks. >> Now I understand your question. So yes, and actually the township engineer had got into that. See, if we do need to use just the equalization tank as a temp temporary storage tank to pump into the tank, the the mobile tankers,
>> we would have to get D review and approval of that because that's under D jurisdiction in addition to working with the board professionals, the township, anyone else involved. So, there would be a number of oversight if we were to use the equalization tank only as a temporary storage tank. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> You're welcome, sir. for resolution purposes, you also need to use the force main, don't you, to get to the tank. Am I was I am I misread? >> So So again, we're getting a little beyond my understanding, but my understanding is the way the system
presently works and the modified if we were only use the equalization tank is right near near the existing building. There is a small for there is a small pump that pumps just from the building over to the wastewater treatment facility which contains the the
equalization tank. So if needed we might have to you know have that pump operational to pump from the building to the equalization tank that's temporary holding then pump out to the mobile tankers which would then go to a licensed disposal facility. That's
that's my understanding of it. We're getting a little beyond that, but again, if that is if that is going, if any of that is to occur, again, we will be talking with D. We'll be working with both engineers, the township engineer and your board engineer to involve them
in the process and and review of those matters. >> I just don't want to write something that says you'll only use that one tank if you need the pump. And >> yeah, >> it sounds like you might need the pump, too. >> We might. Again, again, the hope is, again, we're all talking about what if the hope is the force main is ready on
time, which we think is a reasonable time frame, and we just connect into it and all these other issues go away. Um, and again, everyone and and thank you to the township engineer and others and and the folks at the township have been working very hard recently to to go through this and get
as far as we have. As indicated earlier, everything has been worked out, ironed out, but everyone has really, again, my my partner is handling most of this interface. Um, everyone has really joined hands to make this happen. Um,
it's not it's more of a concept than I'm laying it out, but it's not there, but everyone has thought long and hard about the long-term requirements to make this a reality. Everyone thinks the plan is reasonable and is doable and are committed to overcoming any obstacle that may come up. Um, everyone
recognizes this is the best outcome for everyone. Uh, and it's and it's everyone's intention to make it actually happen. >> Yeah. And look, at this time I also want to express my appreciation to the applicant and the town and as well as the the
Franco and Christine and everyone else who's worked so diligently towards this resolution together because I do think this is the best outcome for everyone. >> Agreed. >> So I do want to thank everyone for that in the meantime. So um All right. Anyone else have uh any
questions? I know. Um All right. At this time, Wes, you still like to give your presentation? >> Well, what's that? >> Well, sure. >> Okay. >> All right. So, go ahead. Floor is yours, Wes. >> Uh, Mr. Mullen, I do appreciate your
sort of looking out for our interests. And, uh, I may have more questions for you. Um, so I I get uncomfortable when I hear I think that's what it provides. our intent is and that's my understanding.
So those are key words that um don't give a lot of resolve and uh and purpose. So we had um done a site visit the other day. I took some photos
and um I also have the um the site plan. So that was of u the existing conditions that >> it's coming. How do I get the whole screen? >> Just get the Oh, maybe it's here.
How do I get rid of this? >> Is it HDMI one or two? Okay. >> All right. >> Did you plug it? >> I plugged it. >> All right. >> This is
You haven't come early. >> We tried and screen. I need to call my technical girl. Okay. All right. It looks like that's not going to happen. It's It's on my screen
here. So it would be okay if I expressed my thoughts as I was you know going through. So >> the the first one would have shown u the >> existing conditions. Um it shows the
plot plan with um the latest date on it being 51225. I'm sorry 20 No. Yeah. 51225 was the original plot plan and then it was revised in December to show the spray field.
>> He's still >> maybe I'll email it to you now. Wes, are you referring to the overall development existing conditions plan? >> He has it probably marked up. He has >> Well, I know, but but he said I just want to be sure that we know what he's talking about. Yeah. So, okay. >> It looks like that.
>> Okay. Just just making sure. >> So, it was the first time that the spray field um mark was >> This is the one that was revised. >> This is the one that was revised at the end of December. Okay. do that.
Okay. Uh next we would have have shown a um a plan of the assisted living um facility like that. >> These are an exhibit. So you you got to
just tell them what you're reading. >> These are or not? >> They're not. So if you're reading >> So these part of the plans, right? >> Just refer to the plan that you're >> Okay. That's all. So that's a plan of the um assisted living facility. The next slide would have shown the
overlay of the spray field onto the assisted living facility. And what you would have seen is 2/3 of the building and half of the parking lot is covered in the spray field. So that would have caused us to pause I
think uh during our first uh meeting that would be like an inconsistency. So looking at the spray field since it's the first time that it was um disclosed, I I personally I was looking for any
signs of because they weren't sure if the field was ever used. So I'm looking at the field and saying was it used or not and um what I saw was lush lush ve vegetation in that field and the uh plants seem to be nitrogenrich. So, I'm
thinking that maybe perhaps it it it had been used. Um, let's see. So, I went back to the plan to read what it said. I wanted to see if it said like future use or proposed use. And
specifically it says on the plan existing wastewater spray irrigation field. So from the looks of it and from the sound of it it looks like um that was used as a spray irrigation field. So when we talk about remediation of the
site, that's that's a question I had um whether to leave that as is or consider uh testing and um identifying and mitigating that before any building is happening in that area. Uh moving on um past what you would
consider the uh where the helicopter pad is. looking at that area of the helicopter pad I call it. Um the um applicant uh claims that they are not bound by any new u New Jersey storm
water uh regulations. Um, I thought if they wanted to throw a bone or ever have to define uh comply by that, that would be a good area because there's natural swailes to be able to run um parking lot water off of uh into
cause um natural uh filtration of the pollutants coming off of the park parking lot rather than running them directly into sewers. Um, next I had this was a photograph that we
had of the um lagoon back in uh September and the lagoon was dry. The northern end was cracking. The mud was cracking up as if it hadn't had water. When we visited the site on uh
Saturday, it was the entire bottom was filled with water. Right now, we're in drought conditions and I'm wondering where the water came from. in looking at the um lagoon from where we stood looking out um at the other
side of the lagoon. That would be um I guess looking um from um east to west across the lagoon. Um what it appears as if that Well, let me go back and say that in terms of the
history of the lagoon, uh Mr. Vulka testified that it actually started as a leech field. So in looking at how that lagoon was created, it appears that that ground that soil was scraped off the top and
then uh dug out and piled against the western portion of the um of the property to create this um to create this um lagoon when we went on the other side of that lagoon. Um so, so from the one side,
from the roadside, you're looking down on the water. When you go on the other side, that's the stream side, you're looking up at the hill. In other words, the natural topography of that would have been, you know, sort of like that. With this being the roadside and that
being streamside, there would have been a natural slope. That's where the leech field was. Apparently, when that leech field failed, then they scraped that out again to create this cavity of um of the lagoon.
When they scraped it out, however, they couldn't go down very deep. They could only go down to as far as the pipes were because once they hit the pipes, that's as deep as they could go. Um, the evidence of that was the actual pipes that you see at the site. They're
in the water, they're out of the water, they're um debris, the um effluent fil, I would guess you'd say. Um so that's the way that lagoon apparently was created and that's um the extent to
which any cleanup was done before it was started to being used as a leech field that is that the pipes were just left there. So that when we talked about percolation test and so on for the last four meetings uh again none of that was done because they would have hit the
pipes. Um in terms of um um depth of the lagoon, none of those um um uh measurements were provided. So we don't know the depth of the lagoon and we don't know the height of the walls.
Remember on the in the lagoon there was a a white stick with red markings. So that would have given them an idea of how much uh this lagoon was filled. But there's no way to calculate how much water is actually in it.
So the apparently we're going to address what's going to happen uh to the lagoon. What if it never dries up? Um what about this year's um class of mosquitoes?
Um, if that water again never dries up, that we've had testimony that the only thing that could live there was uh was the mosquitoes. On the other side of the lagoon, we saw um testing wells that are abandoned. So,
those testing wells are marked with ID numbers. They're supposed to be locked, but appear to be simply abandoned. Inside of the pipe, you would have seen a pipe inside of a pipe that you'd have a test tube to lower down, take a test
sample, and uh and view the results. Um when we got to the treatment plant, um there was a little bit of a disagreement between myself and Mr. Vul. Um I had asked on the um sheet before we
went out to give us an idea of what flow meters are installed there. Mr. Vulk believed that only one meter was required and that was to be 40,000 gallons per
day coming into the plant. I expected there to be at least three more meters. Uh one of them would have been tracking 40 000 gallons per day into the stream in the winter. Another would attract 15,000
gallons a day into the spray field and at least one more for dumping into the lagoon. I had requested the brand and model of any existing and proposed flow meters. Um I haven't heard back on that. I'm assuming there never was any
plan for new or old meters. Apparent I don't know how they tracked 40,000 gallons a day if there was no track method of it. So that's a question um I had
um at the site we were talking uh about the size of the lagoon and the fact that on an NJ D permit it's uh printed that the lagoon is 662 feet by 140 ft
and that it's entirely within the D buffer. That buffer of course is like a ribbon that goes down the length of the stream 300 feet on either side of the stream. So
if we don't know where the corner boundaries are of that um how do we know what we're how do we know what we have and how do we know what we're getting? Um I'm I don't know. One question I would have is when
that lagoon is um what would you call it? Closed or mitigated um who owns it? Who owns that area? Of course, it's in the 300T buffer. I imagine the um applicant still owns it,
uh but they can't do anything in it. So, that's another question. And as you're uh closing the lagoon, how are how are you allowed to do anything in there if it's within the 300 ft uh buffer? How you can't bring um tractors in there? I don't I don't know what what's allowed
to happen within that 300t buffer. So when they start to close it, I was surprised to see um in their in their storm water plan that they had um that the storm water um final pipe
that's a 54 in pipe goes directly underneath the lagoon. So that went to the question of u if you're digging down in that lagoon to either mitigate the problem or to take out the old pipes, somebody should be aware that there's a
54in pipe under there that you would not want to crack or uh compromise. Which leads me to the next question as to what's the condition of that pipe. Now that pipe goes directly underneath the lagoon. If the seals are worn and
leaking, that means the water from the lagoon is going directly into that pipe and that's going directly into the stream. If that's happening now, then it's happening undetected and it's happening in perpetuity. Um, so what that that's kind of a big
deal to me if we're going to um c so in talking about stormwater regulations, the only um what I what I've heard uh the
attorney testify to is they're not bound by any storm water regulations because they're providing more that would be pvious surface than creating pvious surface. I've seen
no drawings. I've seen no calculations to that regard even if that's true um in with with adding the uh phase three the uh the assisted living facility. So if that's true, I'd like to see
something in that regard. Um secondly, if you're going to abide if you're going to have to abide by storm water regulations, then that's the point where you would at least stop or uh gather the majority of storm
water. Otherwise, it's coming from all around the property in smaller pipes that then as they join with each other get larger and larger and larger. Um, I know Jay had found we got a picture of that pipe, right? Jay had
found that pipe and we saw it that day. We had a picture of it. It's got an old sign on it, D sign. So, when we talk about uh biohazard areas, we know that that pipe was used to discharge the stream. So, and that's at the top of the
uh hill. All of that water ran down the hill. So how is that going to be uh mitigated? Is that going to be addressed? We saw a lot of um uh erosion at the stream such that uh
the tree roots are exposed and uh causing the trees to fall over. The Willow Brook stream itself was not flowing very uh fast that day. It wasn't moving fast at all. Anything going into that stream would be um sort of
overtaking it. Anything going into it would be more than the water that's in the stream. Right now, we saw major erosion um at the tennis courts. So, at the northern end of the property, uh where the tennis courts are
leading to the stream, major um problem with um erosion of the bank there. Again, the trees are in danger of falling in, and I don't see anything um uh proposed to uh to either eliminate that
or address that. Um that closes my sort of information for the um site visit. I guess my um question here is I have additional questions regarding the stewards that's being stored on site and about that uh
permit. Should I ask that now or will there be another opportunity to ask that? >> Oh, if you'd like to ask me now. >> Thank you. So, um regarding the sewage stored on site, I sort of went along with similar to what you were thinking right from the building. Now, there's a
pipe that runs to the sewer plant. It's being right now collect when I say right now obviously when it was in business it was being collected into these tanks. So that seems like the most logical place to collect the sewage.
So um you've asked you've asked um the questions that I was going to ask is uh when will it be collected? Um I mean it can't be cheap to do this
right. So, we're talking years of collection. Um, what if engineering u runs into problems? What if they're digging up the road and they hit an old um Indian cemetery? The um the project stops. Uh
what if a waiver is not granted from our wastewater management plan? Um what if the trucker doesn't get paid? Next question was regarding the permit, the NJD permit. When I looked at the
permit, the copy of the permit, I saw that it's not um it's not issued to the developer. It's list it's it'ssued to the property. So the it's it lists the lock and lot in the block and then
it what permissions it gives them. Uh, one of those permissions is to dump starting in November direct. Uh so my my question becomes when November roll I mean the permit has been
held over our heads like like if you've seen the um meetings you know what I'm talking about. So what happens when November comes and the trucker didn't get paid? I don't see anything that stops someone.
And now when I say someone, I mean either this developer or the next owner, right? Because after they go through a uh this process, it wouldn't be uncommon for someone to turn this project over to someone else since this is the hardest part of the project is to get these
approvals. So, my question is, uh, what if the on-site conditions changed and the applicant were able to, um, continue with that D permit and the, uh, the equalization tanks are filled up, the
trucker's not getting paid, the stuff is there, what's the stop in November that plant from being uh, turned back on? I don't I don't know what the answer to that is. um more um troubling is what if they
went to the DP and said, "Hey, we're we're discharging six months a year. Why can't I just go 12 months a year?" So that would negate the having to float bonds. It would negate the ability negate the necess necessity
to um continue with the piping. Um so those are are questions um that I had. >> Maybe I mean, the agreement says that's what they have to do. I mean, we could sit here and have hypotheticals all day long about strikes and acts of God and
everything else, but the agreement pretty clearly states, right, the the resolution, >> right? And with the condition conditions that Carl and Fran outlined, they can't use it. So that would be I mean nothing they can do whatever they want illegally
but they can't legally do anything with that discharge into the stream or the lagoons if that's adopted other than the use of that equalization tank. >> If there's any of those >> violation of both they would be in violation of both this planning board's
resolution and the amended redevelopers agreement. That's not >> and I'm not an attorney but I think that'd almost be criminal. >> Yeah. that that that that's exactly what both of those documents are intended to prevent. >> So, yeah, I mean, >> okay, I got a last one.
>> Uh, we're used to seeing plans drawn so that it's like the buildings fit on the land. So, you've got a plot of land and a developer comes in, he says, "This is what we want to put on the building." So, we're looking for setbacks and so on
and and uh and and you know agreeing with our development regulations. This was an odd application because it was just the opposite. The buildings were being um specified or allowed based upon
40,000 gallons per day. In fact, the the project was going to be scaled back if they were going to go past the 40,000 gallons per day. So, I guess my first question I don't know if the engineer I I guess um
one friend's ready when you're ready. We've calculated that the buildings are going to cause let's say I'm going to make up a number 45,000 gallons uh per day of effluent. Do we know that the pipe the plan can accommodate whatever
is expected from the site? That's a question for you. What the applicant, excuse me, what the applicant has submitted is a a phased plan, uh, a
sequential phasing of their improvements that they intend to build. Um, and I believe that's on one exhibit similar to this exhibit. So, it'll it'll show you the four phases. And they did submit the sewer
calculations for each individual phase. So phase one had x gallons, phase 2 had y gallons, and they would add it all up. And to your point, it added up to 40,000 or uh 45,000 gallons per day. Now,
they've applied for a preliminary and final site plan approval from the board for phase one only. And the other phases two, three, and four applied for preliminary site plan approval
only. And they are obligated to come back to you the board with the final site plan for phase 2, three, and four at the appropriate time of their uh development. But in in front of you for your consideration now under this
application is the full preliminary and final design plans for phase one improvements which is basically the the repurposing renovation and reuse of uh the existing building. So, we know that that flow, that sewer flow is going to
be the first that enter, you know, that comes out that's produced by the new development and that has to be dealt with by the applicant. They're either going to be trucking that wastewater off site or it's going to
have to be synchronized with the construction of this new sewer option. It has to be one or the other. and and to I was just trying to point out earlier that it seems to me that it would simplify a lot of the discussion
if the applicant was asked to relinquish any interest in using any of the three existing sewer components at any time in the future. That's really what I was uh asking at at the beginning. They they stipulate they're they're not going to
look to discharge into the brook again. That's a statement. They didn't go so far as to say, "We're not going to use the lagoon again or the spray field again." I thought that was a fair question to ask of them. I think if they were to commit to that, it would
simplify a lot of the concerns that people might raise. Um then then we would then we would get from them when they come in for their final site plan approval for each of the next three phases. They can come in all together or they can come in one at a
time. Let's assume they come in for phase two only final site plan approval. They will have to show us um well for unit 4 uh the the the facility they want to build on top of the spray field for example they will
have to show us a before and after picture. What are they going to do to the existing spray field to your point? what environmental testing, soil test, groundwater tests, what grading, drainage, and physical improvements like curbs and driveways and parking lots.
What are their plans going to look like in their final site plan set that's going to come before this board? And they're going to have to explain to you how they're going to mitigate the spray field conditions in order to properly build this new phase 4 improvement in that
location. and they're going to have to get all the D permits, all the health department permits, and any other applicable permits that go along with their final site plan request of this board. So, it this is not the this is
not an all or nothing one decision uh to be made now for each of the subsequent phases, but it definitely sets the stage for whether or not they're ever going to try to exercise their right under any D permit to reuse the lagoon or the spray
field uh in any way at any time. So again, I appreciate your um your this form of thought um because it certainly weighs on my mind. Um so again, to um sort of compound on your
point, I'd like to see them relinquish uh the permit. In other words, let state I don't want to use the permit anymore. It sounds as if um there'd be no use for it anymore. That's that's a separate
Here's my question. We're still um um deficient in our um affordable housing uh plan. There's a lot of pressure to um
to build um and this is a very large uh property. the the question had been about other people connecting to this singleuse sewer.
My concern is adding buildings, adding capacity onto this property. So, it's not a it's not a matter of someone else connecting to this uh to this site. It's a matter of this site utilizing the maximum
capacity of the sewer. So, the sewer capacity, correct me if I'm wrong, is based on two things. The size of the pipe and the power of the pump that's push pushing it. So, if you had uh 40,000 gallons uh going through, I'll
make a number 4 inch pipe, and you had uh 60 lbs of pressure uh necessary to push it. If I wanted to add 10,000 more gallons capacity, I just turn my pump up to 75 uh pounds of pressure and I got it
going. So, where is the um the cap? On the other side, it was 40 on the other side. It was 40,000 gallons a day. In this, it's just a matter of how much building can I put on the property unless there's some type of I'll call it
a cap on the capacity of the sewer. Of course, if there's capacity on the sewer, that means it could never be connected to additionally anyway by another site. So, has that been uh considered at all? >> Wes, can I answer that from the planning
perspective, which is this board's real concern? >> This redevelopment plan permits a certain amount of development on the property, permits a certain amount of units. There nothing more that than is contemplated in that redevelopment plan
could be constructed without full amendment of redevelopment plan amendment of of of all these documents new public hearings before a township committee new application before this board that's not something that could be easily done and
I don't think there's any intention you know that that's not the intention here that would be very very difficult and take a long time um then the other thing I will say is that I am not the township's affordable housing planner, but my understanding is that the township is not technically deficient in their affordable housing. They are under there there's a settlement agreement
underway that does include this site in which case the township will no longer be deficient in the eyes of the court once that's approved. So, you know, it it's the township requested a vacant land adjustment. There's certain technicalities there, but um once that settlement is approved, and my understanding is it's just delayed
because there's just a lot a lot the judges are just, you know, under a lot of pressure and it's just a timing thing. the tangent will no longer be considered deficient. >> Andy Bear confirmed that to me today, but to get to your question, the amended redevelopment, the amendment
to the redevelopment grant agreements clearly states that the pipe will be sized to accommodate the wastewater needs of the project only. The project is defined as the three I mean the four phases, the the 299 total whatever the total is of those four phases. So that's
in this document already. So that's this how France team is going to size that pipe >> and and if I could just add or clarify that as well. So on page three of the uh first amendment it says just that that
the sewer system shall service the project exclusively and shall be sized to accommodate the required wastewater needs of the project only. So if the project is calculating to uh
generate 40,000 gallons per day, the the the facilities are going to be sized to accommodate that. The sentence before that one reads the limited sanitary sewer system to allow the project only to connect to the
township's wastewater collection system. So this is specifically written to grant permission for this one property under this development scenario. They have no legal right or ability
to increase the sewer flow on the property beyond the 40,000 gallons per day. They don't have the latitude in my reading of this and understanding of it all. They're committing to no additional sewer flow beyond the 40,000 gallons per
day that they currently uh feel that that that's assigned to the property. There's going to be there's no permission being granted by your board's consideration of this application to allow any other properties anywhere in town to tie into
the force main that's being contemplated. they can increase the flow and other properties cannot connect into the pipe or the pumps, you know, the pump station that's being considered. And I think I'm hearing their commitment
to mitigate, eliminate, remove and eliminate the existing three features that are part of the sewer on the property currently. Um, and a part of our role as the township engineer is to simply try to offer some language to the
board to consider specific condition language that can be baked into the resolution as a condition of approval and can be baked into the site plan notes that alert all the readers, all the inspectors and any other regulatory agencies that are going
to look at these plans to alert them to the limitations and the obligations that have been agreed to by the applicant in this process. >> The Go ahead. >> No, I'm just I'm just ask you know I I
would um suggest that approach is uh baked into all this language that I'm reading in favor of the town. Um, and I think we're raising some uh very specific language that we're trying to
uh have uh further clarify any of these provisions that any of us read in the future. So there's no misunderstanding about what they are relinquishing, what they are allowed to consider doing going forward and what they are now prohibited from doing going forward. they will have
no right to increase the capacity of this force main that's being contemplated and no one outside this property and this applicant will have a right to uh connect into the pipe that that's how this reads currently. >> So to reiterate um my my position is
that I understand I'll put the fact that no one no other properties will be allowed to connect. I don't understand how you're going to size a pipe. I mean, you chose 40,000 gallons. That's probably not realistic. Based upon their
own calculations, it was up in the 43 44,000. U So, you're suggest someone's suggesting that someone's going to size a pipe based upon the capacity of 44,000 gallons a day. I
think that's what you're saying, right? Mhm. So again, my um my position is that you're going to choose this somebody's going to choose the size of a pipe, 4 inch pipe. The amount of stuff that can go through
the pipe is based upon the pressure that's pushing it, >> right? The pump. >> So again, if we crank that up, we're pushing more out. Mhm. >> Um >> um the only way to guarantee that is to go up to the maximum pressure allowed in the pipe. So if you're only allowed 50
pounds in the pipe before the plastic pipe breaks, you know, I'd be satisfied with that because you're at you're working at maximum capacity with the size of the pipe that you have. But um there's no way, excuse me, it's my opinion that there's no way that you're
going to have a pipe that won't allow for additional capacity. And again, I'm not talking about capacity from other properties. I'm talking about possible buildings, whether it's a fourstory now becomes a
fivetory. Um whether a wing is added, whether a completely new building is added. I understand they'd have to come in front of this board. The point is is that um this project was turned on its head because we started out with capacity and then there was the
buildings. Now we have buildings and we're you know bringing in the capacity. But I don't see any way that you're limiting. You're certainly not limiting them to um you know to to gallons. >> Well, I would suggest this. I I would
suggest that the board should be confident in the approach that a the new sewer facility, the pump station and the force main will be owned, operated, and maintained by the township. So, it's not going to be under their
control to open any of those uh facilities up and put bigger pumps in or direct more flow to it without the township's concurrence and knowledge. That's number one. the town will be in total control and own the facilities
we're talking about. There will be a permit issued by the DP that stipulates whatever is agreed upon 40,000 gallons per day, 43 g,000 gallons a day. It's already baked into what they presented to the board for consideration. So, I'm
not here to reinvent the threshold. I'm just trying to reassure you that there will be legal provisions that control the sewer facilities that the developer, the property owner, no matter who owns it in the future in perpetuity, they
have no right to go into the sewer facility and change anything. That will be a town. Nobody goes into the Crawford's Corner pump station and changes the capacity of those pumps with, you know, that the town owns all that. The town would own this. Um, and
then the the only way that they could have any additional sewer flow, wastewater flow increased on this property would be the subject of a basically a variance, a nonconforming
condition to expand, add floors to the buildings, add new housing units, add new generators of the wastewater. That cannot happen without the the board's review, consideration, and a final decision on any future expansion of the
use of the property. I'm just suggesting to the board for this application, you have total control of writing the conditions, asking making requests of the applicant. There may not be full comp agreement on what you're asking them to specify in
conditions, but that's I think that's a function of the board to couch conditions of approval if this goes in that direction. >> Yeah. I I just clarify. You keep saying the board. You mean township, not the board. >> No, I mean the I mean the planning board.
>> I the the anything about the variance, anything like that? >> Varian. Yes. >> No, no, no. anything about changes to this what's allowed on this site. >> Anything about that? That's all the township. The board has Yes, >> that's right. I want to be clear about that. >> The board is limited to the site plan. >> That's right. >> Okay. Under I understand that
clarification. Um because it's a redevelopment site subject to a redevelopment plan. That is a good clarification. I I stand corrected. Uh but no one if a future buyer of the property tries to come in for a zoning permit or some type of
approval to do anything more and new or expand on the site, the town will be in complete authority and and in the authority position and have total control over what can be contemplated, >> right? And it has to and it has to comply with the redevelopment plan
that's already on the books. And no one will deviate from that unless the township leadership, the township committee allows for changes. >> Yeah. I I just want to be perfectly clear because there's a lot of misunderstandings about the planning board's role versus the township's role.
And you know, a lot of these issues about what has to be done or things are are being requested. It's really between the the developer and the township. It's nothing to do with the planning board. >> Understood. Right. Agreed. Am >> I misstating anything? Okay. Thank you.
I'll wrap this up. Um I got four things. Um so I'm concerned about the reuse uh in any form of the um treatment plant. I'd like to call in the Air Force and have a bunker buster um dropped on the
mother and it just decommissioned in that uh fashion. That would be satisfactory to me. Um, I'm certainly unclear about what's going to happen to the lagoon. It's being If I hear the words D again,
I think I'll cry. Um, so I'd like to see more um concrete evidence that u that's not going to be our new free open space uh that the township then is responsible for and all
the liability that goes along with that that concept. Um the thing one thing that we haven't discussed because I don't know a lot about it is the is a 2002 wastewater
management plan and who decides because I I understand the uh the concept of that was that all discharge would go into the ground rather than rather well really rather than into a super plant.
So, I don't know how that's uh is that pending? Is that something that we shouldn't even consider or aren't allowed to talk about. So, that's one thing. And the second thing again is the dismissal of any obligation to our storm water management plant. Um I think
that's a New Jersey requirement and I believe that uh new developments must keep water on the property. The argument again has been about the um somehow they're exempt from that because
um they're taking up asphalt and and things like that creating more pvious surfaces. Again, I haven't seen any um calculations in that regard, especially when you're adding uh phase three into this. Um so I I'd like clarification on
those things uh before I'm comfortable. Thank you. And I thank you um for um for the leeway and as much time as I taken. >> Okay. Um at this point I think uh Marty was telling me that uh Mr. Franco had a
question at the site visit you wanted to ask today. You want to come up give your >> So we should just clarify that we're just supposed to have comments on the site visit. There were some questions that Wes had at the time and I know specifically Mr. Franco started to ask a
question. And I told you you can't at the hear at the site visit. We typically don't even allow questions, but I told you you could have a question. We'll do it here. I don't think I told anybody else that, but if anybody else did, uh I think the chair will recognize you after Mr. Franco, but it's this is a limited
time to ask those questions that you had. >> The question was going to be about the disposal plan, which is now not going to happen. So, one of the questions is out the window, if I could say it that way. Uh the other question I had was uh they were speaking about who's picking up the
cost of pumping in the intern between the uh the the hookup of the force man versus when they're building or giving seos for the houses for people who live there. Who's going to be picking up that cost? >> Um >> I used to be in a septic business and I
used to handle pumping. That's why I want to mention this. I I seem to recall at the township committee meeting they said that we would be initially funding it and it would be reimbursed over time. >> It's addressed in the agreement. I mean I I'm not privy to I just got a copy of
it myself so I haven't read it in full >> the expense involved with that. >> Carl if you know the answer Carl do you know the answer to that question or >> it it's it's kind of shared initially the the developer picks it up for a period of I don't have the exact time frames in here. And then if the force
main isn't ready by a certain date, then then the township would take over the the trucking, but again, the anticipation is that by the time we're ready to put a unit online that the force man will be in place. And >> I don't I don't want to misread this, but when I glanced at it, I believe the
applicant would do it and for that three-year period until we the town had to actually get the sewer operational. If we went past the three-year mark, then it would be Township. >> Now, if I remember right, he said that phase one would be uh 39,600 gallons, if I'm saying that correctly.
>> I don't remember the exact number. >> If that had to be pumped out, that would mean close to eight trucks a day. All right. And that would be a cost of 8 to$10,000 a day, $240,000
a month. I just hope everybody knows the cost involved with this thing and the town could get stuck with some of this. Number one. >> Yeah. >> All right. The second thing I also had to add on the disposal fees. That's without the plant fee. In other words, when you dispose of the waste, the uh
the treatment plant is going to charge as well. So, that's a tremendous cost that somebody's going to have to pick up, whether it be the builder or whether it be the town. All right? And I used to do this for business and it's extreme. All right. The Other question I had to
ask was when we were at the site, we seen the 54 inch uh drain line that was going out. Um there's no retention before that if I remember correctly. So there's no sight retention at all. When it rains, I think
40 acres or more are exposed to that one line. The rest goes down south, I think. Right. There's another disposal area or another pipeline that's on the south of the project or is this the only one? I don't know who the engineer is there. >> I can I can tell you I looked at I
looked at the plans and you're right. >> I don't the most important thing about the project. I mean everybody should know about it. >> So I don't recall where uh I know that is the one outfall. I don't recall if there's another outfall. I'm sure there
are certain areas that flow off of the site uncontrolled. Uh however, I can say that we reviewed the storm water management plan and it meets the requirements of the storm water orders for the town and the and the D. >> All right? Because we get 50 inches of
rain a year, which in 44 acres alone, and that's only the top part, that's somewhere around 60 million gallons a year. That's a tremendous amount of water. uncontrolled because and if I remember what is going to be done to the
outfall to control um the outfall on that now it's all eroded there is no um if I could say uh disposal mats or uh aprons to absorb all the energy coming
out uh as you can see there's another area between the the lagoon and the uh the fields the tennis courts Uh the water comes out so fast in there. It eroded 8 to 10 foot deep. It eroded a hole through there. I I think other
people noticed it besides me. I mean what are we going to do to control the flow of water and the retention with detention of that water? >> So like I said, we review the storm water management report and it meets the requirements uh of the storm water man storm water management rules of the
state and uh the township. As far as erosion at the outfall pipe, that's something that can be reviewed and in a coordination with not only our office, township engineers office, the subro control plan, they can come up with a
plan to alleviate erosion issues by a number of different ways and the agencies with the township can figure out the best way to do that. Uh the other thing to deal with that also is is that is all within a the riparian zone which has been brought up many times. So
there's D involvement in terms of land use regulations and how much disturbance can occur. So that's something that the uh applicant can agree to work out with the agencies that are involved. And what's being done to compensate the loss
of I say the lagoon was allowing water to go back reintil reinfiltrate into the ground. Now we're losing that uh that ability to uh gain water back into the uh acryers and everything else. Wouldn't the detention basins or retention basins
help that as well? >> That's that's the deep that's the um the wastewater management side of it. the this storm water management plan did not um encompass any infiltration because nothing that is not incurring in the
existing condition. So by the pavement uh the applicant has shown that the project meets the storm water management regulations as required by the state >> all through phase four. >> Yes. That's kind of all right. But I thought the town has got the ultimate decision
on the surface water, >> the storm water management. Yes. And the uh ordinance in the township is modeled after D. So they're basically the same same requirements. >> And are you okay with that volume of water and that velocity of the water
going into the creek? >> Like I said, we've reviewed it meets the storm water management regulations. And in terms of the outfall and possible erosion, uh I I did not see it, but I understand that there is erosion there. And we will work with the township, the
SED, and the D to uh prepare a plan that can um elimmit or or or reduce the erosion in accordance with the requirements. There's many different things. We all we all know rip wrap aprons and the like. And there's other
measures that are available. So that's something that we could work out with the applicant >> whatever you have to do. Right. >> Exactly. >> All right. I think that was it. The only thing, guys, I'm reminding $240,000 a month to pump out 40,000 gallons. A lot of money.
>> Yeah. Thank you very much. >> Okay. Um Jay, >> you have something to say if it's about the site visit. uh Jay in Lo8 Livewood Drive. So on the site visit for the first time I got close to the spray fields and several meetings ago when I was trying to figure
out where the spray fields were and there was confusion. Um I was timed out and I respected that and I sat down. Um the audience was really annoyed because they were trying to figure out where the spray fields went. Since then Miss Bontempo and Mr. Fagan have figured out
that there may have been some overlap in the building plans and the spray fields. So, um I don't want to litigate something that's likely not applicable now hopefully. But friend, maybe you can tell us or maybe the applicant can tell
us why is there apparent confusion or no real plan of where the building is versus the spray fields? Do we know how we got to that confusion? I think it's a good question for the applicants team. >> I I think it's a a fair question for the
applicants team. However, um in the exhibits that I'm looking at, there seems to be consistency between the existing use of different parts of the property. So, the spray field is shown on a on the plans I'm looking at and I'm of course
that's they're the same plans that the board has seen and so on. And then their proposed exhibits show where you know phase one, two, three, and four overlap the existing features I think pretty readily. So um I'm not sure how it got
confused perhaps. Um, but I think it's not uh it's I think the exhibits, the maps themselves are are an accurate representation of what exists there now and what's going to overlap the existing features under their proposed design.
So, I it's hard for me to uh offer any explanation. I don't see that kind of disconnect, but I respect that it it could be happening for folks that are looking at this. >> All right. Is it is there a potential that it was just not exactly finalized
exactly how the buildings would be positioned or not? >> Well, I I would suggest that phase one has uh preliminary and final designs with all the details baked into that. >> Yeah. >> Phases 2, three, and four are a little
bit more schematic and preliminary only, but I I do think they are uh two scale. the dimensions all add up and they do overlap each other accurately u but not to the extent of final site plan details is what I would offer.
>> Thank you. >> Yes. >> Ambanto 22 Graan to address your um answer on the previous question. I have brought this up and Wes has brought this up. How it took till the site plan to actually see where the sprayer fields
were. They were never brought up by the engineers, expert witness, by the current owners where those fields were. He couldn't point it out to us. So, we didn't know where it was till we actually walked onto the field. And when I got back and looked at the plans going
back to November of 2024 on the back of the Bonnage headquarters redevelopment plan by the township, which has probably been reviewed by the township engineers themselves. Yeah.
>> Well, how come it wasn't picked up in 2024 that this building was overlapping exactly where the sprayer fields were? And through all of this litigation or discussion with the current owner. This has never been a point or request from
the engineers of the township or anyone on the board. Now, you may not have known because the plans that I've seen in the past didn't really tell you where the sprayer fields were um until 12:3125
was the last one that I just noticed on my computer was updated and actually gave me the size of the lagoon which >> Well, Miss Bonav, could you >> So, I want to know, okay, why wasn't this picked up sooner by so many people
and then addressed in the planning board at any point in time and advised by our engineers. In fact, I could even go back to Ed Broberg with AT&T and his comments on different plants. I've been reading back on everything on this sewage line,
but I really would like to know why the sprayer fields wasn't pointed out by the engineers to our planning board. I can only speak from my and my uh colleagues involvement in this. When we were brought into the process here, I
believe we did write a review letter. We asserted uh all of our review comments on the exhibits that were submitted to the planning board and they are clearly uh shown on these exhibits that we were asked to review. So you told them that
section unit 4 would actually encompass the sprayer field. >> Well, we did our inventory of all the existing sewer assets and we compared that to the proposed development and yes, I think we communicated that to the board.
>> So the board knew that the unit the section 4 was going to be on top of the sprayer field. >> Well, first you can ask questions of the board. >> Fran answered the question. Okay. >> We we >> So you told the board that the sprayer field
>> is exactly where unit 4 is being built built. >> We reported on what we were >> we reported on what we were provided to review thoroughly. I I can attest to that. >> So you told the board
>> and I I He's not saying yes or no. >> He doesn't Well, he's giving you an answer. >> All right. So then I'm assured that he reported appropriately and you guys were all aware. >> That's why it never came up. >> That's that's not true. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. So at this point we're going to close the questions on the site uh visit and uh we're going to open up for public comment. Uh we only have about another hour and a half. So I'm hoping there's we're going to get through. We're going
to limit it to three minutes. So, please come up, state your name, you'll be sworn in, make your statement in a nice civil manner, and then uh we'll go on until we can get everyone who has something to say uh up here. So, uh
>> yeah, and please let's try not to repeat the same issue. Uh we are under a time frame here. We we do need to make a vote tonight. So, uh yes, ma'am, you want to come up? >> I'm ready. >> Okay. I could let me just add before the
question the comment that I spoke with the applicants council um to our meeting today is the last meeting under the current time period set we were given they've extended it once till the end of the meeting today correct me if I'm wrong Carl though but the applicant's
not willing to further extend so to get to the chairman's comment as to why we need to vote tonight we're at the end of the legal time period for this board to act I misstate that or you >> well To clarify, the board was required by law to make a decision by December
30th. We had agreed uh discussed with the board in in open session with the public available as well as the objector's attorney that the extension of time would be granted based upon the fact that we would accommodate a site visit and then this hearing and a vote tonight and that was agreed upon before
we agreed to the extension. >> Yes. Okay. Uh please approach Alicia Unison, 8 Riverside Lane. And >> just for everyone's knowledge, anybody who makes a comment now has to be sworn in for the record. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> I'm sorry. Spell your name.
>> Alicia. A l i cia a unison unus. >> Since its founding in 1998, Citizens for Informed Land Use has consistently and vigorously argued for one core principle of land use policy. preserving the quality and quantity and quality of our drinking water by protecting the
swimming river watershed. For this reason, Celu appreciates that in response to public outcry, the township is addressing legitimate concerns about preventable drinking water contamination at the Vonnage site from the antiquated on-site wa wastewater system. At last
week's township committee meeting, the mayor made a surprise statement that the town is now in discussion with the applicant to extend sewers into this site. Celu has long opposed the extension of sewer service into southern Homeell because it opens previously
protected areas to incrementally and higher density development. Although the township has stated that this extension of sewer service will be limited in scope, deed restricted and size exclusively for the current project. These assertions are inconsistent with
Homeell's historical precedent. Case in point, sewer infrastructure originally approved solely for Bell Work's main building was later extended to serve the surrounding homes that had been planned with septic systems. At that point, the public was assured that the sewer
service would not extend beyond Bell Works. An assurance that is now being abandoned as we consider the Vonnage redevelopment. Once sewer infrastructure is installed, the pressure to expand its use is both foreseeable and inevitable.
There is a viable and far less damaging alternative to extension of sewers. The use of a modern package treatment plant with onsite leech fields and subsurface discharge. Such a system would effectively remove contaminants from wastewater while preserving grounded
water recharge, protecting the integrity of the watershed and remaining fully consistent with Homeell's master plan and wastewater management plan. It would address public health concerns without compromising one of Homedale's most environmentally sensitive areas. For
decades, Homedale Township has made deliberate investments based in science and long range planning to protect our wershed. Public and private funds have been dedicated to preserving open space, protecting groundwater recharge, and safeguarding the drinking water for more
than 300,000 Mammoth County residents. This needs to protect our water quality. This is why the state has designated the area as an environmentally sensitive planning area five PA5. That understanding is also embedded in Homeell's master plan wastewater
management plan and in the R4R zoning adopted long ago for Southern Homeell. The decision the planning board makes tonight will affect Homeell and Mammoth County residents for years to come. This is not just about one site plan. It is about a measure of your commitment to
responsible stewardship grounded in scientific integrity. It is an opportunity to make purposeful decisions that uphold Homeell's long-term planning goals and environmental protections. I urge that your vote tonight respect our guiding principles and leave a legacy
that protects the health of ourselves here tonight and all of Mammoth County residents. Thank you. >> Yes, sir. Swear a firm testimony you're about to give is the truth about the truth. >> Yes, I do. >> Just again spell your name for the
record, please. >> Ian Lavalis Lima Oscar Victor Oscar uniform Lima Oscar Sierra. >> Good. >> You get that? >> I'm sorry. >> You got to do it a little slower. What's
the last name? What's your name? >> Lima Oscar Victor. Oscar uniform. Lima Oscar Sierra. >> All right. You're saying words. She's writing. >> It's fine. No worry about we're good. >> Good to go. >> Yep. >> Yes. Thank you.
>> So, I previously served on the ad hoc vonnage redevelopment committee from January to July 2024. And I come to register my opposition to this project. During my time on the committee, retirement units were one of many concepts, and I believed we would generally explore alternatives that
respected South Homedale's character, minimized traffic, and protected our water. For several months, the committee reviewed nearly a dozen options, and this plan was consistently ranked as the least desirable one alongside other highdensity development proposals. Then
at one meeting, we were told that every concept, save this one, had been rejected as not feasible. It was clear this was no longer a goodfaith exploration to accommodate community input, but a narrowing exercise to justify a predetermined outcome. As a
result, I resigned in July 2024. Unfortunately, regardless of public input or expert testimony, the outcome seems to proceed. It moreover appears the packaging plant was a lightning rod to attract public outcry with the apparent solution of sewage in their
back pocket to be prepared and presented five nights before this meeting. But what is presented as a solution is I fear a Trojan horse for overdevelopment. When asked about the precedent of sewer, town council responded that so long as Home Depot remains compliant with its
affordable housing obligations, it theoretically retains control over where high density development occurs. That is not a guarantee, ladies and gentlemen, but a legal hedging. Irrespective of how this is spun, planning testimony from two weeks ago is
clear. This is overdevelopment and it was never intended for this side of town. To implore at this point seems moot, but the fact remains CHA will be here for a few years and then move on. Some of you will be here over a decade. Nursing units and sewage enabled
highdensity development. Was that the promise of South Homedale? South Homedale was a place where you could car the street and meander down reminiscent trail. Walk quiet arties for half an hour to swim in its streams or run across open fields beneath the ceaseless blue sky. And for a moment
forget that you were just 20 minutes from the sea and within reach of one of the largest metropolitan centers on Earth. It was meant to be a refuge improbably close to God's masterpiece in its purest form and a quiet counterpart to the world beyond it.
My goal on that ad hoc committee was to honor this longitudinal vision, one laid out by Homedale's wise founders who imagined a haven on earth and to safeguard it perhaps in vain for those yet to be born to treasure it for the same reasons I do. I can only hope you
share that vision and act upon it. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else comments? Yes, sir. Affirm the testing I'm about to give is nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> Um I was at the last meeting.
>> Name and address. >> Um Paul Horman. I live in 183 Everett Road in Homeell. And um I just have one question. We had a lot of technical jargon. >> No question. Just comments at this. >> Okay. comments are that it looks like
there's a lot of technical considerations and I appreciate the way the board handled the meeting today. I think you solved a lot of the questions of the town especially Mr. Fagan. Thank you for that. It was good. But uh the
appearance seems to be to try to uh accommodate um growth in Homeell. I would I would think but at the same time uh what happens if the contractor grows and builds and does everything that we
said is going to be done but nothing works what's the responsibility of the contractor taking over this project. I mean, after the houses are built, uh, the office building is reconstructed
and, um, the pipes don't work or they're not big enough, is there a, uh, a penalty or a way to grab back redoing whatever has to be done from the contractor. But I I just uh want to
consider that uh because a lot of times I've seen it and I'm from New York and I've been around the world that a lot of contractors promise the world get their job done, get the approvals they need from regulatory bodies and then walk away
where a lot of it doesn't work. So I'm just hearing a lot about the sewer and uh spraying systems which I don't know much about. Uh I am a marine engineer. Uh sailed on ships for seven years. Worked
for a lot of big companies including Exxon, Sealand Corporation. Uh the biggest shipping companies you can think of. One of my projects was to install sewer plants. They're very good. Uh they put them on ships. They come into New
York Harbor and the water comes out white and clean unless you had something that shouldn't be in there. Uh just I'm not saying don't approve it, but I'm saying that uh this is another consideration that what happens if it
doesn't work and the contractor is not here anymore who holds the bag. >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. Uh yes, miss. Uh who's back there that raised their hand? A lady. Yes. Come on up.
Good evening. >> Affirm the testimony about to give is nothing but the truth. >> Yes. Lynn Leang, 7 Grand View Drive. Good evening, Township uh planning members. I just want to start off with a few important facts. Approximately 71 to
75% of the Earth's surface is covered by water. Yet only 2.5 to 3% of that is fresh water. An even smaller fraction is actually accessible and usable for human needs. Water is essential for life. It
sustains our families, our farms, our industries, and our environment. And today, water scarcity is a global reality. Mr. Chairman, you made a heartfelt speech last week explaining how your position is a thankless job. And I
appreciate all your efforts. I truly do. I know each one of you work very hard, but like you said, you are human and you have feelings, but so do the residents. We all have strong feelings because when all of you are sitting up there, we all view you, whether you are a volunteer or
you're paid, we all view you as government officials. And when we feel like our voices are not being heard and our decision makers are not listening to us, very strong emotions will come out. As you have seen, there is a water crisis across the world and there is a
crisis in this country. One driven by division, disagreement, and inability to work cohesively together. This is Homedale. Look around us. Think about all the community involvement, concern, and passion just for this one issue. If
we can harness this wave and work together, we can craft an exemplary plan that makes our town stand out for its thoughtfulness and stewardship of natural resources that to many of us plus our children and will rely on in the future.
This is the town where the homeale horn antenna helped to confirm the big bang theor theory. A place where brilliant minds came together and created a worldchanging knowledge. This legacy reminds us of what can happen when people unite around and share a purpose.
So I ask, what is happening in this town now? The most basic natural resource, the one that we all need to survive, is on the line. Yet we cannot seem to agree on how to protect it. Not just for today, but for future generations.
I ask you to consider this. How long do you plan to have your children to live? Are we only planning for another decade of water for them? Do we plan to have them grow up? Do we want them to grow up in a place as beautiful as Homeell without having to worry about whether their drinking water will remain clean
and available? I beg the township planning committee before me, please plan further into the future. Please do not only think in long decadel long time frames. The current proposal to extend a sewage line from Bellworks to Vonnage site may appear to meet immediate needs,
perhaps even fulfilling housing needs until 2036. But in the grand scheme of things, 2036 is not far away. Nine or 10 years from now, another generation will be here governing Homedale and they will not remember our debate here.
>> Just you could finish. We continue to make decisions based on short-term conveniences or cost savings. We will simply repeat the same problem again and again, but at a much greater expense for the future generation. Infrastructure changes like sewage line expansion is also a long-term
environmental consequence. They will alter rainwater naturally infiltrate that inf infiltrates the ground and recharges the aquifers and reservoirs. These recharges processes are critical especially during droughts. Disrupting them disrupting them will weaken our
water resilience in a time of scarcity. This can be disastrous for our waters communities water security. In a president once a president is set it is harder to protect this resource from further development pressures in
the future. We are not asking you to halt progress. We're just asking you to plan wisely beyond the next decade to think about 2050 and beyond. History shows that decisions made to save money in the present will always cost far more in the future. It is not a right. It is
not right for our children to bear this burden. If we as a town can speak together respectfully, collaboratively, and a long-term vision, we can preserve our most precious resource and we can protect Homedale's people, environment, and its water. This is a legacy we owe our children. Thank you for your time. I
really appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> Um Yes, sir. Want to come up? >> He was here multiple times. >> Peter Man. >> Yes. Just can't spell your name. >> Peter, M E R I 59 Bethany Road,
Homedale. Um, you know, I'm not sure about the particulars. I know we all been kind of blindsided about the pipe going to Bell Works. That's fine. That's what's going to be. But, um, stake me if I'm wrong. If we're running this pipe, I
guess it's coming from bondage, right? Back down to Homeell Road. Is that how it's going? >> Well, no, it's just comments now, sir. >> No, that's okay. That's fine. So anyway, if we're going to dig up the road, and I know it's supposed to be exclusive for Vonnage, is now not the time. Septic
systems in home deline real estate are 30 to $50,000 per homeowner. Is now not the time to talk about a bigger size pipe for down the road? I don't know. But, you know, to hook up Spring Valley, the other
homes, this is what's, you know, going on now. And honestly, we should be negotiating with the developer on some of these expenses. Put the bigger pipe in a row for down the road. >> No. Okay, guys. I don't know.
>> All right. >> Yes, ma'am. >> You swear affirm the testing you're about to give is the truth about the truth. >> I do. Yes. Um, Taylor McFarland, T A Y L O R. Uh, McFarland MC F A R L A N D 82 Atlantic Street, Keyport, New Jersey.
Grow up at 180 White Road as well. Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Taylor McFarland. I'm the conservation program manager with the Sierra Club New Jersey chapter. The Sierra Club is the oldest and largest environmental nonprofit in the country with almost three million members
nationwide. In a state that's reaching full buildout, redevelopment is needed. But we need to do it right. Um especially in environmentally sensitive areas that provide essential drinking water for Mammoth County, including vital commercial farms. Decommissioning
the outdated wastewater treatment plant as a step in the right direction. It had a history of violations, couldn't handle the volume and type of waste for Zura, and would have serious implications for the Swimming River Reservoir and neighbors like Hot Brook Farm. We do have some questions about what this
means for the application. Does it change the local state permits or approvals? What's the timeline? Was there analysis done to compare the benefits of a new wastewater treatment plant versus a sewer line? What's the route of the proposed sewer line? Can the sewer line handle the volume and
type of waste coming from Missouri? How can we trust the township that the sewer line won't entice new development? Will Homedale continue its preservation progress by permanently conserving the land along the sewer line to prevent harmful development? What will the decommissioning process look like?
What's the timeline on that? Will the decommission happen in tandem with construction? Will the lagoon be capped or will the sledge be completely removed? What will be the implications for the surrounding environment and community? It's extremely important that this process is done right because an
improperly decommissioned wastewater treatment plant and lagoon can cause severe long-term environmental damage leading to contamination of groundwater reservoirs and agricultural land. Because there's so much uncertainty and un unanswered questions, we still
believe a new upgraded on-site wastewater treatment plant is a better option than a sewer line because it provides environmental protection for local groundwater, avoids massive infrastructure disruption, and meets strict state environmental
standards. These these systems treat and return water to the soil, helping to replenish local groundwater and nourish vegetation. A new wastewater treatment plant is better because it provides localized natural treatment that reduces the risk of largecale contamination from
sewer pipe failures or overflows. This is extremely important because this property is next to a Seamun stream that feeds into the Swimming River reservoir and is right across the street from a commercial farm. We are not asking to stop this project. We're just asking to make it better. Almost 335,000 people
could be affected by Azora if this project is not done properly. So, let's make sure we do it right. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else? >> Yes, Miss Pontempo. You swear affirm the test we're about to
give is the truth and not the truth. >> I do tempo 22 Grand View Drive. >> Take it off. >> I got to read my quotes. I'm going to be reading directly from the wastewater management plan West specifically to the Southern Slope
section pages four and five. The southern slope. All of the southern slope of Homeell is designated as a PA5, an environmentally sensitive area under the SDRP. These lands provide significant buffering to most of the Ramison stream
system and the swimming river reservoir. The southern slope has been developed consistent with policies established by the township's master plan since 1970. The reservoir serves as a portable water source for over 300,000 people in
Mammoth County, including Homeell. The Willowbrook, which forms the western and southern boundaries of Homeell. The majority of the southern slope is not served by sanitary sewers and is designated as a discharged groundwater
area. The southern slope area outside the current service area of BRSA is to remain a DGW discharge to groundwater area and not be sewered. Wastewater discharge in this area is limited to subsurface disposal systems
as defined and outlined in chapter 199 of the NJAC 7 semicolon 9A-1.1 at squell and the New Jersey pollutant discharge elimination system regulations. I'm not going to cite the NJAC alt. The township committee retains
the wastewater planning authority for the DGW areas and others not sewed area other not sewed areas of the township. Homedale township contracted Havens and Emerson to prepare a water quality master plan.
The southern portion of the town for the southern portion of the township. The report recommended that the southern portion of Homeell not be sewered. Havens and Emerson recommended that the township continue the use of on-site septic systems, establish a water
quality monitoring program, upgrade on-site systems, and expand the township's role in monitoring the construction, maintenance, and operation of on-site septic systems. I'd also like to add, I was at the TC meeting previous
to tonight, and our mayor stated that there were two options. He only discussed one. The other option was to have an on-site a new on-site wastewater management treatment plant, but that never got discussed.
>> Those are my comments. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else before we close comments? Yes, ma'am. You swear affirm the test you're about to give is the truth. >> Yes. >> Spell your name.
>> You can take that off. >> Kathleen Foley, Lake 297 Lakeside Avenue, Colts Neck. I guess I'll start. Yes. >> Yeah. Um I don't have anything prepared, but um I agree with what many of the speakers are saying in that it's
important to recharge the groundwater and especially in this area. And everyone's talking about the sewer and how much there is. Well, you have to remember that they're also uptaking all that water from um
is it from the wells? I don't know where the well where the water is coming from. You want to return it back to the area that you're taking it from. So, I don't really know a lot about this project, but I know um that you want to keep it in the discharge area. And what seems to
be missing in I don't know, maybe Mammoth County is protection of these rivers. I see in my hand I have a Raway River Association, 24 municipalities together. I have a Lawrence Brook watershed partnership.
Like many rivers in the state have um many entities protecting it and it I don't know the swimming river I I don't know if there's that many really protecting it like it should be especially with the um service of the reservoir serving so many hundreds of
thousands of people. So um that's all I'm going to say. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. Yes. >> Okay. >> Uh for the record 9:04, Mr. Jim Carrian
had to leave. Thank you. >> Matters. You swear affirm the testing you're about to give is the truth. >> I do. Ken Gh Street, New Jersey. I actually didn't have anyone. Um I do want to go on and say that.
>> Is this on now? >> Yes. >> Thank you. Four scores in seven years ago. Um Kenji Ha Street. Um I don't have any prepared remarks, but I do want to go on the record. Um I think many of us here are not opposed to the redevelopment. um
study plan agreement and now the actual application. Uh clearly you heard a lot of speakers we should do this right. However, this whole process from the time it started to now it's just been incredible. Um you know there's a great
saying that you don't see the forest because of the trees. Well you know and I say this with the utmost respect. We have a lot of professionals, consultants both for the township committee, for the planning board and yet it is the public who have raised questions and then force
a 11th hour solution and even today we don't have a lot of documentations. You know, you hear about a letter going to the planning board, it's being read. I don't see that posted on the website. There's a resolution that was passed for this um force main. That's a resolution
passed by township committee yet the formal resolution is not on record that we can tell uh tell so far. So this whole process uh it just been terrible. When we went to um the redevelopment study and then redevelopment plan
township committee said well you know there's going to be an application and the public plan opportunity ask questions. You come to the planning board for the application and what happens? Well this is conforming to the redevelopment plan and we're not asking for any variances. So basically you got
to approve this thing. So, you know, this is not one to write home folks. We got lastm minute changes and yeah, I think it's absolutely correct. It's a major step to avoid contamination of drinking water, but there are s changes
and there are so many details we're not aware of. So, yeah, nonsense the applicant does not want to extend the deadline, but the planning board does have the right to say no. Let them reapply, let them appeal. there's an opportunity to get more details, get
more questions. So, I I urge you to say no for tonight. Thank you. >> Yes, Mr. >> You want to affirm that the test you're about to give is the truth and nothing about the truth? >> Yes, I do. Peter Franco five hot Brooklyn and it's
Franco Farms. >> Yep. Okay, we're good. >> Okay. Uh I was going to say the same thing that uh neighbor says before. Basically, I would say that my own experience with planning boards is they don't have a complete site plan. you
don't have a development agreement that's up to date, that's at least memorialized. Um, I think the board has the right not to give them by default, but to turn them down based on an incomplete application.
We haven't, none of us has seen the site plan. There's figures that are missing, not only from the development itself, but from surface drainage. There's a lot of things that we think are missing and that the public should review as well. All right. On that, I'm going to remain.
Guys, you did a terrific job, but I think you're taking the pilot and the money ahead of the public. All right. And it's my own opinion, but you guys did a hell of a job. A lot of work. And I my point is you can say no and not
give them default until they come up with all the plans and figures that they're required to give before you give the approval or just give them preliminary approval and give them final when they get all their stuff ready. At least it'll give the town enough time to get all the plans going, all the
acquisitions for the force main so you don't get stuck paying $250,000 a month in pumping. Think about it. Thank you. want to confirm the testing you'd like to do. >> Yes. Jello 18 live drive. As I said many
times, I was on the original ad hoc committee for this project. We looked at a bunch of things and um several of us concluded this was an okay project. We weren't thrilled with it, but we were okay with it. As I've said before, based
on, in fact, words with our leadership in town and the developer, a very strict addressing of the wastewater. It turned out it wasn't a serious plan for the wastewater. Um, and as you've seen the fallout here and everything I've said,
um, I would prefer an on-site new septic system over the pipe. My concern here now, if you vote on this, is there's been a history now of the residents of this
town not being able to rely on the words of people in this town and the bodies in this town to do their job. And my concern now is if this goes ahead with the pipe that the costs of shipping, the cost of
remediating, all of these are huge uncertainties. I'm afraid this town could have a big tab at the end of the day and we're going to be the bag holders. So whether it's the township committee listening or anyone else, the environmental people, this is probably beyond you, but we are
watching and you will all be held accountable for the decisions that are made from this point forward because this could be an open-ended ballooning expense to connect properly, to shut this down, to handle the takeaway, and
we're all watching. Thank you. Uh, is anyone else? Okay, then at this time I'm going to Oh, yes. Come up here. >> I do. >> Patrick Tuskita, 56 Line Road. First thing I want to thank
>> just spell your last name again. >> T R I S C H I T T A. >> Okay. Thanks. First, I want to thank the committee for doing an outstanding job over a number of years. This has been
rattling around for a long time and I think you've done a superb job, especially Scott as uh as chairman. And I want to thank Les uh he was right at it and uh really asked some great questions and uh and I enjoyed this
walking the site visit with you. Uh to our professionals again you've done a great job planners and engineers alike uh great job and thank you very much for guiding it through to this point. The um CHA I think it's an excellent plan. We
have a vacant building sitting there, 350,000 square feet, completely unused, completely useless to Homedale. This plan will turn it into something very useful to Homedale units for senior living as well as a senior center, 7,000
square feet, uh five acres of land for a um five acres of land for a new first aid uh EMS building. So, uh, I think from a Homedale standpoint, walking courts, the boholic
character of Homedale would stay, uh, as is. And the one thing that I really want to, uh, thank is the person who three years ago proposed extending the sewer line from Bell Works over to Azer. That person really had some insight. Three
years ago, that was made. And I'm glad that um Mayor Bontep um mayor improved uh remembered that and proposed it. So that is a great addition. Sewers is the way to go. Uh that is not a luxury item
in Homedale. Uh we have highspeed internet, we have water, we have natural gas. Uh sewage is something that our houses should have as well. That shouldn't be a luxury item that only the few get in homeown. And with that, I
encourage you, it's a looks like to me uh that it's a fully compliant uh plan. Let's vote on it and move on and looking forward to uh seeing when the place gets open. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um did she ask another
comment? >> Well, if this is the last comment, Ann, I'll let you up because I want to get to it. Anybody else? >> Is anyone else after Anna? I'm closing after Miss Montego >> since I've been sworn in already. I don't have to be sworn in again. Correct. >> Correct. >> Uh, two comments. Uh, at the site visit,
Mr. Tretta went around saying that there was a 4-in discharge pipe from the uh, winter discharge sanitary sewer. I just like to point out on the new plans that I got on the 31st of December, it's an 8 inch pipe. So, I just wanted to correct on that, Mr. Trasha. And also, Mr.
Triceta, with regards to uh, Mayor Patadudo's comments regarding the uh uh Lucent facility. Um referencing the spring 2013 newsletter.
In the back, he's quoted as saying in front of the mayor. Uh the entire Lucent property was approved for sewers in the 1990s. Homedale can be assured they will not be required to tie into the sewer system, nor will any adjacent property be
allowed to connect due to a very clear and specific requirements. So I I don't know where you got quoted that he was endorsing it. >> Patrick, >> okay. I just want to make sure that you weren't speaking clearly enough. I
misheard you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> All right, Christine. I'll let this will be the last comment. >> Yeah, I'm going to let >> So, let's just make sure Carl the uh chair is willing to let ask or make a comment even though she's
represented by council. I just want to tell you that. >> Normally, I would object, but since we had such a pleasant discussion at the site visit, I'll allow it. >> Thank you. So just just for the record, your council's not here tonight, so we just should put that on the record. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Um to the planning board. >> Well, yes, >> Kristen. Yeah. >> The test you're about to give us is the truth about the >> I do. Uh Kristen Solero, five hot Brook Lane. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Uh to the planning board, I want
to thank you all for your patience as we work through this process. Thank you for coming to all of these meetings and for listening to first our concerns, then our experts, and again our concerns. I hope you recognize that we were desperate to explain why we believe Azor at Homeell poses grave threats to public
health and safety. I want to also recognize that the township committee tried to come up with a plan that they thought would address our concerns, a force man which would eliminate potential drinking water contamination. And now it's in your hands. It's not fair.
I would also like to point out that I'm not here with my lawyer tonight and I have one message left. Let's face it. This plan is a toxic plan and we need to leave it in the in the past and try again. We have tried very hard to show
you that you have the grounds to vote no. This plan Azura at Homedell goes against Homedoll's master plan. I know citizens for informed land use or CEO tried very hard to explain to town leadership from day one that this plan is dangerous. They were ignored. You
have to ask yourself why. Azora goes against our wastewater management plan which our engineers never bothered to read. Had they done their job, read the plan, and stuck with their original recommendation that a new package plant be installed, maybe we wouldn't have to
go through all of this. You have to ask yourself, why was this allowed to happen? Azura goes against New Jersey's designated designation for this area, planning area 5, which means this land is considered the most environmentally sensitive and that it should be
protected. Instead, it's being degraded development by development. You have to ask yourself, why are we going to let this happen? Now, the township committee led by Mayor Roco and Prebadutoo is seeking to allow the developer to tap into a sewer system that his own father,
Mayor Patrick and Preb and Prebadutoo said would never be tapped into again. You have to ask yourself, why would Rocco go against his own father? Why were all of these plans, designations, and warnings ignored? And then why why was the result of that
dumped in your laps? Of course, mine. It's probably what the developer wanted all along. But because of all of the reasons I just reviewed, this was never supposed to happen. I want you all to know that we believe all of these issues are so serious that we are working on legislation at the
state level that will ensure nothing like this ever happens again. This legislation will be complemented by an educational component that helps our children understand why not only our drinking water, but on a larger scale, the watershed is precious and needs to be actively protected.
One hand feeds the other. This plan, Azura at Homeell, is another blow in a war against our community and our right to safe, clean drinking water. Do we want to be the people who paved the way for carpet bagging developers to issue another deep cut to the watershed? How
many more times can we say just one more? Just one more. This will be death by a thousand cuts. I'm sorry that this is on you tonight. I want you to know that we are here to support you if you can vote no. I just have no finish. >> Thank you. Azor at home is
overdevelopment in an environmentally sensitive area. We need to protect this land and our watershed. The best way to do that is to reduce the amount of development on the property and to install a new package plant with subsurface leech fields and absolutely no wastewater lagoon. We knew this all
along. Thank you again. >> Thank you. Well, Ron, make it quick because I said that was the last one. So, please, >> thank you for allowing me to speak. Uh, sorry. >> You swear affirm the testing we're about to give.
>> I do. Thank you. Ron Emma, 32 Ladwood Drive. Um, just a quick comment that you all know that you obviously this is a volunteer organization. Any vote that you take, you also know can and probably
will be overturned by the TC. So, we can't vote you in or vote you out, but we can, as as evidenced tonight and every other meeting on this subject. There's still clearly some issues with
this project. It was the bombshell was dropped at the meeting. Everyone was happy about it. This is a great outcome. Let's do do the sewers. But in the time since then, obviously, we've had some time to think because it was like a bomb was dropped on us and it was wow, we
were in uh stunned silence. So clearly there's still some issues. So my suggestion is you guys send a message to the town council so then we as as voters could actually
make them go on the record and hold them account uh responsible because clearly we can't hold you responsible. You're a volunteer organization. Send them a message. There's still some issues and problems with this project. Vote no tonight because you're probably not
going to be able to get another extension. Vote no so that we you make the town council go on the record with a yes or no vote and we the voters can decide whether we want to vote them back in. Thank you for your time.
>> Okay. Uh, no more hands. So, we will close uh public comments. Uh, before we get to the vote or whatever or I'm going to say a few things. Um, and I have a lot of scribble notes
here, so forgive me if I if I ramble a little. Um, you know, we've sat up here for several meetings for several hours and contrary to what people think, I've listened to everyone and a lot of you have had some very valid concerns
and uh I appreciated all of them and uh but one thing is that a lot of you don't want to listen to what I've had to say about the process and what our rule what our roles are here. Uh we are a semi and if I speak out of turn, Marty, please
correct me, but we are a a semi-judiciary type of committee here. You know, we we're supposed to vote on not on opinions, not on our feelings, not on emotions. We are here to vote based on the rules, the advice of our
professionals, and the advice of our attorneys. Um despite what people think, you know, we did not sell the land, we did not negotiate the deal with the buyers, uh we didn't do anything. You know, normally this planning board is
here to resolve issues of when there's non-compliance or if there's a matter of a variance or if there's a a waiver that's see agreement so we can move forward and approve these plans. And whether I disag whether I agree 100%
or I don't agree 100% with things that are said that really should not be factoring into our decision sometimes as a board because it's not about what we think it's about what the laws provide. I don't agree with all the laws and I'm happy to hear Christine talk about going to legislation because that's the right
way to do it. I don't agree. I didn't agree originally that maybe they should have been allowed to retrofit, in my own personal opinion, an antiquated system, but the laws exist and the laws allowed them to do that. Whether I agree with that or not, I could tell you there's
thousands of things every day in every building department around this country where people come in and want to do the bare minimum. That's compliance with the codes because let's be honest, you know, they don't want to spend money. you know, if anyone was doing something at their uh respective property and we
said, "We want you to dig out your your septic tank and spend $50,000 because that's the right thing to do and you should incur that cost." That's not something we're here to do. Um, you know, and I know West doesn't want to hear D, but they're the governing agency
that deals with this issue. We're all If the DOP tells you you have to, even if they want to do something different that's better and the D doesn't agree, you have to do what they say because they're the ones that govern. Just like you have to do what the IRS says for your taxes or if you want to go to any
other government agency that oversees a specific uh area of of the law. Um so yeah, so a lot of your concerns are valid. Okay. And you know this project's been going along for how long? How many years? Westino three, four years. When
does >> they've been here um three months, three to four months? >> No, but I'm talking about the projects. >> Three of those months we've been chasing a rabbit hole. >> Yeah. Which which may or may not been which might be the case. We are not here. I understand Mr. Franco's concerns
about the money and the costs and as a resident and taxpayer. I don't want to spend more money either, but once again, that's not my decision. We are a planning board and I will have Marty chime in for a second to say, you know,
I have no agenda. Okay, I will tell you for a fact on the record, hand to God in the lives of my children. I would vote against something that was detrimental to my family if I felt it was right and it was in the best interest of this town. That's how I'm wired, whether it's good or bad. Uh so you know that's you
know even if I thought something was 100% wrong but I'm told that that's they're legally allowed to do it then I'm going to vote yes in those situations because that's not my role to be to to give opinions on things. Now before we get into it I'm going to ask
Marty when we ask to vote there's two outcomes. We can vote yes or we can vote no or you can pass obviously. But if you vote so I'm gonna ask Marty that if we vote no so everyone understands what is the possible outcome by the planning
board voting no so they're fully aware what could happen. So in a normal application, you're subject to potential litigation by the >> Yeah. So >> in a normal litigate a normal
application, you vote no typically you're subject to the potential that the applicant could file a lawsuit against the board saying you were arbitrary, especially when everything we've done, everything we've heard is it's a compliant plan. All right, that's the big issue. It's a compliant plan. uh and
your your leeway to vote no under the law is is minimal if non-existent. So uh the things that are governed by other outside agencies do not come into play. Um obviously the the big maybe the bigger issue if you vote no is as Kate
already mentioned is the affordable housing component. So, this is not only a normal a regular site plan, it's also part of our affordable housing fourth round plan. And that has the potential, and Kate can correct me if I'm wrong, to uh throw the fourth round settlement
agreement uh out and potentially expose us to other issues with other sites and other developers or this developer coming back for things that we don't control at that point. Uh so that's actually a very big component of any uh project that involves affordable housing
which this you know which the planner board in the past has deemed this you know the housing element um consistent. So we've already approved the housing element part of it for what's going on here. So my opinion clearly you'd be arbitrary. Uh but um obviously people
can vote the way they want and uh I just ask for the record. You put your opinions on the record so we can try to defend that position and whatever it may be down the road. >> And let me ask you this, Marty, for my own knowledge because I don't know the answer to this. A lot of times I know the question the answer before I ask the question, but I don't know. If we were
to vote no, could the applicant then say forget the force main, we're going to go back to the original plan. Could they do that? Yeah, they they could go they have to comply with the redevelopment agreement if they move forward with this project.
If a court if they go to court, most likely the court would probably make them go with the current redevelopment plan as amended. But we don't control that decision. The court controls that decision. Uh and again, if it's if there's a problem with the reduh with
the affordable housing plan, um all bets are off at that point. I'm not saying that would trigger uh you know a rejection of our settlement agreement or or trigger a breach of it but it has the potential for that too. >> You would you would have potentially multiple courts involved >> multiple courts could be involved at
that at that stage because you have Mount Laurel judges you have typical appeals judges and you know we're not saying that we're just saying this is facts. This is not you know this board knows how we talk and and this is this is all just facts. And to go back to what Marty said about the um you know for both both this re both this
redevelopment plan and the um uh fair fourth round fair share plan both of those were reviewed by this board and deemed to be consistent with the master plan. And that I think is you know where a lot of what Marty's talking about comes back to um if you were to vote no because this board has seen all these
documents before. Um and and so yeah, so when we say that there is not a lot of of of not a lot of where are you going to hold on to to vote no, that doesn't mean that you don't have an impact on this application. I think we've seen that through the last couple meetings, but it is at the end of the day a fully
conforming redevelopment plan that has been um approved in accordance with this board. >> Yes. Yes, it is. >> Yeah. And and just to reiterate like I've been giving asking people uh for reasons legal reasons not opinion
reasons to deny the application and you know still even though I've heard a lot of passionate statements and a lot of great questions and a experts and all that stuff from my from what I'm being advised from our attorney and from our professionals is that there is
nothing in my in my what I'm hearing that's a grounds and if we you know I'm still Not sure which way we're heading here, but I just want people to understand that the voting no just opens us up to a whole other
it's not going to stop it. >> Mr. Chairman, can I just make one more comment on behalf of the master plan and how that relates to everything. Something that's come up a lot of times tonight is the home wastewater management plan which was prepared in 2002. I will defer to the engineer the
engineering professionals here, but my understanding is that at the time that that was prepared, the township held certain jurisdiction over certain areas that has been changed completely statewide. So that Mammoth County's wastewater management plan is the only
document that document supersedes anything that was done before that. And so the that 2002 homeell plan, which as far as I can tell was never actually formally adopted by the the county um even before the law changed, which I think was in 2007 or 2008, but the
Mammoth County wastewater management plan is the governing document here. The Homeell Township Well, the Home Del I'm just I just want to qualify that because people keep referencing the township's wastewater management plan. That is that is a that document has been superseded. And it also the the reason I bring this
up also why I'm saying this is because that's not part of the master plan either, right? >> That's not an element of the master plan. And so that's not something that's under this board's it was prepared by the township by a consultant for the township 26 24 years ago, but it was not prepared as an element of the master
plan. So I just want to reiterate that because I know it's a little confusing. There's a lot of documents floating around, but that that was never an element of the master plan and at this point it has been superseded by the county's wastewater management plan. Okay. >> Okay. Um, let's see.
Public. Yeah. Okay. Well, I think I've I've said my piece. So, get to this point. >> Comments. >> Um, you want comments? Uh, >> call for a motion first.
>> Okay. So you want to make I guess does anyone want to make a motion to to accept the redevelopment plan with the resolution >> accept the application major subdivision delivering final phase one and phase 2 that's what's on the table >> right
>> and accepting >> subject to all the conditions we talked about tonight >> subject to all the conditions we talked about tonight outlined by both uh Mr. Kemman, his his first one in his letter and all of uh France that he put on the record that um you know if that if the
board so decides to choose that and I think there was a comment about erosion an erosion plan being submitted if you want to add that to the equation as well. >> Yes, that that Craig that that Craig talked about. >> Okay. So that's So someone make that motion, right?
>> Does someone make that motion? >> I'll make the motion. >> Second. choice. >> Okay. Mr. Man made a motion. Miss Plaus a second. >> You want to? >> Yeah. So, does anyone want to make uh so
many comments before they go? >> Yeah, I would like to make a comment. >> Okay. >> Go ahead. So, I am not good off the cuff, so I wrote down my thoughts. Please bear with me for a minute. Um before discussing my reasons for my decision on this application, I want to be clear about the role of this board.
We're an administrative body. Our job is straightforward. We all have taken an oath to apply the municipal land use law and the township zoning, including the adopted redevelopment plan, in weighing the credibility of the witnesses who testified as to the plan, both for and
against. We are here to determine whether an application conforms to the rules in light of the law and our oath, not to weigh popularity, emotion, or personal preference. We decide what is legal, not what is liked.
One of the undeniable facts is that this application is fully conforming to the redevelopment plan applicable to this site. Even so, we have listened carefully and asked questions and requested additional information, including voting for a site visit.
As part of this process, we have heard testimony from three expert witnesses testifying for an objector. While qualified, in my opinion, none presented facts that could justify delaying or denying the application. In one instance, one of the expert witnesses
selectively cited a portion of one section of the municipal land use law to suggest this board could delay action because of the wastewater treatment approval had not been issued by the D. That is simply not correct and seriously diminish the credibility of his testimony in my eyes.
Not to mention that such testimony failed to state that the board has an obligation to make its decision within the time period provided in the municipal land use law or any applicable extension of such period as has been agreed to by the applicant. That extended time period runs out tonight.
Under the municipal land use law, when an application requires approval from outside agencies like the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, the board cannot withhold or deny the application based on the absence of those permits. We have no jurisdiction over D standards or enforcement and it
would be improper for us to try to substitute our judgment for theirs. Instead, the law expressly allows and expects the board to condition its approval on the applicant obtaining all required outside agency approvals. Our municipal professionals across multiple
disciplines have also advised and testified that this propo this proposal is conforming use that does not seek any variances or waiverss with the one original waiver for lighting being withdrawn during the hearings. They have further warned that failing to act could expose the township to serious legal and
financial risk not only for being arbitrary but due to the fact that this application is one of the sites that makes up the township's fourth round affordable projects. As many of you know, Homeell, like all New Jersey towns, must meet the statemandated affordable housing requirements. While
beyond the scope of this board, this project represents a meaningful step forward, meeting those obligations responsibly, helping the township avoid overdevelopment and costly litigation seen in other communities. I also want to address the public process. We are all volunteers and while
this proposal is sensitive, especially the public's reaction concerning the permitted on-site wastewater treatment, our meetings have strayed from civil discussion into jeering outburst and personal attacks. While I personally found such con conduct unbecoming of the very citizens
that I know, the attacks on some, particularly towards our chairman, were simply uncalled for. Scott conducted these meetings exactly as required, balancing public input with the board's obligation to maintain order and stay within the legal scope of what we can consider. Even after he was forced to
read a statement reminding the public about how our meetings run, the conduct continued. Claims that we came into these meetings with decisions already made are completely false, and I resent the implication. In closing, there are many factors this board cannot consider despite being
raised by the public, including issues related to the nearby airport, off-site traffic or roadway impacts, and the on-site wastewater treatment facility. All of these issues are governed by outside agencies. Based on all the factors, it is my belief that this fully conforming project will redevelop a long
vacant property into an economic benefit and provide opportunities for seniors to remain in the community they love while having the added benefit of helping Homeell meet its affordable obligations. I hope the public better understands what we can and cannot factor into our
deliberations and that if this application is approved, the community recognizes the positive impact it will bring. Ultimately, we are all working towards the same goal and share the same commitment to moving home forward while preserving the character and quality of life that make it such a special place
to live. >> Thanks, TJ. Um, anyone down there? >> I just have a couple quick comments. Nothing uh nothing prepared. Uh, first, I I appreciate um Mr. Franco for raising the uh erosion uh concern on the site
visit. That was the one of the main reasons uh I had walking away from that and I was encouraged by our professionals addressing the storm water mechanisms and um the required improvements that are going to be needed or addressed uh through impervious coverage and the lack of impervious
coverage. Um I I'm in a unique position where I sort of wear two hats uh being on the town C committee and also being on the planning board. Um, while I'm new to the planning board, I have um sat in the audience for uh a number of the
presentations and expert witnesses on this project. Uh, and when I wasn't in the audience, I did review those um those meetings online. So, I do feel I am uh up to speed and comfortable with all of the uh discussion points and
issues raised. I appreciate the um our professionals outlining tonight uh some of the caveats or concerns or or elements to be added to the resolution. I think those are important uh items that need to be addressed as we move forward. Uh and I am comfortable making
a vote tonight. So, thank you. >> Ready? >> Yeah. Um the um the site, let me go to this way. We if
we knew that the spray field was directly onto uh phase three building, I think the first night we would have had at least an 8 to1 no vote um to proceed with that. That was obviously an
engineering um I don't know fauxa. Um my question uh I guess from Marty would be um if those site plans were um were approved I
should say deemed complete without knowing without labeling the we're going to call it the spray field. So first of all they should have never been uh deemed complete to begin with.
Secondly when we find out that well we we consider that it's incomplete. What is what is the process there? Do do we then deem it incomplete or is the the the applicant just say hey you made your
choice. Let's move forward specifically referring to the labeling of the spray field. In other words, what happens when it's deemed complete and we discover there's a problem? That's that's my first question. >> You can ask for more information or >> you could vote your say it's incomplete
and that would be your vote >> if you got to a vote at meeting one you could be clearly asking for >> at that time more information. I mean obviously it's not applicable now. >> Does it does then the meeting stop or it just keep keeps going because >> keeps going but you heard Fran's
discussion too. that, you know, a lot of the plan is preliminary. Uh, just phase one is final. So, a lot of the detail I'm not I'm not an engineer. I don't know if that would have been on a final plan, but not on a preliminary. Uh, leave that defer that to Craig and Fran. >> Thank you. Okay, I'll move on.
>> Yep. You could have >> um um reading from this guide to planning boards and uh for specifically for instance regarding um site plan approval. Uh the function of the site plan review is to ensure that when all of the elements are joined together, the
development will not have any adverse effect on the surrounding neighborhood or community. Before granting final approval for a subdivision, the planning board should require the applicant to
as a condition of approval to guarantee that all of the improvements will be installed. To determine whether the improvements are necessary, the planning board should consider the following. The protection of public health, the preservation of the ecology and natural environment to
the extent possible. The improvements should be in conformance with good engineering practice. In terms of the plat details and what should be on the plans, individual municipalities may include what they may deem as appropriate provided they are
consistent with the standards of the plan. Overall this um project has been I think um lacking um from meeting one, two, three and no not not the first meeting but the
second, third and fourth um the whole thing uh revolved around this u this reuse of the New Jersey um wastewater uh uh permit and at the last minute that goes away.
Some of the problems I have with this uh plan are I really have a problem with people living on site prior to the sewer uh being available. Um it was very sketchy in terms of how that process is going to
work. Apparently we're pushing again that uh stuff onto the New Jersey DP. I have a problem with the sewage being stored on site. I have a problem uh with calculations of pvious versus imperous uh coverage not
being uh made available to us. Um I have a problem with no definitive um answers on closing the lagoon, the timeline associated with it, and the mechanism that enables them to work or
even who is going to work in that conservation easement. I have a problem with the storm water pipe that's underneath the lagoon. Not only because that provides a path of um effluent to reach this stream directly
um and constantly uh but the fact that that storm water pipe is the key to uh preserving any storm water on the site which again goes back to the calculations.
I would much The words I've heard on the applicant side are I think that's what it provides. That's my understanding. Our intent is and this is contemplated. So um they could very easily I talked
about the new the two New Jersey D permits and the fact that they go with the land. So, I'd be more comfortable if they agreed to abandon those permits so as to not be able to reactivate the um sewer on-site sewer plant so that as
that sewage is being stored on site, November comes and they go back to uh stream discharge. Uh I haven't seen any um information that says they're going to abandon uh those permits. And uh with
that um just I would feel much better if um we disabled the treatment plant so that cannot be uh brought back into use. Um I believe there were very much many elements that are incomplete in the site plan. I think that the amount of
liability I could probably go through 10 things that the liability can come back to let's say bite us and leave us holding the bag for a lot of a lot of money. That's my comments. Thank you.
Good evening, guys. Uh, I'd want to briefly explain my vote so that the basis for it is clear and reflected in the record. This application was reviewed over multiple meetings, and the board devoted significant time in hearing testimony, asking questions, and reviewing the material submitted. All
testimony and comments presented throughout the process were listened to and carefully considered. My vote must be based on the evidence before the board, the township's ordinances, and the scope of this board's authority. It cannot be based on personal views or preferences.
After reviewing the full record developed over those meetings, I find that the application complies with the applicable ordinances and requirements within this board's jurisdiction. Thank you. >> Okay. Um, yeah. Anyone?
No. Any comments? No. Okay. So, um I guess the motion was seconded by Joyce. >> Uh we have a motion by Mr. Man, second Miss Plaus. I just want to put on the record Mr. Gary Vanderham and Mr. Michael Antonucci are able to vote since
they had the chance to review the tape and they do have a um paperwork for that. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. Mr. Connelly, >> yes. >> Uh, Mr. Wonderham, >> yes.
>> Mr. Fagan, >> no. >> Miss Plaus, >> yes. >> Mr. Bell, >> yes. >> Uh, Mr. Antonucci, >> Mr. Man, >> yes. >> And Mr. Silverman,
>> uh, yes. >> Motion has passed. Thank you. >> And I would like to say to those out there, I mean, I would encourage you to keep going and doing what you're doing and hopefully maybe with the township and the applicant, maybe things could could
change, but at this point, uh, our hands are tied, I think. So, um, so with that being said, uh, have a motion. >> No reports and motion and second to close. >> Yeah. Motion. >> Second.
>> Thank you. Have a