test test okay we got here our names on look at that good evening no we we don't we didn't order yet because I need few more and need few more and we'll order with
one sh good evening ladies do you want and everybody has with so at the end just give me back so I can recycle save some treats you mind um microphones are on Just for that's awesome I have the stuff you us I
asked for yeah for the large I have oh good I think I have everything I think I have everything thank you see I did just in case it's much better if you do nice big sheet of
paper yes we're gonna call him actually John uh he's doing YouTube but then we're going to call him right now actually see hello good how about yourself I asked about FaceTime and they said no to
FaceTime so YouTube is the way to watch the video is it zero or one all right because Demitri how are you the March 5th meeting Jason bur how are
you yeah John's John's not here yet I'm gonna move the phone over to where John is sitting so that he can put on I'm going to see how I feel and that will determine if I physically think your set so um I'm just going to confirm with Marty for a second
here thank you thank you coming in I'm actually so because it's okay and then down you know exactly andom did not
as hello are great how are you last yes thank you we're gonna ask for your your uh your feedback on some because she said 90 minutes is all we have they had we weren't prepared for that we
thought it was he did and I said I don't how are you got you Michelle consult how's
it okay can't complain too much traff expert for us so we want to get done so we around 9930 so are we changing the order is it the engineer first I'll help you definitely
do engine engineer first then then then cross cross examine and then the traffic and then before we get to cross examin on traffic we're going to have Michelle provide her so we may not do any questions from the okay of anybody until we get engineer done traffic done and
traffic done but you'll come back I'll let ATT oh can you see us right now yeah I see you perfectly okay okay we have a full house I don't know if you can see the full house too yeah I
see two people missing oh no I'm talking about the audience too oh can you see the you can't see the you can't see the audience no I I only see straight ahead I see from the second
forward okay like that lady walk just yeah yeah okay it's okay know I all right how you do good how you doing
see you see you how are you Hi how are you good all right um we're doing the engineer first then we'll have a plain of question across the uh engineer then the traffic
coordinator and then where before we complain to cross the traffic coordinator we're going to have Michelle rehof from Kier explain her share with us her traffic report her traffic stud and then the plaintiff hopefully we don't go past 9
9:30 yep that's I got that on the list here minutes we're going to actually if any changes January 8th and February 10th right yep I got that on here please thank you I have my Robert's Rules was planning for to have everything posted already and we a little behind here so I don't want to I don't want to be yeah hopefully we fly
back through that quickly it's 659 so we're just possibly John any we get any texts from John yet I'm G to just text him real quick see yeah him and I both we're the New York commuters you got here earlier yeah you
know what it's the congestion that's working out well but you know what they're reversing that now the traffic into city has been phenomenal I think I don't think they're going be able to do it it's amazing I hope it's so beautiful I get in in 50 minutes 50
minutes yeah it's I think John's gonna come New York's fighting well that's it came out today Trump's gonna try and reverse it well I know that but governor herle was also going to
so okay not to allow okay good good good yeah but but honest to God the commuting back and forth good time to be a lawyer right it's incredible it's like 45 50 minutes no there's no cars on the road
It's All Buses it's amazing so you're in favor of oh totally for selfish purposes I mean even if the bus for environmental purposes hey even if even if they raise your fair two or three bucks right it'
be worth ex I I pay it I I think it's worth it I mean I hour and a half an hour and a half sometimes in the old days yeah an hour and a half to get into the city every other aspect in our lives we pay for convenience how long do
you notes it's do you drive in or I drive not every oh yeah that's better I could but I would be I would have to find another me yes for the most part I'm inid
want to make a comment he's officially on meeting when he does a roll call he'll do that okay thank you and I'm gonna put your speaker there oh you mic wow I do
it all right 701 what do you think do that good evening everyone welcome to the hell zoning board meeting I hereby call the February 19th 2025 zoning board meeting to order Arena can you do the
roll call please you have in accordance with the open public meetings Act njsa 10 4-10 and the regulations governing remote meetings njac 5391 to5 I hereby announce
that adequate notice an electronic notice of this meeting was provided in a notice dated January 14th 2024 that was sent to the Asbury Park Press Two River Times posted on the bulletin board and on the main access door to town hall
filed in the clerk's office and posted on the Township's website wwwh Homedale township.com IA can you do the roll call please Mr Berkeley present Miss campus present
Miss Gerard present Mr JM Pao present Mr Lani here Mr oranos for the record Demetri attending by telephone so we have to make sure we speak up a little bit when he start thank you Demetri can
you hear everyone uh yeah mostly okay so we got you in there okay good Mr Moka here uh Miss Castello Mr frola absent thank
you uh can I ask everyone to please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance and remain standing for a moment of silence for our military police and First Responders I pledge allegiance to the flag to the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one
nation under indivisible with liberty and justice for all thank you um okay so we're going to look over the approval of minutes from the last two meetings was everyone able to further review the minutes of January
8th 2025 and February 5th 2025 were there any uh edits changes or questions about those minutes no okay uh if there are none may I have a motion to approve the minutes please all motion approve minutes can I have a second
second just for clarification are we approving both of them together or one at a time what do you think if everyone's eligible same people we can do it both uh no they're not so unfortun have to do sep January 8th
2025 um eligible to vote uh Mr Berkeley yes Miss campus yes Miss Gerard yes Mr Jolo yes Mr Lani yes Mr Moka yes Mr
orphanos yes uh Miss castellum thank you can I have a vote on the February 5th 2025 meeting minutes motion to accept the meetings second
eligible to vote Mr Berkeley yes Miss campus yes Miss Gerard yes Mr Gan poloo yes Mr luani yes Mr orphan pulos yes Miss Castello minutes for February 5th and January 8th
2025th uh have been passed successfully thank you okay thank you uh we have one item on the agenda for today's meeting so let's get started uh Francine can you please read the first item okay Zoning Board of adjustment number one Zoning
Board of adjustment 2023-2024 Red Hill Road Block 21 Lot 4 and 4.01 r40a Zone D1 use variance bifurcated application seeking a D1 use
variance to construct two three-story Medical Office Buildings in the r40a residential Zone thank you Francine uh Mr Fier would you like to give us a recap it's been a while since we've last heard your testimony of uh the the prior
three meetings um testimony yes good evening everyone salvator alfery clear GI Kobe alfery and Jacobs on behalf of the applicant I'm not sure if you want councel for the objector to enter appearance now well when you're finished so just by way of introduction we were here September 4th is the first hearing
at that time the applicant testified and our civil engineer testified um there was no cross-examination at that meeting on September 18th our engineer came only to testify and there was no cross-examination on December 4th our
traffic expert John Ray um testified cross-examination began but was not completed the board at that meeting um had requested that he provide a copy of his Gap study that he referred to during the course of his testimony
subsequent to the December 4th meeting the Gap study was provided and revised engineering plans were submitted that was at as a on January 28th so um we we then received new reports from Colliers
December 10th and Kate I mean February 10th and then Kate February 12th um and so that brings us to tonight our our I understand that the procedure for tonight is going to be that we're going to bring our engineer up to provide testimony to discuss the plan
changes we're going to bring our traffic engineer up to discuss his Gap study and then we're going to open up for cross-examination of either or both Witnesses and hopefully get after our traffic after your professionals yes thank you so that's our introduction
that brings us up to where we are tonight um obors council is GNA put an appearance in for the record good evening ladies and gentlemen of the board my name is John Kaplan I'm from uh Herald law and Warren Township New
Jersey here on behalf of the uh oransky family at 121 Red Hill Road in Homedale thank you thank you so let's um just as the beginning of the year I want to swear everybody in again so for our professionals and we'll start with your engineer as well now everyone just raise
your right hand you from the testimony you're about to give for this application it's the truth nothing but the truth so help you guys I do I do for the record our the board's traffic in here also was supped at the same time we'll have you introduced later on tonight thank you and and Mike here um
since there's one member on the phone you make sure you speak right into that microphone would you reintroduce yourself to the board because there might be some new board members too so but we don't need to re-qualify him because he's already aced
sure my name is Michael waloski I'm a principal engineer with shortpoint engineering uh it's my name I signed the provided use variance plan and to remind the board this is a bifurcated application so it's not fully engineered it's just we're just seeking D variant use variant for now and Mike
your office prepared the plan that was submitted on January 28th the revised plan I correct okay would you summarize for do you have an exhibit to show the board I do don't we that
so we can have him start I'll figure it out after you know while you start go ahead the exhibit that you see you is an updated colorized version of the revised GI plan that was recently submitted to youren the exib ti sender
1257 road to February as so first we made a few small shifts in in a few site elements the first being we took the entire lout the building side right there this one testing sounds good
so the first of those shifts being the buildings the sidewalk the parking the drive AES those were shifted in a Southwest Direction approximately 5T away from the parkway RightWay next the two buildings by themselves were shifted
in additional 5T in that same direction finally I'll say approximately the upper or Northeast half 2/3 of the site was shifted an additional 6 ft and one of the effects of that was
that the area reserved for Bio retention Basin one shrunk slightly and three parking spaces in that perimeter were lost now as a result of all those shifts the two buildings themselves are now 16 ft further away from the Parkway right
of way and not withstanding uh Miss Keller's testimony that the individual bulk variances may not technically be required here one of the benefits of that is where a 50ft front yard setback was required to the parkway previously
44 ft was proposed Now 60 ft is proposed removing the need for any such variants now the the main benefit and the reason for these shifts was to address probably one of the main comments to shift the septic fields for each building from their previous
location which was adjacent to the Southwest or bottom property line away from that property line and as you can see we've relocated those as far away in the opposite direction as possible so that they're between the two
buildings and the Parkway right away uh bearing in mind the required dimensional setbacks of those septic fields themselves we are maintaining 10 ft required to the property line and 15 fet required to the buildings typically
that Dimension is 25 ft in a scenario where you have a building that doesn't have a basement where it's a slabon grade construction as these would be that Dimension can be reduced to 15t and those are the two circles on that diagram right the two the two rectangles
two Okay okay right they're still green so they're may be a little hard to see from here okay okay then the next revision we focused on was we had discussed uh reducing the parking and really focusing on removing the spaces that were in close proximity
to the adjoining residential areas so those are really three areas first we had removed the spaces in this vicinity immediately Northwest of building a that was 20 spaces next we removed the group
of 24 spaces that was in this vicinity the most Northwestern area of the site and then finally we had removed the row of 38 spaces along the southwestern property line that were power with both that line and the drive
AIS so including the removal of those spaces the three I had mentioned that were lost surrounding the bio retention area and I believe two more in the perimeter of the remaining parking we had a net reduction in parking from the
previously proposed 199 spaces to now 108 spaces bearing in mind that 108 includes four electric vehicle spaces which which are allowed to be credited as two each then at the building square footage
totaling 29,000 760 Square ft that provides a ratio of 3.63 spaces per th000 square ft of building area um along the lines of all the parking reduction you see that Associated to a reduction of lot
coverage uh previously 37% I believe was proposed whereas in the Zone 25% is typically required uh we are now proposing 26% so a substantial reduction but still a non-conformity given the Zone uh finally a few other minor
revisions that were made to address comments by the board we had added an ambulance drop off area which is indicated immediately between uh buildings A and B that could be shared by both buildings as needed uh second well it's not shown here on this
colorized rendering it was indicated on the use variant plan that was resubmitted uh that being the water services for the project so those would come in connecting to the existing New Jersey American main on the opposite side of Red Hill Road that tap would be
made and the services would come in in the Eastern property corner and then would enter what we refer to in the industry as a hotbox which is an above ground heated structure where some of the mechanical equipment is enclosed uh that would be situated approximately
here and then the the service would circulate to the site feed the buildings and any hydrants that would be required then finally given the the additional reductions of uh impervious service and parking areas we have a result of increased buffers to both the
North and West uh first focusing on lot depth of the property line to the north we had previously testified that the required buffer was calculated to be 133.6k uh we had previously testified that the required buffer was calculated to be
61.2 ft we're now providing 79.2 ft from that Southwestern property line to the adjacent Parallel Drive aisle uh the key benefit there is now that with the relocation of the septic fields we're able to provide a fully landscaped and
buring screen to get screen the proposed development from the adjacent property that summarizes the revisions made to the revised plan just one followup the again the buffers you've described Etc they're they're all conceptual and if the board were to
Grant the use variants we'd be back with site plan approval with far more detail on the type of planting Etc is that correct that's correct U but it would be substantially similar to what you've just showed the represented to the board yes yes um that's that's all we have to
summarize the changes Mr chair okay thank you um uh we're going invite question okay he's going to wait okay okay all right so we'll open up to the board if you have any questions of the um engineer on the changes to the site
plan I just want a clarification you Ma mentioned something about the septic being away from the buildings if it doesn't have a basement it's one thing and if it does could you just repeat what that was so the require the requirement from the septic
rules the state septic rules uh give a a range a variety of Dimensions from one structure to another in this case we're talking about our septic fields now if you have a typical building where a lot of times you have a septic field you're doing a house the house has a basement that separation distance is required to
be 25 ft in this case these buildings will not have basements they'll be what we call slab on grade uh Foundation type um in that instance you're allowed to reduce that separation to 15 Fe that's what we're holding here okay give or take an additional couple fee one
another question you didn't mention anything about ADA compliance spaces you mentioned about electrical Vehicles those are indicated on the uh proposed plan to meet the Ada regs they are immediately fronting both buildings uh how many parking spaces are
you having now 108 108 Okay so not 190 but 18 I have another question you mention that your detention Basin is shrunk from previous what ramifications of that what were you required why did you have it at
this stage we don't see any ramifications particularly given the reduction in impervious surface it was a minute reduction in square footage of that Basin area uh compared to the impervious surface that we lost it's probably a net gain of storage volume
for the site relatively speaking do we have any other questions from the board go ahead no go ahead oh Demetri Franc is one more too I'll keep you busy okay um that hot box you're talking about what does that look like is that an unsightly looking structure
what what do it look like generally is and it's unfortunate that in many circumstances it is required it's a large um gener metallic above ground enclosure um that un is required to be in the front of the site by New Jersey American water so we would ensure that
we provide adequate excuse me screening around that structure uh Demitri did you want to ask a question yes um the rear of the property that's listed as a landscape and buffer area what will the surface be
will that be a grass that's going to be maintained or is it going to be left wild and then part two of the question would be can the applicant stipulate or special condition that there would be no more additional buildings put on the property at any future
time to answer part one of that question I know in the in the rendering you see here it's it's left kind of untouched that was intended to convey that there's no need at this time to provide anything in that area it could be left as is it could receive additional plantings as
the board May request um to answer part two of that question I would defer uh to answer your second part um it's impossible to say what will happen in the future I think we could clearly state that nothing else can be put on this property until we come back for the
to the board with an amended use variant and site plan application but um 5 10 years from now if there's a need for more medical and it could work we may want to do that I just it's hard to predict yeah but and sell any anything in the future would have to come back to the board to the zoning board to the
zoning board so it really is if if the board were to approve this and were to approve a site plan that would be inherent in the um in the approval so you know you would they could always you may not have her mic on I can't hear her too good I'm sorry Demetri it's Kate
sorry I was just saying that um yeah I didn't realize I was no I can hear it much better now I was just saying that you know if if the board were to approve this if they were to approve the site plan down the line anything would have to come back to this board whether it was an expansion of this use and or or a proposed of an something for for another
use so you know that that I think overrides the potential for having a condition because a relief a condition you have to come to the board but having to come for a use variance would override anything other question you said that the HotBox structure would be um would
have screening what exactly did you mean by SC you said that the HotBox structure would have screening what exactly did you mean by that screening so our intent would be to provide uh of adequate height Evergreen screening so that it's it's generally out of view
and if also desired it can also have the Evergreen screening and a fence the fence andc isn't all that different from the enclosure itself so the Evergreen screening may be sufficient Evergreen okay John you'll get a chance at a site
plan hearing if this B for use is improv have more detail at that time absolutely and and Mike you could those come I know you just said sometimes can be metallic but they're also available in neutral colors green I have one town that requires them in green that might be a little onerous but there are options for
screening that can be done yes I think that makes sense given how often they're required and they're required right in the front the Mr chairman I have a quick I have a question if there's no more board uh questions we're going to move to the professionals next so Kate um if there's
no more questions please go ahead Kate sure um I just wanted to uh you know we we noted the um reduction in parking that was proposed here um I think that we had heard testimony on that at prior meetings we had acknowledged that there technically is not a parking standard
for this use however it is all part of the overall review of the use variant so you know I think that we welcome the idea of having less coverage on this site even the variance is not technically required but we're always we always welcome that especially in this type of environment where you're on
septic Etc um we noted in our letter that you know there that there it might be a potential for banked parking on the site because what the number of spaces that's proposed here I I don't remember the exact ratio off hand but it is substantially less than what is required
in the M medical Zone in town so the applicant um the applicants professionals gave testimony at prior hearings you know based on the um usage at Medical Offices in hell I know that the the applicants principal also operates medical offices around the
state so I think that that was part of their argument for reducing the parking but at the same time it is substantially lower so we mentioned in our um letter that that could be a potential for you know some certain amount of Bank parking to be approved as part of this and I think this is something that would be
reviewed as part of the use variance plan because it affects the site layout in such an intense you know such a such a kind of an overall way so that said um would do you have any idea of where that could potentially go on the site have you thought about that at all yeah
absolutely we had reviewed uh that comment and our first thoughts would be to introduce I would say the majority of depending on what number we feel is comfortable in the long run where I had mentioned the loss of 20 spaces adjacent to building a and 24 at the
northwesternmost area of the site those are the first two areas that we would seek to reintroduce as banked parking um to purposely not reintroduce the row uh adjacent to that Southwest property line okay yeah and and do you have any idea about you know what what your estimate
of how many spaces you could potentially do over there I I don't think we'd be looking to have the total you know maybe 199 but just just an idea yeah again that was we had lost in this area it was 20 and this area was 24 so we're able to
bank however many we feel as that the professionals feel is appropriate to reserve okay and and I'll leave the rest to our uh engineer Consultants but I that was in my letter so I wanted to address it on the record thank you thank you Kate uh Mr White do you have any questions I think all my questions have
been asked already okay uh that being the case um we going to have Mr Kaplin do you want to come on SO with your consent we've uh agreed unless you want to change it to
let him go right to his traffic reserving your rights to do all question of the engineer from prior and today uh and then when traffic's finished we may get our traffic person just to get that finished tonight and then obviously you're free to cross all his
professionals however long you need to after that we're not trying to cut you off we're just trying to get our traffic person who's here special for us tonight to but she can't go until they finish up I'm sorry you can't hear sorry so uh Sally you're good to bring
up your next witness we'll call John Ray John just just John because it's a new year we'll swear you in just do you swear if i'mm to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth so help you got I do okay and you're you've already been accepted as a traffic expert thank you John uh after the last hearing and
and as you indicate as I indicated at the beginning at the introduction and the summary of where we left off um course examination had started with you but um you were referring to a gap study that you had agreed to provide to the board that Gap study to speak closer to
the mic okay and that Gap study is dated January 21st 2025 correct 2025 so that and that's the only new traffic data that you submitted to the board correct all right so would you summarize for the board and I know you discussed the Gap study but now that they had the report
to review can you discuss that with the board how you how you used it and what your conclusions were sure well just to uh go back over what was initially presented to the board during my previous testimony and John I just wanted S I was up to A4 I don't know if
you had that so before we get too far out it we should Mark that as I have A3 up to A3 okay so we'll mark that as A4 just for the record sorry the exhibits may need to be okay correct it if we're wrong okay
so uh I originally prepared a full traffic impact study dated December 8th 2023 five correct that A5 and included in that traffic study was a gap study that I conducted on Red Hill Road at the uh site of the proposed
driveway and uh I concluded that there were more than adequate gaps substantially more gaps that were necessary in order to get our left turns out of the site during the critical afternoon peak hours when traffic exiting the site and the traffic volumes
on Red Hill Road would be at a maximum but since some time had passed since that Gap study which was done back in November of 2023 I wanted to update the data I wanted to get a little bit more current data so we went back we did an
additional Gap Study last fall the Gap study was done on September Tuesday September 17th 2024 and I can report that the results of the Gap study that we did in 2024 were very similar to the original Gap
study from 3 to 4 pm which was the the lowest number of gaps that we recorded we actually did the Gap study from 3 to 6 p.m. and the 3 to 4: p.m. time period was the time period when there were the
fewest gaps and there still were 87 gaps over 8 seconds in length and a lot of those gaps were substantially in excess of 8 seconds some of them were in the in the teens and in the 20s and the reason why I bring this up is because once you
have a gap of let's say 17 20 seconds you can get multiple cars out of the driveway during that bigger Gap but at the the end of the day the result of the Gap study is that there are more than sufficient gaps to safely get uh left turns and right turns out of the
proposed site driveway um that's that's really the only additional information I have to provide um and since the parking number and I know you provided this testimony previously but since the parking ratio has gone down to 3 six and
change um can you just provide some test some testimony to support that reduction I I forgot about that uh and one of the items in the coler's report uh that they've asked for is the backup data at the last meeting I had testified as to some parking studies we had conducted
here at Medical Office Buildings here in hondale Township and I had testified that we found the maximum parking ratio that we recorded was I think 3 .3 parked cars per thousand square fet at any of
the six sites that we took a look at and so the the ratio that we're providing here is in excess of what we found was necessary at those other office building Medical Office Buildings here in hell we believe it'll be sufficient but as our engineer uh Mr waloski testified to just
a few minutes ago there is room to bank some additional parking if the board and the board's experts feel it's necessary to provide some additional parking we believe the ratio that's provided will be adequate uh the only other thing I would add to that is that in terms of
how many more additional spaces we might need to bank I took a look at the Institute of Transportation Engineers latest edition of the parking generation manual and if we use the 85th percentile Peak parking ratio that the it reported
for Medical Office Buildings we would need approximately in order to meet that ratio we would need need about 137 parking spaces so we would need about roughly 29 30 more banked parking spaces should that be the direction that the
board wants us to go to again we don't think we need them but in order to reach that number and I think that number was also in the Collier's report they kind of recommended that as long as we could meet the 85th percentile Peak parking ratio that the it presented and their
data uh that they'd be comfortable with it okay so do you have any more testimony to provide no I I know Michelle had some comments in her report so we can we'll open up the board questions first and invite Michelle up uh second uh anyone from the board have any
questions for the yeah I notice most of the traffic uh uh projections were for no Bild situations now we know that there's some predicted bills on the Middletown side uh how does that impact
your traffic study if if in fact some of those builds occur well I looked into that and there was a proposal for 70 town homes on the opposite side of Red Hill Road on the Middletown property my understanding and somebody can correct me if I'm wrong that has not been
approved and it is in litigation so the the the proper protocol in the traffic engineering industry is to take into account projects that are approved so hopefully if that project goes forward they include our traffic that would be the the protocol they're not approved it's in
litigation uh the only thing I can tell you is the addition of in my estimation the addition of 70 town homes on that property would not impact the Gap studies that I've done there still will be plenty of gaps for our traffic to get out safely so I have considered it but it's not included in any of the data
because it's not approved it's in litigation and I'm just following protocol yeah another thing I noticed is that there's a uh you have two lanes coming out of the uh uh of the property uh I I don't know how far back
those two lanes go uh and and so and be before you get to those two lanes there's a section there's obviously only one lane in into that uh would either of these two uh
Lanes be back backed up with cars so that the uh uh so that you'd have car is backed up uh uh on the uh you know on the internally internally okay if you give me one second to look at the Q analysis from the print outs I can I can
hopefully answer that question it looks like the 95th percentile Q length which is what we use would be one vehicle so it shouldn't be an issue it looks like we can hold about three cars in the left turn lane and two cars in the right turn lane so it shouldn't be an
issue any other questions from the board go ahead need a mic I think is that better okay was any um was any other day um reviewed or was it just
the the S the September 17th day uh the other day we did do a count back in November of 2023 we did a a supplemental Gap study and actually the supplemental Gap study that I did back in 2023 was also in addition
to traffic counts that I conducted for the so there were actually if I'm not mistaken give me a give me a chance there were four days we actually collected traffic volume data back in September no three days back in
September of 2023 on September 14th then we did the follow-up Gap study on November 16th 2023 and then the last Gap study was done September 17th 2024 so we actually collected traffic
volume data on three separate days the only other thing I would add to the uh situation is I've been out to the site numerous occasions during the afternoon peak hour the last of which was this afternoon to sit there and watch the traffic flow during the afternoon peak
hour to make sure that the data we collected would was modeled correctly and I could see the gaps that were produced in the Gap study and I can testify to the board the gaps are there and was the morning peak hour reviewed
at all or Solly the afternoon the morning peak hour was not for two reasons number one the traffic volumes on Red Hill Road were lower during the morning peak hour than they were during the afternoon peak hour and the second part of that equation is we generate more exiting traffic during the afternoon peak hour than during the
morning peak hour during the morning peak hour it would be be mostly arrivals to the site the afternoon peak hour would be departures so the combination of higher exiting traffic and higher traffic volumes on Red Hill Road uh would would cause us to you know to to
know that the critical peak hour was the afternoon peak hour thank you you're welcome any other questions from the board if not I'd like to invite Michelle bof from kers sure
to provide any share any questions yeah um I'll just introduce myself real quick uh Michelle brha from Coler engineering and design um I'm a principal associate there I manage the uh traffic planning division Vision um I have been involved with and reviewed uh dozens and dozens
of of applications just like this um so I will go ahead and get started um I did review uh Mr Ray's uh both of his reports that he provided the original report in 2023 um as well as the most recent report that he provided with The
Gap analysis um January 21st 2025 um I do agree with his findings from a a traffic methodology perspective um you know he followed the protocols as far as the trip generation the Capacity Analysis um one of the things we did
comment in our letter was was about the parking um I do feel as though with the the additional I believe it was 44 landbank spaces that they were potentially able to provide um that would bring their their number up to
that 85th percentile it parking Generation Um so I am comfortable with the proposed parking Supply with the addition of those landbank spaces um being being close closest to that it number um I would request uh just a copy
of the the parking studies that they did do um at those six sites just so we can review that and and have some level of comfort um the only other thing that I will pull comments on and I know this is going to be part of the site plan
application as well as the county view um is just the site distance on Red Hill Road um at the location of the driveway you have a little bit of a vertical and horizontal deflection I know Mr Ray mentioned in his report that there would be a sight triangle easement and some
clearing uh that would need to take place but again that would be probably part of the site plan application um so that that would really be my my one concern is the site distance at that location and and we concur that we need
to get a sight triangle on the opposite side of the road I I did testify at the last meeting as to the need for the sight triangle and we concur we need to get it just in response to the request for the parking um data that John referred
to he handed me his report um from June of 2023 which I'll send to the board and to Michelle and the board professionals directly because we only have the one copy and Council of course okay after tonight all the all the data that's been requested is in that report so six home
sites are yes okay and that study was requested by my client in order to make sure that he was going to provide the proper number of parking spaces for this project so that was something that we went out and we did before we even made an application to the board just to make
sure that when the site plan the conceptual site plan was developed we had enough parking okay any questions on the board for Michelle all right none being seen um what thank you uh I'd like to invite up John Kaplan
to ask questions of both the engineer and um our traffic consult one minut time yeah if it's okay yeah I think the engineer first we're gonna do the engineer i g say I'm here you might as well do me first but that's okay well before you leave John Joe do you
have a sense who you may take longer with certainly okay so yeah if we can finish Mr Ray then he won't have to come back uh possibly I'm fine with whatever Mr Kaplan wants to
ex public right never mind do yeah evenes I use the microphone please that one's that one's live John Kaplan again from heral law and Warren Township New Jersey on behalf of neighboring Property
Owners uh as the board is aware uh our office did start conducting cross-examination of Mr Ray I believe back in December so with the additions and to conclude that cross examination start
with Mr Ray right now did you in your analysis uh perform any traffic analysis Prov any report as to the traffic on the msk site yes needs to be closer to the mic and did you provide anything to the
board with regard to that study yes that was in that was included in my original traffic study of December 8th 2023 we looked at the impact that this project would have at the signalized intersection where the the Garden State Parkway ramp comes off at exit 114
opposite the msk driveway and uh based on that study we concluded that we would not have a significant impact on the operation of the traffic signal there would be very minimal increases in delay no no decrease to the level of service and no significant impact it it's in the
traffic study and I know you just testified about the 70 uh townhouse units that are in litigation and is that the only application approval residential non-residential in the area that you're aware of that I'm aware of and you're
not aware of anything in in the immediate vicinity of the site no okay and did you do any Oprah requests for police reports on Red Hill Road no and what about the intersection of Red Hill Road Garden State Parkway and
msk vicinity no so you're not familiar with any accidents or safety issues in that area he has to talk closer to the mic Jason he's I mean I think it's that other microphone might be better sure I you
know yeah yeah okay I'm talking ladder okay that's part of my nature I guess we switch microphones toet so that's the same for speeding tickets as well you haven't performed any study on that
no so if you're making a left-hand turn from the site I'm sorry into the site from left from Red Hill Road in your opinion is this a dangerous condition making that left-hand turn uh the site distance for the left
turn movement into the driveway is good so that's not an issue uh my expectation is that we get the use variant from this board and we proceed to site plan and we proceed to get a Monmouth County planning board approval they are probably going to require a left turn
lane which will require some widening on Red Hill Road so the answer to that question is my expectation is we're going to provide a left turn lane on Red Hill Road and it will be safe and what about that with the for now the lack of the site
Triangle Well there's no traffic now so that my my test testimony is that before we generate any traffic to Red Hill Road we have to have the site triangle so that that site triangle would be important to this application correct in the use of this property it's it's a
safety issue it's important to any application yes and was that lot part of your application not part of this application no and you're not aware of the proposed tenants in the site so you have no idea the frequency of delivery trucks garbage
trucks size Etc oh I no I'm I'm familiar with Medical Office Buildings we've probably done 50 studies for medical office buildings over the years and for the most part no tractor trail of traffic a lot of UPS trucks FedEx trucks
box trucks that deliver medical supplies things of that nature So based on those studies a fac a facility of this size do you have an idea of how often we're going to get deliveries garbage trucks Etc
garbage truck probably two times a week um other deliveries multiple trucks on an everyday basis delivering medical supplies things of that nature and you didn't provide any turning templates for garbage trucks delivery trucks I did not because I did
not prepare the ples I don't know if Mr waloski did but um that's usually a sight plan issue and as far as turning templets you say is a site plan issue is that your same answer for emergency vehicles uh based
on my quick review of the latest plan I don't see any issue with getting a typical designed vehicle in there garbage truck a fire truck uh what we would call an s30 single unit vehicle with a 30ft wheelbase I I don't see an issue
there's not going to be any conflicts with large fire trucks you have you coordinated with the fire department about access to this site uh again usually uh the fire department would be something we' do at site plan but we we would have to submit these plans at site plan to to the fire
department to the emergency services people and get their approval and at this time in your traffic Studies have you identified any mass transportation options in the area I don't think think there are many we have the north Jersey coastline couple
of miles away but I'm not sure if there's a bus route on Red Hill Road okay so without knowing the tenants based on your experience with medical office buildings of this nature do you have any idea based on demographics
clientele uh the type of person that would or would not use mass transportation or would need mass transportation my traffic he assumes everybody would use a private automobile it's it's a worst case scenario okay now you testified
previously that two-thirds of the traffic exiting the facility is going to make a left correct correct and how did you come up with the number splitting it between 2/3 and 1/3 well I several reasons why I did it that way number one looking at the population
densities in the area and the access of course from the parkway it was my estimation that most traffic would arrive and depart from the north the second reason why I did that was because I wanted to do a conservative analysis with respect to the number of left turns coming out of the site driveway and by
assuming that 2/3 would go to the North one/ Third to the South it probably if anything overestimated the number of left turns because again that's the critical movement that I wanted to make sure we had capacity for now when you did your Gap
analysis and based on your experience with demographics of these types of sites would there be a larger number of senior citizens that would use these medical buildings and if so do you take into account their reaction times when you do a gap analysis it depends on the
types of Physicians and medical users that are in the medical office buildings there could be some that cater to the senior community but there's no uh to the best of my knowledge and Les Michelle knows something different the it or any of our professional organizations do not have
any factors that we can apply you know for senior drivers are you aware if it applies those factors when they come up with their estimates studies numbers not sure I understand the question when it comes up with their
different standards for different types of uses of property are you aware if they ever take into consideration when when analyzing a use of a property they take into question demographics specifically in this type of situation the age of a driver I haven't seen any
published data from the it and when you did your last Gap analysis 3 to 4 o'clock you said was the busiest correct are you aware of what time the high school and M Middle School get out probably a little bit earlier but
I'm not sure so if it was and you didn't even start until 3 o' correct correct so had you started earlier would you think you would have noticed any difference if both the high school and middle school traffic volume traffic volumes would have been lower on Red Hill Road based
on my experience everybody asks me the question well the schools let out at 1:45 or 2 o' the thing is there's very little commuter traffic on the road at that point in time so I'm very confident that the overall traffic volumes would be lower for example between two and 3
o' does Gap perception change whether it's light out or dark out in my opinion it does but again because we've got so many multiple gaps well in excess of 8 seconds it's not an issue in this
case there's all the questions I have for Mr Ray okay thank you uh any follow the board any board questions questions for the board Jason I have a question a couple things okay
Dem go some of these things will be for the engineer but I I've been listening here and I've been uh writing things down uh some of them may have to do with an architect if there's one available so depending on what it is and who can answer it um that's what I'm going to
say so ramp first of all uh the first the handicap spots that we have in the front the cros area will those be ramped so that if first aid responder has to come there they can pull a stretcher right up a ramp or is there going to be a curb there so so to me why don't we
wait till we get the back yeah and um so do you have any questions for the traffic traffic study the gapud um well I mean it might be considered traffic uh ballister in front of the parking spes in front of the building that's for Mike
engineer okay anything else Demitri for The Gap study no that's it we'll bring the engineer back okay so before Mr C before John do you have anything for our traffic engineer or I do not okay okay
okay thank you thank you Mike do you want to come back up would you would you like to open to the public for traffic or um we're trying to You Gotta Be You gota be a while you think yeah okay maybe you should okay
get the traffic out of the way okay okay I'm sorry all right at this point we'll questions if there's only questions of the traffic for the traffic study do we have any people in the audience that would like to ask come on up is a microphone do you want to share
that microphone uh please state your name slowly state your name and your address for the record please yes hi Christine Harry I live at 12 Fox Hunt Road uh my question is um I heard that uh there would the
road would be potentially made wider to accommodate for a left turn lane uh where would that property how where would you get that space where would the property come from to to widen the road it at the left turn lane has hasn't been laid out yet but it would likely take
place both on our side of the road and from the opposite side of the road okay thank you can I just ask a followup on that issue that's something the county yes puts into play because you guys don't do that the county makes a decision the county has designed yes
and the county has designed standards and if a left turn lane is warranted they pretty much hold firm to their design standards uh question for you then uh if they take some uh property from your side of the road would you have to push
back the uh the two lanes a little bit that that's possible and that would be something that would be adjusted at site plan that's a possibility yes okay do we have any more questions from the audience from the public yes come on
up again just state your name slowly and clearly and your address G Stephanie 8 Fox Hunt Road um I have a question the traffic study did you do anything in the morning because I know back in
September like I take that road every single day about 8 o00 between 8 and 9 it's very very crowded I'll give you some numbers because uh I did open to the the raw traffic counts that we did for the original traffic study the peak
hour in the morning occurred between 8:15 and 9 915 basically what you're describing total of 1 1554 cars in two directions on Red Hill Road peak hour in the afternoon
1,882 three 300 cars higher okay but your afternoon was 3:00 not 2 o00 correct from 3: to 4: there was still almost 1500 cars it's higher okay it it is what it is the afternoon peak hour is usually higher in
most plac places all right thank you you're welcome thank you are there any other questions from the public right now for the traffic Gap study seeing none I want to thank you thank you all right and um Mike if you
can come back up please thank you Michelle all right so you have your microphone there Mike I do okay great all right Mr wowski as you're aware we're going to be going back to the
beginning as expected so as part of this application you reviewed the home Del Township ordinance correct yes hey John just before you start obviously anything to do with the old plan that's been amended we want to stick to the new plan so we're not
absolutely St just just for everyone's clarification you aware of any other ordinance provisions that the applicant has not met that's not reflected in this plan just gonna have to talk closer to the mic it this it speak up a littleit louder just speak
louder are there any ordinance Provisions that the applicant will not meet that are not reflected in the plan not that I can speak to you of this at this time understanding that as this plan evolves should a subsequent cine application be made those things are
more likely to be identified by either ourselves or the board's professionals with regard to this site are you aware of any prior efforts or applications devel to develop this property I am aware of a prior application I am not aware of the
specifics of that application so you don't know when what the outcome was no and you reviewed and prepared these plans right including the most recent ones yes and they're accurate and complete
correct believe that's subjective what was a question if you believe that they're accurate and complete it's your subjective thought for the purpose of the use variance plan yes and you haven't seen any architectural plans correct
I believe at the first hearing we had introduced an architectural exhibit the rendering of the exterior with the elevations yes I think that was this September fourth hearing okay nothing internally no those wouldn't have been prepared by uh myself so no landscape
plan yet you either right that's correct No Light No lighting plan yet correct no storm water management plan correct correct now with regard to the geot technicals that you did perform none of them were performed in
the in the Basin areas correct I don't believe any fell within the proposed Basin are is correct and you didn't prepare the geot technical report did you correct the report that I believe you're referencing would have been associated with the
prior application when you say prior you mean the with the four buildings the prior iteration of this or the prior application that you're not aware of Prior application that I'm not aware of okay and there's no environmental assessment report for this not that I'm
aware of and again without any tenants you don't know if there's going to be any noise outdoor storage any other additional lighting that might impact surrounding areas correct correct but it will increase the noise
level correct some level of noise is to be anticipated but it would be within ordinance tolerances ordinance standards for noise in the municipality would you consider this an environmentally sensitive area I would
not did you review a title report for this piece of property I did not based on the survey that was submitted and any Deeds that have been submitted for this property are there any incumbrances on this
property I don't believe so and there is a 25t easement on the tax map correct are you aware of I don't believe I'm aware of that so you have no idea if it would
have any effect on this application correct I would need to review that information and are you aware of the traffic study that's was prepared for this application and we've discussed it the it's been discussed the site triangle that's needed are you aware of that yes and
that's at 490 Red Hill Road in middl town I can't confirm if that's the exact address okay but you agree that this site triangle is necessary I do but I would add uh should
right of way dedication to the county be provided on the property that's currently the subject of that site triangle application given the of that easement being so small it may negate the need for it okay so use variance is required for
this application correct correct height variance as well correct correct and you do need can I just clarify yes that I I think um as testified or indic ated by
Kate I don't think there's a height standard in this Zone and we're going to get back to that I think I I don't want to sound like a I don't want to sound like a broken record on um because I know that um the Mike you alluded to this during your initial testimony but no there are no bulk standards for this
use in this Zone the bulk standards for this zone are only applicable to permitted uses such as single family residences so when we talk about height when we talk about impervious cut coverage these are really setbacks we talk about these are really for com
comparative purposes only so once again the applicant does not applicant proposing 40 feet in height where 35 ft is permitted um but they do not technically require a variance for that however the board obviously can take the
height and all of the site layout into account as part of their um weighing of the D1 use variance which has a higher standard of proof than any other variants including C D6 Etc so it's all
part of the overall uh D1 uh so I don't want when anyone gets stuck on things like you know height variance setback variance impervious coverage um you know for example like like like was testified to the prvious coverage is being reduced that's a good thing but they technically
do not need a variance for be being over by a little so we'll get more into that when they provide planning testimony but I just wanted to clarify that again can you uh tell me what the uh height uh standard is for a residential
area in this Zone um it's it's 35 feet I believe right yeah um sorry let me just double check just I haven't even looked at it because it's not applicable um sorry um yes the mini the maximum
Building height for a single family um a church a Library Public Utilities Etc is 35t the applicant is proposing 40t I would clarify that that's 45t sorry 45t I'm sorry no problem yes and so you know
this I there are other standards that apply to Medical Office Buildings in other zones in the town they also don't apply here but that's another thing the board may want to look at for com comparative purposes but we'll wait until their planner goes forward to get
to that thank you Kate so at the present time the site drains from the rear to the front correct towards Red Hill Road predominately yes and then when it gets to Red Hill Road it goes down the road to
where or would it get to Red Hill Road under yes some runoff would get to Red Hill Road uh there are there's some runoff that drains toward the road toward the adjacent properties so what drains into the proposed B to rtion facilities the proposed bio retention
facilities would receive runoff from the proposed development so just the buildings and the parking areas short of the impervious perious Paving I'm sorry likely some of the perious areas would also be ratted to those
basins so not all of the water from this site is being retained on site correct that's likely okay and was there a soil perme permeability test done for the basins we had reviewed that with the
prior application that I'm not familiar with so at this time you're not aware the soil type in the proposed bio retention facilities correct I do have that information for I apologize I thought I had the
hydrologic soil group r reading with me but I do not appear to have that information and you didn't do any analysis of storm water from other sites draining onto this site correct no any soil testing for the proposed
parking lot areas no so that environmental impact statement any of the other reports that I just mentioned you don't really know the environmental impact of this proposed development do you we have not prepared
an environmental impact statement that being said we don't consider this as we had previously discussed to be an environmentally sensitive site did you do any analysis as to the groundwater flow of this
site personally I did not only that information which was available in the previous geot technical investigation now when you say previous geot technical investigation what year is that I don't know do you know what's changed on this site to now as opposed
to what was there on the previous application I believe the home that was previously there is I know it's since been demolished I believe it may have been standing at the time of that application anything else removed from the site like trees uh it's possible but I cannot
speak to that so I'm assuming you didn't do any groundwater flow analysis on neighboring properties either no and you didn't determine the depth of the water table correct having reviewed that previous geot technical report that determined
the depth to seasonal High to be approximately 6 feet to clarify when I say seasonal High I mean seasonal high water table and when you say seasonal hi that's January through April correct typically and as you said you didn't
conduct these tests correct that's right so the bio retention systems are not collecting 100% of the water correct it's just the driveways and the buildings they may not so are you aware of whether or not
more storm ERS going to be leaving the site after this is possibly constructed or as it is now as part of our design we're Bound by both the municipal and the state's uh storm water management rules with which we would comply so you don't know the answer to
the question right now at this time we have not performed a storm Water Analysis the storm Water Analysis that you did perform with regard to the two bu retention facilities did you perform any analysis as to what happens if those systems fail
no gone over the septic and the changes that you made are there any pable Wells over there in that vicinity that you're aware of not that I'm aware of do you have an estimate of daily outflow or Wastewater generated by the buildings
correct yes that number is about 1,860 gallons per day per building so obviously 1,860 goes to each tank correct yeah yes with each respective leeching field
septic field leeching field correct yes have these newly proposed septic fields been tested No so at this time you're not aware of the capacity of the septic fields as compared to the tanks correct correct
and as you stated there is no landscape architect correct correct now on this rendering before us right now it's marked as A5 all of the Landscaping on there is that existing proposed or just hypothetical
at this point we call it hypothetical or conceptual con are you aware of how many trees are going to have to come down for this proposed development I'm not did you do a tree inventory of the site no do you feel that you'll be removing
fully grown trees it's possible without an inventory you have no idea the caliber of those trees Heights age STP line canopy anything like that correct are you aware right now how many trees
are going to be required to be replaced based on the number you take down no and there was a brief discussion about the hot box and uh evergreen trees are you aware you did suggest
before that you do have a larger buffer now specifically on the Southeastern part of this property next to the residential are you have any idea right now what you'd be planning there a landscape plan has not being been developed at this time now there was a substantial
discussion in the geotechnical report about the suitability of the soil for development correct I believe so and there was specifically statements in the report that the site will need to be over
excavated correct I'm not familiar with the entirety of that report so right now if it's being over excavated you really don't know what the limit of disturbance is at this time correct no so you have no idea the
impact of neighboring properties we would not disturb soils on adjacent properties will you be disturbing soils close enough to neighboring properties that you can disturb the root system of the trees on neighboring properties I don't have that information and with the overe
excavation of the site do you have any idea right now how much soil will be removed from the site and how much soil will be brought into the site I'm not familiar with any overe excavation requirements or any cut fill analysis so do you have any idea at this
time when you develop this site what kind of grade changes there's going to be if any no grading plan has not been developed so you have no idea of any cutting and filling that will take place how deep they're going to be correct
and again no lighting plan correct correct so you have no idea what kind of lighting there will be on this site and what impact it will have on neighboring properties correct correct but the neighborhood will be exposed there will be lights in the parking lot correct
yes no idea what type of Lights other than LED no no idea the site PS ballards no now and with these proposed changes you left the trash enclosure where it is
correct that didn't move I may have been subject to one of the few shifts I had mentioned but it's predominantly in the same location you say it may have shifted did it shift closer to the Residential Properties next door or further
away would have been a few feet closer any idea what kind of negative effects that might have on a neighboring property no I would reiterate that we are proposing a landscaping buffer and birming within that area that we've
created and with regard to the location of the site you you don't think there's going to be any pedestrians accessing the site correct no and there's only sidewalks along two edges of the parking area
correct correct no sidewalks or safety walkways from the Southeastern portion of the property those parking spots there's no walkway to get towards the buildings correct correct you ever observed any
pedestrians on Red Hill Road not that I can think of and has any construction sequencing been determined at this time no and I'm assuming you don't know if there's going to be any blasting required anything
like that in the development of this site I can't speak to that I apologize for not being as long as I thought I would be but okay thank you we'll open up to the uh board you
have any the board first and then public um any questions from the board yeah I got a question the uh uh where would be the uh uh the entrance to the building across the street in Middletown uh the SLO catering Building
compared to your driveways here do you know I mean that's not shown on this diagram we're saying there's no pedestrians but would anybody Park in one place and cross over try to cross
over to the other I don't want to speculate I believe opposite our driveway is an entrance only to SLO cering uh I think it looks like their primary driveway is opposite the parkway Francine um know the site of this de
proposed um development there were lots of trees there the roots are still there the trees were knocked down well not cut down but the roots are still there I would assume the roots are still would mic on I can't hear her yeah she I would
assume the roots would still be absorbing water to not do runoff on adjacent properties so it was something done to see because if you're going to do construction on that land you're going to probably have to pull up those roots that are retaining water for storm
is there an analysis going to be done to make sure that when all those roots come up with all that construction that storm water runoff is going to be different than it is currently on the site right now think obviously with with any development the storm water changes from what we say
pre-development to post development but we account for all the requirements of again the municipal ordinance um and the overarching state requirements that we always hold to regardless of whether or not a state permit is required I'm just concerned because I know there was a lot of trees on that
property which might have been absorbing a lot of water and when when we look at the the surface coverage of a site that's factored into our analysis La question so a lot of the questions that you didn't seem to have answers to concerned about environmental
and what Francine was talking about storm water will that be followed up in stage two if we reach a stage two like a second phase of this right so the next step should we obtain a use variance approval and choose to submit a site plan application that application will
be much more encompassing in terms of plans reports in detail um oh T I'm sorry I was going to H up to the professionals but I think you have a question or two right yeah I have a couple okay in front of the parking spaces approximately 23 of them in the
front of the building is there balls being placed there to protect the building from uh cars coming across so there's no ball proposed currently there's a 6in tall curb and then where the a spaces are proposed
there are what we call Curb or wheel stops uh that would be in front of the space where we have depress curb to serve the same purpose as the curb okay I being on the squad I've seen many occasions when Vehicles jump that
curb and hit the building so um I would suggest that balls be considered at some point or another and be placed in between in the middle of the parking spaces all front of the building yes we could certainly consider that
request uh number two the the handicap crossed hair ramps I I presume there're ramps in order to allow Wheelchairs and and Walkers to get up there yes there are I believe uh a pair of ramps that would be proposed
here okay then the buildings going into the front of the buildings based on the elevations I saw steps can the gr be CH to eliminate steps so that a wheelchair or a walker
or even a stretcher from the first aid Squad could go straight into that building we currently don't show any steps from the sidewalks to the buildings well I mean I'm looking at the elevation of the buildings and I see steps about four five of them in front
of both building accesses if you're speaking of the the architectural plans um I had not developed those yes I'm looking at the typical elimin very typical elevation view of the med office I think that's what he's
referencing okay but yes to to clarify the the front entrances would certainly be Ada accessible there's not intent to have stairs there I'm sorry I didn't hear that so the main entrances to each building would certainly be ad accessible there's not intent to have stairs there be STS there the will be
adjusted to allow flat access yes okay now the next question I have may be something that requires an architect but I'm going to say it anyway um Demetri just just for the record the witness said it would be 88 compliant
I'm not sure it' be flat but it be 88 compliant correct right well 88 compliant means that a somebody in a wheelchair can roll without steps that's fine but it might be a ramp I guess right or some other if necessary might not necessarily be a flat in just I just want you to understand that before you
move on in case you want to make another guess in the next portion if this goes through we will we can address it again and then whoever whoever would handle this part um stretcher needs to go be able to fit in an elevator to go up so I
don't know I didn't see anything that shows that I know we're at the first stage and hopefully the second stage you'll talk about it but if um if somebody's doing the drawings let them consider that there's room for a stretcher to get in an elevator yes again as as part of any subsequent
site plan application we would submit complete architectural floor plans and elevations okay and and lastly I presume in the next section if we get there the Landscaping plan would be submitted in detail with the BMS Etc and how it's
going to look absolutely okay that's all I have Jason okay thank you Dimitri Angela do you have any questions all right uh at this point then if there's more further questions from the board I'll open it up to the professionals Kate and
um Mr White I I'm I have nothing right now thanks Mike you indicated that you have not done a soil testing with in the septic areas nor in the the bio retention basins correct so should you
have testing results come back that have a problem you will have to change your design correct correct whether you have to remove soil and fill it back in down to the ground war table or come up with an alternate design you're going to have to meet the flow reductions and water quality
requirements because you are a major project and it may alter your design that would bring you back to this board with an amended plan and it may be at the safe plan stage So the plan May alter a little bit T to address those items because you'll have more
information at that point in time because this is only conceptual at this time is what they'll make the board aware of that so when they if they come back I can't hear a thing you're saying basically if you end up getting bad test results for all the test pits and the soil borings that the plan they come
back with in possibly in stage two I guess we refer it to for site plan approval may look somewhat different than what the plan is right before the board now because this is a concept it hasn't really been developed all the way I just want to make sure the board was aware of
that yes and I I will just add to that that you know I think we've discussed this but typically a condition of approval as for bifurcated applications if the board were to look favorably on this is that the that the site plan looks substantially similar to the
concept plan so that means you know if if if there were issues related to you soil testing and things had to be moved around on the site where you know maybe the driveway was flipped the the the building sizes were changed that would trigger a new D1 variant
uh testimony they would not you know they would have to come back with something similar to this and that's up to the board to decide but substantially similar you know typically means it pretty much looks like this with uh some you know minor minor changes but if if
anything were to happen that related to a major uh shift on the site they would not just be able to come forward again for site plan approval they would have to put on use Varian testimony thank you
Kate um if there's no more uh testimony from the professionals we'll open this up to the public again just uh raise your hand if you'd like to come forward and speak ask any questions directly to the engineer not seeing any oh we have one
okay please come up just state your name again for the record uh can you borrow the microphone over there just switch your microphone so you can respond to her Regina Stephanie 8 Fox Hunt Road my question is a I have three
questions what is the hot box does it make a lot of noise and um is it large like is it going to interfere with the neighbor so a hot boox is the the industry term we use to describe an above ground heated enclosure and New
Jersey American Water who's the provider here requires that that be provided in certain instances where certain mechanical equipment can't be provided within a certain distance say the buildings are set too far back from the street so we'd be providing that here
and it's an above ground heated enclosure that houses some of the important mechanical equipment um it would be against screened because it's generally considered to be an unsightly feature where is it being placed in
adjacent to the house like the property adjacent to it so we currently have that hot boox situated toward the northeast corner of the site so near the Parkway intersection with Red Hill Road does it make a lot of noise no okay thank you
you're welcome you know I just want to ask my question again because I don't think I quite followed it can you show me again on the on the the map that the drawings where the old septic tanks were being planned and where you you move the two septic tanks too can you show me
that again referring back to exhibit A5 the previous location of the two septic fields was adjacent to the Southwest property line so approximately I'll say here and here okay so we've taken those and from the room we've created the
adjacent to the Parkway right of way they're now here and here okay that's what I was looking so right off the parkway good yes okay great thank you you're welcome Francine do you have a question do do you want to ask a question go
ahead it's it's right off the parkway so right these these larger rectangles here indicate the septic field the tanks aren't shown here they would likely be one probably between the buildings that would feed septic tank B for Building B and then another would be similarly left
of building a feeding septic Fu a see Francy you I had the same problem I couldn't see the two very light I saw the the brown buildings I was wondering where the septic tanks were septic fields okay that's good that's helpful
um uh any more questions from the public okay um what I oh go go Ahad ahead Mr Fury yeah just um and I I don't like to be redundant but I just want to make it clear Mike a lot of the questions that were asked of you were I don't know I don't know I don't know the reason you
didn't know is not because you are not going to ever find those answers the reason is because of a bifurcated application unless the board asks you to go beyond the concept plan it's premature to do that type of investigation and that type of design work correct yes so just so the board
and the public is clear if this use variance is approved can you just explain what you would need to do to determine how the storm weaer management will work how the septic will be designed what type of investigation and and design work would you need to do sure yes specific to both the septic and
storm water so there's uh what we call Geotech infiltration there's different tests that we do of the soil material itself to determine characteristics of the soil The Depths to the seasonal high water table the infiltration rates of those soils to
make sure that the locations of our storm water basins and the septic fields are suitable in those locations and they can function based on the proposed design using the tested infiltration rates that we found um and to the point
of I believe Mr White that should we have results that are unfavorable that may require adjustments but there's adjustments that there's regulations for us to design around those and and as it relates to septic the Board of Health would ultimately have to approve the septic design is that correct typically
yes in the case of this because of the the size and the the generation of the sewage it would go through in the gyps and the state right so that would be njd and I I just want to follow on that so the if if there were I know Kate you said that it's not going to be exactly
the same exact site plan but I would like if we're g to stipulate that the the two septic fields remain that won't change in any possible application adjustment if if they're moved from that side to the other side that the board
can consider that a substantial change in the plan which would require us to pres present D1 testimony all over again okay exactly exactly because you know they're presenting this concept plan um it's not fully engineered it's not fully detailed but the board you know the
applicant has put on testimony they've said this is going to go here and they've provided the basis for that so something you know that could have es especially an impact on a neighbor or just really something that they've testified to being in a certain location if that changes the board really gets another crack at the whole application because the proofs will have
substantially changed okay and then another uh two follow-ups the as far as the um storm weer management system you've indicated that during your responses but there are storm order management regulations both by the
Township and the D and you agreed to comply with both of those regulations that correct yes and then finally as it rates to relates to tree removal you will have to conduct a tree inventory we will have to comply with the tree removal and tree replacement and or payment ordinates of the town is that
correct that's correct and that analysis would also be done as part of the site plan design yes okay that's well Mr CH and just another followup I know this is not concrete yet we're just you know it's all conceptual how much lighting will be going on that
parking area um 10 lighting LED light poles like just curious about the potential light quote unquote disturbance for that area right at this point I would say that's an appropriate estimate uh again as part of a site plan application we would conduct a lighting
plan following revie review of your lighting ordinance to ensure that we comply with things such as light pole height illumination at ground level Etc okay um any further questions from the board I do want to talk about one more thing before we we adjourn um but any
other questions regarding I have no questions at this point regarding the uh the engineering and the traffic uh I do have a kind of but it may be somewhat out of order uh I am have a bit of a
concern considering the there's two aspects of this one is this a desirable uh facility from the point of view of the overall area having Medical Offices here uh and it would
be nice to know in fact uh that somebody at SLO ketering would say look we're busting at the seams and in fact doctors really would love to have offices across the at this
location uh so I've heard testimony saying that but I haven't heard you know any any uh substantiation uh from anyone that this is the case so that's one thing that
that I'm concerned about uh in fact that's probably the major thing and and then of course you need to get we all know you need to get the site triangle uh on the on the other side but again that question is probably not an
engineering question or an architect's question it's uh and overall the question I have is more a mark Market question I mean is this really so so in just briefly in response uh not tonight
but at the next meeting we have to present our planning testimony that's our last professional and um I'll make sure she can address that question as part of her testimony and and and she has a lot to address because of the D1 relief that's
required so she knows what she needs to do and Kate will make sure she does yes I was about to say thank you s yes Jean um you know because we'll go over this more at the next meeting and I'm happy to speak to the board you know before the planner goes on we can talk about it on the record um but you know the the
proof for for um special reasons for granting a D1 variant is that the applicant has to show that the site is particularly suitable for the proposed use and there's a number of ways that they can do that so you know what you're saying kind of factors into that it's
one of several ways that it can be shown but it's I think that the planner will will address that kind of that kind of topic good thank you any other comments questions from the board okay so I would
like to propose a site plan meeting on-site meeting was that s on-site meeting onsite yeah to kind of like visualize um where the layout of everything's going to be with uh different colored flags for obviously
the buildings let's call those yellow flags um the septic fields let's call those red flags um blue flags for all the parking and any Dimitri am I thinking
about any other um maybe that where that that want the access point the access point where the the building is that heated building where that would be as well was the hot box Hot Box um you know pick a color go ahead Francy go exits and
entrances exits and entrances yeah that right there that spot there um am I missing anything you'd like to see when we go to the and then we'll pick a date as well to go there and look at the site plan do we do that before the planner speaks
or after um it's probably more engineering the planet but whatever you guys want yeah I it's it's up to the board I think typically the board has has gone mid application rather than at the end um because you know really with as a
planner um when when when we provide testimony we're really supposed to be pulling together everything that's been presented so far that includes you know the board's questions the Public's question most importantly the testimony that's been given so I think that that would make sense there um another thing I was going to say maybe and I'm not
sure if this would be possible to do on the site would maybe be to show you know the height of the burm potentially just maybe not not you know you don't do it across the whole area but maybe just like a mound in some some way that would show kind of how that would that would
function um because I think that that's an important change to this plan from prior iterations um the only thing other thing I just want to say say is that you know I we regarding the hot boxes it's come up tonight a lot and it's kind of a it's kind of an interesting thing because it
doesn't really come up in hell I can't remember hearing about it in Hell before but I have I work in a few municipalities across the state and I don't really know what the Rhyme or Reason is but they fre this frequently happens they frequently are part of site plans um and the one thing I just want
to caution the board is that the applicant can show their um they can screen it they can have an ideal location but to a certain an extent I believe this is at the mercy of the water company okay so you know I think that that's something that you know we'll we'll touch on that we can see how
it goes because I think it's also I think it's going to be smaller than you're thinking um it's not not small but it's um it's it's when you when you get used to seeing them you don't see them that often but when you hear about it it's a it's kind of a unique feature but yes it's they are very common in in
some municipalities in some areas of the state I I'd like to also propose if there's any way as that we could see how high these buildings would be because I'm concerned this is a residential area most of the homes there are two stories
you're proposing a three story so if there's any way to let us know how high that would look yeah I would also chis Francine if that's not possible that day maybe they could do a balloon test take photos whatever whatever is
easier yeah so three things Mr Fury um could you ask the water company kind of now where they think this hot box should be placed just so and then the second followup question is when do you think you'll be able to have us come to the
site uh you give us an idea of as it takes a week or two or maybe three weeks we can kind of internally off the Record figure out a a day whether it's a weekend day or a week day because you I think we're GNA have to if we could pick it if don't you have to notice if we
don't pick the day today yes it it is it is public I think we have to live with whatever day okay so let's talk about that now then you could also potentially carry it to the you know carry it to the next hearing date right Marty and then make
so we're getting a request from the other attorney well do you want to come up and speak why don't you just go on the record for the record John Gavin I just not 100% of availability so if we could announce that it'll be announced at the next meeting I think
that we're going to try to do it now announce it and if that works for your schedule if not try to accommodate everyone's schedule or yours at least if you can or your offices yes I mean I'm I'm thinking a Saturday yeah I'm thinking of Saturday definitely because
you know it's too dark we talked about a weekend or something yeah I'm thinking of Saturday would be probably pref preferable April 5th yeah was that April 5th uh let me just check M everyone can you check your calendars Dimitri uh April also decide when
they're coming back before okay okay Demitri do you want to check your calendar for April 5th still got Demitri okay that's if good up you speak requested yeah I was just uh mentioning
whether we can get flagged um for the perimeter the highlighted area just so we can kind of map out distance between the Landscaping to yes so well the the perimeter the buildings the septic fields the the access points exit
entrance the parking area and then the hot box B and the BM the of the B any way for us to see and some kind of like illustration of the height of the burm um I I think April 5th will work
for me I just want to check with the rest of the board does anyone have a conflict that it won't work right nows Demitri can you hear us still still no okay um all right so
let's say April 5th and John April 5th works for you plent time for your engine okay so John Kaplan for the record said yes April 5th take a time um 11:
am 11:00 am. on Saturday April 5th for a site plan meeting where we'll have flags for the perimeter of the property uh different colored flags for the buildings different colored flags for the septic
fields different colored flags for the entrance and exit different colored flags for the parking area and then again we talked about an illustration of where the water company may put the pot box and then we said the Burma Burma and
we'll have a do you have all that do you do you have we have all that and we'll have like a ski slope map that should with the color so you'll know what each thing is so you because we have to limit communications too we're not supposed to do much talking to each other
it's just for questions for the where do wek um is to Park Memorial Salone cing across the street street yeah that's what I would say we'll have an area cleared for parking okay I just want people see yeah so the public is aware
of Saturday April 5th at 11:00 a.m. for a site are you Mee the owner of the property or contract the owner's here he's contract I think they're part they're together okay so just want to make sure the owner can say I'll bring Mach there perect
cut and Marty just for the for the public um this is a public meeting but there is no public comment correct yes so everyone's welcome to join um you know it's not really supposed to be a commun the board isn't really supposed you know the board speaks you know the public can watch but it's not really
supposed to be a conversation questions they'll bring the they'll bring the comment no no you'll ask questions if you have clarifications yes but you come back here and then you on right and the public can do the same at that
F absolutely phot not on that point let's talk about the next meeting we after April 5th through chair I have a question so this would be considered as a special meeting are we adding as a special meeting yes yes um so that will be advertised it it will be advertised
we we've done these before in the last couple years and I can help you with it yeah thank you all right so the meeting so there's a meeting right before that April 2nd but right now the agenda looks clear tell me if I'm wrong arena for April 16th right so what was that yeah
so if we have the site plan meeting on Saturday April 5th then 11 days later we can discuss you know what we saw and asked questions at the um April 16th meeting and I I'm just U our planner is
in Jackson so she has her phone with her to make sure because we're going to need her at that meeting so I'm just waiting for it to text back okay sure sure John uh April 16th work for you yes okay great great um do we want to wait a little bit
more she's good she's good she's good okay so all right so I think we're uh we're firm April 5th for the site plan meeting 11:00 a.m. we'll have parking set up for everyone to safely Park their cars and walk around the site plan with like we to discuss the flags and then
questions comments further followup will be on April 16 with no further notice without without fur without further notice s your professionals will be here even though they're not they're finished you mentioned me Mike so I just
want to I want to clarify someone those we your engineer will be here definitely be here all right all right okay we said um if no more comments from the board are we okay if so may I have a motion to adjourn the
meeting please I'll have motion to adjourn the meeting second thank you have a good night all right have a good night everyone thank you for your patience all right want the green fitri we're hanging up uh microphone's off do we turn the
microphones off