[Music] Heat. Heat.
[Music] Good evening everybody. Welcome to the Township of How Planning Board meeting for Thursday, September 4th, 2025.
Thank god school's back in and uh I know the Eagles play this evening, so we'll get a move on. I leen opening statement please. >> I hereby declare this meeting of the Howell Township Planning Board to be open adequate notice having been given
pursuant to the New Jersey Open Public Meeting Act in the following manner. First, on January 3rd, 2025, a copy of said notice was emailed to the Asbury Park Press in the Star Ledger. Second, on January 3rd, 2025, a copy of said notice was hand delivered to the clerk
of the township of Howell. Third, on January 3rd, 2025, said notice was posted in the office of the planning board and on the bulletin board in the Howell Township Municipal Building, 4567, Route 9, Howell Township, New Jersey. In accordance with the fire prevention code and for your safety,
please be advised that this facility is designed with two emergency exits at the front and rear of the meeting room. Furthermore, smoking is not permitted in the municipal building. Please make note that this meeting is being videotaped for possible future broadcast on Howell Township TV77. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Bato, >> here. >> Mr. Greenfield is excused tonight. Mr. Carbonic is on his way. Mr. Mercer >> here. >> Mr. Tannen House is absent tonight.
Councilman Nadell is excused tonight. Mayor Leio >> here. >> Mr. McNicholas is excused tonight. Mr. Freriedman >> here. >> And Chairman Huster >> here. >> You have a quorum. >> Thank you. At this time, would everybody please rise for the pledge of
allegiance? And afterwards, a moment of silence for our men and women who have served both here and abroad. To the flag of the standy. Thank you. Eileen, are there any minutes? >> No minutes to approve tonight. >> Any correspondence?
>> No correspondence tonight. >> Any resolutions? >> No resolutions tonight. >> Okay. Thank you. On to submission waiverss. The first being case number SP1138 JNS Flex Center LLC. >> Good evening. >> Good evening, Mr. Chairman. My name is
Gregorya of Collins and Cassello. I have the pleasure this evening to represent JNS Flex Center LLC regarding the waiver request. Um what Miss Newman wants and we'll agree to it. >> Absolutely. Thank you. >> You swear or affirm the testimony you're
about to give this word is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> I do. So, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, we have an August 22nd, 2025 review letter. The submission waiverss are specifically outlined in item three. Um, I would recommend that at a minimum a narrative environmental impact report
be provided. Similarly, I recommend that item 60, the 2,000 foot downstream drainage analysis be provided. And as it relates to the items D through H. I think that those should be provided. They don't need to be provided for completeness, but on a separate um
submission, but I do recommend a narrative environmental impact report as well as the drainage uh the 2,000 foot downstream be provided prior to the application being deemed complete. >> Thank you, council. Are you good with that? >> Mr. Chair, I have no objection. >> Okay, great. Gentlemen, any questions about this one?
>> All right. At this time, I will entertain a motion. >> I'll make a motion. >> Mr. Mercer, do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> Mr. Freeman. >> Mr. Badel. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Mercer. >> Yes. >> Mayor Legio. >> Yes. >> Mr. Freriedman. >> Yes. >> And Chairman Huster. >> Yes. >> Submission waiver approved. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Hopefully, we'll get our engineer working and hope to see you within the next few months.
>> All right. Great. Thank you. Have a good night. >> I'm not going far. Okay. First application this evening is case number SD. >> Okay. Case number uh SD3018, Carmine Caruso. This is a minor
subdivision. Good evening again. >> Good evening, Mr. Chair. Uh again, my name is Gregory Vel from firm Collinsville Excel and I have the pleasure this evening to represent Carmen Caruso in this minor subdivision application which is essentially just simply a lot line adjustment. Uh no new
lots are being created. Um very simply, we have three lots. Uh we are modifying the lot lines to provide Russo excavating company on one lot, a vacant uh conforming lot and another lot
conforming a lot area that has the existing sign that this board approved previously. There is not a shovel going in the ground. There's no drainage going in the ground. We're simply taking the lot lines that are wonky. As you can see, they run kind of like north to south. and we're adjusting to still have
three lots, but the lot to the left or the middle lot will be it's still vacant. There's nothing on it. There's just trees. Eventually, that hopefully will be developed at some future time. We don't know what we're going to do, but I do know we'll have to come back to you guys for any approval. We're doing
nothing else. >> Mr. Chair, if I could just jump in. >> Sure. >> I know because I agree with Mr. Ella's introduction wholeheartedly and there are a number of of variances that are identified in our letter dated um I
don't even know what the date is on my freaking letter. Hold on. September 3rd and you know front yard setback, sideyard setback, rear yard setback, all these things. All we said is that nothing is changing on the site. It's just a factor of the realignment of the
lot lines and the the lot that they're creating that is vacant as Mr. Bella had indicated is conforming. So they're not creating a non-conforming lot. And I also want to add for the record that the lot where
the billboard is located is actually increasing in size. >> So we take no exception to the to the lot line adjustment. I think that it's consistent with our planning and and zoning goals. Got it. >> I if you guys want to hear more testimony, that's totally fine.
>> I mean, I I read through this gentleman. I don't know if you did your research before you came here, but it's it's pretty simple >> in my opinion. >> I I agree. And I feel like it's an improved condition over what's there now. And yes, there are some things that
technically need relief because the lot lines are changing, but it's it's an existing condition. The the development on the property is not changing whatsoever. So, I take no exception to what they've asked for and it's up to you guys if you want to hear more. >> Gotcha. >> Mr. Chair, the two reports by the
planner, the engineer, any of those conditions in there, we will agree to provide that information. Again, it's not much because we're not putting a shovel on the ground. So, it's we'll agree to those reports, but it's up to you. I do have my planner here. I have my engineer. It's up to you, Mr. Chair. I'll do whatever you want. >> Gentlemen, any questions on this one?
>> I read it, too. >> Okay. I'll open it up to the public. Any questions, comments? >> Seeing none, close the public portion. >> One comment, Mr. Chairman. >> Yes, Laura. >> I would just recommend that if the board acted favorably that the subdivision be
filed by map, not deed. Is that okay? >> We were going to do that anyway. Perfect. Okay. Uh, I will entertain a motion at this time. >> Motion. >> Mayor Legio. Do I have a second?
>> Second. >> Mr. Bato. >> Roll call, please. >> Mr. Ball, >> yes. >> Mr. Mercer, >> yes. >> Mayor Legio, >> yes. >> Mr. Freriedman, >> yes. >> And Chairman Hustler, >> yes.
>> Application approved. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you very much, >> professionals. Uh, >> see you on the next one. >> Good luck. >> Take care. >> Okay, the final one this evening is case number SD3022, Cody Milch, 2011 trust. This is a
preliminary and final major subdivision uh, block 3, lot 2701 on Ramtown Greenville Road. Good evening. >> Good evening, Mr. Chairman. For the record, my name is Michael Vidiello. I'm an attorney at Girardano Howerin and Ceisla representing the applicant
tonight. As you indicated, this is a single vacant lot. We're seeking preliminary and final major subdivision to create three single family residential development lots out of this single lot. We are not requesting any variances. There is a minor waiver being
requested. I have with me here my civil engineer. We have our exhibits and you have our application package. We have no comments generally speaking with all the reports and the comments and the reports um except only I believe my engineer can elaborate. There was a comment in the
report um asking the the applicant does not know what the houses would look like on these lots yet. They don't have architectural plans. They're just creating the lots right now. We're fully aware of your lookalike ordinance and we would make sure that the homes comply with that. Um, so we would provide
architecturals to demonstrate compliance with that, but it wouldn't be as part of the subdivision. It would be prior to seeking building permits, construction permits, because we simply don't have those uh drawings at this time. But >> other than that, and my engineer can confirm, I believe we had no real um
questions or comments with those reports other than we can comply. >> Okay. >> Well, I'll open it up to Jennifer and Laura um on this one. Um I mean I I think the engineer should directly introduce >> 100%. Yeah. Yeah. Um yeah, if we could
because there are members of the public here which >> absolutely I didn't know if you wanted to cover some preliminary comments or issues first. >> Yeah. I didn't know if you guys wanted to have any questions or just let the engineer >> we could he he'll briefly describe. >> That's perfect. That that works. >> Yes. Please you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to provide this
board. It's the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Hey, please state and spell your name for the record. >> My name is Douglas Hanley. Hy. >> I'm a licensed professional engineer um in the state of New Jersey. I work at Dynamic Engineering where I'm a project
manager. I've testified before various planning and zoning boards throughout the state. Although this is my first opportunity in front of Howtown >> and we'll accept your credentials. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Uh Doug, use the application and the exhibit plans that were submitted, those were prepared by you or
others under your direction and control. Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> So using those application materials and the exhibits you see here tonight, describe for the board briefly how the site currently exists and what the proposal. >> Sure. Do you mind switching to the first exhibit, the A1 aerial map? Perfect.
Thank you so much. So on the screen now is titled aerial map exhibit prepared by my office dated September 4th, 2025. It's essentially the the same sheet as sheet two of our
site plan set. Um if we want we can mark it A1. >> It's A22. >> A22. Okay. >> Thank you. >> No problem. All right. So on the aerial map exhibit, you'll see a couple different colors. In
the center of the sheet, there is a yellow property boundary, and that is the property we are here tonight to discuss. It is block three, lot 27.01. It has frontage on Ramp Greenville Road.
Uh it's approximately 6.5 acres in size and has about 490 ft of frontage on that road. Uh it's currently a wooded lot. Um, it's bordered to the north by residential uses, the east by
residential uses, south by residential, and then to the west by an agricultural use, the Muddy Creek Farm. And just to close the loop on the existing conditions, the property is in the agricultural rural estate 2, the AR2
zone, uh, where single family residential dwellings are permitted. Now, if you don't mind switching to that second sheet. So, this we can mark as A23. >> Is that a 23? >> Yeah. Okay. >> Okay. And this is the site plan
rendering. This is prepared by our office also dated uh September 4th, 2025. And this is essentially a colorized version of our site plan sheet um with the landscaping coloriz and and a couple other colors just for visual visual
presentation to the board. Um, we're here tonight seeking major subdivision approval uh for the the three lots that are shown on the plans as well as the the various site improvements that are shown on the the plan as well. Um, each
lot is compliant with the bulk requirements of the AR E2 zone and we are using the lot averaging um bulk requirements. We submitted a conventional lot layout as part of the completeness review uh which allowed us
to reduce the minimum lot size and some of the setback requirements but we are compliant with the township ordinance. Um just for orientation purposes we'll consider north to the top of this sheet. Um so I refer to the the lots I'll do so
in that fashion. proposed lot A is the easternmost lot that's on the right hand side of the sheet that's approximately 2.35 acres in size where one is required. Uh lot B which is the northern lot that's uh 1.85 acres in size and
then proposed lot C which is the western lot that is proposed or 1.98 acres. In the middle of each lot you'll see a orange light brown rectangle. Those are the proposed footprints at this time. Um
like Mr. Vidiello said, the homes for each lot have not been designed yet. They're going to be custom homes and we would like to request that um architecturals would be submitted to the township at the time of plot plan review. Um,
>> so those are just demonstr. They're about 4,500 square feet in size, 75 by 60. Um, but that doesn't mean that's exactly what is going to be submitted for each plot plan. And just to to put it on the record, like Mr. Yellow mentioned, we will we
already have a note on our plans and we'll make sure um it makes it onto the plot plan that the township lookalike ordinance will be met when those architectural plans are submitted. In the middle of those three dwellings,
you'll see a a culde-sac. That is the proposed street. Uh it's labeled as road A, uh which provides access to Ramtown Greenville Road for the three proposed dwellings. Um, road A is intended to be a public road dedicated to the township.
It contains a 50 foot right ofway and a 48 foot radius on the culdesac and it's about 225 ft in length from Ramtown Greenville to the back of the culdesac at the northern uh end of that road.
Each dwelling has a a driveway that is 20 feet wide by approximately 40 feet in length. At least 40 ft. It varies a little bit with the the radius of the culde-sac. Um, and
the intention is for parking, entree parking to be allowed on the western portion of the road. Um, and not allowed on the eastern side or within the culdesac. Uh, that was based off discussions with uh the review engineer
and for fire truck circulation that parking would only be on that one side of the road. for landscaping. >> Can I just jump in? >> Absolutely. >> This is just a traditional subdivision, right? You're not really doing a lot a >> We are doing a lot averaging.
>> So, we need to you need to walk the board through I don't have a yield plan. It wasn't submitted, but you need to walk the board through the compliance with the lot a >> Sure. >> And can I'm gonna ask real quick. I'm gonna ask Doug to comment. Correct me if
I'm wrong. The lot averaging was done because you have one piece of property. You create three lots. Every homeowner gets about the same size backyard. But then you put a detention basin on the lot and now one homeowner says,
"Hey, I don't have much of a backyard." So, it was pointed out to us, I think it was municipal staff that pointed out to us, you know, if you've used the lot averaging and prove that you're still you're not gaining extra lots, you can actually adjust the backyards. So, the person with the detention basin still
has the same green area as his neighbors and the lot lines slide a little to allow that basin to fit on that lot also. So, Doug, am I correct that that was the intent of the uh the averaging? Yes. And there was a a lot or a conventional lot layout exhibit submitted during completeness review.
And I'll make sure Miss Beam you get a copy of that. >> No, it needs to be now. So what when did you submit it? I I have You have to understand we have to be able to deem that it's fully compliant. That's what she asked for. Whether the direction was to go to lot averaging or not, I need to be able to pull it up to show that you
yield fully compliant three lots with the underlying zoning. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> I have a copy of it on this flash drive. I don't >> is it >> when when did you submit it? Was it part of your original submitt? >> It was not part of our original submitt. We came here in June for a completeness hearing and we submitted a few weeks
after that. I would say early July was the submission date. >> You have it on the thumb drive. >> I do have it on the thumb drive. conventional lot layout. >> There you go. >> Yes, >> there you go. >> Okay, perfect. I can I can run through this. This is a good good place to get
started. I apologize for not starting here. >> Um, >> sure. >> Okay. So to take a a step back for a moment, we prepared this conventional lot layout exhibit which shows three
lots on the same property with the compliant a compliant layout with the standard AR2 zoning. So the the main different well some of the differences in
the requirements hang on I misplaced my outline here. Under conventional subdivision, you need a minimum lot area of 2 acres. So, our subject property is 6 and a half acres. So, we were able to
put this layout together with lots A, B, and C to provide a minimum of two acres on each lot. Um, and compliance setbacks for the side, rear compliant buffers. Um, and
once you're able to do that, then the ordinance allows you to then apply a lot averaging bulk requirement, which reduces the lot area from 2 acres to 1 acre. It reduces some of the setback requirements. It doesn't change the
buffer requirements, so that stays the same um between the two layouts. Um, but like Mr. video mentioned it allows you to adjust the lot lines slightly in this case to allow for a more uniform uh lot
layout while accounting for the storm water basin that is proposed on lot A. So as I mentioned for the three lots that we are proposing under the lot averaging lot A is 2.35 acres. So that is a little bit larger than the standard
requirement and that's to account for the storm water basin which is on the eastern side of the site between the building on lot A and Ramtown Greenville Road. It's shaded with a little bit of a more grayish green uh color and I'll get
to that in uh in a few moments when uh we touch on the stormwater design. So that is 2.35 acres where under the lot averaging only one acre is technically required and then lot as such then lots B and C are slightly under the two acres
which again is permitted because of the lot averaging ordinance. So lot B is 1.85 acres which is less than the two however greater than the one acre and then same thing lot C is 1.9 acres slightly under the two but it's over the
one. So, um, the three lots would be compliant. >> That's fine. I just I just wanted to walk through it for everybody. I I don't disagree with what you're saying at all. I just wanted you to walk through it on the record. >> We want to get it on the record and for the board's benefit, too. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate it.
>> Absolutely. Happy to run through that. >> So then going back to the proposed layout. So, just to touch on landscaping quickly, uh my office met with Miss Sparrow on site to go over the proposed
buffering from our original design, uh revision zero of the plan. Uh based on her findings and our landscape architect's finding, the existing buffer is in it needed some love for lack of
better terms. Um so we you can see around the perimeter of the site there's a 50-foot perimeter buffer um along the road and then along the other two sides as well. Uh we're looking to supplement that with native trees rather than uh
some of the invasive species that are out there today to uh enhance the buffer. So in total we're providing 120 trees on site um between the buffer and the the street trees along the cold sack and frontage. Um as well as a a significant amount of
or ornamental grasses within the bio retention basin. Again we'll get to uh the stormwater design in a few moments. There is a design waiver requested. >> Go ahead. >> I just want to chime in on on uh the property here. So, I do want to make
sure that the board understands this uh property is really not wooded. Um there's vegetation there. Um I'm assuming this was a field years ago and what has grown there are invasive trees
and a lot of vines. So, you know, from an aerial view, it does look green, but really there's a strip of trees along the road and some random trees throughout, but it is all blanketed in vines. So, there is tree there, but
there's really not. And I don't expect any to remain once homeowners move in. >> So, so you guys are going to clear the entire lot? >> Well, it's not that they would per se, but um I mean certainly we will clear the 50oot buffer, >> right? because there's no there's
nothing in there. Ba >> basically the area that your forester identified that said this isn't worth saving. We agree that we will now go in there and plant new proper buffer species even though as she said it maybe looks vegetated and wooded. It's really
not. So we will get in there and make sure it's a proper wooded buffer. So, not to say that they would come from the buffer and clear to where the homes are, but I would expect at some point somebody will do that because there's nothing there.
It's just fines. So, I did um from this plan, I did request um the landscape architect add a few more trees. I noted some areas I wanted to um be filled in a little more, especially um like at the bottom of the page where Moses Milch drive comes in.
Um, yeah, we discussed that area maybe to add some more evergreen trees just so the people coming out of Moses Milch, their headlights I expect will be in the, you know, the backyard because again there are no trees like that.
>> And the applicant has agreed with all those comments. We really appreciated her time coming out and working with us, but we'd agreed to that. And then just for the record, a design waiver is required for the tree replacement calculations
um based on uh the tree plots that we did and the the clearing area. Um so we do need to request a waiver so we can contribute to the township tree fund. Um like I mentioned, we are planting uh a significant amount of trees on site,
although what we're clearing is not necessarily ideal. So, we will work with Miss Sparrow on the actual tree fund contribution amount um for something that she agrees is a fair amount for uh trees that are not as desirable as the
ones that we are putting back. >> How about sidewalk? >> We are proposing sidewalk along the entire frontage >> and curbing, right? >> Uh the curbing is existing. We're providing a 4 foot sidewalk along uh Ramtown Greenville as well as the proposed roadway on both well on both
sides of the culde-sac and on the our side of Ramtown Greenville. >> It'll dead end at the horse. >> Correct. >> And then you have that existing hole at the east side that's not yours obviously, but that
that's the issue with sidewalk connections, right? The sidewalks go all the way around and then there's right there. So, there'll be no sidewalk from >> right >> from there to there. I've we've seen this time and time again. So, >> Jen, I don't know. Is that something we
could we could work with with connecting that sidewalk? >> I mean, we take money from applicants >> throughout the community, throughout the municipality that we determine that sidewalks are inappropriate, it goes into a sidewalk
fund. Should the town determine that connecting this sidewalk to the sidewalk on Michelle Boulevard, we could tap into the sidewalk fund and like they're they're paying into the fund based on a linear foot
>> dollar so we can that's the whole purpose of getting that fund together. So when we see these little patches and we want to >> connect the entire sidewalk network, that's what the fund is for. So we can tap into that fund and the town can, you
know, put that that section of sidewalk in. We can't ask them to do it. It's beyond their property line, but we we have that fund that we can tap into for this section of sidewalk to make the network connect. >> That's the whole purpose of the fund.
>> You do it on the ground utilities? >> Yes. >> And the street's going to be sit sewer at the street. >> Yes. The sanitary sewer. There's going to be an easement on lot C, which is the western lot. The nearest sewer main is at the intersection of uh Moses Milch
Drive. So, that's where it will connect. >> And I know you're coming up to the retention pump. What's the purpose of this retention pump being this this narrow long >> I don't understand why it's so big. It's only it's only three houses. >> So, the way the storm water regulations
work, and I agree with you, I'd love for it to be smaller. Um the way the storm water regulations uh make us reduce storm water. This is a wooded lot today which means you have um no flow for some of the designed storms and then little flow for the larger design storms. So we
have to reduce or meet those limited flows. So even though it's only three houses, you have to essentially hold all of the water for a for you know a certain amount of time to meet the existing flows. >> You're going to have recharges on the
house coming off the gutters. >> Yep. So each house has a dry well to collect the roof runoff and then the remaining runoff from the road and driveways and the associated lawn areas will be collected with inlets and routed to uh the bio retention basin where
it'll be attenuated to reduce flows and then released um into the existing storm water system. >> Yeah. With no air and all that stuff. It's supposed to be natural maintenance on the retention will be on the homeowners. Correct. >> Correct. There will be an HOA for the
Yep. for maintenance of the dry wells and the retention pond. >> Will the retention pond be fenced in? >> Yes, there's a fence around it. >> Complain fence with the anti. >> Yep. If not, we'll make sure it it should be, but we'll make sure we >> Oh, it better be.
>> Oh, it will be. It will be. >> Yes. I just want to go back to storm water maintenance. These dry wells, you need those as part of your storm water management plan. So your HOA will also be maintaining those. >> Absolutely. We talked about this before. Your ordinance requires this. Our HOA,
even though the dry wells will be one per lot, the HOA is going to be obligated. It's going to be built into the HOA documents. So the basin and each dry will be part of that obligation, single obligation. >> So the only thing you want the township to do is plot a road, >> right? >> And pick up the leaves and brush it.
Right. >> Right. Right. >> And then one last thing on the storm water design while we're on the topic. So, uh, another reason the storm water basin is larger than you would expect. So, we designed it to accommodate a 15% imperous coverage for each lot. So,
that's the the maximum allowed by the ordinance. So, that way if a homeowner comes in and they want to put a patio, a deck, something in their backyard, they don't have to then put in a separate storm water system to handle that. So, it's all accounted for. They can go up to the maximum amount of impervious on
their site. And Doug, is the is the sidewalk do you have to count the sidewalk in as part of your correct calculations too? That >> gets Yes, we'll work Yep. We will work with uh CME to get that accounted for. And >> Okay. >> I'm just going to make a recommendation that the board disclose to any potential
homeowners that this is an HOA with a privately maintained basin. I have a concern when you only have three lots that at some point they're going to be at the governing body saying we can't don't have the funds to maintain it. The the way the state regulations are set
up, it is very difficult to maintain the individual BMPs. So I I think there should be a disclosure um so that anyone that's buying in here clearly understands that it is their obligation uh as part of a homeowner in this community uh to maintain that
basin. Agreed. >> And we would have a declaration that establishes that HOA >> and it would be Yeah. It would be recorded against every lot and it and we would send it for review either to the board or the town attorney, whomever
reviews it, but that could certainly be in bold and you know in a recorded declaration that every home >> we've been down this road before in the past 15 20 years ago retention. >> Okay. And it's not it's not fair
>> outside taxpayers, you know. >> No, understood. Completely understood. It would be loud and clear in the declaration. It would be in their title reports. They would be technically considered to be on notice of it whether they decide to read their title report
or not. No avoiding that for anyone. >> Let me be devil's advocate on this real quick. Laura, so just because this happens in this town way too often, we have homeowners move in. it's conveyed to them they have the
obligation to maintain this all well and good year one year two year three year four year five as we see throughout this town right what is the ultimate that happens if they just say listen we can't do anything about it okay the town comes in they find them they find them and
then ultimately we're like Mayor Leio says we're cleaning up these basins like we're doing all over town anyway what happens >> unfortunately there's really no enforcement >> yeah beyond that that's why we have the code enforcement regulations. We can issue fines
>> and there can there can be an enforcement in terms of if the if the town maintained those those costs those unit owner those home owners be responsible for those costs and it would be as if they owe property tax. So you'd have the same rights as if somebody didn't pay their property >> but respectfully there it's expensive
and so when you're tasked with three homeowner I can tell you what like the average fee is it's somewhere between 250 to $300,000. So understand If you are sitting at a council meeting and homeowners are coming in and expressing their concerns for that, that's what the board is trying to avoid.
>> Understood. Understood. >> Joe, I I that's why I mentioned it should be adequately disclosed because the ability of a three party homeowners association to be successful. >> I have my own concerns with however the regulations allow for this.
>> Be a larger bold font. >> Look at the look at the debacle right next door on Michelle Boulevard. >> Correct. Okay, we have the neighborhood that's right next door, >> right? >> They have in the back that's >> has had issues from day one. Standing water, even though it's technically
supposed to stand and release into the ground, water tables high, there's always water in it. And we just, you know, same thing. Those homeowners over there cut the grass, have to stay away from certain plants because the plants are in there, you know, to keep the slope together and all that stuff. I
get, you get all that. >> No, I I understand. We would certainly, as you said, a boulder font and any other means to make sure all the homeowners are fully aware. >> Mr. Cooier, are you fine with that, sir?
>> I'm fine with it. Although it's, you know, it's a problem that's almost impossible to avoid. As a town attorney, I've been in that exact position sitting with my board and even with the disclosure, you know, people particularly like firsttime home buyers.
It's difficult for them to process and fully appreciate what it even means to to have that responsibility, but we can do as much as we can to make sure that, you know, people are walking in with the knowledge at least. >> Yeah, that was a good segue to my next
question for you. Sure. >> So, I got to switch my to my old fart glasses here. Um, on your grading plan. >> You you did perk testing, right? And I guess I'm assuming Dynamic did the perk test. >> Yes.
>> You went down 11 feet and you didn't hit groundwater in that area. How? I find that very hard to believe, >> especially given the Michelle Boulevard. >> I I mean that I I've drilled there and I know for a fact you're hitting water within 10 feet.
>> It's Have you ever been to the next door >> where it puddles out in the road in front of that big oak tree. It's, you know, and then that's that's actually down the road from you another, you know, 200 feet maybe, right? >> But you got the stream up there, too. That's always over. I >> I'm just a little concerned that if if
basin construction was based upon not hitting groundwater water within 11 ft, >> one thing I will say to that in the CME review letter, uh, because we did essentially poked holes around the entire site, Yeah. But we don't have
enough testing within the basin footprint at this time. So CME is requiring two more tests within the footprint of the basin. Yeah. >> So once that is completed, we will give that information to >> wait till it rains a little bit because it hasn't rained in like you know >> can we can we does the municipal staff
can we have them make arrangements if they want to witness those tests come witness those tests? >> We could we could contact municipal staff so that everybody is >> because we just know the area really Yeah, absolutely. >> I'm glad we're going back out there so we can have everybody take a look.
>> Um, and then just while I got the microphone for two other questions. Um, these are monster houses, right? 4,500 square foot. >> Why do you need on street parking? Like, don't you have a pretty darn big
driveway? I'm just confused why why you would even need on street parking. We were pro providing entree parking. The discussion um with CME's office was to review the firet truck circulation to see where entry parking would have to be
restricted. >> Um and we were able to show that circulation would work if essentially four cars were parked on that west side of the road. >> I mean those driveways probably hold about 20 cars, right? I mean I just
>> it was just a question. Dimensionally, I think each driveway could hit foot fit four cars. And then at this time, we don't have plot plans. So, a house of this size is is most likely going to have a garage. So, you have another car or two there. So, I agree with you. There is a surplus of parking.
>> Yeah. >> Um >> but in part, the parking obviously having parking available to the property owners is much better for those owners than not having it. And if they ever needed to use parking like that and it wasn't available, technically that car
would go park in the neighbor's street. So while it's there, while it's off the main beaten path, you don't have through traffic. Your emergency vehic will still circulate. We feel it's a benefit to have it available to them. Why why cause somebody to go into another neighborhood? And if your driveways are
big enough, it'll self police. You won't really have cars sitting up. Well, I can tell you right across the street on those there is no parking on those streets completely jammed up, >> right? >> The homes are >> right, >> you know, four, five, six. >> That's where I'm going, but I didn't
want to say it, John. But >> I know that neighborh is off the >> right off the bat, you going tell you that. >> Right. >> Now, Michelle Boulevard, same thing. Now, you're only supposed to park on the one side, >> right? >> Okay. And that road with those massive
houses and massive driveways now has multiple cars in the street too. So, but it's a longer road. It's wider. So, that's you know his concerns are because it's it's a narrow co it complies with DT and all that far size. But if you put
cars on both sides of of that roadway heading into the Kovasac, >> okay, that could be an issue. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. And that's why just approximating like twothirds of the the frontage on road A parking would be restricted. >> So at at most with the signage like I
said it's about 100 ft. So you could probably get four maybe five cars in that 100 feet. >> And will you guys be providing the signage and parking on one side of the road or doing that? >> We'll put no parking. >> That will be part of our that'll be part of our >> make it clear to the homeowners too.
That's >> Oh, it'll be signed. It'll be properly Yeah, it'll be built to municipal standards, including signage. It has to by us. >> Street lights. >> Yeah. So, we are currently proposing two street lights. Uh, one at the end of the culde-sac and and one um in the middle
between the culde-sac and um Ramtown Greenville. We'll work with CME's office. I think they want it a little bit closer to Ramtown Greenville. Um so, we'll work with them to see if if we shift that down. Do they want a third light? >> Laura, I think I think
at the entrance to Ramtown Greenville are staggered one on each side so that way your entrance way coming in is >> that's exactly what we said was we recommended shifting the lighter closer to the intersection. >> Yeah, I think this Yeah, listen I'm not even particularly happy with your with
your because that's a sharp curve right there. So I I would have preferred seen that driveway lined up with Moses Milch but then that would change of the entire then you wouldn't have the same way. So you're pulling the lighting
pulling the lighting more towards that intersection. >> You understand what I'm saying? When you come around that bend >> from the schools, it's a tight It's a tight bend, >> right? >> And then boom, you're going to have an intersection, you know, >> right? >> So I've recommended also on Ramtown River Road in both directions. Signage
saying intersection ahead. >> Yes. We received that today from the police department. They even sent us copy of the signs that they'd like to see out there. So we would comply with the police department's report. It's an email report, but they have the same problem. >> What about line of sight for for a
police department? Did they have any input on that? >> Yes. Um, they deferred to the engineer. Um, but we are trimming back the buffer along the intersection. You can see how there's a little bit of grass space in
between where that buffer starts. And that is to provide the compliance site triangle. >> Right. >> Um, >> but you're on the inside of a curve. So, do you actually You plot it all out here and it makes it look like you can see, but being on the inside of the curve, is it your opinion that there's adequate
sight distance? >> Sight triangle is not the same as sight distance. >> Yeah. So, we we follow the roadway lanes with the sight triangle. So, it doesn't just go straight. It
follows the curve around. And then, >> you see, I mean, I get you can draw a triangle on a I get that. >> But like when you're there, how far out into the road does a car actually have to be before you can actually see
>> cars coming? >> Yeah. You got a >> blind cars coming. >> Here's the problem right here. Okay. >> This is a blind spot. >> 50 mph blind spot. Okay. >> So this sight line right here, I know we
got the pros. We need to shift Mr. We shift this shift this back or shift this over or lose these. Put them someplace else. I don't know how many feet, maybe 15 feet, 20 feet, >> 30 ft. Needs to stay open on both sides of this coming. So that way these sight
lines are going to be clean. >> It looks It looks nice, you know, all these trees, but that doesn't mean >> crappy unless you're driving on the road. I'm telling you right now, that's that's a sharp curve. But mayor, I'm also concerned that if a car stops at that stop bar shown on that graphic that you're at,
>> whether there's trees in the sight or not, you're not going to see cars whipping at 50 miles hour. >> You're going to have to This is going to happen. >> You're going to have to You're going to have to the car is going to have to extend almost into the rideway to be able to see cars coming from the left.
>> So, the the sight triangle is measured from the that's a standard set by Ashtto to measure back from the travel lane. to where that sight triangle starts and then based on the speed limit extend down the lane in each direction. So if
you're looking left in this case you have 335 ft of clear sight triangle and that none of those trees are proposed in that sight triangle. So that should be cleared low grass. So you have a clear sight for 335 ft to the left. You look to the right you also have 335 ft. Um
and >> so the car traveling 50 miles an hour at the 335 ft if somebody pulls out >> in front of that car that's that's >> yeah based on Ashtow guidance that is >> but let me ask you Doug following up with the mayor's comment notwithstanding
with what you just said if you work with the township forester I think the applicant would agree to shift some of those trees work with township forester make sure they go to go above and beyond the problem the trees are not the There's clearance underneath the trees
that you can see. It's the curve of the road that's the concern. >> The trees will have the apron like >> you know when trees grow there's clearance up to a certain height. >> I was just pointing out that are more of a problem than trees. It's more the
geometry of that road. >> Well, >> I was just pointing it out because Mr. Mayor commented on it. Otherwise, yes, they comply with the ASHTTO standard for the speed limit, for the road size, for the size of the intersection. >> It's road that's a fast road, but you
don't have the when you come around the bend, then you have to slow down because >> you know, it's supposed to probably be 40 45, but that's that's a >> Yeah, the schools, you have three schools up the road >> that are going to be coming down that road with buses every day. You know, I
mean, it's a that where you have the the Kovac entrance is tricky. You know, I don't know if it could be >> if it could be shifted to the keep it where your houses are, but can that that >> taken away >> take it put it on a I don't know. I'm
not an engineer, Laura. I don't know if it could be redesigned >> further west >> to to ease it more. I don't know. You know, without taking away your >> worse. >> Yeah. You can't take the curve out.
>> Yeah. No, that's even worse. If you go to the east with it, it's even worse. >> Get it wid it widens out after you come around the bend right there. >> You go the other way. >> Yeah, that's why I'm saying to you. I just want to make sure you know sight
lines are clear. you know, moving trees around, moving bushes around, whatever. >> Yeah. If if we wanted to do some sort of offset off of the the sight triangle and eliminate trees even further from that to >> But the the issue I understand that
you're echoing on what the mayor saying. I don't think you're you're listening. This road is exactly on the inside of a curb. Agreed. >> Agreed. >> I haven't seen a profile. So, I'd want to see a profile that shows that you have clear distance to see because what
what Jen is trying to say to you is that when you get that stop bar I I know you plotted out the look back but the reality is the cars coming down are not going to be in that vehicle's view. So the vehicle is going to have to edge out of the stop bar.
So we need more of a profile to make sure that the sight distance is as you've represented. >> We can prepare an exhibit a sight line exhibit for this stop bar. Yeah. And and if it pleases the board, um we could certainly demonstrate
compliance with that, we would like the board to consider the application with that possibly as a condition of any approval the board might grant unless the board feels like that's something that has to be observed first. Obviously, >> one of the things the board may wish to
consider is you could um if this is preliminary and final. So, if the board wanted to act on the application, perhaps preliminary would be uh more appropriate. I would like for the board to be able to see um that sight line. I wouldn't be comfortable if it was
granted preliminary and final with that as a condition. So, that would be my recommendation. And just understand when you grant preliminary and final with these conditions, you don't see it again as a board. If you grant it preliminary with these
conditions, they have to come back with all those changes made and present it to you. >> Well, listen, >> you get to see it. >> I'm uncomfortable without seeing it. >> Yeah. So, what >> that's all that's all I'm asking. Okay. We need to protect the surrounding homes over there. That that roadway is a very busy roadway, sir. We have three schools
on that roadway. Busy busy area. >> Understood. >> Heading out to Arnold Boulevard and and back up around town. That's a major like when you went there. When you went there with Sherry, it's like you said, Shar, it's not really wooded. It's all vines. It's garbage. You know, especially from
arrow, you can see all the wall holes. But that curve is quick. When you come down past the house that's next to the house that's next to Moses Mil. >> Okay. up there by by uh Moses Drive. Not the not the second one. The first one.
The other way. >> Move that map down. >> Right there. See where Michelle Boulevard comes out? >> Oh, this one. >> So, when these those cars are coming down, they pass Michelle Boulevard and then there's that guy's long house right there and that's where everybody picks
up that speed and comes around. And if someone's making a left out of there, that sideline better be better be, you know, I'm not concerned making a left into it coming from the west. >> It's the >> it's from the east, you know. >> I understand. Um, and in light of the
mayor's concern, we we would prepare that exhibit. We'd request that we obviously not have any vote tonight. We prepare that. We'd submit it. And when the board could place us on another meeting agenda, we would come back to review that as part of the >> So you're you're not even seeking
preliminary? >> Yeah, we would we would rather just come in and show it to you now why we understand the concerns, why we why we're fully engaged in what we need to change and rather than >> later on my team forgets exactly how we're supposed to amend things. So I'd
rather make the changes now while we're very clear on what needs to be changed. And and you said the the police say defer to the engineer for the sighteline. If my memory serves me correct, didn't we have a couple applications where the police kind of, hey, this is what we want. So, I would
work with the how police department because they're they're familiar with with this kind of stuff and uh take it pretty darn seriously. They've definitely um weighed in on other applications that we've seen in the past. Yeah, we actually asked to have them contacted today because we hadn't
had any correspondence from them. So, so they reached out to them and got that communication for us because we were interested to hear what they had to say. >> So, that's how we ended up getting that today. But, um they did note the clear sight distances and they said, "But
nonetheless, we'd like to see these signs. They're basically the driveway ahead signs um on both sides, both directions >> which addresses part. Sure. >> Every every street needs to reduce. >> All right.
>> Well, we're just concerned with it's a high it doesn't need a traffic study obviously because it's a minor subdivision, but if you want to go out there and sit >> a major subdivision, >> it's a major major but it's not it doesn't require a traffic study. Correct. I mean the major subdivision
checklist requires a traffic study. They ask for a waiver, right? >> Yes. >> Yeah. Listen, there's a lot of reason. >> Let's just be clear though when the board grants submission waiverss. When you look at the resolution, it says we're granting you this waiver for
purposes of completeness. We're not saying that you never have to supply the information. We can still ask for it. or just not going to hold you up from beginning the hearing process. So, the board, if it wants that information, it's still entitled to it. >> I I know Dynamic has a pretty uh hefty
traffic division. So, I mean, it might >> We would certainly have them chime in on what we have to do now to make revisions. Yeah, >> we I I was planning to tell the client that that's what we >> If that driveway in any way, if this whole thing could be possibly shifted a
little bit and that driveway could be facing more westward away from that sharp curve. >> I don't think, John, I disagree with you 100%. I I think that that curve is going to be a nightmare regardless. Either way, >> yes. >> Well, there's no other and the only other way is to put put the driveway at
at Moses Mils at at the bottom on the west side and have a travel road going through to the Kovasac, right, Jen? >> I mean, they could shift the culde-sac a little bit to the north and have it not right at the center of that curve. A little bit farther like instead of like
this like into the pond, >> but like the the inside of the curve is Yes, Chris. Exactly what I'm saying. But the inside of the curve is worse than the outside of the curve. >> So,
looking to >> the ter. >> Yeah. So, it's just something to consider. I understand what they were trying to do to try to to split the baby and like make it as big as possible, but I do think they could make it work if they shifted that a little bit outside
of where you're kind of blind on the curve. >> Y >> the interior curve is more concerning. I mean, first day of school today, I I'll be honest, I was blown away about how fast people go on that road at, you know, 7 o'clock in the morning. >> Um,
>> yeah, >> I only got one more year there. So, and I get to deal with how high school. So, um, >> and can I just ask Miss Newman a question for the the profile? >> What are you, I guess, looking for for that profile to show or your concern
elevation change? And you should see, I mean, it's exactly like I said, you're plotting this as if the driver is going to be looking back this way. You can see it's all in the green. That's not helping them. It's not showing that the car is coming. So, there needs to be enough to see along of
the road profile the line of sight. >> Okay. Just Yeah, it's generally a flat site. So, between the northern end and then all the way at the western There's not a significant grade change. It
actually goes down a little bit and then comes back up. So, >> and would you agree with me that your your driveway again, you've kind of already conceded that you're going to do this information? I understand you're looking for additional. Right now, you have a road proposed at the exactly point of the inside of a curve. Correct.
>> I agree with you. >> Would you agree that sight distance is a concern on the inside of a curve? >> I I agree with that and that is why we show the 33 saying that you show the astro sight triangle. We've already been through this 85 times in a day. Right
now, for somebody that's coming out of that road to see a car heading southbound on the inside of that curve, they have to go beyond that stop bar because like it's unrealistic to expect people to look through a long area.
They're going to creep out into the road and the speed limit's 50. I can guarantee you that cars are on that road hauling at 65 plus around that curve. So like I get from a technical standpoint,
the sight triangle is a side triangle. From a realistic standpoint, what you're showing is causing the board concern. So they want to make sure that a driver doesn't have to put their front end in the cart way to see cars coming which
are going to result in accidents. That's the concern. Correct, mayor. Am I Am I misspeaking? >> Listen, it's self-explanatory. We're going to drive over there right now and I'll show you what we're talking about. Okay? I'm not trying to be a smart ass guy. >> No, no. I I understand. I just >> You need to understand that this road is
fast. It's not supposed to be that fast, but the speed limits don't matter. Okay? Our police officers are out there all the time. Doesn't matter. That doesn't matter. When you come around that bank, I'm telling you right now, it needs to be that needs to be softened out. There's no way on that straight line
like that. It it can work. There it's just not going to >> I don't care. No landscaping at all. The grading, you drop the grading down, whatever. It's you know, people don't pay people don't care what where there's drive. If you go on to Moses Milch, the other street that's across, that's a
nightmare getting out of that that intersection making a left because when you get to that, when you come out of Moses Milch, you look to your left, there's the horse farm right there on the same side of the road and it's a little woody. You got to like stick your nose out >> to see the cars coming from the from the west side.
>> The stuff from the to the to the east is easy. >> So you you know you're making a right or a left, but that there >> you if you're going east, left out of that driveway >> or right you're not paying attention to people coming around that split second, >> they're going to catch up to you in two seconds.
>> Understood. And and I don't mean I don't mean to just beat a dead horse here. I just want to try to get the information from the the group of people that we will be in front of in a couple months hopefully with more information. So I just want to understand. So I think one
of the suggestions is relocate the road is look at where you can shift that road specifically maybe where >> you're a little bit more straighter on or change the orientation of the road. That was one very specific request. In
the absence of doing that I have to I would bring maybe a traffic engineer here to talk about the site >> distance. I plan to assuming my applicant obviously would agree. I would like to do that. Maybe maybe the retention pond gets shifted to the other side.
>> The difference, right, Jen? It don't really I don't care where the retention pond is, okay? It's not our problem. It's the HO and whatever the DP wants with all that. If they can shift that this whole thing and just move it. That's what you're paying, you know, all these big time engineers for, you know,
come up with a a smoother design, you know, a more This is all about safety, guys. >> It's three houses. We're not reinvesting here, but it's safety. That's a that's a nasty curve. Okay. >> And it's a very it's a very heavily
>> but it's a very heavily populated section of >> Oh, it's that area is nuts. >> Yeah. >> With the three schools be there. >> Yeah. >> And Mr. Chairman, hearing that they're going to come back, I would ask for the additional soil testing, too. >> Yeah. Please.
>> But wherever the strange pond's going to be, make sure that you know, whatever the the water table that you're talking. >> Yeah. So, >> um, another good segue. Did you guys do a a phase two out there, a soil investigation, historic? Um,
>> no. So, that was one of the last things in uh my outline. So, we um we talked to the applicant. They don't have any historic environmental testing out there for the phase one or anything like that, but they are going to comply with the historic um pesticide testing out the
ordinance. Yes. >> Okay. Perfect. >> Condition of approval. >> The applicant does not have any data. They've owned the land a long time. They don't, but they will go out and get those test over there. >> That has been like that since I came here in the early 80s.
>> I know. >> All right. I'm just letting you know that that's been like that since the early >> Yeah. But we'll still do the soil test to support. >> Yeah. It was a it was agricultural from the 30s >> and prior to about 1960 >> and and then it got overgrown because somebody abandoned it. Whatever whatever
happened, you know, >> but we'll test the soil as a we'll test it. >> Beautiful. Thank you. Um well, I'll leave it up to you counselor. Do you want to continue with the I mean or do you want to try and get a a date
for coming back and discussing going back to the drawing board and having more conversations? >> Well, I'm I'm not sure. I'm going to ask my engineer because it's Were you close to concluding your principal testimony? >> Yes. Yeah. I had the utilities which we talked about environmental we just
talked about. >> So, Laura, no street lights out front just just on the co side. Correct. No, we asked my our technical report which I'm assuming they're going to agree in totality is to shift the lights closer to the intersection. >> Yeah, but I'm say at the intersection street
>> to the left and right. >> That is correct. >> Okay. >> So, if he was very close to of course I was unless the board doesn't want to. I was just going to have him finish. >> I would have him finish. >> Okay. >> So, why don't you just wrap up your primary testimony and we'll ask the
board what you'd like to do from >> Sure. Um, yeah, we I think I'm >> I'm not sure there's much more. >> Yeah, I'm pretty much done. The utilities we talked about and the environmental. So, the other thing was just the the reports, but I I did my
best to hit all of the open items in the reports as I went. So, if there's any >> Well, I is there anything in the reports that you can't that you do not agree to comply with? No, the only clarification was we will definitely show renderings that comply with the non-lookalike
ordinance, but that would be at the time building permit. >> Honestly, I don't know that we need to see the rendering, >> right? There's a note on the plan. >> Commitment to compiance with the lookalike requirement I think is is as much as we need. >> That's fine. >> And there's a note on the plan that says that >> there's a note.
>> Well, look alike to what Jen have a requirement. They can't look the three houses alike. Right. So we will make sure it can't look alike. Right. >> Yeah. People save money with their architect. They design one house and
they try to build it three times. Your ordinance doesn't allow that. >> We don't allow that. >> Allow it. So that's part of our assumptions. We have a note on the plan. We intend to comply. We have to comply. So they won't look. >> Are these going to be built out with full basement? >> Um, you know, they do not know what type
of houses or what they would be built. They will most likely have basements. Um, but they really haven't decided um what type of house would even be built there. They want to see more with the market, what the what the buyer might want. >> See, Jen, the only issue I have without
seeing what what's going to be built there is like with the basement, right? You know, if it comes back and it's approved, we approve this and then we don't see the other part of it, right? We don't see what the houses are going to look like. Okay? And they're they
come back and it's full-blown basement with the walkouts. You know what I mean? Well, they're going to have to provide a FL plan to the town. It won't come back before you, but they'll have to provide a plan. >> Yeah. To the town >> to the town for review on on everything to make sure everything's complant. If anything in what they're proposing on
the plot does not comply, have to be back for you >> or the zoning board, right? Yeah. It's going to be a single family home. But this is a subdivision. They're not obligated to provide us with like full architectural plans. >> Okay.
Eileen, what are we looking at schedule-wise? >> Well, before we before we do that, yeah, just Mr. Vidiello, what kind of time do you think your team needs in order to get all of that together before we start picking out dates for you?
>> Well, um, are you uh you may be booked at least a month out, right? >> Well, no, I'm saying how much time do your guys need? Because if they need a month, we're not going to look at less than a month. Any two months? We'll start looking at two months. >> Two months. >> Two months.
>> More in the two months range. >> Okay. So, >> so September, October, November. No earlier than the beginning of November. Maybe two months. >> Um, we have one meeting in November. That's November 6th. Otherwise, I have
December 4th or December 18th or January 8th. 116 12 >> 4 >> 12 124 >> 1218 >> 128 >> or January 8th, 2026.
We'd like to please be scheduled for 116 if you please support the board. >> November 6. November 6. What's the uh November date? >> November 6. >> November. >> And I'll just need an extension of time from you.
>> Well, let me just make the announcement. So case number SD 3022 Cody Milch 2011 trust be carried to the board's November 6, 2025 meeting.
There's a live meeting beginning here at 7 o'clock in the main meeting room at town hall. There'll be no further notice to property owners and council. You're granting an extension of time till the end of November. >> That's correct. I am over there.
Whatever works for you, sir. That's two months. Get all your ducks in a row. You keep these ladies over here happy because I don't want to hear them. We have to hear it after you leave. So, we're very diligent here that if you haven't figured that out already. >> Absolutely. >> We understand.
>> We're here to represent the residents. Okay. I just happen to also be the mayor. So, I am going to do my due diligence on every single application. >> Absolutely. >> Not popular with some some of the some of the professionals. >> That's just tough. That's not That's not what we're here for. >> We have to do our due diligence up here.
>> I appreciate everybody talking is a serious issue. >> That was a straight road. This is done already. This application's done, guys. We're all going. Okay. Because it looks good. It's, you know, it's not that you do have some technical stuff. >> Understood. Understood.
>> Thank you guys. I appreciate. We'll see you in November. >> Have a great night. >> You too. >> Jennifer, any master plan update? So, to date, I have not been made aware of
any formal challenge to our housing plan, which would have had to be in by Sunday at midnight. There is additional information that's being requested from Fair Share. We're probably going to have to amend the plan to include this additional information.
It's like housekeeping stuff. It's nothing substantive. >> Gotcha. But we may have to amend the plan at some point between now and December 31st. >> Okay. >> Not one one application that came up. >> I haven't gotten any. >> So, from what I understand, and Ron
probably can also attest to this, from what I understand is that the deadline for the submission of any object objections was midnight at on August 31st, which was Sunday. And apparently people waited until the 11th hour and
then overloaded e courts and then e courts kind of shut down. I don't know this for a fact but this is what I've heard. Ron, have you heard the same thing? >> Yes. >> And so there are definitely things that have been filed >> Tuesday morning. There's also the the so
the the legislation required the submission by midnight August 31st but typically when there's a deadline at e courts and it falls on a weekend it carries to the next day the next day was Labor Day so there are some things that
got filed yesterday no Tuesday morning >> but like we did not adjust our number we complied so we haven't gotten a lot of hits from people that said that they should be in the plan and we didn't put them in the plan. It's more fair share asking for
additional information. So, >> I think we're in good shape. Are we going to have to amend the plan to include this additional information? 100%. >> Got it. >> But we're not in a bad position. Like I work in one town in Somerset County and we got 12 objections. So,
>> it's going to be a fun fall winter for me in that regard, but we are not on that hit list. >> Whatever. Okay, good news. Uh, Ron, any reason to go into executive? >> Uh, no, Mr. Chairman. >> All right. Uh, at this time I will entertain a motion to adjurnn.
>> Motion. >> Do I have a second? >> Thank you very much. Have a good evening.