Heat. Heat. Good evening everyone. Welcome to the Township of Howell Planning Board meeting for Thursday, April 24th, 2025. Eileen, opening statement, please. I hereby declare this meeting of the Howell Township Planning Board to be open. adequate notice have 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 the rear of the meeting room. Furthermore, smoking is not permitted in the municipal building. Please take note that this meeting is being videotaped
for possible future broadcast on How Township TV77. Thank you. Thank you. Roll call, please. Mr. Cristiano is absent. Mr. Greenfield is absent.
Mr. Carbonic here. Mr. Mercer here. Mr. Tannen House is absent. Mr. Mr. Rubal here. Councilman Nadell is excused tonight.
Mayor Leio here. Mr. Bad here. And Chairman Husser here. You have a quorum. Great. Would everybody please rise for the pledge of allegiance and afterwards a moment of silence for our men and women serving both here and abroad. Allegiance to the flag of the United
States of America to the stands nation and justice for all. All right. Thank you. Next is approval of minutes for the regular meeting of February 20th, 2025. eligible voters, Mr. Carbonic, Mr.
Mercer, Mr. Rebel, Mayor Leio, Mr. Bato, and myself. Do I have a motion? I'll make a motion. Mr. Mercer, do I have a second? Second. Mayor Leio. Mr. Kabanic? Yes. Mr. Mercer? Yes. Mr.
Rubal? Yes. Mayor Leio? Yes. Mr. B? Yes. And Chairman Huster? Yes. Minutes approved. Okay. And then the approval of minutes for the regular meeting of March 6, 2025. Eligible voters, Mr. Carbonic, Mr. Rebel, Mayor Leio, Mr. Bato, and myself. Do I have a
motion? Motion. Mayor Leio, do you have a second? Second. Mr. Rebel. Mr. Carbonic? Yes. Mr. Reubel? Yes. Mayor Leio? Yes. Mr. B? Yes. And Chairman Huster? Yes. Minutes approved.
Thank you, Eileen. I'm certain we have correspondence. I have uh five things for correspondence. Uh the first is the financial disclosure statements are due by regular members by April 30th, 2025. Allison from the clerk's office
sent an email with instructions on April 1st, 2025. Yeah, we're all good up here. I don't know. I'll check with the other people. Okay. Uh, case number SD
3013, Basador LLC has requested to be carried to July 17th, 2025 with no further notice. An extension was granted to the board through July 30th, 2025. Do you want to do we need
a No. Okay. Thanks, Jen. Sorry, Eileene. That's okay. Case number SP 1034A, Gutierrez Properties LLC, will be rescheduled with notice to May 15, 2025 with an
expiration date of May 31st, 2025. What was the date? May May 15th. Thank you. Case number SD 3016, Ben Zion Youongrass will be carried with no further notice to May 8th, 2025 with an extension
granted the to the board through May 31st, 2025. And the last one is case number SD 3009 Augustine Kim for the extension of time will be carried to the next meeting of May 8th 2025. You don't have to come.
You're good. So we carried that to the next meeting. So just make sure you coordinate with your engineer before the next meeting. You're good to go. You don't have to stick around.
I wish I could come with you. Do we The meeting schedule got jumbled around from May. Uh yes, because of um the National Day of Prayer and the Yeah. Memorial Day. Got it. Okay. 8th and
15th. Cool. That's it. Eileen, I have one more thing. Uh just that the council introduced an ordinance at their last meeting. So the board needs to review it for consistency. Uh as it is it up for public hearing and adoption. Jennifer.
Yes sir. This is an ordinance for if you guys are aware the florist in Ramtown. I know Mr. Mayor we've discussed this in the past. This is an ordinance modifying the zoning on
the floor site and the immediate area which are small lot singles to allow for small lot singles on this uh on the floor site 8,000 square foot lots which is consistent with what's
around it in the back. It is consistent with the master plan. We have uh provisions for maintaining uh neighborhoods, adequate uh availability of variety of housing types. This is a small lot single
opportunity. Uh and so I would recommend that the board find this consistent with the master plan. This by the Wawa. Yes. Across the street. Y got it. Exactly. Okay. Any questions from the board? Okay. I will entertain a motion that it
is consistent with the master plan. Substantially consistent with the master plan. Excuse me. I'll make a motion. Mr. Mercer, do I have a second? Second. Mayor Legio. Roll call, please.
Mr. Carbonic? Yes. Mr. Mercer? Yes. Mr. Rubel? Yes. Mayor Leio? Yes. Mr. Ball? Yes. And Chairman Husser? Yes. Okay. One, two, three, four, five. All right. Okay. On to uh Oh, no. We have a
resolution um appointing Eileen here as the new administrative officer. For those that don't know, um our former planning board uh secretary, Eileen Rabano, has um retired and we wish her very well in her future endeavors. So, I
guess we have to vote on you being it. Yeah. Officially, even though she's doing it. All right. Uh, all right. Do I have a motion? I'll make a motion. Mr. Mercer, do I have a second? Second. Mr. Reubel. Mr. Carbonic? Yes. Mr. Mercer? Yes. Mr.
Reubel? Yes. Mayor Leio? Yes. Mr. Bad? Yes. And Chairman Huster? Yes. Thank you. Welcome to the team. Thank you. Okay. on to submission waiverss. Um, am I missing something
here? Okay. Uh, this is, uh, case number SD 3017, Lzette Cholula, uh, for a minor subdivision. Hi, David Burns here on behalf of applicant Lzette Cholula. Good evening.
So, uh, we we have, uh, the all the submission waiverss outlined in our February 27th, 2025 review letter, and our office takes no exception to the board granting same. Excellent. Any
questions? No. Pretty easy here in How, huh? All right. Thank you very much. Well, we got to vote on it, so do I have a motion? I'll make a motion, Mr. Mercer. A second. Second. Mayor Leio.
Mr. Carbonic. Yes. Mr. Mercer. Yes. Mr. Rubel. Yes. Mayor Legio. Yes. Mr. Bato. Yes. And Chairman Hasser. Yes. Mr. Waver. Granted. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'll see you in a few for my extension hearing. All right.
Okay. On to applications. I believe first couple are extensions of time. Uh first is case number SD 3014. Neil and Monica Slatterie for an extension of time. Good evening. Good evening, members of the board. James Carton here on behalf of the applicant. James, how
are you? I'm doing well. The we're just waiting uh final county approval. They have everything on their hands. We were expecting approvals actually today. Somebody lost the deed that they recorded, so we sent it back out to them. Uh could come as early as tomorrow, but we were seeking 90 days just in case. 90 days. Yes, please. I
think that's more than fair. Anybody questions? Yeah. All right. I'll entertain a motion for a 90-day extension. Uh motion. Mr. Rebel, do I have a second? I'll second. Mr. Mercer, roll call. Alen, please. Mr.
Cabbanic? Yes. Mr. Mercer? Yes. Mr. Reubel? Yes. Mayor Leio? Yes. Mr. Bato? Yes. And Chairman Huster? Yes. Good luck. Thank you very much. Thank you for coming to help. All right. All right. The next is case number
SP1099 Mammoth Solar. Another extension of time. Do we have anybody from M? Oh, there you are. How are you? Sorry. Grace Chan of Pearlman Miranda on behalf of the applicant. Hi, Grace. How are you? Hi, I'm good. So, we are seeking actually um I submitted a letter for a
uh an extension of time seeking a one-year extension. I'm actually now seeking two consecutive one years and I'll explain why. Please do. Yeah. Um, so there are actually two things that are holding us up. The first is a uh solid waste facility uh permit from the D. We are actually close to receiving
it. We submitted the application back in October of 2022. There's been a ton of back and forth with the D. Um March 19th, they submitted another uh comment letter to us. We are literally preparing a response that'll go out within the next couple of days. We believe that
right after that uh response letter is submitted to the D, we'll be the D will be issuing a permit shortly thereafter. So that's one. The bigger issue is with uh PJM interconnection. So PJM interconnection, they are the regional
transmission um operator for the um transmission of electricity. We cannot operate without PJM approval. um PJM uh coordinates with the utility in order to transmit the electricity. And the problem that we had is so we submitted
for approval through PJM in September of 2020. Um PJM, they manage 13 states. So they had a major backlog and in the middle of um our submission, they decided, well, we're going to revamp and overhaul the way we review applications.
We got our application got caught up in that trans um that transition process with PJM. Um we finally they actually fasttracked us and we were able to enter into an agreement in July of LA July of 2024. So we do have an agreement. Unfortunately, we don't ne get to
negotiate the terms of that agreement and the PJM inter interconnection agreement gives PJM until October 31st, 2026 to actually interconnect the solar project. She's absolutely correct. They're unbelievably difficult and the
red tape is unbelievable. I have no doubt of what she's saying that they submitted. Oh, I in years ago and it's just backed up in a quagmire. So, I would take no exception to the two-year extension. Yeah. I I guess my question is the two years back like when does the
two years start? It get it's backdated to the end of your approval, right? Correct. Yes. So, we got our approval on August 4th, 2022. We um we have the 2-year period where our our approvals are protected um from any zoning
changes. So that brings us to August 4th, 2022. So you're like August of 2026, correct? Got it. Okay, that was my question. Um any questions? Okay, I'll entertain a motion. I'll make a motion. Mr. Mercer,
do I have a second? I'll second. Mr. Carbonic. Roll call, please. Mr. Carbonic, yes. Mr. Mercer, yes. Mr. Rubel, yes. Mayor Leio, yes. Mr. B, yes. And Chairman Huster, yes.
Extension granted. Thank you very much. Thank you. Good luck. Okay. Next is case number SD30002, Frederick Hair for an extension of time. Good evening, mayor, members of the board. My name is David Burns, and I'm
an associate attorney of John Jackson's law firm in Manisquan, New Jersey. And I'm here uh tonight on behalf of the applicant in Frederick Hair um to request a second extension of the minor subdivision approval of for the property located at 94 Porter Road. This was
previously granted by this board um and memorialized on September 15, 2022. The resolution approved a minor subdivision of block 39 lot 7 into new lots 7.01 and 7.02. The applicant uh was initially
delayed in perfecting the subdivision due to delays in obtaining outside agency approvals. Um subsequently this board granted ext granted an extension of 190 days and this was memorialized on December 14th 2023 and unfortunately
um that period has since expired before the required myars could be signed and filed. Uh the applicant here experienced a very unfortunate passing of his father which was incredibly difficult and emotional time for him and his family. This happened uh very close to the expiration date. Um, in fact, his father
was present at the last board hearing regarding this property. Uh, otherwise the applicant is in full resolution compliance uh from my last conversation with the engineer on this project and I also believe uh he's received all necessary outside agency approvals. Um,
he's fully prepared to move forward. Um, he's not proposing any changes to the application. He wants to build uh he wants to develop his house. He wants to uh have children there, raise his family and um he was just unable to obtain the necessary signatures for the myars
before the expiration of the 190day period. We understand that this is the second extension. Uh however, given the unique circumstances, the applica the applicant has uh faced. We respectfully request that this board uh grant an extension for whatever reasonable time
the board deems appropriate to allow for the signing and filing of the myars. Um, and I also have the applicant here if you have any questions for him. I'm very sorry to hear about your father. Uh, can you just give us an idea of what you're looking for timewise? Um, I believe the board is in possession of the myars. So,
um, we can as if it's granted 60 days. 60 days. 60. Does that work? 60 days. Oh, perfect. Yeah. Okay. Excellent. Any questions? 60 days work. Entertain a motion for a 60-day extension. I'll make a motion. Mr. Mercer, do I got a second?
Second. Mayor Legio. Roll call on please. Mr. Carbonic. Yes. Mr. Mercer. Yes. Mr. Rubel. Yes. Mayor Leio. Yes. Mr. Bato. Yes. And Chairman Huster. Yes. Extension of time granted. Mayor and chair members. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Have a great night. You too. Okay. Last extension of time. Case number SD 30009. Augustine Kim got carried to the next got carried to the next to the next meeting. Yeah, I know. Just checking you. It's okay.
All right. So, we only have one application this evening. That's case number SP1127, Diversified Acquisitions LLC. This is for preliminary and final major site plan with ancillary variance and design waiver relief.
Yes, councelor. How are you? How are you doing? Good. Good. You cleared out the agenda for us. Thank you. Yeah. Look at that. Uh my name is Matthew Pada from the law firm Sils Cummus and Gross and I represent Diversified in connection with this application for preing a final site plan approval along with ancillary bulk
variances and waiverss as well. As mentioned before and also on your agenda, we were last here on November 7th where we had the opportunity to have conversations with the board and also the public and put on some engineering testimony. However, we weren't able to complete all of our testimony. But uh
one of the focal points I wanted to bring up to this board as a matter of recollection is that during that conversation was what is exactly is going to be the proposed use for this subject site and we did a recess and then we came back and we agreed on the record that for right now this application would be narrow just to the
flex space use itself. Uh subsequently to that we've had multiple conversations with this board's professionals and it pursuant to their recommendation for approximately 60% of the building itself would be would not be necessarily designated but could be used up to for
trade contractor businesses. So just to clarify flex space use can have trade contractor business but up to 60% of the floor area itself. So, I just want to get that out front that we would agree to that such a condition if this board were bind favorably. However, we're not
saying necessarily that's going to be the only use, but we just want to make sure that we're all on the same page with that. Uh, with that, it would not be the only use if you're maxing at 60%. Right. What the trade contractor business, correct? You have to do another 40%. Correct. Yes. So, with that
being said, we're going to have four professionals tonight. Um, I don't anticipate that they should have long-winded uh, testimony, but we want to make sure we can cross every tea and dot every eye. Sure. So, just to continue on November 7th, my first witness will be my engineer, Anthony Maltise, followed by my architect,
traffic, and then our planner to wrap things up. Perfect. So, if I may, I'd like to call my first witness, Mr. Anthony Maltise. Absolutely. You guys can sit. Those prisms on the tables are actual microphones. Thank you. Good evening everybody.
You swear affirm the testimony you're about to present to the board concerning this application will be nothing but the truth. I do. For the record, sir, please state your name, spell your last name, and provide your business affiliation. Sure. Anthony Maltese, M-L Te. Uh, I'm
the principal of of Abington Engineering LLC. Please set up a free hold. Great. Anthony, can you please provide us with your educational credentials, name of other boards you've been qualified before in the past as a qualified engineer? And also, if you may, please notify us as to whether or
not your engineering license is still in good standing. My engineering license is in still in good standing. I'm a I'm a licensed professional engineer, a professional land surveyor, um, also a certified municipal engineer. I'm currently the burough engineer at Free Old and um I've graduated from Oxford
University and also NGI take and I've appeared in front of many boards around the state of New Jersey. We will accept your credentials. Great. Thank you so much. Uh Anthony, um subsequent to our testimony you had put on the record back on November, why don't you continue to walk us through what we're looking to do
here, including uh the buffers, setbacks, access. Sure. Walk us through. Um, without boring everybody with the all the testimony I gave from last time, we basically went through the entire project on an engineering standpoint. Um, I want to just hit up uh some points
along the way. Uh, and then I'll get to anybody's questions if I missed anything. Um, in our case, Flex is governed by HD4 zoning parameters and we meet all bulk uh standards except for one. Currently, um, we are providing a
25 foot setback to the rear of the property, uh, which we call the rear along the New Jersey bypass, Route 33 bypass. Um, according to the ordinance and and the professionals letters, uh, they are considering that a front yard
setback. So, we would seek relief for a um, a bulk variance of a rear yard set uh, front yard setback at the rear of the property. Um, we've we've we've spoke to the DOT. They they sent us a letter and I believe you guys should have that in your
package where they establish that there is no properties along that bypass that are allowed to have access um to the bypass. So that's why we really strongly feel that that's a rear yard. Um it's not a rear yard, right? So
let me be abundantly clear. It's a front yard. They need a front yard setback. Do I take exception with the fact that they need a setback variance? No. But you're not convincing me it's a rear yard. It's a public right away. Whether you have
access to it or not, it's a front. So, stop referencing it as a rear. Just own the fact that it's a front and deal with the fact that you're not accessing it and provide the testimony that way. But it is not a rear. And I'm not going to
let the record reflect that it's a rear. It's not a rear, it's a front. So, we do require a um a front yard setback of uh 25 ft where 60 foot is required. Um the site hours in operation, I don't
believe we touched space on last time, but the site hours of operation is 6:00 a.m. to 10 p.m. 7 days per week. All ordinance driven use parameters and restrictions will be written into all the tenant leases. Um can I ask a question on that? Sure.
Not sure if you'll have the answer. We talked about percentage wise 60% trade contracting 40% other. Right. Yes. Correct. Um how do you know the hours are 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. But we can institute that in the least. Is that what you're going to do? like there not going to be any 24 hours regardless of
tenants. Not to my knowledge. Got it. Right. That's the intent. Got it. Uh the last time I gave testimony that the bypass was um above our site, but it was actually incorrect or the bypass is
lower than our site. Uh the elevation of our finished floor of the of building number two at the rear of the property is one. The alternative frontage of the property That's what I'm going to keep saying. Thank you. You're welcome. Elevation 140 and the roadway
ranges from uh 140 to 148. So, we're roughly uh two to to 8 ft below the roadway of the bypass. Um the project will be served by a single driveway onto Route 33 business.
Uh Route 33 business. the route 33. Um I'm sorry, our uh traffic engineer will provide more testimony as to the um circulation and the the access permit that we're seeking from the DOT
currently. The site will have no outdoor storage. um uh the truck parking that there's loading docks located at each of the buildings at the rear of the of the or the side of the property of the side of the buildings and
um let's see the project is planned for flexibility up to six to eight potential tenants depending on a demisement for each of the buildings. We we comply with all parking requirements. Uh what we use we based our uh projections on a maximum office
percentage of 15%. And uh plus warehouse area adding one additional space per potential contractor vehicle per per ordinance up to 42. Um this yields a parking count of 97. We provided 101 spaces.
the ADA spaces would be. We have 88 spaces in front of all the buildings. Uh we propose one, two, three, four, five. There's five total. At least one of them accessible. Yes.
Yes, they are. Does storm water from the bypass enter that site or is are there catch basins along that area? There's an embankment that goes um at the top left uh which is the s southerntherly part of the property. There's that would be
considered a high point there and then it flows right along the roadway and it's an embankment. So it's a it's almost like a swale in the back. It's it's it's lower than our property and lower than the roadway and it just continues down through that wood line. That's all bamboo, 50 foot high bamboo
throughout that. So it's it's there for season. Um the buffers uh we we met with Sherry on site not too long ago. We made some corrections to our um to our landscape plan and if she would agree, I think we've met all the requirements uh within
the buffer areas. Um yes. Yeah, I worked with um Steve Kislick from their office. Uh we had a you know a few back and forths, some minor corrections, but as it stands right now, you know, they have plenty of buffer plantings along the front edge.
um you know so I I think they they meet it especially with their um parking setback as well. So I take notes. Thank you. All principal permitted uses are compliant with the buffer provisions.
Trey contractor spaces to be valid under the application will be specified within the buildings as part of the resolution compliance submission. Uh with the building codes specified matching one of our pre uh specified uses tendered by a letter submitted. Uh this conforms to
what the board attorney mandated in our last meeting. Um our overall building coverage is 24.61%. 61% which complies. Um any trade contractors on site will agree to restriction fleet vehicle parking to be either a truck in the
truck court or in the identified fleet spots. So we did designate fleet spots uh across from building number one. If you could bring up the uh site plan sheet number four,
please of the plan set. I mean, is that in So, directly across from building number one, there's 31 uh total parking stalls, and those are four fleet vehicles. They're 25 ft in length.
Did you say they're four fleet vehicles? Correct. Uh the the trade contractors on site will agree to restriction fleet vehicle parking to be either in the truck uh court or on on those identified fleet spots. These restrictions will be written into leases and the number of
fleet vehicles per tenant will be submitted to the zoning officer. Uh no outdoor storage will be allowed for trade trade contract. Before we go on, yes, you understand that no outdoor storage is allowed, but like if you store stuff in those vehicles,
that's considered outdoor storage. So those vehicles need to be 100% empty, otherwise that's considered outdoor storage. Okay. No storage is planned. Pretty trick. Well, planned, but if you guys are to act in the
affirmative, the condition in the resolution will be no outdoor storage. and understand that means that if there's someone there with a fleet vehicle that has stuff in it that's violating that approval. Just want to make sure we're clear.
Yes, that's acceptable. Okay. Um for tree contract tenants office will remain at 20% or less of square footage and the showroom will be less than 10% of uh 10% of the space. If not compliant, a future user would have to secure uh zoning board approval,
conditional use approval. Um the latest plans that were submitted indicate a specific space limitation for individual trade contractor businesses that we have withdrawn given board professional recommendations and instead we agreed to the board professional recommendations
that a maximum of 60% of the projectwide floor area can be a trade contractor space. Um moving on to the to the sewer. I know um someone had brought that up last time. The sewer connection is necessary for the project to function. Uh but since November, publicly
available information has emerged confirming that our applicants are proceeding with the projects that will bring sewer across business 33 to to so we can tie into it. Signage uh the project will be serviced by one monument sign at the
entry. Um we indicate foundation plantings uh in our landscape plan. Tenant identification will be via uh individual placard signs near entry storefront window areas and the only other building mounted signs will be the address number. The address number is to
distinguish buildings one and number two. Architect will discuss sign locations and appearance. The monument sign size uh is code compliant. Uh architect will also go over the placard signs uh but those signage areas will also be compliant. We will require a
variance from section 188-256-5B for the number of signs since in each user will require its own building mounted sign. Um on behalf of the applicant u the sidewalk calculations that were in
the uh one of the board professionals letter. The applicant the the letter stated that um the they wanted a sidewalk trust fund of $24,612 to include both frontages, Route
33 bypass and also Route 33 uh business. Uh we asked the board to just consider Route 33 business um as the only sidewalk contribution since we we are unable to construct sidewalk along the So I would recommend sidewalk along
Route 33 and the contribution along the bypass. That's what I would recommend. You like first of all we can't absolve you of of the contribution. That's not this board's purview. But you need a waiver from providing sidewalk and we
have been getting back information from the governing body that they want the sidewalk. So I would recommend requiring the sidewalk on 33 and waving the requirement for installing the sidewalk
along the bypass. However, you'd have to contribute for that sidewalk along the bypass. You want to discuss that with your client or is that Unfortunately, I mean, there are no sidewalks along the It doesn't matter.
The the there's no sidewalk anywhere argument is irrelevant. It has to start somewhere. There we're interested in getting New Jersey Transit to come along Route 33. We need sidewalk. So, I don't disagree with you. Right. So along Route
9, which is also a DOT regulated highway, we have zero problem getting sidewalk when we ask for it. It's the same scenario along 33. And respectfully to the board, this is not news. I said this exact same thing when we had our
first of multiple TRC's with this applicant. My position on this issue has not changed since we started. Sidewalk on 33 payment for the bypass. That has been my position from the jump and I've
had at least five meetings with this applicant. That has not changed. Do we have just the calculation for the bypass? It's X amount per linear square foot, right? Like it's a square foot. We're talking about a
$24,600 contribution opposed to a $9,000 contribution. I'm sorry, but we don't get to ch to to change the dollar amount, but at the end of the day, you're developing this site with a industrial development, right? Flex
place trade contractor. Every single applicant that has come before us along this quarter, we have said put in the sidewalk. You're not new. You're not special. So, no one's saying we're not going to do the sidewalk. So, if if the applicant's okay with it, I don't disagree with putting a
sidewalk. Well, the applicant is okay with it regardless. You're asking for a waiver if they say no. I'm asking for a waiver on Route 33 bypass. The bypass? You can't construct a sidewalk there. Well, you could, but I'm not asking, Anthony. Not for nothing. No, but you can't do that. Not for nothing. I'm not
arguing with you. Yeah, I know. What I'm saying is put the sidewalk in on 33. That makes sense. Pay for the sidewalk on the bypass. That's what I have said repeatedly. Well, you're paying for something you can never construct. It doesn't matter. We can't we can't absolve you of it. This board does not
have the ability to do that. Council, if we may. Yes. Can we please have a 5minute recess? Let's take a 5minute recess, please. So the uh you can discuss it with your your client. Absolutely. The board will now take a fivem minute recess and reconvene at 7:55 p.m.
If uh you guys want to use the pod, now's the time. Okay. Oh yeah. Yeah. You guys have your little meeting in there. Bunch of weirdos. Yeah, you're going to be hurting tomorrow, bud. I did that on Tuesday.
My grass was knee high. I don't We don't want We don't need You guys over there, man. All you guys have They don't want They put them in those houses. Well, ours after the pool and we got it sold ours and then it died. We
got it slice seeded like nuts. It It's crazy how quick that thing grows, too, man. It's like you got to do it almost like it just took up until last week it was it was nothing. Yeah. Just took off in like a week and a half and I
have told them no less than five times fertilizer that I have to say which the people on this team should know. Like I'm I'm doing it in front of the roof in like two weeks and I'm like I know they
always say they're just put it right in the roll off, but something ends up in front lawn and then it's going to be a divot. So I was like, you know, if you can then you pay. But they were pretty cool about it. I was like, do you know you don't have to do freaking roof permits anymore?
You do not need a roof permit in the state of New Jersey. You know why? Because there's nobody certified from the township to jump up on roofs. I learned a lot from my buddy today, by the way. You don't want to do it? That's fine. See you. He's gonna do my house. Yeah. He gave me a quote. I was like,
"Sign me up." Super nice guy. No roof. You don't need a roof permit anymore in the state of New Jersey. Put a roof. Zero. Because there's nobody from the township that can go up on the roof. That's They were just and close out the permit. So, they're like, "Why
do we issue permits if we can't close the permit?" JR. No. Who's Who's he with? Proving. He's good dude, man. Really good, dude. Yeah. Good price. Oh my god. That's his right.
Yeah, he uh he must be doing surprising. This is This is the Yeah, I see. That was the one where uh you Yes. Wow. Really? Yeah. You were not here. I
know that. Oh, really? That was Dude, they did away with the wholewhere. It's crazy. What's going on? You need some more time. Are you okay? Sure. All right. Eileen, we'll go back on the record.
Meeting has now reconvened. Oh, we will not go back on the record because we're missing one of our members. We got one. Got some more time. Future. It's basically connecting absolutely drive by they look out the window behind
So what I'm seeing on a lot of like open like I'll have to pull construction permits from properties 99% of them permit is always always no matter when it was issued HVAC they
won't have no right right and they're just open forever all right I think we're good now the meeting will now reconvene Okay. So, you spoke with your client, I assume? Yes. You can also make
the assumption that we agreed to the condition of approval regarding the payment of Lua and the construction of the sidewalk as well on the other opposing side. Okay. So, construction of sidewalk along 33 contribution on the bypass. Yes. Thank you, sir. All right. Terrific. Uh Anthony, just for
clarifications, can you please clarify again the uh 20,000 foot restriction that was noted on your plans? Sure. I I stated before that the the latest plan submitted indicated a specific space limitation for individual trade contractors and we we have withdrawn
that um on our plans. They will you guys will see that during resolution compliance. But if you can zoom in on this uh the sheet here right in the middle of the building, there's some small verbiage and within you'll see uh tenants each
limited to 20,000 square foot maximum building area. uh that area will be that will be removed from the plans in the next set. I just wanted to clarify that 20,000 square feet was getting removed. That's on both buildings. Sheet four and it's also on sheet
five. Keep going. Okay. Um currently we have a a a application out with the DOT for for DOT access and also to
um to run our storm water conveyance system to uh a storm water discharge which we're going to apply to the D4 as well. Um we're currently in review with the DOT going back and forth with comments. Site triangles are provided
and visual corridors are safe. The additional relief that we're looking for is building one. Uh this was not in any of the the letters that we came across, but we did pick it up that building number one is perpendicular to Route 33
business. And so we will require a design waiver uh under section 188-224C for the front building. That concludes my updates on where we are. Just for confirmation, the actual building addresses and sweet numbers.
Anthony, can you go back? What was that waiver for the Trump building? I just want to go back section what the waiver was that he just testified to. I'll give you the section number first. 188-224C and that is building one is perpendicular uh to Route 33. Requires
the sign. That's fine. I just want I just did not catch that. That's all. And Anthony, I just have one quick question for you regarding the building addresses and suite numbers. uh those postal addresses they'll face what route 33 those addresses will be located on the
door frame the doors according to what I understand and the architect will give more testimony to it but the placards that will be on um next to each tenants window space okay I have no further questions for this witness the sewer tie-in is that it's going to happen
during uh development yes it's ongoing and it's it's supposed to be happening really soon. It's really a condition of us getting this this project done. That's a DOT approval.
Yeah, it goes through the DOT, the the How Township, the the municipality, the water water and sewer department. So, we do have to file all our um applications for that as well. So, Okay. TWWA
crossing 33. Did you say it's running from uh Fairfield Road up 33 uh westbound going going to the west to to How it's there's a a proposed pump station that's being proposed on 33
between How Road and Fairfield Road which will ultimately tie in to the pump station at Fairfield Road which they can ultimately tie into. So there are things in the works which will happen within the next several the approvals will happen within the next several months
that will make that absolutely viable. It's kind of outside of their control. So I would say it's an outside agency issue but I would say within the next couple months all the things will be put into place that will allow them to tie in. Got it. And we
still have a lot of homework to do after resol, you know, with resolution alliance and deal. Any other questions by the board? I'm just going to open it up to the public. Does anybody have um one last time? We're going to want us a
conditional approval that you got the NP PES permit in hand when you're going to start. You can't go breaking ground without that in here and submitted to the municipality. We will have everything before we break down. I break, you know, break ground. Okay. Any
questions from the public for the engineer? Seeing none, he may have. Yeah. Chairman. Oh, yeah. Of course. Absolutely. Um, Anthony, I'll keep it as quick as I possibly can. Do you have any issues with complying with any of the comments in our review letter dated
February 14th, 2025? No, we did not. Okay, that's all I have. Great. Great. I'd like to call my next witness. My contact. Sure. Thank you. Good evening. You swear or affirm the testimony you're about to present before this board
concerning this application would be nothing but the truth. I do. For the record, sir, spell your last name and provide your business affiliation. Yes. My name is uh John Manino. M A N I N O. I'm a principal architect and owner of Sermina Architect. We're located in
Hillsboro, New Jersey. Uh John, can you please provide your educational credentials for us, including other boards you've qualified in the past as an architect and also if your license is still in good standing? Uh yes. So I am an act have an active license in the state of New Jersey as
well as six other surrounding states. I'm a graduate of Philadelphia College of Textiles and Science uh which has changed names a few times. So now I believe it's Jefferson University. Um I have a bachelor's degree in architecture, minor in business. I've I've presented in front of various
boards throughout various states though this is my first time in how so I uh thank you for welcome. Uh we will accept your credentials. All right. Fantastic. John, uh did you have an opportunity to draft the proposed plans here? Yes, I did. Great. Why don't you walk us through what we're looking to do? Sure.
I'm not sure who's controlling the screen. There we go. Pulling it up right now. Should be uh floor plan PDF. There we go. Perfect. Okay. So, um, as we're all
aware, the development consists of two buildings. Building one and building two. On the screen is building one, the larger of the two buildings. It is approximately 48,000 square ft. Um, much of my comments about the buildings will apply to both buildings since they're
essentially a brother sister. Um the buildings are are built of uh insulated um concrete panels. Um they are uh provide for a 32- foot clear height. Uh designed to be flex related
space. The this particular building accommodates four loading docks and two drive-in doors. The smaller building um accommodates four loading docks and one drive-in door. Um the uh the building is um very well
in terms of energy efficiency based on how they are designed uh from a plan standpoint. Um again uh the the roof would be uh a white tpo roof which provides some energy efficiency. The buildings are both designed to be provided with a with
a fire suppression system, um, LED lighting, and both roof systems are designed to provide for future solar panel installation should the applicant or a tenant choose to to do so. Um the you'll see around the perimeter
mention the tenants having triple net leases where they're going to be responsible for the electricity and as a landlord may not care if there's solar up there. I would have I'd have to defer to the owner on on how they were going to handle their leases. Not aware of that.
Um as you can see on the footprint there's undulations around the perimeter of the building. Um we we've made uh some conscious effort to provide breaks in the building facade both in in plan as well as in in elevation view that we'll we'll see next. Um those breaks in
plan uh vary from 8 in to a foot into the building and up to three feet out from the building. Um and this particular building, the larger building, you'll see six possible uh unit entry locations. Um each entry location is provided with a projecting
canopy to provide some cover um and help define that entry as well. Um and uh on the elevations I can touch on where the applicant would like to consider some wall signage for each of the tenants.
Um if you can go to the next page again. So these are the uh elevations of uh the larger building one. Um what you're seeing again is uh insulated uh concrete panels in varying colors and textures as well as
articulation to help break up the mass. Um and at the same time, you know, we made some conscious efforts in working with the town planner to ensure that all four facades of the building is articulated. Um often, you know, you would only have one or two facades articulated and the others are
forgotten. In this particular case, we did make the effort to to really articulate all facads. Um, you see how uh the the L-shaped element really emphasizes where those unit entrance elements are, and we've carried that as an element around uh all sides of the
building. Um, we've incorporated a a a base element uh on the two main facades. Um, at the entrances, you'll see uh CMU water table base. Uh and then on the facade on the short facade which is the east elevation facing 33 we've also
articulated a wall base to help unify those two walls together a little bit and then again carried the panels around. Um this particular building on the high side is approximately 41 foot 6 in in height to the highest point of the panel from the calculated average grade.
But on the front side which is the north elevation the lowest point is about 38 and 1/2 ft. Um the building slopes from um from the south to the north. So all the water is collected on the north side of the building uh from the roof. And so that roof line is a little bit lower at
its lowest points. Um the elevation design that you see here is very consistent with the design for the smaller building uh building two. So we could maybe move on to the next page. Again um this is building two.
boots very similar to u building one just a smaller footprint of approximately uh I got the square footage off the top of my head I think it's 30 32,000 ft approximately um this particular building is provide could provide up to four tenants there's four
entry points on this building um so total possible tenant units across the development would be you know a total of 10 six in one building four in the other um and again identical four loading docks an identical the identical drive-in door that faces this internal U
truck court um that is shown on the site plans. Um if you can just go back to that one page real quick. Um just want to touch on the bottom left hand side there uh there was talk about a monument sign. Um there is the design that we are
proposing for the monument sign. Um the location of the monument sign is shown on the site plans. Um this particular monument sign does sit on a base uh in accordance to the ordinance uh which is max of two feet and then the the sign elm itself is 3 feet high on top of that
and the body of the sign is 12t long. However uh you'll see the dimensions there. The actual signage of the sign is much smaller than that. Um and the square footage is is noted on that design as well. And I believe pull my notations here. I believe it's about
16.9 square feet. What kind of lighting do you envision for this? Um just some uh landscape uh uplighting on the sign. It would not be internally illuminated. I believe that is also not applied there as well. You can go ahead and go to the
next page now. And again, uh these are the elevations for building two. very consistent um you know uh to uh to the previous building that was uh that was shown. I'd like to touch on the wall signs
before we go back to signage. Sure. So the HVAC and everything is on the roof or is it on the ground like what's happening? Yep. So um typically with these flex type buildings and users um each user if they have air conditioning
not all of them ultimately do. Most of the units are internal. So you would have uh you know unit heaters that are hung from the structure above. And any small office space would be provided with like a duckless split system or even just a a system in a closet like you would timidly see in your home. Um the the office space that typically gets
conditioned here is relatively small. Uh usually less than 10% of of the user space consists maybe of a toilet room, a front office, and a kitchenet area. That's often what we see with these type of flex type of fit out. So mainly
internal. We don't anticipate uh much rooftop units though any rooftop unit that would be proposed on here. We would look to locate them on the roof to ensure that they stay below the 45 foot height max. Um and certainly we would be open to screening them if they are
something that's visible. Um I would say they should be screened regardless. Yeah. Which is fine. Yeah. Okay. That's what I was asking for. if they are going to go on the roof that they be screened because we have a requirement that it that says that they shall be thoroughly
screened from view from the public right away. So that makes sense. Yeah. But it does any parapit or any screening goes into the overall height. So just make sure that it's compliant with the height and it's thoroughly screened. Yeah. How big is the the the pump house?
The pump house right now is a footprint um based on our initial previous calcul about 15 feet by 17 feet in footprint but it only sits anywhere from 8 to 12 in 8 to 12 feet high. It's relatively low. Is it required? Before we go further on the on the
sewer, just so you know, the town is in the process of putting a pump station on the site literally immediately next door to this. Okay, that's what I was going um which will take uh effluent from other places. That's why I didn't know. Collect it and then
tie into the pump station that's on the rock solid property which is on Fairfield. So, in my humble opinion, and I don't mean to speak for you, I don't think that this site will require an actual pump station. They will be able to tie in. I think it's going to go from
that pump station by gravity. I we it hasn't been designed yet, but the the intention is the pump station be on the lot immediately next door. Got it. Okay. Yeah. If I if I can just reiterate though, the uh what this particular pump
house with the tank is really for fire suppression for the buildings. So it's not not sewer. Got it. Okay. So there's no public water. Yeah. So this is for water supply to the facilities in particular for the fire suppression
system which obviously requires certain pressures to be met based on your collection of water. So we source the water in the tank that pressurizes that system and then the pump is utilized to force the water to the buildings. And do you propose any floor drains not not in the restrooms per se but in the
warehouse portions of the building? No floor drains. And do you have dock levelers proposed? Yeah. Uh, dock levelers are pretty standard for for loading docks. Yeah. Are you going to go electric? No, typically those are mechanical hydraulics. No, just manual
manual mechanical unit. Yep. There's a chain that you pull and unhook it. Same with the overhead doors. They tend to just be um if we could go to uh the renderings. Uh, possibly. I think you had you had an aerial earlier. Okay.
Yeah. Yeah, that's works. And then I believe there's another rendering as well. So, um, what's on the screen now is a is an aerial uh, this is actually a a photo simulation. We took an actual photograph from uh Google view and superimposed a 3D digital model of the
of the development um as bestly scale to the photo uh to kind of give a sense of scale and and really help emphasize how the development sits on the lot. Uh it shows the natural existing buffering that exists there along the uh Route 33
bypass and on the adjacent properties. Um and uh again you can see how the trucks are kind of centered in that court. So they are rel they're screened pretty much from uh all sides um in terms of visibility. Um this also shows
how the articulation of the building facades continue on all sides. So again, we didn't we didn't shy away from providing a canopy over the loading docks, accentuating the green and grays and and and scoring those panels to bring some articulation and texture on
all sides, even even if the side is not, you know, easily accessible. There's one other rendering I believe is an eye level. Uh not in a elevation, is it? You said eye level. It's an eye level. Yeah. I'm
not sure how it was labeled in the file, but there would have been an aerial and an eye level view, you know, to be 826 back in. Yeah, it wasn't in there. further back.
It's not coming up. Yeah, we doesn't look like we have that in the file. Okay, it's fine. We can go back to the if we want to go if we can go back to the uh elevations of building number one. I can talk about the wall signs that are being considered for the
tenants. Go to the next page there if you don't mind. Thank you. And then go down uh show the bottom elevation if you don't mind. So um the um it was touched on earlier that there is a need um by the applicant for
uh individual wall signs for potential users. Um in building one for instance there's the possibility of six users. Uh what we're proposing is a relatively small sign uh about three feet wide and one and a half feet tall. uh it would be
centered directly over the entry doors going into the units and it would be supported by the projecting canopy uh that is over the door. So it would it would reside in the space above the entry door and below the canopy that you see in these elevations. Um this is new.
These elevations are not new. And these the signage we're talking about. Yes. Yes. The signage is something that is uh will be required and it was briefly touched on by Anthony in his testimony that we need a variance for a number of signs um since we have multiple users
and that's what I'm going to allude to now. Probably should have been submitted to us before today. I mean like you're going to be expecting me to opine on the number, the size, the mounting height that like it's
This application has been carried x number of times. I've met with this applicant. How many times? This is the first I'm hearing of it, which in my opinion is a little disrespectful. It was submitted Tuesday electronically. Oh, it was okay. So, it was submitted Tuesday. I'm sorry, two days ago. Okay.
Not for nothing like we were we had testimony on November of this of last year. So to submit this 2 days ago and expect us to review it and opine on it is not acceptable. Plans need to be submitted 10 days in advance. So my
recommendation is if if you want to move forward with the application that's fine but the signage should be separate because they need variance relief for the signage. I have not seen it. numbers and access. Uh if please support uh we respectfully
request that as a condition of approval we have to submit a signage package. I'm not I'm not I don't think we should How about this? We'll give them preliminary only. We'll review the sign package and then we can come back for final. But I'm
not comfortable with this board acting on preliminary and final without us having reviewed the sign package which was submitted 48 hours before the hearing. So if they want an action tonight, it should be preliminary only. If they want something other than that,
they should carry. Okay. We like to move forward the lanes application as preliminary and final site plan for tonight and then subsequently we'll submit an application specifically designated to signage itself if this board find. Yeah, that would be a difference of variance. You need more than one sign.
So if there's a variance, yeah, we need more than one sign. So that that that kicks into variance. The square footage of signage is not the issue. It's the number of signs. So we'll remove the signage from the application. Yes. We'll remove the signage from the application this evening. Not the monument sign, but the
wall signage would be removed from the uh and we will have to submit that separately. But the wall sign is yourself. That's code compliant. The monument sign mon sign is code compliant. Correct. Um that kind of summarizes my my testimony on the plans and elevations.
I'm open to any questions. Since there was a discussion about signage that you only have the monument sign, but as you're driving on Route 9, which Route 9 is not like 33, but you're only going to have the name of the site. You're not going to actually have the name of the companies
that could be possibly be part of that monument sign. That's correct. So, with the monument sign, I think you said it was how high uh with the base, the top of the sign is 5T. So, the base is 2 feet and then the sign is 3 ft. s in on top of the base.
It's almost about the height of me and the width of me. So, it's going to be not very clear from 33 driving for wayfinding. Um, my biggest concern is having cuz now you brought up about signage is that you're only going to put it on the building. So, if you're
driving like how are people let's say by there is a CrossFit in there like how would I know that like oh I have to go to this site then I have to go here to this building. So that's another question I'm going to bring up. Um, another one is about the pump tank. I think before you said it was 8 ft high,
but in your drawings the opening is 8 ft, but really it's 16. Yeah, I said it was a variation. I think it was 8 to 12. Um, but, uh, with a footprint of 15 by 17 right now, uh, based on our initial calculations, it may be smaller footprint. Um, we don't anticipate it
being larger than that footprint because we kind of oversized what we needed. Yes. Um, so and then the tank itself uh is less than 25 ft tall um as an accessory structure. And when it comes to lighting that I appreciate that you're putting more vegetation onto the
site, but now with lighting and there is a residential building next door and you said the hours are between 6:00 to 10:00 p.m. So when do those lights turn off or are they going to be I know that they might be LED, but what how you going to control the lighting, especially for a
space like that on site? Which light? Which lights are you talking about? For the whole site for clearing. Oh, for like sight lighting, you mean? Yes. I I would I would have to defer to Anthony the engineer in terms of the controls on that. Okay. Um time clock, photo cell, that type of thing. Um I'd have to defer in terms of to him on the specifications
on that. Um there as far as the interior lights, those LED lights, those will be controlled as you would any any typical space obviously. Perfect. Um with occupancy sensors and so on often. Um so if it's vacant, the lights are out internal inside the building. And for the receiving area because since they're
going to be flex spaces are they all gonna have access to it or how is that being blocked off internally? You mean inside the building? So it would be like a shared dock scenario. So we would have a shared dock where if you have let's say two users both users have access to the same
dock area and then there based on how we design the insides they would then have access to bring that material to their space. All right. Uh directly but it's a shared dock situation. All right. And then I also cuz I know it's flex spaces
and you said that each space will have a restroom or bero or anything like that for each one depending if they want to have one tenant or multiple that how would the waterh water ratio I'm sorry I'm
thinking of when I'm in my mind um the it's a it's in the codes for plumbing it's for plumbing fixtures you mean toilets and so on. Thank you. Yeah. So, um, so really depends on the user, depends on how much space they take will dictate how many toilets or sinks might
be required. Okay. So, in New Jersey, you're allowed to design to an actual occupancy number. So, uh, even as a tenant who may take 5,000 square feet, if only if there's only two occupants in that space, because of the nature of the of the use, the the code in New Jersey
allows you to just put one toilet, one sink, right? Uh, for that whole space, right? But obviously if you have a user that may have you know a few more people or they have a need where they want to have individualized male female then you you know you work that into your design
for that user. Um we would have uh as part of the design we we put in under under slab sanitary lines ahead of time with stubups so we can anticipate where we need to make our tie-ins when we do fitups.
Perfect. That's all the question I had. And respectfully, would you like us to answer the lighting schedule from our engineer? Yes. So, the lighting will be on a time clock on a dimmer switch. So, approximately I would say 30 minutes after close of 10:00, it would shut off. All right. Okay.
Oh, would that actually one more question about the lighting because there's also EV parking. So, how could if it turns off in 30 minutes, how do would it turn back on if let's say I drive my Tesla and I want to park in that spot because Waw Wa is all taken off. Would they turn back on or would
they just stay off? Uh, this is it's not public uh parking. It's only private parking. So, you're not allowed on the site unless you're doing business there. Okay. But I'm just thinking of since there's EV parking, like how can you control that? I don't know how the EV uh controller works. Uh,
I would imagine you could set timers on that as well, but I'm not sure. They probably shut off after a certain time. I'm sure they don't want people going there after night and trying to fill up. I don't know how it works on a private. I'm sorry. No problem. All right. Just Just to be clear, signs are being
removed. You're looking for preliminary and final, and you're going to the zoning board. For clarification, the monument sign is saying, correct? But the wall signs are being removed, right? so that we can move forward a final the signs package more likely I'll have more than one sign so it's going to send us
to zoning thank you got it anything else Jennifer no anybody from the audience okay if I may I like to call my next witness my traffic engineer Thanks.
Good evening. Good evening. You just want to affirm the testimony you're about to present to the board concerning this application will be up to the truth. Yes, I do. For the record, please state names, spell your last name, regard your business affiliation. Certainly. Gary Dean, Dean. I'm a principal with Dolan and
Dean Consulting Engineers. Uh we are headquartered in Somerville, New Jersey with a branch office in Ocean Grove, New Jersey. Um by way of background, I'm a graduate of Lehigh University with a bachelor of science degree in civil engineering and a former member of the
faculty of Lehigh University in Lafayette College, having served as an adjunct professor teaching transportation engineering. I've been doing so over the past, I'm embarrassed to admit, more than 40 years. Um, and I'm a licensed professional engineer in New Jersey as well as surrounding
states. And my credentials are uh valid and in good standing. Good wrestling programs there in Lehi and Lafayette. Very good wrestling program. Quite a rivalry, too. We'll accept your credentials. Thank you, sir. Terrific. Gary, why don't you
walk us through the traffic impact of the proposed use? Sure. Um, just by way of identification, I prepared and we submitted a traffic impact analysis for Howell Flex Industrial dated April 10th of 2024. Um that report sets forth uh
the general parameters of any traffic study wherein we counted during peak commuter hours in the site vicinity uh including the self- storage uh driveway across from uh the subject site and also at Park Avenue and at uh Brickyard and
Fairfield. Um, all of this information, the the duration of the counts, the actual information is all embodied within our report. Uh, most notably, as you've heard from our other experts, the only means of ingress and egress to the subject site are to Route 33 business.
Uh, to the south of the site is in fact the Route 33 bypass. Um just by way of background and we have reviewed the construction plans when DOT acquired the right of way. It was for the purpose of building the bypass and to keep it a
bypass and not a land service road that has access. DOT imposed what's called a limit of no access along the southerntherly property border which means we can't have access to the bypass. nor should we just for general
mobility purposes. But that is forbidden by DOT not only when the property was acquired for the bypass. It conveys with successors in title and it is incorporated on what is known as a general parcel and property map. Um that
section of the bypass is also known as access level one. Much like your municipal master plan with a hierarchy of different roads, the most restrictive in this state is for limited access freeways, which the bypass is. And simply put, you know, you
can't have access on roads like Route 287 to a driveway. Um, and and this falls into that category. uh for this application and and concurrent with the preparation of our traffic study, we did review the access design uh to Park
Avenue, uh DOT has uh set of regulations known as the state highway access management code. It sets forth all of the geometric criteria for driveways such as width, radi, curbing that's required. All of those components are
reflected on the plan and and the design complies wholly with DO's access code. We have had an initial review from DOT already. I'll say in essence they have approved the driveway design. Um, as you heard from our engineer, we are
fine-tuning the nature of our storm water connection, uh, which is to convey runoff when it rains across the site frontage, but on on a pipe that runs behind the edge of pavement that crosses several properties
to our west and then ultimately discharges into the water course. Putting storm water means we have to detain it. We have to filter it. We have to environmentally control it. And we get into the AY's DOT, but we are well
within that process. Um, so in terms of our driveway and access to the site as reflected on the exhibit you have before you, there is only one way in and out of the site. Um, our frontage improvements are are are relatively limited. And and
the reason for that is and I'll I'll draw your attention back to the traffic study. Um we included projections of what the two buildings were generated. Um as a flex building it is a multi-tenented industrial type building
typically occupied by uh e either companies that need uh mostly storage and a small office component. Uh for example, uh any manufacturer or builder that assembles, you know, specialized
equipment, uh instruments, things of that nature. These types of spaces where the bulk of the tenant space is allocated for storage. It becomes very convenient for them to do that fabrication, assembly, and storage
within the back end of the space with a small administrative office in the front. Um the hours for each of those tenants in in our experience having studied these flex uses widely vary. Sometimes you have contractors that are
in it before 7 in the morning and out already onto a job site. Um other times you may have more professional type tenants that come in closer to traditional commuter hours be because of the wide variety within the space. um
and that most of it is dedicated towards storage internally. The the traffic generation is historically low and and just to put it into context uh our report indicates projections based on the 81 roughly thousand square feet. It
would generate about 30 traffic movements in one hour. So, a car either entering or exiting or or a truck once every other minute. It's it's from a traffic guy's perspective, these are great uses because um they
don't generate a whole lot of traffic. You will note that there are accommodations in the plan for a truck court. Recognizing again on a on a building such as this, there may be the need for occasional access. The majority of the time it's box trucks, smaller
deliveries. However, the plans have been designed, the driveway has been designed. In the event, unanticipated, but we cannot rule out that a tractor trailer may not wind up on the site for whatever reason, all of the designs will
accommodate that size vehicle and is reflected again with the truck court toward the southeast corner of the of the property. Can I stop? We also have two two small loading areas up front at building one. I just wanted to
Sorry, just wanted to uh touch on circulation. I I was about to do that if you don't mind. Okay. All right. Go for it. I knew where you were going. All right. So, um your engineer has raised an issue in the review regarding the width of the circulation line. Is that where we're heading? Um, as I read the
standard, the main corridor connector access aisle for the site must have a 30 foot wide driveway. Um, the design, as you've seen, and unless my plan show it, it is 30 ft wide coming in from Park Avenue.
It continues to the westerly side of building one at a 30 foot width and then it's 32 feet entering the truck court. In my opinion, it complies with the standard. The one area that doesn't is you'll see on the upper right hand
segment of the exhibit, which is the southwest corner of the site. That is a parking lot for automobiles. And I would not characterize that as a main connector aisle as your ordinance calls it. It's a standard parking lot like we have out front or any retail space. It's
not intended and it's deadend. So, it doesn't go anywhere. it ends in the parking lot. That is designed at 25 ft, which in my opinion is the appropriate design standard. Uh if it warrants the technical waiver, we we will will request it. But in my opinion, the
purpose and intent of your ordinance is where we have the highest volume of traffic, the greatest number of parking maneuvers and access by trucks. The all of those dimensions meet the 30 ft that's required. So yeah, absolutely agree. Our office doesn't have any
issues with that technical waiver, although it is required. Um, some of the concerns that I see is potential circulation with a tractor trailer back to that rear loading area. Um, yeah. And circulating and really as well
as if a tractor trailer is parked at that uh entrance trying to exit, is there any way a trailer could pull in at that same time? Um, I I think the circulation there could be a major issue
if you have multiple tractor trailers on the property. I And I guess I want to be clear, I don't have a pointer. Are you discussing the two loading spaces on the northern end of building one? Yeah. So I I believe I
see six sorry five loading spaces on building one as well as one two three four five as well as building two yeah thank you I if we're looking Oh can
we go oh I'm sorry you're discussing these spaces yeah exactly okay the design of these is that it allows a truck to pull in let's say it's going to building two, then start its turn in a counterclockwise manner. Um, which is
why we have the extra painted areas. And then that truck will back into each one of these loading spaces. If the truck is trying to access the the loading on the southern side of building one, that truck would pull in
the court. It would then have to move maneuver to the left and then turn to the right facing the loading. And then again that truck would back into those loading spaces. For typical industrial buildings, the minimum for maneuvering
and the loading space itself is usually 110 ft. We we've well exceeded that with this courtyard design. Uh and the whole purpose is just to give those drivers again if they're all tractor trailers the ability to to maneuver within this
courtyard. So I tractor trail. Correct. Yes. So I assume no issues providing circulation plans showing same none at all. We we'll be happy to do that. All right. That that's all I had. Thank you. I just had a question about the parking calc. Okay. So for flex it looks to me
like you have utilized like the office and the warehouse, right? But flex basically says you have to calculate the parking based on the highest intensity parking requirement for whatever use you're going to put in this building. So
if you're going to sit on office storage, that's what the approval is going to be based on. If there's some other permitted use you want to put in here that has a higher parking demand, let's say like indoor wreck, which was not anticipated, that would not be
permitted under this approval. And any tenant that would potentially come into this space would be required to come back. So, it I get how the parking was calculated and it's totally legitimate,
but that is definitely going to limit prospective tenants moving forward because flex equals the parking for the highest anticipated parking demand permitted. So if you're not proposing that and you're not parking to that
standard, just be under just understand that the resolution is going to be very clear as to how the parking was calculated and what types of uses are anticipated. So a prospective tenant that doesn't fit that requirement requires the applicant to come back. Are
we good with that? Yes. Yeah. The answer is yes. It's a fairly common uh scenario with these types of buildings in that some of our clients have these and and you get a strange tenant that wants to do an escape room. I don't think
there's a zoning ordinance in the state. Well, we call it indoor wreck, but so but it it yes, the applicant would would clearly need to come back demonstrate sufficiency. we want to agree to on the record is that when a tenant wants to seek a CCO, they have to establish that
there is sufficient parking for that use. I totally understand that part of it. However, trade contractors, as we discussed at the outset of the application, was limited to 60% of the square footage. The balance 40% is open to other permitted uses in the zone.
However, you need to park it. And so I'm not suggesting there's anything wrong with the application as presented. However, the parking calculations as I'm looking on the plans are based on a specific square footage of office and the balance as warehouse. There's other
permitted uses in this zone that are way beyond that parking calculation that were not factored in here and it could potentially be problematic for you when a tenant comes online. I just want to make it abundantly clear on the record and Pat for you for the resolution as
well and we completely accept that. We're very cognizant of that and we understand that that's going to be our responsibility and again I want to reiterate this is being built on spec. So contingent on what those users are will dictate what the parking requirement is and that'll be our responsibility to see if we can satisfy
that parking requirement. Absent being able to do that we have to come back for a variance. If you're building this on spec, what's your threshold limit in terms of how much tenency have you got to have locked up in order to put a shovel in the ground for moving forward? Yeah. Well, that's
our responsibility to take that risk. Yeah. I got a question. I I'm I'm a I'm a sports guy in town. I coach multiple sports, right? And uh it's a need in this town that, you know, we have indoor recreation areas, right? We come to your client, hey, we got we want batting
cages, pitching mounds, yada yada yada, right? Sounds great. If the building is in the based upon what now, right, of of what you're projecting, but it makes sense for a tenant like that to come in.
How do you reconfigure it to or or like I guess my question is if the parking isn't there and that tenant is sexy for lack of a better term, right? How do you reconfigure or do you just say you come back and hope for a variance?
Well, what what we do is depending on the tenant, we look at the time of day because some of those uses are busier either later in the evening or on weekends when we would expect very little demand in parking from the trade
contractors. So, um we sometimes call that shared parking where if we were to sum up the individual needs for each of those components, we we would need variance. But our but our justification in seeking the relief is that at call it
5:00 at night when when instructional play starts or on the weekends um we would do a study and we would prove to ideally to your satisfaction that that there is no demand and that we're left with uh you know dozens of empty spaces
that can readily be used to absorb that type of demand. Got it. So that would be that would be a justification for relief, right? Is that what you're saying? Yes. Cuz like indoor wreck, the parking requirement is one per 250. So that's pretty intense parking requirement that was not contemplated in
the parking for this particular layout. Correct. Correct. I Well, I'm not sure what the office ratio is. It might be four per thousand as well. Well, let me give me office is one per three. So indoor wreck is higher. Yep. Um so this is parked at office storage
basically. And I'm not saying they don't comply. Yeah. No, I get it. But if you go to our ordinance and you go under flex, it says parked at the highest intensity use proposed. So understanding that there are other uses that are
permitted in the zone that have a higher parking requirement than you're proposing. If someone were to come back, in all likelihood, they would wind up back before us for some kind of parking issue later. Absolutely. Noted. Yep. Yep. Just wanted clarification. Thank you.
And in conclusion, in in looking at the traffic study, the movements in and out of the site, recognizing we're, you know, stones throw away from our DOT approval, excuse me. Um, our study has shown that that we would have favorable levels of service getting in and out of
the site. I I would say similar to all of the other uses along this corridor. uh probably a little better than Wawwa, but you know, similar to the office park immediately to our west wi which is comprised of generally the same type of end users. Um that we would have safe
and efficient ingress and egress in my opinion for for what you have before you and recognizing what was just discussed that that a suitable parking supply has been provided. Um and and I think in terms of the other tests and circulation
elements that there will be uh safe flow through the site as well, not only for regular users, but in the event that emergency access is needed as well. And that's that's all I have in the way of direct testimony. Great. Thank you. Thank you, board. Any questions for
anyone? I just have a general question. Um Sure. Like I see a lot of commercial buildings that have like fire lanes around the back, the ability to circulate completely around that. Um what is it that makes a building require that and why doesn't this have something
like that? I am a little outside of my expertise as a traffic engineer that usually stems from I'll say a preference by local fire. Um, but it's but it's compensated for the fact that these are industrial fire rated buildings and and
uh I I don't know what the rating is, but they're steel and concrete and they're sprinklered. So, the idea is that there would be access um where needed uh but not not to pave around the entire building perimeter. It's that, you know, it's like we don't
pave around our houses either. So it it's a sprinkler building with a higher fire rating than than frame construction I I think is the best safeguard against that need. But I'm not an advocate of just putting down more black top. You know we get into storm water and
flooding and a host of other issues. Um and and to the best of my knowledge it's not required by any code. Do you have a do you have a letter from the fire bureau? I do not. No there should be one. If I may for my engineer. Of course. Thank you.
We have uh two correspondences with the fire official. Um we've made several revisions to where he wanted the fire department connections and also the striping. Uh I don't believe we have a final approval where we addressed all his comments and uh none of which had
anything to the rear of the building that was required. Over. Thank you all for your time. Thank you. Anyone from the Yep. Anyone from the public questions? Seeing none. All right. I like to bring my last witness. You may
know her. Christine Poe. Oh, thank you. Good. Hello. Good evening. You swear affirming testimony your val concerning this application will be nothing but the truth. Yes. For the record, it's
Christine Nazaro. N A Z A R O C Kapone. C O F O N E. Business address is 52 ROS place, Redbank, New Jersey 07701. I'm testifying this evening as a licensed professional planner. I have been qualified here in Howell on
numerous occasions as well as before about 450 or so other planning and zoning boards. I've been practicing for about 29 years of New Jersey. Thank you. Thank you. Um so this is what I would consider a substantially conforming application in the HD4 zone. we meet all
of the um the use and essentially all of the bulk criteria. The reason we are seeking a front yard setback of 25 feet along the bypass is because that is a technical front yard, right? It's technically a frontage even though it will function as a rear yard. It is
undoubtedly technically a front yard setback. So that is the only bulk variance relief that we are seeking in conjunction with this application. As a point of the intensity of this project in relation to what the HD4 zone en envisions, the HD4 zone envisions about
70% or not about 70% lot coverage where this site has about 50. So dimensionally and in every other way we meet with the letter of the intent of the HD4 zone. So stat and and as was testified to um and
stated by earlier witnesses, we have a letter from the DOT saying that you cannot have and will never have any access to bypass 33. So we know that even that variance relief is required there for that front yard setback that that is always going to maintain a quiet
portion of the site as the DOT is not going to ever allow access to that. So that to me allows us to argue for this variance under the C1 and C2 statutory criteria because I do think that that is a unique feature impacting this piece of
property which would be a C1 criteria in the absence of any hardship criteria. The board can still grant the variance if you find as a board that one or more purposes of the municipal land use law would be advanced by the grant of the application. Criteria G of the municipal
land use law talks about providing for sufficient space um for a variety of uses in in different locations. Um I would submit to the board that the HD4 zone was born out of your 2022 land use element. In that element you actually
removed age restricted housing and you added um flex warehouse or flex space and a n number of other uses actually including warehousing to the HD4 zone. So you removed residential uses at that time and added commercial uses some of
some of the more intensive commercial uses in Howell. So I think that you could certainly conclude that this is an appropriate location for that and find criteria G. Criteria M also talks about an efficient use of the lands. I think that even though we do have a dual
frontage with 33 and bypass 33 that the relief does take advantage and an efficient use of the land and I think the site has been laid out to in all of respects. I mean when you have shar indicate that you have plenty of plantings on your site I think we can come to the conclusion that the zone the
plan has been laid out well. So it's not something we get to hear or enjoy a lot. So I thought that it bared repeating tonight. So that's the positive criteria for the grants of the variance that we need in conjunction with this. I know we were asking for um to sign. I believe
we're going to table that request even though I think um it's it's unusual, right? Your ordinance requires you and in the 6040 split requires you to have multiple users here. So I don't think it would be unusual to have a sign for each tenant on the building. But if your professionals are not comfortable at
this time um to address that then I suppose we can take you know come back either we'd have to go back to the zoning board um to do that at another look another time if the board is not inclined to do that as a condition of approval um if you were so moved that way. So as far as the impact on the zone
plan, right? Because rather um whe whether we come in under the C1 or C2 section of the statute, we have an obligation to demonstrate that we satisfy the negative criteria. And the negative criteria does not ask you to hold us to establish that there's no detriment, just that the benefits of the
grant of the variance would outweigh any detriment to the zone plan. And as I told you, this zone, the HD4, came into being from your 2022 land use element, which followed your 2019 re-examination report, which had a goal, which reads as
follows. To encourage new businesses and industries to locate along the township's highway corridors, um, which will grow the economy of Howell and provide new services and potentially employment opportunities for residents. So when I read that goal, I feel as
though that this application could not possibly have a substantial detriment to the zone plan or the public good here in Howell when um your master planning a actions have called for commercial development and raidable producing developments in this location on your
highway corridors, which this would certainly be. and then that there was a subsequent action in 2022 to remove um age restricted housing and add expand the uses and create the HD4 zone. And I should note that this application eliminates several non-conforming
residential structures that are on the property. So in if you read the HD4 uses permitted as of right, you will in no way, shape or form find um that you can have residential there. So when I look at the impact on the zone plan, I look at this application as only having a
positive impact on the stated purpose of the HD4 zone, which is written in the zoning ordinance at section 188783, as the purpose of the HD4 zone is to provide for highway development along Route 33 that will provide a balance of social, economic, and
cultural opportunities for residences while maximizing existing transportation and other infrastructure along the Route 33. 3 corridor. So again, I I believe that we meet our statutory burden of pro proof for the grant of the variance relief under the C1 and C2 criteria.
Statutoily, we only have to advance one purpose of the land use law. I cited two criteria G and M. And I testify that it is my specific opinion that not only will we not have a substantial detriment on the zone plan or the public good, but we will in fact implement the 2002
2022 land use plan element which created your HD4 zone as well as your 2019 re-examination report which had a specific goal to create businesses, new businesses and new industry on the highway corridors in Howell. So with that being said, I believe the board can
certainly move this preliminary and final site plan with this very minimal relief and waiverss required um in accordance with the statutory burden of proof required under the municipal land use law. Thank you. You're welcome. Anybody Christine? Thank you as always.
Uh anyone from the public? Seeing none, floor is yours for any uh yeah summation remarks uh board professionals anything at this time? No,
Mr. Chair, I don't disagree with the testimony that you just heard. I actually think that I agree with Miss Capone that given the DO's uh correspondence and limited access. Yes, it's technically a front yard which they need relief, but there's no access
available. So, I do believe it is a C1, but I do think she also put the criteria on for a C2, which kind of covered them regardless, but I don't take any exception to the testimony with regard to the setback variance, which they need, and then they needed dimminimous
waiver relief for lighting, the width of the driveway, um, some of the other minor issues that we talked about before, the sidewalk along the bypass. Um, all those things
are enumerated in both my letter and Ryan's letter. Um, and I don't take an exception to anything that they've asked that we haven't already addressed. I say at the beginning of the night, you know, we conceded back on November 7th that the use itself be flex space. At
the opening of tonight's hearing, we said we designated only maximum 60% for trade contractor. We've also withdrawn our signage as it relates to the proposed improvement while keeping the monument signed and we believe that this is a fail application that should be uh approved in the affirmative and I think
the big reason why we're here tonight and the reason why we're able to reach this conclusion hopefully is because of the partnership we've had with the board professionals. So I just want to thank you guys for meeting with us numerous times. Uh so thank you and we hope you find the affirmative. Great. Yeah, I I
think it's a it's a a good plan. This is the type of um you know project that it's where it belongs, right? I mean it's on Route 33 and I I think it's a it's a very good plan. Um and thank you for working with the professionals. Thank you professionals for being so
patient. Um so at this time I will entertain a motion for preliminary and final um taking out the signs as discussed that there will be going back to the zoning for that. So do I have a motion? I have I'll make a motion. All right. It's come a long way. So, I'll
make a motion to approve. Mr. Mercer, do I have a second? I'll second. Mayor Legio. Eileen. Roll call, please. Mr. Carbonic. Yes. Mr. Mercer, yes. Mr. Rubell, yes.
Mayor Leio, yes. And Chairman Husser, yes. Application is approved. Thank you. Thank you very much, everyone. Have a great night. You, too. Jennifer, do you want to give a quick uh update on the master plan? Sure. We
are currently working on the housing element and fair share plan in accordance with the legislation that came out last year uh regulating uh affordable housing. We are we have
actually a very good head start on it. God bless you. And settled on a really nice number. So, I think we will be prepared to present this in a public hearing at the second meeting in May.
Great. Thank you. And just an update for you New York Giant fans, they selected Abdul Carter from Penn State with their first pick overall. Are we happy with that? I'm a Dolphins fan. I picked 13. So, that's not We are. But the Jets just
picked Armand Mebo, offensive tackle from Missouri. What's that? I will entertain a motion to adjurnn. Motion. There's there. Yeah, there's another ordinance there. Did we not do this under correspondence? We did. Yep. Yep. We took care of
everything. Yeah, I thought we did that under correspondence. Second ordinance roof. This was the section down by There was another one about the No, not not the floor Jennifer. Uh the roofs roofs. Oh, the ear. So that is what how
ar I would submit that that is consistent with our master plan at promoting health, safety, and general welfare. Okay. I had a I had a couple comments I wanted to submit for the record to go back to the council. Um, one of them
being, uh, they have to apply for a permit to put these up in public right away. Um, how do we know if they've obtained that permit? When you get a building permit, you know, it's displayed on the front edge of a house so that you could tell that they've gotten the permit. Is there a way that
they can put it on, you know, the the pole system every 100 feet or 100 yards just to show the property owners adjacent to the public rightway that they in fact did get a permit and they're not just moving forward with a project without said
permit that I I don't know the answer to that question. So I would just submit it as a question or a comment associated with the ordinance because I really don't know what the answer to that. Do you need it like in writing in an email or does this vice verbal? We're going to
we're going to act on it in terms of consistency and then Pat we need to keep these comments as things that attach to the resolution determining consistency. Yeah. So the first is like how were our
permits obtained right by the individual property owners. Yeah. Yeah. How are they obtained and how are they displayed such that the private property owners adjacent to the construction are aware that a permit was in fact obtained? I don't even know if you can be flooded. I
don't think it's considered construction. It's not going to be it's basically a wire that's hanging off the telephone poles. But in air in on streets where there are no telephone poles, they have to install a pole line 16 to it's in the ordinance. There's a
16 to 20 foot high poles that they need to install. And I would assume they would land in that grass area between your sidewalk and your your curbing maybe, but that's the grass area between your sidewalk and the curb is town property. It's not their property. That's in the right way. Your property
doesn't start until the upside of your sidewalk. Understood. But I'm just saying, how do we guard against people just doing things on their own without obtaining a permit for it and just putting poles up on the street line without I think you have to defer to your code
enforcement officials. Um these types of uh established ways of demarcating certain areas in a neighborhood uh have become rather common place over the last 30 or 40 years in New Jersey. Um, so I don't
think it'd be too hard for your code enforcement officer to contact uh his his colleagues in other municipalities and say, "Hey, have you had an enforcement issue where people have engaged in the proverbial self-help which you're concerned about and how are
you dealing with that?" Okay. So they would have to be directed to the code enforcement official too. Well, most most any other code issue is dealt with there if it comes down to a permit not issued and people doing work without or doing work outside the scope of what was
given in the permit. How does a utility company what's that do that? They do they do go they go go through the the approvals? Usually there's an agreement of some type between the people looking to put up the Above and the utility that owns
the pole, right? Uh because then it's primarily their responsibility. You're delineating the area to meet the religious aspect of the service, but the pole is owned by the power company. So that's a separate agreement they need to enter into. And I believe the ordinance
had a provision along those lines. I get and it kind of rolls into my second question as to why I'm, you know, bringing it up is what, you know, what would happen if one or these poles were to get blown over and go through your car windshield on your in your driveway
on your private property? Would how, you know, if they weren't constructed properly because they didn't have a proper permit, that's it kind of rolls into, you know, being able the public being able to check if the permit was obtained. That's I mean are permits required for this? That's how the
ordinance written. They have they have to obtain a permit and if there's a private property that it traverses, they have to get permission from the private property owner. Um and then the second question is it says that the township has to be
put on as an additional insured on the C certificate of insurance for the applicant. Can you put the private property owner adjacent to the pole lines put on the additional insurance in case something like that happens? You have a storm and these poles get blown over structures in the rightway. It's
not on their property. Even if it blows over and damages your property, it's a structure in the rightway. It's no different than if a a tree JC a street tree or a JCPNL situation. So, it's on the township. It's it's in the right
which is why the township is on the insured because it's in the right of way. It's not on private property. It's in the right way. So it would go back through the township's insurance if that were to happen. Okay, understood. Whatever joint insurance fund the municipality is a member of, they should
be able to also give you guidance if they need it with regard to what is or isn't covered. Understood. And uh finally, easements, public easements through private properties, that still counts as requiring private permission from the private property owner. Like say for instance, you have a
pipeline running from the street to a basin or something and uh it's private property, but it's a public easement, public rightway, they would still need to get permission from that private property owner even if there's an ement on the property. I believe so, but I'd
want to look into it more first. I believe so because I think it's already happened. You address it as a question, right, John? It's already Yeah, it's already happened. What do you mean was already where it's the right way? But yeah, yes, your the qu the answer to your question is yes, they do need to
get permission. Okay. And um how was that permission obtained? Is it a written letter or what would happen if they sent you a letter? Is there a certain number of times where if it, you know, you throw it out as junk mail, you don't realize what it is, they can just proceed with the project because they
haven't gotten your permission and they've given you due notice. I don't know if they require it by certified mail with green cards so you get something tracked back. Okay. But I can put that on the list. Okay. That was pretty that was everything. Yeah, sure. I just want I think what Mike was trying to say with this first
question, correct me if I'm wrong, Mike, is like when you get a construction permit, like you're gutting your kitchen or something like that, you have to display a placard in the window so that everybody knows you you have permission. Yeah. Is there a is there a method for displaying the fact that there's a
permit pulled for the construction of one of these so that when a neighbor wakes up one day and there is a pole out there, they know that that was done with permission versus without it. And that would eliminate the necessity to call the code officer after the fact and
bother them every time this comes up. That was my Yes. If there's a way to eliminate a lot of animosity, say, "Hey, there's a bunch of Yeah. So, if there was a way to prove it via a a uh I mean, it's exterior, so via a laminated permit placard or something showing that I've
never seen it come up with one of these before, so I don't have a ready answer for you, unfortunately. But, right, we'll raise it as a question and back to the governing body because ultimately they're I think it would defer a lot of issues with the current climate. I think the that's what I was
driving at so they don't Yeah. So they don't get overwhelmed. I I don't think you're going to see a lot of individual homeowners applying for this. This is going to be like the rabbi is going to Right. The shul is going to apply for all the members that go to their temple
are going to put up the av. It's going to be a whole area. Well, that's my question. Are they individual permits for the block and block and lot? No, it's not. I don't think so. Because by me, right, there are tons of them on
multiple boom boom boom boom boom and it goes around and goes around. But are they existing poles? Are they? No, they're brand new. You don't have utility poles then in the What's that? You don't have utility poles in Yeah, we don't have util, right? Well, we do and we don't, but there are a ton. Um,
what's the what is it over by uh uh attach it, but you would still raise it. It has to be tall. There's just bang pole, bang pole, bang pull, and there's utility poles. That's the other thing. Just an FYI, they're not using the utility poles. They're installing
without a markout these poles. Okay. What happens if they hit a gas line or your Yeah. Your service line around all the poles like they need to do one call and all that stuff. You know, you wouldn't be able to differentiate. Yeah. I I I only know about it because I know
about it. But any other person in my neighborhood would have no idea that our neighborhood is in an a roof, right? You know, but it's all on the utility poles. So, it just looks like another wire. These are these are stainless steel probably 2 in. I know what you're talking about. I've seen those. Yeah. Yeah. Go in the ground. So, I just think
the comment should be like did we just did we think about it how they're going to get permitted? And my my my vision here is that it's going to the more that we can prevent people from taking these things down because a they don't know
what they are or b they don't like them regardless. Um there's something that you could show, hey, I did this right. And if you don't have the right to touch these things. Yeah. Um but it also they should be done right. A markout should be done, you know. Um but yeah, there
are a ton of them going up right now. Where where are these? They're over start like closer to um uh what the hell's that road like at the end of Locust Maxouthern Maxim Southern. Yeah. Going
on right now I just did it with right bridge drive. Yeah. Over by me to Markwood Bridge Drive has telephone pole. Yeah. So they're all the holes, right? You don't see them unless you're looking for them, right? And then we have the right
the what's it called? The rightway. Yeah. That's behind those people's houses that go out to Oakland. Okay. And that goes around Birchshire to Markwood. So there's where we had issu they had some issues with some homeowners saying you're not going to attach that to my
behind my fence. Right. So they went to they've come to the town and they said listen that's public pro that's township property that's right away. Okay. open space. So, this is where this whole thing is has come up that they're going
to install these poles on the backs of those properties that we own, the township owns, right? The township and that way they can run the See, I think that as long as you go and I don't think you need permission, but you should I think you have to ask, hey, you you
know, you don't own this. It is your prop. You know what I mean? Like for the rightways, right? I'm just more concerned about like the easements. Yeah. I mean because it says in the ordinance the private property I'm more concerned about somebody hitting a freaking gas line. Well that too that's that's something else.
Okay because let's say in the future you know more families move in and they want to make that whole block safe whatever that this this line does. Yeah. So they can move around. Right. Sure. And function you know
according to their their religion. your block is going to be interested if they come across the front of your house, the front of your driveway, 20 ft high, you know, with a pole, like if the neighbor puts a ball, right on his right on the edge of the property at your
edge, then that line shoots right across the front of your house, right? Not like a front door. That way, you're going to want to go up there and say, "That line." Yeah. going across my property. That's where that's where or the pole doesn't go on the property and it's an
aerial rights thing. The wire goes down the fence line or something but it traverses your property, you know, but ailerally crosses your property. I'm trying to cut off all these issues at the pass. You know, we're trying to provide a detailed framework to be progre, you know, to work with everybody, but at the same
time, these are things, you know, got to think of every possible thing that could could go wrong. What are they? They're like fishing line on these poles that are up high. What do they do? It's so they can protect their Yeah. So they can
walk and do it extends their their bless. I've actually thought a lot about what if like um what if it encompasses your house like you were just saying, right? Isn't that imposing it on you now though? Because what if you don't want to be within it's literally to extend their private domain. What if you don't
want to be within their private domain? Do then do they then have the right to walk on your property? And that's what I'm saying. Exactly. Now that they've just cut part of their private domain. Okay, guys. So, our focus here is consistency master. And then maybe a
couple comments. We're not looking to solve the world's problems on this ordinance, right? Just to adopt into the ordinance. All right. Do I have a motion that this is consistent with the master plan? Yep. Do I have a motion? I'll motion Daniel.
Do I have a second? I'll second. Mayorio Mr. Carbonic. Yes. Mr. Mercer. Yes. Mr. Rubel. Yes. Mayor Legio. Yes. Mr. Beto. Abstain.
And Chairman Hustle. Yes. Well, I mean, it's