Heat. Heat. All right. Good evening everybody and welcome to the township of PAL Planning Board meeting for Thursday, January 8th, 2026. Happy new year everyone. Uh Eileen, opening statement, please. I hereby declare this meeting of the
Howell Township Planning Board to be open adequate notice having been given pursuant to the New Jersey Open Public Meeting Act in the following manner. First, on January 3rd, 2025, a copy of said notice was emailed to the Asbury Park Press and the Star Ledger. Second,
on January 3rd, a copy of said notice was handd 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 your safety. Please be advised that this facility is designed with two emergency exits which are at the front and 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 Howell Township TV77. And as a side note, if I could just remind all the members, if you're going to speak, please make sure your mic's on because we're having trouble picking you
up on the video after the meeting. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, with those members that need to do the oaths, please rise. And you should have your oaths in front of you. >> Can you raise your right hand, please? I state your name.
>> I Nicholas Wetco >> do solemnly swear or affirm >> domly swear or affirm >> that I will faithfully impartially and justly >> I will faithfully faithfully and partially and justly >> perform all the duties of the office of planning board member
>> perform all the duties of the office of planning board member >> to the best of my ability. to the best of my ability. >> That I will support the Constitution of the United States. >> That I will support the Constitution of the United States. >> Constitution of the State of New Jersey. >> State of New Jersey.
>> And that I will be our true faith and allegiance to the same. >> And I will true faith and allegiance to >> the government established in the United States >> and to the governments established in the United States. >> And in this state in this state >> under the authority of the people
>> under the authority of the people. >> So help me God. >> So help me God. Congratulations. >> Thank you. Uh gentlemen, just sign those. Give those to Eileen. >> Thank you. >> Roll call. Mr. Bo
>> here. >> Mr. Gimble >> here. >> Mr. Greenfield >> here. >> Mr. Carbonic >> here. >> Mr. McNicholas >> here. >> Mr. Mercer >> here. >> Councilman Rebel >> here.
>> Thank you. >> Mr. Freriedman >> here. >> Mr. Wetco >> here. >> Interdep is not here. And Chairman Husser >> here. >> You have a quorum. >> Thank you. Um at this time, would everybody please rise for the pledge of allegiance and afterwards a moment of
silence for our fallen men and women who have served both here and abroad. To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
>> Okay. Thank you. Uh at this time the planning board I will uh gentlemen I'll need a motion to go into um executive session for reorg. >> I'll make a motion. >> Mr. Mercer, do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> Okay.
>> Who was the second? >> Mr. McNicholas. >> Thank you. >> Um do we need a roll call on that? Eene. >> Uh I can do one quick. Okay. >> Mr. Bo? >> Yes. >> Mr. Gimble? >> Mr. Greenfield? >> Yes. >> Mr. Carbonic? >> Yes. Mr. McNicholas,
>> yes. >> Mr. Mercer, >> yes. >> Chairman Rebel, I mean Councilman Rebel, I'm sorry. >> Yes. >> Mr. Freriedman, >> yes. >> And Chairman Husser, >> yes. >> Motion carries. I just have to read the resolution before you go in. >> Yep. >> Executive session resolution. Whereas
title 10, chapter 4, section 13 of the New Jersey Revised Statutes requires that the public shall not be excluded from any meetings of a public body unless a resolution authorizing such exclusion is adopted at a public meeting. And whereas the planning board
of the township of Howell has determined that such a closed meeting is required to discuss certain matters which are exempted from consideration with the public in attendance under New Jersey revised statutes 10 col4-12 namely personnel. Now therefore, be it
resolved by the planning board of the township of Howell that the public shall be excluded from the next portion of this meeting and that the planning board will reconvene in public session thereafter. Be it further resolved that minutes will be kept of the meeting in close session and the time and
circumstances under which the discussion conducted in closed session can be disclosed to the public cannot be determined at this time. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. Um, Eileen, could you do a roll call now that we're back on the record?
>> Sure. Mr. Bato >> here. >> Mr. Freriedman >> here. >> Mr. Gimble >> here. >> Mr. Greenfield >> here. >> Mr. Corbanic >> here. >> Mr. McNicholas >> here. >> Mr. Mercer >> here. >> Councilman Rebel >> here. >> Mr. Wetco >> here.
>> And Chairman Husser >> here. >> You have a quorum. >> All right. Time for reorganization. Uh, do I have a nomination for chairman? >> I nominate Nick Huzzar. >> Do I have a second? >> Second.
>> We need a roll call. >> Yeah. Who was the second? Thank you. >> Roll call. Mr. Bato. >> Yes. >> Mr. Freriedman? >> Yes. >> Mr. Gimble? >> Yes. >> Mr. Greenfield? >> Yes. >> Mr. Carbonic? >> Yes. >> Mr. McNicholas? >> Yes. >> Mr. Mercer?
>> Yes. >> Councilman Rebel? >> Yes. >> And Chairman Husser? >> Yes. Motion carries. >> Thank you, gentlemen. Uh, do I have a nomination for vice chairman? >> Nominate Chris Mercer. >> Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Corbonic.
>> Mr. Bato. >> Yes. >> Mr. Freriedman? >> Yes. >> Mr. Gimble? >> Yes. >> Mr. Greenfield? >> Yes. >> Mr. Carbonic? >> Yes. >> Mr. McNicholas? >> Yes. >> Mr. Mercer? >> Yes. >> Councilman Rebel? >> Yes. >> And Chairman Huster? Yes.
>> Motion carries. >> Um, okay. Do I have a nomination? I'm going to do um because it's three positions at once. Um for secretary, administrative officer, and recording secretary. >> Nominate Eileen Cus.
>> Do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> Mr. McNicholas. >> Mr. B. >> Yes. >> Mr. Freriedman. >> Yes. >> Mr. Gimble. >> Yes. >> Mr. Greenfield. >> Yes. >> Mr. Carbonic. >> Yes. >> Mr. McNicholas. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mercer.
>> Yes. >> Councilman Rebel. >> Yes. >> And Chairman Husser. >> Yes. >> Thank you on behalf of Eileen Kusa. >> Thank you. It's not Thank you. It's not me. >> Uh,
okay. Uh, do I have a nomination for consulting attorney? >> Yes. Um, Pashmanstein, Walder, and Hayden. Do I have a second? >> I'll second that. >> Mr. Freriedman. Roll call, please. >> I'm sorry. Who was the >> Mr. Freriedman? Uh, Mr. McNicholas. Mr.
Freriedman. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Bato. >> Yes. >> Mr. Freriedman. >> Yes. >> Mr. Gimble. >> Yes. >> Mr. Greenfield. >> Yes. >> Mr. Carbonic? >> Yes. >> Mr. McNicholas? >> Yes. >> Mr. Mercer? >> Yes. >> Councilman Rebel?
>> Yes. >> And Chairman Husser? >> Yes. Motion carries. uh nomination for consulting engineer. >> I'll make a motion for CME Associates. >> Do I have a second? >> Mr. Gimble, second.
>> And who was the motion? >> Uh Mercer, >> I'm sorry. >> Mr. Bato. >> Yes. >> Mr. Freriedman. >> Yes. >> Mr. Gimble. >> Yes. >> Mr. Greenfield. >> Yes. >> Mr. Carbonic. >> Yes. >> Mr. McNicholas. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mercer.
>> Yes. >> Councilman Rebel. >> Yes. and chairman Huster. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. >> Nomination for consulting planner. >> I nominate Leon Svakian Inc. >> Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Second.
>> Uh Mr. Greenfield. >> Mr. B. >> Yes. >> Mr. Freriedman. >> Yes. >> Mr. Gimble. >> Yes. >> Mr. Greenfield. >> Yes. >> Mr. Carbonic? >> Yes. >> Mr. McNicholas? >> Yes. >> Mr. Mercer? >> Yes. >> Councilman Rebel? >> Yes. >> And Chairman Huster? >> Yes.
>> Motion carries. Thank you. >> And a nomination for licensed tree expert. >> I'll nominate CMA Associates. >> Mr. Mercer, do I have a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Bato. >> Mr. Bato. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Freriedman. >> Yes. >> Mr. Gimble. >> Yes. >> Mr. Greenfield. >> Yes. >> Mr. Carbonic? >> Yes. >> Mr. McNicholas? >> Yes. >> Mr. Mercer? >> Yes. >> Councilman Rebel? >> Yes. >> And Chairman Huster? >> Yes. >> Motion carries.
>> Okay. um the 2026 27 meeting dates. Do we have to discuss anything on >> No, just uh memorialize the resolution for those dates. So, I need a motion in a second. >> Uh do I have a motion to memorialize what was discussed? >> A motion. >> Second. >> Okay. Mr. McNicholas, Mr. Freriedman for
the second. >> Mr. Bo? >> Yes. >> Mr. Freriedman? >> Yes. >> Mr. Gimble? >> Yes. >> Mr. Greenfield? >> Yes. >> Mr. Carbonic? >> Yes. >> Mr. McNicholas? >> Yes. >> Mr. Mercer. >> Yes. >> Councilman Rebel. >> Yes. >> And Chairman Huster. >> Yes. >> Motion carries.
>> Thank you. Um the official newspaper that's um determined by the governing body which is the Asbury Park Press and the Star Ledger. >> Correct. >> Uh the environmental commission liaison is myself because I'm the only person on the environmental commission. Um and
then we have two committees on the planning board, a site review committee and a master plan committee. Uh I am nominating Brian McNicholas uh as the chairman with Mr. Wgo and Mr. Freriedman as members and the master
plan review committee the chairman will be Mr. Mercer with members of Mr. Councilman Rebel and Mr. Gimble and that ends the reorganization portion of the meeting. >> Okay. Thank you. Yeah, we're good. Thank you.
Nice meeting you. >> Nice meeting you. >> You too. >> Welcome aboard. >> Thank you very much. >> We'll wait for you to get settled in. All right. Uh Eileen, is there any minutes?
>> There's no minutes this evening. >> Any vouchers? >> No vouchers. >> And then we have some correspondence. >> We do. I have an email from Mr. Vidiello. He's the attorney for case SD 3022 Cody Milch 2011 trust. They were carried to tonight's agenda for
scheduling purposes only. Uh he would like to be rescheduled to February the 5th, 2026, and he will notice for that application. >> Okay. >> I also have a letter from Mr. Hirs for
case SP 1140 Cree Plaza LLC. They were put on for tonight for scheduling purposes only. He would like to be carried to February 19th, 2026 with no further notice. You want to make the announcement >> with no further notice? >> Yeah.
>> Okay. >> Because he already noticed for it and was carried. >> Got it. All right. So, if you're here for case number SP1140 C Free Plaza LLC, that will not be heard this evening. It is being carried to two uh to February 19th, 2026 with no further notice.
>> Right. I also have an email from Mr. P regarding case SP1 1135 Star Cap Holdings. He would also like to carry his application to February 19th, 2026. And he also granted the board an extension of time through the month of
February, 2026. >> No further notice. >> No further notice. >> Okay. So, case number SP1135, Starcap Holdings LLC being carried to February 19th, 2026 with no further notice.
>> I also have an email from Steven Goen. He is the attorney for case SD 3027 for RCH Newton's Corner Road LLC. He asked that that application be carried to February 5th, 2026 with no
further notice. >> Okay. If you're here for case number SD 3027, RCH 162 Newton's Corner Road LLC, that is being carried to February 5th, 2016 2026.
uh with no further notice. >> And the only other item I have is there is an upcoming training class if anyone is interested, new members, which I guess is just Mr. Gimble and our alternate who's not here this evening.
Uh they're January 31st, 2026, 8:30 in the morning to 1:30 p.m. online or February 26th, 2026, 5:30 to 10:30 online. And that's in the evening. I'll send an email out as well and then they can get back to me because they have to
have training within 18 months of being appointed. >> Got it. >> And that's all I have. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Mr. Chair. Yes. >> I just want to bring to the board's attention that at the zoning board, they're intending to have their
professional team give like a directed training class. So, I think that if you're brand new and you definitely need the 18month, that's one thing. But for those of you guys who have been here for a while, Andy, we were discussing doing a training class with the zoning board
at a subsequent meeting when the agenda was light and we could do like a a personalized training, not every other town or what have you. So, it's something to keep in mind. >> Okay. Yeah, I think that'd be very very helpful here.
>> Yeah. >> We did it right at the meeting. Like we did it either we >> before the meeting or after the meeting, >> conducted the business and then did the training or we did the training first and then conducted the business but at a regular scheduled meeting so you guys didn't have to come out on a different night.
>> Got it. Cool. >> All right. Um Okay. On to resolutions. First case number SP113271 Adelfia LLC. It's a resolution granting preliminary and final major site plan
and preliminary and final major subdivision with ancillary variance and design waiver relief eligible voters. Mr. Carbonic, Mr. Mercer, and myself. >> Do I have a motion? >> I will make a motion. >> Mr. Mercer, do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> Mr. Carbonic. >> Mr. Carbonic?
>> Yes. >> Mr. Mercer? >> Yes. >> And Chairman Huster? >> Yes. >> Motion carries. Resolutions memorialized. and case number SD 3026 Edward and Edward and Dorothy Morgan. This is a resolution granting submission waiverss eligible voters Mr. Bato Mr.
Carbonic, Mr. McNicholas, Mr. Mercer, Mr. Freriedman, Mr. Wetco, and myself. Do I have a motion? >> Motion, >> Mr. Carbonic. Do I have a second? >> Wait a minute. >> Mr. McNicholas, >> you made the motion. >> Uh, Mr. Carbonic. >> And who second?
>> Mr. McNicholas. >> Thank you. Mr. Bato, >> yes. >> Mr. Freriedman, >> yes. >> Mr. Carbonic, >> yes. >> Mr. McNicholas, >> yes. >> Mr. Mercer, >> yes. >> Mr. Wetco, >> yes. >> And Chairman Huster, >> yes. >> Motion carries. Resolutions memorialized. >> Thank you. Okay. This evening, we have a
submission waiver before the board. It's case number SP1133A. Uh, Archangel Michael, Adult Daycare, I'm sorry, adult day healthcare center incorporated for a minor site plan. Mr. Pap. Good evening m Mr. Chairman and members of the board Kenneth Pap on
behalf of the applicant. This is a request to modify the use of one of the rooms in the existing house of worship for day and adult daycare and I know that there's a couple of waiverss I think that your engineers prepared to address. >> Okay.
>> So, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, um do you want to swear in? >> Sure. Do you swear the testimony I give will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. So, >> I do. >> State your name? >> Laura Newman. Uh so, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, first I want to thank you all. I didn't get the opportunity to thank you on the record, so I do just want to do that. But we did
issue a memo dated January 3rd. There's only one waiver being sought here, and that's for the 2,000 ft downstream drainage analysis, which I typically require, but because this is an interior um modification. There's no exterior improvements proposed. So, there's no additional impervious coverage. There's
no ground disturbance. I take no exception to the granting of that waiver for the purposes of deeming this application complete. >> Got it. Any questions? >> Seeing none, I will entertain a motion.
>> Motion. >> Mr. Bato. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Mercer. >> Roll call, please. >> Mr. Bato. >> Yes. >> Mr. Freriedman? >> Yes. >> Mr. Gimble? Yes, >> Mr. Greenfield. >> Yes, >> Mr. Carbonic. >> Yes, >> Mr. McNicholas.
>> Yes, >> Mr. Mercer. >> Yes, >> Chairman Rebel. >> Here. >> Yes. >> Sorry. >> That's a yes, right? >> That's a yes. That's a yes. >> And Chairman Huster, >> yes. >> Motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. So, that's done. That's done.
So, we have two applications this evening. First being case number SP1139 Atlantic Health System is a preliminary and final major site plan with ancillary variance and design waiver relief. >> Happy new year S.
>> Happy new year everyone and congratulations everyone. Um good evening Mr. Chair, members of board. Salvatore Alfury, Clearary, Giovi, Alfie and Jacobs on behalf of the applicant. Um, for those board members who aren't aware, this is the old Moon Motel site,
which has been vacant for a decade or so. Um, we're excited to bring an Atlantic Health System medical office building, single occupant. Um, you'll see a beautiful building. Our client has authorized our engineer to spend a lot
of time in the design features of the application, including storm water management. We've attempted and I believe successfully worked with your board professionals to come up with a plan that um satisfies all the ordinance requires and all the technical comments that the board professionals typically
have. We've eliminated all of the variances except for those variances that relate really to health and safety and traffic um site visibility. Um we have two witnesses we intend to present. We do have um a traffic engineer if you decide you want to hear traffic
testimony, but otherwise we have our engineer planner and then the architect and of course anybody else or any questions you may have. >> Sounds like a plan. >> We submitted exhibits in advance and to
to speed things along and our first witness we're going to request that he be sworn in so we disqualify him. >> He swear testimony would be the truth. The host nothing but the truth. I do >> state your name for the record last. >> Yes, it's Patrick Linham L Y Nam. I'm
with Kier's Engineering and Design. We're located 101 Crawford's Corner Road in Homedale, New Jersey. Um I am the I am going to be testifying as the engineer and planner for the applicant tonight. I have over 25 years experience
in the site planning and engineering field. I have been in front of this board before. >> We'll accept your credentials. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. and and and Mr. Lyman, your um office prepared the application and you were involved in the entire design process
that I briefly described before we before I introduced you. Correct. >> Correct. >> Um would you um orient the board as to where this property is located and then get into the site plan details, please? >> Sure. So, >> if you want to sit, you can. There is a mic on that table. >> That prism thing is a microphone.
>> You don't have to stand for this. >> Okay. I'm up here anyway. Thank you. Uh so as you can see the first exhibit is an aerial uh and it's is marked previously as part of the the uh the set. The address is 4650 Route 9 South.
The block is 78.10 lots 26 and 28. The lots will be consolidated as part of this application. Uh the the site is located just south of the How Township Municipal Building. It's uh you can I could probably throw a stone from here. lot
area is 4.637 acres. It's uh currently de uh de developed with remnants of a demolished moon motel. The property fronts Route 9 South and there's a New Jersey barrier that uh segregates the lanes in that
location. It's bounded by commercial medical office, a physical therapy, dental to the north, a vacant retail property, and Wawa to the south and residents to the la to the west. Uh the property is located approximately 430 ft south of New Friendship Road. The lot is
irregularly shaped. It's an L-shaped with a 250 foot deep by 25 ft deep portion that is removed from the Route 9 frontage. As you can see, uh the site topography slopes down approximately 3% from east to west. That's from Route 9
to the rear. Uh there's a uh there's a tax map plotted 50-foot buffer in the rear uh for the rear residence which is uh maintained as part of this proposed development. Uh the property is located within the HD-1 highway development
zone. The the use is a permitted use. The rear residents are located within the R-3 zone. uh the property has a valid wetlands LOI indicating the absence of wetlands in the property and uh there's no known ecological
constraints impacting the property. Uh there were two prior applications on the on the uh property. One was a um a 62,000 foot mixed medical office and retail which was approved in 2008.
Obviously that never moved forward. And then there was a subsequent application in 2023 for self storage and that was um that didn't move forward either. Um if you could go to the next one please Mark. Thank you. Uh so the proposed
conditions uh we're proposing a 46,500 ft three-story medical office building. Uh the office and healthc care facilities are permitted uses in the zone. As mentioned before, the use consists of uh was surround is consistent with the surrounding area existing medical uses to the north along
the route 9 corridor. It complies with all the bulk criteria for the setbacks in previous coverage. Uh in particular, 70% permitted, 64.2 proposed, and the uh the height of the building is 45 ft
which is permitted in the the zone. the uh the proposed height uh just to go through how it's calculated real quick. The average ground elevation around the building is proposed at 113.3 and the top of the building is at 158.3
resulting in a 45 foot high um building. There it will be uh some screening rooftop screening on top that that goes no more than 10% of the uh the height of the of the building which is 4 and 1/2 ft. Uh there are pedestrian sidewalks
proposed along Route 9 and connecting to the proposed building. Uh refuge and recyclables are provided within a trash enclosure screened trash enclosure. Trash enclosure sizing conforms with facilities operated by the owner including properties in Bridgewater and
Pamis. Um the uh private hauler will be used for trash pickup which is anticipated for three times a week. As far as the circulation, um there's a right in right out driveway proposed on Route 9, which is under DOT
jurisdiction. The full-size uh shoulders are also provided along the frontage. Uh two two-way drive aisles at 25 ft with perpendicular parking are is proposed throughout the um the site. Two loading
areas are provided separated uh the patient and the operation needs which is in in the rear. Um the drive aisles are are designed to accommodate fire delivery and refuge vehicles. Um the if
you want to go to the next uh slides, you could just see real quick uh we provided and you can go to the next one too. Just real quick just going through them. It's just illustrating that the site can accommodate fire delivery and refuge vehicles. Um there is no tractor
trailers are anticipated for the operations. The largest vehicle anticipated are box trucks for supplies and mail deliveries. There are design waiverss proposed um for 25 ft circulation aisle whereas 30
feet is required for fire paths and for a 30ft driveway width at the entrance whereas a 24 foot width maximum is permitted. These weird uh waiverss can be granted under C2 requirements. Fire official deem the current layout
acceptable. The deviation lowers on-site impous area uh areas. So that's a positive. Uh the um the the wider driveway at the entrance supports safe ingress uh route as you know route 9 is divided and a
high-speed road higher speed road. As far as the compliant uh parking uh compliant parking is provided 310 spaces are required 312 are proposed including uh credit for 12 EV ready parking spaces. The parking spaces are nine
feet by 19 feet. We are requesting a waiver for a portion of the site uh where parking spaces along Route 9 which are 9 ft by 18 ft. Spaces along the perimeter contain a two-ft overhang which effectively provides a 20ft space
depth. So we believe it's a better design. Uh the ADA compliant parking spaces are increased from five to 10% based on health care needs and that's a it complies with building code as well. There are eight bicycle spaces. Um the
parking spaces are are partially constructed of porous pavement as for storm water that is technically requires a waiver. We're requesting a waiver to allow porous pavement specification with does not provide the required 2-inch
compacted base course. Uh the porous pavement is limited to the parking area, not the drive aisles, limiting wear and tear. The porous uh pavement promotes water quality treatment and water quality control and the and the pavement section will be engineered to meet
required structural and traffic load demands. Uh as far as the traffic being generated by the site, uh we are reconstructing the current right in right out driveway to uh current NJ DOT standards. Um the
the trips are calculated at a maximum of 96 entering trips and 143 exiting trips during the weekday evening peak hour. the driveways will operate safe and efficiency efficiently and and is currently under review by the DOT.
As far as the signs, uh two total signs are are permitted. Uh one wall sign and one freestanding monument sign and there are two directional signs um are proposed. So the there is a variance for the freestanding monument sign setback which
is 8 ft from the the highway rightway uh proposed whereas 20 ft is permitted. Uh we're also requesting to sign area variance where 12t long by 6 foot um high 6'8 inch high um on a 4ft base is
proposed whereas 12tx 3 foot on a twoft base is permitted. Uh also uh we are proposing two 8 foot directional signs exceeding the maximum number of signs permitted. Uh so the existing on-site uh vegetation to the north. Laura, if you
want to uh >> do you want me to go to the landscape? >> Yeah, keep going. Well, no. If you just keep going so Yeah. So you can you can see Whoops. What happened >> that one? >> No, keep going >> back. No, you
I think we went too far. I want to go back to the signs. I want to show the board the sign details. >> This plan? What plan are you looking at? >> Keep going back. C >> can I ask you a couple questions before you get to the signs? >> Uh, sure. Um, what what kind of like
what's going on in this building? Is it just like your typical like I hear medical office and I there's 18 million different kind kinds of medical offices, right? You know what? >> Well, I we do have the architect which is also going to provide operational testimony. So, that probably be answered
by him. >> And then around the building where there's parking towards the building, are there ballards there that are going to be installed? Perfect. Thank you. >> Okay, >> that's what you needed. That is it. >> Yes. Thank you, Laura. So, yeah, you could see this is what we're proposing. This is the detail the freesting sign as
well as the directional signs. And uh when I was getting that, if you want to go to the next one, you could see here these are the the pictures of along Route 9. And you could see here that the off-site vegetation to the north limits visibility for the signs on Route 9
southbound approach. You can just visually see the signs. Uh so we are that's the reason for our waiver. This is a um exhibit showing >> Can I just ask you a question? Go back. >> So, you're telling me that as you're traveling, you can't see that sign if it
was compliant? >> Correct. >> And do you have an exhibit that shows a compliance sign and that you can't see it? >> No. >> Because looks pretty visible to me. >> Okay. >> So, you know, I I don't understand the vegetation that you're referring to.
>> The vegetation you could see it's the mature uh deciduous >> trees. trees are past the entrance traveling south. You can Oh, they're entrance. I'm looking at the middle exhibit that shows vegetation. You can clearly see the sign.
>> And if you're looking for a sign variance, one would think that you would show a compliant sign and that you couldn't see it. So, like I don't believe that if you change the dimensions of the sign to 12 by3 or 4 by 10 versus 12 by 6 that you're not going
to see that sign. >> Okay. So, the the photos, just to reiterate, they're they're labeled as one, two, and three as they're shown on the left of the exhibit. So, those are where the the photos are taken. So, they're taken before the site.
>> Yes, that's my point. So when you're coming down southbound, you got to be able to see the sign before you enter the driveway. >> I understand that, but I'm not buying the argument that a 12 by3 or a 4x10 is not visible and a 12x6 is. Right? Like
you have to prove to me to get the relief that deviation from strict compliance is a better alternative. And right now I can see that what you're proposing clear as day. And if it was a little bit smaller, I'd still be able to see it. So, I would encourage before the
board act to be able to determine a compliant sign would not be visible. We're very we're very strict especially on signs on Route 9. There's a lot of sign clutter, >> right? >> And and that sign is perfectly visible heading south.
>> I disagree. >> For for reference, what size is that existing sign there? >> That's that's not even our sign. That's not the sign. the for reference to the different sizes Jen is speaking about. >> Well, if you go to the next exhibit, you could see all the other signs that are on Route 9. And that's
>> that wasn't the question, Pat. The question is that sign for scale. What size is that sign? >> Oh, what size that sign? >> I don't know. I don't know what that sign is. So, if you go to the next exhibit, maybe it's shown on there. >> But you don't really know the
circumstances surrounding how those signs came about and whether they've been there forever. I understand >> versus not. >> I'm showing it's a character. It's it's the character in >> I understand. But the deviation from 12 by3 and 12 by six or 4x10 which is also
permitted I think would also be visible and not require relief. So can you prove to me that you cannot see a compliance sign? >> Not with these exhibits. No. Thank you. >> Anyway, so continuing on.
So, we are requesting the the waiver. It's up to the board if they want a a lesser sign. Uh we are hoping to uh to consider a lesser dimensions of sign >> and that vegetation's on the northern property that's not on yours. Okay. >> Yes.
>> There's an existing sign at the moon. That's >> okay. So, um, we can circle back to the signs after arrested testimony, but if there's any other questions, we're going to address them and address the signs at the end. So, the, um, so that's the exhibit. So,
again, we I guess we just went through all the sign area and setbacks consistent, uh, along Route 9 as is shown in the next exhibit. I understand Jen's point that there are different circumstances, but my point was to the character of the area. This is these aren't a large signs like these. This is
a monument sign. The reason why we're asking for a variance for the for the dimensions is because we want to provide a landscaping at the bottom >> and that causes us to uh adjust the uh the sign dimensions. >> It's required to landscape around the
per the base of the sign. Yeah. So like you're not doing us a favor by landscaping around the perimeter which would enable you to get a bigger sign. >> Well, this allows us to have better landscaping without blocking the sign. that that was the point. >> I I would respectfully submit to the
board that I think a compliance sign would be more than appropriate at this location and without information to demonstrate that it's not visible and that deviation would be a better alternative, which is required under the law, deviation is a better alternative
to strict compliance. You're not demonstrating that you can't comply. I don't see why a deviation is required here. And just to clarify, we're talking about the size because it's a little it's closer than allowed, but because of those trees, we need it closer. >> I'm not I'm not opining about the
setback. I do understand about the setback, but I'm opining about the size of the sign. >> All right. All right. >> We'll leave it at the board. If the board wants us to have a conforming sign, obviously, we'll provide the size >> that's that's allowed. >> Agreed. >> Okay.
>> Continue, please. Um >> so uh for the setback in the area um I'll provide some planning arguments for it >> all in agreement the setback's okay right do you need >> I'm not worried about the setback and then all right please
>> okay let me jump to the lighting then so all the lighting will be LED fully cut off fixtures with timers to turn on at night except for necessary for security lighting the site lighting will be warm hue at 300 Kelvin range
That seems to be the new uh uh color range for LED for for for the environment. Um we are asking for a waiver for lighting where we're proposing nine uh uh foot candle average whereas uh half a foot candle average is
permitted. Uh we are the the slight deviation is for um uh to in is in accordance with uh illumination uh engineering society for parking lots. The the the lights are well far from the
the residents in the rear. So we don't see any negative impact for uh the increased lighting. It actually it's better for safety especially for elderly for a medical use >> downward pointing. >> Yes. Yes. cut off down >> nine or nine? >> It's 0.9.
>> Okay. >> Oh, you said nine just so you know. >> Oh, sorry. Sorry. >> So, uh on to landscape and buffering. Uh you can see on the on the plan it's a diverse landscaping spread throughout the project including uh street trees, foundation plantings, and parking lot
screening. This includes 61 deciduous trees, 491 deciduous shrubs, 116 evergreen trees, and 183 evergreen shrubs. A 50-oot landscape buffer will be provided along the rear. As noticed,
um there was a a previous variance that was requested, but we worked with your landscape uh architect to uh change the the buffer um into a burm, a sixoot burm, and heavily landscaped. So we we
enhanced uh the the buffer by providing uh the uh the additional screening. Uh there is a waiver for payment in lie of of uh plantings. So um you know the we we maxed out the amount of plantings
without them uh killing each other. So we are requesting a uh payment in lie uh for uh replacement tree credit. >> And your office worked with Sherry on this design. Correct. Correct. >> Sherry, anything
now that you're a landscape architect as well? >> So nice. >> Um, yeah, with the additional landscaping, they'll be paying a fee of 16,800. So, they agreed to that. They have it all calculated. Um, no, I asked
for the one thing I did ask for was for um like a no mo seed mix so they don't have to go through this whole area every single week and mow. Um but yes they >> uh I think we updated the plan to drop
because we added more plantings. I think we dropped the payment in L to I I calculate 13,800. >> I looked at his email last maybe. >> Okay. Well, we'll we'll hash out the the the correct amount. Um but the the the
fact of the matter is we need a a variance to provide uh in lie of >> it's a waiver >> a waiver. Sorry. >> Gotcha. Okay. >> So, with regards to storm water, just jump into storm water real quick. Uh the existing site uh did not contain any
storm water management or storm water quality treatment. Means just ran right off into the residents. Uh the storm water runoff uh followed the topography from east at Route 9 to the west in the residential neighborhood similar to where the Wawa discharges their storm
water. Um the development uh provides storm water quality control quality treatment and exceeds the groundwater recharge requirements. Storm water is to be managed by 11 smallcale green infrastructure BMPPS. Uh the mix of
stand bomb infiltration porest payment and subsurface infiltration BMPs are being proposed throughout the site. The basins are decentralized throughout the development to maximize groundwater recharge, storm water uh quantity model
conservatively. Uh so we did not model infiltration. So we are very sensitive to storm water on this project because of where it's discharging to the residents in the rear. So, um we we we took conservative measures to in in the
design to uh to uh manage the storm water and reduce runoff from the site. >> Um I'm not going to put you on the spot there, buddy, but I'm going to put you on the spot. Um what the who is in charge of this infiltration basin? Like
is is it you're going to have like a an on andm plan? All right. and and it's going to be maintained by the the property owner. Okay. >> Yeah. And that O andM manual gets recorded in the county clerk's office and they have to obviously abide by and you're supposed to file annual reports
with the town on the maintenance. >> Good with that, Brian. All right. >> Yes. >> Could you flip to the drainage plan as you're talking through this? >> Yeah. Yeah. So, Laura, if you can move forward, please. >> So, yeah. Oh, back. Yeah. So uh just to
illustrate for the board on uh where this the storm water uh actually um goes it's you could see uh you see uh the the proposed development in the top right and then you can see where the storm water in blue actually traverses over um
you know discharges to the residential development. There's actually a uh a buffer actually on that first uh resident. I think it's 76, lot 76, which which can't be correct. Thank you, Laura. Uh, which the storm water goes
through uh and eventually reaches a a a storm water manage based by the town uh right there and then that discharges through uh the township storm water system. Eventually gets down to the stream uh sweet gum brook down at the
bottom. So um what we did um we actually went out and done uh two performed two investigations on geotech. We found that the first uh geotech showed a restrictive layer uh which would have uh restricted infiltration in our basin. We
identified um the restrictive layer and proposed to over esavvate that area uh and to promote infiltration. There's there's actually a perch condition there. Uh if we didn't do that investigation, we're not sure if that would have infiltrated. Uh it's probably something similar happening to the
neighboring uh Waw Wa because they discharged to the surface in the same direction. >> And just as it relates to the discharges because it's a point source, have you have approval from Freehold soils? >> Yes, actually. Uh good point, Laura. We
did uh work because they are very strict with off-site uh discharges, off-site uh stability. uh we actually developed this plan for them as well as for the town. The town does require offsite uh drainage uh but particularly uh we made it priority to get our uh so erosion
district approval certification um because that pretty much uh approves the the drainage system uh and has their buyin on on off-site um management off-site stability. So, so not only does
Laurel reviewed it, but also the Freel erosion district has reviewed as well and has certified it. >> So, you have like a perched groundwater level sitting on top of like a confining clay layer. Is that my understanding? >> That's existing condition. We're going to punch through the that restrictive layer to get to the uh the
non-restrictive sand layer. So, it's going to infiltrate much better. >> So, we took a >> basically they remove and replace it, right? So they get to where the perch condition is, they overexavate out that area and they replace that with a
suitable um soil to achieve the permeability rates. >> I guess yeah, I guess my question is on that right from a I don't I'm not an engineer. I'm a geologist, but from my dirt rules, right, how does that affect
the rest of the site if that's the only area you're doing that in? So in other words, if you have a confining layer throughout the site of silty clay, let's say, and perch groundwater conditions and the rest of the site, and then you over excavate that area, right, to put in your basin, does that affect the
hydraology of the rest of the site? >> Let me just mention the rest of the site. This is an isolated perch condition. >> Oh, it is. >> Yeah. So that's that's where the basin is. >> Okay. >> So that's where we concentrated the over excavate. The other areas are okay. >> Okay. Okay, that makes sense. >> And it's sand. It's It's you know we got
great sand here. >> Gotcha. Okay. >> There'll be infiltrating elsewhere. >> Got it. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> If I may for the for the record um over here. Sorry. Hi. Um a phase one was
performed uh for the site assessment. Was there any known contamination or anything? It's a large project and with uh the actual site work happening and the the storm water runoff going offsite towards residential properties is there
any concern of disturbing >> I was actually going to get into the environmental but let's address it now. Uh yes. So the phase one was done. It showed uh before the moon motel was even built. It was a farm uh bunch of all how
was a farm at one time. So there is a a uh a concern about um pesticides heavy metals and those are not soluble. So the so to we're going to do further testing but if in fact that there's become levels that are regulated by the DP uh
there are easily ways to manage uh as um arsenic uh which is a heavy metal usually just cap it you collect it and we probably put it in a burm and put a two-ft cap over it and then and since it's not soluble there's no threat of it going into the storm water
uh >> I don't think you really want to do that if you find that >> well that's I'm a practice, believe it or not. >> LRP, I'm well aware of it. >> Um, but uh All right. >> I mean, the cap the site, we're capping the whole site as well. So, uh, you know, with the with the pavement and the
building and all that stuff. >> Okay. >> And you know, it's not volatile. Uh, because it is is heavy metal. It's not a volatile or >> But you'll have a restriction on that property, you'll realize, >> right? Yes. We'll have to go through the motion with a a deed restriction for the
area. That's only a member. This is only if if we exceed their their requirements, but >> we definitely plan on that's this is a matter of course. >> Uh we just didn't get to that point yet. >> If I may though, just just for the record again, just for clarity, during
the this is a large construction project. So during all that site work, if you disturb anything during that site work and have a situation with runoff that there I just feel like during that
process, maybe there should be something stipulated and >> absolutely I mean runoff during that process. >> Yes, there there is going to be a plan and controls to manage if if it is exceeded. There has to be a whole plan during construction to to address whatever environmental concerns during
construction, especially during construction. >> Thank you. >> Um, so yeah, we discussed that just quickly on the utilities. Um, we're going to service by all the util they're all public utilities. Uh, they're all available within Route 9. Sanitary, uh,
is available sanitary uh, manhole in in the rear. Um Laura, if you if you'd like to go to the other back to the other exhibit. Laura, please. >> Just hit next. >> One more. There you go. Thank you very
much. So, uh in the in the in the northwest corner, there's a sanitary manhole that we'll be connecting into which uh eventually goes through the residential neighborhood. So, uh that's the only really unique utility condition. Um we are obviously going to
comply with the fire department. We provide a knockbox near the front door of the building. Um brings me to the again for the utility. There is a variance for providing the hot box. That's the new trend with the the water utilities especially New Jersey American
water. They require their backflow preventers to be above ground. So then we got to provide them in a heated box so they don't freeze. Uh but what we did is we did put um uh landscaping around three sides of it, the visible sides. We got to leave at
least one side open for access. So, uh we are requesting a variance to put that in the front yard. And you can see it's in the top uh or or north um east corner. >> Um
>> that concludes his testimony. >> Yes, >> Mr. Chair. Any questions? I I just got one. How long has this Moon Motel been? I mean, since I've been down here certainly, but how long has this been out of commission? >> I I can't answer. >> That beautiful sign on Route 9 that was
there at >> at least 10 years. But I beyond >> 15 20 right >> that long. Wow. >> And in your >> How do I phrase this? There's been no due diligence on that site to address
historical pesticides from I I mean I just find that there's been other people parties interested in that property that at this point in the game wouldn't it be people would be aware if there was an impact to this so >> yeah I I would agree with you
>> you know right so and to your knowledge there's been nothing that you've seen laboratory wise analyzed for >> not laboratory wise no mention this you know, when a project has to get past the board approval before they they start investing uh in in the cost for lab
testing and how to manage it during during construction. So, that's the that's the speculation, but that's probably why we haven't seen it yet. >> Yeah. But, I mean, all right. I >> was just saying due diligence before you even look at the property because the cost with remediating something like
that before you even go through this process could be ownorous. >> It could be. Yes. But the you know the the risks and >> yeah I mean I'm listen I'm crossing my fingers that nothing is out there but it leaves me to believe that if it was a farm and there is an issue
I mean >> then what >> I mean we we we have addressed arsenic I mean this is a common thing especially now >> I understand I understand it's a common thing but you know you go out there and you find pesticide DDT and DDE and arsenic and lead and mercury all over the place. What happens like what are
you guys doing? >> Well we hire an LSRP and they you will go forward with development impacted or not. >> Yeah. I mean the other other the board has seen other applications where they have impacted soils where it's cleaned up during construction and and and by an
LSRP uh who managed it during construction. >> So do you intend to do those soil testing as a condition of if the board acted favorably of compliance so that we understand what the level of contamination is? >> Absolutely. And we have to do it anyway. >> Understood. I'm just I what I don't want
to hear is we're gonna the board acted favorably get compliance and then deal with it prior to construction. I think we need to understand it. Um if the board acted favorably would need to be submitted so that we know what the remediation remedial action plan is
before we have an approved set plan uh construction plan set. >> So are you saying during Ros's compliance? >> Yes. >> Okay. Yes. Um if I let me just throw on a record the planning uh the end of the planning. So just real quick uh the grand
intervariance will have no substantial detriment impact to the public good surrounding properties or the neighborhood. The project advances several purposes in miscellaneous law. Uh it aligns with the town's planning goals. the proposed medical office facility is com compatible with and and
beneficial to the surrounding commercial contexts while minimizing impacts to the residential uses. >> Well, I I just want to because you're you're doing I mean I I'll defer to Jen, but just so I understand, we're literally talking about the location of the monument sign >> and the hot box
>> and the hot box. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> So, are we >> acquiescing to the size of the sign? >> Yes. >> Okay. if unless the board says we like it larger and you can have it. But I have a feeling they're going to listen to you and not us. >> I don't think I had one follow-up
question. >> Yes. >> The you you had a chance to review the technical reports that were submitted by both the board engineer, planner, and landscape architect. >> Yes. >> And you're okay satisfying all of the comments as a condition of approval, correct? >> Yes.
>> That's all we have. >> Any other questions for me? any >> for the architect up. >> Um, is there anybody from the public that has any questions for the engineer?
>> Seeing none. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Aritect. >> Architect. Okay. >> Do you swear the testimony you give it will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. Healthy God. >> I do. >> Say your name for the record. Spell your last. >> Heath Cameron. Last name K A M M E R E
R. >> And Keith, would you place your credentials on the record, please? >> Um, I've been a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey since 1988. I think that works out to about 38 years. Uh I am the current president of Buckle
Architects. We're a firm that uh specializes in healthcare planning and we have two offices, one in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, another in Eastern PA. Uh I've been before many boards throughout the state uh especially for Atlantic Health. But uh
>> had quite the drive this evening, I would assume. Then >> no, he's got a flight attendant. >> Well, >> oh jeez. All right. Yeah, you're we'll accept your credentials. So Keith, u first I know you have um experience with the Atlantic Health
System applications and operations. First, why don't you tell the board who Atlantic Health System is and what's going to happen on this site if it's developed and approved approved and developed? >> And I'll just mention as part of that, I've I've had a relationship with the with Atlantic Health uh since 1999, so
going on 26 27 years. Uh so I'm intimately familiar with with uh how they do things especially facilities and so forth but uh just as a general introduction um Atlantic Health System obviously I'm sure you're aware is one
of the leading health care providers throughout the state. Uh they have over 500 locations points of service if you will and that's everything from a hospital down to a physician office. uh the the project uh this project
represents sort of a a middle zone there which is a a large ambulatory uh health center. Uh I'll go into some details of what what that includes but uh for those who don't know obviously the uh the Atlantic Health is uh
headquartered in Morristown, New Jersey. Morristown Medical Center is their tertiary hub. Overlook Medical Center is also a center of excellence for neurosciences while Morristown is a center center of excellence for cardiac
care for children's medicine for cancer care etc. And and then there's a series of community hospitals, Newton, Hacketttown, Chilton, and and obviously uh you know, locally uh um
as well with the addition of Central State. Uh this project is a byproduct of that relationship and uh is intended to to answer your question uh to to provide uh services and and at this point the
specifics have not been decided yet but in the in the initial discussions and planning for the building uh the intent was to have diagnostic and imaging services likely on the first floor. So we've we've maintained a little higher floor to floor height on that first
floor. And then typically what happens is uh their specialists uh occupy uh the other floors and and usually those are symbiotic specialists that that may have some relation to you know obviously the diagnostics. This project is very
similar to a project, a little bit smaller, but very similar uh to a rock uh Rockaway Medical Center was the former BASF headquarters there right by the mall. Uh and uh Atlantic Health developed that project. Now, that
project is a little different because it has an ambulatory surgery center in it as well. There's there's to my knowledge at this point there's no intent for that to to be located here. Um uh that being the case um I wanted to at
least talk about hours of operation. Their typical hours of operation uh for these facilities are set during weekdays 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and then usually there's a sat Saturday morning roughly 8 to 1 uh type of operation
for that as well. Um, I'm gonna I I don't want to add to the civil engineers uh discussion about building height. I'll just sort of reinforce it and add some context. Uh, and just talk a little bit about the building exterior
because this it was really derived by two things. one-year ordinance in terms of size and and configuration, but also uh by the uh design and site planning standards which we studied fairly rigorously to really try to understand
what you were trying to do. So that really that and the and the site kind of uh had an impact on the building because the building uh kind of locks into that little key uh in in the front of the
site. the location of the entrance and the location of the sign are sort of skewed a little to the north where it's more centered on the frontage uh of the lot uh along Route 9. So, but taking the cues from um from the design standards,
the approach to the base uh in terms of you know using a masonry base or or something that was continuous uh the approach to windows versus wall panels, the approach to creating some undulation uh to the facade uh you know to try to
create visual interest were all factors in in developing this facade. And in addition to that was was really kind of creating a you know a uh a building that had you know a dynamic building if you will that became a local landmark and
that was easy to identify from the road as well. Um so again um you know it it had had that had you not had that some of the some of the design probably would be a little different but I think uh the
byproduct of of having those design standards and trying to follow the trying to interpret them and follow them as we put together the building facade kind of created a certainly a building with some visual interest. Um the civil engineer did testify as to building
height. I'm just going to point out that the building height the highest part of the building which is that uh parapit over the Atlantic Health system that's the area that is you know the highest part the the other uh parapits are a
foot and a half uh roughly lower and the roof is a little bit lower than that. So uh uh that's >> and so the highest part would be what heightwise >> I'm going to leave it to width 45. >> You're the architect. >> 45 ft. I think I think I got the 46,000
of this uh of the square footage confused with what I just said. So 45. Okay. >> Yes. >> And the sign it's you had originally we contemplated more than one facade sign, but we settled on this one sign. Correct. >> Correct. One sign um maximum size of of
200 square feet. It's actually likely going to be smaller because Atlantic Health System has kind of changed their name to Atlantic Health. So that the sign will probably be a little smaller in the final byproduct just because it's not going to be quite as long. Um okay
and that's all we have of the architect as chair. >> Any questions gentlemen? >> Um just roughly how many I I know it's not decided yet but roughly how many offices 2030 >> that really depends upon how what type
of offices and how large they are. In all likelihood the imaging probably might take twothirds of the first floor. So you you might have something that went with it, urgent care or something like that. >> Um for the typical offices for these types
of buildings are around 3,000 square feet. So um I don't think it would be uh up to 30, but it might be in the in the 15 to 20 range. I I don't think it would get much above 20. >> Just trying to get an idea. >> Yeah. >> Scope.
>> Anything else? uh the imaging that includes radiology as well. Is there specific uh permits or uh um department of health uh requirements associated with that? >> That's correct. Yeah. >> Have they already been taken care of or >> No, we don't even
>> you don't do that at this stage. >> Not right now. I think they're looking to get sort of an approval on in concept of this and then they're going to start detailing or start putting the program together of what's going to go inside. >> But that would be a condition of any certificate of occupancy. Certainly any licensing
>> and and I'll just point out you know for your benefit uh in an ambulatory setting typically something like an MRI or a CT would have to go uh to the department of health for for review and approval. >> Any else? >> Uh yes, real quick. The the roof deck is
45 ft and then the parit is a foot and a half over that. >> The the roof deck I can give you the exact um >> 45 is max. So, we're looking like 46 and a half with the puppet. >> What's the maximum height?
>> The roof deck is 42.45 ft. Um, it's generally a flat roof deck because it typically will have some mechanicals on the roof for this type of a building. >> Okay. >> 45 foot overall. Correct. >> 45 ft. Yes. To that highest parapit
which is in the uh closest to you in that >> Okay. So, the roof deck is like 42. >> Okay. Not only because it's on 45 on this drawing that I have in front of me here. Um, couple of slides, but thanks for clarifying. >> Okay. >> And there's no HVAC equipment or
anything on the roof that would be protruding above that 45 ft power pit or anything. I don't know if you covered that already. >> We we do it at as the civil engineer testified there there is some screening on the roof, although it's in a limited area that's 25 ft back uh from each of
the facades. So, I'll just point out that our rendering has the screening on it. And if you look at the car, the point of view from the rendering is probably about 15 ft high. So, it's a little higher than you would normally see it. And it's still not visible this close to the building. So, >> so that 45 foot is the top of the
screening. That's the highest point for the building. >> No, the 45 ft is the tight is the height of the parapit. And then the height of that is uh of the screening is 49.5 which is less than 10% of the building height.
>> Okay. >> What? >> Cuz that would require relief. >> Over 45, right? >> Correct. >> Like they're not exempt from the height. >> This drawing I'm looking at has roof
deck level um 45. That's that's what I'm just saying. is uh does that have to be corrected or >> I'm not sure what you're >> It doesn't show equipment >> drawings have it 42.5 >> um >> 42.45 four five.
>> Okay. >> So, he's looking at an older drawing. >> I bet I don't know. I don't know what drawing. >> We haven't had any resubmissions. So, if you guys have amend your plans, we don't have them. >> Uh A3. If we could take a look at A3.
That's it. That's it. >> Yeah. The roof height, the roof deck level is right here. >> 42.45 of those on the left hand side. If you go if you go to the dimensions on the left hand side is the bottom.
>> It says 43.25 on the plan I have >> on what you're showing on the screen. says 425 >> max and that's the maximum roof deck level. The roof deck may have a pitch >> that says 43.25 right there.
And then the maximum height of the screening is 49.5 which is in excess of 45. >> Excuse me. I'll just point out that the 43.25 if you look down below is to the top of the sign. >> Yeah. >> On the dimension. That's not to the roof
duct. The roof deck is detailed on the left side. >> The roof does so the sign exceeds the roof deck. >> Doesn't look like it to me. >> It does. >> There's a dash line that continues the roof deck. >> Wait, but that's the roof deck on that
side. I'm talking about the other side, which the sign There's a roof deck above that. The sign goes to the top of the roof deck of that part of the facade which is higher as you said than the other side. >> Right. You said that. >> Yes.
>> Mhm. >> I I did. >> So the roof deck on the side that that Laura keeps scrolling away from is 43.25, not 42 whatever. No, >> but the top of the screen that's that's not even the point. It's the
>> the point is that the top of the screening is 49.5. >> It's over 45 >> which is a variance >> which I don't know that you guys notice for >> I'll just point out that well
>> it's not exempt from from height here. >> Let me just clarify the roof deck is the same over the entire building. The power pit on the right is higher. So, it allows the sign to be slightly higher than than the roof deck.
>> I honestly like I think we're talking like semantics here. I don't really think anyone cares whether you call it roof deck or top of roof or whatever you want to call it. But when you have that screening that goes 49.5 ft, which is undisputed by any calculation,
>> it's not part of the building height for there. >> You need a variance for that. >> Okay. So, so the testimony is going to be that we are going to con comply with the height. >> Bring that down to 45 ft total. >> That will affect your first floor.
>> Well, >> you want to take five minutes maybe? >> No. I I mean, in my opinion, the screening is not part of the building height. >> It is here in Howell. It is. We calculate that as part of building height 100%. We do.
>> Yes. That is part of building height. >> It's not included in the exemptions. >> The equipment. Yes. The the wall to screen it. No. >> Well, yes. Five minutes. >> All right. We're going to take a fivem minute break.
>> The board will now take a fivem minute recess. They'll be back at >> 8:46. >> 8:46. >> Now reconvene. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, S. >> During the break, u we had a chance to discuss it with our professionals and all brief also briefly with Jennifer. We
have two options. One is that and the architect will explain it in a little more detail. One is we could eliminate that wall that surrounds the mechanicals and he'll explain why. Or if the board wants it, then we're going to need the variance relief. it is less than the 10% so it would would be considered a C
variance. My meeting notice has a catchall that says any and all other variances that come up as a result of the hearing. So we're I think we're protected from a notice point of view, but we're going to leave it up to the board as to which alternative you prefer. And I'm going to have the architect give you a little more color to that so you fully understand.
>> Sure. >> Yeah, just adding to that. Um where the screen wall is is obviously outside where any of the mechanicals are. Uh the mechanicals typically on a project like this and again we haven't designed it yet are are probably about four feet
high with curbing uh maybe you know 20 30 feet long depending upon how much air flow we need. So the existing parapits again and based on the location of the the mechanicals um are pro not probably they're more
than 25 ft back. The screening is 25 ft because it's on a column line. the mechanicals are further away from the edge uh in all directions than that and they probably we could consolidate them further which would keep the visibility
of them very minimal if if as I mentioned if at all from you know you'd have to be pretty far away before you actually got any visibility maybe of the top of one >> and at that point it wouldn't even be recognizable as something other than the you know
>> as an element of the building. Mhm. >> Gentlemen, any Dylan your forte? Any uh comments? >> Can you show Can you bring up the slide
that has the equipment? >> Okay. So, there's elevation app and air handling units you're saying are 4 ft high. I'm I'm >> estimating. >> Estimating. Yes. >> And and the the column line where the
screening is is that horizontal dash line. >> Yes. >> Each bay is is 25 ft. So that's 25 ft. So right now the from the rear of the building, uh those two that are horizontal are minimum 30 feet on the
right hand side or probably 35 feet where it projects out a little bit further onto the roof. And again the same dimensions from the front uh which is at the bottom. Uh so just pointing out that that the bottom
right is where the front uh is is uh towards Route 9. >> Can I ask you a question of why you decide to add the screen? Is it just because you don't want to see the mechanical equipment or is it more stylistic?
Now, we're really not talking a lot of noise from this kind of equipment. This is these are just areas. >> Well, not noise. I'm just saying that you have a beautiful building already and so you added the screen as a secondary item. But I wanted to know why was that included?
Because if the parapit is a 1 and 1/2 ft high, if you're coming from the street, has your team looked to see from the driving on route nine, can you see that equipment? And is that why you decided to do the screen? >> Well, again, if you go to the rendering, um, you can't even see the screening,
which is going to be higher and closer to the parapit. And >> I don't believe that your rendering would show anything if there's any equipment. I think it's just there as being stylistic. >> So, for us to decide to make a decision, it's going to be impossible. >> I'm kind of confirming that because
again, that point of reference, we adjusted that upward because it showed the building a little better rather than being from the ground. um and you still can't see it uh with with the location of the screening that's there. So, I agree with you. Um
and not all four of those, I should say, are uh the three the two horizontal and the one on the left are air handlers. The the one that's just to the right of the one on the left going north south, that's the top of the elevator shaft, which would only be a couple feet high.
>> I don't think that answers his question. He's asking why did you add the screen? >> I think I think if I could rephrase I think the question is like at what distance away from the building would you actually be able to see the units if the screen was not there. >> Thank you. >> Right. Something like that
>> and what what was the initial function like what was the function of the screen? >> Like I presume you added the screen to stop you from seeing the units >> to be honest with you. It was to be a good neighbor, >> right? To stop people from seeing the units, right? >> To be a good neighbor for what? Noise or aesthetics?
>> Well, not noise, but a aesthetics. >> So, at what distance? So, then the next question the board members have are at what distance away from the building will a neighbor see it. >> I'm just going to say this. We still have a lot of options for design. So, we
can design those so they're lower. >> I'm just going to beg you to just answer the questions. I'm begging you. >> What? I don't think he did an analysis of the distance. What he said was even from the farthest point, you might see the top of a you might. >> It's it's minimal.
>> In most probability, number one, motoring vehicles traveling will definitely not see it >> at all. >> So, we're talking about in the rear where there's residences. What is the likelihood that a resident in the rear would be able to see the mechanical equipment on the roof of a 45 tall
building? Right? Right. I mean, that's what you're asking, right, Dylan? >> Yes. >> I'm going to give you my answer. I I mean, it's pretty minimal on the first floor, especially given the landscaping that's between uh that's buffering that side.
Um from their second floor window, might they be able to see the top of it? Perhaps. But again, we have the ability to to, you know, to design that in in multiple sh >> What is the negative if we just keep the screen and do the variance? >> Nothing. >> Can we just do that? >> Exactly. We we'd be happy.
>> We're trying to >> Let's just do that if it's Al. >> Yeah, that's fine. >> Okay. >> Thank you, >> gentlemen. Good. Good. >> I'm fine. Okay. >> Just Annie. It just needs a C variance for building height. That's all. >> Okay. >> You're not going to get equipment that's 4 foot high. Usually have a foot of curving
>> and then a a 20 ton or 15 ton unit is going to be at least 5 foot high. >> Six feet, right? >> The the roof is 40. You know what I mean? The roof is 42 profile 45. Screen variance. Good to go. >> Yeah. So that's all we have.
>> Thank you. So >> um is there anything else >> sitting on the >> That's all we have. >> Uh is there anyone from the public that uh has a question for the architect? >> Yeah. >> Seeing none. >> So the only guidance we would need from the board is whether you want to give
the variance for the size of the sign, which I know the answer to, but I just want to make sure it's clear that >> Jennifer. >> Yes, sir. >> The sign I mean >> what's where are we leaving this? I mean, >> I mean, >> like to be perfectly fair, S, you didn't really prove to me that you >> Oh, yeah. I'm just saying that they
didn't decide on it. So, >> I mean, I think the location I totally understand because of the vegetation, but I think the size should be compliant. >> I agree. >> That's fine. >> So, having said all that, we request Well, you have to open it up. You have >> Yeah, I'm gonna uh open it up to the
public for any questions, comments. Uh seeing none close the public portion. S any closing remarks? >> Just very briefly that we request that the board grant the var the the approval with the variance relief that we discussed we've and all the conditions that we've stipulated to including
compliance with the technical comments contained within the board professional reports. >> Okay. >> And the soil testing which was part of the the discussion during the testimony. >> Got it. All right, gentlemen. I will entertain
a motion. >> I'll make a motion >> approve with all stipulations discussed. Mr. Mercer, do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> I'll second. >> Mr. Greenfield.
Roll call, please. >> Mr. B? >> Yes. >> Mr. Freriedman? >> Yes. >> Mr. Gimble? >> Yes. >> Mr. Greenfield? >> Yes. >> Mr. Carbonic? >> Yes. >> Mr. McNicholas. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mercer, >> yes. >> Councilman Rebell,
>> yes. >> And Chairman Huster, >> yes. >> Thank you everyone. >> Thank you guys. >> Good night. >> Good night. >> All right. Next up for this evening, save the best for last. Case number SP1130, Vanderve Industrial Partners
LLC. It's for a minor subdivision and preliminary and final major site plan with ancillary variance and design waiver relief. >> Past our bedtime, Ken. >> Okay. >> May I begin? May. >> Of course. Absolutely.
>> Mr. Chair, members of the board, board professionals and public. Good evening. Kenneth Pap on behalf of your applicant Vandervir Industrial Partners. This is a request for a minor subdivision lot line adjustment between two lots owned by the same property
owner to make the lots a little bit more developable. There were somewhat awkward shape created in the original subdivision plat. And then we request for preliminary and final major site plan approval to construct a 48,000 plus
square foot warehouse building in an industrial park. The 48,000 square foot building is approximately 42,000 square feet, a little less of warehouse space. And then there's a twostory square twostory 6,400 square foot office
element. And before we begin, if we could confirm that the board has received our notices and the board has taken jurisdiction of the application. >> Yes, we are, Mr. P. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Chair. This is the I think I think
this is the third of the lots that we're presenting to this board. Our client is the owner of the industrial park. This is an industrial park that was created four or five years ago by this planning board. Um and with
a P-shaped road with most of the lots that were developed prior to our client purchasing this property are on the outside perimeter at the beginning of industrial court. These are all the internal lots of industrial court. The building that we present to you is
contiguous with one that the board has already approved and it's also sequential to I think three of the buildings that our client owns. The the uh presentation this evening we're starting at 9:00. I maybe not past
bedtime but certainly late for the first meeting of the year. What I'd like to do with Mr. chair with your permission. >> Can you give two seconds because one of the board members excuses themselves. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Mr. Bato just had to use the restroom very quickly. Okay. >> I apologize.
>> No, it's fine. >> Thank you. >> Good. >> All right, Ken. >> We're good. >> Yeah, it's okay. minor subdivision lot line adjustment property own client owned both
properties resulting lots are as they are now they're fully conforming no variance relief they would remain fully conforming with no variance relief it's a preliminary final site plan application for a roughly 48,000 square foot building with a two-story office
presentation that we'll make this evening is Peter Strong the design engineer from Crest Engineering and Steve Rodosti, the architect who's designed this building and all the other buildings in the park. Um, Mr. Chair, mindful of the hour, I may have the
following request of the board. I would like to make the initial presentation with through Mr. Strong, the nuts and bolts of the site plan. Similarly, do a introduction of the building and a preliminary presentation by the architect. I think the architect's
testimony is pretty succinct. And then I'd ask if we could conclude for the evening. There is some staff reports that we would like to further address and I've spoken to your professionals about meeting with them and I've also spoken to Eileen and we could be placed
on the agenda for February 5th at which time I think we'd be in a perfect position to have a succinct conclusion. >> Sounds good, Ken. >> So, it's acceptable. We'll go two witnesses. We'll stop and we'll be back on the 5th. Works for you. >> Works for me. Thank you. >> Good. I thank you. So, if I quote, Mr.
Peter Strong is the professional engineer who prepared the plans. I'd ask if we could have Peter sworn, have his credentials made part of the record. We'll go right to presenting the minor subdivision, which will take just a few minutes. And we'll go right then do begin the site plan presentation. >> You swear the testimony again will be
the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> State your name for the record. Spell your last. >> Peter W. Strong. S T R O N G. >> Peter will accept your credentials. >> Just say been here before. Yeah, >> Peter Strong is a professional engineer and a professional planner. Peter, your
licenses are in good standing this evening. >> They are. >> And he has prepared before the board. I thank you, Mr. Chair, for accepting those credentials. >> Mr. Strong, I'm going to ask if you could identify to the board the exhibits upon which you intend to rely so that the IT officer, Miss Laura, will be in a
position to put them up. Uh well, we have several several exhibits uh including uh and an an aerial map that shows about a thousand feet around the site and uh the uh has the outline of the lot that were is the subject of tonight's
application. Um we have another exhibit actually that's the one I just spoke about. Um this is you can see industrial court is uh under construction. Uh the yellow is the site that we're concerned about today and Vandervir Road is kind
of goes off at a 45 degree angle to your right and probably where the the head of the north arrow is there is Bennett Road. So just to orient you uh to to where this property is if you if you're not familiar with it. >> Um there's also the abandoned railroad
on the left side there. and our client owns all of the all of that property, the entire industrial park. >> Right. This is uh the the site that we just looked at on a closer scale, which shows the proposed development of the
property uh on on the vacant land. >> We can go through that after we go through the subdivision line revisions. >> Uh okay. We have a uh a minor subdivision lot line adjustment plan. Um
if you can find that, Laura. There you go. Um so the the two lots that were created by the uh subdivision by the uh by Abington Engineering um
created I'm using a uh point laser here. So the existing lot line runs this way. Um and the two two adjoining lots lots four and five um have kind of I guess lot five is sort of
regular but lot four is uh very irregular. And so we're we're proposing to straighten out the line come perpendicular off of the industrial court u uh property line and create two
two lots that are much more regular. and uh better suited to the rectal linear type of development that we're proposing for these type of warehouses. So that's the the purpose of the subdivision that we're lot adjustment that we've filed with this application and the the lot is
3.49 acres is now four acres. It's going to be 3.49 that that's the lot that we're looking at tonight. >> Peter, if I could just No new lots are created by this request. >> No new lots. No, just an adjustment of the lot line between the two
>> and no variance relief is required to grant this minor subdivision lot line adjustment. >> No, no, no variances are required. No, >> Mr. Chair, board members and board professionals. I have no further testimony with regard to the minor subdivision lot line adjustment. Um, it
is, as Mr. strong indicated intent to create lots that are more recttoinear because warehouse development is recttoinear and we can do so without any relief and we're not creating any additional development opportunity. So >> correct >> not sure whether we ask you to consider
the voting on the minor subdivision at this early stage or we proceed with the initial presentation of the site plan. >> Is there any questions gentlemen? So the reason is just to so that you have the distances from the lot line to where the building's going to be built. Correct. >> That's it.
>> That's all it is. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Um I I would just keep continuing with the process. >> Verify. >> Y >> then Mr. Strong um assuming that these lot lines are accepted by the board. U the lot that we would be working with is
Thank you. If you could describe this lot. The board has now seen that it's an inter interior lot inside industrial court part of the industrial park. If you could um do an executive description of the relief that the applicant is
requesting of the board. >> Sure. Um, we're proposing to uh put a an office warehouse building uh for 6,400 ft of office space in the uh front area uh to the north end of the site and then a warehouse building of 42,672
ft I believe. uh attached to that to uh to the south end. Uh we have car parking in the front for uh 28 cars including two handicap spaces and two EV spaces.
And we have uh six loading docks and a drive-in door in the rear of the site. And the this site is going to share its driveway with lot five to the uh to the south uh which is was part of that minor
subdivision that we just looked at. Uh that's the other part of the lot and we've submitted a site plan for that but that hasn't gotten on the board's agenda yet. Um so that there's a storm water management uh basin in the front and the rear uh near the loading docks. We have
some porest pavement uh for both the the loading dock area itself and some of the parking spaces in the front to handle the storm water management and uh the environmental standards that we're required to uh to meet. Um and we have a landscaping plan obviously that goes
along with the with that uh building and site improvements. Um so that's the the thumbnail sketch. So, um I think just one quick question, couple quick questions up front. Sure. You're showing that there's a shared driveway with the property next door. The shared driveway
is on our client's property. Our client owns both of those properties. >> Yes. >> And if this building is approved and is developed before the adjacent building, is it the intention that the full driveway will be constructed as part of whichever building goes first? >> Oh, sure. Yes. That's that's absolutely
positively the the plan that the the full driveway and enough enough room on the whichever lot goes first will be uh paved and and improved so that the uh uh trucks can maneuver in and out and uh not only the driveway itself but uh into
the loading docks that are going to be associated with each each building. And before we go into the the details of this site plan, I wanted to share with you when we were before the this board with the warehouse buildings previously, our client's earlier buildings that are located adjacent. We discussed the water
system. Currently, there's a private water system with pumps that provide the fire the firefighting water supply. Our client as part of the development of 90 industrial court, which is under construction, has since early since middle of December been installing that
water line. And I spoke to the contractor earlier today. The contractor anticipates the water line will be 100% complete in approximately two weeks time. So this area that has been without the benefit of a water supply for firefighting purposes or for portable
purposes will have that water system that provides for all of the properties in the area including the ones that are owned by other property owners. Mr. Strong, if we could site plan elements, the site plan elements include grading. if you could briefly describe
what type of grading is necessary to accommodate the development as proposed. >> Well, the the lot itself is uh gently sloping from basically from the north to north west end, I guess, to the southeast end. And we're going to continue that
drainage pattern um in uh in the development of the site. Uh we've, as I said before, we've created a couple of storm water basins in the uh rear end of the site, which is where the the uh drainage water is uh tending to go in the first place under existing
conditions, and we're going to continue that is as part of the lot development. Um I might point out that as part of the industrial court uh construction and improve improvements there is to the south farther uh a regional detention
basin we'll call it uh that handles all of the storm water from the industrial court and was intended to take all of the undeveloped land from the industrial lots that we're we're talking about. And that that basin is in place. And uh when
we finished uh uh developing this site and putting in our storm water basins on the site, that will continue to go to that basin so that we're we have basically uh double protection, if you will, as far as storm water management and infiltration of the uh the storm
water uh into the ground as we're required to do because we're going to be doing it on site and then we're going to be doing again uh at the in the regional basin itself. And again, the regional basin is on lands that our client owns and is responsible for maintaining. >> That's right,
>> Peter. You That's an overview of the drainage system. I'm going to ask if you could place these statements on the record. It's necessary that this storm water system be compliant with the township's stormwater requirements, the D stormwater requirements. Would you
confirm that the design is conforing with both? It does conform with both and it's also been um reviewed and approved by the soil conservation district as well and it will be privately maintained uh in in the future in perpetuity. I know this board is very familiar but
just so the record is complete there is a private storm water system. There is no burden on the municipality. There is an operations and maintenance manual that will be reviewed by your engineer after it's reviewed by your engineer and approved. It'll be recorded at the county clerk's office and it imposes on
this property owner and all property owners in perpetuity the responsibility to maintain the system and also to do the reporting to the township and the DP on an annual basis. >> That's correct. >> Mr. Strong, if we can go from grading and drainage if we can go to the on-site
circulation and parking. Uh well, as I said before, we have separated the on-site circulation and parking into two two pieces. Um we have the uh residential I mean I'm sorry the car parking in the uh north end of the
site uh which is uh exclusive to that and is separated from to make it safer. It's separated from the truck traffic that is to the rear of the site so that we have uh no interference in between the two types of uses of vehicles uh
with the uh with the site plan development. The parking lot has 28 parking stalls. The applicant um indicated that two are EV charging stations. There is that fiction that was created by the state that says an EV charging station parking is two parking
spaces. With that fiction that 28 becomes 30 and we're technically compliant. It's a fiction. We all know that it is. Peter, could you find room to add two more parking spaces to that parking lot so we don't have to rely on the fiction? Absolutely. Uh they can
easily put two up on the end over here or we can add one on this end and one on that end. But yeah, two additional parking spaces is not a problem. >> The uh the description that I just shared with you is something I heard from Miss Newman once or twice before.
So we're we're very comfortable getting rid of reliance on that state authorized fiction. Um if you could just describe the loading area. I know that there is an atgrade and there's also um loading docks if you could just briefly describe.
>> Yeah, these are uh typical loading docks that are have a 4ft drop from the floor elevation of the building down to the uh surface of the uh loading dock and which is made of porc pavement. And then there's a um a uh drive-in door that's
going to be on the west east side west side um into the into the building itself. so that there's six actual truckloading doors and one drive-in ramp uh for the for the facility. When the when we convene in early
February, Mr. Scott Kennel, who is here and is our traffic expert, will add a little bit more to the description of how the vehicles maneuver on site. Um you know, Peter, if we could talk a little bit about landscaping and then
lighting. landscaping if I know if you could describe as you've landscaped it and then I know there was some important instruction that came to you from Sherry. >> Yeah, we have uh we have um provided a number of uh deciduous uh ornamental and
uh coniferous trees uh on the site in addition to the uh street trees that are required along the industrial court frontage. And we have put in uh smaller shrubbery and landscaping around the facade of the building and to hide some
of the loading docks uh in the back. Uh we had gotten a report from uh Sher Spiro and I spoke to her about it. Um, she wants some slightly modified uh locations and some different some changes in species on some of the uh
plantings which we have no problem doing and we will do that at resolution compliance. >> So I know that along the way we've gone to the environmental commission, the shade tree commission, the fire official, the shade tree commission asked would you quantify the number of
trees that are coming down to develop the site and I know that you were able to do so in advance. Yeah, we had a tree management plan as part of the set of plans and we're taking down 15 trees as part of this site development and we're we're planting 29 uh additional trees,
shade trees and or ornamental trees as part of this plan. The lighting plan that you've designed I we again board members we've all had heard this. so difficult to meet the standards of the ordinance and we have
been meeting an an a different standard the standard that comes from the I >> IE >> illumination engineering society so we we do meet those requirements uh as opposed to the ordinance requirements were which are almost impossible to meet
>> we'd ask that the board consider that and I'm not sure if it's a variance or a waiver but that if we be were willing to follow that IEES standard throughout the parking fields. Peter, trash enclosure location and
size, please. >> The trash enclosure is located right here at the end of the uh uh aisle from the industrial court and past the uh past the loading docks. Uh it is uh 20 by 10 uh can uh accommodate several uh
dumpsters in that location. Um, if the board feels that it it should be bigger, we could make it a little bit bigger. Or the normal way to uh handle uh these types of situations if the trash enclosures become overloaded is to
increase the the uh time period between uh picking and collecting the the s the tra uh trash and the recycling to twice a week instead of once a week or three times a week instead of once a week if that's what's required. So that's uh
that's what we would propose to do. Again, that's an item that we'd like to discuss with your professionals a little bit further. There is room to make it larger. John Aguar from the code enforcement has made it clear to us that he's very concerned about the adequacy
of these storage areas for trash. We believe the 10 by 20 is adequate. Um, but we'll we'll we have room to expand it. We'll spend a little more time with your staff and have a final decision. Peter, I know that the design of that is a masonry structure. I think we're going
to ask Mr. Adasi to confirm that that masonry treatment is consistent with the building and that's not you. Correct. >> Right. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Signage. Um you'll hear from the architect that there's the only signage that is on the facade of the building or
will be the numerals to identify it, the building's address and then minor tenants identification on the glass of the office doors. But a monument sign if you could identify. >> There is a monument sign uh out front here on the on the curve for industrial
court. So that's where the the signage would be and it's landscaped and >> and the location and the size are intended to be 100% consistent with the ordinance requirements. >> I believe so. Yes. >> The details Steve designed it.
>> The details of architecture and lighting are will be placed on the record by Mr. Rodosti. So, you've had the opportunity to review the staff reports. >> I have. >> And I know that we're going to spend a little more time with Miss Beam's report, but as far as Miss Bureau's
report and the report of September 11th that was issued by by Miss Newman's firm, are you comfortable advising the board that you can and you will be able to address the outstanding technical requirements? >> Yes, >> Mr. Chair, I thank you for the opportunity to do that six thing
presentation. That is as far as I intended to go with Mr. strong this evening. He is available to the board of the boards professionals if there's any questions before before we go to Mr. Reardski. >> Gentlemen, any questions? >> Number of offices in the warehouse.
Number of offices. >> It's in this is int. It's a small building. It's 40. It's intended to be a single tenant building. It could be a two tenant building. There's 6,400 square feet and it's on two floors. 3200 over 3200. It would the offices would
only be for tenants. They'd not be rented out as office space. >> Laura, Jen, Cherry, anything? >> No. Okay. Um Okay. >> Okay. Mr. Mr. Strong or Mr. Strong's partner will be with us when we return
in February. If I may, Mr. Chair, I'd like to go to Mr. Redsi and have a a succinct presentation. >> Mr. Adasi has worked on it so many buildings with Miss Beam that they I would say that they're they kind of have it down to a duet.
>> Hey Brian, you still have the control. >> We could have Mr. Rodosti sworn. >> Testimony. >> I do. >> Take your name from the record. Spell your last. >> Steven Rodosti. R A D O S T I Steven with a P.
>> I would submit that Mr. Mr. Rodsi has been before us >> 100%. >> And for the record, Mr. Rodasi is an architect. His credentials as an architect are accepted. Please share with us that your license is in good standing tonight. >> Yes, it is. >> Thank you, Mr. Rodasi. I'm going to ask
if you could indicate to the board the exhibits upon which you intend to rely. And then if you could take us through a succinct presentation of the design of the exterior of the building, I think a couple important things. Height of the building, materials that you're intending to use. And I'm going to ask that you confirm that both this monument
sign and the dumpster architecture treatments will match the building. >> You're sure you're certainly you're up. >> So I have uh two architectural drawings. Uh these were previously submitted. They're not new exhibits. They're sheets uh SK1 and SK2.
Um dated 82624. Proposed floor plan is SK1 and uh sheet SK2 are the proposed elevations. Which one would you like? Where should we begin? >> Uh SK2, the um proposed elevations.
>> We're looking good start, right? >> Nothing that replaces the relationship. Nothing. Good. No, you want that switch. Oh, yes. There you go. Okay. >> Thank you.
>> So, the proposed building will be a pre-cast or tiltup concrete office warehouse uh structure that'll be 45 ft tall. Um the building is composed of two different rectangles. Uh the larger portion would be warehouse and the
smaller portion would be office with a little bit of warehouse. Um the two the smaller portion is the office. Uh that that is two stories. Um and there's a total of 42,672 of uh square ft of warehouse space and
6,400 square foot of office space on the two floors and that's a total of 49,72 uh square ft. The building will be of non-combustible construction and will be uh fully fire sprinklered. So I designed the building
facads to be visually interesting. Uh the focal point is the office area at the center of the northeast elevation. Uh this main building facade is totally symmetrical. The office area has a series of glass storefronts with a canal levered metal roof that accentuate the
front entrance. Uh near this entry area is a series of large windows and include metal sun shades that help reduce solar heat gain into the offices. The concrete sandwich panel walls are painted three varying shades of gray with horizontal
and vertical patterns to visually break up the building's mass. Uh in addition, I added cutouts at the parapit to break up the roof line and I added decorative pilasters and I set the doors uh back to break up the facades. Uh these
pileasters and cutouts add a vertical element to the mostly horizontal uh facades. Uh, at the upper corner of the northeast elevation, I have 30-inch high non-illuminated address numerals. Uh, other than the address numerals, there will not be a
building mounted sign. However, the occupants may identify themselves with small lettering on the glass portion of the entry doors. I I also designed a monument sign uh that is constructed of the same materials and is the same colors as the building. Uh this sign
would be internally illuminated and the sign box for that is 2'8 high by 6'8 wide and the entire sign structure including the base is 5t tall and 12 ft long. That's 60 square ft. However, the
portion above the 24in high base is a total of 36 square ft. Uh all of the HVAC units uh will be located either inside the building or on the roof, but any of those on the roof would be over
the office area which would have a lower uh a lower roof line. So it' be hidden completely uh behind that parapit. So nothing would be above that 40 foot 45t tall uh building walls. Uh the trash enclosure will be designed to match the
building's colors and materials. Um, so we're gonna have the same the same uh gray colors of concrete um with a a metal cap to match to match the canopies. >> Steve, the HVAC for the office you just
described very completely. There is no HVAC for the warehouse. Could you put that on the record? >> Uh well, the the warehouse would have heating and ventilation, but it wouldn't have any air conditioning. So the heating would be located, they'd be typically suspended from the structure
inside the space. So uh they wouldn't be on the exterior of the building. Uh there would be uh internal ventilation, but there would be no uh no devices outside of the building. >> And just to avoid some confusion,
similar to the application before us, 45 ft is 45 ft. There's nothing above 45 ft on your building. >> Correct. Thank you. and the the building mostly meets the requirements of section uh 188-228
general non-residential architectural design standards. >> Mr. Chair, if you'd like, as always, Mr. Adosti designed a greatl looking building and my office takes no exception to the architecture as proposed.
>> I'll be honest, I think you missed your calling. Um, it sounds like I'm listening to like a like a narration of love it or LIST IT ON TELEVISION. >> You're good. Um, it was a really good summation. >> Is that a first for you? >> That is a first.
>> But I mean, Mr. Adasi's office has worked with us here. I mean, he's been before us multiple times. He knows what you guys are looking for. So, you know, we don't typically have to ask for a lot of revisions. I think this is a very nice looking building. It's in keeping with our intentional design guidelines
and I take no exception to the what you've proposed. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, I agree. Um any any questions, gentlemen? >> Mr. Chair, board members, that concludes the direct presentation of the applicant for this evening. We will return. I I
don't Do we need Mr. Adosti when we return? >> I don't think so. >> We're okay. There'll be a representative for Mr. Strong office and we'll have a rep and we'll have a traffic expert to finish in February. >> I don't I don't unless they do. >> I don't. >> Okay. >> All right. Thank you.
>> Would it be wise to open to the public? >> Yeah. I don't think there's Well, there's one member of the public, but I know why she's here. Um, any question? >> No. Okay. >> Okay. So, Mr.
is effectively released from >> Yes. Thank you very much. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Then I would defer to you if there's any examination or questions of either of the witnesses. If not, we would ask that the record reflect that we're coming
back on February 5th and in the interim we'll meet with your staff to see if we can finish the the details. >> Yeah, I believe that is the that's case. How are we looking the fifth? Eileen, >> one second. The fifth has two applications, both of
which have started already and are coming back. So, this would be the third one coming back. >> Who Who are they? Just out of >> uh the Cody Milch one with the >> drive or the street on that curve on Rampville Road >> and the Newton's Corner Road one. >> Okay, that could be okay.
>> And this anything, but I think that we'll be succinct. >> I I would recommend putting Ken first. >> I would. Yeah, if we could do that and then get Ken out of here. All right. Thank you very much. >> Could we carry on the record?
>> Yeah, >> Mr. Andy, could we put the uh that they'll be carried on the record to the >> 5th be without further notice >> to February 5th >> February >> 2026. >> Yeah.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you very much. Happy and healthy new year to all of us. Same to you. >> See you in a couple weeks. >> See you in a couple. >> Thank you. >> Um Eileen, what are we looking at next week? Do we have an agenda?
>> Yes, I sent it out just before the meeting. >> Okay. And >> there is a minor subdivision and a site plan application on >> Okay. Um Jennifer, anything for master plan? Um, I know that Councilman Rebel and I
had a conversation, uh, I don't know if it was this week, last week. I've kind of lost track of it. Um, but I think that there are definitely some things that the governing body wants us to take a look at in terms of perhaps doing a
re-exam this coming year. So, I would um submit that we'll start having those subcommittee meetings and going over the various items and then I'll be in a better position to report back as to the direction that we're heading. >> Perfect. Um
Andy, I don't think there's any reason to go into executive session. >> Not that I know of. >> All right. >> Not that I know of either. All right. I will take a motion. >> Okay. Yeah. I guess I guess I don't think it's an executive
session matter about victory. Is that an executive? It is. >> So I guess we do have to go into executive session. >> Okay. >> Um I I would uh can I get a mo a motion to go to executive session? >> I'll make a motion.
>> Do I have a second? >> Second. >> All right. Executive session. Let's go in real quick. >> I have to read it on the record again. Hold on. >> Oh, yep. Yep. Sorry. I gotta find it first. >> One minute. Sorry. Thought we were done
with that. >> Where did I put it? >> I mean, I definitely need you guys, but >> Executive session resolution. Whereas title 10, chapter 4, section 13 of the New Jersey Revised Statutes requires that the public shall not be excluded
from any meetings of a public body unless a resolution authorizing such exclusion is adopted at a public meeting. And whereas the planning board of the township of Howell has determined that such a closed meeting is required to discuss certain matters which are
exempted from consideration with the public in attendance under New Jersey revised statutes 10 col4-12 namely litigation. Now therefore be it resolved by the planning board of the township of Howell that the public shall be excluded from the next portion of
this meeting and that the planning board will not reconvene in public session thereafter. Be it further resolved that minutes will be kept of the meeting in closed session and the time and circumstances under which the discussion conducted in closed session can be disclosed to the public cannot be
determined at this time. >> And the meeting is adjourned at 9:34.