[Music] Heat. Heat.
[Music] Good evening. Eileen, could you read the opening statement, please? Township of How Zoning Board of Adjustment, Monday,
May 12th, 2025. I hereby declare this meeting of the Howell Township Zoning 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 2nd, 2025, a copy of
said notice was emailed to the Asbury Park Press in the Star Ledger. Second, on January 2nd, 2025, a copy of said notice was handd delivered to the clerk of the township of Howell. Third, on January 2nd, 2025, said notice was posted in the office of the zoning
board and on the bulletin board in the Howell Township Municipal Building 4567, Route 9, Howell Township, New Jersey. In accordance with the fire prevention code and for your safety, please be advised that this facility is designed with two emergency exits at the front and rear of
the meeting room. Furthermore, smoking is not permitted in the municipal building. Please take note that this meeting is being videotaped for possible future broadcast on Howell Township TV77. I also just wanted to make a note that the bathrooms down here at this end
of the municipal building are closed. Uh there are bathrooms down here at this end for everybody. Thank you. I'll attest to that question. Okay. At this time, could we have a roll call, please?
Mr. Varillo here. Mr. Cancer here. Mr. Hughes here. Mr. O'Donnell here. Mr. Rosco is absolutely he will be he's on his way late. Okay. Mr. Ryan present. Miss Scottson here.
Mr. Kabarakus here. And chairman Martins here. You have a quorum. Thank you. Could everybody please write rise for the pledge of allegiance? It's a great number. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay. Andy, could you swear in our professionals? You swear the testimony you give will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but
the truth. I do. You state your name for the record. Charles Kliff Jennifer Beam Barry Spiro professionals chairman okay thank you Andy uh the first order of business approval of minutes from regular meeting April 28th 2025 eligible
voters Burillo Cabaracus O'Donnell and Ryan I have a motion make a motion to approve second you can't you cannot you can't second who is the second Tom
Roll call. Mr. Bell? Yes. Mr. O'Donnell? Yes. Mr. Ryan? Yes. And Mr. Kabarak? Yes. Minutes approved. Okay. Correspondence. I have no correspondence tonight. Okay. Resolutions. Case number
BA1915A. Squon Fire Company number one. Resolution granting use variance and minor site plan. Eligible voters Villo Hughes, Odano, Orasco, Ryan, Scottson, and Merrens. Do I have a motion? Motion
to approve. I'll second it. Second. Roll call. Mr. Burillo? Yes. Mr. Hughes? Yes. Mr. O'Donnell? Yes. Mr. Ryan? Yes. Miss Scottson? Yes. And Chairman Merren? Yes. Resolution approved.
Okay. We have three cases tonight. We are going to move case uh the C which is case number BA24-13 first. So if the attorney and anybody coming up for that application can come up now.
[Applause] Good evening. Good evening, Mr. Chairman and board members. My name is Matthew series from Carell Bird here on behalf of the applicant Ed Wiseman. The applicant's here seeking variance approval to construct an
approximately 1,995 ft twostory single family dwelling with a covered front porch deck. South system patio driveway that'll provide access to the
easter frontage, a brown road, a pool and other associated site improvements on property located at 42 Brown Road designated as block 72 lot 10 on the township of tax
map. The property is located in the AR-2 agricultural rural estate zone consists of approximately 48 acres and is a lawfully existing other
size lot of record. The applicant is going to seek the following variances and design waiverss. lot area the permitted lot area of 048 approximately 048 acres where two acres
is required no change is provoke proposed that's what's existing well with approximately 177.2 2 feet where 200 ft is required and no changes proposed. Lot
depth approximately 118 ft where 200 ft is required. No changes proposed. Front yard setback that requires 50 ft where setback of four approximately
48.4t is proposed. A rear yard setback that requires 50 feet where approximately 29.3 feet is proposed lot coverage the to permit a coverage I'm
sorry a lot coverage of 23.6% where 15% is permitted. Then there are additionally two design waiverss for not providing curbing along Brown Road and for not providing sidewalks along
Brown Road. I will point out in during one of the review letters they requested that we send out buy letters. I did. There are two majority glad owners. One responded that they had
no desire in buying or selling their land. The second majority is actually the municipality which did not respond. So I'll take that as they don't. That being said, I'd like to call our
engineer who do you want to swear in or Hold on. Before we do that, um I've been away five weeks. I got a little rusty. I forgot to read this application in on record. So, let me do that and then
Okay, I apologize for that. This is case number BA24-13. Edward Weisman, construction of a single family dwelling with septic on undersized lot. Applicant of Edward Weisman as applicant and owner seeking a
bulk variance approval to construct a FFD with associated site improvements on an undersized lot in the AR 2 zone on block 72 lot 10 42 Brown
Road. Expiration is July 24th 2025. We're all good. So we'll get in your professional sworn in. Mr. Chair, there's one other variance that you need, which is septic on an undersized lot. That's a variance. Our ordinance
requires that septics be on 1 acre lots and you are not on an acre lot. That is a variance. Okay. So, noted. Okay. Can I just ask the council if you submitted the buy sell letters to Eileen? I did.
Okay. Uh I I I have a copy if you need them. Well, you could keep going, but before you leave, if you Yeah, they were submitted last week via email. Okay, great. Do you swear the testimony you give will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. So, help you God. I do.
Please state your name for the record. Spell your last. Sure. My name is Tim Lori. L U R I E. I am the director of engineering at New Lines. Sit because the mic is Oh, sorry. We can't hear you. Okay. I'm the director of engineering at New Lines Engineering. I am a licensed
professional engineer and professional planner in the state of New Jersey. I've appeared through numerous boards. I was here at the planning board on Thursday throughout the state of New Jersey doing subdivisions, site plans, and single. We accept your
qualifications. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Tim. Um, if you wouldn't mind, could you take the board through what's being proposed and then go through the variances and design? Is it possible to put up the um site plan on
the screen? You know what exhibit that is? That's just the architectural. You keep scrolling through. You should have our plants. Yep. I'll give you this. I brought I brought an extra cotton for should be here. Just
give it a minute. I don't think it's there playing. That's it. Yeah, that's the correct one. You just want to zoom in a little bit so we can all see. And has that been marked for the record or Yeah. Oh, it's a var that's a
variance plan. This is our variance plan which has the last revision date of 5225. And this this site looks should we mark this as a one? Well, there are pre-marked exhibits already from what
was submitted. This one is marked as A3. A3. Yes. This site looks familiar. This this property was approved in 2016. Almost the same exact configuration except there was a six 12
by 16 shop area that was located to the south of the pool. And that we have It's delayed. In this set of plans, we have eliminated that shop area from the previous approved plans back from the resolution in 2016. The
property is saying is a is existing 4 acre lot where the it's known as lot 10 block 72. It's located on the corner of Brown Road. We are in the AR2 zone. We have a two we have two acre which is a
twoacre zone. The site currently exists, it used to have back in 2016 had an existing structure which was removed. Now the site is just half wooded along the wetlands area that's to the west and some pasture high grass that's located
on the eastern side of Brown Road. The our project that we're proposing is a five- bedroomedroom house with five parking spots. As you can see, we have a onecar garage and we have four parking spots along the front. We're also
proposing a pool to the side of the house. And then we have the septic system which is located on the eastern the east southeastern side of Brown Road. We currently have wetlands that run along the western side of the
property which we had which we received an LOI and also a transition averaging permit to allow the the compensation and the reduction of the buffer for how the house sits on the [Applause]
lot. We are the house will have will be serviced by a well which is located on the northern portion of Brown Road and then we have the septic system which I previously discussed which is on the southern side of of southeastern side of
Brown Road. We currently the house is going to be two and a half stories. We're going to have a basement in there which is unfinished which we're going to set at two feet above the seasonal high water table. We are providing a 10- foot easement along the eastern edge of Brown
Road. And I I have a you need to need me to clarify anything. I do have a pointer which we have an east about 10 foot wide easement along Brown Road because Brown Road itself is along the side of that
property line. We're also proposing uh sight triangle easement to allow proper sight distance as you come around the corner of Brown Brown Avenue. We have HVAC units and a
generator for the septic system that's located on the side of the house in between the house and the pool. We have previously talked about we have areas of buffer reduction and buffer compensation for for the con
construction of this house. This house sits in pretty much the exact location that was previously approved back in 2016 by the resolution. The previously talked about the lot area proposed is 48 acres requires 2 acres.
The width of the lot is 200 ft required. We have 177.2 feet for the lot width. The lot depth is 200 ft and we have 118 ft for this lot for the lot depth. The house itself, the front of the house
sets back for on the north side of Brown Avenue is required is 50 ft. We're providing 50 ft. on the east side of Brown Avenue. This frontage is also 50 ft and we're providing 48.4T which is uh requesting a variance.
In addition, we have the rear yard area is 50 ft. We're requesting a variance of 29.3 ft from the rear setback. In addition, for the rear yard for septics is 40T versus 50T. So, it's an extra 10
ft in our favor, but we're still requesting a variance for that. We have a rear yard deck which is has a requirement of 15 ft and we're setting that at 19.3 ft. The building coverage for this zone is 12% is allowed. We have
9.54%. So, we don't have it's not a variance condition. The impervious coverage for this zone is 15% and we have um our imperous coverage is 22.7%. So we're requesting a variance for the impervious coverage. If you take
out the roadway that's along that's on our property which we counted in that impervious coverage, it would drop down to 18.6%. The building height is 35 ft and our building structure is going to be less than 35 ft. previously stated,
we're we're asking for waiverss for not providing curbing along Brown Avenue and also for sidewalks along Brown Avenue. And if the board requires sidewalks, we would gladly pay into the sidewalk fund.
Make sure I follow up with everything. Mr. Chair, if I could just jump in and kind of uh get some clarity. So, as the applicants engineer said, there was a 2016 approval for this for a development of a single family dwelling on undersized lot. Um, at that time, the board granted variances for a lot of the
existing non-conformities due to the configuration of the lot. You've heard them put testimony on the record that they issued buyell letters. The property to the south is owned by the township of how the property of the west is owned is a farm property that's owned by some individual property owner. they indicated there's no ability or desire to buy or sell property from that from
that property owner. As far as the uh current development, it's largely the same footprint uh same schematic that was presented and approved by the board in 2016. They actually eliminated a additional accessory structure, a shop building that was approved as part of the last application. Um they've
eliminated that. So that reduces some of the impervious in the building coverage. Um they do need the relief because it's a septic system. tomorrow requires uh if you're not serviced by public sewer, you need a minimum lot area of 40,000 square ft. They're just under a half an acre. That was the same relief that was
granted by the board back in 2016. Um Mr. Luri talked about the wetlands and they said they had an LOI and the uh TAW permit. Is that current or are you relying on the one from the prior approval because those only have a time for current? I can provide you a copy
with the expireds in in 29. Okay. So, so you have one that's current valid for five years, you know, provide that as part of resolution compliance. Should the board act favorably? Yes. Okay. All right. Um, the lot is a little unique. Um, anyone that's driven on Brown Road, it kind of does like a 90 degree hairpin
turn uh from Kent Road down to uh Forb Road. It's also unique in the case that when the when this got approval back in 2016, the applicant had to actually grant or at the time proposed to grant an easement to the township because part of Brown Road is actually on their property. Uh so that's why they're
proposing an easement and not rightaway dedication. Uh it doesn't impact the lot area. It also doesn't impact the setback for the sepsis system. Was that formally recorded or is that still was that ever like perfected as part of the 2016 approval or is that still just being proposed at this time? I was actually
the attorney who did that one back then and I don't believe it would ever change by because they never perfected their so if the board were to act favorably we actually want to see a meets and bound description Description for both Andy and I's review and approval. Um as far
as um the sight triangle we had a comment I think they showed it from the center line of the road though it should be from the center line of the lane so it's just going to come into the lot probably a little bit more. You have no issue with doing that as compliance. Okay. Um the septic system is it going to be
traditional or you do have any like enhanced dosing to reduce separation of seasonal water table? Right. Right now we're anticipating traditional. Okay. Did you do test pits for like seasonal high water table? We we did a test pit that's right along the side of the septic system right that's shown on the
plan. So are you anticipating any mounding? Obviously, you haven't we we are doing an end dosing tank to get it over to that area. Yeah. But is the system going to be mounted because we don't really like that. So, we're going to look for an engineering alternative to just
putting a big hump in the front of the property. We don't really like that. Right now, we're showing the grades approximately matching the existing grade so it won't be mounted 2 feet above. So, what what I would say is I think they I don't think they've made application to Mammoth County Board of
Health yet to get approval, but but that would be contingent on Yeah. So in the event though that they go and they go through that process and the septic system has to be raised, you know, uh we traditionally don't approve septic mounted septic systems in the front yard. So I would say they'd have to come back to the board uh to to get a
reapproval for that. There's alternate means you could do additional dosing to reduce the zona uh separation of seasonal water tables. So that's also something that they can they can look at as part of their their uh board of health approval. Um, as far as the structure itself, so
um, you said there's five bedrooms, so we counted four and there was a bonus room with a closet. I counted that bonus room with the closet as a bedroom. I would request that closet be removed and it be a fourbedroom house. You're over on your coverage, right? So, you're over on your coverage, which is a
direct result in being requiring five parking spaces. And I'm also going to suggest that there be some kind of deep restriction on the basement, that there be no dwelling habitable space in the basement, that it be used for storage or whatever, but no bedrooms.
Okay. Just I mean, cuz the thing is is if you were here as of right, we would have no you would get a permit and you'd build it. But the the lot coverage is 15% in the zone and you're at 23% which is predicated by the fact that you want
this big house. So that might agree with this. Perfect. So the closet in that bedroom will come out and it will be identified as a four bedroomedroom house. No bedrooms in the basement. Mhm. Sure. Uh applicant agreeable to that? Yes sir. Okay.
And then obviously uh you're going to have to get free soils as a condition approval. Any openings into the Brown Road are going to require a road opening permit. Um, obviously I have comments in here about separation to so you're saying there's a is it a full basement the whole No, it's not a whole where the
garage is so that we're able to maintain the garage is a slab so we're able to have the separation distance from the septic system. Okay. So you're maintaining like 25 foot from the septic to the slab on grade and then it's basement thereafter. Okay. Uh obviously they're going to have to get board of
health approval for all that. Um, see if I had one more comment in my letter. Just make sure I'm not missing something. Uh, the only comment I had is the uniqueness of the lot with the road being encroaching onto their property and the septic system and the proximity
to the road. Um, you know, they are asking for a waiver of curb and sidewalk along the property frontage. Um, I with the proximity of that septic system to the township's roadway, I think it would be prudent to put some kind of curbing along at least part of the frontage so that way cars aren't driving off the
edge of road onto a septic field. Absolutely. I get a point, but as far as I know, there's no curb or sidewalk anywhere. We got to start somewhere. That's our mantra here in How we're starting now. So, he's asking for curb, not sidewalk. I think there's a
legitimate reason to put it. Yeah. And I mean, would you go from the driveway back to the to the eastern edge of the property? Yeah. I mean, I think that's a satisfactory compromise. I mean, it's really for the applicant's benefit, like if they want someone riding off the edge of the road on top of their sectic system and, you know, potentially
damaging it. I I wouldn't want that if I live there. So, so that's why where are we are we from the driveway to the southern property? I don't think we're talking about curving the whole thing. I think it's just where the septic system is. I think that's a reasonable compromise. No, I'm sorry.
Just so I'm clear. Curb. Yes. Sidewalk. Curb. Oh, curb. Okay. We're compromising with the curb, but the town we are not, we cannot wave the fee. That would have to be through the council. Understood. Yeah.
That's all I have. Mr. Chair, Jennifer, the only thing is is that I know that there's a number of variances that are associated with this and I don't really take exception, but you got to put some kind of testimony on the record. I will I agree. Mhm.
Sure. We we have the C1 variances and then it's based on which we previously discussed the unique site characteristics of the of the lot also with the being a corner lot and having the wetlands in the buffer to the rear
of the lot. The site design was m was designed to minimize the impacts to the wetlands and also set set the house in the center of the property. We're providing dry wells to mitigate the runoff conditions and also helps on the
increased impervious area to decrease the decrease the runoff. We're in addition we're also the site the zone is residential. for providing a residential structure and a residential zone and it fits into
the character of the neighborhood. There there are undersized lots throughout this this neighborhood area. the we feel that the positive criteria outweighs the negative and it will promote the intent of the zoning plan and ordinance in
accordance with 4055-d2 A and also promote the purpose to promote the purposes of zoning in accordance with with C also provide adequate light air and open space by providing the house right in the center of the lot and allowing the area around
the lot to be But do you foresee any negative impacts in the surrounding area? No, I don't. Thank you. So, I'm just going to do a little recap of that because um so I would state that because the applicant has provided or will provide
the buy sell letters that the lot area the frontage the depth and the width are a hardship because they sought to ex uh increase the area of the lot and one person said no and the other did not respond. So therefore, those variances
qualify under the C1 hardship requirement, which they would not be able to take credit for if the buyell letters were not sent out, but they were. So then you get into front yard, rear yard coverage. Those are not C1 variances. Those are being created with
respect to the development. And um I would suggest that the fact that the lot is less than half of what's required in the zone, those setback requirements envision a 2acre zone where a 2acre lot whereas we're at less than a
half an acre. So therefore, if you were to impose 50 ft in the front, 50 ft in the rear, it would create a very dimminimous building envelope as well as the fact that there are environmentally cons uh sensitive areas on the lot. Um,
with respect to the coverage, they've already committed to uh restricting the property to four bedrooms, no development in the basement. And even though they're over on their coverage, if you were to take 23% of the halfacre
or less than halfacre lot, you are less than 15% of a 2acre lot in terms of coverage. So they're not exceeding the square footage, they're just exceeding the percentage given the fact that the area of the lot is significantly lower than what we envisioned when the
standards were established. That being said, I don't disagree that there is no negative impact. It's zone single family. It is a single family home, so there's not going to be any negative impact. There were some mitigation measures associated with uh dry wells for roof runoff, etc. that can mitigate
any kind of negative impact associated with stormwater management. do not ex anticipate any negative impact associated with traffic. So I don't disagree that there is no substantial negative impact associated with the application and so therefore I would
submit to the board that I take no exception to the relief that's being requested. I think that's a pretty good summation. Yes. Yes. Anyway, uh just put on record um Mr. Rosco is here but he will be ineligible to vote on this application
but I just want to make it officially so um at this time I guess if there's any comments from the board before we go to public nothing further from the professionals okay I'd like to entertain a motion to
go to public motion second by an Marie all in favor I Okay, Eileen, we're going to go to public. The meeting will now be open to the public. Uh, if you'd like to comment, please come up and state your name and
your address. Motion to close the public. Second. Second by Mr. Okonnell. All in favor? Yes. I Okay, we are closed to public. if you'd like to make a summation. No, I think you guys all heard the
testimony by your own experts and ours. We've done the best we could to comply considering we are less than half of what's required and couldn't buy more or sell it. So, I leave it to the board's judgment.
Okay. Thank you. Okay. Unless there's anything else, I'd like to entertain a motion for this application. Mr. Chair, I'd like to uh make a motion to approve this application. I do want
to emphasize though the the septic and mounding and and hopefully that gets straightened out. But uh if it does have to be mounded, then obviously coming back to us. That being said, I make a motion to approve. They say on the record, do I have a second? I'll second
that. Second by Mr. Canour and Mr. Chairman the fourbedroom that will be in the resolution. It'll be in the resolution and it'll be a deed restriction along with the no habitability. Yes, absolutely. Yeah, it's fine. Okay, Eileen, could we have a
roll call, please? Mr. Burillo? Yes. Mr. Caner? Yes. Mr. Hughes? Yes. Mr. O'Donnell? Yes. Mr. Ryan? Yes. Miss Scottson? Yes. And Chairman Merren? based on all the findings of facts but on the record I will approve it as well.
Thank you. Thank you Mr. [Applause] Thank you. Okay. Okay. So now we'll get back to the regular schedule here. Um we will be going first
to case A. Case number BA22-15A ZS Mills 1 LLC amended preliminary and final major site plan with both variants description application of ZS
Mill1 LLC as applicants and owners seeking amended preliminary and final major site plan with both variance approval to remove previously approved but not yet constructed retail buildings. and to modify the existing movie theater
on site to a sto two twostory professional medical office space as well as construct a retail building identified as B2 and to add a drive through to the proposed building one on the proposed site plans along with
associated site improvements on premises known as block 25 lots 54.03 and 54.06-46 06-4654.10 Route 9 North and Lanes Mill Road. Expiration is June 25th, 2025.
Good evening. Good evening. How are you? Good, thanks. Um my name is John Sardo from the law firm Giardino Hower and Cela. I'm the attorney for the applicant uh ZS Mill1 LLC. Um, you've given a nice introduction and
I'll try to not reiterate too much of that. Um, but this this is the 52 acre property improved with the shopping center known as Green Leaf at Howell. Um, it is on Route 9 North and Lansill Road. We're seeking amended preliminary
final site plan. We also have C variances and design waiver relief. Um, and in basic terms, we're seeking to uh renovate the existing but vacant movie theater, which is
56,650 ft. Um, that's identified as building A on our plans, and we're going to convert that to a proposed two-story office building uh with no expansion of footprint. It's just really a internal reconfiguration, which gets you the change in square footage there. Um,
we're also going to be proposing to construct a one-story building for retail use shown as B2 on our plans. Um, this replaces buildings previously identified as B2, B3, and B4 uh on on prior applications and approvals. Uh,
and I will address you did note in your um explanation of what we're here for. Building I um with the proposed drive-thru, we have amended our plans to withdraw the driveth through component of that. So building I um was still on
the plans 2400 square ft and that was prior approval with no changes in that area. Okay. Um we have two new monument signs proposed for building A and for a group of buildings D1, D23, and D3. There's one monument sign there. Um,
and as I mentioned, there's several bulk C variances and some design waiverss which I we can get into and have the professionals describe them and go through them. Um, so um, so who's going how many you going
to have testifying? I have uh our civil engineer, architect, traffic, and planner. So I have Okay. We'll all we'll swear them all in right now and then when they come up we can go through their credentials. You swear the testimony I give will be
the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth to help you God. Yeah, I do. Please state your name from the record going my left to right. Uh Jason Bernanko. Uh Bur Ny Ko. I'm a licensed professional engineer.
uh employed by uh New Lines uh land consultants. I served as the project manager uh on this project. I've testified before before you get into your credential. Yeah, we're just going to get the other people sworn in, but thanks. No problem. Sorry about that. No
worries. Joseph Davidson, D- Avid Dso Nissy Architecture. Okay. Kafone Consulting Group. Scott Kennel keen n with McDonald and array associates the profess right that's everyone right the professionals are
sworn in this okay sounds good and we got half your uh credentials on the record so if you want to just finish up we'll be ready to go uh yes J again Berno Bur ne ko licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey um I'm employed by New Lines Land
Consultants in Lakewood I served as the project engineer for this application I've testified for uh several townships throughout the state including uh this uh Howell Township zoning board and I've been here for previous Okay. And your license is currently active. Yes,
correct. Okay. We accept your credentials. So, thank you. Um before we get started, do you want to pull anything up? Uh uh yeah, we can start with um exhibit
A23 as as we had submitted. Eileen, you're Are you uh It's John tonight. John. Okay. This is the previously approved site plan, correct? Correct. Yes. So, can you just describe a little bit what's on there before you start
discussing it? Right. So, this this rendering um represents the previously approved uh plans for the Green Leaf at Howell Shopping Center. Uh I think everyone knows where this is. It's located along Lanesmill Road and Route 9
North. Um, it's not entirely developed yet. Uh, mo several of the buildings are constructed already. Some of them have, uh, been previously approved, but not constructed yet. The area of our
amendments that we're proposing is uh, centered around this uh, highlighted rendered area on the plans. Um, this represents this is the existing movie theater building. Uh, and these are three previously approved but not
constructed retail spaces. And then further down, just to orientate everyone, this is the Climb Zone uh, Children's Recreation Building and the BJ's Wholesale Club. Um, the property is located in the
HD. Can I stop you just? Yeah, sure. Uh, I have handouts if you want any of these things that we're going through, but if the computer's fine, I'm happy to proceed that way. Does any board member wish to Yeah, I'm good. Thanks for asking. No
problem. So, as I was saying, the site is located in the HD1S zone, the highway development one south zone. Um we are proposing to uh renovate the and convert the existing
movie theater building into a twostory uh office building. Uh that will maintain the same the same building footprint, the same building height. Um it's most mainly going to be uh renovations uh of the interior of the
existing building and different facade changes. Um, previously approved retail spaces B4, B3, and B2 will be replaced by one retail building, uh, which we're calling
B2. Um, and that's going to total 31,200 square ft. The I didn't say this, but the theater was 56,650 ft. So now applying a second story to that, the office would uh contain
113,300 square ft of office space. Jason, before you go further, I just want to clarify for the board, too, cuz we have a couple new members, but a good amount of them were here the last time you guys were for the board. So, uh, last time you guys were here, you got an approval to add office space, like
portion just general office and then also medical office on the site. uh in between the existing escapes theater and the climb zone there was I think it was twotory office space that was proposed there and then building D. So if you're looking at this plan it's a lower lefthand corner closest to the
Starbucks. Um those are three retail spaces. They also got approval to put I think it was three stories right of of office and medical space there. So with this application, you're reverting basically back to approvals before that and you're and you're waving any any approvals for for the office space that
you got the last time around. Correct. That's correct. That's correct. All right. I just wanted to give the board that clarity. So we're not we're not adding another twotory office on top of the office and medical that we already were approved as part of the last application. Just to remind us, Charlie, what what was the last time? Was there
anything with the escape theater last time? No, that was I think that's been vacant for a while. Yeah, but we had no that wasn't part of that, right? Correct. There was no change. No, thank you. Was it else? D1's not in play with this, but it's
you're not changing the logistics of D1. So, it's going to be as previously approved, which is presented on the plan. So, the March 23 approval for medical is no longer standing. That's correct. Thank you.
Correct. Um, if I could request to pull up um, exhibit A22. And just to follow up on that point, you'll see, it's probably a little hard to see, but in the right hand side of this plans, it gives all the square footages of the buildings as they're
proposed, right? Yeah. Um, no, it's just confusing because I know we approved it as I know medical and everything being presented showed retail. Yeah. So, thank you. So this exhibit um it's a very similar exhibit. Uh again everything is
previously approved except for the colored portion uh which represents the amendments that are part of this application. Um the uh again we noted that there's no increase uh in the uh in
the building footprint of the uh proposed office building. Um there will be one facade sign that's proposed on this office building and this will be something that the architect uh gets into a little bit further but we are
proposing one facade sign and the retail building uh B2 as we currently show it now on architectural plans we're showing six tenant spaces therefore we are uh proposing six facade signs uh at this
time they don't have any tenant spaces leased out yet or anything. Uh but we will be seeking one facade sign per each tenant of the building. Um so they're going to be retail in those six spaces. Correct. Yes.
Um we are proposing two uh groundmounted monument signs. One of them will be uh right in front of uh building A right here, which will be the proposed office building. uh a small 3-ft high uh sign
mounted on a a two-ft base which is in um in accordance with ordinance requirements and that's going to uh that'll just be basically within the interior of the site. It's not proposed on any of the any of the roadways here.
It's just internal just to uh provide some um some idea for you know to help out with uh traffic circulation through the site and to identify the building. We are also proposing uh one sign over here which was not part of the original
application but the applicant has is seeking to uh construct another similar ground mounted sign uh right in this area here to identify this uh building D which is previously approved. And again that that will not be uh we're not
adding any looking to add any ground mounted signs to the uh frontages of the site. These are more internally located um just to uh you know to aid in tenant identification of these buildings. Well, while we're on that point, we need
variance relief, right, for the addition of the two monument signs because we have existing monument signs, right? I believe because we already have monument signs uh along Lanes Mill Road and along Route 9. Uh I do believe that this
necessitates a variance. Well, the requirement require it says that the signs need to be visible from the street. So, when you're putting internal monument signs that are not visible from the street, that needs relief anyway. Okay. We will be seeking that. I would also
just want to put on the record that simply putting the sign up is one thing, but you're going to have to landscape around the base of it. Correct. And that was not shown on your plans. So, that's something that you guys are going to need to revise your plans to provide landscaping around the base of those signs. Yes, that that was I think the
spiro's comment letter and we're gonna comply with the comments. Thank you. Yes. Um lastly, you know, that that basically identifies the uh the building um amendments that we're making. We're also adding some ancillary uh you know, we're
proposing a small parking area in between the two proposed buildings. Um we've reconfigured some of the existing parking spaces. Uh we'll be restriping those to ADA spaces with additional crosswalks. Um we
are relocating. There's an existing handicap uh ADA curb ramp that is located before the existing stop bar that's over here. Uh per a comment in Mr. Kunliff's uh review letter, he's
asked us to relocate that curb ramp so that it's beyond the stop bar. Um again that's an existing condition that that we will be uh uh correcting. Um other than that we are providing uh masonry
trash enclosure behind the building. Um light lighting. We're proposing one uh proposed light pole uh just to light up this um this small parking area in here. I'll talk more about the lighting in a second. Um we're proposing uh
landscaping uh storm water and utility connections to existing uh facilities and just the typical uh site improvements uh that are ancillary to the building. Um, as far as a statement of operations and site circulation,
uh, building A, which is the office building, we are proposing hours of operation, uh, Monday through Friday, 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Uh, with Saturday hours from 6:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and Sunday hours 6:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. and
building B2, which is the proposed retail building, uh we're proposing hours of operation of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. uh 7 days a week. And these hours of operations had been previously discussed and accepted um during
previous uh iterations before the board uh to previous amendments that we had. Could you just back up real quick? Between the buildings, you said there's some going to be some designated parking areas. Who are they for? Are they going to be restricted parking or is that uh
they won't be necessarily restricted parking. We we had some space available to uh provide a couple additional parking spaces that are in direct proximity to the buildings. So, we decided to utilize that space and provide additional parking. Okay. Did
you have anything to add to that or No, this is kind of weird, but um the only other thing I didn't hear was are you going to have the protecting poles in front of the building so the cars can't drive into the buildings? Both are the question. What are the what
are the PSards? If the parking spaces head on to the building, whether there's a sidewalk or not, we require ballards or some other kind of safety device. If they're not directly parking up against the building, that's not a requirement.
Okay. Yeah. I mean, we have with the the office building, building A, I mean, the parking spaces are out of the parking field, but they need so that zone B2, the parking area in between the buildings, those parking spaces are
headon to that building to the south. So, those would require ballards. Okay. Yeah, we can. We can you good with that? Yes. Okay. While we're talking about that area there, it looks looks like that that
parking area is cut off by landscaping from the service road out back. Is that cut off or is there access to go between building A and two to the here where I where I have the pointer right in here. Right. This
is separated. Um Okay. This is a a parking area here. This uh this in the back is the truck uh delivery entrance which is uh you cannot get through from from here. This parking lot kind of dead
ends over here. There's no connection to want to encourage people to go that way. Right. Right. We don't want to encourage Yeah. I think I think it's a good idea to utilize that that truck. John, thanks for bringing that up. That's a good point. Um, I'm going to further uh get
into the operations of uh of of building A. If I could request that um exhibit A24 be pulled up. [Applause] So this this exhibit represents just a larger enlarged version of the uh areas
that are part of the uh amended application here. Um the uh you can see this this is the existing parking field. We are not we're not proposing any changes to that aside from some restriping uh of some standard
parking spaces into ADA spaces. Um the uh there is parking provided across the entire frontage of the buildings A and B2 as it currently does for the movie theater building. Um the site will continue to be accessed through the
entrance drive on Lanesmill Road and the entrance drive on Route 9 North. We're not proposing any additional entrances uh to the buildings. Um as the uh the board engineers review letter identifies, there are 2,23 parking
spaces that are required um based upon the ordinance requirement of 5 and a half spaces per thousand ft for a shopping center. Um, however, this shopping center had previously been granted a waiver to reduce the parking
requirement to four and a half spaces um per thousand square feet. And that that waiver has been carried through all of our uh prior amendments before the board and we would seek to continue that um that waiver relief uh for the amendment
tonight to reduce from five and a half to four and a half spaces per thousand feet. But you still need relief regardless. We still need relief. Yes. So you probably should add that onto the like yes looking to continue the waiver for the reduced parking requirement, but
they're still seeking relief from that lower requirement. Correct. Yeah. I'm we do have our our planner here also that will get further into the uh the um the needs and necessity for for these variances and waiverss. Um so according
to uh our calculations when we consider the retail spaces as a as a shopping center and um break out our office space separately uh we calculate a total of 1,670 spaces being required. Uh whereas
we're proposing 1,791 spaces. That's for the uh shopping center as a whole and the spaces are distributed well throughout the entire shopping center. Now because we have this um this surplus of parking to just
gohead clarity on that Jason when you calculated that did you just take the gross flurry area of all the structures so like the Texas Roadhouse the Starbucks everything and and do the 44 and a half spaces per thousand square feet? That's correct. We well we we broke out the um as we've been doing
along the way with with these amendments uh we broke out the office uh separately and the Texas roadhouse uh was broken out separately. The rest of the uh shopping center was we had calculated it
based on the shopping center requirement. Okay. So I would just say the calculation in my letter comes out a little bit differently. Yeah, I I think um you know a lot of the retail space that has been approved and some of it constructed um the BJ's wholesale uh the
Starbucks sorry maybe not the Starbucks but the retail and the BJ's wholesale we've calculated based on that four and a half parking spaces uh for a shopping center we broke out um the climb zone we have a separate standard for like recreational facil indoor recreational facilities um the Starbucks and the
Texas roadhouse quick service like Starbucks has a certain certain requirement uh that's a little bit more intense than like the Texas Roadhouse which is based off the number of seats. So when we calculated it all out um even with the 4 and a half space per thousand ft you know waiver that they got going
back to the original approval we get a requirement of 1,837 uh parking spaces and they're at Jason where we at 1,7 uh 7 1,791. Okay. So, you know, as we get further in the testimony, we're going to want to hear kind of uh more information on the
uses on the site, how they kind of work in unison, uh hours of operation relative to some of the other like the BJ's Wholesale, the LA Fitness, uh and the like to uh substantiate the the the request that you're you're seeking with the parking. So, we'll provide that
testimony as the uh as we move on. Um so but I did just want to say that uh based on the parking surplus that we had calculated um we we calculated uh we
kind of reverse calculated the um the amount of space in this office building that could possibly be uh developed as medical office. medical office has a um has a a higher intensity uh parking requirement which would be
one space per 150 square feet whereas professional office is one space per 300 square ft. So, as we indicated on our plans, um based on the available parking that we have, uh we are requesting that
a uh that we can dedicate a a maximum of 33,500 square ft of this office building. Uh we believe could be um developed as medical office use and still be supported by the amount of
parking that's on site. 33,000 33,500 of the 113,300 square feet uh would be our maximum that we could develop as medical office.
Um, as far as, uh, truck deliveries, um, as we just started to get into, they would still continue, uh, to access the site through this dedicated, uh, truck delivery entrance, um, which is beyond
the, uh, the shopping center entrance, uh, to the west. Um, the, uh, this this se again separates the truck traffic from the customer vehicle traffic. Uh we're proposing to uh to install and construct
a loading dock uh for the proposed building A office. Um a a typical loading dock. Uh it's it's been deemed necessary by the developer for uh for a class A office such as this. um mainly to get
deliveries of of furniture and paper and supplies and anything that would be delivered on on possibly uh on with pallet delivery. uh developer and we we feel that it's best managed to have a a
centralized loading area in the back of the building rather than have to uh you know deliver any kind of furniture or pallets or or paper through the smaller doors uh that are at at the front entrance of the building. And that would
involve disrupting the the general uh flow of of the uh of the daily office um of of the the daily office operations. Uh dragging uh any deliveries through the front lobby. Um it we're we're
seeking to uh install a centralized area. Okay. Um, can I just ask um are the deliveries going to be tied into this same time frame as the hours of operation? Because, uh, even though
there's not a lot of houses back there, there is residential and I don't want to I don't think we want to see deliveries coming all hours of the night. So, there's got to be some type of restriction on when they're going to be allowed and the size of the trucks
because you have that backup truck and you know, yeah, I envision it being during regular business hours. Right now, it's um to the extent we have control over when they come. Well, I think it should have some measure of
control and then because it should be in the resolution because I like I said, I don't want to be s, you know, a truck comes at 2:00 in the morning and there are people behind there. So, yeah, absolutely. Yeah. I mean, typically, yeah, we don't see tractor trailer deliveries to an office building. You
don't get paper in a tractor trailer. Okay. So I I and based on these plans, I don't even see how the truck can get into this area because there's lawn area 15t wide adjacent to this area proposed concrete pad for truck. So I'm not even
sure how that's going to work, let alone I don't know why we need it. Like office supplies do not get delivered in a tractor trailer. So unless something else is happening in that building, I don't understand the need for that. It's box trucks, FedEx, Amazon, UPS.
It's not tractor trailer. And furniture comes in an Amazon truck. It comes in a FedEx truck, in a UPS truck, or maybe it comes one time in a moving truck. It's not a regular scheduled delivery. I don't understand this. and I
was here when this was done initially and those residents on Castle Court were upset which required the burning and limitation to the activities taking place behind that building specifically. So unless there's a demonstrated
absolute need in an office building for this, I I don't understand. First of all, I don't understand how it's going to work cuz circulation wise it it will not work. But I don't I don't understand the need for it. And you're just going to create a noise nuisance in the
backyard of these residents on Castle Court. So and it kind of along those same lines. So there is a trash compactor like a cardboard compactor also proposed back there too. Yes. Correct. So you know we've had a couple offices a medical office come before this board recently and that's something that's
certainly atypical for an office use. Uh begs the question are we having other uses like light assembly or something like that that there might be more packet package repackaging of goods or something like that. That's the concern that I think I have for the board. That's something certainly atypical for
for an office use. Uh well I to respond to your late last point I think um there's no industrial manufacturing assembly proposed even if this were to be approved the way we're presenting it when we got a tenant we'd have to come
in and make an application for that and that use would presumably be flagged. No, we're we're not rep we're representing that that is not the use that will be in this building. Um happy to have that incorporated in condition.
Um the and also just further out the trash compactor, you know, that's accessed from inside the building in a chute. The materials go into it. Um it's right up against the building versus right now there's the refuge area I
believe is further back away from the building. The compactor would be located right here. Yeah. Thank you. And we'll and we'll connect we'll connect to the internally to the building. Do you want to pull up the your plan just to zoom in on that
loading area? Um I could do that. Um would we be able to get the site plan uh pulled up? I don't know what the exhibit number is on that. 825 or is 824 better? Are you interested in landscape plan or you want your site plan? Um the actual
site plan I thought or well I'm sorry you can you can zoom in um if you wouldn't mind zooming into uh bringing in a new piece of medical equipment do front door. Yeah.
Zooming into this area back here. WP62 truck. trailer to show the landscape. She doesn't want the landscaping plan up, right? Oh, no. Zoom in closer. Oh, yeah. The landscaping.
Um, yeah. If if we could zoom in further, I think there would be more detail being shown. Is this I'm sorry. Is this still exhibit A24? This is 22. This is I'm sorry. I'm sorry if I confused you. I was
looking for A24. Sorry about that. You want to zoom out one quick? Uh, you could probably zoom out one uh one one tick. All right. Can you That's good, right? Yeah, that should work. So, this this was the uh compactor that was being
proposed. Um and then the loading space was uh was up in this area. So, this this area is all pavement out here. So, based on our circulation that we've looked at, a truck would be able to pull into this area and then back
into the loading space. It's a single It's a single loading space that's proposed. um you know 9 9 foot wide uh loading space with some uh some space on the side between the building and the uh
landscaped island here. So can you you scroll up? Is there a is there a truck circulation exhibit that shows how a tractor trailer even though I don't understand why you need one is going to make that movement because like the layout is just just beyond me.
I don't understand it at all. We don't have uh and the circulation back there is one way. Does the loading dock have a platform for a big truck or is it just a ground level for little trucks? It would have a platform, a 4ft platform. You are talking big trucks. Guys, you need to
revisit this. I'm sorry, but this is not safe and it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. And we committed to those people when this development got built that we were going to take the activity. The only thing that was back there was parking and it was for employees. So, it
was supposed to be sleepy. It wasn't supposed to be beep beeping backing up behind these people's houses. Yeah. I mean, it would make far more sense for box trucks back there during the day, but a a tractor trailer to make I don't even know how they would fit
back there. And honestly, like who's back there? If this is an office, like we don't have loading dock staff at my office to un to supervise the unloading of a tractor trailer. It's someone who's sitting at the front desk that accepts the paper delivery. It's there's no So, are you going to have like warehouse
people like unpack? I mean, it's not warehouse people, but I mean, for instance, I work in a three-story office building that has my law office on the third floor, and there's other offices throughout. We in the back of our building have a loading dock and one bay. And I know that when paper's
delivered on a big pallet, it gets it goes in this room, it's broken down, it's brought up in shipments because we order it in such big bulk. You know, we have new chairs we order. It's not necessarily like we got an It's not like John Sardo wants a chair. We're ordering 25 chairs so it comes in a truck and it
goes into an area to be managed and brought up in the service elevator at a later time. So it's not disrupting the flow of all the people coming in out of the office. Um so I don't think it's that atypical. I see why it's useful at least in my I think from my perspective this needs to be reooked at. I don't the
way it's configured the circulation. I'm gonna need to see a circulation plan. How you get around that landscaping, you're going to be backing up against traffic to get into this area. It I I don't it doesn't make any sense
whatsoever for a two-story office building. Can you just give me one minute? Yeah, please. Yeah, I just want to take a break. Yeah, Mr. Chair. Yeah. Yeah, we're going to take a five minute break down there already. The board will now
take a 5m minute break and reconvene at 8:15 p.m. All right, Lane, we're back in the meeting will now reconvene. Um so okay during the break we spoke with the applicant about the you know this issue
and the concerns raised um hearing one of the main ones I think was the size of the trucks coming in and then the concerns about having the backup and the turning template. Um I I think point one would be we're not expecting tractor
trailers would primarily be back box trucks, FedEx trucks. And then as we're looking at it, maybe there's a way to re incorporate uh this what you're seeing as the parking field there. Yeah.
As a one-way circulation pattern. It would eliminate those spaces, but it would provide um a drop off area essentially at the side of the building. So then you kind of eliminate that need for any kind of a backup or maneuvering
awkwardly. Um, and then it gives a a way to circulate out without having to back up. Um, I I guess I would ask Jason maybe to also talk about how we might what we might do about to compensate for the lost spaces or
where we might be able to gain some additional spaces. Right. Well, if if what Mr. Sarto just uh outlined if that would result in a loss of these 11 parking spaces. Uh however, there are existing parking spaces uh to the rear
of the office building here that would uh if if we don't put in this loading dock here, those spaces could we could revert back to those parking spaces. That would basically offset the loss of these parking spaces here. There's uh
and that wouldn't affect the disposal, any of the trucks coming in for any of the refuge. Uh, no. This this drive aisle here is still um this is a I believe that's a 30
foot wide drive aisle here. So, the the truck still has plenty of um of space to maneuver uh down that existing truck delivery route. Yeah, I I agree. I'm just saying if you put regular parking spots in there,
that's not going to happen or deal with that. So, I don't think there are existing parking spaces back there. I No, no, but you said you I believe they're designated as employee uh parking spaces. Uh right right there. Yeah. Yeah. Yep. There's There's 11 spaces. So, you wouldn't actually lose any parking spaces. You would still stay
on the back side where they are. The drive aisle is still the same way. That pavement area that they have right there, they could carve that up. So, they got a oneway aisle. Maybe create some island with some landscaping to kind of break up some of that impervious. You know, I I think there's a couple ways to skin the cat. I would just say if the board acts favorably,
this is something they can work with my office as part of those. That's good. So board members, anybody have any concerns about that as a good solution? Yeah. So I think we're good with that. So now we're getting rid of Great. And thank
you for uh Yeah. Mr. Kumliff for outlining that path forward. Yeah. Um well, do you want to keep Yeah, I have a couple more. Just a couple more items to uh to bring up if we've moved
if we've moved through that. Yeah. Uh loading uh concern. Um I just wanted to point out that the uh based on these um could you would you mind zooming out uh slightly just so we could see the uh
that full area of development? That's good right there. Um I just want to point out that we have added some green space uh behind these buildings which previously was not uh in place. This was all pavement uh before.
So by by making these amendments we've actually reduced the amount of impervious coverage on the site by approximately 10,000 square feet. um that you know reduces the amount of drainage runoff um and and in incorporates uh infiltration through the
grass areas allows us to provide some more landscaping. So I just wanted to point that out uh to the board. Um as I mentioned earlier there uh there was a light pole proposed here but that this area is being reconfigured now. So we'll we'll figure out how to uh how to handle
the the lighting through there. It may just still require one proposed light pole um back there which would match the other light poles that are on site. Um we have provided uh uh a landscaping plan and I did see the comments from um
from the board tree expert. Uh if it's okay we would work with you um to provide some additional plantings as you had requested in your letter Sherry. Um, and I've uh I've also reviewed the um
the engineers letter and just briefly wanted to say that the um just to reiterate some comments in his letter that the uh the amended design will connect to existing storm water and utility infrastructure uh that exists on site. Um the runoff will be reduced
because of the uh the reduction in imperous area. Um we are uh don't anticipate any environmental impacts. Uh we we did submit um an environmental report for the site which cited no uh detrimental
impacts to any wetlands areas or buffers. Um and we will uh seek to procure any uh outside agency approvals, freehold soils. Um and uh possibly the need for a uh TWWA permit uh based on
the increased flow that's generated uh by these proposed uh building amendments and we'll work we're working through with New Jersey American Water, the Howell Township Utility Department, uh Freehold Soils. We'll procure all the
required uh permits. That's all the direct testimony I have this witness. Okay. Who's going to provide test? One thing that I do think is a concern is the lighting in the rear of the building. Who's going to give a little more detail? Are you so as to the
proposed like building mounted lighting? Yeah. Because I'm just Yeah. Yeah. My next witness. Okay. Tom, did you have anything that you wanted to add or you want to wait for the architect about? I'll wait. Okay. Mr. Chair, I just have one question.
Yes. In looking at the plans that were originally approved for this shopping center and looking at the aerial photography, it appears to me that the buffer the on the burm between the backs of these buildings in Castle Court was not installed either per plan or it
looks like some things have died. So, I would just ask that you coordinate with the owner of the shopping center to take a look at that buffer and if there have things that have died to be replaced um because that is like right up against those backyards. Absolutely.
And Mr. Chair, if I could just add to so the last time they were here too, I think there was a lot of discussion around like pedestrian circulation through the site. Uh people come from a client zone all the way out to the Starbucks and things like that. Uh they are doing some modifications along the front of the retail spa spaces um you
know north of the climb zone reconfiguring some of those crosswalks. So I think that's a positive. The last time around too though u the main thoroughway coming in off of lanes of Mil Road. There was a lot of concern about like that being basically like a speedway people cutting through trying to get gas and get groceries on like a
Friday. Um, so, uh, if that hasn't already been improved, I know I think the touch of engineer has already been in correspondence with this applicant about upgrading some of the striping and refreshing it. I just ask that that be made a condition of the approval. Looking at some are aerials, the the parking strip in looks a little worn and
tired throughout the parking area. I think that should be freshed up as a condition of the approval. And then the last thing I'll have is we're going back to building D1, 2, and three to what was like the original approval with all those retail spaces. Um, I would just
ask, as a lot of this site has come back numerous times, we've asked for the refuge enclosures to be split face m masonry. I would just ask that those buildings be upgraded to have split face masonry, trash enclosures. Is that acceptable to the applicant? Yeah. I noted that was a comment in your review
letter and we can comply with and uh and I'll just confirm with what Mr. Berno said. So, last time they were here, they were like a technical major development because they were converting a lot of building area to parking area. here. It's really re repurposing building area. So, they're not really exceeding
the threshold of new parking area to get it into a major development. So, so I don't take any exception to his uh testing what about no impact from a stormwater perspective. The rest of the comments I have will be for traffic and for the architect. Okay. Anybody else? Sherry, anything to add to
the landscaping there? um as long as they agree to you know what I had in my letter uh you know no I also sent them uh some notes on the plan just to help um explain what I was asking for. Um I did ask for foundation
landscaping because they're missing that um in that parking area that we're now going to take out. Um yeah, I think anything's going to be in an improvement right now. The one one um thing I wanted to point out though in the prior plans um they have foundation
landscaping across the entire frontage of the new building um what is proposed now are pretty much like sidewalk cutouts for a couple shrubs. So I wouldn't recommend doing that. So I don't know if you want to have the you know the full foundation landscaping how
it originally was in the last um you the more recent plan. I think on building B that's a challenge because it's right it was an office and now it's going to be retail with tenant you know doorways come in and out so that was I think the challenge in redesigning it but that's fine so they would need a waiver then
for that okay but I wouldn't recommend any of those shrubs in the middle of the sidewalk they're not they're going to look terrible I think what the we were just trying to provide I know but they're going to get run over and walk through and to put it uh you know
briefly that we're willing to rev revised the plan for Miss Spiro's review. That's good enough for us to meet those comments. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes. Can can I ask Mr. Sardo, can can we go over that whole thing
again with the uh getting rid of We're getting rid of those parking spaces between the two buildings. And what is it becoming? Sure. Um, and you can jump in if you need to, but so we're getting rid of that and it's going to connect to the drive aisle in
the rear. So the idea being that when a delivery is made through that one way um or the you know the the trash is being picked up that the truck can then make a turn which through that oneway drive and then exit without having to you and the
deliveries and drop offs would be at the side of the building as opposed to the rear. That's one benefit versus how it's designed right now. So you're getting rid of the loading dock. No load. Right. Correct. Correct. So, where are the deliveries going in that in that? They're getting rid of the parking spaces and that's where the loading's
going to be in between the two buildings as opposed to in the back. I'm saying but how where are they going into the building? They'll have to get to a man door in the front of the building or on the side. Something that could be coordinated. Even in the rear here, there's still um
there's still building entrances in the rear. And I think part of what Mr. Kiff was saying is that we would submit revised plans to address the comment and he he would review that and see if it what his expectations were.
Miss Beam, your your concern both was for that um for the trucks coming in the back that back aisle there um and then try to get into that loading dock, they'd have to back up, right?
So, I don't particularly think that's a problem. But getting back to the tenants or the the people who own homes behind there, was there you said there was some type of agreement, I believe you said that there
wouldn't be this when this was originally approved. Noise behind those buildings against those backs of those homes on Castle Court was like 99.9% of the hearing. Tom, you were here, right? Yes. That was like that was
99% of it was what is going to happen behind these buildings. And so there was a commitment to that neighborhood that to the maximum extent we could, the activities would be moved away from that coincident property line here. Backing off into that elevated loading zone,
which I still submit for an office building is completely unnecessary, um is going to require backup beeping. Whereas if this is if they redesign it the way we're recommending, everyone's moving forward. They're going to come down that aisle. They're going to move
out and then they're going to pull out. No backing up. You're not going to have to maneuver around that landscape island. Nothing. It's just going to be a straight circulation movement. And I can I can guarantee you that 99.9% of the deliveries are going to come in an
Amazon or a box truck. and they're not even going to go behind the building because they're going to park right in front of the building because those drivers do not want to hump farther than they have to. They're going to unload, run in, and get out. That's what's going to happen. But this is a better circulation plan. So, so what happens
when the one of those medical facilities, which could possibly be an imaging place, maybe possibly could is that a possibility where they might get a large piece of equipment. So where how are we getting that large piece of equipment? Go right in that same spot.
It's 11 parking spaces. So that's No, but I'm saying getting into the building. I don't think we bring we we should be bringing large pieces of equipment through the front door where people go the like deliveries and people should be separate. If you're getting imaging equipment, you're not getting a delivery when the room is full of
patients. You're going to get it when the the office is closed. That's assuming it is an imaging place, which there's been no testimony to support that. Right now it's medical office, so I would assume doctors. But regardless,
putting that loading zone where they have it proposed from a circulation standpoint does not work. It doesn't work. So, but the other the other issue is is the noise at at any time of the day, 3 in the afternoon, 4 in the afternoon. Yep. Okay. So, just to clarify on top of
what Mr. Berllo is asking, in the middle then there's going to be some kind of a loading door designed Like you said, you coordinate with Charlie on the side of the building. Is that what we're Yeah. So, if you look at the rendering right here on the lower right hand side of the the movie theater that's going to be
converted to the office. There is a loading space next to the trash compactor. So, we would envision it would probably something extending that further. The drive aisle would likely remain the same footprint that it is. It would just be converted one way. you lose those parking on the left hand side, but it would just be you come in
the back loading area, you make a right, you got your loading zone on the right hand side, and then you keep going on to the balance of the shop. The big stuff could go in through the side door. Correct. Yeah. And I'm sure the architect can work something out with the location of the man doors and making sure hallways and such. Okay. Yeah.
Thanks. Okay. Well, then any go anything else? I'd like to add something on there on that parking. I agree with Jennifer. No backing up because if they get there, you're not going to have a gate closing that area. You're going to come in
whenever they feel like at night waiting for them to open in morning. If they back up, they're going to wake up the people. And if they leave their trucks running, they're going to wake up the people. So, I'd like to see a sign wherever they park, no running trucks,
because you could hear them. I hear him at garbage man miles away and I hear him backing up too and they're pretty close. They're only hundreds of feet. So, you know, you got to be careful with that. And I don't know if this is the right time, but that the medical building is
that one story or two. It's it's a two it's not a medical building. It's an office building dedicated medical space. So, you really don't know who all the tenants are going to be. That's that's what you're proposing, right? We're
we're we're saying that the the parking that's available on site could support up to a certain amount of medical offices. So, is that going to be one story or two? Including the um movie theater is going to be two, but the the other part's
going to be two, too. No, the the movie theater. So, just referring to what's behind you. Building A is the one on the top. That's the existing movie theater. No more movie theater, two floors of office, predominantly professional office space with the maximum amount of
33,500 is what we're And how high is that going to be? Uh the building height's not altering at all. I believe it's the 30 I believe it's going to stay within the limit of our heart. Yeah, your your HD1 zone HD1S is now 60 feet is permitted. So, it's well under that.
And how many uh additional handicap spots are you going to add to it? We've provided I believe the number is 16 16 addition handicap stalls from what's there now. Yes. And they're and just to add on his point they're relocated in closer proximity up to the
the office. So it's it's actually bringing it out of the main parking field and putting it up closer to the building. Right. Is there going to be an elevator for if it's medical and you have handicapped people? Yeah, there's Yeah, there would be elevators. Okay. The the architect will provide testimony as
well. Okay. That that's it for that. And is there still going to be they would be required by code to have an elevator? Is there still going to be a freight elevator a service elevator? I don't know the answer. Our next witness architect will have a better
handle on responding to that. So, okay, that'll I'll I'll ask him to address that first. And the other thing I just want to point out is I I don't know how we're going to restrict anybody from possibly having to back up. AR, you know, a truck may have to back up. That you're gonna hear those backup beeps. Every truck has one. So, I'm not I'm not
quite sure how we're gonna, right, stop that. But a truck occasionally backing up and a loading truck having to back up to make a delivery are two totally separate animals. Someone doing it occasionally, which this circulation plan that we're talking about does not require it versus someone having to back
up every time a delivery is made is a totally different level of noise. Okay. Okay, I think we're ready to move on to the next. Mr. Chair, before you move on. Yes. Over here. Uh for building B, uh I
believe the testimony, uh on record was six tenants for retail. Correct. Y that's and we only have one enclosure for six tenants. I could tell you throughout town it's inefficient uh or insufficient. Um, I would make a
recommendation to request at least one more, two more enclosures. Um, you know, I'm not asking one for one, but trash. Yeah, you're talking about trash enclosures, correct? Yes. We the one that we did provide was uh it's a it's
large. Um, but we have to reconfigure that anyway for the um for that drive-thru space. Yes, we'll we'll we'll make that work. Yeah, I think I think one extra is not going to be Yeah. We'll comply with that. Yeah. Thanks, John. Okay. You ready for your next witness?
Yes, I am. Okay. Um, calling Joseph Davidson. I'll ask him to put his credentials on the record. Yes. Thank you. Hi. Uh, Joseph Davidson. I'm a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey. it's active uh as well as about 25 other
states in the country. Um uh I'm the principal busy architecture and design and I've been responsible for the project here going in terms of the design and drawing super. Okay, we accept your credentials. Thank you. Thanks. Uh can we
um guess we should start with the office. Good. All right. Uh I'll start with the office. if uh you can bring up exhibit A13. Do you want to go to render? Uh we Yeah, I guess we could start with the rendering. Um and what this is marked as a this
A25, correct? All right. Um so this is the uh the o the the existing uh movie theater that the the general shape uh perimeter of it is not being uh
modified. Uh we are modifying the facade the skin of the facade. Um the existing roof line is intended to to be maintained. Interior structural modifications will be made uh to provide uh elevators, stair towers and uh the
additional floor. Um what we are proposing is kind of a modern look uh with some fiber cement panels in in in uh grays and beiges. Uh and in this particular area, we are looking at actually making them dimensional. So,
not a flat panel, but having more of a geometric pattern to it that actually pulls and pushes in into the facade. Um, and then the vast majority of the um facade is going to be glazing uh on the on the first and second floor as
there's uh many offices and that is um intended to be pretty pretty tall uh floor to ceiling glazing to to kind of give this modern um clean look for for the office. uh you know and this is something that the owner wanted to kind
of design too. Um I know there was some comments about uh from the planners letter regarding the uh the community um non-residential community design standards. Um we have taken some elements and moved them up. Uh again we
are trying to reuse the existing roof structure. So, um, moving too much up and, uh, will create additional loads on that roof that were not there. So, we're trying to kind of keep the height of where the, uh, the the theater was and
and work within that envelope. Uh, all the rooftop equipment is currently screened, uh, for the movie theater and would continue to be so for the office. And again, we we do uh, kind of want this to be a sleek and modern look. We did add um from one of the comments from
the engineers review letter uh a a limestone uh water table base uh to to kind of create that um uh articulated base that is in the community design standards. Um I guess that's pretty I'll just go
over this. This is an office sign. Um it it's it's it's sized um to be uh as small as 240 square ft is what we're asking for. We do not have the the name of the sign or the name of the building at this time. Um it's intended to to be
a marker for the office. Um and it is less than the allowable signage permitted in the sign ordinance and that is on the the elevation. But I think in terms of proportion, this is a good proportion for the size of the building and whether it's one line, two lines, it's still
legible. Uh if we can go to um A13, exhibit A13. Uh maybe that's not the right exhibit. A14. A14's environmental impact. This is the architectural plan. Uh A14 I'm
reading as the floor plans and elevations. That's for B2. And I had A13 was the floor plans and elevations for the building A, the theater.
No, that's the B2. one for building A. Yes, building A. That's it. Okay. Um, so, um, if we can go back to the, uh, floor plan. I just want to kind of address some some questions that had
come up in the review letters. Um, I think you're it's in that same where the elevation was that was just there. I think if you just scroll back one. Yeah, that's perfect. Thank you. Um again we do not have um any uh current
uh planned tenant right now that that is uh designing for this particular space. Uh what what I did do is create an office layout that it could be to give you a a kind of general idea of how this
may lay out uh with a with an office court and and some multiple tenants. It's possible that a tenant could take a whole floor. It's possible that this could be, you know, six tenants, two tenants, three tenants. We don't know at this time. Um, we do have plans to have
a centralized core. I know there was some some concern about this uh delivery area, which will change, which will be just located uh along the side of the building. Um, and again, there'll be a central core with restrooms. And then if there
are uh something like a medical office or a doctor's office, that would just lay out a little different and and they may have their own um plumbing uh running through that space as well to meet. And once you're done, I was going to say, can you point out where the elevator? Oh, yeah. The elevator core is
centralized right off the main entrance here. So, uh we we plan for two elevators right now. Um that that seems to be about right for for the floor area that we have on the second floor. Um uh at this point we didn't have
provisions for a freight elevator as deliveries of the larger bulk items uh would be relatively infrequent. You know when someone moves in we'd have construction materials to fit out the space and furniture.
Um, as for um large medical equipment, if it was an imaging center, um, we we can certainly make sure and again with that overhead door that we had here, that would have been large enough to accept larger pieces of equipment into the space.
Um, but again, we don't know that for the at this stage what that would be. So, um, so Miss Miss Beam in her review letter raised that uh that we'd need design standard waiver for this building for
because it has uninterrupted lengths of 50 ft. Yes, it does have on there. And I guess just you'd be willing to work with her office on any recommendations to kind of modify the appearance to better meet the ordinance
intention. Yeah, we yes, we would be willing to work with the planner to but considering keeping the modern flavor of the the building, I think that could probably be achieved. Yeah, we can certainly work with adding
a couple more relief items and stuff like that, but the intent is to not really change the the building height overall from what it is now, nor change the footprint of the building as the uh theater had laid out. So,
um if we can go to the second page of the elevations here. Uh and and these elevations will obviously be modified slightly based on the revisions to the um delivery areas. Uh but what I would like to say is that there were some
comments about reflectivity off of the uh glass or glazing in the engineers uh letter. Um uh glass is reflective. Um but what we can propose is along the residential
uh facade is to use uh tinted glazing which we would we would use in in the office but as well have an anti-reflective coating on there to minimize reflections off of that glazing. Um um Mr. Chair, can I just ask a question on that? What about the front
windows? Would they have any type of like um like bird safe glass? Is it going to keep them from smashing into the building? Uh, we have not considered that, but I think we we So, I think you use like UV There's like a UV light you could use uh or patterns so they could
see and we can't. Yeah. And I think uh we would be open to working with the board and professionals to achieve that. Okay. Um I have no further um comments on this
building unless anyone has any question. Jennifer, any anything to add? No. And and I will say I do like the architecture. I do think there's a couple little things we can do to I I am not suggesting that they revise the facade to comply exactly with our
standards. And as you know, we try to work with people to adhere to the intent if not, you know, when they can't comply with the letter of the requirement. The other piece of of the relief is flat roofs are not really um encouraged and
obviously this is a flat roof, which I take no exception to. So, they would just need a waiver. They would need a waiver from both of the architectural requirements because they don't strictly comply. But, I'm happy to work with them to to do little minor things. There's nothing major that needs to take place
on this building. Charlie, so you said there's going to be elevators centralized to the structure and there's also going to be a new bulkhead for stairwells. Does that provide roof access? Uh there will be roof access uh whether that's through a
roof ladder or a st ladder in that stair tower um as opposed to it going above the roof. Um again the the rooftop units now are probably about five or six feet above the roof line. Um so no amenity space and there is no planned amenity
space on the roof. So it would only be for uh mechanical access and in this particular you know case there will be some modifications to the HVAC system because of adding that second floor and it's being a different use than the
theater. Okay. And then uh sorry uh and you said all the mechanicals are all going to be like centralized to the roof and then the center of the structure is the roof line actually or is that a like a partial parapit? There's a parapit all around. Um so centralized so that like higher tier
will kind of cover a lot of that those mechanicals in the building. Right. Yeah. And you can see um in the back here there is that bump up which is where the theater spaces are uh in terms of the taller theater spaces that's already existing. uh it's it's way back on the facade and you can't really see
that from from ground level as you move about the site. Um but that that's still there. Okay. Uh and all the mechanicals are actually in front of that uh where they're underneath there which again I did I did do Google Earth and checked where they were and looked at them and
that there is a parapit there that is existing that is covering those mechanicals and we are not proposing to modify that. Okay. All mechanicals will be screened. Okay. And then the last question that I have is I see the very sizable office wall facade sign on the
structure and there's also a monument sign. It's not shown on this rendering, but it would be like on the right hand if you're looking at the top elevation. It would be Yeah, I think uh it's being proposed over in this area here. Yeah. So, uh what's what's envisioned? Why do we need the wall monument sign if
there's going to be a large office sign on the structure? What's the So, typ typically the differentiation between the two typically this would be like a building identification sign uh to to to highlight the office. The monument sign uh typically is placed to put major
tenants on of the office but not all the tenants. So, it is a um more of a you know identification sign to find a particular uh tenant within this building and then obviously so office would be like the the building address like 139 or something like that kind of thing. Yeah. or the building name.
Building name. Okay. All right. I just want to get clarification on that. That's all I have. Okay. Board members, anybody have any questions? Tom, how quick question. Uh, how tall is that um parapit on the front there? Do you do
you have that the top of the parapit? Yeah, from the from the roof. Uh, I don't know the exact number, but I'll say around six feet or so. Okay. sufficient to cover block the mechanicals then. Yes. And it's already blocking the mechanicals and there are a number of uh large rooftop units on that
roof right now. Uh and we would not be uh proposing anything larger than what's already there. Okay. Great design. Looks looks really nice. Uh you'd mentioned a 50 foot under um uninterrupted lengths.
I wasn't sure what what you meant by that. I can probably answer that. Our ordinance requires a bump out like a three-foot bumpout uh literally every 40 ft. So you don't have blank walls. Okay. So that's what
he's referring to as uninterrupted for 50 ft because this does not have those breaks. It's the front elevation, the all four elevations. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.
Anybody else? I agree. It's a very nice design. Thank you. So, do you want Yeah. Um, if we can go to exhibit um A14. I think that should be Yeah, there
we go. Um, so this is uh building B2. Uh does these we showed uh as part of kind of the uh comments is just a potential layout of multiple tenants in this uh building. We do not know at this time
the number of tenants or the uh size that each of those tenants will require. Uh what we do know is that we designed this building so that it can be flexible in terms of adjusting to uh retail
tenants needs and uh the market. Um so it's possible that this could be two tenants, three tenants, uh eight tenants. Um I don't see it getting much more than that because then that the spaces will become very narrow. Um so I
just wanted to kind of go over that part of the the plan. If we can go to the uh nextG the elevations. Um and again the signage what we were attempting to do with the signage here was just to propose that uh we will meet
the ordinance requirements in terms of the size uh the percentage of area uh and the number of signs per business within this building. Um so I believe there is a a waiver that
was um noted in the planners letter uh which which you know again we are um agreeable to because we are just really trying to meet the sizing requirements and the intent of the the ordinance. Yeah. Well, just to clarify that, I
think um the the size of the individual signs overall were meeting the the area, but I think there's, you know, technically the number there's the number, right? So, there's supposed to be one sign here, which obviously is
kind of a hardship if you're a shopper of the the center and you know, you don't know which store you're going into because it doesn't have a sign. So, um you know, we would like to have a sign for each tenant space. So obviously uh shoppers can do what they need to do and
find their way around the center. Uh but we do technically require a variance from that and that's one of the ones we're requesting. Any issues, Jen? No, I didn't think so. Uh so again, the building design is kind of to to match some of the other retail
buildings that were um already designed on this site uh with a mix of brick uh splitface uh block and ephus. Uh there is a a number of colors here in earth tones and um this storefront obviously
with the flexibility for where what we're trying to do is have flexibility as to where we can locate tenant doors and openings uh based off of their requirements when they they are known. Um, again, the screening I think you could see on this elevation,
uh, and I'm sorry, it's very far for me. Um, that we did screen the rooftop units. I did select the rooftop unit that was the largest size that I would anticipate on this building of about 15 tons. Um, and made sure that that was screened from from the location here
based off of sight lines and all that is is is on here. So you will not even though from a 2D perspective you may see a tiny little bit of the top here that in reality will not be seen because of where the placement of those units are and that is also located on the the
floor plans as well. Um in addition to um from the last uh to review comments, we did add some additional relief and uh uh bumpouts on the rear wall and the sidewall to to comply with the
uh the community design standards. Uh there were some comments about what type of lighting we are proposing on the back of the building. Uh what we anticipate here is just like security lighting at each of the doors. So it would be completely shielded uh on the sides and
just uh face down at the door and and be of a a light level that isn't, you know, it's not blinding. It's just to illuminate the door and entrance area in the back at each of the tenant doors. Okay. Um if you want to go to just before Mr.
Davidson. Yes. in the lower uh drawing the four white objects that that's just utilities. Uh that's for utilities. Yeah, that that would be uh like electric utilities, gas utilities because I see you have the ballers in front of it. So yes, and we we I and I
know that there was some comments uh given in previous testimony. Uh we will add some some some decorative followers along this side. And then if this does become a delivery area uh over here, we may just remove a little bit of this glass here on the back too, just so that
you know we're not looking into that and there's no need for for any access or doors here because we won't have parking there. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Uh if we can just take a look at a uh 26, exhibit A26. This just gives you a general
flavor of how this uh might look. I think this is uh you know, we have some relief up here. We have a mix of uh of fabric awnings and um canopies along here for some sun shading uh and some different uh elements of the brick and
um ephus and then pulling the facade out and in to give it a little bit more um uh interest as you walk down alongside this this building in particular. Okay. Um I think and I have no further
uh discussion for this. So I'm open to comments, questions. Jen, Charlie, no board members. Nice. Very nice. Very nice job. Thank you. And that should be it. Um real quick,
we're going to let's keep moving along. Um, familiar faces coming up. Mr. Kennel. Mr. Kennel. Good evening. Good evening. I'll I'll be brief and and basically
talk about uh traffic projections and parking. Um, we accept his credentials. Yeah. Um, I qualify as a traffic expert and I've been doing that. 35 plus years. Yeah, I've heard I can almost memorize his
credentials like Christine. So, we accept and as such I've been involved in this project since 2005. So, it's 20 years now I've been working on this project and as a result of that we initially secured NJ dot approval in 2009. So at that time we had
approximately three thou 3 330,000 square feet approved and that included the the German club site and basically where the fitness center is right now. And that basically set the baseline as far as the traffic projections that were considered when we developed the access
system and all the roadway improvements on Route 9 which included Estelle Lane and Lanes Mill Road. And then I took into consideration this current proposal which the conversion of the movie theater to
office results in uh going from 330,000 square ft to approximately 387,000 square ft with the office use being approximately 30% of the total build area. And when you when I look at the
the critical peak hours are really weekday PM and Saturday midday. When we considered the loss of the movie theater, the traffic generation for the weekday PM and the Saturday peak hours are less than what
was previously considered. With the office component, the weekday AM does increase by approximately 175 trips, but the total AM peak hour generation is still only 30% of what you would see at the weekday PM or Saturday
uh midday peak hours. So again, even though there is that increase in the morning, it's still significantly less than the other time periods that drove the access design and the roadway improvements adjacent to this site. And then I also reviewed this as it
would relate to NJ DOT. They have criteria as far as when you have to where they consider a significant increase in traffic. Even though we do have an increase in the morning peak hour where we take into consideration the traffic that's assigned to Route 9
versus Lanes Mill Road, we are still less than their 100 trip threshold. So this if the board was to ask us to go to DOT, this would qualify for a letter of no interest where we would not need a new access permit. The one that's in place would be sufficient for this land
use proposal before the board. Uh the next we had a lot of discussion on was on the parking. Uh as much as uh you know Mr. Bernano indicated we're providing 1,791 parking
spaces. Charlie's calculations based on the 4.5 per thousand has us at 1,837 in my opinion based on the variety of uses on site now that we're introducing the office which is going to be approximately 30% of the floor area.
We have the recreational uses whe whether it's the climb zone or the uh fitness center. We have restaurants and retail that we have what we what we typically experience here is shared parking because the none all the different types uses do not peak at the
same time which would be the critical consideration of providing you know adequate parking. So based on the fact that parking is well distributed throughout the entire development and that we have a variety of uses which have non-coincidental peak
uh peak uh parking periods that the parking proposed at 1791 spaces and even consideration for approximately a third of the office building is medical office say 33,500. It is my opinion that it's more
than adequate parking to serve uh the demands of the of the development. That concludes my testimony unless there's any other questions. So Scott, you said uh to both site driveway. So Lanes Mill Road and Route 9, it's under 100 additional trips
during the peak hour, the AM peak hour when you cons Yeah, basically for the DOT criteria is it's looking at the the route 9 access. Okay. And based on the traffic patterns and what were approved by DOT, we would not have uh we would have less than 100 new trips to the
route 9 access and that's during the morning peak hour period which is a lesser demand. But during the other u time periods the more critical I consider a weekday PM and Saturdays there'll be less traffic on the route 9 than what was considered in the 2009 approval.
Okay. But you said if it doesn't rise to the threshold of needing a major access permit, you can still procure a letter of no interest from DOT for staying under that 100 trip threshold. We could if it's requested by the board. It's going to be burning a lot of brain cells. I got to tell you because there's
a lot of different people down at DOT. Um but that exercise can be done. But based on my testimony, um this site qualifies letter of no interest and I would hope that would suffice. Charlie, your recommendations on that?
Yeah. So, I mean, when they were here last time and they were converting retail to office, I don't know that we necessarily required a letter or no interest. It's certainly something that we could if the board is particularly concerned about the trips and the parking, we could we could request it.
Um, you know, as far as the uses, all right, so you're converting the climb zone to office. So, not no at the moment. No, the movie theater. Uh, sorry, sorry, the movie theater. My apologies, the movie theater to uh office. Um, and I think there was
testimony that the office would operate on Saturdays and Sundays, but it's not going to typically offices don't operate at the same intensity on uh Saturday and Sunday. It it just basically you could be open. You're not going to close the doors and not let anyone in to utilize the office space. Correct. It's Yeah, typically it could be anywhere from 10
10 to 20% of what you would see on a weekday that you would see on a Saturday. Depends on the tenants, obviously. And then like your LA Fitness, right? That's going to normally see a peak like first thing in the morning or like 5:00 p. p.m. and later when the offices is generally the parking demand is starting to wind down.
Correct. That's correct. All right. So I I think this is something this isn't something that is new that's being introduced. They had a prior application approval. I have no issue with the board waving that requirement because it's under the 100 trip threshold. What I will say is and it was came up at the last application. So the intersection on
Lanes Mill Road to the east of this Lanes Mill and Maxim Southern Road that's been designated in the circulation element as like a trouble intersection. I think there was a u an agreement as part of the last application that they would make a a monetary contribution towards
intersection improvements. I can tell you I don't think the township has any uh plans in the foreseeable future to install a traffic signal there. So it would be you know maybe widening lanes or curbing or something to the like at some point in time. So, uh, we're not talking about like a traffic signal
contribution. It's, you know, I think it was on our range of like 10 or $15,000 was what was agreed to. Is that something the applicant's still amendable to? Yes. Okay. That's all I have. Mr. Chair Jen, I just have one question. Scott, when you were calculating the 100 trips? Yes. That
included the 33,000 of medical office? Correct. So, you know, I'm just curious because it depends on what kind of medical office you're talking about, right? Because there's a variety and the intensity of the trips is dependent upon what kind of doctor you're talking
about, right? Well, yeah. Like, for example, a pediatrician sees one patient every eight minutes and I know that by heart, but versus a specialized doctor that sees five patients a day. Right. And
that Exactly. So again, given uh you know, if you were dealing I know you have applications where you have maybe 5,000 square ft, it's usually a single practitioner. This at 33,000 be multiple practitioners. So there'll be more some that'll be more intensive than
others. Uh so in my opinion, the the it trip generation rates we use for medical would be appropriate because we're going to have a mix of low intensity, more high intensity. Um and that's what was the basis of my calculations.
Thank you. Okay. So the waiver will Yeah. for go the waiver. So that's any other questions from the board. I did have a question early on in the testimony. We talked about those three
buildings over by the Starbucks. They were originally approved for medical and now that's being waved. Is that is that correct? Well, they were accommodation was office and medical medical predominantly general office uh was going to be multi-story building. Now we're going back to the original plan.
It just considers one-story retail uses along that portion of the site. Okay. And now that we didn't talk about that other building that's just south of uh the uh LA Fitness. What what what has that been approved for? That was general retail. General how many units? I don't
recall if I remember correctly. is approximately 18,000 square ft if I remember correctly. Okay. Uh but it would it could be anywhere from 3 to six different tenants in there as I recall 18,455. Right. Okay. All right. So we'll bring
in the parking. So yeah, just to clarify, so we did tabulate. So the the lower left hand building, it's like D1, D2, D3. We calculated that in our requirement. And then also that retail space, I think it's just a pad site right now south of the LA. We tabulated that in our calculation as well. So it
wasn't like it was omitted because it hasn't been built. The what they presented as far as the requirement and what the proposed it's the totality of the site, what's been built and what hasn't been built. Okay. All right. Very good. Thank you. There's nothing else. Uh let's get
Christine up. Thank you. Better make sure she's credentialed. Yeah. any changes with your credentials or since I was here last week, I don't think so. No. Okay. Thank you. We we accept. Thank
you, chairman. Um so this is what I would consider a substantially conforming um project in the HD1 south zone. The site is very large compared to the underlying zoning requirements. Right? We're dealing with a 52 acre site where the minimum required is 1.8 acres. So
the variance relief that we're looking for is the justification of those two individual we're calling them monument signs those two square foot those those two I'm sorry 32 square foot monument signs uh interior. So with a site that's so large like this uh as opposed to
what's considered in the zone and given the fact that we have multiple buildings I certainly think that the excess signage is appropriate to the size and scale of the building. In addition, we conservatively have requested facade sign relief for all of those building facade signs. I would say in my
experience as a professional planner, it is certainly reasonable and customary for each business in a shopping center to have its own sign. Your ordinance at section 2565B, actually in the signage section, reads, "Each business located in a shopping center is permitted to
have one facade sign unless the shopping center is on a corner lot, in which case the business in the end unit may have a sign placing each frontage. So I think that this relief is properly granted under the C2 section, which is the flexible C section of the SA statute. I think certainly criteria I, a desirable
visual environment, would be advanced. The signage has an advertising as well as a wayfinding component to it. So that also brings in criteria H, promoting the free flow of traffic. Regardless of which section of the statute the board would be granting the relief for the sign package, you need to find that the
negative criteria is satisfied and there's no substantial detriment to the zone plan or to the public good. The stated purpose of this zone is to provide for highway oriented development in the Route 9 corridor south of Lanes Mill Road and this application does exactly that. So I see no substantial
detriment to the zone plan or the public good if this variance relief is granted. Moreover, in the last re-examination report here in Howell, there was a statement that talked about evaluating the potential for economic and rehabilitation plans in strategic locations. This is the exact location
the zone develop calls for this type of development. So that's essentially the variance relief that we're seeking. And I agree with the board that the sign base should be landscaped, right? We should certainly have it's a two-foot base that that sign sits on per the detail that's provided in conjunction with the plans and it absolutely should
be landscaped and I we will certainly accept a condition of approval should the board seek to move that way uh that we would work with your professionals to do that. So with that being said I see no substantial detriment to the zone plan or the public good if in fact the variance relief is granted. As far as the waiverss I think um Mr. Kennel as
well as our site civil engineer did a great job explaining the parking already. Um, our office has participated on the development applications in this site for for years. And I think that the board can certainly um, let's face it, any shopping center in New Jersey right now in this economy that's facing a
parking problem is doing great. So, I think that um, certainly that waiver is reasonable and justifiable and our office will certainly work with the board to um, clean up any additional waiverss with respect to lighting or some of those bumpouts on the building that we need to work with. But the test on the waiverss is are they the minimum
required to meet the intent of the ordinance? And I think you've heard from the testimony this evening that they are. So I can unequivocally say from a planning point of view, I think we meet our statutory burden of proof for all of the relief associated with this application. Okay. Thank you, J. You're welcome. I don't have an issue with the
the relief that's being sought. Uh it's not a planning comment, but um I don't know if it came about the last hearing, but uh I think there's been a concern about like tractor trailers just parking in the parking lot right now while the buildings are vacant. Obviously, you're going to refresh all the striping, so there's going to be the parking spaces, but would the applicant
have any issue with putting any kind of like no overnight parking signage or something to that effect? Just generally at a couple spots. Yeah. My understanding is it's not vehicles that are associated with the applicant. people are just pulling in and parking there, but it might kind of deter, you
know, people from doing that if we put some signs up. Yeah. I I the applicant shared, you know, my contact shared with me that he's going up to those trucks and knocking on the door and I said, "That's that's very bold of you." But especially at 3 in the morning when
you're sleeping, I'll tell you. And so, no, we have no problem with that. And hopefully that's something that resolves with, you know, the further development and use of those areas. Okay. Anything from the board for the planner? Yeah, good to go. I didn't
think so. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Christine. Um, at this time, we'll make a motion open to public. Nick sec. Have a second. Diane Marie. All in favor? Eileen. The board will now be open to
the public. If you'd like to state a comment, you can come up and state your name and your address. Thank you. All right. Motion to close to the public. Second by Jose. All in favor? I.
Okay. Mr. Sardo, any anything further from anybody? John, uh do you have any idea uh or the applicant have any idea as to when the start of construction would begin? Uh we've had some code enforcement issues with the building
being broken into. Uh I believe JC uh the power company was just out there to cut off power which caused violations with the fire bureau for a nonactive uh sprinkler system. Um you know I wouldn't want to put a sunset clause on this but I also don't
want this building to sit vacant with these violations and issues for an extended period of time. Good evening. Good evening. My name is Charles Manino. I represent the applicant. Andy, does he should be sworn in? He's swear testimony I give will be
the truth. The whole truth, nothing but the truth. I do. Again, Charles Manino, Mn I Okay. Um so to you know answer the question of uh
what exactly start of construction I'm sorry when when construction was expected to begin construction to begin. Yeah. So yeah there there's been several instances uh we appreciate the work that the local um fire department police have helped us with. We've had some breakins.
There was a period of time where the power was shut down. Uh it's since been restored. Um all the fire um uh systems are back in place. Our our property manager has been uh trying to set up a meeting this week and I would attend
with him um with uh Brian and Josh from the fire fire bureau um to just make sure everything's uh straightened out. and we understand that there are some pending violations and possibly some penalty fees. So, we do intend to make
right with all of those. With respect to how soon um we would get to constructing, obviously, we'd have to get through resolution compliance. Um but with resolution in hand, uh we would be going into design of the the full
design of the office building. Right now, we're just in schematics. So, we would go into that design um and potentially even um try to pull an early demolition permit because there's a fair amount of demolition interior that would
have to be done prior to the construction of the building permits being issued. So, we see this happening in a couple of different phases. Um but we we intend to move relatively quickly on it as best we can. So, I would only ask that maybe on a
weekly basis have property manager or somebody from the company just do checks uh of the building just to make sure that it still remains secure. I know they've uh they've boarded up uh the entrances. They've been taken down unfortunately by some squatters or um
homeless uh that are in the area that have taken up uh residents there. So, um I would just ask for weekly checks and any issues you could either contact my office or uh Chief Proct Now's office uh who seems to be uh called there quite
often just to make sure that everything's uh in line and in check. Yes, we'll continue to uh monitor those items. Thank you. Okay. Thanks, thank you, Mr. Sardo and Slammation. Uh I will be
brief. Um I think you've heard the applicant's willingness to work with the board and the board's professionals. There's a number of conditions which we've um agreed to or confirm that we're you know continuing conditions for prior approvals.
Um we are hopeful that the board will vote favorably on this so that we can keep going and with hopefully this will be a good addition to uh the shopping center in the township and we're asking and requesting for the board's approval this evening.
Okay. Thank you. Okay. Do we have a motion from any of the members this application? Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion. I just like to go over a
couple quick things we talked about. Uh, and I want to, you know, keep a focus on that. They mentioned the burm issue in the back with some dead plantings. I mean, I'd like to just make sure that that's that's checked on and relocating the uh loading area between the
buildings. Uh I would like to make a motion to to approve this and I think this will be a nice addition to the to the center there. Okay. Thank you. We have a motion. Do we have a second? I'll second it.
Um, I think you may not I may not be able to Oh, yeah. I'll vote on this one again. I'll second it. Motion. Second by Mr. O'Donnell. Can we have a roll call, please? Mr. Burillo. Yes. Mr. Caner. Given all the
stipulations provided by our professionals and all the requirements. Um, and with the the acknowledgement that it's nice to see that this property is getting developed and we're not going to have a vacant movie theater sitting in hell. I vote yes.
Mr. Hughes, yes. Mr. O'Donnell, yes. Mr. Orosco, yes. Mr. Ryan, I vote yes. And Chairman Martins, I do. I'm going to vote yes as well. I think this is a well needed improvement. Time to move on from
the movie theater, even though I'm going to miss it. But but anyway, as long as you follow the stipulations that been put on, I'm good. So, good luck. application is approved. Thank you everyone. Okay, at this time we are going to
proceed with the next case. I do want to have a quick 5m minute break before we begin. So we'll take a fivem minute break. The board will now take a fivem minute break and reconvene at 9:26 p.m.
The board will now reconvene. Okay. Last case, uh, read it on record. Case number VA25-32, New Jersey National Gas Company, use varian preliminary and final site plan. Application New Jersey
National Gas Company as applicant seeking use variance in preliminary. Sorry about that. And final major site plan with bulk variance for the demolition of various existing buildings and construction of a new New Jersey National Gas
regulatory station with associated site improvements on block 139 lot 7 intersection of Burgerville Road and US Highway 9. Expiration July 4th, 2025. Good evening. Good evening. For the
record, my name is Lisa John Basta with the law firm Key the Shahinian and Jan Masi on behalf of the applicant. As the sheriff stated, this is an application for New Jersey Natural Gas Company final site plan approval with use variance approval um to put a gas regular station
at the intersection of property located at Burgerville and Route 9. Uh whereas such use is not permitted. Public utility is not permitted within the HD1 zoning district where the property is located. The uh use itself is however an inherently beneficial use as it serves
the needs of uh the residents of how as well as the greater community for such things as gas, cooking, laundry, etc. Uh as you're going here momentarily from our witnesses, the applicant is looking to relocate the existing regulator station that's located in the jug handle
of um on Route 9 directly across the street, but it's a New Jersey DOT jug handle. They're looking to place it on the property that we just talked about for uh many reasons that we'll go through in a few de in a few minutes. They're proposing it on a site that's 2.8 acres, which was the former site of
a long abandoned bungalow colony from the 1940s and 50s, which has been long abandoned. You can see the remnants of those structures. So, in connection with the application, they're looking to demolish those existing structures, clean up the site, and place the regulator station there. Tonight, we intend to call three witnesses. We have
a representative of New Jersey Gas who will talk about um the operations and what a regular station is in general. We also have our civil engineer as well as our professional planner. If you would like us to swear them all in. Yeah, let's get them sworn in real quick. Dude, do you swear that the testimony
you give will be the truth? Tell the truth. Nothing but the truth. Tell God. Please state your names for the record. Spell your last. Mark Panachon. P A N A CC C I O N E. Okay. Brian Dina. D E C I
N A. You don't need to spell it. We're good. Unless the name changed in the last five minutes. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Mark, you're employed by New Jersey Natural Gas. Is that correct? Yes. And what is your title with company? Director of
engineering. And how long have you been employed with company? My 21st year. And so in connection with your employment, you're familiar with the operations of a new of a natural gas regulator? Yes, I am. And what would be proposed at the subject site? Yes. Okay. Um, so who is New Jersey Natural Gas? Generally, New
Jersey Natural Gas is a public utility that provides safe and reliable natural gas service to over a half million customers in Mammoth, Ocean, Morris, Sussex, Middle Sex, and Bellington counties in New Jersey. Um, we've been in business for approximately 73 years.
We serve approximately 19,000 meters in Howell alone. We are highly regulated by both federal and state agencies, including the federal office of uh federal department of transportation, office of pipeline safety. Uh, New Jersey Natural Gas is also regularly
inspected by the New Jersey State Board of Public Utilities. Uh the town may be familiar with our recently constructed training center on Fairfield Road in How. We do call that Safety Town. Uh we are very proud of that facility and what that facility is, it's a state-of-the-art training center that we
use to train our employees but also to train local emergency response personnel. Uh reinforcing our commitment to safe and reliable service. And as I stated in my opening, there's an existing regular station that is operating in HAL today. Is that correct? Yes. The station serves Go ahead.
Service Howell and the surrounding communities. And where is the station located currently? Within the jug handle of State Route 9 and Burgerville Road. And can you um describe in general how a regular station fits into the overall gas delivery to customers. So a
regulator station transfers gas from high pressure pipes to lower pressure pipes ultimately um to customers homes or businesses. When you transfer that gas from a higher pressure or a lower pressure, there is a corresponding decrease in temperature of the gas. And
if that temperature reaches a point where it gets below freezing, 32 degrees, um the equipment can freeze. And why is the existing regular station being proposed to be replaced at the current loc the proposed location? I'm sorry. The pressure drop being
experienced at the existing station is causing our equipment to freeze. So, and freezing equipment can lead to outages as well as delays in our personnel responding to emergency issues and uh and troubleshooting problems at the site. By adding a heater to this station
or to this facility, uh we will be able to preheat the gas before it goes through the pressure reduction so that it maintains a temperature after pressure reduction that is above the freezing point so our equipment doesn't freeze. um in improving the reliability and efficiency of our our service and
operation of the regulators and the subject application that's before the board that's uh to be located in that piece of property that's 2.8 acres at the corner of Burgerville Road and Route 9. Is that correct? That is correct. And why was the subject location selected?
The location of the existing station is in the jug handle of a state highway. it can't support an above ground heater. Um, which as I mentioned is is critical to the reliable and efficient operation of the station. Um, so basically we needed to find a new location for the
station. The proposed site is an ideal one because it is consistent with our existing pipeline infrastructure that has already been built to serve Powell and the surrounding communities and also the property was available to us. And the proposed regular station is is
similar to the one that's existing. Yeah, the new station is designed to continue to serve How and the surrounding communities with the enhanced reliability of the heater. Um, and there was a zip drive, I believe, that was handed over be before we
started our presentation and I think you wanted to go through the various parts of the proposed system. Is that correct? Yes. Um, if we could I think we're there was pre-marked A1 through A17. So this would be a 18 if you have it. No. Yes.
In the zip drive I have uh aerial demo photos rendering sheet 8 and then exterior view overall interior pipeline inspection and regulators. Can you pull up overall interior view please? Sure. Thank you. So what this what this picture is is a
picture of a similar station that we Hold on. Uh if we can should we call this A18 then? Yes, that will be A18. Okay. And Mark, can you describe what is being shown on the uh TVs? Yes. So, this is a picture of a similar station that
was recently constructed uh by New Jersey Natural Gas in in Mammoth County. Thank you. Um the equipment at the station shown in the picture is very similar to the equipment they're proposing uh for this facility.
So when you look at the I guess be challenging but hopefully there. So if you look at that small piece of equipment in the front right that is a filter. So when the when the gas comes from our inlet piping into
this regulator station it first goes through the filter. The filter will remove uh dust, other particulate, and some condensation from the gas stream in order to clean it before it enters more of the components of the station. Next, the the gas will flow
into the heater. The heater as as I mentioned before, it will it will preheat the gas. Uh typically for a installation that we're proposing here, it'll preheat it to 95 degrees. So, as it as as it exits the heater and goes through the pressure drop, it will maintain a temperature that's above 32
degrees to prevent our equipment from freezing. And then if you look in the back left there, those are our regulator runs. Um, two, it's above ground piping. They're not they're not very long, they're short. Those are our control points, right? So, they are that's how
what we use to control the pressure and the flow into our downstream system based on customer demand. Something we also show here is that's a communication box. So what that does is a facility like this, an above ground
regulator station for us and we have over 35 of them in our fac in our system is controlled by our gas control in our main headquarters which is man 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. They're constantly monitoring pressure and flow at this facility.
Something else you'll see if you look by the heater there's an emergency generator that's just to supply emergency power in the event of a power outage something we are proposing additionally to this facility it's on what are the other options of
pictures pipeline inspection regulators pipeline inspection please yes uh I'm sorry which one pipeline inspection please thank you so this is a picture of pipeline inspection. Uh, this will be A19. Sorry. Thank you. That's okay. So,
just to clarify, this is a picture at a different facility than I I showed before. Um, what this does, it allows us these are two pipeline inspection um provisions, we'll call them. They allow for us to perform internal inspections
of our higher pressure lines. So, these are this is um facilities that we'll have at this station that we didn't have at the other one I showed you previously. And so, there's no um occupiable buildings that are proposed in connection with the application. Is that correct? No, no buildings. Okay. And can you talk about uh maintenance
and how often employees might come to this site? So, for a facility like this, our routine maintenance is two times a year. Um, routine maintenance will be performed during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, 8 to 5. We will have monthly safety and security patrols
as well. So, somebody else will drive around on a monthly basis to make sure everything looks right, the way it's supposed to be. Um, our maintenance crews, they just show up in a box truck. It's like the size of a UPS truck. So, very uh very limited um vehicle disturbance to the area. Okay. Thank
you. I have no further questions. Charlie, do you guys have an existing facility at the corner of Belmar Boulevard and Route 34 in Wall? Yes, we do. Is that comparable to what you're proposing here at the corner of Burgerville? Comparable, but Belmar Boulevard is larger. Larger. Okay. So,
just to give the board perspective, anyone that's driven from how Belmar Boulevard, you're heading east towards Wall, Route 34 on your right hand side. That's kind of what the facility is going to look like. Okay. If you're on Route 34, you might not even notice that it's there cuz they got a pretty solid hedge of trees there. But that gives you
an idea of what what they're proposing. Question. Yeah. Yes. Just a quick question. There were there were exhaust uh pipes, whatever, lack of a better word, chimneys. What comes out of them? So, those are the vent stacks for the heater, which is a boiler. All it does,
it generates heat so we can preheat the we can heat the gas as it flows through. So, it's the same as any other natural gas appliance that needs to be vented. Okay. Thank you, Jared. Yeah. Um, two quick ones. Does this generate any sound?
Yes, it does. We do have an acoustic uh expert here if you would like to qualify him. However, he will tell you, I can give you the summary of it that this would be in compliance with the noise regulations, both daytime and nighttime levels. Okay. And just, you know, we're dealing with gas and heating it up. Just
can you address anything safetywise? Is there any any issues with safety of this uh this type of business you're doing here? Sure. Well, as far as far as what aspects what are the mechanics of the heater? Like how is that how does that heater work?
What you said it runs off of natural gas? OB, I guess that makes sense. Uh is it like a filament or that that heats up the gas or it's an indirect heater, right? So there's there's tubes inside that heat that heated glycol mixture and then there's tubes that have the gas
flowing through it. So you'll have the the glycol mixture will be heated to you know the temperature warm enough to be able to maintain the temperature of the gas flowing through it at at 95 degrees. So there's no direct fire on the gas inside the heater. Okay. It's insulated.
Okay. Jennifer, do you have anything? pilot light. Mr. Chair, yeah. Um, is there surveillance cameras? We are not proposing cameras at this
time. We do have surveillance from our gas control that monitors pressure and flow. So, if there is an issue with uh they do see an issue with pressure, they do have the ability to remotely shut the facility down if needed and obviously call a crew out to Okay. And and what are the security measures? What other
security measures? What do we have? Other security measures? Well, we're going to have a 8ft fence surrounding the facility. Uh, all gates will be locked, padlock on them. All the valves you can see inside will be chain chained and locked as well to prevent anybody
from being able to turn them. And that's just standard. That's all your facilities have. All of our above ground facilities I mentioned have the standard uh safety measures, right? And that and that's in in regulation with um governing bodies of that oversee you.
Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Um I think that's it actually. Um I don't know if there's a question for you. So all these other buildings that are on the property New Jersey Natural Gas owns the 2.85 acres, right? They're contract purchasers today. What was that? They're
contract purchasers today. Hopefully, in the event that this board were to approve that location, they would move forward to acquire the property. Okay. All these buildings are still in existence on the property. They're still there. All of them. Yes. Our next witness could address that, but I
believe they are. Okay. Great. Okay. No further questions. We'll go to next witness. Our next witness is our civil engineer, Brian Dino with French PL. Um, oh, you already swore. Uh, Brian, you are civil engineer in the state of New Jersey. Is your license current? It
is. And you've previously testified before this board. I think it was several years ago, but u, Mr. Chairman, we can go through his qualifications, but uh, his license is current. No, if his license is current, and I do remember a couple years ago, so I accept your qualifications. Thank you. And you were the preparer of the civil
engineering plans, the stormware report and uh the EIS that was submitted. Is that correct? Either your office direction. Correct. Correct. Okay. Um finally, if you can start by discussing the existing conditions of the property, the buildings located there on and the surrounding area. If I can get exhibit
one, please. One, which is aerial. I don't know what that next exhibit number would be. A19. A20 would be the next one. Yes. A20. A20. So, I'll try to go fast. I have five exhibits here. Uh, what we have
here is an aerial exhibit showing the uh property outlined in blue in the center of the screen as well as surrounding properties. This is obtained from near map um this year 2025. So, it's pretty current. Actually, no, might have been last year. I'm sorry. During fall. Um,
so you get a little idea of what's going on the site. I know one of the questions were, you know, are there buildings still on the property? and and the question is yes, but I'm going to walk through it real quick. Property is located in blue. Um, as was mentioned earlier, this property is about 2.8 acres. It's located along Route 9 and
Burgerville Road. It's a regularly shaped. It has two frontages, both obviously on Route 9, which is about 330 ft of frontage, and Burgerville Road, which is about 560 feet. Um, to the north part of the property, which is what's called the rear property line,
and you can see it says Madwan River. that is a tributary to the Manasquan River and it does run along the rear property line. Um the HD1 highway um highway development zone extends up and down Route 9 both north and south and on
both sides of the highway. Uh there's retail and commercial to the north. Um the one property just to the north of the property there which is I believe lot 7.01 1 is an existing residence in the HD1 zone which is a non-conforming use. Uh across the street there is a
retail um office sorry retail and commercial space and to the souththeast uh you can see it says office building is an office use. Uh question uh mentioned earlier was the location of the existing regulator station and it's located right in here. That's the jug
handle. Um that's where the current regulator station is located. Um, some other some other things. The property is wooded. I mean, this photo here is taken in the fall, so the leaf cover is is gone, but it's primarily wooded. It does have structures on
there. There approximately 20 structures that are located on the property. Um, they are abandoned. They are mostly all collapsed. Um, not sure, but
yeah. So, I have a board. These are all uh photos of various buildings showing their current condition. This was taken about I say about a year and a half ago when our our environmental uh engineers went on the property LSRPs. Um debris piles. That's Route 9
view. Um obviously Burger Rail Road has a couple um buildings along it, but approximately 20 structures and debris piles just um scattered throughout the property. Um, it is okay. But we can
mark the whole packet of existing conditions photos as 821. Those are mine. They're not yours. Oh, okay. Because we did we did have our own, too. Oh, so if you want to go to um You have them in uh this one. I want to jump to sheet
two, which I'm sorry, number two demo or no. Yeah, number two demo just to kind of give an idea of the property a little bit further. So I I mentioned so this is part of the set that was submitted. This is sheet two. This kind of gives an idea of of the
building locations. Um not the current condition obviously. We'll see that in a second on my next exhibit. But this is the property that was um surveyed by my office. The building and andor foundations were located. Um they're all labeled, you know, A through I don't
know, I think an L or an N. Um and what this plan shows is here some of some of the constraints in the property. Um to the north I mentioned which is the rear property line is Masquan River. Uh we we had delineated freshwater wetlands for our property, submitted LOI application
to D. D reviewed our line and has approved it and issued the LOI uh permit and identified buffers. The majority of the wetlands that's on our property is along the water's edge which is called state open waters has a zero foot buffer
and as we move to the west I don't want to hit this gentleman's head but right over here the wetlands jumps up the embankment a little bit so that far west portion uh the wetlands does come up the embankment and there is a 50ft buffer there uh across the river uh D um
applied a wetland line on the other bank and there's a 50ft buffer So, as you look at this uh exhibit, I believe it's in um it's hard to tell what color. I think it's believe it's in yellow. Yellow is the wetland buffer, the 50ft buffer. Um our office also calculated
the flood hazard line, which is the flood elevation. Um topography on the site is relatively flat from the intersection to let's call it the yellow line only drops about 2 foot in grade. So, it's a relatively flat site. Once you hit that yellow line, it drops down
about 12 to 13 feet down to that water body. So that flood flood hazard line or flood elevation is halfway up that embankment. And that line is shown in that blue dashed dot line, the light blue dashed dot line um to the northwest of the uh what's called page and and
plan. um from that water body. D also has a repairarian buffer uh and that is the orange dash line which is further closer to uh to the intersection which is that orange dash line that runs uh through uh buildings I think it's O and
K. In addition, township has a stream quarter on water bodies which is that that first uh line a dash dot dot dash line and then then the township also has a 100 foot buffer on top of that which is the
blue dash line. So, as you can see, this property is is not only riddled with a number of structures, but also riddled with constraints. Not just DP constraints, but the township's own stream quarter and stream quarter buffer. With these constraints, as you
can see, the most restrictive one is this one here, right? That's the stream quarter 100 foot buffer, which is really 200 feet from the stream. And if you apply the 60ft front setback, you really get a small little triangle of billable area on this property without disturbing
any of these buffers or um environmental constraints. And that's approximately 2500 square ft. So really, it's a really small area on this property. Um but again, I just wanted to show the board some of the constraints that have been approved by D and the other ones that are um imposed by the township's
ordinance. And you can see a lot of these buildings u I would say 17 I think three of them are outside it 17 of the 20 of buildings are located within all these constraints whether it be the stream quarter buffer or the stream quarter or the repairarian zone. So
again um just wanted to give uh the board a sense of what's occurring out there. If we can go to exhibit number my exhibit number three on the on my uh thumb drive which is called photos and that would be a 22 22. Yeah, A21
will be the uh the demo. Okay. The the slide that was just up and A22 will be uh photos. So this plan is not part of the set. It's called existing site photographs prepared by my office sheet 101. And and
what this is is uh 12 photos. You know, we have we have a whole slew of photos, but uh my environmental team had visited the site to look at the property to do some environmental testing um on some of the debris material, some of the dumpster material, um some of the soil
and groundwater. So, uh we did a phase one and a phase two. Uh pictures working from the top uh corner um working clockwise. Photo one is looking south. You're standing on Route 9 looking south at the intersection. Yes, the building that probably everybody sees as they're
driving down Route 9 south. If you turned right and looked into the property from that same location, um there are two driveway curb cuts located on Route 9. Um this is the one that's most northern uh driveway curb cut looking into the property. At the time of our visit, there were some vehicles
uh and some dumpsters as you can see. Uh moving again to photo three. Hey Brian, I don't mean to interrupt, but we're rolling in on 10 here. I think the board understands what's out there. Can we move it along? Got it. Next, next exhibit. So, if we can go to our
rendering exhibit. This is the proposed conditions as was described by by previous uh by Mr. Penachon is that the applicant is proposing to demolish all of these structures, clean up the site,
remove um all the debris piles um and will be overseen by our LSRP and construct a new natural gas regulator station. The station will be approximately 8,500 square f feet uh in in size which is approximately 85 by 106.
Um it will have a 8ft fence channel fence as uh was mentioned earlier. Um the station is located approximately 340 ft from the nearest residential dwelling to the southwest and approximately 250 ft to the nearest dwelling to the north.
As I mentioned earlier on Route 9, um this station location will meet the current setbacks in terms of lot front uh sorry start terms of front setback located a little over 60 ft from both Burgerville and Route 9. However, it will encroach into the township corridor
buffer as well as the D's repairing uh buffer. Uh the compound will have three different gates. The first one is a 20 foot slide gate which will be accessed from that 20 foot paved driveway as you can see on this exhibit. Um which will
have a new driveway curb cut coming off of Burgerville and turning to the east and accessing the the uh compound. Another 12ft double gate will be located just to the west of that and a 4ft man gate will be located to the north. Um I'm not going to walk through the
equipment inside as was discussed earlier. Um the compound itself will be screened by year-round um landscape as you can see consisting of hemlocks, red cedars and holl. Um emergency backup generator was mentioned. Um
uh this compound is located where it's located is going to require about 22 trees to be removed. However, the application is proposing 138 new trees of which 83 are deciduous. 55 will be evergreen trees. Um, as mentioned
earlier, the existing com uh existing station to the south will be decommissioned. If we can go to my next exhibit, which is sheet eight of my set of plans. What What are the purple squares? I'm sorry. You have to go back to that one sec. So, what we did what we illustrated
here is all those buildings that I mentioned earlier that we demolished, we're going to reveate with new landscaping. So, these are all various trees plantings that are going to be in those footprints. So, we're going to reveitate the stream quarter, the stream quarter buffer, and the repairarian um zone. Difference between the purple and
the green blocks. Looks like you got two sets of Yeah, it's my my landscape architect gets crazy in colors. I don't know if it's one species or another, but Okay. Um so, moving forward to exhibit A. Uh sorry, this will be that's going to be
A24. Uh labeled as sheet eight. Yes, this is sheet eight, which is part of the set. it was colored as part of the set. Again, reiterating um the three purple buildings are the three buildings that exist that are not being impacted or or impacting the existing buffers.
Everything else as you see in there, the greens and the blues, we kind of identified what the restoration is. Um one of the variants that we're seeking is is disturbing the township's second 100 foot, which is really the stream quarter buffer, and that's hatched here
in this light beige or light pink. Um the township uh ordinance allows you to go into that buffer no more than 30 feet. Basically creating the 100 foot reducing down to 70 and taking that loss of buffer and then compensating it somewhere else almost like what we do
typically with wetlands. Um in this instance as I mentioned earlier there's not much area to develop on this property. So we are uh not proposing to compensate anywhere else. But however what I'm what I'm illustrating on this sheet is and it's important to note is the top corner here in the blues and
greens. I we calculated what those structures are um and what would be reveated as opposed to what is going to be disturbed. So yes, we are going a little bit further into uh that that buffer um more we're going into about 70
ft at the worst case location. So we're disturbing the buffer or stream quarter buffer the township court buffer with a total area of that beige pink of 6,562 square ft. Whereas we're re reveitating the first 100 ft of the
stream corridor which those green buildings that's 6,000 ft and the second 100 ft which the blue another 4200. So a total reveation of 10,389 whereas this compound is disturbing 6,562 which is really a net
increase in reveation of about 3,800 square ft. Mr. Chair, could I just ask some questions? Maybe speed along a little bit. So, uh, you you guys submitted a application to D for a flood hazard area permit, right? That is correct. That's pending. Okay. So, what I would say is, um, their 150 foot
repairarian overlaps with 150 ft of our stream and stream quarter buffer. Um, if they get their permit from the D for the flood area, I have no issue with the board granting relief. A lot of the disturbance that they are proposing in there is to like amilarate existing derelict structures and abandoned septic
systems and wells. Um, it's my understanding that those have been there and the town's been trying to get the existing property owner to do take care of that for a very long time. As part of this application, that's going to be a requirement of any approval and that would help expedite hopefully that process occurring. Um, as far as the
development in the other, you know, remaining 50 ft of the stream corridor. Um, what's the alternative? Right. So, what's the reason why it can't stay across the street in the jug handle at DOT? Is that something that DOT has mandated that it can't stay in there right away?
I'll answer that. I know my Yeah, I know. Yeah, I know there's the issue with the freezing and everything like that, but like is is there a reason why you couldn't build this same facility in the jug handle across the street? Is there maybe that's a question for Miss Pachio and Yeah, I we actually talked about that. Historically, NJ dot will
not approve the heater in that in in a jug handle. Gotcha. So, they're literally moving the facility across the street. it's going to be enhanced and upgraded. But I would say as and I'm not going to I'll let Jen talk more of the planner, but in terms of like some of the other uses that are permitted in the
I think this HD1 zone, this is probably one of the least intense uses that can go there. Um, as far as the ground cover for the for the the site, it's 6-in gravel. They have a concrete apron up at the rightway. I think that's more than sufficient for the two maintenance vehicles that are coming in a year to
come in and out of that site where we're not going to be having gravel tracked into the rightway. Um there there's a number of curb cuts that exist along both frontages probably with these historic structures. I think they're closing all of them. We had a comment about there was one more that looked like it wasn't going to be closed. The
applicant agreed to to That's correct. I counted three. You found you found the fourth. We'll close all four and open a new one which is for this driveway. Okay. And then as far as circulation, so like once you get into the actual compound, like that's all dictated by what like NFPA or or the GPU dictates
like separation or clearance around all the infrastructure in there. It's my understanding. I don't think you're pulling vehicles in there. You're pulling up to the gate. Yeah, I mean we do. I mean, the vehicle may pull right in front of it just to be able to,
but a fire truck should be able to pull into that access driveway up to the gate and access and everything. Okay. All right. And then, sorry, uh, they do need a waiver from not providing sidewalk along the frontages. Having said that, there is nothing along the corridor. I'll let Jen
talk about whether or not uh, you know, they need to make a contribution to a fund for that. As far as the stormwater management and uh things like that, we didn't treat it as a major development. A lot of this is to like ameliate existing non-conformities into the repairarian. So, as long as they rectify
that with D and get their flood area approval, we have no issue with that. Um, as far as traffic, uh, we talked about the curb cuts. They are doing a rightaway dedication, a partial rightway dedication along uh, Burgerville Road, which is our rightway. I just say as a
condition of board approval, they got to submit a deed and meet some bounds. uh as part of resolution compliance. And then I have a bunch of comments in there about updating the ERRI, the NRI. Um you know, obviously as you get your flood as area permit, that will be added to that
uh as part of resolution compliance. Um and then obviously we talked about all the wells and septic. They're going to have to get board of health approval, and that was also in their memo, too. So, um that's really all I have from an engine perspective. I had some questions about sound and you know is really the generator and then I guess we had a one
or two board members ask about the the heaters and and that kind of stuff. Maybe you can come up and just give us a brief snapshot about that. One other thing we didn't talk about lighting there is no lighting proposed here and based on the frequency of maintenance I don't think that it's warranted for this but that would require a waiver. Yeah,
correct. Okay. So, if I could just jump into just to kind of s uh tag team on what Charlie was saying, we had identified and I know that um Christine still has yet to come up and testify, but we had identified
uh variances from our buffer requirements section 63 because you do have residential development um to the south and to the west of you. Um, however, and and I believe that it
majority of it falls within the encumbered area of the site as it is. It wouldn't require the entire frontage along Burgerville. It really would go up to like the end of the jug handle basically, which is where your development is. So, there's no development you're proposing in that
residential buffer. I just want you to show it on the plans. Uh, we showed it. It's probably too light for you to see, but it's definitely there. Okay. Cuz that's like really hard. I know. I looked at today and I saw how light it was. It's definitely there. And then to the north, uh, Jen, as well, we showed a buffer to that property to the north as
well. So, I I agree with Charlie, that there's really no need to delineate parking spaces with the frequency of the of how many people are coming. Um, they also do need a waiver for the fence height, which is 8 feet where 6 foot um is typically required instead of in the
front yard 4T 50% open. This is chain link. We don't typically like chain link. However, they have heavily landscaped around it. So, I feel comfortable that ultimately, I know Sherie would like the the evergreens to be a little smaller on installation because otherwise they'll die, right?
Um, but ultimately, I don't think you're going to be able to see this except if you're looking right at the curb cut that it's not being landscaped. Um, so I don't have a problem with the the fence variance. I think it's necessary for security reasons. Um, the one thing I
will say and you you will have heard me say this a million times, I will not recommend a contribution for the sidewalk on Route 9. We have been systematically putting a network of sidewalks along Route 9. I know it's Route 9. Everyone says that
except for the bus stops along Route 9. And if you look at an aerial photograph where there is no sidewalk, you can see the dirt trail of the people that walk along Route 9. I would take no exception to the contribution along Burgerville because it's really kind of going nowhere but and but along Route 9 I
would like to see the sidewalk and before anyone questions me DOT does allow it 4 foot concrete. So it's jurisdiction with DT we're submitting application for those closed illustrated if they say no they say no. Well, I would say partial waiver like in installation of sidewalk on nine and a
contribution along Burgerville I think is a is an acceptable. Yeah, I think it is too. Would the applicant be a great agree just with the caveat that so long as DOT approves it? We haven't had any push back from them on any other site along through 9. So I do not anticipate DOT pushing back. That's kind of how
we've gotten sidewalk on. Yeah. So no issue. Good, Mr. Chair. Sorry, one last question. So, I think there was a question about um like you know everything's going to be locked and and chained and everything like that. Uh with the chain link fabric is there like sometimes uh board will ask for like anti- climbing. Could the fabric be made
like a little bit tighter so it's harder for like for climbing purposes or something like that? Good. Yeah. I've seen that fencing like along around PSE and D substations and stuff like that. It's called it looks like chain link but it's really like anti- climbing and it's a little bit smaller and it's a little bit sturdier than a typical chain link.
It's a little bit more solid. Yeah. Yeah. I think that's uh goes without saying we got to safety safety but other than honestly at this point other than the um the testimony on the D1 variance I don't have any other questions. Okay Sher so that you'll work with Sherry as
far as type of plants that are going around the chain. Yeah, I've been working with their landscape architect. Um, I did ask for and they agreed to um to put temporary deer fencing around all those uh areas where they're going to
demolish the buildings and replant, you know, in those type of areas where it's literally in the woods, you know, we won't see those trees again. So, yeah. Uh, so they are putting temporary fencing in for that.
Okay, board members. Okay. Okay. Uh if you'd like to hear briefly from our acoustic engineer and then we will close with our planner. Okay. Amitted on compiance with the noise and I think we need to swear Ben in because
he was not uh he didn't not be the truth. The hospital I do state your name for the record. Spell your last. Benjamin Muller. M U L L E R. I'm a principal at Ostard Acoustal Associates. I've been practicing in the
field of acoustics for 25 years now. I'm a licensed professional engineer. My license is a good standing. I just accept your qualification. Everyone loves me, right? Thank you. Uh can I just roll and then very briefly please? So excellent. So um to look at
this site, we first went over and visited we saw some photos earlier. Uh we visited that site of where the pictures were taken which is in Homeell. Uh very similar equipment. We we measured sound produced by the valves. We had uh work with um NJNR to let some
gas loose to simulate a winter condition. We took measurements there and then I superimpose them uh engineering wise. But it for this new facility um we also Oh, so projections of those result in levels 40 or below at
the nearest houses and then it's in the mid-30s and low30s uh further away. Uh but to also collaborate with that, I went and visited and did a nighttime survey. Um ambient levels for all the locations that we care about are higher than the emissions. So not only will we
comply with uh ordinances, but will also have no negative impact. And then because I'm going fast and I skipped over it, discussing ordinances, we have a state code uh NJAC 729. NJAC 729. Thank you. and then our local
regulations which are a version of the model noise ordinance provided by the state. So everything lines up nicely. We have a 65 dBA daytime limit, 50 night. Uh we're going to be 40 or below at all receptors of concern. And so this is a
great location. Uh very suitable uh from an acoustical aspect. I have no concerns. Oh, generator. Uh the generator I have coolers bigger than the generator, but uh we measured that also at the site. Uh we have specs that were included in the submission. It's going to produce levels in the low 60s at 23
ft. So that would comply with the 65 dBA limit well within the fence line. So I have no concerns about that. It's it's really a minor player. Um the boiler doesn't heater doesn't make any noises uh to to be concerned about. Uh the real culprit is the um the valve noise. It's
a whooing noise when we change our our pressure. Uh, I think that's it. In conclusion, I I approve. I approve, too. I think you kept your uh authority a bit.
Any questions, Charlie? No, I would just say the generator is not operating 24/7 certainly during loss of power. So, it's it would only be exercised for routine maintenance which is uh as required by the site.
Everybody else good? Any questions from the board? Okay. Okay. Our final witness, Christine Capone. And Chris, Miss Capone was previously qualified and accepted. Yes, she was qualified and she can start. Yeah. Thank
you. And she's also under a time limit, too. Yes, I am. You know, I'll make my time limit. Um, so good evening again, chairman and members of the board. As you know, this is a D1 use variance because regulator stations are not a permitted use in the HD1 zone. Because this is an inherently beneficial use, we
are governed by the Sika balancing test, not the Medici. So, you will not hear particular suitability testimony because presumptively we satisfy that as an inherently beneficial use. But what we do have to demonstrate is the public interest at stake here, which is the delivery of safe and reliable natural
gas service to the nearly 19,000 meters here in Howell Township. After we identify the public interest, we have to identify any um the the any potential impacts and any mitigating conditions and any reasonable conditions that can be imposed by the onto the application
to mitigate those conditions. You heard from the professionals that we are introducing hundreds of plantings onto the site and we will certainly be willing to work with Sher um Spiro and your other professionals. We will have the the um anti-climbing fencing to the best of our ability. will work with your
professionals to deliver that as well. Um, and we will comply with the requirements in the professionals review letters. So certainly there are plenty of conditions that we can approve on this application to mitigate any conditions. Uh, and then you balance, right? Then the last thing to do is to
balance that. When you're balancing, I think while we are not a a inherently or not a non-inherently beneficial use, when you're balancing, I think it's important to consider two things in your 2019 master plan re-examination report. In the comprehensive goals, there was a statement and I'm going to read it right from the master plan to minimize
prolonged business interruption and minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains, electric telephone and sewer lines, street bridges located in areas of special flood hazard. If that wasn't written for the site, I don't know what was. So the second is a comprehensive
objective that terms about talks about preserving the high level of public services and provide new facilities where necessary in order to accommodate population growth, economic development and the changing needs of residents. And this application does both of those things. So there are two goals in your
master plan that are uh accomplished by this application. We are also amendable to constructing the sidewalk as uh your planner has demanded on Route 9 and the waiver um elsewhere. So I think categorically we will unequivocally meet our burden of proof with respect to the
variance relief required. Um I believe even Mr. Cland check chimed in that this is a very benign use compared to what else is permissible in the HD1 zone. Um no no employees are going to visit here so we don't need parking and in one of our prep sessions I think we said I
think you'd be challenged to put a a dog house on this piece of property. So statutoily, I believe the burden of proof is satisfied for the grant of this inherently beneficial use. Thank you, Christine. You're welcome. I have no further witnesses. Thank you.
Yeah, that's what I Nothing from I think I think our members are all good, too. So, okay. Thank you. Let's make a motion for public. I'll make a motion to open the public. I'll second it. All in favor? Second. Sorry.
Okay. And motion to close. Oh, no. We didn't do the Are we yet? No comment. No. The board will now be open to the public for questions and comments. Please come up and state your name and address. Nobody.
I'm good. Seeing nobody. Motion to close. Second. All in favor? Hi. Hi. Nothing else from the professionals. John, do you even Nope. Uh, I would only ask that uh if the board acts in the
affirmative that uh there be some kind of stipulation that the current owner satisfies uh all the fines that are outstanding for the violations that have been um uh outstanding for all this time. That's all. It's a welcome project
uh on my end. Okay, you are a little bit under your projection time. So, how you like that? Yeah, that was a so quick summation. Uh, just very briefly, for all the reasons stated on the record before you, we would ask that the board vote favorably
on this application. We thank you for your time. Okay. This time, I'd like to entertain a motion, Mr. Chairman. Yes. I'd like to make a motion that we grant the use variance and preliminary and major final major site plans sought by this
applicant with the provisions that they provide the sidewalk on Route 9. They demolish the existing structures and do the existing plannings as they've uh stated and as John stated that the current owner meets the obligations to
Howell. Do I have a second? I'll second. Roll call. Mr. Barillo. Yes. Mr. Caner. Yes. Mr. Hughes. Yes. Mr. O'Donnell. I'd like to
say before I vote that this is a fantastic uh piece of property that you took from us to revive. Uh I'm so happy to see it go. Too bad it wasn't 20 years ago. Great. But that's a big yes for me. Mr.
Mr. Rosco, yes. Mr. Ryan, yes. And Chairman Merren, yes. Application is approved. Congratulations. Thank you very much. And thank you for keeping under the hour. Thank you everybody. Um, yeah, we're I know we're a little
late and I appreciate everybody staying, but I do think what we need to do is we need to sit down quickly and go over something that's I think important enough while we're all here, all nine of us, which is So, um, I'd like to make a
motion to go to executive session. I'll second that. A motion. A motion. Oh, there's a motion. I'll do a second. Okay. All in favor? I [Applause]
executive executive sess session resolution. Whereas title 10, chapter 4, section 13 of the New Jersey revised statutes requires that public sh not be excluded from any meetings in a public body unless a resolution authorizing
such exclusion is adopted of at a public meeting. And whereas the zoning board of adjustment of how will 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 10-4 to12 namely litigation. Now therefore be it resolved by the zoning board of adjustment of h the township of how that the public shall be excluded from the next portion of this meeting and that the zoning board of adjustment will not reconvene in public session
thereafter. Be it further resolved that minutes will be kept of the meeting in a closed session and the time of circumstances under which the discussion conducted in close session can be disclosed to the public and cannot be determined at this time. Thank you.
Okay, let's roll. We have to leave room. Oh jeez.