Heat. Heat. F zoning board of adjustment Monday November 24th 2025 regular meeting. I hereby declare this meeting of the How Township zoning board to be open adequate notice having been having having been given pursuant to the New Jersey Public 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 and 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, 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 How Township TV77. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Lisa. Can we have a roll call, please? >> Mr. Burillo is excused. Mr. Caner >> here. >> Mr. Hughes >> here. >> Mr. O'Donnell >> here. >> Mr. Orosco, >> I guess he's running late. Mr. Ryan,
>> present. >> Miss Scottson is excused. Mr. Kaparakus >> here. And Chairman Mertens, >> I am here. >> And can I ask everybody to please rise for the pledge of allegiance? >> I alian 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. >> Uh Please put on the record uh Mr. Arasco
is here. So we do have seven members. >> You have a quorum. >> Quorum. >> Oh, we had one. >> I had one. >> Okay. Andy, could you swear in the professionals, please? >> Do you swear the testimony you give will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth of healthy? >> I do.
>> State your names for the record. >> Charles Kliff, >> Christine Bell. >> Your professionals are sworn, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you, Andy. Um, approval minutes. Do we have any minutes? >> There are no minutes. >> Okay. Correspondence. >> Um there's one thing. An email was sent
to all the members with a draft copy of the meeting dates for 2026. Um does anyone have any comments? >> Yeah. Does any board members have any comments on the dates? >> Everything looks good to me, Mr. >> Yeah. The only thing is she said to mention that the only two dates that are different from the second or fourth
Monday are May 18th and October 5th, and that's because of the holidays. >> Okay. and our September looks good with Russia Shana, I guess. So, yeah. Okay, we have seven members. So, um do we need to vote on that
tonight? >> No. >> No, we'll hold off. >> I would just recommend just review it all and then we can >> Okay, we're going to review it and then maybe >> comments we can do >> so that way our other members can review it before we vote on it. >> Sounds good.
And that's the all uh that's it with the correspondence. >> Yes, that's it. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Resolutions before the board tonight. Case number BA21-28 Freehold Welding and corporate resolution granting additional one-year
extension of time on approval granted 911 2022. Eligible voters Burillo, Caner, O'Donnell, Arusco, Ryan Scottson, and Merrens. Do I have a motion? I'll make a motion to approve. M >> a motion by Mr. Ryan.
>> Second. >> Second by Mr. O'Donnell. >> Roll call. >> Mr. Caner. >> Yes. >> Mr. O'Donnell. >> Yes. >> Mr. Orosco. >> Yes. >> Mr. Ryan. >> Yes. >> Chairman Mertens. >> Yes.
>> Resolution memorialized. >> Case number BA24-18. CEV Holdings LLC. Resolution granting use variance, C variance, and preliminary and final site plan approval. Eligible voters, Caner,
Hughes, O'Donnell, Rosco, Ryan, Wisconsin, and Merens. Do I have a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> Motion by Mr. O'Donnell. >> Second it. >> Second by Mr. Ryan Ro. >> Mr. Chairman. Yes. >> Just refresh my memory which one this was.
>> Mr. Mayor, >> the EV Holdings. Yeah, >> this is uh Lenic Auto Body at Maxim and uh >> Okay, thank you. >> Yeah, good question. >> I wish I could have answered. >> Uh roll call. >> Roll call. Yes.
>> Uh Mr. Caner, >> yes. >> Mr. Hughes, >> yes. >> Mr. O'Donnell, >> yes. >> Mr. Rosco, >> yes. >> Mr. Ryan, >> yes. >> Chairman Mens, >> yes. >> Resolution memorialized. >> Okay. Um,
case number BA2420, Julie Rich LLC. At this time, I would like to entertain a motion from the board that we hold off on voting on this resolution tonight. >> It would be a motion to table, Mr. Chair. >> Okay. >> To the next meeting.
>> Okay. >> Yeah, >> I'll make a motion to table it, Mr. Chair. >> Mr. Hughes has made a motion to table it. >> I will second that. >> Second by Mr. Ryan. >> Is that right that I did that? >> Roll call. do a roll call on the motion. >> Just do a roll call. Uh Mr. Rosco.
>> Yeah, we're just going to wait on that. >> It's a motion to put it off to the next meeting. >> I made a motion if I should. >> What? >> Andy, I'm not on the list and I made the motion. Is that okay? >> What did you >> Did you certify watching it? >> I did watch it. Yes.
>> And I did read it, >> but >> um >> You want to remotion that? Why don't we read motion? >> I would. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I would. >> Do I have a motion? >> Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to table this resolution. >> Mr. Ryan has made a motion to table. Do
I have a second? >> Second. >> Only Mr. Rosco. >> Mr. Arasco. Right. >> Okay. Mr. Rosco is uh table. Okay. You have a roll call. Okay. >> Mr. Rosco. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Ryan. >> Yes. Chairman Mertens. >> Yes. >> Memorial. It It's tabled to the next. >> Okay. We This uh motion will be uh we will readress it at the next meeting >> and that is uh Lisa, what's that date?
The 8th. >> The next meeting is December 8th. >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. The other um matter tonight, we are going to just switch the orders. We do have a bulk variance uh C the third
one on the list tonight. This should not um be a very long application. So it is our my right to change the order. I advised the professionals and I've also
advised the uh attorneys. We will take uh we will move GM Church to the first on the list tonight. So, I'm going to read that into record right now. This is for case number BA25-15.
JM Church type of boat variance description application to JM Church LLC is applicant and owner seeking approval to demolish an existing one and a halfstory dwelling and construct a twostory fam family dwelling on an
undersized lot along with a new septic system portable well dry well ashvault driveway and other improvements on premise known as block 165 35.02 lot 15.01
43 Vandermir Road expiration is February 19th 2026. Good evening Mr. Pate. >> Good evening Mr. Chairman members of Good evening Mr. Chairman members of the board professionals and public Kenneth Pap on behalf of your applicant JM
Church LLC. This is as you've read into the record a request for property owners seeking bulk variance relief. There is on the property a single family residence which the property owner wishes to remove and to construct a new single family residence with
considerable additional improvements for the benefit of the municipality. Before we make a substantive presentation, could I ask if the record could reflect that our notices were received and the board has jurisdiction? >> Yes, Mr. Pape. The board has jurisdiction. >> Thank you. The presentation this evening
will be by Eric Halpert. Mr. Halpert is a professional engineer and a professional planner. It is my intention to have him first present the physical aspects of the plan as the engineer and then there are some addition some minor additional testimony with regard to planning testimony. If we could have Mr.
Halpert sworn or affirmed >> sworn in now please >> please. >> Do you affirm the testimony you give will be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Please state your name. Please state your name for the record and spell your last.
>> Eric Halpert, H A L P E R T. Licensed professional engineer and planner in the state of New Jersey. I received my bachelor's in science and civil engineering from NJIT. I have appeared before multiple boards including this board and these plans were prepared under my supervision.
>> Qualifications may just one last question. Mr. Chair, please confirm that your licenses are in good standing on this date. >> They are. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. President. >> Mr. Halbert, if you could indicate to the board the exhibits that you intend to rely upon. Mr. Agodar is here to
assist in presenting them electronically. If you could just identify what exhibits you would like to work with and where should we begin. >> I will be utilizing the um submitted plan set with the existing conditions
and the proposed conditions as well as an aerial exhibit that was submitted to the board. And if you can please put up the aerial exhibit dated 11:2125. Um I could go through the surrounding area. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. the other one. The the board is looking at an aerial exhibit of the property located along Vandervir Road on the western side of the road. It is a two-lane highway with a posted speed limit of 35 miles per
hour and it is surrounded by single family dwellings on the uh same side of the roadway. If you can please bring up the plan set dated 10225, the existing condition sheet
and that would be sheet two of this set. >> Thank you. >> Could you zoom Sheet two, right? >> Sheet two. Thank you. Uh, >> perfect. >> The existing conditions sheet depicts
the property is presently improved with a single family dwelling, one and a half stories. It is serviced by a septic system. It is serviced as well by public water. Presently, there is an improved driveway on the north side of the property.
There is a shed and the present setbacks are are 13 the present setbacks to the uh front yard is 13.90 ft to the rear yard
presently is 8 ft as depicted on the existing condition survey. >> As we go to the next plan, this is the structure that our client proposes to remove. Yes. >> And this is the structure our client is proposing to construct.
>> Correct. The proposed conditions sheet is depicting the redevelopment of the property. The existing house will be demolished. A new house is going to be built with a driveway. The driveway will
measure 20 feet wide in essentially the same spot the existing driveway exists. The footprint of the proposed dwelling is approximately 1650 square ft where the current dwelling is approximately
1100 square ft footprint. A new septic system is proposed conforming to the board of health requirements and the applicant will be required to obtain the approval from the board of health and the NJD requirements. The applicant as
well is proposing to install sidewalk along the frontage. There currently is no sidewalk and the applicant will comply with a comment to connect the proposed sidewalk to the existing sidewalk which is approximately 15 ft to
the north and continues around Satan Hall uh drive. The applicant as well is proposing a right-of-way dedication for future roadway widening by township of Howell. This will result in a smaller
lot area, but only due to the fact that the applicant is dedicating a right of way, an 8.5 ft uh width right of way. >> Mr. Halbert, just excuse me. How much sidewalk is the applicant going to install? The applicant is going to
install along the entire frontage of 153 feet >> 153 feet >> plus linear feet plus a connection to the existing sidewalk which is approximately 15 feet to the north. >> Charlie >> Yeah. So if you were to look at um this
from the road or on like Google Street View, you could see there's a utility pole like 10 or 15 feet just to the north of the common property line with the north to the uh the lot to the north. the sidewalk when that subdivision was done doesn't come all the way to the property line. So, they're just proposing to
>> carry it another 15 feet more than what they have currently shown on the plan. So, John, if you can just go to the north here on street view. >> You can see that's where the sidewalk ends. So, the property line is actually like where the chevrons, the little yellow arrow chevrons, that's probably where the property line is. So, they're
just going to run it all the way and tie into that sidewalk on Satan Hall. Um my comment we had they do need a waiver from providing curb. I mean being that we have curb and sidewalk there. My recommendation would be that the board if you're inclined to act favorably let's require the curb too continue the streetscape through there. So it's one
nice clean frontage um continuation of the the residential. Mr. Pave is that something the applicant has an issue with? >> It's a substantial expense that we were hoping to avoid, but if it's something that's important to you and to the town, the answer is yes. >> Okay. And Mr. Mr. Chair, do Ken, do you
mind if I just jump in and ask some pointed questions? Nope. >> So, so um they're here because the lot is undersized. Uh one because it has a septic system. Um lots not serviced by public sewer in town are required to have a minimum of 1 acre. Um when a lot
is proposed to be serviced by septic system, we also look at the sewer mapping, the sewer service area to see where the closest sewer infrastructure is. There is a manhole at the corner of uh Satan Hall and Vandervir Road. Uh that's 150 ft north of the property. Our
code doesn't require residential single lot property owners to connect to public sewer unless that sewer is within 100 ft of the property frontage. So they're not required to connect. Um so to make them connect public sewer to service one lot would be
a significant expenditure. So I don't see that something as being required. Um the lot is unique. Um it's elongated with like front, you know, significant frontage on Vander Road. The where the existing house is situated, it kind of
runs 90, you know, perpendicular to the length of the lot. So you can see how close it is to the public rightway here. By knocking down the structure, they're shifting it to actually make it run lengthwise with the lot frontage. So, while they do still need technical relief for the lot area, for the frontage, and I think for the one
sideyard setback, they're actually improving upon the existing condition by turning that structure. Um, it's just a particular narrowness of that lot from a depth perspective that, you know, to build something completely conforming, you'd be like left with like a railroad
uh house on this property, which would have a certain aesthetic that uh uh is not necessarily appealing. They are proposing a new septic system that um complies with the board of health. They're going to have to get that approval as a condition of any board approval. Um the Have you done soil
borings, Mr. Halpert on that? >> We have done soil. >> What's the water table look like? >> The water table was greater than 10 ft. >> Okay. All right. So by that >> by Mr. Roberto. >> Okay. So by that representation, there should not be any concern for the septic system needing to be mounted if the
septic if the water table's 10 ft or lower. So we can cross that off the box. They are also moving that into the property. The existing septic system, the concrete chamber is like very close to the rightway. So that in itself is also an improvement with this with this application. They are proposing dry
wells. All the roof leaders are going to be channelized into a dry well size for the water quality storm. So that's a positive. As far as the dwelling, is there any intent to put bedrooms in the basement? >> There is no intent. The architect plans depict no bedrooms in the basement. >> Okay. And then there wasn't any like
attic plans, but there's no intent to make a habitable attic or bedrooms in the attic. >> No. Okay, >> that's the correct. That's correct. >> So, it's a four bedroomedroom dwelling. You've got a onecar garage attached to the structure and then you've got a 20 foot wide by at least 20 foot deep
driveway. So, that's enough to satisfy three cars. So, complies with RSIS. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um, see if I just had a couple more comments. So they are so they do need the relief because they're making the lot area even smaller. Um I would
just acknowledge that they are providing rightaway dedication that's required in accordance with the master plan. Uh Vander Road here is only 33 foot wide. They're proposing to dedicate another 8 and 1/2 ft to get us to 50 50 ft. We could require it in an easement and they would you know still need the relief but
it wouldn't be making it worse. To me, a rightaway dedication is preferable to an easement here. And I don't know that it necessarily changes the characteristic of of what's being presented to the board. So, that would I think be the preference. Um, and I think the if the board's inclined to require curb, I think that would be a positive as well.
Um, see if I had anything else here. We talked about the septic. So, you said it's on public order right now. >> We confirmed >> and it's going to be reconnected. Okay. >> That's that's positive, too. Um, let's see if it's on. We talked about the rightway. We talked about the roof
leaders. Uh, as a condition of the approval, if there's any tree clearing required, you'll get a tree clearing permit. You're also going to have to get us free soils because you're over 5,000 square feet. Um, and then as far as accessory structures and generators, obviously, this is an undersized lot. At
time of future plot plan, you know, you just make sure that that's shown and you're going to be subject to all the codes that are applicable to those infrastructure. Uh, other than that, that's all I really have. I'll let Christine chime in if she has any planning questions. >> I don't have any additional questions.
>> Okay. >> If I may, I very much appreciate the thoroughess that Charlie just placed before you. Um, essentially usurp Mr. Halpert's testimony. only item that was not pointed out that we wanted to make
certain was pointed out in addition to the storm water management and the dedication and the sidewalk there's also street trees where there currently aren't street trees that are shown on this plan um and I quite candidly unless the board has
further questions of Mr. Halpert I'm very comfortable resting on the presentation that Mr. Kliff has just made to you in support of the requ relief that's being requested. >> Okay. Um we have two things we have well we got to go to public but before we go
to public I think among us we need to discuss the curb line um with the sidewalk. So I want to just get a feel for everybody before we >> Mr. Ryan. >> Can we maybe um take a look at that street view again? I know to the south
there's a sidewalk >> and Yeah. Is there a curb? That's >> okay. Yes. >> So, if you continue to the south, Charlie, you are you controlling it, Charlie, or Oh, I'm sorry. >> Sorry. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Keep going to the south. There's You're going to hit a sidewalk at some
point. >> It's further down than I thought. There it is. All right. It's much further down, but I believe there's a Yeah, if you kept going. >> Yeah, there's a curve there. >> So, it's kind of just ends right at that light there.
>> We would rather do a contribution, right? >> Yeah. So, um that's just guesstimating at probably like a thousand feet maybe give or take from the south of this property line. There's nothing in our ordinance, especially for an undersized lot that requires them to run offtrack
improvements for such a development. I think what they're offering, what we're discussing is sidewalk and curbing along the subject frontage, which is still pretty lengthy. Uh to me, uh I think the curbing is good because when you don't have curbing, even if you have sidewalk, it creates the possibility for people to
pull on to areas that aren't meant to be parked. Uh and having curbing there certainly makes that more difficult. You know what I mean? And you have a clear defined driveway curb cut and a driveway with um you know, people aren't just pulling head on off of Vander Road. And uh you know we always ask about how you know extra bedrooms and things like
that. The curbing I think would be another uh >> check and checks and balance on that on that aspect. >> Everybody concur with uh our engineer. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. I'd like to just say something in regard to the curbing. I agree with the curbing but what I'd like to see from what I've just seen that everybody has to put curbing in there. not a pick and choose like he needs it, he don't because it should connect all the way up
in that particular area. Not that I'm in favor of curbing, but I don't want to see anybody come in and say we don't need it and not get it and he's getting it and he has to pay for it. So, I just want to make a record of that if any other cases come through that that's our policy.
>> Yes. Because I miss uh Charlie did bring up and I totally agree. I do not like to see a sidewalk without a curb. I mean, I know it's an extra expense, but I mean, it it doesn't really serve a purpose having a
sidewalk if you don't have that uh curbing. So, I think I think we're all cons. >> It's dangerous for somebody walking. >> Yeah, exactly. Also, um John, maybe you can help me out with this one. Um
they're testifying. There's not going to be any living areas downstairs. Is that something with the current issue that we've been having? Should that be maybe >> Mr. Chair? No, no, no bedrooms. >> No bedrooms, >> correct? >> Yeah.
>> Someone may have recreation in the basement. >> Yeah. No, that's fine. What I'm just saying is, is that something that we should be inspecting once a year just to make sure that they're complying? I'm not saying they're not going to, but we
are the town has been having a lot of issues with uh a lot of people. I would say that that's more on a case-byase basis. I mean, given the location of uh where they're proposing
the the home, the additional occupants, you know, you're now taking into account uh more motor vehicles possibly coming in uh in and out of this property. And uh I would say maybe in this case uh as a condition of approval that uh you
request that no additional bedrooms be placed just because of its location and the sides of the lot not necessarily as a blanket. Uh >> John, haven't we put those in other resolutions on single family? >> Yeah, we have. >> So we're all good with doing that having
>> Yeah. And the resolution gets recorded by deed. I don't think we're suggesting a d-restriction on no basements, but the resolution has that representation and that gets recorded with the property in perpetuity. >> Okay. >> Um, actually as Mr. Paper saying
something about trees that >> the street trees that are shown on the plan that will be planted by circles >> ordinance ordinance or >> ordinance street trees. >> They're going to plant them. >> Yep. >> Okay. Thank you. >> That's good to hear. >> Yeah.
>> Um, Mr. and Yeah. Yes, Mr. Caner. >> For the for the professionals, is the spacing behind the house appropriate meet requirements >> behind the the back of the house? >> Setbacks. >> Yeah, setbacks about 50 50 ft whatever
it requires. >> Apologize. What was the question again? >> Setbacks, Charlie. The back in the rear of the home. >> Yes. So, they're proposed at 12.25 ft where 50 ft is required. So, and just to give the board clarity, so uh the width
of the lot. So, if you look at the left hand side of the screen here, >> uh you got a dimension of 69.20 ft. So, if you had full compliance with the front and rear yard setback, you would have no buildable area. So, and I think it's also important to note that
the existing structure, you can kind of see it underlaid underneath there. It's set back closer to that rear property line. So, while they do need their variance, they are improving the condition. Um, like I said, if if there was strict compliance with the bulk standards as far as the front, rear, and
side tip back, the the lot would be like you wouldn't be able to build anything on this lot. It would be very difficult. >> I think I heard you say currently it's about 8 ft the rear setback, correct? >> Okay. So, there is an improvement there going to 12. >> That's what's behind it.
>> Yeah. nothing. >> Okay. >> The area behind it is wooded. So, and you know, I don't haven't looked at the subdivision maps or anything like that or history, but I think this is like 1501 and the lot behind is 1601, but I I venture at some point they were probably
in common ownership and subdivided at some point. So, uh you know, whoever owned that property previously knew that there was they were creating a an undersized lot to a certain extent. So, >> thank you. There's enough. You have anything else?
Anybody? >> Okay, let's uh go to public. I need a motion to go to public. >> Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion that we open the hearing to the public. >> I'll second it. >> Postman by Mr. Caner, second by Mr. Kabarakus. >> All in favor?
>> Yes. >> Okay. Statement for opening to public. Secretary is out. >> One second, sir. >> I couldn't hear. Just give the attorney a second. He's
going to swear you in. >> Okay. >> Oh, fine. >> You swear the testimony you'll give will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> Hey, please state your names for the record and your trust. >> I'm Angela and this is Bob Straowski.
We live at 41 Satan Hall Drive and we also own the property at 38 Vandervir which is across the street from the lot that you're proposing. Um I just wrote a bunch of notes. Um I heard you address a few of them but I there's a few that are concerning to us
from a safety point of view because you did address um lot is on a bend which is very concerning. um doesn't the one end of Vander comes in at 45 miles per hour and then right where that
is is 35. So there is a speed issue there. Also the other end of Vander if you're not aware is uh like an industrial complex. >> There's multiple tractor trailers come in and out of there all the time. The road is not very wide. Um, I can tell
you from experience, uh, I we are living in in the Country Meadows development for 31 years. Um, multiple neighbors. I was talking to a friend of mine today that doesn't even live in the neighborhood and is terrified of this bend. She says it's
very dangerous. I've seen people walk. There's no shoulder at this in this bend. So, I'm glad you addressed the curbing sidewalks. Um, because we were uh talking about if there was going to be a sidewalk added, are curbs going to be added? There's no
shoulder. Uh, there's 45 miles an hour at one end goes into 35 at that bend. Is people really going to slow down? Probably not. Um we were uh asking are the is it the road would be be expanded the other side of
Vander where our side is all brand new telephone poles put in they just all rewired that whole section so where would you be expanding the road would you be tearing that whole I mean that would be something we would like to know for future
um when I went down to the township to find out about the structure because I received the letter. Um they they just handed me a bunch of blueprints and I took photos because I there was nothing scaled down for me. Um I was looking at my phone because they
mentioned it was a fourbedroom house. I have on my phone it's a five- bedroomedroom house. It was three bedrooms upstairs, two downstairs. Um my concern is with a onecar garage and one driveway, you know, I mean I we're a family of
six. I mean, it's a parking lot in front of my house. Where are people parking? You have kids down the road. They have friends. Where are you parking? There is no room for parking. Um, in addition, um,
my husband brought up backing out of that driveway is a blind spot. The the neighbor on that corner of Satan Hall and Vander, his whole his whole sidewalk is lined with bushes. pulling out >> even pulling out you would be obstructed
view of all the bushes his whole come right there. So as you're approaching th this new house that they want to build you're you're going to back out of this house. This is what you're looking in front of you bushes. So you can't see
oncoming traffic and you're talking 45 miles an hour. Um, got we wanted to bring that up to let you know. Like I said, we we're we're living there 31 years. We see things that you probably don't see. Um, there's a lady
that walks there. To be honest to God, I I don't know how she hasn't been hit by a car. I wouldn't let my children drive with a bicycle on that road. That That's how small. There's no shoulder. You could see it. There's no shoulder. Um, if the family that's going to live in this house, you're gonna have parties,
but where are you parking the cars? There is zero parking on Vanir in front of this lot. Um, I know they mentioned the eight setback of 18 ft. I mean, is that from the house or is that from the porch that's in front of it? I don't know where the structure is is
determined from the setback. >> And I'm assuming with the sidewalk, just like my neighborhood, you you own the first four feet, correct? Yes. >> So, um I didn't know looking at the blueprint that they gave me. I didn't know this
the size the square footage of the house cuz I thought it was going to be an enormous well it's if it's a if it's 18 ft 18 ft from the street I mean with oncoming cars, tractor trailers, buses. I mean, it's I it was a safety concern
that we wanted to address here this evening. So, that's what we wanted. I'm trying to see if there's anything else. Did you want to add anything to that? >> Like three, four bedrooms moving to create room on that lot. That's the smallest
part of the lot on that side. >> A lot narrows a lot. really the septic where is it leeching out? Is it leeching to the street or is it leeing to the neighborhood? >> She's concerned with directions. We don't have enough room to create a
>> Charlie, could you address some of her questions? I mean, >> yeah. So, to I'll just start where we're at now. So, the septic system. So, this board doesn't have jurisdiction on the approval of the septic system, right? That's something that goes to the board of health. Any application for a septic system in Mama County, they review that.
Um, they're going to look at the setback to the property lines. They're going to look at the set back to the uh the front property line, the rear property line, set back to the house and make sure it complies. We asked a question about the seasonal high water table because if you got high water table, then it's mounted and you got this white elephant in the front yard. So, that doesn't seem to be
a concern here. If they can't get signed off on a board of health for the septic system, they're going to be right back before this board, you know, because this is condition on them getting uh board of health approval if the board's inclined to act favorably. Um, regarding the concerns regarding the driveway and the availability of parking. So, um, the
resident is correct. I there is five bedrooms. One of them is a master bedroom. I was just going by. They have bedrooms one through four. So, um, regardless, they still do comply with RSIS. Uh, three bedroom, three parking spaces are required for a bed, five bedroomedroom home. Having said that, I
I do think it's a valid concern regarding like any house that's here. That driveway coming 90 degrees out onto Vander Road with the curb. Can would the applicant be amendable to providing like a hammerhead or like a a bumpout for >> for turnaround?
>> Yeah. >> Beat us to it. I'm happy that he did. So, the county has what we call a K turn driveway system that you put on any driveway that goes through a county road. We'll use that design here. So, there'll be a backup. >> Okay. I think that's an excellent idea
because um I concur with uh what those residents have said because I do use that road. Where's that house? >> I do go to a nursery which is close by and they do have a weight limit on that road, but I don't think it's, you know, I still see trucks going.
>> You mentioned all every time there's construction, they detour all the vehicles to the end of the year and they're big trucks. >> I I totally get I'm I think it's nice that you came to express your concern on the safety issue. If if it stays the way
it is and we don't have a curb and a sidewalk there, it's going to be as bad. >> Well, it's a concern for us also because I mean we're family people. We have four children. I mean to have 18 feet just in the front of your house. >> It's nothing in the backyard. Where are your children playing? And then
>> eventually kids grow up. My neighbor and I joke cuz he has he's a family of six. It looks like a parking lot in front of our house. And then when other their friends come over, it's even more. So it's like where are you really there's it's just a bad the curve is just a bad thing. It's it's just it is what it is.
But where are you parking all these vehicles? You're probably you're going to have a couple. They're each going to have a vehicle and they have two kids, three kids, four kids. It's down the road. >> You understand? You understand that if we leave it the way it is,
>> somebody can move into this house and it's going to be the same problem. >> Absolutely. >> Yeah. And we can't, >> Mr. Chairman. >> The house that's there now was built, I think I looked up in 1943. >> Yeah. It's a postage stamp compared to what you want to put there now. >> So, you're putting you get something
from it looks like the size of the shed in my backyard and now you're going to put a big and I believe this house also has a basement. So, it's going to I mean I don't know what the setback is from the from the the um curb um not the curb uh the gentle the side where the seat
and hall gentleman is. I mean are you going to be looking right into his house because it's going to be so close. >> Mr. Chairman, >> Mr. Donald, >> I I think you uh should one contact the police force to lower the speed limit and you'd have to do that probably
through the council by ordinance because I agree with you, 45 is too fast. When I look at those >> at the end, that's really not busy. Okay, you're talking about the industrial. It only it lowers to 35 when you hit the hit the neighborhood, >> but then they're going 50 or 50. >> You're absolutely correct. >> So, it should be lower.
>> You're absolutely right. those bushes on that uh turn there. It's my understanding that the town that's a town road I think. So we have 22 feet from the center line in and those bushes are in the sight triangle and they
should be removed because everybody that comes there can't see with those bushes like that. >> Please don't tell that I said it. >> And the person that lives there isn't going to like it. But maybe they could put up a small fence that doesn't interfere or cut them down, right? So you could see
>> because it is in a sight triangle and we generally don't allow that >> and that's my opinion. >> Does the township currently have a setback if you're on a corner home? >> I don't know, you know, precisely because that's not our jurisdiction. I'm just making a recommendation some things that you could do to help the situation.
People put plant things and they start out small and then they just get >> Well, if they get too big, then we have the right to come down. If they block the sight triangle. If they don't, then they go as high as they want. >> Question is with the curb and the sidewalk. Are they going to allow for the uh the width of the road when they
do that? Are they going to do the curb and then say, "Oh, we got to make the work bigger and then tear it all up." How they going to work that one out? >> I don't know. I could >> I mean I think what they're proposing right now is to uh curb and sidewalk off the existing edge of payment. Like we
could have them get uh some consistent shoulder off the fog line. Um you know to make them match what's coming off that subdivision, you know, I imagine would get pretty costly to do like an 8ft shoulder or something like that. But uh you know if we could get two or three
feet off the fog line and get a little bit more separation and clean it up, I think that's something within reason. and if the applicant's amendable to that. Um, regarding the street trees that they're proposing, I I I do generally think that that's a nice aesthetic, but given that there's concern regarding this bend, I think
maybe it might be more suitable for those to be planted on the site if the applicant would be amendable to that, Ken, instead of >> trees off the rightway. >> Yeah, I think with the sighteline concern, putting more trees once those become mature. Why I like the streetscape part of it. I think maybe if
those were to be put on the property or maybe maybe make a contribution to the tree fund in lie of that if the board doesn't want them planted on the property. I think given the concern that's being represented with the driveway and things like that, I don't think they >> I I think that's I agree because certain trees have low canopies and that is
going to be a safety issue. So >> the response is seeing where the septic system is. I'd rather make a contribution to the tree fund >> than bring those trees in against the >> Okay. I Okay, let's I think >> we'll take the trees off and we'll fund.
>> Okay, >> that's fine. >> They're going to go somewhere. So, I'm happy about that. >> Perfectly fine. >> So, you'd have and the two foot of shoulder outside of the curb. Um I'm certain that Mr. Halpert and Mr. Con can work out the details of that. That's
acceptable. The curb is acceptable. the sidewalk was our offer and switching the trees which was our offer to a contribution um is acceptable. We can also just to the extent that we have control over any of the vegetation
that's along the roadway, we can agree that we'll remove that vegetation down to a height of under 30 in so that it won't be in anybody's sight distance. I think almost all of it's on somebody else's property though. >> Okay. Can I just ask what were the what was
the square footage of this home again? >> The square footage of the existing home. >> Uh the one you want to build >> the proposed home is 1,684 square feet. >> Is that with or without the basement? >> That's the footprint of the >> That's the footprint of the building. It's a twotory. >> Oh, the twotory. Okay. So, that's
without the basement. >> Okay. >> Well, thank you for addressing our concerns. Um we're just looking out for the safety of everybody that drives there. We appreciate that. I think we made some >> just wanted to address things that maybe
you didn't think of because we live there and so thank you for listening. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Chair. I would just say that I think the curbing is goes a long way on this application because if you look at Street View right now, it's kind of a gravel driveway that's opening and like,
>> you know, there's nothing really to stop people from parking seven, eight cars if they wanted to. I think curbing and having to define curb cut will like kind of help to serve regulate that and obviously if you start and wind it to 8ft shoulder then like are you going to
have people trying to park on the side of the road there so you know I think two foot will give us a little bit more of a cleaner edge there but also not invite people to be parking on Vandervir where they probably shouldn't be parking. So I think that's a suitable compromise. >> Okay. Right. >> Maybe a no parking sign might be help.
And there's also a lot of deer. See that? That wooded area. >> Deer. My my daughter would adise hit by a got hit by a deer in March driving home on Vander. It just came out and smashed right into the car. So, it's uh it's certain things you just don't think of. >> I get it. So, um
>> appreciate that. >> Some radar there, too. >> Sorry. >> Radar. >> But you can always come to the council meeting and express your concerns on the speed. So, that's something. Well, I was concerned with the speed because I know people I was just talking to a friend of
mine today and she she doesn't even live in the neighborhood. She lives um like off ambiance and she goes, "Oh, I hate driving on that bend." And I was we were talking about people walking and she's like she goes, "Yeah, a couple times." Because you don't see people walking. You're almost there's no
shoulder. So I I mean there's a lady that walks every day. I mean I'm like she's crazy because I I'm surprised she hasn't been hit. I mean, there's no shoulder and the road is not really like super wide. So, >> okay. Well, thank you so much. >> Thank you very much for listening.
>> Thank you. >> Anybody else? >> Motion to close. >> Second, >> Mr. Caner, Mr. Hugh. Second. All in favor? >> Yes. >> Nothing further. Charlie Christine.
>> Okay. Mr. P, anything? briefly. I think that the offer of your applicant has been made very clear to the board members and to the public. The additions that were suggested by Mr. Kliff on the comments of the neighbor are acceptable. We'd ask the board to
consider this application favorably. >> Okay. Seeing none other, I'll entertain a motion at this time. >> Motion to close to public. >> We We just did. >> We did.
You did? >> Yeah. >> Oh, okay. >> Well, thank you for making sure. >> We did it twice. >> Okay. This time, what is the pleasure of the board? >> Before we go, >> taking out those not having to do the
trees that would probably help facilitate the driveway modifications you want to make as well. Correct. >> The hammerhead will be easier. Correct. >> The hammerhead. Yes, sir. >> Okay. >> Yeah. With that then, Mr. Chairman, I recommend that we approve this um
for the board. The modifications being that the sidewalk and the curbing uh removal of the trees and putting in the hammerhead driveway uh certainly upgrades the safety and usefulness of
this property. >> Okay, we have a motion by Mr. Ryan. Do we have a second? >> Second by Mr. Oasco. Could we have a roll call? >> Mr. Caner? >> Yes. >> Mr. Hughes? >> Yes. >> Mr. O'Donnell? >> Yes.
>> Mr. Rosco? >> Yes. >> Mr. Ryan? >> Yes. >> Mr. Kabarakus? >> Yes. >> And Chairman Mertens? >> Yes. >> Motion carries. >> Mr. Chairman, members of the board, thank you all. Okay. Good night. Thank
you for taking us early. Okay, we'll start the next case which is let me get my glasses here. Case number BA25-13 EAS how Property Company LLC
use variance and preliminary and final major site plan application of EAS Hard Properties Co. LLC as applicant and owner seeking approval to modify the existing car wash and automobile service
station, oil change facility, provide vacuum stall spaces, and revise the site circulation, parking, storm water in infrastructure, landscaping, and relocation of the emergency asset access driveway to the
south south fire department on premise known as blocked 35.83, lots 33, 34, and 35, 4629, US Highway 9. Expiration February 19th,
2026. Good evening. >> Good evening, Mr. Chairman. My name is Thomas Troutner. I'm an attorney with the law firm of Kiaza, Shahennian, and Giantoasi here on behalf of the applicant, EAS Propco LLC. >> Okay. Um and uh with your uh permission,
Mr. Chairman, I'll provide a brief introduction and we have a few >> Okay. So, let's swear in your anybody who's going to testify. >> Sure. So, uh we have uh three witnesses this evening. So, sitting to my left is uh Lawrence Kosori, who's a representative of the applicant. He'll be a fact witness. Uh I have with me
Christine Kafone uh from the Capone Consulting Group, our professional planner, and Mr. Robert Prud from dynamic engineering, our site civil engineering. >> Okay. >> These including Yeah. Do you swear the testimony you give will be the truth of truth? Nothing but the truth. >> Yes. Yes, it is. >> Okay. State your names for the record
and spell your last, please. >> Lawrence Kakuri. K H A K S H O U R I. >> Christine Kafone. C O F O N E. >> Robert Fruit. F as in Frank. R E U D.
>> Witnesses are sports. >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh so again this is uh the property located at 4629 route 9. Uh the property is located in the highway development uh one zone or the HD1 zone. It's presently developed
by a car wash uh and automobile service station or oil change and all of that is to remain uh and to be modified and improved uh for for site circulation. And otherwise, we're here tonight seeking preliminary and final major site plan approval with some variance relief to modify and improve that existing
structure, provide vacuum stall spaces, and improve uh site circulation of the property. Um there's overall going to be 14 parking spaces for the property and 15 vacuum stalls as you'll hear in testimony. Uh so car washes and automobile service stations are
conditionally permitted uh in this zone and as you'll hear in testimony uh the existing car wash uh and what we propose complies with virtually all the conditions for the use but it does have a pre-existing nonconformity with respect to its location. Uh it's required by ordinance to be 2500 feet
away from another automobile service station and 1,000 feet away from public offices and it's about 300 feet away from the Mavis Discount Tire uh to the south and within 1,000 ft of township hall where we're sitting right now. Uh so therefore we're going to need variance relief pursuant to uh 4055D
uh 3. Uh and we're also seeking variance relief uh from the township code uh for a number of D2 variances. Uh we're uh expanding. >> Hey Tom, we could the board through the engineer and >> we got all right, I could skip past all that. So we have we have a bunch of
variances. Uh so as you're going to hear um uh from the applicant uh and from our civil engineer and our planner um uh uh we'll go over all that. So actually with that ado, he's already been sworn in, but um I can u uh first introduce Mr.
Ashi uh from the applicant who can give the board a little bit of background uh regarding why we're here and and what's not. So uh Mr. Ashuri, can you just give the board a little bit overview of uh who you are, your company, and um and and and basically why you're looking at this particular site.
>> Hi everyone. Thank you for your time. Uh so I'm one of the owners of Express Auto Spa. We are a familyrun car wash and oil change operator in New York and New Jersey. Today we have >> Would you speak into the mic? It's that triangle >> closer. Sorry. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Better.
>> Um, today we have uh 14 locations across New York and New Jersey, 12 in New Jersey and two in New York. Um, and our business model to date has been acquiring existing rundown fullervice uh
car wash and oil change facilities and investing in capital to modernize them with new state-of-the-art car wash equipment. Um, and convert them to a more automated car wash model. um where we improve sight circulation and
install, you know, state-of-the-art equipment and technology where now there's an emphasis on on car wash membership model with self vacuums and um it changes the site circulation um significantly. It has a lot of benefits
for the end users and the customers. It reduces weight times um with the membership model. that actually is a is, you know, cheaper for for a lot of the customers because they can um save with a monthly subscription. Um and so we've seen a lot of success with this model
throughout New Jersey. And um with this particular site, this was an acquisition we made earlier this year. It was a part of a portfolio that we bought. Um we're excited to join the Howell community. We think that this site fits our model
pretty well. Um, it's been run down for quite some time. The prior owner neglected it, didn't invest, um, you know, the right amount of capital into it and really let it run down uh, get run down and so um, we're excited to
modernize it, bring it back to life and um, and look forward to hopefully getting a favorable outcome tonight. >> And Mr. Shi, one question because we'll go over a lot of stuff with our civil engineer, but if you could just give the the board the benefit. What, you know, what are your days days open, hours of
operation, and you know, summer versus winter. >> Sure. So, we're open seven days a week. Sunday is 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday is 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Now, when the clocks go forward, it'll be 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
>> No further question of uh the applicant, but he'll be here throughout the evening to the extent anything comes up. We can bring it back. >> Are you changing the car wash equipment? >> Yes, >> we go there all the time. Thank you. >> Yes, the new car wash equipment is actually already installed. So,
>> yeah, they've been working on the site for the last couple weeks there. >> Yeah, we to date we've done a lot of, you know, HVAC, uh, electrical, plumbing work inside the building, plus the equipment. And so if we get um approved here, we can, you know, begin on site
work and open pretty quickly. So >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Uh so, uh we if you want to save the public or to the end or we >> just go to your engine. >> Yeah. Yeah, we'll do public for >> So, let let's bring Mr. Fruit back up uh
and I'll seek to have him qualified as a uh expert in the field of civil engineering. So, Mr. F, you've already been sworn in. So, can you give the uh the board the benefit of your uh uh education experience and prior testimony and license to seeking to have you
qualified? >> Certainly. I have a bachelor of science degree in civil engineering from Lehigh University. I've been doing uh civil engineering and uh land development consulting for over 30 years now. Uh primarily in New Jersey. I'm also licensed I'm licensed in New Jersey. I'm also licensed in six other states in the
region. >> And you're all current licensed in New Jersey. Yes. >> I accept your qualifications. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, uh Mr. familiar with the subject of tonight's application? >> I am. Yes. >> And you were involved in the supervision and the preparation of the plans that
were submitted in support of the application. >> Yes, I was. Uh so can you please give the board uh an overview of the property uh as it relates to the surrounding area? Uh and um I don't we we have a number of pre-mark exhibits. There's a A17 is an overall aerial map. A18 is an
is a more condensed aerial map, but I'll let you orientate the board where you want to go. >> Yeah. So what's up on the screen now is the overall aerial map. Um that is uh taken from a service called near mapap which is an image from uh March 11th
2024. Uh that shows not only the site highlighted in yellow but the surrounding area on route 9. I'm sure the board is very familiar. Route 9 runs north and south. That's left and right. So the left side of the page would be
north. We're here in the municipal building that's just north of the jug handle. The site is outlined in yellow. uh at the uh intersection with Locust Avenue. Uh and you can see uh as the board's aware and we know Route 9 is a heavy commercial corridor in the HD1
zone where this property is located. Um immediately to the north of the site is a small property that uh was most recently a foundry. Uh so a a a form of commercial or business use there. The next site to the north is the southern
fire department uh before the jug handle and ultimately the municipal building. Uh uniquely here uh there is uh an access uh S's way that comes from uh Locust Street across an easement
behind the property serving the Southern Fire Department to allow ingress and egress of emergency vehicles and responding uh personnel to get to the fire department or to get to Locust Avenue and points east without having to get on to Route 9 and uh loop through a
jug handle. So that's a critical element there. Uh if we can now uh go to the uh aerial map exhibit >> believe it's uh A18 >> A18.
So this is excuse me an enlarged version of uh the same aerial image uh at the same orientation. So, Route 9's at the bottom of the page. North is at the left side of the page. Now, we're looking a little bit closer at what's on the site
today. Uh for uh for record, uh this is block 35.83 uh lots 33, 34, and 45 and 35 known as uh 4629 Route 9. Uh again, it's in the HD1 zone. As noted, it is uh car washes
and service stations are conditional uses. Uh this property is just shy of 1 acre at.99 acres. That 1 acre does include the easement area and drive on the east side of the property. So the usable area is just a little bit less.
Uh existing on the site today is a 4,860 square ft building that houses both the uh car wash. It does include a detail bay in the central portion of the building and then on the south side is
the lube uh or repair bays uh that exist today. Circulation through the site is in a uh counterclockwise direction. There are three lanes off the south of the building uh that rotate counterclockwise to get either into the service bays or at the north end to the
tunnel wash. Access is from Route 9 and Route 9 only to this facility. uh what is again somebody's way which comes off locust is uh protected from access to the site uh today and will remain that way under future development so that you can't come in from locust uh
to get to the site protects the integrity of that emergency uh access point. So as you would come in off of Route 9, you can uh circulate in a counterclockwise direction. today. Uh there is one lane that serves the lou
facility that stacks about eight cars which is quite a bit uh for this type of service. Then there are two lanes uh that come around to the car wash. There are also 14 parking spaces uh on the site today. Uh several facing route 9 and several facing uh Locust.
>> Are they for employees? >> They're generally for employees. Yes. Um, I believe that maybe for the detail bay that's there today, there might be some uh advanced uh drop of cars and things like that that I'll get into it, but that's not part of the proposed uh development. Uh, but yes, those are
generally for employees. Uh, topographically, the site generally uh runs from east to west uh towards Route 9. There are some inlets on site. There is an underground storm water management system, oversized 36-inch pipe, perforated pipe that collects and
recharges water uh from the current system today uh before it outlets into Route 9. Uh as you can see at the top of the page, we do border a residential zone. Uh immediately adjacent to our property is uh what's known as lot 58. Uh that is 25 ft wide by locust, goes
back to about 105 ft wide as you get to the north end of our property and expands further as you go north. that is a homeowners association property uh for the development uh that is uh bear drive immediately to the east. So the immediately adjacent property is that uh
residential buffer on the residential property. Uh now if we can turn to the uh site plan rendering which is exhibit >> I think A19 >> A19 and I'll begin to describe existing conditions. So this is the same view and
orientation as we just had with the existing conditions. What we've done is we've uh superimposed the site plan and the landscape plan on the aerial image uh to represent the proposed development. Beginning with uh the customer's entry
into the site, you'll still come in off of Route 9 is the same entry point as exists today. The building remains the same with the car wash on the north side of the building. a single lane car wash in the middle is will become operations.
That uh prior detail bay that exists here is being eliminated as a detail bay. Uh we'll be adding a few parking spaces including the handicap parking space uh in front of that. And then on the south side remains uh the the two uh
lube bay uh lanes as well. Circulation for the car wash will remain the same. It'll be in a counterclockwise direction with uh multiple lanes coming in uh for two purposes. One is uh there
is a member as uh the applicants described as Lawrence described there's a membership service here. So if you're a member uh you'll have it's almost like an easy pass. You'll come in there are two uh pay stations right here. You you'll wave a fob and you'll be passed through uh membership right in. And as
with easy pass, you'll get uh sort of priority uh dispatch into uh the car wash. Uh the other lane that's there would be for paying customers. It's all cashless. You would come in, select your treatment, and and proceed through the car wash. Again, as indicated, this is
all very automated, brand new equipment. Uh more extensive dryers within the uh wash bay uh lane. So that at the egress to the wash um unlike uh older or more conventional car washes where we might have a team of employees drying cars,
cars are fanning out uh in this case near route 9 entrance to get dried off. That is not necessary here. Um cars will come out. Uh there'll be a little bit of touch-up drying maybe around your rearview mirrors and that's it. And then you'll be able to exit uh and pull into
uh exit uh the wash. The other change that's proposed here uh is the addition of uh vacuums along the frontage of Locust and along the frontage of Route 9. There's a total of 15 vacuum stations. Uh there are uh
positioned prior uh to the staging lanes or the Q lanes for the car wash. So a customer would come in uh do some self vacuuming there and then enter the uh car wash lane. Those vacuums operate with the same hours of operation as the car wash. Uh so the turbine that runs
that vacuum system uh will be shut off uh when the car wash is closed. Uh that turbine uh has been repositioned with the latest revisions and is now located uh here in this triangular area facing uh Locust. It's about a 9 by12 pad that
houses the turbine equipment and feeds all of the vacuum uh pipes that run along and Locust Avenue. So, can you give the board some context on what exactly is the size of the turbine in the pad? There's a fence, right, that's screening
that from the public right away because that needs relief because it's in a front yard area. Uh, one for the the structure itself, but then also the the fence not meeting the front yard setback requirement. Is there somewhere else on the site that this could be relocated to maybe be less intrusive from the public
right away? So from an good questions and from an efficiency standpoint, the turbine really wants to be as close to the vacuums as possible, providing the the vacuum and suction for the vacuum. So it really wants to be as close as
possible uh to the vacuums themselves. So what we're doing is we're using this triangular area to to feed it there. Uh we understand that we do require relief uh for proximity or with being within the front yard. Uh we have discussed internally what we can do to mitigate
that and to eliminate the fence in the front yard. Uh we can take that uh 9 by12 pad and shift that uh into the site by about 3 or so feet creating additional space on Locust Avenue so that we can put an evergreen a narrow uh
evergreen row there to provide a more naturalized screen uh within that area. There is already landscaping on the east and west side of that pad. So that'll provide some nice uh four-season screening around that pad uh within the within the front yard there. >> So let me ask you this question. So uh
there's a driveway on the north or the it's the east side. So it's a top of the page here that services the fire department and I think the town uses that also as an informal ingress egress. That tree that's in that little hemisphere island between the drive aisle and the parking area. Could that
not go there? Uh we originally looked at it there. We did move it uh to the to the west to get it in this area. The reason we moved it is to get a little bit more uh central so the amount of tubing was equal on either side of the vacuums. Also that allowed us to provide a little bit more
uh landscaping and screening in this area. Understanding that we are uh within a a there's a 10-ft wide buffer here. So by shifting the drive lane to the east, we want more room to put landscape buffer there. >> So it could be done. It would just be a little bit more costly because you need
bigger pipe. >> Correct. >> Yeah. So, as the board knows that's not something that this board weighs, you know, cost effectiveness or cost and practical uh pract, but it would be less impactful, I think, from the proximity to Route 9 and Locust
Avenue. And, you know, it's not going to be right up on the front property line. to me. I think if it's something that can be done, I I I would recommend the board, you know, consider as a requirement. >> Along with that, Charlie, I'd like to ask all the turbine, is it loud?
>> Uh, so we do have um information provided by the manufacturer on the uh noise levels of that. And I want to make sure I quote, >> not to go against what Charlie's saying. I'm just thinking if it gets closer to >> Yeah. So uh as provided by the manufacturer
the readings are 38 dB at 30 ft away. >> So the uh NJSA 729 the noise standards for the state uh require uh 50 dB uh at night and 63 during the day. So we're below that. That's the residential
receiving line. So in this case I believe it would be even though this is not a uh there's not a residential structure on this lot. would apply that uh to the east property line here. So, um one of the other reasons we moved it was not because we wouldn't comply with noise ordinances but or statutes uh but
we did want to move the that further from uh the residential receiving line. So, we'll we'll defer to the board on on what they feel is more appropriate. Uh we were kind of weighing residential receiving versus uh you know the ambient noise levels and what's happening on
Route 9 as far as the impact there. Could you also put an enclosure on the structure so the noise would not be an issue? >> Well, I think we we looked at a fence that was more sound attenuating and based on the feedback we we switched to landscaping. So, >> I get that. But what I'm asking is do
they make enclosures that also mitigate sound impacts from those types of infrastructure? >> I I don't know specifically from the manufacturer, but I think any type of offense material will provide some sound attenuation. >> Yes. So, what I would say is let's see what the public says. Let's see if there's any concerned neighbors who live
uh to the east of this property and whether they are particularly concerned about the sound. I get I get the sensitivity to not wanting to move it closer towards a residential property and the potential for so noise impacts, but you know, they're coming to this board asking for relief of something like there's other means to ameliate
that if they put the relocate so it's not right up on the front property line. If the public and the board is not so concerned with it being where it is, I think it would certainly need to be thoroughly landscaped to uh, you know, so it's not looking like a, you know, a fence or a wall right on the property
line, you know, and uh, >> I was just asking 30 dB is low. I normal radio guy, I know what that is, so I'm I'm not concerned about that. Charlie, if and anybody if we eliminated one of the vacuum cleaners, it'd be more
ability to move it in and keep it in its current spot. I'm more inclined to say keep it as close to Route 9 and away from the houses as possible, but maybe just eliminate one vacuum cleaner. >> That That's also certainly a valid point. I will say that they do need a variance from not meeting the parking
requirement. I think uh they're short by three or four spaces. So that would exacerbate that. Um you know >> that's not a parking spot. That's a vacuum spot. >> Yeah, someone could still park there. No, I I get it. So um
it's certainly a trade-off. >> Is it also safe to assume that when the facilities close for the day that the turbides are shut off electronically? They can't be used. >> That's correct. Yes. Okay. >> Is that the the new system um Garden
State Car Wash has it where it's all you don't pay for individual vacuum cleaners. You just it's all one system that >> there there is no pay. I'm not particularly familiar with Garden State Car Wash, but uh in this system, you do not pay for the vacuum. You will vacuum
before you enter the lane. So, it's for for customers. >> They're all in one system and it's just individual customers. That's right. That's one of I think it may be similar to what you're >> Yeah, it is. Okay. >> Is there anything stopping someone from coming in using the vacuum and then just
doing like a K turn to pull out of the site to not have to go through? >> We've we've seen it we've seen it the other way around and I I imagine the next folks might have it that way where you have to go through the car wash to then use the vacuum. So, it kind of preempts it. But that that is another uh
design uh standard in this case because of the layout of the site uh it made sense to do it before. Uh but there will be uh employees uh and that maybe just to relay that there are will be about four or five employees for the car wash. Um again not what a a old school kind of
car wash would entail. There will be several employees that will be outside so they'll be able to monitor uh the use of the vacuums and make sure that there aren't people coming in from from >> on site has to go to garden.
>> You can't get out of there. >> So just to continue where I left off uh if we're >> if I can keep going. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I was going to tell you to keep going. >> By all means interrupt whenever you have questions. I just want to um where we left off. There about four to five
employees at the wash. There about uh 5 to seven uh in the loop bay. So about 9 to 12 employees total. Um there are in addition to the 15 vacuums, there are uh 14 parking spaces on site. There are five uh that we put on the uh north
property line that are parallel parking spaces. There are five adjacent to the south side of the building and there are several parking spaces uh extended beyond that. There's a small uh concrete structure here that prevents us from continuing that row of parking. Uh and
then there is an ADA and one additional space in front of what was the detail center. So uh from a parking standpoint, um the ordinance uh requires uh 10 spaces per wash lane. So the car wash would require 10. As I said, there's
only four or five employees, so that's about half of of what uh the ordinance standard is. And then there's uh for the uh lube bay uh there's a just want to make sure I have that right. >> So the two >> so the lube bays will remain. You're
going to continue to do that. >> The lube bays will remain. Yeah. And so uh when I talked about the existing conditions I mentioned that everything everything's circulated in a counterclockwise direction. We are reversing the circulation of the lube base. So you'll come straight in as you
come in to get into lube base and exit out the rear. Uh the main reason for that is I said the the current lube base is if you were to circulate in a counterclockwise direction, there's stacking for at least eight cars there. That's not necessary. The lube bays for the number of vehicles coming in here, not nearly that much. We have four bays
available. We have uh stacking for four cars in front. That's more than enough for the operations here. Uh so we figured reverse that circulation. uh get people coming in and coming out the rear uh and then you've just follow the circulation pattern there. >> I assume Frank, sorry. Go ahead.
>> No, no, Matt. No, >> I was just gonna ask the uh detail area is going to turn like offices or something. I assume >> that'll turn into storage uh inside the building. Uh so that space that was detail and I think that plays into the parking a little bit because if you have a detail bay, you may have people dropping off a car, coming back later to
pick it up. In this case, this model is entirely designed uh for queuing and circulation. You come through the car wash, you get you vacuum, you get in line and you're out. If you're coming for the lube, you get in line and you're out. There is there may be um uh brake
changes or other minor things happening there, but everything that you can do from a pull-in pullout standpoint. There is no car drop off. There's no appointment service or anything like that in this bay. So, everything in this model is designed for circulation in and out of the site, which uh certainly uh lowers the need for parking uh to pretty
much covering the employees on site. Uh so the 14 spaces that we have, one of those is ADA. We have on the order of 9 to 12 employees. Not all of them are going to drive. Some are going to carpool, some are to get take a bus, some are going to bike in. So I think
there's enough parking. Uh and then you have the sep separately. You have the 15 vacuum spaces. Uh there was a question uh in the uh review letters about uh EV charging here. Uh if you look in the EV statute, anything under 25, any any
commercial retail under 25 does not require uh EV parking. So we only have for again 14 parking spaces. I don't really count the vacuums as parking spaces. Uh so we're not required uh to provide uh EV parking uh on the site.
>> Yeah. Um Mr. Frank, I wanted to talk about you just brought up the uh the reversal of the circulation into the service side of the building where you used to run counterclockwise. Now you're you're having these cars come straight in from the highway. >> And I I understand it's probably not
going to be a whole lot of volume, but if it seems to me if you get five cars there now, you may be blocking the flow into where the um car wash is, which potentially could back people out onto the highway. >> So, good question. And again, operation,
we don't expect that nearly that level uh of volume of cars coming in. Um, I just want to be uh we we do I'll point out we do have these two spaces, first two spaces here that are pull through. So, if we do find
again, there will be people out there monitoring. If we do find that cars are backing up, we can have them pull into one of these spaces before they come in. Uh but based upon uh the traffic letter of no interest that uh was filed with the DOT uh to maintain the driveway that
looked at the IT traffic for both the lube facility repair as well as uh the car wash and the number of the peak hour trips would not require more than four car stacking. Uh so we don't expect it to be a problem. But in the event that
uh there is uh a peak point where there are a couple extra cars, we do have these two here. uh that are pullthroughs that are convenient to use for that purpose. >> These spots down here would be for employee parking. >> Uh those are also vacuum. Route 9 is also vacuum. >> So this would be employee parking then.
>> Those are also employee correct. >> Reason why I'm asking is I'm thinking well let's say you did have a bit of a backup and you had some of these cars backed up here waiting for oil changes. Perhaps you could park them somewhere but I guess being that these are vacuums that's not an option. Uh, but the access
to these spots is a little bit blocked off. If there was a long line of cars here waiting to get to the car wash, how would you get these cars into a parking space, staging them to to be serviced?
>> So, there is stacking for 13 cars and with the express model and the the time to to process cars, we don't expect uh that stacking will go beyond 13. So this is really access to the vacuums, access to the parking spaces. So we
don't expect this to be necessarily additional queue. That's really just access to the vacuums. >> Good. >> All right. >> I do want to circle back and and go through uh where we stand again with regard to the >> Excuse me,
>> Mr. Caner. Might I suggest that we I if if cars are stacked up on Route 9 that we prohibit cars from come from stacking up on Route 9. Like if if you can't get in, you're you're you can't you can't stop
on Route 9. Is that >> is that something we can do? >> Uh that's Route 9's jurisdiction as far as the ingress egress. Um >> but our police department would be involved if that happened. Agreed. Um, >> I mean, I know in the winter when they
get the salt on the cars, these things get real crowded. >> Yeah. No, no. What I'm saying is it wouldn't be like an applicant. I mean, they could, we could certainly request that they >> Is there a driveway, Charlie, or >> self police it, right? But I mean, police, they could, you know, someone's going to have to call the police if it's an issue. Um, yeah, I don't know if
there's any kind of special signage that they could put at the entryway. if there's like a like a significant queue that might identify the people looking to pull into the site that there's too much of a queue to come into the site. You know what I mean? You know, 13
cars is a lot. I don't know that you're going to have >> It's three lanes. I believe that right lane is usually for cars. >> Yeah, there is an extra lane there. Yeah, there is. >> Yeah. Going into the jug handle plus the bus uses it. >> Plus cars coming out of Locust.
That's going to be I mean and I I bring this up because there you know there are peak hours, peak times where you could have an excessive amount of flow. I recently went to an oil change place and freehold only about two weeks ago. Showed up first thing in the morning when they first opened and there were seven cars waiting in front of me for
the doors to open. So, you know, it's not out of the question for these uh backups to happen at certain times. >> I I I don't disagree. Um what I was trying to point out is again we have stacking for 13 which we feel is is uh very adequate for uh the use of the
wash. Keep in mind we also have 15 vacuum spaces. So anybody before they get to that 13 car stack you have room for 15 cars to to be vacuuming and staging. So theoretically not counting the the several cars that would be in the wash. You have 13 plus
15 vacuuming. you have 28 potential vehicles on site staging before you even get into the car wash. I think that's more than enough uh based upon the the peak hour per it was uh 78 trips uh in an hour and that's basically three
cycles through here um which would be you know 20 minutes and it's it's not nearly 20 minutes to get through a car wash. So I think we have more than more than enough uh uh capacity here with providing the lanes. We also have the double lanes here. So, >> did you tell the board like did you give
contact like what's the typical cycle for going through the actual car wash? Do we know like is it >> a minute, two minutes, five minutes? >> Once you're >> You got it. You got it coming up to the podium. >> Right there at the podium.
>> Once once you get into the the front of the tunnel, you're in and out in less than two minutes. >> Mhm. on the car wash. >> In on the car wash, >> what's typical for this uh the service station? How how many cars can you service at one time in the new >> So, in the oil change, you could service four at one time.
>> So, if you're stacking, then that's stacking above four cars being serviced at once. >> And how much time do you spend typically on each one? >> 10 to 12 minutes. >> Okay. Do you anticipate the um vacuum spaces all being filled
ever when cars are waiting um to use the car wash? >> So we limit the amount of time that uh that a customer can use the vacuum to 10 minutes and that's really being policed by our manager. So our site manager responsibility is to ensure that the flow of traffic is always circulating
and so that on busy days that's when it's going to be the most important is to ensure that 10 minutes is is not being you know that no customer is using it for more than 10 minutes to ensure that that that is not an issue. >> I know you have the 13 cars past um the
vacuum spaces but if ever there were more than that in the queue it seems like um cars could either get locked into the vacuum or there could be some type of >> so so the the lane to all the way to the right is going to be the members only lane.
>> The members only lane is really the easy pass lane and so stacking isn't going to isn't going to be on that lane more. It's going to be more on the left lane. So we did that intentionally so that the vacuums could be uh easily uh you could you could enter and exit the vacuums more easily.
But if I'm at the if I'm getting vacuumed at the top of there and there's a line and I'm done vacuuming, do I then have to back out and get in line or let's somebody's got to be nice enough to let me in or >> So the lane the the >> This is New Jersey. People don't do
that. >> Yeah. So the two there are two car wash lanes. The car wash lane to the right is the members only lane. the members only lane doesn't stack as as deep as the paying customers lane because uh >> I know but if I'm not a membersonly if I'm if I'm paying cash if I'm vacuuming
and then paying cash I have to back out and get into the vacuuming lane. >> Yes. So you're so if you're if you vacuum first and then you want to get on the paying customers lane then and there's a line then yes you have to you have to work yourself back but that's also the responsibility of the manager is to is to manage that traffic flow.
>> Okay. So I just just want to clarify that. So you said was it it was 78 peak hour trips was per it >> correct? >> And then that's uh total so 39 coming in 39 going out in the peak hour. All
right. So just to give the board context. So if it's 2 minutes per cycle you're going to get 30 cars in and out of that you know. So, uh, you're going to have nine cues typically per the IT queuing waiting to go through that um in in the peak hour period. So, just to
give some context. So, 13. So, you got four more than based off the IT recommendations seem to be appropriate based off what they're saying. >> Have a question. I'm not familiar with this. Um, when you go through this type of car wash, do you get out of your car?
>> No. So the new model is the customer stays in the vehicle the entire time. >> Okay. Is there any air pumps on your property to put air in your tires? >> No. >> So you're eliminating that because that causes a little >> jam that that service is done in the oil change. So if you get an oil change that
they'll check there in the tires while your car is being serviced. >> And what about restrooms? What kind of restrooms do you have here? uh >> uh for the employees for >> we have one employee restroom and then we have I believe one in the in the manager's office and then uh I think
>> you have a male and a female >> restroom or just >> I believe >> they use the same one. >> I'd have to ask the arch. So we could uh have we have our architect here tonight. I can have him sworn in and he could probably answer this question. >> Okay. >> Sorry for a good question.
Do >> you swear the testimony you give will be the truth? The whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> Please state your name for the record. Spell your last. >> Name is Andrew Troia. T R O CC HI A. Firm is Sonel and Troia Architects.
We're in Homedale. >> Okay. I will need your >> I say could you just give them quickly your benefit of your education and background experience. I'll seek to have you qualified as experts in architecture. >> Licensed architect uh bachelors of architecture from NGIT in Newark. Been
practicing well over 30 years. Have my own practice for same amount of time. Uh we are representing several car wash clients at this moment right now. >> And everything's current. >> Everything's my license. Okay. >> It's current. We accept your qualifications.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Um, there are three restrooms right now. Uh, one will probably be uh specifically for staff because it's off the equipment room and there's two two in the public area sufficient for this for this use as
far as the plumbing code is concerned. >> But they're separate like one lady's room, one's men's room. >> Yeah, there three singleuse restrooms. >> Single use. >> Yeah. Just I was just wondering if I go in there and vacuum my car and all of a sudden I got to go to the bathroom, I'm
going to need a public one. And then now while I'm in there, there's more cars coming in and now I got to back out and try to get back into line, you know? I mean, is that going to be enough to keep the flow going or you don't expect it to be that busy?
again. So, it's it's really if someone needs to use the restroom, they're obviously more than walking to. And so, it's the manager's responsibility just to ensure that the flow of traffic is is always circulating. And I mean, it's going to be rare very very rare instances where all 15 vacuums are full
and the stack the line stacking is very deep. That's a very rare instance. >> I just want to make sure you thought of that and that it's not going to create a disturbance uh you know, once you get going. And I think you should put signs along the front of your property because
when you come down the road there and make a right to come here to the building with all that traffic coming up Route 9, you got to really get out fast. And if there's anything ever backed up on Route 9, there's going to be a rear end there. There should be no parking
whatsoever on Route Nine because if anybody tries to park to get in there, when they come flying around a corner and they can't realize a snowy day, they can't stop. You're going to be one baba boom after another. And you might have to in the beginning get the cops there to give them a ticket
if >> that's a state road, so I don't know how that works. >> Well, I know how it works. I come here, you know, all the time. >> No, I understand. I agree that there should be something there, but who who would
>> Well, we want it governed by the by the police that there is no parking there whatsoever because when you come around there >> right down locus and then when you look out and you think you got to >> Yeah. No, the police would govern that. But who is responsible of putting those signs in? >> They are.
>> Okay. And the state, they don't get state approval for it. >> Once they're up, I don't think they they have to uh take care of business. the police to position the DOT for it. >> John is a public works get involved in that >> not on a private site. No.
>> So that would be >> the responsibility of property owner. >> I mean for safety reasons. >> You're you're referring to the the frontage on Route 9. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. So I think in that case it would require a petition to the DOT >> to put any signs up to enforce that.
I don't think we would object to that because I think anything that's safety on Route 9 would be advantageous for the for the applicant for the process, but um I don't know that that we can commit to that to this board other than that we would petition the DOT to put the sign up. >> I would say you do that and if they say
no, then you're relieved of doing it and if they say yes, then you do. Yeah, I think there should be signs up. So, at least you know make an attempt because uh >> that could be an issue.
>> What would be the sign? >> Just real quick, of the other auto uh express auto spas that your company runs, same traffic pattern exists in all of them or is that unique to this property because it's the way it is? Each site is, you know, has a different
DNA, but the model is exactly the same where we have two lanes for the car washes, one members only and one paying customer. Um, each site's a little bit different on where the vacuums are oriented. Some some in the front before, some after. It just kind of depends on the site. >> Um, but this is the same setup as all of
our sites. >> Okay. >> Putting one in brick. >> H >> there's one same. You're coming you're going into brick as well. Yeah, that was one we part of the portfolio we acquired. One one was in Brick, Howell, Jackson or Lakewood really and uh
Middletown. >> Okay. Do you have any further testimony from >> I I do have a little bit more and I don't want to uh belabor too much, but I do want to get a couple things uh in uh for the board's uh consideration. Um particularly some things that came up in
the review letters. Um, speaking of the Route 9 frontage, I mentioned we filed for letter of no interest. Uh, because we are not changing the operations of the site from car wash and lube bay. We expect the DOT would uh uh grant that. We're waiting for their response. In addition to that, uh it was requested uh
by your engineer. Uh there is a section of our frontage that does not have curb. Uh we would add curb to that. We would also check uh the sidewalk uh at the at the driveway to make sure that it's ADA uh crossing is uh appropriate. So that'll be another part of a more of a
highway occupancy permit to the DOT than our typical than a typical access permit. Uh but we will uh file that uh with a favorable approval. Uh speaking of pedestrians, we also provided an access in uh from Locust that can get you into the site. We will put an ADA
ramp here to make sure that uh that is accessible there. Um, I did want to touch on uh one of the cruxes of this application as Lars mentioned was to add the second lane here uh for the membersonly lane. Again, this is an existing building. The car wash entrance
is where it is. Um to make sure that we have the turn radius to get the vehicles in and to get the second lane, we are pushing uh east a little bit uh with the drive. Uh that means that we are uh requesting to realign uh the fire access
that runs across the east property line and push that a little bit further to the east. Uh we going back uh probably at least a year uh met with uh the fire marshal uh Mr. Brocknow uh to talk about that and to present that. Uh he provided
us some comments and concept. We incorporated some of those comments into the plan. Um we have a 19 foot wide driveway here. We recognize that fire code requests 20 ft because of uh the dimensionality of the access lane. Uh 19
ft was the most that we could provide and still have room to grade and provide a fence along the east property line. Uh but with that 19 feet, we are providing uh a a curved island here with ballards to prevent uh vehicles from uh crossing
that lane, either coming into or leaving uh the car wash site into that access lane. We're also doing some regrading. If anybody's ever driven that as you come in off of Locust, a little bit of a dip down to get into the site before it levels off. Uh we're going to regrade that a little bit, make that a little
bit smoother uh to help out the emergency vehicles uh as they're exiting uh and entering the site. Uh we do neck down at the north end uh just because of how it meets up uh with the adjacent drive to the north. But as you can see, as you're north of the property and the
area behind, much of this lane is along uh that east property line. So we're really lining things up a little bit better as well uh and allowing for that. So, uh, in his, uh, October 30th, 2025 review, uh, provided some comments, uh, for additional striping and some other
things. We're agreeable to all those comments, uh, to improve that area. So, um, the realignment of this easement, they do I think they'll provide testimony at some point, but they do need a uh a variance from the
buffer requirements, the way they're realigning it. Obviously, that's not something uh we we typically grant and we uh take issue with. Um we're also concerned about um the realignment of the isment um and how it is kind of
tapering down uh because it does provide access not only to um the fire department building but also to this building. So to and to clarify, so the the driveway that's there now has about plus
or minus a 10-ft setback from the existing Easterly property line. Um, and it's within a 30 foot wide access easement. Um, which I believe is to Southern Fire Company. Um they're
proposing to shift the driveway, you know, closer towards that easterly property line, remove vegetation, put in a, you know, 30-in high plus or minus retaining wall. Um so they do need relief for the buffer. Um
the fire bureau, I think, reviewed this as part of the application, uh and provided some comments what how they saw the access, but ultimately uh they're not the easement holder. I think the easement holder would also have to sign off on this because they're
putting their member only driveway within the last 10 foot of that easement. So, um you know, obviously it's not there now. They're proposing to relocate and remodify the site or modify
the site creating that issue. Um, we're going to need to hear the need for that and the planning justification for that >> and and and maybe if we pull up A18 that is a a little bit >> before you happens to be taken in the winter so it's a little bit cleaner
version of the existing conditions >> before you move away from >> and Google. >> All right, that's fine. >> You want to see it just cover? >> So yeah, where is where is your main concern Charlie? Is it closer to locust or is it more down here where the closer
to locust where the entire length >> the in the entire length? So right now it's it's 20 foot wide uh but it's plus or minus set back 10 ft from that easterly property line and there is residential uses along the eastern property line. So they are shifting the whole driveway closer towards that
property line. Um, you know, I think we had a comment in a letter regarding if the board is inclined to, you know, grant an approval based off of the layout that they're saying that uh that retaining wall is going to have to have a fence on it. Uh, we would prefer
something solid, you know, so that way it provides some screening and separation to the residential use along the east side of that, you know, and when we get the public, I I would think that maybe that resident has some questions or concerns for the applicant also as well. But I just want to, you
know, they're creating this with the application. It's not something that's necessarily an issue in the existing case. They're shifting this closer to the property line. So, they're going to have to justify their relief from it. I know the fire bureau issued a memo saying that they didn't have an issue from a fire perspective, you know,
access getting in and out of there. Um, but ultimately the fire bureau is not the easement holder. The fire company is the easement holder. They're also going to need to sign off against it and they're going to need to justify that like the site is suited and can function without detriment to the public and and
fire access and safety. So, just want to lay that out there. Now, >> are the trees coming out? Those trees that we're looking at, >> I mean, I'll let the applicants engineer testify. They are proposing like a I want to say a 30-inch high block wall
along that east side of the driveway. So, I don't know how many of those trees are going to be compromised or be able to remain. >> Well, then I'll ask are the trees coming out? >> So, the the the trees are off the property. So, the intention is that the
trees uh would not come out. Um and I think um Mr. Cullins's raising some some good comments that we're going to get into um as far as the easement and things. There's a little bit of a chicken or the egg. We need to have site plan approval and we need to have an
easement amended which I believe would be >> so the the easement runs uh to the township of how uh and it actually addresses uh that uh it's uh in favor of the fire department of the township of how to for have emergency access. It was an easement was actually conditioned by
this board u some time ago when the car washers originally improve approved. So we've had conversations as and Mr. fruit can testify this more intently but with the fire department over the course of almost about a year about this particular topic making sure
we had their support and the chicken and the egg I think that Mr. is referencing is obviously we wanted to come and and ensure that this board would approve the application and I presume it would be with a condition that uh that the township uh council would have to actually be the one to approve the
easement amendment and they're they are aware of that issue. Uh but uh but obviously that's a separate process. >> Who is Tom? Who is the they or who is they? >> Well, I'm sorry. I've spoken with Matt with Matt Howard, the director of planning. >> Well, he's he's not here anymore. Yeah. >> He no longer works for the township.
>> Oh, really? >> Yes. >> Oh, >> so that's why I was asking. I didn't know who you were referring to when you said they. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, and and we mentioned Southern Fire. They were at the last meeting that we had uh with um Mr. Brocknow and Southern
several representative from Southern Fired. they are aware of what we're doing to the access from a fire access standpoint. I don't want to speak for them. They have a a letter here. Uh but it was my uh my understanding that what
we're proposing does create uh there are a lot of improvements uh to what we're doing. And if we can maybe go back to uh A18 again, it it does uh neck down. We're aligning as best we can with what happens north. If anything were to happen on the north property line, they
could uh continue the realignment. Um on our site plan, we do show some tapering just for safety so that um the curb lines match up. Uh but we would agree to have modified allow modified curbing and uh pavement on our property if anything
were to happen to the north that would further improve that. Uh but our goal here is to put that uh in best alignment with that improve the gradient at the entrance. Um and understanding that that easement would have to be uh modified uh
to be narrowed with the the shifting uh of the of the actual access point uh to mirror that. Again, it does uh will have uh a small wall uh for grading along the property line. Again, that lot 58, the first 25 feet is a homeowners
association property along this area. We do propose a six foot high fence on top of the wall provides screening understanding that we are uh coming a little bit closer. We want to help mitigate as best as possible. Uh so we're providing a 6ft high uh fence on top of that wall. Uh it's noted in the
review letters, we are requesting relief uh so that fence can be above 4t high in the in the front yard towards Locust Avenue. uh but as shown on our plans uh that fence does not encroach into the sight triangle or sight lines uh of Locust Avenue. So from a safety
perspective, we don't feel that there's any negative impacts from having uh a front yard fence there. It is a little bit unique being on a on a corner property. Um >> so the easement is certainly one issue, but they currently um have that 10-ft
residential buffer and their realignment uh completely removes it. I think as you know Charlie indicated it's it's there today. This is a condition they're creating and it seems they're only creating it to have that additional
membersonly lane. Um so there is a buffer existing today and uh they're proposing to remove that >> and and certainly our plan I'll get into a little bit more detail in the proofs
of that variance but from a site planning standpoint. Uh we are working with an existing building. We're working with the existing structure. Our goal here is to put new technology and new services into this existing building and make site circulation uh improved. And we're weighing what happens with the
entrance at Route 9 and making sure that site circulation is safe, the cars are moving through efficiently uh and adding the extra lane for additional stacking and queuing. We do understand and respect that we are encroaching into that 10-ft buffer, but with the existing building, it is a little bit of a
balance here. Ultimately, it's a sports decision uh which is appropriate. Uh but I we as we do have a planner here that'll will help weigh that uh balance for you, >> Mr. Frank. the um the concrete wall that's going to be on the east side there along that buffer. How high was
that going to be? 36. >> Just a couple feet. I think it's less than 3 ft at its highest. >> Okay. And did you say you're going to put a sixft fence on top of that? >> Correct. >> So we're talking about eight or nine feet total. >> Uh visible from our side. Yes. >> Okay. Is that
>> So we're the we're the low side. So from the residential property side, you would only see the sixoot fence. >> Okay. I'm only bringing that up because I thought that we had some kind of limitation on fence height. >> Yeah. And usually we count when there's
a a fence and a wall, we count them cumulative. So it would be, you know, 9 ft. So they would need technical relief if the board's inclined for the driveway where it is for that fence to be carried to the the locust front property line. You know, um I think they would need to
show us a sight triangle to show that there's no issue from a sight triangle perspective with the fence if we are going to allow it within the front yard area. So that's the emergency access driveway to make sure that you know someone coming out of there is not going to get t-boned by someone on Locust Avenue. Um so if the board is inclined to act favorably, we'd want to see that
on the site plan, make sure it's not an issue. Um the fence you're proposing is board on board. So to me, I mean I think white vinyl would look a lot nicer and uh more aesthetic than a board on board. Certainly it's better than galvanized chain link, but I would be a proponent
for white vinyl. Is that something the applicant would be amendable to? >> Yes. Yeah. Okay. >> Absolutely. >> So, and then another technical comment. It didn't come up in the fire bureaus's review memo, but uh I did have a conversation with them and I think we we had that concern, too. Right now, I
think some of that access drive drains onto the uh applicant site and they're proposing to put like a curb the whole way through there. And um by putting a curb, it creates a dam and creates a water issue. So, they're putting a curb cut in. the fire officer show had a concern regarding that curb cut being
utilized as like an informal ingress egress from the the car wash uh you know out of the site. Um so we want to see a full height curb there and if it requires another inlet to tie into the drainage on the site or some other means of drainage collection um that's
something that we would be required uh requiring. We're the fire bureau and and the town is not in favor of like a mountable curb there because then that's it's like pissing in the wind. They're just gonna drive right over that thing. So, uh, we want to see a full height curb and we wanna we want to see, uh,
>> I feel like there's another way to say, >> pardon my ver pardon my vernacular, but, uh, >> but but we want to we want to see something to collect the drainage there, and we don't want to have like an informal driveway uh, coming in and out of there. So, >> yes.
>> No, we're happy to work with engineering and fire on that. When we met on site uh with fire, the specific design that was agreed upon is what's on the plan, which is mountable curb with uh Ballard space so that cars can't get through. The the curb cut that's provided for drainage is
no more than a couple feet. It's certainly not enough for a car to get through. Uh if we were to put an inlet there, I don't have an objection. It just happens that there's no storm water infrastructure on that side of the property. So, it would be a long pipe run, but I don't I don't you know, if that's a a critical factor, I think we could provide that. The the reason we
opted against full height curb is it's only about 18 inches. So if you do full height curb there, it it kind of creates a situation. Typically when you have full height curb, you want to have full grade at the high side of the curb so you don't have a car kind of getting stuck rolling over the curb. So that's
why we didn't do a narrow band of full height curb there uh on both sides with pavement on both sides on the low side. Um, we prefer to have the mountable curb with ballards in that area to keep cars from preventing uh passing through. I'm happy to speak with with fire on that. I thought that was our understanding
coming out of the meeting and it didn't come up in his review letter, but maybe the three of us can get together and come up with a solution. You know, from an engineering standpoint, I think that that can be resolved without um, you know, a detriment to the site plan that the planning board would would consider. >> I would say if the board's inclined to
act favorably, yeah, we can have a meeting of the minds. I think we want something more permanent than a malible curb with like the plastic flexible delineators. Can anyone can drive over those things, you know what I mean? So, we don't want it to be a free-for-all. I I get it is tight there, so I get them
wanting to have, you know, something where if someone hits it, it's not going to damage their car, but we also don't want people just >> I've seen them on some public rightways and uh, you know, someone drives down them and they're not there any longer. So, we want something hard and permanent where we're going to be satisfied that
it's not going to be, you know, just a cutting in and out kind of deal. So, but we can we can work that as a condition of the approval. >> Everybody's good with that. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Uh if we go back to A19, I just I don't want to belabor my testimony, but again,
a couple of things that have come up in the review letters uh just to get uh in front of the board. We kind of like moving. >> There is a trash enclosure on the northeast corner of the property. That's where it is today. Uh we're going to rebuild that with block. I think there
was a comment to make it split face block. We have no objection to that. Uh circulation for the trash would be during off peak hours so it can circulate. Uh oh, I just lost my No, there it is. Oh, I lost my uh circulate with the uh turning patterns of the
drive-thru. There was an observation that our our overhead clearance bar uh would be a conflict with uh trash trucks and with delivery vehicles. Uh it's also a comment as far as the signage uh impact of that. Thank you. I lost Mike.
>> We generally ask is there like if is there anything in the engineers review letter the applicant won't agree to or I mean if there is braze it if not you could just say you'll agree to everything in the engineers letter. >> I think that's what I'm going through now. Yeah. >> We don't I'm saying we don't need to do
is there Okay. >> Yeah. So, >> we're trying to just finish it up is the point your testimony. If there's anything in the engineers letter you disagree with, then I guess let the board know. If not, you could just say you're in agreement that you'll take
care of whatever the engineer asked for. >> Yeah, Mr. Chair. And I'll hit on the highlights to speed up. So, um there's an existing CMP site uh pipe on the site. You guys will televise that just to make sure it's in good condition so we don't we're not putting good on top of bad. >> We will. Yes. >> Right. And then you'll agree with any
technical drainage comments regarding the recharge system and everything like that on the site. >> Yeah. There was a comment about the existing uh storm drain on site other than TV it to make sure that it's functional. Uh the way it's designed today. Uh it sits a little bit lower than the outlet structure and and provides recharge. Uh that is the way it
is today. What we're providing is supplemental storm water management. uh which again not to belabor the testimony but we're providing supplemental storm water to mitigate the impervious coverage that we're providing. Um so we're really adding to what's there today. We did not intend to rebuild or
reconstruct what's there unless it was shown to be uh in disrepair. >> Yeah. I mean it would be in the applicant's best interest to just make sure that they're adding to a system that's in good condition. So I I think it would be prudent. Um you talked about
the garage and then also um garbage truck and then emergency vehicles. So that's that overhead's going to be raised so that way there's free clearance coming in and out of there. >> I think hearing that comment and hearing some of the comments about signs, we're just going to take it out. >> Take that sign out. Okay. All right. And
then those operations would occur off peak from the peak of the Okay. >> We talked about no EV beating required. We had a comment regarding like the um site driveway. I think the garbage truck coming in and out of the site had to go in sweeping out into that that second
lane of Route 9. Is there any way was that just a sloppy circulation? >> Yeah, I took a look. Um that is a mountable island at Route 9. Uh we're maybe a little bit carefree with the circulation. Uh we've already looked at it the truck and we'll submit it uh with the revised plans, but that vehicles can
come out and stay out of that next lane. >> Okay. All right. Uh, and then you're going to get a letter of no interest from DOT. Site lighting, everything's going to be downward facing. Houseside shields, 30,000 Kelvin maximum because we got residential nearby. You're agree
to agree uh address any technical comments in the LTE's review letter if they issued one. They should have issued one. >> I haven't seen one, so it's hard to agree to it, but we'll >> Okay. >> I mean, that's typically something that this board requires. It's usually substitution on plantings and things
like that. Um would you have an issue addressing those as resolution compliance? >> Again I don't expect it but it's hard to say had not seen the letter. >> Okay. And then we had raised a concern regarding like there's map wetlands on geo web. You did provide a supplemental environmental report by the boys. Can
you just give us like a very paraphrased version of what that the findings were? >> Uh certainly. So northeast of the property on that uh homeowner association lot uh it's about it's over 100 ft maybe 125 ft. There's a narrow ditch on that property uh that is again
over 125 ft from our property. Um that would be and I guess to to cycle back a minute, D's GIS map some some wetlands on adjacent to this on that property. Uh we sent a we had an environmental uh scientist go out there and walk it to
make sure that there are no wetlands. The only thing that they found was a narrow ditch uh over 100 ft northeast of the property. Any buffer associated with that would not extend out of the property. Um hopefully that's sufficient for
>> Yeah. So they said that there was it might be wetlands. There's a 50ft buffer based on theirs, but it's not even close to the property. >> Right. >> They did say that uh investigation of the flood hazard. It may be warranty, but can you provide testimony? So the area to your easterly property line,
like we said, the driveway is 10 foot off the property line, but there is maintained grass on the property line there, right? So it is a previously disturbed area to some extent, right? >> Where we're uh moving the driveway. >> Yeah, >> it is. Yes. >> Okay.
>> All right. I think that's all I have for the engineer. Mr. Chairman, >> like average intensity, maybe a little direction just to help Christine. Charlie, just real quick, >> with the removal of a lot of the green spaces from the existing to what they're proposing here,
>> the sewer s the storm water drainage system upgrades were more than sufficient to handle the additional runoff from the previous substances. >> Yeah. And um I'll let their site engineer provide some additional testimony, but there is the system
that's on the property is like unique and it looks like it doesn't necessarily have a direct discharge to Route 9. I think it was like it might overflow into the Route 9 right away. >> There's a there's a 15-in overflow pipe into Route 9. Yeah. >> Yeah. So they have like a 36 in CMP on
the site and then the discharge to Route 9 is actually like higher than the invert of that. So the system that's there is providing some storm water collection and attenuation before it discharges to Route 9. They factor that into their existing calculations. So it's not like they're saying we've got
all this additional flow going out in the precondition and we can then just send all this additional flow going out. So so that's why they're proposing 36 in recharge pipe in addition to what's there. So, uh, even though this isn't a major development, they did provide storm water calculations and, um, we had
some techn technical comments in our letter regarding the sizing of that, which I think they've agreed to to address. Um, but a lot of those requirements are, um, because they are disturbing more than 5,000 feet, they got to go to soils and they got to meet the soil restrictions on like no
increase to the two and the 10-year flows. So, it's not a major development, but they are providing stormwater management uh with with uh with the application. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Anybody else from the board? >> Yes, John.
>> Just a couple of quick questions. Uh along the uh the vacuums, are there uh trash receptacles going to be there for anybody who's emptying out their car of any >> Yes, on every stand there's a small trash receptacle that will then be cleared up by staff. >> Okay. And just curious as far as the circulation pattern, at least for the
oil change, is there a reason why it goes counter to what the flow is for the car wash? It would seem that you would be able to stack more cars onto the property if you were going counterclockwise versus clockwise. No.
>> Yeah. So, the main reason there is again doing the the the traffic study on that that was done by Dynamic Traffic and submitted a letter of no interest. There really isn't a lot of demand for that. So having four four workstations inside and ability to stack four cars in front of that is more than enough. We did not
need the stacking that was provided by the circuitous lane around the back. This provides a more efficient flow and provides increased room uh for uh use of the parking spaces. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Mr. Chairman, real quick, I with your
indulgence, I just wanted to have this will help our planner. Just if you just quickly just talk about uh the directional signages in terms of the um uh area and uh height and the pylon sign which is I think the freestanding site uh in terms of the setback and area and
then just real quick the average site lighting >> uh certainly. So with regard to the signs uh the freestanding sign exists uh at the corner of Route 9 uh and Locust uh today it's about 36 square ft. It's a little over 15 ft high. It is set back
5.7 ft from the rightway uh which uh is within the uh which requires variance an existing condition require variance uh to maintain that sign at that setback. But what we're going to do is really just reface uh that existing sign uh something that it looks like in the
picture there. >> Um so that's again to remain uh and be refaced. Uh the directional signs we talked about the car wash entrance sign which is about 112 ft. uh that's being removed. If I'd rather if I can use the
A19 to talk through some of this. Uh so this sign uh the overhead wash sign about 112 ft that's being eliminated. There are two directional signs. They're about six square feet each. They're within the allowable directional sign. uh one as you come in directing you to
uh to the south or to the right as you come in and then directing you either into the uh Lou bays or around to the car wash and vacuums. Uh the other thing uh that that Mr. Trapner mentioned was uh the lighting uh
just to help uh our planner talk about one of the variances that we're seeking is waiver, excuse me, uh that we're seeking with regard to the illumination levels. Uh this ordinance, as I'm sure this board's familiar, this ordinance uh has a minimum of.3 foot candles, but a maximum average of.5 uh foot candles.
That becomes a not very hard uh to satisfy both at the same time. Um and b from a IEES, illuminating engineering society standards. Uh it's usually a couple foot candles is the average uh that's considered for retail commercial
type uses for a parking lot. So, what we look at from a design perspective is to have uh really a half a foot candle throughout the site. You're saying three. We'd rather have about a half foot candle uh throughout the site is the minimum. So, we're pretty much hitting that hitting the.3 throughout the site, but that brought our average
up to uh 1.65 foot candles. Uh from a design standpoint, that's still within uh what the IEES uh looks at for a typical retail commercial site, but it does uh uh requires to seek a waiver uh where it's a 0.5 maximum average. I just
wanted to point that out for the board. >> But you're saying they're not going to be there's not going to be nighttime operation of the business. >> The business won't operate at night, but for security purposes, just because of the Route 9 quarter, we would uh seek to have the lights on uh overnight.
Thank you. >> But nobody could go in there and use the car. I mean the vacuums. They're >> not. >> Yeah. >> The the vacuums are shut down. The gates are shut. The car wash, right? Correct. >> And this is basically during daylight hours because you said you cut back the
hours to five during the shorter. >> That's right. It'll be uh dust to dawn will be the lights. Again, a >> 1.65 is a a pretty low average. Again, it's all uh downward focused LED fixtures. Um 3,00 Kelvin temperature
>> consistent with what uh the sports requesting throughout town. >> I have no issue with the hours based on >> not the hours. >> Yeah, I really don't need the lights if it's >> security. >> Security lights. >> Okay, that's all I have.
>> That's all you have. And then Charlie, you're good with your comments. Christine, do you have anything to add? >> Not for this witness. >> Okay. Okay. Before uh we we are going to be taking a break, I just am curious if
anybody here from the public would be making comments on this application. I just want to get a feedback one. Okay. I think we'll do our break first and then we'll hear from our planner.
So, we're going to take five minutes break, >> Mr. Bell. So, you know the circumstances right now. What do you want to do? >> Um, well, when does the board stop hearing
new applications? As a general matter, >> we usually have a cut off at 10, so we can play it by ear and we can get some testimony in, but I just don't want to be cutting your, you know, your case
off. >> Yeah. Um, so I am certainly not looking to extend anyone's night if we don't need to. Um, my client did fly in from Tennessee. So, if we are able to get through any portion of our application, I would like to try. >> Okay.
>> Okay. Well, >> but I guess perhaps we'll have to just see how the remainder of this application goes and then we'll >> Yeah. Okay. >> Um, >> we'll we'll certainly take that in consideration because if we we can get him at least to testify, >> you know, we'll certainly do that. >> Okay.
>> Thank you. Okay, I see a familiar face. >> Yes. Good evening, chairman. >> And I want to hear all your credentials. >> I know you want to just hear that my license is current and valid, >> which it is. >> Okay, let's move on. We accept it.
>> Okay. >> Thank you, chairman. So, good evening. For the record, Christine Kafone, testifying as a licensed professional planner. Uh you heard a lot of testimony from our site civil engineer as well as the applicant and operator. So you know that this is an existing undersized lot
in your HD1, right? The HD1 is one of our more permissive commercial districts in Howell Township and it requires a minimum lot area of 80,000 square feet where the subject lot is 42,240 square ft. Beyond that, there's an
existing building on the square on the site that's just under 5,000 square foot feet. The applicant is proposing to repurpose that building. There is an existing automobile service station as well as a car wash on the property today. So those uses are both
conditionally permitted in the HD1 zone. The violation of those con conditions that we don't meet are existing conditions. Right? we are violating the fact that we need to be uh a certain distance from
a um another auto repair facility and from municipal facilities. Both of those conditions exist on the property today. It is not something the applicant is looking or asking the board to approve because it's an existing condition. We are 300 ft from the Mavis Tire where we
are required to be 2500 uh feet from another service station and we are within uh 1,000 ft of town hall. So those are the existing conditional uh use requirements that we violate. So what that means is the burden of proof for the Dvariance is a little different
than if you're asking the board to introduce a use into the zone that's outright permitted. Right? If we were asking you to contemplate a use that's not permitted in the zone at all, we would have to demonstrate things to you like the particular suitability as well as the Medici reconciliation of the
omission of that use from the zone plan. Instead, when you're dealing with a D2 use and the D3 unmatch conditional use, we're guided by the Burbridge case. When the Burbridge case was a case for an auto body, it was an expansion of a non-conforming use. And what the essentially the case law for an
expansion of a non-conforming use and unmet conditional use is that absent compliance with those conditional use standards is the site still an appropriate location for the use. That's for the conditional use. When you're dealing with the D2 expansion of a non-conforming use, Burbridge asks you
to be concerned and focus on the betterments of the application and the holistic upgrades to the site, not just mere beautifification. In fact, mere beautifification alone is not enough to substantiate your burden of proof with regard to an expansion of a non-conforming use application uh under
Burbridge. There has to be some other uh benefits here. The applicant is improving the site circulation. They are modernizing the new equipment. They are adding a handicap space and they are introducing and improving the storm
water management systems on the subject property. So, I think that those betterments are substantial. The reason we have to focus on things like Betterments is because we do need some relief here, right? We know, and there's already been discussion with your planner and your engineer that in order
for us to have that middle drive-thru lane for our dedicated um customers, our our U membership customers, that we need to come closer to our eastern property line, which is the the property line to the rear. Um there is already
disturbance in that area. So, this really becomes a balancing act, right? If you had the opportunity, as many as I'm sure of you do, to drive past the site on a regular basis, you know, to say that the site currently lacks curb appeal and uh focus is to put it kindly
because the site really could is in in need of an upgrade. So I think that this is to absolutely one of those situations where you have to look at the holistic nature of the application and the case law tells us to do that
right not to just cherrypick out the variances and look at how do you balance because that's what we need to do. We need to balance the benefits versus the detriments. And when you're evaluating the negative criteria the negative criteria has two prongs to it and the municipal land use law is very clear. It
does not ask you to hold this or any other applicant to a standard that there be no detriment. That is not the standard of proof for the grant of the negative criteria prong of a variance. It's to ensure that the benefits of the grant of the variance would outweigh any detriment. Um I heard Mr. Kliff uh your
engineer ask if we would be willing to do a white vinyl fence on top of our wall and that and I think that that's a nice suggestion. Right. That's a transi. This is a transitional site. We've got the very high intensive corridor of Route 9 and then we have a 25 foot home uh HOA strip and then we have
residential housing. So I am absolutely in support of the application uh to put a vinyl fence there. I think it would be a great condition of approval. Also, when you're balancing and you look at your master plan re-examination report, which was last uh evaluated here
in 2023, there's a specific statement in that master plan that reads about evaluating the potential for economic and rehabilitation in strategic locations within the township where appropriate to encourage sound land use development that can provide economic development opportunities while at the
same time balancing the preservation of neighborhood character as well as the protection of environmental resources. And boy, if this application doesn't hit all of those uh hit that goal on all cylinders, in my opinion as a planner, I think it certainly does. So, I think the board can certainly and unequivocally
grant the relief that's requested in conjunction with this application. We meet our statutory burden of proof in my opinion for both the D2 variance for the expansion of non-conforming use as well as the D3 variance for the unmatch conditional use. And I think when again
when you're dealing with Burbridge, one of the other hallmarks of the Burbridge case is that when you're dealing with the negative criteria, it encourages you on an expansion of a non-conforming use to view the non-conforming use with greater liberality than you would if you were introducing the use. And that's
because the neighborhood is accustomed to the use already as is in this case is in the subject application. So, I think when you look at all those things and you look at the betterments, um, and I I'm not going to repeat them again because I know we have an out ofstate visitor who wants to get on the record tonight. So, I will not go
through them again because I think Mr. Fur did a great job of outlining them and I outline them again. So, I believe we do meet the statutory burden of proof for the D2 and the D3 and I think as far as the negative criteria, the impact on the public good and the impact on the zone plan doesn't rise to a level of
substantial detriment. And when I review the re-examination report here, I find that there are certain goals and objectives in that um master plan that would be advanced by the grant to this application in total. And I I don't see any substantial detriment. As far as the
other relief and the sign plan, your ordinance is very clear at section 256-5, which regulates signs, that when you have a business situated on a corner lot, it does allow for uh two two types of the signs that are permissible. So it certainly recognizes that that's a
situation where additional signs would be appropriate. The other thing I should tell you is that while we do have on the western facing elevation which faces Route 9, we have several signs there, a car wash sign, an express auto spa sign, and an oil change sign. That amounts to about 11% of the total facade area on
the west where your ordinance would allow 25%. On our southern facing facade, which is our side facade facing Locust, we have the Express Auto Spa sign. And that goes to about um 7% of that wall area. And that's important because when you're looking at signs, right, we want our signs to be
advertising. We don't want vacant spaces. We want them to have several functions. We want them to be attractive. We want them to be aesthetic, and we want them to be well positioned to the the walls that they're sitting on, and we want them to be wavefinding. So I think that the sign plan does all of those things and I think the board can certainly grant the
relief with respect to the sign plan with no substantial detriment. Um and again the bulk variance for the area is an existing condition. We do need an impervious coverage variance as well at 83.5 ft where 70% is allowed in the zone. Um and I think uh Mr. Dr. Frey
did a great job of telling you that we will have no adverse impacts with respect to the storm water management and the site can certainly accommodate any of the um the excess coverage and really I I know that your planner is going to have have feel some kind of way about that buffer variance in the back
and I think that the combination of the vinyl fencing that we are proposing will certainly uh mitigate the impacts of the buffer relief and when you look at the overall benefits of the application I'm hopeful that you'll also will come to the conclusion that will be no
substantial detriment resulting from any of the variance relief associated with this application. >> And this compon I assume your testimony would hold also with the if I didn't hear it accessory structure and front yard minimum number of parking spaces and I think fence height and there were
one or two design waiverss as well. >> Definitely with the fence height that's a clear seat too because it gives us more screening. Um, I should have touched on the um the the tur the turbine, right? I think we talked about that the specifics with the turbine where we're showing it right now. It's
in a front yard to locust and we have a fence around it. What we suggested doing was moving it back even further or I believe Mr. Cumliff suggested um moving it back toward closer to the east which would be closer towards the residents. So that's again right that's what we do as planners. you as the board, we as the
applicants, planners, and your plan, we're always balancing what is the best way to do it. This is a highway commercial corridor and this site needs to be redeveloped. There is no question about that. I don't think anybody in this room would disagree with that. So, as far as the um the turbine and the
location of the that in that accessory, that's the accessory structure. That's what we're talking about. When we're talking about the accessory structure in the front yard, it's that turbine. So, I think um I prefer it further from the residential neighborhood. I think we can screen it. I think we we had a good idea to screen it. Um, personally, I think
the vegetation would look better than the fence in that area. I like the higher fence along our eastern property. Um, I think that that would be better and more effective there. I think that the the natural screening along Locust would be a preferable viewshed for me, but that's that's just my opinion on
that variant. I think that that would certainly be um either way, whatever the board felt was more screening, of course, the applicant would do. I find the the turbine along Locust to be a better location and that the natural vegetative screening would be a better alternative there. As far as the
parking, I believe our parking count is 18 is required. 14 is what we're proposing. Um you heard the applicant testify that we have um approximately 9 to 12 employees, but that they don't all drive to the site at any one time. So um our parking is certainly adequate to
meet our our demand. So I see no substantial detriments to the the grant of the parking variance and it certainly lends to a more efficient layout. >> And then I don't just briefly the design waiverss there was a minimum circulation out lighting average and um sidewalks.
U >> so um I believe your planner would probably want the sidewalks if if we I'm not even going I'm not even going to try to justify it because I know that it's just Jennifer would never accept it. So, I'm not even going to bother because I know what to know. So,
>> I think they're there already. We just need to make sure they're handicapped. >> Okay. Well, we're going to have to comply with that. We're going to have to do do our >> adding curb space and then ADA compliance to the sidewalk where it cuts the >> Yeah, I think we're going to have to comply with that. I don't see I don't
see us successfully arguing to not comply with that. And as far as the lighting, I think uh Mr. Mr. Ford testified to that as well that the lighting is certainly appropriate and the appropriate illumination levels. Again, knowing that the latest this is open is 6:00, right? So, I think that we
are open primarily during daytime hours from 8 to 6 or 8 to 5 depending on what time of uh calendar year we're in. So, I think the illumination levels are not something that are going to be ownorous to the to the neighborhood. Did you say the minimum circulation
aisles? Um the minimum circulation aisles we're of course improving the circulation and I think again this is an undersized lot right it's 4240 ft where you have an 80,000 square foot requirement and it's an existing condition existing site so we are trying
to improve the circulation and flow through this existing undersized developed lot and I think that the circulation has been demonstrated by our engineer to provide for sufficient and extensive vehicle stacking and that the circulation aisles are sufficient to accomplish that goal.
>> No further questions, Mr. Chairman. >> Okay, Christine. >> Yeah. So, um the applicant is seeking a D2 variance for the expansion of the nonconforming use. I think that perhaps um what
they're proposing is a little too intense for the site. While there had been, you know, an there is an existing required residential buffer there with the easement realignment, they're proposing to, you know, basically that
buffer will no longer exist, but for the fence, they're um proposing. I think that's an issue. You know, we generally um do not grant variances for buffer relief. Um and uh you know this is right next to a
residential property um HOA property. I think um some of the other variances they need also kind of speak to the intensity of the youth. um they are not meeting their parking requirement and um the board as did I had some questions
about uh how the circulation would work with some of those um vacuum spaces and the um the one uh queuing lane. Um I appreciate they will comply with the
sidewalk requirements, but um my concerns um most my most important concerns I guess are really the buffer that um easement realignment and how that impacts not only the fire station but also this
municipal building. Um and then just the general layout of the site. Mr. Chair, and I apologize if I missed it. So, >> um, so, so you have the two lanes that come through all the way through on the east side of the property, which is
causing the issue with the encroachment into the access easement and having to shift everything. Um c could those be two lanes and then have some system where they converge into one lane and serve the same purpose? Can you provide some planning testimony on uh
why it h why it's being proposed the way it is. Is that you know does it does the site circulate better because of that? Um you know is that the only way that this can be done to for this site to operate the way that the applicant's pro proposing to operate?
>> Yes. I asked my client that at the break. I asked if there we could implement a system like that and he indicated to me that that would not work. It would not allow for the vehicles to move through the site so efficiently and the the project would not go forward if that was the configuration of the the circulation.
>> And then the last comment that I'll have is and I I think you heard the applicant testimony uh applicant's attorney provide testimony on it. The easement is to How Township and it serves the benefit of the Southern Fire Department. So if the board were inclined to act favorably, they would still have to get
Howal Township, the governing body to sign off on the improvements to be within the easement and the modification to the easement. So um if the board weren't inclined to act favorably and the governing body decided that they weren't of the same opinion and didn't
see the driveway was fit to be within the easement and deny that, they would have to come back to the board to uh seek amendment to the site plan. So, I just want to put that on the record for the board's awareness. >> We would of course accept that as a condition of approval and we so acknowledge that we would absolutely have to come back if the governing body
did not get grant that relief. >> Okay. >> Any questions from the board before we go to public? >> Yeah. So, we could consider that then to be like kind of a legal thing that's going to be worked out if we say yes and then if Yeah.
>> Yeah. I think Andy would tell you that there's case law that says you can't deny an application solely for not having an easement or a modification to an easement, but you can make it a condition of a of a board approval. >> Okay. Thank you. Thanks. >> I agree. >> Okay. Thanks, Andy.
>> Okay. I think I don't have any further questions for the planner. Do you want to make a motion to go to public? >> Make a motion to go to public, Mr. Chair. >> By Mr. Hughes, Mr. Caner. Second. All in favor? >> I. Yes. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. We're now open to the public for any public comment. >> Steven Hmet. I live at 11. >> You got to be sworn in. Thank you. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Uh, do you swear that that the testimony you give will be the truth, the whole truth? Nothing but the truth. >> Yes, sir.
>> State your name for the record. Spell your last and give your address. >> Stephen Hid. H UF S C H M I DT. And I live at 11 Locust Avenue. >> Where exactly is that? So we can get a perspective. Exact.
>> The property that uh borders the fire road. >> Okay. >> That they were talking about. >> Okay. >> Um the one question I got uh they keep talking about new technology and all this other stuff. How loud is this new technology? the new air blowers or what
the air dryers whatever at the car wash. I get the turbine uh decibel. I heard the man say that which is 30 dB. That's fine. But what about the big air blowers in the car wash itself? Like how loud is that?
>> I think we need the uh applicant to give us uh answer your question because that is a good question. By the air blowers you mean the dryer is inside the tunnel. So that is at the exit of the tunnel. So that's on the opposite end of it's towards Route 9,
not where not where you are. So >> not like all through the >> No, that's the last piece of equipment in the tunnel. >> You know what I'm saying? >> Yeah. No, that the the the blowers, the dryers are at the exit of the tunnel which is on Route 9, right? >> That's contained within the structure and so it's not that noisy. But regardless, it's on the opposite side of
of where you live. >> Okay, I got you. The other comment I had is about the the turbine issue. >> I think where it is should be where it stays. Don't move it any closer to my property. I mean, >> I think we agree. >> I got enough issues with this fire road
cuz the township came down. They tore out the old fence. They chewed up all the trees and everything. I mean, they made it really made it a mess is what they did. So, I'm glad to hear they want to put a a fence up and and whatever. But my question is, how far toward my property are they talking about pushing
>> the the the fire road? Like, how much closer to my property is it going to get pushed? >> What is it? >> What was it, Charlie? What was it? How much Sorry, what was the question? How much >> move towards the uh line?
>> I think it might be six feet. We could have somebody testify, but uh >> yeah, their engineer can come up and get testimony. I'll also scale on the plans and give you confirmation of that. >> So, so uh again, Robert Prud, uh right now it's about 9 ft off. It'll be about
uh three or four feet 3 feet or so afterwards. So, it's moving about six feet closer, but getting the fence. >> Okay. Now, I may be completely wrong with this, but when I spoke with the a lady from the HOA, I don't remember her name or whatever, when they tore down
the old fence or whatever, she told me that strip of land that runs between the fire road and my property is uh part of the wetlands or whatever and is basically managed by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.
So, if you're talking about moving another three feet, that's you're now you're encroaching in on wetland basically property. And what I've seen on the EPA's website, it it does show a boundary along with my property and that
access road, it says that's wetlands property. Now, how much that actually is, I I'm don't know. I'm not an engineer. I couldn't tell you. But I all I can say is it does show there's a boundary in there for the wetlands. >> So I don't know maybe you guys want to
double check that. I mean I don't know. >> Yeah Charlie is that something we the D has to approve. So that's part of condition. >> So their their engineer did provide a report from u the boys environmental who's an environmental consultant that has been before this board on a number
of occasions. I think the the lot that that he's talking about um there's a 25 ft strip between the subject property and his property that's part of a larger property that's an open space conservation property probably to some extent um that was created when that
subdivision was created further northeast of the subject property there is a drainage ditch that uh you know runs uh behind the southern fire and I think towards the direction of the municipal building and it might tie into
some drainage with the um jug handle there. Um but they their environmental professional that 25 foot strip that's uh immediately behind this property. They in their recommendation and their assessment there wasn't any of the three prongs that would um exhibit the
characteristics of wetlands. You need all three of those for it to be considered as a wetlands. uh that drainage ditch. They did say that that was potentially wetlands and would have a 50 foot buffer, but that was some distance. I would think at least 125 feet, I think, from the closest property
line. Um so, uh you know, I don't necessarily have a concern. If this board were inclined to require the Apple to go get a presence absence LOI or something like that, you certainly it's within your right to do so. I do know it would be a very probably one to two-year process for them to maybe go get
something like that. Um, it's purely at your discretion, but um, you know, I think based off of what Devois has presented, I'm I'm not very concerned with that being a wetlands area. >> Just out of curiosity, is that windmill
club HOA property or another one? Does anybody know that? >> It's his HOA. Oh, >> they the HOA that my mother-in-law's here, they've been a part of it since they first moved here in 8384. >> Oh, so that's where the house is. Okay.
>> Right. Right. And she lives what is there now? >> Okay. >> The wooded area behind my house, this the strip that runs along the side of the property. Um I I don't know if it actually belongs to the HOA or not. I know they manage it like watch out for
it, whatever. I But who it legally belongs to, I have no idea. But like I said, I'm glad I, you know, they want to put a fence up and all this other stuff. That's fine. Uh, I would like to get it on the record. If I could get it in writing, that'd be even better. >> And everything, >> it will be,
>> it will be in the resolution. So, it will be in writing. >> Okay. Because we want it. >> This moves ahead. They put the fence up, whatever. >> We're going to >> They're responsible for this fence. >> If it gets damaged, it gets knocked down. >> They're responsible for the fence. >> Yes. cuz I I don't know who the man was
that got into it with how when they came down there, tore down the old fence or whatever. I don't want to have that issue again. >> Okay. >> So, I mean, we had that tornado come through, blew a tree down on my house, and it that was a whole another problem with with with getting that taken care
of. But the fence will belong to them. They'll maintain it, whatever. >> And the applicant will agree to that. We >> agree. Yes. Okay. >> Okay. Um, oh, the security lights. I I the only comment I have about that is I I would
just ask them when they install them and they they set them, please set them to where they where they need to go, don't point them at my house cuz we had an issue with the last owner of that property with with security lights at night and that was a whole another problem. They put in new lights
and they had one right over the oil bay doors that pointed directly through my back door and it was it was irritating. >> Okay. I would say that if if that happens again, come to the township because it's going to be in the resolution that it's not supposed to happen,
>> right? You know, I'm just asking you when they put them. >> No, no, we're over there. We'll make sure that they're >> That is one big concern we have. >> So, we we hear Yeah. If if I if I recall, testimony earlier said that the lighting would be downward facing all
all lighting. >> Yep, that's correct. >> Okay. Right. >> With house side shields. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, that sure >> So, uh I guess that's all I got. Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, >> well, I appreciate you had some good questions. Thanks for coming up. >> All right. Thank you. Thank you,
>> Mr. Chair. Just to chime in with that. So, I agree with the representation from Mr. uh Freud with uh the driveway is moving six foot closer to the property line. So I I concur with that and uh the lighting point by point analysis that they did provide shows I want to say
zero foot candles along that whole easterly property line. So uh you know based off of the lighting design there should not be any spill over onto that easterly property line. Um going back to the uh turbine area not to beat it into the ground. If we're going to leave it where it is, I would just ask that the
uh fence around that be white solid vinyl fence to match what's being proposed along that Easter property line. Um solid I know they're doing board on board which does have some openings. The solid I think will help will also help with like potential noise. >> Yes. And then just the blowers also I
just want to put it on the record they already testified that those the blowers for the car wash that's already been done and improved and that's not something that's under the purview of this board. that was something they could have went any owner and got like um building permits to to make that modification. So that's not something
subject to this uh our jurisdiction. >> Okay. >> How how high is the auxiliary structure for the turbines? >> I'll let the applicant provide testimony. How high it is? >> Um there are parts of it that are about 8 ft. >> Okay. So it does need a fence. Okay.
>> Well, we we had suggestion landscaping in landscaping. >> Landscaping. Okay. something. >> I think uh in this location, if it's going to stay where it is, I think uh landscaping as they shown on the plan, but a solid vinyl fence cuz the frontage of Locust Avenue, there's no ability to
really put like landscape plantings without it being in the public right away. So, I think the solid vinyl fence and the landscaping they have proposed is would be would be satisfying. >> So, it is a fence. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I I testified that we would shift it 3 ft back to allow room, but I'll
defer to you and the board. >> I would prefer that if you could shift it back. >> I think shifting it solid vinyl fence and landscaping would be fine. There's a drainage manhole there which, you know, we don't want to have a structure on top of it. >> I think that would be my preference if you could do that. >> We'll agree.
>> Okay. >> Okay. Anything further before we have a summary >> close to public? >> Yeah, we Yeah. Motion to close. >> I make a motion to close the public. >> Mr. Ryan
second on Mr. Hughes. All in favor? >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Well, Mr. Chairman, I I don't want to belabor obviously there's a, you know, a number of variances and and design waiverss which the board has heard testimony in support of. Um uh and um
you know unfortunately the uh with the you know constraints on this being a pre-existing uh use and structure on the site uh there were you know certain compromises which we attempted to uh address which drive uh some of those variances and waiverss. So with all that being said without trying to build
labors I know there's a gentleman who would like to satisfy before flying back to Tennessee. Uh I uh uh we'll respectfully close and we uh we hope the board would uh consider approving the application. >> Okay. Thank you. If
>> there's nothing else, I will entertain a motion. >> Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion. Um, taking into account, you know, I think the turbine staying where it is, moving it 3 ft makes good sense. Again, seeing the street view, I don't think
moving it where we talked about earlier would make any sense. Putting up the, you know, vinyl fence and nice screening around it, that'd be wonderful with plantings. figuring out the easement on a legal perspective. I'm going to leave that up to, you know, to that process. The white
vinyl fence across the back and putting in uh we're making sure that the sidewalks are all appropriate and in good shape. I would like to make a motion to approve. >> Okay, Mr. Hughes with the motion. Do we have a second? >> Second by Mr. Arasco.
Could we have a roll call? >> Mr. Caner. >> Uh Mr. Chairman, I do agree that the benefits of this property uh being modernized and updated far outweigh the detention detriments particularly with
removing rem moving that driveway in the back. So, I vote yes. >> Mr. Hughes? >> Yes. >> Mr. O'Donnell? >> Yes. I'd like to say that uh you guys put a lot of thoughtful uh thought into this project and gone over everything
pretty darn good and uh I'm pretty satisfied with the job you've done and everything that you agreed to do as easily as you agreed to do it. So my vote is yes. >> Mr. Rosco, >> yes. >> Mr. Brian,
>> I think that the uh resident that lives right next to the property is thankful for the improvements that are going to happen with the fence. So, if he's happy, I'm happy. I vote yes. >> Mr. Carabach Kabarakus, >> uh
I feel like this application brings a significant improvement to the site. So, uh therefore, I I vote yes as well. And Chairman Mertin, >> I'm going to concur with all my fellow members because everybody kind of nailed exactly what I was thinking too. The
positives outweigh the negatives and you guys did a very good job and I voted yes as well. >> Motion carries. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, members. >> Thank you. >> Good job. >> Thank you very much.
>> Okay, you too. free passes for >> Thank you. >> Can we come and say >> I'm I'm fine if it's late. >> Really?
Okay. Whatever you guys want. >> Oh, well. Oh, yeah. Okay. Sorry. I mean, right. >> Well, you're gonna make the board happy. >> That'll be a good news. >> Yes, Mr. Bill. >> All right. Um, Mr. Chairman, board
members, >> notwithstanding what I told you about 15 minutes ago, um, we have decided to, um, adjourn our hearing till your next meeting. uh don't want to hold anyone over time and my applica and my client would prefer to be here during the entirety of our presentation. So we'll
um uh we will carry it until pardon me carry until your next meeting date. >> Well, we need a date to agree on. >> So the next meeting December 8th and December 22nd >> um >> Rich on on Mr. Chairman on the 8th yet
we may have a large application. Hannah Group is on >> Yeah. I think would be better for them to come the 22nd. That way we can put them first. >> Yeah. >> We'll take it that for us. Yes, that works for us.
>> The 22nd. >> Yeah. Because this way we'll let you start off and you'll more than likely finish. So again, I really apologize. >> These things happen. >> Yeah. It's it's sometimes he's we think a case is going to be a lot quicker than
>> Certainly. >> Okay. >> Understood. Well, thank you very much. >> Okay. Thank you. >> When is the uh when is >> extension of time? Uh let's see. I don't >> have it on it. >> Doesn't have it on here. >> Uh so we're okay on time. Maybe just read an announcement. So no other notice
will be be required. >> Okay. Just to put it on record, case number BA2203A, Hutton Hal NJ State LLC will be carried to December 22nd.
>> 22 >> 22nd with no further notice. And um I guess we'll see you then. >> All right. Thank you very much. >> Okay. Thank you. Happy Thanksgiving. >> Before you leave, >> yes. Uh, could you just let your client
know that the site is absolutely atrocious? Uh, it's been tagged up with graffiti. The boards that were previously used to board up the place are now falling and it just needs a quick cut. Uh, if they could just please address the property maintenance issues. >> Okay. Certainly.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. Is there any further business at the board? Uh so just have a great Thanksgiving everybody. >> Eat lots of turkey. >> Motion to adjourn.
>> Motion by Mr. Caner. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Happy Thanksgiving. >> Okay, we are injured. Happy Thanksgiving.