i pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands One nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all Yeah I gota turn this thing
on All right everybody Welcome to the March 24th Jackson Township Planning Board meeting This meeting has been appropriately noticed in all the proper places and forums according to the Open Public Meetings Act I believe that we
are still waiting on the applicant's attorney So we'll conduct board business first Good evening everyone Sure My mic is um I'd like a uh um motion on payment of voucher for
recording secretary for March 24th please So move Sullivan second Heler Um roll call please Mr Bernstein Mr Marzo Mr Heler Yes Mr
Rogers Yes Mr Tamer Yes Miss Rose Yes Mr Weart Mr Sullivan Yes Dr Campbell Yes Uh approval of the minutes for March 10th please Regular meeting We need a
motion please Uh I'll make that motion Sullivan Second Dreamer Roll call please Mr Heler Yes Mr Rogers Yes Mr Treamer Yes Miss Rose Yes Mr Sullivan Yes Dr
Campbell Yes And we have uh one resolution this evening 2025-10 Resolution 2025-10 Resolution of the planning board of the Township of Jackson County of Ocean state of New Jersey granting preliminary
and final major site plan approval for the construction of a contractor's warehouse and business park for HW Jackson LLC block 2603 lots 5 and 22 Eligible to
vote are Mr Heler Miss Rose Mr Chamer Mr Sullivan and Dr Camp I'd like to make a motion to approve Second Heler
Roll call please Mr Heler Yes Miss Rose Yes Mr Treamer Yes Mr Sullivan Yes And Dr Campbell Yes Thank you Miss Jennings when you're ready We can do roll call also if you want
while we're waiting We did we really didn't but we know who's here We did roll call Yeah We didn't do the changes to the agenda schedule That's I was waiting for Miss Jennings because she is I thought we did Maybe my mind is gone
Thank you Good evening For the record I'm Donna Jennings from the law firm of Walen Goldman and Spitzer Uh as the board is aware we're here this evening on this application seeking an extension of the Hold it for a minute I'm looking for the change in the agenda schedule
and you requested was it you who requested a change in the agenda from April 7th to July 7th oh you mean um Yes Yes So that's why we were waiting for you Gotcha
So block 19501 lot 21 Kahal Nashes AOS Inc is carried from April 7th to July 7th with notice required That okay for you Miss Jennings July 7th Yes We'll take a motion on
approving that please So move to move block 19501 lot 21 location 26 Whitesville Road to July 7th 2025 Second Hel All in favor i I Anyone
opposed carried Okay So therefore the uh since we have no application on April 7th uh that meeting will be cancelled I'm I'm certain there's
heartbreak Heartbreak But we'll take a motion on that to cancel that meeting Please I motion that we cancel the April 7th 2025 planning board meeting Second Uh all approved Yes Yes No one
complaining That's scary All right Now that we've finished with board business Miss Jennings will get to you Thank you We are Okay Thank you again Donna Jennings from the law firm or Skullman Spitzer On behalf of the applicant as
the board is aware the applicant is here this evening seeking an extension of a minor subdivision approval for property located on Pittney Lane identified as block 210001 lot 24 As the board will remember we sought a simple minor
subdivision to create a developable lot and then we're going to dedicate the remaining parcel of the property to the uh township Uh I have with me to the left our site engineer uh Yseph Portoi who will just state for the record um where the applicant is with meeting the
conditions of the approval and why the applicant is seeking an extension of time Please raise your right hand Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth please state your name and spell your last record Welcome back We accept your credentials
Make make sure to speak into the microphone and up I'm not sure if it's on I don't know if it's on Can't hear a week back There we go There we go Much better Thank you Thank you Okay Good evening Um
um M as M J noted we've have received approval in July of 2025 We have um obtained the majority of the outside agency approvals One I believe primary outstanding one is Ocean County Planning
Board Um but even that one we've been back and forth with them and we just the last item we just need to file a couple easements in order to fulfill their last conditions So we're close we're we're close on um getting through the conditions but we still need a little
more time to just finalize that Um any questions from members okay Yes Yeah The one condition was um was not a
con um was was not a resolution condition but was one of the outstanding comments um regarding the pedestrian safety fund Um just as a reminder this property um was part of the subdivision
originally filed in 1987 At that time they only um the board apparently only required sidewalk on one side of the street So there was a sidewalk installed on the opposite side of Pittney Lane There's no sidewalk installed in on the
side of on the um north side of Pittney Lane along the entire subdivision Um so it was apparently the the subdivision was adopted in 1987 which was prior to the township
um sidewalk ordinance So we would not find any evidence of that that uh a waiver was granted or or fund was a kind of contribution So we requested a waiver from providing sidewalk um based on the fact that there's no
sidewalk there There's along the entire subdivision along here and that waiver was granted um with a condition that we the applicant makes a condition to the to the safety fund Um we received the
estimate from the board engineer for the contribution That contribution is um over over $40,000 Um uh upon so applicant has um has now been getting pricing on on
you know reconstructing the basin um it is coming the the quotes he's getting is a lot higher than than anticipated So the applicant is requesting relief from that condition the contribution to the safety fund
um in lie of the um the the in light of the applicant making these improvements to the basin The applicant is is improving the basin remodeling the basin for current storm events and as part of that dedicating it
to the town which was intent of the original subdivision um which was never completed and the applicant would also be making the contribution to the of close to $445,000 to the stormware management fee Um our understanding is that the town
has already been maintaining the basin as it is even though it's been on private property This this would clean that up dedicated to the town and the contribution of the $45,000 calculated based on 25 years worth of maintenance
fees Mr Py just real quick so uh our planner just raised a question It's a good question So is it was this request made in the application itself what request the the the request for the the amendment
We requested the extension of the minor subdivision and in there we I believe we explained that we were seeking trying to get all the outside agency approvals and meet resolution compliance So not directly it's not technically a condition like the board imposed Is it
just in the review letter it might be um difficult for us to make that type of assessment without going back through all the plans and the testimony and looking at uh that uh that those requests We don't have that uh paperwork
We weren't advised of that So we could hear that in a year Mr I believe when we submitted the application we have copies of the review letters and stuff in the application
itself So it's it's really the the issue being you know we granted the subdivision we had agreed to upgrade the storm water management system at quite a bit of money plus pay the 44,000 in the stormwater maintenance fee and then we didn't realize that the pedestrian fund
was going to be $40,000 So the applicant doesn't have to subdivide the property We just thought it was the better thing to do Uh it is a developable lot but we were going to dedicate the 3 acres to the township upgrade the storm water maintenance system pay the maintenance fee but now putting putting another
$40,000 on top of that just really makes the whole thing not really economically feasible And so there's been no sidewalk there for over 30 years Uh the other side of the subdivision has sidewalk and it was created back in the 80s Maybe we can ask uh our professionals to
chime in on this for us please Thank you Madam Chair Um regarding the um the maintenance fund um I'm not really a big fan of the payment and having the town um absorb or take over the ownership and maintenance responsibilities And I would ask what happens after 25 years i think
that's you know now the the taxpayers everybody else is going to going to pay for that maintenance So I have a real problem with waving that requirement As far as the sidewalk goes no we weren't asking for the that m the 44,000 we're paying It's all about the sidewalk Okay It's all about um why instead of paying
into the fund why just not install it because I think that unit price would be significantly less than if the town was going to do a project and have to hire a contractor prevailing wage um all the things that go along with it That's where the $100 a square yard comes from
I think a private developer could install that at a significantly cheaper price I guess because we just didn't believe it made any sense to build a sidewalk on the other side when there is no sidewalk and around a maintenance basin that's going to be owned by the township I'm not really sure that's where you want to be directing all the
pedestrian traffic It's not there now It hasn't been there for over 30 years But that wasn't discussed at the hearing for the minor subdivision wasn't agreed to it Yeah we agreed to the comments in the review letter We just never got the dollar amount I guess and then when he
got when we got it during our resolution compliance it caused the issue My question is isn't this part of the deal that was originally made to accommodate this whole moving the retention basin and fixing no it was just a comment in the review letter that
you would contribute to the pedestrian fund We agreed but we never really thought about what the We didn't realize the fee was $40,000 Isn't this the one that was kind of close to the closer to the roadway so as a concession we added a sidewalk No
I think we'd have to look at it more carefully before we made any kind of decision on that Not we so we can't make that decision at this time So why don't why don't I recommend this so um based upon my conversations uh with with the
administration they're they don't necessarily want to see things just dedicated in the way that it has been previously They they want to go through the formal dedication process via application and everything like that
If just so we don't we're not two ships crossing at night why don't if the applicant would agree to making that formal submission get the town's input as to whether they even want to accept the dedication or not Um and if that's
the case then we can kind of have some clairvoyance as to as to maybe Okay that wasn't an issue the last time I guess is what I'm saying The only issue we're discussing now was the sidewalk All that other was already What I'm saying is that that
um having knowing the township's position on that may be able to give some clarity as to what the board wants to do moving forward on that
Um that that may be able to to clear up their position on things um instead of because I I know from my conversations with the administration they want to see a more kind of formal process taking place with with the dedications Um so if
we know the the township's position on it then the board may have a clearer idea as to as to whether not they want to kind of equitably grant this or not So it may be just better off
adjourning this to maybe get some uh get some clarity as to everybody's position We'll make this decision next year when you return Next year how come it's going to be next year it's a year It's a year
You've asked for a year Well but can you just Well let's remove the sidewalk from the conversation and just grant us an extension of our approval Yeah we we can we can bifrocate them I'm not worried about that Um and and they also if they want to come back before us they don't have to wait until next year They can make an application to come
back Um you know so they are here for a two-part process really you know but one is for the time extension the other is for the removal of the condition If I remember correctly though there was an exception here because they needed the 300 ft of road frontage We didn't want
parking there so that's why there was going to be a sidewalk So I believe we need to review when this application was on there because the sidewalk is there for a reason It was a condition I think you're confusing this application with something else This was No this is
Pittney This is a simple subdivision There was nothing You didn't move the retention basin to enlarge one piece of property on this one to enlarge a piece of property No we're making the property smaller Why don't Why don't we do this we can't We don't have a Yeah So so
instead of covering issues that may or may not be um involved in this application why doesn't the board bifurcate this let's rule on on the extension which is just equitable right uh it's our equitable right to seek Um
and then we can at a later date in time put the the second off to the side adjourn it and we'll get a future hearing date after the applicant can can seek some kind of input from the township That would be good because then we can look at what we had the paperwork
We It's Yeah No that sounds fair We see hundreds of these but No I understand All right So we'll just uh um someone Why not just agree to put the sidewalk in well you don't have to pay it into the fund for the whatever dollar amount You could probably put in the
sidewalk for half that amount as a private Well he always has his option to put the sidewalk in or pay do the payment in L So we'll just get the extension then he could decide look he may not perfect the subdivision I I I don't know It It might have actually become just too cost prohibitive but at least let's give him the extension then
he can decide what he's going to going to do in the meantime Okay Mr Peters anything from you okay All right So we're just going to uh ask for a um motion to uh accept the time
extension at this time Anybody feel free I'll make the motion that we extend the one year give them the one-year time extension That's all Okay All right We'll have a roll call on that please
Second Second Dreamer Thank you Mr Chairman Mr Heler Yes Mr Rogers yes Mr Chamer yes Miss Rose yes Mr Sullivan yes Dr Camp yes All right Thank you very much Thanks Thank you Good evening
Okay moving right along Gentlemen if you could carry on your conversation outside please Thank you Thank you again for the record Donna Jennings from the law firm of Lent Goldman and Spitzer on behalf of the applicant As the board is aware the
applicant is here this evening seeking preliminary and final major site plan approval with bulk variances to construct a three-story 39,000 square foot professional office building with related site improvements on property located at 180 Jackson Mills Road and
identified as block 4301 lot 20 The 3acre property is currently improved with a one-story residential dwelling and is located in a limited commercial zone The applicant is requesting two bulk variances with respect to maximum impervious coverage
and maximum building height Um as will be more thoroughly discussed by the applicant site engineer the applicant will revise its plan to remove one of the parking spaces nearest the side property line uh where a variance was called out by the board planner Um the
applicant is also seeking relief for several design waiverss with respect to parking area curved radi return providing parking access along the main circulation drive minimum width of the landscape parking island not providing a full landscape buffer along the side
property line and not providing sidewalks along street frontages As will be testified to by the applicant's planner The record will show the applicant satisfies the positive and negative criteria to warrant the request of relief In support of the application the app will call the following witnesses Ellie Halpert sitting to my
left will testify as both our site engineer and planner Mary Davis will be our architect and John Ray as our traffic engineer As a matter of recordkeeping we are in receipt of several reports We have the traffic safety unit review letter initially dated February 3rd 2025 with a further
response letter dated March 7th 2025 The fire bureau review letter dated November 4th 2024 the township tree specialist review letter dated March 20th 2025 The board planners review letter last revised March 18th 2025 And the board
engineers review letter dated March 21st 2025 With that if I can have Mr Halbert sworn in we can begin our testimony Okay All right Eli do you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth all right Please state your
last of the record Eric Halpert H A L P E R T licensed professional engineer and planner in the state of New Jersey These plans were prepared under my supervision and I have appeared before this board before Welcome back Thank you The board accepts the credentials We do And I just
want to make sure it's clear that you're going to be both the planner and the site engineer this evening Yes Okay If you could um Mr Halper describe the site in the surrounding areas and if going to rely on any exhibits please identify them for the record We will be relying on um the exhibit set
A1 to A4 and the board is looking at exhibit A1 which depicts an aerial of the site The site is located in the northern section of Jackson Township on the northwesterly side of Jacksonville Mills Road It is highlighted over here
in the aerial It is currently developed with a single family dwelling and other accessory structures and parking areas Um it is located in the limited commercial [Music] zone which um is its border is along
Jackson Mills Road across the street is not a limited commercial zone and the applicant is seeking to develop the property with a commercial professional offices parking area landscaping storm water management
as will be shown in the coming exhibits and in the plan Could you go um Anthony to Thank you Could you uh zoom in and a little uh could you zoom back out a little bit just to capture the roadway as
well the property just to uh discuss um the um some of the roadway improvements uh before getting into the property The property is located on a county road Jacksonville Mills Road is a county roadway and um the applicant as part of
this uh development application um requires approval from the planning board Ocean County Planning Board The applicant has submitted and has received conditional approval from Ocean County Planning Board um for the bifurcated um
entrance and exit The Ocean County Planning Board will be requiring a roadway widening larger than is depicted It will require a widening to provide 23 feet of pavement Right now 17 foot pavement
width from the center line is shown and the applicant will be able to comply with that The applicant um seeks in terms of utilities to provide a uh sewer main extension The applicant has made an
application um and received approval preliminary approval from the Jackson Township Municipal Utilities Authority and has submitted uh to the board previously The uh preliminary approval The um applicant recently received as
well the uh tentative approval for a sewer main extension that would be connecting to a manhole located approximately um it would be approximately 700 linear feet of sewer main extension located along FN's road
is where the existing manhole is And um this um is is a general um benefit um along with the sewer main extension to service this development The applicant's development standard
requirement is to provide laterals to any um properties along the new run of sewer main to be able to give the um property owners along that run the ability if they desire to connect their property to the public sewer Um the
Jackson Township Mut um Municipal Utilities Authority as part of the tentative approval um asked that instead of an 8 in pipe which is all that would be needed technically to service um this
project um a 12-in pipe be installed in order to be able to potentially continue that pipe further along Jackson Mills Road for future development to provide more um properties with the ability to
connect to the public sewer So those are the um those are some of the infrastructure improvements associated with the um proposal Additionally um uh we'll discuss the storm water a little bit more but as part of just to discuss the
infrastructure improvements um I'm sure uh the board members have uh seen the site Um Jackson Mills um has an existing drainage easement um that is owned by Ocean County um along the
roadway and there's a swale sort of a ditch off the roadway that it terminates in the at the adjacent property where the pointer is It terminates at a um an inlet and then
outfalls around um around 300 feet to the um tributary that exists about 400 ft from the property line the tributary to the u Matita Konk to the south branch of the Matita Konk And as part of our
application um we will close up that ditch um which is in a way a little bit unsafe we will close up that swale and um comply with all the storm management regulations The county um this was discussed with the
county prior to doing that and the county has since again as mentioned earlier conditionally approved the application There were some minor uh drainage technical comments regarding time of concentration but the county has approved um the design which I believe
is a benefit to um curb the roadway close the ditch and provide better storm water management Um and likely there will be some improvement to the outfall which is not too far away as part of the soil
conservation district um approval Um that would uh that would um conclude the um the general infrastructure improvements along the roadway Um there was a comment regarding sidewalk the plan had not shown sidewalk There is no
sidewalk However it certainly is sensible to sidewalk Somebody has to start with the sidewalk and the applicant would agree to not request any waiver from providing sidewalk and the applicant would be agreeable certainly to provide sidewalk and that would be a
condition of any approval for the plans to be revised to show sidewalk Although there is no sidewalk on either end but it makes sense to begin somewhere to go to go through um the site The applicant is seeking
to construct a three-story um structure for professional offices Um it will require a a height of variance a three-story structure spanning a total between the three
stories of 39,000 square ft of um gross floor area The architect will discuss the uh floor plans um more in detail but the applicant is seeking to uh construct the three-story professional offices
The applicant um is seeking to um leave some space between the uh structure and the parking area um to provide some outdoor area for um the tenants to um
have lunch Um that would be the intent of the pergola Um there was a comment regarding describing the use So just to get right into the use it's professional offices and I do believe it would be custom a a
an accessory use and it is customary uh to provide some outdoor dining um outdoor eating area for tenants to enjoy um during their lunch break That would be the intent of the pergola details
would be provided with um revised plans but that is the intent of the pergola to uh service the professional office uses The applicant is seeking to um is required to provide 195 spaces The
applicant has provided um 186 physical spaces and the applicant is allowed to receive credit for up to 10% of the required parking with EV the applicant is below that and is providing nine EV
spaces one of them shall be within the handicapped um space as required and therefore the applicant does not need any uh parking variance as um as mentioned earlier Um Anthony could you
zoom out a little bit more uh you could get you could get rid of the you could go capture the site and you don't need to capture the roadway right now just so we could get to the top of the site a little higher There's one more row of
parking Thank you Um and as mentioned there is a one spot that is within the 20 foot setback to residential use and more discussion and
I will get into more the uses um of the adjoining properties But in order to not seek any variance the applicant shall remove one spot um and replace that with an EV
credit in order to um avoid the 20 foot setback to residential use The applicant is um is is proposing um a circulation
you could um zoom zoom out um Anthony just to capture the whole the whole plan Thank you Mr Halper may may I ask a question since you're going into the circulation Um we did not receive the letter from the fire department I don't
know if anybody here got one but I don't have one I have it here So have has there been any question from them about the circulation i'm looking at the radius for turning
I hope I didn't step on you Mr Trauma The the fire um the uh fire review was provided I did not realize that the fire review was not forwarded to the board It typically is Um but we are in receipt of
a fire review from November and um the fire official actually um dropped it off This is u Mr O'Brien and he has some comments regarding certain um um hydrants some some hydrants that are
required which we will of course put on but he has no issue with the circulation That was my question Thank you He has five comments and these will be forwarded to the board Um and now you can have mine Oh I'd appreciate it Thank
you I can at least pass it up and down and we can take a look Thank you so much Yeah we just didn't didn't get it Thank you Appreciate it The applicant agrees with all the conditions The applicant agrees with the conditions They are um regarding just uh
fixtures that the fire department requires And um as a matter of fact on the uh most recent submission for the tentative approval to the Jackson MUA the hydrants are there already But either way the applicant agrees to the conditions stated in the fire official
review letter and will have to resubmit plans to the fire official for approval There were comments regarding traffic circulation our traffic expert will go more will'll discuss that in detail I'm just I will just briefly mention the circulation and the site
However waiverss required due to um any traffic circulation or any other comments um our traffic expert is here to address and um the traffic safety letter as well Um the applicant is proposing two one-way major circulation
drives um which is permitted per the um Ocean County Planning Board um with two-way drive aisles to access
parking and a circulation plan Um the fire circulation plan depicts the ability for the fire truck to circulate the the site and again it is conditioned on the fire official approval The applicant generally has 10
foot wide um island widths There are certain islands where in order to maintain the parking the applicant would indeed seek the waiver to go to 8 ft Although in
general it is 10 ft I believe it is acceptable to uh for the the board the applicant would be seeking a waiver from not providing at all islands the full 10-ft um width island And uh we'll go through the landscaping plan that shows
a robust landscaping package and landscaping along the buffers and within the um islands sufficient um except for the fact that not every island is 10 foot wide
Mr I have a second one I have a second one also if we just have one more Okay question Okay the fire hydrants Um um I brought
the letter along with this letter an image that the fire official took of the plan marking up the location of the hydrants um accompanied this I do not have it here with me Um but the location of the hydrants he pointed to at this
island and at this island and and again the fire official will have to approve but um he did supply a um markup of our site plan of where he wants fire department connections and where he would like the fire hydrants and the
applicant will do that Where is your uh remote fire department connection it would be over here I believe is where he wanted it He doesn't want it away from the building He is this uh the fire
official is showing the fire department connection on the building Yeah I thought they had changed their position where they wanted it separated from the building So the applicant would be willing to provide whatever the fire official um would request
Uh there's different fire officials I am aware the other there's district 3 typically will request the fire department connection to be remote This is district 4 and he has not requested it Um but the applicant can do that No I
absolutely get that they have three different officials three different ways of looking at things It gets very confusing I mean as general principle if your first hydrant is on that island and the second one is there you have the fire truck hooked up to each
one We kind of clogged our roadway getting in So it doesn't make sense to me where in my mind the fire department connection in the would be better off in that island in the back with a hydrant nearby And this way it gives you access
gets people out of there So I I think that needs to be looked at That's a I I think to be safe um the applicant would agree to me to discuss that with the fire official and do what the fire official would would want The fire official seems pretty clear here on his
proposed where he wants the hydrant to be not more than 100 ft from remote fire department connection and a second hydrant placed in the front near the EV parking area So whatever the fire department wants is what the fire
department gets Okay Um we will ask We will ask We will ask He's young so we got to work on him a little bit [Music]
Um Anthony could you go to the um next sheet okay this okay this sheet is uh a color rendering of the um submitted landscaping
plan which depicts buffering along the sides There will be further I will discuss further um proofs for uh reasons for design waiver but just the um layout
provides double row along each side and there is um landscape buffering within the islands and along the roadway frontage and the applicant will work with the township forester does work with the township forester with Sherry to provide a plan to the um to comply
with requirements of the landscape of of all all landscape comments I did see um there are a number of uh revisions that are requested here Yes From the forester Yes And you have those and and agree to
uh Yes Yes The applicant agrees There were one two three four five revisions Yes The applicant Yes This was reviewed and the applicant is able to is able to um comply with the
revisions indicated in the um landscape in in the tree tree specialist letter Yes The only dated March 20th The only waiver that is requested regarding the landscaping is the island is the islands
besides before we get into the side buffering just within the parking area the islands Not every island will be 10 feet Some will be eight Some will be eight But we will discuss shortly the buffering along the property
lines Anthony are you able to bring up the um actual civil plan one the a different file 180 Jacksonville civil plan Thank you And could you go to the next sheet this is Thank you Anthony And uh
just to zoom out Um this is good Thank you Um this is just uh this is the grading drainage utility plan just depicting um the storm water management The applicant is complying with the um storm water management regulations is
providing a stormwater basin a surface infiltration basin a subsurface and as mentioned earlier the applicant is able to um remove the swale which is a conveyance feature remove the swale um
make that area flat curb it and as mentioned earlier we'll provide sidewalk as well and convey the um runoff to the existing county infrastructure with an
outfall not too far away Um just one uh question You did say earlier that the county has stated that they are going to want the road wide and more than shown that's depicted here Correct Will that interfere in any way with your drainage plans or the basin that that will not
The the basin is 25 ft from the county desired row and the county widening is within their desired row and I'm sorry there will be some more pavement added because it's pavement widening and the
required um um storage will the number will go up a little bit but it will not affect in general It will not affect um the uh stormwater management facilities because it is within the county row Our facilities are out of the county row except for the pipe along the roadway
that the county always desires whenever there's a roadway widening Okay Thank you Um I will go through some of the comments and get to the variances that the applicant seeks
Okay this is I'm sorry regarding the statement of operations This is um a development for a professional offices The tenants are not known right now This is general professional offices It is not medical
Um the hours of operation would be um uh expected to be typical 7:00 a.m to 5:00 p.m The applicant is seeking to divide the building into uh to provide nine tenants The applicant would not expect
more than 120 employees for all of the tenants The parking that is provided is as per the ordinance um which according to the statement of operations would be greater than the number of employees but the requirement
um is provided um regard deliveries would be expected typical office deliveries box truck during normal business hours uh to discuss a comment Um there is an area for refuge collection in the rear of the property
Uh there was a comment that it is um approximately 100 feet from the building The applicant is comfortable keeping it away from the building as opposed to closer because of uh it um it is um more pleasant farther away even though um uh
it's 100 feet not uh not 50 feet but the applicant is comfortable keeping the refues in that area The applicant would expect um just based on typical uh usage the um two of the the uh refu enclosure
depicts uh is 27 ft wide which can contain three dumpsters It would be expected two of the dumpsters would be for regular waste One would be for recyclables and again the tenants are not known but just based on the square
footage it would be expected that twice weekly pickup would be sufficient That number could go down It could go higher up to five weeks five days a week as needed But from this um square based on the square footage and um the two
regular waste um dumpsters and one recyclable it would be anticipated two times a week should be sufficient Does the tenant intend to restrict the parking um based upon the lease that they have with the uh with the tenant
just to make sure that you know somebody doesn't come in and have 42 employees or and then offsets the the other eight tenencies You sure I'm going with that yeah he he would agree to that as a
condition of approval Okay to go through some of the comments Some were um alluded to regarding signs Um the limited commercial uh zone does not provide a permitted uh does not appear
to provide um a permitted uh a wall a ground mounted sign as a permitted use In as much as this is um for professional offices not for retail the applicant is not looking to um put up a structure that needs to draw people that aren't familiar with the site the
applicant did not feel the need to request any um uh variance relief to provide a groundmounted sign The applicant would be seeking um although it's not shown on the plan to provide a wall uh a wall sign and um because no
variance has been requested The applicant will need to comply with the ordinance of maximum 80 square feet We're the only thing I'm concerned about when I look at this is that it's quite a way quite a depth and I'm we've been talking about
the making sure that the fire department knows addresses So an address maybe a small monument with an address because this is set so far back off the road I'm concerned it won't be
seen If the board wishes for the applicant to provide the the applicant what do you think Mr Peters a small monument sign with just the number just the street number I'm I'm just concerned that since it's set back
so far it won't be visible Is that okay but certainly if the board feels from a safety perspective you want to have something out front that just has the the three-digit street address on it right you could you may even be able to call that a directional sign But if you
want to give them the relief so that when they go and get it the zoning officer doesn't have a problem with it Then Mr Prooro won't ask you why because it's I just think if somebody's driving down the road looking at numbers and there are no really they're going to be difficult no numbers
over here and no numbers over here might be helpful for safety sake Okay So when for the record you tell us what square footage sign you think would be appropriate so we know what to go in for Mr Mr Peters can you give me some guidance there what what size do you
think okay Okay No greater than 32 feet Good The applicant would agree to that And can it be lighted i was just going to say that by night I love the lighted numbers because as a responder it just
Sure Yeah Yes If if that is what the board Yes Thank you Good It it does make it easier for the fire department to see lighted number Yes Understand And the police department So right Makes sense Safety It it it um I I the limited
commercial um zoning ordinance is an anim does not have that wall-mounted sign that the um neighborhood commercial and highway commercial has Ground mounted The ground mount sorry the ground mounted sign But the applicant is certainly willing to provide it Very
good Thank you Um speaking of signs we have been requesting um of late and if I could if I could ask you to pick up this we're we're asking that
the uh applicants put a coming soon sign uh as u when once the property is cleared um as a courtesy to the residents of Jackson people are constantly asking us
what's going up on the corner of so and so and such and such what's going here what's going there So we would like a um sign up during construction just saying with the color rendering just so that the residents know what is being built
on that location Sure that's not a problem Is there a specific size of that sign as well it's it's on the uh Okay Okay 4 by8 The applicant would would do that as well with color rendering with color rendering A temporary sign during construction
during construction has to be removed immediately after se Okay Yes We see that as a win-win for the community and also for the property owner Agreed Thank you Going through um some of the um the
comments from the board planner letter So the traffic circulation our traffic expert will go through um the um some of some of the comments Um the applicant will provide details as
needed Roadway improvements were discussed and the traffic expert will go through those comments in detail Landscaping Mr Albert I I I hate to butt in and I normally wait until we're done but since you started going through
comments um as you talked about details one of the details we asked for was for the EV ready space Our concern is that where you have the EV ready space is on what we'll call a through space There's another parking space next to it or
through it When you put the EV equipment up you don't have the correct dimensions anymore because the equipment takes up a certain distance Then if you're going to have cars parking up against it you need protection from it So either the EV
parking spaces need to be relocated to a curbed area like where the handicap parking is or some other portion of the site When you have them backto back with other parking spaces they can't just be 18t deep each You have to be someplace where you can put the equipment behind a
curb line because generally it takes up just like you would think you know yes an air pump at a gas station or a vacuum space it takes up two and a half or three feet beyond that So where they are now I don't think works I think they need to be relocated So I apologize for
interrupting your train of thought but I think it's important to understand that the EV parking spaces need to be relocated Understood and the applicant will relocate in order to comp in order to provide the full ATS Let's make it easy for you Put that on your list for
the fire official because they've all been putting them in the corner by themselves like Mr Peters had just said So I'm sure he will help you with that I I missed I'm sorry I missed that
Well and that also goes in hand with what I said with the hydrant The hydrant needs to be within 100 ft like where it is now is more than 100 ft away So both those changes will probably correlate together We're going to make sure we will comply
and suggest and make sure it it works as per um the professionals You know the very back uh of the lot has numerous parking spaces That might be the ideal location since you do have a
There's a sightly issue there Um there there are there is area in the rear There's in the rear there's Could you pull Anthony could you go to the um previous sheet sheet number three or A2 one bit yeah Yeah that's the one There
are there's areas over here This is curb There's areas here Um and the applicant will make sure to find a curbed area as per um the board planner's suggestion um to provide the required EV which
right now we have the plan shows nine but we had mentioned earlier we are taking away one spot so we need to provide 10 EV spaces and those those angular spots um to the left might be the ideal Yes I meant Yes because
they're close to the electric However they're not um they're not close to the building right so that might be the ideal location Yes And we will work with the fire official as well Yes Landscaping we mentioned Um we'll get I'll um we'll get into the
we'll get into the the variances and the and the buffers shortly just to group it all together Um um regarding lighting the applicant will comply with the ordinance and make sure to provide 0.5 throughout the parking area Storage of
solid waste um and recyclables was discussed utilities was discussed and um the applicant had provided um as part of the requirement there um a environmental impact statement was
provided Um I worked with um Kristen Wman from Duboce She provided she um provided the environmental impact statement and um the environmental impact statement indicates there are no environmental sensitive areas Uh there's
no wetlands there's no um flood hazard areas and there has been no um comments received from the environmental commission Although there have been no comments on any jobs from the environmental commission True Um to to go through the board engineer
um letter the um again the um traffic expert will discuss um any comments regarding the traffic safety bureau um regarding um the curb radi The
applicant will make sure that the curb radii um are five feet except at those areas where the islands are going to be 8 ft They'll be uh slightly less Um grading and drainage was discussed The plan in general the the
the lot is generally flat The the ditch and the swale is being removed but instead of uh the swale there is going to be a surface infiltration basin Um the applicant does not anticipate exceeding a thousand cubic yards for of
soil export and does not um does not anticipating requiring to bring in fill as the soil being removed on site will be sufficient to uh fill in the ditch
The applicant is seeking um the two variances and is also seeking um Anthony could you go back to um exhibit A1 to A4 to uh the first sheet um so this is the aerial depicting
the site the property uh to the west and to the east The applicant uh would not want to um does not have any um know direct knowledge regarding the uses The aerial shows perhaps some
certain commercial activities taking place on one of the properties but the applicant agrees it would be considered a design waiver um to provide only the 14.5 ft of landscape buffering that the applicant is providing instead of the 25
ft that would be required because of the square footage of the building As mentioned earlier the um drive aisle is 14.5 feet to the property line There was one spot that was 17 ft away from the
property line That spot is being removed And so therefore the applicant believes that a design waiver is required from providing deficient buffering However um regarding the design waiver I believe
that that would be sufficient in this instance There are certain commercial activities but more important the applicant is providing um double row buffering a robust landscape package
um and I believe a design waiver would be um justified over here from providing the full 25 ft Do you think um because one never knows what's going to happen in the future um do you think maybe a
burm would be possible maybe something that's sloped so that so that um could you go to the landscape plan um Anthony um that would be um that's A3 that would be A3 over here
or maybe fencing over because the if you're looking for a waiver on property that may be developed in the future we want to make sure to protect those future developments as well Yes So
um the applicant So in terms of a burm I don't know that that there's fence a fence the applicant would be would be agreeable to put up a fence as a condition of the board granting the approval Do what what size fence a six foot high fence
How about how about four just just to give the property owners next door enough um separation uh for future development Thoughts yeah if if that Yes the the applicant would agree
to provide a fence Six foot 4 foot I think six foot would be better And vinyl of course Solid vinyl Solid vinyl Yeah that would be good because you might not want to see the neighbor's property either which it's a double-edged sword Yeah Right So to protect future
development and your own site applicant agrees Thank you Madam Chair Madam Chair just just want to chime in I apologize for interrupting um the the landscaping um to the I'll say to the right of the
right of the site are those actual trees that were located in the field or is that just a repres or this is a those trees I'm sorry are just representative those were not located we did locate trees on the property right okay it just seems that you know based
on that oh there's there's plenty of trees that you know um that there's you know significant buffering between the two but I don't really know if that's what's in the field Same thing with the um to the rear of the property The aerial would depict the Those are to be clear those were not field located Those
are part of the landscape rendering The aerial would which does show some trees but the applicant either way is willing to put up a fence But Anthony could you go to the aerial the aerial does show some of the land and according to the um to what we have here from the
uh forester that seems to suggest the same thing What we have from the forester seems to say there's enough trees being proposed but there should be a shift
Um the foresters letter March 20th The survey does show the survey does show trees along the property line in existing conditions Um Anthony could you pull up the um one the
um again the site plan not this file the other file and we can look at the second sheet of the other file we had up sheet number two the previous sheets So these are along the property line Our
the survey did not was not required to show more So this is I was there and it seems to me that there are some hardwoods and pines but a lot of scrub So much of that is sparsely uh arbored
Yeah Madam Chair Yes sir I don't mean to testify for the applicant so I'll ask him some questions How deep's the property generally the property the general depth of the property is 435 435 ft So um and it's what 300 feet wide Yes
So you've got 800 1100 maybe,000 foot of perimeter to landscape And it appears from your plans that you you're proposing just under 200 evergreens in those areas right yes
So he's got an evergreen every five six feet right so we double stagger them wanted him to explain sort of the intensity of the proposed landscaping plan and the idea that when you have enough enough trees
to play with the landscape architect certified tree expert can supplement what's good out there with brand new trees And we seem to be getting there appears like just under 200 evergreen trees Okay Appear to be planted only along the perimeter of the property
the fence We're good Okay So to um so therefore um are we is the board recommending the fence the the applicant did clarify that um to the left there is an existing BM Um
can't be seen from the road Right Um regarding regarding um so the applicant is seeking two variances The applicant is seeking um a variance um from uh is is violating the ordinance
requirement of 35 ft height and um the impervious coverage Um the applicant would be seeking for this a uh what is known as a flexible variance a C2 uh variance And the um proofs that are
needed to be provided for the C2 variance is to uh demonstrate that the variances which are sought for this um property will promote um one or more purposes of
the municipal land use law and the applicant has to as well uh demonstrate that he satisfies the negative criteria Um so regarding the um struct the height of the structure the applicant is seeking um a height
variance by providing um the floor area over three stories the applicant is able to condense the footprints um and have um the floor area um um have floor area provided in a more condensed
footprint which does provide a more striking architectural look and more important it also uh provides some more area adjacent to the um building where as mentioned earlier the applicant can
provide some open area for use for the tenants Um and this is accomplished because the floor area is spread over the three stories as opposed to two stories Um and for a threetory structure
the applicant would require the height variance in order to have the proper height How high is the building the uh the applicant is seeking a height variance of just under 3.5 ft is seeking a building that will be just under 38
1/2 ft I did check also I did have a quick one minute conversation with the fire official and I asked him um and he is willing he would be able to provide in writing if needed be I checked with the
fire official if there was any issue in terms of fire with the um the extra height in terms of any type of truck and he indicated there is no issue and if the board and he would be willing to put that in writing if the board would would would require I believe we have other
buildings now in town that are of that height Yes Yeah For reference they're that company has a 100 foot aerial ladder So it's more than adequate So the um
so the applicant so the so the um applicant is therefore seeking the um height variance in order as as as mentioned in order to provide the uh the floor area spanned over three stories Uh the applicant further is seeking the
impervious coverage um variance the parking provided does exceed the parking area with the building does exceed the um imperous coverage requirement Um but
at the same time the um distribution of the uh imperous coverage with the robust landscaping um that is not simply pvious but it's um trees and evergreens um that um absorb uh runoff um I believe is a
good distribution of the impervious and to get to discuss um the um exact proofs and which purposes are being promoted by this um development I believe that um by
providing by the board granting these variances we can say that it is pro it it is promoting um the first purpose of zoning encouraging municipal action to guide appropriate use or development of all lands in the
state in a manner which will promote the public health safety morals and general welfare as mentioned Um C it provides adequate light ear and open space as mentioned this um development
is providing the floor space open space buffering I promotes a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good civic design and arrangement and solar ready solar ready
The Yeah the the architect is here and will provide testimony um and indicate that uh the applicant is willing to make it solar ready in order to satisfy um the requirement for variance relief pursuant to this uh C2 It has to be
demonstrated that it advances but and that the benefits um outweigh any detriment As mentioned the applicant is providing a robust landscaping package storm water and the detriment is de is
deminimous This is a 3 and 1/2 ft um uh an extra 3 and 1/2 little less than three and 1/2 ft in height It is set back considerably from the property line and from the roadway and from the side property lines And I believe that the benefits um substantially outweigh any
detriments In order to for the board to grant the relief under C2 it has to be demonstrated It has to meet the criteria of the the negative criteria and demonstrate that it does not substantially impair the intent and
purpose of the zone plan and that there is no substantial detriment to the public good This is a permitted use in the zone does not impair the intent and as mentioned earlier there is no substantial detriment to the public good and therefore I believe the board is
justified in granting the variances and um design waivers requested and just to add sorry just to add to that one of the reasons why you're seeking the impervious coverage it's correct me if I'm wrong is the fact that we requested
that the building have 360°ree access for for fire purposes right yes so That would go to the public safety portion of the of the MLU public purposes Yes Mr Peters have your questions all been answered
all your comments sheriff Miss Jennings is done with the witness So I'll wait until she tells me she's done with the witness My direct testimony is finished Um it's not my report It's his testimony So we'll just go right to the the
variances Um the proof for a C2 is that the benefits of the deviation substantially outweigh any detriment And respectfully I I' I've heard I've heard the words from the ordinance or land use law read into the record I'm not sure I've
heard there's general in the area zones that permit 60 or 70% impervious coverage without any problems Um we didn't even talk about what the relief is It's not pvious coverage permitted in
this zone is 60% That's pretty healthy It's not 60.1% It's 68.7% It's a 15% increase You talk about that from a density perspective So asking for 15% more My I
guess my only question is is there anything on this site that stops you from complying with the ordinance requirements that you're seeking relief from the applicant w would have the ability to provide some um pvious paving in
order to supply the needed parking and the um and comply with the ordinance uh requirement of um 60% um impervious coverage um pvious parking can have um
issues and I believe that uh the impervious um parking provided combined with the landscaping is a good use uh of the land but the applicant would be willing to provide uh pvious parking if needed Mr Alper could you have a smaller
yield on the site and less impervious surface and meet the variance and get rid of the variance relief is there anything from this design that stops you from complying if the applicant would be providing a smaller yield then the um impervious
coverage relief would not be So the applicant certainly within his rights to ask for a variance he has to give the proofs The board has to agree with the proofs My concern simply is when it came to impervious coverage the testimony was there was a distribution of impervious
and that by providing more landscaping all those things are required So while I understand that we may have met while there was testimony that the applicant believes they meet the
purposes of zoning I think the board members need to think Lord long and hard about we're going from 60% to 68.7% So we can have a bigger building and more parking spaces Is it a good ratable is that the
reason to grant a bulk variance this is a by their own testimony a flat rectangular site that they're not providing a sufficient buffer for they're asking relief from They're not providing the aisle width I'm sorry
the um the parking island width or the radiuses So if you had a conforming application building would be smaller and there'd be fewer parking spaces I don't think that's news to anybody
who's here They are certainly entitled to request relief The board should focus on what Mr Halpert testified to that for a C2 they have to show that it advances one of the purposes of municipal land
use law I believe he recited three of them And that the benefits of the deviation would substantially outweigh any detriment That's all I have from a planning perspective I did have a question for Mr Halpert During your
testimony you said Ocean County permitted the one-way drives Did you mean to say that they're permitting the one-way entrance and exit configuration because the county doesn't have anything to do with whether or not there's oneway drives on a site in
Jackson Township Correct Correct My intent was permitted the two openings along the roadway That was the intent Thank you That's all I have for Mr Hopper at this point Um and just to follow up on you know Ernie's comments um if the islands all the internal
islands were 10 ft that would reduce the um variance for the impervious Correct By by a small amount Yes But if you did you would you would also um reduce the parking Yes
which kind of tells me that maybe there's just too much strictly in terms of the per the the the impervious coverage relief The applicant would be able to provide pvious parking um if the board would not want to grant
that relief But um in terms of the islands if the islands would be wider then yes some more parking would be eliminated and um the amount of parking that would be eliminated would not be greater than any EVs that can be
replaced with the parking that would be eliminated strictly in terms of the islands My kind of knee-jerk when I see islands less than 10 ft it's speaks more to we need the parking so we're going to make the island smaller kind of goes to only there's just too much building
Thank you So if this were a two-story building we wouldn't need the height variance We wouldn't need the impervious coverage variance because we could reduce the
parking Does that make sense because we're already asking for a 3.5 foot variance for height Well the height really is more related to the architectural and we get the architect up makes it a more aesthetically pleasing building etc We
can we can eliminate the maximum pvious coverage by doing pvious parking It's not going to change anything So we'll we'll we'll eliminate that variance request not a problem But with the architectural it is dimminimous And you have to show that there's a substantial detriment to the zone plan and the
master plan And this is a building that's set back significantly far from the road I don't think anybody driving by is going to see that the building is 3.4t higher than required in the ordinance At some point we'll get that testimony from a witness I appreciate her summation but at some
point we have to get that testimony from a witness Right There'll be no reduction in parking spaces You're just changing the parking to pvious as opposed to impervious The applicant would be able to provide the parking required through pvious
parking Not all of the parking would need to be pvious Um there is sufficient parking that can be replaced that is presently impervious that can be replaced as pvious that would bring the impervious coverage to below 60 The applicant is
able to do that which would probably be at the rear It would be it would be along um curbs um is is a good place to put the impervious um the pvious parking and there's sufficient parking to be
replaced and swapped and and have the impervious pavement replaced with pvious pavement So then we're down to the um only the height var the height and and the 10 feet we we keep 10 ft There
wouldn't be any 8 foot medians the applicant could keep all could keep 10 feet and add um EVs So the only thing we'd be looking at is the height Do you want to put any more testimony in the record regarding that or
I think I'll have the architect explain the um you can always come back up after he hears her testimony He won't leave Madam Chair Yes sir Before we leave the the impervious coverage calculation if if the applicant's going to instead of
reduce the intensity of the development use pvious pavement there has to be a deed restriction that says it will be pvious pavement Or five years from now when pvious pavement which is harder to maintain and more expensive to install
and maintain you're going to get contractor out there just going to pave it So that would have to run with the property no matter who owns it Well I would say that it would be a condition of the board's approval but
not a deed restriction because if the use changes in the future or there's a change in the township's impervious coverage issue the person would have to go to court to have that condition lifted That's pretty ownorous on the property owner Yeah you're relying on the standard to get the yield
right but we would also have an approval and if we violated our conditions of our approval we that's part of the so so so what would have so this situation would happen is that if we if we require it be put in the chain of title through the deed the only way to remove that is
basically to it wouldn't be here it would be in superior courts you have to file a motion to remove it uh in as a matter of equity right if we put it in as a condition of approval it it still kind of quasi runs with the land because
it's in the resolution itself which a zoning officer can enforce There's two different things that get to the same place but there's two different avenues to remove it One would be you know amendment approval which we have one prior somebody wants to remove it from the resolution and we come in seek an
application but if we if we put it within if we request that we put it within the deed itself then they have to go to superior court to remove that So that's I'm going to leave that up to the discretion of the board as to which someone they want to require if that's
the avenue that we're going down Approximately 70 spaces 70 70 70 that would provide um that would remove approximately the applicant um is
approximately um 8% 8.7% over on the impervious coverage and by um replacing 70 spaces it would bring it under the 60% % That's half the spaces That's uh less
than half That's um a third 37% of the spaces Yeah My I agree My concern is you know what's going to happen in the future if someone else purchases this property and
they come in and just pay that off has to be a consideration because we're we would be are being asked to accept a building that's a lot of building on that piece of
property attractive a building as it is So that I think we'll be thinking about that while we're listening to the architect Thank you Mr H Maybe maybe we'll take we'll take 10 minutes We'll take a 10-minute break
It'll give us time to do some thinking and consideration A 10-minute break please Any thoughts on your end sure I'm going to have Mr Halbert explain We've discussed with the client The applicant uh we we discussed
uh with the applicant The applicant would seek to reduce um the gross floor area in a way that there would be no um imperous coverage variance relief sought in the following manner Reducing it by 6,000 square
ft that reduces the parking requirement by um to 165 parking is the parking requirement the applicant would provide 16 um EV parking spaces which is the
10% that would equal to a reduction of the um from the current plan of 36 physical spaces which is about half of what I had mentioned previously um half of the 70 that we are over and
the remaining um will be permeable pavers That's what the applicant would be seeking to propose in order to eliminate the impervious coverage um variance relief So that would be 6,000 square feet make the building square
feet smaller and yes most likely that would be off let's say if I'm looking at the building square on that far right end would be moved in the architect will get into approximately 2,000 square feet
per floor The architect could uh point to but this is just the general contour of what the applicant would be seeking to uh and that's certainly we're we like the look of the building You know it's a very attractive building We don't have any problem It's just too much building
So that would uh probably please the people on this board Anybody have comments on that thoughts and uh professionals 10-ft islands Yes All right And and we were discussing the islands and that's a
safety feature too because it gives pedestrians uh a little and and architecturally attractive and gives some uh greenery Yes Okay All right That's that sounds very good to us And
we'll hear from the architect now Yes I guess I'm getting older because they're getting younger Please raise your right hand You swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth Please state your name and spell your last of the record Miriam Davis
D-avis licensed architect in the state of New Jersey I'm the project architect on this project from Gutban Architecture And these drawings were prepared under my supervision Board accepted qualifications We're pleased to have you Welcome Thank you Thank you If you could uh Miss Davis for
the um board um just please pull up your plans and if you could go through your floor plans and your elevations for the benefit of the board Sure Could we pull up the architectural plans that were submitted probably
A2 through A4 I believe it's a separate PDF Anthony I think it's A2 through A4 Separate Yes that's it Well I think we also have the plans besides for the rendering
There we go Okay So some general project information The project is a new construction threetory slab ongrade office building The total gross floor area original gross floor area was 39,000 square feet The first floor has a
gross floor area of 13,07 square feet Second floor gross floor area is 12,554 square feet and the third floor gross floor area is 13,439 square feet The building contains nine suites ranging from 2500 to 4700
square ft If we could move to the floor plan sheet believe it's the next sheet that's just the foundation plan slab ongrade One of the comments were regarding a basement which there's no basement It's a slab on grade building Okay so this is the ground floor plan We
have two entrances one from the front and rear of the building from parking in the front and the rear There's also an emergency exit located on the right side of the building Um we come into a singlestory vestibule that leads us into the double height lobby There are three
office suites on this floor as well as public bathrooms mechanical and electrical rooms and an elevator that connects us to all three stories If we move on to the next sheet the second floor plan So we have the double height
lobby from the first floor Three more office suites that each have a private balcony We have again public bathrooms some storage spaces Moving on to the next sheet the third floor Three again three office suites
public bathrooms and each suite has its own private balcony The next sheet is just the roof plan flat roof um showing proposed mechanical unit locations as well as roof drains in the center of the roof Moving to the Yeah to the
elevations So we could bring up the exhibit A4 which is the rendering will show us a better idea of what the building looks like or you could go to the cover sheet also shows shows the rendering but I believe it was submitted separately Okay So as mentioned the proposed
building height is 38T 5 and 7/8 The applicant is seeking a height variance um which we believe contributed to the overall aesthetic of the building provided a nice exterior was as was mentioned before The applicants proposing a class A office building and
we felt the height variance would increase the aesthetics and provide an overall nicer building as opposed to the twostory um as opposed to a two-story building And in order to maintain the ceiling height that would be
satisfactory in a class A office building the height variance would allow us to maintain the 3T between floors for the structural mechanical system and allow us to have a ceiling height that would be satisfactory for a class A office building That's a 12t ceiling 12t
height How high well the the actual ceiling height would be about 9 and 1/2 ft And then the the structural and mechanical systems three feet correct In terms of materials we're proposing two different colors two different shades of
gray of ACM panels with non-combustible woodlike siding as accent materials Um we also have in the front where we have the singlestory vestibule that's clad in an aluminum finish at the roof The ACM panels were chosen because of their
durability weather resistance and low maintenance Um some general code information about the building The proposed building will be construction type 2B which is an unprotected steel building A sprinkler system is not required per the building code However a fire alarm system will be provided
throughout the building There is an elevator that connects all three stories and there are a minimum of two means of egress at each level that lead straight outside Um as mentioned by Mr Halper the building will be designed to be solar ready as requested by the board Um and
the building the building signage is not shown on the plan but it will comply with the building ordinance of the max of 80 square feet Any questions from the board uh yes I Where will the 2,000 square feet on each
floor be taken off so essentially we would be taking in again we would work with Mr Halpert to figure out the exact side implications but we would basically be pulling in the building on either side to reduce the square footage per floor
But in general all of the amenities that we're seeing here would still be included Correct Correct Okay Thank you Thank you Madam Chair Miss Davis thanks for your testimony Um the only thing I I didn't hear you testify to that's on the plan would you
describe the use of a parapit in this design please yes we do have a parapit on the building Typical parapit height of 3 feet which is according to the ordinance not included in the overall building height That's fair enough But if you're testifying about what the building height's going to be from lay
person stands outside it's going to be 38 and 1/2 ft to the underside of the roof and three more feet for the parapit Correct Correct The parapit is not required per building code It's provided as a safety measure typically And it is acceptable However it's on your plans and I want to make sure the board
members understand the applicants asking for the three and a half foot height variance and they're taking advantage of the three-foot permitted parapit Correct And if I'm looking at that building correctly there's a little larger piece of the parapit in the
middle There is as an architectural feature we do have that the center portion over the doll bill height lobby does I don't have an exact dimension but it does come up a bit maybe six inches just just a bit just for I mean I would say more like a
foot it looks like aesthetics but yeah just for aesthetic purposes it's a beautiful building thank you truly it's a beautiful building and and we're delighted that the [Music]
uh quality quality and and beauty of the buildings Uh it's important to the community So we thank you for that Thank you Madam Chair My last comment or question maybe to the Miss Jennings Um
the applicant understands that at the building height of [Music] 38 feet 5'78 in that should they go over the height of 38'6 in they would require a D6 height variance which can only be granted by the zoning board of adjustment not this board and it can't
be a field change Correct Thank you That's all I have Madam Chair Thank you so much Anyone here on the board any comments questions for this young lady just one comment It is a very beautiful building and we want to thank you for
working with us Thank you Mr Rogers Anything okay we could go on to uh safety traffic Oh sorry I'm not sure if this is for the architect but maybe more for Mr Halpert or combined We spoke about the parking and I'm actually going to take a page
from Mr Riker here who is not here at the moment Um he had suggested and I think the calculation based on the parking was based on the entire square footage of each floor But if you can actually look at the usable square footage and that goes for every
suite I calculated it excluding the openings and stairwells etc My number comes out to 152 parking spaces without the electric parking So just something that I've heard in the past here on the board Mr Halper could
testify to this but I do believe the parking goes by gross floor area and the ordinance doesn't have any exceptions for usable versus stairwell That that would be net floor area Different calculation
So it does go based on it It does include the entire floor area Yeah it be the entire Good good question Good question All right we'll move on Thank you so much Thank you At this time I'd like to call
up Mr Ray on traffic You should have a permanent You should have a permanent pass on swearing in Mr We just have a continuing I always have a problem with microphones I don't know what you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth I do All right Your name for the record John Ray Raa Does the board accept his credentials yes we do Welcome back Only as a traffic engineer Thank you Mr Ray Um your office has had an opportunity to prepare a traffic impact analysis for this site Uh yes we
did And if you could just uh describe your findings please Okay Well uh the traffic study was based on the 39,000 square foot office building It sounds as though that may be reduced somewhat from uh what I've heard here this evening So
uh I will testify as to our findings for the 39,000qt office building Uh we did our typical full traffic impact study Uh Jackson Mills Road is a county road So the county is going to be reviewing the traffic study as well So we did our
traffic counts at the intersection of Jackson Mills Road and East Commodore the signalized intersection just to the northeast of us and that's how we arrived at the peak hour traffic volumes passing the site frontage on Jackson Mills Road We projected traffic volumes
to a design year of 2034 in accordance with the Ocean County Planning Board protocol That's what they require of all applicants And we did our level of service uh analysis for the site driveways uh based on that 39,000 square
feet and we're looking at approximately 60 peak hour traffic movements entering and exiting for a building of that size Uh our findings were that the site exit to Jackson Mills Road would operate at a B level of service during both the morning and afternoon peak hours for the
2034 design year and the left turn movement into the entrance driveway from eastbound Jackson Mills Road would operate at level of service A Uh the county has conceptually approved our access plan as Mr Halpert testified to
So that part of the issue I think with respect to how the driveways are oriented the county has accepted that Uh as Mr Halpert indicated the county will also require a 23 foot uh crosssection from the center line of Jackson Mills
Road on our side of the road And what that will essentially do for us is kind of address one of the police department uh requirements or issues that they had They wanted us to provide a full right turn deceleration lane into the entrance
driveway The county does not require that simply because of the you have to reach that threshold of 200 parking spaces in order to require the full deceleration lane However with the 23 foot cross-section that the county is requiring we can provide a 12-oot travel
lane and an 11 foot shoulder which for all intents and purposes will serve for decelerating vehicles and and make it safe for vehicles to get out of the travel lane and to decelerate in order to enter the driveway Uh the other issue
the police department had that I would uh like to comment on is the ability to legally make a left turn across a double yellow line Uh we did provide the police department with a letter from the NJ DOT which we obtained some time ago uh
because this issue has come up all the time and the police department does agree that you can make a left turn now after they've read the uh DOT interpretation of the motor vehicle and traffic laws that you can make a left turn across a double double yellow line
Would would there be um striping to indicate that i noticed on several of the roads in Jackson now they're having uh you break the striping up So you break the striping up So that right it's No it's a good question
because in some cases the striping is broken up to make it obvious to people that you can make the left turn It's not done in every situation It is something that we could uh if if we get to the point where we get an approval for certain size building we can go back to
the county with a break in the striping uh if that's the desire of the board and see if the county will approve it I think that makes sense because although some people just flaunt the laws and cross those yellow lines we can stripe it appropriately then people will know
what we we can go back to the county with a revision to the striping Great Thank you And I'm going to have to revise the traffic study because even though we're going to be downsizing the building the county always requires that the studies be updated to reflect
exactly what the township approves So I'll I'll have to revise the traffic Maybe your B will go to an A Maybe I doubt it but maybe But that's it's a good call I just have a one question here
regarding the Jackson Township Police Department traffic safety unit letter March 7th 2025 Now they agree with you that you can make left turns crossing a double yellow However they don't consider where
that exit comes out a double yellow They consider it a median uh painted median dividing section And in their letter it states here that they feel that anyone making a left turn over that uh median
would be in violation of NJSA39 col4-82.1 Are they correct in my opinion no I I I hate to disagree with the police because I love them but I don't think that's a proper interpretation of the motor vehicle and traffic law I think we have a neighbor here who has a
driveway I'm sure she's made left turns out of her driveway Her There you go And she's never gotten a ticket so I think it's an improper interpretation but I'll leave it at that and let a judge determine that one day Maybe the striping issue will that could alleviate
the Yeah if we get the county to agree to a break in the striping that should alleviate that issue That was going to be my second question Thank you chairwoman And sometimes we do think alike a lot Uh thank you very much You're welcome I I'm going to add to what you were just talking about though
It is a two-lane merge section at that point Correct Coming heading uh in across our frontage Yes Yeah Which is why Jackson police put it So now with two lanes merging at high speed into
one you may actually be not wrong but overlooking the fact that people are too busy merging and there's been accidents there I drive that way every day So a left out of there is extremely dangerous
and in my eyes should be a median across and no lefts out there because you have two people that are fighting each other trying to get past your building You're creating a problem Well the county is asking us to widen across our property frontage to kind of take
care somewhat of that situation Again I No no no That's making it actually worse now because you can have two lanes going further racing for that spot because people drive like maniacs I I I'm sorry I won't debate this way I respectfully disagree And if you restrict that left
turn out of the All I ask is if you restrict that left turn out of that driveway just think about where people make U-turns to get back in that direction It's the law of unintended consequences It's going to be much worse And the sight distance is good and the signal up at East Commodore provides
gaps in the westbound traffic flow and the county has approved it So I'll leave it at that Isn't it better though that they make the mistake making a U-turn then you build something mistake i don't want them making U-turns in somebody's driveway down Jackson Hills Road Jackson
police can sit there and handle that part of it Okay I get it I've answered to the best of my ability Anyone else i I'm a big fan of the new striping
that's going on I think all of this new the police have done a wonderful job in Jackson of uh changing some of our stripings down our major streets I I'm thinking of uh new prospect a big
improvement on that road uh that informs drivers about appropriate places to turn and to move to the middle Dr Campbell having done traffic studies in all 21 counties across the state the Ocean County engineers are pretty good We're
we're lucky to have them and the Monmouth County engineers You you don't want to deal with some of these other You don't want to deal with Middle Sex That's all I can tell you Okay Anybody here from Middle No Okay Any other questions from the board that's right Our professionals anything to say now
just a minute ma'am We have a process I know you haven't been here before so I'm going to explain the process We allow for two different types of of uh resident input The first time
you come up you will address questions to those professionals who have given testimony That will be your first opportunity After that section closes then we'll open again and you may
make additional comments First time is questions So we have a another process So we'll now uh look for a motion to open to public comment So move Sullivan Second move
All in favor i All right So now and then you have another little rigomearroll you get to go through too All right All right So this part is for cross-examination of any of the experts that just had direct testimony All right
So you swear affirm tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do All right Please state your name and spell your last of the record Use the microphone please It's being recorded Thank you Diane Craig K R A G You got to speak into it Closer You have to get close to the microphone Diane Craig K R
A G H 189 Jackson Mills Road Uh I have a question I guess for the traffic man Just a question If when you're redoing it if you're going to have people going and turning left ma'am you have to speak into the microphone I'm
sorry Sorry If people are going I guess you're saying it's east towards uh East Commodore East Commodore right and they're turning left into the building I think there should be a separate lane
for them with an arrow that they go for left like they have on a dedicated left turn lane A dedicated left otherwise they're going to back way up I I the the traffic study indicates that that left turn movement into the driveway based upon the opposing traffic
flow is what we call level of service A with very minimal delay for the left turn So the county hasn't required the left turn line I understand what you're saying It's very hard for a traffic engineer to argue against a left turn lane but the county hasn't required it based on the traffic study but I
understand what you're saying Okay Um basically that was it It looks like a very nice building And my other comment I guess would be reserved for we'll go out of this session We'll look for a motion You don't have to move I'd like to make a like to make
a motion to close the cross-examination portion of the testimony Sullivan second Heler All in favor all right Now we will now open another section I'd like to make a motion to open the public testimony section of this application
Sullivan Second Rose Thank you So do I have to do this again or I already did that that's okay You're good Okay My comment would be I live right across the street and the building although beautiful will change all of my privacy
being a three-story building They'll be able to see right over my house into my backyard or my recreation area And I know we are zoned residential When we bought the house we had some kind of business zoning that was taken away It
was just a tiny business zoning maybe R10 R20 something like that But that disappeared and nobody could ever tell me why it went but it did And so I'm wondering if you're going to do this heavy
commercial shouldn't our side be changed for when we sell so that we would it really doesn't fit being residential next to a building like that That would be my comment Thank you for your attention Thank you for your
comment Uh zoning is is a an odd an odd kettle of fish I've I've been dealing with it uh maybe the last 10 years and have learned a great deal Um this is I believe an LC zone So it is light
commercial zone It's been light commercial zone I believe for about the last 20 years um we aren't in the uh habit of making those changes at this point in this
body that is looked at in the master plan which we are also working on but I appreciate your comments as far as losing your privacy this building is set back quite a way so I think that it won't be as
intrusive for you as you may believe it to be right now just looking at it It's set back quite far and you know there's and then there's a a wider roadway now than there has been I don't think it'll be as tough on you as you think but I
understand your concerns Thank you Thank you for being here All right Comments Let's close Let's close I'd like to make a motion to close the public testimony portion of this application Sullivan Second Heler All in
favor i All right Now any uh comments from our professionals any questions or comments from the board and uh would you like to make a closing statement just very quickly uh
we are dealing with a permitted use I think with uh the back and forth with the board and the board's professionals we have agreed to a number of conditions to modify the plan to get it more into conformance with the zoning ordinance So at this time the only thing that we're
actually seeking relief from is the height variance which I believe as everyone's indicated it is a beautiful looking building We want it to be a class A building So you need those 10 foot high um floors and you need to have enough room for all the uh heating and
ventilating that goes in between the floors Uh it is set back quite a distance from the road So I think that it'll have uh not a great impact on the the public or the neighborhood and we would just respectfully request that the board grant an approval The applicant
still seeking the waiver for the uh for the buffering for the with the solid vinyl fence Correct Yes All right And just to sum this up for the board so we have uh we only have two waivers one C2 variance Uh the uh
purposes of the municipal land use law that the applicant put on record was CG and I for the height variance Um given the the depth that this is from the road we take that into consideration as well Um and then that's what's before us All
right Look for a motion I'd like to make a motion uh that we approve this application with the two variances the C2 height variance as well as the variance for the one variance Just one just
the C2 height variance with the waver with the waivers Uh and it's a very good project and I look forward to seeing it complete Thank you We need a second Second Rose
Roll call please Mr Heler yes Mr Rogers yes Mr Chamer yes Miss Rose yes Mr Sullivan yes Dr Campbell yes And I I do appreciate the uh concessions that have been made I
think we I think we have had a good evening working together on a project that will be good for uh the uh applicant and good for Jackson Thank you Thank you and have a good evening Motion to close Entertain a motion to close
Motion to close Dreamer Second Rose All in favor i I And there will be no meeting