--------- And so I pledge allegiance 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.
All right, this on. All right, everybody. Welcome to March 23rd, Jackson Township Planning Board meeting. It's a year's going fast. Uh, this meeting has been properly noticed in all the appropriate places and forums according to the Open Public Meetings Act, and I will leave it
up to you, Madam Chairwoman. >> Good evening. A roll call, please. Mr. Brezie, >> here. >> Mr. Marzo >> here. >> Mr. Heler >> here. >> Mr. Parks, Mr. Rogers >> here, >> Miss Santoro >> here, >> Mr. Tremor >> here, >> Mr. Weart.
>> Mr. Sullivan >> here. >> Dr. Camp >> here. Um, approval of minutes uh for March 9th regular meeting. Need a motion, please. >> Motion by Sullivan. >> Second.
>> Roll call, please. >> Mr. Brezie. >> Yes. Mr. Marzo, >> yes. >> Mr. Heler, >> yes. >> Mr. Parks, >> yes. >> Mr. Rogers, >> yes. >> Miss Santoro, >> yes. >> Mr. Tmer, >> yes. >> Mr. Sullivan, >> yes. >> Dr. Campbell,
>> yes. Payment voucher for recording secretary for March 23rd. A motion, please. >> Move. >> Second. Sullivan. >> Mr. Brezie? >> Yes. >> Mr. Marzo? >> Yes. >> Mr. Heler? >> Yes. >> Mr. Parks? >> Yes. >> Mr. Rogers? >> Yes.
>> Mintoro? >> Yes. >> Mr. Tremor? Yes, >> Mr. Sullivan. >> Yes, >> Dr. Camp. >> Yes. Um, for uh engineering and planning matters, uh, Mr. Clay, I think you have something for block 13801,
>> correct? Um, an application we received a for courtesy review from the um board of um board of education. Um uh the proposal is to install solar p powered soccer and field hockey scoreboards at uh 125 North Hope Chapel Road. I understand somebody's here from the
board of ed um to give any um >> Yes. Would you like to come forward, please? >> Good evening. >> Hello. >> We'll be having you sworn in, please. >> All right. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes.
>> And please state your name and spell your last record. >> Anthony Bruno, Jackson Township Board of Education, Director of Buildings and Grounds. >> All right. >> And would you like to make a statement, sir? >> Uh, I'm here to hopefully that it gets approved. What we're doing is we're taking one signage from Jackson Township
uh Middle School, formerly known as Memorial High School. We're going to move it over to Jackson Township High School on the other side. We're going to install the uh the signage and it's going to be a solar um signage. That's where it's going to be getting all the power so there's no any electric beans.
>> Oh, I'm a big fan of solar. Very good. Uh we'll take Okay. Motion, please. >> I'd like to make a motion to approve the request from the board of education. Sullivan. >> Well, ju just just to be just to be clear, this is a courtesy review standard. Um, so what happens is that
the the board can weigh in on um a courtesy review is because there's a couple people here who haven't seen one before. Um it's exactly what it sounds like. So under the municipal land use law um we have the ability of giving feedback. We have the ability of um
providing input. um we can do a determination as to our findings, but there's really no they're coming here as a courtesy to fill us in kind of on what they're doing. Um not the other way around. So
if if we want to do a vote on, you know, what they represent just to kind of have a >> Anyone have any comments? >> Um you can open it up to the public. It's fine. Would anyone on the public like to come forward to comment on this
proposal? >> I think we could just have a um general approval. >> That's that's fine. >> We'll just Why don't you just do an approval? >> So, I'd like to make a motion to approve the courtesy application from the board
of education. Solivan. >> Second, Brzie. All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you. Thank you for taking the time to come out. Thank you very much everybody. Everybody >> go Jackson. All right,
Mr. Shay, we have some resolutions. The clerk will read >> resolution 2026-05 resolution of the planning board of the township of Jackson County of Ocean, State of New Jersey, granting conditional use for a home occupation
for mechanical/motor repair and maintenance facility with design waiverss for McCraea Motor and Marine LLC, block 10201, lot Eight. >> We need a motion to approve, please. >> So move. Solivan.
>> Second. >> Mr. Brazie. >> Yes. >> Mr. Marzo? >> Yes. >> Mr. Heler? >> Yes. >> Mr. Parks? >> Yes. >> Mr. Rogers? >> Yes. >> Miss Santoro? >> Yes. >> Mr. Sullivan? >> Yes. >> Dr. Campbell? >> Yes.
>> Resolution 20260. 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 an approval amendment for medical office use for Hal Realy Associates LLC block
7403, lot two. >> Was it a motion, please? >> Motion. Hello. Dear Marzo, >> Mr. Brezie, >> yes. >> Mr. Demarzo, >> yes. >> Mr. Heler, >> yes. >> Mr. Parks, >> Mr. Rogers,
>> yes. >> Miss Santoro, >> yes. >> Mr. Sullivan, >> yes. >> Dr. Campbell, >> yes. Resolution 2020607 of the township of the planning board of the township of Jackson, county of Ocean, state of New Jersey, granting administrative administrative approval
for Six Flags Great Adventure 2026 capital improvement program regarding Hurricane Harbor lock 3101, lot 11.01. Before Before we begin, could you check um please to see if Mr. Tremor is on
those uh resolutions for approval. >> No, he was not eligible for five and six. >> Okay. Thank you. >> You are a you are eligible for the six flex. >> Good. Thank you. We need a resolution, please. 407. I'd >> like to make a motion to approve the greater venture resolution.
>> Second. >> Mr. Brezie. >> Yes. >> Mr. Marzo. >> Yes. >> Mr. Heler. >> Yes. >> Mr. Parks. >> Yes. >> Mr. Rogers. >> Yes. >> Miss Santoro. >> Yes. >> Mr. Tremer. Yes, >> Mr. Sullivan. >> Yes, >> Dr. K. >> Yes.
>> And the last one is resolution 2026-08 of the planning board of the Township of Jackson, County of Ocean, state of New Jersey, granting administrative approval for Six Flags Great Adventure 2026 capital improvement program regarding
the Safari base camp block 3101, lot 11.01. >> A motion, please. Like to make second, Sullivan. Mr. Brazzy, >> yes. >> Mr. Marzo, >> yes. >> Mr. Heler, >> yes. >> Mr. Parks, yes. >> Mr. Rogers,
>> yes. >> Miss Santoro, >> yes. >> Mr. Tremor, >> yes. >> Mr. Sullivan, >> yes. >> And Dr. Campbell, >> yes. >> Thank you. Um, Mr. Peters, anything from uh your point of view? >> No, ma'am. >> Mr. Cle, anything from yours? Thank you.
>> Mr. K, anything from yours? Not on my end. >> Okay, then we'll move on with the agenda for block 1102, lot 24.2, Miss Jennings. Been a while.
I think we have some new equipment. Thank you. Good evening. For the record, I'm Donna Jennings from the law firm of Wend Goldman and Spitzer. on behalf of the applicant WB Ocean. Um we're here actually just seeking a one-year extension of the three require um
allowed extensions under statute. Essentially, the applicant has received most of its outside agency approvals, but the county has asked us to realign uh Fister Road, which is uh it's at the intersection of Farmingdale and Fister. So, we've been working with the county on that. And so, we just need a little
bit more uh time to iron everything out. And really, that's essentially it. But I do have our engineer here with me if you want to take any specific testimony on that. But otherwise, it's pretty straightforward. >> It's uh something that we requested right from the beginning. So, correct. That's great. Uh let's uh take a motion
on that. Do we need a motion on that, please? >> Entirely up to you guys. >> Let's get it done. >> Like to make a motion to approve the extension. Sullivan. >> Second. Heler extension. >> Second a motion.
>> All in favor? >> I. >> Any questions? Good. Thank you. Next. Next we will be hearing about block 22401 lot 7 8 9 10 11 and 12 510
Whitesville LLC. >> Thank you again for the record. Donna Jennings from the law firm of Gold Coleman 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 to develop the property with a
three-story approximately 15,000 square ft office building and warehouse consisting of approximately 12,750 ft. Properties located in the Pinelands manufacturing zone and lot 7 is currently improved with a single family dwelling. All existing improvements will
be removed. The proposed development will be used to support the applicant's construction business by housing applicants office functions and providing warehouse space. The applicant proposes to place its office building towards the front of the property where its employees will arrive uh during normal business hours. And behind the
office building, the apple proposes a warehouse that it will use primarily to store and prepare materials in connection with the construction business and also an area of storage of small construction equipment and vehicles used during the business operation. Uh there are no variances with this application, but the optin is
seeking four design waiverss with the site engineer. We'll give you uh some more details on that. In support of the application, the applicant will rely on the following four witnesses. Uh Schlommo Horowitz, the applicant's representative, Yseph Portoi, the
applicant's engineer, Mary Davis, the applicant's architect, and John Ray, the applicant's traffic engineer. For the record, the applicants receive the following review letters. The board planners review letter dated February 12th, 2026. The board engineers review letter dated March 17, 2026. The Shade
Tree review letter dated March 23rd, 2026. Uh the Bureau of Fire Prevention dated February 6, 2026. Environmental Commission dated December 1st, 2025, and Traffic Safety Review Letter dated January 28, 2026. So with that, I'd like
to call actually up the first witness is the applicant's representative, Schlommo Horowitz. Who will >> Before we begin, I'd like to see if Mr. Peters has any comments on this application. Before we begin, >> thank you, Madam Chair. Um, as Miss
Jennings indicated, we have a report dated February 12th of 2026. Um we would expect during testimony that um perhaps the first witness the use issues go away. There was a concern with regards to the PM1 zone
um not permitting the outdoor storage of goods or products. Um there appears to be some discrepancy on the plans, what's going on out in the field, what's proposed on the plans, and what's permitted in the zone. So from a procedural perspective, we we would
suggest to the applicant that they address that item so that the board can retain jurisdiction of the application unless they require um a user either a use or conditional use variance which this board cannot hear. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Cle. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um really not that much to add. One of the waiverss the applica applicant was initially requesting was an EIS that's been submitted. So, we definitely should have some testimony as far as the findings of that. Um there has been some discussion
about the applicability of the conservation overlay zone. I just like to throw, you know, on the record that um those provisions relate to nonpelands portions of the township conservation overlay um requirements. What be it an
LOI? Um this is in the Pelands and Pelands does not issue an LOI and there's no mention of this conservation own conservation um zone um within the um Pelands regulations and the zoning ordinance. So I just want to throw that on the record, but we should have some
testimony regarding the EIS that's been submitted. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Jennings. >> Okay. So um actually instead of uh Mr. Horowitz speaking, Yity Carrie is going to speak on behalf of the applicant. So get see
hopefully this works and if if you'd be so kind as to speak clearly into close to the microphone because there are people that are listening at home and Mr. Sheay will swear you in. >> Please raise your right hand. You swear or affirm and tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
>> Yes. >> Please state the name and spell your last on the record. >> Yes. Carry. C A R R E Y. >> And you testifying as a professional planner? >> No. >> A professional engineer? >> Nope. >> Oh, backwards. >> Gotcha.
>> Gotcha. Okay. >> Thank you. >> So, just for the record, u Mr. Carrie, what is your relationship with the applicant? um on the seal of the country. >> Okay. And if you could um do you know why the applicant protected selected this particular site?
>> Yeah, because of its location um close to proximity to some of our sites, our employees um and it's just a good location for you know a lot of our different business actions in Ocean County. >> Okay. And regarding the office building, what is proposed to occur inside? um
regular office activity, employees doing their job, accounts receivable, accounts payable, you know, plans, permitting, you know, regular office work. >> Okay. And uh how many tenants will occupy the building? >> Um one >> one tenant per floor. >> One tenant per floor. There should be
three floors. So it'll be each floor will have one tenant. >> And are any of the tenants known for the office building? >> Not yet. Right now we just have one Atlantic site construction and that that's what we have currently. >> Okay. And approximately how many employees are expected to arrive at the site? >> 20.
>> Okay. And when are the employees expected to be in the office building? >> Um, regular business hours 9 to 5. >> Monday through Friday. >> Monday through Friday. >> And what kind of deliveries do you expect to the office building? >> Regular office deliveries UPS, Amazon,
FedEx, nothing out of the ordinary. >> And how many deliveries to the office building you expect per week? >> Five to eight deliveries. And what will occur in the warehouse? >> The warehouse we're going to use to service Atlantic Side Construction. So, we'll have um a mechanic for our
vehicles. We'll have some storage for our material. Um we'll have some some of our smaller material um machines like we have like um snow piles or whatever it is. Um small uses. >> And will there be uh any equipment or vehicles uh coming and going on on the
site in a daily basis? Yeah, we'll have probably two pieces of equipment going on and off the site. >> Okay. And there'll also be, I guess, the employees vehicles coming to and from the site. >> So, employees will come in the morning. They'll park in front of the building and they'll use the parking area. >> And how many uh tenants do you expect in
the warehouse? >> Just us. Just one. >> Even though there's four units listed in the warehouse, you're just going to have one. >> We're just going to have one tenant. We're going to use all the warehouse space. >> Okay. Um, what is the purpose of the large truckiz parking spaces in front of the warehouse garage doors? Um,
>> our dump trucks parked there in it and some of our pickup trucks will be parking there. >> Okay. And what is the purpose of the parking area at the rear of the property? >> I'm just staging some of the equipment that we don't use often. Um, just some area that we can leave some of our let's say lights or what different small pieces of equipment.
>> Okay. And how many vehicles will be used in connection with the warehouse? Um, probably seven to seven, eight vehicles, dump trucks, you know, pickup trucks, lightweight vehicles, some of our mechanic trucks. >> Okay. And how many employees do you expect to occupy the warehouse space?
>> Um, 10 to 15 employees to work in the back area. >> And what days and times do you expect the employees to be in the warehouse? >> They start a little earlier than the office space. They'll probably be there 6:37 to around 4:35. >> And what types of deliveries are expected for the warehouse?
um material, parts, hoses, different things that we use in our regular day-to-day business. Um that's what we'll usually, you know, will get delivered to the back. >> And how often will these deliveries occur? >> Um I would say multiple times a day. You know, if we need a part, we'll have Ozone come out and bring us, you know,
single part. So they come a little more often in the regular office building. It's probably up to five, max 10 deliveries a day. >> Okay. And how do you expect to use the storage shed and pipe storage shed that are located south of the office building in the warehouse? What's going to be
stored in those buildings? >> Um, that will have material for our business. So, we'll have some storage of pipes that we use often throughout the day that we need to pick up quickly. Um, just general piping and material that we need to use often. >> And do you anticipate any outdoor
storage of any materials or goods? >> No. If vehicle maintenance is required, do you anticipate providing maintenance on site >> for the vehicle? Yes. >> And that's inside the warehouse. >> That's all in the warehouse. Yeah. >> And will the applicant plan to construct a project in phases?
>> Um, we don't plan to, but if we we don't plan to, but it's possible we put up the office building first. >> Okay. And will the applicant be responsible for the maintenance of the buildings and the grounds? >> Yeah, we'll provide maintenance for the whole building. >> And how do you plan on providing security for the site?
>> Security cameras. um security cameras and hiring security company to monitor that. >> And uh is the applicant prepared to consolidate the lot's condition of approval? >> Yeah. >> Okay. With respect to the use itself, it probably more appropriate for the
planner to discuss that since he's just a fact witness kind of set him up. So if the board wants to ask this particular witness any questions, that's fine. And then we'll go on to the planning testimony. Uh, may I ask if is there overnight parking of those larger vehicles? >> Yeah, the vehicles will be parked there
overnight. >> So, the way it works is we have a driver come, he'll pick up, let's say, a dump truck. He'll go do his shift, and then he'll come back, park, and take his vehicle home and come back the next day for work. >> Any questions for the board? Mr. Brazie, >> I have one question may not be the right
person to ask. You mentioned a warehouse and maintenance for the vehicles. Are there any floor drains in the warehouse? >> Floor drains? Yeah. >> Um um the architect probably could answer that question for you. >> Okay. We just want to make sure that gets addressed. Thank you. >> Okay.
>> Any other questions? Mzo, how many vehicles do you have in total that'll be there >> on site? >> Yeah. >> Um well, most of them, let's say the dump trucks are going to leave every morning. Um on site, I would say depending on the maintenance, hopefully not too many because we don't want them
to be broken. But >> what's your fleet look like? What how many how many vehicles? I would say probably 10 to 20 vehicles, let's say. >> And then equipment wise, you said um just how many how many pieces of equipment do you have? >> We don't really have on site. It's mostly on our actual development sites
where we're developing. They're not really stored there overnight or sitting there. If they need to get fixed, they'll come in, we fix them, and then we bring them back out to get used. Um I would say anywhere from two to four pieces maybe max at a time. >> And what type of equipment is moved? Because you say like two two pieces of
equipment will be moved every day. I'm just >> Right. So we have let's say a little boy that carries the machines in and out of the site. Um a machine comes in, it needs to be fixed and needs to get a oil change. They'll bring it in, they'll fix it in could be a quick thing. The next day they'll bring it back out to the site. So you'll have one machine that's
the low boy that's bringing them in and out. That's what's going to move two pieces of equipment. And then you have the different pieces of equipment that are going to get back and forth to get maintenance fixed or whatever the issue is. >> Okay. Thank you. and you have uh one tenant now for the warehouse and you
understand that if you decide to have more than that you have to come back. >> Okay. >> Okay. See you. >> Any other questions? >> Madam Chair. >> Yes, sir. >> Mr. Carrie, thank you for your testimony. You've seen um our report,
the RV report dated February 12th of this year. >> This report, >> the board planners review letter. >> Okay. Have you seen this? >> I didn't go through it. No, >> M. Jennings, would you like to go through it with him? >> I was really going to have our experts go through the review.
>> He's the guy who's going to be using it. So, he's the guy who needs to understand what's in it. >> Sure. >> So, let me ask him this question. There's a comment in the letter that says page elen page five under the warehouse use the warehousing or storage of goods and products is permitted provided that no goods are
sold from the premises and provided further that all items to be stored are within an enclosed building. You can comply with that. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> I was going to ask that question when you were done but that's fine. >> He's the one that's operating it. So, I
want there to be no confusion if there's a problem in the field and we get a call from neighbors that say, "We're not following it. We talked about it tonight." >> Understood. Thank you. >> There's a section in the back of the plans that says small machine concrete parking area. That's the outdoor storage area we've made reference to.
>> Yes. >> I didn't understand. Ask me again. >> Is that the plan in front of them >> in the back left corner of the of the plans? There's a small machine concrete parking area. You said you're the owner's representative. So, if if you're telling
us what goes on at the site, I want you to >> agree that machines will be parked out there. >> Not correct. >> Not the storage of goods, products, top soil, lumber, fencing. >> Says small machines, something with a motor. >> Correct.
>> Correct. And I would really say they're parked there. >> That's all I have, Madam Chair. Thank you, >> Mr. Clear. All right. No other questions for this witness at this time. Don't go far. >> He [snorts] won't. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> All right. At this time, I'd like to call up the site engineer, Yseph Portoy. >> Who do you think >> Mr. Port or Mr. Shay will swear you in? You swear, affirm, to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> All right. Please state your name. Spell your last of the record.
>> Joseph Portoi. P O R T N O Y. >> All right. >> And if you could, Mr. Portoi, give the board the benefit of your background and qualifications. >> Yes. I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey. Um, practicing 13 years in land development.
I've bachelor's and masters and master's degree in civil engineering. I've appeared before this board on several occasions. >> Welcome back, Mr. Portoi. >> Thank you. The board accepts his credentials. >> Yes, we do. >> If you could, just for the record, um Mr. Porto, confirm that your office
prepared the site plan. >> Yes, we did. >> And if you could describe the existing site conditions and if you're going to reference any exhibits, please identify them for the record. >> Okay. I believe we submitted a couple exhibits. So I would if we can pull up there was an aerial exhibit of the
existing conditions. >> Yes. Thank you. Okay. >> And that's exhibit A1. >> Yes. It's a little not so bright there, but um it the exhibit shows our project site outlined in red in the center of the
site block 22401 lot 7 through 12. As noted, um the lots will be consolidated as as a conditional. The the property contains approximately 6.38 acres. After a rightaway dedication
to the county, it would be 6.07 acres. of those it was um there was a question regarding how many acres are are on the property excluding wetlands when you buffers there are no wetlands on the property excluding wetlands buffers we
have 4.17 acres the property is fronting Whitesville Road um right now it has a single family ho house and multiple accessory structures which will all be removed it's in the PM1 Peland's manufacturing zone
Um the surrounding properties on this side of Whitesill Road are all in the PM1. The opposite side of Whitesville is in the industrial zone. Um Whitesill Road is a varying wet pavement. There's no curb or sidewalk in
um along the frontage. Um there are no wetlands located on the site. There are wetlands offsite both to the south and west. um the buffer some of those buffers to those wetlands do extend on the site. So
there are there are wetlands buffers on the site. There are no wetlands. The wetlands were verified by the Peland's commission um and were confirmed in the certificate of filing. Um the buffers to the wetlands to the west are 600 ft and
to the south of 240 ft. as noted being that this is within the pileands area um there L of interpretation does not apply letter a letter of interpretation is issued by the NJP department of environmental protection to verify
wetlands but that only apply that within the Pelands area the Pelands has jurisdiction over the wetlands and they verify the wetlands through the certificate of filing >> and in that uh certificate of inconsistency that we received prior to filing On this application, there are
certain conditions that have to be met. Correct. >> Yes. >> And the applicant will meet all those conditions before they get a final approval. >> We will need to. So the the way the process works is that after we we have submitted the pilins, we received a
certificate filing um an inconsistent certificate filing. um they issue that when they feel your plans are in your design, your plans are um substantially conforming and the last remaining items could be cleaned up
later. So they won't give a uh inconsistent unless they feel there's something whatever is left is relatively minor and the process is it they then direct you to proceed to the local municipal and county boards and after
those after you know should the project receive municipal and county approval you return back to Pinelands later to finalize the outstanding items and approval cannot take effect until we received a letter of no further review
from Pinelands. So, it's not even possible to know Pylons would not accept an application right now for those items. So, it's inconsistent, but we we remedy that after any other approvals. And two of the um conditions, if I recall
correctly, on the permit is that the applicant is to remove the existing structure and they're to restore some of the buffer area that the existing structure that's been there for about 50 years is encroaching upon. >> Correct. And looking at the at the at the aerial, you see there's an area of
clearing in the rear of the site. So as part as as part a condition of the certificate certificate of filing was a res the removal of any structures and the restoration of that area. We have a restoration plan including our site plan
which was approved by the pilands commission. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um the applicant proposes to construct a now um let's could we switch to the there's exhibit um an air colored
site plan exhibit. >> Yes. Thank you. >> And just for the record that's A2 that we're looking at now. >> Yes. The applicant proposes to construct a threetory. Let's get this.
It's not not it's very faint on the screen there. Um in the front of a site there's sort of like a plus shaped building. Um that is the proposed Thank you. >> Boy, you guys got a lot of fancy stuff.
Uh happy new year. Thank you, Mayor. >> Okay. The applicant proposes to construct a office building in the front portion of the site. The has a footprint of 4,778 square ft. Um, at three stories, that's
a total of 14,334 square ft total floor area. In the rear portions of the site, we have a proposed singlestory warehouse um 12,352 ft.
And there are storage sheds that was referred to earlier, a pipe storage shed located alongside the warehouse and another storage shed near located near the office area. Um the the permitted use in the zones are
general office facilities, professional and commercial office facilities, warehousing or storage of goods and products are all permitted uses in the zone. >> And just quickly looking at that proposed site plan, um the black dotted
line that is the wetland buffer area. Is that correct? >> Correct. And so all improvements are outside now the wetland buffer area where before the existing condition is the existing building and some disturbances in within that buffer area. Correct. >> That is correct. And any previously
disturbed areas within the wetlands buffer in the rear and there's a small area in the front um will be restored reveated. the the the the proposed development complies with with all bulk standards
required required lot area of 2 acres. We are we have four 6.07 acres total um 4.19 acres excluding the wetlands buffers conforms with all required building and parking setbacks.
Conforms with um required lot coverage. >> Just for the record, can you state what that is? >> Yes. Um 50% lot coverage permitted, 49.71 is proposed. Um complies with proposed building height where 50 ft is permitted and 44.94
is proposed. Um complies with with all required no um setbacks. Um the proposed the there's a proposed driveway onto Whitesville Road. Again, Whitesville is
a county road under Ocean County jurisdiction. A single ing ingress and egress driveway. It's designed with a know the cir to accommodate the circulation of the trucks that are anticipated to the warehouse in the in
the rear. Um per the request of fire department we have added there's a um grass paver emergency access to to add additional circulation between the two portions of the site designed to provide circulation full circulation both around
the office building and around the warehouse building plus with with with additional cross access um between them. and I reviewed the circulation with the fire official. Um
and then um okay, Whitesville C the Whitesville is known as a county road that's we've had so we've submitted to the county and we have a conditional approval. Um we are proposing widening to 30 foot pavement
halfwidth. We are proposing curb along the frontage. We're proposing striping per county. The county has improvement plans for the Faraday intersection which is a little bit to the to the east of this site. So we are you know we are
coordinating our improvements with the county plans. Um we no sidewalk is proposed along the site. There's no sidewalk in the area. So we are requesting a waiver from that. We understand that will contribution will be needed to the sidewalk sidewalk fund
[snorts] should the waiver be granted. Um the traffic safety did request a dedicated left turn lane. um being that this is a county road that the improvements will be dedic dictated by Ocean County based on their review and
their their plans. They did have us review the county did request even though they are not proposing a that a left turn lane um in in case they will in in the event that they would want to add that in the future. They had us model and design our site that the
circulation will work circulation sight distance will work with that center turn lane but they don't want us installing that right now. Um regarding parking um the ordinance
requires one space per per 1500 square ft of storage warehouse and one per 200 square ft for business offices. um for the the warehouse based on this
the square footage we the 12,352 will need eight spaces our plan nine spaces um addition to vehicles used in conjunction with the business those will be utilized
uh those the truck spacing those are the vehicles utilized for for the business are the trucks and other vehicles as the applicant testified to earlier for the business office for the 14,334 ft we need 72 spaces. Um our total
required parking is 81. We do we are providing four EV spaces which technically adjusts our required down to 77 but we and we are proposing 97 spaces. So we're exceeding our required. We have 4 ADA spaces. So the the the
parking may adjust during final revisions or design, but we we are 20 spaces over. So we will we will be exceeding the requirements even if we end up losing a space or two. Um we are proposing 23 truck spaces along the warehouse building
um which are 10x40. Those are size county dump trucks, war trucks and similar trucks for the business. There are three larger truck spaces. Um those are to accommodate like trailers want to mention low boy low boys to all
equipment. Um we are proposing curving along all parking spaces. So along the entire office area is all curved. We have curved along the parking in the rear. Um we are not proposing curve along the the the the
rear warehouse area. Um we are the the front parking area is we are proposing asphalt pavement while in the rear around the the warehouse storage warehouse we're proposing stone paving.
>> But isn't that a design waiver? Just so >> that would be a design waiver. Yes. There's a four 40 45 foot by long by 12 foot wide loading loading area along the office to accommodate any deliveries to
the office, UPS, FedEx, etc. So they have a place to pull over and and load unload to service office. Um as noted expect typical no off deliveries, no UPS, FedEx, etc.
There is existing water along Whitesville Road. So, we propose a domestic and fire water connections um to Whitesville Road. We are proposing several fire hydrants on site as requested by the fire fire department. There's gas along Whitesville Road. So,
we'll have a gas connection. There is no public sewer available um in Whitesville Road. So, we have a proposed septic system. Um this is going to be utilized in advanced treatment system um as required by Pinelands. It's been a
preliminary review by Pinelands um and will be still be subject to Ocean County Health Department review um and final approval. >> Can you just indicate on the plan where the septic system is going to go? >> Yes, the septic system is located in this area in between the office and and
uh and the warehouse. There was a comment in the in the one of the pondlands inconsistency was know the location of that but the the was a they wanted a little farther from the wetlands buffer but but we have already
adjusted to accommodate that. Um the proposed stormware management is compliant with the DP stormer rules and pylons requirements. those um small scale green infrastructure. We have some several areas of porous pavement. Um we
have some subsurface infiltration and we have surface infiltration basins. Two surface infiltration basins. Um all the stormware management will be privately owned and maintained. Um and
then manual any required fee notices will be filed. um for light land landscape by lighting. The we're proposing street trees, parking lot plantings around the perimeter and the islands. Um screening
along the northern parking lot. Um foundation plantings. Um the basins are infiltration basins, so they have a sand bottom. There's no plantings, but around the perimeters we have landscape. Um and then along we're preserving um the
landscape along the south of the southern part of the site within the wetlands buffer and also reveating the any disturbed areas within the buffer. Okay. Um the lighting the there we have full
lighting in around the office building. All the parking lots will be lit. I know there was a comment regarding some areas under that may meet some adjustments which we will we will address. Um in the rear of the site we have building
mounted lighting on the warehouse building. Um know the parking lots will be lit during typical business hours. Um know we'll set the light will be on timers dawn to dusk and know some security lighting will remain on overnight.
Um for in terms of signage there, the fire department requested an address sign along the front of the sites that will have an address sign um at the at the front of the property. There's no
monument sign proposed other than that. Um there is a building mounted signage which will um architect will will show that on our architectural plans but is proposed to to conform with ordinance requirements with the 25 that will be
under the height of the sign will be under 25 ft. Um so other miscellaneous items we have a um there's a proposed trash enclosures for the office and over here another trash enclosure in the rear of the
service warehouse. Um trash we were taken by priv private holler. Um no locations are the trash enclosure compliant and screening are compliant with ordinance section. Um all any roof mounted HVAC equipment will
be screened. Um any me exterior mechanical equipment should be required will be screened. Um the building will be sprinklered. Um we will comply with the clearing and grading and soil fill ordinance. Um we will not exceed 1,000
cubic yard of export. We actually based on a preliminary analysis we expect um import about 1,700 cubic yard of fill um for the construction. Um
no industrial waste will be discharged from the property and the applicant does intend to place a temporary construction trailer during construction. Um terms of approvals, we have a Piland's certificate of filing which we
discussed. We have a conditional Ocean County approval. Ocean County soils is pending. Um we have a Ocean County Health Department issued um and 51524 a letter of no objection. We have a statement of utilities from the Jack
JTMUA and and we've received several review layers which we referred to earlier. So, we'll work with the township agencies to address any of their comments. >> Are there any issues with any of the comments in the review letters that you looked at that you'd want to address?
Now, >> um traffic safety, we know noted earlier that they had requested that left turn lane, but it's subject to county um jurisdiction. The county does not want that left turn lane at this time. Um and the one other item in the fire the fire
official had requested if possible to add a second um you know driveway onto the site. I reviewed it with the fire official and they understand that may not be feasible. So we'll say we we agreed that we'll know provide response
and he said he he can't be okay with the single entrance but that will be addressed in correspondence with the fire official. Um just to summary summarize the waivers um design waivers are required um where
ordinance section 244-203A where sidewalks and curving shall require along all streets and there is no proposed sidewalk along the frontage um of Whitesville. um section 244-197H
where all parking should provide pavement where the where parking and um the parking areas and circulation else for passenger vehicles um is is is paved but the rear portion
of the site is gravel um and with portions of porous pavement section 244-197J2A2C we where no parking shall utilize required entrance and exit drives or major circulation drives as parking access aisles where we do have parking
along um the access aisle to the rear of the site. Um and section 244-197J1F where lighting is required for all parking lots. Um and and we are while we
are proposing lighting in the front to.5 foot candles, we are not providing lighting in entire rear area. We are providing building mount laying around the building area but not around entire um parking area. Um there was also noted
a waiver for 244-197G where the perimeter of all parking areas and internal islands within parking areas open to general public shall have shall be concrete curving. Um it was noted as a waiver in the reviews. We um
we are do have um curving proposed in the front parking area where which is open to general public. The rear area is does not have curving but that is not open to the general public. But if that's required we are know if the professionals feel we
need our waiver we're requesting that as well. That is that is all. >> Thank you. Mr. Peters, anything from you? >> Mr. Mr. Clay.
>> Um, just just a couple things. Um, no sidewalk of the curb is going to extend to full uh frontage. >> Yes. >> Um, the anticip and you will consolidate the lots, >> correct? >> Yeah. >> Um, the anticipated flow to the septic
system. Um if that triggers any special permitting, you'll you'll get that. >> Yes. >> Um the gravel area in the back where um ordinance would require paving. [clears throat] Um concerns about dust control or how's that going to be handled?
>> It's no we got we'll provide a detailed specifications of the proposed paving. It's on the it's on the plan and we'll provide details of that. Um, I'm looking at the plan and it looks like there's I'll say three different types of pavement. The heavy duty
payment from Whitesville directly into the gravel parking area. That seems to make sense around the building. Um, it looks like, you know, your typical um section of of pavement um except for the back half of that looks like it's porous pavement. The reasoning behind that,
>> the there are areas of porest pavement to meet the Peland's requirements. So the being this is a Peland's area, they require two-stage treatment. If this would be anywhere else, we'd have our site going into our basins, but Pelands
requires all storm water to go through two types of treatments. So some of it is being treated through porest pavement as well. >> And you needed half that drive lanes to meet that. >> Yes. um on I'll call it the north property
line where I have like looks like 24 maybe 34 spaces um porest pavements um along I'll say most of them but I think the last seven or eight it goes to gravel if these parking spaces are for the um employees
or people that are I guess maybe in the office building shouldn't they be also have forest pavement >> the the p the parking ends over there that that narrows up a little bit over there that the parking ends there. Um the porest pavement has been designed to
be at the lowest points in the in in the in the parking area. So you know the water flows towards the porest pavement. So it runs over areas and goes into the porest pavement but all the parking is proposed to be asphalt. the the vehicle
the passenger car parking spaces >> and um based on the stormwater concerns it looks like we have two sections of course pavement um one along the south property line and one I'll say in the middle of the site is that also related to storm water why isn't that no gravel
>> yeah those are within no surrounded by gravel area but that is no no porous pavement again was required to comply with the pylons require And the last one, the um storage area, the 1,575
square foot um proposed storage shed. Um how do you access that? >> This storage shed? >> Yes, >> that's accessed. No, that'll be managed by the by the by the by the own building owner. So those parking spaces can be
marked employees of Atlantic site. This way they control access and they could know have those move to access it. >> Would there need to be any type of depressed curb or or something if you know to facilitate placing storage
material in there? Um, we'll re we could review that if necessary what know we can add. I'm not sure what they're that they're using for something that we require that type of depressed curve, but we'll review that.
We can add that know a a depressed curve a ramp into that. >> And on the depressed curve issue, can we get some depressed curvy in between the heavy duty pavement and the gravel surface area right there? >> Yeah, we can we can put we could put depressed curb in there. Yes,
>> that's one. >> Thank you. Questions from the board. Mr. Rogers. >> Uh, in agreement with our engineer, the assets to that I believe should be dedicated to do so.
concrete look way >> to parking lot to the uh structure. >> We we we have extra parking as noted. So we we could take away a parking space or to to and include that.
>> A lot of things wind up being piled up outside the shed get to it. >> Yeah. >> Best interest to do that. >> Yeah. So we'll we'll remove one or two spaces as necessary to provide an opening there access.
>> Second Adam, did I hear you say that there was no lighting in the back half of the site lighting in the back half of the uh >> there is there is lighting uh mounted on the building. So that's throwing out from the building, but it's not there no
poles around the perimeter. So there is building mounted lighting over here. So it is lit but not all areas of the gravel area are lit to the 0.5 foot candle. >> Depending on the projection of the lighting which I don't think reach that
distance I might be concerned about that uh perimeter lighting may need to add a pole or two in my opinion. Just just pulling up the lighting plan
to see what that So, it does the lighting does cover the the rear, you know, guess a throw around that building. Um, it lights up get it covers all the parking areas,
>> not the driveways. >> What? >> Not the driveways. >> It does not It does not fully cover all the driveway there. >> That's my point. Yes, we'll review what happen. We can we can add some additional lighting along
some additional pole lineing over there to cover that. We may not know the full know half a foot candle, but some additional lighting to cover more to cover that area to some degree. >> I don't think it's going to take much. >> Yeah, >> I think Mr. Rogers is correct because at 5:00 it gets dark here in the winter.
So, uh, when those people are traveling out of that, uh, area, they need to be, uh, safe. >> Yeah. So, we we'll add additional lighting. >> I was also thinking, uh, there you might have a striped walkway from the office
building to the storage area where you're going to have your depressed uh, curbing um, and lose those parking places just for as an extra safety feature. >> Yeah. Put a crosswalk there. Yes. >> Good. Thank you.
>> Make that a condition. >> Yeah. >> Anything else from the board? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Mr. Tremor, >> you said that the the septic field was found as as an inconsistency with the pylons commission. >> Their consistency they approved the
design. Their consistency was um the proximity. There's off-site wetlands. There are 200 um this is a 240 foot wetlands buffer. So they wanted the either the septic know they wanted the
septic 300 ft from the wetlands. So they asked us to slide the the septic over a couple feet. They even yeah it was done already. That was their suggestion. They they noted in in their inconsistency that could easily be remedied by sliding
it over which we've done. And then is that the same with excuse [clears throat] me >> is that the same with the stormwater basin that's directly next to the buffer? >> No, that's not there's no concern with storm water near they have no concern with the storm water near the air. It's
just a requirement for septic systems. >> No further discernment. >> Thank you. Anyone else? M de Marzo. >> Um can you tell me a little bit more about what's going to be stored in the storage sheds on both sides because I
would kind of surprised to have storage shed where there are warehouses. I would think that you could store things in within this that warehouse space. So if you could just tell me a little bit more about those. >> That's really more for the operations. my my understanding this you see is a
long narrow shed that's specially designed for pipes long materials that's easier to take in and out you know I get like from the side rather than you know in the from inside the warehouse building easier access um and the front
is for the tenants use I'm I'm not know that's not my I'm not familiar with the the specific uses >> we can have the operations person come back up and answer that question. >> Thank you. >> When we do, can we verify what if any utilities are in those? And I guess from
your planner or some witness if they're expected to be considered as accessory structures to the principal uses on the site. >> Yeah. The the storage shed is supposed to be accessory to the office building and the pipe shed is accessory to the warehouse. It's expensive pipes that are
in there, so they don't want them mixed up with everything else. So that's what's special about that >> terms of utilities the pipes that shed I don't believe that has anything the other shed no I think they have the light will have lighting in it I don't
believe it has any other conditioning or anything also answer that question >> Mr. Um just quick from um >> up the microphone. >> I'm sorry. The um environmental impact statement. Do we have the um preparer of
that document? Um Mr. Dubar >> the board. No, they're not here. >> They're not here. No. So any questions about the the impact statement? >> I can try referring to it. I I was not the one that prepared it. So it depends if it's something that qualified to. I'm
just more questioning threat of threatened and endangered species. >> So this is within the Pinelands. Pinelands regulate threat endangered species very heavily. Um and they regulate not just within wetlands like
the the DP. Their method of enforcing threatened species protection is through wetland buffers. For example, typically you have a 50 foot wetlands buffer. If they're threat endangered species, they extend that to 150 to provide protection and that's really their only mechanism.
Pelands on the other hand can regulate what we call uplands area outside of wetlands for threat endangered species. So if you have that endangered species anywhere on your site um they will they will restrict those your development on that. So as part of the pinelands
[music] know so without getting into the EIS just as part of any pinelands review that is one of the first things that they look at is threat endangered species. So by the by the pilots issuing the certificate filing with you know
they they they threaten endangered species review and have and are not concerned with anything on the site. They would be concerned with any plants or animals on the site. They or habitats. They would they would not
issue a certificate filing for any potential habitats without doing habitat assess habitat studies. >> I have a question on that. Can you um this is probably for Miss Jennings. Do you who did the uh preparation for the
environmental impact study? Uh the engineering firm is Deo Du B I S and Associates. >> Oh, that's who prepared it. >> Yeah. Well, so I in my notes I have here I I know that we just talked about the environmental endangered species uh
inventory. Can you elaborate when it was done because there's inconsistencies that we found based on the environmental commission findings that you do note that there is multiple endangered and threatened species in the area, but there was none directly found on the property. So, how how do those two not
conflict each other? >> Well, you asked when was it prepared? It was just done. We were asked to do it and that's why we carried the December meeting. So, this was prepared January 16, 2026. >> Yeah. So, that's that was one of my points being is that we we did it in endangered and threatened species
inventory at the peak of hibernation for this the specific endangered and threatened species in the area. So if it's in peak hibernation, how are we doing an accurate report that there is no species during that time? When is there peak hibernation? >> I mean, I would have to bring that
specific person here to answer that question. I don't can't answer that question. I'm not qualified. >> Understood. >> And just to be clear, so this application is going to be conditional upon a no further review letter and a no callup letter by Pineland, correct?
Right. All of this type of information is in within the jurisdiction of the Pinelands, not with this board. >> Well, specifically as to the [snorts and clears throat] So, not worried about that for a sec. It's just this application is going to be
conditional upon Pineland's providing a a no call back letter and a letter of no further review. >> Correct. We wouldn't be able to put a shovel in the ground without the pine. All the inconsistencies have to be taken care of. >> Um, >> correct. Just like every other outside
agency that has jurisdiction over the site, we can't do anything even if you guys say a Okay. >> Right. >> And there will be a public meeting uh about this particular application. Does is that what happens at the Pelands Commission?
>> No. Highlands only has the only reason why there would be a um public hearing. If there was an inconsistency that we were not able to remedy and then we would need some waiver, then we would have a public hearing. But as long as we could satisfy piling, we if our goal is
to satisfy pilings without requiring that. But if there is something we cannot, then there would be a public hearing. >> Thank you for clarifying. Appreciate it. Madam Chairwoman, doesn't the township have an ordinance that we can't that the pylons can't take the final say in this
situation? >> This is a I believe it's state requirement and the state uh over lays the township and the Pinelands Commission over exceeds the DP, the township, the environmental commission,
this board and every place else. the Pinelands rules in this state. >> Correct. Understood. Thank you. >> Any other questions from this board, our professionals?
>> Yeah. So, just um go through the waiverss one more time with me. I just want to make sure that we because we got there's two in one of the review letters, two in another. >> There's four total, correct? So, just if you could just go over them one more time. Well, just give me the the titles just so I can or the uh ordinance
numbers. >> Sure. Ordinance section 244-203A, that's the sidewalk and curving along all street frontages where we have no sidewalk and we have part partial curve is proposed. Ordinance section 244-197H
where pavement for parking areas is required and we have a combination of gravel and porous pavement proposed near the warehouse area. Number three from ordinance section 244 1 97 J2 A2C
where no parking stalls to be located at the entrance and exit drives or major circulations drives is required but parking is proposed with access to the main circulation drive about 38 parking spaces along the north property line. And then the final one is from ordinance
section 2441 197 J1F where lighting is required for all parking areas and no lighting is proposed for the vehicle parking area for the warehouse. The circulation drives an area for outdoor storage but we're we agreed as a condition of the
approval that we would add some additional light poles over there to light up that area. >> Got her. >> Good to go. >> No variances. Correct. No variance. Correct. >> So there's two variances uh called out in Mr. Cle's reports, but we can get to
that. Is the planner or is the engineer is going to testify? >> No, there is no variances. Uh we can address those right now if you would like on the record or Doug could >> Let's put it on the record, please. >> And I and I would agree. Um I first looked at it. I took those setbacks from the wetland buffer line and there was a
requirement in the ordinance that you measure from the wetlands line which is further away than the wetland. No um no variances as far as that goes. Um but I will add one more um design waiver. Um perimeter curbing. You mentioned that the surfacing um needed to be um uh
pavement and you're proposing gravel, but also the perimeter of that um um rear parking area would need curbing. So I think you're looking for a waiver there also. >> Yeah, it's under that first section ordinance section 244-203A. We're doing partial curb is proposed. So
that's was captured under that. I I think you're referring to 24197G. Um that's one was referring to parking areas on internal islands. Um it does say open to the general public. So that was No, the rear parking is not open to
the general public, but we'll ask for that waiver to be to to be safe. >> Yeah, sounds good. >> Sounds good. Thank you. Anything else from our board? Our professionals are good. Thank you for your testimony.
>> Thank you. >> And at this time, if we could bring up the traffic engineer who is switching hats. So instead of John Ray, we're going to have a special appearance by Scott Kennel. >> He's been here before. He knows >> I think maybe once or twice territory.
>> Thank you. >> Please raise your right. Oh, there you go. Uh, do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> Please state your name, spell your last for the record. >> Yes. Scott Kennel, Ken Nel, with Mcdana and Ray Associates, located at 1431
Lakewood Road, Manislon. >> All right. Testifying as traffic, >> accept your uh credentials as usual. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. And if you could, Mr. Kennel, just for the record, could you confirm that your office prepared a traffic report dated January 14, 2025?
>> Yes, we did. And if you could uh go through that report and indicate for the board your uh findings and conclusions. >> Yes. So again that we submitted a report dated January 14, 2025. As part of that we did initially we did
an inventory of existing traffic conditions and roadway conditions in the area. Uh we have access out to Whitesville Road which is also county route 527 which adjacent to the site has a north south orientation and has a posted speed
limit of 40 miles per hour with one lane in each direction. Traffic counts were conducted in the area in November of 2023. They were conducted during the morning peak hours from 7 to 10:00 a.m. and then 8:45. The peak hour is 8:45 to 9:45 a.m.
And then the afternoon, we inventoried traffic volumes from 3:30 to 6 pm with the peak hour from 4:15 to 5:15 p.m. Uh during the morning peak hour, the two-way traffic flow along the site frontage is approximately 1,460
vehicles. And as far as the uh afternoon peak hour, it's approximately 1,400 vehicles. As far as traffic generation uh for this site, we considered first the office building and consulted with
the IT trip generation manual to develop the traffic projections for uh the office building during the morning and afternoon peak hours. And as far as the traffic to be generated by the employees or activity from the construction yard,
it was based on input um provided by the applicant. And as a result, we projected approximately 55 inbound and outbound movements during the morning peak hour and 54 during the PM peak hour. Again, that represents
only during a 60-minute period. There's vehicles coming in before the peak hour, during the middle of the day, and sometimes after the peak hour. Uh based on the the area roadway network and the
existing traffic patterns, we distributed traffic uh 50% to and from the north and 50% to and from the south. Um, it's important to realize that this site is located approximately 600 feet north of Faraday Avenue
which uh, as M. Mr. point I mentioned uh is under design by the county and what they're going to do is install a traffic signal at that location and also widen Whitesville Road through that intersection to uh provide uh enhance the capacity of that intersection
consistent with the Ocean County planning board protocol. We expanded their traffic volumes to the design year 2035. And based on the New Jersey Department of Transportation traffic growth data, we expanded the base traffic volumes by
approximately 10% to establish the 2035 traffic volumes along the site frontage and then searchcharge the site traffic that I previously mentioned u and analyze the site driveway. It was determined that the site driveway would operate a level service D and that's
consistent and acceptable by Ocean County uh for the both the morning and afternoon peak hours that's for exiting traffic entering traffic would operate at a level service B that being a northbound left turn movements into the site. Uh it's important to recognize I
know there's questions raised by the police department about having a dedicated left turn lane at the site driveway. According to the latest plans developed by the county, they've they incorporate the site driveway. The improvements extend up and along the
site frontage. And again, their improvements, the plans show our driveway, but do not recommend a left turn lane into the site access. So, they're fully aware of this proposed development and its relationship to the Faraday Avenue uh proposed traffic
signal. As far as the site plan, Mr. Port Noi ran through the um site plan design which has more than adequate parking to accommodate the projected parking demand. The site's been designed to provide positive on-site circulation not
only for passenger vehicles but for large wheelbase vehicles. The location of the site driveway at the northerly end of the site frontage provides adequate separation from Faraday Avenue as well as provides sight distance in excess of 500 ft in both
directions which is uh meets the accepted criteria for uh sight distance and that that is something also that's reviewed by the county when reviewing the site plan application. So in summary, this uh this project in
my opinion can be approved. The site driveway operates safely and efficiently and will result in levels of service that are acceptable. And the site plan has been designed to provide positive on-site circulation and adequate parking.
>> Thank you. >> Questions from this board >> from our professionals. >> Just real quick one, Mr. Any idea timing wise when Faraday is going to get improved versus when we anticipate this driveway becoming active? >> It's my understanding it could be within
the next 18 months and that would I imagine be fairly consistent with when this would be developed. >> Good news. Thank you. >> Y >> Madam Chair. >> Yes, sir. >> It's a pessimist's turn.
So the county says don't do any improvements until they do Faraday. >> No, what what I stated is our plans have incorporated their improvements and our analysis was in my opinion conservative because I did not take
advant take consideration the traffic signal at Faraday which will platoon traffic and provide additional gaps than what was considered. >> And again I apologize I don't know if you or Mr. Port can can answer this question. So, at the proposed site entrance,
is any portion of Whitesville being widened? >> There is a widening along our frontage and again that was done in in concert with Ocean County. >> Okay. >> So, I my understanding is Mr. Port can qualify is that the frontage
improvements would be borne by the applicant and then the county would tie into those improvements. I always get back to the what if part and I can't apologize for it. That's why I'm here. If the county improvements don't get done, would any of your results change
for the northbound vehicles traveling trying to make a a left into the site while traveling north? Is there an existing bypass lane or do people have to stop behind the vehicle that's traveling north on Whitesville to make a
left into the site? Uh generally for for pass there there's a should be adequate room for a passenger vehicle but if it's a larger vehicle no they'd have to wait similar to many of the other driveways along the northern section of Whitesville Road >> and your level of service takes into account the widening.
>> No it does not. We did a conservative analysis without the county improvements in place. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. We can all hope for Faraday's traffic light to come as soon as possible. >> Agreed. Any
other questions, comments? Thank you. >> Thank you. >> At this time, I'd like to call up the architect. >> I have to say my favorite part. >> If you want to hand out some pretty pictures. Mr. Shay will swear you in.
>> Yeah, you can let her hand out the pictures first. You know, while she's doing that, I'm actually gonna Well, give us a few minutes to review these pictures and await the attorney's return. Part: 2
They said there's no barriers required. Matter of business before we continue, >> if that's okay with you, Miss Jennings, >> a motion to re I make a motion to reopen the meeting. Sullivan,
>> you need a second. >> Second. >> All in favor? I >> I thank you, Mr. Alfair. >> Hi, Madam Chair, members of board. Um, we I have the two minor subdivisions that are on at the end of the agenda, and it's looks like you're going to be a while on this application, and we're
going to request that we be carried to a future date for both um without the need to renotice. >> Miss Morrison, how are we looking? >> We're We're very busy. >> I know. I know. [laughter] As long as it it doesn't go beyond 2026.
It will not >> hopefully don't. >> It will not. >> We have one application on for May 18th. Um right now >> what what's the application? >> It's mine. >> It's Oh, it's the daycare center. >> It's yours.
>> How about that? >> How about that? >> That would be perfect. Let me just check with my professionals. >> May 18th. >> May 18th would be perfect for both, please. >> All right. I'll take a motion to um
reschedu this, Mr. Alfair, for May 18th. >> I'd like to make a motion [clears throat] that we reschedu block 8901, lot five, additional lot 4, Yseph Haim Minsburg to May 18, 2026.
and also block 8901 lot 19 Yseph Haim Minsburg to May 18th 2026 >> second >> all in favor >> I >> thank you Mr. The applicant grants time of extension.
>> Yes, the applicant will grant an extension and would you please announce that there won't be an additional notice? >> No, no public notice. >> No notice required. >> Thank you. Good night. [clears throat] >> And um so anyone who is here for those two applications,
if you could just uh leave quietly, we'd appreciate it so that we can get on with our business for tonight. and thank you for enjoying uh what we do here at the planning board. >> All right, we're back in session now. We have um
>> Mr. Brazie has a question. >> Uh to the architect, ma'am, you stated uh about the floor drains. Uh did you say you're going to have floor drains? >> Yes. >> Okay. I have a problem with that. That's only me. Okay. >> There's going to be vehicle maintenance in there. And how where is your floor
drains draining to? >> Well, we'll have to coordinate once we get the MP engineer on board who would coordinate with civil. Um, but typically, again, we could look into it, but typically when there is vehicle maintenance, floor drains would be required. But again, if it's not required,
>> well, and typically on couple of years on this board, uh when there was vehicle maintenance side, we didn't require floor drains for the purpose that we don't want it laying out in the street and ruining the ground and everything else. So, uh if you're going to have floor drains, we're going to need something detailed on where those flow
drains are going, how they're going to be cleaned, how it's going to be picked up. >> Again, I think that's got to be addressed before anything else gets addressed in that warehouse. >> Okay. >> Madam Madam Chair, if I just could chime in from >> Yes, please. Um this raises a concern as far as this is a storm water drainage
and are these floor drains going to tie into the um the storm sewer system? The answer to that question is no. Um but the it's a it's kind of a critical item as far as I'm concerned. >> And I think it's going to be a serious problem for the environmentalists as well.
>> Correct. Good question. >> Correct. >> Correct. >> Correct. [laughter] So I think you might find a workaround for the drainage system you use. I believe there are uh portable workarounds. >> There's a lot of workarounds. How came caught, but then how it's removed. You
have to have, you know, receipts every time the stuff's removed. I think Mr. Trema can add to this. There's many ways to do it, but we have to make sure it's in place because if you're changing oil fluids in that in that warehouse and it goes into the regular system, it's going right out into the grounds. We can't
have that. >> Let alone the storm water system. It's just going into the grass and stuff. You can't have it. I'd like a little bit more detail on it. I agree with Mr. Presley. There are mechanisms that can take care of it, but just to say we'll do it later. >> Well, I think it's more of a building code issue and we'd have to file follow
the building code. The building code isn't going to allow you to do that. >> I think it's more of an environmental issue, which I think falls with this board. >> Well, no. Again, environmental is not part of the board's jurisdiction. So will the will the applicant agree to a condition of approval whereby the the
oil is not put into the ground, they'll remove it off site? >> Correct. >> And we'll get some final detail of that as part of any approval the board may grant. >> Yes, that would be part of the conditions of approval. Yes. >> Okay. So just for my jur, you know,
justification, if it's part of their approval, if Mr. Cle is not satisfied with the details of it. They have to come back in front of us. >> Correct. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Cle, you're the uh bottom line. >> That's fine. >> As usual, >> the applicant agrees to that condition.
Correct. >> Correct. Okay. Applicant will agree to that condition. >> All right. We're sorry to have interrupted your uh presentation. No problem. >> Do we know where we need to start? Do we have to start over at all or >> No. >> No. Um, so the uh the YouTube so it got
it got a little complicated. Um, the hearing itself was being recorded but the YouTube audio wasn't wasn't on um when we restarted. So now it's it's got both. So if you want to um
backtrack by a couple of minutes, go back a few points. Start there. >> Okay. I guess should I start with the warehouse? Go back to the warehouse. Okay. >> So, the warehouse consists of a new construction singlestory warehouse, no
basement. The floor area is 12,352 square ft. The warehouse is divided into four bays. The warehouse will be occupied by a single tenant and the division was just to create some separation between uses. The warehouse will be used to store and maintain vehicles and for storage purposes. Uh
the common area in the in the warehouse includes bathrooms and utility spaces. There are two overhead doors in each bay. And in terms of the exterior, the exterior material is carated metal siding with a sloped roof. And the building height is 22' 11 12 in. Um, a
sprinkler system will be provided throughout the building. There is no signage on the warehouse. Um, and if we could pull up the site rendering. Site rendering. And I'll just go into a little bit of detail into the two
storage sets. >> That was A2. >> No, not the No, we have uh Yeah. No, it's Yeah, it's A5. Um, in terms of the storage shed, so we have two storage sheds on the on the site. pipe storage shed of 8 810 square
feet and a 1575 square foot storage shed um used for accessory office storage. There are three overhead doors in the pipe storage shed and two in the storage shed. The exterior materials will be corrugated metal siding with slope roof and the
height of materials will match the warehouse. Um there is no building signage on any of the sheds. And then again, just for the record, the uh pipe storage shed uh that's to hold the piping,
>> correct? >> And that's related to the warehouse use. >> Yes. >> Um you just see the rendering here. We're showing a bird's eye view of the full site. So we have the office building with the accessory storage shed and then the warehouse in the back with
the pipe storage shed. >> Mr. Turmer, may I ask a question? Uh when you have these off-site buildings, would the fire department prefer that there's a number on those uh ex those smaller buildings so that if the fire
department is called, they know to go to building two or building three or >> Yeah. So that that's ultimately going to come down to Mr. Roush and how he how he deems it to be labeled. Um I'm assuming that all of those buildings are going to be alarmed and have suppression systems
in them. So the two storage heads are not required to have fire expression, >> but they will be alarmed. >> Fire alarm. >> Yes, >> fire alarm is not required in those either based on the size and the use. >> Mr. Rous cleared those >> building code.
>> Yeah, I mean we have his review letter >> with the How about the numbering? I mean, typically we as a first responder, we would like to see buildings be labeled. So that way when you do get some sort of incident in one of these, it's better to
be to play on the safe side, it's better to be clearly labeled. >> Even if it's building A, B, >> Sure, we don't have any issue with that. We can label the buildings. >> Thank you. >> Continue. Thank you. >> I think that's it. >> That's it. Okay. Questions from this board?
>> What's the square footage of the shed? >> So, we have one that's 810 square ft um which is the pipe storage. The other one is 157. >> The one in the back. Just to give some context in teri in terms of fire suppression or fire alarms
even um the building code requires fire alarm systems when you have an occupant load of 500 in a warehouse or 100 above the the lowest level. So we're significantly lower than that in those two storage areas. >> Understood.
>> There won't be any flammables stored in these buildings. Correct. >> Correct. >> Thank you. question on the height of the office building you have it up at 42 feet plus the parapit of three I thought there was
no variances with kawaii >> so it's 42 feet parapits are not included in building height and >> I understand that but it's 42 and three isn't it >> it's 42 feet even if you included the three which is not included it would be 45 which is less than 50 >> I think it's a third
>> oh in this area Sorry, >> no problem. >> Good. Any other questions from this board from our esteemed professionals? >> Thank you, >> Mr. CL. >> Just a quick one. In this um um
elevation or um rendering view, I can kind of see the um the storage shed 1575. And I kind of get my answer my or answers my question as far as how you get into it. I see two garage doors in in front. Um, and I guess the testimony
was that the parking spaces in front of them are going to be designated employees. >> I believe uh Mr. Pory testified that he could remove some of the parking to provide access. >> Yeah, we're over parked. So, we were going to remove one or two of them so that there would be direct access and
nobody nobody parking in front of us. >> And there'll be some type of pavement connection between the parking lot pavement and the parking. We >> said we do a crosswalk hatching. Right. >> Thank you. Thank you, >> Madam Chair. >> Yes, sir. Mr. Peters,
>> thank you for your testimony. With regards to the elevator, is there a penetration through the roof for the elevator system? >> No, no bulkhead. >> Okay. Um, the preliminary elevation show
signage of some sort. You just indicate that the proposed building signage will meet the ordinance requirements. You're not asking for any relief. >> Correct. >> Thank you. That's all I have, Madam Chair. >> Thank you. I noticed that the first rendering we received had two signs. The second
>> We adjusted. >> You adjusted. >> Thank you for doing that. >> Appreciate it. >> Anything else? >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, at this time I'm just going to call
uh Yseph Portoy back up just to address the accessory nature of the two sheds so the records clear. >> Excellent. Thank you. >> He does have a planning license. So maybe re-qualify him as a planner. >> Yep. >> You swear affirm to tell truth the whole
truth. Nothing but the truth. >> I affirm. >> All right. And you're retestifying as a planner? >> Yes. >> Okay. And Mr. Poor, you heard the testimony. uh given uh here this evening and the question uh placed on the record by the board planner with respect to the
two storage sheds. Can you just from a planning perspective indicate in your opinion whether the uh storage shed for the office building is considered accessory and whether the pipe storage shed is considered accessory to the warehouse use? Yes, based on the
testimony, I is my opinion that each of those sheds are accessory to those to their respective uses. Hey, >> you want to go into a little bit more detail or >> the the the storage head in the the pipe
storage head is accessory to the the rear warehouse use which is um similar sto storage of materials um and equipment. The pipe is another know another form of material that just
requires a little specialized storage just to based on its you know the size and shape of it. Um and the storage shed in the front and the office area is accessory for know equipment and and materials associated with the office
uses. Would would the um storage shed in the front uh have um lawn maintenance or building maintenance materials in there? I'm concerned about uh flammable
situations. >> The testimony was that there would be no flammable. >> All right. So, there will be no snow blower, no uh >> no >> mowers, none of that kind of thing in there. Just office supplies.
>> Correct. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions? I think that's that's sufficient. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And that's u essentially our direct testimony. I >> think it's time to uh call the public.
I'd >> like to uh make a motion to open this to public cross-examination on this application and this application only. Sullivan. >> Second. Hela. All in favor? >> I
>> uh explain the uh circumstances of the cross- examination to the public for this portion. >> Okay. All right. So, uh here's where we're at. So, we are opening to the public the cross- examination portion of the application. So, uh any questions
you have for the uh experts that testified, uh you're more than welcome to come up and cross-examine them. Um based upon the recent appellet cases that we've had, I'd just like to indicate that if I feel like we've already put the testimony on record, uh
and there's already um if the record already reflects the point you're trying to get across, I'll simply just say asked and answered and we can move on because once the record has that objection, the record keeps that objection. So there's no reason to kind of go over the same thing seven or eight
times. Um, so anybody who wants to come up, more than welcome to. >> Good, good evening. I just want to >> Good evening, sir. Uh, you'll be sworn in by the >> Yep. >> Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? >> I don't. >> All right. Please state your name and spell your
>> Say your YouTube is broken. >> It's been broken for I don't know a while. So, just letting you know it's still >> whether that impacts anything or I don't know. >> We are under we're under different rules than the um council.
>> Well, you know, that's up to you. I'm just letting you know. That's all. I'm not making it up. >> You you have to give your name and spell it for >> My name is Paul River. I'm on West Comm Road Boulevard in >> It's working. We have it on We're hearing it.
>> I'm sorry. We have it on uh >> the YouTube is working now, sir. It's It's fixed. >> I'm sorry. >> The YouTube is fixed now. >> Okay. Well, I'm just saying you had a blank period. Whatever. You know. All right. My question is uh
>> to the uh uh one of the uh people who gave testimony. Sir, >> well, you had uh my question is to your our own experts. Sir, our questions at this particular time are to the people
who gave testimony. Later, you will have an opportunity to speak giving a statement or asking questions of us. >> Sorry, I just want to uh ask our the planner and the engineer a question. >> Not at this time, sir. This is only
crossexamination of the people who gave testimony. If you have if you have any questions as to anything that they testified about, you can maybe take the same question directly. >> When can I ask them questions? >> Not at the next period. >> What's that? >> So the next meeting you're saying?
>> No, the next section. Oh, the next Okay. >> Hang hang on, guys. So >> So just just to be clear, our our professionals don't testify on behalf of the applicant. So if you if you have questions regarding the use the what they put on record, you can kind of
reverse engineer what you want by asking the the board or the the applicants professionals. >> Well, I the uh our professionals have made statements and uh I have and they've provided reports that each and every one of you should read and uh I
have questions on that. >> Okay. >> At the next session. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Now, I guess I just want to clarify. Is there uh an approved LOI on this application? When I
say approved, it's either some government entity that said that they agree with your your environmentalist uh LOI. Yes, we have the Pinelands certificate of inconsistency which confirms the wetlands and they're the
ones with jurisdiction. >> All right. So, what was that again? You said that you do have an approval of the LOI that's in this in this application. >> So, you want me to All right. So, um >> and I'll you know if
>> Hey, hey, let me just let me just kind of set >> No, I can't ask you this question. [laughter] No, no, no, no, no. Let me kind of let me explain the situation to you. >> So, we have a situation here where there is an applicant that's in the Pinelands, right?
>> The Pinelands is in the conservation um overlay zone. What happens is that the conservation o overlay zone requires an LOI, right? But the but the pineelands because they're the governing jurisdiction
um the certificate of filing is the equivalency of the LOI. Right? Because what happens is that when you're in a Pineland's jurisdiction, Pinelands subsumes the jurisdiction of the D. So the certificate of filing becomes the LOI because the Pinelands are the ones
who are in control. So, so basically any habitat, any tidelands or I'm sorry, any wetlands, um, anything like that, anything environmental related, the Pinelands Commission has final say on all of it because it's the Pineeland
zone. So, it's it's a little funky um because you have two you have Pinelands and nine P non-pinand zones in the conservation overlay area. Um, so it it gets a little confusing, but that's where we're at. So, what happened in
this situation is that the certificate of filing is the LOI. They then got an either more enhanced version of it, which is called the uh letter of inconsistency, which set forth all the things that um they have to correct on their property. And then what happens is
that um after this they then have to go back to Pineland Commission rectify all those problems get what's called either a a no call back letter or a no further review letter. So so it's it's kind this is a
tricky situation. Um >> well thank you for that explanation. However, I still would like to clarify that the Pine Lands approved the LOI. That's that's that's my thing. What I'm
saying is that their environmentalist is their LOI is best case for the applicant. >> So, when the government looks at it, they might say, "Oh, that's no good. You got to we we want that. You got to you got to move that forward 100 ft."
There's give and play on this. Okay? Okay. 100 ft [clears throat] could make a major uh difference in this application. >> So what happens is that the Pinelands is now in control [clears throat] of the t of the wetlands delineation line. So they're the ones that now they retain
jurisdiction over it because it's in the Pine Land. >> Yeah. But you're still not m Mr. >> No, I'm I'm trying I'm trying to answer you. So it's it's confusing because what happens is that the the LOI is only for a D issue, right? So that the the the
essence of an LOI is to figure out what the delineation line is for a wetlands area. So what happens when you're in a Pinelands area? You don't file that with D. You file that with Pineland. >> I understand that, >> right? But that becomes a certificate of filing. >> But do you understand my question?
>> No, I I I get you. It's >> my question is have they approved an LOI yet? I mean where they say this is it. This is the official element. >> The buffers are approved. If you read the Pimand certificate, it tells you where the buffers are from the wetlands offsite. No wetlands on our property,
but we have to buffer from the wetlands off site. And that was the wetlands line that the site engineer went through twice under the existing conditions and under the proposed conditions. >> Okay. Well, I was just trying to clarify that. I'm not trying to go >> No, no, no. It's fine. Do you want to ask the engineer any of those questions
or? >> Yeah, I I would also uh would you accept uh uh the board the planning board uh do uh giving you a preliminary uh site plan approval and then coming back after all
this is settled all this? >> No, there's the board. We don't have any special relief that we need from the board. So, we would get our final approval. That's what we would like and it would be conditioned on getting all outside agency approvals including most
importantly the Pinelands and we can't do a thing until the Pineland signs off. >> No, I understand that. But if there's major deviations uh what happens? >> We already have we know where the buffer is because we already did that step. That's done. >> Okay. All right. Well, that's those are
my questions. Okay. And I appreciate your explanation. So, what what happens is that if there's any deviations whatsoever from the from the wetlands delineation line, then they have to number one, they'll get um they'll they'll have a public hearing at the Pinelands Commission regarding that issue because they'll most likely get a
call back letter. Um but also the approvals that uh if anything happens tonight, this will um be null and void and they will have to come back for board approval if the wetlands delineation line is changed. Well, what that's what happened with Applegate and the the people, you know, out out in the
back of me there was a a assembly fall. >> They don't trust the uh the uh uh anybody to to not stretch the laws and the rules. >> This is the time this is the time when
you may you may cross-examine. You may discuss these things at the next session. I'm just telling you that the people feel better if they can see the final environmental lines and uh not worry about
>> We have the final lines, sir. They're in the plans. >> Well, thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> For cross-examination purposes, please. Thank you. >> Please raise your right hand. You swear affirm to tell the truth, the whole
truth, nothing but the truth. >> I do. I please state name and spell your last for the record. >> My name is Tom Smith, SMITH. Uh our residence is at 520 Whitesville Road. It's directly adjacent to the south side of >> uh this application. Um I I have some uh
questions I guess for either the applicant or the applicant rep. >> Yep. At this point, it's just for the applicant and the repres back up or Schlommo, you want to come up. >> Schlommo wasn't sworn in yet, so you'd
have to swear him in first before he can answer any questions. >> All right, please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> All right, please state your name. Spell your last for the record. >> Schlommo Harowitz. H O R O W I TZ. Okay. And just [clears throat] for the record,
uh can you say how you're affiliated with the applicant? >> I I am the owner of the property and the company Atlantic Site is my company. >> Okay. Just want to make sure he was qualified to answer the question. So, go ahead, sir. >> Okay. So, Atlantic currently owns
controls the property. Correct. And um Atlantic's a heavy equipment and paving company. >> We do heavy Yeah, heavy equipment work. We don't do our own paving. Do small, very small paving jobs. >> You stop out paving. Yeah, most we do a little bit of like restoration work, but the the heavy paving work we sub out.
>> Okay. All right. Because because previously there was an application for a paving contractor on this same site and I'm sure >> sir, I'm having trouble hearing you and so the public might be having trouble hearing you as well. >> That that was the previous owner. It was owned by Justin um his last name of Phil
Lee Paving. >> All right. But u Atlanta currently operates at 680 Cross Street. >> Correct. >> Okay. The testimony was that the choice of this site was to accommodate the employees that it's close to the area.
So, you're moving the business from less than a mile away to this site. Correct. >> Correct. >> Um, are you were you subject to any land use violations where you're currently operating from in Lakewood? >> I do not believe so.
>> And that's irrelevant to the application in Jackson. >> Yeah. So, so what happens is that the um planning board doesn't have the ability of of taking into consideration what's called policing actions. So, um anything that happens outside uh jurisdiction of
the township um violations um policing authority, policing powers that that's that's an executive branch function. We don't have the ability of taking that into consideration. >> There wasn't testimony to the to where they're current. >> Yeah, I'm just saying what we have jurisdiction. Yeah, >> I do have a question. Um, I guess
directly for you. I have a question on their their operation that they're going to move to this site. >> You can >> I'd like to base my question with a photograph. Uh, I have copies for the board if this is the time to hand it out or I could come back with that question during the questions directly to the board.
>> I would say has to come back if he wants to put on testimony and be subject to cross-examination. Yes. Later. >> So, if you um >> I can hold that. That's >> if you want to put that during the public comment portion and then we can submit it as an exhibit.
>> All right. Well, based on that, I got to skip several questions till I come back if you just give me one second here. Um, the exhibit actually that's up shows one dump truck on the site. How many dump trucks does the company
actually own? the company. I'm not exactly sure, but I think it's about eight nine dump trucks right now. >> Okay. Well, and it's not significantly more than that. You have a you have an off-road Moxy. >> We have an offro I'm sorry, I didn't hear you. >> You know, the off-road articulating dump
truck. >> Yes, but you have that. >> Yeah, they they generally don't come to my sites unless I've been I'm repairing them. >> Okay. The testimony before was that most of your equipment is actually on job sites and not >> correct >> residing. Okay. I don't know if that's appropriate to base your application on
your equipment. You own it. You have to store it somewhere, but you're saying it's off sites. So, uh that would be a question for the board later. Um especially if >> So, so ju just just to be clear. So, any questions you have as to operations, now would be the time to ask the the
applicants experts. Yeah. >> U you and probably also your your council here, your representative. 244 197 off- streetet parking for non-residential development. I just want to see if they've considered that because failure of an applicant to
indicate applicable in a statement of operations that vehicles larger than automobiles are to be parked and stored on site for such parking and or storage on this have to be on the site plan. And if they're not on your site plan, the parking for these
vehicles, that's actually a violation in the application. So, I just want to point that out. The application meets the parking requirements. We actually exceed them there. I didn't see any dump trucks on the application. Any large off-road
vehicles or large construction vehicles? >> I believe there was testimony on the types of vehicles and the number of vehicles and the size of vehicles. I I believe um Mr. Marzo asked that question and it was answered by the applicant. >> Correct. And it was that there would be
essentially two pieces of equipment kind >> Oh, no. I believe there were something like eight. >> So, so why don't we let the the applicant testify as to So, Miss Jennings, if if you have whatever expert testify as to >> I can speak to that. >> Well, he's the owner. He can speak to it.
>> So, so there's um equipment that's being worked on that's being stored indoors and as an overstock there's going to be some equipment that's going to be stored outdoors. Um what what there will be I you [clears throat] know this is a guesstimation about two pieces of
equipment that will be going in and out of the site every single daily um just on when something's ready to be going you know when something's finished being repaired it's ready to go back on onto the the sites it will be exiting and then we'll have additional pieces that
on average again that will be coming toward to to the site to be repaired and maintained. >> Okay. So you could you You could have up to eight dump trucks parked on the site in >> We currently have about eight dump trucks. >> Okay.
>> In operations. >> Is it possible to bring up the stormwater plan? I just have one one question about the stormwater plan and >> the year could probably answer it from >> Thank you. The first >> we'll bring Yseph up for that question. Uh I just have a question about what the
scour holes are particularly on the plan scour hole number four because it looks like it's an overflow point from the storm water basin. >> The scour hole scour hole is is located at when you have end of a pipe as to um
to so water exiting a confined pipe spreads out and and does not cause erosion. So, we do have any type we anytime time we have the end of a pipe, we'll have a scour hole or some type of um no energy
dissipation. >> Yeah. I I couldn't figure because scour hole 4 looks like it's connected to the front stormwater basin. >> Yes. >> And it comes right to our property line as a scour hole and I didn't know if that was a discharge or not. >> There is a discharge air. Um there is a
discharge. Um the storm the the basins have been designed to fully infiltrate you know most storm events but in a in a large storm event there will be a there is a
head wall there for an overflow discharge the discharge locations are based on where the existing topography is and where it water flows now and are reviewed no besides for this board this board's professionals are also reviewed by a soil conservation district and the
pineelands to make sure that we're we're complying with all of our requirements. Um any water being discharged, we have a requirement to reduce our peak discharge. So we have to analyze what water was going there previously and we
have prescribed reductions that we need to um to make on those. And additionally, the soil conservation district makes us account for a failure analysis if our basins would fail until to demonstrate there will not be an
impact to adjacent properties even in such analysis >> on this exhibit. In the storm water flow outside of the warehouse building, all the storm all of that storm water is captured in basins and directed to the
storm water basins. Correct. Correct. >> Okay. I I'll come back to the board with that because that's actually going to be an issue. Um everything I have uh is not has been answered for this. I'll have to come back with
>> Thank you, Mr. Smith. Hello. Why did you just shake your head at me? >> Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> All right, >> Adam. >> And were you were you here when I
discussed the um answer? >> Yes. >> Yes, sir. >> Good. Okay. >> We should name that the Adam law. >> That's right. [laughter] >> All righty. Um my first question um >> um if you could move that microphone so that we can hear you better. Thank you. >> Is this a little better, Mr. Chairman?
>> Oh, much better. Thank you so much. >> Absolutely. >> Um, my first question is um about the location of the property. This property is located in the conservation overload zone. Correct. >> It is within the count the overlay zone. Correct.
>> Okay. Are you familiar with our township ordinance 2445 >> about the conservation overlay zone? There is a that ordinance as noted is in the nonpelands um section. So it that ordinance section does not apply to this property.
>> Okay. Can you point to where in 24545 it explicitly states if the zone Can you can you point to where in 24545 it exempts your parcel from an LOI from the D? And for the record, I'm going to
give the applicant our ordinance. >> It is I have a copy. Thank you. >> Yes. Is an article six titled nonpelands area zoning district regulations. So >> is this within 2445
>> that 2445 is within article 6. >> Okay. Continue. >> And therefore the entire ordinance section does not apply [snorts] to our site. Um, nevertheless, our pine our wetlands were
verified by the Pineelands is not possible to get an LOI because it the otherwise issued by the Department of Environmental Protection who does not have jurisdiction over the site. But we do have confirmation of the wetlands from the Pinelands Commission. Can you
read me explicitly at article six where can you please read that because I don't I don't see anything of what you're saying. >> It's in the overall heading of that. >> Can you point to where in the ordinance specifically? >> Adam, it's judicial notice. You don't have to re not have to recite the
>> He's not citing anything specific. >> You don't have to recite the ordinance >> for the record. The owner is not citing specific stat. >> If his testimony is to it's not applicable, then he has to put the reasoning on the record. He's not testifying to a particular ordinance, Mr. Jones. Um,
>> right. >> Is there anywhere in 244-45, the conservation zone overlay that stipulates the Peland's commission trumps the authority of the D?
>> No. [snorts] >> Correct. So why wouldn't you need to file for a letter of interpretation? >> It has not. So our our ordinance explicitly states you need an LOI from the D. It specifically says the D. It
does not mention another governing body. In fact, I would point for the record 2445 section A, the intent and purpose. This was made in alignment in concert with both the D and the Peland's commission. So neither or um have Trump
in power. It would be Mr. Chairwoman. Does your board trump the authority of the zoning board? >> Adam, hang on. Hang on. All right. So let me just >> two separate a let me just >> They're both municipal agencies. We're talk you're talking about the difference between the township, the county, and
the state. the state and the Pinelands Commission over rules that county and this township. >> All right. So, >> I'll move on. >> Do you want me to explain? >> No, I hear you. >> Okay.
>> So, an LOI was done is what you are saying. >> The wetlands were verified by the plants. >> The wetland delineation, >> yes, >> was done by who? and then verified by
who? So on your site plan, it states the applicant has delineated a wetlands buffer on an environmental constraints plan that was done by professional design services. >> Correct. It was prepared by a different
firm. >> Correct. I have that here for the record. this environmental constraints plan wetlands limit line as approved per 2014. Is this what you're referring to? This wetland delineation on your
environmental constraints plan. >> I see wetlands limit line as approved for file number 2014. >> We're talking about our Pinelands cert certification from December 24th, 2024. >> Perfect. Does a certificate of filing
contain a letter of interpretation or is that simply a review of compliance? >> I don't know. I feel like we are going around and around and around. >> All right. So, I'm going to I'm going to say ask. >> Have you ever answered that question? >> Adam, just hang on. Let me let me just explain like how this is operating.
Right. >> I don't think you had the confidence to answer the question. >> All right. So, >> you don't understand what we keep telling you over and over and over again. >> You're misspe one. one of one at a time. Guys, come on. Let me let me respect Jennings.
>> Adam, let me at least put on record. What is >> Adam? Come on. >> You know, so so he here here's how it operates, okay? Is that you we have a situation here where the Pinelands
Commission subsumed jurisdiction over the wetlands delineation line. >> I get that. But I I I know I know that. But let me just explain to you how how it's operating. So what we have in this situation is called a doctrine of legal
impossibility. Okay? You can't have an ordinance say one thing to a jurisdiction that doesn't exist when another jurisdiction is saying. We're we're subsuming the responsibility of it. We're taking jurisdiction of it. Therefore, the certificate of filing is
the same thing as an LOI, right? That's not true. >> A certificate of filing is not okay. Let's let's go back to and and I can move on with that. That's we can hang on. Let's go back to first principles for a sec. Okay. So, first principle is
what does an LOI do? All right. An LOI seeks a determination as to the boundary lines of wetlands. >> Correct. If if Pineland's commission is saying we are taking jurisdiction over that then every single thing that would have
been in an LOI is in the certificate the filing and the inconsistency determination because they have retained jurisdiction over the first principle of whatever is contained in the LOI. >> So so so we we can't you're in a situation where it's legally impossible
to comply with something that doesn't exist. And what I'm telling you is I've reviewed their application, their certificate of filing. It does not include a letter of interpretation because that's not where letter No, >> that is not where letter interpretations >> the pylons doesn't issue LOIs.
>> They can approve it. >> They they they approve a delineated line, but they do not issue LOI. >> Thank you. Now, can I move on to my next question? >> My point is that delineation was done in 2014 by Ian Bordon at professional design services,
>> right? It's on their environmental constraints plan. >> So, >> is there an expiration on a letter of interpretation or a wetland? >> Let let the applicant talk about the history of it. >> Okay. So, I'm going to read this is a um review letters issued by pylons during
the certificate filing process. So, it's really subsumed in the certificate filing. But in the review process, there's a back and forth. You know, they provide comments. We address um we address them. And this is a >> And where do they approve the LOI? That's
>> this is a letter. >> No, >> let one at a time. Let let him complete whatever he's testifying to. >> This is a letter dated April 12th, 2023 from the Pylon Commission. And we and I'm reading um third paragraph of this
review letter. We have reviewed the environmental constraints plan for the above reference parcel prepared by professional design services LLC and dated January 19, 2023. Um and then in the next paragraph um the wetlands line associated with the main
stem of the tons river to southwest parcel as depicted on the plan is accurate. Additionally, the 600 foot buffer to the wetlands required by Jackson Township require buffer overlays accurate that it's accurately depicted on the plan. This information completes
the items four and five of December 5th, 2020 due letter. So the pylons has reviewed the the delineation of the wetlands and the buffers and confirmed that the plans prepared the environmental constraints plan is
accurate and that was subsumed within the actual certificate filing. We're under background relevant information. the the certificate of filon notes there are wetlands within 300 feet of the parcel to the south and within 600 feet
of the parcel to the west. >> Heard you. And and what was the date on that again? The date of the letter and the date uh what was the date of the letter? >> The date of this Pineland's review letter which is again one of the the multiple review letters within the
process was April 12, 2023. >> April 12, 2023. And then the date on which uh the uh review was approved or the review was done. I think there was 2019. >> I don't see a reference to a 2019. You may have been looking it's
referencing a environmental constraints plan dated 2023. It's possible there was an earlier version in 2019. Um but they are they approved a version dated January 19th, 2023. >> Interesting. On your environmental
constraints plan, there's a a wetlands line from 2014. We all are you aware that uh LOIs and and wetland delineations are valid for a period of five years? >> That is correct. In reference to the
NJDP LOI, the Pineelands knows their own rules and >> and and with the Pinelands, what how how long are their permits valid for? Are you insinuating more than five years? They're they have issued this now. So they've made the determination as part
of this certificate filing that they still concur with that line regardless of when it was originally delinated. >> And just for clarification, they issued the letter of inconsistency. Correct. >> It's an in it's a certificate of f it's
an inconsistent certificate of filing. Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. And that was dated December 24th, 2024. Correct. >> Yes. >> For the record, um, our ordinance
explicitly states an LOI is needed from the D, and I'm putting that on the record just in case, uh, for future prerogative rits. Um, my question, uh, my second topic is revolved around the use, Miss
Jennings. um application states this development is going to support a construction business. Is that correct? >> Correct.
>> And where in uh 244-97 the Pineland's manufacturing zone ordinance does it permit construction use? Could you point to any of the uh subsections in there? They permit office and warehousing. Then that's what we're
doing there. Office and warehousing for a construction company. >> Okay. Does it permit any contractor use? Does the word contractor anywhere in the 24497 uh ordinance?
>> Uh no, but I'm not really the one who's testifying. So I'll have Mr. Portoi testify to that. May I ask Anthony, can you bring up the documentation? It's titled 24069. It's It's one of the second to last
attachments for this parcel says new warehouse zone in set. I believe the title explicitly mentions contractor shop. Um to my understanding, no contract and no contractor work is allowed in the Pinelands manufacturing
zone. I can't I couldn't find the word contractor anywhere in here. In fact, in fact, for the record, I'd like to make the board familiar. These are meeting minutes from 2020,
August 19th. This explicit block and lot block 22401, lot 7 through 12. Going more towards testimony. We're getting into >> was denied. >> We're getting into lack of permitting a D1 variant. >> Right. Sounds like >> Adam, [clears throat] you have to ask a
question as to the >> I'm asking a question. >> It's cross-examination. You're basically putting direct testimony on at this point. So, just put >> if a use is not permitted in a zone, a variance would be needed. Correct. >> Has a D1 variance been requested in this
application? >> No, we do not believe one is required. This is an office warehouse use. I'll wait for Anthony to pull up uh the uh uploaded documentation from your applicant, please. Uh that contracts
your exact statement. In fact, >> what what what exhibit are you requesting? All right, Adam, we have to have you on record, man. We got it. I I I know. Do Do we
Adam, please stop? Stop. Adam, please go up to the I I I know. I know. I know. If you can describe If you could describe the >> Which exhibit are you looking for? If you go to the plan website, the uploaded
documentation, there's a I think it's the second to last link. It uh it's an image of the proposed contractor shop. It explicitly says contractor shop. And I want that on the record. >> No. No. >> Are you talking about the architecturals?
>> Says proposed warehouse. >> Says proposed contractor warehouse. >> Okay. So maybe those were all if if you can show that to the applicant. >> They're on the website. They uploaded it. It was just >> if if you can show if you can show up to
the applicant to see what he >> and actually in the site plan >> does say it. >> Hold on. >> Anthony, it' be really good if you could pull that up, brother. in in the site plan itself, it mentions
the the uh intended use for a contractor shop. So, there's two there's two pieces of data that insinuate a contractor shop, but your use that you were testifying to doesn't explicitly state. >> Okay. So, we can put this to bed real simple. Does the applicant agree that
this is not a contractor shop and it's just what was proposed on the application? >> Correct. The application explicitly states contractor shop. So, whatever they proposed and written submitted to you guys, it says contractor. >> So, so then we're going to >> we might need to change your plans.
>> We'll do a condition of approval indicating that it's not for a contractor shop. >> Okay. >> Correct. >> Is the Is the applicant's attorney familiar with the uh previous denial at this blocking lot? >> Never heard about it until this tonight. >> For the record.
>> For the record. I didn't even know the client back then. >> Okay. >> Would you like to know why the application was denied? >> I don't think it's relevant. Adam, >> you're testifying and we're this post cross- examination of our witnesses right now. Would you be surprised if it was denied? >> Adam, we can't we can't we can't take
outside. I know. But we can't take other applications from other jurisdictions and incorporate them into this one. It has to be what's what's in front of us. >> You're an attorney. You know better. You can't repackage an application. >> It's it's called it's called Resudicata.
If it's a zoning board application and they're here in front of the planning board, it's a it's a different type of situation, >> right? So, resjudicata, like if they had applied to the planning board, got rejected, came back with the same type of plan, then that would be a
resjudicata situation. But if it's a different form of variance in front of a different board, it's not. >> Okay. Right. >> What kind of vehicle uh repairs are going to be taking place here? One of the one of the uh applicants, somebody mentioned vehicle repairs. >> Yep. No, one of them will come up and
answer that. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Was vehicle repairs in the site plan report or was it testimony will be provided? >> Go ahead. Please just say no. It wasn't there. Were any vehicle repairs were any was the vehicle repair intended use
included in the site plan report that I >> I'm not a liar. It wasn't >> I mean that I don't know exactly what one of the time >> I can talk about what's relevant to me but
>> Okay. Okay. So, so what what's the question? >> The question was what kind of vehicle repairs are taking place? One of the uh one of the team members mentioned we'll just be doing vehicle repairs probably in the contractor shop. But no, I'm just
want to get clarification. >> It can't be anymore because we just put a condition of approval in there. >> Well, there's so many conditional approvals. You deny it and they redesign a site plan. They come forward with an actual plan that is permitted based on our ordinances. 15,000 conditional approvals.
>> It's got to be permitted. That's why it's here. >> Ordinances for a reason respectfully. >> I I I know >> res judicata. >> Well, res judicata. >> So, just so the record's clear. Thank you, Yseph. So, section 244-97B
says, "Following accessory uses shall be permitted in the P1 Highlands manufacturing zone. private garage space necessary to store or repair any vehicles associated with the printed permitted principal use on the premises. So, I don't think we need how to spell it out. >> What section is that?
>> 244-97B. I'm looking right at it. >> Okay. Private garage space. Is this going to be private garage space? >> It's a private business. Yes. It's not open to the public. >> Interesting. Interesting. Okay. >> All right.
Um, I may have came a little late. Did the applicant testify uh at all towards the outdoor use? It's uh believe that they have some plans of storage outside the warehouse outside. >> Yes, we did talk about that.
And I would refer you to ordinance section 244-97E 6 which does say all industrial activity process shall take place in a completely enclosed building. Incidental storage out ofdoors shall be shielded from any street or adjacent residential zone by fencing landscaping or appropriate
measures. We indicated we'd have like two vehicle two things stored there while they're waiting to be repaired and they be removed from the site on a daily basis. So I think that we're we're fine with that. >> Okay. Uh one last question. All over the site plan and throughout your testimony,
uh you guys have stated there are no wetlands on the site. Are you 100% confident there's no wetlands on the site on any of the six sites? >> Correct. 100% confident there are buffer wetland buffer lines on the property but no wetlands. >> So you're saying on all six lots there
are wetland buffers but no wetlands. >> Is that correct? >> I'm I'm going to let him answer one one last time and then then we're this is at this is over. >> I just would like to submit. >> I know >> we only have two loss as an answer. >> No 7 to 12. >> Oh 7 to 12.
>> Yeah. >> The wetlands were verified by pylons. The pilots has verified there are no wetlands located on any of the subject properties. Um there are offsite wetlands with buffers that encroach on the properties.
>> For the record, this map is uh from the Pinelands GIS. All six of your lots are listed here. >> Okay. Again, he's testifying. He's not an expert. He's using documents that no one's seen. Can't allow that. >> Yeah. >> For the record, confirmed by the
Pinelands themselves, there are three wetlands on Adam, ask ask an answer. Ask an answer. It's the Pineelands is going to determine all of this and they may have somebody go out to the site and walk the delineation line themselves if they think it's it's needed. That's how it operates. Either have an engineer do
it privately or or either the D or Pineland send somebody's out to either rescope out the line or do it themselves. So, we're this is way beyond our jurisdiction. For the record, the applicant stated there are no wetlands on all six.
>> They've all they've already testified to it. >> Correct. Great. Thank you. >> Anyone else would like to uh cross-examine? >> Seeing no one come forward, I move to close the cross-examination portion of this application. Solom.
>> All in favor? I >> like to now open the public comment portion of this application and this application only. Sullivan. >> All in favor? >> I >> someone would like to come forward now.
>> All right. And just per usual, we're going to limit it to five minutes a piece. We go from there. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> All right. Please state your name and spell your last for the record. >> Tom Smith, smite th. >> All right.
>> Um, as I alluded to earlier, I have a photograph I wanted to share with the board and then use it to ask ask some questions of the applicant if they if they choose to answer them. Can I just hand you these in there? So if you want to if you can submit it to our board
secretary we'll we'll uh sub we'll make it as a exhibit and then she can she can send it around to the rest of us. So we'll make it um 01.
Okay. First comment to the board is in the PM1 zone, uh, this is not an accessory use and this almost identical site use with the heavy equipment, excavators, dump trucks. They say their paving is subcontracted out that was not
permitted previously by the zoning board and it was denied a D1 variance. This is essentially the same application. I want to use this exhibit photograph to to show exactly what my concern is and what I'm talking about uh with the current operation that's being proposed to be moved onto this site because their
current operation does not match what we're shown in these exhibits. And I just want to make sure which one's going to actually exist on the site. You know, this exhibit, which I would have no problem with, or what their current operation is that they want to move
over. I did testify that they do operate at 688 Cross Street. So, I've got I'll wait till I get across, sir. I've got a 2023 photograph aerial Atlantic site construction at the front part of the site.
>> Right. So, ju just just to be clear, this So, where did you get this from? Where is this from? >> This is this is Google Earth publicly available aerials. Anybody can look at them. >> Okay. All right. And and where where is this located?
>> I'm sorry. >> Where is this located? >> This is 688 Cross Street from the site on Whitesville Road. You go down Faraday, make a right. It's immediately right there. It's probably a half a mile away from where you want to move on to Whitesville Road.
>> And what do you >> if you look at the >> Are you saying this came from the zoning board application? >> I'm sorry. Are you indicating that this came from >> discussing what their current operation is that they want to move on to this site?
>> Well, we just had a whole hearing about what we proposed on this site. What's happening? I don't see the photo. I don't know anything about the other site. We're talking about what we're doing here. We just had a full night of hearing as to what we're doing on this site. >> Right. So, so what what's going to
happen? They're going to be constrained to whatever the testimony that they put on tonight. even if they're doing something different and another piece of property they own somewhere else. >> Okay, I understand the cross- examination part, but I thought I was be able to bring up some questions about this this applicant in their application.
>> So, so right now is a general public comment period. So, you can put whatever you want >> on the record, but it's but you can't you can't bring in other outside applications that they've done and bring it into this one saying >> this is what their operation actually
is. So, so put whatever. >> We're not arguing that. I just want to express my concern that what's shown as their current operation is a horrendous mess and it looks nothing like that. You know, and as an adjacent property
owner at our residence there, you have to understand we already went through the testimony with the D1 variance last time and now, as far as I'm concerned, we have almost the same application. And in the PM1 zone, the storage with all the dump trucks and the heavy equipment is not a permitted use. It's
twisting the regulation. >> We we will only approve or consider what the testimony has been given to this board for this application. If they do not comply with what is approved for
this application, it's a different situation. We only can consider what this applicant has told us they are planning to do. >> They must abide by what they say they are planning to do.
>> Understood. And it's just my concern is once this happens >> understood. >> It's very difficult to do anything about it. There's very little enforcement. So on the on the I I have another issue with the storm water and it's not related to testimony but to the
regulation 244209 for storm water. Storm water specifically will not be recharged if industrial storm water is exposed to source material. source material in the definition is heavy equipment, petroleum,
and and they're going to have these vehicles and source material on the site and it's going directly to an infiltration basin on the site right from catch basins. So, >> right. So, so we have a condition of approval that we're not going to allow
that. And again, 24497A PM1 zone. This application requires a use variance for the equipment owned by Atlantic. They're saying on their application they're not bringing it, but they own it. Um,
>> all right. Because I've talked for a little bit of this one minute warning and go from there. But last point I want to make is, you know, you can disregard the photograph in their current condition. Um, the earlier photograph doesn't look so bad. And that's prior to them being evicted from having all their equipment
on a residential property, vacant lot, and then they had to consolidate it all onto that site. And if anything I say is not true, please correct me. But they were land use violators on this site. And I I got real concerns. There's just not
going to be a good actor here. So, I really want the board to uh be spot on in the approval with the limitations. The last thing I'd request is that that buffer line um for the limited disturbance have at
least a 4ft chain link fence so the site doesn't grow because that typically happens. Look at the photographs and even up at the the other sites on Whites Hill Road, they're constantly growing into the woods. So, if they can fence that line. Um, and
then the only other thing I know for a fact is that the Pineel Commission physically visited the site and they did look at the yellow eye markers in that approval. It wasn't just an email or a phone call. They did actually visit the site and verify the
actual wetlands lines. So, I know there was some confusion about that before, but they they did actually come out. So, >> all right. >> Thanks. >> Thank you, Mr. Smith, >> you swear or affirm the tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> All right. Please state your name. Spell
your last for the record. >> Adam Heidi. H A I D I. >> All right. >> Um, couple things I just want to put on the record or whatever this is. First and foremost, uh, to piggyback off the last gentleman, I'm not sure if this board has the
authority to grant the uses that the applicant is testifying. Sounds like exactly what got denied in 2020 from the zoning board. Um, it's a contractor shop and nowhere in the PM1 ordinance
mentions contractor shop. In fact, Donna Jennins told me that warehouses are allowed, but in the ordinance, it explicitly says small goods and products. It doesn't mention vehicles,
machinery. It does not. Second, in regards to the uh debacle, I'm speaking >> in in I'm speaking in regards to um >> Adam, >> you made a point. >> Can you pause? Miss Jennings is going to refute that point.
>> Yeah. So, the ordinance does not say anything about the size of the goods. It says the warehousing or storage of goods and products provided that no goods are sold from the premises and provided further that all items to be stored are within an enclosed building. There's no reference to the size of the goods in
the ordinance. I just want to make sure the record was clear. >> And that was also a question by our professional at the very beginning of the testimony >> and answered. But and just just so we're just so that we're clear, the the zoning officer is the one that renders the determination of something's permitted,
not permitted, and then it gets funneled down to the to whatever jurisdictional board the zoning officer determines it should go to. So by the time it gets to us, it's already been jurisdictionally predetermined what type of use it is. So
just so that you're aware, it's not, you know, the board sitting up here making the determination as to what kind of use it is. There there's a process that happens before it even gets to the planning board as to as to what type of bucket it's in. So
>> um also just want to put on the record uh in the site plan uh it again states that this LOI was done by Ian Bordon at professional design services. Uh my point was uh dismissed
by Donna Jennins due to me not being an expert. I would argue that Ian Bordon's also not an environmental expert. So he had no qualifications to conduct that uh wetland delineation. Uh, furthermore, I >> I I'd like to refute that because Ian has testified that he has an
environmental science licensing. So, he is an environmental specialist as well as a planner. >> He's he's not here to testify that. So, please >> Well, I know him and I've used him quite often. So, you're making a statement here and the rules one at a time, guys. One time for someone.
>> One at a time. One at a time. >> I'm cross-examining you and and pointing out your inconsistent facts. >> Just because you speak doesn't mean it's >> Mrs. Jennings, if you want to cross-examine them, guys. >> Exactly. >> All right. If you want to cross-examine them, you can do so afterwards.
>> And my last point for the record is uh 244-45, our conservation overlay zones explicitly state the LOI must be done by the D. Nowhere in there, in fact, there is an exception section, letter E. Nowhere in
there does it mention if the property is within the Pineland zone the jurisdiction goes to the Pinelands >> been discussed today in detail that's not a fact at all the another meeting we're going through this he makes his own facts up >> Mr. President let me ask you a question
Mr. I'm talking now. So >> use the microphone. >> I am using the microphone. Okay, that's what it is. Okay. If you can't hear it, I can't help it. >> Ah, I think you're being rude. Continue. >> Mr. Brussley, you're making quite confident points about this conduct, but
you don't understand the law yourself. >> Okay. All right. >> Under the jurisdiction of D, the yellow has been discussed even by Mr. Smith said that the pylons had come out there and it's been discussed so many times tonight. And I mean, how many times you have to hear from everybody before you
accept the facts? >> Yeah. And what I relate to, Miss Jennings, just because you guys are saying things does not mean they're factual. All I'm asking for is our ordinances to be upheld. >> We need to understand that state law trumps local ordinances. And maybe being
a member of the Environmental Commission, right, you should know what the Pineelands Protection Act is and how the Pineelands Commission works. >> Can you point out where in the state law where in the state law does it say that, >> guys? We're not >> Where in the state law does our
conservation the the Pineland Commission has their own NJ >> ACS, >> which trumps everything that we do here. >> Okay. >> One last point. One last point I'd like to make. Uh Donna Jennins uh when I when
I began to question the applicant whether or not there are wetlands on all six lots, Donna Jennins uh refuted my paperwork that I got from nj.gov. Three of the six lots explicitly state there are wetlands there. >> Right. And >> she's correct. All six have wetland
buffers, but three of the lots specifically have wetlands on them. >> Right. Pine Lands Commission the one that makes that determination. >> Adam, the Pineelands Commission is the one that makes that determination. [clears throat] >> Adam, can I make a suggestion and a
question? >> Sure. >> Uh, you're on the environmental uh committee for the township. >> Yeah. >> You do a lot of the research and stuff, I'm sure. >> Sure. >> In preparation for that, right? >> Sure. >> You talk amongst the other
>> uh members. >> Sure. >> Okay. Why don't you constitute a list of questions before meetings such as this so that the applicant, the professionals and the board members can be prepared
and to give you actual quotes that their best >> All right. All right. So the environmental >> Hey, can I ask you a question? >> Yeah. Did you guys receive environmental commission's report? We can't have >> So it so you have to be testifying Adam.
You got to be testifying as just a citizen. You can't be testifying on behalf of the environmental commission. >> So if we we go down that route, it's a different ballgame. >> Just answering a question. >> Okay. Thank you guys. >> Yep.
>> Let's anyone else be interested in coming forward? Seeing no one else come forward, I make a motion to close the public comment portion on this application. Sullivan >> second. >> All in favor? >> I I
>> Any comments or questions from this board from members of this board? Mr. Rogers, >> I would like to recommend that the uh chain link fest requested be considered and added to the uh approval. Would the applicant agree to a condition
of approval for the chain link fence? >> Subject to the Pineland's approval because I'm not sure they're going to let us put a chain link fence up, but we'll ask >> whatever kind of fence that the >> P may make us do something different like a split rail or something, >> right? >> A little bit more >> delineation, Mr. Smith. Would that be
would that be good for you? Some type of delineation. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Rogers. Thank you. You know this board cannot do five or six different jobs. It can only
do the job that we are allowed to do. We are not code enforcement. We are not the police department. We can only do the job that is given to us with the constraints that we have to live with. One of the constraints we have to live
with is the way our system works in this state. The township has its limitations. The DP has its limitations and above and
beyond that are the Pinelands limitations that are set by the state of New Jersey. We have to stay in our lane. We can only do the job that we are allowed to do. We can't do everybody else's job.
Anything from our professionals? Mr. Cle, >> just just one thing and I'll piggy back off of Mr. Rogers. Um, you'll install the fence. Um, you'll ask the pylons if they say it's okay, you you'll install it. Does the pilots commission know about the floor drains?
>> I don't know. when you're asking him about the chain link fence, can you also mention the um floor drains? >> Absolutely. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Peters. >> Nothing, ma'am. >> Mr. Shay, >> just that uh going back to jurisdiction.
So, the board's quasi judicial authority is to enforce the ordinances that are in effect, right? That that's where our job is derived from. That's what the board has to do. Um the outside agencies, they
do their own thing in their own way. Uh we're supplementary to them in a lot of ways, them to us. Um so in this situation, the board has a permitted use in front of it, which is called out by the zoning officer, not by us. Um there are no variances and four waivers. Uh
the waivers standard are that of uh it's again, it's two-pronged process. Um it's based upon a reasonableness standard. Um, and it's either the condition of the land or the circumstances involved will be enough to grant the waiver. So, with that, I'll leave it up to the board to
make the decision. >> Statement before we move any further, just to make it clear to people because I know you have before. We're only the first step in this process. We're not the final step in this process. And ultimately, the final step in this process will be the finance commission.
>> Again, >> assuming one of the steps. Yeah. Um, and I think it is sad that that that has to keep being repeated and that it's not getting through to some people.
>> Okay. >> All right. >> Anything? >> Anybody else? >> Anyone else? All right. We'll look for a motion, please. >> I'd like to make a motion. I mean going back and forth over the Peland's control over this whole site has been
done in several meetings and it's a shame that the public hears other parts that people put out there and it's totally false and believe it. I think with all the stipulations you have in there is a nice application a good application. I give you credit for
going forward and working with the planners. Good luck with them. They're tricky, but I think it's a good application with the stipulations. With all that involved, I make a motion to approve. >> Look for a second. >> I'll second that motion and also uh add
that um with the stipulations uh with the general cooperation of the applicant. Uh this is a conforming and um approvable application.
>> We'll have a roll call vote, please. Mr. President, >> yes. >> Mr. Marzo, >> yes. Providing that all of the conditions of course are met and that we can get some kind of a a buffer there with a chainlink f or fence or whatever kind of fence that I would approve that.
Yes, >> Mr. Mr. Heler. >> Yes. >> Mr. Parks. >> Yes. >> Mr. Rogers. >> Yes. With the permission to note that the zoning was approved. There's no variances and it's a as Mr. SA said an
approvable uh application. >> Miss Santoro. >> Yes. >> Mr. Tremor. >> Due to the considerations with the floor drains and the environmental impact statements, I'm a no. >> Mr. Sullivan. >> Yes. Dr. Campbell.
>> Yes. >> Thank you very much. Have a good night. That's going to be the third lawsuit against the conservation overlay. >> You are out of line. >> You are out of line.
>> We are still in session, Mr. >> Mr. We are still in session. I'll accept a motion to adjurnn. >> I'd like to make a motion to adjourn this meeting. Sullivan. >> Second. Demarzo. All in favor? I. I.