to call this meeting to order please stand for the pledge of allegiance 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 this meeting complies with the open public meetings act notice of this meeting were published in the appropriate newspapers and posted on municipal bulletin board roll call please mr brezie here mr heyman no dr hoffstein
Mr hudac Miss Rosol here mr martins here mr such here miss Bradley here do we have any resolutions tonight mr we do not okay and I know I receive minutes so I need a motion and a second to approve
the minutes please I make a motion roll call please mr brezie Dr hoffstein mr hudach Miss Rosal Mr martins yes mr
such yes miss Bradley yes i have a voucher in front of me from the township of Jackson for our recording secretary for this evening in the amount of $175 i need a motion in a second to pay the voucher please motion second roll
call please mr breesie yes dr hoffstein yes mr hudek yes miss Rosal yes mr martins yes mr such yes miss Bradley yes now that we've rushed through that um I know we have announcements for this evening we do actually a number of them
number one on the agenda uh Gooffman has been carried to the May 7th 2025 meeting uh notice must be provided um number four on the agenda uh amendment to
Armory LLC that application has been withdrawn and Tracy Place LLC number five on the agenda that application has also been withdrawn and we can swear in our professionals Mr
supri please raise your right hand do you swear the testimony you will give before this board will be the truth and nothing but the truth i do i do please state your name and position for the record mark Roer board engineer ernie Peters board planner gina Tumalo assistant
zoning officer steve Maer conflict traffic engineer okay uh no executive session for this evening do we have any matters for discussion no we do not all right and no administrative approvals so um as Miss
Cypriani stated applicant number one has been carried so we're going to move on to applicant number two Elaine Mcrist this is for a time extension for preliminary and final major subdivision 665-1 thank you and um as I had advised the
chairwoman I have a conflict on this matter so I'll be stepping down and Mr sheay who is the planning board attorney will be sitting in mystead thank you all right good evening everybody mr galman good evening dennis
Galin with the firm of Davidson Eastman Munos and Pon i represent the Mcristals uh the property before you is was approved for uh six single family homes on North H North Hope Chapel Road we
were approved and the resolution was memorialized April 5th 2023 uh two years puts us at uh April 5th 2025 which was a couple days ago um the the long and the short of this is we
need an extension uh we kind of wound up in a black hole in May we tried to file for resolution compliance and unbeknownst to us our escrow fees were at a negative balance we did not know that all of the transmissions of the
escrow deficiency were going to Miss Crystal's uh spam account and she's a little bit older than me and she has difficulty working with her computer on top of that so it took us about six months to figure it out so that's why we filed for this extension the good news
is we have our county approval and we're very close to our soil approval and we will probably perfect this subdivision within the next 60 days so what I'm asking for is an extension of time until um the paperwork I saw from the town was
August 2026 but whether it's April or August I'm I'm happy to have that time yeah and just to be clear so uh this is kind of an administrative mess up on on our end ironically so they they're entitled as a matter of right to three
one-year extensions which actually leads them out to about 2026 so what was was happening was that the the um escrow deficiencies were going out but the email was basically inactive that but nobody was following up so she didn't
know and nobody from the township was following up with the applicant say "Hey listen you know you got to deposit this or else nobody's going to you know work on the file." So uh they've operated in good faith the entire time um so it's really just a time extension as a matter of right and we can extend it all the
way out to 2026 if we wanted to um 2025 is probably more than enough time say we're we're asking for April of 2026 yeah which is which is fine yeah yeah the engineer report I saw said August but it's regardless doesn't
matter right and it's just a matter of just rounding everybody up getting the plans signed and then handling whatever issues for resolution compliance without this extension we can't get the plans finalized and recorded with this extension and with the other two outside agency approvals should be pretty easy
for us and that is it you have Mr sheay's comments any questions or anything for Mr galin i think it's pretty straightforward so we need a motion uh to uh approve the
extension dr hoff motion to approve second second roll call please mr brezie yes dr hoffstein yes mr hudach yes miss Rosal yes mr martins yes mr such yes miss Bradley yes thank you very
much thank you hope to see you soon but not too soon and board it was a pleasure for as long as I was here thank you very much that was your easy yeah that was that was the best application I've had in months you kidding me i want to come back here
have a good one guys thank you now we have to get Miss Cyprieni back so we're just going to hear okay all right we're going to move forward to applicant number three Cardonali and Jackson crossing number two adventure
crossing preliminary and final site plan 839-2 phase three and four for the record Mr hudac has to recuse himself on this application and 3A as well um I know that the attorneys it's my understanding anyway that everybody was made aware that we would not have a
full board uh yeah but we this is a no variances so we don't need five yeses we just need the majority yes for the record Donna Jennings from the law firm of Wend Goldman and Spitzer on behalf of the applicant as the board is aware we were here on February 5th
where we had Mr bordon go through uh the history of the site and how we got to where we are today um at the end of that meeting we indicated we're going to file some revised plans which we did and it did generate two new reports from your board's consultants we have one dated
April 4th 2025 uh from Remington and Vernick and another one April 9th 2025 also from Remington and Vernick so I don't believe there are any other updated reports
i I think that's incorrect oh okay yeah there's a um report from CME dated April 11th 2025 and one from Morgan dated am I looking at the correct one
april 15 2025 april 11th is see you have it i don't at this time we're going to call up Mr board and he's going to go through the changes thank you do you want to swear them in um I'm certainly happy to i believe Mr bordon
was sworn previously on this matter but uh would you like to be sworn again Mr bordon or do you recall that you were under oath we'll see how the evening progresses do you whether your testimony before this board will be the truth and nothing but the truth and Mr important
uh could you state your name and uh credentials for the record unless the uh chair would repeat your acceptance given that you were sworn in and we're all I think very familiar with you i think it's already on the record madam Chair yes i apologize for interrupting
i want to make sure that on the record we understand what we're hearing tonight there's an amended site plan application that we heard previously and that we're continuing tonight since the last hearing there was a minor a technical subdivision application that was made i want to make sure that it is correctly
on the record and I want to ask the applicant if they're going to proceed with that concurrently this evening so our record in fact is complete as to what's being requested this evening we're going to do the sub the subdivision after we finalize the site plan
thank you do we have an extra microphone we could have otherwise gene does that other microphone work okay you ready yes all right Mr bordon if you could why don't we go through the changes yes uh I do have a single exhibit we had a series of exhibits at
the last hearing and I do have a single exhibit data today which Anthony if you don't mind pulling it up it's it's very simply uh the uh the overall site plan that was uh submitted to the board and is there exhibit number with that
yes since A7 we had finished up at A6 at the last hearing very I'll be very brief and then we're going to get traffic testimony on the record uh subsequent to the February 5th meeting my office revised the site
plans to address the comments received from Remington Verick the items discussed with the board at the hearing uh primarily those those were two things that we did uh there were no changes to the project as far as number of units building or
uh road layout um but what we did do was we addressed there was a lot of conversation at the last hearing about the off- streetet parking the guest parking providing that off streetet so we uh added off- streetet parking and then we also uh there was also some
discussion about recreation and we added five separate recreation areas on the property um three in phase three and two in phase four so uh I'll return later I believe to go over the detailed responses to the
items in the particularly the planning review uh but with that intro I believe we wanted to get the traffic testimony put on the record if you could though Ian can you just show on the plan where the additional parking spaces are sure
and where you added the recreational area so it's clear to the board sure if you can zoom in Anthony maybe just pick the left side we can kind of scroll around and if you have a count on the number of additional parking spaces that you've added that would be helpful
okay what we're looking at on the screen is exhibit A7 and we're looking kind of expanded in the area of phase three on the left here and here you can see some off street parking uh examples we uh we scattered them around i know there's some comments about that that John will
address in the traffic testimony about uh locations of them but um they're just scattered around at different locations at the end of the day what we have is we have provided 1587 parking spaces
um including the credits for the EV spaces 15% of the off- streetet spaces will be EV ready the uh driveway spaces recall that the units have twocar garages twocar driveways kind of encroaching into John's testimony but those four spaces
count as three under Riss because the driveways aren't aren't wide enough to qualify under Riss uh that's going to and then um we have to provide an additional half a space per unit for for guest parking so again we provide 1587 the number of spaces they're required i
know there's some comments from I'm sorry Mr bordon i'm just I'm having trouble hear you what is the total number of spaces 1587 thank you there was comments from both professionals both the planner and the traffic engineer about calculating the
spaces for the units based upon the number of bedrooms but Mr ray will will break that down for the board but very simply that's you'll see them uh again scattered around in different locations the off- streetet uh spaces and then the uh recreation are denoted you can see
there's one there's three again in phase three there's there's one here uh one in the center part and one on the right and then two in phase two in phase four and those will be those will be provided with play structures for tots and
children as as well okay thank you Ian and I'm sorry i just want to understand so Mr mr bordon is just doing that and then he's leaving and Mr ray is that that's your and then Mr bordon is returning obvious to do the
planning correct section correct okay that's okay just wanted to make sure i thought you heard me talk enough last meeting i talked for like an hour plus and and and we all had we were riveted and I thought it would be nice to hear a fresh
voice and have and have questions stemming from that so I just wanted to make sure there would be that opportunity okay thank you at this time we'd like to call up Mr ray mr do you swear that the testimony you will give before this board will be the
truth and nothing but the truth i do and could you please state your name and uh credentials for the record john Ray REA a professional engineer with Mcdana and Ray Associates uh my field of specialty is traffic engineering i've testified before this board on numerous occasions
mr ray this board accepts your credentials thank you thank you and if you could John um just for the record your office prepared a uh traffic analysis dated I believe November 11th 2024 uh November 13th 2024 okay and
that's been submitted to the board uh it has okay okay and if you want to go through your uh findings uh for the benefit of the board and you also had an opportunity to review the uh letters submitted by the board's consultants yes and if you can touch on their concerns as well as you're going through your direct testimony sure uh the November 13
2024 uh report that was prepared and sent to the board deals with the changes in traffic generation for the new plan for phases three and four as compared to what was previously approved for phases
three and four and uh just to jump to the conclusions and I'll go into some detail as I go through my testimony the new plan does generate uh significantly less peak hour traffic than what was previously proposed and that's important
uh simply because our firm did an overall traffic impact study for the entire project for phases 1 2 3 and four and as a result of that overall traffic study the improvements that were made to the signalized intersections at Route
537 and Pine Drive and the reversing jug handles to the south of Pine Drive which will primarily serve as access to phases three and four they were designed to accommodate a higher level of traffic than we're anticipating from the revised
phase three and four proposal and I'll go go through the the changes and the numbers the current proposal for phases three and four calls for 459 town homes and 46 affordable apartments so that's
what I prepared my traffic generation estimates based upon the previous approval for phases three and four included 48 special needs beds uh special needs an apartment with um
special needs beds 428 market rate apartments 70,000 square ft of office/ retail space a 134 room hotel a wave pool and a 70,000 square ft indoor water
park that was what was previously approved for phases three and four and was included in our traffic impact analysis for the overall project so what I did was I went into the Institute of Transportation Engineers
trip generation manual and I prepared a traffic generation comparison for the new phase three and four proposal which is all residential as compared to the mixeduse phases three and four which I just previously described and at the end
of the day there is a net difference of 67 fewer AM peak street hour trips 216 fewer PM peak street hour trips and 206 fewer Saturday peak hour trips so the
conclusion that I reached with respect to what's in front of the board this evening is that it will generate less traffic than what has already been approved for phases three and four and my conclusion is that the improvements that were designed and already have been constructed at the two signalized
intersections out on Route 537 that serve as access to the property will be adequate to handle the traffic that's generated from this proposal excuse me chair yes
how many cars do you anticipate the whole development over here will have okay well we we we we base our analysis on peak hour traffic so let me go through those numbers i was just going through it okay for the
morning peak hour the total new trip generation for phases three and four and this is a total of the inbound and outbound movements for the residential there will be 215 A.M peak street hour driveway
movements 2460 p.m peak street hour driveway movements and 247 Saturday peak hour movements i I don't You're not answering the question if I if I count the number of cars right
that may be in this community right if you take two cars per unit two cars per unit of the not even counting the 55 just the 479 I think it is it comes out
you would have at two cars per unit you'll have 918 cars there'll probably be more than that and going out further than that to your 10year plan you will have somewhere around 2,000 cars not as much as that but you're right you're pretty much on track you have four and
five bedrooms and you have six and seven year old kids moving in now 10 years from now every one of those kids will be getting a driver's license and possibly a car so I guess you have to anticipate that now at the beginning where you have
close to a thousand cars in the development how do you figure only 200 and so are leaving for work in the hours very simply because they're peak hour trips dr hoffstein I know you've been on this board or maybe
the planning board many many times and you've heard traffic testimony and and you know that traffic engineers analyze the impact of a land development proposal based on the amount of traffic that's generated during the one highest peak hour of traffic on the adjacent
roads which in this case is route 537 so I agree with you over the course of a 24-h hour period or even over the course of a four or five hour window in the morning and in the afternoon there will be more than those numbers generated that's just the amount of traffic that's
generated during the peak hour on the street because that's the worst case scenario so you're going between 8:00 and 9:00 1 hour uh yeah yeah it it it's some some it varies from day to day but it's generally between 7 and 9 in the morning and 4 and 6 in the afternoon and
and again who decided that would be the number so manual the Institute of Transportation Engineers which is a manual that's accepted by the New Jersey Department of Transportation Ocean County Monmouth County every county in the state okay now I was happened to be
reading through one of these things that you were talking about and uh basically those are are and it's stated in one of them those are general guidelines according to the literature and uh it also states that the board has
the discretion to modify the traffic impact analysis requirement based on the unique characteristic of this particular project so you're just going by a standard that's all over the country and we want
to go by what this development can bring in that area i I think fair to say because you can't say this is what it is because there's no way to count the number of cars it's not it's not de the development isn't there yet yeah they're
not there yet and I'm not quite sure what you want me to use Dr hoffstein if you want to present me with some literature I'd be glad to take a look at it and see if it's pertinent or not but I don't I don't have anything else but the it right now because that's what everybody accepts that's what this board
that's what Ocean County has accepted before i have nowhere else to go unless you give me some literature or some data i will I will try to get it to you i have it written down just that I I just think you can't just go by you know okay
this dot over there and that's the way it is because things change every every development is different okay thank you miss Jennings were you going to say something i was just going to say that uh I've been to many board hearings myself both for this board and the
planning board and the boards have always accepted the IT it is the national standard so I'm not sure what again Mr hoffstein thinks we're supposed to be using since this is what the traffic engineers use unless there's a traffic report that the town has
produced that going to criticize Mr ray's findings so I'm not going to criticize his findings i'm just going to question um I'm not questioning the it i've sat on the board long enough now to know that's what we use and what we go by my question is more of a
realistic question piggy back on what Dr hoffstein said if we have x amount of units and even if we only take one car but we haven't talked about a school bus we haven't talked about Oh I know so these are questions I had written down ahead of time so I'm
just a I understand and again I'm not questioning the standards we're listening to i get it but I can't realistically see being 200 seeing 215 being realistic from 7 to 9 or 4 to 6 and we haven't even talked about a school bus
yet because even again let's put the cars to the side we want to start talking about schooling from 7 to 9 you're talking about high school in Jackson starts at 7:05 middle school starts at 7:35 the elementary schools are staggered and that's just public
school so when we start talking about school buses we have to talk about the fact that even if you're only allocating one child per town home where we're where how are we only getting such a low number we're not allocating any specific number of
children per town home we're using the database that has been accumulated by literally hundreds if not thousands of studies that have been done throughout the United States many of which were here in New Jersey we're using that database because that's what we use
because that's what every organization that reviews our studies that's what they accept the DOT Ocean County Monmouth County and as I've said before this board has accepted these numbers before i'm not quite certain I understand why it's an issue now when
it's been accepted before but I'll leave it at that okay and I'll give you a reason why I'm bringing this up because when somebody comes before the board and traffic is an issue we listen to it and
uh we really don't say much about it and the reason is that that and this comes from Cox that the board has no authority to deny an application based on existing offtrack conditions and uh the authority
to prohibit or limit uses generating traffic into already congested streets or streets with high accident rates is an exercise of the ether the town council or the state or or the county we
know that but there's an exception and the exception is uh uh then this is speaking of court ruling the courts went on to say appropo of the site plan denial based on off traffic problems the board may deny site plan application
only if the ingress and eress proposed creates unsafe and inefficient vehicular circulation now this in all the years I've been on the board this is the first time I've seen where the entrance and exit comes into
play and that's why it's never been mentioned because we always accepted something that we couldn't even we shouldn't even comment on we sat here and listened to the public complain about the traffic as we always do and we listened but we know that we can't act
on it this is the one application I've seen in all the years I've been on the board where we can act on traffic well I would I would say no because it's still a permitted use and when you're talking about the access I'm looking at Mr ray's
report he's paying that all study and intersection intersection operate acceptably so I'm not sure i mean there was no issue with the intersections and coming in and out of the site correct no the the the the the signalized intersections on Route 537 were designed
to to handle in my opinion an even higher volume of peak air traffic than this would generate and let me just go back for a second i I agree i'm not an attorney i'm only an engineer but if if the board or the board's experts you know feel that the access something
about the access is unsafe then you've got a right to deny an application there's no indication in any of your experts reports that the access is unsafe as a matter of fact in my opinion it's it's very safe because all of our traffic with the exception of some right
turns that will go out onto eastbound 537 everything comes in and out of two traffic signals uh you couldn't have a better situation i did a traffic study for a 550 unit uh project in Ocean Township off West Park Avenue that has
one unsalized access to a road that's got a higher traffic volumes than 537 and it works this is this is a terrific plan from a traffic standpoint and John wouldn't it be fair to say that the original project that was approved I think you went through the numbers were using the same access points and their
numbers were significantly higher that was already approved by this very board yeah I I I went through the numbers it's a it's you know in some cases it's 100 fewer peak hour movements in other cases it's 200 but the the signal improvements out on 537 have been designed to handle
this traffic and it's it's very rare that you have a project where almost all of your traffic comes onto and off the property through two signalized intersections rather than an unsignalized intersection i I think it's been handled very well by the designer
and a lot of thought has been given to this and this this project has evolved over I want to say 10 years I'm not quite sure we have two major attractions right there yes so you know the other part of this application and great
adventure you have hundreds hundreds of cars maybe thousands I don't know Dr our traffic study is predicated upon summer traffic counts we conducted summer that's everything is based on summer counts if you go out there today you'll have better levels of service than you will in the summer everything is
predicated upon summer traffic counts we're well aware of that um I Okay I was going to say any other questions yeah I just I had a question in terms of the reduction from the what was previously approved yes
um since we're talking about the movement throughout um the whole uh section um what has been removed that has resulted in the
reduction of the traffic intensity we'll go we'll go through that what has been removed are six different things and actually if everybody has the November 13 2024 report from Miss Mcdana and Ray it's outlined right there on the first page so it might be easier if you looked
at that i'll go over it again uh six different things have been removed 48 special needs beds but I'm sorry but that that's where I think it might confuse because I did hear your testimony earlier but aren't the 48 special needs beds still part of the
traffic for this overall site no okay 428 market rate apartments so when you look at that there's almost an equal a little bit less than what we're proposing now the number of residential units 428 is a little bit less than
what's being proposed now but in addition to that 48 special needs beds 70,000 square ft of office and retail space a 134 room hotel a I'm sorry and and isn't the hotel also part of the
overall traffic not for phases three and four that's back in phase one right and that's really to to my point talking about the movement of the traffic throughout the site but these
other things not all of them but some of them are still on the site i mean I you I I understand that this is the application for three and four right but it's obviously part of a comprehensive plan in fact you're correct other aspects relying on that and what I'm
saying tonight is that a comprehensive traffic study has been done for the entire plan that was based on higher traffic volumes for phases three and four than what is being proposed this evening that's essentially what I'm saying so but does your
report then take into account the traffic volumes for all of the site including the proposed phase one and the improvements out on 537 have been designed to accommodate the entire project phases 1 two three and four so
the pieces of the overall traffic that are being reduced or the contributors to the overall traffic that are being reduced are not the ones that that's that was my concern when when you mentioned all of these things that were removed and that that because those were
removed the traffic counts were lower it didn't seem honestly to to I had a concern because some of those things are still part of the traffic on the site they may not be part of the traffic in three and four but they are part of the track of the site because you said
they're only on the site uh to uh entry and egress points correct and and and there will be a hearing i'm not sure if it's in front of the zoning or planning board i lose track of these things there'll be a hearing for some changes to phase one that's here yeah that's
going to be here okay you'll get another shot at me then madam Chair load your load your guns but it it it's just in terms of the board being asked to vote on this section three and four which is being
asked is separate but it's part of the overall it is and I I just feeling that that would be informative and it's confusing I guess because phases three and four are coming in front of the board before the changes to phase one i understand that so I had to go through I
have done since 2017 probably a dozen reports for this property i had to go through a big file to pull out what I believed was relevant for tonight's application and I'm doing the best I can to answer the questions thank you madam chair um I just wanted to make a
statement that for all involved that um while the applicant and the applicants professionals have been on this project as John said for a dozen reviews I don't think there's any board member except perhaps the chairman who's ever seen this application before so I'd
remind the board members take your time you have a question ask it it's not a bad question just because it may have been covered or may have been in the report you're not the experts they're sitting over there and they're sitting over here so if you have a real world
comment concern question please ask it there's no bad question here um and I remind the applicant that while we've all all the professionals and maybe one or two board members have seen this application before it's a lot to remember from month to month what's
going on so I'll sort of take a pause and ask John some questions um about his testimony um Mr you had indicated that the that there are traffic improvements that were done for the project and I would assume
that's a project as a whole correct based upon a an overall plan yes can you explain to the board currently are all of the traffic improvements that are anticipated for all of the project
completed at this point they are i c I can summarize those improvements for for the members that aren't familiar with the project and I would greatly advise if we don't finish this evening board members to go out and take a look at the improvements that have been
installed first of all at the uh Route 537 and Pine Drive intersection that entire intersection has been rebuilt a brand new signal has been installed and the existing eastbound jug handle has been expanded to provide for more
stacking and also for access into some of the retail pads along Route 537 that entire intersection including the eastbound jug handle has been rebuilt expanded and a new traffic signal has been installed internally about 400 ft inside the
project from Route 537 there's a four-way intersection that uh creates some conflicts we were asked a long time ago to signalize that intersection we agreed to do it the signal has been installed and it is safely and
efficiently handling traffic through that area route 537 has been widened to provide uh deceleration lanes into the project and into the signals and the other thing that's been done is the two reversing jug handles towards the west
end of Route 537 where the primary access to this uh phases three and four will be uh will be made those jug handles have been expanded and a new traffic signal has been installed there so some pretty extensive improvements have been constructed they're in the
field they're operating today uh I was very pleased i know the project is not fully built out but I was very pleased to go through last summer and not have one complaint from anybody about traffic everything seems to be working well even when the parks are open
so it's working well now but what happens when we have all these units and homes there it will still work it'll work within acceptable levels of service and acceptable traffic engineering parameters and uh my understanding is both counties have signed off on it both
Ocean and Mammoth so So let me ask you just one one other thing if you have uh in the peak hour leaving in the morning 150 cars did you say I don't remember exactly how many you mentioned okay i'm looking at your chart but
there's numbers all over okay yeah but say you have 150 cars how many can leave the site at each traffic light at at that at that jug handle right there yeah when leaving the site and going east on the 537 okay i'm going to
give you a worst case scenario you got all 150 cars leaving at the traffic signal where the reversing jug handle is that jug handle signal is on a 90-second cycle just stick with me the math is very simple it's on a 90-second cycle
that means there are 40 traffic signal cycles per hour so that's an average of roughly four cars per cycle that are going through that traffic signal during the peak hour on average it may be six sometimes it may be two other times but it's an average of four cars the
stacking is well four car it's not an issue for four cars to be or five or six or 10 to be at that signal it's been designed to accommodate that so if you got to be at work at nine o'clock you better leave quite early if
you're going to be at the Yeah you better leave at 5 tonight no depends on where you work m Mr pressy yeah I have a question um uh you mentioned all the residential traffic in your peak hour and I understand that i've watched it a long
enough years with you um but I have a question when when and if those huge warehouses get into play is that traffic terminated the truck traffic in that study how much is coming out by pine I mean the density for the size of them
warehouses if you have 10% of it coming out so much traffic can you explain how that ties into your report sure the the traffic from the warehouses has been included in in the the overall traffic report that was done for for the entire project phases 1 2 3 and four and and
the truck traffic has been included and the truck traffic will be on the drug handle on the opposite side of Route 537 because when you come off 195 you cannot make a direct left turn into the Pine Drive signal you're going to those trucks are going to have to come down
and that's why the jug handle both jug handles but in specific the jug handle on the westbound side of Route 537 was expanded from one to two lanes and to accommodate the trucks and the geometry of the intersection was modified and
expanded to accommodate the truck traffic that has to make a U-turn when they're coming off 195 proceed back up 537 and make a right turn into where the warehouses are instead of a left turn that's all been accounted for in the in the traffic studies now with the
commercial traffic from the warehouses is that the same peak hours would be the same peak hours as your residential traffic more or less it will be yes 7 to 9 4 to 6 in the afternoon and that's been accounted for yes thank you and that will include the
tractor trailers and the box trucks and smaller trucks that that come in to pick up whatever yes it's been accounted for and I don't know if any of the warehouse space has been occupied yet no but it
it I don't want to say anything more i think perhaps some warehouse space you know may have been overbuilt a little bit throughout certain parts of the state but we'll we'll see that's exactly my concern if those warehouses ever got to capacity which I
guess that's why they built them i don't know how that could still tie into this report and be accurate well the traffic the traffic report assumes that the warehouses are fully built out and generate fully tenanted 100% that's what the study you know because we have to do
it that way we have no other choice i can I Okay so the bad news is I'm going to be one of those new people that weren't here forever so but the good news is I like numbers so I'm going to ask you a
few questions on the numbers before then I want to just clear up so the assumptions you have you put in place contemplate the fact that there's going to be a hotel and all these other things somewhere else in the site correct yes okay there let me let's take a step back
for a second there are two traffic studies that I'm referring to one for the overall project as a whole which assumed a certain development was going to occur in phases three and four which is no longer the case and we're proposing this instead
and this generates less traffic than what was originally assumed but there is an overall traffic study that's been done for the entire project yes but that overall one is not what we're talking about today correct correct the one we're talking about today does it contemplate any traffic from all the
surrounding areas including the hotel that's going to be somewhere else yes including it does yeah that that's included in the projections through this in what we're going to discuss today that's included all the figures all the numbers let me try to make this as simple as I can okay yes or no yeah I know because you weren't here you
weren't here for the last 10 years i got it okay okay the tra the traffic study that was done for the overall project assumed phases 1 2 3 and four everything was fully built out and assumed a higher traffic generation number for the old
three and four phase three and four proposal so it's all included in the all-encompassing traffic study it's there and now and now we're going to have less traffic than we originally assumed we're not talking about that one today we're talking about this study correct
and this will generate less traffic than was originally assumed does this do the numbers that you're presenting today for this study i don't care about any other this study do those numbers contemplate the fact that next door to it is going to be a hotel for example is going to be
all these other things yes or no the simple answer is yes great okay that's all I want thank you that wasn't clear with all the things that were talked about okay so the way I kind of think about it the one thing we know for sure that we we don't have to make assumptions is how many town homes are
we building right we know that 459 you start with that right okay so after that do you make an assumption of how many cars those town houses are going to generate yes okay and that number is what and I'm talking about peak hour traffic
now no no no no no i just want right now what are the total number of cars in your assumption based on the town houses that we know can can can you be more specific as to what are you looking at a 24-hour count for all the town homes i
can give you that i'm not clear i don't I don't know what you're asking for traffic hold on one second i'm sorry i if I'm wrong please correct me i think what Mr martins is asking specifically not the traffic count but how many cars do you anticipate based on the number of
units not any of the other uses just the number of town home units how many cars do you anticipate cars per unit oh okay okay roughly what's equal to the amount of parking spaces that are required 1500 for you know roughly is that the number okay 1500 roughly 1500 because that's
the number of park and let me back up for a second because I didn't get to testify the the the residential site improvement standards require a certain amount certain amount of parking for town homes and for number of bedrooms and what have you and our parking count
meets and exceeds the RSIS requirement but if you're looking for a total number of cars in the whole project it'll be somewhere around 1500 okay but they're not all going out on the road between 7 and 8 in the morning okay wait with all due respect all that is great that
that's not part of the question I asked i asked a very simple question and I think you've answered it now through all those other words okay remember I'm a numbers guy i like numbers so 1,500 is the assumption of how many cars are going to be in this phase correct in
these townhouse yeah more or less 1500 yeah probably probably be a little bit less but we've overdesigned it a little bit that's fine okay i'm struggling with getting quick snipe answers so of these 1,500 how many are we assuming are being
are going to uh move around during peak hours again just the number okay well I'm going to let me look at my chart uh 215 during the morning peak hour and 260 during the afternoon peak hour 260 okay
morning is 215 afternoon is 260 great okay so if I look at a percentage basis I got 1500 cars i'm assuming only 215 are going to be moving around during peak hours is that reasonable based on Absolutely it's based on real studies absolutely i appreciate your enthusiasm
to answer my question but allow me to finish it i thought you did i did okay so based on all the history and everything that you know about this if I was to do a percentage 215 is a reasonable percentage based on
historically and what the state says to mandate and all that correct it's a reasonable number not a reasonable percentage you can work the percentages out you're a math person yeah right okay so 215 according to the study and history and I don't remember the acronyms of what you're supposed to use
that you guys discussed 215 is reasonable for the morning peak hour why don't you use the afternoon peak hour it's higher it's 260 260 yes that's reasonable right yes and and and again that that includes the fact that not just that we have 1500 cars related to
this town home but that surrounding area we got a hotel got people checking in and out in the morning right we got a hotel we're going to have warehouses around there all of that is contemplated in this 215 peak number of vehicles moving around this area correct
it's it it includes the fact that phases one and two will generate traffic and that's been included in the overall traffic study i really wish you were here for all the other hearings Mr burton but that's a simple question is it included in this 215 or 216 assumption you just made no that's just
for the town homes that's just what we're here for tonight that that's why I struggle so where the fact that there are more cars moving around more vehicles moving around from the warehouse right from the hotel from everything else where is that
contemplated in these assumptions it's contemplated it's not in the Sorry sorry my bad now I I I don't know when you finished with your question so I'm sorry yeah yeah i I stand correct i apologize for that um but it's not to be clear it's not included in this assumption of
260 cars at peak hour correct you're going to have to clarify that the 260 is what phases three and four will generate but from these town homes only correct yes yes okay so it doesn't contemplate anything from the surrounding areas the hotel the
warehouse any of that let me try to explain one more time the original traffic study that I did for the whole project phases 1 2 3 and four contemplated a different land use plan for phases three and four which generated more traffic than the town
homes that's the best way I can try to describe it like I said I wish everybody on the board was here for the last 10 years and uh quite frankly it does get a little bit confusing especially for people that are new to the situation i understand that but what I'm saying is
that the overall traffic study for the entire site that was done several years ago contemplated more traffic from phases three and four that's what I'm saying can't be more clear than that around in circles so I'm going to stop but I get that but I'm not even I'm not
asking about any of that i'm asking about what's in your assumptions today and you told me the assumption is there's 260 cars moving around during peak hours right in and out from the town to clarify is how do you get to that 260 is it only looking at the town
homes or is it looking at potential traffic from around the area like the hotel like the warehouse all of that no it's only looking at the town it's only looking at the town homes okay that's what we're here for tonight so right so how does that circle back to when when I
first asked or are your assumptions okay are you incorporating the fact that there's a hotel next to it all right you said yes let me let me go back where my confusion comes from if I could be I'm trying to be as clear as possible okay i'm going to try to answer your question
as best as I can okay the original traffic study that we did which resulted in the new traffic signal improvements out on 537 the original study we did projected 476 movements from phases three and four
we're down to 260 see that that's my problem right okay because the hotel and all these other changes they're not leaving the overall site they're just going to a different closer by so to me it doesn't change that total number they're just closer by
or in a different property but they're still there so that's why I asked are you contemplating the fact that they're still there even though in a different phase and you keep saying yes you do but the numbers tell me no you don't and now you
just confirmed you're not i I don't follow i'm sorry okay that's fine madam Chair Mr mr such and then I'll ask Mr maser sorry and I I I in the beginning I may have missed his your name and your credentials mr mer okay mr
didn't you said that you were a traffic engineer correct what is your take um I mean you're the you're the traffic engineer expert okay um so I think there obviously
there's some confusion but there is there was a traffic study i was not on I was not here either in 2022 when Mr ray and his uh his office prepared the the last overall traffic study for the last
set of plans that were approved by I'll say this board but obviously not some of the members that were on the that are here tonight um what Mr ray has pres presented as part of this application is a trip generation analysis which
compares what was approved um as part of that 2022 study and what what's taken out and what's put in its place being these town homes and he has uh come to the conclusion that there is a reduction in
the overall amount of trips that will be generated by the project um as part of that and the um how do I say the uh the methods by which he's done that is trip generation the IT trip
generation manual or sound uh traffic engineering science uh for doing so um as I think he he mentioned he will be back as part of the phase one and I'll have another review letter as part of the phase one uh project uh my initial
review was was uh hurried because I only was assigned to the project a few days before the the meeting a month ago for phase one so there'll be additional information there and I assume you're going to hear additional testimony from Mr ray uh re regarding that and that is
where your the hotel discussion comes into play and where you'll hear from Mr ray as far as what's removed from phase one and then what was put in on on traffic as well so so Oh I'm sorry sorry so so go ahead Jay i'm sorry go ahead i
think I'm just trying to take in and and I'm understanding what Mr martins is saying he it's almost way I'm taking this in is just looking at phase three and four solely by itself is m because
it's just that one phase and it's going and I I'm following you i get what you're saying it's just in this townhouse what I think what Mr martins is saying is you can't just look at what's just in this townhouse when you have so much other activity surrounding
me it would be taking a small little piece inside of a large circle and saying yes inside this you only have x amount of cars who live here x amount but when you have to take in the whole so so just to consider the traffic for
phase three and four is difficult when you're looking at the whole phases one two warehouses great adventure the summer everything that's going on so that's where I think where we're some people on the board are hitting the wall
i I do understand and I understand that a good number of the members weren't here you know for the previous applications and testimony that went on for 10 years i would suggest and I think the board does have it i know the
board's experts have it there is a report that was last revised December 28th 2022 which looks at the entire project as a whole and maybe that's the report that uh you know you guys should be looking at to get a better understanding of the
entire project that's the report that Ocean and Monmouth counties have signed off on with respect to the improvements that we did to Route 537 and I I don't want to underestimate you know what's going on for the whole project but we're here
tonight just for a change to phases three and four and that's what I'm focused on i did not go back and redo the entire traffic study because the big traffic study contemplated more traffic from phases three and four and all I'm
testifying to here tonight is from a traffic perspective what's being proposed tonight instead of what's already been approved is less intense from a traffic standpoint that's the only thing I'm trying to get across tonight excuse me Mr jennings um the suggestion was just made by Mr ray that
the board consider the December 28th 2022 I believe that was the date um overall traffic study is that something that you would be uh sub submitting to the board or having the board rely on i think the board has it the board has it
i mean it wasn't part of this application but the board has it yeah okay so my question I need I still need to go back to you Mr mer so I'm not done with you yet um I'm not going anywhere mr ray forgive me i'm not questioning
your credentials i've listened to you for four years now i think you've got a lot of knowledge i'm struggling here and you need to help me that's what I'm asking and I think Miss Rosal has some of the same questions I do but the poor thing hasn't had a chance to speak yet so part of my I get it we are talking about phases three and four here tonight
i get it understand it i get it however I am struggling with the number of units i'm struggling with the fact that we're saying in peak hours in the AM that the town homes alone will only generate 215 trips i find that basically impossible
to to believe because when you look at the number of units the number of rooms and school buses how can we really believe that there's only going to be 215 in the morning and then 260 in the afternoon i do agree with his analysis
in that what was compared to what is because we have to look at what was and what was according to my notes um there was 70 uh,000 square feet of office space well and retail space it would make sense to any of us sitting here that the numbers are going to change and
especially when you look at the hours so I think that was a good point he made about 7 to nine and four to six but I'm struggling Mr major with how can we look at this many homes we're not talking about two-bedroom apartments we're
talking about fourbedroom town homes and approximately I'm just going to round the number to 500 i know it's not exactly so don't How can we realistically sit up here and I think we're all struggling with the same questions here even if I take out Mr martins and I'm not discounting
anything you said i agree trust me you should see my notes my point is if we narrow our scope to just sections three u part three and four how can we realistically believe that there will I understand traffic studies and and averages and standards but we have to be
realistic here that there are so many units how can we really sit here and say there'll only be 215 trips when we haven't even talked about a school bus well it it comes down to again the trip generation manual um it's the it's accepted nationwide um it's been I could
say I think I believe it's the 11th edition mr ray can correct me if I'm wrong there they're up it's been um and it it does rely on hundreds if not thousands especially for residential land uses studies um I I in a prior life
submitted uh the trip generation studies uh to the Institute of Transportation Engineers who maintain that database and they update the manual every so many years based on new data and uh that that is that's the best available uh data
that that that we have to go off of so Mr isn't it also accurate that the board can consider uh you know not only credibility determinations but to some extent uh know their knowledge of local
conditions the board can consider that yes i was going to say the same thing how do you come up with 476 from the original to 216 with the changes and how accurate
are those trip generators well they're straight they're straight from the IT so I can't I can't make these numbers up wish I could but I can't and they're straight from the IT um I it there are six different land
uses six different uses that previously comprised phases three and four i had to go through each one of those land uses go to the it and do a trip generation assessment and that that's how I did it i guess we're just trying that's the
only way we have to do it okay i I and believe me I understand the questions from the board i do understand it and I'm not trying to be different or difficult or confrontational i'm just trying to explain to everybody how
my you know my business works and Mr mer's business this is this is what we do we count cars chair sorry Mr breast go ahead mr ray I respect you we've seen enough years together here and you got the greatest business in the world to
get a D at an intersection passing so that's a good thing I guess but I guess and over the years I looked at bifocated applications and stuff i think that's part of the problem here i was not here for the beginning of this application and you're looking at section three and
four now and then we're just referencing one and two and not being able to see it all i brought part of it up before with the warehouses and I mentioned the baseball fields the 7-Elevens and the retail and stuff and I really find it hard with the size of those
warehouses how it wouldn't have that much of impact in those times of the morning trucks coming in and out the delay of the trucks coming and out the only addresses they have and don't have and you look at the roadways and I'm familiar with them out there that I just I don't want to doubt your
professionalism and your reports i understand you go by that and and I'm not arguing with that i just can't fathom all that commercial traffic tied with this and and not running in there with just the two intersections i mean those warehouses aren't built for
go-karts they're built to track trails i mean it's all major conveniences there and it's coming right out that one intersection and have to make U-turns on 537 and come back around i mean you can almost count that same truck twice i'm just confused i guess looking at it on a
bifocated way phase one and two and three and four is really complicating it for myself thank you and I understand those buildings are big they've got a loading a lot of loading docks and again we use the IT numbers i can only tell
the board and I don't want to be here until 4 5:00 in the morning go going through numbers but Oh you won't be my my my my firm actually did some trip generation studies at large warehouse projects over in Monroe and Cranberry
which the board may be familiar with if you've driven past those areas and we actually found that the actual traffic generation from some of those large warehouse projects in Cranberry and Monroe next to the turnpike are generating lower volumes than the IT
suggests i didn't use those i use the IT numbers i think there's a common misconception about what these warehouses generate in terms of trucks and traffic simply because everybody thinks they're going to be an Amazon fulfillment center
that's not the case with every warehouse building there is an Amazon fulfillment center out in Robinsville which everybody knows about that was a little bit crazy for a couple of years i think they've gotten it under control now that's what what gives everybody the opinion that the warehouses are going to
be generating traffic that's off the charts if anything I think the IT numbers are a little bit higher than what we actually measured out in on South River Road on County Route 535 in Cranberry and Monroe and um I I I guess
that's the best way I can explain it mr mer one of the things in your letter um was a comment about internal traffic so you know I I've explained my struggles i think I'm I'm abundantly clear here so if we look at the map internally
um I think Mr ray did a phenomenal job explaining to us it can stack four getting out but let's talk about internally when you start talking about all these people leaving at the same time to go to school to get to work because you're talking 7 to9 so again in Jackson public schools start at 7:05 for
high school but we're talking middle school and all the elementary schools and people going to work and then in addition any private school busing how is that going to work internally the way this is set up how I mean yes it's four deep at the the drug handle and I think
Mr ray helped me understand that because that was a big concern but internally let's talk about traffic circulation how's that going to work with so many people so my com excuse understood understood um so my comment regarding the internal
circulation was more towards the overall development all four phases similar to uh what Mr breie and Mr martins uh have uh asked and that's my comment my question was more for and and it'll be addressed I can assure you because I'll
insist it'll be addressed more in the phase one application um and that's more towards how the uh the commercial and the recreational development and the warehousing development intertwine with the residential development because the other application does have a large
residential component as well as far as this goes and and I I I don't want to provide testimony on behalf of the applicant by any stretch here um but the again 260 you know those PM peak hour trips or
the 2:15 in the morning um and and I mean the IT manual does take into account like things like school buses uh as part of residential development it doesn't just look and say well the only traffic being generated is by the people
that live there it includes your trash trucks your um your school buses and things like that um because when they do when they do those studies uh the individ when when when traffic engineers do do a study to to look at that they're
counting the actual cars all cars trucks buses that go in and out of say a subdivision or an apartment complex or a town home community when they do those studies um so internally as far as just how um the the what you see on the
screen there I I honestly I don't have concerns with the with with that internal circulation of just the town homes my my concern which I'll be looking for the testimony is the overall project because of the way they all intertwine together
so um I'm gonna I don't know this is allowed so please speak up and correct me if I speak out of turn here mr such is the um president of his town home community and I live in one of the older developments in Jackson i'm picturing what it's like in the morning so I leave
for work early to avoid the school buses and everybody leaving so that's what I'm envisioning here and I'm trying my best to just keep three and four and not involve everything because we're talking about parts three and four i don't even
want to think about the rest of it at this point because I can't imagine how three and four is going to work so that's what I'm struggling with here and I think that's speaking for Dr hson and every the others have asked questions i think we're all in the same situation
we're not doubting his numbers we're not doubting his credibility by any stretch it's just hard to believe that this is going to work smoothly and safely and that's my concern and I and like I said I brought up Mr sut being the president of this
town home association because I know that that's an issue trying to get in and out there are times I mean in the morning with the school buses yeah getting onto Cooksbridge Road
um there is no light uh but I mean you deal with it i mean really that's there's really I mean obviously in any neighborhood you get stuck behind a school bus you know it is what it is but uh
I don't know i mean it's about time management and just uh when you uh I mean I guess at least for me you get what you get and you don't get upset i mean really what are you going to do and it seems at this point we talking about the circulation issues i don't
know if there are more questions from the board on the overall circulation obviously there are other aspects of uh the report having to do with uh parking and some of the other issues so maybe we should say focus on the circulation right now one more thing and this is
from the police report i think it should be mentioned that there were concerns about first responders and emergency vehicles getting access to the buildings in phase four from the
police board with the one egress and and entrance well there's two there's not one because the emergency services could also come through the Pine Drive intersection and use the extension of Linda's Way I believe is the name of the street so
there's two ways to get into the project from whatever direction i just wanted to ask that because I know it's good good question and I'll just make one comment i'm the only one here who can was on the board when this first appeared way back
when and uh Mr ali did give the best presentation that we ever had it was the first time visual aids were used and at that time we talk about a sports complex with some with
rentals and it's progressed over the years to being residential with a small much smaller sports complex just to see the change seems every time I come to a meeting there's something subtracted added or moved
okay let's move on can I Can I just continue some ah your turn so um the the normal business as usual procedure for calculating trips right
um whether it's this situation and the other the study that that we're using or the the guidelines that we're using in those guidelines do they tell you to contemplate traffic from outside of whatever we're building that will use
the same in-n-out street are you supposed to do that or only focus on the cars generated by this development in this case three and four so in a in a traffic impact study the um which is the
again I'll go that's the 2022 report um which uh that the I I did get a copy of since the last meeting for phase one from Mr ray in a in a traditional uh traffic impact study
you you have the trip generation which is again the IT trip generation manual and it's all of the different land uses that are part of the development are there so that's the new the new traffic yep part of the development you take then take into account and so in in this
in a case like this where this was essentially vacant land um I mean I think that there was a minor land use something on there years ago but this is essentially vacant land so they then go and they do traffic counts i believe
they went uh six or seven different intersections going both ways my question is a little more general though so it doesn't even have to be specific to this you follow the directions you follow the standards yes do the standards ask you to contemplate how
other things around it have nothing to do with the development i'm just going to call it other things around it whether it's a hotel or anything else has nothing to do with the development but because they use the same road that we're talking about here do you need to contemplate the traffic from that or yes
or no that's all i I got to And if you don't know you don't know too well so you wouldn't contemplate when you say a hotel if you mean offsite say it's uh three miles down the road past six flag no so if it's on this site it is
contemplated not on the site next to it next to it well you you would you cont you would include background traffic is part of um the growth rates when he talks about in his traffic study okay the existing condition and then there's a no what you have is a no build
condition then a build condition yes and the no build condition is where you contemplate known other development okay into that yes okay so this study does it contemplate that the surrounding area is built up already or
not built up that's a question for you because if it is built up you're telling me the standards tell you you need to contemplate what traffic is coming from there because they're all using the same road if it's not developed and you don't contemplate that
so the numbers you you're reporting to me today do they contemplate the other areas around it being developed or not yes and when you do all that math you still get 260 peak hours well there's two different things that you just asked
me there's 260 afternoon peak hour trips generated from these town homes with respect to the external traffic growth the NJ DOT publishes background traffic growth rate data for every county in the state and that's what we used in order to project traffic volumes and let me
let me back up for a second too ocean County is very aggressive in that regard when you do a traffic impact study in Ocean County you have to project traffic volumes 10 years into the future in order for the county planning board to approve the traffic study so we had to
include 10 years worth of background traffic growth great so now we have 260 only coming from these town homes we just established right only from these town homes then you had to on top of that add contemplation of the surrounding growth of the surrounding
area development of the surrounding area all that stuff how many more to the 260 did you put into your assumptions to get that i would have to look at the 2022 report let me back up for this this roadway that's going to connect phases
three and four to phase 1 and two it's going to be an internal roadway that's going to be used only or at least primarily by traffic generated within adventure crossing phases 1 2 3 and four out on Route 537 there's going to be external traffic that's part of that NJ
DOT background traffic growth that I just discussed you wouldn't apply that to the internal traffic here because we've already accounted for that in our trip generation numbers but out on Route 537 we had to include that traffic growth and we did do that and again u I
I don't want to belabor the point but both Monmouth and Ocean counties have signed off on the traffic study got it and they and they did a a long review and asked us a lot of questions right i I I don't want to believe you the point and I think as everybody else said I'm
I'm not trying to be difficult um I am a numbers guy so I like the number so I would like to and maybe going through the details of your study to know that number if 260 is generated by the town houses how many is assumed being
generated by everything around it so you don't have to answer now you don't have to look for it now i can do it i can give you you know the that number has to be in your assumptions right for you to be able to say "Yeah this is going to be." The best way I can answer that question is by telling you that our original traffic study for the whole
project contemplated 400 and some odd contemplated I'm going to I want I want to put the numbers on the record because I think it's an important question contemplated 476 afternoon peak hour
trips from phases three and four that's what was assumed in the original traffic study and now we're down to 260 we're about 55 60% there's my whole problem so let me just finish this thought uh that's my whole problem
right we go from 260 but all in we're at 476 and for this study to me it's only three and four i Yeah there's a fundamental misunderstanding here okay somehow but you're saying no 476 is not
right because that was the old one it was right for the original application but not for what we're proposing now yeah but all you're proposing is to have it move to a different location it's still right there it's the same location less traffic it's still generating those
that move those of course but let me let all right let me try one more time because all I want to get us to that is what was your final total number that you assumed was moving around this area at those peak hours it wasn't 260 because you said you contemplated other
things so what is that number well I'm going to I'm going to refer to the 2020 offline i'm going to refer to the 2022 report because that had answer the question okay i got Yeah I'm I'm getting very confused because I'm getting jumbled here i my mind's not
that sharp anymore i'm 73 years old it feels like you're not answering my question i want to know what number you used not what the 2022 report used what number did you use the number that I used in the original traffic study for the whole project phases 1 2 3 and four
was actually for the weekday afternoon peak hour 1814 trips okay 1,814 how many did you use for How many did you use for this study that you're presenting to us today 260 so where's the contemplation of the
surrounding i don't understand your question sir you're totally confusing me i'm sorry all right yeah I don't understand there's a fundamental misunderstanding here that I I can't answer the question i just want to know what what number you're using okay Mr martin give him a second hold on i think I think what Mr martins is trying to ask
Mr ray and I I have the just for the record I do have the 2022 study in front of me so I do see where you got the 476 and I see where you got the 282 overall for the entire project right it was 1814 in the PM right and 149 in the
AM i think what Mr martin is trying to ask what is the overall now oh very s okay let's take the overall now would be somebody has a calculator go ahead all right the original uh peak
hour traffic that we assumed to the original study was 1814 okay that included 467 from the previous phase 3 and 4 we now have 260 so if you take 467 minus 260 I think that's
207 deduct 207 from 1814 and that's the new number for the afternoon peak hour 1607 thank you that's it and my whole problem is the 260 doesn't contemplate any activity from that from the surrounding areas it does it does it
does it does okay it does okay that that that's that that's not what anyway okay so it does so the 260 is not just generated from the cars in the 1,500 cars that we assumed
it No no no it is that's from the residential town homes you just said it's not it It contemplates also surrounding activity right it's not either it does or it doesn't are you contemplating activity
only from the 1500 cars from the townhouse or are you also No there's two different studies sir two different numbers one that was done for the entire project which resulted in the improvements being and and what I'm telling you today is what's being
proposed for phases three and four is going to be less intense than what was originally assumed for phases three and four and that's what we're here for tonight just phases three and four got it Mr martin so again so the the the numbers let me not mistake the numbers
earlier in Mr to raise testimony in the morning it's 215 uh in-n-out trips and 260 in the afternoon what he's saying is overall prior back in December of 2022
his study said it was going to be 1814 in the afternoon 1,049 in the morning now he's saying in the afternoon it's going to be 167 that would take everything into consideration correct correct phases one two three and four so
then if we were to deduct we could do the same for the morning take the,049 and deduct the change and that's what he's saying would be everything inclusive i think I got that right please okay is that Yeah that's I know i know that's what you're saying that's not my
question and it's not my point but um I I'll drop it okay okay all right any other Yes um can we take a 10-minute break please sure thank you call this meeting back to order miss
Jennings thank you um I think we're going to continue with Mr ray's testimony we're going to move on to parking okay okay so although the project overall does meet the RSIs requirement for
parking for both the total number of parking spaces and the guest parking spaces in Mr mer's review letter on page three uh most of those items deal with the fact that uh in his opinion he feels
the parking is not as well distributed through the throughout the site as it could be and quite frankly I agree with him what we would like to do even though we meet the overall number of parking spaces uh Mr bordon and I have conferred
and we uh we can find some spaces approximate to the buildings that Mr maer is concerned with we don't want to have people have to walk a long way to get to the get guest or visitor parking and so the long and short of it is we will respond to his items by adding some
additional guest parking which will give us more than the RSIS requires but we will provide some uh some additional parking spaces approximate to those buildings that are pretty far away from the guest parking now um and outside of that I'm sorry god
bless you thank you i'm not sure I have any anything else that I feel I need to respond to unless Mr mason feels I missed something so the the first uh comment number one on page three um if you I
think what we'd be We need you we to put some testimony on the record regarding the uh premise that the garages are twocar garages given the dimensions of the interior of the garage in that fitting
two cars amongst other things trash receptacles um that's another item I know is in uh my re my review and uh Ernie's review as well um because the the concern there is the ability to fit
two cars in there or the likelihood that the resident who is there will even try to fit two cars in there and then where does that other car that parking space get made up on uh on site if uh if they
can't okay i I I think our response to that is that's one of the reasons why as Mr bordon indicated before we are only um calculating what's technically a small twocar garage and a two-car driveway as
three parking spaces whereas the RSIS if if you met the dimension requirements that the RSIS lays out uh you'd be allowed to calculate that combination as three and a half spaces per unit we're only counting it as three the assumption
is people will probably use one part of the they'll park one car in the garage and they'll probably use the other space for storage trash receptacles things things of that nature so we happen to agree with the comment but that's why we only included uh only calculated that
combination of the garage and the and the driveway as three spaces rather than three and a half per unit i'm sorry Mr ray so does that mean that you're counting the driveway as two spaces yes thank you
and that the driveway dimension is 16 ft wide i probably have to refer to Mr bordon for that i'm not Is it 16 we believe so and the the driveway also includes the pri that the driveway also serves as a
primary walkway up to the front doors of the of the units correct uh I just heard Mr bordon say no i I'm I don't have the architectural in front of me so I probably let somebody else respond to that i'm not certain
and I'm sorry Mr ray and is 16 feet wide enough for two cars uh it is it's a little tight but uh there are grass strips on either side of the twocar uh driveway that you know you can open a
door u I thought Mr ray was done um no i I was just going to say that the width of an average car is probably a little bit less or truck the width is a little bit less than seven feet so this technically the 16 ft is adequate for two cars it's a little tight but people get used to it
and like I said on the the passenger side on on the passenger side on one side of the driveway the uh driver's side on the other side you would have room to swing the door out open into the two-foot grass area you probably need you then somebody's
going to have to back in because you're probably going to want the driver to be able in both cars to open the door i I I can't you know I guess it depends on the uh the people driving the cars how big the cars are okay so Madam
Chair Mr maer and I had had a concern that testimony that the site is RSI is parking compliant relies on a section of RSIS it says a twocar garage and driveway combination shall count as three and a half off streetet
parking spaces provided a minimum parking area width of 20 ft is provided for a length minimum length of 18 feet as specified for a onecar garage and driveway combination i'm sorry could you say that again please two-car garage and driveway combination
shall count as three and a half off streetet parking spaces provided a minimum parking area width of 20 feet is provided for a minimum length of 18 ft as specified for a onecar garage and driveway combination so the question is
if the driveway is 16 or 17t wide and there is it really three and a half spaces or is it a onecar garage and a onecar driveway and so we're just looking for some testimony some affirmative testimony to counter the comment that
was in both of our reports and and the only thing I can you know I believe the 16 ft is is adequate based on the width of a typical car or truck which is less than seven feet but I understand Mr peters and Mr mazer's
comment we technically don't meet the RSIS uh requirement for the width of the of the driveway that and that's why we went down to three from you know it's a lot's going to depend on you know the number of cars there are in the household what
kind of cars they are whether they want to get two cars in the garage or just one and use the other half of the garage for storage so it's um it's going to be dependent on the individual homeowners i'm sorry i heard Mr bordon say that's why we went down to three i thought you went down to three because the garage
doesn't really we're not counting the garage as a two-car garage but now I think Mr peters was asking about the driveway yes and we're still you know asking for the board to consider the driveway as two but the garage is one i don't want to belver this point but I think it's important to make sure the
parking is correct and whether or not it's RSI is compliant in in the original submission they talked about a certain number of driveway spaces and a larger number of garage spaces so I don't mind if they come to the hearing and say "Well this is what
the change is." But quite frankly I can't reconcile that sitting here tonight without someone showing it to us so we can say "Okay we agree with it we don't agree with it." Um it's just it's difficult to reconcile we we've had two reports that have these
comments in them we're just looking to make the record clear about how they believe they comply with the standards so we're just looking for that other than just telling us at the meeting these are the numbers i can't reconcile what they're
suggesting if the driveways are 16 ft wide and they're supposed to be 18 so you can count them as two spaces madam Chair yes so living in Cooksbridge parking is probably one of the biggest
obstacles that we deal with over there i've I've been through Cooksbridge i agree with you i don't know what happened there where I have town houses I actually share the the parking where the condos are so I have access to that on the other side they have no
parking um the driveways are not are not as wide also so when you do have two cars and I'm also looking at the picture here if you have trees and other items in the middle islands you can't
open the doors so one of the things that I faced as president when I rellandscaped is we had to remove any bushes any kind of trees that were in the middle island and then if it was any kind of grass we also had situations if we had
handicap homeowners trying to get out of a car when you had another car parked in there and they were trying to maneuver even my daughter when she broke her ankle with the crutches it was uh it wasn't it was challenging
so well I I I don't think we're I haven't looked at the landscape plan in detail but I don't think we have trees planted in the grass strips somebody can correct me if I'm wrong but I understand what you're saying i'm just looking at this picture yeah there shouldn't be it's just a rendering i don't think there should be trees in the grass
strips mr peters does that help at all again I I I heard the testimony that the question is does the board accept that it's 16 foot wide you can get two cars in there
rsis states 20 i'm not picking a fight with the applicant i just want the record to be clear they said they're going to be RSIS compliant but the driveway isn't so is it two or one because that indicates how many off- streetet parking spaces there are they've indicated they have more than
enough and I I don't doubt if they had two parking spaces in the driveway and one in the garage that they may meet the standards they're not my rules or your rules it's RSI i say I want them to put affirmative testimony on the record so we can say
they need to request a dimminimous waiver it could be a condition of the approval if the board acts affirmatively just I want our record to be clear about what they're what they need any form of relief for mr right
yes did you hear Mr peter's comment yes I did and I I tried to explain it as best as I could you know at the 16 ft but uh I think we're thinking about it but um it we as I've indicated we recognize it's going to be tight but given the
fact that the average you know car or truck is less than seven feet wide they fit so Mr right are you saying or and I are either you're saying that you are not asking for a waiver because you
don't think you need one or you're still contemplating that question i don't waiver from what from from RSIS yes well the board has the power what we're asking the board to do if they
believe the testimony is sufficient is grant a de what's called a dimminimous exception from the RSIs okay so you are asking for that yes madam chair yes i got to be honest you and I just said to Dr hops I wish I knew the width of my
driveway because if I knew the width of my driveway and I was able to say to you it's 16 feet I would tell you man you need one more foot because if I had that one more foot because I'll tell you and I'm just my wife pulls in sometimes and
she's a little bit too over and then I'm sitting there and I can't park and I got to run in the house and move her car and and and I mean she has a bigger car and I have a bigger car as well but then there's other times then you know I'll find myself I'm almost on that middle
median and then the neighbor can't open his door and it's a whole thing so I I would love if I could figure out or at least present to the board what my driveway is just as living example to
come back and say this is what we got we we hear you and I think Mr bordon just said we can make the driveways 18t wide by just eliminating the grass strip that sounds great there you go awesome i couldn't say it until somebody gave me the permission to say it but that's what
we're going to do sorry Mr peters Mr mer your thoughts on that going them going to 18 and again I don't 18 yeah that sounds great but like I said if I knew as living proof of what I've been dealing with for 11
years if I can get that if like I said if it was 16 feet at my house now and I can come back to the board and say man 17 ft would be great and you could still keep that little path of grass in there just for some separation
i don't know maybe your wife can go in and I wouldn't even stare to call my wife and ask her in Mr peters did I understand did I understand when you were saying to meet the RSIS standards um there has to
be three and a half off streetet parking spaces with a 20 ft width minimum but they would accept 18 did I get that right or no oh it's 20 feet of width for a length of 18 feet of driveway towards our street so technically even if we made the
driveway 18t wide we would still needed the minimous exception but I would point out that that gives you two 9 foot wide parking spaces which is what the RSIs requires for an offsite off- streetet parking spot it's 9 foot wide
so just to be so that the minimous amount would be in this case you're building 18 be waving yes that's correct sorry Mr jennings i'm just thinking about the uh technical subdivision to
come understood are there any additional um comments in the CMA review letter that we need to address um I would say if and I I know there'll be some other testimony tonight and some of the engineering and planning
testimony um from the other professionals may address some of my concerns that maybe are more directed to them than Mr ray so just reserve the right to ask questions later if that appeal to the board
madam Chair I just have one more because I'm not sure if if a site civil is going to cover it but Mr rake testified about the RSIS parking compliance so I want to ask him the EV ready parking spaces which is sort of a a new requirement for RSIS could you explain how the applicant
plans to reconcile the need for those on the project uh I I'll do my best and Mr bordon can supplement whatever i I believe we have provided some EV spaces and we get a credit as every I shouldn't
assume everybody knows you get a credit for two parking spaces for every one EV space that you uh construct and um I just want to look over the numbers i did see them hang on one second so in terms of
the guest parking we require 230 and we're going to provide 210 physical spaces but 32 of them are going to be EV ready so we get a credit or 16
of them are going to be EV ready so we get a credit for 32 so the actual number of parking spaces require uh provided for the guest parking is 242 where 230 is required what about the
requirement of providing 15% of the spaces on the site i'm not totally familiar with the EV requirement it's not something that you know is it we if you're saying we're required to do 15% we'll do 15% one of
the new sections of RSIS says that 15% of the spaces approved by the municipality shall be made shall be make ready with EV uh Mr bordon just indicated he will
address that he's the designer and he will address your question Mr peters thank you i'm sorry and actually this is probably Mr ma's question maybe I'm asking at the wrong time but um or it was covered earlier when you talked about changing
um the guest parking spaces but what's happening with the on street parking we will be adjusting the number of EV ready spaces mr bordon will testify based on the fact that as Mr peters
indicated apparently the RSIS requires us to have 15% of our guest parking bee ready spaces so we're going to have to adjust that number and install more of them which is actually going to give us a higher parking count because we get
a credit for two spaces and that may help us find some additional parking spaces in between the buildings that Mr mer is concerned about where where the parking isn't as well distributed as he would like so we'll we'll make that adjustment and we'll
comply okay so there is or is not going to be on street parking well it's it's actually 90° it you could classify it's not on street it's off streetet but it it's 90 degrees to the street but it's
not parallel so I would call it off streetet parking it's it's a 90 degree parking space that that's perpendicular excuse me to the to the to the aisle which is an accepted way which RSIS allows you to do so it's
not a parallel space it's a perpendicular space and it's not an on an angle no 90 degrees sorry I'm just very familiar with angle sparking and how fun it is to get out of it on Route
35 in the summer mr brown if I may um the uh the comment I had was related to the the width of all of the roadways i believe every roadway on this on the site is 24 ft and RSIS does not support
parallel parking on either side of any street uh when the when the road width is at and I think my my uh comment was that this the street should probably be signed as such so that um so that nobody's confused and thinks that they
can stretch and so thank you we we concur and we will follow through on signage and then I think uh Mr ray addressed uh there I had three or consecutive comments about the parking uh the guest
parking distribution um I think the only really outstanding uh question is that I had comment that I had is the two uh we'll call them off- streetet parkings as Mr ray described them um along
Linda's way uh we had concerns with those spaces being there because Linda's Way does um operate differently than the rest of the roads in the community because of the connection uh it being the main thoroughfare through and its
connection to phases uh one and two um so um I don't know if you want to discuss that well we we we believe that uh those parking spaces are appropriate even though Linda's Way is the connecting road between the two
um different well four different phases between phases three and four and phases one and two if you look at the overall site plan and perhaps this goes back to Mr martin's comments before and I didn't think about it until now uh the way the
site actually is going to function is the signal at Pine Drive and Route 537 which is to the east of what we're looking at on this sheet that's going to be the primary access for the recreation for the warehouses for the restaurants
it's going to be it's going to probably take 80% of the traffic that the site generates the residential area down here is going to primarily be served by the traffic signal at the reversing jug handles and so I guess what I'm saying is I don't think there's going to be a
significantly uh you know a significant amount of traffic on Linda's way in this area because it's primarily only going to be used by the residential traffic so we'd like to keep them if we could and we think they are in an appropriate location
uh that they can safely back up into Linda's way can I ask a question please could you use the pointer Mr ray and show me exactly what we're talking about so we can get a better understanding right here there's a bank of parking spaces and right here and they back up
into Linda's way so there's two areas as Mr maser indicated where we have some parking that's 90 degrees to Linda's way and backs up into that roadway in order to get out so Mr mer what you're saying is because of the way they're situated it's going to be difficult with Linda
Way Linda's Way Linda Way being used the way it is that it's going to be more dangerous because of the way that they're slant not slanted but set out that's correct um because Linda's way it would it would operate more um along the lines of a collector street or even a
you know an arterial type roadway because of the level of traffic that would be anticipated on a daily basis that you ordinarily would not have um traffic backing up directly onto that similar u to not having any of the town
home driveways along Linda's way um and that that was that's my concern yeah that's that's that that does answer my question which helps me to understand the assumption
that thank you Mr ray but you think that that's safe I I I personally do so given the level of traffic on Linda's way you don't think that'll create a problem no I I I I I don't I I think
Linda's way in this area is primarily going to serve the residential community and I don't think the volumes are going to be of a magnitude that would create issues for those cars to back out yeah just to state the obvious yes so to me that's a key assumption right there
and I got expertise you feel it's it's a it's a good assumption so go with that but thanks And so there is there is a section of the land development ordinance that deals with the parking stalls on major circulation drives um if the board does
and I and and I think that goes um and Ernie you could step in uh if I'm wrong here that goes for a couple of the other areas as well um where the where the off streetet parking is along the some of the ma the major circulation drives u
that are off of Linda's way so that they may need a design waiver from the board uh for that if uh if I'm correct that would same would go for Linda's way if the board was to consider that mr puce any input
mr major is correct the residential site improvement standards classify roads and drives based upon um number of vehicle trips per day based upon the type of use so when you reach a certain standard you call it something
else um I'm not sure we've heard any testimony specific to that throughout the project other than from general comment that Linda's Way is the main access from 537 over into section one uh there may be other parts of the main
circulation aisles off of Lindaway that because of the number of vehicle trips may rise to the level of a different roadway classification which may limit their ability to have on street parking we haven't heard that testimony i haven't run the numbers for Linda's
way so I don't know what the answer is but all I can say is whatever the road classification is uh I don't think the volumes on that road will be of a magnitude to create a problem for people to back out onto that road that that's all I can say so Mr you're not you you have not
looked at to into what the classification for Linda's way or any of the other roadsway would roadways would uh as far as RSIs is concerned no we haven't done that calculation and what kind of factors go into that calculation Mr right well you would look
at for example um you'd look at I want to go to phase three first phase 3 A and B those vehicles uh that portion of if it's still called Linda's way it is would have um you know that area would probably
have a higher traffic volume in there because you've got phases three and phase 4 contributing traffic to that section of Linda's Way whereas the section of Linda's Way that's over by phase 4 will not receive much if any traffic
from phase three because they're going to go out to the traffic light so you'd have to look at phase three and phase four separately and I haven't done those calculations but you'd have to look at the traffic generation numbers for a 24-hour period for both phase three phase 4 and look at how that traffic
would be distributed and then you'd have to add in some traffic from phases one and two that might use Linda's way i don't see that being a large amount of traffic that that they're probably 90% of that traffic is going to go out to Pine Drive because it's going to be
easier but we'd have to factor in something for phases one and two as well but given all of those factors I I I I don't think backing up onto that section of Linda's way given the fact that you know the phase three town homes are not
really going to be on that portion of Linda's way I don't think it's an issue and Miss Ray I'm probably just being pretty snakity because that's my nature um but you had said earlier that when I asked if you had done uh looked into the
road classification for Linda's Way or any of the other roads on site you said not for RSIS purposes have you looked at them in terms of classifying those roadways in any other way i I have not
but I believe Mr board and I asked I believe Linda's way is has a cart way of 30 ft and he can correct me if I'm wrong and if that in fact is the case RSIS permits parallel parking on both sides of the street and we could address
the off- streetet parking that way if that's the board's desire we could take a look at that a 30- foot wide street according to RSIS permits parking on both sides so if if it's a 30- foot wide cartway we we could look at it we could replace those parking spaces with
parallel spaces that that is correct the 30 foot wide road would allow um parking on both sides but only if it's classified as a as a local roadway if if it's if there's consideration to it being a collector or
a um I think I think that the classification is a neighborhood street um for the 30 ft and it's RSIS allowed that as a throwback to a prior typical development in the state of New Jersey um but if it's if it's deemed to be of a
higher order street um which I I believe it is regardless whether the traffic volumes is that would not even if it was 30 ft you wouldn't have uh parking on either side but um I I I also I and they
can correct me here but I I thought I saw read the plans to be 24 feet for the lion share of this the cart way of 24 feet okay and just just to try kind of address it a little bit further what I would propose and what I was just thinking of
is parallel parking even though we're permitted if if it's a local street to park on both sides of the street uh I would propose just having parallel parking on one side of the street to leave the cartway open and going back to RSIS you only need a 28 foot wide street
with parking on one side in order to maintain two-way traffic and if we have 30 feet and we only have parking on one side we can address the situation that way in my opinion and that's based on the determination that it's a local road that would actually I think that would be for a collector road as well too just
have if it was 30 ft wide I think we could have parking on one side of the street and of I think it would be on the side of the street that's on the what side that would be i'm looking at the directions here it would be on the side of the street where the town homes are not on the opposite
side so they wouldn't have to cross the street yeah we we we understand the comments and we are going to work on the uh guest and visitor parking and present the plan to you at the next meeting that will meet RSIS and hopefully meet your
uh approval as well too we're going to work on that thank you M any other additional questions for Mr ray mention anyone uh from the public wishing to come forward and ask any questions regarding
traffic of Mr ray seeing no one come forward miss Jennings is Mr ray you have anything else i do not no thank you very much for your patience i tried to answer your questions to the best of my ability and I know it was confusing at times thank you for your patience
thank you John okay at this time we'd like to call up uh Ian Bordon okay so uh Mr bordon you're still under oath yes and I think you wanted to touch on first the uh EV parking station while we're still a little bit on traffic tail
end yes just to the last two items discuss the EV park or EV ready spaces uh we're required to provide first of all each of the driveways for the townhouse units each of the each of the town houses will have a receptacle an
outdoor receptacle suitable for EV charging uh the EV ready regulations require that 15% of all guest spaces for residential be EV ready and we do propose that
so in fact we're going to have substantially more than 50% because every single unit is going to have a charging receptacle in addition 15% of the gas parking will have the uh charging and the compliance with the uh with the state law i just want to
address briefly the parking along Linda's Way uh I think it's important to note a mention was made about an ordinance section that a waiver might be required from the citation in the letter was 244-197 197 is a non-residential parking
standard that standard only applies to commercial driveways there is no standard in the ordinance uh nor ensus that that prohibits 90°ree parking to a street be it collector or u neighborhood so there's no relief
required to provide this parking i think it's a matter of just opinion i'm sorry Mr borne your testimony is that Linda's Way is a residential street no I'm saying that the ordinance section quoted in the review letters does not apply
because it's it's because it's a res it's a residential street meaning it it the ordinance only applies to non-residential parking okay 244 197 of the ordinance is entitled nonresidential parking the next
section of the ordinance is 244-198 residential parking which has no such standard that's all i'm just saying that the the it's a mislication of the interpretation to to this project this project is not a non-residential project
and none of the commercial aspects of the overall site are located close enough that they would be likely to park in this area absolutely not this this parking would not serve any non-residential use whatsoever in fact they wouldn't be
permitted to okay forgive me maybe I'm maybe I I'm forgetting i'm confusing the phases is the paintball in this area the paintball is in this area that That's But there's no parking for the paintball in this area the paintball is service
this this what we're proposing on phase 4 is simply a play area in the woods to the if you're looking at the exhibit the air dome the existing aird dome is off to the right or the east all the parking and act and that's actually a question
in the plane review all the activity uh for the business activity for the paintball occurs in the in the existing aird dome all the parking you check in you get your equipment you pay and all they're doing is walking from phase one to the paintball uh through the woods so
the paintball itself is in phase four but all the park correct parking where they sign up and everything is phase four it's only the play area none of the parking in fact that's a prohibition and you're certainly more than welcome to put it in the resolution none of the parking in phase three is permitted to
be used by the paintball use question on the paintball is that really needed it's on wetlands or not it it is located in in forested freshwater wetlands that's correct and don't you need permission
from the use it in in my opinion we do not because we're not proposing to construct anything as part of the paintball we're simply trying to use the existing natural obstacles the trees and the and the undergrowth sounds like it's just going to destroy everything that that's on the ground
there well I I would say no because Rick understand that that phase three part of the site and part of phase four under the previous ownership there was a paintball facility on this property for many years and and that paintball use
utilized the woods in u phase three and four and and that was granted by by the town by I I I can't speak to that i mean I did work on that project for the previous owner but I did not work on the paintball so I just know that the
business existed there for at least 15 years we just had a dog sanctuary that was there for 20 years oh I again I I don't know i'm just the the point to the the point to the comment is addressing can paintball coexist in forested area and
and I'm saying yes and as supportive proof of that it did so for many years on the site previously that's all this will come up when we do phase four or this is phase four oh this is three
and four yes my bad three but it's also totally my bad okay so let me ask about that paintball so I I think you're saying that we're gonna have a bunch of kids basically running around with a bucket of paint thrown it at each other
and that's not going to have any environmental damage to that wetland yes that's what you're saying yes paint on the floor on the trees well the trees might get a little unsightly but uh might get a little yellow or or orange
but uh yeah it occurred i just find I think I'm just find that hard to believe i'm I'm pointing at a I'm pointing I don't know if it's my Sorry you go ahead i'm pointing at a A7 this area of the site forested many of it still forested
served as active paintball for many years inside the woods again I'm legally or not legally we don't know but we're trying to we're just trying to increase the recreation activities i don't even know is that something that we going to rule on or that's not that's
not well certainly whether those wetlands can be used for paintball is the question is that something we rule on that is part of this application okay the use is part of this application as far as the applicability of the New
Jersey Fresh Wetland rules that's a determination made by the state of New Jersey not by this board okay the state regulates wetlands and they say it's okay to have paintball have paint flying around the woods well they would have to i'm sorry they would
have to they haven't done so yet have they no not yet wouldn't it be smart just to have check with D to see if it's legal to use it instead of setting it up and having to eliminate it well we we do our homework
i I've investigated it i've contacted some people at D and verbally they told me that uh basically what we're the question is is the activity is is the activity that we're proposing development you're not allowed to do development in wetlands what is development development is
removing trees placing fill removing fill we're not doing any of those things so my I I don't believe that what we're proposing is development it's simply use of the property it's not development they would have to concur with that formally i did reach out to them
informally and received adequate responses that made us comfortable to appear in front of the board but if the board approves that use then we'll then we'll have to formalize that with the D okay so I think uh Ian you're ready to
address the questions in the review letters yes I I do i wanted to go go through uh particularly the planning review letter there were a number of items in particular under the bulk zone standards um under item three Roman
numeral 3 uh B and I just wanted to run through them very quickly i know it's quite a few but they are important um and these were basically footnotes to a zoning table that was uh put in the report by Remington Vernick uh under
item one uh this is speaking of the area of the track remember we discussed the area of the track at the last the first hearing in May in February uh the track being 286.5 acres including the entire property phase 1 2 3 and four he notes
that the calculations include phase 1 two and three properties and I simply want to just remind the board that the tracked area as calculated for the entire property has been consistently calculated that way through every single phase of the project that's been
approved by either the zoning board or the planning board i'm sorry Mr bordon i feel like what you're saying is important and I can't hear you at all i'm sorry am I not talking not not with any market clarity it's on sorry so I'm simply saying that the tracked
area of 286.5 acres has been consistently used in every single approval that either this board or the planning board has issued for any phase of the project uh be it phase 1 2 3 or four yeah and that's I I thought that's what we were talking about and I'm glad that I stopped you because this I think
is the issue that had been raised with Mr alfuri which is the in that calculation are you continuing to include phase two which has been removed from the GDP and is no
longer under the same ownership yes that was and and so M right and so we'd had this conversation with Mr alfuri and I'm sorry Mr jennings I can't remember if that was on phase one or phase three and four but he was had made the representation on the record that he understood the issue i had told him
ahead of time that I had concerns about that he was going to write me a legal memorandum which I have not received okay so I I would like to receive that i don't want to to bear down on you on that topic but I do want to see that thank you but I think I'm going to
answer that in a different way in just a few minutes as it relates to density so okay um I think I might moot that point but I'll testify you you can agree or disagree uh number two the maximum height was questioned is regarding uh
the few of the buildings close to Mammoth Road or I'm sorry I'm ahead of myself uh this is regarding the building height for the code generation and the affordable housing building uh we we added a height table to the plans on sheet two and the maximum building
height for those two buildings under the HCMU ordinance is 90 ft the maximum uh or the proposed height is 20 feet for the co-generation that is the height as approved under the current phase 4 and phase one approvals and 35 ft for the
affordable housing building so the heights of those two buildings will easily comply with the maximum permitted height um number three was the height of two of the residential buildings townhouse buildings that are closest to Mammoth Road those will be the buildings
up on the top of A7 right in phase three question is uh what is the maximum height permitted those buildings are set back 61 ft at the building uh the ordinance allows as the note indicates a increase height of 1 foot for every 10 ft of
increased setback so we're allowed a height of those buildings of 36.1 ft the proposed height is 35.5 so the the buildings comply with the building height uh number four it was requested to provide calculations for imperous
coverage we calculated the impervious cover the imperous area of phase 3 and 4 at 27.1 acres that u applying that math to the area of phase uh 3 and 4 which is 122.8 acres is a coverage of
21.3% and considered over the entire tract it's 46% 75% is permitted so we're well under the impervious coverage for the project both taken individually as a as a divided into the area of lot three
and four only as well as the total tracked area and similarly on the building coverage and five we proposed 9.6 acres of building coverage in three and four that's all the townhouse buildings affordable housing and go
generation which is a coverage of 7.6% of lot 1.01 1 which is phase 3 and four alone and uh 20% for the total tracked area of phase 1 2 3 and four 30% is permitted so we're well under the coverage again both taken individually
as part of phase four and three and four as well as the total tract the uh number six is the uh we testimony from last week or last two two months ago is the co-generation building is uh
set back 14 ft from the sideline of lot two which is phase one uh that was a variance that was previously granted in the phase four site plan um and also the uh there's a what's called a sports barn in phase
one which actually encroaches into lot one um and uh those again that variance was granted as part of the the phase one site and phase 4 uh I would note the fact that and this is getting ahead of myself but I think just as a statement
of fact should we be approved for the site plan we're going to discuss the subdivision as we as we said and as part of the subdivision we did adjust the lot lines to eliminate those variances so the testimony in those cases is twofold one is the variances were previously
approved second is we eliminate them if the project and the subdivision is approved number seven is the density um and um the the first there's two subsets to
this first is as I just testified about the tracked area the tracked area is 286.5 acres which which the density of our 505 units is 1.76 units per acre um understanding that this question
persisted as Miss Cypriani had noted in our discussion from February when we did the subdivision the subdivision map currently the property is 122.85 acres u so what we which with combined with our
number of units places the density when looked at solely on lot 1.01 1 at slightly more than four units per acre so to avoid any question on this density issue whatsoever we took a we included in the technical subdivision a portion
of lot 2.01 and brought that into the project to make the tracked area uh 126.85 acres which then gives us a density of 3.98 units per acre so we stand alone on
the density not utilizing the total tracked area i hope that was clear i No but only because I wasn't following everything that you said it's I think it's a uh lack of clarity is a delivery issue not
a statement issue i I just couldn't follow everything you were saying so am I the only one who has trouble following Mr bordon the the track area i think so i think so i'm sorry i just that the tracked area is to with the with the subdivision the
tracked area increases to 126.85 acres that creates a density of 3.98 of this property lot 1.01 taken separately so we are not relying upon
the tracked area including phase two to have conforming density for phase three and four so when you do that's when you add the technical subdivision right in the subdivision we added some of the property from phase one into phase three
and four we created a new lot line that Okay but you're asking us to approve phase three and four first before you do the subdivision yes so So right now for lots three and
four that's not included in Well I assume that would be a condition of the approval that the subdivision the site plan would be conditioned upon the subdivision so we we may have gotten there but I I and I'm sorry M jennings I'm going to
ask you i need to see that written out i can't I get it it's complicated so I I I understand i'm following him only because I have it in writing in front of me so I I appreciate that thank you Miss Jennings did I understand Mr bordon or did I Or maybe
I'm getting tired did he state that part two was sold phase two was sold did I misunderstand phase two was sold yes we had testified about that in February the warehouse project is No that's what my notes said i'm like did I write something wrong right but understand not to repeat what was to said in the
February meeting uh because it was a lengthy conversation but the the technical subdivision aspect of this ordinance was done so to allow properties to be bought and sold within the project because you have many different tenants i mean we have in
phase one alone you have 7-Eleven Taco Bell you have all these different and some of those corporate entities don't want to lease the ground they want to own the ground so that but this technical subdivision that you're gonna that is in association with this application is very different from
correct okay correct excuse me are you planning on selling this townhouse these townhouse lots the town houses themselves will be fe simple yes all town houses are okay so so Havanian
according to the plans is going to be rebuilt and they will have an HOA and the HOA will work uh with maintenance and everything else that's correct that we had testified at the last hearing yes the the homeowners association will
maintain the roads the parking the drainage everything so when this is built out and everything is sold it will not be part of of your project at all correct correct okay one more thing while we're in there
who is building the affordable housing unit and who will be responsible for maintaining the services that it demands that that will be a separate owner okay they will be they will they will not be part of the HOA the affordable units
that will be owned by an entity that will that will own and operate the affordables recall that the affordable units in this case are special needs affordables they'll still be on the property on that lot correct for example one of the just to use a
name we did a similar project in Manalapin with special needs affordable units and there's a company there that we hope will build these units and operate them which is called Enable they're a nonprofit organization that provides affordable housing and uh
personal care and maintenance to the residents uh for special needs people so there are specialty companies that would that would do that uh so they would my client would be responsible to build it and then that an entity such as them would operate it in accordance with the
state guidelines madam Chair yes uh speaking of affordable housing I could be totally just curious about this i believe you're at a 10% set aside because of the special needs correct yes and you've eliminated 48 special needs
does that change your calculations at all you still meet it or I mean I'm confused how that works i understand special needs you don't have to do the 20% set aside you go to 10 we have 10% but now today somewhere Mr ray pointed out you've eliminated 48 special needs
does that change any of the calculations for the affordable no we I don't understand the eliminate we have 46 proposed affordable special needs units and where on the site are those located they're located in a building located at
the uh eastern end of phase 4 where's the 48 that Mr ray said you eliminated i'm not I'm not sure what that reference is mr breie maybe he just misspoke no it's in his report it's in his report
mr ray never misspeaks oh the original special needs were up in the up in the front of phase three okay maybe that's what he meant maybe we moved them maybe that's what was just I just wanted to make sure it didn't change no no we doesn't change your obligation nothing stays at 10% we We
maintain the 10% obligation is mandatory and we intend to provide it thank you i think we that was number five or eight then uh number nine uh was a question about the maximum length of the town
oh thank you Ernie uh yes uh the statement is that uh the ordinance requires 10% of the minimum number uh 10% of the number of residential dwelling units shall be reserved for special needs and affordable uh the statement is that we have 505
total units he grossed up the affordable so that we need 51 affordable not 46 my response is honestly a little different than what I wrote uh but that the the question is how do you
calculate the affordable historically and I'm speaking about over the last 10 years Jackson Township land use boards have taken 10 or whatever it is 10 or 20% of the market number of units i understand there is a calculation out there that some use to gross it up which
is 10% of the total number of units including the affordable phase three as it's currently approved is 10% of the total and that's what we proposed here we believe it's 46 is required we'll be guided by by your professional uh u
interpretations but we'll provide whatever is required uh as as far as uh maximum length of the townhouse buildings the 220 ft is the maximum building length of any residential building in the HCMU
zone the townhouse buildings are maximum length is 182 so we're substant substant that's for an 8-unit building which is the largest building so we're substantially less than the maximum length permitted uh number 10 the decks were not taken into consideration when
determining the minimum distance between buildings uh the ordinance has different separation distances between residential buildings based upon their orientation side to side front to rear rear to rear and the dimensions are different this
comment relates to how do you measure that because we measured it between the buildings not between the decks and we believe our interpretation is correct because uh the ordinance requires it between quote unquote principal buildings that's that's a quote from the
ordinance whereas 244 chapter 244 defines a building as a um having a roof so in order to be classified as a building under the Jackson Township ordinance it has to have a roof the
decks do not have roofs thereby in my opinion they're not part of the building they're certainly not part of the principal building defined in the ordinance so the spacing between buildings is properly measured between buildings and not between decks i would note that the decks do count
against the setback because that's a different part of the ordinance but we do comply with the setback requirements as they relate to the decks that's not a question in the planning letter that's just a a general statement uh number 11 is there is there a limit to the size of
the deck in the ordinance uh there's no limit no we are proposing 10 foot deep decks 10 foot by 12t I believe uh number 11 uh relates to two of the buildings um
uh the the minimum distance of 50 ft the the as I meant the minimum distance between buildings that are back up uh front to rear or rear to rear in this case is 50 ft um and this is uh the dimension is 46.6
ft um it gets a little complicated here because the ordinance says that there shall have a distance minimum distance of 50 feet between the midpoint of the walls and the minimum distance of 40 ft
between the building wall corners so the separation is actually 50 ft at the midpoint of the buildings and 40 ft at the corners the two buildings in question are up in phase three in in that area and the buildings are actually offset that the midpoints actually do not line up with each other so in my
opinion the 50 foot does not apply the corner of the building to the to the rear of the other building is 46.6 ft which is greater than 40 ft so in my opinion those two uh buildings do comply with the
setback uh distance minimum distance uh number 12 there's a building uh uh question about uh setback between building 3A or 422
um between the building and the internal roadway of 30 ft is required we checked our plans i guess the dimension was not written on the plan but we checked our plan and the setback is 30 ft we'll we'll we'll add the dimension and the same thing applies to buildings 3A10 and
3B6 he asks us to confirm compliance i'm conf I'm I'm sorry confirm compliance i'm confirming compliance that the setback in all those cases is 30 ft and we'll add the dimensions to the plans and the same thing apply uh
actually not the same thing item 13 this speaks to the front of the buildings being questioning whether the front of the buildings meaning behind the driveway needs to be 30 ft from the curb line we are 27 ft
uh the these are again the fronts that have the driveways that's not a uh condition that's contemplated in the ordinance uh we believe the uh the layout complies with the intent of the ordinance as far as setback to driveways and parking
areas uh driveways again are not listed in the ordinance uh number 14 there's again a setback of a building to a parking area that's a requirement of 20 ft uh the comment is correct in
that it states that less than 20t is provided for the affordable housing building uh that is a correct statement uh we do have to move that building back to comply with that and we will do so so that would be a condition of any approval that we move building the affordable housing building back to a
distance a minimum distance of 20 ft to the parking and we would agree to that uh item 15 is the architectures with the garages and the width i think we've already discussed that with Mr ray the uh the two foot the twocar garage
having a width of 16 foot uh 16 and a half feet is really intended to provide one car plus the the storage we we do provide the three spaces with the two car garage and the one uh twocar driveway in the onecar garage as Mr ray
had testified item 16 is regarding the parking uh we uh we had uh interpolated up when you talk about a four a four and fivebedroom townhouse a three-bedroom townhouse under Riss
requires 2.4 spaces risses does not include a standard for a four or five bedroomedroom uh we have used a number of 2.5 spaces for the fourbedroom and 2.6 spaces for the threebedroom or for I'm sorry for the five bedroomedroom a discussion with Mr array we are going to
use a number of three spaces for the uh five bedroomedroom and that those spaces are already provided the 1587 parking spaces I testified includes adequate parking if we use a multiplier of 2 of 2
uh uh five spaces for a fourbedroom and three spaces for a fivebedroom plus the guest parking um item 17 is the EV u I started with that because that's how Mr ray finished
but we will provide the 15% of the guest parking all of the townhouse units will have EV receptacles and item 18 and 19 are the same comments as 16 and 17 just related to phase 4 uh the same my response
remains the same we have adequate parking with 2.5 spaces for the four bedroomedroom and three spaces for the five bedroomedroom uh item number 20 questions the parking for the affordable housing we might need Mr raider come
back up and address this residential site improvement standards require 1.8 spaces per unit for a one-bedroom residential unit we provide uh uh we provide less we provide one space per unit again this is a special
condition because these are special needs units our experience in in the Manalopin project is that nearly none of the residents drive u the parking that you only need is for the support staff so the actual parking required
or required based upon u this the actual use that's that's occurring in manalopant is substantially less than one space per unit he can provide more supportive testimony on that if
needed item 21 is uh 15% of the affordable housing parking to be EV ready and we do agree to comply we we will comply with that and then item 22 is about recreation facilities uh it references an ordinance
244197 which is a recreation ordinance in town um and it asked for us testimony to discuss oh actually asked for testimony to discuss a number of spaces for the paintball recreation area uh and I already testified that those spaces will
will be provided in the phase one aird dome sorry question yes we have the five recreation areas yes yes yes otherwise we agree to comply with any of
the uh technical comments of both uh of all the review letters i don't know if I left any of the traffic engine CME letter questions unanswered i thought I hit them in my answers if I didn't Stephen please tell
me what I missed madam Chair I'm not sure if you're in a hurry to go home the short answer is Mr bordon was kind enough to share an outline of his testimony with me sometime today i saw it very late in the day and printed it
out i've had no opportunity to reconcile it with the plans i asked the board be given the opportunity to reconcile it and report back i also understand that there going to be perhaps some plan revisions i don't know if those are being asked as part of a continuence of
the application or as part of a condition of approval but if the application doesn't finish this evening I'd like an opportunity to respond to these we're not prepared to go through all of them and say yes we agree or or
provide retorts to Mr gordon's testimony um as it relates to the the last comment which is we're going to technical comments um I have 16 more pages of comments
after this um I think we should get some testimony regarding that and I guess I'll ask Miss Jennings is someone going to testify about the units i mean if you want architectural testimony we can put it on it's a
townhouse unit i mean the architect yes I I think we would that's certainly the impression the architect is here so we can certainly put that testimony on if you'd like i think it's important given that the
the density of the project and the standards that quite frankly of the 22 items we talked about more than half of them relate to whether or not the building fits or not so I think it's
important to note what's going to be in the building how big the building's going to be have an understanding of patios and decks um the initial application came in and they were all three and fourbedroom now they're three and four story and four
and five bedroomedroom i think it's important that board understands what's being proposed so that we can reconcile what's going to happen i don't think there's anyone in the room maybe Mr bordon might remember one of the
applications over by Glories one of the town home projects in the back has 465 units had an issue with what's a deck and what's a patio so the idea of what's that concrete thing you walk out on when you walk out the the bottom floor of a
building and what's that thing you walk out with the sliding glass doors that has wood that you step out on because once you get over a certain height that thing that you walk out on is part of the principal structure so I think it is important that we have an
understanding of what the buildings are how they're being proposed there was some testimony about driveway widths and getting rid of planting islands what's the access to them where's the sidewalk in front of them so while certainly if the board members are satisfied and
they're comfortable looking at the site plan and reconciling the the pretty color pictures that we got from Kahob on those then that's okay if not I think we need to get some testimony because when the applicant receives an
approval it's going to reference these units the project gets sold to a different developer what's going to happen so I while I don't doubt that the architect's testimony is going to be
sufficient to say that they match what was submitted I think it's very important that we create a record for the zoning officer post approval and Mr bordon had just indicated and someone asked how big can the deck be as big as we need to i'm not sure that's correct
so I I need to know what the applicant for this project is proposing to do in terms of the decks i can't have someone come back in later and say "I want to put a 20ft deck." And in point of fact the zoning officer says "Well they're too close to the ones over there." Or it negatively impacts the ability for the
guy across the street or across the backyard to build a deck so I do think it's important that we we get some confining testimony about what it is and what it is if that makes any sense to you all he actually just answered my
question so there is an interpretation of where the distance between homes where that was kind of a gray matter of is it from where the deck ends or is it from when the dwelling ends is there an actual code to that interpretation of
what is it from the distance behind is it the end of the deck or is it the house yes and Mr bordon made a a compelling argument like an opportunity once we hear from the architect or the owner or someone to tell us what these things are going to be so we know what
animal we're dealing with it's not just you know let's take pot shots at the application because it's easy to let's get the testimony on the record so we can well define in in an approving resolution what was agreed to so there's
no confusion when we leave here we had a project that was 465 units that had to come back to a board i think Doc Hoff's team might have been here for that um because because of the size of the decks and I just I in fairness both to the
applicant and the town and the and the owners who buy the units there should be an understanding of what you can and can't build in addition to the physical town home so Mr jennings um
My understanding of Mr peters uh the beginning of his statement was that he had needed the opportunity to go through uh Mr bordon's testimony both what was said to you tonight and what was provided to Mr peters in writing to see
if it matched or satisfy the comments that he made um I would ask that uh once we Mr peters has the opportunity to do that if he needs to that Mr bordon be made available again
yeah he'll be available again yes yes to to the extent that he needs architectural testimony to properly inter No that was the second part of what he had to say i understand but I'd like to do that tonight if we could because I'd like to get his feedback on that i don't want to wait till the next
hearing to get his feedback only to find I got to change something again that is up to the board and the chair i would appreciate if possible his feedback as soon as possible so that I have time to plan before the next meeting
certainly perhaps he'll give you as much time as you gave him well I submitted my plans a month and five weeks ago but when did you submit your testimony to him that he's reviewing now yeah I was being courteous
yeah I'm sorry but when was that that was uh yesterday okay that that's that's my point okay but I'm sure that Mr peters will try normally I do the testimony verbally in front of the board so don't It sounds like you're holding a good deed against
me no I'm absolutely not holding a good deed against you you're punishing me for providing information so now I'm talking and what I'm saying is that you had said that you wanted to have Mr peter's uh thing and so you would have a time to respond since you gave him something
today that he needs time to respond to i'm still pointing out that's apples to apples i understand that's I agree and I I agree with that i'm just asking for a response from him professionally to my office when he's ready not at the next meeting oh
and yeah understood fair and and quite frankly Madam Chair if you want answers tonight we'll we'll go through them tonight no I'm not asking for that i'm just saying that I'd like to have a chance to not only discuss it but also make any necessary so if he he goes
through so we don't talk about it anymore and he has another comment you want to have the opportunity to respond to it correct I don't want to talk about it anymore's questions Any additional questions for Mr bordon i'm going to open it to the public anyone have any questions for Mr bordon
on what you've heard this evening seeing no one come forward I'm going to close public session uh Miss Jennings yeah can we bring up the architect now okay do you swear the testimony you will give before this board is the truth and
nothing to the truth i do and would you say your name and give your credentials joseph L microphone please yes may I sit down joseph Liponovski Li
P O V S KI and if you could uh Mr lumbosski give the board the benefit of your background and qualifications sure um yes I've worked with Khanian Homes for over 35 years in various
architectural and managerial positions i'm also the architect of record for several hundred uh buildings constructed under my tenure i hold a bachelor of science degree in architecture from New York Institute of Technology and an MBA in management from St john's
University i've been a registered architect in multiple states for over 30 years and uh have testified before several dozen planning and zoning boards throughout the region mr lipinowski this I hope I didn't butcher your last name um this board accepts your credentials
thank you thank you okay if you could um Anthony can you bring up the architectural exhibits and perhaps we can start there so while we're getting the exhibits I'll just point out that um this home uh this community uh
consists of two models uh within the market rate homes um the models uh are comprised within buildings uh varying from three homes to eight homes per building
and um each of the two models uh will offer a u two-car garage the size of the smaller home uh which is at three stories high is approximately just under 2300 square ft and that's a four
bedroomedroom home and the size of the fourstory home is approximately 2700 square ft if you could pull up the uh the front elevation of is the yeah that prior so
as you can see the uh typical building's exterior is compatible with the architectural style of the local area as well as the broader region uh each elevation includes many jogs recesses and recesses intended to provide uh
diversity of materials color uh and massing um of at the primarily at the uh front facade of the each of the uh the buildings the primary material uh for both uh uh three and four story
models is vinyl siding um materials in a in a mix of horizontal siding shake style as well as uh board and batten uh at the front to complement design features such as um
carrot style garage doors box bay windows and accent trim around doors and um and gables the uh rear um and side elevations will be will be vinyl siding uh surrounded by uh window uh as well as
uh door trim at the at the rear um so this build this building represents the three uh story 2300 square foot home as you could see there's a uh front entry adjacent to the
uh twocar garage door three stories of living space uh the ground level if you could proceed to the uh floor plans of this model the ground level consists primarily of a garage at the front
a garage uh at the front um adjacent to a foyer area leading to the um the second level living space uh behind the garage is uh our extra suite uh which is intended to be uh bedroom uh or den area
with a private bath and um and closet at the second level is a wide open floor plan frontto back floor plan with uh living dining as well as kitchen area with a large island for eating and
entertainment uh at the third level is the uh three bedrooms um which include a uh owner suite with a dedicated uh bath in the rear as well as large uh uh
laundry closets for a washer dryer i'd like to point out back to the second level the two doors uh at the rear wall access a deck that is 20 ft wide by 10t
deep and it's supported by posts at the end of the um um at the end of that um 10-ft dimension you could see it in the fourstory version a little little clearer if you could proceed to the fourstory front elevation um wait before
we go there can you just what is the width of the each of the buildings i think that was a concern the width of the buildings yes each of the buildings are 22 feet wide the depth are 40 feet deep and again this model uh is uh
2295 square ft of living space okay and when you say it's three stories what's that in feet it's below the um the the the height requirement of 35 ft okay thank you uh so uh this this model is our
fourstory version as you could tell from the um from the three-story version uh it's it's almost imperceptible along the streetscape the intent is to have uh the the the front of all the buildings
appear uh as as three-story buildings but uh the rear is where you see the fourstory uh pronounced if you proceed to the rear elevation of this model you could see that the fourth story up top
uh is basically um includes a wide open deck above the third level uh living space and again each of these buildings uh also you know in full compliance with the um with the height
limitation um you could see the deck um it's uh not exactly full width deck deck we um hold it back a foot on either side therefore a 22 foot wide home has a 20ft deck because there's a twoft separation
between adjacent um adjacent decks um at the ground level at the rear each of the homes will have a door uh that leads out onto a 10 by 12 patio the floor plans for these homes uh first
second and third floor uh is identical with the exception at the third floor since we have a fourth level to get to the stairway uh is is inserted to provide access to that fourth level but once you get to that fourth level we have a uh open loft area a dedicated
bathroom as well as the fifth bedroom uh leading out to the rear uh is that open um open deck space I had um I had referred to earlier again this home uh five bedroomedroom is sized at 2700
square ft of living space i'll point out uh just a technical uh matter uh the common walls between our adjacent homes will be two-hour rated firewalls extending from the foundation all the way to the uh
underside of the roof uh consistent with the New Jersey Uniform Construction Code each of these buildings will be uh will be fully sprinklered um and the the implication of the sprinklering is uh we have u uh
we will have on one side of our of our buildings um sprinkler closet so the site plan reflects the sprinkler closet um but uh not all the renderings um u well not all the renderings pointed out
it's generally a uh 4 foot by um by six or seven foot wide-story closet uh with a door and a shed roof uh shed roof above it that concludes my overview of the
product i'm happy to take questions any questions from for Mr lipinowski microphone um on the fourstory units on the upper balcony I'm going to call it a knee wall even
though it's not a knee wall what's the height and there to the code of because I see that's open where the second floor has a railing the one up on top what's the height of the wall compared to the foot space
the wall along the outside perimeter of that deck i guess like it's going to be 42 in high okay yes sir will these have a different color vinyl siding yes we will yes we will have three
pallets we call them color palettes sort of groupings uh of colors both in terms of the vinyl siding will also have variation in color um on to the extent there's stone uh water table so um they
will all be compatible um colors uh so that the um uh it both acts as a homogeneous community but also within buildings uh they'll be compatible from unit to unit to unit
um just two things um one and I understand I just want to make sure that the record is clear you referred repeatedly to it being a twocar garage i believe the testimony uh earlier from Mr ray was that it is going to be considered a onecar garage for RSIS
compliance we're counting it as one space okay just wanted to make sure that was clear and um are these on a slab what is the construction these are all constructed on slab on grade so the first level is your your your first level there there will not be a basement
um underneath it uh I would like to point out uh while the the garages are um you know um relatively narrow at the front along the sec the rear half of the garage there is generous storage space
under the stair leading to the second level to allow for trash bins and recycling bins uh that width along the the the second half of the garage is actually the full width of the home um so again there is there is excess there
is additional space um within the um within the garage may I have to Oh are you finished no I'm finished you're done okay um two quick ones I promise so 4.1 bats what does a
0.1 bathroom look like uh if you look at the Let's see do I have a pointer uh that's a 0.1 it's a powder room uh it's a bathroom with a water closet and a sink it simply doesn't have a uh
shower or tub okay great thank you that I appreciate it um can we go to slide six right before that just to that question that came up before so if I'm measuring the distance to to the next house in back right do I start from the
porch the bottom por the deck sorry the deck do I start from where do I start the measure according to the ordinances right back to that question that we had before i believe Mr bordon um testified it's the main wall to the main wall of
the building not the end of the deck to the end of the deck the deck doesn't count and considering that the top and and it's from the first two or three apartments not the top one the top one has that is a little more set back because it has that deck
right yeah uh the first three levels are the the the 40 foot depth the full depth of the home it's that fourth level that's not the full depth as you can see we held it back uh to allow for an a nice open deck area right and and that doesn't when you're measuring that
doesn't count the fact that that's fact if I if I just certainly the testimony of Mr bordon was uh recapped correctly i just wanted to remind you that Mr peters had asked uh the opportunity to review
that so that determination um had not been agreed to by Mr peters he was still reviewing that okay okay and and therefore I think the the deck might look like that might not be like that that really hasn't been decided yet this is just a maybe well we've constructed You said the deck could be
whatever you wanted or something no uh we propose a 10 by 20 deck to look like that okay so okay well that gives us a little more fin you know all right that's all I got thank you and they would be st each one of the decks and the patios would be as proposed correct
every every family will have a deck uh it comes it comes with a home it's not like an option that they could add on to it it'll come with the home they purchase deck and patio or just deck uh the patio and the deck comes with the comes with every home originally you
said that but then you just said deck that's why I wanted to be clear yes the deck comes with every home and I I thought madam you asked the patio as well and the answer is yes the patio as well and I'm sorry what is the way that you describe the the deck at the top on the four you
fourth floor oh the top deck yeah it's an open deck it's a it's a open deck without just like the just like the bottom deck is open it's not roofed over yeah fair enough thank you sorry yes Gina
good question um touching back on page seven Anthony if you don't mind scrolling um we're going to have access to the deck off the kitchen i'm not seeing doors is that going to be amended i'm sorry access to where from the kitchen the deck the rear deck
yes on this plan the the we're showing windows but those will be doors uh accessing all the rear decks just regular single like as depicted in the artistic rendering correct okay it'll be a 30 80 glass store got it um so now my next
question is the decks are going to be staggered so we're capping them at 20 feet in width and 10 feet in depth yes that is going to be required for the CO as well as the patio we just established that we're going to give no options for any stairs uh no we will not be offering options
for stairs off of the deck leading down to grade okay i just want to clarify and one of my last questions is um are you proposing the condenser at where's your location of your condensers going uh typically on the patio or on the deck it's on the ground floor okay uh behind
the that extra suite sort of to the opposite uh so it'll be underneath the deck on that patio yes on the first floor okay um and you answered my question about that wall height i think that's all I got thank you
any additional questions mr peters Madam Chair thank you um Mr liponowski thank you very much for your testimony these are
impressive units congratulations thank you um you indicated but I just want to make sure it's clear there are no basements proposed in any of the units no sir um at the rear of the units um is there any
decorative fencing that separates one unit from another proposed none are proposed okay um I sort of hate to put you on a spot but there was some conversation before about how does
someone walk from the street to the front of the to the entrance to the unit they utilize the driveway there's no separate walkway from the street to the entrance to the unit there might be from the driveway to the entrance to the unit
that's right uh there that's right they would have to walk if someone is walking from the street of a guest they park in a guest parking spot and they walk up to the home they'll walk up the driveway once they get to the the the front of the home there'll be a three-foot wide walkway from the edge of the driveway to
the um uh door area as it relates to the issue that engineers and traffic engineers discussed this evening about widening the driveway that obviously is going to limit some of the I don't know
if it's going to reduce or eliminate the landscaping in between the driveways for the units is that correct uh it will my hope is that we're able to uh at 18 feet wide uh 22 foot wide home 18 foot wide
driveway um should give us 4T to play with and so uh we could depending on Mr bordon's um uh engineering um solutions um we could go straight
across um to the edge or I I generally prefer to hold back the driveway and have uh rock in between um as a sort of a divider because at a certain point the the the the space is too narrow for grass to to grow anyone over the age of
35 who's been in this business has dealt with residents who don't like something about the design that you as an applicant and us as a board has approved they think that there's a better way to do it of course um and unfortunately sometimes we find out some of them are are minuscule and it's just two
neighbors not being nice sometimes as to one of our board members we simply don't design the project with enough parking so I appreciate your cander and quite frankly from kahhab nanny I would expect the ability to rely upon the testimony
and the documents you have the last question I have um well it may not be related to the land use application but I I would like to know the biggest problem in terms of either enforcement or zoning officer
issues has to do with a salesperson's ability to change a unit or a model can you talk to the board about you had indicated that everyone gets a patio everyone gets a deck nobody gets stairs are there any other issues with these
drawings that someone out in the field could walk up to one of your sales sales agents and say you know I'd really like that are there any options that are on these plans that we haven't discussed this evening that might affect setbacks coverage the ability to park vehicles
and I even if you say you don't know tonight if you find out between now and the next hearing I'd really appreciate knowing our responsibility sometimes is to make sure the zoning officer doesn't say "Hey you need to come back to the
board." So I think it serves both purposes sure to make sure what things could possibly change when we leave here um I could just share with you in addition to my architectural uh role in the company I also managed um several communities in which I was responsible
for sales construction and homeowner service so I'm used to dealing with the requests of many homeowners for you know they want to personalize their home they like certain features um one of the things that is very important to us is
standardizing the products that we offer we we we spend a lot of time effort and resources to understand the market and to um design our products to to to meet the market you you're never going to
please everybody but I think uh we have a fairly decent system certainly on the exterior um there's very little I I in my experience I I I don't recall a scenario where we agreed to bump something out or put a little roof cover
over a patio because someone asked for it because that's the house they they that they're selling uh that they live with their whole life um that's we're we don't have that i'm concerned that if if generally the box that outlines the
units in these town home buildings is 22 by if the units are 22 by 40 if they're staggered that's okay i'm concerned that a sales agent comes in and says "You know what i'd like to put more of these units that are 24 foot wide and
48t deep in here." And now the box starts to get bigger oh no um let me be clear these are the models that we will be offering a sales i have nothing else for this business Madam Chair thank you very much
perfection any other questions for Mr lipinowski i I Yeah I just thought of one sorry um to the fencing right so I look here that little brick wall or retaining wall that's separating um two big units
that's not standard this is just showing what you could do yeah that's not standard that's sort of representative um for if there's a portion of the site that has a high to low um sort of slope
that's how we would handle a scenario where the homes to the right are higher elevation than the homes to the left right so that's how you put that that's we we do that we call that a a garden wall or it's it's a it's a feature that
allows us to step the buildings to respect the topography but do it in a way that's aesthetically pleasing because it's at the front yeah yeah helps me not get the my neighbor's leaves on too much um so now with within
that so if I want to put a little fence between me and my neighbor because I don't like his No our our homeowner association documents will will govern that and we uh fences are things in in a typical Hubanian community you don't a
homeowner doesn't have the the ability to uh put fences if the HOA documents but that that wall that you just described to me that's okay if that wall um the trigger on that wall is if it's 30 in higher than the lower grade it
will require a fence and if it requires a fence there will be a fence but we uh we go out of our way to make sure we grade the site so that we're never in a position of constructing 30 inch uh retaining walls great thank you you're welcome
any additional questions mr roar oh sorry Gina go ahead u my apologies i know we we touched on the the fence needs well pretty much everything needs an HOA approval uh in the instance possible instance that
somebody would like to enlarge their patio technically as a zoning officer there's really nothing I can do you don't have to abide by setbacks i mean as long as you're not above your coverage amounts is that something that even though they may have obtained proper zoning approval that would be the HOA responsibility to then govern that
yes just so I'm I'm I have a little bit more clarification yes okay thank you you're welcome mr omar you've been awfully quiet any comments can you hear me just for the record the uh Remington Vernick did handle the engineering site plan review comments my
comments are just limited to the subdivision plan okay no additional questions anyone from the public wish I'm going to open this to public session anyone wishing to come forward and make any have any questions or comments at this time okay yeah just two separate
things one is if you have any questions for the witness and then and we're going to open this to public session seeing no one come forward we're going to go ahead and close public session board it's up to us for
discussion i actually have just one more question do you guys plan on selling your homes with a with Kah on-site salesperson or is this going to be sent out to an outside realer no we have a um sales model that we will have Kahab
Nanian employees selling our homes and constructing our homes and servicing them after home sold right there on site i can go to that site and purchase a home on site not going to be directed elsewhere no thank you you're welcome
i'll leave you my card going to fight his wife i just misspoke and said it's up to the board for discussion but actually we're not discussing it this evening because Mr peters's um requested additional time to review the comments and get back to Mr bordon in a timely fashion correct Mr
bordon and also Miss Jennings is going to prepare provide me or Mr alfuri i'm not sure how that's working um but someone's going to provide me with uh the analysis that Mr bordon had provided in writing uh to consider that issue on
density understood thank you we do miss Gina do we have a date for them to come back for Dawn anything carried please use the July 16th date july 16th no additional notice is required
i don't even have a I don't even have an agenda for that okay thank you okay yes yes we're done and on the 16th uh Miss Jennings I assume that we would finish up here and
potentially you wanted to have this done before you had the technical subdivision is that how you wanted to proceed if you want to write motion and madam chair I ap I was I might not
have been listening we're also carrying the technical subdivision application to that night as well it's a separate application on our agenda yes that's what I was just uh discussing with Miss Jennings and I apologize thank you yeah she's going to get back to us on how they want to proceed on that
i Thank