Anthony. We're going to call this meeting to order. Please stand for the pledge of >> 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. >> Oh, this meeting complies with the open public meetings act. Notice of this meeting been published on municipal building board in the applicable newspapers and on the website. >> Ethan, roll call, please. >> Mr. Martins
>> present. >> Mr. Tremor >> here. >> Miss Cusano >> here. >> Mr. Seleia >> here. >> Dr. Hoffstein >> here. >> Miss Bradley >> here. We have no resolutions this evening. We have no minutes this evening. I do have a voucher for this evening though from
the township of Jackson in the amount of $175. I need a motion and a second to pay the voucher. Please. >> Motion. Second. >> Right. We have a motion and a second. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Martins, >> yes. >> Mr. Tremor, >> yes. >> Miss Cusano, >> yes.
>> Mr. Seleia, >> yes. >> Dr. Hoffstein, >> yes. >> Miss Bradley, >> yes. >> Do we have any announcements this evening, Miss Cypriani? >> I do not. >> All right, we're moving right along. >> Very unusual. >> And we have no application. So, let's go ahead.
>> All right, we're going to swear. >> I'm sorry. I will make actually an announcement. As you can see, we have uh six up on the board. We had two board members that were called away unexpectedly late this afternoon. So, I'm just making sure that everyone is aware of
that. >> Thank you. And we can swear on our professionals now, please. >> Do you swear or affirm that 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 Roier, board engineer. >> Ernie Peters, board planner. Gina Tumo, acting zoning officer, excuse me. >> Thank you. No executive session this evening. Any matters for discussion, Miss Cypriani? >> No. >> Okay. Uh, we have no administrative
approval. So, we're going to move right along to applicant number one, Meyer and Freigha Stolman, variance 3547. Miss Stolman, you can come to the microphone, please. >> I'm going to swear you in again. Do you
uh please you raise your right hand and do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give before this board will be the truth and nothing but the truth. >> Yeah. >> And yeah, please state your name for the record. >> Freda Stelman. >> Thank you. >> And as you remember, the acoustics in
here stink, so yell if you have to. Thank you. So, why don't you tell us what it is you're trying to do? >> Okay. So, um I'm trying to put a white privacy fence on the corner properties. It's two front yards.
Um, but first we wanted to deal with I have a shed that's over we notice is over the property line. So I spoke to a few people. Um, the shed movers, the first person right away he's like, "Oh, it's going to break. You can't move it." So I after that I
reached out to two other people who also said that you can't move it since it's built on a cement slab. That first initial person said he would be able to cut off 2 and 1/2 ft and put a new back on it. This would give 1 and 1/2 ft
um between between the back of the shed and the I guess new fence that's on the property line which would leave enough space for my to cut the grass using a weed whacker. Yeah, >> they're going to cut they can cut two
feet off and it'll leave about approximately one and a half feet between the back of the the new back of the shed and the fence. >> So cut off 2 and 1/2 ft because it's 7 or8t depends which part of the shed that's over the prop over the property line. So I guess it would be 2 3 2.4
different parts. So just round it, you know, say let's say 2 and 1/2 ft to cut it off. And I'm not sure if the board recalls if everyone was on the board when Miss Stolman was here before. We had had some extensive testimony. Okay. Thank you.
>> I remember. So I'm the newest one. So >> Okay. If you remember, then everybody remembers. >> No. >> So I'm looking for a variance to that. It should be one and a half ft from the property line, the shed once we cut it,
which will come out to be a I guess it's $1,500 to cut the shed, but that's the best option. >> She's like, "Yeah." So, just to keep the record clean, you were here back in December. It's a six-foot vinyl fence and you're going to replace the chain
link fence that's existing, correct? >> Yeah. >> Okay. And then the issue became that was raised was that the shed was actually over the property line. So that's why we're discussing cutting off the back of the shed, right? And now there will now >> if the variance is granted, you can do it. There'll be a foot and a half between the back of the the new back of
the shed and the property line. >> Right. >> Okay. >> And uh the representation was made at the prior hearing that chain link fence would be removed and that the new fence would be installed at least 10 ft from the edge of the sidewalk closest to your
property. So, I actually noticed I asked the one from the township to um pull up to see if they had across the street from me on 69 South Cooks Bridge Road. Um they're um South Cooks and Georgia in the same, you know, corner property.
They have they looked in 2004 for a variance to construct the 6in solid fence. They have a white vinyl fence that's on the property line. It's the same Georgian side and they got approved for on the front.
>> Yes. And I know that you finished. >> Just wanted to point out, Miss Stolman, that your property line is not on the sidewalk. So, >> right. No, no. Yeah. Yeah. I realize that yours is going. >> So, so what Miss Cypriani was saying is that essentially allowing you to go on
the property line. It's just your property line is set back so far from the sidewalk. >> But there is a right. I think they got approved. That should be set back from the sidewalk but to the property line, not further in. >> Correct. >> Yes. But we're not asking you to put the
board was not discussing nothing. The board is not was not discussing at the last hearing asking you to put it further in. >> Oh, they were saying because remember your your >> property line oddly is not at the sidewalk. Right.
>> Your property line is 10 ft in from the sidewalk. So, this would be actually a variance allowing you to put the fence on the property line. >> Correct. It's just >> But it would look like it was 10 ft in because it's not. >> It's actually on your property line, which none of us understand. >> And the reason why Miss Brianna Well,
most specifically put that on the record is because what you originally requested was at the sidewalk, which is not your property. So, even if they wanted to allow it and approve it, that's not their jurisdiction, too. they can approve it up to the the property line boundary. >> Okay. >> That's okay.
>> That's okay. That's why we're here to clarify for you. >> Yeah. Okay. Thank you so much for clarifying. >> So, just sorry. >> I just want So, I was out there today looking at all I looked at the the house that you brought up and and I read the the variance that they got and it said
on the property line, but then I looked at the way it's set up and it's really in line with the house, the way they're structured. So for for your property, the the key is you're going to have to at least from my
perspective is moving it inside those tree line that you have on the h on the side of the house. So right now you have a the chainlink fence and there's trees inside of it. You're going to have to move the fence inside of those tree lines. So those trees will be outside of
the fence if if it's granted. I think that's I think that's more in line with what your neighbor has and also the house that I mentioned the last time we were here that's on Georgian and Pine Hill. They have a similar situation with a
white p white privacy fence that's it's about 20 feet from the street but they don't have a sidewalk. So it's a lot different than what you're dealing with. So, but I think if you if you're willing to come inside of that tree line, >> yeah,
>> we can move forward with that. At least that's where I would be at. >> Well, because don't forget, so what Miss Cypriani pointed out, the existing chain link fence is over the property line. Absolutely. So, it does have it was going to have to be moved back to her property line. We can't grant a variance to allow her to put it
>> not on her own property. Right. >> And the question is, are those trees on the property line or are they inside the property line? or outside the property line. That impacts where you're going to put the fence. >> If if I'm reading this correctly, which I think I am, I believe those trees are
outside the property line. So, the fence the if we were to approve it, that fence is going to have to be on the inside, as you pointed out, of those trees. >> It was hard to tell from this. >> Yeah. So, the the the fence would not be able to be replaced where the chain link
fence is. It would have to be in order to be Miss Stolman's property uh at least 10 feet from the edge of the sidewalk and I think um she can or the position of the board that that it is
anticipated and required that that would be inside the tree line. Right. >> Any additional questions or comments for Miss Tolman? No. >> Roire. >> Yes. Just to put a couple uh more things
on the record. The requested fence is 6 foot solid vinyl fence. Is that correct? >> The privacy one. Yeah, I think it's six feet. Yeah, >> that's what you're proposing. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yes. >> The standard. >> Um and the uh the fence will be outside of the sight triangle on the corner of
the property. It's only going to go to the front of the house essentially and then into the rear of the yard. So, it's not going all the way to the corner, >> right? >> Um, so I have no issue from an engineering standpoint on that. And there is a driveway next door with the
fence proposed on the property line. The next door neighbor does have enough room to pull up safely towards the edge of the pavement and look both ways to pull out of their driveway. So, I'd have no issue. Sumalo, >> thank you. I just want to address um you
said 2 and 1/2 ft off the shed. Just want to clarify and also put it on the record. The one side of the shed uh closest to Georgian is 1.2 feet over. So if you're cutting it two and a half feet back, that's not giving you that foot
and a half spacing. So I just want to put that on the record. >> So it's >> So you would really be requesting to the engineer. >> Well, if she's gonna go if she's already gonna give her one and a half ft, the shed's going to have to be trimmed so
that it's one and a half feet completely. So, not just two two and a half feet, >> right? But the email that she's saying the work that she's going to do is to get >> Please correct me if I'm wrong, Miss Stolman. You're getting two and a half feet cut off, >> right? >> So, you're not going to be in two and a half feet. you're getting two and a half
ft cut off >> putting you at slightly over a foot >> of a setback. >> So you wouldn't because the shed is angled. >> Part of it is wider, >> right? So it's it's just it's not perpendicular to your property line. So you're not going to have the same
spacing for you to like you said your husband to mow the grass. >> Right. Right. >> Right. So right but so if the board chooses to get give approval the resolution is very specific. So, >> it's okay. That's again, that's why we're here to clarify.
>> Yeah. >> And I >> Okay. >> And that's why I said I think if we give her a foot and a if we say a foot and a half when you have the shed cut, you have to make sure they cut it so that there's a foot and a half all the way through. So, you're cutting it
in an >> Right. But just because um Don had maybe a little bit more uh apprised of the situation, she's looking at getting two and a half feet cut off. So I don't think it's fair to holders that because she didn't get necessarily a quote for what you're asking because then it would
be 2 and 1/2 ft more off that side. You see what I'm saying? So right now what uh if I'm following correctly it would be two and a half feet of the shed to be removed which will leave one and a half feet from the um the the shed one and a half ft from
the property line in some sections and a little under one foot in other parts due to the angle of the shed. >> Right. So I just wanted to make that clear and also to make sure I have the correct understanding. >> Yeah, it would be at least 1.3 feet off the rear property line.
if these are right. >> I know it may sound redundant. It's just very uh important to have the specifics on the record and as part of the resolution to avoid any issues with you in the future possibly. >> All right. Perfect. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Appreciate
Yeah. >> Yeah. I just wanted to clarif so you said the minimum is 1.3. So is the max 1.5? >> Is that how I should think about it? >> I'm going to politely defer to uh board engineer on this on the numbers part
>> because if you look it's 1.2 and 7. So if you're taking off two and a half you're going from 1.3 to 1.8 >> 1.8. Okay. Yeah. >> Fire appears to be doing math. >> Correct. That is your math. >> He's the mathy. He's very good at this
stuff. Okay. Okay. So, so worst case scenario is 1.3. That's what I'm getting. It's not like 0.5 was over. Okay. That that's that's Thank you. >> You have something else, Mr.
Any other questions or comments? >> Uh, just one thing. The shed is on a concrete slab. >> Yeah, that's why. Now, is the concrete slab that's on the other property, is that part going to be removed also?
>> I forgot to specify to ask him. I assume >> have to put the fence in. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Put the fence in. >> They're going to have to put your fence, >> right? They're gonna Yeah, he's going to have to remove it. >> They'll probably cut the slab, I'm sure. So the just to reiterate the conditions
if someone were to make a motion would be that it was a six-foot white vinyl fence. The chainlink fence will be removed at least 10 ft from the edge of the sidewalk closest to the applicant's property inside the tree line. Um the shed that is over the property line will
be cut back two and a half feet which will leave uh at least 1.3 ft off the rear property line uh with a little bit more in other areas due to the angle of the shed.
>> I said I didn't have any questions. I'm sorry. >> Go ahead, Mr. Lawrence. Um I think last time you um you testified to this and I just want to be sure all your neighbors were notified, especially the ones right next to you about this. Right. Right. >> And um I don't believe they were here
last time. I don't think that anybody's here this time. Um have they communicated anything to you where you know >> No, they weren't happy. Yeah, >> but I don't know if I can even accept that. I'm sorry. I can't accept that.
The neighbors >> can't solicit hearsay testimony about what the neighbors >> hearay should have said. >> Like a murder trial. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. I I'll just I'll just check.
>> It's a shed. I I think we can all agree that it's not a murder trial. >> Okay. Miss Stman, I'm going to open it to the public. Okay. If anyone wishes to come forward and make any comments about the testimony you've heard this evening, please do so at this time.
Seeing no one come forward, we're going to go ahead and close public session. Board, it's up to us for discussion. I don't I don't think we need a whole lot of discussion. Uh I think with all the requirements that Mr. Supriani has stated, the applicant seems amanable to
everything. Uh I would make a motion to uh grant the variance based on the stipulations that we've put forth. >> Yeah. >> All right. We have a motion to second. >> I would second that. Sure. Okay. You >> beat it.
>> But thank you for your thought. >> Mr. Martins. >> Yes. >> Mr. Tremor. >> Yes. >> Miss Cusano. >> Yes. >> Mr. Seleia. >> Yes. >> Dr. Hoffstein. Yes, >> Miss Bradley. >> Yes, your variance has been granted. >> Thank you.
>> All right. Thank you. >> We are going to move on to applicant number two, 330 Whitesville LLC. This is for time extension for site plan 687-2. Good evening, Madame Chair, board members, board professionals. My name is
Jared Pape with the firm of Hybrurn Pap appearing on behalf of the applicant 330 Whitesville LLC. Uh, this application previously received approval from this board and we are here solely to request an extension of time
of that approval. Uh, by way of background, the applicant received preliminary and final major site plan with use variance relief for modifications to the previously approved retail center and the existing gas
station and convenience store. Uh, pursuant to NJSA 405D-52, the applicant is requesting an extension of time on that approval. The project has been unable to proceed
due to the uh utility authorities lack of sewer capacity, which obviously is a circumstance outside of our client's control. The applicant's engineer, Stuart Challenger, uh will briefly confirm the status of the project, including some more detail on the lack
of sewer capacity and also the fact that the zoning has not changed on the property since the time of its approval. So, with that, I'll ask Mr. challenge. >> You swear affirm that the testimony you will give before this board will be the truth and nothing but the truth.
>> And if you could state your name and put your credentials on the records. >> Make sure the microphone is up. >> Uh my name is Stuart Challenger. C H A L L O N E R. I'm a licensed engineer and planner in the state of New Jersey. I've
been practicing engineering. I've been licensed since 1989. I've owned my own business in Tom River since 1995. Uh I've appeared in front of this board uh at least 50 times over the past 30 years and um I prepared this
application. I think this application started in my office in 2006. >> Right. This board accepts your credentials. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh this application uh received its approval I think originally in 2010. The market was soft at that time. So we
tabled it. Um when we re uh re got our amended approval um sewer capacity this area of sewer uh shares sewer infrastructure into Tom's River capacity is at its max at this moment.
There's um uh currently we keep our preliminary approval uh open with the MUA to make sure that we are in the queue for the uh sewer when it does become available. Um we currently are working with Pinelands. We our Ocean
County soil approval is still valid. Uh we're just crossing the tees and dotting the eyes to make sure that all our approvals stay valid uh while we're waiting for the sewer to be approved. That's the full presentation. If there's any questions, we're available.
>> Questions or comments? Mr. uh Peters. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um first, I can confirm that the Jackson MUA has prepared a letter either August or September of 2025 indicating there's no sewer capacity for the project. The applicant's responsibility under the law
is to prove to the reasonable satisfaction of the board that they were barred either directly or indirectly from receiving all required outside agency approvals such as the MUA and that they diligently pursued them, which they obviously have if they went back to the MUA last year and asked for an
approval. So, from our perspective, they've met the requirements for a time extension and we take no exception to the testimony that was given this evening. >> Any questions or comments? Um, so have they committed when the capacity
is going to be available? Like how long of an extension I guess would you require? >> Um, so no, they didn't commit a time period. They're looking into whether or not Toms River can ex There's Last time I spoke to the MUA, uh, they indicated
there's three projects that they're trying to earmark to see if they can get those because ours is only 2,000 gallons a day. It's not a big sewage generator, >> right? >> Um they're looking to see if they can get Tom River to accept additional flows, >> right?
>> Um but there is uh a developer that's looking to run a new interceptor into the uh the county OCU system in Tom's River near the Boy Scout facility on 571. Uh when that occurs, then that this
area of Tom or this area of Jackson will have ample capacity. So we're we're on hold until that and >> yeah and I guess the key right until that which is two years from now >> you know who knows right
>> okay thank you >> any other questions or comments? >> How many extensions have you had so far >> since our last approval? This will be our first sorry >> since our last approval or amended
approval. This will be our first extension. >> That's correct. Yeah. So, the the amended approval was um adopted, I believe, January 3rd, 2024. So, that initial 2-year period has has
run. So, we are here now requesting an extension for the first time of that approval. >> So, would this be a one-year extension? >> Uh, yes. Yeah. We'll defer to the the board, of course. I mean, there's a certainly a
possibility. We'll be back requesting further extensions, but at a minimum, we'd be requesting a one-year extension, >> and the maximum would be three years in total. >> That's what's provided for in the municipal land use law. Correct.
>> Are you anticipating um needing a future extension after another year? >> After the initial year? >> I would assume we don't get the story. It's likely. Yes. >> Would you request a two or three year if
possible from the board? >> If the board is open to it, we we'd be we'd certainly request a two or even a three-year extension. >> Just from my >> just um I'm sorry. I would just say um I actually like your idea because I do believe that on a different application
we were notified that they were going to be widening that section of Whitesville Road as well um before they would even consider bringing the water in. Right. That was according to my notes from 2023. Um so I agree with Mr. Roar that
maybe rather than one year we should be looking at two or three. So you don't have to come back. >> We would certainly appreciate that. or I apologize. No, >> that's exactly um my point that I was going to say what's the detriment to us
or the community in extending it to three years and and if you get the capacity earlier, you start earlier, it doesn't matter like >> the question is actually a legal question. Okay, go ahead. >> Because the way that the statute is written is that you may get uh
extensions of one year but not to exceed exceed three extensions. So, the way the statute reads contemplates up to three extensions of one year each, not a three-year extension. Um,
>> and we give them two two extensions tonight of one year each. >> Yeah. And I I mean I think I understand that the board does not want to to burden the applicant with having to come back and and that's but
that's really um issue. I think that we could probably phrase it that there we're granting three extensions of
one year each tonight. It's not the the very cleanest way, but I think that it is a reasonable way to proceed under these circumstances. >> Is is is the MUA the only thing that's holding you back? So, if the MUA came
within a year, there's not something else that would hold you that Okay. I just want to make sure we give the v the approval. >> Any other questions or comments? Let me just open this to the public. Um, if anyone wishes to come forward and uh
make any comments or have any questions regarding the testimony you've heard this evening, please come forward at this time. Seeing no one come forward, we're going to go ahead and close public session. Board, it's up to us for discussion. And just so that the board is aware, um
the one-year extension would bring it to January se uh January 2027. Um, and so obviously if they were to do the three one-year extensions, it would be uh they would be extended till January of 2029.
>> I don't have an issue going to the three extensions. Saves everybody a lot. >> I'm okay as long as it's each one is a separate extension. >> Yeah. >> And it's the fact that you only have the MUA. So there was a second possibility I would
say you might have to come back in the year because that one. >> Yep. >> So we need a motion. >> I'll make a motion to grant the three one-year extensions uh through 2029. Is that what we decided?
>> We have a motion in the second. Kathleen, roll call, please. >> Mr. Martins. >> Uh yeah. Are you going to put on there that they have to run consecutively or concurrently, whatever? >> Yes. >> Yeah. Something like that. Okay. Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> No. No later than January 2029. >> Mr. Tremor. >> Yes. >> Miss Cusano? >> Yes. >> Mr. Seleia? >> Yes. >> Dr. Hoffstein? >> Yes. >> Miss Bradley? >> Yes. >> You have your extensions. Thank you very much. >> Crash.
We are going to move on to applicant number three, Steven Rivera, Elite Wrestling LLC, Mr. Feffer. More homework. It's not in color. cutting corners, right? >> Thank you.
>> I'm all right. How are you? Ready? We're ready. Good evening. Adam Feffer turn on behalf of the applicant, Stephen Rivera, uh, Elite Wrestling LLC. First, and again, just from the outset, I understand that there are only six members this evening. Um, and the
applicant as is a use variance, uh, we need five affirmative votes. Uh being that we're here already and I also see that some neighbors are here, we would like to at least start the process, get started. Um we'll see where it goes and and then we'll we'll go from there. Um if that's okay with council and the
board. >> Certainly, Mr. Feffer, what Mr. Feffer is alluding to if anyone is not aware is that he may uh wish to come back um and hold the vote until there are seven members present. But as we're here, we would like to start the process and
maybe finish. But we'll see. >> Yes. And I'm sorry, Mr. Feer, if we had had notice earlier. Unfortunately, two board members just had problems that rose up at the end of the day. >> Life happens. It's wouldn't have been the first time. Um, as the board, I'm sure, is very familiar both with the
site in question. Uh, we're located at 1435 Tom's River Road. Um this this property has been before this board on many occasions uh and had received previous approval. Um the site uh currently is is over six acres in size.
Um there are five structures on the site itself. Uh the application this evening is not looking to change anything with the site. I should also say from the onset this is what's known as a bifurcated application. So the only thing that we are here before the board
this evening is for the use the use of of a wrestling training facility and we'll get into uh Mr. River will come up shortly and we'll give testimony as to his his uh business. I believe the board is also familiar with Mr. Rivera has given testimony on a different site. Uh
it should be noted that he is looking to move from that site. So a lot of the the use and stuff is the board should be familiar with. Uh we're not changing anything. We're just moving. We're looking to move locations. So again, the the property itself is is
zoned uh is in the RD1 zone uh 6.6 acres. Uh as I indicated, there are five existing buildings. There was a previous approval that had back in uh 2017 uh that granted the approval of a 5,000
square foot um warehouse building. Uh that building has been built. It's there. Uh it's up uh and we're now looking to utilize that for the wrestling facility. Um again important to note that again and I went through uh your professionals
reports both the planning and the engineering uh and and they both have raised certain questions regarding to the site and and obviously should the board approve the application this evening we would have to come back for a site plan um to talk about traffic flow and whatnot. We we could touch on some
of the uses the use and and and the traffic that will come to the site, but as far as actual testimony regarding how it would flow, we would ask that that be at at a later date. Um, I should also just point out there are some existing bulk variances, uh, a
front yard set a front yard setback variance and a accessory structure setback variance. Again, we are not proposing any changes to the site. So those two existing variances are there but we're not increasing them in any way.
At this time if I can call Mr. Rivera um >> Mr. Rivera. >> Hi. >> Hi. Could uh do you Yes. Please raise your right hand. If you swear or affirm, the testimony you give before this board will be the truth and nothing but the truth. And please state your name for
the record. >> Thank you. And here comes a microphone. So that's going to be helpful. >> So Mr. Rivera, if you can again, as I indicated here, I know you given testimony before this board before. If
you can just first give us an over today. >> Uh we we are a wrestling training facility. When I say facility, we train >> Could you speak into the mic, please? >> I'm sorry. Thank you. >> Is that better? >> Yes. >> All right. Great. Sorry. Um we are a
wrestling training mentoring facility service for first graders through 12th graders. And we run like it's hard to uh All right. So we run five days a week based off the
resolution that we had before we were at the three days but over the years and everything else I'd like to get to a point where we'll we're able to go you know five days a week. The the need is there in the community. I have the kids that want have the interest in the sport
and um basically >> So when you say five days a week is that Monday through Friday? It is Monday through Friday and uh possibly like a Sunday morning. Um we don't have class all day. Uh wrestling practices start in
the late afternoon. I usually start my privates like today. I started at um no earlier than usually 3:00 because I have a real job. I'm a technology guy and I sell Cisco routers. So during the morning I'm making my real living and then my passion takes over in the
afternoon. And I've been doing this for 30, 40 years. Uh, as far as a wrestling club, I've been lucky to be in Jackson for the last 10 to 15 years and we've done some great things in this town. And
at this point, I'm on a property where I was here last month and, you know, I got caught off guard there. I didn't know that by selling the property, I would lose my rights to that variance I had. and uh and I want to thank you for extending that. But then I just recently
learned that that is only for the term of their extension. So that puts me in a gym, which I didn't really get that day because I was excited that I didn't get kicked out of there. So um >> so when when you when you when when you
heard that you had a a finite period of time and you had the location, that's when you started to look for a new site. >> Destiny took over. Destiny took over literally one of my kids is their dad is married to the people that own this
property and he heard obviously in the situation they were in and he's like Steve I think there might be a property available my in-laws you might have to look into it and I literally met Tracy the next day or that afternoon and and
we're here today because that facility that property is exactly which I would love to use and and and and and based on the situation that I'm in and and and and already existing in, it's very sim it's very familiar. It's very similar.
The setup's similar. The barn's just a little bigger. Um the parking's better. And if you guys know from my last meeting here with the residential situation I'm in, the parking with that house mixing with their patrons and my
patrons, it got jammed up a little bit and this would be an opportunity where my place is my place and we could be more structured in our parking and our coming and going and all that kind of stuff. I could just be better at what I do on this property, I believe. So,
we'll get to the site itself in in in a couple minutes, but um as far as you're saying similar situation, your site now is also >> correct. It is. And I'm working through a resolution that was approved 10 or so
years ago. And uh since then, I've been running clean. I've been able to come back and they haven't had any complaints against me. So at this point based on the situation a forever home you know >> so and we'll get to some of that shortly
but with regard to you indicated like a daily today you started your private I assume that a private one >> private is when I do privates is anywhere from two to six kids in that private small group um and we run for
usually just an hour and then another hour and then practice begins but yes How many students are in a class? >> Yeah, like 25 25 kids. 25 to 30 kids. And um >> And are there any
>> And there's And there's No, there's no parallel classes. There is car pooling because I, you know, this kind of wrestling thing is very often. So parents work together and you end up working with towns that get the card pulls together with those kids that are
willing to come. Obviously Jackson's one, Tom's River is one. You know, those are areas that people drive out and uh use my services. A >> as far as employees besides for yourself, are there any other employees that you that you engage? >> I do have like three of my alumni that
came through my program that today are married with children and now come back and work consistently in my program. >> So again, just for the board's understanding, so at a max >> three three employees.
>> Yeah. Plus yourself. >> Yeah. No, two plus me normally. And at night it's two I my guys are scheduled two coaches and I am there. And hopefully in the future I won't be all the time, but yeah, right now I'm there.
>> Okay. And then and how many what's the maximum? Is there a maximum amount for students in a class? >> No. Wrestling, not everybody loves wrestling. So, as it is, you know, I I feel like we have a a strong community of wrestling and that 25 to 35 is a solid group of kids. I can consistently
say that we're in there. >> Okay. The the the board's report talked about uh parking for the area. Based upon the the the use, they were indicating that there would be 50 for a 5,000 foot building.
there would be a need for 50 parking spaces. And again, as I indicated to the board, should they approve the use, we would have to come back with the site plan to show um the parking area. I will point out the on the exhibit I handed out that there is a large existing
gravel area. Is that correct >> where we're going to in the property we're speaking of in a new area? It is so much better than what I am currently working with and we do a great job with what we're working with. But in the future, I
could with the way this is the way this propertyy's set up, the way we're off the road and come in a little bit, I'll be able to organize that parking lot either through cones and ropes where people will know exactly where they're coming through and how they'll exit. There'll be signs and poles so I can
make it. It's just the layout of their land is more w it's wider where mine's narrower and long and with their way their space is there next to this big near that barn right in the front of it. There's just a whole open area there
with gravel already. So, it's really just organizing the cars to know and I you know I talk to my people through my software that everybody's engaged in my club and uh I would be real easy to coordinate the organization of it that
for the future. >> Thank you. Uh with regard to you indicated again privates may start around late afternoon 330 main classes start approximately 5:30 or so. What's the late how long do the classes go? Latest class starts at 7:00.
>> And how long are the classes? >> About an hour and 20 minutes. By the time the kids leave and stuff, maybe 10 minutes. They get out of there pretty quick. Um >> so in approximately 8:30, everybody's offsite. Everyone you're shut down. There's there's no And do you hold any
other type of events um other than the training facilities? No, currently I we we just do the training on a regular basis and it's consistent >> and and again I I I asked this on the site that you're at today. Does anything
is there any detriment that you that you see or that you've been indicated >> by operating a commercial business >> that that any comments that people have made to you? I I I want to say that one, I'm a good neighbor. You know, I I do
the right things. I I'm not there to cause problems. I'm literally in the business of helping kids. So, if there is a problem, I try to address it with a neighbor if there ever was one. At one time, at my current address, there was a disgruntled neighbor that I tried time
and time again. And unfortunately for her, she couldn't get the variance she wanted. But we tried to help that woman as well. I'm not looking to fight with people with what I do. I'm looking to quietly build champions inside my four
walls. >> Um, the site, if you can just talk about how the site works for you and how it it's suitable for the actual use that you're you're proposing. If you could see here on the front here, the way they have it set up when you come off Tom's River
Road 571, for one, it's a great road to be coming in and out of. They have a great entrance in the front, very wide, where I'll be able to have cars coming in and out in real lanes versus now where we're in a driveway and, you know, I come, they come, and it works. But
this is going to be the enhancement. Um, >> and and just for the board's understanding, is the building that you're proposing to use the most rear rectangular building that's towards the top of the >> Correct. Correct. And they also have like So when you come in there, I'll be able to come in, my people will come in.
There's a gate of privacy there from the road. So once they're in, I can shut them in and make sure no one's doing this or that, which I love. Um, and then I can also keep people out. So, when I say we're not doing things, we're not doing things because they won't be able
to get to it. Um, and then the flow, like I said, you come right in that the in front of the the building, they have a big awning that's 30 by 100, I think, and the parking right there will be just so organized. Just by literally let them
park straight into the building, I might cover the majority of the cars that I'm going to have coming. and then the second row would be for the second class and those people would be able to pull out. I think that's like one of the major things um because that's what the town worries about and you know like I
said we're trying to do things within the realm of permission. So I don't see any detriment to what I'm going to do here in all honesty and if any of the neighbors have I'd love to try to quest their concerns. C
>> could I interrupt just one second? >> Sure. You have Mr. Rivera presenting the application. However, the variance is going to go to the owner of the property. I assume I'm right. Right.
>> Because the variance that what we're seeking tonight is is again just a bifurcated use variance for the use of a wrestling uh school in that one building which is labeled as building four. >> The variance still is going to the owner
of the property. It's not going to Mr. Rivera. >> It'll be correct. The use He's the applicant. He's not the owner. He's the applicant. >> Well, you you're not having the applicant testifi. The the real applicant. He's not the applicant. >> He is. He Mr. Rivera is the applicant.
He's not the owner of the property. The owner of the property is present who has signed and consented to the application. I I I think your your question is does it run does the variance run with the land? Yes. So, but just to be very clear, what we're seeking is the
operation of a wrestling facility in that warehouse building >> and and and the guidelines are going to be the same as the previous resolution was for the property. >> In other words, that the owner of the property has to live in the house and so on. So, we're not
said he wants to change the use of this building >> of that one building. We're not looking to change any of the other um conditions that were in the previous resolution. >> So So the owner will abide by the resolution that has already been passed. >> Correct. Correct. We are not looking to
change anything other than the use of that one building. >> So what you are changing then is the use of this building previous has been for parking lot equipment. >> Equipment. Yes. >> And none of that will be there obviously. >> Correct.
>> Yes. with that is going to be almost a modification of the previous but it's a totally new use variance but it would be specific and and should the board vote the use is only it's not for I I would even condition it that it's only for that one building not for any other
building on the site not for um not to take away anything from the previous resolution and I do I and I do appreciate that there were many conditions in that previous um resolution I I should point out that again should this use be approved. I
indicated before the applicant would have to come back for a an amended site plan, right, to show how the traffic will work on the site where the cars are going to park. Additionally, that con that previous resolution specifically indicated restricted that there would be
no plumbing and there is no bathroom in this warehouse. So again, if the board approves the use when we come back for that site plan, we would have to come back to seek a bathroom in there. >> Fine. Thank you. >> But again, none of that is is proposed
today. We are just here because if we don't get to the use, the rest of it is is irrelevant. >> I think for us to grant a use, we need to have some idea of the the plan that you're going to have going forward because
bifated. They don't >> I I I get that. But so if I if I look at if I'm looking at Mr. Peter's report, it talks about how right now there's only electricity and no restrooms in there. So, you know,
before we grant this use, I would like to have them agree that there will be bathrooms put in and it will be part of the site. Obviously, I know the site plan isn't here, but it will be part of the site plan going forward.
>> 100%. And let me if if I could just take it one step forward, we would agree it and should the board approve it. Number one, it's conditioned upon us coming back for a site plan and we have to meet certain criteria. So for example, one yes the bathroom we have to meet listen
this is also in in in the um we have to meet all the environmental concerns all the issues that possibly and they did start to look into it and it is feasible conceptually but yes your board professionals have to review it would have to approve it and if it doesn't get approved are we may have the use but if
we don't have all the other items it doesn't happen. Um, additionally, just for example, they they called out they recall they're calling for 50 parking spaces. We acknowledge, we understand if we came back and showed you 20 spaces, you don't have to grant the site plan and we don't get anywhere.
>> And I guess I just have a question based on something you said tonight. You talked about for this, you plan on having up to three employees, yourself and two others. under the where you are now, you were the sole
employees. Wasn't that what we approved? >> Yeah, I I I have always I've always had I'm just there all the time. I always have at least another coach with me for the wellness of the kids and the safety of the kids. Um even if I'm like short-handed and maybe I don't have a
coach on the schedule day, I'll have a dad sit in there just to make sure I have those extra eyes on the kids. Like honestly, we're real focused at practice. I'm really trying to get things accomplished so that the the staff that's with me are focused on those things with me and and I feel like
that uniform thought keeps the injuries away. >> Okay. Maybe my brain is just not working. >> That's all right. I appreciate the questions, guys. Honestly, I'm not here to hide anything. I'm not here to hurt anything. I I want the permissions based on what we're looking for. And like you said, those things that you're asking
for, I have a plan, but like he said, without we don't get the use of the varants, we really don't have anywhere to go. For me, I it's not like I have tons of money in this business to be wasted on this good-look guy. So, when I'm telling you, I'm trying to break this into a process where I can know as
I'm spending that I'm getting somewhere versus just getting all these people here tonight and then receive some crazy bill rate and we and then we get moved to the next one. And >> I I was there today just doing a quick look. I didn't go on the property to >> I kind of just from the street
>> perspective. Um the road that you talk about going in, is that going to be strictly for your use only or is it also used for the other and now there is the new build there to the right which you would go past. So
those two things but that's >> I can't speak for the owner in that building. Like I said, I'm here for building number five. >> I'm just building four. >> Building four. So, I'm here just for that building. But we would come through that main driveway there, go right past
that >> uh perpendicular building and then park to the front of that. And that space is huge between those two buildings. >> No, I agree. And I Okay. Like I said, I was there so I kind of got the one thing I noticed there was a large piece of
construction equipment there. Is that part of what's there now? Is that going to be removed? Because >> so we could I do have the owner of the property here, but I do believe and I can confirm in a minute. I do believe that a lot of the stuff that was going to be parked on the site that you
originally for the original approval is being moved off site. Uh I do also know there was some final construction happening with the basin um and the construction of renovation of the building five the perpendicular building. So I I just don't know if that was related to that. But
>> yeah, and the only reason I bring it up is if it was just sitting out there. So if you're dealing with kids between the ages of eight and 18, they're going to go running right over to >> the intent is that those are being moved off site with this approval other than there might be some related construction, but that's
>> and honestly I had talked to Tracy about those things and she's concerned about that as well. So she assured me that all any of that heavy equipment stuff would be where it's permitted to be and off the property if not being you know where if it's not supposed to be there
>> in order to try to organize this doc team was talking about the original resolution which is part of the application package the board got. It's resolution number 2017-52 and it grants
approval for certain uses, certain residential structures, the 5,000 square foot building. So, it's sort of a use and a site plan, and we're going to need to leave it up to the
applicant, Mr. Feffer, and his client, the applicant, Mr. Rivera and the owner to make sure that this new assuming the board votes in the affirmative on this use variance how this use variance
resolution comports with the old resolution. So if Doc Hoffstein has a concern that the old resolution said it's a 5,000 foot building and there's no utilities to it and they'd like to have utilities
to it. Well, I think we should talk about it now because as Mr. Rivera said, he don't want to keep doing this if at some point he's going to get told no, go home. So, if we don't deal with the ability for him to have utilities in this structure, then we wait until site
plan and for some reason we decide not to do it at site plan, he's got a use for a building that's going to have 25 or 30 people for four hours a night, five days a week, and we're not going to have utilities in there. So, it's a strange thing because I don't
know that Mr. Feffer represents the owner. He represents the applicant. So, the applicant's asking for a use variance for one unit on this property. The applicant owns the rest of the approvals. Part of that approval is going to change because of this
approval, assuming we get to that point. It's up to Mr. Feffer to make sure he explains it correctly and has the consent of the owner as well as his applicant when he presents those facts to Jean so that she can put them in an affirmative resolution should we get to
that point. I hope that sort of clears up the there's two separate entities here. There's an entire site that has a resolution and then there's one building that's being asked to change the use. So if anyone thinks I've misspoken, please let me know. So I agree just
about everything Mr. Peter said. Just to clarify there the resolution allowed utilities and there are utilities to the to this building. What it doesn't have is is PL a bathroom. Um so and again so if I can read actually from Mr. Peter's
uh report on page four um talking about the old resolution so we can get this out um so there's no no questions. Um, the applicant received approval for the continued existence and use of two principal residential structures on one lot and for the construction of a 5,000
foot commercial storage facility, which is what we're looking we're talking about this evening. The commercial storage must relate to the owner of the property and the structure shall only have electric utilities and no bathroom facilities. There shall be no outside storage, no repairs of equipment or
vehicles on the site. Testimony shall be provided. So we everything there we agree obviously now that that originally the owner of the property wanted that this 5,000t warehouse for the own use. What we are here tonight is now to amend that to say we are seeking the use
variance for that building for of that 5,000t building. The utilities are there and we understand should this board approve it, we got to come back. We got to show that we could do a bathroom in there. We have to show the traffic. We have to show all the other site items that will be required in in in the site
plan. >> Mr. Feer, just to Mr. Peter's point, and so you had the consent of the owner who holds the existing variance approval to have that variance
approval amended to change the use of this building. >> Yes. And to clarify, I have the own here. I'd like to if we can we can call them up. They did sign the application as a consent um to be submitted and I have no problem. Obviously, it's just want to make sure the record is have it on the record and we do have the owner
if you can just come up. We'll have her sworn in uh and just you could indicate yay or nay if she consents with everything that we're we've been discussing so far. >> Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you will give before this board will be the truth and nothing but the truth? >> Yes. >> And please state your name for the
record. >> Tracy Droville. >> And you are the owner of this property? Yes, >> Mr. Roville, you you heard the one, you've heard the testimony um of of of Mr. Rivera and you've heard the questions of the board. Is there anything that we have said that that is
not correct or you understand it differently? >> No. >> Okay. And just for clear to be 100% clear, you would consent to this application moving forward. >> Yes. And additionally, you understand that should the board grant this approval that we would be modifying your
original approval that you and your husband have received um for the for building four for the warehouse. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. Does the board have any other questions for Mr. Roville? >> I think what I what I would like to see even even though
coming back is that I can't see how you can operate a huge a large wrestling school or training facility without a bathroom. So, I would like the owner to go on record to saying that she would agree to have a bathroom put in, whether
it needs a septic or whatever. And second, just to confirm that uh since you're giving up this building where you were able to park uh equipment and the uh without that you will have no outside storage that you will honor that part of
>> Yes. >> of the agreement that you made previously. So we at least we know that or we be in effect. >> So Mr. Roville, if I can um we had an opportunity to have a meeting at my office a couple weeks ago. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> And during that meeting we specifically
discussed that should this board uh approve the application that we would have to come back for a bathroom on the site. Is that correct? >> Yes. Okay. And it's something that you have I believe you you indicated that you have initially looked into um the capacity that there would be a a way to
install the bathroom in that area. >> Uh when we were here, I think it was a year ago or um they had septic on our plan. We were trying to make changes and it was denied. Um so we would be coming back with I guess that septic plan. Um, and
when you say it was denied, meaning you originally had shown a bathroom in that site, but the board didn't like the idea that for the warehouse use, there was going to be a bathroom. Is that >> correct? >> Thank you. And we would agree should the board
approve the use variance only that it be conditioned upon a bathroom on site, we have no problem because we need it for our own uh >> fair enough. can't operate a business without a bath >> and the property is on a septic system. So, >> yes,
>> Madam Chair, >> just question for the owner. So, what is that building used for now? >> Uh equipment storage. >> And where would you relocate that? >> The um the building five has been remodeled now so that um some of the
pieces would move in there. And then he they've also been moving stuff. Uh we have another shop in Tom's River. Um that has everything there. >> Okay. >> Question. >> So those are all the the again go after going through everything. I know that
we've I say punted a lot of things to a future site plan, but we would agree that all those items would can be conditions of this use variance. Um that that in some that would be our our testimony.
>> What kind of time frame are you looking at? >> So >> sure I'm sure he's under the gun because I remember your your case. >> Yeah. And Mr. Re, I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I believe should the board approve this, we're going to move right into working on the site plan. We'd have to get all that
stuff done. So, as soon as the site plan would be able to be perfected, come back before the board, get that approved. Um, I I can't speak for how long the construction would take, but we're moving along because I believe you have >> question is you have to do it ASAP. I'm assuming
>> like you mentioned the the way the variance is working on the house right now that I'm on. I need to do this as soon as possible, you know, and uh yeah, there's no doubt. No doubt. Can I just piggy back off that?
>> Thank you. I just want to uh let the record reflect that the current location of Mr. Rivera school was given a one-year I believe time frame to complete uh construction. So that's probably about what we're looking at here
just as a friendly reminder. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Yes. If anyone would like to come forward to discuss what you've heard testified to this evening, please do so at this time. Hello. Could you please raise your right
hand? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you give before this board will be the truth and nothing but the truth? >> Psyche. >> And could you please state your name for the record? >> Black. Thank you. And could you put your address on the record? >> 1461 Thompson Road.
>> Thank you. >> Uh, thank you, chair, and members of the board for the opportunity to speak tonight. I live next door to this property, so I experience firsthand how it is used daytoday. Speaking personally, if the choice were simply
between what has been happening on this property and a wrestling training facility, I would certainly prefer to see a youth focused use. However, my support hinges on one very important issue, the continued industrial use of
this property and the history of non-compliance with this board's prior conditions. When the variance was granted in 2017 to allow construction of the poleborn, the terms were very clear. As Mr. Feffe um
outlined, storage was to be indoors only and outside storage and industrial materials were not permitted. As a neighbor who lives immediately beside the property, I can say that those conditions have not been respected. In 2023, when the applicants
came before you seeking to expand industrial activity, I provided testimony along with photos and videos documenting ongoing violations. Unfortunately, some of those violations continue to this day. As of just this a
couple of days ago, um trucks and fully loaded log trailers continue to enter the property and often remain there for extended periods. Logs, heavy equipment, and other materials are still being stored outdoors. Living next door, this
isn't something I observe occasionally. It's something I see and hear regularly. My concern tonight is ultimately about safety and compatibility. A youth training facility is by definition a place where children and families will be coming and going. Combining that use
with a heavy equipment yard with log trailers, machinery, and chippers creates a situation where the risk of a serious accident is very real. Children and industrial operations simply don't mix. And I don't believe that the environment that that is the environment
this board intends to create. For that reason, if the board is inclined to approve this application, I strongly and respectfully urge you to require that any existing variance permitting commercial or industrial equipment on
this property be vacated. No equipment, materials or operations related to the land clearing business or any other business should be allowed to remain. I would also ask that this restretch that this restriction extend to the adjoining property also owned by the derubals
since it appears to be used in part in connection with the same industrial activities. From a practical standpoint, limiting one parcel but allowing that same operation to continue next door would not resolve the underlying safety
concerns. and having them put the uh industrial equipment in this new storage building that they just built. It doesn't doesn't solve the problem. There will still be trucks and uh heavy equipment coming and going at all hours
of the day. Finally, given the clear history of conditions not being followed, I respectfully ask the board to include strong enforcement measures, clear monitoring, defined consequences, and meaningful penalties if violations
occur. Conditions only work when there is accountability, and neighbors should not have to repeatedly document issues for them to be addressed. I want to be clear that my goal is not to oppose this use. My goal is to ensure that if a youth facility is approved, it exists in
a safe environment and that the rules established by this board are actually honored going forward. Thank you for your time and your consideration. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Low comments regarding enforcement.
I had the pleasure of speaking with Miss Black last week. Um, she did relay some information regarding a complaint on the property. I was very transparent and honest that um there is leg work that needs to go in before a site visit uh can be completed, but it is scheduled at
this um excuse me, the site visit is scheduled but has not been completed at this time and I will follow up once that is done. >> Thank you. It's scheduled for when?
>> Next week. Would you like an exact date? >> Right. It's not a surprise, right? They know. They know you're coming. >> No, >> they do now. >> Thanks for that, though. >> Hi, I'm Gina. I'm the zoning officer. I'll be stopping by and introducing
myself. >> Sir, raise your right. Oh, go ahead. Feel free. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give before this board will be the truth and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> And could you please state your name and address?
>> Robert Connor, 1411 Tom River Road. >> You can go ahead, Mr. Com. >> I have to agree with Vicki wholeheartedly. This is not the place for anything else, any other commercial business. that road. If any of you drove on 571, you know what it is. In the last three
years, how many people have been killed up there? Just this past Friday, I came open the store and there was a bad accident on the corner of Hope Chapel in 571. I mean, there's right across from there, there's three bus stops. One right
across the street, two right next door coming south uh northbound, and then you have the trailer park. There's two there. This morning alone it was 10 minutes of traffic backed up all the way down the street for the buses down by the trailer court. The traffic won't
handle it. It's just unsafe. And between the commercial traffic that comes in and out of there, you can't have kids there. It's it's got to be one thing or the other. Somebody's going to get killed out there. And it's
the infrastructure just won't handle it anymore. I mean, right now around the corner, they're putting in 300 some houses. Where's the traffic supposed to go? They're going to come down 571. It's, you know, somebody's going to get killed
and I just pray to God to start kicking. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Can I ask one question? I'm sorry. >> I'm sorry, Mr. Connor. >> Mr. Connor, >> I'm sorry, Mr. Feffer had a question. >> I just want to just one question. If you had a choice between would you go the
the business operations operating alleging today verse a a a wrestling school >> I have nothing against the wrestling >> No I understand what I'm saying is if if I think the point is I'm trying to make
is that should this get approved a lot of what you're seeing during the day won't be there. No, but now he said 3:00. >> At 3:00, 3:30 and and 10 to 4, you have buses stopping there. >> You know, it's the same thing. Traffic
is traffic no matter what you put there. You know, I mean, I'm get I get tired of going out and getting detourred and it takes me a half hour to get back home and I'm only a half a block away. You know, the accidents have to stop and you just can't keep putting more stuff there. It's the road won't handle it.
>> Thank you. Anyone else wishing to come forward at this time? Seeing no one else come forward, we're going to go ahead and close public session. Mr. Feffer, >> a couple before you can I just ask a question of
our attorney. So, since they're bifrocating this, I'm sorry. Since they're bifrocating and this is for the use variance only we can consider traffic for the use variance but not from a
>> so >> site plan. So should we expect or should we have expected to have a traffic report tonight before we vote on the use variance? Couple of things. You can consider traffic as part of a site plan
on the plan application. >> But I thought it was only if there was a use variance attached. >> Well, there is use variance attached. >> So even though it's bifurcated, it's the use variance is still attached. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Um on the site plan side um and I feel
like as far as um the you know the use variance application, Mr. Fafereer as the obligation to um submit the EV put evidence on the record um for all of
the positive and negative criteria and that's the question for tonight. >> Right. And and again I completely understand the comments both from from the neighbors and from the board regarding obviously we're talking about
children so safety is always first and foremost. As you heard Mr. Rivera indicate, he he only chose this site once he saw the site and saw how it could work um in the area. That's why he he wanted to go forward with it. I have no issue again
should you vote in favor of the use variance. It be conditioned upon all these items including the siphon, including the traffic report, including uh traffic testimony indicating how it's going to work. Um again, offsite you can't really consider, but it's a
separate issue. But I have no problem with the board, you know, requesting those items. And just because you grant the use variance, we still have to meet your conditions when we come back for the site plan. So if our site plan, if you don't like it, you say this is never going to work. Yes, you granted the use,
but it it doesn't go anywhere. And the reason why we bifrocated is all these things are fairly expensive. Um, and so we're just trying to, you know, if you guys said this is the worst idea in the world, we move on and Mr. Rivera looks for another site. Um, but if you say, "Yes, this use does make sense. It would
work here. It would clean up the site." Um, all the other stuff, then we'll go ahead and keep spending the money. He'll keep spending the money and and and moving forward to meet the rest of the conditions that the board may uh impose on the applicant. >> Madam Chair,
>> Mr. Feffford, this propertyy's along a county road, correct? >> Correct. >> So, would the county have jurisdiction over the >> Yes. driveway or intersection design. >> Yes, they would. >> As well as the municipality. >> That is correct.
>> Thank you, >> Mr. Feffer. Are you planning on offering any other testimony in support of this application? >> In support of the use variance. This is all the This is all the testimony we'll be providing. And just want to make one other comment. Um, I know Miss Black indicated about a neighboring property
owner, a neighbor, the the other side property. This application's only on this one uh site, this blocking lot. I can't speak about the other site. Um, but I can tell you that should this get approved and this business move in there, a lot of I believe what they are
seeing and and commenting on will no longer be there. >> As Mr. Feer, but the testimony was that it there was a consent both uh what your representations were and the testimony of the owner that there's uh consent to
uh the amendment of the prior varants. >> Correct. For this building. Yes. And this I don't think any commercial approval was ever granted other than the buildings, just so we're clear. So I know they're indicating there's a business being operating. Um, I can't speak to that, but I can tell you that
the resolution didn't talk about the approval of a of a business. >> So, Mr. Feffer, obviously, as I said, you know, it's your obligation to make sure that the positive and negative criteria are met. >> You provided provided all the testimony.
You're not providing planning testimony, >> correct? I have a closing statement. Um, >> okay. Okay. >> Okay. I just have one moment just to ask my client just to make sure we want to proceed based upon the six members. Just give me one 30 seconds. >> Y.
Thank you. Um, yes. So, so just real quick in closing, um, as council has indicated, uh, we do have to provide the positive negative criteria for for the application. I believe that, uh, Mr. Rivera's testimony, uh, while not a a
licensed planner, uh, he does have have experience both in operating his business, um, both in a residential zone and has has visited the site. Um, the testimony from Mr. Rivera that the is that the property was particularly suited that the the there is sight
suitability. Um the use is is conducted entirely indoors. There's no outdoor training events, no amplified sound. Um the wrestling training is a low inensity recreational use with limited class sizes. Um as far as uh we have to also
talk about the negative criteria. Um so again is is Mr. Rivera's testimony that there was no substantial detriment to the public good. Again, this is an existing use in another residential area. Um, and has has been a good neighbor in the site that he's at. Um,
the the use uh in Mr. Rivera's testimony was that the traffic and parking impacts will be minimal due to the limited class sizes and and the staggered scheduling. Um, as far as um balancing once you balance the two, the positive of the
site and and the negative of that there'd be little to no impact uh in the site. In fact, Mr. River indicated that he's already had conversations with the owner that they would have to move off site. There's other heavy equipment and the machinery um so that the cars could come on, the children would be on site.
Um when you balance it to I believe that the conclusion is that the the applicant has has satisfy both the positive and the negative criterias. With that again, I would ask that the board uh vote in favor of the application. Um I asked the board to remember again that we would need five affirmative votes as it's a
use. uh we would agree to all the conditions that we had spoken about um before and that should the board vote on it, we would still have to come back before this board. You get what I call a second bite at the apple. Um and if you don't like it at that point when we put
the rest of it together, you have the right to vote now. So the conditions that I believe that it discussed were that there would be the previous conditions on uh the property remain including no outside storage equipment. Um that there's a
representative that would have to have bathrooms which would be included in uh subsequently submitted site plan and that the approval is limited to building number four. >> Correct.
Can I just ask you the clarification? Um, no heavy equipment outside, right? >> That's an existing condition. >> Okay. And that's for the whole property, not just what's outside, meaning around this building for
>> nowhere on this property, there should be heavy equipment. Is that correct? >> There should be no uh equipment uh outside >> anywhere around anywhere in the whole property. Well, >> I just want to be because there is right
>> someone visited and the first thing they said, "Hey, I saw this big truck. What is it?" >> And we heard testimony >> that goes to that goes to the uh enforcing visit to Miss Chumlo. >> Okay. All right. I I just >> some point future
more lovely commentary. Mr. >> Going to like tomorrow. How about first when you come in the office? >> How about first thing tomorrow morning? So they don't have time to move anything. >> I I can just indicate again. >> But I I am concerned. Okay. But because my major concern is I don't see this as
wanting to put a commercial um wrestling thing in the middle of a residential. >> We're ask you're asking to put um a school in the middle of an industrial zone. Right now this is being treated and used as industrial. We have heavy
equipment in there. heavy commercial use, right? >> Good. >> And I have no problem with that. My problem is >> the record is clear. So we're all >> Yeah. No, I think Mr. Martin's uh was
>> in fact what is happening. So let me put it that way. Right. So in fact, what we know will be happening from all the testimony and everything that we've seen is that it's being used as a heavy equipment industrial area and we want to put a school right there. I have a
problem with that. That's all I'm saying. It in effect I I I know. So that goes >> so we're clear on the procedure where we are. Mr. Feffer, are you because we're we seem to be verging into discussion. And I want to make sure that you've had
the opportunity to complete your closing statement. >> Yes, I'm I just want just to clarify that whatever conditions are in the previous approval are there but for the use of this building. I just wanted >> Yeah, I I I right. I I get you.
>> I'm with you. Good. >> Yeah. It's not It's not you. I know. just um but it's not your your applicant >> in a way going from a a heavy equipment use
industrial use on on the property to something that's a lighter commercial use where you're not going to have the big trucks coming and going which is more of a danger to traffic. The pool offer. So
something to consider. >> I just because I want to make sure that that the board understanding correctly. I I believe that that would that the application would change if granted the use of building five. I don't four I'm
sorry. Building four. Um that I'm not sure that it would change the overall use of the property. Right now, if if the what was approved isn't was forced, we wouldn't have this problem with the heavy equipment coming
and going because it shouldn't be there in the first place >> unless it's >> unless it was stored. Now storage facility is eliminated. So there shouldn't be any heavy equipment. >> No. So that's not some of it will.
I believe that there would be that correct >> that's correct >> correct >> correct and and the and again just reading from Mr. Peter's report which is quoting from the resolution shall be no
outside storage or repairs of equipment or vehicles on the site. So again building five which is the long horizontal building point in the middle of the property >> one that was a chicken coop before is that the one you're speaking about I'll take your word for it but
>> how well I happen to be on the board when when the original was passed. Uh >> how large is this building? >> Uh no idea. I know which building it is, but the building shaped. I don't know how what kind of heavy equipment you could park
in there. >> Are we talking about building five? >> Yeah. >> 4,800. Yeah. Indicate on the plan. 4,800 square feet. >> Building building shape of it. It's It's >> It's very long. Yes. >> Correct. It's a 24 by 17 in that in that
building. It it says that building five to be renovate uh renovated. >> Renovated. >> Yeah. What what kind of I guess it doesn't matter. >> It's almost we have miss the room will come back up. I believe it's been renovated.
>> Oh, okay. Not extend. Okay. >> No, it's inter uh they're all internal renovations >> to the of that building. So, >> so that building's been renovated. >> I'm sorry. Yeah, we can't. The exterior of the building is
completed except for the overhead doors and the interior is not because the uh with the current weather everything is frozen which is why you're seeing equipment on the site because construction stopped on both the retention basin and that the finished
construction of that building. Everything that you'll see sitting there is in regards to that construction. What kind of construction are you building that's going to allow you now to put the heavy equipment in it? You because you said the reason it's
parked outside is because you can't >> you're not finished with >> it's dirt moving equipment for the retention basin. >> Okay. And and is that what's going to be parked in in building five going forward? >> No, that be leaving the site.
>> That'll be leaving the site. It doesn't fit in that building. It's only >> Yeah. >> Right. Right. Because that's what I for the dimensions. That's what I see. I I can't see it >> heavy equipment fitting in here. >> But you're saying you will be >> not Well, >> Tracy, if I if I could I think I have to
clarify. Okay. The the heavy machinery that's on site. Is that solely because they haven't finished the construction of the stormwater basin that was previously approved? >> Yes. And and the dirt work around the building and inside. And when that is completed, when the ground thaws and and
snow melts, those equipment will be moved off site. >> Yes. >> So, what will then be stored? I think that they want to know, the board members would like to know in building five that's being renovated. When that's completed, what will be stored? >> Attachments and components. Attachments and components.
>> Okay. It's not >> even though they're the same square footage, it's not nearly um >> right. >> Like the the other building, this one only 12 feet tall and the other one I think is 18 feet tall. >> Okay.
>> So there's quite a a difference. Uh you know 12 feet won't do a 136 >> or big machine. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I agree. >> Much the smaller machines will be stored in that building. >> Sure. and the attachments,
>> but you'll still have trucks coming to bring the equipment and and remove the equipment at times. >> Usually that is early in the morning and and I'm I I I have cameras on my house and I can
show you today that there was absolutely no activity in that driveway today. Um it we've there has been it's been purported that there's tremendous amount of traffic coming and going and I tend to disagree
completely. I live there and it's a very quiet we are very pretty quiet people and I'm a lot closer to those buildings than anybody else and I hear nothing. my daughter in the back building in the
second house. Um the middle middle building, she hears she doesn't even hear the trucks coming in and driving in and out of the driveway. Um you know, we're getting ready to put up the sixoot fence that we have approval for between us and
the blacks. So that'll be done in the soon as the weather cooperates, we'll get that fence up for them and um try and be as neighborly as we can. Can Can I ask you one one question if that's okay? Um, it
was testified that you had big trucks with logs. >> Yes. They they come in they come in. They Well, we're allowed to have things coming in and in and out during the day right now, >> right? >> And they come in and they unload. >> No, no, there's nothing unloading.
>> Okay. No. >> And um so they come in and then they go out the same day. >> Yes. Okay. And they don't drop. So why come in? You're not going to drop anything? >> Because he might be train changing the tractor that's in the the garage.
>> Yeah. >> He could be waiting for a delivery time that you know when you're taking place things. >> Oh, they're going to take it somewhere else and and they're just waiting there. But but but it doesn't stay overnight. See, the whole point is if it's right doesn't stay overnight. It's not being store because it's not being stored
inside. days overnight is under the lean too. Can >> I ask a question? >> Which is in the building. >> Yeah. Okay. >> I have a question. >> Yes. >> I'm a little confused. The application is for building number four. Why are we
beating up zoning issue and we're not even talking about what the application is at this point. I understand trucks come in and out. That's not what the application's here for. We're going round and round. We're not even on issue. I feel very badly for
the people who have an issue. >> Township's going to look at it. Let's focus on this, please. >> Yeah, >> I think we're off base. >> Let let me ask. >> No, we're very off base what we're talking about right now because we've missed the whole point. We're talking about trucks, not a wrestling school.
>> Right. So, in my mind, the wrestling part of it is done. >> If the only issue was putting a wrestling school as been testified in this area, I'd be fine with that. Okay. My problem is everything the safety of
the children that are going to be in there as was testified by the applicant by the neighbors right of putting that school in there right which which goes around what's around what's what's happening around it and that's why I
bring it up I I I disagree with you I have already made a decision about the wrestling school on its own >> but I'm concerned about what else is going on so The only question before the board tonight is whether to allow the use of a
wrestling school. The operation of the wrestling school and the relationship of that operation to the remainder of the site will have to would be appropriately addressed during the site plan application. So during site plan, you're going to be
discussing the other uses that are on the property. I don't think >> how they interact. Yes. >> To approve the wrestling school, how they would interact. >> As I'm looking at it, the way I'm looking at this application right now is we want to put a wrestling school in
this spot. We think it's a great spot and everything, but I do understand Martins's, not completely, but some um that there are other uses on the property. So, how do those uses
intertwine with each other? And I think that's where some of the concern I'm assuming it's from Mr. Martins. I will say I may not be as strong as Mr. Martins is right now, but I do have a concern to a certain point. Um, because
they are to me they're interactive. They're on the same piece of property. It's it's you know, anytime you have a piece of property that has multiple businesses running on it, you know, we're going to look at >> Does it make sense? you know,
you know, to get extreme, you're not gonna you're just not going to put totally outlandish different businesses uh that would be very detrimental to the community in the same lot. So, I think
that's what we're I think that's what Mr. Martin is struggling with pretty significantly. >> I I have some concerns. Uh you know, I've listened to the testimony of the owner. I've listened to the residents speak. I think from my perspective,
um, what's going to be key for my my determination here is the trip that someone may or may not be going out to the site. >> But remember, that's part of going to be part of site plan. So from a land use
perspective, Mr. Chair makes a great point. From a land use perspective, we're discussing is a resin school, that building, that piece there of this lot suitable for that. All the other discussions are basically how when we
get to site plan, how does it interact? >> And that's fine. As long as that's >> Yes, that that is correct. As long as, you know, if if we say yes to the use tonight and they come back with a site plan and we start talking about the other activity that's on there and all
of a sudden there's just things that are going on that I totally say no way should we have children there, we're going to be able to say no and the use variance goes away. >> Correct. question tonight is whether the
wrestling school use if the if it's if it's going to be uh beneficial if it has been shown that there's no detriment um you know from that use itself. When there's a site plan application, then
the question is, does that application allow for appropriate use on this site? And then therefore, the conditions on the site will have to be considered at that time. >> Agreed. >> Basically, what we're saying is that
while the wrestling school may not be detrimental to the site, the rest of the site may be detrimental to the wrestling school. And that that'll be a site plan >> and that we will be deciding at the site plan. Correct. So we could say approve the application tonight and then deny
when it comes to the site plan unless the site plan takes care of all the negative criteria that that will come up. >> Also gives them the opportunity to come up with a better plan too. >> Correct. And I was just gonna say Mr. Feffer has been here plenty of times in
my I don't know five year tenure at this point and I'm sure he's heard every con every concern and I'm sure he will come >> and I certainly think tonight provides a preview of some of the board's concerns when we get to site plan >> and that and that was the reason why we
bifurcated the application so a blessing so that we could >> and I'm sure you would have carried it if you really knew where we were going to be head >> this is why he gets paid the big bucks and I I Mr. Hosting put it exactly right. My views the detriment that the
what's around it would have to the school, not what the school would have to what's exactly right. That's exactly why >> that's why I was concerned about the use, >> right? Well, that's what we were trying to explain. But that'll be a site plan discussion. >> Well, if you remember what he said in his testimony earlier,
>> right, >> where he is now, it's a single lane road going in there and they had head-on issues, too. So, I mean, understood your concern, but just like the gentleman with 571, all the roads are dangerous lately. And some some of these places,
even the driveways are dangerous. It's inherent, but you know, >> I'm sorry. May I ask the board, do we have any further questions for the owner standing up here? >> Sorry. >> You can have a seat. I'm sorry. >> Thank you.
>> Have anything else to add, Mr. Feffer? He said, "No, I'm done." I think we I think we've said it all. >> Okay. Um, we've had public session. Mr. Feffer has made his closing argument. Uh, board, it's up to us for discussion. >> I I think we've had a lot of discussion already. I think we know where we're
headed. >> Um, I think I'm comfortable knowing that we have a second shot. I don't want to say shot, but a second bite at the apple when the site
plan comes up. Um, and that kind of gives me some guidance. Uh, you know, the the residents have made their issues, but we've also heard from a resident that said anything for the kids is great. And I think a lot of people
think that way. So, you know, we have something that's for the kids in this community. Hopefully they're mostly from Jackson and you're not bringing them in from everywhere else. Um, so from my perspective, I think it's a
good use dependent on your site plan when it comes through. Um, so if if you want I would put a motion that as long as everything is is we've discussed stays intact, I'm okay with
approving the use variance. Um, >> can we cl can we clarify what the use is though? Is it primary, accessory, or conditional? >> Yes, thank you. If I could jump in just so the board's clear, that the original resolution 201752
that was discussed before talked about an approval for continued existence of two and use of two principal two principal residential structures on the lot and for the construction of a 5,000 foot commercial storage facility.
I just want to make sure that Jean's comfortable writing the resolution in those terms. So, um, to Mr. Tremor's point, whether it's principal or accessory, I think is somewhat irrelevant because
there's already two existing principal residential structures on the lot. The hook to all of that that Dr. Hoffstein brought up at the beginning of the meeting was that the commercial storage must relate to the owner of the property. So, somewhere in here, we have to
reconcile that part of it. Not discounting your question about use. The previous approval said we have two principal uses. We're building a building that requires a use variance and we're connecting it to one of the
principal uses somehow. So whether we call this a third principal use or two existing principal uses somehow connected to the property. I I think that I don't know if we need to work that out as part of the vote or as part of the draft of the resolution. Yeah.
And my inclination is that it would be a third principal use um because it's not you directly connected uh to the residence and the other principal uses
in the same way that the storage facility was. >> It would be an accessory. >> Oh, third principal. >> Principal. >> That's just a Okay. So, did I understand you made a motion? I was just Do I have to change anything now?
>> No. So, yeah, you would made a motion and the condition that we talked about, we just talked about it um being uh principal use. We discussed it would also um be that the previous conditions remain including no outside storage equipment, must have bathrooms, which be
included in the site plan application, and the wrestling school use is limited to building four. So, yes, I would make a motion to approve based on >> I'll second it. >> All right. So, we have a motion and a second. I'm sorry. Are you done? I'm sorry.
>> Yeah. No, I'm sorry. I was >> Mr. Tremor seconded. >> So, we have a motion and a second to approve the use as a wrestling to approve the use of building for as a wrestling school. Obviously, as you all know, because we've talked about a lot, we will address a number of these other
issues should it be approved by vote at site plan. So, if you vote yes, we're approving the use of the building for as a wrestling school. Kathleen, roll call, please. >> Mr. Martins, >> yes. >> Mr. Tremor, >> yes. >> Miss Cusano, >> yes. >> Mr. Seleia,
>> yes. >> Dr. Hoffstein, >> yes. >> Miss Bradley, >> yes. >> Thank you. >> So, Mr. Feffrey, you've heard the concerns. I'm sure you'll >> took lots of notes. >> Motion to close.
>> Motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to All in favor? >> And I know no one's opposed.