okay Mr chairman we're on the air welcome to the meeting of the Long Hill Township Planning Board uh today's date being April 8th 2025 and we are starting right on time at approximately
7:30 uh Madam Secretary would you mind reading the announcements i would be happy to Mr chair hope you find my agenda okay number one call to order and statement of compliance adequate notice of this meeting hearing has been
provided by posting a copy of the public meeting or hearing dates on the municipal bulletin board and website by sending a copy to the echo central newspaper and by filing a copy with the municipal clerk number two standard board procedures any meeting or hearing conducted by the board is a quasi judicial proceeding any questions or
comments must be limited to issues that are relevant to what the board may legally consider in reaching a decision and a quorum appropriate to a judicial meeting or hearing must be maintained at all times number three meeting shut off okay announcement is made that as a matter of procedure it is the intention of the planning board not to continue
any matter past 10:30 p.m at any regular or special meeting or hearing of the board unless a motion is passed by the members then present to extend the meeting or hearing to a later specified cutoff time number four electronic devices all in attendance are asked to mute cell phones or any electronic
devices as to not interrupt the proceedings pledge of Allegiance yep before before we go to pledge of allegiance just following the pledge of allegiance I want to hold a moment of silence for the four US personnel uh that we lost in Lithuania about two weeks ago during a training exercise
thank you 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 moment of silence please
thank you thank you Mr chair thank you thank you Mr vice Chair all right roll call miss Still present mr hans here minan Lavender present mr lavario here
mr mitchell is excused this evening miss Ojins here mr okala is excused this evening vice Chairman Jones present chairman Richardson here chairman we have a quorum thank you very much we're going to uh make a little bit of adjustment in the order this evening so
we can hear our application up first uh assuming the applicant is ready fantastic exactly we know time is of the essence here uh this application is for uh listed a minor site plan carried from
uh March 25th 2025 for block 14602 lot 10 in the zone M-H area at 632 Meyersville Road application number 24-16P and before we start I'll turn to
our board attorney uh just uh please confirm notices are all in order cir certainly Mr chairman my pleasure the uh this matter was the notice was deemed sufficient and timely served and published for a prior hearing at a prior
hearing and then was carried without further notice to this evening uh so we do have sufficient notice uh as I understand it from the prior meeting uh being carried to this evening uh timely served so the board would have jurisdiction to hear and decide the
application this evening and we get to the appropriate point I'll be happy to swear in all the witnesses including our port professionals great when we get there fantastic good we'll turn it over to you thank you thank you Mr introduce yourselves thank you Mr chairman my name
is James Lala L of Riverdale um and the attorney for the applicant with me is Luan Jubai juvikide it's complicated i've only known her for 10 years and uh matter of fact his other uh
location of the Blackpool restaurant is roughly across the street from my office so I can testify to the excellent uh food and uh you just have to do it as a prop establishment yes uh we also have Tyler Vanderval here as the uh engineer who has prepared the
plans it is essentially uh running a restaurant and bar just as the old place has been but obviously in a much better way the application essentially is to pave the existing gravel parking lot put up a couple of signs and dear to his
heart a large statue of a black bull uh the statue is made of fiberglass if I'm correct so it is easily movable he told me last night that a child could move it i don't know if it's that light but in any event uh we believe that the uh
application should be straightforward and hopefully pretty brief great thank you okay i'd ask that Mr uh Jebai be uh sworn in yes certainly and I'll swear in your other witness as well as well as our two board professionals if you'll all raise your right hand do
all of you swear to God or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do yes I do thank you all okay please proceed all right if I may call you Leo sure there we go uh you're the owner and operator of the business
yes I am could you describe be briefly what it is it's a um establishment restaurant so it's a customer service we serve food and alcohol and it's a high-end steakhouse and uh you actually opened under a CEO back in December just
before Christmas correct and at this point you're here simply to ask to be able to get the outdoor improvements that you're seeking primarily the paving of the gravel parking lot correct yes and uh with regard to the letters that we received from the board engineer and
the board planner a couple of questions there was a comment about trees removal of trees could you talk to us about that uh we did not remove any big trees what we did remove there are dead there were a few dead trees actually laying down and then most of it was debris and was
that also done in cooperation with the D yeah D was there afterwards we did it first time and they came in they looked over we went over the u detailing what we did they uh there was also some uh few trucks of dump was dumped there
gravel or dirt I should say it in a corner of the property we talked about that i leveled it up dp did not want to so we removed it that dirt in my expense removed all the debris in the back of the by the um by the side of the
property they did ask me to if I'm willing to put some trees back there i agreed with it i'm waiting for their what kind of trees because they said they're going to specify what kind of trees they're going to put there one of the comments made by the engineers specifically was do you intend to
continue to cooperate with the D yes and that that uh uh process is still ongoing correct correct yes at this point you're waiting for a response from them yes they they should give me a list of trees of what they would what kind of trees they want back there and also they know
that I will go slowly because those trees they want they are very expensive and with regard to the ownership uh he indicated in comment uh 20 you want to confirm I'm sorry which report are you referring to oh this is uh the Van Clee engineering engineer and number 20
you're now yeah checklist number 20 on page three okay just indicating that you are the sole proprietor of both the steakhouse and the property owner yes I am and you are seeking to put uh two signs on the property as well as the bull
correct and Mr vanderv will be testifying in detail about this yes i'm sorry Mr chairman when you say two signs and the bowl there's Am I correct there's two wall signs a ground sign and a bowl that that will be there there was
no there's one wall sign no two wall signs sorry two roundish two wall signs that is a uh one sign on in the entrance in beginning and then is a ball there's two on the building two in a building one is all in the beginning
outside in the property that's the ground sign the ground sign and one and then a ball three in a bowl no it's two signs and a bowl two facing as you're coming up uh New Vernon towards the circle and there's another one facing
towards uh Meyersville Road as you're coming toward the circle from uh Chad correct those are the two that you have and I'm sorry for clarification though i thought I saw there was a sign setback deviation i thought that was referring to a ground sign am I is that not
correct that is correct signs are only So what is that signed setback deviation if it's the zero step back what is that 10 i'm sorry rather than 10 per minute right so would that indicates there's a ground sign that's a third sign there's a third sign by the entrance on on
Myersville on Myersville it's square correct there's a square not a round sign yeah yeah there's two rounds in a building two walls one ground statue yes two walls that's where I started i guess that's where I'm two walls one two walls
one permitted one variance yep yep i'm with you one ground permitted but at the wrong setback variance and then the statute thank you right good we're all saying the same thing different ways okay and then I'm going to jump off to the
conditions of approval number six which is the old Myersville in approval okay and they listed a number of things here and they're asking simply are you able to continue with these conditions are you asking for certain uh exemptions or
additions i mean I read I read the um numbers there um I would probably ask if am I ever allowed to hold a wedding party can I close the place down for event which is a huge event not a uh now individual but let's say somebody wants
a wedding party want 300 people outside inside can I or can I not mr sharon can make a recommendation maybe to help move things along there's a list that Mr voch was kind enough to put together on pages six and seven of his engineering memo that I think are carry forward of at
least many of the conditions of the prior 1999 approval i take it you've decided which ones you can stipulate to continuing and which ones you're requesting uh to either be eliminated or modified that be an accurate assumption yeah that's that's basically an accurate
assumption okay so maybe it's best to Let the board know what it is you're looking for and the board could ultimately for the sake of clarity I'm going to walk it through one at a time all right whatever works best okay thanks the first one is a bar shall be limited to uh 20 seats in the bar area
to 560 the square footage is actually about 600 is that right yes it is and you're looking to put 26 seats there because you have 12 at the bar and three tables of four is that right there's uh there's four tables of four four tables and there's 12 stools so a total of 26
correct but you're not looking for a dance floor there no but during a wedding you'd be uh possibly having you would likely be having an area cleared to dance not specifically a dance floor necessarily but if you have a wedding there in the future that would be an
option correct not necessarily to be a dance floor or or make a setup of a dance floor it's necessary what event or a private people will ask for it they might want a clear area just to stand maybe they want to put a DJ just kind of like hanging out and having a cocktail hour so you have to remove those tables
and have a clear room not necessarily a dance floor like a dance floor but the ability to have dance a dance floor if there's a private event is that what you're asking correct yes counselor thank you can I ask a question uh there's a second floor in that building
correct yes it Are you using the second floor as a private event like a birthday events uh groups of the events like um any events that goes around for it's about 40 yeah what's the size of that it's about 40 chairs in it so if you were to have a wedding let's say you
could have it upstairs correct only a small one but a small one but it seats only 40 correct so it's really limited to let's say a birthday event something a communion or something like
Next condition is a use uh the as a restaurant would be emphasized as opposed to a bar i'm assuming you have no problem with that no problem with that next is eating services emphasized over takeout i'm assuming you have no problem with that no problem with that next is that there'll be no groups DJs
bands etc uh on the property except I love this Christmas New Year's and the seven days of Marty GR no martyra i I haven't been celebrating it properly i didn't know there were that oh yeah on
other occasions it'll be limited to uh background music piano players and the like and other than the large exclusive groups like a wedding you're okay with that other than private event for the day off no need to have any other large
music other than regular music it also says no pool tables video pinball games and the like i'm assuming you're okay with that i'm okay with it by the way if I may for clarification um we have a couple here where you're making requests to keep certain things
uh uh or do certain things um excuse me and then you're also asking to do them for private events uh has there been a contemplation as to I guess it's conceivable they could be a private event 365 days a year uh the the uh correct but uh more is like those
private events may be once a year or maybe once in five years well I guess I'm just maybe throwing out there for contemplation by people if there's going if there was contemplated a limit of how many private events per year there would be or is it simply uh you could have 365 per year no I don't that I don't think I
don't think that would that would be even my case because I'm not a career well I'm I'm kind of putting that out for the board i'm sure the board's thinking about it they didn't need me to say it and but I just wanted to make sure applicant maybe has given us some consideration council maybe is give us
some and we'll address it at some point sir uh indicates a total of 210 seats is that correct correct does that include second floor seats yes it does i'm sorry that includes the second floor yes it does by the way I um I take it you're
requesting that the uh uh uh that changing the law regarding race judicata in a private resolution that that not continue to exist correct that's correct thank you because if he didn't do it I would have the the all
due respect to my predecessor in 1995 that may not have been uh maybe it's best that it be extended is what I'll say that would be the next one i would suggest would be rescended as well regarding signs because we have a specific the signs are a specific part
of the application today all exhausted to be directed and be hidden from view there's another condition like that they are pre-existing we're not doing anything to change it so we would like to have those two things taken out no word burning grills is no problem right no
uh only porch will be screened in porch and no porch will be heated is that okay do you have Do you plan on When you mean heated meaning like a heat lamps or heat no I mean like putting in heating like like closing in a porch and making it a
new room if in effect uh no no that was used only for a summer purpose or outside maybe if it's a little late in the winter or in the fall I should say or beginning of the spring some nights are a little maybe a little warm portable heating yeah something like
that tank yeah uh not something that's hooked up to a furnace correct no no no that's not right truck deliveries will be at the rear yes what about uh perhaps we'll ask Mr i'm sorry did you skip the HVAC uh I I coupled that in with the all
exhausts oh you're asking for that to be also to be dropped because they're existing we're not doing anything about Gotcha okay are they already hidden from view anybody know anybody notice no they were hidden
i You can't really see i didn't see them i mean you could see them if you're driving outside of the property but if you're in a property sitting down you can't because they were there existing there's a roof fan roof correct yeah on New Vernon roadside right correct
yeah i don't know the answer to this on wooden guard rails it's the uh it's an existing wooden car for the parking lot where the gravel is right now and that's going to stay that's going to stay because it's better to stay instead of taking it's wood it's kind of like it fits with the natural
stop signs at the exits is okay they both are there yes i put them both police department is authorized to enforce handicap parking yes and the other one is about signing again that's part of the application yeah there are three three uh community markets and the
planners report on page three before you do that could I just ask a question on page two pam can we can we just get through the applicant testimony we'll have an opportunity for the board so if you could just hold on to your questions just a discrepancy
between occupancies okay if it's a clarification real quickly yeah uh page two says 178 occupants i think you said 210 if if you count the upstairs that makes so in parking you have to go by 210 not
one so that I can clarify so my letter says 178 that's the maximum occupancy shown on the architectural plans based on the amount of square footage the 210 is from the prior resolution indicating the maximum occupancy could be 210 but
we're hearing tonight that there could be 40 people upstairs in a party on the second floor so maximum occupancy would be 210 no area D is the dining that's up to 50 the
upstairs has up to it says on the plan up to 50 it does say the plan but it doesn't fit because we So it looks like by square footage of each of those areas cumulatively the maximum occupancy is is still going to be less than the 210 that
was previously allowed in the approval the 95 approval and we were going by the 210 just to say if that's what it is yeah right there's no reason to limit you right the 170 further down any architectural plan is what the real right any architectural changes interior
of the building would allow you the discretion of that 178 to the 210 got it okay thank you okay in which while we're on the subject would include the first stipulation was on the bar the increase to 600 was requested to modify
that and then per the plans you're showing 14 bar stools and 16 for a total of 30 correct but it doesn't fit 12 it's really more like 12 okay show more so so that'll be at like 28 then yes
so the plan show more plan show more i made it less because it just does not look it look too proud there's two on the corner that don't really belong there yeah but what's true true is the one I saying because the plan the the architect asked for it which is really
you can be true we can modify the plan we can modify or we can add 14 shares but again I remove I think just to go into plan we can come back to it later but I think the plan should be true to the to what's there is we can we can have the
architect modify the plans maybe that can if in the event there's an approval it could be a condition subsequent to the approval to match what's there and then the certainly the condition limiting them will govern regardless but this way it's a suspended
i don't want to take Can I talk about Can we not close this point then yeah well we might as well we're into it now so Oh no i'm saying I can bring it up later if you want yes abs well no i think if you've got a quick point I just want to make sure they get through their their I think what he's saying is
architecturally it can fit this many the way he has his restaurant it's not going to fit that many that's correct so I don't think you should change your plans if you decide to change chairs one day you can change your configuration yeah I would give you the 30 so I I don't think
so your point is show the maximum get one yeah okay as opposed to I don't know that it's inaccurate versus his operation right now okay which is what I was trying to point out Miss Ojens is the maximum that the architect has proposed which is per other codes is
the 178 but that's still below the 210 that they could Yeah so future architectural improvements to the building could enhance the capacity inside the 95 approval well stated thank you for that point that's a good point second floor
in any event this is on page three of the planners report she's asking you to confirm what is the total number of employees as right now we have 22 and maximum number of employees at uh maximum shift
that would be a Saturday 22 I'm sorry still 22 a Saturday is the maximum Saturday okay so Saturday you have entire staff all hands on deck on Saturday okay that's number that's number five on the planners report number five if we could add certainly
hours and days of operation seven days a week uh 11:30 to 10 p.m monday Monday to Friday to Thursday Friday to 11:00 p.m saturday to 11 p.m sunday 1 to9 hours
that the staff is on site i'm sorry I didn't hear sunday is what 1 to 9ine 1 to 9ine got it thank you the hours that the staff is on site staff comes in different staggers it starts from 10:00 a.m and um they come in as based on a
business and operation or job description they have the last person leaves one hour after we close so if we close in at 10:00 the last person should be there by 11 or if we close in 11 the last person should be there by 12 hours
and days of deliveries it's 5 days a week and is from 11:00 a.m to 5:00 p.m hours and days of trash twice a week for trash once for cardboard and containment of any food related odors
you have dumpsters those do those the trash that's a dumpster that we do twice a week it's picked up the trash and once a week cardboard i did it twice a week for the safety of environment and the trashes because I think it's a lot of vultures around here so I kind of added
one extra pickup thank you and large rodents and large rodents yeah so I just said do twice a week so that the Now you've been open since December december 22 or 23 have you had any problems with the trash with regard to odors or
vultures or rodents or anything else not until now we will not have any that's all I have of uh Great thank you uh what I'd like to do is first start with uh any of the uh board professional questions and then
we'll turn it over to board members here for any questions and then turn it to the public so yeah did did you want to have them uh testify your architect or engineer it's the engineer yes okay uh do you want to
incorporate that with the questions because it it seems to me like it's probably going to go that route anyway uh with the uh both our engineer and and planner i I assume that they may have some questions of legal i didn't know if
if if your engineer had a presentation to complement he's mostly primarily going to be going through the reports his comments how do we drive that with questions and going through the report does that make sense i was just looking through everything i
don't think I have anything direct for the operator so I would I don't really have any comments to defer to the board and my and our planner and then I'll give the engineer an opportunity to
present as he's prepared and then we can go through the items to make sure everything's satisfied yeah I concur with the the applicant is addressed and I think we've had questions about the other technical questions we'll follow the professional testimony okay great thank you okay well why don't we turn it
over then to your call Mr another question did you want to open it up to the public for Leo somebody here we could bring him back i mean he's not going anywhere right
did you mean Leo or our public everyone will get an opportunity to question everyone there we go all right Tyler we have one mic to hold and pass around so I'll ask a question and I'll hand it off to you for as long as necessary first can you give us a general overview of Before you do name
and address is this address fine for the record then you're going to want to qualify yep uh Tyler Vanderval Van Der Val K uh owner of Civilized Engineering 64 Valley Road Butler New Jersey can you give us uh the benefit of your
professional qualification yes I'm a licensed engineer in the state of New Jersey my license is current and in good standing i have a bachelor's degree in civil engineering from New Jersey Institute of Technology i have testified before numerous boards not this one yet
but uh other nearby uh boards Morristown Chadam Chester Bridgewater can keep going but we did one in Denver a couple years ago that's correct yes all right uh I would
offer you any any objections we're good great you're good to go thank you could you give us an overview of the plan yeah sure um so I think we're all familiar with the site essentially we have the restaurant which has operated as a
restaurant historically located unless you're what you're referring to yes absolutely i'm sorry this is the don't have to if it if it is exactly as it appeared when it was submitted which it looks like yes this is uh last revised March 5th of this year so I
believe that's what the board has in front of them and it's the layout and dimensioning plan this is sheet number one correct okay so the building is located uh nearest to the intersection of Myersville Road and New Vernon Road this is in the southeast corner of the property uh generally we
have a rectangular shaped lot here everything is primarily along uh the street frontages as we get to the rear of the property where it's undeveloped uh we have regulated areas by the D Uh parking exists along Myersville Road
and behind the building to the west this is uh has been paved and continues to be so the lot located to the north of the building historically has been gravel uh so the intent as part of this application is to pave that gravel lot
uh and to stripe it up to standard for the um ordinance uh so that includes hairpin striping proper markings and signage as far as uh stop bars stop signs etc um and this would also go for the exits and entrances from the
roadways there are a number of other uh smaller cleanup items as part of the application including uh repair replacement of the dumpster enclosure uh ballards to protect that dumpster enclosure lighting was
um repaired recently they basically refurbished the existing lighting that was on the property uh that's why we hadn't prepared a lighting plan as part of the application as far as the zoning goes uh we are in the MH Myersville Hamlet zone i'm not going to work through the entire
bulk table we're not requesting any bulk variances is there are a couple existing non-conformities specifically related to the front yard setbacks uh due to the current building location which certainly we're not looking to change or adjust as far as variances go we are requesting a couple of variances
specifically in regarded to the signage uh we talked about that briefly already we have uh two circular signs that are being posted on the building uh to be viewed from the street frontages uh those signs while compliant in size we require a variance for having two
instead of one in this case I believe that is appropriate given that we have two frontages that makes sense uh to have that display along both of those streets the other uh variance that we have is in regards to the setback of the freestanding sign uh essentially what
was done there is there was an existing sign in that location with an existing signpost so essentially this was just rebranding so to speak in that same location that's why it's non-conforming uh furthermore we don't have a lot of opportunity to move it back just due to
the uh depth of that island by the entrance so interestingly as I inspected the property recently I saw that that sign is actually not the shape shown on the plan here that threw me for a little bit of a loop but the reality is that we still are under that max square footage
of 16 square ft um and complying with the height max of of 8 ft above grade so if I could share just a quick clarification on that when you said that what you saw was not the sign appears on the plan it's incumbent upon us to ask that what did you see and does it comply
with the ordinance and how is it different than what's on the plan so it's a rectangular sign rather than the circular sign that's displayed here um the exact dimensions of that sign I don't have I don't know if the applicant recalls them
his testimony is 6 feet by 2 feet that requires some math that would be 12 12 square feet yes luckily we have an engineer you saying from ground to top no no the sign itself six feet that to me is ground to top and I know it's not
six feet no no no six feet wide i don't think it's six feet wide i think it's smaller than that it is it is long and and then the depth is narrow um I'm going to rely on his testimony he bought the sign so um and that seems to make sense with what I saw i thought it
was relatively long and then it it was short and that just simply said and I guess the black bowl board professionals should determine if if in fact that is 12 square feet i think the 16 square feet is the max sign area but isn't that for is that for the ground one ground
sign or is that total signage wall and ground i'm sorry if I'm I believe that's the question total look it up i I believe that was specifically under the ground sign section of
the ordinance that's the section we cited in our letter we'll just double check now but it has a height because that's a separate height requirement of 8 ft right as well as a sign area of 16 and a setback so it's but let's make sure we're correctly citing the ordinance section
certainly what we would stipulate given that we don't have the exact dimensions potentially is that this will comply in those regards as far as area and height so if upon inspection it does not we'll we'll adjust it accordingly it's going to be 15
it should be 155.7 here uh maybe while they look that up we'll just touch on the statue uh because we do have dimensions on that which was something that was lacking previously so
again this is a 3D structure it's not a sign per se but I think we're going to treat it as a sign in the fact that it's branding uh for the restaurant no pun intended but it is i got one i got Nope
almost got a majority i'm sorry th this photo is literally as it lies you can see the restaurant in the background so um you get a good sense of what it looks like the dimensions is 6 ft long and as you look at the plan that's really from building to street 6 feet uh the width
of that structure is 30 in 2 and 1/2 ft and the height is 50 in just just over 4t and that would sit in the lawn area and if that were assigned and if that were subject to sign area what would that come out to as sign
area for that separate and independent ground sign unfortunately it's a volume so I don't know it's 3D i don't I'm not sure how to interpret that uh the easy part i just asked the question yeah i think to be conservative I think we would have to
take the largest view of it right which would be the length by the height sure uh so 6 feet by 50 in now I have to do some math that 24 is is it a sign or a monument
monument sign monument sign is also something yeah i mean it's it's ultimately I think for the board to determine with perhaps input how would you treat like a like a flag pole how would you treat a flag pole you treat it as a flag pole because our
ordinance discusses flag poles okay specifically as one of the freestanding we don't discuss monuments it's not uncommon in my experience this is from the legal perspective not the planning which is what you should listen to more my legal advice is don't listen
to me first but listen to the planner first but but um certain types uh there are when walls have certain signage or mural I should say murals or something that are uh uh uh determined to be branding for a
certain entity you know a little girl's face with freckles and pigtails perhaps or something uh the the uh it might or that might on a wall might be determined to be a sign even though it may not technically be a sign it might be
interpreted to be a sign um and also uh other structures uh might be interpreted to be a sign if it is branding and is utilized that way um it's really uh not as much a legal issue as a planning
issue um hence the legal advice is listen first to the planner great well as planners we write ordinances that try to come up with every situation here you have a generic fear township ordinance has the definition of sign it's an object device display or structure or
part thereof situate outdoors or indoors which is used to advertise identify display direct and attract attention to etc etc the point being that if it's if it was a statue of a cat or a statue of something else of a couple kids playing probably not but if it's of the same
name as the restaurant I think you could certainly interpret it as a sign since it's directing attention and it relates to the use mhm um unfortunately the ordinance does not give you direction as to how to measure a volume or a sign of this type just similar to a mural as Mr warner pointed out I would agree there
too if it's painted in a certain way or certain color it's attracting attention in your opinion Mr graggle if I may Mr chairman would it be reasonable to interpret that structure under the ordinance as a sign i do i believe so in
this given the circumstances of the what it depicts and the name of the restaurant being the same yes and I believe I might have heard the applicant's engineer offer it as conservatively assigned if I wasn't mistaken i would agree with that interpretation yes so I think we have a
stipulation so my qu So then the question on that is what is the maximum width and the maximum height viewed from right angles on this right uh it would be 50 in high and then
6 feet is is the depth so viewed as coming along Myersville I think you'd be six by 4.17 which I'm coming up with a square footage of 25 square feet right so rather than go down this path of volumes consider it to be a
frame the largest frame that has to be used to capture this object right the crate it was shipped what side of the crate it was shipped in the biggest side section and if I'm not mistaken uh uh Mr bragg and Mr which we
have a or now or now we come to the conclusion that we have a 25 square foot second ground sign along with a 12 square foot first ground sign is that correct so the first was 12 right and
the code is one 16 I think 16 is 16 uh 8 ft in height mhm so 37 versus 16 and is there a limitation on number of ground signs or is there not
uh one ground side hopefully yeah so for all permitted uses this is 155.7B for all permitted uses providing at least a 15 foot principal building setback one ground sign not exceeding 16
square ft in area and 8 ft in height so if I'm not mistaken there would be a variance for number of ground signs two versus one and square footage of ground signs 37 versus 16 square feet would that be uh no it would be for two ground
signs because there is not a 15t principal setback on the building so for all permitted uses providing at least a two versus zero yes it's two versus zero because of the existing nonconformity of the setback on the bill
gotcha and and for the ground sign and for the uh square footage though did I get that one right at least for the square footage you have one compliant and one that is what was it 20 something 25 total them and compare 37 to 16 yes yeah and yeah I would count them% I get
a I get an F I think and then directly to the back uh and then we'll be par for my high school no thank you then you're good because then we're covering the setback separately yep okay so just to try to keep the scorecard for
everybody absolutely and I appreciate that uh certainly unique situation um as far as that variance goes I would just point out per definition I think we agree that it's treated as a sign visually for people driving by it's it's less so much a sign as maybe an artistic
element uh provided to the building so I I think there's some good reason to grant that variance in this case uh just due to the specific subject matter um specifically with regard to the condition of the variance do you foresee any negative impact on No no the one
sign is is placed where the previous sign was and the uh the bull statue is set back far enough from the road and from the intersection uh I don't see any issues um the other thing to I wanted to mention was we would like to amend the
application not to throw any more loops here but uh to remove the EV in review of the engineers report it's understood that the EV charging would not be required in this case um so that being uh the case we would rather just uh keep
those two stalls but they would be standard stalls rather than EV charging stations so you would then have 68 spaces versus 45 required uh no we would right now we're saying 75 which includes a two stall credit so the two stall credit
would go away so we would have 73 total i was going by the engine uh I'm sorry i was on the planner report okay that doesn't mean I got it right though so check no competition jeff I didn't say comparatively i just said
myself it's a game of golf over here mhm so so why did you not think EV was necessary well so the E so per model ordinance mhm uh and the the state requirement it's triggered after
25 new parking stalls new as opposed to existing yes and so by re repurposing the gravel stalls into and the prior approval had provided I believe it was like up to 80 something stalls um
so they're they're not proposing any new and they don't trigger that requirement either our local level or at a state level now if I may assuming well recognizing that it's not required uh that doesn't prevent them from doing
it if they wanted to and if there were a benefit associated there with on a C2 argument that might be relevant right or and if they were to desire to put them in at a later date I believe they could do that with just construction code permits and not have to seek approval from the board they have to make ready
spaces well there's no requirement to make them ready but essentially what we're discussing is waving it being part of the application since it's it's not required and then we could
stipulate to permit them to obtain a construction code permit without additional board approval for the locations at a later date mhm would be you know really the location they would put them is probably the location
they would put them in in the future and any other location would just be as appropriate as that location so anywhere on that site would be suitable for them to be located at a later date and if that were something desirable for the board would that be something that the
applicant stipulated you don't have to come effect you don't have to come back to us to go get a construction permit to put them in that that sounds great myself mhm good uh the last thing I want to touch on is
we did uh dig into the ordinance specifically in regards to drainage and I believe that the level of development that we're doing here does trigger the drainage ordinance uh and so we did provide calculations on sheet two of that plan set along with the appropriate detail what we're looking to do uh since
the rear lot is not curbed uh it's all just sheet flows off into the grass uh naturally um the front lot is curbed so we're going to take an opportunity to put the dry well in one of those uh catch basin locations um to get some
recharge and to alleviate any extra runoff caused by the project and that would just overflow into the existing system which uh discharges to the rear and that discharges into the open lawn there's a a bit of a an existing swale that drains to the same location in the
rear yes that's correct there's a discharge there now we're not discharging to that location we're discharging to the catch basin that discharges there yep and that's just for emergency overflow if the drywall couldn't handle a larger storm event
so that's basically the summary of the application yes to the engineers make sure page three is working way down beginning at uh checklist item
number eight towards the top of page three yeah so we didn't touch on the landscape plan actually in my direct testimony but um there's really landscaping that has uh survived and been cleaned up around the the building so those foundation plantings are still
in play from what has been there previously um and in inspecting the property they seem uh to be in in good health and and doing their job well along the foundation there um additional cleanup has been done around the
perimeter of the parking lot in the islands along the the streets just to get rid of weeds etc uh and there are a number of uh street trees specifically along New Vernon and that island uh so we weren't looking to necessarily do any new landscaping other than what will be
required from the D uh but certainly we could uh respect any wishes of the board he addressed the tree removal permit okay so we really talked about all of those waiverss so would you would
you agree that the landscaping that exists today is preserved from the prior use of the restaurant and the operations that's certainly what it seems like yes and then the specifically the area that we're talking in the rear under D's enforcement for the cleanup of the the
prior historic um illegal dumping that was done by others u that area you're still stipulating the work with D so there's going to be some replantings in that area to establish a better buffer back to Myersville Ballfield that's correct
yep and the D is specifically going to give the guidance on what needs to be planted there just so I'm clear on that stipulation or the former part uh the is the stipulation to maintain the present level of landscaping yes okay not just
to recognize that no to recognize that it's that it's m it it's been able to be preserved from that prior use that was vacant and then resurrected now with with the maintenance of the site and it will be maintained yes okay thank you okay
if you could then walk us through the comments on page four yeah i think I'll highlight just specific answers here that I didn't touch on um we do have the we heard testimony regarding
collection of waste uh the ADA it I didn't have quite enough spot shots on the topo provided by the survey to exactly show it but um just based on inspection it certainly seems that there's nothing that exceeds the required slopes for the ADA parking or
the access but we could provide a level of detail needed to show that i'll go one further for you yeah I believe because we we have certificates of occupancy operating from the construction code the construction code official also has overlapping jurisdiction to ensure that there was
ADA okay and I do know that he's diligent on making sure that is in compliance so I think it's already been affirmed for you perfect on the question of traffic circulation um yeah we do have
two entrance and exits two two-way driveways one on each uh road and there's currently no proposal for turning restrictions and maybe I'm not fully understanding the comment here is there an anticipation that there should be additional restrictions you know I I
just wanted to recognize that the prior operations if you go back before 95 approval the the whole parking lot was gravel 95 approval reaffirm that the paving in the front parking lot on Meyersville needed to occur that did
occur now the applicant is seeking to pave the rest of the parking lot though the legitimacy of the rear parking lot becomes more of an option for patrons to utilize that entrance and exit as opposed to a gravel driveway i think what we'll see is a bit of uh the
patrons changing their traffic circulation to operate around the circle and go into what what works best for them um that's why we had encouraged additional stop signs stop striping and the accommodation of the crosswalk to
come across that area i I don't believe we we need to enforce any restrictions on the on the parking or on the the turning and if it was to occur it would occur at the county level being that it's county juris jurisdiction on both roads so I think I just wanted the board
to recognize that there will be a traffic pattern change an opportunity for people to use both driveways more evenly and I think it actually improves the circulation of the site because you're going to have parking out of the rear that can leave and enter the circle to come back around as opposed to
navigating through the site to get to Myersville Road one more question yes it's more about safety um I know that on New Vernon Road when looking north uh a lot of the overgrowth has been cleaned up so it's
more about line of sight when exiting the property on New Vernon Road and exiting the property on Meyersville um has that improved um so that it's not a safety issue because it's not just cars uh traveling
up and down New Vernon and Myersville you have cyclists and runners that also sure uh uh use those roadways so so in my review it's it's part of the reason that I I'm comfortable with not supplementing landscaping along the parking to screen
that parking because we do have a tight corridor there with the parking and then the the tangency to the to the roadway and not much shoulder so I think maintaining the the trees that are there and not doing ground plantings allows for that site triangle to be preserved
agreed because as you move more north on that uh property you start to get into that DP area where it is wooded and there is a um a a stream there just past that burm there is a stream there so uh definitely want to make sure that we maintain that line of sight for anyone
pulling out whether it's pulling out where traffic runners cyclists whatever thank you i I believe the remainder of this are just comments that were addressed in prior plan revisions and really don't require additional testimony tonight
unless um it's believed otherwise but I'm and I'm just checking them all through and I think you're you're on that so certainly we agree to the required outside agency approvals as required
so um with regard to the uh improvement there were some improvements done to the parking lot already then that was kind of halted to to allow for the approval um I noticed that some maintenance and repairs of the
guide rails were done there are some additional areas where a guide rail would be encouraged particularly along New Vernon there's a seg se segment of a log hold kind of as a a placeholder yes assume that would be replaced with guide
rail absolutely um and I'm sorry Mr v you talked about improvement on that back lot is that the part that was paved from that uh new Vernon Road entrance yes so to date the
work that was done as maintenance on the site prior to coming to the board included redressing the top coat and striping the asphalt parking lot the Myersville side right the new Vernon side was then uh bladed and and graded out with some with some material to then
level in the areas that had depressed and create a constant grade back to matching what was there so the site still drains in the way it had to the rear towards Myersville Ballfield mhm um and the intent is then to pave that area stripe it and reestablish the um the
center island because that entrance off of New Vernon used to be gravel yes and it's now been And so that so that portion had been paved way across across to the west side and then so then and prior to that it was at the curb line of the building that's correct right so
that part had been in expanded in in the in the gra in the paving the rest will now be done after approval and the rationale for why that was done uh it was maybe that's not a question for you
uh no it's not a question for me but I could say in the owner's defense it was the contractor had directly told me that it he had pushed forward and expanded that area because of the lateness in the
season for getting asphalt okay so he had made a decision that was not directed by the applicant okay fair enough and so then he stopped when I made a site visit and told him to cease thank you very much thank you um so one thing I do want to touch on
then is the lighting and I understand it's not your lighting plan so I'm not seeking for you to testify to the design uh but the it came up in the original submission that there like you had said there was retrofitting and repair of the
lighting maintenance and there were some discrepancies between the survey of where lights were located and then where lights would have to be replaced that had I believe been there before um and when I look at the lighting plan specifically one of those locations
being um is there a particular exhibit for the one uh it's it's a plan by Park West engine Consulting Engineers it's E1 dated 11124
okay it said was submitted and it was submitted yes it's part of the revised submission well in advance of 10 days um so there is a proposed new lighting we're related you know the two of us soon soon maybe maybe we'll get there
we're getting close one of us might have to change religions i was I was the first born to win uh so there's a proposed new lighting plan and then there's a proposed temporary lighting lot lighting plan mhm um I
see a call out to the center island there's there's what were two um I guess foundation protection boxes one of them I believe still exists and the other is gone and there I believe there were originally two lights
and one remains and it seems like they're toggling between the two plans of which one is proposed and which one which one's proposed on each plan do you know if both are being proposed to be added
uh so my understanding just to clarify is that the right side temporary lighting plan that's the retrofitting that they already did okay with the one exception being that of those two diamond shapes on that plan where that you're talking about the center island
in New Vernon Road yeah they're showing the northerly one with the light it's actually in the southerntherly one as it stands today which is what's reflected on the left side of the plant right right that's the toggle that's the discrepancy okay correct now the left
side it is my understanding that the the applicant is seeking to keep the lighting that's out there today this left side was more of um if what's out there today was not satisfactory that that's my understanding talking to the applicant
okay so I can bring Leo back up for that but yes his opinion is that his opinion is that the lighting is adequate and is essentially the existing lighting fixtures that have been refurbished and
there are no immediate plans to add any additional lighting okay so there are areas on the plan showing zero foot candles specifically along Myersville Road
um in the transition between the side and then the rear around the corner of the building um we would have to address this the design deviations with an approval if we're accepting them as they are or
taking the recommend or requiring the improvements so the the plan as what we would call the the right side the temporary parking lighting plan which is the existing retrofits does not meet our code requirements
if Mr would would there be a relatively simple way of phrasing what would comply requiring them to comply if it's not ownorous it's add lighting well it's ad lighting and there's some rocket science it it's
been it's that's why you're it's been proposed on the consultant's plan but it's not what's being requested so that that's not the only solution i can't say that if the board wants to impose a
condition of needing additional lighting and you could leave it to the approval the board's engineer certainly consent if we we have testimony that operationally it works we can verify that and do a light test if
necessary during because it's now operating and then we could we could address that at a later date yeah and would it be to conform to the ordinance subject to your uh No it would be to I would prefer it be to improve the
lighting to meet what I would deem as operational deficiencies so it would it would meet in the middle between the applicant feeling that it already meets their needs and me believing that it needs to provide additional coverage what is the
biggest concern on when you look at that is it that area that's northwest corner yes uh yeah for me it's it's coming around the building in the middle of the site northwest because you're introducing that driveway as a more steady use so if we see that the
building lighting and the ancillary lighting the building and the area is operating well and it's just not showing on the plan then that's going to make me feel comfortable with that is there a walkway is there a walkway that goes right along that uh when you exit the building and make a right there's a walkway all the way to that corner right
so you have sidewalk control over to New Vernon so you probably would want to make sure that you have sufficient lighting right whereas I'm not really as concerned with the Myersville Road because of the adjacency to the roadway and we don't want it we don't want to have light pollution into the roadway
there that's right right and and to clarify just a reminder that that light pole in the middle of the parking lot is actually in the southerntherly island not the northerly one so the real numbers so what we see there I think we're going to translate some of that to to get rid of some of that concern I have when we see it in the field and
that would be my area of concern as well but it's it's much easier for us to meet an operational standard than it is to in the field confirm compliance with our lighting standards it's just the actual and the and the paper studied will never
match while we're on the subject of lighting though could you clarify sign lighting and how is the bowl going to be lit uh is the there's is there lighting on the signs on the building
yes there is uh lighting that's specifically directed at these features the signs that noted here uh you are correct this is uh I'm learning this live as we speak sorry there is a light at the bulb for
sure i guess this would be upward from the ground right from the western side of the bowl and that picture would be to the light he might need to testify we're getting into unknown realms for myself i might bring back
as you know you remained under there'll be a light right here on the ground mhm you might have to hold the mic up just so people can hear so there'll be a light right here on the ground roughly few feet from the board and one more here and then one will be
on the side so when you pull in the parking lot you will see the ball so it give you two lights and one in the front what's there now there are lights but they are I haven't put them on yet okay and then it's two lights further on the front over
here which is a two lights in the bottom that will upright they will hit they will hit the sign and that's that's the ground sign that's the ground sound yes the um the other ground sign the other ground sign yes not ground correct and then it's a light that it's a light also
coming from Vernon's side towards a circle on a round on a circle sign hitting a wall but no light when you come on a circle from Chadam side on a wall you have no light in that sign because there just I thought that the
light on that area in that circle it will be a little bit too too much of lighting for the cars and people so I did not put any light there cars approaching will be correct okay thank you
so Joe did can is Joe are you complete with your list i am because then I want to unless you have a question on the lighting i do want to move over to the planner so on the lighting can I just double check the the timing goes off at the
appropriate time and how much lumens and is projected skyward is that all Joe are you comfortable with where the lighting is just because it's in a sensitive area down there and I know we've talked on other applications
about Eddie pollution light pollution you mentioned a word a minute ago as well for the site lighting or the signage lighting sites the site lighting um yeah I mean I think do we testify they are at the original approved
locations it it the site functioned what's what's that is it really downward shielding screening it'll I'll have the opportunity to address it during a a night field visit I just want to make sure that whatever
existing or not that it meets any concerns that we have about down lighting and but not light pollution go north under perfectly understood and again we will abide by the engineers uh recommendations and requirements
That's fine so stipulated want to make that point to you Joe just be conscious of that if you would light pollution yeah there's there's a relatively tight footprint on these existing fixtures but they are they they appear here without
shielding so there's a location at the Myersville Driveway and then the location uh just up New Vernon that might provide some spillage to be that that I'll take attention to so you you got the details i'll leave that with you thank you
thanks okay yes please thank you thank you we we've raised a number of issues that have been addressed for the most part through the testimony we've been hearing i mean the one technical question that I think remains was just on the how you calculated the square footage of the
wall mount the the round signs just confirming uh was it based on a square or there's I'm doing the math correctly maybe using geometry to calculate that it's listed as 12.6
square feet on plans uh you mean 14.8 14 yeah we Oh that's the I'm sorry that's a facade that's the allowable uh yeah the proposed 12.6 right so that was actually using the the circle okay not a box figured as much okay which is which
is consistent with the way the ordinance reads for measuring the area it's the whatever has the lettering on it and is an actual sign face uh beyond that I don't believe we have any other questions on the technical aspects of the for this witness thank you okay
great thank you i'd like to open up to the board for any additional questions i do have some clarifying but was there something you wanted to ask earlier or did you ask the point of the parking
do I look like I want to say something no but you have you've made your point on the parking earlier that was what you was going to ask you want to take this sign down so you can see us
sorry ju just on polishing the few over there i get it there you go thank you just for my own benefit at least on the conditions for prior for prior approval we went through the list right so I made
a couple of notes so the bar you talked about 26 going to 20 seats going to 26 seats yeah just to clarify the the bar itself shows 14 on the plan at the bar i think that was the restriction in the resolution when we're referring to 28 I
think was the number in the end that's including 30 30 we go with 30 yeah 30 that includes four four tops that are in the bar area but it's actual table seating okay so are you trying to strike this from the prior approval this limit
of 20 seats was that the intention that I understood because you're now saying this plan supersedes 20 supersedes and make the 560 600 right but that would not be under the conditions of p approval that you want that whole thing
struck because it now be replaced by this yeah yeah so I'll make sure I good on that or understood it um yeah a number of events we we can talk about
the going to strike the uh 210 seats was that in the intention now on the restaurant is limited to a total 210 seat no 210 as indicated by your engineer and and uh Leo is that that with architectural improvements in the
future we could go up to that but given the architectural plans that we have the maximum would be 178 so you still want to keep with the 210 yes and recognizing if it did go to 210 my presumption is parking would not be adequate so we would have to come back to the border if
we're going to exceed the need for 73 spaces right and if you have more than 25 new then EV comes into play exactly so yeah okay right so So you want to leave that there i just want to make sure that's going to be left the plan's going to supersede okay okay
uh and can we just double check and and the last one was the the setback of the the sign but you that you want to resend that as well because of this yes yeah like the barian relief dv
yeah yeah and the other ones be in i just wanted to double check okay sure thank you for that right pam I know you have a question uh just you're working with the D about plantings and trees yes
and we um have a shade tree commission that lists the trees that are appropriate for planting as long as they both agree we're okay exactly my point i would imagine that they um If not exactly the same they're very close
right i would think so but can we confer with the list that we have from our shade tree commission i can confirm that the applicant will first get the recommendation at the D and then can go to your shade tree commission to confirm
that sounds like a good plan very good speaking of the D approval if you could just clarify what approval specifically are you pursuing from the D i wondered if you could elaborate on that yeah absolutely so it wasn't a permit application it it all started when he
was doing cleanup back there of materials that had been dumped and D enforcement came out once they realized what he was doing was actually what they would want him to be doing they sort of just teamed up on that effort so they've D enforcement has been overseeing that
so there is an an open case with regards to that or has the case been closed with regards to the removal activity whether it's been closed I don't know i I would think it's still open until the trees are planted correct and I'm getting a nod yes yeah so
normally if you were to propose disturbance in that area it would have triggered permits you would have asked for it by application the the area was historic dumping illegally and they were in good faith cleaning that up not realizing
they were in a in a regulated area so D enforcement looked at it as opposed to D land use for approvals and enforcement decided that it won't go to land use for an approval it would stay with them to be mitigated appropriately
so you know the concern turns to then safety of occupants and people coming onto that site uh will there be improvements with regards to protection from whatever the contaminants are uh it was my understanding it was just um
construction debris and other remnants gravel and other materials that were dumped there by some unknown third party and those materials were taken out and removed and then the area was leveled that grading activity was the only
objection enforcement had so there's not a risk with respect to the planting of the future trees no no in regards to disturbing more right impacted soil right top soil is brought in assure would would have met residential
standards right so that area is then restored and stabilized and then there's the barrier of the guide rails to demarcate the area that the patrons and then the regulated area behind it that will start to naturally grow back in around the
enclosure for the And then the final question I mean will there be a need Joe in your estimation for some sort of a deed notice on then that site or whatever remains or will it be clean be clean now to most restrictive
residential standards right i mean it it was it's it's in D enforcement's jurisdiction and their discretion and based on the nature of the materials that were there and their understanding i don't believe any sampling done but it was all removed and then it's been
restored and stabilized or is is being restored and stabilized okay with clean import great thank you down this end any other questions um
what I wouldn't mind doing at some is just go through the variances seats and additions we look at that yeah can we can we Yeah we'll come we'll maybe come back to that but yes because that was going to help me frame my question i just want to make sure I'm on the same page before I ask my questions yes
please thank you Mr chair uh and I guess uh the work of cleaning up the back uh removing all the debris is a case of no good deed goes unpunished so uh apologies for that uh and there's a lovely nursery right down the street where I'm sure they have trees that you can purchase um the garbage bin is
definitely a concern for me because I had seen the previous occupant um there could be up to 20 vultures hanging out up in the trees and so forth so far I've only seen one uh the number of times I've run down that road and cycled down that road so hopefully it only stays one
so please keep an eye on that uh that garbage um for clarity was there any talk or consideration for possible tent erected in the drive in the parking lot or outdoor music or is everything contained
inside the building everything is inside of a building nothing outside okay thank you clarification you have the patio patio but patio has a um speaker music that's not a it's not enclosed yeah correct but
that music correct it was screened in by the previous uh owner i think you've moved the screens right now uh there may have been a door that accessed that uh at least the rear uh patio not the one on uh Myersville but I think you're
maybe planning to use that as potential correct guest area yes and I'm planning to screen it and no no no music live music or uh speaker music outside no not even in those uh on a on a on a patio
yes but the music will be lower for the dining it won't be because there is a resident uh just to the west correct right there's two residents over there okay um there is a ball field behind you on the north side yes uh I had seen when
the property was vacant number of the participants uh or family members would come and use your parking lot as uh a place to park their cars now they have improved the number of parking spots at the ball field you may find yourself
with some extra cars in your parking lot i don't know if you want to put sign up saying patients only or you're going to have have the police come or the tow truck driver or you ask them to I I don't think I'm going to really go after them at all because if they come there
on Sunday afternoon okay and it's fine with me if the town people park there in the corner not a big deal all right so just people when I have seen any can I can I question yes please i'm just looking at
um Google Street on this looks like there's a Bilco door you know a seller door is that what I see there on the north side uh in the back where the parking lot is yeah north side is that what yeah it should cross
yeah it's on the corner here and I guess the question is those are the basement doors yes they go straight down the basement okay you bringing supplies supplies yes okay where does garbage come out garbage comes through there out and goes straight down to the uh Okay so the garbage is going to be
taken out of that through those two doors yes got it okay and I'm sorry you mentioned a patio i don't see a designated patio it's called porch you are you calling that a porch
okay so there's not a an uncovered patio no okay is that your plan maybe I misspoke with you thank you any other questions i'm gonna turn it over to Steve here okay please yeah I just want just wanted
Yeah just a couple uh and there was also a request uh with respect to variances so as I understand the variances and we can do this again right before we vote as is my custom but uh the uh number of wall signs two versus one max permitted uh
sign setback for the non ball ground sign being uh zero setback versus 10 ft uh and then for the uh num sign area we have two ground signs uh that we're the bowl and the uh
non-b ground signs 37 square ft total versus 16 square ft max permitted and then um since we're considering both of those ground signs and there's a setback requirement in our ordinance technically I guess uh uh from our planner and
engineer uh we actually have two ground signs proposed whereas technically none are permitted in light of the deficiences that we're talking about is there a coalescence around that okay great
uh and and um I understand we uh don't have planning testimony per se but these are bulk variances and the board is well familiar with the alternative bases for bulk variance relief c1 undue hardship andor C2 benefits substantially outweigh the
detriments and serve the purposes of the MLUL both requiring of course the two prongs of the negative criteria um the uh from the engineering perspective I understood uh the number
of signs testimony to be there's two two streets two uh there's a these angled wall signs I take it you're saying might be a better from an engineering perspective uh better
approach than having just one wall sign was that accurate yes correct um and uh as far as the setback I understood that the uh you're utilizing at least for the nonbold ground sign uh the
um existing setback of essentially no setback correct yeah we were using the existing structure and just replaced the signage and is there if I Well you tell me did I understand there'd be some limitation on
going further back with that sign setting it back further andor was it better for some reason to have it closer to the um property line well both yes so there's a a fairly
narrow um island and fairly shallow behind it to use for that sign uh and then also given that that sign has historically been there without issue uh from a practical perspective it makes sense to continue that
and then with respect to the sign area 37 square ft versus 16 square ft total for uh that's ground sign area um just over I guess twice the maximum
permitted u from an engineering perspective um what is the reason why that would either uh be beneficial or would be uh it would be an undue hardship to uh to uh comport with
this yeah ordinance or both in your opinion right so I think we mentioned that uh this the sign proper so to speak that actually says the restaurant name that is conforming in size uh and this other item which is the statue while per
the regulations would count by definition as a sign we feel it's almost more of a landscape feature or a um artistic feature so to speak uh that really sits in that yard area it's not
the same impact as having so much signage on a site that you feel like you're blasted with advertising this is really acts quite a bit differently than than typical signage so I are you saying that the 25 square foot bowl is not the same as a 25 square foot sign that said
Blackbull restaurant absolutely right is is your argument yes correct correct i'm sorry and then uh two ground signs versus technically zero permitted given the setback deviation um what is your from an
engineering perspective what is your argument with respect to that being better than zero ground signs uh or uh uh right I believe complying with the statute excuse me the ordinance specifically
uh uh why would that you know be a hardship in your opinion or both well I I believe that we're limited to zero because the setback of the building is deficient but if you actually look at the site plan uh first off our deficiency is only by 6 in along
Myersville Road so it's hardly uh noticeable as you're driving by furthermore as you move further west on the property to where the signs are located that setback to the building opens up much more substantially uh so practically speaking um yes we we are
off by 6 in in that one corner closest to this intersection but where the signs are located we actually do have compliance set back to the building and that would afford you the opportunity then to have one ground sign but you're asking for two but I guess the fact that
the second uh is not your typical sign might play into your contention exactly and the first sign being also duplicative to wayfinding to the entrance right at the driveway correct
okay you don't need me to go through the conditions right yeah only reason it's going through that quickly is because we have two new board members so I want them to understand if you wouldn't mind just what before we have a discussion as well that they
aware of some of these aspects that we are going to be looking at yes so in addition to the deviations the conditions yeah just if you don't mind because I think it might be just helpful for I think that's fine i do want to get to any public questions exactly exactly yes please sure oh so real quick the as
our board members know uh uh when you when you vote later you'll be deciding not simply whether uh to approve or deny an application um but all approvals uh in land use are with conditions so what you'll be determining is whether to
approve it with all the stipulated two conditions and possibly even imposing some that weren't stipulated that's conceivable um or in the alternative denying the application i always joke denials are unconditional they're unconditional um the the the uh it's not
a great joke but you know it's good enough it's on par with your other joke i was just Thank you i was going to say appropo most of my jokes but uh my twin beat me to it uh the um the the uh so the conditions that I have uh are uh basically the
items set forth in the planner and engineers report in that order Joe and uh the the um and as well as uh the conditions of prior approval on pages six and seven uh they're essentially modifying some of those conditions as
you heard uh my colleague to my left go through some of them uh the bar shall be limited to 30 uh seats in 600 square feet uh no dance floor except private events by the way I don't know if anybody wanted to have any limitation on the number of private events or not
that's up to the board and the applicant uh the restaurant uses shall be emphasized eating service shall be emphasized uh that stays the uh uh other than private events no for no entertainment other than the limited entertainment listed for those uh uh
holidays including uh the seven holy days of Marty Gro um there shall be no pool tables video that stays the race judicata i'll talk to you about it one day about what that really means but it what it really means to me is you can't have that provision in there so it's a good thing it's being uh removed uh the
restaurant is limited to the 210 max um we're keeping uh I think all the other ones but we're not we're the the request was to eliminate all exhaust or to be directed up uh HBC on the roof hidden uh and the other one to be uh uh requested
to be eliminated from the prior 1995 approval was the very last one about the uh setback uh 10 ft at least for the sign on New Vernon because uh we have a a request for variance relief for a sign with no setback that um as well as a few
other conditions we went through they'll be cooperating with both D well with D with respect to uh uh cleanup enforcement and uh landscaping including planting of trees uh and then also uh where poss where possible also
comporting with our shade tree commission's uh uh uh uh requirements I believe as uh as non-invasive species would that be Yeah uh the um and then uh the other conditions would be
um uh they would be permitted to administratively comply via the uh construction code uh for any EV spaces in the future without having to get land use approval uh they'd maintain the existing level of landscaping uh as well
as comply with D requirements with respect to landscaping in the rear uh the existing would be more to the front that they'd be maintaining uh encouraging guard rails along New Vernon in particular uh and the spot that uh
our engineer uh isolated uh add lighting to improve uh the lighting to meet operational deficiencies or to I guess to eliminate operational deficiencies uh meet operational standards subject to the review and approval of our engineer
uh and there may be a lighting test and again uh uh particularly with respect to site lighting uh subject to the review and approval of our board engineer so as to avoid light spillage and uh uh um night uh not dark sky compliance but
what about light glow light pollution yeah there's just something in the sky light but but yes light pollution um and I think those were all the conditions so if I may since uh I attempted to get them all in
here and then I'm looking back at the prior resolution I realized that I had started on condition 8 which was specific to the use on page 10 of the prior resolution mhm um it actually starts and conditions on page eight but
I'll just quickly summarize the first being regarding final architecturals of the building which is not changing and not applicable to the application at hand second being final landscaping was not spec specified by the board but
collaborated with the applicant by a subcommittee later which is essentially what we've discussed about the keeping with the uh landscaping plantings uh landscaping to be permanently maintained which was stipulated the
uh there was a walk on the plans which leaded to a different entrance which had been removed uh exterior lighting was to be turned off when the restaurant was closed uh and the site
lighting was subject to a night test for operational purposes as opposed to our code so our condition is compliant with that prior um only security lighting deemed necessary to be left on all night
and with respect to the use for the bar number seven site plan approvals granted uh exclusively as a restaurant and accessory bar not for a nightclub singles bar etc
uh with the exception of the upstairs room which may be used for parties so it was already incorporated into the prior use conditions okay thank you i think I hope just to see a little bit more thank you for doing that any questions on those
conditions before I open it up to the public well since I'm the new kid I get to ask all of them questions questions is it customary to grant a CO to a property before final
how about I handle this one uh so the the application in front of us uh is for the site improvements and those site improvements
are are going along with a long-standing effort by the applicant to address prior construction code issues by the prior owner he purchased from so the history of this site is that the prior owner purchased the site done renovations
without permits had been in violations with our construction code office and been in a long-standing uh matter that was then resolved by the purchase of the property by our applicant and he worked in good faith from that purchase with the construction
code office to address all those code deficiencies and get all the required permits for all the work that was done before him fix that work and do the work appropriately under UCCC under construction code from that point that that matter
resolved itself with cos TCOs and cos I had TCO being temporary temporary and then the final CO Well I had expressed a concern that we were we had a pending application that the timing
was not going to work out to release the cos and uh with that worked as in my township engineer role on the appropriateness in this scenario of issuing the CO for the
purposes of operating the restaurant consistent with the prior approvals until they were in front of us for the site improvements so we this is this is not normal yeah sort of an explosion it's all in good faith from the efforts of the applicant when they
purchase the property and working to correct the prior sins of the person they purchased from and then what is in front of us is their desire to beautify and enhance the site itself to support the restaurant they improved that makes sense thank you and the the other
question was just I I didn't see a lot of separation between first floor and second floor activities so when we refer to restaurant um and the exclusion except for these three
events would that apply to the second floor as well uh my interpretation of the condition was the entire restaurant on those on those dates being first and second and then and then the upstairs would be able to be host private parties
at the discretion of the business do we want to put that somewhere in here that second floor it is not just Christmas New Year's Eve and seven days of Marty Gro that the second floor you can have what as long as it
meets the occupancy standards you can have any event up there well yeah we'll add it to reaffirm uh what was existing condition seven certainly there's an approval uh the
resolution will not only include conditions of approval but will also include clarifications such as Thank you the one you just Well my husband's got a big birthday coming up who knows maybe I want the second floor that's uh no discount but it's not Christmas for New
Year's party does he happen to celebrate for seven days straight we can do that he'd love to as a board attorney let me advise that I'd be the only one to make jokes that can get me in trouble so noted
but but but not um I read the 1995 provision where they talked about special events to almost be like the restaurant shouldn't be hosting events and like bringing in a DJ and and whatnot i I feel like there's a difference between the restaurant like
being like "Come to singles night on Friday night we have a DJ coming in." And him hosting a 50 person small affair for a birthday party that might have a DJ i I don't want to see like any sort of club atmosphere or anything
but for example like my sister just got married up in Sparta and there was 20 of us and we had just like a very small DJ at Mohawk House and and it's a normal restaurant just like yours and so I I just want to make sure that we're not restricting
because it's not just you know the applicant like it's for members of the community that want to have a facility that's accessible for different types of events so and maybe I'm the only one that feels that way but I'd like to hear what other people think about like making sure that this isn't being
misinterpreted because I I think it is i I think this is like the restaurant shouldn't be hosting I I don't know something other than a Marty Gro event apparently that's okay but so um I don't know so is that is that what you is that what
the applicant also thinks I'm not trying to speak for the applicant but I I sense that there's a a miscommunication between your very fair question Pam and I think with the upstairs being a private party space I'm just talking the restaurant I don't think I customary i
don't know many restaurants that you go to that say "Well we can only the town is only letting us have you sit in this place to have I've never heard that before." Right so using the whole restaurant for the private party if if that is Yeah do you do that in your
other one in your other town i mean over there we have a um bigger place it's a 200 uh chairs per floor there's two floors there's 400 chairs there is three bars bigger operation um however I
understood for the private event or for the parties only Christmas only this understood if you do something big you kind of close the parking lot you make it a big deal the whole town knows about it for my private event in a restaurant i didn't think that I need to ask the
board i'm going to have 40 people upstairs with a little small DJ for their own private birthday party right but I think the question stems from is the whole facility or the whole facility if I close it to the private event for the night but it's not even you do that
I guess is the what I would do based if it's if the if the client willing to pay to close the restaurant down for the night but but it say it's not even I'm talking about I've been there I I'm not even talking about I like I'm it says there shall be no groups
except on Christmas New Year's Eve or could be any day at any time of a year think that a general relaxing of the prior language yeah because he may just have a group of 30 people that it's going to take up part of the first floor for a rehearsal dinner or like something
like that we're trying to control I mean I hate to bring it up South Street uh in Morristown that's not what we're looking for in which Myersville we got a long way to go before we become there's 50 liquor lices i think you can
control that and not say there shall be no groups other than Eve yeah correct so however you want to proceed i just that was one question I had and then also comment just about I I think um we should clear that before the just
just to be clear though it please do make the com but uh we haven't yet gotten to questions or comments from the public yep so and we'll we'll come back to the board yeah we'll come back to the board to provide um uh input before we uh decide on I just want to make sure
because I read all the relief and the conditions i didn't want anybody to think we're morphing into voting no no no no no no not at all in fact I think this is a good segue to uh open it up to the public so if there's anybody who would like to
provide questions or comments please step forward stating your name and your town affiliation one of these days we'll get another mic things are tight here in this town
charles Renowitz Millington and I don't know who this gets directed to from the applicant but in your conversations with the New Jersey Dforcement and discussions tonight you said that no trees were
removed was anything removed from the area in the wetlands other than the debris and soil whatever is left by this victim that dumped things come on up and please Yeah why don't you
just grab mic right there perfect i mean I can't list everything that was there there were pipes there there were debris there there was old uh woods that actually trees that fell down and they were completely on the floor there were
some of um I think bricks and somebody dumped even bricks there so there's a lot of different debris i cannot name you specific what was it but most was debris okay you mentioned trees so you didn't take any trees down but there were a lot
of trees there that were left that you had to remove correct they were fallen down and they were pretty much uh uh dead were these trees that were there i'm
assuming since the D is requiring you to replace trees these trees were in the wetlands i No they were not in the wetland they were behind right by the property but they were what DP says they're supposed to be 300 ft from the
water to be there's a there's not only the wetlands but there's the riparian correct area yes in that repairing area they were asking to add more trees if I'm willing to they did not force me either they actually would you add some
trees okay in the current area to be paved is it currently stone or is there a base of asphalt already in place in the driveway
there is a under first it's about 6 in or 8 in of gravel that was before there when we paved an existing paver when we mil that we put that mill in a gravel area regarding the signs that and this branding of the
bull are they currently in place and if so when they were how long have they been in The bowl has been roughly 6 months there maybe more 7 months in the summer time the sign has been put up roughly by
November i did not put lights on because since we were not approved yet we're just staying there that's why the lights are not up there's at least one drain from a down spout on the building draining into New Vernon Road for the safety of the
drivers bikers and pedestrians especially in the winter would you be willing to divert this storm water somewhere on your property i don't think I can because the uh the actually
naturally water the breeze goes the other side the water is coming down the down spout on your building running underground coming to the Belgian block out onto New Vernon Road
your your question is isn't that correct it's the water that comes from the building goes straight down by the street and it goes in actually in a um in a stream then it continues further
down there is a stream there that cuts the mermaid road what I'm asking is for the safety of the drivers the bikers and the p pedestrians especially in the winter can you divert
this water that's coming from the downspout off your building underground out the Belgian block into New Vernon Road can you divert that when it's coming down the down spout to your storm water management system i don't think I
can no um is is this something you could opine on please do need to look at the plans have you submitted to and received approvals from the county planning board we did
yes and that included review of any drainage concerns to both county roads by the county engineer yes okay thank you personally I'd have to investigate it further if if there's still an open
question on it i think the question is could this be done from an engineering standpoint the issue is like the drainage that we're putting in is on the opposite side of the building so that would be difficult without routing all the way around so there's a
question of elevation there does the pitch work and then secondly you know how much sidewalk and curving has to be ripped up in order to make that happen so would it also require county approval to relocate it no no to relocate an interior to site would be part of our
site plan approval up let me ask this question of the owner in renovations to the building did you change any direction of the roof gutters to downspouts no so the
condition that's being discussed was there prior to your purchase the discharge of roof gutters to the county road is remains the same from your purchase through today correct i didn't
add or change any direction of water so I would assume it's part of prior approvals of the site and was also then reviewed recently by the county i I was just going to make that point it
was also reviewed reviewed and approved by the county correct the county didn't raise any concerns no thank you there has been whenever this was approved and what's happening now and
yeah I swear you in so it counts sure raise your right hand please do you swear to God or affirm testimony you're about to give any testimony you already gave and any testimony you will give in the future in this matter is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you please proceed i
guess the question becomes there's a new owner here conditions have changed we've been public this town's been publicized that this is a great place to ride bikes you get on New Vernon Road on a Saturday and
a Sunday or even in the mornings it's very heavily traveled by bikers and people cutting through what I'm asking for and maybe the county missed this if you have storm water coming out onto New Vernon Road that's heavily traveled by
bikers especially it's a dangerous situation maybe they're not aware the county isn't aware of the use of that road for bikers this was fine when it was the Myersville in in 15 years back conditions have
changed so we need a little consideration here of trying to re-engineer this process to taking a a a downspout put it in a drywall as opposed to running in the road i'm not an engineer let's talk about conditions
that changed so that that's why I asked specifically from the time of their purchase if he's modified those roof leaders because the rain hasn't stopped falling since the Myersville in closed and the roof leaders haven't stopped
discharging to the location that they discharge so if if perhaps the county is not aware but the county specifically has jurisdiction on matters that abut their roadway or impact drainage to county facilities
and so they have two bites at the apple for both the frontage on the roads to the county which is why they initially went there but they also have it for any drainage impacts of this site or a site that's interior from the county road
just just be aware if you've gone to our Myersville Christmas tree lighting a lot of people walk up and down that road by the restaurant and if there's ice and water there we're going to have some problems we're going to have some lawsuits okay conditions do change i I agree and and and just because the
county may have made a mistake we don't need to make the mistake this board doesn't need to make a mistake that That's not what I'm saying what I'm saying is the county has jurisdiction it's their roadway it's their improvements it's their infrastructure we cannot compel them to do anything
that they don't wish to work with us on and the county is in constant conversation with the municipality about the Meyersville Circle and traffic as well as the lines of sight and improvements to that
intersection for drainage and circulation i think we can say it duly noted thank you for your comment i appreciate that that's what I'd like to hear duly noted thank you for your comment
just as an avid cyclist I've not had any problems uh riding my bike uh down that road or running down that road with ice and or water also during the uh holiday and thank you very much for turning on the Christmas tree uh for at Christmas
um that roadway is blocked and you cannot walk that way because that's where the fireworks are going to be set off from it is blocked right at the top where the circle is so no one's walking that way thank you great thanks all right i'd like to turn it over to the
board for any last comments i I assume that you have no other summation comments you kind of already did your summation but I do want to give I want to give both the applicant attorney an opportunity to sum summarize and then we'll come i don't know if you have any
additional summary comments the the uh why don't we have the uh since I uh I believe the testimony is closed we've closed the public portion for questions and comments just for clarification sake so I think it's summation time and then the board can deliberate and vote and if the board
wishes me to go back through relief andor conditions they know where to find me very very short summation i agree with your summary of what the conditions are and what the stipulations are and we
hope that the board approves thank you great thank you okay what I'd like to do is just kind of go through uh board members uh Bob starting with you if uh you'd like to just offer your perspective we're just going to kind of do a quick discussion with regards to
the application any comments you'd like to make briefly okay so this is my first application um welcome there you go gee thanks um some of the things seemed intuitive
based upon the way the the whole restaurant's laid out you know the two signs on two main streets seem to make sense and if that requires variance I can understand that um because it it it sounds like most of it's thinking
that there's one face to a fronted street and that's one sign so seems logical to me um the the bull is an interesting feature um and as far as I'm concerned it it's okay with me i I didn't know it
was fiberglass i'm glad it's fiberglass because it's on a road and that would have concerned me if it wasn't um the the lighting stuff that Joe brought up I didn't catch when I looked at the lighting piece i appreciate that
um I appreciate the explanation on the DP involvement yeah no good task goes un punished um and having worked with the DP a lot good luck in getting your
answers um other than that uh I thought the reason we brought this to us primarily was on the parking lot right and I appreciate all the background information now understand how a lot of
this transpired over the years and um that the conditions as laid out in the the old Myersville in approval is is pretty consistent with
what they're asking for so from my perspective I think I understand and Great thank you good summation you're you're an old hat at this Bob you're seasoned beyond your what you've said your experience is yeah engineers
are engineers you have anything to add Scott we'll go right down the line yeah I'll just add one thing um you know this idea of um closing the restaurant and reserving it for private groups i I I think it should it should not be left indeterminate how
many times a year that could happen i'll throw out something arbitrary four times per year once every three months i I just feel that that's a that that's a gap that we should define if I may just for clarification that's for the
whole restaurant right and not the second floor to have private events absolutely right does that seem reasonable four times a year that was 12 again it could be entire year and none of it will happen but it could be
sometimes every week someone wants to have the restaurant to themselves right you don't get to store them up if you don't use them yet be very hard for a year it's four limit it's four limited what do you think is I never need it more than four what do you think is a fair maximum might I suggest
once a month once once a month maybe okay yeah the 12 year probably because you might get three four in Christmas time or the month of December or get in June while schools are getting closed and everybody wants
to have it i'm just curious how you got to manage that though when people expect to show up for dinner and they find out it's closed if you do that that would be the advance yeah yeah so that will be people call for reservations and I'll say none and and again if we do stipulate to that there still would not
be any outside tents etc this would still all be contained within the structure inside if Iorch something outside the parking lot or something outside of the walls in a sense then I would come to the town asking permission for the day off well you'd have to get a
permit I guess for the day off to serve outside parking lot let's say example that That's a good point uh the previous owner uh when it was operating used to have events in the parking lot it was once a year that they did something the community would come in and they would
do something so that might be and a permit would have to be we're not talking about the Christmas tree lighting we're talking another event yeah right that' be addressed under our temporary event okay good point you probably more loud music yep perfect but it's during a day it's during a day
and it's published and Yeah okay great thank you good comment thank you David anything to add yeah a couple just on that point so how would we Right now it's about nine days right christmas two or three days New Year's Eve seventh day of Mardigra presumably not the seventh
day of Martyra right so it's about 9 to 10 days um are we going to strike the whole the whole language here and it's just now focus on the 12 days that we just mentioned and that allows you then to have DJ i think that makes sense but
just strike the whole just get out of the Martyra get rid of that whole thing get out of the Get out of the Marty GR unless we allow that's Marty Gro i think we should allow this Marty GR yeah it's already
I'm not even sure they have seven days of Marty in New Orleans every day every day is Morgan i got to get out more from the Epiphany until Ash Wednesday that's true all of Marty G you got to go you got to You got to go down
to Nor as opposed to 40 days of Lent can we go down that path well that's why you do it so you get it all out of your system all right anything else David yeah just one minor minor point i think what as you picking back bit on Scott the statue it's it's in no opinion no no
issue particularly but I think the size matters here a little bit because we have to define the size and I think we have to probably go three-dimensional because it's a unique situation because I'd hate not to have that somehow encapsulated because next week you come down with a ball that's
five times the size so I think it's appropriate to size even if it's with the actual sizing right now 50 in 6 foot whatever it is but I think that should be something that we define the 6T by 50 in by 30 in I think that should be defined somewhere
you're not going to make a bigger bowl so you don't come back with ball's already there wait you get a point I don't want to approve a statute without some dimensions so that was my last comment thank you for the way Mr john yep thank
you um I'm opposed to the uh putting a number of how many times you can close your uh building to a private event i rather leave that to you to manage um I will say that this does meet the master plan especially for the Myersville the rehabilitation of the of the circle
there so thank you very much for taking that on um and the other piece uh that is aligned with our master plan is the two EV spots mhm i don't know if you're going to want to break through that asphalt to run lines out to put in two
spots uh or have it pre-wired and then revisit at a later date i don't know but going from 73 to 75 or 75 to 73 you may want those two parking spots and there's plenty of people with EV cars out there and I think that just might be a draw uh
that you have it maybe a subtle draw but a draw so I'm I'm uh in favor of keeping the uh provision about adding the two EV spots can you um can you expand on why why are you opposed to limits on number
of you know I think we're both going to be suggestion that might help articulate what okay I think sometimes people come before us and we start analyzing things that are outside the
application I understand part of this was in the existing uh 1995 resolution which is which I understand but I just want to make sure we're not overreaching as a board and so what I think um I want to point out that the Sterling Hotel
closes for special events and doesn't have to come before I think it's just like a little silly to like dictate to a business owner when they can have a private party but I think what you're going to agree with is they shouldn't have a DJ maybe more than 12 times per year maybe something like that but I
think you should be able to have a private party whenever you want and I suspect it's not going to be that often because you're a restaurant and you're a restaurant and and I don't think we need to dictate it because I think we just had something like this price is going
to dictate it right so I don't want a DJ every day of the year but I think at Christmas time he might have a 50 person event one day a 20 person event another day and then a 100 person event another day and we could talk all day about all
the different restrictions and I think it's just I think it's overstepping so I I Yeah so I just Fair enough suggest like a DJ max of like 12 times a year like maybe like outside hired
musicians DJs maybe that's a 12 times a year max i'm not speaking for you that's just my suggestion i don't know if the applicant would have When you say outside are you talking again being outside exterior building okay like a third party external contracted
musician right turning turning the space into a venue as opposed to a restaurant use right right closing for a private party is still complimentary to the the use and inside the building is still not going to be perceived by the external
public any other way than the business operating during its business hours yeah and I just think it's very very common for restaurants to get phone calls hey can you host our office lunchon hey can you host whatever and I think if we're not super clear all of a sudden he's going to be like wait am I allowed to do
this you know what I mean and then all of a sudden even us you know or somebody from another town is going to be like I can't use that place because they said that we can't you know have a 20 person event there so I just want us to be very clear and very careful um and then also the comment about how will they know
again the hotel I've shown up and I' and I'm like "Oh they're having an event there like what's going on?" So I think it's just not as problematic as we might think it will but I don't think we were talking about large groups of 30 or 40 people we're talking about that whole restaurant right but even if it's the
whole restaurant and there's no DJ is that a problem why do we care okay it's basically all the reservations are booked up by one person paying the tab it's still a restaurant use is so then how do you how do you agree with you i
love the logic so then how do you deal with this DJ thing and how do you deal with the the resolution language i think you just Well maybe I'll work on swing for 10 seconds if you want to give your comments sure please i I agree with that
um Mhm don't want to be DEI here but these are all Christian events new Year's I guess you could say not necessarily what if somebody wants to have an event at the end of Ramadan or or something else i would say not to
limit ourselves to just language just a question of number of times uh this really has nothing to do other than to encourage the applicant to be a good neighbor there's um Mountain Hill is
right there you've got Casemaya we've had issues in the past with restaurants that open up not being especially neighborly so have you met the owners of those other restaurants yet i
just to establish a good relationship again has nothing to do with your application but it's um it's the good thing to do and that's that's all I have until Casemaya wants to put up a Mexican
statue they they have two cactuses out there they have two cactuses out there they're going to put up a matador and Mountain Hill's going to put up you know Mount Vuvius or something like that but um yeah that's that's all I have the
u okay I'll still give her the time but on on that kind of point I think the intent of the original condition was not necessarily closing down the restaurant or hosting private parties but I think
it was more what you'd say a theme night right like looking at the Christmas festivities and trying to promote the brand of joining people together on a celebration night or during Marty Gro and theming it and so I think if we're
looking at the opportunity to host themed days of a limit so the Kentucky Derby or whatever else is going on the world you know the Super Bowl party or something else i think that's
where you're getting away from the restaurant with a complimentary bar and being more of people coming there for that activity that day do we impose that on any other establishment here in town no no then shouldn't do it to me it's almost like the difference between a
restaurant and a catering site and I heard very clearly the applicant testify that he does not want to be considered catering right those those conditions read to me as a bit of belts and suspenders on the intent of
as that application came forward it was contemplated as a bar with a access a restaurant with an accessory bar and that being the use and it specifically says if it was any other machination it may not have been considered for approval so I think he's keeping in that
intent of that use and operating within his controls is at his discretion as a business owner well you've been open since December have you closed down the restaurant for any events right the the market will dictate yep theresa
we want to come back to I thought of this all my own that's fantastic i mean you're going to split no I was going to say AI won't replace you but you will be replaced by AI if you don't start using for an attorney you're That's the fastest I've ever seen an attorney do i'm in house now i don't
bill hours that's a It's a 6 minimum my partner All right I'm I have to digress my partners used to I used to build this many they used to bill at 0.25 for you know for like a simple
email so okay anyway louder entertainment including but not limited to DJs bands or group performances shall be permitted to no more than 12 times per calendar year and these events must be scheduled in advance and shall be conducted in a manner that minimizes
disturbance to neighboring properties i think that's fair as long as that's not too What was that is that our code no no i just I just general I just made it up because I think impressed again to to to do Joe's point for a second i think
there's that difference between closing the restaurant for a private party that's and then the other thing is this more extravagant evening affair bit more that'd be more of a two and fro people come backwards and forward as opposed to close the
restaurant down and so everybody's there for the evening so I I I would think that's that's I'm still going to take the hard line and say do we impose this on any other ery in town no then we don't do it it's it's just the location
it's only sensitivity for me i my my vote would also be to not impose this i'm just using this if there's a way to bridge the gap but I agree that um I actually just don't think it's going to be that big of an issue i've been to his restaurant i understand what the vibe is and it's not like a
It's not a club it's not a club and my last very highend Yeah and my I'm not worried about it I guess is my fault and my last point is is if you had something like that it' probably be in the bar anyhow but it's really it's a small bar so it's not as if it's going to be the max will be people right having a good
time yeah I agree so I think the consensus is let's not even go there take it out okay sounds good nice language favor save that nice save that for the next save that save that the zoning board might want to reference that one i'm going to retract my I'm not
splitting my feet we're not using it we're not using uh again thank you for uh coming before us thank you for your investment in the community uh and in Myersville in in particular uh now I would like to
entertain a motion uh to accept this application with the conditions stipulations and I'll understand it to be a motion to grant all the relief sought the variances that we previously stated with all the conditions stipulated to buy or on behalf of the
applicant that we've already stated and and just a minor point on the size of the statue we good with um codifying that it'll be clarified as will I already forgot the another item but it'll be clear if I wrote it that's
the private party what was striking the language I Yeah oh oh you wanted clarification on something else though earlier was it the upstairs room uh the separation of first floor second floor no you know what whatever it is if if we haven't
eliminated will be clarified comparison of the trees of the D and our Oh yeah that was a stipulation that they would offer a planting schedule to the shade tree commission oh that I think you're good with the understanding that the D would most
likely overrule or dictate what needs to be done got it preemption preemption thank you just like that is a big word that's a that's a just like race we can't we can't eliminate that from ex existence by putting it in the resolution can we
please come to a motion so moved thank you second second okay okay committee Lavender yes vice Chairman Jones yes miss Dill yes mr hans before I vote I just want to thank you for doing what
you have been doing and re-energizing that part of town so I greatly appreciate yes i approve you Mr livera yes Miss Ojins yes and Chairman Richardson yes motion carries great congratulations thank you very much
thank you and the food there is excellent and the horseradish is out of this world out of this world minor minor point happy hour would be a good introduction by the way and a bar menu i want to see a bar menu ask the board to see
if you're uh I'd like I'd like to make a motion to hold our next meeting at the on nights when we hold committee and board meetings extend his hours to midnight so wait just for clarification
on the record since we're still on the record uh there'll be no attendance until at least 45 days after notice of adoption of the resolution good point yes we I've already been there buzz right attorney Buzzkill I think so we
have to stay out of there for 45 days not necessarily i'm going to walk by and check the uh plumbing just go and discuss all right thank you guys we still have a couple of quick items here uh but I do want to be sensitive does anybody need a break or can we push
through because I don't think this will be more than I'm pushing 15 minutes we're good push through is everybody good 15 minutes we're finished thanks guys thank you okay so we will return to the agenda and we're going to bypass the meeting
minutes that our secretary is working on thank you next meeting uh and we'll go to the master plan consistency review uh so does anybody have any comments on
the two ordinances ordinances ordinance 565-25 and Ordinance 566-25 and uh Mr warner I think you could clarify we need a motion second and on both of these correct right yeah the way
this works as the board knows very quickly uh is that uh any land development ordinance uh that is introduced by the governing body uh is referred uh to the planning board for master plan consistency review uh prior to a second reading and ultimate uh
hearing and presume it uh uh uh adoption by the governing body we have two such ordinances here and one with respect to fence construction permits one with respect to wall signs pertaining to residential home offices the normal
process is to hear from our board planner with respect to his opinion as to whether or not uh these uh or I should say whether these ordinances are not inconsistent the double negative it is a lower bar than being consistent and
substantial consistency works close counts um okay close counts um I'm not very sure and I'm sure to begin with the the the uh so uh perhaps we should hear from Mr
brigal on each of these uh ordinances uh so that then you can decide whether you're going to follow his recommendation and find them not inconsistent with the master plan if that is his opinion mr warner's correct the municipal land use law is very specific that the planning board's duty
is to review and report back as to whether or not is inconsistent with the master plan and any other recommendations you may have there is open-ended language as well um you know in my opinion with regard to the ordinances given their very focused nature compared to a more broad master
plan I do not see any inconsistencies um if there's anything individual board members think you know raises you know an issue that should be raised then you can certainly do that but as far as the overall intent of the MLUL requirements here I think there's nothing
inconsistent with regard to what's proposed and and just to be clear you may not be exactly aware these ordinances originated ated with us that's that's more of a reason the different form of us form so correct
perhaps with the collective even better but good thank you again um just as uh the chairman has uh stated both of these ordinances were reviewed by us uh came through from the
ORC the um ordinance review committee um it has gone to first reading uh following our recommendation on the changes of any of the language they have sent it back down to us just as our attorney has stated we've now seen that it is not inconsistent from our planner
so I think at this point uh we will u have final say on this to send back to the TC for second reading and public um uh comment and there is a possibility that it may come back to us for any refinements
and and I would recommend uh we take the extra 30 seconds or so to do each one separately motion second and roll call vote starting with 565-25 if chair's permission please
so motion please on that particular ordinance a question what what precipitated changing the um the size of the signs permitted on a home office what was why did that came out of well
you want to give the a little bit of history so the backstory on that is that came out of an application that came before the board where the uh sign was a 2x two foot square or square foot sign so that that's pretty big sign and that kind of that big of a sign in in a
residential area we were getting feedback from uh the residents that were opposed to that sign stating that this is just too big of a sign uh it would it would be it would it would it would add
characterist character from the res from the uh residential neighborhood so we said okay we're going to go with a smaller sign and this is what we settled on yep so it's not just one person that No drove this whole bus no no no this This came I drove the bus but there were
a lot of people there on the bus spreadsheet for the seating so so are we talking about both ordinances or just the the sign we're talking about just a motion on the first order on the sign i thought you could do 565 first oh
the first one was 565 that's what I asked yeah pam asked about the sign yes 25 yeah right right but I I had a question about 565 and this is where I it has uh a minimum
height for a fence on a swimming pool of 54 in and the the state minimum is 48 so where did we get 54 do we know that's probably that's pre-existing so
but we were talking about uh perimeter fences right you have to have a a perimeter fence around a swimming pool i'm not talking about the swimming pool we were talking about the property around no there's a Did we not change the swimming pool portion i think we did not we did not touch we did not change
so so that's existing that's exist that's based on UCCC code yep not the law UCC code overrides anything land use when it comes to this fence around right but what I when I did my research the
state rule says that the minimum height on a fence is 48 inches so who's who setting the I I don't understand how they're I'm going to say that was pre-existing i don't know who wrote whoever whoever authored that ordinance prior to us amending the
ordinance for the perimeter fence they created little bug they increased it right what you're saying right that's Yeah 6 in above four and a half instead of four it's four and a half instead of four our code's requiring four the code the the the code
is four right we're requiring four and a half and we're requiring four and a half so we're actually asking for more safety the higher the fence around the swimming pool we didn't touch the fence we did not touch around the No we only touched the
perimeter it's not realized to make to bring that in align with the uh construction code right yes uniform constru UCC i'm going to get Thank you is that something we want to entertain now at this point you want do you want
to lower it to be in conformance with UCCC is 48 i don't know off the top of my head i I didn't look at UCCC i only looked at what New Jersey stipulated new Jersey stipulate stipulates 48 in
and I was trying to understand why we would establish something different than what the state establishes because the state typically that kind of stuff I don't understand why we would go I mean because technically we can suggest it but I don't know that we can I mean Steve you would you well I don't I'd
have to see the state requirement in order to tell you whether exactly what it says and and for certain whether would preempt municipal ordinances if if it is if we are directly contradicting and it doesn't afford us the opportunity to be more strict then we would be
preempted i think rather than guess I didn't I didn't look at any of that yeah rather than guess uh particularly since this is an area which uh has not been amended but pre-existed in the ordinance and at least for the time being remains
u my recommendation be would be to do one of two things is either just find it not inconsistent if you agree with our planners professional opinion um or in addition to that maybe just ask the governing body to take note of that
particular section and and if the governing body wishes to uh and the township attorney uh excuse me yeah the township attorney wishes to look into it double check and make sure then you've done your uh job if not more so than your job by
just alerting to that fact those would be my suggestions or the case but it's never been challenged and you know and has it been challenged in the zoning board either it might not be enforced if it's preempted who knows yes your construction code official was
reviewed against UCCC not our code only the zoning effort is going right so either ignore it or say hey guys if you want take a look at it so my recommendation is to say that it is not inconsistent and that highlight to the
planning board uh to the governing body this variation that our uh the fence around the pool exceeds that of uh what is required by the state yeah and leave it at that y I think that puts us in a
better position with greater safety and and and Mr l if we want to find out who and why that was origin originated we're happy to go down and take a look at that we'll invite you to the party okay so that sounds like a motion
yeah um yeah motion to move ordinance 565-25 as stated not inconsistent with the master plan not inconsistent with the master plan highlighting the difference uh the variation of pool height fence u in long
hill u and that of the uh state requirement i'll second that great okay vice P Vice Chairman Jones yes committee Lavender yes miss Dill yes mr hans yes mr lavario yes miss Ojins
yes and Chairman Richardson yes motion carries excellent you want Go ahead i'm sorry you want to take the next one no I don't okay i can't make the motion no no no i just All right so this is uh so ordinance
566-25 this is the uh addressing the sign of the wall sign or or of a business in a residential area we have reduced the sign from a twoft by two foot or one by four uh however you want
to configure that uh four square feet to a two square foot uh sign okay is there a motion and this is a motion to find that ordinance not inconsistent with the master plan and leave it at that i have an issue with this
you what i have an issue with this i think help me talk it through forget what you said in the size i have no problem that's what we discussed before but under B right added or to permitted home office
uses right these regulations shall not apply to flags United States of America or to permitted home uses and this is quite extensive as to what is permitted here right which which paragraph B right it's struck out and then it's
been added with permitted home uses right so why that seems excessive to me flags emblems or insignia of a nation state county municipality school business or religious group provided no more than one such flag emblem or
insignia shall be permitted for each entity so you can have one for each of the military branches i that's why I take it and to note such individuals display 24 square ft in area no more than three flags shall be permitted on the property
these victims shall not apply to flesh night America or be or to permitted home office uses so the difference is just the or to permitted correct uses is added yes which makes no sense to me did help me understand i have no idea this
piece we we we looked at the we talked about it at I trying to remember this this particular piece though i just don't remember this one segment this I'm trying to even think of what the implication is in
actual real time like what it these regulations shall not apply to flag United States of America which is pretty serious or to home office uses why why we I don't know why the best would be just to remove that or statement just to remove that strike out completely be
leave as is remove the or statement out right back to state just don't do it if you remove the or statement there's no need to I just wonder if it got caught up because of the fact it talked about sign I I don't know i just I just apologize i didn't realize that until
just now say that again does that make sense anybody else mhm yeah so the reason that the strike that you're back anyways the reason that it says shall not apply to the flag of the United States i'm just saying just for this
guys guys let's let's just the last sentence the regulation shall not apply to the flags of the United States of America i believe that original purpose before revised was so
that a flag of two nations our nation and a other nation could be flown at the same time that's fine right that's a because without adding that of not applying to our nation then you would be restricted to flying our flag or another
nation's flag not two on your property but then they or permitted home usees i don't see where you would have flags for a permitted home and more than one that's that should be struck i just don't think that we should undo the I think you just leave be as it was unless
anybody just that's why I was reading i just want to make sure I apologize for unless that was a committee revision that was makes no sense intended so was it this when the sport came up with that ordinance change your intention was only to change G and not B
that's what I thought I thought somehow B got changed flags or anything yeah there was conversation about flags and we were talking about it talking about then I don't recall how it was so long ago that we talked about yeah it just just shot me now that's leave be so so
if if I understand the motion that's about to be made it's a motion uh to find 566-25 not inconsistent with the master plan but also to in the other matters uh language uh avail yourself of the
opportunity to recommend that uh the last phrase in be or to be permitted home use or to permitted home office uses be stricken so that B would be returned to its original correct language is everybody comfortable that's all right are we good with that yeah and
someone could just say that's the motion so move okay okay we have Scott seconding theresa motion okay miss D yes lavender yes mr
hanss yes mr lavario yes miss yes vice Chairman Jones yes and Chairman Richardson yes motion carries great just for clarification if I may D because I do it differently and differently here we don't do do a resolution we uh
there's a notification letter but now you have some particulars here correct so maybe uh the answer is first thing in the morning send it to me well exactly thank you uh both letters thanks great okay uh on to old new business this
should be five minutes or less uh or less i have one thing from the ORC uh this is regarding HPAC uh not being a commission but an advisory committee in land use 171 established uh establishment and uh composition
um section D it is uh written historic preservation commission and it should state um historic preservation advisory committee so the recommendation is to change the
two instances where it says HPC for acronym to HPAC okay no issues with that no issues okay write that up yeah write that write it up yep deb's already got it additional care
that while you got or any other updates there um I sent to Liz or no I'm sorry i sent around to or the comments that we all discussed about the apartments on the ground floor into Tom's template um
we've been all really busy so I haven't heard back from anybody in efficiency sake i don't know if we want to just bring it to the next meeting there's not I don't know that there's a ton more to discuss but I made this template a little bit more comprehensive no that's great to make sure that it's docu So the the homework we have is to bring our
comments or do you want them in advance of the next meeting uh if people have additional comments send comments so that way we can talk about it at the ORC um off cycle of the of the uh planning board meetings and then we can incorporate them and then separate from
that I sent to Liz the much more um just like procedural like the just ordinance name changes and whatnot um the zone name changes right changes i haven't heard back from her but per your instruction like let's just get that to her at least for drafting and then we'll
see those excellent um can I just add I recommend that we hold for now the um draft of the LU1 24.1 for the following reasons
um I feel we should wait until after the housing element of 2018 is completed that we also wait until the fair share housing plan of 2018 is updated uh I don't feel that it supports master
plan specifically for MyersB you're referring to the apartment correct okay well what why don't we I know that we will be discussing but my recommendation is that we put it on hold for now before we invest a lot of time and effort something we address and discuss and
look at the pros and cons of that i know people have put a lot of work into it but it is inconsistent with master plan good so that's a good segue Pam because the housing element draft has just arrived thanks to our board planner uh
it has a hard copy i will email it to everybody yes uh well yeah I think we can email it out but I do have a a a subcommittee um Scott uh Pam and Tony are going to assist in and I'd like to
just do a Zoom call maybe in a week that we could discuss it amongst a smaller group in regards to any comments on the housing element and then facilitate a discussion at if if time permits in the next meeting as well oh also uh I believe Jessica should be almost done
with her portion too so Oh for the for the fair fair share okay good so just so you know yes so Jessica is working on the fair share plan and uh the draft of the housing element was shared by Miss Ms lehaney uh with regards to that so I think we're
in good shape there but again time permitting I don't see any reason that uh the whole board can't have a copy of the draft it's just we'll have a subcommittee to help facilitate uh thanks to you guys paving the way it's a very efficient way to kind of get
issues out in regards to the general discussion if I may ask one question regarding the fair share plan aspect of the housing element fair share plan um since the uh fair share plan for the
fourth round is part of a pending litigation uh and that's a declaratory judgment action I believe that was filed by the township uh in even if the township accepted the number i'm not privy i'm
not affordable housing council um but uh the um the uh at least in some municipalities perhaps most uh the drafts are there's a deadline as everyone knows of June 30th for adopting
the housing element fair share plan as well as having at least draft implementation ordinances at the ready for the governing body to adopt um even though the AOC directive seems to indicate they should actually be adopted by June 30 and I believe that's
incorrect it's inconsistent with the statute um but uh but uh the the at least many municipalities have handled drafts as uh in the context of executive session until a certain point when they're ready or close to ready for
adoption i just throw that out there just as an information um certainly draft so the board talks about it in an executive session versus in until a certain point in time since it is until the public hearings until
the judgment is settled well effectively well no there you know the the the it'll be adopted publicly has to be of course but but but I'm just saying it at in the formulation stages i don't know and
that's really more something for the uh I guess the governing body and township attorney to maybe share their view uh with the board and the board can make a determination as to how best to
handle it with that input as well as guidance of the board's attorney i'm very confident our our professionals will figure out this uh labyrinth as we get through this process so is there a motion to adjurnn no no uh I have one
other new business i'm sorry that's okay yeah um I know that you're working on the zoning maps with uh Joe and uh Joe I just want to say thank you for uh the flood map uh presentation yesterday as well as the uh
vision for Central Park u but I have 39 line items here about uh zone reszoning things that need to be addressed that were in the um uh in the master plan so I'd like to work with Joe obviously I'll work with Randy to make sure we get that provision correctly you need some
additional assistance and a small Yeah I'd like to have Mitch uh join me uh as well to to kind of work through these well sorry well yep okay so that way we can uh address these 39 items as we start laying out the map of uh uh long
health good that's all I got good one quick old business um if I can i mentioned it earlier to Joe about the state plan and the conversation that Bob and I had with the com county representative yes and they asked for us
to go back to him or he asked us to go back to him about the sort of formulating that uh putting the townships together again something he had done he said a few years back but that's sort of fallen by the wayside so you like to re-energize that yes and I
think in our meeting or discussion on state plan we've pointed the finger to you Joe to help get that conversation going or at least an email sent to that gentleman so is that well it reminds me to thank you and Bob for going before
the township committee to present a cross acceptance uh summary i thought that was very well good thank you so So you're good with that do we need to Yeah so I will coordinate with the county about their prior efforts and then bring that to our administrator for an
opportunity to join any new efforts thank you okay now motion to adjurnn i make a motion to adjurnn second all in favor i thank you well done everybody thank you well
done another day