that this meeting would take place at Town Hall at 7:30 p.m. on February 12th 2025 Natalia can we have a roll call please yes Michael Zion Alison Canfield Frank sakami here Michael Cohen Here
Deborah nevas Cory biller here Jonathan Baxter here Sergey s here SJ here Gaston helper here we have a quum all right um not too much for housekeeping tonight I just want to
say we did um have a little bit of a reorg on the working committee for the housing element for the master plan um instead of Deborah NZ we're going to have another member of the environmental commission represent the environmental
commission um to make sure we didn't exceed our quum of five people um and that's that's pretty much it I think we're ready to start with the application Council are you ready yes Mr
got uh good evening uh members of the board Michael LaVine with Fox Rothchild here this evening on behalf of the applicant the high Center for l living Judaism um you will recall that last week we were here uh providing additional testimony in support of our
application um there were a couple of uh kind of open questions and loose ends and requests for um conditions that had come up kind of in the waning hours of the hearing um that we had said that we would get couldn't necessarily commit to all of them on the on the Fly we'd go
back and look at them and and come back to you so first kind of in terms of housekeeping items for this application I wanted to revisit what I believe were those those open issues and address those uh with the board and one actually goes back one hearing further to the
very tail end of the hearing immediately prior to the last one and that was when um we're providing testimony with regard to the roof manity BAC units they're going to be towards the center of the uh rooftop they're going to be enclosed by a screen and a general location was shown by our architect through exhibits
there was a question as to whether or not the applicant would agree uh if this board were to see fit to approve this application if they would agree to a post installation noise test in order to confirm that um the HVAC once it's installed and up and runting that it
would comply with the applicable njde uh noise regulations and on a skip that yes the applicant would accept that as a Kion of approval and was happy to comply with that thank you for that for the record digit for confirmation purposes and clarification purposes that's at
applicants cost onetime post occupancy consistent with nj7 call 29 and our ordinance correct that's correct okay thank you next one and these do all uh stem from the tail end of our last hearing uh a ago there was a question as to whether
or not the applicant would agree to limit uh garbage pickups at the site so as to be no earlier than uh 7 am I will point out that that's uh consistent with the njd regs that Mr Warner just cited to where they Define night time is from
10 P.M to 7: am and there's a more stringent uh noise requirement with regard to deal levels that are applicable during that time and the answer is yes the applicant would would agree as a condition of approval to uh limit uh garbage pickup to no earlier than 7
a.m. there was a question was really kind of an informational request as to whether the applicant would be using uh containers for its trash and garbage uh collection and removal as opposed to uh dumpsters the applicants looked at that I mean obviously there's a poity of
operational information to kind of draw from their expectation that was not unlike most non-residential uses there will be a need for dumpster use from from time to time um so is not in a position to pledge that there would never be any dumpsters used at the site but again is hopeful that with the
stipulation of not having those even if they were dumpsters picked up prior to 7 AM that that would address kind of the main concern with regard to the clanking of uh of dumpsters on the site um there was also a uh request that
really came from the uh objectors attorney um with regard to um the portion of the there's a portion as our plans show there's a portion of the bio Swale and sand filter uh a small portion of which
encroaches into the 25 foot buffer from residential that's required as a conditional use standard and while the applicant you know still maintains that in light of the fact that this it's essentially just a vegetated s rather there are no structures there's no active use there's certainly no parking
there's no uh active activity of any sort really just to kind of remove the the question as a as a potential issue at the applicant would be willing as part of of resolution compliance and standard plan revisions to Simply remove those encroachments from that 25 foot
buffer and stay completely out of it for purposes of that of that feature if I may chairman I I take his representation is that it would still be feasible uh the uh the Swale and the uh
bio bio swell still be feasible for purposeful Water Management purposes that's correct um there was also request a request again coming coming from the obors attorney as our plans show there is an existing six foot tall wooden fence that runs along the western edge
of the property and there was a request that the applicant agree to keep that fence uh in place uh and comply with you know the applicable maintenance requirements of property maintenance code in town such that you know a continue to Be an Effective uh visual screen and the app yes is willing to do
that as well um there was a point of clarification we had submitted a uh updated uh tree replacement and removal plan and one of our the tree inventory chart noted some existing trees in a parenthetical as removed and there was a
question as to whether or not that was really accurate or whether they are actually slated to be removed and I can uh confirm on behalf of the aent that those are trees to be removed they have not already been removed and we would uh correct that uh table to properly uh
read that that's in fact the intent and the last one which really dug tailes into our need for a small bit of supplemental testimony is there was a question uh that was raised at the tail end of the last hearing as to the Fine
points in particulars of our calculation of lot coverage as you're where one of the conditional use standards is that the house of worship comply with the underlying R3 Zone requirements with regard to maximum watt coverage and in consultation with the board's planning
consultant and also engineer it came to light that lot coverage for purposes of complying with that requirement is not just impervious coverage but also areas of accessory use and put an even finer point on it it was whether or not the 900 square foot play
area that we've shown on our plans and dates back to one of our interim Concepts that we shared with the board was included should be included um and so uh we have I believe it's been distributed to the board um as has been the case uh throughout these proceedings
I think it's been rather helpful to all involved and productive is um our engineer was in direct contact with the board's Consultants to try to get on the same page with regard to the Fine points of that calculation our updated calculation has been submitted I'd like
to call Mr fron back just for a very limited purpose of reviewing uh for the board this calculation of lot coverage and try to get confirmation that that's in fact correct and that as we believe we are under the maximum amount uh
allowed so um I understand we do not have our typical whiteboard here this evening is that correct so that being the case I think Mr fante does have handouts it has not been I'll have him confirm it but it just is simply a copy of what was submitted and I believe it's been
available on the municial and before we do with the chair's permission uh because I always I'm afraid I'm going to forget um and I rarely do but it's when I'm not afraid that I'm forget that I forget so let me stay afraid that I'm going to forget um can we uh confirm
that we have an extension of time to act for the board to our or the day after our at least our next meeting um and uh and I'm going to rely on someone other than myself they tell us to when that is because I have a history of giving the
wrong date I can tell that's exactly correct uh Mr Warner we confirmed that on the record last time and it is through March 6 in light of the fact that the next regularly scheduled he okay there you go um can we get another
one we'll wait till the end of the evening see where we are I think that makes that makes good sense thank you and at least for the time being we uh we believe we can hear this matter on this okay all dates will be communicated by
someone other than the board attorney theis um okay thank you all right so uh is this our handy dandy additional mic over here [Music]
ready they're replac Sean if you could just reintroduce yourself to the board please yes John fan side engineer for the applicant and you're uh a licensed PE in the state of New Jersey correct and your license is still current through today correct that is correct I'd like to remind you that
you remain under oath understood uh now I just described a um uh lot coverage calculation that you had uh performed and submitted uh for review by the board's planning consultant and engineer is that correct that's correct and uh do
you have a um photo copies of that that you can hand out to the board yes and as you're doing that John can you confirm that what you're handing out hasn't been altered or rendered in anyway from what was posted on the municipality's website correct when was it
posted that uh we distributed it two days ago to the we we'll need to Market as anib what are we up to exhibit A8 A8 is our next one thank you so a is the what are we calling lot
coverage cation [Music] yes the have copies for at least some of the I have a El we may have some extras here if someone is available
elop the audience I have one extra anybody needs it make sure obors Council has one wants a [Music]
copy some uh behind you again that's A8 all right now uh John you've compared these uh law coverage calculations correct that is correct so exhibit A8 does that include a calculation of the
uh the footprint of the entire principal building correct there was a question in particular last time as to whether or not the 900 square foot playground area which um may or may not be impervious but is certainly an accessory use whether or not that it was included has
that area been included yes it has have all of the on-site walkways been included correct uh what about the driveway asphalt circulation areas all included and parking lot yes parking lot as well so this site has some uh certainly proposed curbing has the
proposed curbing been included yes what about any uh existing uh features either existing curbing uh there's an existing head wall in the uh southwest corner uh have those existing features that are slated to remain been included yes um
you're showing um on revd a stone trench in close to the southeast corner of the building um is that then included yes um other uh site features there we're sh
a trash enclosure that we reviewed with the board in the southwest portion of the building has that been included yes uh some of these features include uh linear uh walls the trash enclosure I believe has a wall is that correct correct uh the playground have a a a low
wall is that correct that is correct um now we had also uh testified and been noted in um some of the expert reports we've received that we proposing some uh retaining walls have those all been included yes yes um your rev D shows a
water hot box uh kind of close to the northeast corner of the building now is that is that an a below ground feature it's an underground uh hot box but uh We've conservatively uh sized the the the top slab as impervious and included it yes
so that a slab do have like an access hatch to the B under underneath correct normally would have access manholes yes um as for uh the board's planner uh recommendation we had added a bike rack which is kind of close to the southeast
corner of the building um The Bike Rack uh is loaded on um located on an impervious kind of pad or slab is that correct that's correct has that area been included yes uh and then also we are proposing a very small Monument sign
at single sign in the northeast corner of the building near to the intersection of Parson Hill Road and Old Hills Road has that also been in yes um so as for the 35% maximum requirement in the ordinance what is the
is the total maximum amount required did you come to 50, 665 square feet that is uh correct and what are you showing 50, 665 665 thank you and what are you're uh doing all that addition of all those
features what is that totaling up to our total of what we are providing is [Music] to come up with that uh 50469 figure that you just referenced yes those are retaining walls that we had in parallel to the Rain Garden uh we re removed
those and we had re did some regrading in that area and uh we uh were able to remove them um and anything the uh was there any alteration to the uh sidewalk weeding from the Eastern side of the building out to Old Short Hills Road
kind yes we we made that sidewalk of 3 feet wide instead of the original four feet wide were there any other changes required to be made to the plan the the changes were all internal uh minor changes to the parking lot but uh none uh that
uh would have uh cause a revision to the drawing and did you share these calculations with the board planner and the board engineer I did yes I don't have any further questions from Mr fr Marthur are you able to confirm Mr front's calculations uh we' reviewed the
calculations and confirm the calculations just for the record you were speaking on behalf of yourself as a planner both you and Martha um reviewed them as well and con with it okay didn't want there be any
question as to who's speaking for H on the record do any board members have any questions from Mr PR I did you also look into including the
sidewalk on the county road that sidewalk would would be outside of our property it would not be included in the calculations but the answer is is something that was discussed or the sidewalk on uh parsel or no we have
not included it as of now uh the county may require it but as B on this application does not have a sidewalk on parsonage we we are uh re rehabilitating the existing sidewalk on o shill Road if I ask for clarification on that
chairman though if I understand correctly uh what you're saying is even if the county asks for that and it's provid Ed a post approval it would not constitute impervious coverage or lock coverage under our ordinance because it's offsite as long as it's in the as
long as it's off sighted in the right of way correct that would be correct it wouldn't be counted towards our laot coverage max Mr ped Andor M Callahan is that correct yes I a question that no because I see here the property
line is outside of the the sidewalk if there is a sidewalk on the corner will be within the property lines so that will count to that is a great question just for everyone I I'll go to the board if if if
the board and the public recalls the the curve line encroaches inside our property on the intersection so if the county would require a
sidewalk and follow the curb line and to join existing uh there'll be this area the sidewalk will be inside our property and that would be counted and uh we have a we have an overage of 196 square feet
and we would have to mitigate that uh encroachment but at this point we uh the count whether the count is going to require That Sidewalk we we not we're not aware if if they do we'll uh have to address it yes so with that be a
condition of approval then that in the event uh it's required by the county there would be an offset of any overage so as to confirm compliance well I mean I think I think as a fact of matter we'd have to do one of two things if that were to transpire we either have to make a corresponding
adjustment so that we comply uh or you know certainly we would move Heaven and Earth to make that happen otherwise you know our only other it would just be a little Earth it wouldn't be any would be to we'd have to uh receive
uh the necessary relief which would involve uh D3 VAR relief no understood understood okay thank you for the confirmation clarification thank you chairman for letting me ask that question without asking your permission you have a
question I have a question that's unrelated to lock coverage so is this time to ask but it's a question Mr if it's engineering related yeah so I have a question related to uh the
buffers and how you interpret the meaning of buffer so if we go to 6062 D1 J which is the conditional use requirements and J is specifically says the minimum buffer to a residential use or Zone shall be 25 ft now I'm a lay
person when it comes to planning but what strikes me is the use of the word buffer there rather than everywhere else in the conditional use any distance is described as a frontage or a setback looks like a pure linear measure buffer seems to have more uh
meaning associated with it and um so my questions to you are related to how do you interpret the meaning of a buffer uh in this context and in particular I'd like to refer to uh 6093 which is the part of our ordinance that
actually describes a buffer now it's in a different context but there's no definition of buffer under the conditional use so this is more than a question I giv a little testimony backgr question no understand no issue with that at all Mr backer it's just I think you kind of touched on it when you said um you're La
person and not a planner uh Mr fonte hasn't been qualified as a planner either we do have a planning expert who's here to prepare to who prepared to testify exactly to that issue and it would be within his expertise all right I'm happy to wait for that I wasn't sure great and Mr chairman it may beho us at
the appropriate time to hear from our planner as well but I just throw out that as it might be obvious just in case and we're going to we're going to see from the planet today I would love that as would he I'm me
too any more questions from the board are there any questions from the members of the public specifically relating to the testimony given tonight by Mr Fon story evening Mr chair members of the board Nicole Dory conell fley on behalf of
sustainable development for Milburn Township um I just have a a few questions related to the uh calculations presented this evening um you mentioned that there was an encumbrance for a portion of the roadway that was on the property is that right yes yes and was
that counted included in your calculations for lot coverage it's uh it's only literally it's a sixin curb so it all the curbs have been added to the calculation okay and I um I know in the
past there was a a question I think from the board traffic engineer about the possibility of a like a dedicated right turn lane if the county required that would that um impact those calculations would that require um an additional offset by the applicant it depends what
that intersection will look like with to satisfy the county okay we cannot make that determination at this time okay so whether you need a wider sidewalks or per perhaps wider lanes that would be a decision that the county would make correct okay so then uh if if the county
requires uh additional um traffic improvements or a wider sidewalks with the applicant return to this board to confirm that the application doesn't require D3 variance you know rather than speculate over a hypothetical situation I think we'll have to cross that bridge when we come
to it I mean we can't we would only be have an approval for what is shown on our plans and if the count is going to require something different then I think everybody here understands that it will need to be dealt with if I understand correctly Mr chairman that any approval all approvals
have conditions there's compliance and if and when there is an inability to comply or required change in the plan that would impact and I'm looking to our support professionals as well to so hopefully I'm correct uh in a way in which there
would might be additional relief necessary or material change in the site plan itself then they would either have to come they would have to come back or at least demonstrate that things were modified such that uh they're compliant
without having to come back would that be essentially the uh protocol I'm sorry that would be my assumption so so the law is the law they'll have to follow the law right I think it's I think it's a a typical
condition of a board to have to the applicant return if there the board's jurisdiction is in question as a result of the count it would not only be an explicit condition but even if were it's an impl a condition because everyone must follow the law at all times
applicants who receive approvals so yes okay thank you quick Mr fron I think if you don't stand directly under the speaker with the microphone probably benefit everyone's ears listening my name is Jeffrey Feld 11
Alexander Lane Short Hill New Jersey um I really didn't have a chance analyze this but if you can maybe at the next morning just bring a sum because at the last meeting you had you revised summary you had a chart on the bottom left that
was fig fig one from at the last hearing and you had different columns where you got to your prvious use and today you have your lot coverage you have a little more expansive breakdowns and I'm just trying to find out what was included or
not included to compare to understand where the where the modification is coming from you know if you could help us that I mean the building is the building stays the same but like walls you on on the the piece that you gave us
today exhibit A8 has uh I think four columns or walls and I don't know were they included in that I'm just trying to find out I think where the difference have a question let's see if you can answer I think he he kind of explained if I've heard it correctly what was and wasn't included
and where the changes were made but but but if you if you have a specific question see if you can answer I mean I'm trying to find out the only way I could understand one change that came out is that he reduced those the width of a sidewalk ask did you reduce the width of a sidewalk from four feet to
three feet correct all right and because did I reduction how many square feet was reduced by 30 just 30 no 300 actually 100 we have 128 ft for to the property line times 151
foott that to get within compliance is it the sidewalk reduction allows you to get under the uh percent so that's because I'm just trying to understand the before the the testimony will come later the questions and answers are now all right I'm just trying to we
understand but we have to all abide by the rules thank you the rules are that this should have been given to the public before this meeting now exhibits are allowed Mr exhibits are allowed Charles vanar 37 Keith Road Short
Hills wait wait folks folks theum please thank you okay um Mr fr you uh I'm a little confused uh you testified that you removed retaining
walls uh uh to remove the I guess the area of the top of the retaining wall from your from your uh from your tally U and then you explained that you regraded but I I don't notice a change
in the topography uh elevation lines on your plan versus what you submitted before has has that not been updated to show the new grading correct the the minor change in
regrading was not included in the exhibit it be the uh addressed in the compliance revision to the drawings uh because I the purpose for this exhibit was to to affect the calculation for impervious area so okay
yeah what was the the purpose of the retaining wool in the first place if it was so easily removed is Pur the purpose of the retaining WS was to reduce the uh area of disturbance the lower of the southern part of the
property and the and the obviously we wanted to uh reduce the limit of disturbance and that that retaining water allowed us to do that and uh we were able to regrade and uh not that impact on the limit of
disturbance appk thank you evening Christine vest it's fful Terror Short Hills um I had a couple of questions off of um the testimony this evening and I also had sent a document that Mr Warner you requested in terms of
a question that I had for Mr fan last week that he couldn't answer because I couldn't provide evidence that was visually appropriate at the time okay yes that's that's those are the pictures you're asking got it you had some pictures on your phone I think is that correctly okay and so you provided
those do we have any objective exhibits yet so this is marked as 01 okay it's three pages the way it been provided to us of pictures there's two pictures on one page three on another three on
another did the applicant get it well I had asked Natalia to make it I don't know I don't know the answer to that questional did the applic get great okay the the uh I get it this evening that that's not exhibits are exhibits uh
you want to ask the questions based on these photographs if that's if that's yes permissible I would like to do that thank uh so 01 are the photographs they've been offered just for purposes of with the uh you did you take these y
we have to authenticate that who took them when where what are yeah so I crafted this entire document and some of it is AI generated modeling that I I um you know created and then some of it is just random photos used as you know
commentary I'm reading I have commentary on it there as well yeah okay but you w you so obviously you want to make a point with the commentary that's what like com people have commentary right that's but the pictures are what you're asking the questions based on you want
to have that visual so I think for purposes of your questioning because presumably at some some point you'll be testifying consistent with the commentary correct when you're under oath at the appropriate time we gotta you know make sure we do it right yes the the the um for now my advice to the
board and everybody for the record is that we just utilize the pictures uh and and allow ignore the commentary right no I forgot your name it's okay Christine yes allow this member of the public to
ask questions utilizing the uh pictures uh any objection Mr line uh no just two things I I uh Miss Bess indicated that and I do recall that she had raised this issue the last time she had some uh photos on her phone you correctly
pointed out that you know they're not part of the record they exhibit I recall that I would ask that this line of PR be limited just to that that uh lighting issue but also I just had a couple of foundational questions as to 01 before we just a couple of foundational questions before we proceed your
questions well the the uh and and that's fair because it's when people bring these exhibits we have to make sure that so with the chair's permission you can ask those few foundational questions great thanks so so we can get it on the
record so miss best are you a uh electrical engineer I'm not an electrical engineer but I led a team of electrical engineers and a team of mechanical engineers when I started up The Nook for Barnes & Noble when you started up I'm sorry for bar for Barnes & Noble I was one of two people that
started up that whole business and I'm sorry if you try to get used too I know it's hard yes I started up yes and I had a whole team of industrial designers Engineers mechanical and E under you but you're not you yourself are not a licensed engineer I am not a licensed engineer are you an architect I a
designer I'm a trained formal designer I'm not an architect are you a graphic designer I actually studied Apparel Design and then I learned on the job um I was a chief merchandising o officer over designers that did Home Furnishing so I was very involved with Architects
that um we're also industrial designers very familiar that's it Mr chair okay okay so we have exhibit 01 you can ask questions based on that on that one line of questioning and then also of course if you have any question with respect to the lot coverage testimony
that Mr P gave this this evening as well I don't have too many questions um so hello Mr I hope this this is clearer so than my phone good job on thank you all right so when I made the comparison is it bright like you know a commercial
parking lot like a Best Buy store obviously your height is 12 foot not 18 feet or whatever it is in a commercial parking lot um versus you know I had referenced Christ Church and I used it as a reference just because it's another religious organization that is in Short
Hills and some of their lighting is uh in I'm on I'm on page one so the left was sort of what I was referencing would this look like a very brightly lit area with the 12 feet light poles um that are LED at 3,000 Kelvin that you have or
would it look more like the lights that you see right here the Ballard lights that are about 36 inches high is this when you say right here is that the secondo phot he can only do one in front the second photo to the right of the first
photo that you Des I'll be more clear on page one yep we're on page one yeah the if I may the uh the photograph on the left is more of an industrial parking lot with u uh light
poles as we have a recommending the one the photograph on the right hand side shows more of a all the lights being balled but you can see also there are additional lights that provide up up upward lights towards the trees
we do not have those type of Lights we do have bers in small in one area and but do we do have poles as well as building mounted fixtures which are all pointed down and obviously meeting the requirements of the township as far as
uh uh encroachment as far as light pollution on the uh adjacent properties okay you can see from these photographs you could just looking at the photograph obviously there are there is a a considerable
amount of uh bleed of Lights to outside the property line which our exhibit does not show that um what I wanted to ask you are the downward lights I didn't see them indicated and I might just missed
it because there's a lot of detail in your drawings are they are they um you know under the eaves on the third floor or they um where are they mounted they're mounted close to the he not not under the heath but close to the top of the building yes
so they're Downs okay thank you um do you think you could accomplish the same wattage with a mixture of elegant landscape Li lighting and Ballard lighting versus putting up in more
industrial fixtures that the neighbors would see good question the the fixtures that we're proposing we don't consider those industrial fixtures they're more parking lot fixtures uh for these type of uh let's say uh areas residential areas so
that's not your typical parking lot uh uh Home Depot type lights for sure that's why not we did not specify those lights uh but in essence to to achieve a safe parking lot safe sidewalks with the
sufficient lights and cover them with the distances that we have in uh involved it'll be very difficult to cover the the parking lot uh with just Ballers and they'll be just not just not possible because the as you can see the
Ballers are the lights are localized so the the footprint of the Ballard is literally uh made possibly an 8 by8 area and to get across the parking lot is difficult we might have to place them in more strategic place not no
I'm just saying it's difficult the the light poles uh provide a more efficient way to cover the parking lot and uh as as we indicated uh the lights will be turned off at a certain point we will leave a minor amount of lights for
security uh but those lights are most closer to the building and not closer to the property line can you confirm on what time you've established as the cut off point for the parking lights I think that was uh was testified
as far as the operation I don't I I don't remember it being testified I guess so I have to wait for an operations first okay um so in a residential area you know um these lights are traditionally not
used so how do you explain the safety issue for residents that don't light up their home in that way that are nearby it's we're all the homeowners that we make our own choices it's the only way I can answer that so
is it a liability issue that I cannot uh comment on that um would you would you consider on page two I just gave examples of you know from a designer's perspective not from
your perspective but just different types of lighting from from an aesthetic purpose um that would be conducive to a residential area do you think that um it's the last um image on the right where there's Landscaping um you know in between the
parking places there's Landscaping Islands would you consider um doing some type of landscaping Island to soften the harshness of that parking lot between the lights and the lack of greenery for the Neighbors would you guys consider
that that's all I'm asking on behalf of the applicate the applicant is standing by the Landscaping plan that it's submitted and it's uh stipulations with regard to the lighting that it will be shielded downward directed bright dark sky compliant and will not um uh
encroach onto Residential Properties beyond that the application stand thank you um in terms of dark can you define for me because I'm not educated on this issue what dark sky
compliant means under either federal or state standards I'm not familiar with that as well as you are well dark sky excuse I think this goes beyond the impact of the lighting and the exhibit that Miss best had asked to bring before us and hearkens back to testimony that's
already been proved and agreed and was agreed to I don't does everybody understand what that means on the board yeah the the uh to the extent you can uh succinctly explain what dark sky
compliant means uh to those of us who are not expert in that area may be beneficial to the board and members of the public yes uh dark sky compliant the first thing I want to clarify it's not a standard it's a voluntary standard
created by the industry as far as I'm aware it's so there aren't there are no regulatory standard for dark sky complying it's it's voluntary and the lighting Industries has adopted and a lot and primarily many of their fixtures
comply and the the whole standard is is to reduce uh light pollution at night because light as you know tends to uh bounce upward and uh so if you have a lot of lights you can see we all seen
the uh views from space where you see a lot of the city lights are visible so it's an attempt to uh uh to reduce that uh light pollution primarily that will bounce up and in and reflect on the
clouds and things that are nature um I just had on your new plans here um so that's it for the lighting thank you so much for explaining that to me I appreciate it um I just had a couple quick questions nothing major um I don't
believe anybody's you you I think maybe some of these EV EV Chargers um you know I'm I can see them better on this plan so I had a question on the 10 it looks like you have 10 EV Chargers those um give off a lot of um EMF frequencies and
I do have concerns about and they're also lit up very brightly and extremely industrial looking so our Township has a law about you know covering up you know a PL any type of you know outdoor whether it's a generator or any type of air conditioning system with um
Shrubbery Etc how are you going I mean this is an industrial piece of equipment that really belongs in in a store question are they going to landscape en close it and screen it yes that's I would like to know thank you yeah keeping on track the first thing is uh
obviously you're what you're describing is a commercial Tesla EV charging that we see in the malls and the Wawas and things these light Ballers will not be that they'll be much more subdued you know with all those lights that you
talked about there'll be primarily a post with with the plugs that people can plug their cars their cars in the uh and that's as a home charger or is it different it it uh there's three types as we know there's the class one which
is a home which takes six or eight hours to charge then there's a level two which uh takes you know a little longer and then there's the uh the commercial uh that takes a half an hour these are most likely we have not specify the
uh I think we provided a uh a detail but these are I think are more level two than the level one could you clarify that for us next time is that possible okay this this will be done testifying okay will will the if I may
the Mr chairman the can the applicant it confirm whether or not the expectation if not it's already detailed as class to either later today tonight or or next time yes okay thank you okay is do do
you you know if there's a Township ordinance that requires a minimal distance for Ev Chargers from the property line I'm not aware of it okay okay and the New Jersey model law EV law does not have that requirement either okay I just have two more questions and
it's are those two more questions related to today's testimony they're well they're related to things that were not answered by the engineer and um in previous testimony so um I thought maybe he'd have the answer because they've been working with
architect on you know redoing the plans and everything so I was going to ask about well it's it's related to the square footage coverage that they spoke about today and so I wanted to ask um on the rooftop equipment it's a square footage it's a square footage okay thank
you I just I wasn't sure so on the rooftop equipment we we still haven't heard um from the architect what the square footage allocation is on the rooftop between all the equipment and the water tank is there a reason why that can't be on the ground is it
because of the um square footage requirements would that impact the square footage requirements or would it not it would yes that's why it's on the on the roof no I didn't say that it's the selection of the location was the architect selected the roof mounted
equipment and we did not have a discussion about imperious area but it would it would it would of course yes okay thank you so much I appreciate it Jean Pastak 342 Hobart Avenue um my question is um and follow up to what the
the person before me Christine asked can you describe in your professional opinion if you were um trying to compare what the property's lighting prior to demolition when it was a single family home what it is now and then what it will be for the people The Neighbors on
the western part of the property what what would be what's going to be the impact on those neighbors with this new lighting well the impact as we know light light poles lighting is visible to matter the foot candles at the property
line at the property line we meet the requirements for the township whether the the neighbors uh can see the lights of of course they'll see the lights once they're on through the trees through the vegetation through the foliage and everything else
but the standard that we are held to is the foot candles at the property line and we meet that and how would that change based on a conversation earlier about the buffer and the definition of the buffer that's in our ordinances well
the buffer uh obviously it uh it's currently is landscaped and will continue to be landscaped there are existing trees that are remaining are not being touched and we're adding a lot more trees I as I indicated on my Landscaping plan that I
showed the last time adding those trees where on the western side uh all over really on all four sides north south east west it all the entire perimeter of the this property is well landscaped currently as well as when we're done
with it and your professional opinion the addition of those trees would that make any material change to the visibility of the lights to it would help in what way can you describe well if if they're non if they're decidous trees during the spring summer and fall they will help block the
lights if they're Evergreens year round uh so we would have to look specifically what type of trees are there versus what we're proposing we would can those can the choice of those
trees have U the maximum impact of blocking the lighting can I can I just just I'm just we're gonna let you continue but again the questions tonight have to be about the testimony tonight so well I think they are so far no was about lock right but there were
questions about the buffer and there were questions about what I just cover buffer doesn't okay well do you want me to not ask them or take them back what what what is it continue yeah obligation to I understand
I just don't know what you want me to do what would you like me to do this continue the question thank you um so I'm I'm now I'm lost but I think I understood the question choice of the trees would make a difference we uh
again we don't have uh a particular preference we we tried to provide a mixture of trees that provided a a very comprehensive Landscaping plan whether uh you prefer a deciduous tree versus a never green uh
I don't think uh my my the applicant or my client would object to that but uh the the Landscaping plan is been submitted it's been reviewed by the by the uh by the professionals the consultant the uh for existing plan in
your professional opinion there's enough coverage absolutely okay thank you are there any more questions from the public before we let Mr fronte go I just wanted to ask Mr living there's an exhibit a
that we provided that is the I don't it's Landscaping but it does have the reference to trees on it do you want to speak to that for the for the record no that was just uh I really touched on that and my introductory kind of cleanup remarks if you will that
essentially just kind of implements what I had indicated the applicant was was going to do was by uh way of the uh compliance plans is to correct that um parenthetical from removed to be removed and that's really was it corrected or
was it confirmed it was corrected just so nobody went out to the site and checked that these trees have not been removed no they have not been removed they correct okay thank you I question is there an additional exhibit that was presented by the
applicant it was no additional exhibit as I understand it maybe Mr L speak to this um there looked like there were two pages that uh were provided uh presumably they were put on the on the website okay uh and they're
part of the record however we marked one as A8 was it um and if it was a second page and it was submitted less than 10 days ago is that correct correct well in order for it to be a part of the record should you want it to be a part of the record and I would imagine you do
because referenced it uh it should be marked A9 and uh uh we should have uh if you have any copies or if we can make copies of what's already on the website uh it's A9 is uh and is that
the existing conditions and demolition plan uh that was provided last revised January 23rd 2025 if my prescription is good enough to I I can
just tell you all that's changed is changing is that the right document exhibit A9 yes so exhibit A9 will be what was just referenced for the record since it was submitted 11 than 10 days ago and you made you already made your
representation about the correction on the remove that's right what that means it was submitted simultaneously with with the other one right now it's a good point that M Dory you know for housekeeping if nothing else uh uh uh uh we we didn't mark it and it was
less than 10 days ago and you did reference it so thank you Mr for picking that up uh and and do you have any extra copies by any chance on you as you did with the other one these are all extra yes and maybe they could just one to go to myor and if there's more than one
they I believe the board received I have extra copies so there was no other changes to the Landscaping plan because there was also a comment that the the uh part of the storm water feure was removed area that wasn't made just for clarification that was a that was a
stipulation that the applicant made as a condition that it would be removed there's been no submission uh tonight or prior to tonight's meeting showing that remov okay and no other changes to the Landscaping correct okay thank you all for that clarification I oops we have maybe one
more question from the public I have a question please please up I'm I'm just curious my name is Linda Perry 37 Blain in Milbourne and um I'm I'm just curious can anyone just take
pictures with their cell phones of something and have that accepted as testimony it it what is the veracity of that sure if somebody well that's why there were uh there were questions of this of the member of the public uh and
uh uh to establish the authentication that that Mr LaVine did uh and it was utilized uh for purposes of asking questions so the short answer is people can submit uh uh documentary evidence and Exhibits uh as questioning if it
meet meets with the legal requirements uh and ultimately it can be uh potentially admitted into evidence uh just like testimony under oath can be admitted into evidence by applicants or objectors or people in support or or
opposed as members of the public and also AI generated doc uh weight of the evidence I'm sorry for interrupt and I kind of anticipate of what you were saying the the the uh uh if it's admitted it's admitted and the
weight of the evidence uh is for the board to appropriately determine to give it if any based on whether it's relevant material uh credible Etc uh and the are there copies of the documents available
for the public to look at I believe uh did we get copies of these photographs that were handed do we have any more I thought we handed some out here they are the uh they're on the website did you say no yeah that's why I wanted to show you them before I knew if
they could be public record oh okay well they were they were marked and utilized for questioning purposes so they yes they can they'll be uploaded first tomorrow they'll be they'll be uploaded and they're they're part of the record thank you and you got a copy I I have
another question what's the height of these proposed lights is that like a standard height like well we're getting back to more just a quick question no no no there's no questions of the board I mean I I wanted to with me I want one he want I wanted to help you with the
because they were legal questions right we try to the best we can help but but if you have questions of a witness that's something different we can't testify right I just have a question is it typical I I I can't let just ask question yeah I can't be part of the not
I'm not asking to be I'm gonna assume that the light of a the height of a light is between eight and 12 feet what you can do question is what you can do is either now if with the chair's permission you can't speak you can ask
a witness if there's no objection a question about their testimony um but the case is put on by the applicants fact and expert Witnesses and then members of the public can testify and if members of the public or objectors have
witnesses they can present evidence the board can't present evidence the board attorney can't present evidence okay so but so we should the questions have to relate to the T they have to relate to the testimonials provided he testified
regarding lock coverage uh there was uh there was some lighting testimony questioning that an answering that got in uh and I'll leave it to if you have questions if the chair will entertain it and if Mr LaVine objects he objects if he doesn't he doesn't we'll deal with
it I would just ask that this be very limited this was detailed testimony provided a number of hearings ago uh that we should not be reiterating and retray and that and that's reasonable we can't go back over and over and over again that's not fair understand so if you have a couple of questions I think
this is your opportunity for Mr fan okay is is it can you just give me an estimate of how tall theight the lights are the lights that the lights that we're proposing we stipulated that will not be more than 12 feet in height thank
you so my question to you is there no question to me I can't answer people do you have an ordinance in the town do you have an ordinance in the town that people can't have H trees over a certain height in the front because to block it
makes no sense that these questions on the trees are being asked because nobody's going to go out and plant 12 foot high trees at this point you're testifying and and my advice the board chair is with all due respect you're gonna have to stop okay because it's violating the protocol OFA
judicial have a chance but but you could actually you could absolutely ask more questions that are relevant of the right Witnesses and you could certainly make your comments and testify uh uh at the end after the applicants finish their Witnesses thank you Mr L ready for your
next witness I sure am yes thank [Music] you Daniel yes could you reintroduce yourself to the board please hi uh Daniel duet um LIC arct my license is in current and in good standing yeah I'd like to remind you
that you remain under oath from last time um as the board may recall uh Mr D provided accepted as an architect thank you very much thank you Mr chairman um Mr D had uh provided extensive testimony
with regard to his um architectural floor plans and elevations that were submitted originally as part of our application he pre prepared and distributed and reviewed with the board a a fairly extensive supplemental exhibit that was marked as exhibit A7
that he went through uh the board with and um there was a request that he come back with some updated um visual depictions of the post construction condition you may recall that that was kind of right in the midst of us
revising the plans we had shared some concept plans with the board we had relocated the driveways we had done some other things uh at the request of the board and its Consultants so there was a bit of a of a moving Target and there's a request that uh to the extent that the his visual depictions required updating
or revising that those be done and those were submitted uh in advance at the last hearing so they've been on file for quite some time uh and I've called uh Mr duet back just for the very limited purpose of reviewing the updated exhibits that he submitted in advance of the hearing um and share those with the
board and the public what are we up to 810 810 and I'm not sure procedurally how to do this but the exhibit that I submitted so they had it 10 fire they have and then recently I made some
adjustments to it so I'd like to supplement what they have with some minor changes uh I Was preparing to show it but also made 15 C Mr chair i' just like some clarification the only thing that weed was something receed
maybe even this meeting before meeting before was just the entrance uh from across from Park Road is that the exhibit you're correct and that was A7 okay or was that the one that or was
that one that was submitt submitted A1 um at one point and we received it again and that's all we received from the architect for the last meeting will you have a new exhibit is that what you're s yes it's just an updated
version of that image and if I made natal you why why are we up to A10 if I'm being told that we are already up to a11 can we double check our exhibit because that's uh not normally the board attorney responsibility I have A7 as the
most recent architect exibit I yeah I think everybody received this but what let's call this A1 B like sheet 11 a sheet sheet yeah that's probably a reference because A7
was a multi- sheet exhibit okay all right so then the bottom line is you have a new exhibit we're apparently up to exhibit 810 and he's going to testify to this exhibit and he's going to pass it out it'll be marked as an exhibit because it certainly didn't get here more than 10 days in advance it's
getting here now um I'm all the board yes we might have some extras for the more extras for the so what I had the the what I had presented in and tried to uh the reason
for the presentation is not that I'm a landscape architect or not that I um designed the plantings in any way but to enforce or reinforce the concept architecturally that this building the way it's cited and the way that it's
planned on being screened with trees what types of trees and what kinds that's to be determined between the Forester and I guess the landscape architect but just really to give uh me peace of mind and the neighbors and and whoever's interested
that the project the intention of the project and the end results of the architecture and how it sits on the site is that it's going to be very well screened from the streets and the neighbors and it was and so that's the
the major intent of the presentation or the image that you're seeing and so when we relocated the our access driveway AC Cross Park um previously I tried to illustrate what it might look like and was that in a was that part of A7
then it was I guess okay but at that point in time I didn't have the updated Landscaping plan so I wanted to uh do something and say okay let me reserve the right to get the Landscaping PL back and this way I was able to analyze uh and study exactly
what he was proposing and work as diligently as we could and to study the species of plants and Google them and try to represent that on the image that you're seeing so this is that's why you have the latest
one is because I noticed I had made some um Inc Corrections in the type of trees that he was planting mainly along the walkway I thought he had Evergreens but they're actually Birch so I meticulously went through the
Landscaping plan species by species and quantities and I tried to uh present it in front of you today and I think the result is that I'm happy to say that the the building is well screened from the street and that's the
intent so this this is the benefit of both existing trees and you would describe your efforts to incorporate new Landscaping yes uh and does this uh exhibit A10 does that uh show the location of the proposed building yes
and can you highlight that for folks that uh if I have screen I can zoom in on it but uh it's basically if you could identify where the walkway is The Pedestrian walkway you would run right into the building um this is a somewhat
mature version of the trees I would estimate a 5 to 10 years um obviously we could uh imagine plantings they're going to be much smaller but this is about an estimate of about 5 to 10 years um
certainly in 20 years it's going to be twice as big um but again the intention of this was really to show that you know we weren't trying to present a building that was on the street gape and and very visible but the intention is to hide it and that
building is is set back a minimum of 100 feet from old CH Hill's Road correct and Par as well as parsonage hill now notwithstanding what we're looking at here in A10 there's no requirement under the ordinance to completely block all views of proposed development with
existing tree growth in landscaping isn't that correct yeah just pick up a little bit have the mic or if you can get and remember about not standing up as far as I'm aware there's no requirement uh there is a tree
replacement requirement and even if uh we had a project where we didn't want to replace trees we could pay uh to put the tree somewhere else but we would like and the intention is to plant as many many many trees as we possibly can now you are uh an architect that's done a
lot of work in nober correct yes and you're familiar with any applicable uh design requirements from an architectural standpoint uh in mour I believe so um so there have been a lot of question questions and concerns raised regarding the style of this building the color of this building the
particular building materials that the applicant used intends to use for this building are there any required design standards that govern these things with Style Elements colors building materials that are applicable to a house of worship no are they any that are particularly applicable to this property
no um so is it true that nothing you've designed is is in Your Capacity as the project architect is it true that nothing that youve designed by way of your floor plans or your elevations requires variance relief is that a true statement that is a correct statement that was the major goal of of getting to
where we are today and there's nothing on your floor plans or elevations that require design waivers is that correct absolutely not any other questions from Mr I first I would like to I I understand that there is no variances asking in
this project but this is a conditional use and I feel sometimes when we are talking here that we are so many things but there is no variance I understand that but this is a conditional use and as a board member we need to figure it out if this is the right use for this
side so I always feel that when we asking a question the the people here is like why you asking that question this is a conditional use I understand that there is no variance okay second I don't know what I'm looking at here
because I see trees here today I see trees tomorrow trees can die and I understand there is no requirement about blocking the view of the buing yes but when we ask two meetings ago material samples how the building is going to
look if because we are taking care of the neighborhood so there is no require the ordinance doesn't say has to be white yellow or red but we want to understand how the building is going to look so you are present in this um rendering or picture first is not I view
it's about I view so the trees are blocking the view because it's higher than any normal person can see see the view this is the sign of the street so you're looking this from about so this
is not a real view of the of the site is this allow discuss remember me the um do you want to put that in the form of a question such as isn't that correct so that he can answer my question is I want to see my my my advice to help you in
the questioning in in the appropriate way for purposes of protecting the board and protecting the process as you may wish to when at the end of making that statement ask isn't that correct so the gentleman has an opportunity to either
say yes you're correct or no you're not and explain why if he thinks you're not correct so what we asked last time is to materials to see the materials was the color because there was different views with different on this so I would like to see
how the building is going to look can you provide I think you're being asked to provide that can is that something that the applicant can provide it's not some I mean the the applicants has provided testimony and showed renderings provided testimony as to the architectural features the anticipated colors the anticipated materials the
applicant was not prepared to bring in additional sample boards or provide additional offsite views in light of the fact that we feel it's been thoroughly described and explained and we don't have to demonstrate compliance with any particular applicable standards or requirements in that regard okay that's
on to do another no I didn't see I think you were asking about the rendering and you might have wanted to ask isn't that no I would like to rering of the the building the right color the right materials right then was uh is it your opinion Mr LaVine that the applicant has
provided such rendering already and if so can you reference which exhibit that was the initial application materials included uh elevations with renderings and I believe there were additional abws in A7 I was going to try to pull it out
to confirm that unless Daniel you can do that off the top of your head I I believe it was exhibit A7 when I gave my presentation did you have a another copy of A7 that we'll get them from the app thank
you we I want to make sure the board does this the proper legal way uh so that whatever the decision of the board is is it's done properly and Appel as opposed to reverse the uh that's my job so thank
you so it is in fact in A7 on on number of the sheets oh A7 a multiple page all the board members have that available which also A7 also includes a
view uh at the corner of both Park Road which we just saw the supplement to as well as an additional view from the intersection of parsonage Hill and old Short Hills Road that was also a part of A7 and if I understood correctly this
particular A10 was not introduced for the purpose of showing the building it was for the purpose of the testimony of the architect perhaps somewhat to the opposite of showing the building is the contention made by the applicant the picture will speak for itself the
testimony will speak for itself um but uh I want to make sure the board members uh have what they need in order to render determination and if not they'll continue to ask for more are you okay yeah um Mr
chair extensive testimony um you know that's the attorney's opinion I think we had questions for the architect and never received copies in testimony that said he would get us these things so
what can we list the things that they haven't provided that I actually testified that I would not be providing more material sample boards at at the discussion well why don't we allow our board member to list what it is she's
referring to and if the testimony was it's not going to be provided and it's still not going to be provided then that's what the record will reflect and the board will make a determination based on all the evidence when the case is done um but with the chair's permission perhaps board member can't be
a would like to reference what she's referring to I would so uh at the last meeting we received this right but we had asked for any changes in aerial views from all directions You' been
updated um and you said you would do that um but we didn't receive it so all we've received are these two Co copies of the exact same thing except your new rendering has fewer maybe we could just reference it by exhibit so that I think
this was A7 or a what was the last one they just because I have two that look so one was submitted more than 10 days part so it wasn't wasn't marked okay okay and and I think he testified that he made some changes based on updated Landscaping
this is what was marked as 810 today but I believe board member of Canfield is asking for something beyond what was already provided yeah uh and uh if you understand the question is the applicant going to provide it or not I guess is the question direct answer question is
we don't intend to provide additional visual renderings or material boards we intend to stand on what we've shared with the board uh thus far we will not be submitting additional A1 through A10 and whatever other documents were not marked as exhibits because they were submitted as part of the plans Etc
correct Mr CH I think they provided this packet over here that provides different years of building but there's still kind of questions on the colors yeah I think we I'm sorry just for the record when you picked that up I just want to make sure the record gets what we're referring to do we have an exist
this exhibit a A7 the multi-page exhibit yes we talked um about material selections we what we didn't want to commit to or have reserve the right to
uh pick our color I could always asked for a Pantone color I don't think we're ready we're not at that stage of development and design but I did talk about the the color the the visual coloration that we were proposing which is the Earth Tone colors was going to have a limestone
base stuckle materials um Limestone trim work and cornices and black windows and and so we're not just at that level of development to commit to this is the stone I'm going to use this is the
texture of the stucco so we reserve the right for that but it won't materially change uh what the is um so we have we have some work to do on our end um have you selected the the
color well it's it's a it's a it's Earth Tones colors right so they're different colors you look at the Rings yes the color the color printer is um you know F not it's a takeway from right so the takeaway is that we're just not at that
level of development to be able to commit to this is the stone we're using or have you done any renderings from the the second floor view no because at some point we were asked to U show the trees that planting show the trees from second floors and it just got overwhelming
that to do such a work and and I'm an architect and and again the intention of of of presenting the images to begin with is to really hit home that this is not a project that's front and center on the street that's going to be well hidden and screened and it's
my clients's intention and it's going to be for the neighbors and the community that's that's the type of structure or or development that we're going to see it's not you know the reason we put the parking lot in the back and pull the building forward is to
hide everything so to provide additional views would be um complicated and we provided from major points so coming down uh old Shore Hills Road the intersection of part of the chill what
that looks like and the testimony is that it's going to look very similar to way it is now which is very well screened um yes right I think what we're trying to get at though is like we're putting this in a neighborhood I know we're screening
it from the street but we have to worry about the neighbors what are they going to see you know I'm sure they're here tonight and asking yeah what am I going to see with this so you really would like I would like to see what it looks like from the side of the fence that's you know from from both the South the
West that that to me with the trees or without the trees because I said architect I provided by renderings without the trees all view so with with the trees I know there's some evergreen trees down towards the Southwest portion of the site they're
going to be deciduous trees up front so during the fall winterly fall winter you got to see the building you got to see the lights um just something though that would give us an indication of what it's going to look like maybe not necessarily I apologize but you might say what time
of year the deciduous trees lose their leaves um so it's it's it's endless on it's endless on on the uh type of situations that I could try to portray
to the public and to the board um if I would it make sense to maybe make a rendering of what the trees would look like let's say year one I don't think that's fair I think it
is it's not fair Mr LaVine if I may Mr chairman obviously uh at least some board members are interested in what might be termed a 360 degree view for season uh the uh the applicant will
present the case the way the applicant presents the case objectors members of the public will present their case the way they present their case support will hear the case support will decide based on the law and the evidence but uh the request is being made um what is the applicant's position Visa the request
being made by from what I can tell multiple board members as to what I would term a 360 degree for season view which at least in my experience uh and every application is different the relief's different Etc but it's
not very uncommon for such a request to be made of an applicant and specifically I think we had asked and I think this is very important what it's going to look like the day the project is done right okay because the testimony that we heard tonight is this is five this is A10 this
is five or 10 years down the road could could be longer so I think what we all want to know is what is this going to look like for the next decade and we have been haven't been provided with anything to answer that right and now we have more board members being more specific which is also temporally which
is also in my opinion not uncommon uh uh Visa uh uh installation of the trees at planting height one year five year 10 years now again the applicant will decide and maybe maybe you want to consult with your client as well but uh
In fairness to to the applicant but we're hearing the request uh it's for the applicant to decide and address understood certainly hearing the request uh we certainly not prepared obviously to share that with you this evening we've heard what you're saying we digested it obviously you're right it's
been coming upon us to present our case uh as we uh as we see fit and you know you referenced uh tangentially you know the legal requirements and what have you and not to put the cart before the horse but part of our calculus and thinking
about all of this is at the end of the day whether or not it's within this board's purview to deny an application this strictly over aesthetic concerns when there are no design standards applicable you may be curious you may want to know but in terms of its legal
relevance to what we're doing here it's nil uh I also think it's much more common to have 360 degree renderings when you need variance relief as opposed to when you are a full-on conditional use that complies with all the conditional use standards but certainly hear the request I'm going to discuss it
with uh with my client we certainly reserve the right to come back and provide additional uh exhibits uh in response to the board's uh request but we certainly heard the request loud and quitter and understand it and we'll uh I I one thing I can pledge the board is that we will I'll discuss it with my
client we'll consider it and and decide to move forward we won't Overlook it or forget it respect the board appreciates that I'd like to add one more piece to that you know I keep hearing that you know as far as architecturally and you know meeting all the requirements but it
is you you do realize that you're in a recognized historic district and I wouldn't be doing my job it is not designated it is recognized on the element of the master plan and on the virtual map as future designations this
particular property current it is current and please I think the chair was about to say something about the core okay got it for thank you I think it is our responsibility and also yours is that we do know what the
residents and how it is in keeping with this historic it's documented okay again a resource on the element of the master plan so we do have the right to make sure it's in keeping with the current
community in this historic property so I I'd like your opinion and how it does fit currently but I think it is our responsibility as a board to say how does it keep within
this historic recognized District which someday may be designated sure they they thank you the uh you wish to respond I just
applicant Vigor vigorously disagrees with the notion that this is in a historic district that is a defined term you have an extensive historic preservation ordinance in town there are two historic districts in town this property is within neither one there are Des a handful of designated historic
landmarks in town this property is not one of them this property is listed on the in the historic preservation element of your master plan along with dozens and dozens and dozens of others uh the master plan is not um on par with his
ordinance and that it does not have regulatory effect it's aspirational there was a nomination report that was prepared with regard to this property that the historic preservation committee uh submitted but that nomination was not accepted it's not on the state historic preservation office uh list of historic
places it's not on the national list so the blanket assertion that this is in a historic district is factually inaccurate I'd like to make a correction uh it was withdrawn because I cared about the public and opinion so please that
clarification on that historic designation it was not denied I didn't say it was denied what did you say I said if there was a nomination report that wasn't designated you're claiming it's categorically factually incorrect but you did reference the fact that it is designated in the master plan so does
his district 100% inrees there there's a legal issue that Mr LaVine is Raising Miss Dory Mr LaVine are both welcome to uh submit their positions uh legally uh in writing
should they so desire with respect to the facts as they understand them uh including the uh uh inclusion in the historic preservation element of this particular District uh uh uh and
the legal impact if any that has on the boards the ter mination of this particular application which at least as I understand it uh still for the time being is a conforming conditional use approval and a conforming site plan
application I don't believe that's changed yet has it Mr ped or Miss Callahan it has not changed yet no okay um they're they're welcome to do that uh because uh and they may have different
legal opinions uh and uh once we receive that information should the board so desire I'll provide my legal opinion and then the board will decide the extent to which of at all they take that into consideration of his legal now that's
out of limits is that what you're saying no what I'm saying is is is he's making a legal argument Miss Dory should have an opportunity uh to make a different legal argument should she have one um because what I'm hearing factually is uh
it's uh in the historic Pres ation element of the master plan but it's not elsewhere so to speak including not on the national or state historic register and what he is arguing is what import that has legally the extent to which if
at all we can consider it in our I say we as the board I don't think to consider but the board can consider in in in making its determination on this particular application Miss Dory may have a different opinion uh based on those facts they may agree on the facts disagree as to what the law is on and
the impact on us let them make their arguments that's why we sit in a quasi judicial capacity uh it's my job to advise based on the arguments they make and the facts as as we understand them and then ultimately the board will hear all of the positions including
my advice and and incorporate uh those facts and that evidence to the extent the board determines it's relevant to to this application and the thing in particular that I was pointing out is that Miss tfield used the specific term historic
district which is as has legal significance and there are established historic districts in town under your under your historic preservation ordinance this property is not within them that has there are certain legal protections and procedural and substantive requirements that apply in a
historic district so characterizing that it has in a historic district has lots of legal significance and that's simply not the case and the fact that it's listed in historic preservation element of the master plan doesn't make it part of the historic district okay but if we characterize it as historic without the
district that that's not the objection right so the fact that it is characterized as historic in the master plan you're not disagreeing with that you're just disagreeing that technically may not be part of a historic district I can't it's a it's a fact it's a fact that it's listed on the historic preservation inventory I express no
opinion as to whether or not you know make a value judgment as to how historic or whether it's historic it's simply a fact but what what we need to do as a board is hear the arguments and hopefully there's an agreement as to what the facts are if not the board will make a determination as to what the
actual facts are um but that isn't where the inquiry ends then there's the legal import of those facts uh and the impact it has if at all on on the on the decision- making process given that the application at least thus far has no
variances has no design waivers Etc presented we're not done yet we haven't heard the whole application yet either but part and parcel of it should be a submission of the factual and legal positions and the objectors council's welcome to do the same uh that happens
in court as probably everybody knows as well uh they call motion practice or trials this is somewhat like that uh so we'll await I think is the answer so Mr chair my my question was that I think it is important that we know color what
materials they're using all of those things because of that very reason and I'd like to correct no it is not a designated District but there is documentation it was the Short Hills Park Association and within that there
is clear lines as to what that uh was the Short Hills Park Association within that that block is part of that so I disagree it's not I agree and disagree there's a difference
between designated in the hopper which we call the master plan to be designated so there's the clarification so and and if I may with the chair's permission again just to be crystal clear the board has not made any
determinations one way or the other on this issue let alone the case is the application as a whole the board will not make any determinations on the applic as a whole until the application is complete and that includes all evidence presented by the applicant and members of the public objectives Etc um
but this is an issue that's been brought uh and uh it it I I think it uh well applicant and obor counselor are welcome to submit on it uh for clarification purposes I would submit it might be helpful to the board if they were to do
so both factually and legally uh and uh I can assure you it would help the board attorney to advise the board and then the board will do as the board does actually is it the house that's onor no it's the block and lot but then the
district has many blocks and lots and it is on the um maybe gram you can help me on the virtual map is recognized that it is on the element of the master plan and really the evidence thank you should come from our board
professional but again ultimately it's also going to come from the applicant the objectives thank you gr is that correct what board member Canfield's understanding is yeah the property is identified within the surface okay thank you for putting that
on the record and uh again nobody's made any determinations one way or the other the board awaits uh the factual and legal submissions C you have any other questions no I think I'm my clarification was knowing materials the
color all of that is important because of this very in my mind the historic possible district and and I suspect applicants Council will take that into consideration discuss it with the client M dor you'll do the same we'll see what we see and hear what we
hear Mr Baxter I did have one last question that goes right back to what Paul said at the start which is this I think we're talking about A10 right the one you just gave us um it looks like we're looking down on top top of the uh street sign there for Park Road so the question is is this A View From Park
Road for someone who's 12et tall yeah it is well this was taken from Google uh imagery and so I I guess their camera I'm not sure what height their camera is mounted on I was able to get so yes I could go there take a picture yeah I think some seeing a rendering from a
more natural human height yeah uh help but I guess uh help determine what what the actual look like because I think you looking down through a tree cany is is very blocking
looking across where there's no low branches it's not necessarily the same Viewpoint right I think that's what was okay well I I think the the question is a claim was made testimony was made that this project would be well screened yes
and what we were provided with is something that's in the future and from a different angle which distorts the perspective so now we're in a position where we're potentially questioning the veracity of the statements that were
made because what was provided is something you know in the distant future that may or may not it's it's very interesting I think maybe to my advantage if I show the plants at planting and I show it at I level and
we're all different let's just say we'll show it at 5'8 or to um it will probably work in my favor because the trees you know you plant a small maple and the canopy is going to
be right in your face versus 20 years from now you know it's going to be 67 feet tall and the canopy be there so um it's kind of like to what Avail do I do I map this thing and and it sounds like you're saying it would be ho you to
absolutely so I'll do it but uh but again I guess it's just um it's confusing when you uh when I have a piece of architecture that's very um it's not changing and I have definitive Dimensions but when we talk
about Landscaping these things move and change and there's times of years but if you look at the Landscaping plan and the intent of the project you would say this is like a tree farm like we could charge rent and you know a park um not that we mow down every tree and we have grass
and here's our building and so that's the intention that it's most great um to what so that's the intention is there any guarantee that we'll get that these trees will be allowed to grow well yeah I think there's a rep there a two-year
maintenance and and replacement guarantee as there generally is in my experience in other municipalities if I recall correctly that's already been stipulated to correct that was two years two yeah I think somebody had put one in something and candidly I think I said
isn't it two that's so I'll take the blame for the extra year it's in compliance with the ml it's two years yeah no it's two years it's two years I get no credit or blame the the uh so so then I guess my question would be if the
intention is for this to eventually one day look like this on A10 trees are grown the area is scamed would the applicant agree to a stipulation
that they would go beyond the two years maintenance so that you know if some of these trees didn't take and you know after two years there're little Twigs that they'll be replaced and you know they continue to strive towards what we see here in in A10 is
that the stipulation that you guys would consider you don't have to answer now but consider I think my what I'm thinking is that it might be helpful um because if your intention
is actually for it to look like A10 I don't see you know why why would someone object to that right I heard the request that's something we have to discuss to my thank you are there any questions from the
public spefic specifically pertaining to his testimony tonight thank you good evening Mr J how are you I don't know yet Danny I think that was a credible response
um so I I saw the uh rendering that you marked as 810 and that's the view from Park Road right Park Road yes okay and and you have not prepared any renderings from the west side of the property no okay
and there was one one view from the west side of the property that was included in A7 do you remember that no you have A7 you need A7 I'm looking at page A9 on A7 I'm
sorry page nine A9 a on exhibit A7 okay yeah that unfortunately every sheet has its own designation on top of the exhibit sheet that happens all the time these I'm with you okay um so that shows the west elevation is that right yes in
the lower uh left hand corner and is would that be the view that the uh the neighbors from the west side of the property would see if they were in the parking lot right if they were in the parking lot not from their property and from their property what what would
be uh buffering their property from uh this develop uh specifically the I guess there's trees on both sides of the fence and whatever do landscaping in the buffer right and and did you evaluate uh
the buffer on the west side of the property and this part of your design not as uh as as detailed as I did from Park and or pars parsel Road okay and are you aware that as part of the conditional use standards for uh
this use that you the applicants required to have a 25 foot buffer absolutely and what is your understanding of what that buffer entails um Mr chairman if I may this is squarely within the planner Tes it's just asking for an interpretation of
what the buffer required on thein I'm I'm not sure if he testifies anything about correct well he provided a view from Park um which said that the property would be well hidden so I'm trying to ask about his evaluation of the vi from the west
side of the property because um I want to know if it's it's well hidden from the west side is the question you're asking with I with respect to the to the buffer um whether that buffer was taken into
consideration in his opinion as to what the view would be well screened or or not from the West Side from the property owners to the West yeah sure I'll start with that I think it'll be well screened um
from the adjacent neighbor to the west to the west and what's the basis of your opinion uh the Landscaping plan is what I looked at um certainly architecturally it wasn't involved but uh looks like a lot of mature growth plus new planting so to me I don't know if it could be any
more well screened um and are you aware that there there used to be a a storm water feature in the buffer area that now the the applicants agreed to remove I heard that okay and do you know if the applicant will be adding any additional plantings
into that buffer area because it's removing that storm water feature I couldn't answer that question would that be part of your evaluation when you return to the board at the next meeting to demonstrate how this would be well screened from the western side maybe if
we did a more views but if I could get um I couldn't answer that what up we'll have next time in relationship to the West Side well have you have prepared any other views of what the Neighbors on the Western Property uh on the western side of the property would see that you
haven't presented to the board can you repeat the question have you PR prepared any views or renderings of what the neighbors from the western side no okay there's there's none that you have prepared I haven't prepared um and are you aware that the
of the slope of the property some of the Neighbors on the uh western side are at a higher elevation and would be kind of looking down into the property are you aware of that no I didn't study the neighbor's topography so you didn't study the grading of the adjacent properties to determine whether or not
there would be an adequate buffer between this use and buffer is a plan view 25 ft so I don't know what the Great is of the adjacent neighbors home no um right well I'll save the rest of my
buffer questions for the planner um and other Witnesses um yeah I believe you depicted the rooftop of mechanical equipment on your plans here correct correct and um you took if that
the location of those would be in the center of the roof is that right Mr yeah he did that and the story was here to cross-examined him with regard to that testimony at a prior hearing and that was not the subject of tonight's testimony that's retreading the same ground if I may Mr chairman is Dory was
your intention to get to something different with respect to that were just at the beginning of the question it sounded like I was wondering if the location of those have changed at all I thought there was some testimony earlier or commentary about the Rooftop mechanical
equipment only that I agreed that uh as a condition of approval the applicant would agree to do a post HVAC installation noise test to confirm that we comply with the D noise regulations and Mr chair confirming that it was in the center of the
building Mr chair if I can add there was another followup from a previous meeting to make it more green did you look into that the the uh ex the screen that we're proposing is the is the one that we're going to go with there was no additional
further green uh screening that the applicant was willing to provide if I may continue uh was there any evaluation done by you to determine what buffering there would be um from the adjoining uh residences to the West
so to determine whether or not they could see the uh rooftop mechanical equipment from where from the from their residences from the first floor from the second floor I think it's from the first or second floor of their residences well from the first floor I would testify that they would not see it because my
rendering I I specifically located the mechanical units on the roof I did my 3D perspective uh imagery and I could not see that was the goal to not see I don't want to see it either um from the parking lot um so as you I don't know what the
height of the you would be asking me if you could see from what height well the second floor let's say the second floor of the adjoining residen is to the West how tall is the first floor I don't know standard that's not my house I don't know 12T 12 foot first
floor Florida second floor 12et 10 foot I guess that's too high oh I couldn't answer that oh let's say 10 foot 10 foot um and so then the thickness of the floor is maybe a foot
I can hear you and I don't know what elevation the the first floor is at either so I couldn't answer your question from the second floor if they could if I've studied that what they would see from the second floor right could you evaluate that no not without having more
specific information about the neighbors floor uh house itself not by looking at the grading for of property or the adjoining property you could determine that no um I wanted to ask about uh garbage
just because I think this would be the appropriate witness there were open questions about garbage um and find that typically The Architects do the calculations for garbage storage and so forth is that right no that's not correct no okay and in other applications they have is is that
something but he he didn't testy to anything about garbage this even right but there were some representations at the beginning of the meeting about garbage and garbage storage and there was also some open questions by you Mr chairman about garbage storage that haven't been answered I can't help the chuckle because the only reason that those were
mentioned was in direct direct response to M dory's request on behalf of her applicant would the applicant be so kind as to limit its hours of pickup and you know can you tell us more about whether it'll be dumpsters and containers in order to try to be responsive and answer her question question so
by merely answering those questions you can't bootstrap that into an argument oh the door's been open so now let's ask questions about Mr leine your argument is that that there was a time for the qu that questioning when the testimony was given the last go round or go around before that is that your objection yes
and and none as though there was testimony open today specific answers to direct questions that the applicant had stipulated to they would be agreeable as conditions of approval not opening of the subject of the test Mr chairman my advice is maybe
Miss Dory should look and see if she has new areas of questioning based on this evening's testimony well I appreciate the applicant addressing as a stipulation in the beginning of the hearing my questions related to garbage but there was one outstanding question regarding whether or not there would be enough storage for the trash and whether
that was evaluated so either if the Architects has evaluated that or the engineer that was an open question maybe the applic can address whether someone is going to test the whether that's an open question and if so whether it's going to be addressed by a certain witness or not I don't believe it's an open
question and the the dimension trash encl fully enclosed trash enclosure is is shown on the plans there's some question as to the accuracy of the I mean we haven't even uh engaged with a trash hauler to know how frequently they're going to be picking up the trash so it's that was en question the
frequency of trash pickup but we can hand that later maybe the r so do we have a representation with respect to frequency of garbage pickup no we okay and we should and uh should the board not expect to hear from a
witness with respect to that question I mean you know there are health and safety ordinances in town we certainly can't you know we would be cited in find if you know we had an unsightly you know garbage condition and an un uncontained and uncontrolled garbage um we wouldn't expect to be exempt from
that is it the representation of the applicant that there'll be sufficient capacity in the track closure in order to abide by all health and safety ordinances of the municipality of course and the applicant obviously doesn't have to stipulate it to because the applicant's going to be
obligated but the applicant will have to comply with all ordinances including those ordinances absolutely okay thank you no further questions [Music] Charles 37 Keats Road in Short Hills
uh uh attorney Warner I have a a question of the architect pertaining to the presentation of uh figure one uh or exhibit the set of of of plans that were
presented at the laste pl presented by the engineer and and I asked the specific question I had architectural questions about some of the elements of these PL and should I
reserve should I reserve my questions for the architect and and I was I was instructed to reserve my questions for the architect why don't you begin asking the questions of the architect we'll see it's not something he testified here tonight it's regarding the the plan
architectural element that first introduced last week this is my first opportunity to question right it's architectural questions that you had that the engineer couldn't answer because they were deferred to the architect why don't you ask the questions and we'll see how it
goes my my my question is when you abandoned your closed storm drain plan for for St water run sounds likeing and went no and went with the swes went with this these swells yes went
with these swells did you consider did your did your team consider the use of this uh property uh by Toddlers and small children and their propensity to
go exploring and the rain Garden uh and the swell and the depth of the Swale and the possibility of of water flowing through that Swale and the safety of those small children versus a an
enclosed storm drain where that wouldn't be a concern that's just really not within the scope of the architect's testimony or expertise that's it's all storm water maybe maybe the architect can if that's the case he he he can under oath testify to that is that within your
scope it is not within my scope okay I'm confused okay I I was ready to ask this question the last meeting it's their burden appr proof they they have if you asked a witness a question he could answer it if you ask another wit question he could answer It
ultimately if none of the witnesses can answer the question the board will take it into consideration in evaluating that is my my stated concern it's on the record and whoever wishes to answer that or if nobody wishes to answer it you have any other questions a
legitimate concern and no thank you very much that was really it any of the members any other members of the public have questions Jean Pastak 342 Hobart um my question is I I like the um phrase Earth Tone but I really don't know what that
means when it comes to Colors is could it be a bright orange that's that would not be a considered Earth Tone color bright orang could it be red Earth Earth earthy I'm asking Browns beiges yes or no no is it red
could it be red I testified that it's going to be beige colored very neutral colors I'm sorry beige or what beige are very neutral colors neutral um so so it's so I'm just trying to get really it will not be a purple
building it will not be a purple building it could it be a green color it will not be a green color unless maybe a little bit of olive somewhere so we're talking about when you say neutral nothing that's what can you just give me like a little more specific what does
neutral mean in terms of color soothing soft um colors beig beige I'm sorry sir sir if you want to ask a question you'll come up give your name and address and ask a question I
would say um uh bee in Bee family okay so the renderings that we had seen earlier I don't know the numbers of the exhibits A7 in the beginning it looked orange and then in other other renderings the
building looked white in color so I'm just trying to get a here to testify yes beige okay beige neutral range yes okay warm tones uhuh okay thank you thank you um e
RL uh ETA I first name last name is harl h a r l 45 Woodfield Drive good um just a few questions uh what does it say in the ordinance is there a specific ordinance that refers
to what color this building can be or cannot be not that I'm aware of no there's nothing in the ordinance that says that you if if if the applicant wanted to make this a purple building yes is there anything to deny the because purple no okay um is there
anything in the ordinance that says that um that describes what this building should look like because I've heard references to like the master plan saying it should be in keeping with the neighborhood right where in the ordinance is it kind of specify what that what that means um we
don't have those design criterias we have height uh mass and and sizes of buildings there's nowhere to so so long as you meet those requirements yes there's nothing to stipulate what color
what design what style what shape no okay there's nothing there's nothing okay um one last question uh where in the ordinance does it explain what type of screening is required for a conditional use application I didn't find any is there any no there's no
there's no requirement to screen this building no as far as you know none just to maintain the 25t buffer and and the setbacks from the street uh yard so where did all these extra trees come from that's the the tree replacement uh it's a tree replacement
yes so that's just replacing trees that were taken down the trees that will be taken down need to be replaced yes and that's part of the ordinance yes but there's no ordinance that says the building has to be screened from the road from the neighbors from Livingston
from the Moon there's no there's no requirement no at all none okay thank you n thank you I have a question relating to that last question so that's really related to the definition of a buffer whether there's a requirement to screen certainly under
certain interpretation of what buffer means right there is screening requirements well there's question's coming up so yeah okay is is it your assertion that those buffer considerations are Irrelevant in this case in response to your last question you're saying this nothing in the
ordinances that requires screening yet a buffer tends to require usually command some sort of screening and we heard earlier that you weren't the one to answer these questions but the planning person was so are you now the person we should be asking these questions about
what constitutes a buffer uh most likely not no but that's the only thing if you talk about screening is uh the buffer the 25 foot buffer what's in the buffer and and and the design that outside the architectural perview but I know from a
zoning perspective you must keep a 25 foot buffer and I think the only requirement is a six foot high fence and staggered trees but I'm not the right person to testify about the what's in the buffer last question well I think I I
think I added that I think I added that technicality which is the only thing in the ordinance that I know about screening is the buffer to maintain I just was trying to politely sit Christine best back again um you
just talked about uh the conditional use uh you know regulations they're very clear cut um I wanted to ask you you know with your level of experience doing a lot of you know homes in the town what is the difference to you on a
conditional use application in terms of you know the things that the planning board thinks about versus a variance hearing well various you would require the permission to violate a law or a zoning law and we've done we don't have
that so from my uh understanding uh as long as we meet uh the requirements of the conditional use it's good now we're here to talk about traffic flow and patterns and lighting and requirements and the operation of the building uh to
make sure that it's a works well and flows well and and I think we've received some really good feedback uh from the engineers and the planners and the board members to develop uh the site okay um what what I'm what I'm
confused about and maybe you can educate me is then if you meet all these requirements why are we here tonight present I just no I'm just trying to ask here why are we all here because I'm asking
people can laugh about the question the reason why is is that conditional use is still on condition of what you know you present in the same way a variance is on you know what Madam chair Madam and Mr chair uh the the u i
I don't know if it it would be appropriate for Mr pedo uh to weigh in on as as the board planner uh what a conditional use a conforming conditional use means and as opposed to variances
and the like if he's willing on Le a I mean educate for the benefit of the board and perhaps also members of the public including the member of the public who just asked I guess I I'll limit my commentary because I don't want to you know I the the witness to to ask
their questions but the planning board under land use La the planning board is is empowered to authorize or approve conditional uses um and uh the planning board is also empowered to approve site plan applications of which this applicant meets this application before you this evening meets both of those
criteria one seeking conditional use approval um conf and the board is is to confirm compliance with the conditions as they're set forth within the ordinance and also to approve a site plan application if a if a conditional
use conforms with all the conditions the planning board has jurisdiction to hear it and as a gatekeeper for lack of a better term uh uh can ensure that the conditions are met and Grant approval would that be accurate that is accurate
cor okay if there were a deviation from any one anyone of the conditions of the conditional use with that require a D3 use variance which could only be heard by the Zoning Board of adjustment
and not this planning board that is correct yes the the board of adjustment is empowered to authorize D3 variants relief uh from the conditional use and there's different and more stringent standard for D3 relief from a zoning board than there is for a fully conforming conditional use application
before the planning board correct that's correct and I just want to also just further underscore because I did mention the site plan component that uh if there is a d variance required of any application the entire application including the site plan approval goes over to the of plan board can loses D
variance in one instance and one instance only and that instance is never right correct okay the the uh so at least in your professional opinion as it continues to stand right now it's before the planning board because we have
jurisdiction because they fully conform with all the conditions of the conditional use correct that's correct and the site plan application is before the planning board uh because planning boards here site plan applications um with their limited parameters uh but uh
this particular site plan application uh even if there were bulk variances it would still be before the planning board however in this case in your professional opinion thus far there are no variances correct that's correct okay so it's a in your opinion thus far it
remains a fully performing site plan and a fully formform performing conditional use application correct that's correct can I follow with that question for for you so as a conditional approval
do we need to look at the environmental impact the visual impact of this building in the surroundings on the neighborhood because again this is a conditional use we understand that there is no variances here as a conditional use and just I could if I could help
answer that question perhaps uh the Mr ped correct me if I'm wrong but the term conditional use means the use is permitted yes H as long as it satisfies conditions correct Mr pedo that's correct and in this case again at least
thus far the reason this board is hearing it is because this particular conditional use meets all of those conditions correct that's correct yes a permitted use or sometimes they refer to that as a as of right use correct that's correct as and in furtherance to your point the conditions to which the
applicant must conform are enumerated within the section uh the within the Zone District section for this so if there's no deviation the board planning board can hear it and uh obviously the burden of proof is different than if there were deviations
from those that's correct now Mr Warner just for clarification for the benefit of everyone here this body serves basically as the jury in this Clause proceeding subject to the facts and the law yes the law sure and so we hear
testimony from experts ordinary citizens as well and it's our job to decide whether that's the testimony that we've heard is correct and that it meets all of the the conditions and the
um the requirements correct part of well correct whatever those requirements are they're different in every case in a fully conforming site plan application uh the review parameters for a planning board are very limited That's the Law um and
for f conforming conditional use approval they're limited That's the Law we are going to hear from uh in addition to Mr ped who our planner who you've already heard from we're going to hear as I understand it from the applicants planner who will be addressing those
very issues what the law is what the standards are that the applicant has the burden of proof to meet and uh whether or not they met them and if so how I suspect we both hear from the planner that's generally will you hear from the applicants planner and the applicant
excuse me the ejector or anyone for that matter who wishes to uh retain a professional planner uh to testify in opposition there to can do the same uh and again you'll you'll make the
determination but it is frankly more more than fair to say that the standard of proof for a fully conforming conditional use and a fully conforming site plan application if indeed it remains as such is would it be fair to
say Mr pedo it's significantly lower than if there were a a D3 variance before the Zoning Board of adjustment or perhaps even bulk variances before the planning board I would agree with that characterization yes so I just want people to know at least generally what the parameters are we'll hear the
specifics right so that being said I I think you know the public had asked what this board basically does why we are here and what I'm hearing is we will hear testimony and we'll hear testimony from the jeer perhaps we'll hear testimony from our own uh professionals
and we'll hear testimony from the applicants professionals and then part of our job within the confines of the law is to make a decision based on that testimony as to whether this you know correct how however low arguably the
standard of proof may be for the applicant the applicant has a standard of proof a burden of proof must meet that burden of proof uh and uh uh based on the facts and the evidence within those parameters you're the ultimate Arbiter or at least at the administrative level you're the ultimate
Arbiter uh there's always an appellant review process but uh I'm sure the board will make the correct decision based on the facts in the law they'll make the proper decision within their discretion appreciate the clarification hopefully that gives the public a little bit better sense of why we are all sitting
here tonight hopefully it's complicated that's why there's a lot of people and professionals involved and and board members as the public no doubt is aware but I can't stress it enough they are volunteers who give a tremendous amount of their time and effort uh to to
provide a public service to their fellow residents uh and uh and that's why they're here tonight and that's why they painstakingly spend time during the days as well also uncompensated I don't want to rub that in too much because we want keep
these wonderful board members but uh uh so I suspect everyone appreciates that uh uh that they're doing that service for the benefit of the public so hopefully that helps did that answer your question not really but I I I may I
ask a question between you two because I'm not sure who can answer it because am I allowed you just asked the question can I ask well really ultimately I think for you to have a better understanding if you wish to of of what the board's uh
parameters are you probably want to wait for the testimony from the planning the Planner on who's probably the last witness on the applicant's side that's usually what happens and says based on all the evidence this is why I think this and then you'll hear perhaps from
an obor's planet um so but we can't sit here unfortunately and I'm not sitting here I'm I'm being quiet no no no we we can't we can't spend hours upon hours I'm not spending hours upon hours all right if you don't want to let me finish I'll stop myself why don't you see with your questions of the the actually I've
actually been very polite Mr Warner no you have and and and I was trying to help but I'll stop it's okay I just you know it's it's a lot of I just wanted to ask the simplest question maybe you can answer this because you're an architect in this town I bet you you can so
planning boards have a responsibility to the general public when making their decision to uphold the neighborhood scheme it's it's written in the law I mean I don't know if they're using the exact word scheme but and also for I'm sorry I was still I
never yeah what what is the question I'm asking is that true I needed to finish the statement and then I was going to put comma is that true okay is that okay so the question was is the planning boards responsible to uphold public good in the neighborhood
and uphold the neighborhood scheme yes or no I think that is uh what they're doing and so I think there's application uh and I the process is been great we've learned so much about you know there's been some fine tuning to the plans and
the parking lot and garbage the play area so there's been a lot of good that's come out of this process so I think that's that's um I mean I could say thank that there's no variances needed uh because that would make my job
much harder but I think that's the process is is to say okay well this is a conforming uh I don't want to say the wrong word but we make all the conditions of the conditional use and the zoning and now it's like okay well how do we make this the best plan it could be and we're
getting there so so you had stated originally in your design going back to fitting into the neighborhood scheme the responsibility of upholding that you had stated that you designed something that was going to be unique and stand out and not fit into the neighborhood scheme I'm
not using your exact words because I want to point that out but I'm I'm reiterating what you said uh is that true it say quasi well the design intention was not to make it look like a residential
home um for many reasons uh and so was to make it look like a a Civic piece of architecture a traditional piece of architecture Timeless piece of architecture not a modern m Masterpiece which maybe I would have loved to do but
uh my client and U congregation they all wanted a very traditional place to practice um what they do so is it traditional or modern because I was it's not modern I apologize if I Mis let you it's we've given this a lot of latitude
none of this was testified to tonight it's well beyond the scope the very limited offer of testimony that we made this evening this is again a rehash of prior testimony that this woman and all the members of the public had ample opportunity to ask Mr du about the last time I'm going to move on to the next
question yes thank okay um the there's there's um are you a dual degree person with a landscape architecture design background as well as the design background architectural background no okay are you acting as the
land ape architect for these plants absolutely not is there a landscape architect that has been overseeing placements of trees selections of trees looking at under story trees and how they're going to fit in and grow up yes or no not within his testimony well I
can't tell if he's behind fin my question wait thank you disrespect please Rabbi Rabbi there's no need to speak to do your job Mr attorne I think there's enough link to
be shared around maybe everyone can exercise ability at the Quorum and allow the chair to preside over the meeting and the hearing uh as the chair will uh and uh we can proceed with hopefully relevant question
Witnesses I thought go ahead Mr chairman yes Mr chairman get please make sure it is on the testimony that he gave tonight and if it isn't let's try and try and get pasted so that means I can ask a question that wasn't ever answered is that what that means I just want to be
clear it was a question for the architect that was never answered well I just had some other questions just like the attorney did if I can't ask it I will sit down and I will send you guys my email questions no that's part that's that's improper things can't be sent to the board everything the board does is
an open public meeting uh so you can continue to ask the questions of the architect please that are relevant to his testimony receiv so Mr Warner this things along if the resident has posed a question didn't
get an answer wouldn't it be appropriate for them to bring that up or highlight that during the appropriate phase when they're at the commentary if they believe that there was a question that that was relevant or material to this application that wasn't answered they
can uh uh under Ro say here's my list of questions I asked I believe they're all relevant and material to the application here's why I think that and as you will call Mr chair uh members of the board uh it wasn't answered and therefore I think that means something in the in your
decision-making process absolutely they don't have to ask the question 40 times if it the if it's not answered then that's their point when they get there absolutely thank you respectfully I I don't think I answered asked any question more than 1.2 five times I was
emphasizing then wasn't meant to be personal so my next take it that way I I'm not taking anything personally I'm just stating facts okay so next question is you talked about the roof equipment being in the center of the building you still don't know the square foot space of the roof equipment so what I'm trying
to understand is on this drawing which I believe was from A7 if I'm incorrect let me know is this A7 it is okay thank you so did you do this to scale or was this just sort of a mod no that's to scale
okay so can you answer what the square footage is if you've drawn it to scale on the plan of what of the roof equipment you want to know that I asked that previously yes no I will not be able to give you the sizes of our equipment yet we haven't designed it there's so many variables and options
and it's it's like when I design a house we design the house we design FL okay now we get to what's the way to heat and cool there's so many options so I know that makes total sense but so then we can't really can you based on knowing that can you really confirm at what
point the horizon line of the equipment is actually going to be how many steps you have to be away from the building um I I can confirm and testify to from the ground level even at the high elevation of Parson chill road which is um 5T
above our first floor that you cannot see this rooftop mechanical equipment at a a screening of 5 foot high so however big the area is going to be it's not going to change that as long as I maintain that it's on the uh upper level roof
yeah is it your opinion as a designer if you had a choice from a design perspective not from a square footage perspective and trying to me code would you put rooftop equipment in a residential neighborhood or would you try to put it on the ground or it's
going to be quier I think it's not part of tonight's testimony well he testified to the roof equipment to Dory think we we've also stipulated as a condition of approval of regardless of how many square footage square feet are devoted to the area of the hbac it's all going to be screened and it's going to be
compliant with the njp noise standards we've provided testimony in A7 as to uh two scale renderings of of showing that the screening will be effective at blocking the view of the roof top anals there's no prohibition against roof
Mechanicals oh so should not rooftop Mechanicals are allowed on residential homes this isn't a residential home a residential district agreed I think the the architect can answer that correctly yes you're what IED just try to ask question you're allowed to put rooftop
Mechanicals on a residence you can of course I I didn't know that I hav seen too many was that funny for you thank you okay let's so thank you very much just give me a second to collect myself if
you don't mind last question so I know that people talk to you about color I'm not going to get into specifics about it so it's not going to be gray and it's not going to be it's not going to be gray and it's
not going to be orange correct correct thank you that's all I want to know thank you so much I'm sorry that public interruped me so much well you I had a great question thank you any other questions from the
public any other questions from the board I'd just like to make a comment um Mr chair I think the confusion here is um you know when we talk about Landscaping the architect agrees that he's not a landscape architect so then
we go to the engineer and the engineer says well that would be something to ask the architect so I can understand everyone's confusion I also understand some of the questions that are being asked multiple times because some of this stuff is exhibits for the public um
we've done our best to push this application through as quickly and hear all the testimony from everyone but understand that the materials have not been available not only always for the board but also for the public so I I'd
really like us to kind of you know give some leeway to people that are asking questions uh that they may not have the same materials we have and in some cases not even we don't even have materials so I'd like to make a suggest suggestion
going back to the landscape architect I think there's some real questions when the attorney stands up and say which trees are not missing and they're still on the plan when the architect you know says well I misunderstood these are
Birches versus you know Evergreens so my suggestion would be a landscape architect to give us a clear idea of how this particular buffer or around this commercial building in a
residential area absolutely and I think we can ask actually the applicants if they will have a witness landscape architect witness testify I have to ask my client about it right now that's not part of our project team in terms of testifying it's
certainly part of the project team in terms of putting the landscape plan together that's before you that's been submitted as part of the site plan that's been reviewed by the environmental commission the Forester your planner your your engineer uh but was not intended to be a testifying
witness I'll discuss it with my client but I'm not going to commit to it now okay all right and understand it's their burden of proof thank you yeah I I so to say I concur I think there are questions that have been asked that have not been
able to be be answered and I think the most appropriate professional for that would be the landscape architect seem to have heard from everyone else or will um so yeah I think that could be help and I'm sure uh the applicant
appreciates the input from the board who are the ultimate uh will be making the ultimate determination at this administrative level at least as to this application and so I think they heard the board excuse me the applicants Council say he'll discuss it with his
clients so again we shall see thank you So Daniel thank you very much Andrew yeah you want what you Andrew uh you had provided uh extensive traffic related testimony um
the last time that you had testified there was a request uh primarily came from the board's traffic Consultants with regard to putting a finer point on the uh daycare aspects of the proposed facility um there's been some talk about
um calculating uh the trips that would be generated from that uh particular actually sorry let me let me step back uh just introduce yourself for the record for the members of the board and public leads absolutely Andrew viio traffic engineer for the applicant uh
work for Stonefield engineering my license is still active and in good standing and I remind you that you're still in Ro yes this witness is AC acceptable to the board thank you than you chairman um it's a question about um
doing some additional uh data Gathering and Analysis with regard to the daycare uh uh operation aspect of this proposed facility is that correct that's correct and in particular was there a request that the uh trip generation rates and the traffic analysis be looked at both
from what the it manual um guidelines are with respect to the um square footage uh devoted to that proposed particular use as well as what the licensed capacity uh of that particular use would be in terms of student population correct and uh did you gather
that requested information with regard to both yes and uh well in advance of our last hearing a week ago you had prepared and submitted uh a supplemental report is that correct correct could you just identify that by title and date for a record please absolutely it was a t
technical memorandum dated January 21st 2025 the subject line is updated trip generation and Capacity Analysis then you say updated updated with respect to what sure so the purpose of the of the report in addition to documenting the
the daycare operations uh of the proposed daycare center um uh we also sought to correct the size of the daycare component and the synagogue component of the development um and we also updated the weekday morning peak
hour trip generation to account for the potential morning prayer and daycare drop off to overlap so do you have been recall fan how many times he testified before this board before in connection with this application approxim imely three times uh
and been subject to uh questioning and uh cross examination from both the members of the public and the board is that correct correct uh and this was a supplemental report that was uh requested just with regard to the the daycare operations
correct uh well the the one clarification that I have is the changing the uh size of the daycare component does have a direct effect on the size of the synagogue component so
that that travels through okay so with that um additional fairly limited scope in mind could you please uh briefly share with the board uh the results of that additional analysis I have two conclusions um one is that the proposed
driveways are calculated to operate at acceptable levels of service and there are an adequate number of gaps in traffic for motorists leaving the site uh and the eastbound approach of parentage Hill Road to Old Short Hills Road is calculated to operate at level
of surface D or better for three of the five Peak periods studied and for the two peak periods where the Capacity Analysis uh that we were uh asked to provide results in capacity constraints we've confirmed that there are
sufficient gaps in traffic to accommodate the build volumes and I'll just leave you with two other aspects to note and then we can go directly to questions and answers um the the latest Bright View engineering review letter
dated January 27th 2025 concurs with the use of the it daycare center land use code and affirms that the Gap study methodology is consistent with traffic engineering practices and is acceptable to their office and to boil things down
into more layman's terms because uh we've been you know getting into the weeds about levels of service um I just want to say that the proposed site as calculated with all of the conditions uh uh uh that have been Incorporated in
this report um are calculate the proposed site is calculated to add just one car about every four minutes to the parsonage Hill Road approach to Old Short Hills Road during the weekday morning in weekday evening peak hours that concludes my direct testimony I'd
be happy to answer any questions before we get to the questions by the board Mr Y is here did I say that correctly y yes sir Mr Y is here in attendance uh in the absence of Mr Fishinger from brigh viw engineering Mr yard did you have any questions for the
witness actually jar like jar jar I'm sorry it's so much easier than you think okay um do I I don't need a microphone you can hear me um I project pretty well sure just if I may for the for the benefit of the public Mr jar like is from Bri view light Mr Fishinger is an
independent traffic engineer retained by the board in a consultancy fashion perhaps not unlike our board engineer and our board planner uh so he is here he works together with Mr Fishinger as I understand it and Mr jar you'll raise
your right hand and I'll swear you in excuse me like I did every other witness uh do you swear to God or airm that The Testament you're about to give is the truth the whole truth of nothing but the truth I do thank you who's going me your name John jar j a
HR and all my credentials are in good standing order thank you and no objection to Mr jar uh Mr LaVine or Miss Dory as an independent expert on behalf of the board no Mr thank you Miss Dory and Mr LaVine and
I'm sorry Mr chairman you had a question or Mr jar I just wanted to know if you had any questions or comments about Mr VI testimony I do I've gone over uh the extensive analysis performed for this job Mr vish's comments tonight are are
correct uh we reviewed the data and the analysis and and the testimony that he provided is is accurate uh mathematically we've checked the analysis and we concur with his conclusion that there will be suitable gaps and that the intersection will
continue to operate at acceptable level of service so um very curious to see what the county has to say on this application uh I I think that um the the big concern I I pointed out when I
looked at I think you guys already noted on this is that there's some RightWay issues going on there uh I was I was very curious as to find out um that how do you take have you taken that into account when You' looked at things and what's been your your your uh uh correspondence with the county there was
a an issue uh with respect to the property lines uh encroaching on to parsonage Hill Road uh that was in one of the initial engineering review letters or planning review letters um we reached out to David Antonio at Essex County to understand uh how uh we could
remedy that situation um we inquired about the feasibility of uh utilizing an easement uh to uh correct that uh property line and make sure that the full parsonage
Hill Road cartway is out outside of our effective property limits uh and Mr Antonio was um 100% um agreeable to utilization of an easement to sort out that particular
issue my only request would be that in the future should the uh the applicant have correspondence with the county that that correspondence be copied to my my off the board the board engineer so that we can keep keep a track of that process
yes that's fine I have no further questions I'm sorry if I please chairman if I made Mr you did submit a report though dated January 27 2025 as ref referenced by Mr bisho yes we did um would it be appropriate to speak to that
report and uh possibly also if I understand correctly there may be some outstanding requests that you made or conditions of approval for confirmation or if not please uh please let us know for the benefit of the board members of the public the applicant
everyone certain and Mr that's that's certainly fine I just want to refresh the board's recollection that um when uh La at the last hearing when I had Mr fante up I went through all of the uh various expert reports and tried to address the engineering related items that came up in each one including this
one so for instance on the top of page two where it says um where practical curb lines that intersect and acute right angle should be rounded we had actually testified to that and agreed that that would be a plan revision got that Mr line and and uh my apologies to
everyone I said the report in in the hall I'm looking at mine I have some check marks uh in some boxes I have some boxes without check marks uh so I believe that is correct some of these issues were addressed with the the engineer but uh we the board had and everyone has the benefit of the
independent traffic engineer here so maybe he can go through that report make sure he's satisfied with it and can share that with the board the members of the public I agree even if just for the sake of Rec so um with regard to our comment Mr chair can we ask the
professional to come the left turn Mr jar you might want to come to watching at home I just want to make sure everyone is able to hear I can certainly do that thank you I will do my best to be brief and succinct um
uh uh they uh should I I go through the gist of each comment or can we just go number and because everybody has the benefit of having my memo in front of them which would you prefer I can go much quicker if we just let me just knock through this okay um our first comment was we're concerned about some
of the curb radiuses the my understanding is the applicant has complied with that or will comply um will comply will comply yes okay yeah that's the check mark I have thank you yep the updated circulation uh pattern is consistent with the previously submitted concept plan is generally
acceptable to our office so that is that comment is resolved Mr I just by way when in a couple instances in this report it says are generally acceptable to this office what does that really mean generally acceptable that means we find it adequate we find that you responded to our concern in an adequate
manner so there it's acceptable and acceptable does that also mean that it's as you view the proposal that it's safe or or does not create an unsafe said another way does not create an unsafe condition that depends on the comment okay
and moving forward uh updated site triangles have been provided with uh the submission and we find them to be be acceptable it's confirmed that the site triangles will will be adequate um large wheel Bak this number three number four large wheel Bak vehicle templates for
garbage trucks uh my understanding is that we haven't seen that yet but they will comply with our request for uh turning templates to review turning correct large wheel vehicles okay uh to to be to be I I want to be clear yeah we we will comply we this
would be again if the board were to see it to approve this application this would be part of traditional resolution compliance we're planning an additional iteration of the plans to show that prior and this this this is this is a good example of a very common thing right this is a very technical
engineering thing they have to comply with that right they will have to provide a plan that my myself and the and the town engineer will review and make certain that the trucks can make the turns and if they can't they'll have to fix the plan or make whatever modifications are necessary to make it comply um additional information
recommended regarding the access to the proposed playground area is Ada accessible ramps and playground area proposed is a k proposed if so etc etc um my understanding is that they will comply with the the comments made under that under that section I think she was a request for additional testimony that
we provided at the last we talked about the setback from the curb and the location of the gate and where ramp is as well as signage that's right I believe I certainly have the notes on that test so all right the next section is traffic
analysis Mr viso just just testified to he has complied with our our uh our request to review the trip generation so he's complied with comment number six provide testimony in case the operation uh restricted certain times I think that that we've resolved this issue with
regard to times the they he's provided a trip generation a gap and analysis and Capacity Analysis that Encompass all the possible time the daycare is going to be open and he's provide the necessary uh engineering backup to convince our office that the intersection will operate at acceptable level of
service uh number eight we note the trip generation estimates are provided based on both building size uh he has revised his trip generation estimates to the to the satisfaction of our office so we agree with the me the the the um technical
memorandum dated January 21st which was just testified to we agree with the trip generation as stated in that memorandum previous trip generation uh we were not in agreement with but we are 100% in agreement with this strip generation in this memo and last but not least the
traffic analysis reviews existing proposed conditions for time periods weekday morning peak hour highest strip of 96 um what we're pointing out in in in this comment was that the um primary concern of our office is going to be the am peak hour and we ask them to dig into
that uh with a fine tooth comb and provide that Gap analysis to prove to us that the intersection will be able to will be able to operate at a reasonable level of service uh and he has done that to our satisfaction at this
point I that is the conclusion of our our memorandum I think I covered all the all the comments any any questions by the board with regard to how with regard to the traffic that I might be able to offer some some uh uh additional commentary
on yes please just a clarification on the property line encroachment I know you had given your definition of what that is and could you share with us Mr viso testimon is pretty much spot on because I work a lot with Essex County who are actually kind of the def the
facto County uh Traffic Engineers and uh this this is very very common Essex County probably not as common out this way as it is in Newark and and in Irvington in some of the more urban areas where we built the roads past the RightWay lines so um this is uh you know
I don't know how how often uh Martha and her team have come across it in Milburn but you know it happens very regularly in those areas the the um the road actually has been widened by you know you pave and you pave a little more pave a little more so they actually widen past the RO Wayland nobody really knows
where they are until like after somebody goes out and surveys it so it doesn't come as a big surprise to me and it's also typical for Essex County to not want to cause a detrimental impact to a property owner so they're willing to work with a property owner to allow them to instead of doing right away
dedications which are are cumbersome and could be costly with regard to attorney fees and recordings and whatnot they've been very flexible in in the past in my experience with them because mostly we were for town so our company we primarily represent like Bloomfield and and Nob bur and the towns in Essex
County so we come we come across this an awful lot working with them and is their typ typical uh way of approaching this is that they'll accept an easement and this way it it keeps the the paperwork to to a bare minimum but provides the necessary infrastructure and uh security
to the municipality and to the county that that right of way now could be used for the public good okay so that encroachment also then um it's actually on the property too so in other words they negotiate how much of the property
they take from well what will happen is is most likely the county will either create a radius that somewhat matches or is an offset from where the actual Road Edge is or they'll create you know um you know Square lines in the map and and
say that this would be an easement dedicated to the county for for public use and public and public uh purposes it's it's it's actually quite common thank you Mr CH if I could ask a question dub tailing off of board member Canfield's question which the answers to
which might uh might further inform the answers to those questions uh are you in your opinion would it be feasible uh for the applicant to contend that an easement as opposed to a dedic dedication excuse me uh uh would be
obtainable from the Essex County uh I guess it's the planning Bo correct yes I think it's very reasonable and uh is it your understanding that if an easement is provided that is not a take of any property like a dedication would be but
in essence it is a a WR or license to for the roadway to encroach upon the property but it doesn't change the property lines would that be accurate that is accurate correct okay that's one difference between an easement and a dedication the two
correct uh options that you uh uh uh addressed correct yes and and also if they do a a dedication it changes all of their numbers on their plan as far as P impervious open space so hence the reason why the counties for for obvious
reasons the counties come up with a policy that they try to go in this direction uh to to to help applicants and help towns better manage the situation clarification so is that also include setbacks
too um if the question is uh if the property lines don't change do the do the calculated bulk yeah uh uh deviate or bulk um uh
uh bulk regulations what you know whatever is proposed do they stay the same my understanding is yes they would stay the same because no property would be changing hands the boundary lines would not be changing so yes I I thought
that might in further inform the answer to the question yeah thank you uh so my my pleasure and I guess if I may while I'm uh for Mr vishio uh there was a he addressed communication with the Essex
County planning board and gentleman's name uh David Antonio David Antonio yes um the um I while I might guess it what the answer is let me ask the question do you have anything in writing at least as of yet from them in regard to your
inquiry I personally do not I do not okay um uh would the uh I think it's already been asked by Mr jar and I think it's been answered so uh uh whatever writings do come when they come they'll be provided to Mr Char and the board it would also also be reasonable for us
simply to ask quite honestly because it's such a common occurrence and what they're asking I think it's probably pretty reasonable for you to ask David to send you an email and and you know let's just kill this you know I I I well it's up to the the applicant in the SS count planning board correct but
whatever is obtained in writing will be provided to Mr jar and the board correct yeah yes typically the county plan board does that in any event but yes I'll yes schol it also takes a number of things off your guys plate to you know there's a lot of concerns here so this this could take one concern off the off the
board's off the board's agenda I had nothing forther Mr chairman thank you thank you anyone else from the board with questions from Mr VI or Mr jar I have question for Mr yes the one number I heard that and I'm sure I'm interpreting it incorrectly was one car every 4 minutes at the passage Hill
entrance correct okay so that would be 15 children per hour shiming one per car I know that they might be doubling up or whatever so I'm wondering how you arrive at that fet and I don't need them new shap but it's just over what period are you measuring that but I'm imagining a
morning Rush 30 minutes where 60 children arrive and then it doesn't add up right like so what I'm referring to is over the course of an hour and uh there are two side driveways one on parsonage Hill Road one on Old Short
Hills Road some motorists uh exit parsonage Hill road and travel to the West some travel to the east uh and likewise on Old Short Hills Road some motorists travel make a left turn travel North make a right turn travel South
what I was specifically referring to uh was the the number of motorists that are making a right turn out of the proposed driveway on parsonage Hill Road and then approaching old Short Hills Road okay got it's not the number that instance
entering there which is going to be no three times what you just St actually if we average it across all the aces no no no okay like to open it up to the members of the public do you have any questions for Mr or or Mr jar
so my name is Ani Verma just spell a an I last name is Verma v r m and I live in the neighborhood uh so my question is to the traffic engineer technically it's supposed to be the address so we could so the board and others can determine whether you're within 200 feet or not
but Al but you have the absolute right to ask questions and make comments regardless right so just so so technically the address should be provided along I can give you the address I can give you the address 29 kilma Drive Short Hills thank you yeah so my
question is I use the road the parage and the old shs very often currently there's no traffic light at that Junction and I've seen Sometimes some sir are you asking him isn't that correct yeah so my I'm just putting the question I'm just the background behind
the question so I'll put the question at the end can I do that why don't you give it a try yeah so so I use the often currently there is no traffic light my question to you is is the traffic light needed
there and that's your assessment no and it would make it worse no because there are people going I've seen sometimes issues some incidences of accidents sir happening I know I know sir yeah I want to help I know it's an odd process we don't live our daily life in a question
and answer and wait for comments to be sworn in ETC but for these proceedings whether we like it or not that's the way it has to proceed uh under the law so if you can continue to ask him questions and then your observations comments Etc when you're under oath you can make
those okay these questions might be a predicate if you know what I mean by that and I'm sure you do to ask to making those comments and testimony later on for you okay so just one question one question is very pointed it's a very pointed question you are say there is no need for a flight correct
and you said it will make the situation worse yes white with the existing roadway geometry yeah if there is a traffic signal it would result in extensive cues along Northbound and S southbound uh old Short
Hills Road um right now Northbound and southbound traffic along that roadway uh does not have to yield to any traffic a traffic signal could perhaps depending on phasing and timing help the parsonage Hill Road approach roach but the vast
majority of traffic traveling through that intersection is on Old Short Hills Road and you would see delays increased significantly with the installation of a traffic sign okay thank you Charles Bambara 37 keiths road Short
Hills um I my question is for both Traffic Engineers Mr jar as well um it it's been brought up before uh the possibility of creating a a a third center lane uh both on Old
Short Hills Road and on that section of pars Hill Road uh to facilitate uh turns and also provide a right of way for emergency vehicles and
I know that the applicant applicants attorne the applicant himself uh said that he would provide an easement for such a lane were it uh asked for by the county I guess because it's a county road but my question to you is do you
believe a third center lane for turning and as a right of way for emergency vehicles would help to improve many of the questions and many of the concerns that the public and the and the board members have
expressed go first yeah who question sure and that's my only question so when answer that sure so um I'll start by saying well let me
start by saying that the the proposed development would constitute 3.8% of all traffic traveling through this intersection during the morning peak hour and 2 2.2% of all traffic traveling through the intersection
during the weekday evening peak hour as we calculate so if there is an issue that needs to be remedied um the the the cause of that is the ambient traffic not this application and the uh the
intersection as it currently is configured does have the capacity for the additional trips that would be borne by this development um as indicated in our um in our Gap analysis um
so we calculated that during the weekday morning peak hour there are sufficient gaps for 73 motorists to make a left turn from parsonage Hill Road to Northbound old Short Hills Road the
build volume with the ambient growth in the future with our site traffic is only 49 and again that 73 that number 73 uh of gaps is
utilizing the default Gap value um that applies Nationwide that was not reduced in any manner to to calibrate for existing conditions and uh that was the weekday morning Peak and then the
weekday evening Peak there are uh there is capacity for 126 left turns uh and only 56 uh uh a demand of 56 left turns in the build so you've you've accurately
addressed the the normal traffic that that you're that uh that you described um I also expressed the a concern that was shared we even had a cardiologist from from St Barnabas come and express a
concern about a right of way for emergency vehicles and that was also part of my question is wouldn't that then provide the right of way for emergency vehicles that a number of people are concerned
about my recollection is that the the the cartway width of old short Hills Road doesn't change drastically as you travel North or South um so that seems like a core wide issue that needs to be looked at more holistically than at this
one particular intersection okay that's your answer and do you concur jar or his answer is really complicated I'm going to be a little more simple your question was very simply well additional turning Lanes help the intersection okay that
analysis hasn't been done so I can only answer that question with a very common sense approaches and that is is that you know in the future should the county look at it and determine if additional turning lanes are necessary they might that this application does not have
enough traffic impact to for me to to say that they have to but the larger you so if you look at um figure two the 200 2026 no bill traffic that that's the actual volumes before they come with their development so that's really what
I'm looking at is what what what's what do I own all right I'm I'm the responsible party the county in town and the volumes are heavy there okay it's heavy volumes and in the future it may it it may you know warrant to have additional turning Lanes I very simply
would would it help very possibly could all right but the analysis has to keep done do the engine I understand okay thank you very much uh Mr viio um I had just had some questions there was a lot of discussion of the County's requirements uh will the application require an uh will this
require an application to the SS County planning board my understanding is yes and it's already been made okay so uh the County's requirements will be addressed by the County Board correct and U the potential for diff there is there a potential for
traffic improvements that the county might require I can't guess on that okay um and I think the the engineer previously testified that whatever the county requires you're going to comply with is that true or no that's not accurate I
mean we'll have the county will review it and sometimes there's a back and forth sometimes there's a discussion and I'm not going to stand before the board that doesn't have jurisdiction and pledge what we're going to do when we're before the body that does have jurisdiction it'll be up to them and we'll have to satisfy them we're not
regardless uh if there's an approval from this board it'll be conditioned among other things on that board's Pro okay um um and I reviewed your latest report uh you didn't include any additional traffic counts so you're still relying on the prior data is that
right we've collected traffic counts on a number of occasions um May of 2024 and November of 2022 okay so around like Memorial Day and Thanksgiving those through your traffic counts and you're not conducting any more right uh I
I wouldn't characterize the dates that we collected the traffic as being affected by those holidays that you mentioned okay but it's true you're not collecting any other traffic data that's further away from holidays no okay um
and you're no longer relying on a reduction for trips for siblings right that was correct for prior testimony and your report now has hours of operation for the daycare um on the first page um and states there will be four not five
classrooms so um are those set hours and is that that number of classrooms set is the applicant going to return to the board if those change because I believe your testimony is that it affected the traffic analysis right I don't think anything has changed from what the
latest architectural testimony was with respect to the floor areas of the daycare center although we did say to the board that by way of clarification that we would when it comes time to resolution compliance that on the architectural floor plans that there there was some question as to whether or not the fifth classroom was classroom
space or play area and we had testified that it's play area and we had indicated that we would make that designation clear on the on the architectural floor plan um so my question was twofold as to the hours of operation which are in your
report right uh are those hours for the daycare um if those change would the applicant return to the board they affect your traffic analysis right yeah I don't know the degree to which uh what con stitutes a significant
change that would require the applicant to come before the board um the purpose of me including that in the report was to provide the re the reviewers the board an understanding that uh drop offs and Pickups would happen uh somewhat
gradually and generally consistent with that of a typical daycare the the leeway that the applicant would be given to to change things five minutes 10 minutes 15 minutes here or there I I can't um uh I can't make a determination on
what would require us to come before the board okay but the hours that you provided in your report those are the hours that the faciliity is expected to operate at right correct and that's the basis of your reports those hours correct correct so then if those hours change I'm asking if the applicant is
going to return to the board if they so let's say they change significantly Mr chairman there was a request that dates back quite some time um and was actually a recommendation that originally stemmed from Mr Kissinger's office bre view engineering
uh to submit proposed Language by way of a condition of approval with regard to this issue which I complied with that request I submitted uh I drafted proposed language ran that by Bright View engineering U Mr Fishinger uh reviewed provided some minor comments and otherwise blessed that I
Incorporated his comments and I provided that to um Mr Warner and I believe through the board secretary but that's been on file with the board for some time I have not seen a copy of that has that been made available can you provide a copy to this
story uh yeah do you have one this evening no is that available on the website should be haven't seen it the objecting letter or no no no he's he's referring to some language uh from a proposed condition that went through Mr
finger's office to say I I could swear that I me to put you on the spot Mr War I could swear that I copied you I believe I submitted it to the board and copied you on I haven't seen that I don't think we we never received it why don't we do
this whether you did or you didn't yeah uh you believe you did so why don't you uh and copy uh the story uh and if it's not already on the website it will very good K as soon as reasonably practicable
no reason why I can't do that tomorrow thank you thank you um so your report states that you did not study this Sunday you didn't study Sunday um and you also did not study the weekday evening is that
right did not study Sunday we did study weekday evening can I just CL clarify that these questions are towards the supplemental report that we testified is this all with respect to the January what was it 21 yes yes that's what I'm referring report that you're testifying Mr vishio
is it January 21 I think I got January 21 2025 right yes uh and that's what you're referring to with all these questions Mr story so there's no confusion yes thank you yes I just as an overall I don't think I have ever asked any questions of Mr vishio yet so um
this my first time um but you're referring to the you're referring to the January 21 20 25 reports so we're all clear and so he's answering the question you're asking correct okay if I can just be the fact that she may or may not have availed herself of the opportunity to ask Mr Vio
questions in the past doesn't mean that I don't think she's asking anything other than the January 2125 report so respectfully I I don't think you need to object well with all due respect I did uh not ask questions of Mr visho at
prior hearings um you know to allow the applicant to proceed preparing a concept review before we discussed this at the end of a hearing that I would wait so I'm just letting you know this is the first time I'm questioning this witness and I'm going to try to restrict it to the January 21st report right I think
we're good please continue with your questions and and Mr vish's answers um okay so at least for Sunday you didn't study that and you're relying on data from other days of the week is that
right we didn't study Sunday at all or included in the analysis at all right and you did that because you're relying on uh data from other days of the week you said the the traffic volume on Saturdays we we it's it's highly unusual
for traffic analysis to study every possible peak hour on every day uh we conducted automatic traffic reporting counts uh on Old Short Hills Road so we know what the traffic volumes are on that road all seven days of the week
Sunday traffic volumes as is probably intuitive um is is significantly lower than the other peak hours studied so I believe we studied five peak hours um
and that is a uh it's very fair to characterize that as capturing all of the potential worst case Peaks so to speak by starting the Saturday peak hours is that you said no by studying
the weekday morning weekday midday weekday evening Friday evening and Saturday midday it is in my professional opinion that the level of service results would be would show more traffic
and congestion during all five of those peak hours than it would on Sunday and for that reason we did not study Sunday okay um so I was just looking at the um the midday peak hour traffic volumes for Saturday and Sunday and and your prior
testimony you testified Saturday uh 1,23 vehicles per hour Sunday 1,157 vehicles per hour these sen your prior testimony um so these are pretty similar numbers right they're off by
like 50 can you repeat that um Saturday one uh 1,23 vehicles per hour Sunday 1,157 vehicles per hour that was my prior testimony yes
what was the context um what are those numbers referring to uh the midday peak hour for Saturday midday Tre peak hour volumes for Saturday peak hour volumes traveling through the intersection Northbound southbound eastbound
westbound I don't remember I don't know what the question is okay well these were um these were amount that you provided in your prior testimony for Midday peak hour traffic volumes for Saturday um all right but um given that
the applicant has testified that there'll be teen events on Sundays um that will coincide with the regular Sunday service um isn't it likely that there'll be some kind of traffic impact during that time shouldn't that be studied there would there would be some
level of traffic impact but would not be to the level of the peak hours that we've already studied um I heard your prior testimony um in response to the questions of one of the board members
regarding the meaning of you know one car every four minutes over the course of an hour I'm just looking at the table from your report has uh some more data in there I just wanted to ask you some questions table A1 on um page 84 of your report it's in
the appendix um that has um old chill Hills Road and Parson to chill Road eastbound left and right and it has a table uh weekday morning peak hour and then it lists the existing
condition 2026 no bill 2026 build right I'm sorry you said A4 correct yes page A4 for got it yes okay table A1 um and it's listing in that first row
there um it says level service e 37 is that 37 seconds correct and that's the delay that is the calculated average delay for all vehicles making that approach to that particular
intersection according to the parameters that we were asked to utilize by the board's reviewing engineer okay so it's uh in the existing condition it's a level of service e 37 second delay right that is what the analysis says that's
what the software output is using the parameters that we were asked to utilize okay and then in the no built condition it says level of service F 51.4 seconds right correct okay and then and the build condition um it has level of
service F still and it says 143.5 seconds so that's the the difference in the delay from the existing condition to the build condition the the delay is going to increase from 37 seconds to a to 143.5 seconds for that particular approach is that
right that is that is accurate according to that table that is not what the values will be uh in the future condition nor what the values are today in my professional opinion they are sub substantially better than the analysis
reflects in that table okay but I mean you're a traffic engineer as regards traffic engineer you rely upon the math the data right no we rely on a lot of factors okay but the math is one of the factors correct so or gaps okay but the math is one of the factors yes one
factor okay um so in this case the is the math is showing that the the level of delay is going to be you know three times almost four times than what the average motorist is experienced at that intersection now presently uh yeah again I disagree with
the conclusions of that analysis um the primary reason being we were not given the opportunity to modify the gaps that motorists accept um uh we found through extensive review
of video that there are motorists accepting gaps significantly smaller than the default gaps that are utilized Nationwide um there's an excerpt in the highway capacity manual that I that I would would love to provide the board
that speaks to this issue specifically um this is the highway capacity manual seventh edition um it is generally assumed in gap acceptance theory that drivers are both consistent and homogeneous this
assumption is not entirely correct Studies have demonstrated not only that drivers have different Gap acceptance thresholds but that the Gap acceptance threshold of an individual driver often changes over time in this manual the critical Headway and follow-up headways
are considered representative of a statistical average of the driver population of the United States it goes on to say that again this is also the highway capacity
manual critical Headway can be estimated on the basis of observations of the largest rejected and smallest accepted Headway for a given intersection so we've again
like I said conducted extensive amount of of review of the video that we have at this intersection drivers are accepting gaps smaller than what is considered the statistical average of every driver in
the United States and for that reason the real world operations of this intersection are substantially lower than uh uh what is reflected in the table that you're referencing and if
you'll allow me I think the the best most straightforward way I can provide a real world example of of this is by using the intersection of old short Hills Road and Park Road as an example um so in that same table the calculated
delay value is 28 seconds um during the morning Peak period I reviewed the video myself from the 8 am to 9:00 am peak hour with a stopwatch uh and found that the average delay
was uh 19 seconds and that 19 seconds includes one vehicle that was stopped for about a minute allowing a emergency vehicle to pass so if you discredited that one vehicle the average delay would be 16 seconds so the
real world delay at Park Road is 16 or 19 seconds depending on how you want to take a look at it versus the 28 seconds that we're representing in that table um using default
values okay so uh wouldn't it make sense you're say saying that the the current delay that you're experiencing when you apply the numbers and put it into your computer is greater than what you observed at at Park Road right correct correct okay so wouldn't it uh wouldn't
it make sense that the numbers that are provided in your table even though those the delay in seconds may be greater but the uh the multiple of the amount of the delay would be the same no because when you achieve uh volume to capacity volume
volum to capacity ratio uh approaching one or greater the delay values increase exponentially so uh what you're seeing is in the no build condition we go from uh in the morning peak hour I think it's
uh we achieve an F right in in in that table Yeah morning peak hour so that's when the volume capacity ratio is over one every additional vehicle grows that delay EXP itially but if the we were
starting at a lower delay value which is what the real world conditions are that exponential growth wouldn't occur okay but would you expect there would be um at least I mean this table showing almost four times the delay for
the uh eastbound left right approach wouldn't you expect there would be double or triple the amount of du ey no I mean I think I'll go back to what I said at the top one vehicle every four minutes I don't think would double the
delay for 300 some OD vehicles that approach that intersection okay well at least the First Column here is showing almost four times the amount of delay and then when you go to the weekday evening peak hour
it's it remains level of service at for the entire time for old TR Hills Road parsonage Hill Road eastbound left right right it's always of service at that's the current condition and it'll remain that in the build right um
the my previous answer I think still applies um you um stated in your testimony that you're relying on the um gaps uh gaps that motorists are going to accept uh
gaps in traffic and that's why there'll be less of a delay right I am saying that given the restrictions on calibrating the model that we used
um the the Gap study was necessary to determine whether or not the build condition whether or not there were adequate gaps in traffic for the build condition because there would be worsened level of service right that's why you evaluated that we
yeah we exactly it was in collaboration with Bri view engineering and Joe Fishinger so uh Mr finger's uh uh preferred methodology for analyzing this intersection was to not adjust the
critical gaps uh in the software uh but rather to keep them deep default and in concert also perform a gap study um to uh use real world statistics to verify
that the intersection would still have capacity in the build condition so what's that default Gap value what's the amount of time that those Motors are looking for a gap to make a turn that they're depends on the geometry of the intersection was there a certain amount
of time like 5 Seconds 10 seconds that for your Gap study which which movement are you interested in um this eastbound uh old Short Hills Road and parsonage full road so the default Gap there
is 6.43 seconds for a left turn Okay so because the traffic will be increasing you're saying the level of service is going to go down wouldn't you expect that motorists traveling through the intersection would start to get impatient and maybe are accepting
shorter gaps than Sixx yes they already are and do you think that's you know reasonable to evaluate the impacts and the safety of this intersection by assuming that motorists are going to rely on short gaps of just a few seconds in order to
make a turn they are already doing that right but at over time after this is constructed the level of service is going to to degrade and the amount of traffic is going to increase and motorists will become impatient when you agree when traffic increases motorists become
impatient perhaps 10 20 30 years in the future but not as a result of this development okay but you're relying upon short gaps in the traffic for motorists to be able to make a turn that's what you're relying upon for already
are um do you have any concern that motorists might because they're impatient they might use the property as a cut through that's illegal okay did you evaluate that as part of your analysis no are there any signs or anything like that that no to prevent that no
um um I'm interested in the uh driveway on Parson Hill Road that's the only access point for the property correct no it's the only entrance correct it's the only entrance um and uh you previously testified here tonight that um you
didn't believe a traffic light was necessary because it would create backups along psh Hills Road right correct okay and then um what about um have you analyzed um how the increase in traffic from this
development would affect um um cars stacking up on parsonage Hill Road and whether they might block the driveway um I have taken a look at that uh and even with the default values and
the Capacity Analysis that we performed the the driveway again the geometry and the location of the driveway changed from our initial proposal we have we have moved the driveway on barill road
as far Far West as is feasible um I believe that spacing is 287 feet if I'm not mistaken um when you consider about 25 ft per vehicle and there's room for 12 left turn uh two left turning
vehicles at the intersection um you have capacity for about 13 Vehicles before approaching our intersection using the highly conservative um analysis the 95th
percentile Q calculations for the warning peak hour is 12.2 vehicles and the PM peak hour is 14.5 Vehicles again so we have stacking room for 13 cars and
using that that extremely conservative assessment um we're we're barely approaching 13 Vehicles so during the the peak hours did you also evaluate that during the peak hours that is the peak hours that is the peak hours okay um in in evaluating your uh the
safety of circulation for the site and this intersection um have you considered the impacts to the private driveway that's to the east of old short Hills Road uh I I when I was reviewing the video I I've watched the entire hour
video I think one one car made that okay so that was the your only evaluation of that driveway other than that was the only thing you observed they found an adequate Gap in traffic and they performed a turning maneuver okay safely you didn't analysis analyze
this as a four-way intersection it was just a three-way intersection you didn't include that driveway I wouldn't analyze this as a four-way intersection if one car makes a movement in an entire hour do you think that the additional traffic and increased delays will create any
kind of unsafe situation for vehicles trying to get in and out of that private driveway no um has the applicant proposed any type of mitigation associated with this application no um would that be analyzed as part of the county
application not that I'm aware of do believe that there's any mitigation necessary or recommended for this application no no further questions thank you hi Randy f l Park Circle for 24 years um when you do your analysis are
are you taking uh into account speed at all when you watch that hour video speed of the cars that are traveling uh we do in performing our site distance analysis so the site
distance triangles that were provided and testified to previously those dimensions are based on the speed of vehicles so um in that respect we we did take it into so you're able to calibrate that through the video that you're
you're watching no I didn't calibrate or take any speed measurements from the video I was watching okay um you know what the speed limit is on that road by CH I believe it's 35 okay testified to that previously okay good um so this
this speed is not taken into account of any of the math or analysis that you Mr jar are are putting together you're you're assuming that they're going 35 miles an hour up and down this road no you not assuming that no D drivers just
looking for uh a gap that they find suitable to enter um the uh you know the intersecting street right and so a gap that the analysis uh of coming in and
trying to fit into a gap you don't think speed has any kind of determinant on on that no do you have kids that drive by chance I'm sorry what was the question the speed no no no the last question oh I was ask him if he has any kids the drive Oh I thought it was a question it
was yeah um okay that that doesn't seem right to me but um so your this delay time um is the calculus the same so coming out of Park Road is the calculus the same for making a right
and going up the hill versus going making left and going downhill no no left turns require a larger Gap than right turns okay all right fair enough thank you thank you Jerry Kung 17 Lee Terrace um I have a couple questions
focused on the now it's going to be a four-way intersection or there's two stop signs right at the exit from the daycare and the exit from Park Road there's going to be stop signs and then jordal road going north south is that corre okay so uh in your traffic report
dated January 21st 2025 page A4 this is the delay level of service analysis um the current or the no build condition in 2026 is 30.4 seconds going westbound so that's if I'm interpreting
that correctly does that mean that in 2026 in the no build condition a park resident trying to leave in the morning peak hour will wait on average 30.4 seconds according to the parameters that we were asked and required to use understood uh okay so and then
the and based on that same sort of reasoning in the build condition in the build condition there's an 11.3 second delay increasing for those residents out of park be some increase okay it based on the analysis that is presented in your traffic report that is the increase that
is to be expected mathematically is that correct okay okay so uh okay so on page uh A9 so this
is uh this is the same report page A9 um this is showing traffic counts coming out of the proposed structure um I have a question about the counts for the westbound Park Road residents versus the eastbound daycare
exiting uh folks um could you explain why two-thirds of the traffic out of Park Road in the peak am hour is going northbound um versus 2third of the opposite side going
Southbound because most traffic is coming Northbound in the morning so we're sending our trips back that way most traffic is you see 9:30 there that's higher than
724 wait where's 9:30 sorry Northbound through approaching Park Road uh we might not be looking at the same numbers uh so I'm looking at the 11 so exiting Park Road there's 11 cars going northbound and seven cars going Southbound
which figure are you looking at four figure four page A9 yeah yeah so that's two3 approximately two-thirds of the traffic leaving Park Road is going northbound yeah that makes sense more people travel Northbound on Old Short
Hills morning so no this is okay yes so exactly so coming out of the daycare approximately two3 is going Southbound yeah because they're they came from the south and they're returning to the South that's called primary trips that's another way that our
analysis was conservative we assumed every trip was primary uh we didn't assume any pass by traffic if we had assumed pass by traffic I would have sent the trips okay Northbound so okay that's fine but suffice it to
say there's approximately twice as much traffic trying to go onto 's Road as a result of the built condition is that correct no so
there's maybe I'm not understanding this so right now if I look at these traffic counts there's 18 people exiting Park Road trying to go either North or South Oh you mean approaching old Short Hills Road at this particular intersection yes yeah we're we're going from a three- leg
intersection to a four leg intersection good correct great thank you so then two pages from there um page A1 um so you have so just a general traffic question so right now um it's a
three-way intersection as you said when we go to a four-way intersection who has the right of way if multiple people approach the intersection at the same time uh the driver to the right who is to the right if they're there's there's two stop signs they're opposing from
each other so who has the right of away the driver that gets there first okay the driver that gets there first and it's that's irrespective of what direction they're going in well the two if they're both making left turns they could occur
simultaneously if they're both making left turns they can occur simultaneously yeah are you certain about that if they're both making left turns it can occur simultaneously yes it happens at every intersection
constantly yeah wouldn't they crash no okay um maybe I'm I guess that I'm okay we we'll set that aside um so they would have to alternate essentially sure for the most part
baring baring any baring any okay for the most part if they're both thinking right I I understand they wouldn't crash if they're both making less I'm a little worri but that's fine in a little bit of a disagreement there but sure sure um okay so there's a gap analysis for Gap required for one vehicle two vehicles on
this page a11 does that take into account this alternation that's just the total number of gaps available for any left turn whether it's coming from park or the site dropway so
my question is specifically related to you say Gap required for one vehicle 6.43 seconds Gap required for two vehicles 9.96 now that makes sense to me if there's a three-legged intersection but when it becomes a four-legged intersection you're going to necessarily
requ some alternation yeah and the the Gap actually increases for four leg intersection okay and that's previously testified to 6.43 a four leg intersection has a base critical gap of 7.1 seconds for a left turn which we utilize uh am I looking at
the right this is A1 uh you're looking at the wrong intersection you're concerned about a13 okay I see so that the increas is 3.5 for can you help me
understand that because the increase from one vehicle to two vehicles is 3.5 seconds and now it's it's the same difference between those two okay so here's the difference between the first intersection you were talking about and and the second intersection the the first intersection
par Hill Road and Old Short Hills Road has a basic critical gap of 6.43 seconds yeah that increases to 7.1 seconds because it's a four- leg intersection the followup Gap is taking into
consideration that drivers behind that vehicle that accepts a gap tend to accept a smaller Gap because they're aware of what traffic is on the roadway and they don't need to wait that full
time to perform a follow-up maneuver yes I understand that but is that doesn't shouldn't that increase if it's a for like shouldn't that differ between the one and two car the differential between the Gap required for one and two cars or am I not I might not I just might not be
looking at the right I mean the highway capacity manual doesn't say that okay that's fine um so I'm going to go back to my original question related to the delay in terms of level of service so just help me understand this because
if I use a simple and maybe I'm oversimplifying um if I use a symmetry argument right so I'm taking a three-way intersection I'm essentially taking this this Park Road I'm mirroring it on the other side right it's the same we said
earlier it was double the amount of traffic wouldn't logically you would expect that it would go from 30 seconds to 60 seconds as opposed to 30 seconds to 40 seconds no I disagree with that completely why because
the the the Vehicles can use Gap simultaneously and and just just increasing the even if we were to double the traffic on Park Road the tra one car does not but that's
different right because you are you're not you might he was trying to ask In fairness you might want to let him finish trying to answer your question and then follow up sure you finish I'm finished Mr
may try to give a generous amount of latitude here but at the end of the day I don't know that it's some comment upon the applicant for its experts to enable every member of the public to thoroughly understand the details of his report he's provided testimony he's been subject to specific questions the
board's independent Consulting traffic engineer is in fundamental agreement with the conclusions we've voted an awful lot of time just to help an individual member of the public better understand the study I don't know that that's the applicant's responsibility if I understand the
objection everything has to be reasonable Mr chair if I may ask a question of M Dory M Dory did you say you have one or more experts that you intend to bring in opposition to this application yes and what it would be the profession of that one or more expert
Witnesses um yes I have one expert our teller he's a engineer a traffic engineer a traffic engineer did you say yes okay uh so maybe in the context of that reasonableness we're going to have an objector traffic engineer who presumably will be an expert in the
field of traffic engineering and accepted as such we'll see uh so maybe may maybe the objection is reasonable we may not be able to get everybody to understand every aspect of traffic Engineering in the report do you
have some specific questions based on as best as you can understand traffic engineering for this particular witness sure I guess my specific question is based on the sort of questions that I asked do
you continue to think that it is reasonable that it's only going to be an 11 second delay for the folks coming out of Park Road in the build condition yes if not less okay thank you Mr chair the we either have to make a motion or
not I said or not anyone want to make a motion to to call motion to end tonight session did you want to see if we have a couple of housekeeping items uh did
anybody who did not maybe the first is did anyone who did not have an opportunity this evening to ask Mr vishio a question about uh his January 21 report which is his testimony tonight did anybody else that the chair's permission uh the public want to ask a
question we have one we have two yes two are you raising your hand ma'am yes two anyone else two okay start with next time okay uh I also had some followup questions so next time's fun sure sure
and uh um Mr jar you can come back or Mr Fish okay um and uh so the reasonable expectation is a couple of members of the public and certainly our board members uh uh may have questions so Mr vishu and M will be back at least for
that uh Mr LaVine yes thank you uh and then I I believe your next witness if I understood you correctly was your last witness which is your planner is that correct correct okay um and then in light of that uh among other things we
certainly need to before we carry this meeting uh well we do have a date to carry it too uh as I understand it um but will the applicant extend uh uh certainly the applicants going to need uh to finish the expert traffic engineer
and the planner uh and uh members of the public certainly have an opportunity to uh present comment in Miss story apparently has one witness as we understand it m story traffic engineer or civil engineer and traffic engineer I have one witness not surey I he's an
engineer and or a traffic engineer okay thank you the uh uh so I think it would be fair to assume there'll be at least one more meeting date after May uh March 5th um so can we get an extension do we
anticipate having an do you may want to talk to your client s separately do we have a date after March 5th that we anticipate being available for this year just remind that if they agree to a landscape architect that would be
another profession well all TVD yep uh trying to get us an extension beyond the next hearing if it wasn't obvious just a reminder apprciate also going to need adequate time to everyone's going to get due process
in an adequate uh amount of time Fair um after March 5th what's our next uh date March 19th okay and do we have anything scheduled I know it's a little early but for either of those dates yet not yet okay uh so can we have an extension of time to March 20th so as to accommodate
everyone including you and your Witnesses and your client for the fifth and the 19th uh I need to confir with my client as to that our consistent practice with the exception of last time because we had the benefit of a special meeting was to take the meetings by meeting by meeting you have an extension
this evening as well didn't you that was why we gave the extension to Mar that's what I meant um so I need I need to confer with my Cent did you have something yes I just had to wanted to ask one thing by way of housekeeping is
if M Dory is planning on a offering a case in Chief which is certainly her right uh I wanted to confirm that as has been in coming upon the applicant uh to submit uh reports that are uh 10 days prior to the hearing if that will also be true with regard to the any expert
reports that uh is board chair is that that should be that's what's fair that's what's reasonably expected uh and uh and and certainly you know the board and the applicant should have some idea before this witness comes to at least what what
area of expertise this witness has if it's civil engineering traffic both neither uh In fairness to everyone so represent to you that he's a he's an engineer he's a traffic engineer he's a planner so all three and will you be seeking to have him accepted as an
expert in all three years I don't know at this point but I'm just letting you know his qualifications and um there's a potential for all three is that correct there's a potential okay thank you but as to the question of Mr LaVine about um submitting things 10 days in advance you know there has been many changes to the
site plans that have been discussed over just the course of the last two hearings and my understanding from the last hearing was that the applicant would be submitting revised plans to the board before the board actually voted on the application because at least some of the changes related to whether or not there
a variance for lot coverage um and uh there's now been changes to the uh buffer um so I had the expectation that revised plans would be submitted 10 days before the next meeting so that the board's professionals and the board could review them to confirm compliance
before the board actually voted on the application um there's also been representations that there may or may not be additional submissions before the next meeting so I'd like to also know from Mr LaVine if he'll be um submitting anything 10 days before the meeting and if he will be submitting uh revised site
plans uh I never represented that we'd be submitting an additional set of revised site plans we submitted a set of revised site plans that were testified to at length the last Hearing in my view any other loose ends that had been discussed and testified to we had indicated that would be part of
resolution compliance if this board would to see fit to approve the application I don't and I think what what we're referring to aside from everyone endeavoring to get these reports in 10 days in advance for the benefit of the board professionals the
board members the public Etc uh and the respective applicant and objector uh is is initial reports in particular uh so I think the initial reports certainly were were provided well more than 10 days in advance I think from the applicants and so uh given the time frame that your
expert has had if there's going to be a report from your expert in any or all the for mentioned capacities uh it's very reasonable for the board to request that you provided 10 days at least in advance yes but I hope the board and you will recognize that there are actually
calculations and Exhibits that I've received just today that um I think the board recognizes okay and and if I am appreciates that you'll Endeavor to do like like just as the applicant um today is feary 12th if I am going to Endeavor which I will I'm going
to submit something to send it at least 10 days before I will try but that does not give a lot of time um there's a holiday in between and I'm just letting the board know that there's new material that I have received just today that is in my hand I do not have it otherwise and I'm promised more I guess tomorrow
so you'll first be providing that to your expert no doubt immediately and and go from there so we have we're looking at March 5th um and uh again you're going to see Mr LaVine if you have the authority from your client to extend to
March is it 20 don't quote me well 19th is the DAT but 20 the day after is the as per prior so do does the board have an extension of time to act through the end of March 20 or is it still just March 6 it's still just March 6 okay
well then then with the chair's permission I think we're carrying this matter without further notice to March 5th is that correct Natalia okay uh 7:30 p.m. correct me if I'm wrong this building still correct me if I'm wrong okay so that's when we're carrying it to
so everybody's on notice no further notice thank if I may just two things take away one was the discussion about the landscape architect and two was the rendering 360 also don't mind thank you
very much thank you everybody also for your deorum the last half year was much better motion to journ Mr all in favor I just I don't want to mislead you I understand that those are the open requests that I need I didn't
mean to suggest it I've had that chance that I can I can promise it to you that we will discuss that I understand you're looking for excuse get speak no I just called you directly because I usually just problem I'm tell de with whatever else
you have to do a [Laughter] oh it's before him all right isn't that isn't that a conflict of interest okay there you go that's me that's my signat wait just make sure you
get every copy on there CU it's a oh I got to sign all the cop p