Thanks planning board meeting. In accordance with section five of the open public meetings act chapter 331 public law 1975. Please write a notice of meeting with made by posting on the bulletin board and town hall and serve
the officially designated newspapers. A list of the meeting dates annually indicating that this meeting would take place at the Milbour Board of Education Center building at 7:30 p.m. on July 15, 2026. We have a roll call, please. >> Jonathan Baxter >> here. >> Alison Campfield
>> here. >> Michael Cohen >> here. >> Jorge Master Pedro. >> Deborah Neas >> here. Frank Sakamandi >> here. Michael Zion >> here. >> Vice Chair Steven >> here. >> Gen Card >> here. >> Susa >> here. >> Chris
>> here. >> Right. Welcome again everybody. Tonight we do have a full agenda. We'll have a little bit of housekeeping to do. Approval of minutes, couple of resolutions to memorialize. Going to switch the order of the capital review
project and our ordinance master plan consistency review. So do the master plan consistency review before the capital project review and that will be followed fined by an executive session should the board choose to have them.
Um all right to start off did everybody have a chance to review the uh May 20th 2026 regular meeting minutes. Any comments or questions? All right. I'll make a motion to approve and adopt the regular meeting minutes
for May 20th, 2026. Do I have a second? >> All in favor? >> All in favor? >> Wow. >> The objections will be noted. >> Yeah, will be noted. I have three. >> Yes. >> Jonathan, Alison, and Denver.
>> All right. It was unanimous otherwise. Um, on to the executive session meeting minutes for May 20th, 20, 2026. Does anybody have any comments or questions about those? I'll make a motion to approve and adopt
the May 20th, 2026 executive session meeting minutes. Do I have a second? I'll second. All in favor? I. All opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Um, did everybody have a chance to review the June 3rd, 2026 regular
meeting minutes? Any questions or comments? All right, there are no comments or questions. I'll make a motion to approve and adopt the regular meeting minutes for June 3rd, 2026. Do I have a second?
>> Second. All in favor? >> I. All oppose. Motion passes unanimously. And finally, the executive session meeting minutes for June 3rd, 2026. Any comments or questions?
No comments or questions. I'll make a motion to approve and adopt the June 3rd, 2026 executive session meeting minutes. Do I have a second? Second. >> All in favor? All opposed? Motion passes unanimously. All right.
Next up on the agenda, uh, memorializations of resolutions for application 260004 and application 260005. The first application is uh resolution
is for the approval of the major site plan with associated variances for Annie's Milbour Partners LLC 249 Milbour A block 705 block one. Do we have any questions or comments from the court?
All right. I will make a motion to adopt the resolution for application 26004. Do I have a second? >> Second. you were ask another second.
>> I would just not and uh I believe we might have had a June date that may or may not have been changed in the interim, but I just want to make sure we have the July 15th resolution adoption date. Being a little presumptuous in assuming the resolution is going to be
adopted, but it's not going to be a June date. So, thank you. Um so, we I'm sorry. We do have a motion in a second. So will be a roll call vote of those qualified. >> Michael Cohen, >> yes. >> Frank Zakamandi, >> yes. >> Michael Zion,
>> yes. >> Vice Chair Sweeney BJ, >> yes. >> Chair Gston Hackert, >> yes. >> Sergey Sisto, >> yes. >> Chris Hinrix, >> yes. We also have up for adoption the application may be resolution for
application605 approval for preliminary and final site plan of can club 1108 Morris Turnpike block 5304 block one. Uh any comments or questions about the resolution?
No comments or questions? >> Only the same July 15th date in one spot. At least in the last draft I saw it had the June date. if we could double check that. Thank you. >> So, as noted, I will make a motion to
adopt the resolution for application 26005. Do I have a second? >> Roll call vote, please. >> Jonathan Baxter, >> yes. >> Allison Campio, >> yes. >> Michael Cohen, >> yes. >> Deborah Neas, >> yes. >> Michael Zion,
>> yes. >> Chair Gaston Hackard, >> yes. 30 system. >> Yes. >> All right. Thank you everyone. Um, as stated previously, I'm going to switch the order of business with the capital
project review. So, next up will be uh master plan consistency review for ordinance 2756-26. Um, this ordinance has to do with floor area residential floor area ratio. Mr. would you mind guiding us through your
memo? >> Sure, absolutely. Um, and just by way of initial background, uh, this is a an ordinance that's product of the zoning code examination committee. Um, this is an amendment that was requested by the zoning officer with respect to uh specific language within the existing text. Um, I'll refer to that just for
clarification in the board's edification. Um it's the strike striker sentence the second to last sentence of the existing text of the ordinance document that indicates that such computation shall not include basement floor area of that part of any room where the ceiling is less than 7 ft in height. Uh zoning officer is seeing a
number of applicants uh with ceiling heights of 6' 8 in 6' 10 in. Um so the purpose of this amendment is to clarify that um and quantify and capture all roofs um even if they are not dimensionally identified. Um so I'll
go through the consistency review uh to to better guide the board. Um so pursuant to the municipal land use law the governing body may adopt ordinances regulating the use of land buildings for adoption uh 40-64 prior deferral of the proposed ordinance to the plan work for review and report
and a report identifying any provisions that are inconsistent master plan. Together with these recommendations concerning the inconsistencies in any other matters the board deemed appropriate to help the board's review this evening. I have this uh memo that I prepared which you all should have a copy of as well. Um so under existing
issues and ordinance summary section DRZ 301.22 current a defines residential floor area ratio using total floor area in relation to lot area. It includes private garages excludes and portions of rooms with ceiling below 7 ft and double count certain uh high ceiling spaces.
The ordinance revises the definition to establish a more objective and uniform measurement standard. In summary, the ordinance states the formula directly as uh total residential floor area divided by the total lab area and requires uh floor area to be reduced to outside dimensions of exterior walls. Retains
the inclusion of private garages and the inclusion of basements from floor area uh floor residential floor area. Deletes the existing exclusion of portions of rooms with ceiling height below 7 ft thereby eliminating a headroom based deduction for upper level floor areas with sloping roof. uh clarifies the
treatment of cathedral vaulted and other open uh ceilings with floor to floor heights of 16 feet or greater by requiring the floor area beneath the opening to be counted twice. Um this is for subsequent future additions where somebody can put a floor in to create an additional space. Uh it does not amend
the maximum F percentages, bulk height, setback coverage limits or other bulk controls applicable. Um and does not modify um the floor area ratio for non-residential and multif family developments. Uh with respect to the relationship to the master plan um the following goals, objectives and or
recommendations are advanced by the ordinance amendment. Uh the first is goal one objective 1.01 to encourage appropriate land uses that promote the character of the township as a small suburb of the highest quality and protect the character of established residential neighborhoods and encourage land use and development at an appropriate scale and density. The
revised definition makes regulated floor area more representative of building area and interior volumes created by low ceiling of floors and double height spaces. This supports residential development at scale consistent with established residential neighborhoods. Item number two is the recommendation on page 48 of the master plan. Evaluate as
necessary the effectiveness of existing land use regulations to ensure that new residential development and additions to existing homes are compatible with prevailing neighborhood context. Specifically review the R six zoning to ensure that new construction is not excessively bulky in relation to existing neighborhood context. The ordinance directly advances this
recommendation by clarifying how residential query is calculated without altering altering the underlying F limits. Uh number three, another recommendation on page 48, monitor recent tearowns and new construction in single family districts to determine whether additional zoning modifications are necessary to protect residential
character. This amendment responds to an identified zoning administration issue affecting the measurement of new homes and conditions and provides more consistent basis for enforcement. And finally, number four, promote clear, user-friendly, and transparent application review and public hearing processes for development proposals and
application uh by stating the F formula directly and clarifying the treatment of garages, basements, and low ceiling areas and open spaces. This improves predictability for applicants for viewing professionals such as the zoning officer and the public. And finally, the planning board shall make any transmit
the contract committee or report identifying any provisions in the proposed ordinance that are inconsistent with master plan and recommendations concerning. many other matters. Any questions? >> I may, Mr. Chairman. As always, we do
have a resolution prepared so that if the board finds that the uh proposed ordinance is not inconsistent with the master plan, uh you can go right to adopting the resolution accordingly. If it's a different finding, we can modify it quickly and easily enough so that you
could adopt that resolution uh to the contrary as well. And of course, if there's any other recommendations, we can add them and have it ready for tonight. I anticipate any questions or comments
and I will Yeah, I agree. Mike, it's straightforward. Uh I it does help our zoning officer makes things much more clear and advice for everybody else who's using the ordinance. So, uh, yeah, I will make a motion to find this ordinance not inconsistent with the
master plan. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Roll call vote, please. >> And and just for the record, will and that would also include the adoption of the resolution memorializing as such. Sure. >> Yes. >> Jonathan Baxter,
>> yes. >> Allison Campfield, >> yes. >> Michael Cohen, >> yes. >> Deborah Nevice, >> yes. Sakamandi. >> Yes. >> Michael Zion. >> Yes. >> Vice Chair Sich. >> Yes. >> Chair Gaston Harder. >> Yes. >> Sisto. >> Yes.
>> Um, next order of business is ordinance 2761-26 and it is uh ordinance for wireless telecommunication facilities and again this is full of master plan assist. Mr. Federal can you please take us again
through your >> certainly we'll do um I'll save the background as by way of you know the consistency review again the governing body has referred this ordinance here to the planning board for consistency review with the township master plan um I'll review kind of the existing issues and the ordinance summary uh to get started so the township's current uh
development regulations and zoning ordinance does not comprehensively address sighting design and review of wireless telecommunications facilities outside of municipal right ofways public rights of way uh the ordinance for establishes a new section DRZ 609.16
wireless telecommunications facilities. The summary read ordinance uh number one defines or letter letter A I guess I'll say defines the facility subject to the zoning regulations and distinguishes small wireless facilities within municipal right ofway which remain governed by chapter 4 uh section 4-2
from what's called macro facilities subject to 609.16 uh permits macro facilities as conditional uses in the B1 CMO O13 and C zones only and allows for conditional use consideration in the B2 zones
B3, B4 and O2 zones only where no feasible location exists within that first group of districts. Uh this the ordinance requires applicants to demonstrate that those districts are in feasible or not able to support the facility which then allows them access to that second group of districts. So if
I may Mr. Chairman in essence there is an additional condition uh for that second level of potential uh uh zones within which uh a macro facility can be deemed a conditional and permitted use
as opposed to a non. Um item C requires a service need alternative site and collocation analysis of the by the applicant including review of existing facilities and potentially suitable structures within the township and within one quarter mile of all township borders. Uh
D, it establishes sighting, bulk, and design standards including a 300 foot setback from residential zones and uses, schools, places of worship and childcare centers, a general 90 foot tower limit, uh monopole screening, self-design, rooftop placement, lighting, and noise standards, and provisions for federal
law relief where there where they may be required. Uh item B regulates operations, safety, maintenance, abandonment, and removal including security fencing compliance with applicable radio frequency admission standards and removal of facilities that become abandoned or discontinued in use.
And then item F. Uh the ordinance also establishes application review procedures, professional review escro provisions, federal preeemption standards, and procedures intended to comply with applicable federal shot clocks. Um it's important to just highlight here that uh the Federal Communications Commission sets forth a
series of standards and requirements uh which put a lot of pressure on local governments to expedite review um in context of those federal timing standards. Um this ordinance uh isn't is in alignment with those and I do just want to extend appreciation to the town wireless telecommunications consultant
who advised on this ordinance and helped us craft that language to make sure it's consistent with federal promise as well. With respect to the relationship to the master plan, the ordinance advances the following objectives and recommendations. Uh, goal one, objective 1.01, encourage appropriate land uses and promote promote the character of the township as a small suburb of the
highest quality and protect uh the character of established residential neighborhoods and encourage land use and development at an appropriate scale and density. The ordinance advances these policies by excluding residential districts from listed conditional use zones, requiring substantial separation for residential areas and sensitive uses, and requiring screening
concealment and context sensitive sighting. Uh number two, uh goal four, objective 4.01 and 4.04, the master plan, um on page 44, maintain and enhance economic vitality of the downtown and other business districts, promote opportunities for high quality
retail and commercial activity in all business districts, and strengthen existing business centers, provide providing wireless infrastructure that supports business operations, emergency communications, and moderate economic activity. Um while the ordinance provides design controls intended to limit adverse effects within
the business district's character. And uh finally number three go six and objective 6.03 develop and implement strategies to address townwide sustainability resiliency and to adapt to global climate change and evaluate and improve township's infrastructure as appropriate. This ordinance directly advances the objectives by establishing
a predictable framework vision of creating a tele communications infrastructure while encouraging collocation and use of existing structures already. And again uh the planning board shall make transmit a report identifying any provision in the ordinance that is consent to plan and make recommendations
concerning those inconsistencies. Then finally I did just include there is one technical edit that needs to be made uh to the ordinance. Uh there's just a numbering uh issue. It's it's listed as the last section on the um on on my memo. Um there's a spot where it's referred to that six section 609.14.
We're doing these kind of concurrently with other new section numberings. Um so that this ordinance should be 609.16. I have the language here. Um that should be transmitted over to the govern. >> Is this is there a case or is there something is there a request by one of
the telecom companies to put a tower in or something? There's not um the issue is right now the township does not have any regulatory language that you know if a wireless carrier comes into the municipality they there is no avenue for them to repeat um with thereby forcing
every piece to essentially go to zone order adjustment where there is no use permission or no use standards um and that creates an inherent natural conflict with the FCC requirements of I think it's a 90day shot 45 days depends on the type of facility um so So the
federal requirement is 45 days or 90 days depending on the facility type and the board of adjustment timeline for approval is 128 days. So we have an inconsistency right off the bat as far as getting approvals through the process. certainly want to be careful and commend the councily
year old sure the math correct uh statute a federal uh telecommunications act from 1996 uh and uh the FCC directors have only gotten have only enhanced the preeemption of
our municipalities with respect to locating sighted marless medication facilities So prudent in my opinion uh and just from reading the uh and well done certainly appears to be a very well done ordinance. Um with respect to resolution
of course we do have the same as always um although I'm not certain that the ordinance number got into the draft that we circulated uh because I believe the ordinance number might be a very recent vintage. I think was introduced if I'm not mistaken last night was it? So,
ordinance 2761-26, but that can be included in the uh resolution if the board so finds that this ordinance like prior one was not inconsistent with the master plan for the reasons stated by our plan.
>> Um, I just have one question. the 300 foot from residential properties is that a standard is or how did we come up with that? So um I believe that dimensional standard was provided by the wireless controller. That's a recommended distance um to to be from residential.
>> I guess residential and other what we call sensor. >> Yes. That's that's included that basically. >> Um it's a good question. It's it rather it it varies by zone. So it depends on which zone if you're
talking about multi family structures I guess in particular. So multi family building within the residential district. It's a good question because I need to I'll just have to look at the ordinance language to see if it talks about residential uses
exclusively. >> In a lot of towns you know you have a four fivetory resial building. That's probably one of the taller buildings around >> tends to be where you can put one of these antennas, screen it so that it doesn't look like
>> cell tower. Good question. But would that be necessary if we had the cell towers placed properly throughout the town? It's complicated. There's
I've recently put out social media call for people to send to me where there's no cell coverage. I've been working with Verizon on that. And there are a lot of areas of town that have very poor coverage. And the cell phone carriers have said they want to put additional
towers. It's just it's hard to find locations to put those. and so don't want to necessarily limit where we can put them if it would make sense for to maybe go there. So for example mall you've got some tall
buildings there residential they could easily hide antenna on the top of that some of the taller structures in the area that probably work better than if they just put an ugly tower on pole. So, you know, I think we want to just be
careful about whether we're excluding a place that you might typically find these antennas going in other counts. >> Yeah. The only request I would have is that would be fully disclosed for some of those residents. I think if it were
right because that would be >> I mean the FCC says the radiation a minute is harmless but that's the FCC I suppose. >> So with respect to your request uh mayor
so under the setting and bolt standards item number two um states the following language. Tower shall be set back a minimum of 300 ft from any residential zone, residential use, school, place of worship, or child care center. Um, based on the wording here, um, just the way
it's phrased, I would say that an exclusively residential use may fall under that residential use. So, if we had just an apartment building or just a residential building only, um, I think that that would fall into this bucket. So, a wireless facility could not be located within 300 ft of just an
apartment building or garden apartment complex. Um, but I think it's a mixeduse structure that's not captured. >> So, so if it was a a multif family, but it had retail on the bottom as they often do, then it would be a >> correct. That would be a mixeduse in exclusive press.
You've got to be up there, >> right? No, I know it doesn't necessarily cover it, but >> they they do need a tower over there, but not sure what would the hotel res
>> would would the micro facilities be able to cover what we're we're talking about or is it are we do we need a macro tower? >> I I can't on which technology solution is. >> All right, I got you. I was on this one as you question my researchers.
>> I wish I had Verizon director that I spoke to a couple weeks ago said that you know in general if they have the ability to place a macro tower that is a lot better one of them higher power covers larger area. We do have a
number of small cells that have been deployed and we're trying to get more deployed. Um but carriers prefer the larger centralized towers because it served more customers. It's more cost effective less
to get one set of approvals for it as opposed to do five or six small cells >> and presumably the the agreement would be with the dollar companies as opposed to the horizon agencies of the world. Yeah, it's my understanding most of the
towers are owned by separate companies and then space >> but it's generally a carrier might be sponsoring or requesting the tower in that area. So as it reads right now any residential
like full resitional so they would have to come >> so any any exclusively residential building of use um would be subject to the 300 foot setback. So facility must be located 300
>> or else they would have to request >> nonconforming conditional use variance from the zoning board. >> Okay. Right. And our telecommunications consultant was fine with that restriction. Yeah, this this setback lang was
it does qualify. It says if it's does say straight away where compliance with the 300 foot setback is technically infeasible or would result in an effective prohibition under presumably the federal code. >> The approving authority may reduce the setback to the minimum extent necessary though but they have to come. Yes. Which
could be zero in the face of the >> or are they able to put it where? >> So we've authorized one on JFK Parkway on land. They're looking to put another over by the Hilton, but we know from our
affordable housing plan is likely to be sort of building there that >> so that would be a lot that might be a logical place for one at some point, but you know, just thinking of the taller buildings in town, more and more of them
are again the communications consultant does this for a living and >> no >> arguably would would air on the side of carriers. So they think it's not a concern in this town >> and if there's a particular problem it's not that there's going to be hundred of
these. So if there's a particular problem and they need to come before the the land use board and the appropriate evidence then you know that's fine. And I think it's an important it's an important point raised um because uh in
in both case in all cases these are conditional uses. So there will be an appearance before land use board regardless. So if it is conforming and meets all these conditions it will be here the planning board if it deviates from one of these standards that will be so these these facilities are not going to just be approved administratively.
They must >> but so if we did for some reason need to put one of these things on top of resial building they'd be able to come before this board and get a variance you know from the conditional if it doesn't meet that standard goes to the board of adjustment I see
>> yeah D3 from the board of just >> fully conforming with all the conditions comes to us as a conforming conditional use approval not a nonconforming I think it's good that you mentioned the facility on JP Parkway because that
that's an application that came in without standards. So that's an application that's at the board of adjustment for all the relief that's not not complicated use makes it very difficult as well >> 99%
>> and without the uh ordinance then they would have had to seek or must have had to seek a D1 use >> I believe that was that difficult >> to obtain because it's just a purely
nonprevented use. It's not listed. So, but this might comport more, this ordinance might comport more with the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, the FCC
directives that have come out and the regulations since then. So, hence prudent. It is when when I did my research on it again, I will gladly say Communications not my thing. I did a lot of research
ran through several AI thought and we have a very comprehensive ordinance ranks among the top actually more comprehensive than most ordinances than the in this area. So I do think it's good. Um I do think it is not
inconsistent with the master plan. >> It's right back on target. >> Right. Well, I want to say that there may be a little bit that we can improve on, but as far as this ordinance goes, I do think we should find it not inconsistent
with the master plan and we have something and then we can do further investigation and try to amend it and your future should not be >> necessary. Okay. All right. So
waiting for a motion to adopt and find not inconsistent if if everyone's done and that's the desire of the board. Okay. I I will make a motion to find this ordinance not inconsistent with the master plan and to adopt the
resolution with the edits that Steve has said. Um do I have a second? >> Second. >> Roll call vote, please. >> Jonathan Baxter. >> Yes. Alison Campfield, >> yes. >> Michael Cohen, >> yes. >> Deborah Neas, >> yes. >> Frank Sakamandi, >> yes. >> Michael Zion,
>> yes. >> Vice Chair Serini VJ, >> yes. >> Chair Gustin Happer, >> yes. >> And Sergey S, >> yes. Motion passes. All right. On to our capital project review. Capital project review public
hearing for the evening. We have representation for the township. Good evening. My name is Rob Walsh, chief civil and environmental engineer for EI Associates, uh, designers of the project
which I'm presenting tonight. We submitted plans. I don't know if you want to swear me in this. >> I will be doing so. In fact, with the shared permission, maybe I and perhaps Graham as well can give a little predicate for reminders to the members
of the board uh and for the members of the public uh as well. Before I do this, so this is a capital project review pursuant to section 31A of the municipal land use law that provides that whenever planning board
shall have adopted any portion of the master plan as we have um certain public agencies including specifically uh school boards I'm checking me to make sure I get it right. They they uh before taking action necessitating the expenditure of public funds incidental
to the location, character or extent of a land development project must afford our planning board an opportunity a 45day period um to uh conduct a capital project review uh in conjunction with uh
to make recommend excuse me to review and make recommendations in conjunction with the master plan. um prior to uh the uh project proceeding. We uh uh do not have primary jurisdiction over this
application. This is not a land development application before the board uh because there are various statutes and case law NJSA18A-16 uh the uh facilities planning services
act uh the mic case and the clipton case I'll spare everybody with citations because I sound enough like a lawyer without them uh the um but uh the state Department of Education has near exclusive authority over the approval of
contracts for the development of any land development project pursued by a board of education, any board of education in any district in any municipality throughout the state. Um, our role is limited to determining whether the development is consistent
with the objectives of the municipality's master plan and we can make recommendations only recommendations uh on the proposal if any particularly focused on and bear with me uh the uh
recommendations if any uh designed to make the capital project even more consistent. with the master plan should we make such a determination wish to make such recommendations but our role is strictly recommendatory uh this we don't have the ability to
approve or deny in fact the project will move forward regardless uh and we don't have the authority uh because we are preempted by the state uh the uh we don't have the authority to impose conditions only to make recommendations
that said under the municipal land use law. This is a public hearing under section 10 thereof. So we will treat it that way. I will with the chair's permission swear in the witness. We will have public questioning should there be any as well as board questioning. We
will have public comment should there be any. uh and then uh you will make your determination with respect to master plan consistency and any recommendations you wish to make and I will memorialize all this in a resolution uh hopefully by
the next meeting generally people um so um I hope that explains everything comprehensively uh and in understandable fashion if anybody has any questions or anyone else wishes to add anything that I missed I
would just want to point out it's a it's a joint project of the board of education and the township. So you know some of the stuff that you said about you know jurisdiction with the state board of they have they have jurisdiction but it's not entirely a
board of education. Thank you. that that that and uh although I say 90 some odd percent stays the same because even if it were a township or to the extent it is a township joint project uh the township is generally exempt from zoning
as well. Uh so the same processes apply uh the same authority applies uh master plan consistency and strictly recommendatory um uh so nothing really changes in that regard but yes that is more clear so
thank you for that it is a joint >> um otherwise uh with the chair's permission I can swear in our our one and only witness as I understand it >> correct >> okay do you swear to affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the tree. >> Yes, sir.
>> Thank you. And are you testifying, if I understand correctly, you're an engineer and a planner. Do you wish to testify in one, the other, or both capacities? >> I can do both. >> There you go. And if you could just provide us your qualifications and
lensure in good standing, I assume, in the state of New Jersey, both as an engineer and as a planner. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. and and could you just very briefly provide your qualifications other in addition to the fact that you're a licensed uh engineer and a
licensed plan in the state of New Jersey both a good stand >> right uh so I've designed synthetic turf fields for uh 35 years licensed engineer and planner accepted as a expert witness or testimony before
over 100 puppies uh also testified as an expert witness planner and engineer before eight superior courts in March. >> Defer to the chair. >> Thank you very much. The plan is acceptable as an engineer and
professional. Thank you. So the uh the plan to is to install synthetic turf uh at the varsity field and the outfields left field and right field. And what I've done just to this is not in your
packet. you want to label it as an exhibit. Uh this is a colored site plan highlighting the green area where the synthetic turf will be installed. As you can see, the varsity field uh will become synthetic
turf. We have a multi-purpose field one that'll be in right field and a multi-purpose field two that will be in left field. Uh this the fields will be striped for various sports. Uh generally speaking, girls and boys lacrosse will
be in uh multi-purpose field number two because uh those require a safety screen beyond the goals and this was kind of the best place to put it because uh putting one uh in shallow right field
would interfere with the varsity baseball field. um prior approximately two years ago knowing that there was concern with this site as to whether it was feasible because of the location of the flood and
then 23 July 23 DP changed the regulations to raise the flood elevation on delineated streams by 2 feet. So prior to July of 2023, you could have made the whole field area synthetic turf without involvement from
DP. In 2024, we did a feasibility study and determined that the flood hazard line, which used to be out by Van Winkles Brook and along this edge here, uh when you raise it up two feet, it created an
island. This is not in the flood plane. this area and this area closer to uh the school is outside of the flood plane. So this portion of the site was regulated by DP. Essentially what it involved is us meeting the net fill criteria where
we do not increase the fill or take away from flood storage. Uh we uh in the flood plane we applied to D. We we got this verification and these flood limits have been documented and it was recorded
in the uh county clerk's office and then we proceeded. We had this represents plan B of an overall plan that we had to do the entire area with synthetic turf which allowed us to place a
um cricket cricket thank you cricket field because of the large area that's required. So um and due to the cost and you know this would be an easier application of DPS less incorporated to the flood hazard area we went away with
uh we went ahead with this plan B uh scheme which is 189,000 square ft of synthetic turf in place of the natural turf that's there. We're basically following existing grade uh another part of the project is we're lighting this
field as well as the Miller field so there's the 13 light poles installed that'll light up uh all of these fields that will be synthetic turkey. Um one thing to note, we got the D approval
for this construction last week and uh D changed their policy on how to treat synthetic turf. uh they no longer treat it as an asphalt pavement from a storm water management
standpoint which makes total sense which I'd just like to inform you that that m doing the entire field the full buildout is going to be a relatively simple process you just have to follow existing grade there's no under drain piping just
12 in of crust stone we're keeping the topography essentially the same as what it is So that's my only comment is that the door is open to move ahead to the second uh phase if the uh town chooses.
That's it. >> I'm sorry. >> I just wonder how long will this take >> construction? Uh we've got it slated to I mean bids were received yesterday. They look favorable. They're being evaluated.
starting construction the beginning of August and you're talking about a fourmonth period perhaps shorter. So it'll go to the beginning of December potentially. Hopefully we'll finish in November. >> But this probably not a question for
you, but I could take a poll of the four high schoolers in my house or former high schoolers. They're all unanimously opposed to synthetic. So why are we doing this? Why? Why is synthetic turf better than natural turf? >> You want my opinion?
>> I want your opinion. Yes. >> Ready? >> Yeah. Okay. >> Synthetic turf is an engineered surface designed explicitly to provide safety. That's what this does. On top of that,
it's a permeable surface that allows water to drain directly into the subsurface area. you can use the field within moments after the rain stops or during the rain. Whereas when you have a field that's natural turf, I've dug tons
of fields where they weren't able to use the field. If it rained, if you had a heavy rain period, there's no sports, all sports back hands. In addition to that, to maintain natural turf, you're putting herbicides, fertilizers, things
that could be deemed if they stay in the soil as contaminants. So, synthetic turf is fantastic. >> And why would you not have an engineered safety surface rather than a natural turf?
>> And safety just because it's more uniform like the surface, >> smoother surface. Yes. Okay. >> Uh it's got a cushion. It's it's engineered to have a certain uh impact resistance. So, >> and the draining comes from that 12 in of the crush stone. Go straight through
that. >> Yes. That's what allows you to play on it. >> Soon after the answer to this, but I want everyone to hear it. Um what is the amount of playable hours that we have now versus what we'll have with the uh new fields?
I did not do that analysis, but I, you know, going years back, a lot of school districts did that analysis and it's tremendous. There's a big difference. >> I know that we did do that analysis township the appropriate time,
but it is generally synthetic turf fields more playable hours because you can use them right away after the the rain. Do you know if the current fields if they have problems with flooding?
>> Uh, I wouldn't say they have problems with flooding, but we did a geotechnical investigation and they're not the greatest soils in the world in terms of their ability to drain. There are some spots where water ponds now you're going to have a uniform area that drains
nicely. You're going to have any pond water. So, that's the main thing. I'll tell you this though, like I've done a lot of read a lot of studies over the years and uh the biggest thing and there's a great
report that was done 101 15 years ago if anybody remembers when synthetic purple was removed from some sites and there was was tested for contaminants and there was a big lead wet issue that was associated with nylon colorization of turf. They use a lead
chromate process and it was just residual that nobody knew about it at the time or cared when it was manufactured that doesn't exist anymore. Um that that coloring process uh but you know now it's you know they
use poly. >> Does this create any particular risks like kids? No, there's been a lot of studies as well as that too. And uh it's like carpet. There's there's no risk uh as far as that's ever been doc. The
biggest thing >> synthetic >> what's that >> like synthetic >> right? So there's no risk. I mean there's are complaints studies about contaminants that can be none has proven
to be uh real or we wouldn't have you know so the other thing the biggest for health issue over the years has been the um the temperature that the field will get raised to as opposed to a natural turf field during the hot wet summer
months. And I know schools that would even put in um sprinkler systems just to cool the field for that really hot period of time. So that was the biggest health risk. You know, in New Jersey, this stuff is monitored when the kids are playing, when the field's hot. They
have temperature gauges and it's controlled regularly. Um and now a lot of that's from the rubber material. So this is what's being selected by the district according to what I understand right now. We bid three different types
of system. One was an organic fill system where there's no rubber. There's a pad underneath. We had a what's called now it's it's relatively new, but it's called a non-infill system, but they do have infill. They have a calcium base
sand as opposed to silica sand. No organic infill and that has a pad underneath. And then finally, the third type of product that we bid was a traditional rubber fil system, but we use green EDP rubber. That's
manufactured rubber. It's not recycled. So, it's pure the content and but it's very expensive and you know, not to no surprise, it was the highest bid price that we received that type of fuel. So what this the district I believe is selecting is the organic silver material
and it's a similar carbon to what you have on the game field but just an organic version no rubber >> so when it heat itself doesn't produce any >> uh no the uh >> studies have shown that that that uh
infill material reduces significant >> what about the uh the injuries >> injuries that you're not going to get a safer surface to play on than a synthetic turf field with a pad that has a a Gmax level uh that is way less than
uh regular ground. And when it freezes, ground will freeze and it gets pretty hard. This is that it's a a frostfree condition. The Gmax level is referring to the impact of an Gmax test is an impact measurement
>> uh by dropping a ball a certain weight from a certain height and so forth and getting a reading and just to give you an idea I don't know if it's still on the right at one point years ago uh synthetic turf first came about a Gmax
level of 200 was the maximum that the NFL would allow it field to be played. I think it's moved down to 180. 150 is what schools usually use. The lower the GMAX, the more cushiony things. So, what Matushen did years ago,
they opted to get the pad and the rubber infill. And justformationally, uh, they had they installed the turf in ' 07. They just replaced it, I think this past year. So, and fields are typically supposed to last 10 years.
They got so much more to do. They got a big bang for their buck by taking and getting that extra pad and it was a safer surface. I recommended doing that since finding the results of those tests over the years. I've been recommending it to schools and they've all been
buying it and we get initial GMAX readings in the 70s and it just prolongs the length of the field, you know, the the duration useful life. So, and in this case we have the infill
material albeit organic and an under. When you say organic what does that mean exactly? >> Uh wood material uh coconut husk there's all kinds. not corn because
that was something that you know they introduced these organic they industry uh you know in light of the people's concern of rubber infill and saying that like 15 years ago they started there was
a whole you know range of materials that were available but nobody had ever used them but over the past 10 years we've seen the results I think east handover was close to a flood plane And they put in the almost all cork infilt. They
needed a pad underneath because the cork alone will not do what rubber can do. And they had a flood and it lifted all the rubber out and deposited around the track and everything just paint. That's a mess. So I've steered away from
>> your organic material. Is it rock or >> Well, it'll it'll degrade uh you know but throughout the the life cycle of material. So what when you get to let's just say 20 years okay you need new carpet you'll get new infill
>> are there any need is there is there any need for any type of filtration for if it does flood if you do have a heavy rain that this infill does get dispersed or how is that >> generally the the reason why the the uh cork got distributed they were in the
flood plan so there was no place for the water to go they're under drain system was saturated. There was no place. So, it lifted up and it ponded and pulled and spread out. We're not we don't have that condition here. In fact, the fact that we raised the regulatory
flood level was raised by two feet. Realistically, the flood level is not going to go up two feet just because regulatory code required that be designed for that. It just brought more properties into the
permit uh requirement. I know you might not be able to answer just in your opinion obviously a lot of schools are going to this art do you know percentwise it sounds like you've been doing this for a long time is that 80% of the
schools 50% of schools you have >> I find it difficult to find any school that's not in favor of you'll have an element like this community you have an element of people who they're against synthetic turf for whatever reason whatever they've bread. But the reality
is, especially in New Jersey, you have towns, districts that are fully developed. You don't have open space. We do a lot of projects in Pennsylvania. There are 200 acre campuses with all their schools on one spot, tons of fields. They get the synthetic turf
field because even their grass field, they get into a rainy period, at least they have these synthetic turf fields. they can continue their athletic programs, police practices and stuff like that. So, uh there New Jersey needs
it like these kind of somewhat urban uh areas need it badly. Uh but rural areas are adopting as well just because that rain condition. Look, I I have three and I asked them that
question and they said the injury actually comes from going from a grass field and then playing somewhere else on a turf field and you know what I mean like they're not used to the same field level. So the more that people are going
to turf, it's best to go to a turf uh because it is a different plane um situation. So that's what they said. >> When our students are at away games, chances are they're playing on synthetic turf already. And so they have synthetic
turf here. Also, isn't it, >> you know, it's a flat surface. It's not going to have >> Yeah. So you're not going to get superior and, you know, other sorts of injuries that you would get from, >> you know, the natural settling of, >> right? it was a transition of one to
another when you get used to those divots and stuff versus you know going somewhere else that's for the injuries. So being more consistent across the board and that's why I asked you a lot of schools are going to this and
that seems to be the the way to go. Uh I would like to bring up also there is there a lighting portion to the project? >> Yeah, there there will be I I've indicated here it's shown on the plan. There is an electrical plan that
identifies the lighting but uh there are light poles placed around like I said the existing Miller field uh and there are total of 13 lights. The height ranges from 60 feet to 100 ft. Now the reason we needed the 100 ft because
these lights you could see the furthest light uh or these two light poles here and here there's nothing in between here because the plans to expand this area do the um J field and then the two softball
fields and then have the uh cricket in the middle uh would place the lights we don't have to relocate them you know and Then we would supplement the put the rest of the lighting in if that second phase came about.
>> In comparison to the lights that are currently in the stadium, what do these 13 light bulbs look like? >> Uh well, they're LED. The ones you have out there are older ones. Older month lights, the LED lightings, they're um I don't think we have like a cut sheet or
anything, but I'm sure you've seen them. They're very sleek and uh you know, they're less bulky looking. Uh, and you know, in a lot of schools when we put them in, they their head of maintenance, whoever just presses a few
buttons on his phone and controls the lights, right? So, it's a very, very cool high-tech uh, feature, you know. >> But this provides additional lighting where none even exists. >> Yeah. You don't have any lighting there. You have the temps that I was going to say as we start to look generators. some
of the cons. I know the turf versus the natural gets all the attention, but as we looked at how the project benefits the community and therefore cons lighting is an important part of that because it increases the availability to
use the fields at night. So that's another reason that we should be thing we should be looking at as we make our recommendation. That's the playable goes from about 20 that we have now per week to over 90 and
that really a significant improvement because we have a real lack of fields in town and we don't have places to build. I mean, we're already renting, you know, space um because of that. We're renting
space at a a religious institution to uh for the fields because we're just out of capacity. >> Do you plan on renting and maybe this is not correct, but renting the fields once you have them leave to other outside agencies? I always get asked that question. I doubt
>> I think there's such a demand. I just imagine that. I think we would then we would no longer rent the fields that we currently rent because we would say we would say that >> I just had one quick one just really just procedural let's mark what you
showed as exhibit A1 of the record and uh you did submit a set of engineering plans as well was a colored striping plant.
>> Oh, did I? >> Uh, >> oh, yeah. So, that's >> that might be the 11 by7 version of this would say, >> but this one shows the the screen that one. >> Yeah, this is this is >> Yeah, that's the one that's part of the
specifications that the contractors were bidding on. Yeah, >> this one was I I think we needed a a larger scale for the biders. This one was more for the purposes of the uh property overview.
>> Right. And so that exhibit A1 is we're >> I could give you that is known as drawing number C02.1. I can send it to you electronically. I can give you this whatever you want. >> Whatever Sarah wants. And it's called colored striping.
>> Color. So it's got the same title, but >> same title, but this is a 24 by 36. I mean 30x 42. >> Okay, we have enough to identify it different from what was submitted. So that's fine. Uh um and I know uh at some
point um when the board is done perhaps before public questioning and comment if there is any uh well I think we should hear from our planner who did a buy memo uh with respect to master plan consistency. Um the witness is also a
planner so he may concur or not that I don't know. Uh and then I don't know if we're gonna hear from any engineering anyone as well but uh and I'm seeing the affirmative nod yes from our engineers. So don't don't want to make sure we have all that taken care of uh before the
hearing is concluded. >> Um can you just talk about what material is used for the synthetic t itself? I know there have been some talk about whether it's hybrid or synthetic but can you just
>> it's polyethylene. polyethane and hybrid was not doable. >> I really don't know what a hybrid is. >> It's a combination of synthetic and natural gas. >> I've never seen that before, but it's
becoming more and more common and it is something that I know at the town committee level we looked at. I think the BOE may have looked at it as well. Um think that given the amount of water that area gets that would make that
feasible is what I'm remembering. >> Okay. >> Um the but they they aren't using like I think they're not planning on using the chrome rubber info. They're using technology. So >> yeah, chrome the chrome rubber. We had
three bid styles styles of t mention the uh traditional with an organic infill and a pad and the number of fibers. There's like you know that changes from turf to turf. I'm not going to go into that. >> Then there was the zero fill which is
really has a very dense but has a very fine sand layer to weigh it down right like that. fill the same grade over time. >> Yeah. Yes. Potentially right. And then finally the traditional one with the
rubber albeit not recycled rubber pure you know manufactured rubber. So those were the three types. >> What part is the existing >> uh rubber infill? >> Rubber infill is the most common area
and I think a lot of the you know but I really don't know. I I think a lot of people think there's contaminants in the rubber that affect people. That's one issue. But also the field temperature. I think those are the two items I've heard of.
>> I think it's more temperature. >> Less temperature combined with the the plastic. >> Yeah. >> Whatever mix is in there, >> the rubber gets a lot hotter. the non rubber versions hotter than normal grass, but they're
not nearly as as hot as the old school >> years ago when they transition from astroturf. Astroturf was originally a crown field. It was not vertically drained. It just rolled off to drainage on the side of the field. And it was
placed with a pad underneath it on top of asphalt in impermeable asphalt. Then when they came first vertical drain system, they changed that. They were able to flatten out the crown of the field and they use porous pavement. So that's the first vertically drained
system. And then they had a rubber called the e- layer which was like a porous pavement but with rubber built into it. So I had cushion and then it just evolved and the most common is stone pad carpet and rubber end that was it.
There's no need to put in something that would get like a heat island effect but still cooler than the other synthetic fields we already have. Yes. >> Right. And just curious, life, is there a
difference in life? I'm sure everybody probably knows this, but >> life cycle span uh that um not really, but oddly enough, the you know, it depends how much you use the field. There's a lot of fields that last so
long, but maybe a private school is limited play on it. It's just looks great and it lasts a long time, but it doesn't get a lot of play because this the program that they offer. Whereas a a public school or a community like this,
everybody's dying to get field time is probably not going to be like the super longest duration. >> So, think 10 to 20 years somewhere. >> So, it's going to be 10. I would say the system we're talking about here, you you should think about replacing in 15 years.
>> 15. >> 15. But it's going to be driven by the uh the GMAX test. >> So that that decays over time. >> Yes, it will. It will diminish over time. And then the other thing is sometimes it just like say a football
field there's act heavy active play at the midfield and then at the goal lines and those are the areas that harden dump first and then they lose fiber. So you don't have you lose the thickness and there's an aesthetic driver that makes you want to change the feel at that
point. So >> is there periodic maintenance that can be enforced to loosen to maintain? Well, there are sweepers and then tools that um you know tines that go in and just loosen up that turf material, but and
you know, we used to make it part of the package for bidding and everything. And over time, uh we found a lot of school districts just said, you know what, we hire a firm. We have a sweeper for general maintenance and stuff, but we hire a firm that comes in once a year or
twice a year or whatever and then does like the with the magnetic and the time and they, you know, they spruce it up. So that's what I've seen happens from board for the witness like to open it up to our engineering planner. Any questions from you, Mr. Color?
>> Um, yeah. a couple. Thank you, Mr. Um, so I'm sorry, I didn't swear in our are our professionals and this is a public hearing. Uh, so if you you and and Mr. Ped both raise your right hand,
do both of you to God or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and >> I do. >> Thank you both. Um, so the D doesn't require any storm water management for the field anymore.
Correct. So is there any the only drainage underneath the field is that stone layer um and then so when it rains it goes through the field through the stone and into the underlying soil. >> Yeah. And if there's spots of poor
uh permeability in one area, it doesn't go. It'll migrate and go to the areas that are better. >> Right? >> What happened was they were treating it like synthetic tur or like a pavement >> and it was driving the cost ridiculous.
And then I guess there was a project we did in Lincoln Park in 1920 and we got into an argument that that was ridiculous for they had a flood plane that was had really good there was a bad area of permeability but then they had this ridiculously fast area and they
came to the conclusion you don't have to treat it like a pavement but you can't put any pipes underneath it to let it leak out to or discharge any place else on control. just you can just go with stone and it's the only thing I can say
it's similar to their opinion is permeable pavement that if you design it with no outfall pipe you know it functions a certain way and then if you have it with the outfall pipe then you have to design it >> right so the artificial turf the
synthetic turf is in a portion of the flood plane um and just for the board. The twoft rise or increase in the flood plane that the state imposed three years ago
three years ago Friday um is really related to all the storm water you now have to design for the year 2100 and higher rainfall amounts. That's why it's 2 ft higher is that the current flood plane regulations are dealing with what
the D has determined needs to be planned for 75 years from now um and an increase in in the precipitation. So at this point you you said that under the old rules the flood plane really follows a
stream. So the likelihood of in the near term in life of this field that that this area would flood is minimal. >> Correct. >> If it does flood, say there's another
storm like I um and that area floods, what happens? You know, the ground is saturated. It is it going to come up into the stone? I mean, what's your best >> It'll it'll be it'll cover the turf and
it'll be, you know, it'll be underwater. I mean, if that's what happened, that's what happens. If you want to look up the story of Ridge Ridgewood, New Jersey, Ridgewood, New Jersey has their synthetic turf over how they got this approved 20 some odd years ago, whatever
it was, they have their synthetic turf deal in the flood way. So they it's they have a big problem there if it comes and then all the set then the flood waters recede and then you got to vacuum out there's all
sediment there >> right but that's not >> right does it synthetic I mean if it was underwater does that material does a pad or this float is it buoyant
>> so it could require >> lift it Yes. I've there's a video on uh the Ridgewood one where it's being lifted, >> but it's been told to me and I've seen the video that their underground drain system, you know, what you typically
would have everybody designed for the last 25 years. >> Yeah. >> Didn't have vents. I never designed one with vents. If you know I'm up in the Highlands area, I just did the regular vertically drain. There's no need for the air that's in the system to release.
I was told that that system doesn't have uh it didn't have any vents. So, >> right. Okay. >> I think that was most of what was causing that. But again, I took my samples and I threw them on my toe just to verify that
wasn't technical. All right. Um on the lighting said they're all LED. Um, I presume that those various light fixtures and the lights that go on those
bulbs have all will all be designed in a way that all the light is directed towards the field. >> Oh yeah, there's a pretty sharp cut off, >> right? So, not that I know the answer, but I want the board
to hear it. Um, and um, it's not that you won't see the glow from the lights, but if you're standing behind the lights, it's not directly illumined. Is that correct? >> Correct. We don't have like a lot of
field projects with lighting, we have we have seating and we have to put supplemental lighting because the cut off is so sharp at the field. If you forget to light the pedestrian walkways, you're going to be have a problem. We really don't have that here because we're we're just all the areas around
these fields are just accurate pathways, >> right? And all of lighting fixtures can be controlled individually so that you can turn on those six lights but not those seven lights. Um is there a way that for some reason you don't need to
turn on every fixture that sits on the pole? >> Oh yeah, we there is Musk developed the plan. All I did was bring the cut sheet for the uh the heights because that's usually the big concern. But there's a there's a lighting plan for each individual field for the full buildout
and it shows I think you know it's like 40 foot candles spotted out >> on the field >> point by point. Yeah, that's >> but behind it it's >> it's full cut. Well, they didn't take it out to zero, but it was there was a cut pretty good cut off,
>> right? And the higher you go, that's why we have hundreds, the more focused the lighting is. That's all I have. >> I have no further comments on the plan itself. I just have to consistency. I know that feel go through that now.
>> If we can, let's get comments from the public short and then ask Mr. Wolf to sit down if everybody's done and then please take it through. Sure. Um I think that concludes I guess the board questions and our expert questions. Um
is there anybody from the public who has questions? Mr. W. >> I just have like three basic questions. >> Mr. Fel public hearing. So you have to go through the formality of >> introduce yourself name and address and then you could ask question. >> Jeffrey Fel Alexander Lane short New
Jersey. I've been starting with this project when I started with the conversion of the par three. So I know the history but I just want to understand all three different proposals will have a 12-in crush stone and will all three different licks I think except
big productions have pads because I think you were talking about the safety that there would be more safer one ones that have pads. Do all the three proposals have pads or just >> all of them >> that they all have pads? And in your professional opinion, which one would
you recommend to the township and the board of education both if they not looking at cost as the best one for safety and for use of the three proposals? >> I think they're all equivalent. Uh when you get into I mean because safety is
really the GMAX and it's all going to be fantastic for these fields. me personally maybe if I was you know 40 years younger and have a preference because I could play sports but now like now it's what did I think the district is leaning towards is uh your organic
infill it's fine very similar what you have out there um again I thank you because I've gone to all your presentations I think been the best one you gave giving explanation as to different terms and the use thank you
Anyone else? Republic that conclude public session. Thank you very much, Mr. Warner. Mr. Ped, could you take us through your memo? Sure. Absolutely. Um, so just to kind of recap and bring it back to um, Mr. Warner's opening remarks. Um, in accordance with municipal land use laws, when a planning
board has stopped any force of a master plan governing body over other public agency must refer a proposed public project to the planning board for taking action requiring the expenditure of public funds relating to the project's location character. Planning board reviews the project and provides a recommendation in conjunction with the
master plan. Public agency may not act on the project till it receives the planning board recommendation. The 45 days have elapsed following deferral. Um, and this requirement especially applies to school boards. Uh this is NJSA 445B 31A as one. Um so to
facilitate the uh board's review this evening. Uh the memo that I prepared uh identifies relevant sections of the 2018 master plan reamination and update as well as the 2023 open space and recreation master plan element um for the board's consideration and determining whether the proposed uh high school um fields improvements further
the township planning policies and whether any recommendations should be the board of education. Um so with respect to the relationship to the master plan section I have kind of two sections. First is uh the proposed improvement at in relationship to the master plan reamination update in 2018.
Uh the first is goal one objective 1.04 provide areas for recreation to serve the needs of all age groups including indoor and outdoor facilities as well as active and passive recreational opportunities. Um this project uh you know is consistent with that uh goal objective. Uh the second is public use
zone recommendations. Um the uh well the while the news probably doesn't have an adopted public use zone. This would fall within the public use zone uh consistent with that recommendation. Um identifying potentially acquired lands for new active recreation fields new active recreation field to the allpurpose field with artificial turf. Um although this
project does not acquire or create a new recreation site in advance of the underlying recommendation by expanding all purpose mult artificial turf capacity at an existing public school facility here within the township. Uh the third is goal six objective 6.03. 03 evaluate and improve the township's infrastructure as appropriate.
Obviously, the township the proposed field drainage, lighting, and related improvements constitute an upgrade to the existing public recreational infrastructure. Um, and finally, goal six, um, you know, this kind of indifference to Mr. uh, Keller as well, protect water resources and enforce the
seasonal design practices grading and drainage improvements related to the objective uh, subject to comprehension by Mr. color um that runoff and water resources uh impacts are adequately addressed by those. Um so I guess that was a question you could see. So
>> yes affirmed by the >> Oh yes yeah that's that's true. Um and then the second section of my consistency review uh talks about the improvement um project in context of the objectives and recommendations of the open space and recreation element of the master plan. Um I have a long list here.
I'll try and go through them quickly, but there's a number of uh those that are advanced. Um first, goal number one, maintain a high quality park system. Uh goal number two, expand and enhance active recreational opportunities. Goal number five, plan parks efficiently. Uh objective two, uh activation, identify
township and board of education land that is under is undeveloped or underdeveloped to expand or enhance township recreational capacity. Objective nine, cooperation, coordinate with other entities such as the board of education to leverage opportunities for new and/or shared facilities and programming. Objective 11, enhance,
expand or develop additional facilities where feasible when within existing parkland plan to provide further recreational capacity. Objective 15, flexibility, provide spaces that can comfortably accommodate a wide range of sports and activities. Objective 21, optimize facilities, plan facilities,
and programming to maximize their youth without reducing their quality or creating undue impact on surrounding neighborhoods. Objective 22, organize active recreation, expand opportunities for sports leagues and other outdoor fitness programming, including through the expansion of facilities and programs, as well as more efficient use
of existing resources. Objective 33, upgrade, ensure the township's existing park facilities remain up to modern uh standards and upgrade or replace facilities as needed. uh improvements to existing facilities, game ready fields. The element specifically identifies and
high school fields as candidates for improvements and reconfiguration to accommodate games, shared sports spaces, and additional recreational capacity. That's on page 48 through 49 of the plan. Um improvements to existing facilities, field lights. The element specifically identifies Milurn High
School Fields as appropriate for consideration of field lighting to extend playable hours subject to careful picture orientation amounts committee and text to nearby reference. That's also on page 49 book. Um so and I think Mr. Warner has already kind of covered but the board's action here this is this
evening recommendation that summary of identified consistent um items from those two panel. Is it possible now we can make a recommendation? Sure. Sure. Yeah. >> Well, the only thing I would recommend,
if I may, Mr. Chair, is is we did do the public questioning. We haven't yet done public comment. Um, I don't think it's wrong to do recommendations at any point in time throughout the process, but I don't know if you wanted to wait until the public comment if there is any and then make recommendations.
Although, actually, you know what? Public may comment may be interested in the recommendations first. So, never mind. Please go whenever you go. >> No, my recommendation is um I actually went to Kently School's turf the second go around. So my recommendation is is to
confirm that all of the turf underlying part is as quality. um because the life is really important and as active as this particular field fields that I think they will be um just
confirming that the life of this field with the choice that has been made um that they go to the highest quality because I think this field will be used. Um, again, I was in the second phase of
Kent Place replacing or updating their field. And that was one of the things that they felt that they didn't do the first go around. And I know materials change. Um, so I'm not that into what's available today, but that would be my re
recommendation because maybe price and the length of time it outweighs the quality is truly likely. >> Second. >> Good recommendation.
>> While we have it open, anybody else recommendation before we open it up to public comment? All right, I would like to open up the floor to anybody from the public for public comments. >> I'm just glad again and Jeff I'm just
glad we're at this point where we started about four years ago where you're going to tear down the part three where we are today. >> And Mr. Bill, would you swear to God to that? You want me to swear to God? I will. My
answer. Thank you. That it is formally under oath. Thank you. >> Swear to God or affirm whatever you do. >> I do. >> All right. There being no public comments, I'd like to open up the board
for discussion and any further recommendations. >> And if I may, Mr. just to remind the board the authority here uh is uh whether you find the project to be consistent with the township's master plan and the goals and objectives set
forth and same perhaps consistent with our planners memo uh and testimony in that regard. uh and if you have any recommendations uh beyond that particularly related uh in your opinion to making the project
even more consistent uh with the township's master plan and the goals and objectives of the same those would again be recommendations. Um, I would like to say thank you to the township and the BOE for getting this done. Um, I've lived here now for almost
15 years. Uh, I play soccer. I utilize the fields. I play on every field here. Um, my kids play soccer, my kids play lacrosse, my wife coaches lacrosse, I coach soccer. I'm out on these fields almost every day. And I have heard so
many comments over the years that Milbourne, you're in a very nice community, but you don't have any fields to play on. We'd rather play at our place than yours. So, finally, we're getting uh more fields to play on. And the kids will definitely appreciate it.
There are over 570 kids in Milbourne Soccer Club, all residents, and we would play in Old Short Hills Park. Our seven-year-olds with 6 in high grass where the ball barely moves. You know, again, we don't have enough turf fields
to to play in the spring. We're sharing those sports. Um, so again, much gratitude for everybody working on this and getting it done. I think the town will significantly benefit from these fields and the like. So much
appreciated. >> Just thinking about the BPAS materials that are being used, maybe considering using something that's not pass without the chlorinated chemicals. >> Studies I can show you
on that show that these are actually incredibly safe. California environmental commission just actually levels in the modern artificial turf similar to what you'll find in natural
grass. >> That's very important. the uh that's the uh comprehensive response. >> Yes, there's those studies. >> Are there any other comments or
recommendations from the board? There being no other comments, I would like to make a motion to It's going to be not inconsistent again, right? Or is this You can go so far as Stephen as should you so desire. The
motion can be that the project is consistent with the township's master plan and the goals and objectives set forth in same and then just let us know if you're including any one or both of the recommendations that I believe I
heard one with with respect to confirming the turf is underlining that the lining under the padding or underlining is of a sufficient quality to maximize the
life expectancy of the field and I don't and if you are al also including the recommendation uh to minimize uh PAS in the selection process or not
one vote or neither as Steve said. So moved. Um do I have a second? >> Oh I'm sorry with both recommendations. >> I I would like both recommendations. That's okay with the I I believe both of them are already taken into account to
my understanding but I will make them as recommendations. I don't think there's any issue. Would you wish to say to the extent not already satisfied as the vote? >> Sure. >> All right. And we we do have a motion. Uh
>> do I have a second? Second. Roll call vote, please. >> Jonathan Baxter, >> yes. >> Alison Campfield, >> yes. >> Michael Cohen, >> yes. >> Deborah Neas, >> yes. >> Frank Sakamandi, >> yes. >> Michael Zion, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Sweeney VJ, >> yes. >> Chair Gustin Habard, >> yes.
>> Sir, >> yes. Passes unanimous. >> All right. Thank you very much everyone. >> Um, next on our agenda may be an executive session. So
at this time I think once if the motion passes we will turn off the live feed. We will not be coming back on. There will be no new business and no other business action taken. Um and all we will do is
come back and close the meeting. So Mr. Thorn, can you please get us up for an executive session? Certainly. uh uh by way of resolution. So we'll have a motion second and a roll call vote. Uh the board will go into an executive session um pursuance to the open public
meetings act which permits the same particularly with respect to section 12B7 thereof uh for pending litigation uh specifically uh I center for living Judaism versus Milurn at Al uh case
number 225 Dv 17318 uh it is anticipated that deliberate is conducted in close session will be disclosed to the public upon determination by the planning board that the public interest no longer require confidentiality and the resolution shall
take effect immediately. Again, a motion second and all vote for sake. Thank >> Jonathan Baxter. >> Yes. >> Alison Campfield. >> Yes. >> Michael Cohen. >> Yes. >> Debas. >> Yes. >> Frank Sakamandi. >> Yes. Yes.
>> Yes. >> Vice Chair BJ. >> Yes. >> Yes. That's unanimous.