Okay, it's 7:30, so Let's get started. Good evening and happy new year to everyone. Uh I want to welcome you all and call to order this scheduled planning board reorganization meeting on this day, January 19th, 2026. Please
stand for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> I hereby announce that this meeting is
being held in accordance with chapter 231 of the open public meeting act. Proper notice of meeting dates has been given to the Morris news fee and the Morris County Daily Record and posted on the bulletin board in the bur wall. This meeting is a judicial proceeding. Any questions or comments must be limited to
issues that are relevant to what the board may legally consider in reaching a decision and to quorum appropriate to judicial must be maintained at all times. Uh just a note to members of the planning board and burough staff any use of electronic devices during this
meeting shall be used solely for the purposes of bur business. Thank you. >> Roll call please. >> Mr. Wolf >> here. >> Mr. here. >> Mr. Bezel >> here. >> Mrs.
Mr. >> President Mr. Houston >> here >> and >> I will say that engineer planner attorney
engineer and borrow traffic consultant. >> Great. Thank you. At this time, I would like to turn the meeting over to Mayor Carr for the election of officers for 2026. >> Thank you, Chairman. Uh, good evening. This is the Morris Plains Planning Board reorganization meeting of January 19th,
2026. First order of business is the reorganization of the Morris Plains Planning Board for 2026. Mr. Ross Malpure and Mr. Bartiata as class four members respectively to replace Steven Augenlick and Ron Kelly
turns. Mr. Bezel was reappointed as a class four member and Miss Maryanne Steard was reappointed as class two member. Mr. William Houston was reappointed as a class three member representing the governing body and myself was appointed as a class one
member. I would like to take this opportunity to welcome Mr. Ross Melpier and Mr. Bianciata to the planning board. Thank you. The next order of business is the nomination of board chair to serve in 2026.
Do I have nominations for a chair? >> I would like to nominate Mike as chair. >> Are there additional nominations? Being no further nominations, I declare the nominations closed and ask for a roll call roll call and a nomination of Mike Garagia as chair. >> Can I have a second on that?
>> I'm sorry. >> I'll second by Andrew Wolf. >> Andrew or Mr. Wolf? >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. Bessel. >> Yes. >> M.
>> Yes. Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. Houston. >> Yes. >> Mayor Carr. >> Yes. >> Mcccluskey. >> Yes. >> And Mr. >> Yes. >> Do I have nominations for a vice chair?
>> I would like to nominate Mr. Bezel. >> Is there a second? I'll second by Mr. Houston. Any additional nominations? Seeing no further nominations, I declare nominations close and ask for a roll
call on a nomination of John Bezel or the vice chair. Roll call, please. >> Mr. L. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mir, >> yes. >> Mr. Bezel, >> yes. >> Mcker, >> yes. >> Mr. Siana, >> yes. >> Mr. Houston, >> yes. >> Mayor Carr, >> yes.
>> Missky, >> yes. >> Mr. Gavalia, >> yes. >> And I'd like to congratulate Mike and John on their appointments. carries in 2026. And as I've done since I've become mayor is just take a few
minutes. I go to each board and just want to thank everybody uh that comes out and volunteers uh for these boards and commissions uh that the bureau needs. planning borders adjustment board of health rec shry all these things is really what makes the
world go around and having volunteers that dedicate uh well I told these new guys it's only one meeting a month usually only an hour or so so uh we'll go with that but the uh the time and the effort you know away from their families or at home be watching the playoff game
tonight in college football not coming out in the cold but you know I for one and I know the residents of certainly appreciate everybody's time and efforts uh on all these planning boards and really it's uh it's the volunteers that make this town go around
and you're part of that and appreciate it. So, thank you all very much. Thank you. I turn the meeting over to the chair. >> Okay. Thank you, Mayor Carr. The next order of business tonight is to adopt the resolution approving the
meeting dates for 2026, which is res resolution 26 Planning board resolution number 26-1 notes of meetings be it resolved that the planning board of the bureau of Morris planes in county of Morris and state of New Jersey on this 19th day of
January 2026 as follows. Whereas chapter 231 of the public laws of the state of New Jersey for 1975 known as the here and after designated as the open public meetings act requires notification of meeting of public bodies
as therein defined in a man. Now therefore for purposes of compliance with the open public meetings act after said planning board of the bureau of Morse plans hereby makes the following designations. One, Morse Newsby is hereby designated
as the official newspaper to receive notice of meetings as required by any and all sections of the open public meetings act. It appearing that said newspaper is most likely to inform the local public such meetings. The daily record is utilized from time to time for
additional publication for matters required by law to be published. The daily record is not hereby designated as an official newspaper of the bur. Two, the location of the posting of the notice of meeting shall be the bulletin board of the Burough Hall. Three, sum $5
is hereby fixed as the amount to be paid by any persons requesting individual notice of meetings as provided in section 14 of the open public meetings act. The regular meetings of the planning board for the year 2026 shall be
February 9th, March 16th, April 20th, May 11th, June 15th, July 20th, August 17th, September 21st, October 19th, November 16th, December 7th, and January
18th, 2027 at 7:30 p.m. Five. All meetings of the planning board shall be open to the public. I'd like to ask for a motion to approve of resolution 2601.
>> So move second. >> So move seconded by Mr. >> Roll call. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mir. >> Yes. >> Mr. Bezo. >> Yes. Mcker. >> Yes.
>> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Mrs. >> Yes. >> And Mr. >> Yes. >> The next order of business is to adopt the resolution for professional services for 2026.
That's resolution 2602. Planning board resolution number 26-2. Legal notice. Burough Morris Plains, Morris County, New Jersey. Planning board professional services. Whereas the planning board of the bureau of Morse plans desire desires to retain
the services of planning consultants, an engineer and an attorney to perform professional services as required for the year 2026. And whereas the foregoing services are professional services as in NJSA 48
11-2 section 6 which are permitted to be contracted without public bidding as set forth in NJSA 4A col 11-5 section 1A
and as a nonfair and open contract pursuant to the provision of NJSA 1944A-20.5 and whereas the board has determined that the value of each of the professional services will exceed $17,500
and whereas each of the professional consultants have completed and submitted a business equity disclosure certification which certifies that each firm has not made any reportable contributions to a political or candidate committee represented by a board member in the previous one year
and that the contract will prohibit the below list of firms from making any reportable contribution to the term of the contract. Whereas the board has determined after due consideration that the following named individuals shall be appointed to
fill positions hereafter designated. Now therefore be it resolved by planning board plans as follows. One, the board retains the services of the following to be compensated pursuant to the sums appropriated for the purpose in the duly adopted municipal budget for the year
2026. A planning consultants Elizabeth and Keller Phillips Price Brian Le Hughes LLC B engineer William Ryden of Anderson and Denler Associate Incorporated. Card attorney Andrew M.
Brewer Esquire of Marci Falcon LLP. Two, the business disclosure entity certification and determination of value be placed on file with this resolution. and three, the board secretary shall cause a copy of the resolution to be
published in accordance with NJA4A 11-5 section 1A of I four. This resolution shall take effect as prohibited by law. Can I get a motion to approve resolution 2602?
>> So second, Mr. That's right. >> Mr. Wil. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mcker. >> Yes. >> Mr. Siata. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mayor.
>> Yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. The next order of business is to adopt a resolution for the minor site plan committee appointments for 2026. That's resolution 26-3.
Planning board resolution number 26-03 minor site plan committee be resolved by the planning board of the bureau of Morris Plains from the county of Morris and state of New Jersey in this 19th day of January 2026. One, the following individuals are hereby appointed to the minor site plan committee from the date
here until December 31st, 2026. A, John Bessel. B, Marian Stecker. C, Rosman up here. Two, this resolution shall shall take effect as prohibited pro as provided by law. Whoops.
As provided by law. Uh, can I have a motion to to adopt a resolution to minor site plan committee appointments for 2026? >> So move >> second
call. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Mr. Bezel. >> Yes. >> Mcker. >> Yes. >> Mr. Yes. >> Mr. Houston. >> Yes. >> Mayor Carr. >> Yes. >> Musleski. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes.
>> Okay. The next order of business is to adopt a resolution for master plan review committee appointments for 2026. This is resolution 26-4. Planning board resolution number 26-04 master plan review committee. Be resolved by the planning board of the
Morris Plains in the county of Morris and state of New Jersey. 19th day of January 2026. One following individuals are hereby appointed to the master plan review committee from the date here until December 31st 2026. A Michael
Arabia D. Suzanne McCluskey C. Andrew Wolf two. This resolution shall take effect as provided by law. Can I have a motion to approve resolution 26-4? Motion. >> Second.
Roll call. >> Mr. Wil. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mcker. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. Houston. >> Yes. >> May. >> Yes. >> M. Mccleskey. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes.
>> Okay. Okay, the next item on the agenda is the approval of meeting minutes from December 8th of 2025. Each of the board members received a copy of these meeting minutes. Does anybody have any corrections or comments? >> I've got three
on page 412 third section where it starts Mrs. Randy stated it's growing platform. There's not something they I think should be that the other two are on 423
halfway down the page where it says Mr. Brewer ask and then Mayor Cardman Mr. Brewer both times Mr. Brewer should be Mr. Wolf. >> Thank you. >> It would have been much more eloquent had it been Mr. Brewer. >> You were off the hook Andy.
>> Yes I am. I do have one as well on >> 412 down. Mr. Bezel asked if vehicles were ordered for Amazon. I don't know whether that was your question. You asked whe
>> I didn't get where you said >> page 412 about 3/4 of the way down >> it says Mr. Bezled asked if the vehicles are ordered through Amazon. He did not say that. >> Okay. >> Okay. On 414, last sentence
where it says at the end of the sentence, inhale them away. I think that's like two more. Okay. On 419, the first line it says the driveway closet. >> So that's closest
>> all things spellcheck doesn't put up pickup. You got that Karen? >> First line. The driveway should say closest to the Buckley way. >> Okay. >> Okay. Instead of closet. And then um I
think this is a point of clarity. Halfway through that paragraph, a line that starts approval, comma, they will engage with a fire chief. I think we're talking about the burrow fire chief there. I'm not sure. I don't know if it's a or fire chief. Just a point of
clarity. I think we're talking about the burrow chief. >> Okay. The burrow fire chief. >> Yeah, I think it's the versus >> doesn't it say the burrow firefie has the line >> okay and then on 421 halfway down the
page again Mr. Ryden asked if some sight line lights I think it's sit and that is it for me Karen I have one on 425 second line from the bottom. Miss Brandy said dog least think it's least this
building. >> Okay. Anybody else? >> Okay. Can Can I have a motion to approve these minutes with the changes stated? >> So move. >> Second. >> Second. Roll call, please. >> Yes.
>> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> And Mr. >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. The next item on our
agenda is comments from the public. Uh this is specifically for matters that are not on tonight's agenda. We're asking that public comment should be limited to one comment of no more than 5 minutes per person. And this is only a request to provide opportunity for
everyone. None. Okay. Next on our agenda are the committee reports. Minor site plan committee update. >> None. Master plan review committee. Andrew,
anyone correspondence and bills? Uh Karen, are there any correspondences? We have three. First one is number 202 52353
dated the 24th of December um to me Falcon for McDonald's litigation the amount of $7,488. The second PO number 2026073
dated the 13th of January also to Marazi Falcon also for McDonald's litigation. The amount is $3517.50. The final one number 202600074 13th of January also the mayor Z falcon
for legal services in the amount of $1,225. I move that we accept these. >> I'll second it. >> Roll call. Mr. Wolf. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. Bezel. >> Yes. >> Mrs.
>> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. Houston. >> Yes. >> Mayor. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> And mayor and Mr. >> Yes. Next item on the agenda is old business.
Uh I was just going to give a update. Uh the McDonald's litigation as you know um the the approval that was by McDonald was challenged. Um the trial and I use that word in quotes which is really oral argument. It's an argument with the attorney before the judge occurred on
Thursday. There was it went about three hours. Uh judge questioned other things on both sides. Did not give an indication of I don't think he gave an indication which way he was leaning. um which uh Judge Mwood rarely does. Um and he said that he is preserving decision
and he expects to issue his decision um and um you know the explanation within a few weeks. So early early February is would be a good guess on when uh we should have a response and the answer
from the judge. >> Anyone else business? Okay. Uh, any new business tonight? Okay. Okay. Next on our agenda, applications. Our first application is PB-1-25
Rivian LLC, 329 Speedwell Avenue, lot 23, lot 1.01. Uh this is the continuation of the public hearing to include testimony from the applicant experts. Mr. Haro, welcome. Um before you start, we had we
had some items from last month and I'm trying to figure out the best way to tackle those before we get into additional testing. Uh some some were addressed, I think, uh but I'm not sure that all of them
were. So, >> you want me to just quickly give an overview of what was and I think you're referring to the resubmission that was made and some of the additional details. >> There were Yeah. And there were questions asked during the testimony. >> Sure. >> Verse and I feel that that's a better
approach versus waiting to go through additional testimony and then trying to capture everything. >> Agreeable. >> Absolutely. I appreciate that. Uh just for the record, Joe Pero from Porzio Bronburg and Newman on behalf of Rivian LLC. As mentioned, this is a
continuation of the preliminary and final major site plan and variance application for 329 Speedwell Avenue, block 23, lot 1.01. Um they uh we began our presentation of the application at your last meeting on
December 8, 2025. Um during that uh presentation we've uh introduced testimony from a representative of Rivian uh from the project architect and from our project engineer. Um during the course of the proceedings
uh there was questions and feedback from the board, the board consultants as well as the public uh regarding the application. Um the applicant responded uh to those questions and comments uh due to the late hour and in light of the feedback we received um decision was
made to carry the application to this evening uh to give the applicant uh in this design team additional opportunities to address as many of those comments, questions and recommendations as we could. Um, a
resubmission was made to the bureau on January 8th, both uh hard copies and digitally to the board, the burough, the board of consultants. Um, that resubmission included a revised uh revised site plan set which included
a revised landscaping plan. Uh the truck turning templates that Mr. uh requested. Uh updated architectural colored rendering and elevations were provided. There were some questions and comments. I believe the mayor and others wanted a
better visual of what this building would look like. Aesthetics from the exterior. Um the architect provided uh some updated renderings that called out the color, scheme, and materials. Those were part of the submission. Uh, Dynamic
Engineering supplied a performance standard compliance statement. That was a request of Mr. Ryden. Um, Rivian provided a u what I'll call an SOP standard operating procedure for the company. Uh, supporting the testimony of
Miss Brandy regarding how employees of the service center would handle fluids, other materials that are typically used in the service center. uh that Ridian uh SOP was included in the submission.
Um and the um only other what I'll call more technical item was a list of quantities. Uh Mr. Ryden specifically wanted to know quantities of certain items and uh that document uh was provided to Mr. Ryden, the board's
consultants. Um that was really more of what I'll call technical. wasn't really dealing with the handling methods uh to support M. Randy's testimony. It was more in response to Mr. Ryden's request. Uh so that was chairman, that was the
extent of the materials that went in uh on January 8th in response to the feedback and comments we received. I'm not sure if there was specific um items or additional information that you or the other board members were looking for that that was not included in that
resubmission. I'm happy to try to answer that for you. Now, >> I do have one that involves a trash enclosure. >> Excuse me. involves a trash enclosure, but we did talk about some sort of time stamp or whatever you want to call it
for the locking mech. I didn't see any of that and nothing. >> Sure. The detail of the engineering plant and Mr. will go into more testimony on that does include we switched from the chain link enclosure to the full masonry block enclosure with
port on board fencing. The uh testimony and the confirmation at the last hearing was that Rivian would agree as a stipulation of any approval to uh restrict those hours of refuge pickup. Um and again I will defer to to to Mr.
Brewer on this. Typically um we would agree to a condition in the resolution that would run with the approval restricting it as was requested by the mayor and others to limit that pickup. I'm not sure there's any other >> What was that?
>> Yeah, I believe we said I thought it was during business hours, but let me let me double check. I don't want this quote there was I know there was deliveries were some were restricted to a certain time. I believe it was what we talked about.
Yeah, that would that as well. My notes say limit the refues and recycle pickups to business hours so it wouldn't have an impact on >> I think that those auto assign numbers to those. >> Yeah, I think number should be assigned maybe a step two in case that's not a
problem other places in town. Yeah, you can tell them 7:30 8:00 but they're 3 in the morning whatever, right? So there some sort of other mechanism or something else in play or agreed upon
a contin I can't work on that. That's something to do. >> Sure. I don't know what the ordinance says, but it has to be at least what the off would have to be at least
or says >> other times for pick up. >> Sure. Chairman, was there anything other than the refuge pick up that you can recall? I think so. I I looked back at the notes and I marked off a few things.
>> Sure. >> Uh but maybe this will be covered through resolution. So, board member had asked about the chargers and and what would stop someone from using them. Miss Brandy talked about um
she thought that there was an ability to maybe lock them out, but we weren't sure. So, was there a follow up to that? Is that part of what could be put into the resolution later? >> Sure. Yeah. And we can certainly get, you know, some kind of a clarification as to what operationally can be done. I
think the testimony was that practically speaking, they're is not going to be available between having customer vehicles in those chargers as well as any loaner vehicles and the like. It's just just not going to according to his brand test not going to be an opportunity for the general public to
pull in there and use them. But as a safeguard, if we can you know I could speak about something mechanically that could be done or you know technologically to shut them off. Let let me let me do that while you know while the Mr. Fruit's testifying if you allow. >> All right. Sure. Sure. Uh there were
some things about hazardous waste and I and I know you had provided some information. I I would ask Mr. Ryan at a point if you were satisfied with that. >> Well, I will give you my answers. I'd like the uh witness to put this put the
reports on the record and testify as to what what he provided and I'll I'll give you my comments. >> There were some things. Sorry. Go ahead. >> No, that's what I I'll give you my feedback. Generally generally I'm satisfied. any questions. >> Okay. >> Yeah, there were water requirements,
electrical requirements as well. So, I don't know if all of those were addressed. So, again, through testimony, testimony, >> I think Mr. Fruit as part of his engineering can speak to utilities and I think that was some of the the items that you're referring to.
>> Okay. Anybody else? Did you say we're going to go for lighting again? Is that part of it? >> Yeah, Mr. Yes. Mr. Fruit's revised site plan set includes supplemental and you know enhanced landscaping on the East Han Avenue side and there's I know there
were some lighting questions. Mr. Spe >> um what about about ballards because there was a question about ballards too. Is that on your Did that get revised? >> We'll have to double check that. I'm looking at Mr. He'll he'll let me know if that's on.
>> Okay. >> Mr. had also talked about um working with the professionals on other we had questions about um cutthroughs and I think he uh in the in the notes it says that he was going to work with some of the professionals on other solutions
you know and I'm not sure covering that at all. >> I know there's going to be testimony on the revised parking configuration if you you'll notice in those plans the configuration was the orientation of the spaces have all been changed believe Mr. has some testimony. >> Okay.
>> Hopefully that'll address some of those issues including a cut. >> Perfect. That's it for me. >> I think there's one other the the fire hydrant on speed. Well, I think there's a takeway to go back and talk to the fire department. >> Correct. >> As well. Did you do that?
>> I personally did, but I'll I'll defer to see if they reach out. >> Anyone else? >> I I do have a comment. with regard to these new plans. >> Yes. >> Sheet number one which is the cover
sheet >> and sheet number two which is the aerial map. They list academy road on there and it should be cancelled. That's usually a direct reference to I don't I don't disagree with you
>> when anyone else on the board okay you can Um just I'll be very brief just in an overview I we we've talked about a lot already before I recall Mr. Frude. Uh one of the other things I just wanted to note for the record uh was that we did
receive in response to that resubmission an updated report from the dealts uh dated January 15th 2026. And uh we are prepared this evening to respond to any remaining uh items that are in the traffic consultants report. As I noted,
the revised site plan set now has three separate turning templates for each of the vehicles. There's a refuge uh turning template, there is a fire truck template, there's actually four. There's a delivery truck turning template and finally the car carrier to show that all
of those different vehicles can maneuver throughout the site and using the driveways as design. So, that's something that Mr. Fruit will also provide some testimony on. uh there were some elimination of variances throughout the course of this uh proceeding um signage and the like.
So again, I'll let Mr. Prud speak to those items, but I just wanted to note for the record and then to respond to Mr. Ryden's uh statement earlier. Um I can certainly um if there's anything additional that's needed for me to put these on the record, these additional
items are part of the resubmission. Um the Rivian uh statement, I'm sorry, uh standard operating procedure document regarding waste and material management uh is not dated. Um so that's there's really no other way to reference it. Um
other than you know it's it's titled Rivian 329 Speedwell Avenue, Mars Plants, New Jersey, Waste and Hazardous Material Management. Uh the performance standard compliance statement from Dynamic Engineering is dated January 2026. as part of the resubmission and
the colored rendering packet architectural materials were prepared by Red Stark the project architect and I don't believe there's a date on here but if there is I will I will find that before you conclude this even >> I did see a date on
>> December you're correct mayor December 19th 2025 all right so Um, chairman, I what I'd like to do is just pick up the presentation where we left off and recall Mr. Fruit uh to go into more detail on the u revisions that were made
to the to the project and the plans. Also to hit on the additional materials that were resubmitted and to answer the questions that have been presented so far this evening. Mr. Prud, uh, you're still under oath. He was previously accepted and qualified at the December
8th my hearing. Mr. P, your licenses are still good standard. >> They are. Yes. >> Uh for exhibits, we left off at the last hearing. If you're going to present anything that wasn't submitted, we would start with A6. But if you're going with
uh things that are have been already part of that January 8 submission, we don't need to remark those. So, it looks like you have a a rendered site plan. Let's mark that A6 with today's date. So uh thank you. Um this is A6. This is a color rendered site plan with today's
date January 19th, 2026. Uh it is as with the uh previous color rendering. Uh it is a color rendered version of the site plan. The orientation the same. North is at the top of the page. It specifically references the revised site
plans from January 7th uh of 2026. In that uh revision, we we did a point by point response letter to the various uh review letters that we received. That's outlined in our letter dated January 8th. I won't go through all of the comments in that letter. Uh but I will I would like to highlight uh some
of the the changes uh that were made here. Um and maybe first point of fact going through the pages in order the cover and the aerial map I don't disagree with your correction. Um typically those come from the >> tax I think it's the aerial just the
map. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Typically that comes from the tax map. So you might want to >> the cover is good. >> Yeah. >> The aerial map but that will get corrected. >> Yeah. I mean, not even tonight when when you do your final
>> certainly. Um, so if I can I'll So again, this is the same orientation. So you see the building uh here in the tan color, Speedall Avenue on the left side of the page and East Tander Rover Avenue uh at the bottom of the page. As you recall with the plans that we discussed
the last hearing, we had already agreed to close uh the westernmost driveway on East Handover Avenue. In my opinion, that uh does a lot to limit uh the cut through that was just brought up and we talked about a little bit uh in December. Typically, a cut through in
our experience, it's a matter of convenience. So, the more cutth through you're going to get is when it's a more convenient movement. So, number one, that was an an easy shot across the front of the building and out uh to Speed Well. Now, to cut through, you've got to make that decision much sooner.
Come around, make several turns across the front of the across the building and out to Speed Well. So, it's a much less convenient move. Um, so we don't anticipate uh that it would be uh common uh or typical in this situation. Uh certainly not nearly as much as say
something that was on the corner. What did we do with these changes? Uh first and foremost uh we heard the board uh and the neighbors with regard to East Handover Avenue frontage and we modified uh the buffer and the landscape uh spacing set back of parking uh to be
compliant at 10 ft uh from uh East Handover Avenue, pushing uh the existing parking which is non-compliant today, pushing that back to be at least 10 feet. So it's a little over 10 feet on the south on the west side. As you go east it gets to be a little bit further just because of the orientation. The way
we did that, we eliminated one-way circulation that went through the site and parking and made this all 90°ree parking. That does a couple of things. One, it provides two-way access throughout the aisles. Makes it a little bit easier to circulate for customers when they're coming in out of spaces. Uh
number two, it actually makes the parking a little bit more efficient. So, the net result of that change is again the driveway was already closed. We reordered this 90°. The net result is about the same parking. We went from 163 to 164 total spaces, yet we reduced the
impervious coverage slightly further. So, um, if you recall with our first revision, we did the same treatment over on Speedwell. We got rid of some parking. We slid that back, increased the buffer, significantly increased the landscaping there. We've now done that on East Handover. In total, this project
o has over 400 uh various plant materials uh being installed. Uh 19 trees, 230 shrubs, a number of perennials and grasses as well. Um I had it in here. I was and a lot of that again is focused along the frontage
uh of East Hanover where we're adding there's existing cadence of street trees there. We're adding uh one where the driveway used to be uh to keep that cadence of street trees along the frontage and we're adding a lower uh ornamental tree at the corner uh there
to provide uh some aesthetics and in amongst all those trees instead of uh lawn we're adding landscaping. It'll be a combination of evergreen and deciduous shrubs as well as the grasses and perennials throughout that there's a nice cadence in between each tree to
really supplement the landscaping there. uh cust on any headlight screening from cars that are parked facing the street. Also just provides general screening to fill in below uh the limbs and branches uh of the street trees that are there today. We also uh took a look at the
inventory on the Buckley Way. There were a couple spots uh one at the south end, one at the northern corner where that landscaping uh had either maybe died over the years or had fallen uh in uh in disrepair. So we've supplemented that
with some arborvite in this area as well as again in the north northeast corner uh so that you now have a full screen row of evergreens uh throughout that area. Uh all of the uh spaces are in the same location. Uh they're just now in that
center row of parking. So we have a center row of parking that is essentially pull through. You can see white striped areas between every other EV space. That's where the equipment is housed. There's a question about ballards. Yes, we will have ballards uh for ballards around the EV or the EV
equipment to protect it. Uh but cars can then uh pull through in either direction as well as several spaces that are EV ready against the building. It was on the last set of plans, but there was a question about utilities. Again, there is a proposed transformer
on the east side of the building where the electric comes in off the Buckley way that's to handle some increased electric service. The exact design of that, the exact design of the electric service will come as we get our electrical engineer on board through uh design development of the building plants and get the full load information
to submit to the utility company. Similarly, with water service, we're upgrading the water service to make sure that we have the adequate fire prevention in the building. I talked about that at the last hearing. And that will be designed by uh the mechanical plumbing engineer as well as the fire
sprinkler engineer u at the time of our building design uh preparation for the building department. Uh other uh notable changes, the trash enclosure has not been relocated. is still in this location off the uh
northwest corner of the building, but it has been replaced or the the spec of it has been changed uh to a brick veneer with a capstone consistent with uh what is being installed throughout the burrow. We did agree uh to have the locking mechanisms there. Uh there was
uh the mayor asked about the timing there. Just to refresh uh the board the testimony at the last hearing the hours of operation Monday to Friday 7 to 7 and Saturday from 7 to 4 uh with no ops on uh Sunday. So that would be of the
timing for the locking mechanisms on the trash enclosure. Uh the plans note uh the agreement to uh repair or replace I should say sidewalk and curb uh along the frontages as needed uh as well as ADA ramps. Um
and then uh oh one more thing on the chargers we did confirm with the Rivian as far as a method to prevent public from coming in and uh pulling up. You heard the testimony at the last hearing from Miss Brandy. Typically, those will be used by uh Rivian vehicles in the
overnight. However, it will require uh either a swipe card or uh code to be punched in to access it. So, if there is a space that's not occupied by a riveted vehicle overnight, uh you won't be able to get to the the service from that uh charging post.
Uh finally, I want to go through the signage changes uh that we made. >> Just one point if you don't mind that also that I know you can look online or whatever. It's not anywhere even >> it's probably on the Rivian website. Uh but I don't know of anything beyond
that. I'm not sure. >> The final comment I want to uh make uh with regard to uh the revisions has to do with the signage that's proposed. Uh if you recall at the last hearing, we have two freestanding signs, one uh in each driveway. We have reduced the size
and dimensions of those signs to be compliant with regard to width, height, uh, etc. and under clearance. So now, uh, the only variance is that we have two instead of one. Again, we have, uh, really three fronts, we have two
driveways. Uh, and I'll get into planning testimony in a bit, but I think it's appropriate to have those two signs. They are back lit, uh, internal illuminated. Uh, those signs, uh, their metal panel or the, uh, request would keep in mind these are
predominantly black panel and it will be the Rivian name and logo that is back lit uh through the through the panel. So it's not the entire panel that'll be lit up. It'll just be uh the Rivian lettering and logo that'll be illuminated. will probably in my opinion probably have less uh
um less noticeable than say uh a sign with a a light on it or something that was illuminated the whole sign. So I think it'll be very aesthetically uh pleasing. We've also updated uh this the plans to
identify all of the building signs. Uh we had uh conversation last hearing. a conversation um with your planner uh about the signs. All of theformational signs that are out of the building are now inventoried on the plans and documented in our sign table. Uh those
include uh things like uh a guest lounge ID, a key drop ID sign, a mailbox, no tailgating sign, um video surveillance identification, um and then a small entry door graphic. All of those are less than two square
ft. Uh but they are documented now on the plans. Uh so that they can be reviewed and I'll get into a little bit more detail uh when I go through the variance discussion on those. They are all now documented on the plan. Uh we did also uh submit the vehicle
circulation plans. I don't necessarily need to go into detail. If Mr. Maltz has questions about them, I can certainly go through them. I think Mr. The only uh point I want to make is on the vehicle deliveries. We anticipate them coming uh from Speedwell and exiting a standard.
We talked about left turns. It's actually uh a right turnout on these stand up where the circulation is reversed from what you noted in your >> but you should show the uh you've got to go reverse what you're
saying. You can't make the left in >> we're not I think you may have read the plan backwards. So the the plan is the the vehicle comes in, it's a it's a left in off speed well, which is a a permitted movement and a right turn out on >> east
right in speed. >> Left in speed. >> And for what vehicle was that that's going to come? >> That's the uh vehicle delivered >> the carrier. >> The carrier. Yeah, correct. >> And can you tell me how many cars would be on if it was still
We talked about that the last time. I just want >> to record five. >> I thought it was five. Yeah. >> Uh typical height I think is 12 to 13. I know the bridge is uh 137 one direction,
138 the other direction. Um and it's designed to permit trucks underneath it. So uh it would make it through there. Do you know how often those deliveries will come? >> I know Miss Brandy testified to some of that the last hearing. So, I just want
to make sure. Uh I'm looking at about six a week, I believe, was the discussion last time. About 30 trucks a week, five on a truck. That's about six a week if it's a full might be a seventh delivery a week. So, one a day or so.
And they're going to come right through our >> They're going to come to the site. There's no way to come to the site. >> Come from hand. They can come from hand. Make the right in there too. >> Make the right in there too,
>> right? But then they they'd be empty coming out. >> You know what I'm saying? They'd have to come back this way. They'd be empty. one way or the other to your point there's only right turns coming out right on the hand over there's a right turn and there's a right
turn coming out so they do have to come through town is the point I think you're making >> correct >> well I wanted to discuss the whole rear entrance on Buckley too because is that >> is this a good time or not a good I can I don't have we can go whatever
the board prefers. So that's >> I think Harold Mr. Malts was talk a little about that. >> That's why I don't want >> Yeah, >> I think um I would like to if you have the traffic flow plans, do you have those today? >> I do. Yeah.
>> I I think we would like to see those. >> I would like them to show the public. So this is colored from Uh the plan that was submitted, we'll mark it >> A7. >> A7. >> And Rob, which one is that? Which vehicle?
>> This is the car carrier vehicle circulation carrier. The exhibit has today date of 1 19206, but it is uh as from uh the plan set uh that was submitted on uh prepared on January 7th,
2026. Uh so the circulation pattern uh that's shown here would be a left in from Speedwell circulating through the site and it can drop off anywhere across the the front of the building and then a
right turnout on East Handover Avenue >> and then back back on >> left. or a left on speedway. He can go anywhere he wants to. >> What do you mean? >> No, he can if you come to the traffic light, you make a left on speed. You can go straight up and over.
>> Yeah. He's going to come back the way he came. >> We don't care. >> Well, I think the point Mr. Bezel is making is that he's he's coming from the highway. The quickest way to get back to the highway is go back through town. >> That's my point that we're going to have
this truck come through twice a day, per I don't know. Maybe >> testify or however this is going to go. I don't want to interrupt. Well, >> well, I like to raise my question
dealing with the uh access on hand over and way. I guess that's the area we're talking about. I don't know why that's not being entertained to have an egress on Buff. >> The county
uh the one that uh in their review indicated that they would like think of it as several alternatives step by step to close both drives handover make a connection to come out Buckley Buckley stop sign control. You have a left and
right turn lane there and you have a crosshatch do not block the interction. They would out there. As an alternative, if the board uh preferred not to do that, they would want the westerly drive uh on hand
over existing Westwood Drive closed and keep the easterly one, which is only 70 ft west of Buckley Way. Uh so it's furthest you can be from the signal at speedway. But in doing that, they wanted no left
turns inter right turns in and out. And I noted at the last meeting in my original report that my concern was by no left turns being allowed out, no left turns allowed out at handover, you have no ability for
the site to come directly out to be able to proceed onto handover eastbound. That creates a sit situation in which uh if everybody makes a right out, they're going to wander onto other potential streets or neighborhood streets or
roadways that they might not ordinarily be on uh if there was direct access. what I had in my current report and was addressed under additional comments. Um
I I did note in the same area that I did like the change they made 45 degree parking which is in that southeast corner of the site near Buckley uh and going to the 90 degree and two blow it improves circulation around the site.
like that. Uh what I did want to see and I pointed out in my report is in orders being that the county was amenable to using Buckley and they talked about that was their first preference. But on the other hand, we do
have that existing east drive panel right out. You want to gain the 1,000 mel suggested making a one-way connection from the site and now you do have two-way flow through that area. You've
got very good flow circulation in that area. Instead of a two-way connection, just have a oneway out >> on Buckley Creek. People right turn. There's a separate left turn that's right there. Correct. Has stop sign control and that's how you make the left
out and they would sign it appropriately. U his opening statement said that there's a 4 foot height differential in an area. Uh what I did is I looked at the revised plan the grading plan and I didn't draw
a cross-section in the area but just looking at the contours that they show the existing contours and spot elevations on Buckley where the potential would be to come out with the oneway connection. It looked like it was not a 4ft difference but a twoft.
So that would make the grade more amendable. However, it's up to site engineer to provide cross section in that area. Uh there will be minimal impact forgetting about the grade for now. Uh there will be minimal impact
along parking along uh on Buckley way because first of all stop sign control. You can't park within 50 ft of the stop sign. You have a left and right turn there. You can't park adjacent to those turns. So the area where this drive
oneway drive would occur will be just beyond that and that's approximately if you took the two-way drive two-way circulation aisles that they created and you go in between those to come out on Buckley you're within about 25 30 ft of
where the left turn lanes are 40T something like that so there's minimal impact any parking curbside along the buck What has to be shown is for the site engineer to prepare a crosssection, just one crosssection of that area to see if
that uh oneway connection is doable wise between parking lot with the area I've identified and getting down to the curb line area which would be opened up. That's what I'm unfortunate to see.
>> I think we talked about that we cannot eliminate even one parking spot on the Buckley way. >> You have that business really that that relies on parking. Then you have the overflow also for the
Highlands that's right there. And then I think some people also park there or the terrace as well. >> So one spot, two spots out of there. I mean that's a big deal. >> They can park that close to Hanover.
>> Yeah. The other thing is, you know, if this were if if Acme went out and let's say Aldi came in or whoever, we wouldn't be talking about this.
Acme's tractor trailers came in and out of there for 30, 40 years. >> And two drive, right? making left turns. This is once or twice a day. They can figure it out, you know. >> Well, if I could interject something. >> Yeah.
>> Also within my report related to this area, I requested two things. is I mentioned it is to identify how much county was concerned about the what sound safety whatever the proposed application is not
a supermarket supermarket generated >> supermarket generated a lot of traffic you would have a lot of lots out this proposed site generates a lot less traffic than the acne consequently when you take off writes in
writes out you know uh and all all the other directions how much I asked your traffic engineer identify realistically based on the projection to decide how much left turn traffic are we really talking about in a peak hour are we
talking about 20 cars or 15 cars if it's a nominal number then they have an argument go back to the county and say why not allow the left out of the east drive which is the furthest >> it's 220 ft from the westly drive only
70 ft from way so and I think he even had that in his review report the response report responding to me indicating about going back and forth to the county but they should quantify that number so you know
that we're not in a vacuum We got a low number of generation peak hour generation for the site and we're going to have less during the rest of the day but activity is not that great on the road biggest impact uh on speed
well and in the rush hour I mean everybody knows it gets backed up >> but we're not talking about a lot of traffic they have an argument that present to county say and that would then eliminate
connection to the Buckley way one way >> and that block the box is something that's relatively new and the business owner asked for that block the box there the county didn't suggest that ever or put that in there the business owner did so she can get her deliveries out of
there employees so I mean that's a relatively new block box I'll say two years maybe give or take It does make you wonder, could you do a conditional left? Could you say left turns only between these hours during
the day? So it's not during rush hour. It's when there's not as much traffic flow and when the county buys something like that. >> Rush hour is probably better because the traffic stop. >> It's stuck. Yeah. I mean, just not talking a huge volume, >> right? And and I I think you know that
request is sometimes difficult because it becomes an enforcement issue and that just puts the burden back on the burrow. I think to what Mr. Mult is saying is probably the direction that we would like to go um honestly which is to continue the conversation with the county which we haven't gotten feedback from them other than their letter to
pursue that but I agree with Mr. Baltz that um pursuing the ability to make the left is probably the the best approach. Uh I did ask our traffic engineer to look at the numbers. This is a much lower generator than Acme or Aldi or
Sprouts or whoever might come in and reoccupy. When you break down the traffic for Rivian into potential uh left turns out of there, you're talking about 13 to 15 trips total. Um or I
should say in an hour. So in an hour >> just so everybody understands and I say this If I work with a developer in front of the board, if I take for example 18 said 18, what's 18 into 60 minutes? It's about
one car on average every 3 minutes. That's less time than the cycle of the light at the corner. That's about how often it was all backed up at handover. And you can say how long it's going to take for somebody to make a left. From
my experience, you have a signal nearby that's going to cycle allow the queue to start moving that's going to open up an opportunity within that. So if it's a 90 second wipe, that means it's about a minute and a half. Meanwhile, you're only going to generate from what he's
saying about one car every three minutes. So that gives you a sense of the activity. That's why I'm saying it behooves them to really go to the county and push for this. You know
>> that artist makes the left out of there. >> And what what we try to do with this exhibit is show potentially the worst case which is if we didn't have a left out that it could be done. Certainly if we made a left out on East Hanover um
it's an easier movement. Right Mr. Moltz that the turning radius for a left turn is wider than a right turn. So if we can make the right turn, uh that truck can make the left turn. So we want to show sort of the worst case if we didn't have it, but if we have the left turns, we're very com we're even more comfortable uh
with the ability to get uh that vehicle in and out of here. Um I I did go back and look after Mrs. Mr. Maltz's letter. Uh the grade differential there, he he's right. It's not four feet. It might be somewhere between two and three. Um it's
an impediment to grading. Can it be done? I'd have to look a little bit closer with the section like he said, but that split right left turn lane goes back about 40 feet. So that precludes the first driveway, which means that it's at the second driveway closest to the building where we would want to make
that opening into the Buckley way and that is where there's on street parking. So then you would be eliminating several on street parking spaces. Not to mention that turning radius there onto the Buckley way is going to be a little bit tighter. We have more control on site uh with the turning radius of a a truck or
vehicle. So, I prefer to keep our trucks uh certainly on site. >> I think if you go back that far, I think that there's parking on the opposite side or there's an entrance way to that other building as well. >> Yeah. Like >> their parking lot.
>> Yeah. We once you look at the race, you might have to look at more parking restrictions, which I don't think is um desirable here to do that on Buckley Way. Um so, the fact that we can do it with the right turn out shows that it can be done. We will approach the county
uh with the left turns on that premise that it is a significantly uh reduced traffic gener generator than than what's there today. We're eliminating uh the one access. Uh and they did leave the option to have uh the one access off of East Handover. So I think we're we're
very close to what the county wants. It's really just about that left turn at this point. >> Can I ask you a question, but based on my request to have that left turn, identified for the site. Did Mr.
Paraguay know if he prepared an analysis for that >> of the trips? >> No. For the left turn out, if it was allowed coming out, how much left turn traffic are we talking about? >> Well, that's what we said. It was be about 13 an hour. >> Is Mr. Paraguay going to testify to
>> if if that's the board and your preference? >> He's here. He'd like him to do that. >> Yeah, I would like him to put it on the record, but that's going to be approaching the county >> because if it's a small number which I believe it is it makes a very good argument to allow it especially since
historically acne to give you an idea the acme evening peak hour based on projections and site this site has about depending which table you That means a significant drop in the
what could >> and there were no restrictions. I mean that was >> a freeforall there. You could go out either the west I'm sorry the east or the west exit off of East Hanover Avenue
and go whatever way you wanted or not if the traffic didn't allow you to. So this is a great improvement in my opinion. >> I think a very forceful argument that can be made with the county,
you know, and also with the idea that supports looking into it based on past history. >> Mr. I'm sorry, Mr. An. >> Sure. >> Anyone else for Can I just say one other
thing though? Everything's based on today, right? all all your ins and out and how many cars are the amount of volume. I mean, Rivian's going to want to grow. I think that's what their business wants to do. So, who's to say in three or four
years from now? That's not a huge facility and we got a lot of cars coming in and out. Shouldn't we be concerned about the future, too? >> I think and if Mr. Perway is coming up, he'll he'll testify. But the the traffic numbers that he's quoting are for a
fully occupied facility. I know that there was some discussion at the last hearing from Miss Brandy about some of the kind of opening the doors uh and that gets into the parking conversation, number of parking stalls that would be used when they open the doors. Um but when Mr. Paraguay does his traffic
analysis, he's looking at full buildout. Well, yeah. Mr. Ry, let's go back to the profession. Mr. Ryan, do you have any questions for this witness? >> I do. >> Are you done with your testimony? >> Uh, that's the introduction of the civil changes. Yes. I'll get to the planning,
I think, when we're >> Okay. So, uh, last, uh, the the last hearing asked about the, uh, if it was possible for for some of the site lighting to be dimmed overnight, uh, for security, just down to security levels. And you said you would come back with an
answer on that. I'm just trying to address that response. But I think what I what I testified at the last hearing was and we did we did look at the lighting. Um we have really looked at the the minimum the half of
candle requirements that the burrow requires throughout the the site. Um so to dim it beyond that um it would be uh would go against safety protocol. >> Well, I'm talking about after business out overnight. You said you want to leave the full
>> we're going to leave the we're going to turn the signs off. The site lighting >> I'm talking about the site lighting >> the site lighting will will stay at safety protocol throughout the night. >> What does that mean safety protocol? as designed. >> So full lighting on the site. >> That's correct.
>> Even though there's no traffic through the site or no no customers, nobody moving through that. >> That was how we Yes. Correct. >> And the question was and you still haven't answered it. Can you reduce it for overnight? So the you know the neighbors were discussing lighting intrusion into their homes. Why do you
need the full sight light all night long when the business is not in operation? >> So what Mr. your testimate at the last hearing. This lighting design complies with the code lighting levels. Correct. >> We we have some waiverss uh for light
levels. Um >> that's sometimes the speed >> that that has to do with um correct that has to do with >> that's not near the east >> the property line here. That also has to do with the fact that we have uh less
lighting uh than less than uh half a foot candle in the the called the southwest corner east handover but the illumination levels are consistent with the ordinance. We're not talking if the ordinance wants the site lighted when it's in use. When
people when there's customers, when there's vehicles moving through it, when there's pedestrians on the site, there's no activity on the site. There's no requirement for it to be lit at all. Many, as many businesses do, they shut their lights completely off. Maybe a few security. That's what I'm asking you.
Why do you need full level of lighting when the site's not in use? >> I guess I'll We're looking at about a half a foot candle average illumination, right? So, which is >> for nobody there. >> I'm sorry.
>> For nobody there, >> which is not not a high level of illumination. Um, and we have uh for safety and security for surveillance cameras to work, you need some level of illumination there. So, typically a facility like this would leave the
lights on overnight. >> Okay. Thank you. I'll ask the board to consider that when they deliberate the conditions. >> I um I'm not I'm not certainly not testify. I believe that neighbor was satisfied with the the kind of lighting it was. It was downdrop lighting instead
of the um spread out whatever you want to call it. >> That's correct. We're replacing the sort of a cobra light with the downward focused LED light. We're also supplementing uh the vegetative cover on all three street frontages uh to significantly screen and shield uh that lighting from spilling over the
property. >> Did he talk to you at the end or during the meeting? Do you remember? And >> I mean I certainly I can't testify on his behalf, but my impression was that um and if he was here, he could speak, but I you know I did not get the impression that there were any concerns
uh remaining. I think that what we're doing are positive uh impacts relative uh to his view. U most specifically the conversation revolved around the the ID sign in the building which we're not going to eliminate >> at all.
>> Correct. >> It's never going to be eliminated >> on the building. >> Okay. >> On east handover on speed wall. >> Sorry, say that again. >> The the sign on Speed Well will be eliminated. The one on East Handover because it faces a residential use will not be eliminated
>> at all. Not not even their business. >> Correct. >> Okay. The other thing from the prior meeting was I asked for the rendering of the building colors color schemes and that was submitted. I'm satisfied. I'm that we have a specific building look
and I just wanted to for the record and any any approval that that be part of the approval. That's the building and the color scheme they're going to use. If the board is satisfied with I think it's I think it's looks fine. >> I think it's it's crisp. It's clear.
>> This this is what we want. This is what we're would be approved. Okay. I'd like to go through um some items in your uh January 8th response to the various comments we had. Excuse me.
So starting with uh with item 12 and item I had I had asked about performance standards and you submitted I believe dynamic submitted not you specifically
submitted a performance standard compliance statement and the only question I have in there is on the on the air pollution. talk about no substance shall be uh emitted into the atmosphere in quantities which are
injurious to humans etc. And this the response is no substances are proposed to be emitted into the atmosphere in quantities which are injurious to humanity. Can you can you elaborate on that? Is it what does that mean? There you have none of those particular
>> materials or that the they there are but they're below some certain level. You got to quantify that a little bit. Well, the the New Jersey Air Pollution Control Act cited uh NGC 727, 727A, and 727B
have specific requirements for uh for air pollution. Anything that's happening on this site will not uh rise to the level uh of exceeding those standards >> based on what? What are the numbers? What are the standards? >> I don't have them. Okay. So, how do you
compare if you don't have the numbers? I need to know what you're doing versus versus the number. So, you can follow up with that for us, please. >> We we can provide more detail. >> That's the only comment I have on on the uh on the performance stand. Uh next
item is soil disturbance. I asked you about about that last time and you said you would come back with more detail as to amount of soil either imported or or removed from the site. and the quantities of that.
The reason being that this site plan is is incorporating the soil disturbance permit if you will. It's not it's not a separate permit but the issues that would go under a soil disturbance need to be addressed here and the main ones
are how much soil is either coming in going off or and what that material is that's coming in. So again, >> do you have a breakdown? >> So the we can provide it as part of
resolution a number, but I I thought there were numbers provided. So the entire parking lot is going to be a mill and overlay. The only thing that's going to happen is going to remove pavement uh in this shaded area here uh and replace that with top soil and soil. So we're
talking about uh you know, so the threshold is for any of these discussions is really 200 yards. So if you're below 200 yards, I'm going to ask you to just give me a statement to that effect qualify. >> We'll qualify. Don't be less than 200 yards.
>> Okay, good. That's that that resolves those issues once once you provide that. Um the next item has to do with the trash enclosure. We ask that it be brought up to conformance with the board standards for for a brick enclosure. Now on your site plan, it says brick veneer,
but on the detail there's no brick veneer shown. So they have to be that has to be just >> we will revise the details >> to to conform with each with no detail.
Okay. The other the other comment was uh the uh the fire department asked for hydrant on Speedwell and a hydrant on Hanover. >> Correct. >> And your plan shows only one hydrant on handover. And you stated here that you
didn't want to put the one on Speed Well because you would have to deal with the DOT for a and we did not uh given the setback of the building, we didn't know if that provided uh significant value to add
that. Um I think that we will we're waiting for feedback from the fire official on this resubmission. >> Ultimately, we'll satisfy his request. >> Okay. I don't know that he he's got this re resubmission or not, but we definitely need to get additional feedback from
from the fire department as to whether I mean I don't have an opinion one way or the other. That's for him to decide but ultimately we'll satisfy his request. >> Okay. And then uh
the last thing I believe is the this Rivian Paris undated >> Rivian >> waste and hazardous materials management. Again, the only thing that it comes down
to I'm satisfied they have they seem to have a nice safety program and and on site equipment etc. But the under the management overview it talks about Rivian expects to generate a very small quantity of hazards materials
below some some state definition of a very small generator. Is there a way to elaborate on that a little bit? What is very small? What is what's a small quantity? Well, we you know I I don't know what a small quantity is that is that 100 gallons or
is it one gall? >> We provided you with that. >> I didn't get that list. >> Sorry, I didn't get that list. >> Okay. Well, I emailed it to you, but we can I can give it to you again. It gives you all the quantities of all the different materials I can supply. >> All right. If you can get that to me,
I'll take a look at that. All I have is >> Thank you. I just have a couple clarifying questions. Um, so just just so I am straight with the wall signs, the one facing east handover is not lighted. >> Correct.
>> Okay. But the one facing SK well is and both monument signs are internally eliminated. >> That's correct. >> Okay. And then can you just go over again with the lighting poles? I know you're still seeking a waiver for the height, right? So you're not proposing to lower them to
the 15 ft, >> correct? >> And what are they existing? Do you know? >> We didn't do an exact measurement by eye. They're probably 20 to 25 ft. >> Okay. So they're non-conforming. >> Non-conforming today. Yes.
>> Okay. Those are my questions. >> Board members. What was the fence between that lot and the laundromat? Is that the laundromat? >> I'm not sure. Uh, it appears from survey
as though it's right on the property. >> The reason I asked is there's an opening there, which made sense when there's a grocery store there, but I went by there tonight and the laundromat's just booming with people right now. And what they used to do is park in those spots,
right? which probably isn't ideal once that's a lot. And it strikes me that if that opening in the gate went away, there'd be a disincentive to park there. So, just a suggestion. The only other suggestion I had was on the landscape
again. It'd be really nice if some of the perennials came in from say April to early June before the rudabekia came in. So, there's color there all the time. Other than that, I thought they upgraded. That's that's over my head. I'll pass
that on though to our landscape architects. Sounds ideal. As far as the fence goes, um we'll certainly look at that and and open. >> We'll contact the neighbor to see if we can work with them before.
>> No questions for me right now. >> I think I spoke my my question. >> Okay. >> Do we do we know parking spots are back there on that street though. I mean, are they right there? >> Yeah, they're pretty close to it. They
can't be more than 50 ft from the intersection or the stop sign, I think. So, I would say >> and there's signage up there. um two things. One is when you're talking about hazardous waste, and this was on the waste and hazardous materials
management. We talked about it in your testimony last time. The only two hazardous waste that were mentioned was coolant and brake fluid. Is that still the case or is there on that big long list of things?
There's a lot more. I mean, windshield wiper fluid, which I believe that Brandy spoke to, coolants, brake fluid. I'm just trying to look on this. And I have new glasses in this. That's
why Bill didn't see anything. >> By the way, Mrs. Parrot, did you submit that to the board secretary as well? >> You said you emailed it to me. >> Every all everyone was on the >> I I did. I'm sorry. Did you get it? >> I'll I'm double checking. >> Yeah.
>> Um but in any event, yeah, I can circulate it to you. I mean, I can have it circulated. There's a number of items consistent with Miss Bry's testimony that these are items that are in any service center. Frankly, less than what's found in most service centers,
but you know, glass cleaner. Um, I see glass, I see brake fluid, um, some of these words I I can't pronounce. They're transmission fluid was one of the items,
but yeah. Yeah, similar to what's, you know, there's nothing That's inconsistent, I would say, with Miss Brandy's testimony. These are all similar fluids. I think her testim that these are lesser quantities than you find in a non-electric vehicle service center.
>> The reason I'm asking because on page two of the documentation, it says only RC trained personnel shall move or handle hazardous waste. >> The reason I'm asking is, is there always someone on site that can handle hazardous waste? And I was just trying
to figure out like is it, you know, really bad hazardous waste and if there's no one else. >> Great question. Yeah. You just joged my memory to Miss Ry's testimony was that the staff is trained and that's the purpose of the SOP. The confusion is that they have a separate vendor that
comes in and picks it up and removes it. But to your point, the people that are trained to work in the service that are all trained to to handle that. That's part of the SO. >> Perfect. Okay. Thank you. >> You're welcome. And then the second question, your head was right in the
middle of that diagram, so I couldn't see it. Could you I feel like I'm stuck on this question, but can you point out where that entrance exit that you're proposing that gets closed is on that diagram?
>> Sure. So, right here is where it is. So, it would line up with the front of the building uh where it does today and comes right out to East Handover. That's what's being closed. >> Okay. So on that diagram, because I really can't see it from here, are you proposing that that landscaping goes
across it now? >> That's correct. >> That's correct. >> Landscaping goes all the way across one new street tree to fill in the cadence. Okay. Where the driveway used to be. >> So that's a big deterrent. But the other thought I had in my head, and you guys, this might not make any sense, but you're going to county to talk to them
about a bunch of stuff. Presumably, that curb cut out is still there. on the street, right? >> That's further up. That's >> it's not it doesn't line up >> our curve. >> No, there's another
there. The existing one. >> The existing one. So, we're going to replace that with full height curve all the way across. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much for your testimony today. Uh I uh with the the traffic plan that
you showed, you showed the carrier plan. I I think before it was mentioned there there's three additional planes >> for traffic though. Do you mind do do you have those? >> We haven't lo for my benefit and the benefit of the public. I like to see what those are.
>> They are all part of the plans. I'll just flip the board over. >> Uh Rob, this is a eight. Which one is that? >> So A8 is uh the delivery vehicle again with today's date of January 19th, but
it is from the plan set of January 7th. What that shows is a delivery vehicle like a box truck type vehicle that would uh be able to make a right turn in off of East Handover, a turn back into the loading area and then pull out making a right turn all within the two lanes, the
first two lane of East Handover. >> Okay. 89 >> 89 will be the refuge vehicle again 119 2026 from the plans of January
7th that shows the refuge vehicle uh making a right turn in off east handover coming across the front of the building to the traction closure front load and then exiting out with a right turn on to Speedball Avenue. And the final A104 would be A10.
And this is a uh fire truck. Again, today's date 119 2026 from the plans of January 7th. Shows a fire truck able to make the right turn in and circulate and ultimately make a right
turn out on the speed well. Um this was part of the plan set. I believe it would be circulated to the fire department. Um, and there would be uh we don't anticipate any issues with this one. >> Okay. So, with this one in particular, this is the first time that um you're
introducing this the fire uh vehicle or was it was it introduced? >> It was in the it was in the plan set, the revised plan set. >> First time it's been >> So, it's the first time. Okay. >> So, I'd be I'd be curious to see if they have any um input on reaching the back
of that. um building by Buckley Way, right? Because you don't >> stage on Buckley Way and >> Right. But I understand what you're saying. I'm just curious to see if they have any they have any feedback on that um to to be able to uh to reach the
building for Bley Way just with the apparatus they currently have. So, it's more of a comment. It's not a question. Um the uh >> I will say there's overhead wires there. be unlikely that you would do any staging on Buffy Way to
>> Okay. So then they would need to access the back of that building directly from the the driveway there, right? So in other words, they they turn in from handover and instead of making the left in the parking lot, they go straight back. Is there enough room for them to do that?
>> I don't know what their protocol is today for responding. If that happened tonight, I don't know what they would do. >> Sure. Um, well, we're showing that you can get in, hit two sides of the building, that's dust today, and get out. Ultimately, obviously, the the fire officials will will provide feedback on. >> Okay. But can you answer, is there
enough room for a fire vehicle to get to the the let's say Buckley Way side of the building? >> Uh, the the drive lane here is wide enough to accept a vehicle certainly, then it could back out and exit. >> Okay. All right. Okay. Thank you. Um,
And just to clarify, uh, which I think you did, but just on the lighting, um, so the the I think you called it sight lighting, right? So it's the parking lot lights, right? Um, those you said are during during
business hours. What is the output of those lights during business hours? The average on the site is about a half a foot candle. In the pavement area, it's about 1.4 foot candles. >> Okay. I believe you mentioned earlier
that um or was there a comment earlier about uh changing that light level at night? stay as is. >> Rivia's preference from an operational standpoint with the vehicle inventory
here is to keep the uh lighting at the levels that are proposed which are generally around the minimum uh industry standard for a facility like this. We did supplement the perimeter landscaping to provide some screening and shielding from the rightway and from the residents. Um ultimately obviously we'll listen to the board feedback but that's
our our preference is to not adjust the lighting the over. >> Okay. So it stay at roughly half a foot candle throughout 24 hours. Okay. And then I believe uh the December um
meeting you I believe you stated that it would uh give off a about 3,000 Kelvin yellowish hue. Is that correct? >> The design Yeah. The design is 3,000 Kelvin. Correct. >> Okay. And that so that yellowish hue that's that's still LED.
>> It's Yes. >> Okay. But it's not as jarring to to the eye at night, >> right? Yeah, that's in fact I don't remember if that was response to some one of the comments or our design, but that's been a a comment a lot lately is to, you know, originally the LEDs were a
very bright intense light. Um, I've seen across the board more and more of our applications, we've been designing them to 30,000 Kelvin, which is a much more comfortable >> and do we know just to out of curiosity, right? If if If we wanted those lights
to be dimmed, is that possible with those types of fixtures? In other words, like I know like some and I'll just use residential lighting for example, right? Depending on the ballast that you have in the light, you can get a divable ballast or nonable ballast, right? It allows you to dim the light or not, right? So the question is
do lights like that, do they have the ability to have a type of ballast attached to it per se that would allow it to dim if we wanted it to be able to? There are components that can do that. Yes. >> If we I don't know that we could decide
next year to go back and make them dimable if they're not installed that way. I think you'd have to get the the components going in. But yes, there are components that allow. >> So, I mean, it would it would seem to me that it would be pretty reasonable to put those components in day one if we
wanted to be able to to demo it at some point in the future because we find that that half a foot candle, although paper sounds great, but to the residents it's actually not good. Gives us the ability to dim those down or turn them off without having to change out the
fixture. So, I think my request is is that, you know, we could look into changing the components out to make them dimable day one. Um, and then we can go with the recommended light levels and then if we have an issue in the future, we could uh we could address it with the
components that already installed. So, that' be my recommendation. Um, and then the last thing I I questioned the last meeting had to do with the uh the landscaping. I know that you made some some improvements to landscaping is there. I did question the
amount of parking spaces that are there. I didn't I didn't see the need for I think you said it was now down to 164 sorry yeah 163 spaces. Um I I I still don't understand the need for that many for a service center that only has you
know to 35 people working there. Um, plus it's not a dealership. Um, so I I just don't quite understand that many spaces. Um, but that aside, um, you know, I did question the, uh, or ask about the opportunity to add some green
space. Um there yes I understand he did a lot with trees but again as the entrance to the burrow of Morris Plains um it would be great if there were there was some sort of a you know green space park something something that's there that uh would make it a little bit more pleasing to the eye than than what's
been there and I get yes it's been a supermarket it's been a parking lot but just because it was done that way in the past doesn't mean that's what it needs to be in the future. So, um, my request, uh, last time, was that looked into at all or >> you just used the word park. I don't
know if a park is really something. >> You're right. I didn't say park. I say green space, right? But I think the request was to go back to the building owner to see if they would be amendable to doing some sort of a green space other than what's been proposed. So what we did is we went back, we
looked um at satisfying the 10-ft step back and getting the the vegetation, landscaping and green space along the frontage. Um we also went back and and um you know revisited what Rivian needs. I think some of the as I mentioned some of the numbers that Miss Brandy stated uh were
sort of the out of the gate uh parking demand numbers. I was involved in their application uh in Avenel and Woodbridge. That was a little bit larger building at 42,000 square feet, but it had 188 spaces. So, but as far as a typical Rivian, we're really right where they
want to be as far as and that's really why they looked at this site is the size of the building, the the capacity of parking is what Rivian uh targets and needs for their planned growth. They want to be a a successful um uh part of the community here. And to
do that, they need to be able to not just have the the I think it was 75 to to 80 or so kind of spaces out of the gate, but to be able to grow into uh what what they expect to be able to do. As as Brandy said, they have new vehicles uh launching soon. Um as more
and more customers uh are from this area, this region, they'll it'll grow. So as many businesses start with you know an initial demand and then it grows as the business grows. So um long way around that this is similar to
what we have done elsewhere and this is what the really the the driving uh factor is for them picking sites. I think >> I think just to clarify the point about what's done elsewhere I think last time I asked uh the locations of the other Caribbean service centers they were in
more urban areas there. I believe the testimony last time was that there was no service center that was in um a suburban area like like Morris Point, right? This would be the first one. >> Just just want to clarify, Miss Brandon mentioned the Avenel Woodbridge one abut
residences, >> right? But it's also on route one, >> correct? Behind it are all according to his brand is all residential. That was her testimony, >> right? But their their route one is considerably different than handover and
speed well, right? So you have a much higher traffic volume than you would here. Um and I understand the point that you know was a budding residential. Um but there's there's hasn't been one that's right in the middle residential. Anyway, just it's just my opinion. So I guess the the answer to the question is
is that outside of uh doing what you proposed here, there there's not been any uh conversation about additional green space. Correct. >> Correct. it it goes to a balance with what Rivian needs in the site that they're going to occupy and um and as
far as the landlord for again if this were to become something else if this were to to go back to a grocery or something like that this is a a three plus acre site on a a primary corner here that you know that's how it's uh zoned uh and considered. So that's what
what this proposal is. >> Sure. And and I I just one last point here I I I think uh Miss Brandy didn't she did say that uh you know for plain expansion right but I don't think I was ever really clear on what that what that means um in terms of what sort of
expansion what sort of what sort of things uh does Rivian envision needing 167 parking spots for I don't think I was ever really clear on that point >> I think as Mr. Fruit said and Miss Brandy says well they're you know launching new new models I mean as a new model comes online they expect to have
the capab service more vehicles and this is you know to plan for the future so there is no according to Miss Bry's testimony negative impacts if they didn't have enough parking so I think that launching new new vehicle lines and based on you know real data from real
sites as Mr. testified this is consistent with what they need uh to meet that growing demand if new models are launched. >> Okay. >> The size of the building has a number of service bays in it. So that and and they're the experts. They know what the
the cadence is for servicing vehicles based upon the number of bays that are there. And those bays then equate to uh an ideal amount of preferred amount parking uh within that facility to handle the base uh and the turnover that can happen there. And as we said the
traffic study was based upon full build out which is still a significantly lower amount of traffic uh than was there when it was acne or that could be there with the reoccupancy. So, it's a very low traffic generator, but for for them to invest in this size building with that number of bays, they probably expect
that they'll have that many cars uh through the site at any given time. >> And what is that number of bays? Do you >> I don't want to miss >> eight days. >> It's eight days. >> Okay. >> All inside the building. That's across the That's across the back of the back
of the building inside. >> I'm sorry. >> It's across the back of the building on the >> generally across the back. Yeah. >> How come it looks like there's there's spots on each side of the building side and then the other side where there's two vehicles and then two vehicles.
>> So the the entrance to the So, the floor plans, these were these are part of the package. These were presented at the last hearing. I don't know if they need to be another exhibit. Um but just for the board I want to make sure the orientation of the
architectural floor plan is the same as the orientation uh of the site. So the bottom of the page uh is where East would be the left side of the page where Speed Well would be. This is the side of building facing Speed Well. So you have an entrance on the northwest corner of
the building comes in. Cars will circulate around and they can come out uh again back towards uh speed well and the bays are generally yes on the back half of the building if you will. >> Yeah, it's a it's a total of eight bays
>> and there's no service being done on the handover side and the Rose Arbor side would be >> there's no service being done outside the building. >> No, no, no. Inside the building. I'm just using as an example as to location north and south. >> It was a car. >> I'd have to I'd have to defer to the
architect. >> One of the planes it shows a vehicle two vehicles on the north and two >> I I understand but I'm not the architect so I can't say what's happening in that graphic >> one one says wash bay I don't know what these two a car wash.
>> Yeah. really just So it is a total of eight. Is that correct? >> Total of eight bases, right? So then just again, sorry, back to the point, right? 163 parking spaces for future
expansion. Presumably, they're not going to expand the building, right? So they're only going to ever have a max of eight cars there at one time. So again, I just I fail to see the need for that many parking spaces regardless of what the expansion plan is. And I'll state it again that I see it's a great opportunity for Rivian to come in to be
able to provide a green space a much needed green space at the entrance of Mars Point. So um that's all the questions I have. >> I would want to clarify it wouldn't be eight cars at one time on site. You said there's eight bays. There wouldn't just be eight cars. If anybody's had a car service, you know, you're going to
stage, you're going to wait for the that car will wait for it time in. So that's part of the purpose of the parking lot. >> Sure. I I understand that. And um I understand that there you know you have cars queue and I take my car to get serviced all the time right there's more cars queue in there than are actually
based right but I find it hard to believe there'd be 167 um in that location so >> but it's not a it's not a dealership it's a service that's all the question
I have no questions. >> I I have a couple questions. Honestly, I think they're easy answers. So, number six on the response. There's a dead tree along the northern property line which should be removed. You said you're going to remove it, but I think we agreed and it's in the minutes. You're going to not
only remove it, you're going to replace it. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, I have no problem with60. Wouldn't it be wonderful if Rivian did? Whoa. I think that would be a wonderful thing
for the B. How long do you think it takes to service a vehicle? Can anybody answer that? Half hour, an hour, two hours. >> I can't. >> No, nobody. Normally, let's let's say what? An hour? Let's say an hour and a
half. You drop off your car. Maybe you're waiting, right? What do you do in in in this service center? I mean, is it possible if I drop my car off there that I might walk up the street and go to the pizzeria or
Dunkin' Donuts or the diner? >> No. >> I think this will be great for the Burrow of Mars Plains as far as getting people to use our other services and our other uh vendors here.
I mean, it's possible they may not want to sit there in the uh in the lounge, right? Maybe go get a cup of coffee at Duncan or Yeah, you think that's possible? >> I do. >> Good. I do too. I think that would be
great. That's all I have. >> If I could just follow up on a couple things in my report. >> Um, comment number D2 uh the no left turn prohibition by the county to make the left eastbound on
hand over into the site access drive that's not permitted u I did miss it but I didn't see on the site plan no left turn sign that you just got to add to the plan and the other thing we've got this issue of
wanting the left turn out of the east access drive but right as the plan stands as my comment said that for the right out arrow that's shown there now which hopefully we're going to get changed that there should be an only
painted behind it. So those are the two things I had. And then the last thing is really to the board based on the discussion before about the applicant going to the county and stressing various points that are brought up. Certainly the one and I I without
hearing from everybody that to allow the left out acne had it before with far more traffic which is an argument they can make. It was there for tens of years. Um that the board supports uh the left out and not connecting to the
public. So I heard from a few members I just want to be sure if they strongly make that representation that the board supports them. You don't come back and find out 50% didn't 50% didn't. Well, it's it's only for them for making their
argument supporting their argument. That's a very important piece of some direction should be given to them on that >> feel that >> based on what I heard is that >> I just didn't want to
sense >> Mr. Just just a question on your left turn, no left turn sign as you're um sitting on handover. Where does that sign go? It
probably be two. One would be if you're going eastbound on Hanover and you come to the intersection, you probably have looking on the far left corner on the Bley Way, you probably have a sign. I'm going eastbound
here's the intersection coming out and on that far left side the intersection you have a sign facing you and you probably have one on the curve line the second one on the right side over you have one here you have one there but
obviously it would be up to the county what they would approve I have one question remaining on my list. It has to do with the storage of hazardous materials and waste. So on here it says containers shall
always be closed during storage except when waste is being added or removed. They're third party hauler. Do they take that container, that full container, and give you a new one or do they empty that container and leave it? >> That's a great question. I don't
got into that level of detail. But >> how about if I I get that answer for you while Mr. Paragu talking? >> Yeah. Yeah. Because we talking safety, right? So they're emptying that container into whatever it is they brought
probably not a concern protocol. >> I guess okay. Um at this I'd like to ask the public to come up if they have any questions of this witness, this testimony.
No. Okay. Okay. Um I'd like to call Craig Paraguay. Craig is the traffic engineer on this application. He's been, you know, communicating with Mr. Maltz. Um he has not testified yet on this
application. So we'll need to swear him in and qualify. >> Please remain standing. Raise your right hand. State your name as Craig Parag. >> You swear affirm the testimony you do this evening before this board. The truth the whole truth.
>> Yes. >> Craig for the benefit of the board public education area and the license. >> Uh sure. I have a bachelor's degree in civil engineering from Virginia Tech. I'm a licensed professional engineer in New Jersey. I testified all the time and
very very very long nights in front of this board about a year ago. License is still current and good stand. >> Chairman, I would offer Mr. Paraguay as an expert civil engineer specializing in traffic engineering. >> Yes, we're okay with his credentials.
>> Thank you, >> Mr. Harbaugh. You heard the the back and forth on the traffic. Mr. Maltz issued two reports. I know you with him in connection with his application. You've worked with the DOT, you've worked with the county. Um, can you uh provide some
additional information regarding the questions you heard this evening on the left turn out onto East Handover, the expected turning movements uh for Rivian at that driveway. >> Yeah. And and I listening to all everything that the board's been saying with Mr. Mo saying, we're all on the
same page here. We all agree that punching a driveway through the buckling way doesn't make any sense to take away that parking only to make the left turn 50 ft farther down the road. So I think with the support of the board and I'm glad Mr. Boltz asked for that sort of discussion because I think that goes a long way with the county. You already
see in their review letter there have a little bit difference to the board. So I think it will help if it comes from us and from you that hey we want to keep that left turn out um as it is. In terms of quantifying the uh number the volume of traffic, it it sort of depends on where people who have Rivians live.
Really the only residential area that would be inconvenience by not being able to make the left out see the holes in that sort of area. Otherwise, you can go up to 10 to get to 387. But I happen to have uh our firm at some point had done ATR uh automatic traffic counter tubes.
you know, you put the tube on the road, it gets you to 24-hour volumes on all four legs of the East 10 speed intersection. We're probably looking at somebody, some other applicant that may have wanted to go in here. So, I dug that up and I can take a look at the outbound volume that would that's going
east on East Handover as a comparison of every all the other volume and assuming prevailing traffic pattern is applied to this about 28% of the traffic heads eastbound as they leave that intersection. So if you apply that to the number of vehicles leaving here, it
gives you five in the morning peak hour. Only five cars might want to make a left, 11 in the weekday evening peak hour and 13 on a Saturday. So very small numbers and as was discussed before that's less than one
car every four minutes. If you do that same math for when this was a supermarket, it's nearly 60 that would want to go that direction. So, I think that argument, that case, and I think it was also pointing out, you know, giving that other frame of reference to to go back to the I think that's going to go a
long way. I mean, to to to punch a new driveway, create another headache in a different part of town. Only for five or so cars, five to 10 cars at most, come that would want to make a left out of there, I don't think makes any sense. And, uh, you know, that's a pretty good
basis for the numbers, but as I mentioned, it really is going to depend on where people So if a lot of people live in Sen have ribbons, maybe it'll be higher, but I doubt I doubt that. I think more people are going to be coming from a farther distance for this location because of the specialized nature.
>> Thank you. I think that covers what but you know we don't know anymore. That's what I was looking for. Do you have anything in the way of like figure >> I have a little
sketch if you want to take a look. >> No. >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, it's just >> Craig, let me introduce that as an exhibit. >> Yeah. Explain. >> Yeah. What's What's on A1? >> It's the I mentioned that we had done
the the traffic counting tubes. the volume. We make a figure for whoever we did those for that show the volumes and I just circled the outbound volumes and typed in the math how I got to the 28%. >> So that's a depiction of the ATPR results. >> Yes.
>> Could you uh send a copy? >> Yeah, sure. M Mr. Maltz, are you you're good? >> I'm fine. >> Mr. Ry, >> should do you have a date of when you did the when your firm this study
>> the counts they were they were from 2018 and as you know we had much more recent counts on speed well and I matched up the numbers going in and out of speed well pretty close it hasn't chang >> so what those numbers reflect when acne was still a supermarket >> if it was in 2018 no I don't think so
because why would somebody looking at this site to develop if it was still open >> wasn't >> I think it closed >> all But the goal is to get the percentages,
not necessarily the actual volumes. >> I just I just have a question. It's not necessarily related, but um did do you in the work that you did for this application, did you consider what was done a year
ago? considered in that >> what do you mean other the other >> the one you refer to? >> Oh, I mean in this case we're looking at the delta between what was there and what could you know like you said or somebody could go back in here Trader Joe's and generate a lot more traffic
permitted other permitted retail uses would generate a lot more. So this is a big improvement from a traffic perspective. So there's >> correct. So maybe I'm not following I'm sorry. So the other
McDonald's that now is proposed to go in the work the traffic work that you did for Rivian. Did you include what was done for McDonald's in >> No, I one's not related to the other. If
I if I were doing capacity analyses and things then yes I would. But in this case it's hey you got a site that generates this is permitted to generate this. We're coming in with something. >> Okay. Yeah. I just want I want to be clear. >> And I wouldn't have changed those percentages. >> Okay.
>> Thank you. >> Uh does the public have any questions for us? >> I have a question. >> I'll just stand too quick. Joan Dugan 31 cancel. I just want to know how can you use traffic information from 2018 with
all the building that's gone on between that time and now. That's a long time ago. There's condos, you know, all kinds of building all over this area. I don't think that's a a reasonable time frame. >> That's it. Cy, go ahead.
>> Sure. We we use that information. Mr. Maltz asked for an idea of how many people might want to make a left out. So the the percentage distribution of that traffic was the best basis I had to make that estimation. That was it. >> It wasn't used for any analysis or anything. It was to create >> You're not trying to use that
information to demonstrate volumes on the roadways. >> No, you're talking about that's the it's it's I was using that information to establish a percentage of traffic volume. Who who leaves that intersection? How what percent goes east, west, and south? Because that would dictate how many people might want
to make I still don't think that's a good number. Anyone else? >> Okay. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. We we're going to recall Mr. Fruit uh to
provide some planning testimony. There are only a few variances in design waiverss remaining I believe. Oh, before I do that, chairman, I wanted to get you your response to your question. The waste vendor takes the
container as is, closed container as is. There's no transfer and brings and replaces the fresh container. So, there's no there's no transfer from one to the other. Mr. fruit. Uh you are a licensed professional planner. You were qualified
on December 8th as such. Correct. >> Uh yes. >> Can you for the board and the public run through the remaining relief that's requested as part of the preliminary final major site plan application throughout the course of these proceedings? Uh your firm has worked
diligently to eliminate as many requests as possible. Can you just summarize where we are as far as which relief is still needed and address that from a planning perspective? >> Uh certainly. Um and I'll break it down into a couple key categories. Uh there
are three bulk variances uh that exist today that will remain that have not been eliminated. Uh there are variances related to the freestanding building mounted signs and then there are several waiverss that are being requested. Um so collectively we look at that um either
as as if it's a variance we look at positive negative criteria or we look at it as a hardship variance. Um but taking a step back uh we've talked about this throughout the course of of both uh evenings that we've been here. This is a
pretty unique project. Uh it's it's centered around adaptive reuse of the existing building. Uh but it's able to provide a significant reduction in traffic. So, I think there's a a really uh strong uh positive aspect of this application just by by virtue of the use that's going in here. We're taking a
sound structure, reusing it, rehabilitating it, uh giving it a fresh look, um slightly reducing the impervious coverage, improving the circulation, improving the landscaping. Um so, it's really a good um adaptive reuse and redevelopment here. Um it's
certainly unique piece of property. Uh we have uh uniquely three frontages. Um it's not often you have three frontages, one state, one county, one local. Um we have access, as you know, to two of those. Um we're reducing the total access. So that makes it uh relatively
uh again unique from a frontage standpoint. That also creates some challenges when you're looking at some of the variances that exist today or some of the waiverss that we're asking for uh that are related to the front yard. So to quickly run through uh the bulk
variances again I there are three that are remaining. We did eliminate uh variances for front yard setback of parking to both east handover and speed well uh through the course of this application. Talked about that significantly. The ones that remain
there is a uh minor uh sideyard parking setback uh of 9.6 six feet uh that exists today. Uh that's adjacent to a lot to the north. Uh loading uh is is not allowed in the uh or should be in
the side or rear yard. Therefore, it's not allowed in the front yard. We have three frontages. Our building uh abuts uh are one non uh rightaway frontage. So that makes it practically uh difficult uh to uh comply with that ordinance. and
that's an existing condition um on the east side of the property that's going to remain. Uh and finally, we talked briefly about maybe upgrading the fence, but there's a fence that exists uh with lot 1.09 uh that is generally on the property line when it should be a foot off the property line. That's an existing
condition. Uh and we will look to uh fill uh the gap in there with the neighborh working on that. Uh those are the bulk variances, sign variances. Uh again, two two components. One is the freestanding signs. Um we have eliminated again the variances related to height, clearance and vertical
dimension of those signs. So um the the size uh and shape of those signs is now compliant. The variance are related to the number of signs. One is uh permitted in the ordinance. We're seeking permission for two signs. We have two uh distinct per on the state and county highway. Two distinct driveways and
entrance points. Uh and therefore we're seeking uh the the freestanding monument signs on each of those driveways. Uh second is the material uh that'll be a woodlike material. Uh as we note as the detail shows, it's an aluminum side
cabinet. One of the benefits of that is because it's a a darker black cabinet with just the carving out of the letters and logo. The illumination from the inside actually uh presents probably a softer uh uh illumination level than if it were a wood material with enough
light or something on it. So I think there's actually a benefit there. In this case, the material selection. Uh, next are the building mounted signs. We have uh a couple variants associated with building mounted signs. Predominantly uh number of signs. Uh, one wall sign is permitted on each wall
facing the street. Primary signs. We have uh the Rivian sign uh and the logo. Um, but as your planner pointed out, the way this ordinance reads, anything that is uh a graphical representation on the building becomes a sign. So, we have, and I went through them before, we have
the mailbox identifier, the key drop identifier, a no tailgating sign, the service sign, uh, advertisement of surveillance on the property. All those signs are relatively small. They're two square feet, a half a square foot, very small signs, really just intended for,
um, a customer or pedestrian as they're walking up to the building. Not certainly visible uh, from the street. So, I think those number of signs um are certainly unique and not in a an advertising method as you might consider a typical sign.
Uh just for for clarity for the board, it's outlined in the plans, but there's a total of five signs uh facing east handover. Again, none of those will be eliminated. There's a total of 10 signs uh on Speed Well, the predominant sign is the Rivian sign um and the logo. Uh
those will be eliminated. None of the other signs will be eliminated. And finally, there are two of the very small signs um on the east facade uh which are about half a square foot. Uh the maximum sign area is 40 square ft. Uh as we accounted for all of the
individual uhformational signs on the building, uh the west facade or the speed avenue facade becomes 40.39 square feet. So it's a dimminimous um variance in my opinion from the 40 that's allowed. Again the pro um primary uh
riving sign is compliant. It's really the addition of all the the smallerformational signs that creates that variance condition. And uh finally is the maximum sign height where uh one foot uh is allowed. The Rivian signs are two feet high and the Rivian logo is
1.33 feet high. Again these signs are set back significantly from the right of way in order to have the sign u recognition from the street. the letter height um in my opinion uh appropriately should be larger than than one ft. Uh and that's why we have the the two feet
uh proposed here. Uh illumination of signs. We talked about that. Uh the ordinance uh request that lighting signs be indirectly illuminated. Uh only the one uh only the riving sign uh facing uh speed well will be eliminated. We modified the plan to
eliminate illumination on the others. Um, finally is a probably a more minor variance of business or commercial establishment. Uh, as permitted, a permanent window sign painted on the inside of the glass. Um, we have a uh the total area of such sign shall not
exceed 5% of the glass. We do comply with that. Uh, but the Rivian logo graphics proposed on the entry door as 44 uh square feet and that uh requests a variance. That's the extent of the variances. I'll come back and and circle back as to the planning discussion on
those variances. I just want to go through the waiverss uh briefly on here. Um waivers related to lighting. Uh no light uh source shall exceed 15 ft in height. We discussed uh both in December and again a little bit this evening. Existing lights are probably 20 to 25 ft
high. We're proposing um a light that is 20 ft high. So it's probably less than what uh is there today. is also now an LED downward focus fixture. Uh because of the way the parking is laid out, it would require significantly more poles and fixtures to get uh appropriate
illumination levels. Um with a 15 ft high light fixture. Uh next is a minimum of a half foot candle is required anywhere in the parking area. We have um.1 foot candle proposed. Again, that is in the southwest corner of the property or the
remotely used parking spaces. um along uh East Handover Avenue. Finally, light intensity shall not exceed a half foot candle along the property line or put three foot candles along a residential property line. Two instances where that's exceeded um we do
exceed a half foot candle um on our shared property line with lot 1.09 uh which is the laundromat uh commercial to commercial. I don't see much impact there. Um and The second is next uh we exceed 3 foot candles uh next to arbiter
assisted living that is in the northwest corner so closest to Speedway Avenue not immediately adjacent to their building or near their entrance. Um one thing to point out of both of these is our lighting studies and these numbers these values don't account for things like fences landscaping or other things that
might interfere diminish the light levels on site. Um so while the measured levels in the lighting program that we use show the exceedence the actual lighting will be less um in those areas because of the interference provided by uh the landscaping uh defensive.
Uh the final waiver that we're requesting is related to the trash enclosure. Um as I talked about at the beginning uh of the planning discussion and through the civil testimony we have three frontages. the trash enclosure um uh cannot be in the front yard. Uh it is
in this case uh in front of the building towards Speedball Avenue. Um we're moving it there so it is out of the loading area. We are providing it with the brick veneer the capstone providing timing restrictions so that will minimize uh any uh noise impacts related
to the removal of garbage also by putting the brick veneer on it. If you were to look at this from Speedo Avenue, you're over 300 feet away, you will see the excuse me, the side face of the trash enclosure with the building behind it, it will generally blend together uh
and it won't uh be obvious or apparent. So, that's a quick recap of the varian waiverss they're requesting and some of the individual discussions on them. Now, to talk from planning perspective about the bulk variances and waivers. Um again these can be viewed through either C1
hardship because of the the frontages or the existing building or uh C2 which is PL flexible C variance um lens uh where we look at positive and negative criteria specifically uh with three primary focal points. The first is that this is a specific piece of
property. Uh again not to to to go over to to repeat but um this is unique. We've got the three frontages. Uh we've got an existing building that we're uh reusing that certainly creates a specific piece of property that not only provides the basis for the C1 or hardship variance uh for some of these
because of the front yard setbacks but also a foundation for the C2 variance that this is unique piece of property. Um second uh is that the variance is advanced purposes munusable and we'll go through each of those uh briefly and then finally that the var uh the
benefits outweigh the detriments. Um so to go through briefly advancing purpose of municipal land use law to the the bulk variances uh and waiverss um there are several I think that apply here. First is point A which is to provide adequate light air and open space. Um
again this uh is an adaptive reuse and redevelopment application. We're maintaining uh the existing building that's in compliance with the F uh standards in the ordinance. We're also reducing the overall pvious coverage. Uh so we satisfy that from a light air and open space standpoint. the dimminimous
setback variances uh that do remain. However, the overall plan is much improved uh from what exists today. Uh second is purpose H to encourage the location of and design of transportation routes which will promote the free flow of traffic while discouraging location
of such facilities and routes which result in congestion of light. Certainly a lot of the discussion over these two hearings has been about traffic circulation, the intersection and the driveways. Elimination of one of the driveways on east handover significant improvement. The reduction in total
uh trip generation by this use will be a significant improvement um and uh to the uh to not only this site but uh to the intersection and surrounding area. Uh third here is purpose is to promote a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good
civic design and arrangement. Again, the overall improvements to the site significantly improve the aesthetics um along the visible road corridor. Uh we have a few dimminimous waiverss for light level and fence location which I believe are significantly mitigated uh through the
landscape and it's provided not only along Speedwell uh but on East Handover as well. Now to flip um and I'll I can move quickly the sign variances same proofs. uh in this case it's more of a uh the C2
the positive and negative criteria uh for the signs for the same purpose um or same intent of proof here uh again the same same reasons this is unique piece of property uh the advancements of purpose municipal land use law are a little bit different here uh but purpose
A is to encourage mutual action to guide appropriate development of all lands in the state and a manage will promote the public health safety of general welfare with regard to the signs uh the mon signs serve uh promote um health, safety, welfare uh by letting
the visitors know the location of the driveways improves traffic circulation, improves uh flow of traffic um on the on the on the roads and that goes also to purpose H which is to encourage excuse me to encourage the location sign of transportation routes which promote free
pre free flow of traffic. Again, the signs will help promote free free flow of traffic uh by identifying those uh driveway locations uh on on each of the road frontages. Uh and the uh the design intent of those
with the uh internal illumination will be uh less impactful in my opinion uh than a uh than external illuminated sign. And that goes to purpose I which is uh a desirable visual environment. Um the building signage fits with the
aesthetic of the building. Uh the building signage generally complies as far as what is visible from the street. The riving sign, the size uh and the and the letter height of that relative to the setback uh is appropriate. Many of the signs are less than two square feet. And although they are counted uh in our
sign table and the sign calculation, uh they really have minimal impact on uh on the road frontages uh or on the visibility from the road frontages. Uh so with that we look at uh potential negative criteria negative impacts. Um I
believe that any visual impacts uh either from granting of the existing nonconformities uh the waiverss or the sign variances um is mitigated uh by the uh extensive setbacks uh from the street and by the additional landscaping and buffering is provided. Um, with that
based upon all of the discussion we've had and the positive criteria that we described, the lack of significant negative uh impacts, it's my opinion that there's no substantial judgment to the public are granted and that granting the variances will not substant substantially impair
the intent and purpose of the zone. In all, again, this is a uh adaptive reuse, redevelop, rehabilitation of a building and a property uh that will put it back into to utility in town, hopefully generating productive use uh and use of
neighboring uses and and other uh activity within the town uh with a much lower traffic generator. >> Thank you, Chairman. I have nothing further for questions. >> Uh I don't have any questions. Mr. F
>> not Floyd. Um Mr. um correctly uh identified the criteria of the planning proofs that needed to be addressed. the most of the bulk variances are related to signage and he provided testimony indicating that
because of the three essentially three front yards um and the need to have sort of identification signage particularly on both handover and speed well um that you have you need these sort of multiple
uh wall signs and monument signs. Um additionally the um You know, there are all of these sort of other wall signs like key drop, you know, just really like whatever these small little signs that get added.
They're that frontage where there are 10 wall signs um which is on Speed Well, it's set back 300 ft from Speed Well, they're all very small and cumulatively they actually are are just over I think you said 40.39 square feet. You're
permitted 40 square feet. Even with all that signage, there's still just about what is permitted. So I don't have anything else. >> Mr. R questions, >> Mr. Moss.
>> Okay. Board members. >> Sorry. So, uh, you went through that very quickly, but I appreciate it. Um, you did just on the the signage. Uh, I just want to make sure I got my my information correct here. You said there's five that are east facing.
>> Say it again. >> Sorry. You said as far as the wall signage facing the street, right? You said there were five that are facing east. >> Correct. >> There were 10 facing speed wall. >> Correct. >> And then you said there were two facing
Bley. Is that right? Okay. And that's it. There's nothing on the I'll say the North side. >> The north facade, correct? >> There's nothing up there, correct? >> Okay. And the two that are facing Buckley, what are those? >> I believe they are like surveillance and
no tailgating. They're about >> Okay. They're small. Very small size. >> Very small. Just a fix to the wall. Okay. >> Okay. That's it. Thank you. Okay. public have any questions for this witness?
>> Thank you. >> Chairman, that concludes our presentation. >> Any closing statements? >> I I can I'll reserve if you'd want to open up for public comment. I'm not sure anyone has any >> There were I'll be very brief. I wanted
to thank the board and the board's consultants throughout the process. uh you've assisted us make this plan uh much better. I think where it is now um incorporates the recommendations from the various uh board members, public um
we've come up with a plan that really as Mr. Fruits testified, really repurposes this site, brings life to it. Uh the landscaping is a significant improvement. Bringing this business to Mars Plains is a a substantial benefit.
Um the I think that's that's left as you've heard from Mr. Fruit. Fruit is just again essentially existing non-conforming conditions that are attributable to the three frontages. Um the uses of permitted use, the site plan
has been greatly improved. Everything from landscaping, lighting, it's really bringing a site uh to current standards. Um and that's the uh opportunity that the board had with this application to take an old site and really bring it back to life. So again, um we're
thankful where we've ended up. Uh thanks to you and your consultants. We appreciate that. We've worked tirelessly to provide you with a plan that is good for the burrow and good for Rivian. Um so the final uh thing I'd like to say is
that the um conditions that we've agreed to I think you know demonstrate good faith for the company. You know the restriction on the refues. We understand there are some residences on East Hanover uh trying to limit the impacts with the lighting and
having signs turned off. Um demonstrates that everybody wants to be a good neighbor in Mars Plains and um again we're going to continue to work uh with your consultants and the county. Uh we hear you loud and clear and Mr. Maltz and I think his recommendation is an
excellent one. If the board were inclined to approve this application, it would be very helpful to us to have some statement or two that says that the board would like to support the applicant's discussion with the county to allow those limited LS. I think
that'll give us the ammunition, for lack of a better word we need with that discussion. Uh we don't want to hold up our progress with you, but we were certainly committed to continue to work with the county. Uh it's in the betterment of of both the applicant and the town. Again, thank you for your time and your consideration. We appreciate
the public's interest and involvement and as well as all your comments and feedback. Thanks again. >> Mr. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to approve the application granting approve the application granting the remaining variances and
design waiver incorporating all the comments and the testimony subject to the approval by the county I guess planning board uh with regard to the uh turning left turns
off out of the property and request that our uh that Mr. prepare a resolution of approval for our next meeting. >> Excuse me. May I say is it a draft a draft resolution or >> No, I'm asking for an approval of the
application and then Mr. Brewer will prepare the resolution for our next meeting. So, it would be approved tonight subject to >> the county, you and the county getting together and resolving those issues with the left turn. So, just to be clear, in
the event that the county um does not agree to allow the left turns, the applicant has accepted that restriction. And I'm wondering, is the board saying that you would not approve the application? Because that we we're going to continue to work and and put forth
that argument, but if the county does not agree, the applicant is comfortable living with that restriction. And I just want to be sure that I don't want it to be that this is only approved if the county allows us to make left. >> I don't
let me ask Mr. Mol. >> If the county does not approve the left turns out, can the board approve those left turns out? >> No, we have to do that. That's their juris their jurisdiction. You're making a recommendation that that's why I
wanted the consensus of the board. >> Y >> for the applicant to go to them and say this is how the board unanimously feels after the reasons. There were a number of reasons traffic way and all those other >> less volume history
>> okay to revert back to where we were right with no left turn. >> Correct. We're going to we're going to live with the restriction that's shown in our plans, but with the representation to you all that we're going to continue to fight to allow us to make the laps >> and that you can represent to them that we have agreed to do right
>> and your resolution that correct. >> I just don't want the board to think that if the county doesn't allow us that we have to come back for an >> amendment. It would be it would be a condition that they go to the county request the left hand turns and that because the board that's of the board
that record >> right >> I I have a question for are you going to ask for vote? >> I was going to ask for a second but >> okay I have a question before we do that. >> Absolutely. >> Just so I'm clear. Did Rivian not agree to dim the lights
after um the site lights after uh 7 p.m. I guess when it closes. >> I think Mr. Fruit said that he would he would defer to the boards. I we heard Mr. Ryden's position on it. >> So So I don't know how everybody else
feels. I you know I know this is not stadium lighting. I get it. It's not stadium lighting there. But um I I do sort of like the idea of the lights being dimmed and maybe it's not seven o'clock, you know, maybe it could be nine o'clock. I don't know what the, you know, how the lighting works and if
it's, you know, uh, it can be done. >> In my opinion, you want things to look a little vibrant there, not dark and like no activity is there. >> I agree. I just I just think I don't know that it has to be >> I think that they've provided certainly
a lot of additional um landscaping and trees and things that would mitigate any anything. Um, >> yeah. anything that would upset the neighbors because the neighbor across the street last week's or last month's testified that he was very comfortable
with this. >> I'm just saying how I I think we should have the option that um until we see it. I I don't feel comfortable >> until we see it. >> Yeah. I don't feel comfortable just on paper saying here's the numbers and this
is what it's supposed to look like without I'm a very visual person without in actuality knowing what that looks like. So >> I can save you some time. The Rivian will agree to dim to dim, you know, to dim lights to to accommodate what you're trying to accomplish. Whether it's all
of them, some of them I think we need to work that out to the satisfaction of the burrow, but um they some of those lights can be dimmed >> and we can leave that up to you and the engineer to determine what's the appropriate level at that point. >> Correct. >> So that you don't have to come back to
work, >> right? We can work in in you know with your planner and your engineer to just demonstrate that >> certain ones can stay on, certain ones should go off. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> So then this goes back to Mr. Houston's point before about trying to get this
head this off at the path. Do it do it now. >> Sure. >> And then if we need to use it, it's there. >> So I'm sorry, just to be clear, is one of the conditions then that the lights all have to be dimmable, >> right? That was my that was my request. Not all the lights, some of the lights
and it would be up to Mr. Ryden and no that they would be dimable everybody the capacity >> the technology would be dimmable and then we'd have to determine which ones >> which are appropriate >> they would all be dim capable >> I just say one thing I mean there's a
safety element too to having lights on >> you know and I think and I think the fact that lights are on discourages people from coming on the property and messing with the the recharging stations, the new cars that are sitting there, the customers cars, and also
talking about downlighting, which I think we're thinking to be like really illuminating, and that may not be the case. So maybe having a provision that we visit this site when the lights are on to see exactly what we're dealing with and having that condition might
pass this through. >> Well, let's let that Mr. B. >> The other thing as well The Vivian's agreed to fix the sidewalks on on Hanover and Speedwell Avenue. You're going to now have foot traffic there hopefully walking around again. So, I wouldn't want that whole those sidewalk
area. >> And I think that they want whether it's, you know, at midnight or or 6:00 in the morning to know this is where the Rivian dealer is or Rivian service center is.
>> Yes, agreed. I I think we'll we can work with supports professionals to we know what the concern is. We don't want to have a negative impact on residents, but we want adequate safety on site and the >> Is there a second? Do we you want to
repeat what you said? Just I'm sorry. I I know you >> I think everybody got it, but uh motion to approve the application granting the remaining variances design waiverss and incorporating the
comments and testimony and the changes agreed to on the record subject to the approval by the county planning board with regard to the left turns and uh request Mr.
to prepare a resolution of approval for our next meeting. >> Is there a second to that? >> Second. >> Before anybody votes, we have to be sure that that Mr.
and Mr. Malier have >> so so we do have that. So, Mr. that they certify that there was >> I have I have Mr. has
>> Mr. Perry has not >> okay >> Mr. Wolf >> yes >> Mr. Pier >> Mr. Bezel >> yes >> Mr. Ste >> yes >> Mr. >> Yes >> M
Yes, >> Mayor Carr. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> And Mr. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you again for your time and consideration. Appreciate it. Thank you. It's uh it's about 7 minutes after 10.
I'm going to take a 7 minute break until quarter after 10. Good. I'm sure probably >> your dedication. It is dedication.
>> Thanks. You're welcome. >> I see we're neighbors. You're on. >> Oh, okay. I just took a picture of that. Good. How are you?