Ready. >> Can I have a roll call, please? >> Mayor Napleani >> here. >> Mr. Defilia >> here. >> Councilwoman Cap >> here. >> Mr. D Janeiro >> here. >> Mr. Delommo >> here. >> Mr. Chamora >> here. >> Miss Litman >> here. >> Mr. Manell
>> here. >> Mr. Fujielli >> here. >> Mr. Goslin. >> Miss Williams >> here. Vice Chairman Palutes >> here. >> Chairman Fuller >> here. >> Can we please stand as we salute the flag?
>> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. The notice requirements for the open public meetings act for this meeting
have been satisfied and a copy of the annual notice was sent to the Aspbury Park Press and the coaster filed in the office of the municipal clerk. There are two emergency exits to my right that'll take you to the front of the building, one to my left that'll take you to the rear. Please make sure there's no smoking. uh board policy is that no new
cases will be started after 1000 pm and no new testimony will be taken after 10:30 p.m. In addition, the applicant will be limited to 45 minutes. Um all meetings will be audio and videotaped. They'll be shown on the Ocean Township
of Oceans Community Cable channel 77 on cable vision and Verizon FiOS. Uh and channel 77 channel 77 for cable vision. And I think we have a misprint here. We got 77 on both. I think one of them's different. Anyway, they're on Verizon
FiOS and Cable Vision. All cell phones must be turned off. If you need to make a call, kindly step outside. We are going to start with our reorganization by swearing in all of our members. This is a new joint board that has been
formed. So, if everyone do we want to do this all together in one shot? Let's do it. Everybody stand up, please. I will swear them in. Do you have the oath? How many years old? >> [laughter] >> I >> do solemnly affirm that I will support
the state constitution in the state of New Jersey that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same and to the government established in the United States and in this state under the authority of the people and that I will faithfully impart and justly perform all
the duties to the position of class 4 member of the planning board according to the best of my ability. >> You are all now sworn in to the new joint planning zoning board. Thank you. You may be seated.
>> No one calls me out. First order of business so that I can step aside and get down to the other end. >> Do I have a motion for a chairperson? >> Wait, I'll make a second. >> Okay.
>> Wait. So, Gino, >> Lisa. Okay. >> Are there any other nominations? Seeing none, I close nominations. Can I have a roll call, please? >> Mayor Napani, >> yes. >> Mr. Dilia, >> yes. >> Councilwoman Kaplan,
>> yes. >> Mr. D Janeiro, >> yes. >> Mr. Doma, >> yes. >> Mr. Chamora, >> yes. >> Miss Litman, >> yes. >> Mr. Minnell, >> yes. >> Mr. Pujielli, >> yes. >> Miss Williams, >> yes. >> Vice Chairman, >> yes. >> And Chairman Fuller, >> yes.
>> Okay, there John, it's all yours, buddy. Is it this? >> I'm going to try Look at me. [laughter] >> Okay. Thank you all. Uh, next order of business will be to elect a vice chairperson. Do we have any nominations to for vice chair?
>> Mr. Mr. Chairman, I nominate Michael Palutis to be the vice chairman. >> Second. >> Do we have any other nominations? Hearing none, we'll close the uh nomination process. Can we take a roll call vote, please? >> Sure. >> Mayor Napleani, >> yes. >> Mr. Dilia,
>> yes. >> Councilwoman Kaplan, >> yes. >> Mr. Daneiro, >> yes. >> Mr. Delmo, >> yes. >> Mr. Chamora, >> yes. >> Miss Litman, >> yes. >> Mr. Manell, >> yes. >> Mr. Fujielli, >> yes. >> Miss Williams, >> yes. >> Vice Chairman Palutes, >> yes. Fuller.
>> Yes. Uh, next up, we have to approve the meeting dates for the upcoming year. The meeting dates have been listed. Where were the meeting dates listed? >> We all know the meeting dates. It's the >> Which do we have a motion for approval? It's
twice a month. It's the >> Yep. Same schedule as the planning board had been and the same schedule as the zoning board had been. >> Motion. >> We have a second. >> I'll second. >> Mayor Naple County. >> Yes. >> Mr. Defilia. >> Yes. >> Councilwoman Kaplan.
>> Yes. >> Mr. DJ Janeiro. >> Yes. >> Mr. Lommo. >> Yes. >> Mr. Chamora. >> Yes. >> Miss Litman. >> Yes. >> Mr. Manell. >> Yes. >> Mr. Pujielli. >> Yes. >> Miss Williams. >> Yes. >> Vice Chairman Pollutes. >> Yes. >> Chairman Polar. >> Yes. I'm going to ask um our lawyer
here. Uh do you have a problem with uh voice votes on these? >> All in favor? Okay, let's do that. >> Okay, >> let's get the night over. Um or at least to the real business. We're going to approve the newspapers. Uh newspapers for our meetings will be published in the Asbury Park Press and the Coaster.
Do I have anybody ready to uh >> make that motion? >> I'll second. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Okay. Uh, next up we have appointing the plan planning board attorney. Uh, we
have uh Mr. John Pulos up for consideration. Do I have anybody to make that nomination? >> I'll make that nomination. >> Do we have any other uh uh nominations? Hearing none. And do we have uh can we take a vote, please? All in favor?
>> I. >> Any opposed? Okay. Next up, we have planning board planner, excuse me. [clears throat] Uh for this uh we have uh Mr. Jim Higgins in consideration. Do we have any other nominations? Okay. Hearing none. Can we take a a
motion or excuse me, can we uh All in favor? >> I >> All right. Any opposed? All right. Next up, we have board engineer. Uh we have Bett uh M uh excuse me, [clears throat] Matlac uh in for nomination. Do we have any other
nominations? Okay. Hearing none. All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Okay. And then finally, we have uh planning board secretary. Uh we have Nicole. Nicole, I'm blanking on your last name.
>> A thank you. Sorry. Um we have Nicole Ari placed a nomination. Do we have any of the nominations? Hearing none. Uh all in favor? >> Any opposed? >> Okay. Moving on, we have we're going to switch
and resolutions. We have an updated list because not all of them were completed in time. Uh so Nicole, these are all from are they from the different boards? >> So 260 Howard? No, they're all from the
same board. 1307 Wilson and staff that together 9 Shadowan needs to be separate and 118 Darwin needs to be separate and there's the only people that can vote on 260 Howard 1307 Edgewood and 487 Stafa are Mr. D Janeiro
Mr. Chamora Miss Litman Mr. Elli and Chairman Fuller. So, one of the five. >> Okay. So, let's start with Anthony and Khloe Bartalomi, right? Yes. >> 118 Darlene Avenue. >> Um, do we have a motion? >> I'll motion. >> We have a second. >> I'll second. >> So, then Mr. DJ Janeiro,
>> yes. >> Mr. Domo, >> yes. >> Mr. Chamora, >> yes. >> Miss Litman, >> yes. >> And Chairman Fuller, >> yes. Okay. Then we have uh together we'll do 260 Howard Family LLC which is 260 Howard Avenue and Zachary and
Gretchen Wilson which is 1307 Edgewood Avenue and then Lewis and Victoria Hoffstein uh 487 Stafa Street West Allenurst. >> I'll motion. >> I'll second. >> Mr. D Janeiro, >> yes. >> Mr. Chamora, >> yes. >> Miss Litman,
>> yes. >> Mr. Puielli, >> yes. >> And Chairman Fuller, >> yes. And then we have Raquel Liato at 9 Shadow Lawn Drive. >> So the only people who voted yes are Mr. Chamora and Chairman Pol.
>> I'll move. I'll second. >> Okay. Uh Mr. Chamora. >> Yes. >> And Chairman Fer. >> Yes. Okay. The other resolutions that were on the agenda um uh will be heard will be brought to the next meeting. Uh
assuming it all goes according to plan. Um, can you approve the minutes from >> Oh, yes. Get the minutes. Let's approve the minutes uh from May 15, 2025 and August 21st, 2025. >> So, they have to be done separate. Mr. D Janeiro, Mr. Dmo, Mr. Chamora, and
Chairman Fuller, you can vote on May 2025. >> Okay. So, let's start with May 2025. I'll make a motion. >> I'll second. >> Mr. D Janeiro, >> yes. >> Mr. Duo, yes. >> Mr. Chamora, >> yes. >> Chairman Fuller, >> yes. Okay. August 21st, 2025.
>> And then it could be Mr. Doma, Mr. Chamora, Miss Litman, or Chairman Fuller. >> I'll make a motion. >> I'll second. >> Mr. Doma, >> yes. >> Mr. Chamora, >> yes. >> Miss Litman, >> yes. >> Chairman, >> yes.
Okay. Um, let's see. Mr. Pulus, should we do this correspondence? >> Uh, yes. This corresponds advising the board general permit by certification number six for the reference property. This is
forformational purposes only and no action by the planning board. That's easy. Uh next up uh we have some cases that are going to be carried to further notice. Uh each one is different. So let's let's talk about them a bit. Uh park at Ocean Condominium
Association Inc. block 33 lot 1903. Avenue in the C7 zone. Um they will uh they plan they're asking to return on July 27th uh 2026 with no further notice. Any objections to that? >> No. >> Okay. So, if you're here for that
application, uh they will be here. This will be heard on July 27th in this room um at about this time. Next up is Township of Ocean 1313 South Roller Road. Uh requesting to be carried to the Thursday, July 27th meeting. Also
without further notice, any objection? Hearing none. Uh that if you're here for that application, that also will be heard July 27th in this room at that time. Uh Abraham Benitar, 517 Laurel Avenue, Block 68, Block 6, requested to
be carried to the Thursday, August 20th, 2026 meeting without further notice. Um is there uh any details on what that application is? Um, they're requesting no further notice. Is there any reason that the board should not allow that?
Anything that we should consider? >> I believe there's no reason why. >> Anybody have any >> objection to that? >> Okay. Yeah, that's just next month. Uh, so if you're here for the Abraham Benitar 517 Laurel Avenue block 68
hearing, that will be carried to next month, August 20th. in this meeting room at about this time. Uh finally, also on the agenda for tonight was Bio Investment Group, Bioin Investment Group LLC, 702-76 West Park Avenue, that will be carried
to the August 20th, 2026 meeting without further notice. Any objection to that? Okay, if you're here for that for that uh hearing uh that will be heard on August 20th in this meeting room at about this time. Finally on to
presentations. We have Orchard Plaza redevelopment plan known as block 34 lot 11 on the official township promotion tax persuant to words missing there to local redevelopment and housing law. >> Hello. >> Hi. How are you?
>> Very well. How are you? >> Congrats to all the new members. >> Thank you. >> Um I'd like to introduce myself. I've been before your planning board before but this is new board I see. Um I work My name is Golden McMillan. I'm a licensed planner. I have been retained
by the township of ocean. So I'm here in the capacity of the municipality and we're the uh township redevelopment planner. Um bear with me. This is a little blurry. Um yeah, so our role has been um
previously we were retained to study what is the Orchard Plaza property. I think um probably everyone here is familiar with the Orchard Plaza property. is a 10acre property that was previously designated as an area need and redevelopment. And over the last year, our office has been working with
um taking the next step on that and developing the redevelopment plan. I apologize it's a little blurry. I'm not really sure what's that. Um but I'll read to it. Um before I start, I just wanted to say on record just because I didn't want to forget this. Um I do
believe you guys have the redevelopment plan was circulated before. Um, given that this is a new board, it does have the old planning board listed here and some of the old board professionals. So, I just wanted to say on record that when I forward this eventually to the governing body, that page will be
probably updated. But otherwise, this is an ordinance that was introduced as is and um I'm going to present it and then what I'm going to do is go over your master plan and the purpose of tonight is really to review it for master plan consistency. So again, sorry it's blurry, but um the
agenda for tonight is I'm going to go over the background and process, which I just kind of did in my intro. I'm going to give you a plan overview, uh what is in here in terms of uses, some of the highle bulk standards, design standards. I'm going to go over the master plan consistency, and just kind of tell you
guys what happens from here with this. So if you could read this, basically what this slide talks about is what is a redevelopment plan. I think um this board has probably seen those before. What a redevelopment plan is is it's a detailed zoning ordinance and it can get
very specific as this one does with design standards, maybe a mandated public improvements. Sometimes these redevelopment plans will have renderings as this one does and images. They're typically illustrative. What a redevelopment plan is is it's an ordinance. It's a zoning ordinance and
it's not a no way any kind of final design. It's not a site plan. Tonight we're not um >> Yeah, I'm not very techsavvy. It's my personal projector. >> We connect it to the township.
>> I didn't even know you had one. So, yes. >> Yeah, let me do that. >> Sorry. I've been told in the past that this one don't trust this one. [laughter] That's a little >> Well, this is the local housing redevelopment law. So, this is a
municipal land use book. So, >> a little better. Do you need something taller? You can have my folders. >> Yeah. >> Give me a lot of This is how we do it. >> And then this one.
>> I have a smaller one. >> I think it does help when you bring it closer. >> Sorry. Excellent. >> Okay. >> Now I'm like really close to you guys. >> Okay.
>> All right. So, as I was saying, um, a redevelopment plan, it's a zoning ordinance. What this is not tonight, it's not a site plan approval. It's not a site plan. There's no redevelopment agreement. That's not what's for consideration. It's just the redevelopment plan, which is effectively a reszoning of this property.
So, uh this is block 34, lot 11 on Route 30, uh five. Uh an aerial of this site just to get everyone oriented, even though I'm pretty sure this is a very familiar property. Um but it does front Route 35. It's adjacent to a couple commercial properties. Um, and to the
rear is uh some residential apartments. Uh, I slightly already went over this uh, but I'll um, kind of go over it again here. So, this board when it was previously the planning board, I guess before this body heard this as an area
need of redevelopment, they felt that it um, the findings met the uh, criteria of the state local housing redevelopment law. It was then deemed an area need of redevelopment. the planning board actually had two hearings on that matter. And then this summer, last summer, August, the governing body then
officially designated as an area in need of redevelopment. And so from there, that's when a lot of the redevelopment planning happened. Um what's kind of the suitable uses here? What's kind of the zoning we want to see here, the design here? Uh our office worked closely with a um retained architect who happen here
tonight on a different matter and um with the township and um our attorney uh Ashton and Joe Bowman and in working with the uh team we July of this year presented the uh redevelopment plan
which was introduced by the governing body at the last meeting in July and so tonight's that master plan consistency. So on a high level what these redevelopment plans do they do a lot of um like public benefits um which is considered in here. What the goal of
this plan would accomplish is to remove this dilapitated vacant commercial uh property uh the uh old orchard plaza which has several vacancies within. You know when we did the area needed redevelopment there was a lot of
dilapitation here. It's a prominent corridor. It's a prime real estate opportunity to do redevelopment here. And when we do these redevelopment plans, we look at how are there ways to improve site traffic flow access. So
within this, there's considerations to new traffic signals, new um extensions offsite to bring in additional access to the site. Um within this redevelopment plan, there's requirements to coordinate with both NJD and NJ DOT to do such and
to um incorporate those things. And then within this redevelopment plan, there's a high level of architectural standards, site design standards that really you can't do in your traditional zoning. It's something you really need the powers and the tools of the local housing redevelopment law to do in a
redevelopment plan. What this plan also tries to accomplish is really high level sustainability and storm water management. Even beyond some of the um mandated state regulations, there's several requirements within to require sustainable uh building design and storm
water techniques. Uh what else this plan does? Again, your conventional zoning uh sometimes it's very difficult to regulate certain architecture. This will regulate certain materials, certain uh amenities, on-site amenities and
streetscape improvements and different type of uh design standards. that is again very hard to accomplish in traditional zoning but can be through a redevelopment plan. And then lastly, this is a multifamily mixeduse project um that's being reszoned in this and as
such your affordable housing ordinance would kick in on anything that is being put here and so it really will help with your um affordable housing component to the uh municipality. So again, these aren't site plans, these are conceptual designs working with a
prospective developer. Um the two to the left are front images showing uh the activated street front, the mixed use site of it, the um front elevation and then on a high level. This is um what you see in the blue is the
retail component of it. The pink being more the lobby uh community um common space area of it. The yellow being the residential component to it. Then there's a structured parking garage within um surface parking in the front for the commercial users and then all
along the rear of this having a walk-in path um a recreation open space area. Um so to go over the zoning. So what this is um permitting is dwelling multifamily units that need to be above
the ground floor. There are special um circumstances uh somewhat conditional that could allow some ground floor residential. It requires certain buffering, certain um shared walls can't be with the retail soundproofing requirements there. There needs to be a
setback from any kind of um like the walking path in the rear and sidewalks so that we're not having people like up on the windows. Um and most importantly, no frontage on Route 35. So that is to help accommodate with some of the uh building design but generally speaking
this is upper floor dwelling units. Um outdoor open space is permitted here. Government services is permitted here and then commercial is permitted here. Now the commercial is broken down into two categories. One being commercial category one that's permitted here. This
is really actually limited to not exceed 15% of the retail space. What this is is more of your less activated commercial use things like the child daycare, things like office medical, things like a bank, things like a pharmacy, things that provide convenience but maybe not
that exciting activated front you uh like frontage that uh you'll see in commercial category 2 in a moment here, which the bigger goal of this plan here is to have uh most the retail be more of these exciting uses, things that bring um a destination here. makes this more
of a destinationoriented retail. So permitted um being art galleries, art uh arteisal workshops, breweries, distilleries, restaurants, recreational facilities, retail, um retail interactive, which is kind of a new land use you see these days. Uh sporting
goods, um any kind of theater, performing arts, health and certain um spa activity here. Uh so this is just the list of the accessory uses. Um, very much the common things you see that are incidental and subordinate, management, services,
maintenance, outdoor dining, uh, dining to the retail, residential lobbies, um, things like that, amenities to the rooftop. And then within this plan, there is a list of prohibited uses. Typically, if it's not permitted, it's prohibited. But
given that retail is permitted here, um some of these things we just wanted to really define so that there's no gray line in that is this retail like dry cleaning for example. Um so we did list out a couple retail oriented things that will be um absolutely prohibited here.
Things like smoke shops, things like uh dry cleaning and then you know signage being permitted. We wanted to make sure like billboards are prohibited here. So the list uh is as follows. and then getting into the bulk and the massing of the design of this thing. So,
the area today is 10 acres. It's 700 feet wide. Uh it's not permissible to go lower than that um other than any kind of rideway that we may need to provide given any kind of easement or dedications to some of these street extensions we would uh envision in this
plan. Otherwise, we're not looking to subdivide this in half and have like two different now parcels. Um, so that is how the area and width is regulated. This does regulate something called a built to line which instead of having a straight up front yard setback, a
built-in line within this, that's what kind of regulates. So you see a building kind of jog in and out, brings a little interest, makes it look a little less monolithic. Um, so there's requirements with that. And then sideyard setbacks, coverages, and then height. So the permissible height here being four
stories 48 max and then only conditionally up to six stories 70 feet once it's behind a built two line a certain amount and within required stepback. So really from the street when you're really up on the street it kind of I can go back to this illustrative elevation might demonstrate this better.
So the uh picture up here if you see my cursor you know the top level would be stepped back a little bit. So then other things that are regulated within this plan being a maximum floor area, a maximum density of up to 330
units, um a minimum amount of commercial space. We want to make sure that this isn't, you know, completely residential and that there has to be some kind of mixeduse retail component to it. a minimum amount of open space um in the track area and a minimal amount of
amenity space so that the uh out uh the uh residents have you know outdoor as well as indoor and amenity space to make this really um kind of a fine product. And then there's also requirements for the street front to have certain depths between uh if you go back to this motor
uh this uh sorry go back to this uh concept plan you know there's a motor court here but we wanted to also regulate that there's a lot more uh street activity up front. So the plan does regulate how wide these sidewalks have to be kind of make that um what is
a goal of a destination oriented retail. So these are just um illustrious pictures that demonstrate and these are in the plan um kind of showing what kind of amenities could um be here as well as what like a walk-in path and what that kind of um would feel like in the back.
So then other things that are regulated within this plan are uh architectural design standards such as materials, penistration requirements, things how this will architecturally look. Roof uh rooftop decks permitted here, but we do have some regulations based on um you
know, we don't want nuisances, timing, lighting, things like that. Signage is regulated within this plan. lighting, landscaping, again, sidewalks, streetscape, plaza standards, uh sustainable requirements, utility standards, these are all regulated within the plan.
And so then this plan also regulates parking and loading requiring one and a half space per dwelling unit and that the residential parking goes into the structured uh garage whereas the surface is really meant meant more for that uh retail and that requires four spaces per
thousand. This also regulates tandem parking, compact parking and EV parking. It also considers a maximum amount of curb cuts and driveway widths and just a lot of that site plan really in the detail. Probably your engineer would be looking very closely at these standards
should a site plan come forward. And a minimum bicycle requirement is here because there is an envision connection of access to the rear bringing you to Willow. There's a beautiful park right nearby that could be accessible. So bicycle um is required here and then
off- streetet loading is regulated. We don't want to look at that in the front of Route 35. So it's specific to the sides and the rears. So the road access, traffic signal, and a bus stop relocation is uh also regulated within this plan. It
encourages that site access beyond just Route 35. Um I know that this is going to be continued involvement probably with both NJ and NJ DOT. Um, but the plan requires that any redeveloper has to work in uh not only in good faith, but a redeveloper agreement would
probably likely stipulate a lot of these terms. Um the access being off Willow A. Uh if you're looking at the aerial to the north, I guess I guess north is actually if you're looking at this aerial since north is actually kind of to the
right here. The access points would be where the cursor is kind of moving right here off Willow and then in a vision one kind of off into the block and lots on these properties to the right where I believe that there might be some easements where the town has um rights to that. So that would be any um
considered in any project. And also I know that there is an existing bus stop right there. I don't know how actively it's used, but there is a bus stop right there on Route 35. So what this plan envisions is to actually work in good faith with NJ Transit and like bring an
actual sheltered legitimate bus stop not on an active highway but into the into the property um to help support that safetiness. And then, you know, it' have to be maintained probably by the property owner and sheltered.
So then that's what the plan is about. But what your role is tonight is a consistency review. It's required both in the local housing redevelopment law and the municipal housing law. And so what your [snorts] task tonight is is to go over the master plan and report your
findings, whether it's consistent or if it's inconsistent, what is inconsistent, and make those recommendations back to the governing body when they consider this for adoption. So I went ahead and looked at your 2023 master plan. I found a few objectives um that point to where
this uh has some strong revitalization, redevelopment support. You have an objective that speaks about, you know, being flexible and allowing for adequate guidelines for any kind of future development and redevelopment and restoration of residential, commercial and industrial sites in response to such
changes. You know, this doing the area need a redevelopment site. Um there's been so many vacancies here, so many um like kind of attempts to reuse some of the spaces. Like this site is is very much a dilapitated site that would very
much benefit a redevelopment um with standards such as that are in this plan. Objective three, it talks about giving um this community a balanced supply of housing and given that um there's multif family considered here a range of market
and affordability h uh affordable housing um it would be a requirement of 20% set aside under your ordinance. This advances the objective three of your master plan. Objective four of your master plan talks about improving circulation systems, streets, bikeways,
walkways. So again, this plan, you know, it would require working with the DOT, looking at signalizations to the site and additional access points. So this would very much um be in that interest. And then objective five talks about
improving uh storm drainage throughout the town. I know that, you know, just being out there on the site myself, it you know, I'm not an engineer, but it it looks like your storm the storm water system out there is um failing just from kind of my plain eyes. What this site
does is it, you know, any development would have to be redeveloped to these highly new NJD major storm water regulations. This site was originally built in the early 80s. Didn't have the same type of regulations. Um, so there
would be like a major storm and NJ D regulated uh overhaul of the storm drainage. And then additionally on top of this and this is where the governing body felt very strongly to add a couple requirements that are additional sustainable um standards such as uh bio
swells, rain gardens, things like that. Those are also required within the plan. And so I also want to turn to another document that our office worked with the uh township uh council on maybe about two or three years ago now or actually only a year ago. Um this isn't a master
plan document. So you don't actually technically need need to find master plan consistency with this document, but it is a planning document we did with the town. I thought it'd be beneficial to bring to this board. So we conducted kind of a study on Route 35. We did like
a kind of a really high level bird's eye audit where we looked at all the properties that had, you know, maintenance issues, violation issues, repeated issues, and what are kind of the things we can do to Route 35 to help beautify it better, help um some of the
properties that are hurting the most. And we in that study found the Orchard Plaza to be one of these key properties within the study to be considered as like a catalystic site for development. um to remove anything that could you know uh be incompatible with what's
happening there. And so I would say this also advances this planning study um as well as your master plan. So that's really the summary of my presentation. uh we find that this redevelopment plan which is an ordinance you know is designed to effectuate the master plan
and the goals of the township and that we believe it's substantially consistent with your master plan and that uh recommendation of such could be made back to the governing body. So then really the next steps you know tonight is what we're doing the step in between introduction and adoption uh upcoming
hearing I would suspect this might be in August at some point uh would be your governing body would actually hear this you know for an ordinance adoption consideration and then down the road um maybe nothing ever comes back or maybe um a developer comes forward and a
redevelopment agreement can be negotiated and a site plan could eventually come to this board one So that's it. >> Any questions? >> Anyone else? >> There's got to be questions. >> I I got questions. Yeah.
>> Um can we go back to just objective four for a second and I want to talk about the the transit piece to this? >> My is not even a concern. The only thing I just want to kind of talk through and get a sense of is we're talking about
moving the bus station to within the facility itself. Great. What other would that bus station be reserved exclusively for NJ Transit or could other entities use it?
>> So, it's owned by NJ Transit. I don't know if I can properly actually answer that. I don't know if it's being utilized by anyone else. I don't know if NJ Transit has any, you know, agreements with anyone else. But, you know, this site,
this unlike traditional zoning where you just zone something and then one day someone drops off an application and now you have to do completeness in a site plan and here it is and you had no time. That can't really happen here. So this would have to go through a redevelopment agreement process
and through that process like this this bus stop would probably have to be addressed within that there would probably be negotiations and I'm sure if there's like shared use with that how does that work that could be explored during that phase >> okay so this plan wouldn't prohibit that
so where I'm going with this we're this is not the only part of 35 that probably needs to be redeveloped in the next decade more. Probably not today. >> I would agree with that. >> But if if we're putting a whole bunch of residential units in there, how are they
going to get from that site to the grocery store? How are they going to get to Rook? Right? If they want to go to the gym, if they want to get coffee, how are they going to get there? And I just want to make sure that as we are thinking about the 35 corridor as a whole that we are making sure that we
are building the foundational building blocks that we can get from point A to point B to point C to point D either by foot, by bike or by some other form of transit. And that's where I'm going with this bus stop is are we allowing other forms of micro microtransit or other
uses for that stop so they can be a transit hub not just a New Jersey transit bus stop if that makes sense. Yeah, it makes sense and it's a great planning point and of course as planners that's what we encourage. We encourage you know utilizing the park and utilizing the envision willow access to
get around. Um, you know, there's parking here but you know not everyone has a car and yeah I don't know if I'm answering your question. >> Let me let me specify the question. Does this plan allow for that as written?
>> Zoning I don't think gets that deep. So the zoning here and the regulator here is that um like that needs to be regulated. I think that's where the redevelopment agreement comes. The negotiations and the legal side of this would come into place.
>> Okay. Um, and then my only other question is in section S when we're talking about the uh sustainability studies, not the storm water, but just the the uses, I understand that there's going to be rooftop amenities.
And again, understanding that this is just a conceptual plan. It might totally change whatever. Not all the rooftop is going to be pool. I It'd be cool if it was, but it won't be. So, is there any allowance for solar to be on the rooftop as well? Does that need to be added here or is that kind of a Yeah, we can we can
add that in. So, so the plan speaks about sustainable design strategies that are required and that they need to include the following double or triple pane windows, LED lighting, low flow water fixtures,
energy star fixtures, and then there's a long language here which I think we kind of worked a lot with um the town engineer on about storm water management approach. I know this doesn't directly answer you. Um, and then there's biotension basin green infrastructure
management. I don't know if solar panels is specifically spoken about, but that could be one of your recommendations in terms of your master plan consistency is that you know you you can make that recommendation back to the governing
body and talk about that. Um, I don't know if it's required in this. Ben, do you have any thoughts, feelings on that? >> Um, it's so like I I feel like that's a kind of a specific design feature.
I don't know if it needs to be in there, but I think she makes a good point that that could be a recommendation that you >> solar doesn't have to be on the roof either. It can be designated in some of that open space like a solar farm if you
will >> or the parking chore. >> Yeah. Or parking right somewhere. [snorts] I feel like what we're asking we we don't want to be put in a position where later on we have a suggestion and they say oh we had a chance to talk about that at this meeting right you want to
just make sure all the options are open so that when they actually come up with a plan that all the options are open at that point right section F the area and bulk requirements are those proposed or those what exist today >> so those are proposed your zoning ing
today. I don't have it right in front of me, but it's zoned today for something that's probably a completely different project that when you do zoning, I like to describe it as a paintbrush where you have a bunch of parcels and you paint it all a zone and
they all get, you know, those bulk standards. This is like your chance when you do redevelopment, you look at this site and this is a 10acre site, a wide 700 frontage. there's a illustrious project here and so it it changes those
standards um and it's more accustomed to a project here and that's kind of the the point of redevelopment. >> This goes a long way towards implementing the master plan recommendation that the C2 zone between
Deal Road and West Park Avenue be allow mixed commercial residential uses and that be modified to allow those things. And quite frankly, we're starting to redo the entire ordinance now. And I from what I'm hearing right now, I'll be looking at this redevelopment plan,
[snorts] implementing recommending some of those things in the C2 zone consistent with the redevelopment. >> What are the coverages in C2 zone right now? >> I don't know specifically. I don't know. >> I'm just trying to comp I'm trying to
compare what's in this to what exists currently. I'll look this up too. Oh, I don't have internet. I'm sorry. >> It's mainly the impervious. I was curious about the coverages are
ratio of 30%. building coverage 27%. And impervious is controlled by the amount of landscape area. So that would be 75%.
>> All of those are a buildable lot area which again will be changed when we do. So 75% is probably more like 60%. And this is requesting 80. >> So 80% exclusive of proposed offside
road access improvements along West Park, Willow A. Um but also what this plan is doing is it's regulating storm water more than what the underlying zoning does too. So it's a little bit of a balancing with that.
Um, you know, because they to have a project here, you also think about parking and, you know, having a a minimum requirement of retail. You know, some of these things kind of come together. But if we can mitigate anything that's a negative impact of an 80% increase, it was by
means of the really high level enhanced sustainable and bioention requirements within this plan. >> That's a good question. I feel like I had to do this when I did the area in need of redevelopment. Um, if you give me a moment, I can see
if that's in the other report, but it is also a very, as um, Councilwoman Gita is pointing out, it's a builtout site today. >> I think it was like 85. >> It was high. >> Yeah. No, I know. That's Well,
>> yeah, that's a good question. I'm sorry again I need internet because it's to download it off the cloud. Um I could try to answer that once I pull the area need but it is I would agree with that assessment that it's it's very high probably 80 between 80 90 maybe even
more. What page are you on? >> The restaurants. the um plan regulates. Let's see. >> I'm sorry, you said you're on page 28. >> Yeah, 28 management. >> Item number two.
seems like it jumps over. I guess my question is that we're talking. >> Yeah, the surface park in the structure. >> That's very much like an engineering design question. I wouldn't I don't know if it reduces impervious coverage, but
you know, considering that in site design and I know that when it comes to that type of infrastructure, you want to make sure you have it cleaned out. There's a lot of maintenance that comes with it. Um, Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I would think in this scenario and
when um like any kind of site plan comes forward like there would be the town engineer, your board engineer. I think having and an engineer closely monitor this and have a site plan to review. >> That's the parking spot. That's what we're talking.
>> Yeah. The you know the coverage outside the um to the elements >> and do you know about solar parking? So, I would not imagine that changes the impervious coverage since it would be on
top of what's already impervious coverage. Um, I mean, I would if that's part of your site plan, you know, I know those things you need snow maintenance, you need certain maintenance with that, it would be probably a technical detail in the site plan review. Um,
not sure this does regulate accessory. Like I would presume that that's an accessory, you know, permitted accessory use here since it's incidental subordinate. It'd be something part of the parking any kind of accessory setbacks it would have to
comply with. >> Did Did you or we consider any sort of incentive based I think I'm picking up on Mr. Defigley's question. um incentive based implementation of sustainable strategies like if you were
to include photovoltaics on the roof it permits an increased density or a higher unit count or anything like that did we >> so there's no like bonus in that way um >> no I don't think there's like bonuses in this plan I know what you're talking about sometimes you'll say if you do this then you can get that
>> but what this plan does do is it just requires it so I think it's more favorable to the municipality actually because they have to do it. >> Okay. >> You have any more questions? >> I just have have one question. Um you talk about uh access out to West Park
Avenue. >> Talk about uh working with DP and DOT. Um I think West Park A is a county road. Is there talk about involving the county in any of this planning? >> If it is a county road, they would have to be
>> I would presume. >> Yeah, we want them on board because obviously it's a important road, right? And all the traffic lights along that way need to be timed to make sense, which sometimes they're not right now. So, uh I think as we all know, so >> Mr. Chairman, if I can uh just answer
that for you. There was a uh dedicated easement to the municipality, a 50-foot rightaway that was dedicated back in the 70s to the township of ocean for an easement that's a a road that goes from West Park to the Heritage Plaza site
stops there. There's actually more of the easement that goes through that property that connects to Orchard Plaza. That's why that's being discussed now. And What that would do would open up all of that road and would alleviate some of
the stress on Popppler and some of the stress on Highway 35 which would allow people to get in and out um and also get a light out there that would be on the wish list as well. So these are some things that are really good for the municipality in terms of traffic flow
and trying to ease that up a bit. Uh so do our professionals have anything to say? >> I have a couple quick questions. First of all, I'm very impressed with it. Three three things. The list of commercial uses that are
permitted. It looks a little restrictive. Is there any wiggle room in that? Somebody comes in say with a use that's similar but not exactly on that list. >> Yeah. So, this was actually very very thought out. >> Um, so are you talking more about the commercial uses?
>> Yeah, just commercial use. >> So, I know that the C2 zoning today when you look at it, it's a big big list. >> Yeah. >> If you go and turn to the definitions, there's probably more included in there than you think >> because the definition so that the
definitions that's a good point is that you have your zoning things are defined. This superseded zoning. There's different definitions in here. Um, for example, like spa in this definition is not um like it's heavily regulated so
that it's not a standalone spa and then has to be in conjunction with like a hair salon. That way you get like your massage envies here and not maybe other type of >> So there's actually a list of definition >> the uses list. >> Yeah. So the definitions um explaining it. So retail services here it's you
know it's a little more broad where I know that the zoning ordinance will specifically say cookie shop or something like this that that's built into the definition. >> Yeah, we have a lot of problems with that trying to uses that don't quite fit in. >> Yeah. So specific. Okay, that's good. Uh
the second is that loading is zones of in the sidey yards. Is there a requirement that they be fully screened from Route 35? Yeah. So, that's a good point because when we were kind of originally looking at this, it was only actually in the rear yard because we don't want to look at that. And then um just kind of with how the uh open space
ended up working in the rear yard. There's there's screen requirement. So, it's actually that's a good point. It's somewhat conditional sideyard. >> And then the other thing is that the master plan talks about the ultimate goal of creating a walkable mixeduse area in that corridor. Will there be a
provision that I'm not saying when this comes in for site plan they have to provide a connection to adjacent properties but there should be a provision somehow site plan to allow that properties developed. >> Yeah. And I think like that is the
purpose of this and that was like the one thing the council had like said when we started this whole thing was we [snorts] want this to be a destination. >> Yes. >> We want people to come here and be able to come here. So, what this plan kind of speaks to,
and I don't know if this is regulatory, but um kind of those points I said, the key plan outcomes before, you know, we put that in this plan so that there's guidance when you know, you're reviewing this, like what kind of um outcomes you
really want out of this. >> Anything else? Ben, >> I don't have any questions. >> Do any members of the public have any questions for Miss McMillan? >> Hello. You come on up. >> I'll sit. Makes it more comfortable.
Do I have a time limit? I'm going to swear you in. Okay. >> Oh, okay. >> First, can I have your name and address? >> Alex Hayes Oakst. >> What's the address? >> Is it I don't believe I need to um put
my address on public comment. >> We often do when we have, just so you know, we often do when we're when it's dealing with a specific property so you know where you know where they're [clears throat] coming from. >> I think is self-explanatory. >> They could deal with that. Yeah, that's fine. >> Yes.
>> Yes. >> Okay. Um, so I'm allowed to do comments and questions, correct? >> Uh, we're going to just do questions right now for based on what Miss McMillan spoke about. So, if you could just ask her questions about what she spoke about, please. >> Okay. I'm wondering what the master plan
ordinance for commercial height is. From my understanding, it's 35 ft. And this plan is asking for up to six stories. And the photo of the development showed a sixstory building. Um, so I thought the town max was 35 and
the water tower, for example, was 55. I'm just wondering, um, like how is that possibly something that can be approved? >> Yeah. So the >> can I comment on that first national plan.
>> And so what this does is it essentially takes away the C2 zone and it becomes a redevelopment plan zone. I say redevelopment plan, might as well call it redevelopment zone. And so based on the studies, based on, you know, this is a 10acre site, based on kind of planning
and working with engineers and the professionals, architects, um, and giving a significant reinvestment into this property and requiring probably what's a significant amount of public benefits back. You know, there's cost to that, um, when it
comes to redevelopment. And so to accommodate a certain, you know, project, the heights will be adjusted in typically in any kind of redevelopment plan. So like >> this would be just the zoning for that. >> So you likened it to like a new redevelopment zone. I see what you're
saying. Um so you can ditch or change or whatever the current height limits are, but you are asking for up to 70 ft in this. Yeah. So the it would be up to four stories up to seven stories. Yes. But the top two stories are extra regulated as well
to be stepped back. Um so that you're not looking at just one big seven story. So it designwise there's some architectural um to remove a bit of that you know mass and concern to it too. >> Okay. Um a few more questions. So what
you presented tonight said 330 units 20% makes it about 66% affordable housing units. Do we know how much these units are going to go for? um like the the main units um uh regular rate and then how much affordable it could be proposed
for. And then second part of that is 330 units. I'm going to guess two cars per per apartment at a minimum. That's like an additional 700 plus um cars. Um so I'm just kind of wondering if you can expand upon more about where this
traffic is really going to be um diverted to on like a daily basis. How is that intersection going to handle 700 just of the residents cars coming and going, let alone the retail traffic? >> So, I would say, let me just try to
break that down. Um, I can't speak for market or whatever. What I can speak for is for the affordable units. they would be deeed restricted by the ordinance and the state regs and there this county Monmouth I'm not sure what region it's in but it's in a certain region where it
has every every year I don't know if it's HUD but the uh state issues you know based on income what the what the rents would dictate for that um tonight what this board's tasked with is a master plan consistency review I don't
know if I could speak to where traffic's going to be diverted and all that um it's Clearly a master plan consistency review is what we're doing tonight. >> Can I add on to that? >> Sure. >> Right now there's no plan for us to look
at. We have a conceptual [cough] what the site could accommodate um but there is no design for traffic or anything on the site. So it's there will be when the board receives
application for the site and at that point the board would get a traffic report full site layout plan and that's when we would review the the traffic and uh make recommendations to the board based on
what is submitted. >> So is the architectural drawings that were that you presented is that not what TR company or whatever it is that bought the facility bought Orchard Plaza that's not their rendering of what they want to build.
>> So that is an illustrative concept. Um what your board engineer was speaking to is this would go through civil design. That's not going to be a site plan submitted to this board. There's going to be civil full full on civil would be
you know as the site major site plan requires um typically that's grading soil erosion's included in that the site plan landscaping lighting the whole thing. Um but with this concept plan at this level
is informing some of the design zoning parameters. >> Okay. So I guess my last question is so to reiterate the drawing that we saw just now that had six stories of a complex on Route 35 is not what they're
possibly going to be approving in the future. Is that what we're saying? >> Owns up to six stories. So they you all could approve a sixstory housing and retail complex on Route 35 when we have nothing more than four stories in this town and the water tower
is the tallest point at 55 [clears throat] ft. >> I don't think we would have to approve that. It's already zoned for that. >> So if you approve whatever this all is, they could come in and do a six stories >> for redevelopment. So you're saying six stories that's not something that we're voting on right now. But you
>> already zone for correct Mr. >> It's not zoned for six stories. >> Just just to clarify, the planning board is not going to um vote on this and they're not it's not their duty or role to actually pass this. It's the governing body, the township council.
What we're here for is the fact that the township council has referred simply review. So they're their role here is only to review pursuant to the statute. And then what they're going to do is they're going to come up with recommendations within 45 days and issue
the township council um their a report and recommendations and it will be the township council that will ultimately you know thumbs up or thumbs down is not the planning board that we >> but the planning board could restrict. We don't want a 70 foot top height. Correct.
>> But the township council has the right to override reject and decline all of the planning boards. But let's be honest, they never do. I mean, whatever the planning board says, the township council count township council generally tell me a reason when I'm wrong, but
I've never seen the council change anything the planning board says. But if you all approve a 70 foot sixstory possibility of a structure, that could mean that the township council will approve a sixstory 70oot
structure up to 70 ft. Correct. That's correct. Right. Well, the township council could pass. >> The township council could based on if you guys approve a six >> story council approves the recommendation. That's theoretically
possible, but you know, all all theories are possible. >> So, this board could restrict it at 40 ft if they wanted to or 45 or 55. >> Again, they cannot restrict. It's not they're not voting on this. They are not the ultimate arbiter on whether or not this gets passed. They cannot they make
they can make recommendations to restrict but again counsel >> recommendations to restrict. Okay. >> Rejected they can override it. >> Okay that's all I had for now is are there is there additional public comment at the end? >> Uh yes there will be. Um can we just get
clarification on the process here? So, so we're going to we we'll recommend uh make recommendations back to the council, right? That this is consistent with the redevelopment or the with the master plan and then there at some point will be an actual site plan. Does does
that come back here? >> Well, yeah, the site plan would come back. >> Yes. Yeah. >> But ultimate approval of this actual redevelopment plan is made by the council. Go ahead. >> All right. Because that might have gotten lost in in your conversation just now. >> Okay. But based on their recommendations
and their suggestions to alter or not, >> the township council will have their recommendations. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Any more questions from the public? No. Okay, we'll take comments from the
public. Any comments from the public? General general comments. >> Okay, >> Miss Hayes, >> on this case >> on this case. Yes, >> Miss Hayes. Yes. I just want to remind you you're still under oath. Okay. >> Okay.
Um if I'm not uh if I'm not mistaken um it was mentioned that traffic will like the back access roads will be on Willow. Um so I am as a resident very near to this
intersection and who crosses all the time in between Dell and 35 and West Park and 35. I'm just envisioning a nightmare of traffic and you all live here. You know how these two intersections and how 35 can be particularly in the summer. Um, I think
[clears throat] many people would appreciate some oversight in any way to kind of curb some of this overdevelopment. This town needs more affordable housing. I don't think we need a complex that has 330 units.
Um, I'm concerned about the access roads going off to Willow and the apartments that are behind there that this will create undue and unnecessary traffic congestion. back there. Um, I'm a little disappointed,
frankly, that nobody mentioned the height of what's being proposed and there were great questions, but nobody was commenting on the possibility of six stories, the largest um, tallest residential housing complex coming
actually of any building, any building coming to town. And it just seemed like there weren't enough strategic questions about that as a lay person. Um, and I think that's it. I have other uh questions for later on in the meeting. Thank you. Or comments.
>> I have an answer to your question. >> Yes, please. >> The New Jersey Housing and Mortgage Finance Agency that regulates um every year they do different assessment and put out the cost for affordable housing. They're on
NJ.gov or you could just Google New Jersey Housing and Mortgage Finance Agency. They work in conjunction with your local local municipality agency and I think in ocean that is designated as
our housing division and code >> and then it's all dependent on your um income correct like yeah yeah >> okay that's helpful thank you thanks >> any more comments comments from the public. Okay,
Mr. Pulos, what what's next? How do we handle the uh recommendations? Anthony. >> Oh, yes. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So again, just to reiterate as was stated, um this has come before the planning board uh on
referral from the township councils at directing you uh the planning board uh to review the redevelopment plan and in accordance with NJSA4A12A-7E um report back to the township council your findings, conclusions, and
recommendations. I'll just briefly read the relevant part of the statute. Uh the planning board shall transmit to the governing body as a council within 45 days after referral a report containing its recommendation
concerning the redevelopment plan. This report shall include an identification of any provisions in the proposed redevelopment plan which are inconsistent with the master plan and recommendations concerning these inconsistencies and any other matters as
the board deems appropriate. So essentially what it's saying is that you are reviewing to to determine whether or not it's consistent with the master plan. if you find inconsistencies, um whether or not you have any recommendations as to how to fix those
inconsistencies. And the govern, as I stated before, the governing body, um when they consider actual adoption of this redevelopment plan, they will have the authority to approve, disapprove, or change any of your recommendations. But the most
important part here within 45 days a report addressing whether or not it's consistent with the master plan and if if you find inconsistencies what are your recommendations on how that can be rectified? >> So uh procedurally what do we do?
Somebody make a motion. How do we how do we send that back? >> Well there there would not be a motion tonight. There there's nothing to adopt. Uh we have to generate the report. >> Okay. Very good. >> That's the simplest answer.
>> Okay, that's simple answers are the best. >> Yeah, I I did too, >> John. Excuse me, chair. Mr. Um I thought we were told upstairs that we were voting on adopting just the
overall um plan and approving that. Not the specific nuances of it but the the idea of the plan. >> Yeah. Mr. Chairman, what are they putting in their report? What are we what are we telling them to put in their report? >> Those those are not issues that are
being voted on today. You are not it is not the planning board's authority to adopt the redevelopment plan. So, >> but we're finding it. We're here to decide whether or not it's consistent with the master plan. Correct. >> How do we tell them that is the question. [laughter] >> Yes. You cannot we can't possibly
undertake that at this meeting. It's going to be comprehensive review. We have to review the uh redevelopment plan to determine whether it's consistent. You can't sit here and juxtapose two things and determine whether or not it's consistent or not. uh that's going to
have to be done after this meeting, but within the 45day period. The board will the board will make its recommendations. Um doesn't necessarily have to be consensus, but uh you know, it has to be consistent and then we and then we send
the report over to the township uh council. >> So, how are we making those recommendations? >> We're making the re recommendations after we leave here today. board members will study it, determine whether or not with the help of our other professionals whether or not it's
consistent or not consistent with the master plan. To the extent that it's consistent with the master plan, then your recommendations will be simple to if you do find inconsistencies, then that's when uh the report will probably have to have much more information because you will also be giving your
recommendations as to how to alleviate those inconsistencies. >> I think that makes sense. But I think what we're asking is like do do I write them down and hand them to Nicole or like do we speak about them at the next meeting? Like I don't know.
in the last voted that they found itist members up here that are [clears throat] report >> and if we have issues do we submit comments >> write them like Jason's saying
you can get behind the unote at the end of >> Nicole Well, I think what we what we've done in the past was if we found inconsistencies tonight, we would not we could move to a >> vote. Sure. >> Hi, my name is Ashton Hartline McManam
Scotland and Bowman. I'm a redevelopment council for the township. Um, if I heard correctly, the board was discussing about whether or not the redevelopment plan can be approved for recommendation to council tonight. The board can, and
again, I represent the township, uh, the board can pass a resolution this evening, assuming there's no comments or any other substantive revisions, that the plan is approved and the council can move to uh, for a second hearing uh, for adoption of the ordinance at the next
council meeting. So, that's something that the count the board could do this evening. >> Thank you. And and within that resolution, we could include recommendations. Yes. If we had them here tonight. >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> So the and and also I'll add I believe that's how the planning board has dealt with this recently in the past. >> Yeah. >> So this 45day designation Yes. >> doesn't come into play then? >> No. That's from the date of referral. So I believe it was originally referred on
May 28th from the council >> to the planning board >> to the planning board >> which doesn't exist. >> Well, right and so this was originally to be heard on June 22nd I believe and that meeting was cancelled. I don't believe there was a quorum. So um that
period has elapsed. So I think the the effect of that would be that council does not need to consider any comments that the planning board would have because the 45 days from referral has elapsed. But they could, but they're not required to under uh subsection 70 of
the locally redevelopment housing law. >> So for those of us who just saw it yesterday for the first time, >> I I agree. Um a little bit of a weird situation. >> I think for many reasons that >> as a lawyer myself, I can
tell you I'm sure you know just um if it helps with anything this redevelopment plan like everything I did I did a whole presentation but if you turn to page uh section two relationship to other plans start on page seven this this is the
findings of how how we find it consistent with master plan it's actually written into the plan itself >> between pages seven So it goes on talks about the state plan adjacent counties, but if you want to get just into our local master plan,
page seven and and eight and up to nine. This takes those objectives I spoke in my PowerPoint. It writes it out. It can almost serve as your report and then you can add on to that as well. Oh, yeah. Yeah. >> So, so, uh, yeah. So,
>> I think there'll be no harm done if we just hold this and carry this to the next meeting. So, we have for the people that have not been able to look at this at all until this week, a little more time to make sure that uh we're comfortable with it. Uh, in theory, we could take a vote right now, but I don't
think there's any rush um to to pressure people to to really consider that quickly. So, um, does that make sense to everybody? >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, we'll carry this for final consideration for recommendations until the 20 the July 27th meeting.
>> Okay. What day was that? I'm sorry. >> Thursday, July 27th. >> Monday. >> Oh, Monday. Jeez. All right. We're going to work on these. >> Yeah. We're going to work on these uh here. >> Keep on your toes.
>> Yeah. Okay. >> All right. Thank you very much. >> Next up, we have rising treetops at 111 Mammoth Road, block 17, lot one in the R4 zone. attorney for the applicant, Ronald
Trapi. >> I got a moment there. >> There. Good to see you. >> Begin. Thank you very much again. Congratulations to the board and the board professionals. I'm Ronald J. Tropolley and I'm representing my RTO
which is the rising treetops organization. Before I begin, I'm going to request the board attorney to confirm juris Thank you. jurisdiction and the uh acceptance of service. This was carried from the last meeting and I believe that
at that point in time jurisdiction and the notice was not required what the notices were not required tonight. >> So jurisdiction >> so noted. So just to sort of brief everyone as to where we're at what RTO
is and and frankly some of you may not know I didn't know and I'm a lifelong resident of the shore. Uh, but what we have here, this is an application for minor site plan approval to construct upgrades to building six, which is Peter's Place Cabin, which includes two
additions at either ends of the existing building. We're seeking to add a front porch. The this totals approximately 766 square ft, additional decks, walkways, landscaping, fencing, roof, and siding
will be updated on that cabin. There will be four additional parking spaces. The dumpsters that are presently on site will be relocated. This is a very large site. Again, it's very deceptive when you're driving down Monmouth. This is a 15.24 acre site. Um,
and it presently contains a mix of 13 buildings um and paving and other related improvements. And I think it's worth noting that RTO has been in this town for 120 years now since 1906 at its present
location. Um participants live in cabins on site. There are counselors there, support facilities for those who um are the participants. They serve people with pro with special needs including autism and physical and intellectual
disabilities and provide respit for family. summer sleepaway um facilities are there and even over an open pardon me um out of home placement and it's important for this board now that there's a combined board to know that
RTO and this site has been before the I guess at that point of time would be the zoning board for a use variance and I'm sure your attorney will tell you and I'm sure Mr. Higgins who's a totally and eminently familiar with planning. I've
known Mr. Higgins for many years. Um we do not have to reprove a use variance in this case. We need solely to address the potential negative criteria. We don't have to prove special reasons because this border the predecessors to these
boards here have already ruled that the use is appropriate for this particular site. And I'll defer of course to Mr. Higgins when the time comes for that for that comment. Um so there it's been before the zoning and planning board I believe four times in 1992
and 1993. So we're here tonight for a minor site plan approval. And as I understand it, this application does not require any additional variances at all. Does not require reuse variance. I do have two witnesses tonight. Um my first
witness is Mr. Charles Sutherland who is a director of ORTO in Oakurst and then I have Mr. Earl Jackson. We also have there they are some mountain exhibits which we will introduce with Mr. Jackson's testimony.
My first witness who can come up and be sworn will be Charles Sutherland. Charles, remain standing and take an oath, please. >> Good evening, sir. Could you spell your first and last name for the record, please? Charles C A R L E
Southerntherland S U T H E R L A N. >> And can you state your business address for the record, please? >> 111 Mammoth Road, Oak, New Jersey, 077 council, before you move on, can I mark the exhibits into the record?
>> Certainly. I have been provided with a at least a shorthand version from A to Q. Is that of all of the exhibits that Nicole has given me? >> Okay, please. >> So, so we're going to mark as exhibit
A1, the board application. >> Exhibit A2, boundary and partial location survey prepared by Stonefield Engineering and Design dated April 25th, 2024. Exhibit A3, signage upgrades prepared by Stonefield Engineering,
design dated February 24th. And exhibit A4, facade improvements prepared by Gendler. >> Yeah. No, >> this is art or that's okay. Or >> problem is you agreed with the first
number of them. That's >> got my attention on [laughter] that. >> No problem. There you go. >> Okay. My apologies, >> council. Not a problem. >> Um, so we're going to mark exhibit A1,
site plan application. Exhibit A2, South Lot site plan prepared by Earl Jackson, Architecture and Urban Design, dated April 13, 2026. Revised May 19th, 2026. Exhibit A3, site plan prepared by Earl Jackson, Architecture and Urban Design,
dated April 13, 2026. Exhibit A4, trash enclosure specifications, prepared by Earl Jackson, Architecture and Urban Design, dated April 21st, 2026. And exhibit A5, survey of property prepared by Yukonis and White, Inc.
dated July 29th, 2025. Uh, as for the B exhibits, exhibit B1, the zoning officer's report, dated June 10th, 2026. Exhibit B2, board planners report, dated June 11, 2026.
Exhibit B3, board engineers report, dated June 4th, 2026. B4, memorandum from Department of Public Works, dated April 23rd, 2026. Exhibit B5, memorandum from code enforcement, dated May 4th, 2026. Exhibit B6,
memorandum from crime prevention unit, dated May 27th, 2026. Exhibit B7, memorandum from Traffic Safety, dated June 12th, 2026. Exhibit B8, memorandum from Fire Marshall, dated April 24th, 2026. Exhibit B9, zoning board
resolution, site plan, dated November 12th, 1992. Exhibit B10, zoning board resolution, bulk variances, dated November 12th, 1992. Exhibit B11, zoning board resolution dated July 23rd, 1992. And exhibit B12,
zoning board resolution dated March 25th, 1993. >> So Mark, council, may I proceed? >> Thank you. >> Okay. Good evening, Charles.
Can you or would you kindly provide the board with uh what is it that you do for RTO? >> I oversee the entire facility operational part and programming with
exhibit. >> And how many years have you been in that capacity? >> On my 20th year. >> Your 20th year. And u would it be fair to say that you're fully familiar with the operation of RTO here in Oakhurst? Correct. >> Okay. Um can you as by way of an
overview, could you provide the board with the kind of activities that occur there, the buildings and so forth just in a summary sense? They have the site plan which we will introduce later. >> We're we're not a specialized facility.
We do have an indoor outdoor pool. Uh we do recreation. We have a gym. We have arts and crafts, music and drama. We have um sensory rooms. Uh we have a nature program that's on seven and a half acres that we use strictly for the
nature program and uh we have sensory gardens. Anything to do with mobility and adaptability for individuals we we have this >> and can we discuss with specificity building six which is Peter's cabin that
is one of the subjects of the hearing tonight. Correct. Correct. >> Um can you describe what goes on in Peter's cabin? Peter's cabin currently houses 16 individuals that some happen to use wheelchairs. Um, some are happen to have physical or intellectual
disabilities. Um, over the years um, we've been a we have to minimize the space because wheelchairs are getting bigger. They're getting more um, high-end. Um, you know, some of our wheelchairs cost more than a new Mercedes at this point. So, the space
needed in there is a lot bigger than what we've had in the past. And how many um beds or rooms are there presently at the cabin? >> The cabin itself is is it's a dormatory style cabin. >> Okay.
>> So the one section holds um eight beds and then four seven counselor beds that's in its own separate room and then the other side holds the same amount. So it's 16 beds and then seven counselor beds. >> And there are interior renovations proposed. Of course, Mr.
Jackson won't get into that, but what would be the purpose of these interior renovations >> to to give our individuals the state-of-the-art of of independent living skills to learn how to do laundry on their own, how to u watch, you know,
to to do personal care, to um clean their, you know, make their bed, have their own space, to make their bed, to call their own space instead of a dormatory because privacy is to any of us is important and especially to our individuals who some you know some of them need you know uses catheterss
needed you know that they need the privacy. So this is the request from the families in our our individuals is is a more privacy of the buildings we have. >> And from a design standpoint would you agree that adding additional walkways and additional porches would help the
mobility of those who require different entrances and so forth? >> Absolutely. Mobility and independence. >> Okay. Um are you adding any bedrooms? >> No. >> Okay. cutting shorter. >> You're I'm sorry. >> You're lessening. Okay. Um and would it
be fair to say that Peter's cabin needs to be upgraded in terms of the exterior, whether it be roofing, siding, and so forth? >> Yeah. This building was built probably in the 60s and has not been touched since. >> So, part of part of the plan is to aesthetically improve the exterior. Is that correct? As well as the interior.
And one final question I have before I submit you to the board. Have you in your time there, Charles, have there ever been any complaints regarding the operation of RTO at that location? Absolutely not. >> It's all I have, Mr. Chair, of this witness.
>> Any questions? Any questions for the public? Okay, hearing none. >> Okay, you may step down. Thank you. >> Thank you for your 20 years of service there. >> Thank you. >> Okay, my next witness then will be Mr. Earl Jackson, who is the or there you are, the architect. If you would remain
standing, please. And uh take an oath. You would. >> Uh Mr. Jackson, can you stay spell your first and last name? First name A. >> What's your business address, Mr. Jackson? Do you swear affirm that you will tell
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Good evening, Earl. Will you provide the board the benefit of your professional education certifications and so forth and whether or not you've ever testified before any planning or zoning boards in state of
New Jersey or anywhere? >> Sure. I'm a licensed architect in New York, New Jersey and Florida. Uh I've got a history of um city design that goes back 30 years where often times we're the author of zoning and zoning ordinances and design guidelines.
really familiar with the challenges that you guys face on this board. Um taught at Columbia for 12 years, 14 years, taught at NGIT since 2006 and have presented for numerous awards in M County.
>> So clearly you've been accepted as an expert in the past in architecture. Mr. Cheryl is >> Merl, can you briefly uh advise the board um what went into your development of the site plan in terms of meeting
with a client, so forth, site visits, so forth? >> Uh so I first met Charles, I think at the end of last summer, and he expressed the need and desire to expand the building so that they could add programs to Peter's cabin. So what we've come here to talk about tonight are two um
plus 300 foot additions to either wing of the cabin. Those additions help us decant the staff bedrooms that are at the front of the building right now. And then in that decanting and gain of space at the front of the building, we're able to add programs like uh training
kitchen, training laundry, folding tables, and social areas so that um the campers have a place to um practice. And as such, you presented or strike that you prepared a site plan I believe was dated April 13th [laughter] that we
actually have on a photo board next to it. Is that all correct? Yes. >> And you're the architect who prepared that and that such you're fully familiar with that site plan. Is that all correct? That's correct. >> And regarding the photo board that is also on another easel, those are
colorized photos from the site plan. In other words, nothing new. It's just a um a mounted version of the photographs. Okay. Um and matter of fact, you took the photos yourself. >> Yes. Okay. Um
can you prov you kindly provide an overview perhaps using that exhibit? Uh and again, it's a mounted version of what's been presented already, which is a site plan. Um, what I'm going to ask you to do is briefly provide an overview of the
existing campus just so the board can have a feel for how large it is and and how minimal the impact will be. >> Nicole, give him the mic. >> Yes, I'm sorry, Nicole. Yes, Earl. >> Right. And what sheet are you referring
to there, Mr. Jackson? >> Uh, sheet number A050. >> Okay. And in a summary fashion, this is a depiction of the site as it presently exists. >> Yes. >> Please. >> Uh so the campus sits predominantly on the the buildings sit predominantly on
the west half of the campus, the 15acre site. As Mr. Sutherland mentioned before, there's a nature program on the other half. Uh it's about it's greater than 600,000 square ft uh with numerous structures, 16 structures on it. Peter's Cabin is the one at the north corner
>> and you're pointing to it now. >> It's number six. Um the main entry for the camp is off of South Lincoln and the parking lot that serves that main entry in the main office is building number one. Um so Peter's cabin is right there really at the front of the campus.
>> Okay. And uh regarding the um interior and exterior proposed upgrades. Let's start with the proposed exterior upgrades if you would to Peter's place which I believe might be on AO52
so the board can get an idea of what the floor plan would be like. >> Sure. The board look favorably upon the application. >> Is it AO52? I may have it wrong. >> A52 is the site plan. We could start with that if if you want to talk. >> Let's start with that first. I think um
so that area where Peter's cabin was is shown in an enlarged state here. The parking lot is just to the west of that. Um the two additions we're proposing for the staff beds are at either end plus or - 300 ft each. There's a small addition
in the back corner of each of the wings and that addition is why we're losing two beds in the cabin. That addition allows for a safe egress out of the um sleeping area and also access to the bathroom area in the back from both of those wings. Um the other addition to
the building is a front porch to help make a transition between the camp and yard and the public area of the renovated building. And then along with that um there are currently two ramps that allow for access at each end of the
existing building. And we're pushing those ramps and reconstructing them out at the end of the additions. And at the far end of the landing of those ramps, we're connecting to a small deck in the back, which also aids um in creating a second means of access and egress for
the property. >> And you also prepared a floor plan for the reconstructed Peter's cabin. Is that is that correct? >> Yes. >> And I believe that may be on sheet A101. 101. Is that correct? >> That's right.
>> Very good. >> Yeah. If you would just [snorts] briefly summarize what's there and what the interior layout will be. First of all, is it your understanding that that'll be completely reconstructed from the way it is right now? >> The the building will not be completely
re reconstructed. The interior will be completely refinished. >> Very good. >> And I can flip, if you want, I can flip the existing for reference. >> And that sheet that you flipped over is >> this is the demo plan for the existing
site area. And then this is the new. So each of the wings right now, um, the staff beds are stacked in bunks, four to each side. They're going to be sent to the end of the wing and taken [clears throat] out of bunks so that
they're a little bit more private. [snorts] Um that gives the staff a better position within the building to um take part in any needs that occur in the sleeping area. It also helps create a more secure perimeter uh in the
evening if uh if uh campers need need to get up or wander or or anything like that. >> So the staff beds will actually be in the additions. the staff beds are in the additions here. >> What other site plan uh changes uh can
you point out to the board? I understand that there are several um that we can talk about either with the engineer letter or just in general, what other fencing parking areas being included, dumpster location. So, there's currently
a fence along the edge of the western side of Peter's cabin. It separates or helps separate the parking area from the camper area. That fence is going to move further to the west and be reconstructed to make room for the addition. You can
also see a number of uh demolition lines and shades in the area, the southeast end of the parking. That dumpster is going to be relocated or we're proposing that we relocate it to the south end of campus in the south lot which is right near the entrance to the board of ed
building. Um other than that the very minor uh site changes where the walk is moving a little further away from the building to allow for the front porch uh and some minor grading to keep the water moving around the front of the building to the back.
You may come back What I'd like to do now, Mr. Chair, I'd like to go over the board reports. Um, we'll start, Mr. Jackson, again with the zoning officers report dated 610
2026. That's now B1. Um the only thing that I see that I believe we need to address here under zoning would be item D uh regarding the uh architectural zoning note with a 100 ft
setback for non-resident. Can you just explain that that does not apply here clearly? >> Yeah, we we erently included 100 foot setback to um residences for a non-residential use. um because of the
confusion between Ocean County and Mammoth County's uh zoning. >> Okay. >> So, it was just >> it's not an infrequent mistake that's made and I I' I've done it myself. One time I was looking at an ordinance trying to figure out where it came from
in Ocean Township and realized it was >> Mama County. Got it. But it should >> Thank you for that. So, they should really change their name down there. >> They should just go back to wear town. >> Yeah. So ridiculous.
>> Should the board look favorably upon the application that can be handled in subsequently as a resolution approve or an amended site plan. Correct. >> Sorry. >> Okay. And then let's let's move to Mr. Higgins report. That'll be B2. Um
I actually Mr. Higgins I you know thank you. I have your comments and uh you feel that uh that what we're asking for has no significant negative impacts which of course is a standard. Um and
just in terms of addressing Mr. Higgins report you would agree that this is really from a at least an architectural standpoint you cannot I know you're not a planner and I'm trying to qualify you as one but as an architect do you see any substantial negative def and
detriments to the zone zone plan or the surrounding community at all? Um, do you believe that the site is large enough to subsume these changes which may in fact be imperceptible from most people looking at this? Would you agree with
that statement? >> Okay, Mr. Higgins, anything further on that? >> No. >> And we don't have and and again and I I think it's clear from the record that we do not have to reprove special reasons in this case. Uh, would I be correct on
that, Mr. Har? It's an inherently beneficial use. >> Thank you. Then the next report I come up with uh would be the board engineers report. Engineer Mr. Matlock. Let's go through this. He raises some
questions. Do you have it here? Do it this way. Um project description appears as we have testified so far. Um surrounding uses of course are mostly residential R2 or
three R4 zoning compliance uh essentially referring to the board planner. I think we've covered that. Now if you would please I think what's [laughter] the critical aspect of Mr. Matlac's report would be number four if we can just go
through it one at a time. Uh traffic and parking and circulation. um if you would. An applicant is proposing a new waste disposal plan and provided a site plan depicting the proposed location for the dumpsters, a new slab enclosure, a rough turning uh
truck plan uh and construction details for the slab enclosure should be provided on a plan. Now, have we since provided that on a plan? >> Yes. >> Okay. And what plan would that be? The was that the south uh >> Yes. And an agenda,
>> right? And and Mr. Matler, have you seen the that exhibit that was I believe it was dated May I have it here somewhere. The South Lot site plan. It would be a 80 AO53 amended on May 19,
2026. I don't know if you have it. I have a copy for you to look at here. >> I do have a copy of that. Uh what I was looking for was a construction detail. So the the actual slab thickness with proper things like that. And then the
enclosure, you have a chain fence. Just a detail of what that fence looks like. >> Yeah. Did we provide that? >> We did. >> That I believe has been >> that's not on. >> No, no, it was >> Well, no, but it's a separate exhibit, I
think, and I'll be happy to I have many copies here. I can get you. >> So, did you revise it when you dropped off the Yes, >> the earlier one, >> but that was
>> we have I don't have an issue. >> Y have you have this, right? >> This is in the packet. >> Yeah, >> right. >> The chain link fence is in the packet, but the construction details are still something we would need.
>> Okay. So, I think that those details just need to on the plans. >> So on the new plan construct again assuming the board looks favorably upon this you can provide the construction details work with the engineer. >> Absolutely.
>> Okay. Would that be acceptable? Uh Mr. M. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um let's move on to number two. the proposed dumpster location um 90 ft from the nearest building and over 500 feet from Peter's Place cabin. How will
refu be collected and disposed of in the dumpster? Do you do you know or should I recall Charles >> for for number two? Just to clarify, the dumpster is not um into just Peter's cabin. It's a dumpster and enclosure for the entire campus. So,
we're moving that dumpster from the main entry point near South Lincoln in between the main entrance and the cabin to the south lot, which is more of the service entry and parking area for ancillary vehicles. >> And would you know how trash is transported, say, from Peter's Place
cabin to the dumpster area? >> I think you have smaller vehicles that move uh trash around the campus and would bring it through the campus to that site. And number three, let's just clarify that because there may have been some
confusion. The are there a total of 22 beds that are provided to be provided? We're actually losing beds. I think the the code for such facility requires no greater than 16 beds for the occupants
plus staffing beds. So the 16 beds is being reduced to 14 because of the access to the bathroom and eress and the number of staffing beds is remaining the same. >> Okay. So it's a total of 22 >> on your plan. >> 16 and 8 is 24.
>> Math wasn't I'm a lawyer. I'm not a mathematician. >> But you're right. It's reduced to 22. >> Thank you. Yeah. It was 24. Now it's 2, right? Okay. And um was I going to say something else on that?
Okay. And once again, no additional staff is to your knowledge is being proposed. Okay. And uh number four, I believe the engineer is looking for some additional
details on a site plan. Are we able to comply with that as a condition of approval? >> Absolutely. >> If should the board look favorably on the application? >> Okay. Would that be acceptable? >> Yeah. So the the site shows the area
concrete surface and then a note for existing trees like that concrete surface. We want to make sure that those trees are still remain there and survive. So don't want to put the concrete up around
the roof. So just probably locating those trees and maybe not. >> Okay. Thank you. Um I'm going to skip through reports that either have no opinion or or take or have take no
exception. That would be B4, B5, B6, B7. Um B8, which is the fire marshals report. There was a comment and I believe that has been addressed
with uh correct me if I'm wrong. The fire marshall had a concern with any Let's let me just get to the report here and read it. Please ensure new dumpster locations at the south of the property
do not impede fire department access through gate near the board of ed building. Has that been taken into account with the revised drawing? >> Yes. >> B9. Uh I'll point out to the board that we received this. Nicole was kind enough
to get it over to us, but the environmental commission report, which obviously is important in any application, was just received by us on July 13th. Um you know, just a couple of days ago. Um I don't know what the the board uh
Mr. chair, whether or not you would permit us to address it. My client, the architect, actually has prepared an exhibit just to give the board an idea of what it is we had in mind. I mean, we could submit it uh subject to
I guess environmental commission, you know, approval and maybe board planner approval or we could at least explain it tonight as to what it is we have. We have not handed out an exhibit. We understand there's 21 days are needed but >> you know getting a report two days ago
was a little difficult to do. >> Well by all means explain uh yeah >> okay can if he can just you without showing because that's just if you can explain this I find that was >> if you would yeah if you can do it in that fashion and and just so that everyone knows what would be proposing
and just for the record we are proposing landscaping is that correct? >> Yeah I mean you can use without showing them if you need that. But yeah, so if you would Earl with using the previously submitted plans,
what areas will were prime for a enhancement let's say? >> So other than the new paving that helps us with the front door. Um there's an area behind Peter's cabin between Peter's cabin and South Lincoln which
has fallen trees um under brush. Um so that shaded area through here is recommended to be cleaned out. Um and where there are trees that are in failing health uh or leaning threatening the cabin um those trees would be would
be coming down under an application for tree removal. Um we've shown a line of what we're thinking is arborvite. There's 20 of them between that underbrush uh area and the neighbor's fence at lot two. and then a new line of
12 to 14 of the same tree to help shield Peter's cabin from the parking area. >> Okay. So again, um Mr. Chair and members of the board, should the board look favorably upon this? I'm sure the
applicant would provide a a landscaping plan subject to do you generally make it subject to environmental commission review or is it your board planner? >> Board planner. >> Sure. >> Um and uh also you stipulate right that you'll follow uh the tree ordinance.
>> Absolutely. So noted on the record. >> Yeah. >> So noted and you could work with m you know get a copy of a maybe you can even show them to me if you want. But >> do you happen to know if the trees that you have to that you have to remove the would the plan be to replace them on
site? >> Is that something you could say? >> Replace them on site. [clears throat] >> To be honest, there's so it's very dense and uh there's a lot of landscape there. So we might look at an arborist to make sure that anything that's that's newly replanted in that understory would survive the shade that's already there.
>> Okay. >> So if you would work with again if if we are approved, work with Mr. Higgins on that. Um, let me see if I have anything else.
So, once again, just to sum up on the negative criteria, would you agree with me that the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed improvements? >> Yes. And would do you believe also that the additional landscaping and fencing
will serve to minimize any negative uh aspects, visual aspects? And would you also agree that the site is well buffered and is large enough to accommodate all of the proposed changes
that are being proposed? >> Yes. And finally, the upgrades that are presented to the board tonight will serve to upgrade Peter's cabin, which is in need of of substantial exterior
renovations and the interior renovations would serve to make it a more functional building for staff and participants alike. >> Yes, >> Mr. Chair, that's all I have. >> Okay. Any questions? >> Mr. Chairman, I have a number of
questions for Mr. Jackson. I'm just kidding. [laughter] >> I have a question on the arborites that you're mentioned there and could I couldn't see from all the way back there. I apologize, but uh where Peter's place is um with Arborites, is that
facing Mammoth Road there? Are are you looking to make more of a buffer there between the sidewalk and you can just answer? I mean, we're quite a distance from Mammoth Road. So, the entry into main entry into uh RTO is is hundreds of feet from uh the Mammoth Road,
>> but the trees are there to make more of a buffer between the road for privacy. >> They they would make a buffer between the parking area and the cabin >> parking area. >> Yeah, >> I think you did say that. Thank you. >> And the building's closer to uh Lincoln, right? Is that Yeah, that's right.
What kind of buffer exists there now? >> Right now it's mostly natural. >> Okay. >> Um tall like 100 foot tall oak trees. Um some of the ones that are mixed in there are the ones that aren't in great shape and potentially threatening would remove. >> Any more questions?
>> Do you have pictures of that? I'm just reading the environmental commissioner's report and he notes that it's a burden to identify everything but he said identifying the trees in the
immediate area of the work sites expected in most photo of the rear of the building. And then I have the cluster of trees behind me now. Not to change the nice lush character.
We like trees in >> so >> it's a concern. >> So >> thank you. >> Yeah. So the the comment and if I understand correctly here as well is you know it would be a necessary burden for the applicant to have to go through 15
acres of trees and identify them. Also it would not be a problem to identify dust of trees in the affected area and have them marked and or label in the affected areas. >> Not at all. I did a walking survey and and that's how we mark the ones that are in the plan now. But we could do it with
a landscape. That's what the Mr. Colton >> Thank you for that. >> Thanks, counselor. >> Any more questions? >> Next. >> Any questions for the public?
>> No. >> Would you like to sum up? >> Just very briefly, I you know, this is an absolute asset to the town. It's probably one of the largest open spaces. It's a great neighbor. These are really
important upgrades. They're aesthetic. They're functional. And I would ask the board to indicate that there is absolutely no substantial negative impact on the zone of the zone plan as a result of the approval of this
application and I'll submit on the balance. Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the board. >> I should have technically asked if there are any comments from the public, but I see none. We'll close the public hearing. Um, do we have a uh motion for a positive resolution?
>> I'll make a motion for positive resolution with the conditions of the landscape plan being submitted and the complying with the engineers report. The comments in the engineers report >> and the environmental. [clears throat] >> Yeah, that's that was the landscape plan.
>> Yeah, the fact that they're going to do that is in response to that. >> Okay. Second. Yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> Yes. >> Thank you very much. >> You guys Thank you very much, folks. Have a great evening. >> All right. Have a good night. Next, we have Bank of America, Route 35 Southbound, Sunset Avenue and Valley Road, block 187, lot one. Lots one and
10.01 and five. Good luck. >> At least you figured it out. [cough and clears throat] >> At least he told me right away. >> Forgot about that. >> [laughter] >> Okay. Attorney for the applicant,
Mr. Thomas Matisa. >> Yes. >> Is that correct? >> Uh, good evening. >> Good evening, >> Mr. Chairman. I I think we're waiting on three board members to return. >> Oh, right. That's what she That's why she told me. Great. Yeah. Sorry. No, they're coming back. >> Oh, they are.
>> They could clear the room >> because they can't. >> And then there were two. Yeah. >> No objectors, it seems. Right. >> What is the what's the reason for
joining the board? redevelopment plans. >> Well, I guess that's Sit behind the computer. Okay. Let the record reflect. All members are back. [clears throat]
>> Uh, yes. here. >> Here >> okay. Uh, good evening. Uh Tom Letsia, attorney with the law firm of Troutman Pepper Lockach in Princeton here
representing Bank of America National Association, which is the applicant in this matter as well as the tenant uh at the uh subject location. So, we are here this evening for a very
simple application to request minor site plan approval uh for the bank to relocate its existing pylon sign along Route 35. Uh just for the record, we did provide notice of the of this hearing uh
actually for the last month's hearing which did not take place but uh was carried uh to uh this evening and all the affidavits confirming the provision of notice was provided. So I do believe the board does have jurisdiction
uh to proceed and act on this uh application. Just a little bit of brief uh background. So the subject site is identified as lots 1 1.01 and lot five and block 187 on the township tax map.
It is a 27 acre parcel occupied by the ocean plaza uh shopping center. The bank building is located on lot five which is an 8.5 acre parcel. It contains a one-story bank building
with a drive up ATM facility and the address is 1100 New Jersey State Highway 35. The site is in the C3 general commercial zone district that is lot five and the
shopping center itself is also in the uh I1 light industrial zone. Uh both uh zones uh do permit banks and shopping centers. So as I noted, we're here seeking a
minor site plan to replace and relocate the bank's pylon or monument sign. I should point out that uh new facade signage as well as uh some new directional signage uh is also
proposed uh at the bank site, but those uh upgrades were have already been permitted. They just haven't been installed yet. Uh the bank is also proposing to freshen up this facade by repainting it. And we have some renderings that we can show you so you
could see the difference. It's just again it's just really freshening up the uh the bank facade. So in addition to minor site plan, we are seeking a C2 [clears throat] bulk variance uh pursuant to ordinance
section 21-44.3A which permits one freestanding sign per street frontage. The uh shopping center site today has five freestanding signs along Route 35. One of which is the Bank of America
sign. I presume this was uh permitted by a prior variance grant uh by the uh by the planning board. The proposed new bank sign is smaller in size and less in height than the
existing sign. But because the new sign will be in a different location along Route 35, a variance is technically required as indicated by Mr. Higgins uh your planner. Uh the number of freestanding signs will remain at five.
So there's no additional freestanding signs. Uh we have uh reviewed the uh review letters and or reports. I believe there are uh a total of six uh from town uh traffic safety, town
crime prevention detective, township code enforcement administrator, the environmental commission, which uh we just received the copy today. uh that's dated uh July 13th and as well as from your board planner date dated uh
May 14th, 2026 and the board engineer dated May 21st, 2026. Uh of those reports, it's really just three of them uh engineer planner and environmental commission that have any substantive uh comments and those are
the ones we'll uh will address. I can say for the record that uh you know based in the review of those uh reports uh we agree with all the recommendations. So in our opinion there's really no open issues here.
So unless you have questions of me uh we will begin. I think we'll go through the exhibits if you want to put those on the record. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I'll try to get all of them correct. [laughter] Uh let's start with the A exhibits.
Exhibit A1 will be the planning board application. Exhibit A2 will be boundary and park location survey prepared by Stonefield Engineering and Design dated April 25th, 2024. Exhibit A3, signage upgrades prepared by Stonefield
Engineering and Design dated February 24th, 2026. Exhibit A4 improvements prepared by Densler dated January 12th, 2026. So turning to the B exhibits, we have exhibit B1, the zoning officer report,
dated April 29th, 2026. Exhibit B2, the board planners report, dated May 14th, 2026. Exhibit B3, board engineers report, dated May 21st, 2026. Exhibit B4, memorandum from the Department of Public Works, dated April
8th, 2026. Exhibit B5, memorandum from code enforcement, dated April 8th, 2026. Exhibit B6, crime prevention unit report, dated April 10th, 2026. Exhibit B7, traffic safety report, dated April
14th, 2026. Exhibit B8, fire marshall report, dated April 21st, 2026. Just so we're clear, the recent July report was not provided. >> Okay. So,
>> we'll mark that as exhibit B9 then. What was it titled again? >> The environmental commission report. >> All right. Environmental commission report. >> Okay. Uh so unless there are questions of me, I'll ask our u
one witness uh to come forward. She's already here. You'll need to stand up and be sworn. Good evening. Can you state your uh can you spell state and spell your name first and last name for the record, please? >> Yes. My name is Olivia Canon spelled K O
N O N I K. >> And what is your business address? >> I work for field engineering located at 700 banks in Aspbury Park. >> And keep your right hand. Do you swear to tell the truth to help you?
Thank you. So, Miss Kenonia, let's uh begin by having you uh provide the board with your educational professional background, please. >> Yes. Um I graduated from Rowan University with a bachelor's in civil engineering and I have I am a professionally licensed engineer in the
state of New Jersey and my license is in good standing. I have about seven years of experience in the land development field um ranging from bank applications or minor site plans all the way um to groundup developments. >> And have you testified either before this board which probably not because
it's a brand new uh board uh or similar boards in the state of New Jersey uh and accepted as an expert in engineering? >> Yes. I have not testified in front of this board, but I have testified in front of the numerous amount of boards in New Jersey. We'll accept Mr.
>> Chairman. Yeah, I offer her as a expert in engineering. >> So maybe um Coniac, we should begin. I I mentioned about uh some of the facade uh improvements. I know there was a comment I believe uh by Mr. Higgins about the
facade work and wanted to see some renderings and I think we have a plan that shows that. >> Yes. So u I brought a plan. And I also brought some um handouts if the board would like them just to basically show that the upgrades that are being made to
the facade of the building. It's really just the three signs that are existing today. They're conforming today. They're just being replaced with um as also three existing conforming signs that are just updated Bank of America. And then
the building will be painted and then there's some minor repair work to the building that will be um done as well. So let me uh present this exhibit. >> Is this a exhibit name? >> Yeah, this is a new exhibit. Um, so we
can call this the site adaptation package. >> Mark, this is exhibit B10. >> Yes, this is prepared by Gensler on November 11th, 2024 is the date there.
And then um the first page u I guess page 13, page 13 shows the existing conditions. So you can see the um existing Bank of America signage. And then on the next page, which I will flip to now, page 14,
which can be the updated rendering, which really just shows the building refreshed with the new signage. Um so we'll submit this as should the board act favorably this evening. If you read the scope on the
side, it really just mentions painting and cleaning up the sidewalks and cleaning the various areas of the the bank building. >> Okay. So, let's turn to the subject of this application, which is the uh the
pylon sign. >> Yes. So, uh, this site is located the Ocean, uh, Plaza Shopping Mall. Um, it's home to the Pure One Imports. It's got a Panera Bread, Planet Fitness. There's a Wegman's also there. And then along the
Route 35 frontage, there are two standalone buildings. That is the Taco Bell. And then right next to it is the Bank of America building. So, our application is proposing to update um, just the Pylon sign since the facade signage has already been approved. And
this is just or sorry permitted and this is just as a part of Bank of America upgrading and updating their signage and their branding to be um what is current. So um our application is proposing to move the sign to um the north which
really if you're looking at the plans is page right approximately 70 ft um along the route 35 frontage. The setback will remain the same um approximately 27 ft. the sign height and the sign um square footage will also uh remain compliant as
it is uh existing today. It'll actually just become marginally smaller by 6 in the the sign will shrink and then or be shorter 6 in not shrink and then the uh square footage of the actual facade sign will be three square feet smaller.
So um not anything visible really to the naked eye and then as Mr. Letia mentioned the sign, you know, is fully compliant, but there's the uh variance of having multiple signs within the property where only one is allowed. So, we're not proposing anything new. We're
not removing anything. We're simply just moving it. Um, and the bank building, it's set back pretty far. It's set back approximately 110 ft from the property line and then another 5 to 10 ft from the curb line itself. So, as you're traveling down Route 35, the bank itself
is is pretty tucked back and there's like kind of a lessened potential for bank patrons to really see this building as they're as they're traveling. So, on the southern side, as you're traveling against um the bank, the
on the yeah, on the southbound sign, as you're traveling against the bank, um the sign is kind of tucked into those trees. There's a large mature canopy on the south side of the building and it's kind of tucked into those trees. And then um there's the driveway that is kind of like a ramp that allows you to
access the the shopping center. And that's really the best ramp to to take to get to the Bank of America. So you're not kind of weaving through the shopping pit, even though you kind of have to do that anyway. Um but by the time you see that sign, the drive is already started. So if you push it up 70 ft, it gives
drivers considerable amount of time to make their decision. and and you know make safe decisions really and then traveling northbound the the sign is almost completely covered by the mature canopy of shade trees over there. So just bringing it out a little bit
further allows people to see that and then you know they can make their if if they want to you know take whatever uh roads to cross Route 35 and get into the shopping plaza that's you know on them um to to maneuver.
Um, but continuing, there were comments regarding the internal internal illumination. So, I would like to put on the record that the freestanding sign will only be illuminated by the bank letters, not by the entire sign cabinet. Um, similar to
how it is today. It's just via the bank letters. And then we also reviewed um the bank's proposed location for the sign in relation to the overhead wires that are uh along the site. And we've located it
in an area that will provide sufficient clearance. And I I think in general the location of the sign kind of matches the general like the general clearance of of all the other signs that are right up against the utility poles and wires that
are along Route 35. There's kind of a lot of infrastructure there. So it's it's a little bit difficult to avoid, but we think we've done a good job locating the sign so that there's there are no clearance issues. And then also included within the scope of this application is um striping of
the lot. So we will do the pin pin stripe style striping um and the also replacement of any Bank of America uh parking signage and um things like that throughout the site. And then finally, I would just like to
request um a waiver perhaps from the board engineer for the DOT and the county submissions. Since we are not affecting um their frontages in in any way, it's really just sign location. We believe that um we could uh request
waiverss for these applications. And that ends my direct. So, Miss Conc, I know you're not a planner and I haven't qualified you as, but do you have an opinion on whether this relocation causes cause any uh negative
impact along the uh along the roadway or to any aspects of the shopping center? >> I do not think so. >> Thank you. And in terms of the other comments from the board engineer and the board planner, u are we in agreement
other than the the request to provide DOT or county planning board documents which again that they shouldn't be affected. So just to move a sign, we shouldn't have to
go apply to the county. >> I don't know that we have that authority. Do we? >> I don't believe. >> Yeah, we don't have the authority to waste that. >> So I think you could submit a waiver request to those agencies. >> Okay. Yeah. I mean, for the DOT, it would have to probably be a letter of no
interest, which I think is a little overkill for this project considering the um traffic to the site isn't changing. But if the board would um like us to submit to both of those
agencies, we [clears throat] would comply. >> I don't think we can. If it's state rules, it's the state rules or be >> well is not going to take jurisdiction >> of this. I mean, we're not there's no new access. We're not adding traffic.
So, getting a letter of no interest is not a requirement. It's just sort of, you know, what you, you know, >> this type of application is a bit of an overkill. That's that's the point. Yeah, you're asking us to wave
wave another sovereign agencies. >> Okay, fine. We're not going to argue over it. >> I know they are very helpful and cooperative. There is a phone number on the top of the website. You can call them and ask them this exact question.
In these circumstances, do we need a waiver or is there another way to go about this so we don't need a letter of interest? They may tell you it's and this is all you have to do. They are incredibly happy. >> Yeah. What um could we make maybe just
any written confirmation from either agency? Um since you know like the DOT probably wouldn't issue like a letter of no interest. Um, I mean I guess they would, but my
thought is that there's we wouldn't even we would have to prepare a lot more documents that are not within the scope of this application um to submit to the DOT specifically. Um, but I believe that you know like if we were just to reach
out to the county, present them our plans and say, "Hey, this is what we're doing. Do you take any objection? should we submit formally and if they were to email back saying this looks good then would that s like satisfy the requirement I guess >> yeah that would
>> okay and then we will do a similar effort with the DOT and provide some type of written correspondence and if they you know we we'll provide whatever >> correspondence >> okay >> isn't that a permitting question though
not a zoning question >> well any any outside agency approval is always a condition of any board approval. So if they get confirmation that outside agency approval is not required then that would satisfy that.
>> Yeah I think perhaps the language could be written confirmation from the agencies. >> That's our presentation. >> Okay. Any questions? the um environmental commissioner respg.
>> Sorry, we had just um seen that that letter, but I believe there were some um comments regarding the types of plantings that were proposed. >> He was okay if you switch them. >> Okay. >> Yes. Yeah, we we'll um comply with that
and anything that you know we'll make sure that we work with the board professionals. >> Um are there seven pages or is it only six? >> There's six. Yeah, we will we will um resubmit an updated plan which also
excuse me for overlooking will include the uh pylon sign foundation detail as well. Okay. Any more questions? Did we miss anything? Professionals, you're good. Any questions from the public? Comments from the public.
>> You're good. >> Okay. We'll close the public hearing. Do we have a motion for a positive resolution on this application with all of the uh stipulations that have been put forth? Right. >> I'll move for positive resolution. One sec.
>> Yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you.
>> Congratulations on your form and your work to >> more work, right? More business. Yeah. >> Okay. Other business. >> Anthony, do we need to walk through any of these? >> Yep. So, the other business we have is review of proposed ordinances.
[clears throat] Mr. Chairman, the next item is ordinance number 2549 referred to the planning board by council pursuing NJSA 55-26. Planning board's role this evening is limited by statute. The board is not
deciding whether this is good public policy or whether the county council should adopt the ordinance. Our responsibility board's responsibility is to determine whether proposed the proposed ordinance is substantially consistent with the town's master plan and not [clears throat] identify any consistent inconsistencies
and recommendations to council. At this time I would ask our planner to summarize the ordinance and identify the master plan provision supporting these amendments and provide an opinion as to whether the ordinance is substantially consistent with the master plan.
and a little bit of a loss. Is this the ordinance for reducing the >> This is the ordinance for right >> as well as the I don't think there's any inconsistencies with the master plan if anything more consistent with the master plan because one of the goals is to try
and reduce the impacts of development. Um the reason for lowering the height of the building is that residential buildings the way the ordinance is set up now could be almost 40 feet high and the intent is that simply they not be
any more than 35 ft high so definitions were changed and the height was changed and the overall height from from grade will now be I believe it's 30 which is more consistent with the character of residential obviously the reduction in the
impervious curve coverage is going to help reduce impacts like we had last to 45. >> Hold on. Where is 65 to 45? Because all I'm seeing is 50 to 45. >> What the impervious >> 65 to 45
>> the higher density residential zone. >> Jim, in some locations it's already 45, right? We change, sorry. >> Oh, yeah. >> We changed some locations already. This is the rest. >> Yeah, we changed some. This this is correcting some of the others. >> So, I guess my my only question is when
we did the rest of the others, and someone correct me if I'm wrong because my memory on this one's a little hazy, we dropped the impervious coverage, but we up the floor area ratio. Is that correct? >> I don't remember uping. First of all, in
the residential areas, there's no area ratio. >> In the commercial areas, we didn't drop the impervious >> coverage. >> Right. Right. >> Building coverage. >> Yeah. We took buildable lot area out and
then we had a building coverage that was somewhat consistent with the prior building coverage but because of the mathematics the buildable lot area actually was reduced. The lot area is reduced. So the building coverage was higher and then when you eliminated the
buildable lot area and used the total lot area the building coverage came down. So the the size of the building was pretty much the same, but the impervious was reduced. >> Right. >> Okay. >> And it's it's been reduced more because
it was felt that it wasn't enough. >> It's a shame that nobody from the public is here to hear this. [laughter] >> We do good things. >> No, they they know what we're doing. They said we didn't realize we had not
had it right the first time, but this is what we did. You know, we reduced it >> and then we reduced it again. >> I think we've done a significant move in the reduction. >> Um, and this second one really puts us
in a good spot. So, >> absolutely. >> So, when does this go when would this go into effect and how does it affect the cases that are already in front of uh that are >> 20 days from the date council adopts it? So it would get adopted at the next
council meeting and then whatever cases aren't heard. >> Okay. >> If you do your first reading >> Oh, they did. >> That's what I was asking. >> Okay. That's what I was asking.
>> So, so this would be adopted at the next council meeting when August 13th, >> right? >> And then if anything comes in after that, it goes that's what gets affected. >> So 30 ft is that peak
is that the peak of a roof the peak of the roof from the average front of the building. average grade at the front. >> So, practically speaking, will this are we in danger of then seeing a whole bunch of uh variance requests saying
it's really 28 ft, but because we have this nice looking to make it look nice, we did this and it's going to be 32. >> You may get some variance saying it's going to look more attractive if we have a steeper slope roof and that's up to the board to decide whether it is or not. Our architect's going to prove why
it can't stand. >> Luckily, we meet twice a month. >> I agree. >> And we have an architect who could show them how to make it the right way. >> The reason why you're doing the reduction is because you don't want to give out the variances. That's the problem that we're getting right now
with the flooding in town. I mean, unless it's a true hardship, and that's where, you know, the board is going to have to decide what's a true hardship and what's not. You know, I chose to move a little further west in town where the
properties are a little bigger and I could have the pool and stuff. That's the choice you make. If you want to have smaller piece of property, you got to have less. I mean, that's just how it is. And if anything proved to us that we need to be serious about this, it were the events that happened a week
and a half ago. So if that's ever been proof that we have a problem, right now is the time. So, I don't really think there's a great argument coming in here with anybody in front of the board unless
[clears throat] >> you're correct. So because we're a new board, I'm just curious when people have come more recently before the zoning board, what have been the typical requests for what kind of >> what percentage? I don't believe there's
been many. Is it 45%? Is it 65%? >> Colleen, I don't think we've ever had a hype. >> I'm saying they ask >> it's 100%. >> I would say normally they'll they'll the ask will be high and then the board
planner will get involved and they'll redo their plans and then come in and say, "Well, I already made concessions." That's usually what happens a lot. >> But then we turn But then we Yeah. >> Okay. So on this, do we need to uh
>> move to uh agree? >> Is that a quick Mr. Higgins? Now >> Mr. Hicks >> consistent. >> Mr. Higgins, >> is this now all the zones are going to be the same now? >> What >> are all the R zones going to be the same
now at 30 ft? I believe so. Yes. >> And 45%. >> No, but I meant the height like be >> across the whole town. >> Thank you. >> So, uh, a motion will be in order
finding ordinance number 2549 substantially consistent with township master plan or identifying any inconsistencies and any recommendations and directing the board's report be forwarded to the township council. >> Okay. Does anyone find any inconsistencies or is anybody willing to make a motion that it's in performance?
>> I'll make a motion forward. >> I'll second. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. Mr. Mr. Chairman, the next item is ordinance number 2549 referred to the
planning board by town of council pursu this evening again is limited to whether the proposed ordinance >> we just did 25 misspoke 2542 >> 4242 >> our job remains the same though right
>> I apologize All right. 2542 planning board's role this evening is limited to determining whether the proposed or substantially consistent with the master plan and if not identifying any inconsistencies and recommendations for council. This ordinance does not amend the zoning map, does not create new permitted use, does
not expand the cannabis business overlay zone. simply amends committed hours [clears throat] of operation for existing cannabis retail business like make a motion >> that was for the hours of operation >> hours of operation for the cannabis
business. Yes. >> And what are the hours of operation? So 8 a.m. >> Monday through Saturday through 10 to 10 p.m. now instead of 8:00 p.m. >> Sundays until 7:00 p.m. instead of 5:00 p.m. >> I mean, how does something like this even come up? I mean, who
>> I can explain. >> Knock on the door. I [laughter] >> Let me explain. >> I'll explain. Uh, since the opening of our new uh retail location, their hours are less than across the street in Neptune. So they want to make sure they're competitive and people aren't
going across the street >> buying and getting the 2%. I think I'm of the opinion that we want to keep them in town. That's just my opinion, >> but uh it does make sense. >> A goodist
little logic to that one. >> Just consistent with other jurisdictions. >> They better be in these meetings more. >> Mr. Mr. Chairman, if there's no other questions, I'll make a motion to find this consistent with our master plan. I'll second. >> Yes.
>> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. Mr. Chairman, the next item is resolution number 26-101 adopted by the township council. This resolution authorizes the planning board to undertake a preliminary investigation pursuant to the local redevelopment and
housing laws to determine whether the properties identified in the resolution satisfy the statutory criteria to be designated as a non-condation area in need of redevelopment. This action does not designate the property for redevelopment rather initiates investigation. The planning
board's responsibilities will include receiving a planning study, conducting a public hearing after proper notice, considering all testimony and evidence, and ultimately making a recommendation to council which will make the final deterine the final determination. Um,
and at this time, I make a motion for the resolution back to council. this challenge. Yeah, we adopt this since it's in opposite of you know the law it couldn't
be challenged right because usually you have to declare an end domain to do that I mean I think this is a great idea >> well there no because there's non condemnation area need redevelopment and and condemnation where you have the power of eminent domain
>> in a non condemnation you don't have the power of eminent domain >> and we're just this is just The council author or asking us to perform the study. >> Yes. >> I'll make a motion for >> I'll second.
>> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> That concludes my >> There was another one in the packet
2612, >> but it's not in the agenda. >> Agenda, >> so we'll consider it next time. It's not on the agenda. >> Good thing we meet twice a month. [laughter] Well, this was >> this was for the Orchard Plaza
redevelopment plan >> which we carried, right? >> Oh, okay. >> Oh, okay. >> Somebody's reading it. >> Somebody else. >> All right. Motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> I'll take them. I'll take them. We >> have a second. Second. All in favor? I
opposed.