I'd like to call to order the uh May 28, 2026 Oldbridge Township Planning Board meeting. Please rise for the pledge. States of America stands nationy.
>> Okay, Daniel, could we please have a roll call? >> Mr. Deal >> here. >> Mr. Lenning >> here. >> Mr. Tamo is absent. Miss Cannon. >> Mr. Rena >> here. >> Mr. Petty >> here. >> Miss Misella >> here. Mr. McIac >> here.
>> Mr. Brennan is absent and Mr. Ferrar is absent. Chairman Lowour >> here. >> Okay. We're going to swear in the uh professionals. >> Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're going to give this evening? It's the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
>> I do. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. U next minutes of March 26, 2026. Can I get a any any additions or deletions to the If not, can I get a motion?
>> Move it. >> I'll second. >> Mr. Diploma, >> yes. >> Mr. Lenning, >> yes. >> Miss Cannon, >> yes. >> Mr. Rener, >> yes. >> Mr. Petty >> here. >> Yes. >> Meller. >> Yes. >> Mr. McGis? >> Here. >> And Chairman Low.
>> Yes. Um, next resolution, uh, 13-2025P, 95 Wesley Road, Peter Zimmyi, extension of minor subdivision approval. Mr. Chairman, this is an approval that
the board had granted uh, back in the fall of 2025. Uh, due to some um, delays they have with regarding outside agency approvals, they're requesting a 90-day uh, extension of time to perfect the subdivision approval. um which would
then expire uh as of August 20, 2026. >> Okay. Thank you. Um >> can I get a motion to move that forward? >> Second, >> Mr. Dalma? >> Yes. >> Mr. Lenning? >> Yes.
>> Miss Canon? >> Yes. >> Mr. Rena? >> Yes. >> Mr. Petty? >> Yes. >> Missella? >> Yes. >> Mr. Mcis? >> Yes. >> And Chairman Lowry? >> Yes. Okay. Uh next application 4-2025P
600 Jock Street LLC major preliminary and final site plan with a C variance uh carrying uh it's going to be adjourned till 9:2426 with notice. >> Correct.
>> Okay. Okay. Okay. Moving on. We're gonna we're going to jump out of order a little bit here. Uh we're going to go uh to Wawa, Inc. first. Um just so the the the planning board
members u are aware that the minor sub and site plan committee um uh had a representation u of what was going to be uh done at the uh WAWA and u
we voted in favor of moving it forward and uh Mr. Sadilla will give you the uh agreed agreed to uh items. >> Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, that this uh application is for a [snorts] minor site plan uh for uh provision of
changes to the parking and interior circulation of the existing Huawa. There's no changes to the building uh or any of the other site improvements. Uh we are actually increasing the number of spaces from 43 to 55 adding additional
uh ADA compliant space as well as um additional striping curving and landscaping accordingly. This was heard before the planning board's minor uh minor site plan and subdivision subcommittee. Uh it was approved subject
to um a number of conditions. one being the general condition of compliance with the board of engineer and planners memo. Uh they also agreed that they will um pro provide signage for the air pump
space. They will provide landscaping lowlying landscaping, shrubbing and landscaping in the new proposed islands. Uh and that um otherwise they're compliance with with all of our app zoning require excuse me zoning
regulations as well as they'll advise they'll be compliant with the me memorandums of our professionals. >> Okay. Um I'm looking for a motion to uh approve it.
>> I'll move it. I'll second. >> Mr. Dalma, >> yes. >> Mr. Lenning, >> yes. >> Miss Cannon, >> yes. >> Mr. Rena, >> yes. >> Mr. Petty, >> yes. >> Miss Mella, >> yes. >> Mr. McGisac, >> yes. >> And Chairman Lauer,
>> yes. Okay. Uh next out of order uh is a Walmart real estate business 53-2025P major preliminary final site plan with a C variance. Is there somebody representing?
>> Okay. Good evening. My name is Tom Latzia. That's L T I Z I A. I am an attorney with the law firm of Troutman and Pepper Lock in Princeton
and here representing Walmart Real Estate Business Trust which is the applicant as well as the tenant of the property which is the subject of uh tonight's hearing. We have provided the required legal notice of this hearing by
certified mail to property owners within 200 feet as well as publishing a notice in the home news tribune. Affidavit confirming the notice have been provided to Mr. Hulahan and I believe subject confirmation uh from your council. This
board does have jurisdiction uh to hear this matter tonight. >> Mr. Chairman, the board does have jurisdiction. Proper notice was provided by him. >> Uh, thank you. The application was certified as complete by a letter dated
February 6, 2026 from Miss Sant. Just a little uh background before I call my witnesses. Uh the uh property is identified as lots 9.11 and 2.11 in
block 5000 on the old Birch Township tax map. Uh the address of the property is 1126 US Route 9 and the uh subject site is a total of
24.86 acres. I'm sure you all are familiar with the property. It is known as the old bridge square shopping center which uh contains a Walmart store as well as a Home Depot,
a KF uh KFC and a small strip center. Uh the uh property is within the regional commercial shopping or CR zone of the ordinance which permits uh retail development.
In uh 1999, uh the township zoning board granted use variance approval with bulk variances to uh develop the property as a shopping center and the Walmart store uh was opened in 2001.
Uh in this uh current application, Walmart is seeking clearing final site plan as well as C variance approval uh to convert an existing portion of the store parking lot along Route 9 to
create 19 uh designated online pickup and delivery or as uh we often call it OPD uh stalls uh in order to facilitate Walmart's uh pickup and delivery. service. The application also proposes
directional signage to uh direct customers to the pickup area as well as uh building upgrades, namely new wall signage and new exterior paint uh to refresh the store facade to reflect
Walmart's uh current branding. Uh the application also includes approval replacement of up to 40 uh temporary seabbox containers in the existing northwestern portion of the uh
store parking lot. Uh this is at the side of the store facing away from Route 9. And these will be uh seasonal containers on the site from October 1st through December uh 31st of each
calendar year. So with this current project uh this is the uh first uh remodel of the Walmart store uh in nearly 25 years.
Just a little explanation about the OPD service. Uh this is a business that has grown significantly since the onset of COVID uh in 2020. Customers view the service as a major convenience particularly for those wishing to remain
in their vehicles rather than shop in the store and are looking to reduce uh their shopping time. It is an amenity that today's uh Walmart customers demand. And as a result, uh Walmart is proposing O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OPD upgrades to its stores uh
throughout the country. Uh having the online pickup area separate from the main brick and mortar store entrance also provides benefits from a circulation and parking uh perspective. The parking uh spaces are
reserved for online pickup are not the same spaces uh the traditional customer will use uh to park and go into the store. So the pickup areas designed in a way more suited uh to the pickup process
that results in a safer design for both customers and associates. Uh the pickup operation will run between the hours of 7 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Whereas store hours are from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. There will be no changes
to the shifts of uh Walmart Associates. In terms of the uh temporary seabbox containers, uh these are necessary in order to accommodate a seasonal inventory increase that occurs during the peak holiday retail period and are
essential to support Walmart's fulfillment operations. The containers will be used for short-term storage associated with existing retail operations. Uh they will not be accessed by customers. Uh the S boxes will store
only general retail merchandise. Uh there will be no hazardous materials or perishables uh kept inside the containers. Uh no changes are proposed to the site circulation or customer access or
staffing hours of operation. All loading and unloading will occur within designated areas to ensure safety of customers and employees. And the uh storage containers are placed so as not to impact existing uh loading spaces.
And as I mentioned, the containers are strictly seasonal and will be removed promptly after uh December 31st. Uh the OPD improvements that I uh described do not alter the number of existing parking spaces on the site.
There are 1,39 parking spaces today in the center which [clears throat] is an existing nonconformity and 702 excuse me of these spaces are within
Walmart's lease area including 65 spaces located in an adjacent commercial building to accommodate the seasonal sea box containers. is the old Voila Shopping Center parking supply will be temporary temporarily reduced to 1,235
spaces and Walmart's uh car park to uh 628. So there will be a temporary loss during those three months of 74 uh spaces. We are asking for some variance relief. uh it is minor in nature in our opinion
and I'd just like to uh for the record uh describe the variance relief. So we're we are requesting four minor variances pursuant to NJSA455- 55D-70C2
which is commonly known as the flexible C category and the majority of the variance relief pertains to signage. So the first variance pertains to the number and size of freestanding parking area signs. This is
a variance from uh your ordinance section 250-52D7 which permits one freestanding sign for each parking area up to a maximum of three square feet. Our application proposes nine total
freestanding pickup directional signs which uh is comprised of three existing signs and six uh new signs in the parking lot as well as 19 freestanding signposts marking each of the 19 uh
pickup stalls with each post containing three stacked identification signs. The pickup sign on the post is proposed to be 4 and a half square feet. Uh the other signpost signage
uh which has the phone number for the customer uh to call uh as well as the uh directional signs are all three square feet. Uh the next variance uh relates to banner signs. Uh this application
proposes uh four 10 square foot banner signs which say pickup uh on the existing proposed light poles in the uh OPD parking lot. This will be a variance
from your section 250-52G2. I mentioned that this application involves some new wall signage on the store. So, we do need a variance related uh to that signage. So, this would be a variance from section 250-52D1
which permits one fascia sign in commercial districts. The Walmart store currently has nine fascia signs which include four auto center uh care facia signs and the uh combined uh square
footage of this signage is 443.69 square ft. Walmart is proposing to replace the nine facasia signs, including the autocare center signs, with a modernized coordinated signage package that
consists of smaller, low pri low profile facial signs to clearly identify store departments and to direct customers to key services. The updated uh signage package includes a total of 20 signs
with a combined area of 419.22 square ft. Uh this represents a reduction in the overall sign area on the building while in our opinion improves uh customer way finding and operational clarity.
Uh the final variance pertains to parking. This would be a variance from section 250-55A appendix F of of your ordinance which establishes the minimum parking requirements applicable to a shopping
center. So as I um already indicated the existing parking on the site is 1,39 and the parking supply around the Walmart is 702 spaces. uh the placement of the containers will
temporarily reduce the parking as I mentioned by uh an additional 74 parking spaces during the three months [snorts] of the end of the year. So we need a uh temporary variance if you will uh to
permit that reduction in parking. the uh resulting uh reduction would be uh in the in the center 1,235 spaces and 628 spaces uh at the Walmart.
We are also asking for uh some design waiver relief. Uh there are two items under this category and we are pursuing these waiverss in accordance with NJSA 40
colon 55D-51B and they pertain to lighting intensity and light pole uh heights. In terms of the lighting, we're seeking a waiver from section 250-75H, appendix K, which permits a maximum
light level of one foot candle at property lines. Uh, this application proposes a light level of 3.6 foot candles at the Route 9 uh property line uh in the pickup uh area.
Uh we are proposing uh two uh new uh light poles in the uh pickup area. Uh these light poles will match the height of the existing uh poles in the center which is 40 ft.
Uh this does require a waiver uh from section 250-75E of the ordinance which sets a maximum of 18 ft for light poles. So my apologies for the long introduction but I thought it was
important to uh to go through the background. So unless you have uh questions of me, we will begin our presentation. Okay. So, I call my first witness, uh, Ben Crowder.
Mr. Crowder, while you're standing, would you please raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're going to give this evening? Is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Thank you very much. And could you please just uh state and spell your name for the record? >> Is Ben Crowder. Uh that is BN, last name C R O W D E R.
>> Thank you. >> Uh Mr. Crowder, could you please uh provide the board with your educational and professional background, please? >> Yes, I'm a principal with the firm Bowler. Um I run our Northern New Jersey
office up in Ridgewood, New Jersey. Bachelor of Science degree in civil engineering from the University of Pittsburgh. 17 years of site civil design experience licensed in the state of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and New York. All licenses are current and in
good standing. >> Okay, you're accepted. >> Mr. Crowder, [snorts] you heard my uh my background regarding this application. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> Okay. I think you have some [clears throat] exhibits to present to the board.
>> I do. What I'll do very quickly before I get into uh talking a little bit more about the proposed conditions, I'll just quickly, Mr. Chairman, mark this A1 for the record. Just for the record, A1 is an aerial exhibit prepared by my office
with this evening's date of May 28th, 2026. Board's reference A1 will be to or the northerly direction will be the top of A1. And as attorney Letsia had described, the overall property encompassing the Walmart predominantly
to the south, your Home Depot anchor immediately to the north is about 42 acres. What we're really focused in on is the eastern portion of the existing site where we will of the existing Walmart will be proposing the 19 OPD or online
pickup and delivery parking stalls. and then the western portion of the site which will be the location of the 44 proposed temporary seasonal seabbox containers. No change to access, no change to the balance of the site circulation,
anything with respect to the Walmart. Uh the Walmart today is about 133,000 square ft. No change in that overall building area, no change to the garden center. We're just implementing these two different features east and west of that uh existing structure that's there
today. What I'll do really quickly is then move to another exhibit. I'll mark this now A2. This is a coloriz overall site plan. Also with this evening's date of May 28th, 2026,
I've rotated the orientation 90°. So now you have route 9 to the bottom or east of the site. Uh it's predominant access, which is the right in right out off of US9 into the center uh on the right hand side to the north on A2. So
we've zoomed in on the Walmart. Uh just as as a note, the the Home Depot would be just off of A2. And we're really focused in on first the eastern side of the store along uh US Route 9. We're proposing 19 online pickup and delivery
stalls. As you'd heard from attorney Letsia in his opening remarks, the site does function today under an existing parking deficit. Whereas, if we looked at this site as a whole at a five space per thousand square ft, it would theoretically need 1,395
parking spaces. Uh, currently today is 1,39 as it operates. No parking is lost in this area. They're just going to be restriped and signed. Uh, your parking loss that was briefly introduced is occurring as a function of placement of
the 44 temporary SE box containers. They're about 8x 20 and a few of them are 8x40. They will be situated on the western portion of the site and as you had heard these are only seasonal. So this is only a three-month period during the year from October 1st to December
31st every year. That's resulting in the loss of 74 parking spaces which is getting you down to that final total of 1,235. We're doing this all over the state of New Jersey just as an evolution for Walmart. One of the things that we like doing on these sites is when we do have
a existing parking variance or occupying or losing additional parking space with the application, we do have our traffic engineer do a parking demand study. So, they were out there, and you will hear testimony, but just to briefly summarize those findings, is they were out there
on a weekday and a weekend from 11:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. to study the maximum occupancy of the existing Walmart parking lot. And what we hear from our traffic engineer, Mr. Fahheem is that uh during that peak hour that parking lot
was occupied at max 51% of what the total stalls are um during a weekday 2:00 and a week end 2:00 period. So even through the reduction of 74 parking spaces for that 3-month period, there is
still ample parking to support this Walmart store. the site the the loss that's occurring temporarily on the western portion of the site and as I noted no loss on the eastern portion of the site those are just going to be restriped ressigned for that OPD
operation what we also like to do with these applications is because this is an area where I'm ordering on my Walmart.com app it's being fulfilled within the store I'm arriving at the site to my OPD designated parking space you have a lot
of activity with associates bringing out the fulfilled orders to your car. So, you're physically not getting out of your car. You're pulling in. You're either using the mobile app or you're calling the store at a designated number that's on the placard and an associates bringing that order out to your vehicle.
We like to enhance light levels in this area for that reason, just for associate safety as they're accessing those 19 stalls. Hence why we have those two lighting waiverss that you'd heard from uh attorney Letsia. And that's specific to uh not only the light pole height,
we're adding a couple additional poles, 40 feet in height. That's all what's there today in the center. They're already up 40 ft from what's there today. And then you have that light trespass just to route 9 of 3.6 whereas
the max permitted is one uh foot handle. As it relates to um signage, that really is the balance of things. And what I have is an exact copy of a plan that we submitted with our application. I can mark this, but this is an exact copy of
what was submitted. >> It's exactly what was submitted with the application. Just identify what you're referring to, but you don't mark it. >> Okay. Exact copy of our pickup striping and signage exhibit PSS1. That is last revised December 11th, 2025. Very similar to A2. Uh your north will
be on the right hand side of of this plan. I'm using this plan really to emphasize the directional signage. We're calling them freestanding signs. One's permitted, nine are proposed. There's three to four that are out there today if you're already uh familiar with the
site. But we put these three square foot signs at all key intersections of the site to facilitate cars around the perimeter of the site to the OPD operation for this particular location at the eastern side of the store. And we
do that so we try to direct traffic away from the front drive aisle where we already have a lot of activity with customers and associates going in and out of the store at key intersections around this site. And you'll see that on uh this exhibit with our package is
really to just direct those cars. They're three square feet in size, just two foot wide, one and a half foot um in total depth uh just to orient you around uh the development. Once you get to those OPD stalls, uh, on those existing
light poles, that's where we have the permanent banners. Those banners are about 10 square feet. They're tied, uh, very similar to like a downtown where you might have a seasonal banner on a light pole. Walmart likes to do that in this area, and that's really demarcating the the pickup area for the overall
site. So, we have four of those immediately for those stalls. As you get to that area, you've got 19 stalls to park into. So, as you pull into your stall, you'll have a post right in front of you that has three signs in front of it. The first sign is
a very numerical number. You need that for your Walmart.com app, or you need that when you call the number that is the second placard immediately below to let the store know that you've arrived to your space. The last sign that's vertically hung is 4 1/2 square ft.
That's why we need that variance over the three square feet. And that's just a vertical hanging pickup just to designate those stalls and differentiate them from your regular customer stalls with the balance of the store. And that uh kind of wraps up a lot of
the direct testimony on the on the signage aspect. We certainly have uh the review letter which we could we could certainly address at the right time. >> Okay. Thank you. Um we go to our professionals. Uh Vina, do
you have uh questions or comments? The only question I had is uh in my memo I had marked up the last row to move that next to the two rows because I feel then you could barricade that aisle and you
don't have through traffic then going through during those three men uh three months and that would clear because many people use that outer ring to go around the shopping center. So instead of having it in three different rows, you
could just limit it to the two rows and barricade the site. And that is something that we would like to see. >> Yeah. And that was a great suggestion and comment. We have talked with Walmart store operations and we we can make that change. I think that makes a lot of sense to improve circulation on that
that western side. And just to give the board um some background, there have been containers that are stored um on the site currently, at least for the last 5 years that I know of. And um most
of those containers are stored along the front uh of these along Route 9, so they're visible. There have been concerns of them being in the front yard. I think I like this uh location better because now they are to the rear
again. It also would save them a new variance because when you have accessory structures such as these within the front yard, that would be a variance. Now they're tucked behind um they're not visible to uh while you're traversing on
route 9, which is a better location. Um, those pickup signs, although I had questions, concerns about them being a lot more than what you need, um, they're smaller in size and we do not really, uh, uh, control directional signs. These
are considered directional. As long as there's no logo on it, I wouldn't consider it a sign per se. Um also with the fasia signs I think um your plans say 20 there are existing nine and 20
proposed but we do not count address signs. So then the variance is 19 for 19 signs um banner signs are not permitted in the township. Um so that would be another new variance but otherwise I
don't have any questions. Um I will wait for the traffic consultant but I did look at since there was a parking variance involved. I did look at near mapaps imagery to see how much of the parking lot is used because the good
part is the containers were on site when I was looking at the uh parking and there with the containers there's still ample parking within the Walmart parking lot. >> Hey, thank you. Uh, Mr. Dari,
>> my office didn't review this application, Mr. Chairman. >> Oh, okay. Okay. Um, any questions to my right? >> So, with the moving of the containers, I guess, from the third lot to to realign,
is the parking number still dropping at the same amount? >> Yes, it'll be. Yes. >> Correct. >> So, the same amount. >> It'll be the same amount. So it's 40 74 spots down. >> Yeah. Just for that three month >> period. Correct.
>> So this will be on the side. >> All right. So it's where all the the the tractor trailers are. >> Yeah. It's where the loading docks >> where the loading docks are. Correct. >> That's where I park my car. Just so you know when I go there. [laughter] >> Okay. Thank you.
You indicated that the 51% usage >> indicated that this 51% usage was based on the uh review. What about during a holiday peak time because that's when the boxes are planned to be placed. >> Our traffic engineer will have testimony
about that. >> Thank you. Yeah, I just given a just a rough summary on the occupancy, but he's got some more information from his demand >> in regards of was there additional sight lighting add added to the location where the SE boxes are planned to be positioned?
>> Not not for the SE box area, only for the online pickup and delivery stalls that are being implemented. >> So, I'm thinking it kind of creates a a blind spot there. >> It is it is something I will tell you it is something we're always reviewing. These lights are 40 ft high in this
center. So that that's helping a lot of the other stores and centers are a lot lower and it does create you know a shadowing kind of thing >> areas that inappropriate conduct >> correct occur. >> Yes. Okay.
Okay. Anybody to my left have a question? >> Yeah. Um to his point was there any more like cameras added or patrols because we don't want this falling on Old Bridge Police Department to patrol around those conx boxes. the the the store is does
have on-site surveillance attached to a lot of the existing light poles that are out there. I think to the to the comment within the review letter to actually barricade off that area um through the relocation of that that third row of of sea boxes is actually going to help kind
of support that area being a little bit more isolated on the western side. >> And what is the new reason that you need all these uh boxes on site now? It's just fulfillment during those peak seasonal areas. The store back of house just doesn't have enough space for a lot
of that general merchandising that comes in during the holidays. Whether it's the Christmas trees, the seasonal pieces that occur October to to end of year. >> And what was done before it was delivered by truck? >> It's a series of trucks, some sea boxes
that have been noted by individuals on the board. This is really to to free up a little bit more internal space because the store doesn't have the ability to to physically expand. >> So, I think you're you have a good use of parking for the uh the pickup
location because it's not a lot of use there. So, you know, I really like that the signage is good. Um I like the containers being moved because they were right on Route 9. I think it's more aesthetically pleasing for your store to have them, you know, towards the back of the the property. Um, the lighting I
think will be good because I'm in the shopping center an awful lot. So, I I see it. My only concern is that the the approval would be indefinite. You know, I would like to see like a five-year uh renewal in case there is any issues that arise that were, you know, you know,
stores uh business models change and stuff like that. So that would be my request that you know >> Vina you have something? >> Yeah what I was going to say is probably it could be something that the zoning officer can administratively review it
and me as the administrative officer can sign it off rather than have them come back to the board um if that is acceptable. So should the board should the board act favorably then it uh then
that should be one of the condition and it allows us to monitor the site situation. >> Yeah that worked for me. Thank you. >> Okay. Any other comments or questions? >> Okay. Uh
you I have a one question. be the time span for the containers is between 101 and 12:31. >> That's correct. >> Um, what time frame will the containers be moved off off the site?
>> So, we had talked with the store manager a couple days ago on just how they're brought in. They're not all 44 going to be brought in on 101, but starting 101, they usually bring them in in a couple waves just to set them up as the merchandising, you know, fulfills and needs the space. And then in advance,
usually right after the the Christmas, you know, rush, that's when they're going to come off in waves to just hit to be off the site by 12:31. >> Do you have an idea of is it weeks? >> I mean, just judging from other sites,
probably looking by January 7, January 8th, something like that. >> Oh, okay. So, a couple weeks, >> a week or two. >> Oh, okay. Okay, that's it. Thank you. Okay. Um, going to open it up to the public. Does anybody from the public
have a question for this witness? See, no hands. And Okay. Okay. I close the public portion. Okay. Now call Mr. David Faheen. Thank you. Raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're
going to give this evening is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> Can you please state and spell your name for the record? >> Uh, first name David, D- A V I D, last name FEM, F as in Frank, a H I M as in Mary. [clears throat] >> Thank you. >> Sure.
>> Uh, Mr. Uh can you please uh briefly provide the board with your educational professional background? >> Sure. Uh so again my name is David Feim. I'm a project manager at traffic planning. Is this
>> Yeah, it's on. >> There we go. I'm a project manager at traffic planning and design. I've been a traffic engineer for roughly I believe nine years at this point. Been a licensed PE for the last five years. Uh my license is still good. I've testified in front of many boards in the state of
New Jersey. Um, and I've qualified as a traffic expert in the past. >> Okay, you're accepted. >> Thank you. >> So, uh, Mr. Fahheim, as you're aware, there is a parking variance requested with this application, uh, that results
from the placement of the Sabbox containers on the Walmart site. >> And I believe uh, your firm prepared a report that was submitted as part of the application. Is that correct? >> That's correct.
>> Uh can you uh briefly provide the board with um the conclusions of that report and what was looked at in order to reach those uh conclusions, please? >> Sure. So, we prepared a report uh dated July 8th of 2025. Uh and our report
really looks at a couple different things, not just parking, but we also want to understand uh trip generation going in and out of the site um as part of what we're proposing to do here at the location. So, uh, when looking at trip generation, really we ultimately rely on the, uh, the wisdom of the NJ
DOT since we're located on a DOT highway. Uh, but we also utilize a document called the, uh, trip generation manual prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. So, within that manual, we like to, uh, be able to project out what the anticipated traffic would be in and out of any kind of
proposed development. Uh typically it's based on the expansion of a building area, but because this particular development isn't modifying the building area either on the building or within the garden center in any way, shape, or form, we don't expect there to really be too much traffic, additional traffic
entering and exiting the Walmart site just because we're proposing some Cbox containers on site. So, we wanted to make sure again because we're located on Route 9, we have a DOT uh jurisdiction within the area, we wanted to get their opinion on it as well. So, we also submitted our findings to NJ DOT to say,
um, hey, we're not modifying any driveways or anything within your jurisdiction. We're looking to do this improvement, but we don't believe it's considered a significant increase in traffic, and we want to get your opinion. Uh, DOT ultimately agreed with our findings, and they actually issued us a letter of no interest dated August 1st, 2025, uh, which ultimately states
that we're exempt from doing any kind of formal DOT access permitting as part of this development because it does generate a significant increase in traffic. So that's really the trip generation aspect of what we're doing. And then really the more important thing is the parking uh generation. So uh
similar to trip generation, the IT also has a document called the parking generation manual to be able to project out parking demand for different types of land uses all throughout the country. Uh freestanding discount stores or like a Walmart is one of those land uses. There's lots of data from all different
uh locations throughout the country. So we utilize that information per thousand square feet of building area to try to understand what we're looking at in terms of peak parking demand during a typical weekday and a typical Saturday. Uh so as Ben previously mentioned our office did go out and collect data on
top of looking at the IT information. So on between both of those, the IT data that was calculated as well as the empirical data that we went out to collect to see what the parking demand would be at the site, uh we found a maximum parking demand of 345 occupied
stalls during any point in time from 11:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. during either the the weekday or the Saturday. The Saturday was more volume or more demand typically than a weekday. So we utilize that to just have a conservative scenario. Um, one of the board members earlier asked about how it would impact
when it comes to the holiday time since that's really when the sebox containers would be utilized. Uh, so it also has information on that as well. Um they also state that typically for a uh store of this size, we would expect a parking
demand of roughly 450 parked vehicles during a December holiday month where we were seeing about 350 during your typical uh data collection that we did back in November, which is still a little higher than typical because we're getting close to like the Thanksgiving time period, but Christmas is ultimately
the more parking demand out of site. So based on that information, we expect a maximum parking demand of roughly 450 stalls. So even under future conditions, when going from 702 stalls down to 628, we're expecting around 450 parked
vehicles during that peak December month. So considering those loss of stalls, we're talking about roughly 180 100 uh some about 180 uh open vacant stalls still even after the uh the seabbox containers removed some of the parking on site. So more than enough
buffer to accommodate the anticipated demand under future conditions and that's the ultimate finding from our traffic report. >> Okay. Um any questions? >> I have no further questions. >> Okay.
No, >> I don't have any questions, Mr. Chairman. >> And uh the traffic engineer. >> I have no questions either, Mr. Chairman. to my right. You >> always look at me like I'm gonna ask a
question because I usually am. When was the traffic study done? November of 25 >> 2024. Yeah. November 2024. >> When was it done? >> What was that? >> Like what was it done when when in November? November. Yeah, like the dates are Thursday, November 7 from 11:00 to
7:00 p.m. and then Saturday, November 9 from 11:00 to 7:00 p.m. >> And you're saying that it was 350 that you've and you and they're saying that based off of your whatever the guide is, it's saying about 450 would be needed.
>> Yeah. During a December peak holiday month, yes. >> So you're going down to 6 >> 628. >> Yeah. 628. would roughly need about >> there's >> 70% increase in order to fill all the spots, >> right? We're expecting during that peak
December month, this the parking area will be about 70% occupied as opposed to the 50 roughly that we saw out there. >> All right. No, that's all I had. Thank you. >> Sure. >> Hey, Mr. Ryder. >> Yeah, just one question. Does that factor in the commuters as well that
park in that space? >> Oh, the commuter lot. Yes, we did collect that information as well. collect that data as well. >> Yeah, we have that in our report. >> Yeah. So, I oversee the commuter parking and um that's that's on the other side of the KFC between the KFC and the Amboy
Bank and that's very limited use right now. So, yeah. So, it shouldn't be an issue at all. >> Yeah, it shouldn't impact the the parking demand at the Walmart. >> Okay, any questions? My concern would be just during the
holiday season. You did a study beginning of November. Nothing to do with going into Black Friday and then into Christmas shopping, >> right? But we did utilize the IT data that collects during December, which is
typically a lot more demand. I mean, you don't want to project it for like one specific day like Black Friday. You want to try to get it during a time where it's pretty congested, but you don't want like an anomaly kind of a day. So, we did we did account for like a peak December holiday parking demand when we
did our analysis. >> Any further questions? Okay. Um, could open up to the public? [snorts] See no hands. I close the public. Um, okay. Mr. Mr. Shadillo, you'll
>> I think they I don't know if they have another witness. >> Oh, is there another witness? >> We have two more. Yes. >> Oh, two more. Okay. >> They will be uh brief. >> Okay. >> Okay. [laughter] I now uh call Mr. Perry Petrillo. Um, good evening. Do you swear or affirm
the testimony you're going to give this evening? Is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Please state and spell your name for the record. >> Harry Trillo. Harry P R Y. Trillo. P R I L L O. Nine Park Avenue, Park Ridge, New
Jersey. Mr. Petrillo, uh, please provide your education professional background, uh, briefly, uh, to the board. >> Bachelor of Architecture, licensed in New Jersey in 93. I've since been licensed in 25 other states and have been before numerous boards in the state
of New Jersey. >> You're accepted. >> Mr. Petrill, are you familiar with the Walmart site? That's the subject of tonight's application. >> Yes, I am. And did your firm prepare the architectural plans for the building uh
facade improvements? >> Yes, we did. >> And these improvements include uh signage. Correct. >> That is correct. >> Uh can you uh briefly uh go over with the board the proposed signage? >> Sure. Um exhibit that's up was submitted. That's
the building elevations and the exhibit behind it is also what was submitted which is the signage uh details. Um just in general um from the exterior point of view, it's a complete refresh and rebrand of the entire building perimeter. So the entire building
perimeter will be um cleaned, primed, and repainted. Um as part of that and as part of the uh pickup, uh one of the only changes on the building facade is the existing door that's used for the
associates to bring out the pickup. Um which is this door over here in the guard. It's actually within the garden center. We're just replacing that door. It'll be a new door. Um and we're putting a canopy over it so that the associates uh when they open the door and inclement weather, there's not rain
getting in the store. Um and the only other piece of that is there's a gate that's in the chain link fence that's accessible through the garden center. We're just replacing that so it's a little more functional for the associates. Um that's the building
changes. Um with regard to signage, um so currently um I guess we're down to um nine signs on the building. Um there are nine. Um we're saying now there's eight because we don't count the address. Um
the front facade has a total of uh four signs currently at 418 uh.05 05 square ft and there's four auto center signs totaling 25.84 square ft. Uh that gives us a total existing
signage of 443.89 square ft. Um the proposed signage is for uh eight signs on the um front facade um totaling 344.99
square ft. The four additional signs um on the front facade are uh currently the Walmart and the Spark are counted as one sign because they're locked up as one entity and the proposed they would be split. So that's two signs. So there's
an extra sign there. Um then we've got a pickup sign that we're adding. Uh grocery and home which goes over the vestibule because the brand sign moves to the building wall. Um, and then we have a vision sign. So, those are the four additional signs on the front
facade. And then the autocare signage, there's a total of 11 signs totaling 74.23 square ft. Um the signage on the auto center is really meant to be directional uh to help the operation and help
direction with the customer so they understand which bay is numbered and what that bay is operationally whether it's tire or oil oil change. Um total proposed signage on the building is 419.22
square ft which is 24.67 six seven square feet less than what's on and currently redu reduction in signage of about 10%. Um the ordinance actually allows for 15% of signage on the front
facade and if you took our front facade it's 10,78 ft would give you 1,600 square ft of signage. Um, so we're well under, um, we're just under 4%. So, uh, the allowable is 15. Um,
three of the signs are proposed to be illuminated. The Walmart, the Spark, and the pickup. Currently, the Walmart and the Spark are also illuminated. Um, I think that the sign that's proposed is um is clear. It's legible. It's scaled proportional to the building. um
allowing for safe visibility and uh clear identification from Route 9 and the internal circulation. That sums it up. >> Okay, Mr. Petrell. >> Okay. Questions from the board or staff? >> I I don't have any questions.
>> Okay. >> No questions. >> Anybody to my left have a question? Okay. Uh uh open it up to the public. See no hands. I close the public. Thank you.
I now call my final witness, Mr. John Mcdana. >> John, do you swear or affirm the testimony you're going to give this evening is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> Yes, I do. >> Thank you. Could you just uh state and spell your name for the record? >> Sure. Hi there, everyone. My name is John Mcdana. That's spelled MC capital D
O N O U G H and I'm the project planner. >> Mr. Donna, please provide your educational professional background briefly. >> Sure. Uh licensed professional planner, state of New Jersey, current in good standing. Um also AICP, that's our
national certification. Uh same status, current and in good standing. My education comes from Ruters. >> Okay. Thank you. You're accepted. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> So, Mr. Mcdana, can you explain what your role has been uh with this application?
>> Sure thing. Uh we conducted a standard planning analysis in connection with the application. The usual parts review existing conditions. We know this is an established business with a long-standing commitment to the community. It's an anchor business. Uh we look at the proposed condition. We
see this as enhancements to that anchor business. There is some minor relief here. it's a permitted use in your um CR regional uh commercial district. So um again, we're looking at an application that is substantially compliant in its
current condition um and modifying it really in response to consumer demand and uh that would include residents of of Old Bridge as well. There is some relief. It's relatively minor here. Council ran through it at the outset. I can certainly hit it generally. I won't
go through them all in detail again, but there there are statutory criteria that the board needs to apply bringing the testimony that you've heard back to the statute. This is all reconcilable under the C2 balancing test whereby the benefits of
the application as a whole would substantially outweigh the detriments. Um, in terms of the project positives here, these improvements are going to provide for operational efficiencies to better serve the customer base. They are going to respond to consumer demand
which has skyrocketed since COVID based on the ease and convenience that everyone experienced with online ordering during that time period and has certainly carried through. Um we represent Walmart in a lot of towns and we're seeing this done over and over
again. Uh the consumers are embracing it and the municipalities are as well. Uh why it's a simple retrofit of existing space. It promotes efficient use of land. Most of these signs are navigation aids as you've heard. Um, this is a site
that has hundreds and hundreds of parking spaces. So, there's a lot of choices as to which way to go. These signs are going to help drivers get to this online pickup and delivery location. Um, so all of those signs that relate to direction are justifiable as
navigation aids that will provide for clear and safe identification through the site. You've also got those four banner signs which are going to hang on the light poles right by the pickup area. They're 10 square feet in size to give you a frame of reference. This board on the
easel here is about 8.75 square ft. So that's the scale of what the applicant is asking the board to move on. hanging up on a banner so that again when you get on this site with hundreds of spaces you can easily identify and demarcate where that online pickup and delivery
location is going to be. So you've got the freestanding signs, you've got the banner signs. Uh you just heard through Perry's testimony as to the architectural justification. We've got signage on the building. Now we're actually going to increase the
number of signs but decrease the total area. So, uh, really when we're dealing with a large department type of business, we're identifying the various components therein. And then finally, through David's testimony, uh, relief for parking within
the lease area and the total site, uh, you've got the basis there that there is a fluff, if you will, even at worst case in terms of the parking supply on the site that will provide for a hundred or more spaces above what the actual demand
will be. So I believe you have a good predicate in that regard as well. Uh the project will respond to the planning goal for a variety of commercial uses and appropriate locations. We've got these seasonal containers which we are also seeing um not only with Walmart but
other retailers as well to deal with those unpredictable spikes in supply and demand during the holidays. We all know how crazy things get and the problems that can occur with the logistics supply chain. This takes some of the unknown out of the equation and the pressure uh
to have that inventory there uh during those holiday times. The building signage provides contemporary brand familiarity that will meet customer expectations. This is going to bring your Walmart up to contemporary standards with the imaging that
consumers uh expect. All of the above that I just gave you tie back to the statute and the purposes of zoning at NJSA 405D-2 especially purpose A the promotion of the general welfare purpose G our
planning goal for a variety of uses purpose I a positive aesthetic uh this is a site that is familiar in the public eye in the local landscape not changing uh substantially enhancing and then purpose M our planning goal for
efficient use of land, not an expansion of the building going out, not an expansion of the building going up, but basically working within the confines of of what's there. Now, in terms of the negative criteria, you've got a series of witnesses here, licensed
professionals sworn under oath. Uh based on again the predicate of that testimony, I believe the board can find that all relief can be granted here for these very minor site modifications without any substantial detriment to the public without any impairment to the
intent and zone plan is actually going to advance your zone plan. Intent to um improve and enhance the efficacy of an established commercial site. spot on with your goal for positive economic development.
Site signage is in the interest of public safety to facilitate wayfinding. Building signage again will promote a brand identity. You do have those two smaller design exceptions as well, which is subject to a more relaxed test. It's
not the applicant's burden or the board's burden to find that the balancing applies here. The only test is whether the relief is reasonable. I think suffice it to say the light level is reasonable in the interest of safety and the relatively isolated nature of
the site in a commercialized area. You've got a large buffer of woodland deck to the back and then the light h relief uh that uh relates to the existing lights on the center. So we've got some consistency
there as well. Ben talked about that in his testimony. So there's some uniformity and consistent there in that regard. Um lastly, we meet the test of impracticability and that strict or literal enforcement of the ordinance from a design exception standpoint would
really serve no practical purpose here. This relief is largely imperceivable in the public eye. With that, with all of the testimony, I believe this is a pretty clear-cut application where we land squarely on the positive side with minimal, if any impact on the negative
side. uh this is going to enhance the business and can be certainly be granted without impairment to the zone plan or impact to the public. The criteria are met and therefore approval is warranted. >> Thank you. >> That's all I have. Direct. >> Thank you. Questions from the board.
Question. >> I have no further questions. >> Am I right? Am I left? Okay. I'll open to the public. Seeing no hands, I close it to close the
public portion. Um, Mr. Sadillo will uh >> uh is the applicant completed the application? >> Yes. >> Okay. So a vote in favor of this application would be granting the requested uh major
preliminary and final site plan with the requested C variances as outlined in the testimony as well as the design waiverss as discussed. Uh the conditions in addition to the board's standard conditions of approval including compliance with the board uh
professionals report would be that they um uh which actually is concluded in the report but specifically identified meaning uh that they will be uh relocating one of the C boxes to uh block uh or kind of keep it in within two rows versus three rows as uh further
outlined into the report. as well as that they agreed that the um SE boxes will be subject to a um zoning officers uh review and monitoring uh for uh >> do we uh do we discuss a time period?
Was it a fiveyear uh review period or five >> fiveyear review period uh by the zoning officer? And >> if the zoning officer finds it appro uh acceptable, it continues. If they find an issue, then it will be reported to the um uh applicant or the property
owner. If they can't address it to the zoning officer's satisfaction, then they would have to require come back to the board at that time. And those are the only conditions I have. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Sadil. >> The only uh small comment related to
with the professional reports, there was a comment about us reducing the number of signs. Uh I don't think that's the case. >> No, I actually answered that when the engineer was testifying. I'm okay with it.
>> Okay. Okay. Um I believe you met your burden to prove that this is an asset to the uh existing Walmart. It kind of reminds me of the one on 18. I think what you're proposing is already in
place there. So, uh I'm in favor of it. So, um, can I get a motion to make the motion? >> I'll second. >> Mr. Depal, >> yes. >> Mr. Lenn,
>> yes. >> Mrs. Cannon, >> yes. >> Mr. Rener, >> yes. >> Mr. Petty, >> yes. >> Miss Misella, >> yes. >> Mr. McKisac, >> yes. >> And Chairman Lowour, >> yes. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Have a good evening.
Start. Okay. Uh, next application is 49-2025P, 335 Green Street, LLC, major preliminary and final subdivision. Major preliminary final site plan with a C variance.
>> Mr. Mr. Chairman, before we um proceed, so I know that the next couple of applications, the memos that came down from the planning office as well as our um our planner is asking for redesigns of these sites. We have never sat and
had someone come up in front of us and we're asking for redesigns. So, I'm at curious as to why we're proceeding when our planning department is saying it doesn't work. >> That's a very good question. I think Mr. Chairman, we let the
applicant introduce himself, identify, and then the attorney can address the court's question. >> Good evening. >> Good evening, everyone. My name is Matthew Pada. I'm from the law firm Sils Cummus and Gross, and I will represent the applicant for both Green Street as
well as Tytown. Uh I want to uh set the uh record straight that although we are presenting pursuing to the agenda two different applications Green Street and Tytown, we would like for this board to carve out the remaining 15 minutes only for Tytown specifically because we will
not be presenting that application pursuant to asking for land use entitlement tonight, but rather after hearing the comments from the board's professionals, we would like to take that opportunity to hear any other comments of the board so that when we do resubmit, we can have the totality of those comments from both the board and
the board professionals. So, I ask that that would be acceptable. >> Yeah, that that's that's acceptable. Um, but just so you know, testimony ends at 10:00 and the meeting is over at 10:30. >> Sure. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> But you can split it up any way you want.
>> Okay. Okay. >> I appreciate that. >> Proceed. >> Great. So, we're going to move forward with the application for Green Street. Uh as stated before my name is Matthew Casada and I'm from the law firm Sils Cummus and Gross. I think the best way of approaching this is to discuss the
history of this subject site. We initially started the journey of trying to develop this site back in 2022 with this municipality. And over the past four years, we've gone back and forth listening to the comments and recommendations and attempting our very best to adhere to not only those
recommendations, but also the zoning code of this municipality, which we are charged with being responsible when considering the proposed plans that were presented before you. When I look at the history of the site, as I stated before, we started in 2022. At that time, we knew we were going to do subdivisions,
but we didn't know the exact amount of lots. After initially hearing some feedback from this municipality, we decided to proceed forward with 21 lots. After getting some negative feedback, we decided to go back to the drawing board. We went back to the drawing board. Happened to be the same time when the
fourth round affordable housing legislation was enacted. And we started that window. Considering this municipality's position with the fourth round, we decided to go back to the drawing board and instead propose a 76 unit town home project for the subject site whereby 14 would be affordable
housing units. Now, you guys didn't have the benefit of seeing that application because although town homes are permitted within the zone, they're conditionally permitted. Thus, when you trigger variances, you go to the zoning board, which I know you guys all very familiar with, or the D3s or D4s or D5s or any of the D variances, sends you
over to the zoning board. We did attend the zoning board. Uh we attempted to do an inclusionary development. Uh but we had recommendations from the board that that was something that the township didn't want to see. So in an effort to engage in good faith, we had asked what type of project we would like to this
township like to see. As part of the transcripts, uh the board planner did recommend that 18 lot subdivision would be more appropriate than a 76 unit town home project. So that is exactly what we're here today to present before this board. Uh what we have before this board
is a a single lot that we're dividing into 19 parcels. 18 of which like the direction of the board's planner will be single family homes themselves. The one lot that is not going to have a single family home is a simple answer for that is just encumbered by D constraints. So
therefore we're not going to propose any single family homes itself. But as for the rest of the lot as you'll hear tonight they do have variance relief dimminimous C variance relief. And as far as it goes with the redesign, we like to present to the record of what we're proposing to do because ultimately
pursuant to either the Wawwa case or even the Jackson case, the law is very definitively clear that an applicant is only charged with those responsibilities of the existing ordinances in place at the time of completeness and therefore we believe that our plans are fully
conforming but for those dimminimous C variances which we'll go into further detail uh for tonight's hearing. I just before we jump into it, I just want to make clear for the record uh to the board attorney uh that they are in receipt of our affidavit for notice and that notice is adequate and we do have
jurisdiction. >> I'm not sure I got a copy of your notice, so I might have to defer to board secretary. >> We have it. >> Yeah, that didn't come to my my office. So, I will defer to board secretary as to whether or not that was received and
sufficient. Oh, sorry. >> I didn't hear you respond. Sorry. >> No, we're we have it. We're >> Okay. Yes. [laughter] >> I thought you were looking for it. That's >> Yeah. I was like, the drama is building up here. Just a notice. All right. Uh if I may, I have three
witnesses here tonight. I have an engineer, traffic engineer, as well as a planner. And if I may, I'd like to call my first witness, sitting right here, Mr. Seawald of Dynamic Engineering. >> Um, okay. Would you please raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm the testimony you going to give? This is the
truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> Please state your name and spell it for the record. >> Sure. Josh Seawald, SW Ald. I'm from the firm Dynamic Engineering Consultants. Okay. Mr. Seaw, why don't you put on your credentials for the uh record?
>> Certainly. Again, good evening everyone. Great to be back in Old Bridge. I have a bachelor of science and masters of science in civil engineering. I do this on a nightly basis. I've testified before over 100 land use boards and I have testified in front of both the Old Bridge Planning Board and Zoning Board on fire applications. Uh my license is
current and in good standing and I'm a partner at Dynamic Engineering Consultants. >> You're accepted. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh Mr. Seal, have you had an opportunity to review this municipality's review letters? >> I have. >> Great. Have you also had an opportunity to visit the subject site? >> I have. >> And have you been thoroughly involved
with the development of these proposed plans throughout this four-year journey? >> I have. >> Great. Why don't you walk us through what we're proposing here tonight? >> Certainly. And if if I could ask if they could put on the aerial map rendering that we submitted earlier today electronically. >> Um that way the board can take a look at the existing conditions.
>> Now, is this something that was going to mark as an exhibit? >> It's going to be a new exhibit. Correct. That is the Tytown application. If we can flip over to the green Perfect. All right. So, we we can mark this exhibit A1. It is essentially an aerial
map exhibit right out of the civil drawings uh sheet two of the record set and then colored for tonight's presentation purposes. The yellow uh dark boundary line that is the uniquely shaped property that we'll be discussing tonight. The dotted yellow line that goes around the unique shaped property
that is the 200 foot property owners list and all the light um zone lines that you see there directly from the bridge township zoning map. So, let's go through exhibit A1. Again, prepared by my firm and today's date. Uh, like I mentioned, it's a uniquely shaped property. It's about 9.9 acres in size.
Uh, what is unique about it is we only have 50 ft of frontage on Green Street and that's located right at the bottom of the exhibit. Uh, for orientation purposes, top of the plan is to the north, bottom of the plan is to the south. Um, on the back portion of the property, uh, we do have a a pocket of
wetlands. they are associated with a 50- foot transition area waiver. U we do have a wetlands LOI already recorded on the property so we know exactly where those wetlands are. In addition to that and along the entire northern um property line is uh a regulated stream
uh that is called deep run or bottle brook depending on which section of the mapping that you're looking at. We do have what's called D ver verification that verified both the 100red-year flood plane as well as the 50-foot repairarian buffer. The site's been uh partially developed for quite some time. If you've
been to the property, if you've taken a look through the survey or the existing drawings, you'll see that there are six dwelling units located on that northern property line. You can see some of the limited disturbance on that eastern side and northern side property. So again, six dwelling units is there. You'll see the pocket of the mailboxes right on uh
Green Street if you driven past the site. Uh in addition to that, there's various associated sheds on the property and it is actually located within the repairarian buffer uh that exists out there today and it was formerly although I do believe it's closed at this point a church playground and a church ground
over there. The rest of the track is mostly wooded uh and just for clarification purposes to the the property is located in the R12 residential zone. Uh to the north of us is the RS zone. and it's the board of education John Glenn um school as well as some additional residential homes in
the distance. To the south of us is the R15 zone in the neighborhood of Green Street. Uh to the east of us is further the R12 zone residential homes and further beyond is that Avalon Oldbridge uh townhouse development and to the west is the ER zone associated with that uh
wetlands and streams that we talked about a little bit a few moments ago as well as more R15. So essentially we're we're surrounded by residential neighborhoods and this is one of the leftover pieces from that Green Street residential area. Uh if you wouldn't mind flipping over to the site plan
rendering Perfect. So, this is a site plan rendering overlaid onto the landscape plan and then colored for tonight's presentation purposes prepared by my firm Dynamic Engineering. Today's date. Same orientation. Top of the plan is to
the north, bottom is to the south. You see Green Street running in that east west direction. It's just more zoomed in from exhibit A1 for more clarity purposes. Uh, and Mr. department. Not to jump too far into my uh testimony, but I I heard your first opening comment. Um we wanted to let you know that the
subdivision that you see on the screen is in accordance with the underlying R12 zone. The number of houses we have is underneath the density. There's no variance relief we're seeking for these homes. It is a lengthy review letter. We have had a TRC meeting with them and there are some technical things that we are going to have to address. I think
where the difference of opinion comes shortly is about stormwater management. So, we wanted to let the board know that there's not we're not asking for additional houses on this property. We're not asking for too big of homes. The the layout of the subdivision, the the road and the lots are are all conforming and compliant. So, we just
wanted to open that real quick. It's the the design that's before you on exhibit A2 right now is substantially compliant with the underlying zoning. There there will be other items that we go through from a technical standpoint, but whether we agree or disagree on the storm water management won't change the layout of
the road, the six uh the 18 lots that we're looking to do here. Um so jumping right into to a A2, this is a 19 lot subdivision, but only 18 homes are proposed because in the northwest corner of the property, uh like Mr. Pada said,
it is encumbered by freshwater wetlands and other associated environmental features. So that portion of the site essentially is carved off from the rest of it. We are proposing um those 18 houses and like we mentioned earlier the the underlying zone is the R12 zone. Why
the 12? Because your ordinance talks about a 12,000 square foot piece of property. Our site ranges from the smallest being 13,000 square feet up to as high as 25,000 square feet due again to the unique shape of the property, the
nine acres in size that we have. And then the road that we're trying to put in the middle of the site, you have different lot sizes throughout there. So, one of the the nice parts about the uniqueness of the shape of the property is even though we have the 18 houses, we're greatly increasing the size of the
land area for the future homeowners associated with it. And just to give a little bit more detail, four of those lots are about 13,000 square feet. Three of those lots range from 14 to 17. And then five lots are 16,000 square feet. And then other six are between 18 and
20. So, I give you that detail to go through that our lots are oversized in comparison to what the underlying zoning calls for. Every single one of our 18 lots with houses are compliant with the bulk standards, setbacks, landscape
ratio, floor area ratio, and building height requirements that the underlying zone is contemplating. The max density actually for the R12 zone is three dwelling units per acre. The plan that's before you on exhibit A2 is only 1.8
units per acre. Why? Uniquely shaped parcel. There's a little bit of of encumbered areas in the rear. And this applicant is looking to design a uh a nice facility that can attract maybe a different type of buyer because it's a bigger plot of land that you don't see
so often in this part of. Uh overall the house sizes range from about 2700 square feet to 3600 square feet depending on the lot and the configuration of the model. And again we provided a 50 foot RSIS compliant
rightway starting from Green Street and coming up and curving through the nine acres. It's a 30foot paved cartway that allows parking on each side of the road should you have guests or visitors there and also has a two-way in each direction. In addition to that, because we have that 50 foot RSIs right away, we
do have sidewalks on both sides of the property. When it comes to a grading and drainage standpoint, um there's some decent elevation on site. Basically, there's about elevation 40 at the Green Street driveway entrance and it continues to
drop in elevation, which makes sense towards the northern part of the site. That's where the wetlands and the flood plane are. That's about elevation 23. So topography again gradual from south right by Green Street up north towards the environmental features. Each lot
also has what we call a dry well or a seepage pit that takes the clean roof runoff and puts it right back into the groundwater table. There are three above ground storm water management facilities. They are what we call infiltration smallcale sandbas and bottom uh storm water management
facilities and these fully comply with the New Jersey state standards and regulations the BMP method uh and they hit all four prongs of storm water green infrastructure groundwater recharge quality and quantity. In addition to running the two
10 and 100year storm events for the quantity we also have to model for the projected storm event for the year 20100. That's the recent law that came out in 2023 that is basically looking for a factor of safety to protect development and and future climate change that comes along with maybe more
intense storms within New Jersey. Uh utilities, so gas and electric already within Green Street will be connecting and utilizing that for our 18 lot subdivision. We are uh proposing a 6in water service. Uh the fire department asked for an additional hydrant. Our
plans currently show two. Their review letter says three. We're happy to comply and provide that additional unit that um the fire marshall requested as well as we got our preliminary uh review from the Old Bridge Municipal Utilities Authority. Uh and they basically advised
that the water service in Green Street may be at capacity. So they asked us to upgrade it to either an 8 or a 12 in. They'll tell us what that is and we won't dictate that. And we're going to extend that from Van Overdrive up Green Street to tie into our development and we've already advised that we'll be
doing that. That's about a 500 linear feet public improvement. Lastly, we will be proposing a brand new 8 in sanitary sewer main that comes up through the spine of our new roadway, but then ties back in to Green Street. Lighting plan is pretty straightforward. It's 15 street lights, very uh standard,
compliant with our public RSIS uh standards. And then uh just to jump a little bit into your board professionals recommendations, we did have a lengthy TRC meeting. We have reviewed uh the review letters. the two things we want to advise that we want to incorporate uh from their recommendations and review
letter. Uh the first one, which is an easy one, they asked for a different type of fence around the stormwater basin. Our plans call for chain link. They talked about possibly a split rail with a black mesh fence. I agree it's a more aesthetically pleasing fence. We're happy to do that. The second one, which was was a great recommendation, and we
absolutely want to incorporate it. right at the beginning of our uh entrance [snorts] uh right on Green Street. The land currently is only 50 feet wide. So, we're going to convert that 50 feet now to a public rightway per RSIS standards. And as you know, there's two existing
houses on each side of that little tail that comes into the nine acres. And it was your board professionals recommendation instead of doing a full cart width of 30 feet which then leaves only 10 feet on each side because it's a 50 foot wide uh rightway really leaving
only about five to six feet of buffering to those two uh existing houses that are there. Why don't we reduce the cart width? And I thought it was a great recommendation because we don't need to park cars on that that little length of um the roadway. We do have our residents and our neighbors, our future neighbors
to the right and left of us. So, what we're going to do, it's not on A2, but it was a recommendation in your professionals letter. We're going to shrink down the pavement area uh so that we can increase the buffering to both our residents to the right and to the left. So, those are two things we just wanted to throw in our direct testimony
that we're absolutely happy to do. Um, and that is a very high level summary of existing conditions on exhibit A1. Our proposed plan on exhibit A2 talks about again the 19 lots, 18 houses and a 50 foot RSIS compliant right away coming
through the overall property. And I think that Mr. Oh, I'm sorry. Let me do touch on a little bit of landscaping. >> Before you do that, just because I I'm taking notes. I don't know if I missed it. Um, you said you're reducing the cart width. How how what are you reducing it to? >> Uh, I'm going to refer back to Mr. Dar. You could drop it down to 20. That's the
smallest you can go for RSIs if you want to maybe make it 22 or 24. Um, I think we have to consult with the fire official first before we commit to that. >> I didn't know if you testified to it and I missed it. >> At the very least, you can go down to 28, which isn't a whole lot. Well, we
also talked about uh eliminating sidewalk from both sides uh as well. So, we could limit it to sidewalk on one side of the road, reduce the width as much as we can within the fire marshall's um uh guidelines. Uh that would provide some additional space for
for buffering should should the board act favor with an application. that there's quite a few other things that I think we we need to talk about. >> Yep. >> Excuse me. U you've mentioned about five or six time RSIS. Could you explain for
the public watching and in the audience what that abbreviation is for? >> Absolutely. Good question, Mr. Chairman. RSIS stands for residential site improvement standards. Essentially, at some point, the city of New Jersey said in order to standardize uh what type of residential developments, whether it's
single family subdivisions, town houses, garden apartments, etc., they didn't want to have all 564 municipalities in New Jersey having slightly different standards for these residential. So, essentially, it's a state guideline and regulations that dictate parking spaces, roadways, curbing, drainage, everything
that goes along with the public infrastructure improvements associated with residential. >> Thank you. Absolutely, Mr. Chairman. Um I apologize for forgetting landscaping. It is the best part of the project. Um so we we are obviously clearing land to develop the parcel. Uh and in doing so
though we do want it to be aesthetically pleasing because this is going to be somebody's home and extension of the Green Street neighborhood. So a few just different items. We have um 10 different types of shade trees at 126 total shade trees that we'll be planting. We have another five different type of varieties
of ornamental trees. uh that will be 85 total trees and then we have another 52 different uh 52 uh plants for evergreen trees and beyond that over 330 shrubs spread throughout the entire uh property. So about 160 new trees being
planted throughout the the neighborhood both on the sides of the houses along the street of course and then the back perimeter for buffering standards and then another 337 shrubs again for future aesthetic landscaping planting. Now, I believe that's a good pausing stop from summary of A1 and A2 that we've had so
far. >> You may proceed. >> Any questions so far, Mr. Chairman? Or >> are you completed yet or >> just to direct before I get into the review letters? >> Oh, no. Proceed.
>> Okay. So, uh we did receive uh two review letters from the municipality. One is from um ERRI uh and is signed by a host of different consultants, planning, engineering, traffic, landscape architecture, etc. We did then receive an old bridge MUA review letter
uh as well as a fire district review letter. >> Go ahead. Um I I just think that we should first discuss the design the the concept the questions that we have before you get
into the review letter. We have discussed at length among us professionals the review letter. But if there are questions and concerns that we professionals have on the design or specific layout, then I think we should
talk about it first before you get into the technicalities of the re review memo. And I think that would help um address even Eric's comment that if there are questions about redesigning, why are we even hearing? I think it's
important that the board hears those questions and concerns. >> Sure. >> Right. >> If we're going to go into the board questions then, board chairman, may I first ask questions of my uh professional? >> Yes. >> Thank you so much. Uh just a couple of quick questions just to wrap up what you
were saying. Not get into the reports just yet. Um, my first question I have for you is, uh, and I apologize for it being elementary, but did you review the municipality zoning requirements? >> Yes. >> Uh, did you also review those zoning requirements in parallel with their storm water requirements?
>> Yes. >> And did you also have an opportunity to review the state storm water requirements? >> I did. >> Now, regarding either the municipality or state requirements themselves, are there any prohibitions against storm water basins being on single family parcels? >> No.
>> Okay. Uh, I know it's not the engineer's responsibility. I know it's my responsibility, but would you say in your professional experience that it's customary for HOAs to address those potential issues so that quote unquote uh homeowners will know what they're buying before they buy because those
HOAs are attached to those deeds? >> Absolutely. >> Terrific. Uh, just a few more questions regarding the site itself. It's in the R12 zone, right? >> Correct. And as you elegantly put, the 12 is not because it's a 12 zone, but rather because it's 12,000 square ft is
a minimum lot size. Is that also correct? >> That is correct. >> Now, the actual proposed lots that would be hosting the storm water basin, that is what lot, 1328, and 1327. Is that accurate? >> That is accurate. And those lots would
you say range anywhere between 4,000 to 6,000 additional square feet than what is permitted of the 12,000 foot requirement? >> Yes. >> Or in another way of putting it, are they anywhere in range of an extra 33% to over 50% of what the requirement is? >> That is correct.
>> And was this design intentional to to compensate for this proposed basin itself? >> It was. >> And I know you were very enthusiastic for talking about uh landscaping. I believe >> uh is it also your testimony tonight that there would be an adequate buffer between the single family home and the
basin itself to compensate for that viewshed? >> Absolutely. >> Terrific. I have no further questions for this witness. >> Okay. >> At this time. >> Okay. Um >> thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just following up on on that question. Um because I didn't know maybe once again I might have missed the testimony taking notes, but did when you were asking questions,
you're asking about with the storm water and HOA. Was there testimony that there will be an HOA for this this development? uh we were going to get into it, but yes, there would be an HOA. There would not only just be a homeowners association, just to provide a little color to that acronym. Uh we would also be doing a DCCR, which stands
for declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions. Those items would address any and all questions, duties, obligations, and responsibilities for the storm water basin, including creating a fund that each homeowner would have to pay into in
the event that there was any issues with maintenance and operation. So that such responsibility could not and would not fall on the municipality. >> And is the will the H I understand that the testimony is going to be covering the storm water. Would it also be covering the roadway? Is that or is that
intention that that's going to be uh dedicated to the township? >> It's my understanding that would be dedicated back to the township. Uh unless I hear otherwise. >> Okay. Um, Vina, do you have any questions or >> I I can start. >> Okay. >> Okay.
>> Go ahead, Mr. Marcy. >> Thank you, [clears throat] Mr. Chairman. Um, as Mr. Seabald had mentioned, there are quite a, you know, a few issues that we've had that that we did discuss at a very lengthy and enth um enthusiastic or animated Yeah. Uh, spirited uh meeting
that we had for uh to review the plans. Danny, can you do you have plan sets? Can you bring up sheet number uh either seven or 10? Let's let's do I guess you can do 10. I think that might illustrate some of the concerns that we
have. And uh I I'm not um I'm not at all disputing what the state regulations are and and and what the uh requirements are. But it's a little washed out on our screen, I guess, but my screen's very vivid. Uh
there's a uh there we go. So if we're there we go. So the concerns that we have uh really have to do with the incumbrances on these properties and and the um practical
developability of some of these lots, right? So it it's it's not a simple matter of we don't like basins on private properties. This really has to do with uh practicality, has to do with future maintenance, has to do with uh you know, homeowners in the future
basically having incumbrances on the property that you know that that they were I'm sure aware of that they signed all the legal documents, but then they come to you know me, Vina, and Nicole to to basically solve their wos. Uh particularly, you have this strange
basin in the rear of these three lots. Uh these lots lots are oversized. I do agree. It's 12,000 square feet is what the requirement is and they are oversized. The issue we have though is incumbrance on on those properties and and homeowners basically encroaching
into those into the lot uh and and also permitting long-term maintenance. And is the HOA going to hire someone to mow those lots? How's that going to work? And is there is there a maintenance company that comes out uh and all that? And then there's also this is really
awkward with this microphone. We need I'm just gonna yell. >> There we go. >> This one's longer. >> Thanks, J. So the the concern again has to do with with practical encumbrance on these properties. Um, take for instance, you
know, you have uh this lot where you have a drainage easement that crosses really across the the middle of their front yard. There's a dog leg in the property line, which I'm sure was done to to get a, you know, the the required lot width for this property. But then
that causes this uh easement to cross through their front yard into these e into the basin. Uh, you have an easement here that straddles this this sideyard. And the problem with these easements, we're we're experiencing this issue right now with the uh the Khubnian development where
residents want to build fences. Uh but when you have pipes uh in the middle of of these easements, they can't build fences. And then we have uh concerns from residents about that. Um and then the practical difficulty as or or as far
as uh developability issue comes up on this lot and this lot where >> even 13.30 to as far as being squeezed. This this one in particular we defer to the fire official but uh you're basically this this is a hard line right
here that that's the wetlands buffer. So you're clearing right up to this line. The house is maybe five feet off of that line. From a practical constructibility standpoint, I don't see how that gets built. On on the other side of it, you have an easement that's again maybe four or 5 ft off of that line. From a
practical constructibility standpoint, I don't see how that gets built or maintained. And then you have a drainage piece that's that's within these easements here. Again, encumbering these properties. The owner of this property basically has this area as their own property. And then this area is
encumbered with an easement. Then you have this no man's land back here, which I guess they could put a beach volleyball court back here. But again, there's there's encumbrances. Then you have the same sort of issue with encumbrances on these back properties, encumbrances along here. It's it's it's
basically one of those issues where it's great on paper. It's permitted by law, but then at the end when houses are built, it winds up being a a township council problem, a township engineering problem. So I I just want to chime in
because um I heard uh Josh uh and uh even uh Mr. Pada say that it was my suggestion to have 18 lots. Right. Just to give you a background, this application was in front of the zoning
board with much higher density. And when that 18 lot subdivision or discussion came up, it was more like why don't you go back to the underlying zone with our 12 standards? Why don't you create lot sizes? It was pure math that I did to
come up with those 18 lots. The challenge here is that not all of I agree there are no variances and um all the lot I mean uh on the lot size there are no variances. There are lots that
are larger than 12,000 square ft. But do you really have that much of usable yard space? You don't. And in the last few years, especially with the oaks development, with the Ryan homes and poor farm road, we have had many
challenges where these home owners expect that they have this yard space. For example, the two houses on the culdeac. They have the wetlands next to them. The homeowners start clearing land
in those areas. They start using the open space. So more recently we have been asking developers to put a fence there so that nobody can encroach. If you look at the fire chief's memo he too raises concerns about those two homes
because there is no sideyard. So even if you have on paper and that's the difference right on paper you can have larger lots but do those lots have usable space? The ones with the storm
water basin, they are large lots, but once you take into account the storm water basin or the fence that goes around, you may not have that much rear yard space. So, in technicality, yes, you're meeting the ordinance standards, but are you really creating those usable
spaces? And I have a problem with that because now again look at the storm water basin to the bottom of uh the page that those two homes they really don't have any sideyard space. And my concern is why not reconfigure it so that every
home that is created has a usable open space. Those easements that straddle on two property lines, they've become a nuisance now because everybody in Oaks One development wants to put up a fence. And what happens with that is we don't
allow any fences in the easement. It creates a sliver in between. Who's going to maintain that sliver? So it becomes a challenge unless those easements are moved on one lot and the property owner on the sales map because I sign off on
the sales map. If the sales map clearly shows that this is an easement, you cannot put something your the home owner or the buyer new buyer is fully aware then that that is not his usable open space.
You finish >> for now? >> Okay. U anybody to my right have a question? >> I I have a unique perspective just like they do being being the sitting councilman that sits up here where
especially looking at the ones that have the the piping that goes on either side, folks are going to want to put fences in. You have a 3,000 plus square foot house. You're going to put a fence in. You're going to attempt to put a pa
patio. You're going to probably want to put a pool, right? Yes. You're going to hand somebody a 100page sales document and they're not going to read it just the way it is. And then it's going to come back to to us and then it
becomes a problem. And it will become a problem now for 18 families that are looking to move in here, right? There's a lot of encumbrance space like um Enerash was saying, there are two there are two properties that probably cannot even be built. You you could you could smile, but to
put to put a house three feet away from the encumbered space. How how can we rationally put that in and then someone is going to be like, well, I didn't realize that, right? Um there's a lot this really needs to be relooked at in my opinion. I think
there's a lot of Listen, I I understand there are a fair number of people here. We rarely ever get folks coming to zoning boards unless the neighborhood surrounding it is not in favor. [clears throat] Um, understanding that things that this is a private piece
property and yes, something will be built, but it has to be built in the right way and quite frankly, this will cause a problem. but even the the 50-foot buffer. So, we're going to have internal sidewalks, but then no sidewalk coming out onto Green Street. So, how does that that doesn't connect the
neighborhoods, right? How close are we then to those people's sideyards within that 50- foot coming coming in, right? So, now that's encumbering on their space that they have today. There's a lot of different things that that I see that probably this does need to be
readressed because every house here will want a fence. Um, maybe not in the rear, but there are a number of houses like even the ones that have the like on the the top portion of this page. Nothing can be built back there. The usable space
is almost next to nothing in comparison to the size of the lot because you're taking the lot size in the backyard down by half, at least based off of what I see. And some of them even more. It's a lot of unusable space. Folks are going to build in there then without getting
permits. And I understand that's not your problem, right? But that is our problem that we have to look at, right? Because if there is not enough space to put a patio and someone puts it because of the uh impenetrable um space ordinances that we have, they're not
going to be able to put the large patios that they want. They're not going to be able to put the outdoor kitchens that they want, a pool, sauna, whatever they want back there. that the spacing there's maybe two or three lots that I would say yes you could do it on based off of what I'm seeing now and I think on a piece of paper it's one thing but
in practicality is another um the the one development that they were talking about there was a lot of different issues going on with that one development and it all goes back to but it was disclosed those documents yes people should read
them but there's a lot of things within here that [clears throat] I've never seen in in the years that I've been up here putting a stormwater basin on multiple properties, right? And then it being maintained by the HOA.
So, every time something has to get done there, you have to get permission from one or up to three individuals here to actually go and maintain the storm water. So, there's a lot of different things in here. I don't even know where to start. >> [clears throat]
>> which is why I brought it up earlier. We have a a memo saying that it needs to be redesigned and we've never heard anyone come up here and try to convince us otherwise. >> Okay, Mr. Rena. Yeah, I mean really just to to add on to what Eric just
indicated, I I think we start back with the the two groups getting together with the professional planner, coming up with a plan that we're agreeable on so we could review it and then lend support to that. Not bypassing that step. It just
it doesn't work that way. >> Mr. Board Chairman, if I may interject, I just want to answer some of their commentaries. We intend on proceeding forward with this application here tonight, and it's not out of disrespect by any stretch of the imagination, but rather just trying to work in partnership with this
municipality. What I'd like to bring to the attention of this board is the fact that I understand given past experience, you would prefer a redesign, but pursuant to the letter of the law, what the ordinances are in place are what we
have to comply with, design and move forward with. And that is the intended reason of the time of application rule, which is a statutory rule so that there is no moving target. Now I again I want to emphasize I understand the concerns and
so does my client and so do my professionals. So we do intend on moving forward with this land use hearing tonight to hear the commentary of the board. But I want to let you know that although there might be holes being poked when you're not adhering to the letter of the law, you can poke holes
all day long, right? Because you're not following the rules and regulations that my clients had to follow when proposing this land use application. And what I want to bring to light real quick is the is the actual law itself and the statutes. Uh I hate being a lawyer, but
unfortunately I am a lawyer, so I guess I got to be the guy to say it. Uh the first one is Jersey Shore versus Jackson where the court said, "When a municipality or subdivision thereof acts outside of its delegated powers, its actions will be considered ultravirus
and void." Another case says, "A planning board has no authority to deny a site plan based on its view that a use permitted under the zoning ordinance is inconsistent with principles of sound zoning." Now, from the commentary that we've heard thus far
and also in the professional reports, that's exactly what it is. At least from our interpretation that based on prior experience and the experience of the board professionals, they would prefer a different zon uh zoning route. Okay? and we hear you and that's why we're here
tonight to have hopefully reasonable conditions on the application that we can address to move forward. But again, you have to understand, not just statutoily, but based on case law, we are allowed to move forward with the ordinance in place today. And those ordinances cannot be manipulated based
on preference. And the last thing I'll say is it doubles down on the statute itself, NJSA 4055D25. This is a municipal land use law which we all know has jurisdiction over these types of applications. And in one case in a roundabout they essentially said um
the power of the planning board is limited to determining whether the development proposal conforms with the municipal zoning ordinance and the applicable provisions of the site plan ordinance. That is all. So when considering this application I would just like to remind this board of the
letter of law both statutoily and case law. But at the same time too we hear you. We hear your board professionals. We understand we have to be practical and we need to we need to understand that we all have to work together. Which is why I wanted to get ahead of the curve a little bit when I did my direct
my board professional or my professional not board professional that'd be a conflict that we are going to do an HOA. We are going to do a declaration of covenants and restrictions. And when you do such a document you can ensure that the money is ponyied up. you can ensure that the developer is there for the
whole entire route or journey I should say until the last parcel is sold. So between myself if the sport found favorable but between myself the planning board attorney and the municipal attorney we can give all the asurances to avoid
the what seems to be in the past the unavoidable. Okay, those can be addressed. They can be addressed in the HOA and the DCCR which are private contracts between the homeowner and the developer. both of which outside the jurisdiction of this board but absolutely can be a condition of
approval to run through both the DCCR and HOA with the board professionals. >> So uh Joe I have a question for you. Um and it's in reference to Mr. Pada's u statement.
isn't a sideyard. Although you technically meet a sideyard requirement, you don't have accessible sideyard. Isn't that a safety concern? The whole purpose of having sideyards or rear
yards or yard space is for the health, safety, and benefits of the people. when your side yard is encumbered with wetlands or a storm water basin and you don't have access to that yard space for
uh fire separation, you don't have access for uh you don't have emergency access. Isn't the safety itself questionable? So although technically you're meeting the zoning ordinance requirement, you're really not meeting
the intent of municipal land use law or why a yard space is required. >> Well, it to answer your question, it depends on how the ordinances are. >> It depends on how what you know how those the township's ordinance are are
drafted as to the purpose and intent of the sideyards. If you just have, you know, to bluntly answer the question, if it just the the the municipal ordinance just says you have a a sideyard does it, you know, designs the sideyard between the building and the property line and the sideyard has to be 15 ft, well then
that's it. But if there's more to the ordinance that explains the purposes and intent of that why that sideyard is needed spec maybe specific to a zone, then yes, what you're saying does apply. Uh but I just want to uh point out a couple things also in response to Mr. Sada was um you know with I don't
disagree legally with what you stated. I think some of the I want to clarify for my board you know with regard to the time of application rule that go that really is not about anything you do that's stopping municipality governing bodies from adopting ordinances that
will change in between the time of the application. you still get to interpret and apply the existing ordinances to the application based upon the application as you deem appropriate. It's that does not I don't want to think that you're uh not allowed to view these applications
and determine whether you agree with the applicant. The applicant's providing testimony saying that I'm compliant and this is how I'm compliant. If you disagree, you can disagree but and you if your professionals disagree, you can rely on their testimony. But I just want to clarify that point that the time of application is just saying that the
governing body and the municipality itself can't adopt an ordinance that will change it. They're allowed to rely on the ordinances. But the interpretation and application of the ordinances are within your pure view purview. Um and my I just also want to clarify because I understand uh that
this also this application is not an as of right application under what legal terms we use in the land use area, but it does actually require some sea variances. I understand right from the start you classified them as dimminimous but whether they're dimminimous or not a variance is a variance and it's the board's determination of whether or not
you meet the requirements to make those variances and if you can't if you do are seeking variances and exceptions from the ordinance then the board can require certain conditions that are applicable for the you know in connection with those variances. I don't think we've heard any v any testimony yet unless I
missed it as to what those variances are. So we I can't say whether some of the concerns by the board professionals or that's been raised by the board members so far are applicable to those or not. Um but I can say that you know that is something that this board still has the ability to consider. Uh and just
to clarify as well the applicants attorney is correct. It's their application. If they want to go, they can absolutely ignore every uh not saying that they are, but they could theoretically ignore every comment of the board and every comment from the board's professional and just proceed with their application as they as they
filed it. That's their prerogative and the board, you know, will respond accordingly if they don't think it is compliant with the ordinance or they think it is based upon all the information that gets presented during the public hearing and the documents that are submitted. Uh but so you know the board can't say no when the
applicant can't proceed because they're not compliant but it can raise that concern which it did and make that recommendation but ultimately it's the applicant's determination as to whether or not they want to proceed or not with their application. So Joe, I just want to uh bring it up. Uh section 25049A
of our uh ordinance which talks about application of yardage regulations specifically says that every part of the required minimum yard shall be open and unobstructed from its lowest level to the sky. Um I just wanted to bring that
to your attention. I haven't when I said it was in a general comment, but I haven't actually looked specifically as to what we're talking about here in this particular zone uh with regard to that purpose, but I will do so. >> Yes. >> Yes. If it would go ahead, >> please the board and the professionals would love to answer some of these
questions. Um >> so, first and foremost, the the ERRI review letter is over a hundred comments. >> We are happy to comply with 90 of them. So, uh, even though there's a lot of requests in here technically and and items and we I know we haven't gone through it yet, but we're we're already
jumping in. So, let's jump in. We're going to address and agree to almost 90 of the hundred comments that your professionals requested of the applicant. I think what we're focused on right now is a few of the items that Mr. Deama and then and Miss Vino just went through. So, I I'd like to address them if I can. Starting with the easiest one
because I like uh to eat the the meat and the potatoes first and leave my broccoli for last. the easements that are on the property lines, that is no problem. We can shift them to one lot. And I do agree with Vina that based on the way that Oldbridge runs the easements that straddle property lines
and create like an alley of a difficult area, you can just take that easement, which has an underground pipe, and just move it onto one lot. That way, you don't have this alley. And then if anyone wants to put a fence to separate their lot from their neighbor, you can absolutely do that. So, I think that's
an easy one to to address some of those concerns. Second, every subdivision has easements and encumbrances. Why? Because topography uh changes on every single site, and you need pipes, whether it's sanitary sewer or storm water management to cut through
certain lots of land. Not every lot has one, but over every subdivision that you do, there will be some type of easement that you need to be able to traverse underground piping. And yes, on a plan you see a lot of these these lines, these these easements that are going between the lots, but in reality and
pragmatically, you're just going to see sod. You're not going to see the limits of these easements. And the reason why you put them in between the houses in the sideyard is because that's where you want utilities to go. You typically don't ever have a structure there. You don't have the pool, the patio, you don't have the swing set. So that's
actually the location that you want to have that. So I think that's an easy one to address. The second one is storm water management. Every development project has a stormwater basin. The the item that me and uh Mr. Dargy are going back and forth with was for
decades townships took jurisdiction over stormwater basins. Only until recently is it now an HOA. So before when a stormwater basin would be designed for any type of development project, you would put that basin in a separate lot.
Why? because it then got dedicated to the township to then maintain it. We're not doing that here. We're going to create an HOA that governs and manages all the storm water management. So, we put this basin >> to the to the north side and then this
basin to the west side in an easement. To a property owner, whether that is a boundary line or an easement line, it's still an invisible line when you're out there in the field. So, we specifically designed this site to accommodate that
these houses on the end of the culde-sac to be much larger because I do agree with Mr. Depo. We don't want to have say a 12,000 square foot lot for the zoning and then encumber it and and kill the backyard. But that's not what we did here. Each one of these lots range up to
20 25,000 square feet. So, yes, we are encumbering what could be backyard area, but there's still a large backyard for what the R12 zone would have contemplated. If this was an R30 or an R40, and we were leaving these residents with almost nothing, I totally
understand the position. It was it was our design intent before this exchange this evening. And when we designed this thing many months ago, we knew we needed storm water. We chose to put it in an easement because that's going to be easier for us to manage with the HOA. and we left large enough backyard so you
still could do sir the patio and you could still do the pool. Now that stormwater basin is going to have a fence around it so there there's not going to be an encroachment into that basin. It's also a hole in the ground. So you're not going to mistakenly put a structure a pool cabana or a swing set.
So from a stormwater standpoint, you know, the request was make it a separate lot. That's a redesign in our opinion and I think it doesn't change any aspect of the site because a separate lot which then would be dedicated to the HOA still is going to be located in that location.
Why is it over there? It's the lowest point of the site and that's where the soils can support the storm water basin. So regardless of whether it's a dedicated lot or an easement, the basin's going to be over there. But we ensured that though specifically on the northern side, these three houses had enough backyard to be able to utilize
what they would see in the R12 zone. Same thing over here on the R six. We have on the edge of a culde-sac pie-shaped pieces, much bigger lots. So we said, let's put another basin over there so that this person doesn't necessarily have this huge property,
fair and equitable [snorts] sizing across the entire uh subdivision. If if um Rakkesh Orvina said, "Hey, listen. We we want a little bit more space between these two houses, it it's a polygon. I can manipulate a little bit. We can we can do that." That is not something that
we were going to hardline stand against. We just wanted to be heard from the applicant standpoint. We simply chose an easement instead of a separate lot. But in reality, it's an invisible line that no one's going to see. And you're not going to encumber that because it's a
hole in the ground. It is very common in almost all new subdivisions. You're going to have some type of storm water basin and they're going to back up to somebody's house, side of the house, behind the house. It's it's just the way that we design residential. Um, and in regards to the sideyard and these couple
lots over here, I do want to advise the board that that line is the the buffer to the wetlands. It's not the actual wetlands. So, that line isn't a structure. You still have a sideyard. It just has some trees in there. So you will you are allowed to walk through it.
You just can't disturb it, put a patio in it, put a house in it. So it's not that you don't have access to it. It's actually a nice natural buffer. Now again, if if there was some substantial concerns that maybe the building was too close to it, maybe I can shift it around. Maybe I pick a different model
for that house. But in my professional opinion, those two lots have a different feature if you want to be close to wetlands and the streams because that's a tree area. You can walk there. It's usable. You just can't build anything in it. You can't clear the land. You can
build a house next to it. You just can't mow down those trees. So, we we wanted to come tonight sincerely because it is a big review letter and we didn't want the board to think that we were saying no. We're saying yes to 90 of the hundred comments, but the the thought and the design, we wanted you to hear
where we where we came from and how we laid it out. And we think practically it's going to function the same. We're talking about invisible lines between boundaries and easements. And it was a great suggestion, like I started with, take the easement that straddles the lines, which is a little bit more old
school design, move it on to one lot. No problem at all. Everybody can have a shared fence. We'll call that a day. If if your professionals or you guys want to manipulate the shape a little bit of the stormwater basin, I can also do that. But in the general location of where these basins are going to go are
are just based off of topography and and storm water management. Thank you, Mr. >> I just have a couple questions for you regarding testimony you just delivered. >> Sure. >> Uh specifically, let's talk about sideyard setbacks themselves. >> Regarding the sideyard setbacks for
either a buffer setback or a property line setback, are we impro proposing any improvements within those setbacks? >> None. >> And are there any obstructions that exist in there? >> Nope. >> And for all intents and purposes, would someone be able to walk back and forth? >> Yep. >> Okay. And then as regarding the
commentary towards the fence, do you think it would be acceptable to our client that we would propose these existing single family homes with the fence just to address that issue? >> That's not a problem. >> Okay. And um just one more time to reiterate, the reason why we have the site location for the storm water right
there is not based on per se design that you had the liberty to select, but rather storm water and more importantly gravity. >> Thank you. I have no further questions. right here. >> Okay. Are are professionals finished?
>> So, >> oh, Mr. Dar, >> if I may just real quick, the um I think the ordinance says that the sideyard should be unencumbered, right? Is is that what it said? Unencumbered. So, >> unobstructed. >> Unobstructed. So, and again, I I
understand what you're saying as far as trees and people be able to walk through. There's also accessibility for for fire and things like that. So to have a wood line within 20 ft, there's there's definitely is a safety concern for that. But that uh that's just one
concern. With regard to the the the easement in the back, again, we're not disputing that. I think the main reason why the is just my guess. I've designed my fair share of these kind of developments as well. The main reason why why you want why I would want an
easement here as opposed to making it a separate lot because really the lots are large enough for the most part uh where you could create a separate lot back here for the basin but you don't you don't want to do that because then this then becomes the rear yard line and then
you have to do a 45t setback from that line and that obviously severely inhibits your your building envelope. Understood? That that's the main reason why I think uh we wouldn't want to do that. But the the concern really is and I still have this concern. I understand there it'll be fenced. We've had issues
and I get it as far as the you know practical design. This from a practical standpoint this is a problem because we have issues with people encumbering these these or basically either cutting openings into the fences and actually using them. And I told you guys during
our our meeting I have I live in a know a similar kind of neighborhood. I have a neighbor that does athletic training for high school kids who lives right next door to the drainage basin. He just sets up shop with the in the basin with with all of his athletic equipment and they're, you know, throwing javelins and and all kinds of
stuff in the basins and and that's again a liability concern, a safety concern and also a long-term maintenance concern and all that for for these drainage basins. It would be obviously easier if it wasn't their property. More often than not, when it's when people come and
say, "Why can't I do this? It's my property. Do you know how much taxes I pay? It's like rings in my head to the point where my ears bleed because that's what people say. >> It's this is my property. I don't care what the easement says. They don't understand easements. They understand
property. And that's my concern. That's going to continue to be my concern. And and we have the same concern regarding trees in the front yards as well. When we have trees in an easement in the front yard, people have no qualms with removing them. But when the trees are, you know, between the sidewalk and
the roadway, all of a sudden there are public trees and people don't remove them. It's the same sort of issue with the drainage basins that are within an easement on someone's property or on someone else's property, whether it's HOA or township property. That's my overarching concern regarding regarding this issue.
>> And also and also Josh, how can you say that the sideyards are not obstructed? Like when you look at lot 13.33, 13.32 and 13.31A with the wetlands, we are going to ask
you to push posts and signs there so that people cannot walk into those areas. We don't want people to be walking into those areas. Probably that would be a conservation easement. So there is going to be obstruction when
you're talking about the storm water basin between 13.32 and 13.33. We are going to require a fence there around the storm water basin. It is an obstruction in the sideyard. You know a fire chief will not have access. You
have looked at the fire chief's letter. He points out those three lots. And where I'm getting at is on paper you can create 18 19 lots but are you creating
usable space around those homes is the question. It is the intent. I'm not arguing in terms of the ordinance. You meet the ordinance requirements for majority of the lot size requirements. However, it becomes a problem. And when
I say it becomes a problem, I'm very serious because in the last 2 3 years, the amount of complaints that we have gotten is unbelievable. And once the developer builds it and sells it off, it is not his problem. For
I in the past, we have a thick package for the sales map. Before we sign off on a I sign off on the sales map, we created these documents for conservation easement, utility easements, we make sure that before we issue the final co,
the property owner signs it. Regardless, nobody reads it and then suddenly it becomes our problem. You have no idea how many homeowners in the new Havnian development are fighting with the zoning officer for the fences. It is. Eric has
called me numerous times on it. So, it's it's not about creating conforming lots on paper. You have to be cognizant of the fact that these homes are going to be sold for a higher price. Looking at the housing prices now, these homeowners
later on come to us. I mean, I would have even concerns about the road being ours. I it it's it's it's a project and I think it should be a private road, but it's just my opinion. Uh and uh Casey's
right here who is in charge of maintaining public roads and I would let him chime in on that, but um I I mean I get your argument and I understand the legalities of it, but these are some practical concerns that
we have and have been experiencing in the past which need to be addressed. You cannot just overlook them, right? And addressing those concerns, I'll be very blunt. You might lose a lot or two, but then you're creating more safer
developments. I'll >> So, are are you finished? >> I yield for now. >> Okay. Okay. Um Eric, any comments?
I haven't said anything yet. >> Okay. >> I just want to give >> I have a question. >> Okay. Go ahead, Case. >> Um, first things first, um, I'm going to try to go through memory. I wrote some notes. Green Street uh was recently repaved. So, we have a moratorium on the
road. So, if you guys do cut the road to uh if you're approved, you know, if um then you would have to pave full width, but we have to check the moratorium because we've been paving that, you know, in smaller sections throughout the years. Um then we spoken about narrowing the roadway. I believe once you narrow
that roadway um that would be your roadway. It wouldn't be a township road after that. So we'd have to check with that. I would highly recommend that it was a a private road again if it's approved. Um then we move into storm water. I've been with uh the public
works department for 18 years. I've been the director for over five years now. I've never seen a storm water basin on private property that's going to be maintained by somebody else. the insurance liabilities are crazy. Um, you know, that doesn't work for me, you
know. And then, um, you guys talk about these invisible lines. They're invisible until the resident wants a fence because their kids are going to run into the roadway. So, that's major concern. Got three kids of my own. You know, you got to think of all these things. Then I I
saw one larger easement on the angle that cut across somebody's front yard. I'm assuming that would be the access point for maintenance. >> Correct. We have we have different locations for that. >> Yeah. So, um Yeah. Well, that's the most direct point or you're going to go
through everybody's backyard coming up. So, when that basin needs maintenance, it's going to be a bulldozer driving over somebody's front yard through their landscaping. So, that invisible line's not invisible anymore. You know, that impacts people. So, I I'm really surprised that we're even talking about
this. You know, I I see storm basins next to houses. I see houses that are behind other houses, so their front yards looking at their neighbors side house, you know. I see buffers that are they look feet away from the the house. Safety concerns. Safety is one of my
biggest things, you know. So, I really I know you said you're going to it started out at 90. you know, we're going to agree to 90, then it's almost 90, but I'm concerned about the 10 remaining, and I believe everybody up here is concerned about the 10 remaining. So, um, I [clears throat] I think, you know,
our professionals are giving you some really good guidance that you guys should really think about. >> Go ahead, Eric. >> So, just to talk about I know you talked about new trees going in and bushes. So within the letter, I know it the exact
word is you're raising the property. Do you know how many trees that were currently taken down? Because I if I believe there's a number of heritage trees that are in good to good condition that that I guess our um forester is saying that should not
come down. Do you know how many in total we're taking that you're looking to take down anyway in the raising of it? >> Yeah. So we give me one second. I'll pull up the the plan. So, we we did a tree uh plan. It's sheets five and six of the record civil
drawing set. Um your tree ordinance is is robust. So, let um let me go through it. There are tree replacement calculations. There are exempt areas associated with those lots. Basically, you're allowed to >> where you're going to put the house and and features that we talked about,
patio, pool, that that's exempt. And then due to building the road, grading utilities and storm water, we do need to clear other portions of the land. And I'll read right off the plan um to go through some of those those calculations.
Reference to the landscape plan. And then also Mr. Dargy's um review letter, it goes through that we have 19 heritage heritage trees that are in different conditions that are coming down associated with this development. >> I believe that was your question, right? >> Well, just do we know the total number
of it's a wooded lot for the most part, right? So I wouldn't >> if if I may, Mr. Councilman, the other question we had also uh was you have exempt areas, but then you're removing heritage trees outside of those exempt areas. Basically superfluous uh removal
of of heritage trees. >> We're not we're not deleting any trees for no reason. Any one of these trees that are on the property is due to grading purposes. So, you know, we a lot of things go into putting together a plan set and and and of course
heritage trees are important. We're not deleting any heritage trees that aren't associated with the development of a road which is required not or grading associated which which is required and then stormwater management as well. So there are 19 trees that are herit that
are classified as heritage that are being uh eliminated. And then the landscape replacement plan just total that up for you so you have it. We're planting 263 new trees. So 19 heritage. >> I thought you testified as 160. So, we
have 126 shade plus 85 ornamental and 52 evergreen. 263 uh new trees are planted. 19 heritage trees are [clears throat] removed. >> So, I I don't yet, please correct me if I'm wrong, we do not yet have an updated
forest officer review letter. Okay, we're using a lot of the data from the 2024 application. At that time, he issued a forest [clears throat] review letter. We met on site with Gary to do the tree inventory. Um, so I don't have a new update on his opinion of it, but but we everything has been clarified and
classified with Gary. >> So go ahead. >> The reason I was asking about the removal of the trees and how many are going back in. So obviously with with deep run behind the property, right? What does the removal of that trees do to the management of the water coming
from there? The wetlands that are back there, right? Trees soak up a lot of water, right? We're taking a lot of trees out and we're putting a lot of imperous land, right, with a with a big roadway, right? Bigger and big homes as well that are taking up a lot of space
that trees were once taking up some of that water that could be impeding onto Green Street and beyond, right? Has there been any calculation or any thought to what that will do or what's how would you impede that from happening? Because I'm sure there's at least one or two people here worrying
about how will that now affect my property from a wet perspective. I live in a Listen, I live below somebody so I get all of their water and I had to put a French drain system in my backyard at my own expense. So I understand what it could be. I could only imagine what it would be being off of deep run if we get
a a big piece of of big storm come and I have personal in my family. My brother had a house in Manipin that got flooded four different times and he had to be bought by Blue Acres because of it, right? Because of the developments that happened. So, I just want to make sure that we understand what's going on
because it's not only it's I don't want to say I don't care about the 18 houses, but there's probably 50 to 60 houses right in front as well that might be might have an issue with now taking off all these trees. >> It's a great question.
>> And the grading as well. Um, so from a stormwater management standpoint, I saw I have to turn off my uh my alarm. Um, just checking on my kids. Um, apologize for that. So, stormwater management, great question. When we model storm water, we have to model it on what the
existing conditions are, which you're right, most of this property today is woods. So, the runoff coming from the property is very, very low. You're right. Because trees >> suck, >> soak up the water, right? And then New Jersey standards, old bridge standards says when you develop it, you have to
model now the roads, the houses and even grass because grass has more runoff compared to trees. So you create the baseline which is very low. And the state of New Jersey says for the 210 and 100year, you have to reduce the flow from the existing condition, not the
proposed condition. So the water that's going to be coming off this site is going to be less in every storm event, every single one. And the way that you do that is with a basin that doesn't just hold the water, but infiltrates it back into the ground. So that's the quantity aspect. Groundwater recharge is
the calculation that says type of soil and land use, which is woods right now and and decent soils. How much water goes back into the ground. Then we have to provide in our storm water report what our basins are putting back into the ground. We have to exceed the
groundwater recharge calculation. So all of that has been accommodated and accounted for. In addition to bridge of course reviewing and and rash, we also have to submit of course to the local soil conservation district who rigorously reviews uh drainage and they
have already given us a permit uh soil erosion sediment control certification. Now they don't have jurisdiction over zoning if it's an easement or or a lot line but they review our stormwater report, the drainage plan and the um soil conservation district details. So, it's a very good question. I figured I
would get some from the public when it came to that. Um, but stormwater is completely handled. And like I mentioned earlier, in addition to the reduction for the 210 and 100year 2023, the governor at the time said, "We want to protect future rainstorms, kind of like what happened to your brother's house
going to Blue Acres. We're going to model this for rain that we think is going to happen in the year 20100." So, there's a huge factor of safety on the stormwater basin at almost every level. and it has to drain within 72 hours at the same time. So after we
collect it, hold it, and make sure that it's leaking either back into the ground or back into the the stream meeting today's standards, we have to meet it for a projected rainfall rate for the year 2100. So we're I think we're very clear that the storm water will function
well and and in theory, it's supposed to work better than what is out there today. >> Mr. Fair question, >> Mr. Mr. Chairman, I I just we're getting close to 10 o'clock and I know Mr. Pada said he wanted to reserve some time for the Ty application. So, I just wanted to bring that to everyone's attention and figure out how we want to proceed at
this point. >> Yeah, I think we'd like to continue with the Green Street. Our hope is to at least get our planner on as well. So, considering that, >> I don't know if we're going to be able to do that because it's already 9:53. >> Okay. >> And testimony ends 10 o'clock >> and we still have to open it to the
public of this witness after the board's >> understood. So, let's just continue with Green Street, >> sir. >> Okay. Okay. Uh, Mr. Rener, any questions? >> To my left, any questions? >> Nope. I'm sorry. So, looking at all this, the way that
the property lines are and the way the houses are, and you some of them have 3,000 square feet, some of them 2,700 square feet. At one of our last meetings that that we had, a resident said came up to the microphone and said, "Would
you buy a house like that?" And I thought about it and I said, "Wow, just thinking about would I put my family or my income or my hardworking into a house that I couldn't use, property that I couldn't use, property
that I was told, I can't put a fence, I can't put a pool, just think about it." That's one of the main objections. And I see a lot of these faces out there. A lot of these people are nodding. You got to think about things like that. We at
this council, at this board, have a huge responsibility to people in this township. And it's not like what you said before, well, you can't go on what happened or what's happening to to that development to that development. Yes, I could. I want to I want to help the
people here. So, if I feel that something's not going to work a year from now, five years from now, I'm going to make it heard. Thank you. Thank you, Casey. >> So, Deep Run, you know, again, public
works, 18 years. I've seen that look like some of the roughest white water you would find in Colorado and every year the storms, every resident shook their head, you know, [laughter] um, you know, we respond to those calls, you know, public workers and first responders, we're getting calls. We're
flooded. We can't we can't leave our house. We've brought wheel loaders to people's houses to to help them. Camp Bethl. I can't remember in the 18 years if I've ever been there, but I'm pretty sure that we've been there to help people get out. Um Camp Bethl is what they currently call the the compound
there, right? So, um I know you know the the storm water again, you know, I talked about it already being on private property, but the I would venture to say a lot of these residents here tonight are going to tell you that this floods, you know, and I know you're improving it and you have your storm water and it's going to drain in 72 hours in theory,
but mother nature's very tough, you know, and you know, all of a sudden we we have emergency responders responding to houses that are flooding and you know, safety, safety, safety, safety. I always worry about safety. So, just another thing that we really need to
consider when um you know building so close. >> Mr. Lenny, that's a great comment. I really appreciate you bringing it up. You are correct. Four of the six houses today are in the repairarian zone and in the 100red-year flood plan. We are
removing those four houses completely and restoring the repairarian buffer back with trees. So, you're you're absolutely correct. Those four houses grandfathered, they've been there for many, many decades, probably before a time that we actually had flood mapping or accurate flood data, and those are
completely being removed from the property. So, that's a benefit. I couldn't agree with you more. Second, we do have a D flood hazard area verification. What that basically means is we submitted a a package to the D and we said, "This is deep run, right? Take
a look at our topo. Take a look at your mapping. this is where we think the hundred-year flood plane is. This is where we think the floodway is and where we think the repairarian buffer is going to be. They accepted that package and then gave me a permit to show that. So, our plans completely stay out of the 100red-year
flood plane, completely stay out of the floodway, and completely stay out of uh their repairarian zone. So, all the development we're discussing tonight is further away from those air because I couldn't agree with you more, it does flood back there. Absolutely. And there's a decent stream. And one of the benefits of this project is you're
removing four houses from that environmental encumbrance and restoring it back to what it should be. Tree trees lining a stream. That's the repairarian buffer. And then after that, you have a storm water basin. And then after that, you have three more houses that are now multiple multiple multiple feet above
the 100red-year flip line. So I I appreciate you bringing that up because it is it is a real situation in the back of that property. >> Okay. Are you finished? >> Yeah. Okay. Uh, anybody else questions? Okay. U, we'll [clears throat] open it up to
>> Oh, sorry, Mark. Um yeah, I just think it's a real problem area and um assigning a lot of these things to the HOA to not necessarily remedy but contain or take care of or
whatever doesn't work because the HOAs, you know, are responsible for a certain amount, but it's just unrealistic and it ends up being the township that, you know, has to to bail it out And I just
think we need to maybe reook at the zoning and and maybe it's just too dense for that area. And um I think that there just seem to be a lot of issues um with the easements and and limited use of the
space and so forth that just doesn't make it a viable as proposed. [clears throat] >> Okay. Thank you. Uh okay. Hey, I'm going to open it up to the public. >> Uh, board chairman, before you do, can I just do a quick redirect for my witness? >> Sure. >> Thank you. Uh, just two quick questions.
>> Uh, would you say it's absolutely fair and accurate to state that flooding is not just a concern of this community or the township, but also the state and nationwide? >> Of course. And is it your testimony today from an objective standpoint and based on your civil engineer with all
your experience that the exist existing conditions today will be vastly improved with this proposed project? >> Correct. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Um we'll we'll open up to the public. Um anybody want have
questions for this witness and uh keep it to questions. U kind of like Jeopardy. Keep it as a question. Yeah, Mr. Chairman, if I can just I I'd like to make a statement before these that this you will have a portion at the end of the application to make
statements, provide testimony, whatever you want with regard to this application. At this time, it is limited to questions rel to this witness relating to his testimony that he gave. So, please, I know you're going to want to get up there and starting to give testimony and tell what's conditions of your house and what you your
experiences. That's not at this time. That's for later on. At this time it's just qu questions of the witness. Okay. Thank you. >> Question. >> Thank you Mr. Sil. >> Two questions. You said >> no. >> I have a question about the variance. I
>> was going to state your name. >> Oh, I'm sorry. My name is Joanne Feaster. I am the property owner of 345 Green Street. Feaster. Fea s. And I am at the at the foot of that green street where the driveway comes in
and that road is pres is supposed to be. Two things I have a question on on the variance C is it called right. There is you're that's for hardship. Am I correct? >> There are there are two types of variances. C1 is hardship. C2 is [clears throat] what we call flexible
planning alternative. >> Okay. And you are applying for what? >> Uh we haven't gotten to that testimony. Well, well, can I just for educational purposes? >> What is variance? What are you, what are you going for? >> If I may real quick, >> because Mr. Seaw's also a licensed
planner. Is that correct, Mr. Sew? >> I am. Um, can I also have him put his credentials on the record for planning so this way he can answer this question in totality? >> Well, yes and no. >> Yes. I mean, she is asking a a legal question uh or and a planning question
regarding what the different variances are. Um either we can wait until hold on. We can either wait until the planning testimony comes on or if the applicants willing to to answer the question, we're I we always want to make sure we get the public's questions answered. So, that is acceptable as
well. I I think the question was is was this witness going to be your planner or they going to testify? >> We He's also a planner as well. So considering the time sensitivity and we want to be able to adhere to the public. They've been sitting out here for multiple hours. Y >> I just thought that it would be appropriate to swear him in as a planner
since he could put testimony. >> Okay. I mean, Mr. Chairman, I don't have an issue with that just so we can answer the question officially uh and so that the witness the public gets their answer. >> Yeah, you can be sworn in. >> Thank you. So I'm a licensed professional planner in New Jersey. License is current, valid, and standing.
>> Okay, you're accepted. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And just for for the public and for the board, there is a project planner that intends to testify, right? And when you hear planning testimony, they go through everything. They subsume the civil engineer, attorney, traffic, and they they have a a big presentation. So, I don't want to not answer your question.
>> No, it's a simple right now. It's just a simple an a question. Really? >> It's it's not simple. >> No, no. I'm sorry. The question I have regarding what it states in the letter. >> No, I I know. So, the I'm trying to answer your question first. explaining if it's a C1 or a C2 is not a simple yes
or no because you can make arguments of either one and there's planning criteria that goes into whether you agree that it's a hardship or you agree that flexible planning and I know the board knows this but to just educate the public flexible planning there's a
balance test excuse me sir >> thank you there's a balance test and you balance the negative aspect as well as the positive aspect doesn't mean that there's not any detriments. Sometimes there are detriments. The C2 flexible
test and the balance test talks about do the positives outweigh the negatives and we haven't heard that yet from our project planner. So I want to answer your question that there are C1s, there are C2s. It could be argued that some of these are C1s, some of them are going to be C2s.
>> Okay. So but the out of the the mouth of this coming off Green Street, this is a residential road. It's not a county road. It's not a a collected road. It's not anything like that. So, you're proposing 18 houses coming out of Green
Street in Green Street out. There's no other access at all. >> Correct. Right. This is a uniquely shaped property. Right. That falls into more of the uniqueness. When we talk about C1 hardship, it talks about is there unique criteras to a property? Are there unique topographic aspects to a
property? This property only has 50 ft of frontage, >> right? that ties into Green Street >> be different from the the the normal in the neighborhood. Correct. >> Well, you're the No, the rightaways are still 50 ft. >> No, no, no. The houses the frontage of the house. That's that's out of the norm
of our community in our in our neighborhood. >> I would not say that's out of the norm. You have multiple intersections. Uh second place in Green Street was very close by where you have a corner lot that's along Green Street. So my corn if that was to be a corner lot according to
here I have two and a two feet maybe 3 in from that from that right now where that starts from my property to that it's 2 feet it's not 5 feet it's not 10 feet [clears throat] >> so where are you going and no sidewalk
so where are you going to encroach on my property >> certainly not so >> so how are you going to get that clearance when you have another house there and wooded area that has to to be cleared and you have a a road coming in second place and a road coming from
Vanover and then this way. >> Are you on the the right house or the left house? So >> I'm in that house with two and a half ft. >> I meant uh >> I'm on the right. >> You're on the right. Okay. So >> here for 36 years. >> So and that's >> 36 I also am a property investor. 36
years worth. >> I just want to answer your question. I promise you. So your house on the right today there is a driveway correct that runs right along the property line. So I did not go on your property. >> It's not on my property line. It's past the property line.
>> I promise. Follow me real quick. So next to your property line we have 50 ft. That is private property. That is the width of from your house across our property is 50 feet wide and then it hits the next your neighbor. Essentially
inside of that 50 ft we are going currently the plan is to pave 30 ft leaving 10 ft on each side. So out there today is not woods in between your house and your neighbor's house. There's there's a long driveway to service the six >> historically it was for a driveway.
Correct. >> So this is similar. We're going to make it compliant with today's road design standards. But next to your house I believe is just a white fence. Right. And then you have a little bit of grass area and then the the the driveway today
is right there. What we're proposing on this plan exhibit A2 in that same 50 ft and and it it works well because RSIS says you need a 50ft rightway and we have exactly that. We're only going to pave 30 ft of it. And then what we talked about earlier in the evening with
Mr. Dargy, we talked about and it was his recommendation reducing the pavement even further. We don't need a 30- foot wide driveway there because we don't need people parking on each side. He also made the recommendation you don't even need double sidewalks. That way we can leave as much landscaping as
possible between your house and this road. And again, it's it's not a road like a county road or a major arterial. This is simply now an intersection, a corner lot, just like Second Place and Green Street right across the street. So now your house will have in theory two
frontages instead of one. >> But I don't have space between my property line where I have my fence corner lot. What do you consider corner lot from my property? There's usually additional space 10 ft from the from the corner. That's not it. I have 2 foot 3
in. That's it. >> We're not changing your side lot. The the exact real estate that you have today will be the same after this. >> That's correct. But you're also creating that n that that back and forth as that was designed for an access road to the back. That's it. >> And that's what we're doing for this.
Yeah. >> No, but you're creating a two-way street that's going to have ongoing traffic. Trust me. I sit there. You have you just have UPS. You have all these people going down. It's traffic. And right behind me, you have I don't know what
the difference is. I not even 15 feet before the next house. And that's the side of the house. I lose all what I bought the house for. That's number one. Number two, the traffic coming in and out right now is unbelievable.
I had people today, the little boy traveling up and down behind the garbage truck on Green Street. Okay, you can't get out of my driveway with going back and forth, back and forth, trying to find out where people are. They have a
stop sign on second place. Okay, they blow that stop sign and they make a swing and then they go in. I've had emergency vehicles go in, they come out, they go in, and they can swing back. It's not enough space for what you're proposing. A driveway for one
house, maybe. Okay. Whatever the problem is as far as trying to get this pass as a hardship, it's not a hardship. It's not. You're creating a hardship. So I will I'll send I'll say the rest of my stuff for afterwards. Okay.
>> Okay. Thank you, >> Mr. Chairman. Uh this this back and I don't want to interrupt what you're saying, but I do have a question for you, Mr. I think something we might need to discuss offline as well. is um and it it just came to me now based on the questions from the me this member of the
public is does this roadway because as the witness just testified it's now making that lot and the adjacent the lot on the other side now um quarter lots based on the development of that road. Does this roadway now create variance
conditions on those two properties based upon the existing conditions? Those are the four variances correctly identified in your professional review letters. >> But but the var so the variances being requested are on those the adjacent lots or on your lot >> because if the various conditions are on
those adjacent lots, they have to be part of this application. They they they would be properties that need to be included as part of the application. So that's why I think we need to discuss this and figure out what exactly is being created here and what variance conditions are being created.
>> Yeah. So, >> so Mr. Seawol, considering that it could potentially be a variance relief which would require those applicants to be allegedly be a part of this application, would that still be the case if the rightway instead of being dedicated as a public rideway remained a private
street? >> It would not. Those four variances would go away because that would not be a public dedicated rightaway. It would >> I don't think it needs to be a public rightway. >> It's a private if it's a right-of-way period. Public or private, it would create those variances. If it's a driveway, then it wouldn't. But then now
you have a frontage issue because now you're having a driveway uh service 18 homes. >> You can still have a corner lot with a with a private road. >> Yeah. >> It doesn't have to be a public road for it to be a corner lot. my opinion, these two have to be part of
the application. >> These two lots have to be part of the application if you're creating a variance for them because with the driveway, the existing condition, it's a driveway. It doesn't create a variance
for them because it is still their sideyard. But when you put in either a public road or a private road, now you're creating a corner lot. And I'm I'm surprised we talked about this in our internal meeting um that
how can you have a variance on another property get approved by the board unless it is part of the application. There would be nothing preventing us from changing the proposal for this to be a driveway itself or a private right ofway and moving forward with this
application. Again, the variance relief is tied, excuse me, the variance relief is tied to the proposed application itself and only the proposed application. >> This is not burdening those lots at all. >> But how can the board grant a variance
on an adjacent property as part of your application? >> Well, as you heard from Mr. seaw wall that it's no longer a public right ofway that >> it doesn't matter how >> it does matter. It's a law. >> No, I just >> What do you mean a private road? >> Even as a private road, you could create a variance condition on that property.
You're creating a Even if it's a private road, you'd still be creating front yards. Whether this is a private road, even as a private road, you would still have each one of those individual lots would still have front yards off of the private road, right? They still have front yard setbacks. They still have front yard width requirements. Uh
whether it's private or private, I disagree. legally, it still could creates a variance condition. What it wouldn't be is if it's a shared driveway, >> um not a roadway. If it's a shared driveway where they all servicing 18 lots, then yes, I agree with you. Uh
then that wouldn't because but now you're just having a shared driveway with 50 ft of frontage because the only frontage would be on um on uh whatever that roadway is, a Green Street >> because if you're creating a private road, it's a private roadway. It's a rightway whether it's private or public.
You now that's the roadway. That's where all of the the setbacks, everything is is is based off of. It's still a public roadway. Uh and that's why you don't you still don't need frontage off of Green Street if it's a private roadway or a public roadway. That's why I said I think it's something you and I might need to speak offline and discuss. Uh
but I I I think it's something that is a legal issue uh that needs to be addressed before this before further application. Yeah, I I I respectfully I can't help but to feel this is like a fish a fishing exploration here because the one thing the one thing I want to make note on >> the one thing I want to make clear to
everybody >> there are currently six single family homes that are being serviced by this driveway. So if anything this is an existing nonconformity >> by driveway >> then we it will be a private driveway. >> It'll be a private driveway.
>> It's either an existing nonconformity in my opinion I mean, if it's a driveway, then this is not going to be a subdivision. You can't have a driveway into individual lots. Then it's a driveway where you you're having seven homes on or 18 homes on a
single lot. This is not a fishing expedition. This is the testimony that came up right now. I just heard it. I spoke to our planner right when I heard it because I said, "Wait a second. the the witness just testified that now this is these two lots that's not part of this application that they don't have
ownership to are now being created as corner lots because of the application and because of that now they have front yard setback requirements off of the new proposed private or public roadway Fairmont Drive [snorts] and that is now something that would have to be part of this application in
my opinion period legally uh and it we can't go further forward further without that now if you we want to discuss whether it can be a driveway and how that affects the application and whether or not you can still have individual lots off of a driveway versus a private road. I'm happy to have those conversations with you, but right now in
my 25 years of experience on land use, I don't see how that legally can be happen. >> I understand your commentary and I think you're absolutely accurate. We need to have this conversation um outside of the record. Uh but I just want to make note that we have been on this journey with this municipality for four years. many
obstacles. Fortunately, we've been able to overcome them and work with this municipality, and that's what we choose to continue to do. But at no point in these four years has that ever been raised as an issue. I'm raising it, and this is the first time I'm hearing about it. So, I I got I reviewed the application for this
evening. It didn't I didn't catch it then. I'm hearing it in the testimony, and that's why I'm raising it. >> Okay. >> I can't I can't speak to the last four years because I haven't been part of that those conversations or this application before then. Okay, thank you. U any further questions
for this u witness? If >> if I may real quick, I think the planning board attorney though had said that he would recommend we can't move forward until this issue is resolved. So, I don't know if it would be appropriate to continue public comment. >> I agree 100%. We this has to be the application has paused. Okay. We need to
work this out to determine legally how we proceed and then we can pick up where we left off or you know have to re revisit some of the test >> so um procedurally let's let's first discuss the the continuence of this application then we have to discuss the
tit application. Um I mean obviously we'll discuss we we'll talk you know immediately and figure out how to proceed how to address this but when can this uh be placed when's the next available agenda for this to be put on? October 22nd.
>> Respectfully, considering the fact of how many years we've been uh working towards a land use entitlement for this site, uh we would ask the board to consider a potential earlier date. Um as you can imagine, it kind of sits with the narrative of, you know, this has taken a while.
>> Yeah. I I I have to defer because I don't know what our our foration, you know, how busy each each meeting is. Un unfortunately um Joe we are booked that is the soonest available unless the
applicant requests a special meeting and the board is ready to entertain a special meeting but we are booked we have multiple application I can give a date but we are we are so booked that I don't think they will be heard the
earliest available is that date >> so well we And I'm just throw Can I just throw something? So, can you guys work through the issues that you have to work through and then we can assess whether or not it could be because you could say the next
planning board meeting is next month. You may not work through that to have folks come out and then they're not coming. So, why don't you guys work through the issues, right? Once you the issues are worked through from the planning department and the applicant and yourself, then we could see when the next
available is, right? Put it in for so put it in for the October date so you have that locked in so we don't have other ones come in and then we can address getting you >> into a sooner date if it's feasible. >> Right. That's what I was going to
recommend is that we put it on it. So, no, it's being advised here for the public that it's being carried to the October 24th date. 24th. Was that >> 22? >> 27th. Wait, second or second? >> Second. >> Second. Okay. Sorry. To the October 22nd
date without further public notice being required. This is your notice that's being carried to that date. If it determines that another date opens up, it's an earlier date that we can put it on or the special meeting gets scheduled, then we will schedule for that date, but you at that point will
have to give notice to the notice will have to be provided. So, you will get new notice if it's not going to be on for the October 22nd. Okay? So, every member of the public is aware on this application, come back on October 22nd unless you receive notice otherwise.
>> Okay. >> All right. Thank you. So then, Mr. Chairman, >> and then I would assume Tytown will also be carried >> to the October 22nd date. >> Is that okay? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> October 26.
>> So anyone and we'll do the same. Um uh just to just to clarify, um anyone here on the 403 Tytown LLC application that is also being carried to the October 22nd date. If that gets rescheduled to
any other date, you will be pro provided separate new notice. If you um if you don't receive that notice, then that means it's going to remain on for the October 22nd uh public hearing date for the planning board if you're here for that application. >> All right. Thank you everyone. Have a good night.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. We're going to open it up for general public comment. Seeing no hands. I >> Okay. >> Hi. Um I'm 35. I grew up here in Obridgeidge. I attended Carpenter School
like many kids. You know, I explored the woods in the back. We uh our science I remember fond memories our science class brought us um you know to explore the ecosystem of deep run and um all the different lakes that are behind um Carpenter School. Um when I saw the
application here I >> you can't address any applica pending application this is just general public comments something happened >> in so I can't I didn't have a question for you know for them before but this is just my general comment that you know we
really need to protect our waterways first and foremost we're losing land there there once we lose our land it's gone you know so it's it's devastating to be here in Obridge and to see the changes that are happening and the
changes that have not happened right and I just I don't know I don't know like what the solution is why this land needs to be developed why it was >> you're addressing about a certain application we can't >> okay you can't talk about >> I I have nothing else I can't speak
sorry >> no I I'm sorry it's just by by law if if we let you speak then the application whether it's approved or denied becomes an issue so >> I don't know why I came here then >> I'm I'm I'm a citizen of the community and we're all here for you. >> No, you'll have an opportunity to speak
on the application when it's being carried. Like I said, at the end of the the at the end of the application, you provide to find any testimony, any discussion items on the >> right. I mean, I didn't have a particular question for them. I know you guys are looking for questions, but you know, >> and the comments can come at the end. So the qu questions come throughout the
application after each witness and the comments and and concerns that you may have you bring up because at the very end when they close we open it to the public and then the public it's your floor. You >> well I'm just going to say I don't this is not to do with this application at all. It's just this parcel of land. Uh
it should not be developed. It makes no sense. You are you know circumventing mother nature for no reason. Thank you. >> Thank you. Seeing no other u hands, I closed the public comments. Um looking
for a motion to adjurnn. >> Move it. >> All in favor? >> I