Let me do that. Let me ask that question. No, >> hello. >> I can hear me. >> Hello. >> Hello. [Music] >> Hello. We're good.
>> First time Sorry, we're back on the record from the recess. Please >> certainly. Mrs. Andrews >> present. >> Miss Chevier >> here. >> Mr. Scognu >> here. >> Mr. Stoner >> here. >> Miss Testie >> here. >> Miss Gomez >> here.
>> Chairman Sullivan, >> I'm here. Oh, he took your microphone. >> I don't have a microphone. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. So sorry. >> Oh, shoot. >> No, I know. One, too. >> I promise we're usually running much
more tighter >> Can I have one also? >> Oh, sorry. Yes, we are. No. One, two. One, two. Go again.
>> One, two, test. Okay, we're back on the record. Uh we've had a roll call. Uh again, I want to apologize uh to to everyone here this evening, the technical difficulties that we've had uh due to the storm uh which yesterday took out a major component in here that we
couldn't uh broadcast. So, we're working under a little disabling conditions, but thank you all for your cooperation. I want to make an announcement at this point. Um the rules of the of the board are the meetings are from 7:30 to 10:30 with testimony to stop at 10:00 and uh
with the 30 minutes remaining for public portion. The problem is tonight we went way over on the last application and those are the people that are sitting in here uh in front of us. We have one more application and then two more residential uh homeowners with with
matters. I'm asking them uh to if they would agree to not come on tonight because I I can't fit them in. It's just we're going to go too long. They've been kind enough to accept so they don't sit here for another 45 minutes. They've sat
here all night and I truly apologize for that, but uh I sometimes have no control over the testimony and the length of the testimony. They have agreed uh to both be put on the ver our very next meeting on 10:16. I tell you when I'm telling
you you're putting you're going to be put on first. There's one person coming for a vote. Then your two applications will be next. So we start at 7:30. I can anticipate you being on before 8:00. So please uh I'm going to try my best uh to
get this other application out of the way tonight. And I don't mean to diminish your application, Mr. McGowan. Uh we we'll work around it. Once again, I want to thank you as residents of the community. Obviously, we're all residents here. I know that you're you were very patient tonight. I can only offer my apologies, but I can offer you
that these applications will be put on. I'm going to read them into the record right now. 17-2025Z, that's Anthony Frankenro. Uh that's the physical location is 492nd Street in Old Bridge. Uh and the other one is 19-2025Z.
That's Nathaniel Cruz. That's 259 Amboy Road in Manowan. And those applications will not be heard this evening. They are being moved to October 16th. There'll be no further notice. And I once again thank you very much for your patience
both both of you. Okay. And and Mrs. uh Frank Fenona >> Frankenro and Cruz. Thank you very much. Okay. All right. Having said that, we're going to move forward. I hope uh this is uh ladies were being picked up on the
recorder. Uh 06-2025Z. It's 2Gor Farm LLC, Oldbridge Point. This is blocks 5,000 5,00056 lots 20 1-9 1-29 Lucy Drive, Lola Drive,
and Porime Road for solar lighting. They're seeking amended preliminary and final subdivision. Robert McGawan representing the applicant. Mr. Mr. McGowan. >> Good evening. Yes, my name is Robert McGawan. I'm here representing the applicant 2G Poor Farms LLC. A
housekeeping question. Now that all this has been restored, do I still need to produce a transcript for tonight? >> Councelor, >> uh I don't Are we back on live cable?
>> Yes, we are. >> I can't promise that that that it will go. If a transcript is needed, we will have >> but what I've also been told was we were going out over YouTube live. >> Okay. >> So that would be there. >> Okay. >> Am I correct, Jake?
>> We will have uh we will have all of the audio tomorrow. >> All right. So >> to you, sir. >> I appreciate then you're willing to stay. >> Whatever we owe you. >> Okay. I'll help. >> I thank you so much.
>> All right. We'll just give a brief moment for the stenographer to Are you okay? All right. Okay. >> Okay. Goodbye. And thank you for being here. Thank you so much. It was a rough night for you. >> All right, Mr. McGowan. All right, you can proceed.
>> The uh the application of course was uh here through the last couple of years. At this point, uh, the subject of the application, um, is a a completely finished, well, not completely finished development. There's still the final site
improvements. The the road has to be paved. Some cleanup issues have to occur, but all the homes have been sold. Uh, there are 35 uh there were 35 homes altogether. Uh, of them, 17 were
duplexes. Then there was a single included in that because of the incredibly uh insistence of uh our your planner. Uh there are in fact seven affordable homes that were sold to
the people and if you go there you would intention because of the intent of how this was approved you would have great difficulty telling what's affordable and what was market. Uh so this is quite a unique development. uh and it I think it
has gone well and I think it is you know a great improvement for the area. What happened in the transition was that as it was being developed and they were working with Jerse Central Power and Light uh and trying to analyze the cost
both of the construction and the after cost because the roads are private. Uh they are not going to be maintained by Old Bridge. They're going to be maintained by the homeowners association. As a result, the lighting is also going to be paid for by the
homeowners association. So as the developer analyzed the installation costs and then the eventual costs, it became clear uh that the eventual cost and as we know energy rates have continued to climb and in fact is kind
of a political issue in the state at this point at as the advancement of those rates uh with the solar the homeowners association will realize substantial savings. So with that, it was redesigned to do
solar. Uh it was an oversight and an unintentional error that it never cleared through um engineering here in Oldbridge. Uh our engineer went through it, redesigned it, went back and forth,
everyone agreed on it. There was some confusion as to who was going to submit it, and I think each thought the other was, and it didn't get submitted. Um and so as a result uh where maybe it could have been an engineered approval uh with
further consideration and because we do have a variance in the height. Our poles are 19 ft where only 18 feet are are allowed. Um we are now before the board for this variance waiver. I'm sorry waiver I'm sorry for
the waiver. Um, so that's what we're here for tonight is to talk about the lighting to see how it impacts the community, see how it lines up, whether it serves the purposes, do we have any other uh deviations uh from what the the code requires uh and how does this fit
into the community? Uh what I'd like to have is John Vincenti sworn in. He is a representative, the applicant and the owner. Um and provide a little further background for you. You swear from the total truth?
>> Yes, I do. >> State your name and spell your last. >> My name is John Vincenti. V I N C N T. I um I'm employed by Level 10 Development, the developer of the property. I am the director of development. I'm also a
licensed engineer and planner. Although um we have our engineer here to give the um expert testimony. I'm really to give some of the background and fact facts associated with this >> testifying as to
>> I'm testifying to the as the circumstances around around um uh the the the the lighting design. >> Okay. So you you're a professional engineer and you're a professional planner. >> Yes. >> But he's mostly testifying as >> I understand. We'll recognize his credentials. Certainly he's testified before this board before.
>> Yes, he has. >> So as as as Mr. McGowan indicated, the community is is is pretty well built out. Um the roads are paved. Uh the base course is in. Uh we anticipate um final uh landscaping, final paving all
completed by by um by no November. When we first anticipated and and made our application uh for 35 homes, we proposed um that the roads would be publicly owned, publicly maintained by by the
township. And during um the uh staff reviews um we made the switch that the that that the uh improvements would be owned by the homeowners association. Um the original anticipation was that uh
like any public right ofway JCPNL being the local utility they have a a street lighting program where the utility would would come in uh essentially the developer pays JCPNL to put the infrastructure in. Um uh it's a a wired
um system and basically the um street lights are then paid directly and build to directly to to the municipality and the township pays the bills. In the case of a a private property or private
development, JCPNL's policy and and it changed a number of years ago, they will not um entertain that type of arrangement even though um the look of the community may suppose or presuppose
that that um these are typical residential roads because they are maintained um by a private entity. JCPNL wants to kind of get out get out of um something that they don't make money on.
Um and in this particular case, we we um performed an outreach to JCPNL and they made it clear that they had no intention of um uh entertaining the um the the street program for for this community. So, we evaluated
um a cost um long-term and short short-term cost of operating the lights, maintaining the lights of the homeowners association um as opposed to um with with two different
options. is one is that the the traditional um wired hardwired option um where the uh the homeowners would be would be build uh on a monthly basis just like you get your bill for for electric at your house and we we
evaluated also the alternative of of solar. The benefit of the solar is really towards the monthly um nut that the homeowners association would have to pay. There is no um there's no electric
bill. Um they're 100% solar operated. Um the long-term savings is substantial when when we performed the financial analysis and the analysis that we performed was based on 2003 rates. We
performed it in 2004 and as as you all well know um the um monthly uh rates that everyone in the state pays have escalated dramatically. Um as homeowners typically we're seeing 20 to
25% 24%. Um but the street lights accounts are commercial in nature. So there would be a even a larger escalation to to the to the
homeowners for this. Um the cost to the developer are are essentially are essentially the same. >> Um we had to pay for the lights, we had to install them. Um the um actual infrastructure costs um of the
underground installation um uh is is not necessary with with the solar. there's no there's no wiring associated with it. Um the uh upfront costs though are a little bit more expensive uh to to the developer and and
we felt the long-term benefits though really weighed very uh largely on the the small incremental up upfront costs. Um and we're seeing our homeowners benefit uh quite frankly. Um we're going
to turn over the association. We have probably a $50,000 um um um budget surplus that the homeowners are going to are are are going to get the benefit of um with with our um um reserve analysis
that that we did. Um and you know, the idea is when we turn it turn over the community fully fully built, the homeowners have a a a good good reserve. um and the um lack of paying JCPNL
um played a large part in that. Um so we're here for an amended site plan approval that really just uh memorializes the lights that we've we've installed. Uh as Mr. McGowan indicated,
um we had our engineer do an analysis the lighting plan that we came up with respect to lighting intensities. um for all intents and purposes uh the illumination um is is equal um to what uh was originally shown on the plan and
I think that's borne out and documented in the um the review memo that uh your consulting engineer uh prepare prepared. Um the only real difference is the fact that um these particular um light
fixtures are mounted higher than the 13 ft uh lantern style. Um we have a mounting height of what we believe to be 18 ft. Um the middle of the um structure of the the fixture is 19 ft above grade.
um to the top of the uh solar panel is an approximately an additional 3 to 3 to 4 feet above the 19 ft. Um your ordinance um puts the mounting height requirement at at 18 ft maximum. So
technically we're we're seeking a waiver for that height. Um, but we we think um the aesthetics associated with these lights are are different than than what you see um with your your typical um uh
lantern style. We we we think they're a little stylish. The other benefit to these lights, quite frankly, is is the luminere is not really um real evident uh with with the lantern style. Um that light bulb is evident to to to the eye. This this partic particular fixture has
has an LED that's mounted to the bottom. So the light is projected down. So if you're in the house on the second floor, you really don't see that um the light bulb visible. So even though it's a little bit higher, we do not believe
that um it it is an impediment to the to to the visibility of of the residents. As a matter of fact, we have gotten um no comments, no complaints from from our from the residents in the community. Now, um there were some questions um in
um the the review letter um that dealt with um why why we did this and and and really it was twofold because JCPNL wouldn't wouldn't support the community. Um um and um because of the cost savings
generated to to the homeowners association um there's a question with respect to how the energy is stored um um how it's collected by the so solar panel. So there there are batteries
there's there's a battery pack integral to the panel uh underneath mounted to the panel and that battery gets the energy during the day and then expends it during the during during the evening hours when when the the light is
working. There's no interconnection be from one um light pole to the other. Each one is all self self-contained. Um there is a useful life of those batteries. Um it it's a module that we that is popped out and and and replaced.
Um that replacement cost is all was all built into the uh financial analysis uh that that we provided to the township when we made this application that was that uh financial analysis was required by Nicole Shapiro and we provided that
uh as part of the part of the application. So, um the financial benefit is is as I've indicated is significant. So, question about the lighting of the tot lot. The tot lot is is really uh not uh intended to be um
utilized after after dusk. Um the lighting illumination levels in the rear um culdesac area are are similar to um exa act actually exactly the same as what was previously approved uh in in
the lighting plan. Um, so in summary, um, I know Kevin, our engineer, is going to go through, uh, the other bulk issues in in the review letter, but that's that's the reason behind this um, and
why we are here seeking um, the waiverss and an amended site plan dealing solely with um, with the light the lighting issues. And because it is an amended site plan, we did give notice unlike the
presentation before us. Our people were all notified that we are doing this and they obviously saw it. So >> all right. Uh thank you Mr. Vicente. Mr. >> Dari, >> thank you Mr. Chairman. Um we do have a
review memo uh dated and I just had it on my screen and it left me. Give me one second. >> July 28th. >> July 28th. Thanks, John. Um, Mr. Vincenti did provide some of the testimony we had requested and I guess in the interest of of brevity in the the
late hour. Uh, I'll just summarize our concerns. I did get a chance to speak to Miss Shapiro um earlier today about this application. I mean, it's been it's been a few months. We met out there back last spring. Uh, may actually been early spring, I think, when we met out there.
>> Probably around um February. >> Yeah. Okay. Late winter. Uh in any case, our our concerns were obviously the lights were installed without, you know, without us knowing that that the fixtures had changed. Um the concerns were the height of the
lights, which the the approved lights for this development were uh under a little under 13 ft. They're 12.75 ft height. Um it was more of a decorative light light fixture that was that was to be installed. That was the standard JCPNL light that that Mr. Vincenti was
uh describing what what is installed is you know quite a bit taller. The actual light element itself is about mounted at about 18 ft. The the fixture is about 19 ft. Then there's a solar uh panel and battery and everything that that goes up
to I guess about 21 22 ft in height. Uh the concern was the height of the element being near the second floor um uh windows. the locations of the lights also is different right from where it
was on the approved plans were I'm sorry it's the it is where the they were supposed to be on the approved plans but they they do wind up being proximate to to the to the windows and I guess the cons you said you guys haven't gotten any complaints right John but my understanding from Nicole is that she has received some concerns from some
residents I don't know if that's been conveyed to to you or to Ryan Holmes >> it it has not I'm the president of a homeowners association I've conducted the meetings and not one resident has um >> has uh
>> made any comments with respect to um >> the lighting. The only comments we've we've received from the community members or they want to look at the finances and and we've provided them with with that. Then the other concern that that we had and and I was I'm
looking in my files to see if I can find the the financial analysis that you referred to because I I didn't see it in my uh >> my files here. >> I noticed I noticed that you did not >> um >> address it in in the items. I I I I know
that it was um provided both digitally and hard copies because I provided both personally. >> Okay. Um, and that's, you know, it it was, I think, conspicuously opposite in >> Yeah, it's not in our memo. >> You didn't get it. I kind of figured you didn't get,
>> right? And and that's and I don't know that Nicole's seen it either because her and I had this very same conversation today. Um, and I know it's hearsay, but uh, but we had the same same conversation today. The concern that we have and and just down to brass tax is
HOAs. I've never met anyone any HOA that is flushed with cash. Never, especially 20, 30 years down the road. And our concern really is that these lights um the the the maintenance of the batteries and the and the fixtures, which happens
throughout. And then eventually there's going to need to be more of an wholesale kind of replacement of these of either the batteries or fixtures. And our concern is that the HOA is going to basically be coming to beat down the township's door to take ownership of these lights and replace them. And
that's something that we obviously are concerned with and we're trying to head off and and our thinking of heading that off was to make sure that there's a natural reserve. I'm glad you referred to the reserve because because that's our idea as well. You know, brilliant minds think alike. So So we wanted to see what what that reserve would be,
right? like like how much are we putting aside and designating specifically with a bright label that says this is for these lights. Don't go beating down the town's door in 20 years. So, so both versions of the of the budget and the reserve studies that we
did >> had money in both budgets for lights. the issues of replacement replacement of the light fixtures, the light posts, the infrastructure, the wiring >> versus the solar and the batteries was
always in the the lighting was always in the budget >> from from from the get-go. The maintenance responsibilities were always in the HOA documents. Naturally, there are two different
calculations associated with with with that because of the need to replace wires versus not needing to replace wires. The need to to to replace light bulbs is basically the same, right? The poles is basically this the the same
cost. The fixtures um are are very similar. the the the there is a cost associated with with the the solar and the battery and and we took that into consideration in both budgets that were done initially when when it was wired
and and and now when it when it's solar the real big cost differential is the monthly nut paying those bills >> for for electric and that's what really really makes the difference long long
term. So when we met with um in in in in February, it was very clear that that was um an issue and in the followup um correspondence between the township engineers office and our office that was
made pretty clear to us. Um and that's what why we we did provide the two different reserve anal analysis and and budgets. Um >> so I guess >> and we we believe you know we we've
we've um met that met that standard. >> So the I haven't had a chance to look at that reserve analysis obviously both either of those analyses. Um initially when the board approved the the application here I think the understanding was that JCPNL
would be doing the you know maintenance and and and all that stuff. So I understand that you did the two analysis to to demonstrate that hey listen we intend now since JCPL is not in the picture we either would install the standard lights or these solar lights
and here's the difference between these solar lights and standard lights. So, so what I'm getting at is either way now we're we're we're we're basically approving a or being asked to approve something where the HOA is going to be maintain these lights and we just need to see the analysis to make sure
that there is um there's going to be money in 20 years or whatever to to replace these lights if if there needs to be. The only um thing for the in the interest of moving forward here tonight is if the board acts favorably, I I would feel comfortable if there was a an
agreement that if our office and the tip engineers office reviews this and we find that there's a payment that needs to be made by by the developer to to sort of supplement that that you agreed to that payment. And of
course, you can always come back and say, you know, if if we don't agree, you can come back to the board and argue your case later. >> I I I would I would say um within reason. Yes. >> Well, yeah. Everything's within reason, right?
>> And if we don't if we don't agree on the number, we'll we'll come back. Right. The other the other thing that that you know um we know when when these communities are transitioned um to the homeowners association there
is a transition report that's done and they look at the finances. Another thing that we did in running um the um the uh association is we self-managed it and and and um basically did not pay a third
party to manage the association up until probably about four or five months ago. Um so there was a substantial savings associated with that. We did not pay ourselves to run the association. We're doing that with all our communities. um especially upfront because we know that
the budgets the budgets are are generally tight. That's another reason why we have a significant surplus in in the account right right now. Um that will be made available turned over to the association. It's in a separate it's in a separate account. We collect
reserves. >> Okay. um we we if if it's a if there's a shortfall, we kick in from our from our own pocket um to meet that budget. Um even though we're not spending it so that when it comes time, you know, we we
know the the the HOAs um are looking to be made whole at transition. And if we're transparent about it and the money sit in an account, um it's there's less of a um a difficult transition. And that's what we're trying to to to to
avoid. Personally, I I'm I'm managing probably eight homeowners associations, president of the board of of eight of our communities. I don't want to be burdened with eight transitions that become very costly and
ownorous. So, it's in in our best interest to make sure the money's there when the time time is right to turn it over. >> Yeah. I mean, I I hear exactly what you're saying, and that all makes perfect sense. My my only concern is
when the HOA uh takes over, they see money sitting there, and they're like, "Oh, you know, we have money here. We we need something that that and maybe this is written into your documents. We need to see it. We need something that says, "Hey, HOA has been advised. These lights are yours, and there's going to be a
long-term cost." And and I know and I want to see it. And because my problem is always they, you know, it's human nature. you know, they they're looking to to to cut their costs. They're looking to ma balance their budgets. And they're like, "Well, maybe our HOA fee doesn't have to be $120 a month. Maybe
it can be $90 a month because John left us all this money." And so so that's, you know, we want to make sure that that there there's some controls in place cuz I I I know you see it on your end and on my end, >> you see it too. >> What's that?
>> You You see You see? >> Yeah. I see it on my end. And on my end, what I see is HOAs, at least, you know, a few a year. I, you know, I'm sitting through town committee meetings where people come to complain about their trash co the cost of their trash, the cost of their lights, the cost of their roads. Some HOAs don't even know that
they that they are responsible for the roads and, you know, they have their residents coming to committee meetings asking for the roads to be repaved. So these are all things that probably go beyond this lighting issue we're talking about, but I just want to make sure that this lighting issue is addressed crystal clear in those documents and in the in
the financial proform you're talking about. >> The the the HOA documents were also submitted with the application. >> Y I will review those as well. just I'd just like to add to that the thought that while it makes sense to
look that we've properly set it up and we've and the budget that uh the developer has established is a reasonable budget and it has appropriate reserves and so forth. There is no way that any of us can guarantee what the
future homeowners association is going to do. I mean your point Resh that they may look at just like town councils sometimes look at all of this money they have in reserve and an election is coming up and so we're going to uh you know not increase taxes this year when
really a proper planning should say you should maintain the budget that you have. So, all I'm saying is we can show that we've set it up properly for the homeowners to be protected and if they continue to operate in a in a proper manner uh and follow the guidance that
we've given them, they should be in great shape. But we none of us can control what they may do in the future. >> I thought DCA was making homeowners associations uh establish budgetary
constraints that they have to have enough money in order to be covering. >> Is it DCA or it's a Did the state enact something? I'm I'm on a homeowners association. That's why I'm I'm I'm questioning that. >> I I believe it's the DCA, right? And
what they're requiring is uh um >> it might be annual or bianual, but it's it's it's what's called a reserve study. >> Yes. >> Okay. So the reserve study is uh not intended to um to uh account for your uh
daily operations, but it's your rainy day. It's your rainy day fund. >> Okay. And and and to to to tell you where we are with our reserve, our our total budget is $69,000. That's what um that's what we collect on a yearly
basis. I have um a $25,000 $25,000 of that $69,000 budget is the re is the annual reserve amount >> contribution >> that goes into a separate separate um
account set aside for reserves. That's the rainy day. Now, you know, the the intent is that's there for the long-term maintenance. um which includes the paving here. It includes um you know replacing the sand in the uh in in the
recharge basin. It includes the fence, replacing the fence around the detention basin. It includes the lights. Um it includes maintenance on the retaining wall in this community. Includes uh um things things to that that nature. >> What I'm concerned with is
JCPNL is providing electric to everybody's home. >> Correct. Yes. >> The polls that they did they put those poles up. No, there was a new development. So you put the polls up. >> Yes. >> And JCPL uh JCPNL was sending electric
to the pole for the street lighting >> only. >> Yes. >> Totally separate that. Each home owner gets their own bill for their own electricity. Yes. The HOA was going to share was going to pay for the electric bill. >> Correct. the the way well the way the way it was going to be set up, there
would be separate meters that would would power the the light fixtures and those and those the bill for those meters would go to the homeowners association as opposed to a straight bill that goes to the to the
township. It's set up differently >> to the township. If if this was a if this was a municipal program, there's there's no meter. There's there's no um consumption bill. There's a regular bill. The town has built x amount per light pole in in the
community. >> If the roadway was dedicated to the township, >> correct? >> This roadway is not dedicated to the township. >> So therefore, the bill went to the HOA. >> It would have had we done a traditional electric. Yes. >> Understand? What happens? Who's going to fix this stuff?
>> The HOA is responsible, right? Either either way in this in this community either way either way the town is not going to do it. No, no. In in in with with we had an we had an option to go with the hardwired electric, >> but the but the the um the municipality
had would not pay for the electric bill and JCPNL would not be responsible for maintaining those utility p those those uh lighting poles that would fall on the homeowners association. >> Right. >> So, we chose the solar option.
>> Okay. JCPNL was charging a commercial rate for to providing that >> well whatever whatever it may be the town wasn't paying the bills the the HOA is paying the bill >> correct >> okay >> in the in the situation where where um
the town is paying the bill >> and that light pole needs to be replaced that's on JCPNL they h they have to replace the wiring they have to replace the light fixture they have to fix the change the bulbs they they have to, you know, that that
whole infrastructure is on them. And that's where it's a loss leader to to to them. It's not the initial initial upfront cost of the installation. It's the long-term maintenance to JCPNL. That's why they're getting out of the uh
lighting business in privatelyowned developments. >> They're not going to sell lighting. >> They're out of it. They will they in no community in New Jersey if it's a private community they will they will not enter entertain enrolling that
community in the their street lighting program. >> They're not taking on anything new. You mean >> and that's that's been now for probably around 10 12 years something like that. >> Well they take care of ours. They change our bulbs. >> That's be that's because they they that predates their change in policy.
>> That's what I'm saying. This is this is something new coming forward. >> Relatively new. Yes. >> What happens when this stuff breaks? >> It's on the association. >> It's on the community, right? >> It's on the association. >> And why why is the necessity to take it from 18 to three or four foot higher
depending on >> it? It it it's basically the design of the of of this particular uh solar fixture. >> It needs to be higher to spread light. >> It's that's the way it's that's the way it's designed. it it's a lantern style, but the way the the the aesthetics is
not mounting it on top of a pole. >> It's kind of like got a goose neck and it kind of hangs um it's a totally different aesthetic type of type of look. It's a lantern. It's a more um contemporary type of lantern design. And
what that does is it allow allows that um the the the light bulb, the LED fixture to be mounted flat, directed down as opposed to if it was on top of a pole, then you have to have have that um um the the the
light bulb actually visible in that lantern style in the in the four um four walls of the glass. Okay. So it's out of necessity that you did this, not not just out of choice. >> The height because of the way it works. >> It's it's just so the board can understand.
>> It's because of this part particular fixture design. That's correct. Yes. >> All right. And basically you're here ask you want the board to amend the plan to allow for this. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Yeah. It's they're asking for an amended site plan to revise the lighting design and then there's also design
waiverss that are associated with it. >> Okay. Are you going to have other another witness? >> If the board has questions, >> let me I'm going to see if the board does, but I'm saying you're going to have another witness. >> We do have the engineer if there are any questions. >> Okay. Well, let's go. Let's go see if the board has any question. >> And council, you have any Oh,
>> how was the homeowners that I'm I'm assuming they're not in their homes just yet, or are they? They are. How were they notified about this dilemma? So um about this this meeting they were given a >> no about the change of the and and and
were they so you know was it explained to them that >> so inherently >> HOA excuse me and like he stated you know HOAs I I've had a HOA I had a condo and they're unpredictable and was this
explained to them cuz I'm sure they bought it thinking oh the the you know the township just city light, yada yada yada. >> From the get-go, the the the homeowners association documents were clear that
the lighting was to be maintained and paid for by the by the association. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, it was it was always disclosed. Now at that time it was understood or contemplated that it would be
electrical but it was not it was understood by us or >> but you said that the township would would pay that. >> So now you're saying the HOA >> no so when we first came in with the application we wanted it to be a
township road. When the application was discussed and ultimately approved, it was made clear by staff that they said no, the town does not want to maintain this. >> Then you adise the potential owners. >> It was it was reviewed and and approved.
Then what happens is we create the homeowners association documents. This is before any marketing is done. >> Okay. >> Okay. The HOA documents say lighting is maintained and cost uh the cost is borne
by the the residents. Okay. >> That information is disseminated. Okay. It didn't say you put me at ease. Okay. >> It didn't say >> um hardwired electric lights. It says it says electrical lighting. There was no
differentiation ever made between um solar or or hard. they were pre-notified >> that it's on their that it's on their >> Okay. Thank you. >> One of the requirements of selling homes in in a homeowners association or condo
association is you have to have a public offering statement uh that's registered with the DCA and which is made available to all the homeowners. All that information is in there. >> Yep. >> So JCPNL will not come in there anymore. >> No, absolutely not.
>> They don't even want to. >> Nope. They'll put in regular lighting and that No, >> not in this community. No, because Yeah, because it's a private roadway. That That's the >> I got rub. >> I got it. Okay. >> I just have a question for Mr. Dari. So,
what if like we have a bunch of other town um communities where they had an HOA and it's been dissolved. >> Yeah. >> Or it just dissipated. No one even, you know, some people moved in there and said, "We've never even had an HOA when there was one." What happens then? Does
it still fall back on this community and we're ourselves are clean? >> Yeah, I mean that's a legal question, not an engineering question. >> GCA takes over, >> but I I'll defer to our our our attorneys on that. Um, but the the HOAs
are are are are difficult at times. Um, that's the reason why I my whole thing is to make sure it's crystal clear at this stage what everyone's responsibilities are. And then yeah, you just gota >> keep your fingers crossed that HOAs don't dissolve. Right. >> The only thing we can do is make it
crystal clear at this point. >> Yeah. >> Hopes that when it does happen, >> if that does happen that everybody think communities get taken over by DCA if they can't not survive. Correct.
>> I I'm not sure. >> I don't know the answer to that. I have a couple questions. I know what the answer is. They do. >> I believe you, but but I I don't know. >> I have a couple technical questions. How long have the lights been up?
>> About a year, year and a half. >> Do you ever run into problems where we've had three, four days of rain and the lights don't come on? >> No. >> No. >> Nope. >> Okay. >> That's what the batteries are for. So the batteries last long enough >> and even though it's a it's a cloudy day
that you're still collecting energy from through through the cells. >> How long can they go without that that battery backup? Is it a week or two weeks? >> I don't know if it's that long but it's several it's several days. I I I I don't have the technical >> but it hasn't been a problem.
>> Not to my knowledge. No. >> Anybody else on the board? Any >> questions? No. >> Mr. Dari? I >> I don't have any more questions for Mr. Vincenti now. Um, do you want to hear anybody else? >> You know, Kevin, I just had a couple of and I don't know if you had
>> swear. I I apologize. >> Okay, let's do that. >> And and they're very tech very very minor technical questions. >> I we want to be right. >> Can you raise your right hand? Do you swear affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> Yes. >> Can you state your name and spell your
>> Kevin Shelly? Sh L L Y. And Kevin, you're the engineer who testified throughout this application, right? >> Yeah, >> he has testified before uh this board before. I love recognizing his credentials and his expertise. >> Thank you. >> So, the only the only question I really
have is is regarding the illumination levels. I I don't know if you had a chance to review our memo. The the the um illumination levels are different obviously a little bit because you're never going to get exactly the same, right? From Yeah. 12 and a half or 12 and 3/4t tall
uh acorn style fixtures and you went to 18 foot LED fixtures spread a little bit further apart. So the illumination is going to be a little bit different. The the question I have though is the um the averages that we have are they're
they're identical to the ones before. Did you guys recalculate them and they actually are identical or is that just something that was >> Yeah, we did we redid them. We modeled the the fixtures. We modeled them at different heights to see what gave us that same level that was approved and that's answers your question of how we
ended up at an 18t height. >> That's what gave us the equivalent lighting levels that were approved previously. Uh and how we ended up here. >> So you you worked from the those averages backwards to to make sure that >> Yeah, we adjusted it. We started at 15, we were up at 21. We found it at 18.
Gave us what was previously approved and consistent, which in our mind was an approved equivalent. >> Okay. then the height comes up. >> All right, perfect. That was my only real question because it it seemed like I was like, "Wow, that's that's kind of amazing." But that's if you start with that as your baseline and go from there, that's that that would work.
>> All right. And then um let me just go down my list. I apologize. Uh I think Mr. Vincenti gave most of the testimony that we were looking for. But >> I think the only other one was about uplighting on the site sign. There is no lighting on the sight sign. So >> Okay. It looked like there were on the plan. >> Yeah, we contemplated it, but there is
no uplighting. It's not installed. It won't be installed. >> Okay, perfect. Um, and then the other comments about uh adding or updating the plans with the road names, we have no problem with that. >> Um, all right. >> I think I think that was it. Uh, Mr. Chairman, I I don't have any questions
for Mr. Jelly. I think the only thing left is and I think Mr. Vincenti agreed to the the one condition that I suggested, which is M. Shapiro and I will review uh the the um financial analysis that that that the applicant prepared and uh should we find that
there's a um a lump sum that's required to to to sort of you know uh augment um the reserve so that the lights can be replaced or or or repaired going into the future. The applicant agreed to
that. Should we not come to an agreement then the applicant would have to come back here to to >> so conditional conditionally you would agree to agree and if you don't you got to come back >> we'll come back if we can't agree then we'll have to come back to you sure >> let me see if the board members have any more questions for Mr.
on my right. >> Have you done communities before with this lighting? >> We're seeing this particular light fixture. No, we're seeing this in a lot of other communities across the state. Same issue with JCPNL about not coming into private developments. C
>> could you assure the board that this works and uh and >> they work that the light fixtures actually look great. The they give a nice distribution. I think they're >> you're the professional. Well, we're just the we're just the >> I I I think we see this type of fixture in a lot of communities. This exact one,
they differ. There's a lot of options out there now as opposed to just JCP now telling you here's two acorn styles. Um, and they've all worked pretty uh successfully so far. >> Thank you, Mr. Dari. Do you feel comfortable saying that uh it it it we
could safely agree to amend the preliminary and final uh with the condition that it's uh >> I I I do, Mr. Chairman. I think from a technical standpoint um all the standards are met. Uh the the only issue
is the the long-term cost for maintenance and we're going to work that out according to them. >> Okay. >> And this is already in happening. So >> the lights are in. Lights are in and yeah functional. >> Uh you have anything else, Mr. N? No, I do not. >> Anybody else have any questions of this witness or any witness?
>> No. Uh you want to sum or you're good? >> No, I say >> All right, board. You've heard everything. We've heard from them professionals. Uh they're putting their licenses on the line. So, uh they say it can work and we should be okay to do this. Would somebody be in favor?
Amended uh major preliminary and then we'll do final. Chevier approved. >> Roll call, please. As to amend it, major preliminary. >> Mrs. Andrews, >> yes. >> Miss Chevier, >> yes. With the financial, >> Mr. Scogno, >> yes. >> Mr. Stoner,
>> yes. >> Mr. Testie, >> yes. Providing the financial. >> Miss Gomez, >> yes. With the financials, >> Chairman Sullivan, >> uh, yes, the major preliminary. Uh, and now to amend it final. Someone move it.
>> I'm sorry. Chevier and Testie. >> Wait a second. >> And test. >> Okay. Ready to go. >> Mrs. Andrews. >> Yes. >> Miss Chevier. >> Yes. >> Mr. Scogno. >> Yes. >> Mr. Stoner.
>> Yes. >> Mrs. Estie. >> Yes. >> Miss Gomez. >> Yes. >> Chairman Sullivan. >> Yes. Thank you. Your professionals, Mr. McGowan, and yourself. >> Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Board. We didn't want to be here this long either, so don't feel bad. >> Well, thank you.
>> All right, please leave. Uh, >> not you. No, Dorene wants to leave. She's got to get to work. >> Uh, having nothing else. Mr. Dodgy, nothing from the township. Okay, Moren, nothing from the township other than next meeting is
>> October 16th. >> October 16th. Board members, I don't think anybody has any final comments. Once again, Mr. Stoner, thank you for your years of service to the board. We appreciate that. >> Thank you. >> And pleasure. >> I'll ask you if you will call for an adjournment. >> Let's go home.
>> Okay. All in favor? >> I >> We stand a journ. >> When's the move?