All right, you're on record. >> All right, good evening everyone. Meeting of the Township of Paripony Troy Hills Planning Board is coming to order. Today is March 16th at 7:30. Uh let's see. Um, announcement of this
meeting is made or I'm sorry, announcement is made that adequate notice of this meeting has been given and is being in conducted in accordance with NJSA 104-6 ETSSE of the New Jersey Open Public Meetings Act. Nora, please call the role.
>> Mayor Desai >> here. >> Mr. Dpierro >> here. >> Mr. Dinsmore >> here. >> Chairwoman Hernandez >> here. >> Mr. Mey >> here. Mr. Npalitano >> here. >> Mr. Patel >> here. >> Mr. Shaw >> here. >> Miss Smith
>> here. >> Chairman Bonikim >> here. >> We also have our board planner Mr. Ry Ry Ryson >> here. >> Uh Miss our board engineer uh Miss Nest >> here. >> And our board attorney, Mr. Hawkins, >> here.
>> All right. Would everybody please rise for the pledge of allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
>> Okay. This meeting is open to the general public. Are there any members of the general public that wish to bring anything before the board which is not on the agenda for this evening? Seeing none, I'll close the public portion and we'll move on to our agenda.
Application number 26 col502 New Jersey 1 LLC at 4 Gate Hall Drive. Please come forward. Good evening. Is that working? >> Yes, >> it is. Is that working? Okay, good. Um, good evening, Mr. Chairman. Welcome
back. >> Thank you. >> U, Mr. Mayor, members of the board, board professionals, and member of the public. Uh, my name is John Lacino. I'm a partner with the law firm of Inglacino Taylor. Uh, located here in Pipany, proud business owner for the past 16
years. And, uh, we're representing the applicant here, Toll NJ1 LLC, in connection with this application. Um, and we thank you for hearing us, uh, this evening. Uh the applicant is an affiliate of Toll Brothers uh which is
one of America's most distinguished uh luxury home builders. Um I know this is the first major application uh for the new administration. So there's a bit of uh of excitement. So suffice it to say that we're excited uh to present this uh
this application to you. Uh the applicant is the uh contract purchaser of the property. Uh the applicant is seeking preliminary and final site plan approval for a 178 unit multifamily inclusionary
for sale or not a rental for sale development located at 4 gate hall drive here in Pipany. Uh the subject property is also known as lot 52 in block 175 on the official tax map of Pipany. Uh this
project will include 25 residential town home style buildings. Each building will contain three to six units. You'll hear testimony on the project from the applicant's engineer, traffic expert, architect, and planner. The project
consists of 142 market rate units and 36 affordable housing units for a 20% set aside. The affordable housing units will be deed restricted in accordance with state law. The 142 market rate units
will consist of 34 stacked two-bedroom town homes and eight three-bedroom conventional town homes. 36 36 affordable town homes will consist of seven stacked one-bedroom
town home units, 21 stacked two-bedroom town home units, and eight stacked three-bedroom town home units. and the bedroom with portional aortionment on the affordable units is what the state is what state law required uh requires.
My client has authorized me to provide some price points on the units. It's anticipated that the market rate twobedroom stacked unit town homes will sell in the mid mid6s to the upper 7 uh $100,000 range. And that the market rate
three-story town home conventional units will sell somewhere in the 900,000s. That's what's estimated. Um the affordable units again will be sold for the consideration that is set forth in the New Jersey Uniform Housing and Affordable Control Regulations uh which
is also known as UHAC. Uh, I want to take this opportunity to thank Councilman Karifi and Council President Hernandez uh for taking the time uh to meet with the applicant and the neighboring residents of Sedgefield a year or so ago uh to conceptualize uh
this project. Um, by working with the residents and council persons Karifi and Hernandez, we came up with a plan that assists Paripany to satisfy its constitutionally mandated affordable housing obligation in a manner that minimizes impact for the neighbors and
in fact we believe will add value to existing homes. There are other benefits of this project which we will see and will be presented including uh improved environmental conditions for this property. The project is a permitted use
in this zone pursuant to the four gate hall redevelopment plan which was unanimously adopted by the Parcipony Troy Hills Township Council on July 22nd of 2025. Uh and Mr. Chairman, I would like to move the redevelopment plan uh into
evidence before the board is exhibit A1. Uh John Miller from my office has made copies. Uh don't mean to burden you all with uh a lot of paper, but for those of you who want to read through this stuff or at least have it as a reference, we
wanted to make it available to you. >> No objections. Thank you. >> Um the project is zoned. >> I got money. I got money. The project is zoned pursuant to the redevelopment project process contained in the New Jersey redevelopment and housing law. Um because candidly that's
the way Paripan's then planner determined to proceed. Um this is a forale development. It is not a rental. >> Let me be very clear on the record. There will be no request for a pilot here. Okay? These are for sale units.
There are no pilots here. Um the redevelopment process was just a way to create the zoning and contain it to just that property. I was we were agnostic about it. That's the way she decided to do it. Um so as part of Paripany's round
four compliance with its constitutional obligation to provide its fair of low low and moderate income housing, um the Paripony planning board adopted the fourth round housing element and fair share plan back on June 25th of 2025.
Um, and without objection, I'd like to move that into the record here as exhibit A2. Um, and then just a couple of weeks ago on March 2nd, this planning board adopted the amended fourth round housing
element and fair share plan. And specifically on page seven of that amended plan, you'll see reference to this uh particular project. And we'd like to move that into the record as exhibit A3. And that's all the exhibits that I'll have. Um so since this
application is being brought pursuant to the affordable housing plan um this application's variance and design uh relief and waiver requests uh we should feel should be viewed and and there aren't significant uh variances or
deviations or requests that we're seeking. But just to make note that they should be viewed in the context of uh the New Jersey Administrative Code, which states in part that municipalities shall be expected, I quote quoting uh to cooperate with developers of
inclusionary developments in granting reasonable variances necessary to in uh construct inclusionary housing. That said, the applicant is seeking technical variance and deviation relief. And by the way, because it's a redevelopment plan, the nomenclature is deviation, but
it really means the same as as variance. So those terms will be used interchangeably. Um, we are seeking some relief uh regarding man-made uh steep slopes. You'll hear some testimony on that. Additionally, the applica applicant is seeking design waiver
relief from the parcipany code regarding the setback for the proposed monument sign. And I think your planner had picked up another variance or two um that we we will be seeking as well. Um and you'll hear testimony regarding both the variance deviation relief and the
design waiver uh being sought. Um Mr. Chairman, so far uh the documents that we have in the record are we have review letters. We have the board engineers technical review report dated March 13 of 2026. um which we received today and
appreciate. We have the board planners completeness report number three dated March 10 of 2026, report number two dated March 9 of 26, and report number one dated February 3 of 2026. Um,
we have the township sewer report dated February 13 of 2026. And we have the Morris County soil conservation district report dated February 11th, 2026. We also have the township tax assessor
report dated uh January 22nd of 2026. We did submit this application to the Highlands Council because Porcipany is a Highlands uh town and um but um we expect to have a letter of no interest. This project does not uh
increase impervious coverage by more than 10%. Which is a threshold that would trigger Highland's uh review. In fact, I think you'll hear testimony to the extent that impervious coverage is actually being slightly reduced. Um so that's the story there. um have four witnesses for this application, two of
which are here tonight. We have Robert Michello of Gladstone Engineering who will testify as to the civil engineering aspects of this uh project which will include design, parking, circulation, groundwater, lighting, landscaping, etc.
And then we have John Kurak Stonefield Engineering who will testify regarding traffic. Our architect, Mr. Matt JL um of Jal Kizelle will testify as to architecture at a later meeting and uh our planner John Mcdana will also
testify uh at a later meeting. Um we're hoping to finish the testimony of Mr. Michello and Mr. Cor this evening as possible but again Mr. Troy and Mr. Mcdana will be back to testify next time and we can always bring back Mr. Michelle or Mr. Corak if needed uh at a
subsequent meeting. So unless the board has any questions of me um like to proceed to call Mr. Michelle. >> Uh well at first we will just cover the uh um the completeness and the waiverss uh with our planner. Um I do appreciate you breaking up things because we'd like
to be done by about 10:00 at the latest tonight. So that uh having the two witnesses should work for us. And uh before we get started with anything major, I just want to remind the members of the board uh please make sure you're allowing all the members to view whatever exhibits are presented. Sometimes leaning forward or back can
create some obstruction. So >> we're gonna have handouts for you so that you can view the exhibits either not my first rodeo here. So we'll have handout exhibits for you so you can either look at the board or or look on on the on the paper in front of you. We
just want to do everything we can to orient to the public uh so that they have an opportunity to clearly see what's uh what's going on. >> All right. I appreciate that. With that, I'll turn it over to our planner, Mr. Ryder, sir. Sure. Um, thank you so much. Um, just to go over our March 10th
completeness review. >> Oh, that would help. >> Can you raise your right hand? Do you swear affirm testimony today? Is the truth about the truth? >> I do. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Uh, for the record, Ronald Reiner, CME Associates. Uh, I'm still licensed in good standing. No.
Anyway, um just to go over the letter, um we have uh if we can go to page five of it, uh the March 10th, uh completeness, they are asking for a waiver for 30x 42 plans in lie of the 24 by 36 ordinance.
Now, I'm going to defer to the engineer. I have no objection to that size. I don't know if there's any reason why 30x 42 is in the ordinance. uh lath the >> these plans are very large and they don't fit on the deis. >> Okay. So in other words, >> no objection other than that.
>> Okay. So we you know we have no objection to granting that that size waiver. Um so continuing um on page six again these are minor items. We have no objection to it. You're asking for a waiver for um
let's see for for just uh stockholders and yeah number six for stockholders and individuals. I thought you provided that but were you ask you were asking for a waiver on that? Well, >> it's a public company. Oh, >> it's a public company. That would help. So, >> can't give you all the stockholders in
the public company. >> Well, no. Okay. So, I mean no objection to that. I I think we'd be here all night reading that. Um I have provided honestly there weren't too many. Um >> okay so let's go to 12. Yeah we're going
to go through this really quick. Um can your engineer confirm and I think this will make it quick. Are there any uh are there any wet uh do are any wetlands you need a letter of interpretation for? >> We I can't testify for him but I can represent to the board that you will
hear testimony indicating that there are no wetlands on the site. >> Okay. Uh, I'll make that contingent. I mean, if there are no wetlands, we have no objection to that waiver because there aren't any. Okay. Looking for a plan to provide it. Number
16 on page 14. >> Yeah. Thank you for jumping ahead. Okay. Well, we know there are no existing signs. They're asking for a waiver on um including size, material, nature of construction, location, and illumination of the same.
Um I would say that let's wait for the testimony on that. you are asking for uh variance or deviation for for distance, but um I mean I have no I have no objection to granting that, but I believe you handle that during testimony. Anyway,
>> we're going to provide testimony on it and obviously we'll work with the board on placement of the signs. We understand what the issues are in terms of >> site site angles and so forth coming in and out of the development. We'll be prepared to address those. >> Same with number 20. There's a waiver
requested for existing and proposed site illumination. I'm going to make the same rational assumption that you will be addressing that as part of your testimony. >> We will. Mr. Michelle will be addressing that. >> Okay. So, I think now we're on page 19.
Uh final major site plan details. um submitting a separate sheet for final major site plan for preliminary. They're asking for a waiver. I think this is logistical. >> Did we skip over number 23? >> 23 where 23 >> page 16. >> Oh,
>> I imagine that's better. >> Page 16 on I have page 16 number 24 is provided location designs. >> No, we're we're okay. We're okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, once again, I think this is a logistical thing. We don't have any
objection to it because it's prelim preliminary and final. And I have terrible time saying preliminary. It's a speech impediment. So, sorry about that. Uh, so again, this is logistics. It's it's they're doing allin one. So, I don't see any reason to have a separate sheet.
>> Okay. Any me any members of the board with objections to the waiverss? >> All right. Seeing none, I I accept a motion to accept the w the uh request for waivers. >> Mr. Chairman. >> Yes, Mr. Mey. >> A motion to approve the waivers as
described. >> Second. >> Second. >> All right. All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? >> None. Okay. Waivers are approved. >> Uh sir, >> thank you. Please receive your application. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to
call up Mr. Robert Marcelo who is our civil engineer to be sworn in and qualified. Do >> you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give tonight before the board is the truth to nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Thank you. >> And Mr. Michelle, just very briefly, I know you've been doing this a long time and I know you've been before this board, but there are some new members
here. If you could just briefly describe your educational and professional background and qualifications and state, any licenses that you have. >> Yes, I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey. I received my license in 2004. Um, I received my bachelor of science and civil engineering in 1998 from NGIT. I
actually appeared before this board about a year and a half ago on a soil movement application. My office appeared here for another application in town a couple years ago as well. I have appeared before numerous boards throughout the state of New Jersey as an expert in the field of civil engineering. I've done multiple residential and commercial projects
throughout the state of New Jersey. Um, currently my office is working on over 1500 residential units right now throughout the state of New Jersey. >> And your license is in good standing as a civil engineer? >> Yes, it is. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I respectfully submit Mr. Michello is an expert in the area of civil engineering. >> Any members of the board have objection?
>> No. >> None. >> Before you move on, would you spell your last name? >> Absolutely. It's Robert Moshello. M O S C H E L L O. And for the record, my business address is 265 Main Street, Gladstone, New Jersey. >> All right. So, I'm just going to do this
kind of in an open-ended way so to create some efficiency here for the board. So, Mr. Michelle, if you can please um provide the board with testimony with regard to the civil engineering aspects of this application. >> I would love to. Abs. And so what I'd like to do is I have five exhibits this evening that I'd like to present to the
board. So what I'm going to do is hand them out to everyone now so we can have that and then I'll enter them. I'll just enter them now for the record so we have them and then we can just go through them as as we go. >> Okay. >> I think I need more stuff. So there's going to be A4
5 6 7 >> Yes. A4 through A8. So let me just for the record I'll just put them on the uh I'll just put them on the record now. So A4 is going to be neighborhood aerial exhibit dated March 16th, 2026. A5
will be aerial exhibit and existing conditions plan dated March 16th, 2026. A6 will be environmental constraints exhibit also dated March 16th, 2026. A7 will be site plan rendering dated
March 16th, 2026. And A8 will be variance exhibit also dated March 16th, 2026. And I also have um boards which I'll put up as well as we go through. Is there a better spot maybe
in the corner over here? >> Everybody can see. >> Uh, Mr. Chairman, if anybody from the public wants to see the exhibits, we have some extra copies up here uh for the public as well with regard to the exhibits that have been handed out to
the board. So, if they're having trouble seeing the board, um, we have we have some more paper. Thank you, sir. >> Do you want you want me to mark the boards also as I go through them? >> Yes.
So for the first exhibit I have this evening, it's the neighborhood aerial exhibit entitled A uh A4 for the record. And what I want to do here is just use this to kind of orient everyone to the um project itself and um the surrounding environs of the uh of the subject site.
So up on the board here, north is pointing up on the plan. We have route 10 which goes along the bottom of the plan here and basically an east to west direction for the most part. Um Littleton Road or US 202 kind of goes in a north south direction on the right side of the plan here. The property
itself is comprised of basically three tracks of land. Um we have and they're known as block 175, lot 52, 52.01, and 52.02. Okay. And they're known as lot 52 is Ford gate hall, which is the main portion of the property here. And that
is 13.67 acres in size. And that's that's the main focus of the application this evening. But we also have lot 52.01, which is 7.6 acres in size. And that's also known as one gate hall that's shown on the plan here. And then we have lot 52.03
which is 9.27 acres in size and that's known as three gate hall. Um and they're all part of the application this evening but the majority of the project is going to take place on the four gate hall property. The overall summation of those acreages for the three tracks is 30.5
acres. Um for for the record um as Mr. Inglesino pointed out this project has gone through a redevelopment plan. It's currently the overall properties are currently in the RO zone, but for the purposes of this application for Gate Hall is part of the redevelopment plan
that was just recently adopted. My next exhibit is entitled A5, which is an aerial exhibit and existing conditions plan. So, what I want to talk about here is more about the existing conditions that are on the the current property. So, as I mentioned, you've got four gate hall, which is the main par
parcel here, one gate hall, and three gate halls. So, four gate halls comprised of the existing office building. It's approximately 268,000 ft in total size. Um, with a building footprint of about 83,000 square ft. Um there's a total lot coverage on this property for four gate hall of
approximately 57% which encompasses the access drives that come into the property, the parking fields that are around the building and the existing building itself as well as an existing water feature that that's adjacent to the uh to the structure. The site is also adjacent to, as I mentioned, One
Gate Hall, which is an existing office building to the north. And we have an access drive that goes out and and ties into Gate Hall Drive right along the west side of the One Gate Hall lot here. We also have an access drive that comes in off of three gate hall and comes through the three gate hall site, which
is an existing um hotel that's a three-story hotel that's there. And we have access through that parking lot to um Gate Hall Drive as well for access into our site. There's two points of access. One coming off of the northern portion of Gate Hall and another one coming off the western portion of Gate
Hall that comes into the site. Now, the overall Gate Hall drive itself has access out to both Littleton Road on the east with a with a traffic light controlled intersection and then a right in right out um on the western southwestern side of the site off of
Route 10. So, you have full access in and out of the property from the major highways and major highways that are around the subject site. And the site itself has two points of ingress and egress into the actual property for access to the site. This property is serviced by all
existing public utilities, public sewer, public water, um gas, telephone, cable, electric. Um it's all on this particular property has service there. We also have multiple um utility easements that come across this site for servicing both three gate hall and one gate hall. That's part of the overall campus.
Again, this was developed a number of years ago as part of a larger office complex. Um, so there's multiple shared services that are through this property here that goes across this particular site itself. The next exhibit that I have is the environmental constraints exhibit. This
one's pretty pretty simple. Um, as Mr. Enlino pointed out, there really are no wetlands on this property that that affect the site. Um, but we do have in terms of some steep slopes that are here. Um, while they're not naturally occurring steep slopes that were um that were part of of nature that that have
been in place for some time, they are affiliated with the development that occurred on the property when this office complex was constructed um back in the uh ' 80s and '90s. And those those steep slopes are shown on the map here um in in the different shades of green representing your slope categories
of between 15 and 19.99, 20 and 24.99 and greater than 25%. The total amount of regulated slopes is 0.93 acres of the 13.97 um Fort Gate Hall property. And they're
really consistent of basically four different locations. You have the slopes around the existing pond that were created when the pond was built that um as part of the stormwater management on the site. You've got some slopes that are along Odell Terrace, which is on the bottom of the plan Odell Road, I'm sorry. It's on the bottom of the plan
here. And those are slopes related to a landscape burm that was built when landscaping was put in for the office building. Um, and then you've got two more pockets of slopes. Um, one adjacent to the existing office building that's just part of the grading around the building. And a fourth one that's over
by the um the I'll say a null area on the northwest side of the site that's just part of grading that occurred on the uh on the property. Um, so all these slopes are man-made slopes on the site. There are no existing naturally occurring slopes on this uh on this property. We also did a tree survey um and and they we located all trees that
were 6 in in caliber or greater. Um there are a total of 263 trees that were located within the confines of the uh of the subject site itself. Most a majority of those trees were planted back when the office complex was was constructed. There are a few probably naturally occurring uh wooded area, small little
wooded area next to the pond over here. Um it's hard to tell if some of it was planted or if it was natural from from some point in time. Um, but it's all the trees have been located and shown on the uh shown on the plans. So, and there are no flood planes or anything of that nature on the property.
Um, given this location, Okay. So, the next exhibit I have is exhibit A7, which is the proposed site plan rendering. And this is the the subject of tonight's application, which is the proposed project you see before you this evening. So, um, as Mr. Slino
had pointed out, we are proposing 178 total townhouse/stackflat/affordable units for this subject site. And that's going to be broken down into a couple different um unit types on the project. Um and and the project architect will go into the the floor plans and how that
works in terms of some of the in terms of some of the unit types, but I'll stick to the general overview. >> Just I guess the way to think of it is is that Mr. Michello is a civil engineer will generally describe all things outside and the architect generally will
describe all things inside. So, if you have questions with regard to the units, the sizes, uh, things of that nature, that'll all be the architect. Uh, Mr. Michelle, I was going to talk about the outside. >> Yes. Um, but I will talk about the total number of units and the the bedroom
counts and and and things of that nature as far as it relates to the application. So, the project is basically laid out in such a way that we're going to be removing all the existing improvements on the site except for the existing pond that's in the um the north corner of the project site here. We're going to maintain the access going up to Gate
Hill Drive on the north here and we're going to maintain the access going out to Gate Hill Drive on the west. Everything else in between will be reconfigured. So, we'll have a new roadway network that'll consist of what will be considered road A that comes in off of Gate Hall Drive and down to an intersection here. Road B, which is on
the I'm sorry, road C, which is on the bottom of the plan. Road B, which is on the left side of the plan. Road D, which is um here going down the middle of the plan. and then two smaller road E and Fs that are through that cross um 90
degrees to road B and road um D. So the purpose of that is to provide access to all the units and we are proposing 178 townhouse units on this project and they're in a series of different types as I mentioned. So there's going to be 142 market rate
units and the market rate units are not the affordables. Those are the regular standard for sale market rate units for the project and and those are broken down into basically two uh different categories for the purposes of the application. Unit unit A's which are denoted on the plan you'll see on the
planer front is a series of unit A's that go around the perimeter of the site and also front on what is road D. So these are all unit A's that are on the plan here. pointer is and unit A's are basically split between unit A's are basically all three-bedroom units and
they have two-car garages with with a twocar wide driveway that's in the front there. Um, and those are all threebedroom units and there's a total of 74 unit A's on the plan. Okay, those are typical three-bedroom, two-car garage townhouse units and they're all around the perimeter of the site and
down on along road D. The rest of the units are going to be considered stacked townhouse units. And they're split into two categories, market rate town houses and the affordable units. And essentially the entire middle section of the project
here where my pointer is basically bound by road B, road A, road D, and road C. This whole square section in the middle here, those are all the stacked townhouse units on the project. and they're broken down into um the the the
market rate units which are considered unit B's on your plan and they're a total of 78 unit B's and the unit B's are actually broken down into two-bedroom and three-bedroom units and it's the equal amount. So there's 34 3bedroom and 34 two-bedroom unit B's
intermixed within this middle section of the uh project here. Okay. Then also contained within that middle section are the affordable dwelling units. And there are a total of 36 affordable dwelling units on the project. And they're denoted as for the plans you're looking
at in front of you, units C through G on the plan. And those are mixed into the threebedroom types that Mr. Inglino mentioned already. seven one-bedroom units, 21 two-bedroom units, and eight three-bedroom units for a total of 36
units of the affordable housing for the middle part of the site. And again, those units are interspersed in with the B units in this middle section of the project site here. >> Can you repeat those numbers again, please? >> Seven one-bedroom units, 21 two-bedroom units, and eight three-bedroom units.
And I believe, as Mr. Incino mentioned, that's in that's consistent with the U-Hack requirements for bedroom distributions. And the architect can speak more to that as well. >> And all the bedroom types are consistent with what's in what's what's in the redevelopment plan. Correct. >> That's correct. Yes.
>> So, without getting into the square footage and the types of buildings, that's the breakdown of of the of the architectural units that are on site. So, that comes out to the total 178 units that the project has um here that we're proposing this evening. In terms of the way those units are
designed, the majority of them all have garages and driveways that are associated with them. Even the stacked units, there are a total of out of the 36 affordable units. 20 of them will have their own garage
and driveway combination. There are 16 affordable units that will not have a garage and driveway combination. those units and they're intermixed within the the CDE FNG units, they will need to have on on-site parking to be able to um
utilize for for the for the residents of those units cuz they do not have a garage and driveway combination. And we realize that for units that have a garage and driveway combination, you have your own parking space. That's that's that's allotted to you. But for those 16 units that don't have a garage or driveway, and they're basically in in
this building, if I get the numbers right, give me one second. So, building 12, building 13, and building 19, those are the buildings that have the affordable units in them. And just to point them for the record, building 12 is down here, building 13 is
here, and building 19 is up here. So, those three buildings are the buildings that have the affordable units in them, but 16 of those units don't have a garage driveway combination. So, what we're proposing to do, and this wasn't initially noted on the site plans, I want to make sure I put on the record this evening, and we'll make sure the plans are updated to show this, is
you'll see three areas of pink parking spaces on the plan here that are highlighted in in in pink color. Those spaces will become dedicated parking spaces for the affordable unit. So, they'll get they'll be striped and marked per the typical per the unit type for that affordable unit that can park
in that space. So, at least that of those 16 affordable units, they will each have one space that's dedicated to the unit owner that's there that they can park close to their unit and be able to walk to those units cuz we only have so many garage driveway combinations in those affordable in those stacked affordable buildings.
>> Just a quick technical question. I see garden apartment listed here under here. Is that uh instead of town houses? >> Those those were the town those were the townhouse units. We denoted them as garden apartments. I believe there's some comments in the technical review letters about possibly just treating
them as townhouse units and we have no issue with changing that nomenclature so that they're all considered townhouse units and that will change the parking requirement slightly but we'll we'll I'll get to that shortly. But yeah, those those were the affordable units that were in the list on the cover sheet. >> Fair enough. >> So they're all they're all basically
stack town houses whether they're the for sale. Correct. >> Yes. Whether the market rate unit B's or the C throughgs, they're all stack stack town houses. So we want to make sure that those those affordable units have parking that's close to their building. So we've dedic we've dedicated those spaces in pink there close to those
units so they at least get one spot that's by their door to the to their building. >> Um I talked about site circulation already. Um the interior roadways themselves um all the roads are designed to be 24t wide around the entire development. um even what's basically
considered I'll call it road E and road F which are basically alleys if you will but we still designed them to be 24 foot wide just for accessibility purposes so that um you know wouldn't have any issues of cars backing out of driveways and things like that through those roads um because those are where the garages front on that on that road for example
for road F down here both garages for the affordable units and the market rate units all front on this road but the entrances to those units are actually um through this middle section where the sidewalk is here and And the entrance is front on road C um down here as well. So you basically have an entrance on one
road and a garage on the back side for those units. Um and as I mentioned in terms of road circulation, they're all 24T wide roads. We do have um on street parking that's actually comprised of both 90°ree pull-in parking on road B
um as well as um on road A up in the corners over here and then down in on road C as well. And then we also have parallel parking on road C and on road A. Um overall there are 91 surface parking spaces for the project. Um, of
those 91 spaces, 16 will be the dedicated spaces for the affordable units to park in. That leaves you with um 91 - 16. 80 uh 86, I'm sorry, 76 75. I'm doing my math right here. >> Fuzzy fuzzy math.
>> Fuzzy math. Yeah. 75 spaces that are basically open to the uh open to the public to park in in those spaces. Um but in terms of the overall parking for the project between the garage combinations on the market rate townhouse units for the unit A, they
have two-car garages plus a driveway that's basically twocar wide. However, RSIS, we don't meet the minimum width requirement. RSIs is 20 ft for a driveway width. We're actually 18s on the driveway. So RSIS would say you could have three and a half spaces for a two-car garage combination. We're only
counting those as three because we only have two in the garage and one in the driveway. Um the architect will talk about the size of the garages, but it it's the intention is you can park two cars in the garages on these units. Um and then the driveway. We're only counting one in the driveway when theoretically you could have two parked
in the driveway. We're only counting one there for the purposes of the overall project. And then you have the individual um single units which have a garage and driveway combination. We count those as two. And then you have all the surface parking spaces on site. So basically the project the way it's designed and if we change our parking
calculation to meet everything being townous, we're required to have 418 parking spaces on site. That's you know require that's a combination of garage, driveway, and surface parking spaces. And the overall project has 489 parking spaces. So, we're we're we're well over
parked in terms of what the ordinance requires. >> Let me let me clarify that. Are they 489 real spaces or are you taking EVSSE credits and putting them there? >> So, the 489 are the actual total number
of spaces. I'm not counting any EVSSE credits. I'm going to just keep them off to the side for the >> Okay. Yeah. We'll keep them on the side pocket for now. Okay. So that's we have physically 489 >> between the two the two spaces in the the two-car garage, one space in the driveway for the two-car garages plus
one space in the single garages plus the one space in front of those garages and all the surface parking spaces. We have 489 parking spaces on site. >> Okay, made me happy. >> So we have we have a we have ample parking from a site operational perspective. Um
in terms of visitor parking, there is a requirement in the ordinance. I believe it's 0.25 um visitor spaces per unit. That would mean we would need to have 45 spaces. Those 45 spaces would be counted in terms of the surface parking spaces where you have 91 surface parking. 16
are dedicated to the affordable units. That leaves you with 75 of those 75. 45 can be considered visitor parking spaces. They're intermixed with the with the regular parking that's used on site. So we have ample visitor parking on site since we have more than 45 surface spaces.
Um, in terms of ADA parking on site, I do want to point out one of the units. It's denoted as unit G on the site plan. It's this unit right here that's in building number number 12. That particular unit does
have an ADA accessible garage space. So, if if someone were if that unit was needed for that particular purpose, that is an ADA accessible interior garage space in that particular unit. just happens to be the only one that that has that, but it it does have it. So, I just wanted to point that point that out to
the board. Um, there are additional ADA parking spaces around the site. There are a total of nine surface spaces um throughout the site for ADA parking purposes. We've done that to locate them in key in key areas first off by the main entrance when you come in. We are
proposing a tot lot there for the development. We've added an ADA space adjacent to the top lot for access purposes in case someone needed to drive there to access that top lot. Um, we've also added four uh two more I'm sorry, eight more additional ADA spaces at four
key points around the site where we've proposed the mailboxes for the residents to use for mail purposes. So, there'll be ADA spaces by each of the mailboxes. So, they have so if there's anyone that is that needs an ADA space to get to the mailbox, it will be ADA accessible um at those four points around the site.
Um and then of course you know the units themselves will have their own the garages so forth that's not ADA accessible from that perspective. Um in terms of there was a comment and we'll talk about the EVs cuz I do want to mention um in terms of electric vehicle charging locations um the state mandate
requires that there be a total of and depending on the total number of parking spaces that are required. We'll just stick to what was in the planner or the engineer and the planner's letter that there would be 68 EV spaces required on site. Of those 68 spaces, we are going
to have 14 surface spaces dedicated to EV parking for with EV chargers. So, that'll be actually interspersed throughout throughout the parking area around the site. There'll be 14 EV EV EV parking spaces theoretically or public chargers, if you will. They're they're available to the to the development um
in the public parking spaces. The rest of those EV spaces um will be provided through sales of the units where there'll be a 54 of them that would be in in the individual units themselves. That would be in the garages should a a homeowner wish to wish to have one in there. But we'll have 14 on-site spaces
um that will be access open to the public. I believe there was one comment about one of those spaces having to be ADA accessible. While we don't show it right now, we'll make sure that we provide one charger space that would be um ADA accessible. I think >> that meets the standard for that. >> I it would suffice to say you will
comply with the statewide standards. >> Whatever the number will be, you need to do some corrections on your plans, but >> um we will revise comply and that's that's all we need. It's uh one thing on the EBSC and again
I'm just raising this issue because it came up on town homes on our review letter page seven and that's just taken from the frequently asked questions where it basically says town homes can be considered multiple dwellings under the Bureau of Housing Inspections.
Therefore, to be exempt the applicant must demonstrate to the land use board that the development will not be considered a multiple dwelling unit. I mean, you're not contending that here, but that there is a provision, I mean, just for the record, that certain town homes aren't don't need to have ESC's.
It depends on the condition, but you're you're not you're not presenting that, are you? >> No, we're not. And we're open to uh language as a condition of approval that addresses that concern. >> Okay. Yeah. And you're going to have another hearing, too. So, that gives you time to look at it. You know, you just got the letter today, so
>> Yeah. It's a clause I wasn't aware of until a few months ago when I looked at FAQ19. I said I FAQ 10. So I was happy to see that and I just want, you know, to be fair to go on the record on that. >> Sure. Appreciate that. >> So So again, we will comply with
whatever the state requirement is for EV parking, but we do have them on site and we have spread them throughout the site for the ability to have the the residents utilize those uh spaces who don't have the ability to put them in their garages. Um in terms of um recycling and refuse um
the architect will talk to this um but there in terms of the storage inside of the units but in the garages there's space for having a garbage pale and a recycling pale that'll be in all of the units that that have garages. The ones that don't have garages there'll be a separate trash room area where they'll
be able to store th those containers. Um it'll be and it'll be serviced by it's our intention to have it serviced by a private hauler um coordinated with the HOA that will handle trash pickup and that'll be determined based upon you know how many times a week the private hauler would come in and do that based upon the uh the neighborhood's
requirements. Um in terms of emergency vehicle access, the site is designed to meet the RSIS um roadway width standards um for um curb returns and um roadway widths and the like. But we will certainly provide to the board um the board engineer and the
board planet just a turning template just to show that emergency vehicles can navigate through the site. But the way we've designed this is there's no I say there's no on street parking in the traditional sense that the 24 foot wide drive lanes are not impeded with parking. The parking is either a pulloff
into a 90 degree parking space or a parallel space that's adjacent to that 24 foot wide drive lane. So there's adequate drive lane space for vehicles to uh navigate around the site. Um, but we'll provide that that that drawing just to show that they can access it. Again, there you have access through Gate Hall Drive to come off of 10 and
Route 202. You've got ability to turn in both off of one gate hall and through three gate hall, which is the access that they would be using now to get to the existing office building that's there today. So, that that that's all been in place and there's nothing that's going to change that and and make that any narrower than it currently than it
currently exists today. There are two proposed um monument signs for the project and this was brought up um in the planners letter about the possibility there may be some deviations needed for these signs. So I just want to point out the locations of them. There's going to be one sign which will be the main entry sign that when you
come in off of adjacent to one gate hall at the bend in the turn right here. There's a a entry sign right there. And then we're proposing a second smaller entry sign if you were to come in through three gate hall at this point on the plan right right here. um those details, those details of those signs
are shown on the detail sheets. Um but I believe there's some questions as to color, material, and the like. And so we'll have to come back with that additional information and the size of the signs based on the square footage. I know you calculated it based on just an overall, but we need to confirm that.
>> Yeah, I was going to say that that that's in that's in Lara's court down there, but uh that's where her team was making comments on signage. So yeah, I mean we'll we'll look forward to getting that. we need to straight just clean that up and straighten that. But we do want to have two sight signs because we have two entrances into the project
site. Um so a main sign and then a sec a smaller secondary sign. So um and I'll talk about the deviations on those um um momentarily. Um I mentioned the top lot already. That's over here by the entrance when you come in. It's shown there on the plan. We'll provide some additional details on the equipment that would be in the top lot. We'll put that
on the plans as well. Um there will be the need for a sales and construction trailer on on on the site. We had um some of that information on the on the drawings that were submitted um as far as where that that would be located on the project site associated with a sales trail and
there'll be construction trailer also during construction. Um in terms of storm water management, um this site is an existing office building that's there today with a current parking lot. Um we are proposing to basically reduce the
overall lot coverage on the subject site. Um as I mentioned previously the lot coverage was 342,000 square ft um in in in uh in an area on the site and we're actually going to reduce that down to 329,000 ft of lot coverage. So, it's only a 13,000
ft² reduction in lot coverage, which doesn't sound like a lot, but the big difference here is you're taking what was an existing office building that had a lot more vehicular impervious surface, um, which was actually almost 250,000 ft of of existing vehicle impervious
surface for those parking lots. And you're actually reducing that down to 146,000 ft². So, while the coverage only went down by 13,000 ft², you took out almost over 104,000 ft of vehicular impervious and replaced that with buildings and sidewalks. So, you traded
off vehicle parking for buildings, which is a which is a lot cleaner runoff coming off of a site um in the future going forward. So, that's that's going to that's going to help the storm water numbers. We've also because the project um is removing all that existing impervious in terms of the parking lot.
We are still required to provide water quality which we have done here on the site through the use of four bio retention basins. Um two within the middle of the units here. Another basin down in the lower left hand lower right hand corner and another basin over here in the by road A that would collect
runoff from the roadways and driveways and treat that for water quality based on the new standard. And then that water ultimately discharges into the pond um before it leaves the uh before it leaves the site. And that pond is part of an overall um storm water system that was put in place back when the site was built. But we still utilize it for det
for some type of detention purposes. But the bio basins on site provide the water quality now for the project. I know there was a number of comments in the review letters about storm water and we're going to have to go and make some make some adjustments and and certainly clean up some comments that are associated with them, but that's the general storm water system is to have
these four basins which will treat the runoff from the from the roadways and then discharge it into the existing pond um before it leaves the uh the project site. >> And and Mr. Michelle, from an environmental perspective, um, you know, water coming
off rooftops as opposed to, uh, parking surface better for the environment. Correct. >> Certainly, as opposed to the motor vehicle surfaces. >> And this project will comply with the state-of-the-art storm water management regulations uh, issued by the D. That's
correct. >> Yes. This project meets the new 2023 rule and even the real rules that was just adopted. I believe it it conforms to those standards as well or it will conform to those standards as well. Is is it your opinion obviously we have to comply with these things but that this would be an environmental enhancement to
the property from a storm water management uh perspective >> certainly over what's there today is an is an enhancement over the existing development that's there now >> for for for the off for the four gate hall building we're removing I do want to point out that we have to the with the stormwater rule you do have
to meet um attenuation recharge and water quality we're meeting the attenu continuation by use of the basins on site, we're meeting the water quality by the biobasins. Um but because this site has a reduction in impervious coverage, we don't need to meet the recharge requirements um for the project because it it's it's a reduction in impervious.
So we have to meet two of those um three prongs which we do um meet. Um and then lastly in terms of um actually not that does cover all the storm water stuff. Sorry. Um lastly, in terms of landscaping and
lighting for the project, um as you can see from the rendering here, we we have a a a a um landscaping plan that was submitted with the site plan. Um we are going to remove 195 trees, as I mentioned, um uh ear earlier on in in in the testimony, but we are going to
propose to plant 239 trees um that are going to be interspersed throughout the site, whether they're deciduous, evergreen, or ornamental. You can see them on the plan here. Those are the larger green circles that are dispersed around the perimeter of the project and also along the roadways and in front of the the building. So that that's the uh
the overall larger landscaping plan. We also have um 75 shrubs that we're proposing throughout the development around some of the retaining walls that are on site. And there's also going to be um for the individual units um foundation plantings around those units as well. Um and that's based on the
different unit types that are around the site. And that's shown on the on the detail sheets um for the different unit types um for for the landscaping that's going to be there. Um I know there was some comment about a 5ft wide landscape buffer that's required around the perimeter of the site. We do have landscaping around the perimeter. It may
not be exactly within 5 ft of the property line, but we can certainly look to to to supplement or adjust that as needed or adjust some of those trees if need be to to meet that to meet that requirement. Um there are existing plantings along Odell Road now that we want to try to maintain some of those. I
know there was a comment about the existing um pear trees that are on there that I think the board I know it's the board engineer the board planner one of you um asked to have those removed and replaced. Um I know pears are invasive so certainly we can look to to address that. We want to try to keep as many
trees there as we could because they're existing but if there's a need to feel like we can replace them we we'll look into that. I think that >> species are preferred. >> Understood. That's probably by our certified tree expert. That's literacy. >> Generally, we would >> native species are perfect.
>> Which is fair. >> Um, >> thank you. >> We do have a town forester. We generally request that you work with them on their >> certainly. And I know there were some comments about possibly um breaking up some of the uh species types as well that were kind of grouped together. And we have no problem with with going back
in and taking a look at that and making those adjustments. That's that's not that's not an issue at all. and work with the the town forest town forest in your office to do that. Um, as far as lighting goes, um, this is a residential project. Um, so we were trying to take a little bit more of a
I'll say a reduced approach to lighting. Our focus with the lighting plan that was submitted was to put make sure we had lights at all of the intersections and at um, generally trying to cover some of the surface parking spaces on the site. Given the way the parking is
distributed around the middle of the site, we didn't want to have too many lights that could, you know, impact um residential units along road C and and road B and even on the sides of of um road I'm sorry, road A and and and road C and even on the sides of road B as
well. So, we are proposing 32 um polemounted lights. They're 16t in height. is a detail of them on the plans, but I know there's a comment in the letters about possibly maybe adding a few more lights around to kind of fill in some some gaps that might be in some of the parking spaces. So, we can certainly look to do that. We are going
to have the lighting on the site here turned on from um dusk to dawn because it is a residential development. So, lighting would be on basically all night um for people that may be coming and going um in the evening in the evening hours. So, there's no lights being turned off at a certain time here. It's
just would come on at dusk and go off at dawn. Um, we are going to have, and the architect can speak to this a little bit more, there will be lights on the actual units themselves. There'll be lights on the garages, lights above the doors. So, you'll have additional ambient lighting coming from the the units to um to to
fill in some of the uh some of the lighting areas around the around the buildings that would not be covered by a polemounted light. And there is a bit of ambient light around this neighborhood as well. You've got the existing office buildings and the and the hotel and then you've got the retail um to to the south
here that has lighting as well. So you have some ambient lighting that's around this development also. But again, we we've designed it so the lighting is not um overly the site's not overly lit from from a um from a lighting perspective. Um and we also have because of this this middle section of the units that have
front to front here where the sidewalks are, we're proposing ballards in there to light that area as well as the lighting on the on the units also. Um, and and I should mention that the lighting what we would propose would be dark sky compliant to to as well. Um,
and they'll be LED style lights to also mention that. Um, so basically that brings me to my last exhibit. This is exhibit A8 for the record. It's the uh it's the variance exhibit or
deviations as Mr. Englisho pointed out. Um essentially this is basically looking at two components here. One is the sign um and this is the the smaller of the two signs. and we're we're asking for a a deviation for that sign's location in
regard to the intersection here. Um so the sign is supposed to be 25 ft from the intersection and we're asking for it to be 10 based on it it its measurement. Um essentially this is because of of we want to make sure we have a sign here at the entry coming in from three gate hall. Um and so we're asking for it to
be closer to the intersection as if we go to 25 would be over the uh over the property line onto the uh onto the uh hotel property. And we think in its location here, it doesn't present a a sight distance issue for any cars coming in here and looking down those two roads um with the stop bar that's here. Um so
we feel that the location of it is is is is is safe from a a uh a sight distance perspective. Um but we'll but we're asking for that deviation for the setback from the intersection >> and and we'll have testimony from the traffic engineer in terms of the site uh distance issue.
>> Okay. Um and then the other the other deviation we're asking for is for the steep slopes. Um again the slope disturbance on site and and we have them highlighted here in in green. Um we have a total of 0.93 acres of regulated slopes on the property. We are asking
for a deviation um from your um slope categories of of 20 to 24.99 and 25% and greater um slope categories to allow for basically 20 to 20
sorry the 20 to 25% category um disturbance propose a maximum of 20 I'm sorry I got to get these numbers correct it's hard to read on the plan >> while the engineer does it >> it's easier to read on the bigger In our
letter, we didn't cite this. There's a quirk in the um in the plan itself. Normally, there's language to the effect that anything that's not addressed in the plan, you know, goes to the ordinance. There's really not that I can find language in here. However, so
that's why I left it off, but I concur with your calculations. I would say this that there are there's a term here in definitions, and I think I think the intent was always that it's not addressing the plan. It's going to be addressing the ordinance. However, I didn't have a direct link. However, I
think we can use this here in definitions. Just for the record, it's on page uh five of the plan. There's a clause in here. It says, "Terms not defined herein shall have the meaning set forth in chapter 430 of the ordinance." So, I think that that should
be enough. I know what the intent was, and it's it's a worded a little wonky. Uh but I think that uh I agree with their calculations. >> Fair enough. So, so just to put it on the record for for for the calculations. Absolutely. >> Yes. So, the max so the maximum permitted disturbance for the 15 to
19.99% category is 06 acres and we're proposing.15 acres. For the 20 to 24.99% category, we're propos the maximum permitted disturbance is 003 acres and we're proposing 007 acres. And then for the 25% and greater, the maximum
permitted disturbance is 0.1 and we're proposing.13 acres. So there was three the three slope categories we need a deviation from not two. So all three categories we're requesting the deviation for that purposes. And again the total slope area is 0.93. The total area disturbance of those steep slopes
is.35. And you can see them on the plan here. The darker greens it's associated with the existing slopes going into the existing basin. We need to disturb some of those slopes to grade out around the units and the roadway. The small null at the front entrance. We're disturbing
some of those slopes there. This grading area in the middle here is associated with grading adjacent to the existing office building that was transitioning from the the first level to the garage level. And then basically some minor slope disturbance along the edge of the existing parking lot where we're tying back our grades for the townhouse units.
And then along Odell Road down here where we're tying back our grades to the existing little landscape BM that's there. We need to disturb some of those minor steep slopes as well to tie back our grades. Um so those are those are the areas where we're disturbing. They're all man-made slopes, but we do need to to disturb them to construct the
uh the project. Um, and then the last thing, we talked about the signage. Um, that was mentioned that we have the sign location. Then there's also a comment in the letters about the fact that we have two signs and I believe that's a deviation from the ordinance as well. So, the ordinance only allows one sign
or the redevelopment plan allows one sign and we have the two signs because we have the two access points. So, we'll we'll requify the areas of those signs just to be sure what those those requests are. I believe the ordinance only allows 24 square ft. And because we have two signs, we're going to be greater than 24 square ft um in total
signage on on the project. So, we'll requify those numbers um for for the record. And then other than that, we we generally comply with all the other zoning requirements of the uh of the ordinance. Um, oh, we do have, sorry, we do have two dimminimous exceptions that
we're asking for from from RSIS. Um, one was for providing sidewalks on both sides of the roads for the majority of the project. Go back to exhibit A um 57. So, for the majority of the project, we
have sidewalks on um both sides of the roads for the majority of road A coming in. We have a sidewalk on both sides of the road for road B. We have a sidewalk on both sides of the road. Um for um road C, we only have a sidewalk on one side of the road. Road D, we only
have a sidewalk on one side of the road. And then the remaining portion of road A down here, we have one side a sidewalk on one side of the road. um essentially because of the way the site's laid out, we want we have adequate pedestrian circulation both around the perimeter of the site and around the middle portion
of the site, but we felt that in front of some of the twocar garage townhouse units, um we felt that we didn't need to have a sidewalk on both sides of the road there given the and you'll hear from our traffic engineer as well, given the low volume of of of traffic circulation around the site. um we thought providing sidewalks um where you
can walk around the entire inner loop via sidewalk. You can walk down this road or road D via sidewalk and you have sidewalk along road B on both sides um as well as on road A for both sides. There's more than an adequate um pedestrian circulation around the site from a from a site perspective. So we're
asking for a deviation to um eliminate sidewalks in certain location >> and that would also save from additional impervious coverage on the site. Correct. >> That's correct. Um, and then lastly, the other dimminimous exception was under the RSIS where they they actually allow now this actually allow up to a maximum
of of.5 guest parking spaces. So, we're actually underneath that. So, I don't know if that's even a dimminimous exception. Um, that was originally noted on the plan because RSI has changed their language to a maximum visitor parking. >> It is a maximum. And just for the record,
eventually um when we get up to approvals and such, if we look at page 8, this is my boiler plate about the RSIS changes because so many municipalities aren't aware it's a maximum now, not a minimum. It's really thrown
all our schematics to because everyone talked about minimum. They just can't grasp this. >> Right. On bullet point four on page eight under residential site improvement standards, it says, "In the event the developer and reviewer agree to exceed the standard, the developer shall send
notice to the department, the DCA. A copy of the planning board resolution shall be sufficient notice if it describes the excess percentage and reason for it. So when we if and when we get to that point, we're just going to have to make a record so that that
resolution can be utilized to address bullet point four because those numbers you were giving me sounded like they were over than what the requirement is. >> Right. Because we're asking for the minimous we thought we needed the minimous exception, but now it's up to a maximum. >> Yeah. So anyway, we'll deal with that I
guess at the next hearing. >> Yes. >> We'll have plenty of time to do that. >> Yep. Um so I I believe um that takes care of my direct testimony related to the application. >> The only thing I'll I'll add was in I
don't know one of the letters uh invite in involve title 39 uh and the applicant will agree as a condition of approval uh to uh consent to title 39 applicability to uh to the project. Of
course, that's a decision to be made by the governing body, uh, not the applicant. Um, but Title 39 essentially empowers the Porcia Police Department to enforce, uh, traffic regulations and to ticket and so forth uh, on private
roads. These will be private roads uh, within the development. Um and without title 39 applicability then the parcipony police department would have no ability uh to uh patrol or issue tickets or enforce any of paripinies
laws. So it is very common uh in my experience and perhaps you know you have some experience in this as well um that you know municipalities will make title 39 applicability to create that uh police power on the site and and the
applicant will agree to that but the ultimate decision um there lies with the uh partipony uh governing body >> I think that resident the residential aspect lends itself to it. If you're if you if you go to say Kohl's across the
across on Route 10 and it's crowded at Christmas time, that's one thing. But if I can't get a spot in my house because people are parking illegally, then >> complaints come to borrow to town hall. And with title 39 now, I can go in and enforce.
>> I agree. I think the comment was a fair one and a good one. And again, consistent with what I have seen in other similarly situated uh developments. So, I guess um we're turning it back to you, Mr. Chairman, for questions of the
board, the board professionals, and the public of Mr. Michelle. >> All right. Board questions, Miss Hernandez. >> Who owns the roads? So, the HOA, the >> the roads and our development will be owned and maintained by the HOA. Yes. >> Snow removal and everything will be by
>> snow Yes. be by the HOA. >> I'm sorry. paving and everything. >> But but so there's this law in New Jersey called the Municipal Fair Services Act, which at some point later down the road, there'll probably be an
agreement between the town uh and the association for reimbursement for what the town's cost would be uh to maintain those things that are uh reflected in the Municipal Fair Services Act law. But the association will be providing the
service. So, um they'll provide for their own uh refuge uh pickup, trash, uh and maintenance of all the roads, the paving, all that snow removal will all be done uh by the homeowner association
through contracting that out to private vendors. >> We have issues with that in towns though, other so I had to ask. >> Okay. Thank you. electric uh your site plan did not mention about any fire hydrants. Are you
maintaining the existing one or you putting new ones? >> There will be there will be a whole and and thank you for mentioning that. I didn't mention the utilities. Um there will the site will be serviced by public utilities and I mean that meaning water, sewer, um cable, telephone, gas. So it
they're all out it's all out there now. We have to redo the on-site system. So, there will be a new water system um that will service this development and it will have fire hydrants that will meet the fire department's requirements and the spacing for RSIS. So, that that'll all be there as as part of the plan. >> And and you'll represent to the board
that will work closely with the fire department in terms of the placement of those fire hydrants. We'll be happy to do that with the fire official and the fire and the fire chief. >> It it's common that we would get a letter from the fire department. So, I guess we're we're we just need to get a hold of that. We'll be happy to work
with them to to to make any adjustments. >> Very good, Mr. Npalitano. Thank you. Uh, thanks for all that. Uh, is the pond staying and who's going to take care of it? >> The pond is staying. It's maintained now by I I'm guessing the the office associate, whoever runs the office
association. >> All the office buildings maintain the pond. >> Share responsibility from everybody. Is that right? >> Yes. Yes. So, it it's going to remain and it's going to has to continue to be maintained. >> All right. Are dogs allowed >> throughout the whole complex?
>> Yeah, it's a pri it's a private um development. So if you own a dog, I guess >> all the units though. >> Yeah, I guess you could have but not in the pond. >> But not in the pond, right? Never in the pond. >> I hope not. >> Yeah, definitely not. Um All right. So coming in off of Gate Hall and then I
guess that's road A. There's a a quite a large bend there. Any plans for speed humps there? Um, we weren't proposing any speed humps because of the the um the nature of the development given that it's it's that the curves are are I don't want to say they're tight curves. They meet the standards, but you know, they're they're they're not a a very
broad curve. So, again, we wouldn't expect people to be speeding, but if there's any if there's something we can consider, we can talk about that with our traffic consultant if that's >> Thank you. And last one. I live there. I want to go to Tommy's. Can I walk through and cross over on Dell Road? >> So, >> or just fence off? We we weren't
planning to fence anything off. Currently, right now, there's an existing sidewalk and staircase that goes from the office building um that goes down to Odell Road. And while we don't show anything on the plans right now, if if if the board is would wants us to do so, we can make a sidewalk
connection from the end of make sure I say this right. Road the end of road C. and bring ourselves around and tie back to where that where that stairway is there and take us back down to um Odell Road so that there would be the ability for people to walk to that to that retail establishment.
It's not shown in the plans right now, but if that's something the board so desires, we could uh we could certainly look into look into doing that. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Dinsmore. >> Uh three things. It has to do with recreation space and the tot
uh start with the tot seems to be in a spot where walking to it from other parts of the like if you are on uh road B I guess it is
um it would you you would either end up crossing road A going right into somebody's garage or parking lot. Uh, is is there any plan for investigating a a a pathway or a a marking of the road to
make it easy to get across there? >> There's still some um on these plans, we still need to work out, and this was in one of the engineers letters about adding some additional ADA ramping at the intersection and stuff. So, we have no issue with adding like I'll call it a almost a mid block either a crosswalk at the intersection of road A and road B or
maybe a midblock crosswalk um closer to the top lot so that this way if you're on certain side of the project you can get across road A without having any with with having the right signage and and striping there for people to cross. >> So, we can certainly do that. >> Next is recreation space. I see what
look like uh multiple spots uh between road E and F. You've got two spots that look like recreation space. Is this HOA property or is this going to be owned by the the town houses that are adjacent? >> Um the spaces between road E and road F
if you're talking about in the middle here, those are the storm water basins for the uh for the roads. So they're going to be it's going to be owned by the HOA and maintained by the HOA. Um, >> is it is it possible they can be cuz the print is so small on this thing? >> Yeah.
>> That even with my my readers on, I can't I can't quite make out what they are. >> So, these are all storm water things. There's no real recreation space. >> No, the recreation space is really just up by the top lot when you when you first come in. Um, there's no there's no
other open space recreation on the site. >> Okay. And then if you look at the the town houses, the A town houses along uh road D, you've got a couple that has seem to have an extra tree sticking out. Is that land that's going to be owned by
that townhouse or is that going to be HOA property? >> Basically everything outside of the units is is HOA property. >> Okay. >> Um so so you know the the the units you you basically have your your your deck or patio in the backyard and that's your space. Anything beyond that is ma owned
and maintained by the HOA. >> And finally, I just I just because occasionally you get different definitions by different different uh u developers. How do you define a stack townhouse
versus a regular townhouse? Um, I mean, I probably want to leave that for the architect to explain cuz he's going to have the visuals for the floor plans to show you the difference between how a stacked works and how and how a standard townhouse works. >> So, because I looked at these things
over at Lanodex and >> these are slightly different, I think. So, I'm just trying to figure out what >> Yeah, the the architect will explain that so I don't mess it up and confuse everybody. >> Coming thing. >> Yeah, the stack town houses are very are very common now in the marketplace.
All right. Other questions? Mr. Sh, >> you said you have 16 parking space you have for affordable housing. Out of which, how many are onebedroom, two bedroom, three bedrooms? >> So, the affordable units, the breakdown for that again is um
your seven onebedroom. >> I just had a second. >> 21 bedroom. I think the question 8 threebedroom. >> Yes. Seven onebedroom, 212bedroom, and 8 threebedroom. Yes. >> So, what if it's threebedroom, if you're giving them one parking space? >> Well, the way it's broken down, and I'll
have to just confirm this. Um, those 16 units that don't have a garage, um, they get they get at least one unit, one space dedicated to them. Um, if they're a three-bedroom unit, they would technically be required to have 2.4
parking spaces based on the calculation. So the assumption would be the other two spaces or the other 1.4 spaces would be in the in the regular standard parking spaces around the site. >> There will be Yeah, there will be parking. >> There'll be parking available for them. They just won't they'll just make sure they have one space by their door so
they don't have to walk far to their unit. But >> do we know if that'll be covered with the architect, the amount of garage space potentially? Which units will have it? >> Yes. Yes, you will cover all of that. >> Okay. >> Any other questions from members of the board? Please do it one more.
>> All right, Mr. Mr. Hernandez, >> thanks. >> The foundational plants, will they all be native? >> Yes, they will all be native. And if they're not native, we'll make that change to make sure that they are. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Uh only other question I had uh just just with regards to fire
access. I know you touched on it. Let's just make sure that we talk to the uh fire departments to make sure that they can get their trucks in. We don't want any bigger problems than we need to. >> Understood. >> Uh the other question is on all the retention areas. Uh there'll be fences around all those areas just for safety.
>> Foundational. >> This one. >> I think it's in your plans, but I I just didn't want I I didn't want to misspeak, but yes, we are fencing around all four of the bio retention basins, and we're adding a fence around the wet pond as well, where there's no fence there now.
So, yes, I just want to look at the plan first to make sure. >> No problem. Yes, they're all they're all fenced in. >> Okay. All right. Uh, seeing no other questions from members of the board, I'll open it up to questions from members of the public for questions of our engineer
only. Any questions from the public? Please come forward. >> Double Shaw 86 South Road. Um again, I'm sorry. >> Double D H A V A Last name Sha S H A H. Um probably two questions, Max. Um and I
don't know if you can answer one of them. Um what was the main reason behind the HOA um taking care of the snow cleaning versus handing it over to the town? Cuz I know there is an existing lawsuit between the town, I believe, and
the road cleanup. Um that's one. And um secondly uh I believe the main goal of affordable housing is inclusivity and um you know by having them have their own
external parking and the current design doesn't seem as such and it would actually point out like hey you know which one is affordable housing versus not. Just uh feedback on that. >> Sure. With regard to the HOA,
um it is common uh for these types of developments that the homeowners association uh would actually perform the snow removal task. Um in Paripony, you do have a a DPW uh you do provide snow
removal on your public streets. This is a very different um endeavor than just providing uh snow removal on public streets. uh you really need a vendor who's going to really come out and understand the intricacies of the site.
Um know where to store snow or remove snow if there's a big storm. U because a lot of these types of sites, in fact, virtually all of them, if you have an a huge storm, there may be a need to actually transport snow and remove it from the site. those just aren't
capabilities that exist within a a municipality's DPW um department. So, uh for those reasons, um we're proposing that the HOA um provide the service. With regard to the
affordable housing, uh the architect is going to speak to the uh to the U-Hack requirements um which we uh comply with and the architect will speak to those and without stealing any of the architect's thunder um I am told well
let me say that I think I can represent that it will be impossible to be able to tell uh an affordable unit from a market rate unit uh from looking at the outside and the architect is uh going to go through that uh in detail. So the UAC
requirements will be satisfied and we're actually going to do a little bit better than that because UAC requirements uh my understanding is they really don't speak to the way in which there is no discernable difference when you look at a unit as to whether or not it's an affordable unit or not. We've
incorporated that into uh the uh architectural design of of this project. But again, uh those issues will be discussed by the architect uh at the next meeting. >> All right. >> Seeing nobody else from the public step forward, we'll close the public
questions and uh turn it back over so you can >> I had a quick question. >> I'm sorry. Go ahead, Mr. >> H. The 71bedroom you have, will any of them have dedicated parking or they'll be using one of the 16 parkings?
Um, I'd have to go check cuz I don't believe all the seven I don't believe all the onebedrooms um are they may have one of some may have a garage. >> So, the architect will have to check to tell you which ones of the 36 affordable um which ones will have the garages and
which ones will um be having to use an on on street parking space. So, he'll have to have that breakdown for you of that because you'll see how the buildings are laid out and how that is uh has that configured. Okay. Okay. Now, seeing no further questions, uh I believe we're done with our
questions for the engineer. I'll turn it back over to you. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Motion for a fivem minute break. >> Is that okay with the with or with the applicant? >> Fine by us, Mr. Chairman. >> Okay. Very good. All right. Uh we'll
return at 9:00. We're on record. >> Okay, we ran a little over. The time is 9:04. We're going back on the record. Uh just a point of order. Uh we had a few more questions for the engineers. I see he's he's still at the uh uh on the mic.
So, if our board engineer wouldn't mind, um I apologize. That was my oversight. Please go ahead. >> Call the role. >> Oh, thank you, Mr. Mr. Dinsmore. Uh, let's just make sure everybody's here in order. Would you mind? >> Mayor Desai >> here. >> Mr. Dpierro
>> here. >> Mr. Dinsmore >> here. >> Miss Hernandez >> here. Mr. Mey >> here. >> Mr. Npalitano >> here. >> Mr. Patel >> here. >> Mr. Scha here. >> Miss Smith >> here. >> And chairman Vanin >> here. Okay. I'll turn it over to our
board engineer at this point. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Um, I'd like to thank the engineer for going through the vast majority of my letter and all the comments that were in there. Um, and a few more that I'd like addressed. Um,
the in the northern part of the site where you border one of the other existing buildings, it looks like there's a a patio area that's being reconstructed. Could you speak to what's being done there and also how the ownership works between the two lots and any agreements
that you may have with the neighboring properties? >> Thank you for pointing that. I I should have mentioned that in my testimony. Um between one gate hall and four gate hall, there's an existing water feature that's there. Okay. It actually acts as sort of a minor detention basin because
the storm water runoff from the western portion of the site does flow through that pond. Um a and it's a water feature that was that was built with a with a patio around it and stairs um between those two buildings and that ultimately drains down into the existing wet pond. Um because of the way the site because
of the way the buildings were built um that pond has to be removed and that feature has to be taken out because it can't remain because it's because these units are in the way of that feature. So there are there is going to be the need for some cross access easements between the two lots to be able to go in and
remove that pond. We have to take out a a couple of concrete stairs that go from the patio on one gate hall down to the pond and then we have to clean up the patio on one gate hall and have a a finished clean edge to it. Um that that's going to be in the corner over here. So I believe there's there's there
will be agreements. We will the applicant will agree as a condition of approval to um to reach those agreements in form and substance satisfactory uh to the board engineer, board attorney um to effectuate what you just
described. >> Have there been any existing communications between your applicant and the neighboring property about these improvements? >> My understanding is there have been discussions and that an agreement is forthcoming. >> Okay. Wonderful. Um,
apologize if I missed this. The proposed transformer that you have on the site, is there any screening around that landscaping, fencing, etc. to sort of disguise that from the residential units there? >> I mean, there's there's a series of proposed transformer pads. These are the
typical residential style transformers you see. They're usually about 2 and 1/2 ft high, 3 or 4 feet wide that are usually green in color. Sometimes they're gray. Um there wasn't anything that we're proposing to screen them because they're typical of of what you might see in a residential neighborhood. Um so we weren't proposing any any
landscaping around them, but if if if the board needs us to, we can look into doing that. They do have to remain accessible to the to the power company to be able to get to them. So you can't really block them on all sides with landscaping. Um but they they're they're typical smaller style um transformers that you see in your typical residential
neighborhood. Let's see. And you said that you confirmed that two cars can fit into the garage spaces. I'm sure the architect will testify more to this. A car was shown in the singlecar garage plans, but no cars are shown in
the double garage to the >> show that two can be in there. >> The architect will provide testimony with regard to the dimensions of the garage and so forth. >> Okay. Um, with regards to the RSIS, uh, dimminimous requirement for the guest
space, I know we talked about it being um, a maximum, not a minimum. Uh, those guest spaces are also included in the requirement. So, if it's if a two-bedroom unit requires 1.8 spaces, that that half of a guest space is
envisioned in that 1.8. It's not in addition to >> Cor. Correct. Yes. >> Anything we can do to not have to send anything to Trenton would be appreciated. >> Yeah. Larry, there's one problem with that. The ordin the the plan itself calls for that half a space. >> The redevelopment plan calls for a
quarter of space. >> A quarter of a space. Yeah. >> Right. >> So that's an addition to the the RSIS. So that's almost like >> it's a different requirement. >> Yeah. They they threw us a curve on that one. >> Uh you talked about assigned spaces for
the residential units that don't have garages or driveways. Are there any assigned spaces designated for visitors? Um or is it only just for >> The assigned spaces are only just for those 16 affordable units. Everything else is basically open parking. Um there are those EV spaces that are going to be
for chargers. So again, that'll be for EV cars mostly to park there for charging. But um the rest of the space is just open to the uh to the public basically. >> Well, we're saying we don't really mean the public. They're they're open to residents and invitees
>> of the people who live there. Uh not the general public. >> Thank you. Yes, >> I can't go park there. >> Uh the planting details that were provided showed different planting configurations for different building layouts,
including a very specific planting configuration for the affordable units. Um, aside from the fact that we don't think there should be a separate planting arrangement for affordable units, just want to point out overall rather than three different ones, it should just be oriented to the sun. Uh,
that would be better for landscaping in general. >> Uh, I I'll we'll check with that with with Tol and with our landscape architect on on how to address that. >> Um, and then the last one is really more of a comment. uh you say that you'd re-review the the sign details, provide
the the colors, etc. Um but with regard to the signs themselves, I know the Paripony Troy Hills code is a little bit different than other municipalities where they include the area of all supporting structures as part of this
signage number. Um so it it's not just a little over, it's a lot over. Yeah, >> just be mindful of that when you re-review the signs. >> Yeah, and we were looking at the calculation. I think you had provided in your letter the two square footage numbers. Um, and it looks like you just
you took the overall footprint, but there are openings through the structure and everything. So, the openings count or not count because I don't think they would technically count. So, we'd have to >> count. I think an officer and discuss that. >> Well, then that's fine. Whatever is the way
you guys want it calculated, we have no problem doing that. I just want to make sure I have the number correct. So if it is just basically taking a a rectangle around the entire sign, then that's what the square footage is and that's what we'll note on on the plan. So it will be a it will be a deviation because the ordinance is only 24 ft, but
>> but we we'll have to make sure we note it as such. >> I just want to be clear whether it's a deviation or you're planning on shrinking the signs. That's what I'm curious. >> The size of the signs I I think you know and again the plan will testify this too, but they're not the signs themselves are the main sign is 3'6 by
6'9. I think that's a a nice size for the development. It's not overly large. It has a nice stone base to it and and the frame structure. So, and the other sign is slightly smaller, 2'9 by 5'6. So, again, they're not overly large signs for the development. So, I think the size is is is is commensurate with
the type of development we have here. So, I think we want to stick to that and and ask for the the the deviations. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Okay. Uh yeah, Mr. decide. >> Could you clarify for me the who's going to take care of the pond?
>> So, I think the testimony, Mr. Mayor, is that there's ex the same part the same parties who do. Now, in other words, it would be the HOA and the other um properties in the area that utilize the detention basin. There's an existing
agreement uh that exists with regard to the maintenance of the pond and that will stay intact. Okay. Thank you. >> Okay, I believe that concludes our questioning for the engineer. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um,
>> this time I'd like to call John Cororak as our next witness. Uh, Mr. Corak is a traffic engineer from Stonefield. Uh, and if he can be sworn in, >> raise your right hand. Do you swear
affirmative testimony about to get the nice boards of truth? >> I do. >> Thank you. >> If you can state your name and address for the record and spell your last name. >> Sure. It's John Cororak. Last name spelled C O R A K. I'm with Stonefield Engineering and Design office located at
92 Park Avenue, Rutherford, New Jersey. >> And again, Mr. Cor, if you can provide the board with uh your educational background, your professional background, and any licenses that you uh that you possess in the area of traffic engineering. >> Of course, I'm a licensed professional
engineer in the state of New Jersey. I have a bachelor of science in civil engineering from the College of New Jersey. I'm an expert in the field of traffic and transportation engineering. Uh I've prepared over 250 traffic studies for land development applications. I've testified before over
100 land use boards in the state of New Jersey, including this one, on multiple prior occasions. Um, my license is current and in good standing. I've also served as a board expert uh for a handful handful of municipalities as well. >> Thank you, Mr. Cor. Mr. Chairman,
respectfully respectfully um we uh request the board to accept Mr. Cor as an expert in the area of traffic engineering. >> Any questions or concerns from the board? All right, seeing none, we'll move forward. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Cor, if you could please provide uh
some testimony here with regard to the traffic aspects of this application and and your findings in that regard. >> Of course, thank you. Um so with any traffic study that we prepare, right, we begin with a site investigation, review of the subject site, review of the
roadway network. Um, currently we have the office building located on site uh with its access points, the two existing access points out to Gate Hall Drive. Gate Hall Drive is a municipally controlled roadway with a 35 mph speed
limit. Has one lane of travel in each direction and really provides uh a connection for you know these office uses, hotel use um between Route 10 West and Littleton Road, Route 202. So, at the I'll call it the southwest side uh
where um where Gate Hall Drive connects in with Route 10 West, you have the uh the ramp that serves a right in right out. So, you have a direct connection really to come off of Route 10 West or go on to Route 10 West. If you're looking to head Route 10 East, you need
to go out uh on Littleton Road where there is a traffic signal at the end of um you know, the the roadway connecting in with Campus Drive. Um, Littleton Road is a county roadway. Route 10 is a DOT controlled roadway uh
through this area. So, the current site access, the two driveways, one toward the top, the northern part of Gate Hall Drive and then the other toward the west through the hotel property. Uh, these are existing access drives that are proposed to remain as is. And so, we've
we've reviewed sight lines at these driveways. We've reviewed um crash history through the Gate Hall Road area. Um and what we found is very little if no crash history at these driveways from you know the past 20 years. Um
indicating generally speaking that the the driveways are safe and efficient currently and we would expect them to continue to operate that way in the future. um as it relates to the traffic generated by the site going from an
office use at its heyday fully uh you know fully operating fully occupied and generating traffic compared to the 178 uh townhouse units uh we see a a drop in traffic both from a peak hour perspective and from a total 24-hour
daily perspective. Um what we what we forecast or how we forecast traffic uh for these developments, we engineers typically utilize the trip generation manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. So this is the
industry source for forecasting traffic generated by a wide variety of developments. It's used by virtually every traffic engineer. It's used by the NJ DOT, um all of the counties in the state, uh really all the DOTs throughout the country.
um for a a townhouse development of this size. Uh as we narrow down to the peak hours, right? The the singular peak hour of traffic in the morning, the singular peak hour of traffic in the evening, what we would expect for a development
of this size is about 90 trips total. Um so that's in and out combined in that morning 1 hour peak. Um and 94 trips combined in and out combined during that evening peak. And so you might wonder, you know, with with so much parking on
site, with the number of units, why is that number so depressed, if you will? And the reason, of course, is you have commuting periods that are uh wider than, you know, a singular hour. You have staggering work schedules. You have work from home. And ultimately, the the
the the traffic count, if you will, you know, from a a multif family residential unit or residential units in general tends to be lower than those commercial units. So, uh, you know, this this project as a whole is generating less traffic than the old office use, um, at
its heyday. Um, we've also heard a lot of testimony about the the parking on site, the 489 parking spaces provided, uh, which does comply with the redevelopment plan standards. Um, we're required the we consider everything as
town houses required the the 418 spaces. Um and with that I could get a little bit more in depth as to how the space is operating >> in terms of the you're familiar with the
deviation or variance that's being requested with regard to the placement of the signs. Correct. >> Yes. Have you had an opportunity to look at that in terms of whether or not the proposed uh placement of the sign based upon the size of the sign that we're
looking at would create uh in your opinion an unsafe condition for uh vehicles either um entering or exiting uh the property? >> That's a it's a great question. So, we've reviewed the location of those
signs, uh, where they're situated, um, you know, internal to the site itself, not out on Gate Hall. What you have here through the the drive aisles on the site itself, generally lower traffic speeds. Um, and because of that, that helps with the required sight distances that are
needed and the sign placement falls outside of, you know, those sight triangles. um happy to to work with the engineer to have those plotted um on the plans itself and you know adjust as necessary but we feel comfortable that
the the signs um are adequately placed or can be moved uh if if necessary. But uh you know as the the plan is further massaged through you know the course of these hearing proceedings and you know hopefully resolution compliance um you
know we have we we have no issue with with making sure that these are are you know safely located on the site. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman. No further questions. I turn it back to you and the the board professionals and the public for questions of this witness. >> Okay. Any questions from our board
professionals? Yeah. >> Um, thank you for saying that you'll provide those sight distance triangles. Um, I think we requested those because in case of uh any changes during construction, if it needs to get moved a foot or two, we have that triangle shown on the plan to make sure that doesn't
impede any any visual movements there. Um, I don't think I have any additional questions. uh unless there was anything any of the requests within our comment letter that you feel you can't comply with or would be an issue. I think some of them are
just maybe cleaning up some of the rounding calculations in the parking with EV and ADA stuff. Um I think that's it. >> Yeah, I reviewed all the rounding calculations and I agree with the the engineers uh the engineering letter's
take on uh those base requirements. So >> we agree that >> and no planning questions, right? >> Not a planner. >> Okay. >> No planning questions. No, I'm saying no questions from the planner. >> Okay. I had a question. >> Yes. Go ahead.
>> So the entrance into this complex is through gate hall drive through that left up here. >> Right. And there are two entrances into this complex. one from there and the other one is this other on the lower left that the curved road that you see
correct that's in and out that those are the only two >> yes >> okay 90 trips out of both of those >> the the combined trip generation yes >> okay at peak right which is 1 hour increment
>> right >> okay >> it's a 1 hour increment over the course of the in that that morning peak hour or the evening peak hour and >> and this is the same road network that um in terms of entrances that serve the office building before, right? >> Yes.
>> You took the office building uh traffic also into account. >> So the we we provided in our report a comparison from the office building uh to the multif family residential. >> Yeah. >> Um you know to the townhouse development
and the office building at its heyday um was would generate 200 more trips in each peak hour than what the uh the townhouse developer would. >> So, it's fair to say that this will be
assuming that the office building were occupied that the townhouse uh alternative is a a much lower generator of traffic. Is that correct? >> Just a reduction correct the office complex. >> Yes. Okay. >> Significant reduction, right? >> Yes.
>> Okay. All right, other questions from the board. Mr. Npalitano, >> thank you. Uh, thanks for your report as always. You do a great job. >> Uh, I know I live north of here on Littleton Road >> and then I I want to take Route 10 uh west. It puts me through Gate Hall,
>> right? >> Okay. So, the GPS does that. It wants me to avoid all um I mean, I think the people are far enough away from that. They're not even going to notice that extra traffic cutting through their their neighborhood. So, I don't think that's be a problem. What What do you think? Yeah, as as far as a resident living at
the townhouse, no, they're not really going to perceive, you know, that cut through traffic, >> right? >> Um, no, there pretty substantial distance with other properties. >> I I agree with you. And then I I maybe I should ask um the engineer before Southwest part there's a big empty lot
there. I'm assuming that is the uh Sinesta Suites. Are are there going to be signs that say parking for Sinesta Suites only and not like, you know, Johnny living in uh unit E? Hey, I just parked in the lot next to us. You know what's going to happen with that? I probably should ask the engine that one,
but >> I mean it >> don't matter to me. I'm just saying, you know, it's going to get upset. >> You know, there park there. My buddy's right there. You know, it's a short walk.
>> The bushes. >> Yeah, to the bushes. Right. All right. I think the area you're referring Yeah. It's it's exclusive to four gate hall, but they're not proposing anything. >> Yep. >> For four gate hall, you guys. >> This this this area here we're talking about, right? >> No. No. Down lower. >> That one there. Who's that?
>> That's Sesta Suites. >> Three gate hall ownership. We don't own that property, but we have easement rights. >> Okay. >> Yep. Thanks. >> All right. Uh, Mr. Patel. So I know you did mention about some 90 odd cars on a peak hour. Uh have you taken in
consideration of surrounding development as well? >> Uh there are more units on the milit road. We do know that that road does get busy even with >> units being empty right now. >> So is there a way you can work with the town traffic to change in traffic light
patterns um uh like that? What kind of studies can you offer? Yeah. So, the the signal at Littleton Road's a county traffic signal. Um, you know, we can can certainly work with the county on adjusting timing as needed. We have a very good relationship uh with
Morris County. Um, >> you know, beyond Yeah, the the county is we've submitted to Morris County who is taking a look at the application. One of the things that they are looking at is the timing of of the traffic light.
>> Yes. uh as well as the storm water system in general. Um so Morris County Planning Board is looking at those issues as well. Um from a a traffic perspective generally, as I said at the outset, u there were some meetings with
with the neighbors and Councilwoman Hernandez and Councilman Karifi and so forth. And of the alternatives that were really realistic for the property, this was really the least impactful on the residents um from a number of
perspectives, least of which was the traffic. Um and so we feel that uh through the planning and conceptualization of this project that the traffic is really being minimized for the site while at the same time providing PCI
um with an integral part of its fourth round uh housing element and fair share plan uh to be able to meet you know those units without you know fourstory uh apartment buildings there. we have home ownership and and units that um are
are going to add value uh to the neighborhood. So, uh we feel that you know that from a high level perspective that that the traffic impacts were really kind of addressed uh through the planning process. >> Okay.
>> Thank you. Uh do we have any uh any grasp of what the existing use is generating in terms of traffic versus what this uh uh anticipated use would generate? >> Well, right. Right now it's very little. Okay. >> You know when it when it's reoccupied,
>> right? So when it is reoccupied, it would be generating substantially more to the tune of around 300 or so peak hour trips. >> Mhm. >> Compared to this, which is a little bit under 100. >> Okay. And just cuz it's it's on my mind, I know all the all the properties on
Century Road have all told us, "Oh, well, we're just going to send all the all of our traffic down Gate Hall." So, um, we know that Gate Hall is is going to receive a lot more use than it already does. And I guess my biggest concern there is is, uh, the connection
between Gate Hall and Route 10. Um, have you looked into that intersection at all? Is that something that, um, you've reviewed at all? Yeah. So, it's the the right in right out ramp there. Um, as you're on Route 10, coming off onto Gate Hall, they give you a little bit of a
deceleration lane. >> Um, for better or worse, as you're going from Gate Hall onto Route 10, there's really no no acceleration lane there. >> Um, so what you're waiting for is a gap in traffic created by the the signal at Littleton Road. You're waiting for the light. >> Um,
>> you know, and that's that is an existing condition. Um, you know, we we we understand that there is this isn't the only way in and out of here. You can make the the more ciruitous route out to to Littleton. >> Um, where you will have a traffic signal to get you on and off.
>> Um, but but really, you know, that that's >> it's not your property. It's not your road. It's not something that you can control. So, I just >> I had it boiling inside me. So, I had to let it go. >> We get those kind of questions a lot. And you know, the DOT has their own set
of priorities and they largely include moving traffic that's already on their highway. >> So we they can only really get so far with them on on these types of things. >> Yeah. Like so many things, they don't do anything until they see the actual problem. So >> Okay. >> Any other questions for the traffic
engine? >> All right. At this point, I'll turn it over to the public for questions about traffic engineer. >> Sure. I'm not done. >> There you go. All right, turn it on. >> Just your name and address for the record again.
>> Um, Sha, 86 South Pot Road, Mars Plains, New Jersey. The main question I have is right now there is no uh residential traffic. >> Um, this zone of housing is currently not
zone for school busing. That means you'll see an increased traffic going into Littleton, Brooklyn, and um parts of high all in and around probably 20 minutes apart. Littleton I mean Brookline Drive doesn't
have any signal. So, I do foresee a lot more traffic, a lot more work, and we already had one of our um uh helpers with the secure uh with the traffic get hurt on Lake
Hayawa. So, how are we going to address that? Did we do a traffic study on how much more impact, how many more cars and traffic it will be going on to during the school time >> and the safety
>> so north on Middleton basically >> north on Middleton >> up until also on Route 53. >> Huh? >> Also on Route 53, >> right? >> Oh yeah. There's no to 53 >> when you're turning outside. They'll be
going 10 to 53 to perform. >> With regard to the school buses, um >> well, it when there's developments like this, the board of education will determine and decide >> whether school buses come in or or
don't. That's not something that that we control or the board controls or that's the school board will determine what their bus routes are or are not. So, we we can't it's just beyond our jurisdiction or the jurisdiction of the
board. Um that that's just something that they do. I'll turn it over to you, John, for the other part of the question. >> Is it possible this development is too close to have school buses that they want them going down this far? >> I I I think we can separate that part of it. But I I'm more concerned is if you
decide that school buses should be allowed, what route would they take through your development? because that's something that is part of your >> Well, we don't decide that. >> Well, they might decide that a stop is required, but they'll have to agree to with you about how the school buses should drive through the site. Is is
that correct? >> Well, typically there's coordination. Yes. But the board of education typically determines where the school bus service is going to be. >> So, it's really up to them. Um, and if there is bus service here, then, you
know, you'd have to coordinate where the drop off and pickup spot would be, but >> yeah, >> it's not something that we >> Yeah. H having lived in a town home development with a school age child at the time, they were usually for a development like this, pretty close in size to what I was living in, probably
two stops um to pick up kids along the way. And so, uh, what I'm just trying to understand is is, uh, you know, how would you how would the flow of those buses best be coordinated through your site? >> I I I mean, I've seen them come through
Route 10 West just west of here at one when there was that hotel there right near >> right near here. So, they'll come west. >> Okay. >> I bet they'll come west and they'll go in because I think anything else would be >> all right. And I guess what I wasn't
accounting for was the second entrance cuz I I'm seeing that the school bus would literally have to drive through almost the entire outer room. But with the second entrance, maybe they >> Okay. >> So, all right. >> I need clarification on the school bus
thing. So, the board of ed can decide that there are two stops in this development >> if if any. >> If any might not be any >> if any. >> Okay. It could be one or it could be two >> or it could be none. >> Or it could be none. If it's none, that means the parents would have to drop the kids off.
>> Yes. >> Which was what happens a lot in that area. >> Okay. >> Which is a headache. >> If they do decide to put a school stop in here, then the school the the curvature and the the
angler and the spaces would accommodate school buses making turns in here. >> Correct. Yeah. All of these drive aisles, they're all in conformance with the residential site improvement standards. Um, they all can accommodate those school bus movements. I I foresee if there is a school bus that that comes into the site, they're probably looking
at really making a loop along the outer roof along called the outer loop where, you know, road A wraps around to to C and B. And if you have two stops, they're probably on two ends of the the site. >> So, the entrance would be where the signs where the sign would be.
Um >> or you'll be from the north side or from the west the entrance. >> I I think it could be either way. Um you know, it depends on the ultimate routing to and from like where where within the route they are. >> Okay. >> Where the school bus came from last and
where it's going next. >> Exactly. >> Okay. >> If the BOE decides to be a school stop, would they get in touch with you and make these uh >> They would. They would. That's usually that's the process that that usually is undertaken is that we would hear from the board of education with regard to
whether or not there was a if there was going to be a stop here, they wanted a stop here, we would hear from them. >> Mhm. >> In your professional experience, do you think what do you think the outcome would be for this development? Would there be a school stop or no?
>> It's it's really >> school board by schoolboard specific in my experience. >> It also depends. I mean, I think uh Council President Hernandez made a good point, which is that I think it's really about kind of what they're doing in the area and so I have no way of knowing. No
problem. >> You know, we're we were we didn't have buses and then sometimes they change it. >> You're not doing >> No, I'm talking to Mr. Jako all the way in the back. >> Not doing the bus. We just heard from the board.
Our >> our kids our kids did not have >> to >> Mr. >> All right. Okay. Other questions from the public? >> Yes. >> Name and address, sir. >> Yeah. Um,
>> I think it's already on. >> Yeah. Frank Frank Jakamo, 25 Robin Hood Road. >> Spell your last name. >> Central the Jakamo. E I G I A C O M O >> on that. >> Use the microphone for your question.
>> You got to be on the record. >> Oh, this is the record. This is the record. Okay, it's official. >> Um, a couple things. Depending on how many students you're going to have in development, if they're going to have a bigger bus coming into that development, that may be affecting your turning
radiuses here. Not sure if it will or not. But secondly, some of the students, they have the smaller buses and they pick them up at the house. >> Especially if you have somebody with a disability, >> they're going to have to come into the
development and go to the specific unit where that person where the child is. >> All right. And that's part of the board of education, how they approach it. >> And and the county, the vortex schools as well. >> That's right. Right. >> Thanks.
>> I guess our our point is we just wanted to make sure that these roads could accommodate that traffic and also just make you aware of that potential that you could have school buses flying through or flowing through your development. >> May maybe in 50 years they'll be flying. >> Appreciate that.
>> Otherwise, you've got speed bumps, right? If you want them. >> Speaking from personal, I didn't like speed bumps in my development. >> Yeah, preferably not. No, they're they're noisy. They're a maintenance issue. They're an impediment to snow >> removal. >> I I would not want to be the person who
owns the unit next to the speed bump here. The ch >> There's always a traffic, >> but they'll be priced lower. So, >> but actually, in all seriousness, the traffic cushions are always an alternative, but I mean, that's up to the board, which are basically, you
know, the the wheel the wheel base can go over the hump. It basically does slow people down. We have them a lot of times they don't want emergency vehicles to be slowed down their hospitals. But again, it's it's an internal development. I don't know. >> I guess the question is, do we want to
create a problem to solve a problem that doesn't exist? >> I think I think I'd be willing to let your HOA make a decision on that. >> Yeah, I think that we agree with that, Mr. >> Necessary. >> Yeah. Okay. Uh, we have the floor open
to members of the public. Seeing nobody else come forward, I will close the public portion of questioning and turn it back over to our attorney. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh, and members of the board for your um, your time and your attention and your thoughtful questions. Um, we don't have anything
else for this evening uh, for you. We certainly have some work to do on our end uh, based on the meeting tonight, which we will do. Um, so with that, I guess we'd like to be adjourned to the next available meeting.
>> All right, >> we would come back uh either with Mr. Michello or probably with the architect because uh the plan revisions are going to take a little bit of time. So, uh I guess the game plan would be if you're
available April 6th, we are. Um and uh we can come with the architect uh at the next meeting. Okay. Uh do we want to put that on the calendar now nor if it's available or how would you like to proceed? >> Um okay and although you said you know
you had work to do based on tonight's >> well the the engineer does but we can still go forward with arch with testimony from the architect. >> All right it's um I guess my thought is are we going to be coming back a third time for you know the engineers if
you're >> Yeah, the architect's going to take some time. So, we he may need uh a large part of the meeting. So, I'm anticipating um you know, a meeting with the architect, cleanup from the engineer, and then planning. Planning won't take
very long at all. >> So, that's what I'm anticipating. >> All right. And so, you would feel April 6 would work for you, >> unless you want the 20th. >> Yeah. So, I'd be looking for the Yeah. The April 6 would be to hear from the
architect. >> Okay. And you couldn't fit everything in one meeting like the engineer or the architect. >> I mean, we'll we'll try as best we can, but I >> that's why I was asking if the 20th would be better. >> Um,
probably not. >> Instead of coming back the third time. All right. April's >> I'm not sure that it's just one meeting. I think we're going to need >> our our planner had also requested 10 days notice so that he can prepare. >> Correct. >> The the engineering plans are not going
to be done and ready for April 6th, but the architect is is ready to present on April 6th. I think his testimony is going to take up >> probably most of the night. >> So you you want to have a you're expecting a need for a third meeting then?
>> I think we're we're going to need a third meeting regardless. >> Okay. All right. All right. So, it sounds like uh we'll be back on April 6th. Is that correct? >> Correct. Without further notice and with required extensions. >> Yes, you get required extensions. Uh no
problem there. And so, just so the record's clear, we'd be uh back on April 6th, 7:30 here in town hall. No further notice uh to the public will be given. So, can we just make sure the public knows that there was going to be the
this is going to be continued on April 6th. That's a hearing on that date, but no notice will be sent out. You probably received the notice probably for this one. You will not see receive a notice for the new one. This is your notice that it's going to be on April 6th. >> Okay. With that said, I'll make a motion
for a uh >> So move. >> Okay. >> For adjournment. Uh, do we have a second? >> Second. >> All right. Uh, all in favor? >> Any opposed? We are adjourned. Thank you. Yes.