Piscataway Township Planning Board meeting will please come to order, and a quick notice of this meeting was provided in the following ways. Notice published in the Courier News. Notice posted on the bulletin board of the Municipal Building. Notice made available to the Township Clerk. Notice sent to the Courier News in the Star-Ledger. Miss Buckley, would you please call the roll? Mayor Wahler. present. Councilwoman Cahill. Here. Here. Thank you. Miss Corcoran. Yeah. Reverend Kenny. Here.
I'm here. Mr. Adkins. Here. Mr. Foster. Here. I can hear them. They're pressing the button. I know I'm watching. Mr. Ahammed . Here. Mr. Echevarria here. And, Madam Chair here. Mr. Borrello, would you please read the open public meeting notice? Certainly, Madam Chair. We are doing this meeting through the online meeting platform, specifically zoom. In keeping with the guidelines that have been disseminated
by the Department of Community Affairs, the Planning Board has tried its best to comply with the Open Public Meeting Act and the DCA guidelines. In addition, any applicant whose matter will be heard this evening has heard the log in information for the online meeting platform put forth in their notice. Members of the public who wish to be heard will be afforded an opportunity as if they were in an actual physical space. And I believe the board's done its absolute best to comply with the DCA guidelines and the Open Public Meetings Act. Thank you. The flag can be seen over my right shoulder. Can we all recite, the Pledge of Allegiance in unison, please?
I pledge of. Allegiance to the flag. 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. Thank you. Can we swear in the professionals? Certainly. Ron. Jim? Yes. What are the testimony to give me first for me? The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. So help you God? We do. Do. Are there any changes to our agenda tonight?
None that I am aware of, Madam Chair. Thank you. Do we have any? Duly, Ordered? Do duly audited bills to be paid. tonight? Believe so. There should be a motion to pay the bill. I can, I can I get a motion to pay all duly audited bills? Motion. Councilwoman Cahill. Thank you. Can I get a second? That didn't Dawn Cochran. Thank you. Roll call please. Mayor Wahler. Yes. Councilwoman Cahill. Yes. Ms. Corcoran. Yes. Reverend Kenny. Yes. I'm seeing him on the screen there.
Yeah. Once we're done with this, I'm going to have to get off. I'm going to have to move them into Dawn's office. I apologize, Mr. Atkins. Yes. Mr. foster? Yep. Mr. Ahammed? Yes. Mr. Echevarria? Yes. And, madam Chair. Yes. Yes. Do you want to take a quick break right now? Laura to move them? Yes, please. Yeah, I just I call that up. All there you have to do is grab their stuff and come in. So I. Can. Thank you. Meeting is adjourned for a moment.
Chair, I'm going to jump off and try to come back in to hopes to get some video here. Okay. We're adjourned for about five minutes. Thank you. And I told some chit chat. I can't move the building. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. In a minute. Grab a seat. Okay. Okay. Yeah. I think, Thank you. I thought we sign up there. I think everything's good.
All right. You guys are unmuted. Okay. I mean, you know, and unmute if you want. Have the stretch, though. It's just on here. You can see all my work. There about that going on. Right. And I totally can't talk about anybody because they're not. They're not, you know, if you guys do need to mute to you that. This is doing the. Physical as opposed. Yes. Okay. It's, it's.
7:06 and is back in session. The next item on our agenda is adoption of resolution to memorialize action taken on March 11th. Well, there's none on that. There's none. Adoption of the, minutes from the regular meeting of March 11th. Do I have a motion to. Do I have a motion to adopt the minutes of, the regular meeting of March 11th? From there. I'll make the motion. Do I have a second? Mr. Adkins second. Roll call please. Mayor Wahler?
Yes. Councilwoman Cahill. Yes. Miss Corcoran. Yes. Reverend Kenney. Yes. Mr. Adkins. Yes. Mister foster. Yes. Mr. Ahammed. Yes. Mr. Echevarria. Yes. And, Madam Chair. Yes. Yes. Item number ten. Discussion on the affordable housing ordinance. Enacting UHAC and amended FHA regulations. Madam Chair, this is Dawn Corcoran. Basically, this is one inclusive and comprehensive ordinance.
Enacting the Uniform Housing Affordability controls and the Fair Housing Act. The, development fee ordinance and the mandatory set aside for affordable housing. We already have an ordinance in place. However, this is the, most recent. And this is what we are required to adopt. It's already been before council for first reading. So it's coming to us for a, consistency review. And since this is in keeping with the master plan requirements for the affordable housing. I think, Dawn, you'd agree it's consistent
with same. Members of the of the board, do you have any questions or comments? Do I have a motion to, Do we need to open to the public, Madam Chair? Oh, yes we do. I apologize. Members of the public. This is a an ordinance that has gone to the, who has been reviewed by the council, and it's back for our second reading. It's been posted and we have no comments. Any further comments?
If anyone in the public has questions about this ordinance, it's back for review. Please indicate your questions by waving your hand and asking questions. No one Madam Chair. Okay. Close to the public. Members of the board. What's your pleasure? Madam chair, I'll make a motion. Councilwoman Cahill. Do I have a second. Madam Chair? Reverend Kenny, I'll second that. Roll call please. Mayor Wahler? Yes. Councilwoman Cahill.
Yes. Miss Corcoran. Yes. Reverend Kenney. Yes. Mister Atkins. Yes. Mister foster. Yes. Mr. Ahammed. Yes. Mr. Echevarria. Yes. And madam chair. Yes. Madam chair, because of the time constraints that are involved, I took the liberty of preparing a resolution, indicating the Planning Board's consistency review and concurrence with the adoption of same so that I can go back to the municipal governing body for a second reading.
If someone would like to make a motion just to adopt the resolution so it can be sent back to council. Chair, Reverend Kenney. Make a. Motion to adopt. The resolution. That it comes back to chair. Do I have a second? I second it. Thank you. Roll call. Mayor Wahler? Yes. Councilwoman Cahill. Yes. Miss Corcoran. Yes. Reverend Kenney. Yes. Mister Atkins. Yes. Mister foster. Yes. Mr. Ahammed.
Yes. Mister Echevarria. Yes. And Madam Chair. Yes. Now we're an item number 11. Discussion. Consistency review for rezoning block 2101. Lots of lots eight nine, 901 and 902. Madam chair? Yes. I'm sorry. For ease of the for the board's time. We're going to discuss 11, 12 and 13 together because they're just, three different properties as outlined. That are all part of the same, zoning ordinance
in terms of essentially, rezoning them and adding them to the affordable housing requirement. And I think Dawn can just expound on that a little bit. No problem. So so we're merging, items number 11 and items number 12. And 13, 13. And 13. Okay. So basically, last month, the planning Board adopted the amended housing element and our share plan. And if you recall, there was a chart within that plan that identified sites where housing is either been constructed or sites or housing could be constructed
to meet the township's fourth round housing obligation. So, with this ordinance, there's going to be three new zones created. We're going to have the AH4, AH5, and AH6 zoning ordinances. They were allow for affordable housing and market rate housing to be constructed. Keeping in mind that each of these properties will come back to the planning board. For site plan approval. We have the three properties we're going to have. The recommendation is for the, property,
the with the AH4 designation that properties on Lakeview Avenue. The property with the AH5 affordable housing designation as the property on Turner Place South Washington. And the AH6 designation for it will be for another property. Over on Stelton Road. But again, it's important to note that these will come back to us. We will have a say in what the buildings will look like and various, you know, things that we do comment on. So it's just to get the housing in place that the zoning in place or that these obligations can,
be submitted and come to this board for review. And again, we're on strict deadlines. Council had their first reading. This is coming back to the planning board tonight for a consistency review. If the board agrees, that it's consistent with the master plan, it will go back to for a second reading and adoption by council next week. Okay. Is there any other questions from the board? Okay. I would like to open it up to the public. At this time, any members of the public have any questions on these?
On the consistency review of these three items that have been discussed here. Raise your hand. And I did unmute you. So if you have any questions, you could unmute or just raise your hand. No one Madam Chair. Okay. Close to the public. Is there a motion from the board, please? Motion. Councilwoman Cahill. Do I have a second? Second. Reverand Kenney. Roll call please. Mayor Wahler? Yes. Councilwoman Cahill. Yes. Miss Corcoran. Yes.
Reverend Kenney. Yes. Mr. Adkins. Yes. Mister Foster. Yes. Mr. Ahammed. Yes. Mr. Echevarria. Yes. And Madam chair. Yes. And again, Madam Chair, because of the time constraints the state has placed us under. I took the liberty of preparing a resolution, indicating the consistency of review and concurrence with adoption of the resolution for the three properties in question. Okay. Who wants to put forth that resolution?
Can I get a. Reverand Kenney I want to adopt the resolution. That set forth in regards to where, item 13. I am number 13, 11, 11, 12 and 13. 11, 12 and 13, I'm sorry, 11, 12 and 13. 13 inclusive together. For consistency review. And I get a second. I second it. Like roll call. Mayor Wahler? Yes. Councilwoman Cahill. Yes.
Miss Corcoran. Yes. Reverend Kenney. Yes. Mister Adkins. Yes. Mister Foster. Yes. Mr. Ahammed. Yes. Yes. Mr. Echevarria. Yes. And Madam chair. Yes. Okay. Item number 14. Discussion area and native redevelopment study on block 1901. In Piscataway Township on 44 Stelton Road. But only Mr. Clarkin is here. Madam chair to discuss his report. Yes. Good evening. Members of the board.
Thank you, Tom, for the introduction. I'm James Clarkin of 4site planning Council first. And then your board directed me to put together this study for block 1901, lot 64.01, dated March 26th of this year. So I will be guiding you through my report and its findings. And happy to take any questions at the end. So you all may know this property, or better know this property is 44 Stelton road. It is where the former New Market School, is located.
And I'm going to skip to the end of my report just for a, so. Right for a map just to orient us all of where we're talking about. So in the light blue box is the subject property that I investigated. I'm pretty sure most of you are very aware of this property. It's pretty well known in the township. And it's also come before this board for, site plan reviews for several projects. So as you can see, two structures on there. You have a roughly 10,000 square foot strip commercial built, building built in the 1980s.
That's on the south side a lot. And then on the north side, it's like I said, the New Market School or the former Newmarket School. That was in the process of being, rehabbed into an office use. But I will get into that. As you can see. New Market Park is directly adjacent to our property. Pretty much dominated by residential neighborhoods, all surrounding the property. And then, as you all know, there is a small commercial corridor along Stelton Avenue that is nearby. So, jump back up. So I was able to visit the site on February 26th of this year,
and collected some photographs and I do my typical due diligence of, your zoning and building records, police records, ownership, all that good stuff. In preparation for this, study. So, with that, I will get into a little background. I'll try to be brief, because, like I said, I'm pretty sure you all are very familiar with this. So it's actually in your, business professional zone, DP2. And it covers the land area of about 3.43 acres. I already touched on the buildings that are on there.
But just for the record, the former Newmarket School is roughly total of 63,460 square feet, and that includes a 13,500 square foot addition on the rear of the building. That I believe your board actually may have been. I can't recall if it's this board of the zoning board, but one of your boards approved that project. Upon revisiting those, it does not appear any of the uses, approved by the zoning. Oh, sorry. You know, I skipped the set in 2018. Sorry. I'll throw it out right now.
I see it. In 2016, your board approved the the former Newmarket School project. So that was ten years ago. And as you'll see in the photographs, there was not much progress made. In 2018, the zoning board granted approvals for the existing strip mall. So that's where they approved a pizzeria, a bakery and a diner as tenants. Then again, in 2021, they came back to create an approval for a restaurant. In the same strip mall building. So when I did my site visit, none of those uses were in operation or looked like they were anywhere near complete.
And I can say the same about the new former or the former Newmarket School. Some construction was done, but it was nowhere near complete. In terms of tenants, the strip mall did have one tenant is Provident Bank. The occupy about a little less than 3000 square ft. But that was the only tenant in that building. As for the former school, there were no tenants active upon my visit. However, I learned that the post office did have a small 768 square foot space that they had to vacate due to mold.
And so I'll get into those details in a little bit. So that's really a, overview. I did want to note that when I reviewed some of the police records of the month, there were some, there were some mostly about post office, patrons that may have complained or something along those lines, but I did find one where young kids were exploring the construction zone. Which is obviously unsafe to the community. So I do want to flag that in, in terms of environmental.
I reviewed the study area and did not find anything of significant, environmental value or of environmental concern. No wetlands. As you know, you guys approve projects. There's been nothing found. So I don't think there's any environmental reviews. I already kind of went over surrounding land uses, so I won't dive into that again. I do want to touch on the master plan perspective. So as I mentioned, the strip mall was built in the 1980s. The school was actually originally built in the 1920s. And then between those years, mostly in the 50s.
In the 60s, the residential neighborhoods were developed. So you could definitely say that this is an older part of the township that can benefit from reuse and redevelopment efforts. So continue on to my report. Page seven just lists all the statutory criteria that is found in the redevelopment law. No need to really go over that. And before I dive into the pictures of my site visit, I just want to know a couple of things. Mainly that it seems from doing some due diligence that the Covid 19 pandemic really caused some definite delays for construction.
For both projects. I did find some construction code violations, particularly for the school where they had to redo the electrical and it basically had to be ripped out. And unfortunately, I think all those things combined to cause financial issues because it was found out that the former school was the subject of a strict foreclosure. So basically that meant that to avoid foreclosure, the former owner handed over the deed to the bank. So they now have ownership and control of the property. And then I observed significant vacancies,
over 70%, unoccupied space in both buildings on average. And that these conditions have persisted for about two years. So now I will go into the photographs. So these are facade photos. Top is the strip mall, the commercial building. Bottom is the facade of the new school. Sorry. Former Newmarket School. Sorry I keep saying that. So you can see they definitely did some work. But the construction fencing still up. They did some windows.
But once you. And then this kind of really shows the, rear addition that was approved all the way back in 2016. So most of the exterior is done. But as you're about to see, the interior is not. So, definitely not fit for tenants for an office use building. On the bottom photo, you can see that they had to get rid of the drywall, probably to rip out all the electrical that was not up to code. And never were able to replace it. The top is, an interior photograph of the school that I guess just never got touched.
This looks like it's, you know, no construction occurred here, but, photos of broken window. Unclear if that was vandalism or someone trying to enter. Either way, definitely an unsafe condition for the community. And, you know, the top photo is pretty clear. You know, they stored materials here. They seized construction. They just couldn't get very far. And had to ultimately abandoned project. And up top here is the former post office space. But as I mentioned, they were not there. So that concludes the photographs for the former school.
Now I'm going to move on to the commercial building where you have one tenant, but the remainder of it, about 70%, was being constructed for that restaurant use that the zoning board approved back in 2018. So, as you can tell also, in a state of construction, materials, unfinished walls, you know, pictures tell the story for me. So overall, I think the conditions of the photographs clearly show a majority of the buildings being substandard, unsafe, not tenant. Abel. Definitely vacant and abandoned and possibly discontinued.
And I think these conditions are clearly detrimental to the township. So just to put a bow on this. I'm going to touch on the exact criteria of the law that I feel the conditions, match to. So the first is the A criteria. I won't read the entire thing, but it's basically saying the generality of buildings are substandard, unsafe, dilapidated, or really in a condition that's unwholesome to living or working conditions. I think without a doubt, we could definitely say that no tenant could occupy the either the former Newmarket School
or the restaurant space in the commercial building. You know, just just the way they are, they're unfinished spaces, so they're substandard and unsafe. And as I mentioned, there are records of young residents, entering into those unfinished construction sites which is whatever it's for. It's it's definitely an unsafe activity for the community. And then the B criteria, is more related to the discontinuance of use, of a commercial building or a shopping mall or an office park, which these two uses definitely, are consistent with.
But the keyword is the significant vacancies of such buildings. So, I'm going to put some statistics before you. So as I mentioned, let's start with the small, commercial building. One tenant occupying 2900 square ft out of a total of about 10,400 square ft. So that gives you an unoccupied rate of 73%. Almost three quarters is unoccupied. And it's been that way for over two years. So I definitely think I believe that's both significant and meets the criteria of the B criteria.
For being, excuse me, have it having a significant vacancy. And then I would pose the same exact same argument argument for the former Newmarket School, because that has a total of 63,000 square feet give or take. And when the post office was there, they only occupied a measly 768 square ft So that's pretty much a 99% vacancy. Yeah. Vacancy rate or unoccupied state. And since they moved out to to the molds, probably from the unfinished condition
of the construction that moved to 100% in the last couple of months. And then finally, I think you could make an argument that because of the foreclosure status of the former school, you could argue that there is an an abandonment, in terms of the project they proposed to your board ten years ago. That they're obviously not going to be able to finish. And then finally, the H criteria is the smart planning criteria. I think that since this is part of a vibrant existing residential neighborhood
with a commercial corridor, this could definitely be redeveloped in a smart way to have walkability. You know, a sense of place for community. So I definitely think that this criteria can also apply. So, in conclusion, I recommend that the Piscataway Township Planning Board finds, that this study is a non condemnation area in need of redevelopment based on the fact that it meets criteria A, B and H of the law. I'm happy to take any questions because I know I went over a lot of statistics and numbers, but, that is my recommendation to the board.
Members of the board. Do we have any questions. Madam chair? Councilman Cahill? Yes. Go ahead Councilwoman Cahill. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Clarkin could you remind the board. The the the zoning that's in that area right now? Sure. But just want to remind the board, as they're thinking about it. Definitely. So it's in what's called the BP-2, which is business professionalism. So really zoned for office strip commercial.
Exactly what was trying to be, operating there. We don't have any option though, to maybe incorporate. I know that there are some apartments going across the street. I mean, could this be like residential and retail? Does that qualify in our zoning? So I think that is, definitely a tool in your toolbox for the redevelopment plan is that you can work with every developer on what you feel is an appropriate redevelopment use. So the redevelopment has the power to supersede your existing zoning code.
So yes, I think that is definitely a possibility. And Jimmy, if I may, Gabby it’s Dawn Corcoran. this is one of the sites that is in our, amended housing Element share plan as well. Thank you. Dawn. for your Madam chair, the housing. Go ahead. Mayor. I just want. To interject real. Quickly. This has. Been a bone of contention for this. Site, with a lot. Of the neighbors in the area for at least a decade and a half. Because of the deplorable condition.
Of the. Property. More than likely, whatever. Happens, I suspect that the building will be demoed. In its entirety. Because of the condition of it. So. I hate to see it go, but it is what it is. I remember as a child, learning. My first home and my first basketball clinic there. Back in the very late 60s. So, it was an icon then. But you know what? It's time. And, you know, the neighborhood has suffered because the. Condition of. That.
And it's not fair to. The neighborhood that this continued seeing the condition out there. So, if it is, seems to be eligible for, demolition, then why would we go through the process of, evaluating it for redevelopment? I believe that, I mean, as Jim indicated, the designation of the area needed redevelopment opens up kind of the toolbox of development opportunities, for a developer who's actually going to do something as opposed to,
as the mayor has indicated, that, you know, it's in foreclosure now. So it gives a lot more development tools to get something done there as opposed to just sitting in its current state. So this is a positive to advance something positive taking place there. Right now the bank owns it. Yeah. And also they were looking at that property. They're trying they were trying to determine whether or not it could be salvaged. Or is it, you know, as so much time passed and, you know, it's not the code is it doesn't have to come down.
So there was also a back and forth as to what was actually going to be done with the old school. Yeah, because I was on the board and in 2016 when it was originally submitted for redevelopment, and it's in worse condition than it was originally. So we're going seems like we're going back through that same routine again, through that same process again. Okay. Let's if are there any more questions? Alright. Well, Madam Chair, I would just make a comment to your comments. Is that, opening up to the ability to the availability Dawn pointed out,
we want to include this in our affordable housing plan. Is, you know, listen, my husband and I own our home, but a lot of young people with the apartment and potentially, you know, retail, I think it's, a great part of our town to really be paying close attention to, to be able to hopefully add some additional, you know, apartments, anything like that where folks can walk out of their apartment, walk down the street, get a cup of coffee. It's it's definitely something that I hope,
that the whoever the developer is would be looking at that housing and I would be definitely recommending that as, you know, council person. You know, I can see it as a good site for housing, multiple use housing. I think it's a wonderful site for that purpose. And I agree with you in that point. But we have to go through this process for first, in order to see what comes out of it. I guess. And just, just put on the record as well. Councilwoman, I agree with you 100%. Someone who lives that close to Stelton.
I would love to see that mix use of. That property. Yeah. I mean, honestly, that whole strip, we could really could be such a lovely gem in our town if we really start looking at that. It's just way more than what it is now. Madam chair, just by way of historical thing, when I was. Growing up. As a kid in town, that was the. Downtown. Business area of Piscataway. Other than downtown. New Brunswick to. Go, you either went to New Brunswick. Or Plainfield to get your clothes or whatever, but there was a small, thriving. Business community in that section of Stelton Road right there.
Yeah, yeah. Okay. Can we should we open it up to the public now? If you finished discussion it from the board. Members of the public. Oh, Senator Smith. So I'm a member. I'm speaking as a member of the public. Oh, okay. Member of the public. Okay, Bob. Absolutely. Redevelopment is absolutely appropriate for this site, but I wanted to mention two things inside the building. There are some plaques talking about the where what this was historically, who built it,
who were the officials involved that many, many years ago? I'd like to suggest that in your plan for the affordable housing, that there might be a sentence installed in there, that the plaques are saved and given, you know, a prominent location in, in the the new affordable housing. And likewise, that building, was the home for many years of a postal substation. And the people on the northern end of the town really liked that, you know, that can drop.
They didn't have to go to the center of the town to drop off mail or get a the right package, your postage. So the other suggestion I'd like to make is that there be an effort made to see if we can get the post the Piscataway post office to put a postal substation in that location would be. It would be very nice for the people who just. Recently left so we could get it back. Yeah, well, it's a dangerous building, so yeah. Yeah, I mean that in that area or near that site when it's rehabilitated. Absolutely. And that's my $0.02. Okay.
Members of the public, you've heard our discussion. Anyone in the public like to add something to the discussion or ask any questions? Would you please indicate so by raising your hand by show of hands? No one madam chair. Okay. Thank you. Then it's closed to the public. Members of the board, if you, have no further discussion with someone, like to make a motion, please. Madam chair, Councilwoman Cahill make a motion. That we, I guess this is to recommend, Mr. Barlow to have the area in need of redevelopment sent back to the council.
Yes. Okay. Do I have a second? I second it. Thank you. Yes, Councilwoman. The designated in a non condemnation area need a redevelopment. Sorry, I had my thing on mute. All right. And it's been seconded. By whom? Who? Second, Mr. Foster. Oh, Mr. Foster, thank you. Roll call. Please. Mayor Wahler? Yes. Councilwoman Cahill. Yes. Miss Corcoran. Yes. Reverend Kenney. Yes. Mister Atkins. Yes. Mister F oster.
Yes. Mr. Ahammed. Yes. Mr. Echevarria. Yes. And Madam Chair. Yes, Madam chair. I did take the liberty of preparing a resolution. Yes you did. I'm sure if someone would like to move the resolution. And we have someone to move the resolution, please. So moved, madam chair. Reverend Kenney. Thank you. Do I have a second? I cannot, I second. Thank you. roll call moving the resolution to area resolution. Mayor Wahler? yes. Sorry, madam chair. Councilwoman Cahill.
Yes. Miss Corcoran. Yes. Reverend Kenney. Yes. Mister Atkins. Yes. Mister Foster. Yes. Mr. Ahammed. Yes. Mr. Echevarria. Yes. And Madam Chair. Yes. All right. Thank you very much. And I will say to, talk on to, Senator Smith's point during my site visit I definitely saw some boxes of old memorabilia and even old school chairs. So even if the board of Ed wants to take a walk through and grab some things for memory sake. Might be the time now. Yeah. But to put it aside the board.
We'll make sure that it gets to the museum at least. Yeah. All right. Take care. Item number 1525 PB 1516 slash 16 v Brigadier, LLC. Preliminary and final site plan. Madam. Chair. Bob Smith, I'm a licensed attorney in the state of New Jersey, and I'm here tonight. Representing, Brigadier LLC. The property is located at 136 Stelton Road. It used to be the home of Forever Flowers.
Which was a nice flower store. And as a matter of fact, I am mature enough to admit that I did the approval for Forever Flowers. Okay. My recollection is that before Forever Flowers, it was, I think a dress shop, but I'm not 100% sure. I'm trying to remember driving down Stelton Road and what was there, but the building's been there for a long time. It actually, is referenced on the 1925
tax map of Newmarket Terrace. And the reason I mention that is you got a property with the building that's been there, not forever, but close to forever. And as a result, it was built when we had different zoning ordinances. And as a result, it's it's, it has some issues related to the fact that it was up before we had a zoning ordinance. So what what Brigadier is seeking tonight, and it's a limited liability corporation. They want to, you know, utilize the existing commercial building at 136
Stelton Road block, 1903, lot 7.01, which is located in the C zone to operate at Krauszer's convenience store The subject property is an existing commercial one containing a vacant commercial building, which was previously used as a flower shop until the previous owners retired and sold the property. My client proposes a convenience store, which is consistent with the use in the c zone. Hence, we're not in front of the zoning, but we're in front of the planning board. The applicant,
proposes and intends to use the building as it's in its existing structure, which, by the way, was the same as the flower shop. Pretty much, as is with an interior out for the Krauszer's Additionally, some exterior site work is proposed to remove existing parking spaces that are in the township's right of way and to relocate them in the rear yard of the lot. Installation of curbs, sidewalks, conduits, along the property frontage, as per township recommendations are also proposed and should be shown on our, map.
We're asking for, believe it or not, 14 bulk variances as I repeat the bulk variance to you. I will say one word over and over and over again, and that is existing there existing conditions probably which were approved in the in the earlier application, but obviously it was approved for the flower shop, approved with these, dimensions etc.. So just for the record, the bulk variance relief we're seeking
is lot area was 7500ft is required and we have 7490 square ft existing lot with where 75ft is required and 49.98ft is existing lot frontage, where 75ft is required and 49.98ft is existing front yard setback, where 25ft is required. And 10.21ft is existing on Woodrow
Avenue, and 19.23ft is existing on Stelton Road. Side yard setback where 8 feet is required and 0.5 half a foot is existing. And that's at the location of the refrigerator. Number six accessory structure, front yard setback where 60ft is required and 36.5ft is existing. That's at the shed location. Parking number seven. Parking partially located in the township, right of way where no encroachments are permitted.
And it's an existing condition. Number eight parking located within 50ft of a residential zone where no parking is permitted and parking is existing. Number nine building freestanding sign and parking located in a side triangle where no structure is permitted. Again, an existing condition number ten. Parking located in the front yard area within ten feet of the street line. Existing condition number 11. More than half of the required parking is located in the front yard.
Existing condition number 12. Loading area and front yard parking shall be buffered from view and no buffer is existing. Number 13 off street parking spaces where 11 spaces are required and ten spaces are existing. And we're going to you're going to see that we have moved the parking in cooperation with the township's recommendations. We have ten now. And we will remain with ten, but it's still one short of the 11 required.
Number. I think I made number 14. Freestanding signs shall not be located within 25ft from the street Street line, and the sign is located 1.5ft from the street line and existing condition. So everything that you see on this list is existing and had gone through. We believe the zoning board in in 2011 or 2012, one of those two dates, I think 2011. It's our intention tonight to present two witnesses. First, the, applicant.
His name is Bavia Patel, and he is the, managing member of Brigadier LLC. And he's going to describe what he'd like to do with the facility. And secondly, our engineer and planner, he has both titles, and that's, James Masternie PEPP We have received staff reports, professional staff reports, including the township staff report, revised March 4th, 2026, and the CME review, number two, dated March 5th, 2006.
With your indulgence, Madam Chairman, I'd like to call Mr. Bavia Patel to be sworn so that you can give testimony. You may proceed. Hello. Sir. If you could state your name. Spell your last name and give us your professional address. Please. My name is Bhabya Patel. My last name is Patel. My address is nine Winslow Road, Edison, new Jersey, 08837.
I'm sorry. Nine Vince? Winslow. How do you spell that? W I n s l o w. O when Winslow in Edison. New Jersey. Okay. can you raise your right hand? You swear? The testimony I'll give before this board will be the whole truth? Yes. I'll do. Your witness, Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Barlow. Mr. Patel, what is your role in Brigadier LLC? How long have you been in the convenience store business?
Convenience business? More than, like, two and a half years to two years. And I'm the managing director to take care of Krauszer's store. Okay, so you're the managing member of Brigadier, LLC? Yes. You. Yes. Okay. Why did you choose this location for your proposed Krauszer's store? So the Piscataway is a big opportunity for the big and new businesses for commercial. And I saw, Stelton Rd is one of the busiest for. And there is many commercial business over there.
So I get the opportunity to get the building without changing any exterior and interior, and we can show the nearby people and community what they needed. That's why. Okay, this is a little bit like, Maybe 50 years ago when you would have a store that you can walk to as well as those driving by. But it's a nice amenity for the neighborhood in which you're located, correct? Yes. Thank you. What are your proposed hours of operation?
Morning. 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. at night. Okay. And how many employees will be, in the store during those hours? Two employees. So, is that one employee per shift and then a second managerial person coming in? That's true. Okay, and then the managerial person is mainly there for paperwork. Correct? That's true. All right, so I don't imagine your managers you're going to be sitting there for eight hours.
They'll do whatever paperwork they have to do and leave. Correct. Correct. So most of the time it will be one staffer at the Krauszer’s Correct? Yes, sir. Okay. I'm sure you received deliveries. Tell us, what are your anticipated deliveries? So basically, this is like, we almost managed to. We will get by ourself, but there is a small truck will be coming like a Frito Lay or something. Might be monthly, two times or two weeks.
Leave one time. So let me make sure I understand that you have a partner. You and your partner will buy some of the stuff that's sold in your Krauszer’s on a wholesale basis, and then selling it, retail you'll be bringing in by your personal vehicle. Correct. That's true. All right. And then you do have some vendors who have their normal box trucks, and they will be coming by with some of their, food stuffs. That's true. Okay. The,
how long do the deliveries take. Is might be five minutes or maximum ten minutes. They have to just drop the stuff and leave. That's it. Okay. And how long do your customers stay in the store? A max 4 to 5 minutes. Okay. They're stopping in for the quarter. Milk with that? Yeah. We have just gone to serve. Yeah. Okay. And, you. There is an external refrigerator on site. Do you plan to keep it?
If possible, we can use it for our store. Okay. Actually, I think that pretty much is what we wanted to ask from you. So Mr. Patel is available to the board for the request. Members of the board. Do you have any questions for this witness? Madam Chair. Miss Councilwoman Cahill. Thank you. I'm sorry, I thought I heard an echo. Thank you so much, for, those answers.
A quick question just to get back to the box truck delivery. So, the vendors who you anticipate coming to make those deliveries is up for, like, soda drinks. That's sometimes. Yes, the Frito-Lay truck comes, and if they're short hours, something like that, they can come and drop it. Right. And same for Coca-Cola or Pepsi. Yes. Okay. So the I say this because I used to work for Coca Cola. So your delivery drivers I know for sometimes small scale,
some of them were required to merchandise the product. You're saying they are not doing that? Your employee one employee will be doing that. Or two employees? Yes. One I was scheduled for delivery when I was there, so I, me and the one employee can help to figure it out. All this stuff. Okay, so the delivery is just a drop off. You sign for the product, they wheel it in. And, I'm assuming that they're going to be parking on that side street
while that happens and or what times, will your deliveries be? I mean, I don't think like the soda people deliver overnight or anything like that. That's during regular business hours. Correct. Sometimes if you they give you time, if they say you want to call during the morning time, it's not too much busy timing, then. Yeah, we can do in the morning time to. I think that was all my question is really mostly going to be around, like the length of time a box truck might be parked on the side street. If there's no room for parking in the lot.
Madam chair? Yes. I have. Mr., Barry. Reverand Kenney, you may ask you a question. All right. Thank you, Mr. Patel. In regards to your stores, this is a convenience store. Like a convenience store. Or is it a grocery store? What type of store is it? It's Krauszer’s food store. Small Store? Yes. Okay. All right. Because the reason I'm asking that for traffic wise, something really if if those tractor trailers, will they be able to get on that side street
because that Stelton road is a busy road and you know, every guy on the road is, a certain hours. It's it's not conducive to where your store is and it's not going to be a five minute delivery. That's where you're heard. Ten minutes. Let me be help there and. Get your order. Let me be helpful. Are there any tractor trailer deliveries? Oh, I know. Senator Smith. I I'm aware of tractor trailers, and what they do was
I was a manager for a tractor trailer company for many, many years. You know, prior for my prior job. And you, you know, depends on what your orders on those streets. Those are like, some of them go 28 to 45ft in. Jim, who's, delivered to him. That's why I'm saying the width of it on that on that street. That's that's the question I asked. So that let's make sure that we answer it thoroughly. You in your experience, you've been doing this for three years at various Krauszer’s.
I assume Krauszer’s or some other convenience store or any of those facilities using tractor trailers for delivering. We never have the bigger truck. Right. And on the box trucks, they have worst cases in the world. How many box truck deliveries? Worst day would you anticipate coming to the store? So basically we if something like that maximum two times they're coming and that's not too big, they can put it on the back side. So at the possibility we have a back parking lot. So at the back we can tell the people that they can come in the morning time
and they can drop the truck in the behind so they don't discomfort on the front. Okay. Well that's part of it. But, Yes, Krauszer’s do have. Because I. Lived in the area. And I know it's out there. We had a Krauszer’s. The stores that closed up, and they delivered whatever they wanted. They had tractor trailers. I lived in that area. Okay. That's the question. It satisfies. It's okay with me, but I'm just, Because this is a busy corridor.
There. Any other. Madam Chair. Or any other board members have questions of this witness? I do. Okay. Who's who's who said the public statements. Oh, Mr. Atkins. Just wanted for the record, Mr. Adkins. Go ahead. Yeah. I have a question about the parking. It says, I'm reading that parking is going to be in the front. The front is on Stelton. There's no no parking in the front. Okay, so the parking. Is going to be on the side, and you're going to build the sidewalk? Yes. Was that Woodrow?
Yes. We will build the sidewalk and we will move the parking on the behind on the rear. It's still going to be room for parking with with sidewalk and. Buffering. Yes, sir. And, Mr. Atkins, if I may, the, the property is a corner lot. That's why we identified it as front yard parking. Because technically, although it is their side yard, it is also considered a front yard. I was going to say, you know, we can talk more about this, I guess, when the engineer comes out. But we still do have to take care of that striping within the right away and so forth. But that that's more a question.
That's more of a discussion with your engineer. So thank you. So I'm any other questions. You finished Miss Corcoran. Yeah. Okay. If there are no more questions from the board, I'll open it up to the public. Members of the public. You've heard the testimony of this witness. If you have any questions, you may let us know by waving your hand. And you can do so at this time. Or unmuting. Okay. No one, Madam Chair. Okay. Thank you. Close to the public. This is. Appropriate.
I'll call our range engineer at this time. Yes. We're finished with, this witness. You can call your next witness. Mr.. Thank you. I'd ask that. Jim. Mastronardy professional planner be called and sworn so that you can give testimony. Okay, so let me call. And, Mr. Mastronardy could you state your name? Spell your last name for the record and give us your professional. Address, please. James Mastronardy, [spelling name]
I'm an 18 Malvern Drive Clark, New Jersey. Raise your right hand. This is where the testimony give before. This would be the whole truth. Yes I do. Your witness, Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Barlow. Mr. Mastronardy, by whom are you employed, and in what capacity? I'm mostly self-employed as a professional, as an engineer and professional planner. Okay. Can you give the board your qualifications as an engineer and also as a planner?
To. You want me to give them? Yes, please. Oh, okay. Well, I got my professional engineer's license and professional planners license in 1989, and I've been continuously, validated by the board every year since. Okay. And have you done planning and zoning applications in various towns in New Jersey. Throughout New Jersey. Okay. Give a couple of examples, if you don't mind. Besides, I've appeared before, Piscataway, about five years ago. Four years ago.
And as well as Middlesex, many towns and and most counties. Union, Essex, Bergen, Hudson, Somerset, you know. Throughout. And I'm trying to ask that Mr. Mastronardy be admitted. It's his credentials are acceptable to the board. Thank you so much. So, the would you describe the plans that you prepared for this application? I titled my plans supplementary site plan because the, surveyor at Tennyson,
prepared a basic site plan. My site plan addresses mostly the parking and, the improvements, the sidewalk curb, the, there's a conduit proposed, you know, along both Stelton and Woodrow and, and the drainage as well. Okay. And did you work with the township with regard to the parking spaces? And then and as a result of that, did you relocate the parking spaces behind the building? Yes. The existing parking spaces, whether illegal or not.
Run right across the, property line the with Woodrow. There's no currently no sidewalk there. And the five spaces there are actually a little more than half way over the property line, into the Woodrow Avenue right of way. We're taking away all those five spaces and placing them into the rear so that, you know, because not only are those spaces possibly illegal and over the property line,
but they actually are in the site triangle, which, between, you know, Woodrow and Stelton. And so it's a much better, you know, layout and, much safer layout. Great. And you did this working with the town professionals, correct? Correct. Right. And just for the record, and I'll get Mr. Patel back on if you want to hear. We didn't not do any in the parking when they bought the property. Some additional parking had been added since the 2011 approval.
Where in they didn't go before your boards. So. But it's not a shame on Mr. Patel. He didn't do it. He didn't do anything wrong. Prior property owner or someone took it upon themselves to add these parking spaces in the township. Right of way. So one good thing about the application, among other good things, is that you're correcting a problem that was not created by them. So were we able to provide again to this property,
the ten spaces that had been previously approved again by variance, allowing a one space shortage. So we are providing, ten spaces. If we include the five spaces that there were previously, five spaces. Right. And the ones that are right over the into the right of way were, were actually delineated with, you know, delineated spaces. Again, we're getting rid of all those. And we have ten spaces where I believe 11 is required. However, and that was the variance received, by the way, in 2011,
just FYI. Right. There is the possibility, of course, to park along the Woodrow Avenue curb. Because there are at least two spaces available there. It's a 50ft right of way. You know, someone would have to come into the parking area and back out, regardless of whether they're parking in that, parking area to the rear. And then come out Woodrow towards Selton anyway. And should they, you know, in first enter
the parking area and see there's no spaces they can back out and possibly park right along the curb of Woodrow. It. So so, Jim, is your point that in many ways, this application is superior to the Forever Flower's application because in effect, by removing the parking on the side, on the Woodrow side, you've now allowed for some on street parking that wasn't possible before. Correct. And we're, constructing full height curb there. Where? Where now there's a fully depressed curb.
So, Yes, that creates two more spaces. So in actuality, if you include those spaces, then we have satisfied the technically, you know, the technical requirement of the ordinance. Got it. So, my understanding is that on the plan, there is a concrete pad that's going to be used in the dumpster enclosure. And you have a specific comment to make about the thickness of the concrete of the pad. Is that true? And what is.
There was a comment from the, engineering division that the dumpster patch of the eight inches. That's absolutely not necessary. There's no truck that will be coming up onto that pad. Four inches would be enough. Four inch thick pad will be more than enough for a small dumpster or, however, the garbage is, contained. So you're recommending that to the board? Yes. Okay. Tell us about the existing
external refrigerator. I can't really speak to that. Well, you heard the car client's testimony that they plan to use it in their business, correct? Yes. And that doesn't create any site plan problems. No, no, no, there's a fence right along there. Okay. Based on the size of the line and the existing asphalt, are any additional stormwater measures needed? That remains to be seen. There were no comments from the engineering division
regarding the stormwater. And I guess, Joe is is, putting it off? To future to be to to for any comments. I don't propose any there's an increase of approximately 1000, close to 1200ft² of impervious area in the back. If the engineering looks at and says, well, we'd like a seepage pit in there. I can design a seepage pit. As of right now, I'm just showing the water entering,
from the from the parking area and back to Woodrow Avenue and then would travel, towards Stelon along the curb. So it. Is there's existing stormwater system work. Yes. There's no there have been no complaints. The stormwater travels along the curb to the nearest, catch basins. And right now, is, as far as I know, are no complaints. But again, that's for the engineering division to make its comment on. It wasn't commented on in the engineering review letter, and I thought it would be, but, that's still an outstanding item, actually.
But Mr. Smith perhaps is a potential condition of approval with the applicant. Agree to work with Mr. Herrera. With regards to any stormwater issues he identified. Mr. Patel, does that work for you? Okay. So the answer is yes. Okay. Yes. All right. The conduits that the township is requiring on the property frontage. My understanding is that you're we're also being asked by the town
to install curbs and sidewalks where required. And, my understanding as well is that the town wants these noted on the plan. Do we have any objection to that? No. All right. And Mr.. Mr. Mastronardy, you have no problem revising the plans accordingly. No problem. All right. And then, finally, there is no proposal for additional lighting. You already have lighting on the on the property. To in your professional opinion, Mr. Mastronardy, is that lighting sufficient for this project?
I believe so. And how about landscaping? What are we doing in the area of landscaping? We're proposing seven or provides technical American over 80 at the back, beyond the the curb, curb at the back of the lot, to the rear to buffer along with the fence to buffer, the adjacent, residents, residents. All right. That that concludes his testimony concerning engineering. I'm going to flip him into the planner mode.
If that's okay, Madam chair. Yes. That's fine. I don't think we need to have a separate questioning, Session. Okay. So if you would, putting on your hat as a licensed professional planner. You you've heard me list 14 existing bulk variances. What do you have to say about as a licensed professional planner that would, give the board the justification necessary to say yes to those bulk variances? Again, as you mentioned, the it's it's been
the building has been there for a long time. None of the bulk variances are extreme unless you want to consider the lot width, to be, significantly less than required. But the building itself is in scale with the property itself. So I see absolutely no problems with any of those bulk variances. Okay. Anything else you want to add as a as a planner? Excuse me. Anything else you want to add as a planner? Well, as far as the use,
as it's been mentioned before, this is a commercial corridor. There's many different businesses up and down Stelton between Old New Brunswick Road and Lakeview and including, dry cleaners, pizzeria and print shop. Professional offices, restaurants to banks. So, I think the use is is interesting. There is one a quick check about three blocks away across from the library. But, I think it can fill a void.
So, I don't know, I think the use is fine. And, I've, I think it it can fit in, and we're only improving the property again. Said an engineer and saying we were approving the property, putting a sidewalk and curbing, you know, we were, making the parking much better and much, much better situation. And, you know, right now the building is not being used. And, I think, use as a Krauszer’s could be a good use for the for the, the general area. Madam chair, Mr.
Mastronardy is, is complete in his testimony. He's available either as an engineer or a professional player to your board for questions. Mr. Smith. Just real quick. Could could Mr.. Mastronardy discuss the positive and negative criteria in terms of the granting of the variances, even though they're preexisting, just to get some planning testimony on as to the criteria? Sure. Mr. Mastronardy? Well, I mean, I've mentioned the positive criteria.
As through not not labeling, but, positive criteria is that it fills, a possible void in the area providing, a small need. As you know, for, for, small, milk and, whatever they're selling in Krauszer’s in small items of packaged items and, and, cold items, etc.. Although I understand that it won't have any, you know, food preparation in the building. So it's a, it's a quick and in and out, easily,
you know, in and out with the parking down. Come down, Woodrow. Boom in. You're not, as far as the negative criteria, it's not, interfering with the neighborhood. The residences in the neighborhood going back down, Woodrow. Because they come in, they go along. They go, 150ft. Come in, go out, and they're back to Stelton Avenue. Let me let me put it this way. If, the the variances which are requested, which are all existing conditions, can they be granted without causing substantial detriment to the public good?
And when if there's a variance that are granted, they will not substantially impair the intent. And purpose and purpose of the municipal zoning plan. And is that a fair statement? Correct, yes. Okay. And, on the other side of the relief, we have provided proofs that satisfy the hardship criteria doing on this property that's been there for ever. Doing more than is already proposed
only creates additional variances, and makes the property less than it, less conforming than it currently is. So. And the purpose of the municipal land use law are promoted by the requested variances for existing conditions. And then the improvement of the parking, so that there's additional possible parking. And we're getting off the township's right of way. Is that not true? True. Okay. does that work for you?
Yeah. Thank you. So, Mister Mastronardy is available. Thank you. First of all, Mastronardy. I there had been testimony that there was a refrigerator outside. Is there a lock on that refrigerator? I'm just concerned about the safety of the children in the area. I think I referred to the owner. I, I can't speak to that. All right. Let me get you. Mr. Patel, would you please answer that question? Is a refrigerator accessible from the outside or only from the inside?
Only for the inside. Everything is covered by the fences, you know. Madam Chair, if I if I may, I think that this refrigerator basically acts is attached to the building. That's why that they they have a side yard setback measured from this. It's almost like a room. It's not like a refrigerator sitting outside. Okay. Because the testimony keeps calling into refrigerator. Others confirm that. Okay. Just just. I'm. I'm looking out for safety of anyone on the outside. My my older brother almost died getting locked in the refrigerator in 1953.
I hear you. He got rescued by the superintendent of his building. Okay. All right, so emphasizing it one more time. There is no access from the outside to the refrigerated room. Refrigerator. Correct. That's true. Inside only and under the supervision of your employees. Correct. That's true. Thank you. Members of the board, do you have any questions of Mr.. Mastronardy. Madam chair, if I may. I know this is this is Miss Corcoran. About that.
What do you intend to do with the area that was formerly, where the parking was? I know on the I see how the plan is still designated as asphalt. Okay. Do you intend for it to remain as asphalt, or are you going to see that? Is it going to become a grass area? What? What are we doing with that? As far as I know, it's just going to remain the way it is, which is asphalt. I guess then I'll go back to the applicant. I mean, would you be willing to work with the township's landscape architect to sort of dress that up a bit?
I mean, if you don't have a need for the asphalt should just be restored, perhaps back to a grass area and, you know, just make it a little bit more appealing. Okay. No. Yes. Okay. The other question. The other question I had, I apologize, I'm not sure if you address this or not, but the, the dumpster area, will that be enclosed with a fence? I mean, that's where the recommendation of staff is. Will it have an enclosure? We just want to see a dumpster sitting out there. So I guess I should say the staff is requiring
a dumpster enclosure to agree to that. Okay. Okay. And finally, the, the striping for the handicapped space. It extends beyond the property line. In fact, it looks like it's going right up to the sidewalk. You know, how how are we going to address that? Well, can I pose? It is. Would that be a problem? Because all you wind up with is one 1.5ft at the most of a strip? That's, you know what?
What else would it be? And in order to fit five spaces, we're coming very close to the, fence on the south side. Yeah. So it's just a matter of, you know, and, so, so it's just an IA5 foot. I'll. That's allowed to come up to the sidewalk. It's I don't think there's no vehicle parked in that area, obviously. And so I don't think it's a problem. But, I mean, you know. I mean, it's on. I'm always thinking and then rearrange that. And it's an ADA accessible spot.
Why does it have to bleed over or on the sidewalk? That's a public right of way. They've done they've done, yeoman's work in eliminating most of the stuff that was approved in 88, except for a little striping. I mean, if they go that little extra you aren't. You're eliminating an extra variance, with you taking up space that really is owned by by the township. I mean, that's a technicality. That's, Well, they can't. What is. Yeah. It's a technicality, but I don't understand. Mr. Reiner.
Stan, exactly what your suggestion is. Would you? Well, I mean. Is there is there a way we can just. I mean, move that ADA space where the striping it up on required doesn't go. Tight enough as it is? Can you make another space compact and to get that striping back into this property line. Because you guys have done great work. But this is this is the final five yards here. Well it's just that. Hey, if you if you want to reduce the spaces to eight and a half, I guess that I mean, but yeah. Do we really need to I don't know.
Well, see, this goes into the big picture. There are some new variances or waivers. Council, in all due respect, because you move the parking closer to the, closer to the residences, but you're putting the art of ideas in there. So I think, you know, I'm not testifying for you, but it seems this is a trade off that the board has to realize that this these spots over, in the right of way was approved in 88. You're eliminating them, which is a good thing. So, you know, so so there's some extra variances.
But, you know, this is the trade off here that, the public right of way is basically being, cleared of this, over overhang and making a more rational parking arrangement, except for the striping. Mr. Reiners and so what what are you suggesting? You because you talking about that blacktop area that's going to be seeded over? Are you saying that we sacrifice some of that, like I I'm trying to visualize this. We don't really have a picture to look at. Yeah. And if the if they, you know, I'll ask the engineer if he could put something up.
But what they've done is that like five spots were along the Woodrow frontage and it, you know, oh there was a like a 3 or 4ft overhang into the right of way. This was approved as a variance back in 88. And, and, and council, you know, since you are on that you know this. So what they've done basically and I think working with the township and saying, hey, let's fix this. They've shifted all ten spaces to, you know, almost, in one area,
which creates a couple of variances but eliminates this, this whole, overhang on Woodrow. It makes it more rational, but they have this one little sliver of the ADA spot that they have to have striping on the side for, you know, that that that's regulated that actually overhangs on to the sidewalk, which is not their property. It's the township's property. So all I was suggesting is, can you put that in a spot in a different place and, and just get rid of it? So it's not even just about the striping.
It's actually that the vehicle is going to be parked in that spot. Reverse the striping that they've eliminated, that they've eliminated the vehicle. What they've done is the 80 spot is parallel to Woodrow. Okay. But the striping that has to be next to it, you know, for for the actual. Oh yeah. Yeah yeah yeah. That's the part that overhangs. It's just a striking overhang to the sidewalk foot and swollen sidewalks and conduit, two. Foot. And four inches. So if you eliminate the striping which identifies that spot, it results in one less part.
Yes or no. I'm not saying that. Could you, could you move the ADA spot in another space? That's. Well, no. And I think this one was good. That I think Mr. Mastronardy is saying you can't, but you I mean, you've looked at it carefully. You know, I've. Tried different configurations so it doesn't the more it's a foot and four inches we're talking about. And what do you want to do? Make the nine foot spaces smaller. We could take the four nine foot spaces and gain two feet. And if you want to do that. But is it really necessary? That's all. We're saying. It's necessary.
I think you're hearing from the planner some of the board members, staff. It is necessary, okay, to have a make. We made them 8.5ft wide. If you made them the four other ones, 8.5ft wide, you'd gain two feet. Exactly. And that's what we need. That's okay. So then you would just need doing would they need a variance for the four parking spaces being eight and a half by 18 instead of nine by 18. We can we just make them compact? I mean. It's you can call them compact and I call it a variance, but
I think that's so. So so I put aside a proposal for. The four parking spaces will be eight and a half by 18, and that will allow the striping to come off the right of way. Acceptable, Mr. Smith? But does it solve our ADA problem? Yes, yes, yes, yes. You still have five feet of ADA. It just wouldn't be in the right of way. And you eliminate the variance, which is which. Great. Mr. Mastronardy.
you understand the revision? The the eight half feet wide spaces. We'll make Them eight feet, right? Why not? Okay. All right, so, Mr. Patel, that works for you. Yes. I happened to Mr. Mastronardy we lost him? He disappeared. I have right. He vanished. I think he's figuring out. Oh, maybe I'm. I have to put an object down on the, the camera so you can see.
Okay. All right. Did you have any other comments? Okay. I missed, I'd like to point out, notice I say loading area just beyond the, handicapped space toward the building. I have a loading area there. I'm thinking of maybe if a truck wants to park along the curb and unload, maybe create a, five foot depress curb a curb along Woodrow Avenue so they can roll something in and go directly
into the the door as we see where I have the E ther, that's an entrance for loading They can go directly from the truck through to five foot wide, depressed Curb and Woodrow directly into that door. That's at the. Those they are going to defend that. So, and, you know, we talked about loading before, so we can either pull into the parking area and go through the, the striped area for the handicapped and into the loading area and then into the back of the building
or park along Woodrow Avenue, go through a maybe I can propose a five foot wide, depressed curb. Go right up there as well through the loading area, which I designated on the plan into the, door at the rear where I have an E. You see that? I don't know if if the town understands it. Well. I think we understand that we just the it just came out of the blue because there wasn't a question about so. Right. I just, I just thought I'd mention that.
And that striped area would be used because, I have wheel stops along all the parking there, including the handicapped. I don't know. That, you know, truck that offloads. Where would that, that where would they roll that in? It would be they would be using that striped area. I don't think it's just down on it. Okay, Mr. Mastronardy, I don't think the town is asking for a depression in the curb that you're putting it on the drug. It's not something that the town is looking for you to do. All right? The town is asking for 8.5ft wide spaces.
I know I change the subject a little bit. Yeah, it may. Well, that's not a great idea. If I can make that plain. All right. The town's is saying to us that 8.5ft wide spaces and a revision to the striping, solves this issue. Am I missing it, or is that what you're saying? That's what I'm saying. You're addressing it to Mr. Smith. And I think Miss Corcoran nodded in agreeance to that. And that gets rid of the striping in the right of way. Right. Mr. Patel, you ok with this. Yes.
Okay. Okay. That was the correct answer. So we're going to need to revise before you need to get a revised plan to the town so you can see that it's been done. The, It's impracticable, but we'll do it. Okay. Mr. Smith, any other witnesses or testimony or. Oh, I know we. Were in the middle of questioning, I think. Yeah. Finishing up questioning for the board. We have to open it to the public. Members of the public,
if you have any questions of the final witness, who was, Mr. Mastronardy would you please indicate by raising your hand? Miss Buckley, do you see any, anyone who wants to ask a question? No, Madam Chair. Okay. Close to the public, members of the board. If you have no further questions, but someone like to, propose a motion to accept this application, if that is your desire to.
Okay, so. Let me be a little outrageous. Don't be upset. I'll just. Just say what you have to say, Mr. Smith. Okay? The the gentlemen who are, Brigadier LLC have a. Serious need to get this business up and running. And just FYI background what created the. The nightmare that this has been for them
is not anything they did or anything we did. We did not represent them on the, real estate purchase and whoever represent them on the real estate purchase didn't do, in my opinion, the appropriate due diligence. They knew nothing about these parking spaces being illegal and Dawn did the right thing. When she said, you're on our property, what's going on here? That created, an engineering nightmare and a timing nightmare. Mr. Patel, you you close on this property?
How long ago. Is almost nine months. All right. He's in. We're pleading for mercy here. The mercy is that he needs to to try and get. This business underway. I think Mr. Mastronardy can get a quick plan back to the town. But if there's any way in, in, in your deliberations, and, I don't know, do you have any do you have a, anything beside this, the regular meeting? Do you guys have a second meeting or a TRC meeting
or a site plan meeting or something? We don't have a meeting. We don't have a meeting where action could be taken, Until May. Yes. Yes, that's. Our next meeting is in May. May 13th. Yeah. Well, wouldn't this be in condition of approval? I'm confused. It would be. It would be a condition of approval. Certainly. Our engineer can start working on all of these revisions. That question. I'm trying to find a way to get them able to get a building permit,
get the job done, and get the store open. Does anybody have a constructive suggestion other than waiting until a memorialized resolution on May the 13th? you just said? May 13th. I don't have a constructive one other than Mr. Mastronardy can certainly prepare the plans in keeping with everything that was agreed to, so that once the resolution is adopted, boom! You can go right in because, I mean, the, the, the building department Dawn and everyone's going to need to see plans
that are consistent with the resolution that I haven't put together yet. Right. So you're playing bonds and all of that. And so we have the the approved set of plans. But again, if, you know, certainly feel free to reach out to us while you're making these plan revisions. We can sit down and meet with you to go over some of those things we discussed, you know, for landscaping and things of that nature. But. I certainly appreciate the ask, Mr. Smith, but I don't see a way of. All right, let me try another. How about if we.
First of all, nothing happens until there are plans that are acceptable to the planning department. But at that point, perhaps they could let Mr. Hoff know that the plans are in a correct form, and that they can put in their building permits so they can be reviewed, rather than wait till the night that there's actually a memorialized resolution. I'm trying to save them a couple of weeks. They're getting murdered on the, Mr. Smith, I certainly understand that. I and I feel for your client, but I you're putting the staff in a
in a situation where they're saying plans are compliant with a resolution that doesn't exist when it comes to resolution compliance. I told you, I know, look, it was worth the price of admission, and, you know, for, what I. But I don't think that I think you're you're going to have to, you know, have. All of the normal course. Follow? Normal course. Got it. We but. I understand the reason for the asking. They're in very capable hands with you and your office. Kind of you to say so. In any case, we tried our best.
We would appreciate if you'd go forward. Okay. I'm waiting for a motion from the board. Hello. Breakdown. Yeah, I know I tried to do it, but I got kicked out of the meeting, and then my audio and my video is not working again, so I'll get back in. No. Come on. I am. Back in. My video is not working, but I'll make a motion based upon, the client.
You know, an approval of the application, providing that the client abides by all of, the suggestions that the building department has that, you know, Miss Corcoran has laid out, of course, in terms of, some landscaping in that formerly blacktop area which would have fronted, Stelton Road, the, adjustment of the handicapped parking striping, the adjustment of the the other parking spots to meet that,
and really any of the other stipulations that the, that the professionals that the client have come to agree to at tonight's meeting. I'll make that offer. Councilwoman Cahill. Thank you. Do I have a second? I ask second. Who's that? Oh, I Mike Foster second. Roll call, please. Mayor Wahler? Yes. Councilwoman Cahill. Yes, miss. Corcoran? Yes, Reverend Kenney. Yes, Mr. Adkins? Yes, Mr. Foster?
Yes. Mr. Ahammed. Yes. Mr. Echevarria. Yes. And, Madam Chair. Yes, thank you very much. You have an approval and a resolution. A resolution soon to follow. Miss, just thank you very much for your courtesies. Our next meeting will be. May 13th workshop meeting is April 22nd. Correct? May 13th. Thank you everyone. Have a good rest. Of the motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn.
Motion. All in favor? Thank you, Debbie, and have a wonderful evening. Nice safe drive.