Good evening and welcome. This is a regular meeting of the Princeton Planning Board on Thursday, July 17, 2025. Pursuant to section 13 of the Open Public Meetings Act, adequate notice of the time and place of this meeting has been given by prominently posting the
resolution of regularly scheduled meetings of the Planning Board of Princeton for February 2025 through January 2026. A copy was filed with the clerk of Princeton on January 8th, 2025. Legal notice on the adoption of said
resolution was published in the January 17, 2025 edition of the Princeton packet. Notice of this meeting also has been posted to the municipal website, princetonj.gov/calendar. Notice that all regular and special meetings of the Princeton Planning Board
will be held electronically via Zoom was transmitted to the Princeton packet and the times and was filed with the clerk of Princeton on Tuesday, January 17, 2023. Please note that this meeting is being recorded. During hearings on applications for
development, members of the public will have an opportunity to comment and ask questions. Questions may be asked after an applicant's witnesses have testified. Public comment is heard by the board after an applicant's representatives have finished their presentations and
have been questioned by planning board members and staff. Those wishing to comment orally should virtually raise your hand by clicking on the reactions or raise hand icon when the time comes uh at the bottom of your Zoom screen or
if participating by phone by pressing star9. Oral comments will be taken in the order in which hands were raised. We ask with respect that members of the public express your views in 3 minutes or less. A countdown clock on your screen will
help speakers keep track of time. Please note that speakers who exceed 3 minutes will be interrupted. Inappropriate public comment containing obscenity, hate speech, or relating to matters not before the board will be muted. Miss
Phillip, will you call the role, please? Certainly. Mr. Bodakimer, here. Miss Capazolei here. Mr. Cohen here. Mayor Freda here. Mr. McGawan here. Miss Na here. Mr. O'Donnell
here. Miss Pearl Mutter here. Mr. Taylor here. Miss Wilson Anderson. Thumbs up. You're muted. Okay.
And um Mrs. Wilson here. We have a quorum. Thank you. Um announcements. Um Mr. Leco Justin. Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair, and uh good evening, uh members of the board,
members of the public. Um just a quick announcement. Um you may have heard this already, but um our wonderful planning board secretary, uh Carrie Phillip is retiring at the end of this month um after 31 years with the municipality and the township before it. Um, I'm not
gonna get too sappy here. Uh, but I guess this is sappy enough for me. But, um, I'll just say in the six years, six and a half years, um, that I've known Carrie, uh, she's shown time and time again how much she cares about this board, this town, and its residents. Um,
so I would just like to thank her once again for her service to Princeton. Um, for board members, we sent out information for a retirement lunchon to be held at 400 Witherspoon at the end of the month. Um, and I hope you all can attend. You're here. I will certainly be there. Yes,
absolutely. In fact, a lot of us will. Um I I have noticed going to the building that Carrie's smile has gotten bigger and bigger, lighter, and brighter uh over the past several weeks. Um and I
I I know, Carrie, that you are going to love retirement, but we're going to make you come back at least once. uh when we have a um a proper uh resolution um uh honoring and recognizing you um at
a uh at an upcoming meeting. So thank you. That's that'll be after you've you've had lots and lots of full night sleep and much appreciated. We're in the rearview mirror except for that night.
Well, thank you so much. you you've been just uh just wonderful for the board. David, thank you. Yeah, sorry. I didn't want to rush things, but um I do have a report from the site plan subcommittee which last met last week. Uh we just reviewed an
application that's actually before the board tonight for the uh IVN and uh we did recommend that it be uh deemed a minor site plan. Okay, great.
Um I think that's the only um committee report that we have. So let's move on to um the minutes. We have minutes from April 18th um that included some um some good edits uh
offered up by David Cohen and were those edits were uh there were the final version was sent around to the board um just a couple days ago I think. Uh any further uh questions or suggested edits to those minutes? And if not, would
someone like to move them? Moved by Mr. Cohen, seconded by Owen O'Donnell. Um all in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? Okay.
Uh next up we have two resolutions. The first is for Stony Brook Regional Sewage Authority. This was a minor site plan with a conditional use at 290 River Road, file number P2424-503 PM/CO. Um, questions or
comments on the resolution? And if there are none, would someone like to move it? Moved by David Cohen, seconded by A second. Thank you, Miss Capazolei. Seconded by Julie Capazolei. Um,
uh, Carrie, would you call the role, please? Certainly. Miss Capazolei, yes. Mr. Cohen, yes. Mayor Freda, yes. Miss Na, yes. Miss Pearl Mutter, yes. Miss Wilson Anderson,
yes. Mr. O'Donnell, yes. Motion carried. Um, next up we have uh a resolution for Louisa Clayton. This was a minor subdivision lot line adjustment at 93
Mount Lucas Road and 82 TuneU Road, block 7006, lots 8 and 9, file number P2525, 612MS. Any comments or questions about this resolution? And if
there are none, would someone like to move it? May I move such? Madam Chair. Thanks. Thanks, Jack Taylor. And there is a second. Second. Thank you, Mr. O'Donnell. Um, call the
role, please. Carrie. Miss Capazolei. Yes. Mr. Cohen. Yes. Mayor Freda. Yes. Mr. McGawan. Yes. Miss Na. Yes. Mr. O'Donnell, yes.
Miss Pearl Mutter, yes. Mrs. Wilson, yes. Motion carried. Thanks. Um, next up we have um two applications, one of which is carried, but the first one um well was carried
from June 5th. Um Jerry, could you speak to proper notice and jurisdiction for this is I'm sorry. Let me read it first. Sorry. Sorry about that. This is for LDM, Inc. uh minor site plan with
variance at 248 Nassau Street, block 330.02, lot 89. It is file number P2525- 594 PM. Yeah, Madam Chair, proof of publication service are in order and the board has
jurisdiction. Thank you. Um Mr. Leco, you want to start us off? Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. Jerry, could you swear in Justin? And then I guess we should also swear in
other um town professionals while we're at it. Yep. If do you swear or affirm the testimony about to give will be the truth? Yes, I do. Yes, I do. Just please state for the record your
last names. Uh Justin Leco, L KO. Derek Daniel after you Derek Derek Bridger B I DG R Daniel Weissman W I Sm
Great thanks go ahead Justin thank you Madam Chair um and I believe this was mentioned already but just uh to reiterate the second application that's on here the one over in the Jugtown area at 338 and 342 Nassau Street will be carried to October 9th,
uh, as it states on the agenda. Um, you're more than welcome to stay, but if if you want to if you're here for that one, uh, that's not going to be heard tonight. Um, the one that is going to be heard tonight, um, as was mentioned by the chair is at 248 Nassau Street. Um,
I'm going to start by pulling up sharing my screen to pull up, um, the publicly accessible NJ map parcel explorer from Rowan University. And we could call this PB1, Jerry. Yes. Thanks. Great. Thanks. Uh the sub subject
property is located uh on Nassau Street between Chestnut Street and Pine Street. Uh here in the blue outline, it contains the IV inn. Uh to the west is a mixeduse building with a new restaurant on the first floor called the Chick Bomb. Uh
the board approved a site plan application for that restaurant in January 2024. Uh to the east is another mixeduse building with a restaurant on the first floor, Tiger Noodles, um and university educational research space above, and the board approved a
conditional use application for that university use in June 2023. Uh to the north of the subject property is a a parking lot u with parking for the building on the corner of Pine Street and Nassau Street. The one that includes uh Bluepoint Grill, Nassau Street
Seafood and Produce and Small World Coffees Nassau Street location. Um that parking lot is accessed through a driveway actually on the Ivy Inns lot and I'll come back to that in a second. finishing up the adjacent uses. Uh J
Cles is uh the retail bicycle store is directly across Nassau Street. Um zooming into the subject parcel. Uh and hopefully this becomes less blurry. Um the IVN is an eating and drinking establishment, which is the language
that we use in our ordinance. Um and that is a permanent use in the NB zone that it is in. Uh the IVN has operated in this building since the early 1970s. Uh the building itself is actually an adaptively reused gas station built I believe in the 1930s.
Uh you could see to some extent um if you got really good eyes um the driveway that I mentioned earlier leading from Nassau Street to the parking lot in the rear. Um it also uh goes to the uh garage parking to the adjacent building
to the east if you remember that from uh the university's application um two years ago. Uh in the rear of the IVIN building, uh there's a fenced in patio that was the result of a uh 2010
approval by the board. The front portion of the site is really what we're here to talk about tonight. Um 50 or so years ago, it's actually where the gas pumps would have been located. Um following that, it became a sixcar parking area for the IV Inn. Uh and minimum parking
requirements in the NB zone for an eating and drinking establishment are based on the number of seats in the establishment. Um there the minimum requirement is at least one parking space for every five seats. Uh so that 2010 approval I just mentioned of the
rear patio and its seats and the board approved a variance to allow for five spaces where 15 were required. Um variances were also granted to allow those spaces to be in the front and rear yard. they basically already existed there, but they needed to ask for
variance relief regardless. Um, in 2020, the parking area was converted to outdoor seating during the pandemic under the governor's executive order. Uh, the IVN received the required permits from the state and municipality and has operated outdoor seating in this
area since then. Uh, the governor's order was set to expire last November. Uh, and then the legislature signed a new law authorizing continued permanent use of outdoor dining. There are some requirements of the law of that law that the IVN cannot meet under their existing
setup which is why they're here today. Uh most notably under that law they would need at least one ADA parking space. Um they would also need to comply with zoning regulations. Uh whereas you'll see this canopy tent that they've had up is located within the front yard
setback which would require a variance. They're asking for that tonight as well as a uh parking variance. Um, I will let the applicant describe their application, you know, more in detail. Um, but I'll note that they are asking for those variances tonight alongside
site plan approval to operate essentially as they've operated for the past 5 years. Uh, you know, with picnic tables in the tent in that former parking area. A few other notes. Uh, the subject property is not located in any locally
designated historic districts. Uh though the historic element of the Princeton master plan does mention the Tree Streets area as one to study for a potential local designation. The Kings Highway historic district on the state and national registers runs from
Lawrenceville along 206 to Kingston on Route 27 through Princeton from border to border uh and along the subject property. This site is well served by public transit. Uh NJ Transit 606 bus line runs in front of the property up to the Princeton shopping center. Um the free
MU Princeton MUN bus runs a similar route. The Coach USA bus from Palmer Square runs on route 27 to New Brunswick uh on its way to the Port Authority in Manhattan. Uh Princeton University's Tiger Transit, which is free and open to all uh and also electric, um stops about
two blocks from this site on Charleton Street, both on its weekday and nightweend schedules. Uh there is metered parking on Nassau Street and several streets in the area include metered or uh unmetered street parking.
And lastly, as you heard earlier from Councilman Cohen, uh the site plan committee met um last week and classified this application as minor. Um so I I wrote a report uh dated July 11th. Um the general comments from my report are that the IVN has had outdoor
dining for 5 years now, and it seems to function well. uh formalizing the change would complete what you know is kind of unintentionally a 50-year effort to adaptively reuse a gas station into a thriving locallyowned business and community amenity. Um and when I say
community amenity, I'm really referring to uh kind of the term third places uh which are recommended in the Princeton master plan. And these are places outside of the home and the workplace uh that allow for social socialization and
interaction uh and they're open to all. Um so basically they're informal places where community can form and come together. And you can certainly see this happen in the outdoor area of the Ivy Inn. Uh whether it's Tuesday night trivia or when nonprofits hold events
out there. Um you know it's it's a it's slightly different than being within the four walls of a bar I would say. Um the mobility element of the Princeton master plan includes goals to encourage a shift in transportation from single occupancy vehicle travel to other options like
biking, walking, and ride share. Um, and really a large question in this application is whether this land in front of the IVN should be used for five or six cars or or maybe that ADA space um that they would need under the the
new legislation or whether it should be outdoor dining as it is functioned. Um, I note it as did my colleagues and the applicant that a curb cut uh roughly right here would be eliminated if the application is approved. Um, this would
increase uh safety for both people on foot on the sidewalk. Um, and people pulling into or out of these other two driveways, the one I mentioned before and one over by uh that new restaurant. Um, it's three narrow driveways within about I think 115 ft. All three of them.
Um, eliminating the curb cut would also allow for additional spaces to be added to the street. Uh, and the applicant should work with the town um to to figure out what's going to go there. Whether it'll be an ADA accessible space, whether it'll be a loading zone for deliveries during the day and ride
share at night as we've been putting in throughout the town, um, or whether it'll just be possibly two parking spaces. Um, another goal of the mobility element is to identify locations where ride share pickup and drop off could be locations could be established. Uh, an
additional note I I had is that the space required for the minimum parking. Uh, this is kind of a theoretical exercise, but um, 42 spaces would be required for this use. Um, and that's actually the space needed for 42 spaces
would be larger than the whole parcel. Uh so uh and additionally the variances that were granted in 2010 for front and sideyard parking would go away or or would no longer be needed. And lastly, the applicant has stated that they want to keep the vinyl canopy
tent. Uh though they've mentioned uh an optional more permanent wooden structure, um the board may want to consider a time period to replace the tent um or just at least some certainty on on what exactly they're looking to do. Uh so Madam Chair, those are all the
comments I have at this time. Uh and I know Mr. Bridger and Mr. Weissman are here with their report as well. Um thanks Justin. Uh Dan Weissman. Uh, and Derek, do you have anything urgent to flag for the board? Um,
we hear from the applicant. Go ahead, Dan. Yeah. Yeah, if I may. Thank you, Madam Chair, and good evening, everyone. Um, just a a couple of quick pointers. Uh, staff comments that are in the report. Um, so the applicant is proposing 18 uh 30-inch tall concrete planters along the front and side lot lines. Those planters are
proposed to contain skipplural hedges with a maximum height of 36 in along Nassau Street and 60 in along the driveway entrance. Uh staff is requesting that these hedges be revised and the planters be revised to only go to a maximum height of of 15 feet um
sorry 30 in 15 ft set back from the public rightway and then 15 ft set back from the driveway to create a sight triangle to improve pedestrian visibility across the sidewalk and ve vehicles entering and exiting that driveway. Um so we would ask to have a
revised plan indicating as such. Um, so quick uh clarification about that. Is that along the entire uh frontage and along the driveway or just dur just where the sight triangle is that we're talking about
with the lower with the 30-inch limit? My recommendation would be 15 feet sight triangle. So it' be 15 feet at at a minimum. Um if the applicant wanted to go only a 30-inch high uh row along the entire right-of-way line, uh staff would
have no objection to that. Um but the reasoning behind the the 15 ft sight triangle is that the building setback is 15 ft. U so I think that would be a reasonable accommodation to to meet that sight triangle requirement. Okay. Good.
So Dan, are are you suggesting that staff review what's going to be planted in the planters to so we have a comfort level and in fact it's it's not going to be taller than 30 in. Yes, sir. And if a note could be added to the plan that uh it wouldn't grow to taller than 30 in that would be a site
plan maintenance uh aspect. Thank you. Um just one comment regarding the driveway connections to public streets. Um Justin had mentioned that the the driveway if reconstructed uh to just a
curb um public rightway guidelines uh proag uh would require if if there are parking spaces created in the right of way that one of those spaces would have to be ADA compliant. Um so there would have to be some work to do some slight widening of the roadway to make that
space ADA compliant and a and a slight narrowing of the sidewalk there. There is substantial space. uh it doesn't meet uh right-of-way proag guidelines. Um just wanted to make the board aware that that would be the requirement if those
spaces were determined to be parking. Um the DOT does permit parking in this area. It's a it's a parking zone. Um the parking zones on on DOT regulations don't get into um driveway detail. Uh but they do say
okay from point A to point B um measured from intersection to intersection or certain amount of feet from intersection to a point um can either be a loading zone or parking zone or a no parking zone. So this portion is a um limited parking zone. So converting them to parking would be consistent with the DOT
recommendations. If it were to go to a loading zone, DOT would have to approve that. But Dan, one of those two spaces would have to be ADA. say correct. Okay. Well, would it have to be or public rightway guidelines would require
one of the spaces to be ADA. Okay. Um there are some comments in the report regarding um noise regulations. um the outdoor dining legislation, which is not what we're here for tonight, um
but they do provide guidance for um limiting days and hours of outdoor service of of food and beverages if uh an applicant came on in under that legislation. Um which basically limits it from 10:00 p.m. to 11:00 a.m. Sundays through Wednesdays and 12:00 a.m. to
11:00 a.m. Thursdays through Saturdays. Um there is a provision that those can be more restrictive if the ordinance um or hours of operation for uh places serving alcoholic beverages. um the Princeton ordinance isn't isn't but
since we are here for a site plan um the board should contemplate the use of this outdoor space um either as it relates to to noise constraints or um as it could relate to that outdoor dining legislation to be consistent with other
outdoor dining. Um other than that there's there's some general comments in the staff report. Um there is one additional request that uh I failed to put in the report. Um but uh I would just request that uh if this application is approved, the applicant uh just provide a plan indicating accessible
routes uh ADA accessible routes within the site. Um since it is an alteration from what was a parking lot to uh an outdoor dining space. Um we just want to have something that that verifies that uh accessibility is provided. Great. Okay.
Um, so that does it for both of you. Anything to add, Mr. Bridger? At this time? Thank you, Madam Chair. D, just clarifying my own mind. For the accessible roads, they're from where the parking uh in the lot in the neighboring lots and on the street. It would be that and then it would be
within the the outdoor dining uh area within. Okay. Correct. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, great. Um, Mr. Kennedy, Ryan Kennedy, uh, here on behalf of
of the applicant tonight. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Um, Ryan Kennedy from Stevenson Lean for the IVN here this evening. I want to thank uh the board um, and all your professionals for your help with this. This application goes back quite a bit uh, not necessarily in filing, but with
working with the the town. Um, as you've heard from your planner and will hear from us this evening, um, this is a story of a local restaurant bar, um, who, uh, throughout CO has been using this, uh, unique outdoor space, uh, we
think successfully, uh, for the community and as a business in a way that much better use of land than the five parking spaces that were, um, previously approved uh, in the 2010 site plan. Uh and as part of our request
tonight, um we think there's many benefits. One, um some uh minor improvements to what's already working well. Um uh better uh and more um permanent feeling uh planters. uh the option and we'll hear about um and we
think the your planner suggestion of perhaps in two years to pull the trigger um on a on a wood structure um to replace the uh uh tent that's been used for the past 5 years. um the addition um
of two likely on street parking spaces that we would work with the municipality towards um as well as um numerous other benefits of improving uh the site here. Um when we started this um there had
been every year unfortunately uh this tension for restaurants about whether the state would in extend the outdoor dining rules um or let them lapse. And we had several false starts to prepare ourselves to to go in and and request as a site plan permanent um approval for
these um improvements as we are here tonight. As Mr. said um the current uh proposal is is very close uh to what would be essentially allowed permanently without um coming here. However, the uh one uh
ADA parking space would be required on site in order to comply with the ongoing uh as of right COVID extended rules. And here um we believe that a better use of this property, better use of this land,
uh is is for people rather than one car. Um and as part of that, by closing off, again, as your planner suggested, as you'll hear from our team, uh by closing off and working with the town to close off that curb cut, um we'll actually gain back two spaces. And I'll be honest, I didn't know till I heard from
Mr. Weissman tonight that the the state's requirements uh might actually require one of them to be an ADA space. um uh which ends up being almost a net gain from what we would have done otherwise in a way that would have used up a lot of pavement um and and bit a um
and I'm not going to say eyesore, but not as good of a use of the the land in front of this building here on Nassau Street. Uh and in an area where there are numerous curb cuts would have continued the potential confusion and
pedestrian uh concern um with uh having interference or or breaking up that streetscape. And by removing that curb cut uh permanently um and working with the town to do that uh we create a more walkable streetscape. And as we found, and you'll hear uh over the past couple
years, um this use and site has really found its its home as a walkable place uh in the community uh that is used and and uh while we are seeking a parking variance, it is one where the past 5 years have shown uh no negative impact
um from the exer the existing use which we are essentially asking uh to continue here tonight. So, we'll have two witnesses. Um, we've got uh Richie Bryan, uh, one of the owners from the IVN, as well as Brian Perry, um, who's,
uh, who's whose firm is our civil engineers and also did a a bit of a a parking letter to help us understand the, uh, the variance that's needed for parking here tonight. So, uh, if it's Ryan, before we I swear a minute, just wanted the clarification on the tent being converted to a wooden structure.
It it sounded like you would definitely do that within the 2-year period. We uh wasn't our initial thinking, but that was um uh a suggestion for Mr. Leco's memo. And we we think that's a good one. We we think that within two years is appropriate time to decide finalize it
and uh you know, frankly be more comfortable with the the cost of those things hopefully by the end of that two years than than right now. Okay, great. And then Mr. Ryan and Mr. Perry, if you both can raise your right hand. Do you do you swear affirm that testimony about
to give to be the truth? Yes, I do. So, yes, I do. Would you each state your full name and spell your last name? Richard Ryan. R Y an Ryan Perry. P E R R Y.
Thank you. Um, before either of you speak, um, Mr. Cohen has a question or comment. Yeah. Um, since I'm not hearing that there's a planner, a professional planner, uh,
giving testimony, I'm just curious, Ryan, who's going to address the planning proofs for the variances that are being requested? Uh, our our our engineer will tonight. We have a testimony on the on the um on the variances that we'll hear later tonight.
Thank you. Thanks, David. U. So with that, um, uh, Mer, if it's all right, um, we have one set of 10 slides. I'd like to have that marked as our one exhibit here this evening. Um, and if it's right to share the screen.
Yeah. And that'll be A1. Thank you so much. Share away. I believe that was successfully done. Um so uh Richie if if you could before we start just um introduce yourself uh explain your your connection uh you know to uh to the IVN.
So I am currently the owner in um the business has been in my family since 1966 and we've been at this location as you said earlier um since 1975. used to be a gas station and we're just
I mean when COVID came it was awful for everyone as we all know but um there one positive that actually came out of it this outdoor seating that we were forced to do at the time and now it seems to have
and people seem to be enjoying it and we'd just like to make it permanent. Well, thank you Richie. Um I'm going to move to slide two just to kind of orient the board though Mr. Leco did this uh to an extent here. Um that blue arrow
points to uh where the in is that question just if you confirm that we're we're pointing to the property. Is that to me? Yeah, it is. Yes. Yes, that's us. All right. Thank you. I'm going to move to uh slide three. Again, I think a similar photo was shown by Mr. Leco. But
that blue box, Richie, that uh that shows where the the N is. That's us. Pardon me if I'm squinting. I am the one in one million people that had the lasic surgery go bad. Oh, no. I apologize. That's why I'm over here like,
well, uh just maybe we could take the the board through a little bit of the history. Um uh you know, up on the top right here, and I'll I'll I'll remind you, you know, so you don't have to squint as much on slide four. There was a photo that we got from you of the site when it was a gas station. Is that uh um
part of the history? That's correct. Yeah. So, yeah. So, my uncle was a bartender at the original IBM which was which was located at what is currently Small World Cup and the owner took a liking to him of some
sort and offered him to buy the business at that time. And in 1973 he bought the business and he operated out of what was what is Small World um and he did well and in 1973
what what was flying a gas station um became for sale and he was able through the pooling of our family's money um which wasn't much at the time and I don't think it'd be possible today I know it would be possible today but they
were able to acquire the gas station and they did and in January of 75 um they opened what you know today as the IBN and here we are
Mr. Ryan, was the small world location the one on Nassau Street? I assume Nassau. Yes. Yeah. Okay. Go ahead. Sorry to interrupt. Not at all. And Richie, I think that was Oh, sorry. Uh on on the left side there's the the prior site plan. So in 2010, you had gotten approval to have
those five spaces in in the front which required a front yard setback and a parking variance for the number of spaces that were really necessary uh for the site. But could you just talk a little bit about how those were actually used and and did they function? You know, what was it? Customers parking
there, what what really happened? Honestly, it was staff. It was staff and maybe a or two um depending on the time of day. But with five spots, you have, you know, you have, you know, two and two doormen and and a manager, I mean,
five spots wasn't really doing much for us. Um, I mean it was there, but I always wondered why we got I mean, yeah, that that that's basically it. We were the one with a setback and
it was great and it is great, but as far as use for parking, it was a staff parking. Yeah. And then come 2020 unfortunately um that's when under the uh uh EO1 150
uh you started your initially only operations probably outside but then your your co operations correct? Now I'm going to move to slide five here and this has got aerial photos from uh one's from April 2019 and the other's
from February 2024. maybe we could just talk through and start kind of contrasting, you know, what things looked like before and how things have been operating um uh since co. So, you know, just with reference to the one on the right, you know, talk about what um
and the couple things that we're going to want to get at, you know, your hours operations, how it's functioned, um and uh uh and you know, just general use of this front here. So to the left, April 2019 that working as you see there's two
cars. I think there was space for another three and that was that. Um, and that's how we were. And then through COVID, we were I would have even thought of applying for something like this prior
to CO, but we were forced to go outside um because of the pandemic and it evolved into this. At the time it was those I remember eight to a pod. We had the the green turf like golf and it was eight to a pod and you had to be 8 feet
apart and there was six pods and everybody was using sanitizer and now to this which I think has been a very positive I know for us and I hope for the community as well. Now you talk a bit about your hours of
operation and number of employees that you've got. We open at 11:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday. Um, Sunday we open at noon. Monday through we close at Monday, Tuesday we close at
12:30. Wednesday through Saturday at 2 and Sunday at noon. And uh employees that you've got? We have typically two bartenders, two doorstep and a manager. Okay. Um now there's no changes to
lighting proposed, but can you just talk a little bit about what lights have been in place uh you know at the front door and uh um um in in the front of the the site? Yes, we have the existing lights, you know, the running at the front door and the window that says Ivy and stained
glass. But in addition, we just added some rope lighting. the call those bulbs, but they're like those hardy bulbs you see in people's backyards that we kind of roped over the if you see the pink side on that side and we had some
string lighting underneath the tent as well. Excellent. I'm going to move on to slide six. So these are um fairly recent photos um uh perhaps taken uh by one of your professionals while we were meeting
at the site. Uh you want to talk a little bit about again the use and what we're looking at here in the current uh um current I'll just say uh now postcoid outdoor dining scenario. So basically on the right you see a tent
20 20 by 20 and it holds I think eight picnic tables 10 picnic tables. Um and on the left it's open with umbrellas for the picnic tables if needed. There's
another 10 tables. So we've evolved into that. Okay. And um as far as service goes, if someone were to be using this space, they would go inside and purchase a drink at the bar at the uh um at a uh
you know from a bartender. Do you talk a little bit how that works? And then um um I say security is not the right word, but uh ID checking and things like that, how that works at the site. So yeah, if someone wants to get a drink, they go in the front door, they order from the bartender inside the
building, and they bring it ourselves. Very simple. As far as security, there is after nine o'clock at night, always one person at the gate, which on the right picture, if you look past the flowers just to the right before Yeah.
Right in there, there's an o the only opening, and there's always a door man or woman andor manager checking IDs to make sure that it's above 21. Um now in the limited situations where
you've got you know live music or or music outdoors you talk about when when that happens and what your practice has been during COVID u for that for outdoor music I can only think of one band great west God bless them um
and they play outside um where the the hedges and the umbrella side um and they'll play maybe from 1 to 4 and it's fully music that people seem to enjoy.
Never never really at night. I'm sorry. So, yeah. Um, lastly, I'm going to go back a slide to slide five. We just talk about um again, there's no proposed changes here, but what uh um what the arrangement is
for for trash for your for the for the site. We have two dumpsters out back, one for recycling and one for trash. both of which are picked up three times weekly. So any trash that's out front or in the
building is taken out the back door to the dumpsters and discarded and picked up three times a week. Excellent. Moving back to slide six. Um
I'm going to move ahead one more to slide seven. And before we get to our engineering testimony, I want to talk a little bit about the um uh I guess at the the bottom here, there's a picture of what I I think we're proposing uh at in within the first two years to um uh
replace the more temporary feeling uh canopy tent with a more permanent structure. Talk a little bit about um your your thinking of that and what what your your preference would be um should the board be amicable to allowing that in the future. Excuse
me. I'm great with um I love the look of this specific I don't know if it's a pergola or gazebo, what you call it, but I like it. It's very expensive. And I instead of purchasing it from a manufacturer,
I was wondering if we could find potentially some sort of a carpenter or builder that could build it for less money than it's retailing for on the site that I found. But but ultimately um we could provide the specifications of what it would look
like um you know essentially like this but if you were to have it stick built by a local uh contractor that it would essentially match this with the the roofing and and timber materials and number of posts. That's correct. Okay. Um I think we just make give me one
moment just to go through um uh the memo here. Um I'll just also if you could confirm uh you have your um uh ABC licensing in a place in place including for the outdoor extended space. Correct. Um with that um madam chair of if your
board or um members or professionals I'm happy to have the applicant uh available for questions uh at at this time. Okay. Any any board members have questions? Uh, Mr. O'Donnell, Owen O'Donnell,
thank you very much. Uh, just a couple of questions. Is there um if this should go through and with the uh outdoor dining and uh would there be additional weight staff,
do you think, or would the uh the uh practice of going into the bar to to get your drinks or to to order your food uh remain? Um well, actually, I left that out. We lease the kitchen out to Saturn Pizza,
right? So, we have a kitchen and they have they have two servers on most nights of the week that do go tableto table. So, really you only go inside for the beverage. Okay. And that that would remain you wouldn't have weight staff outside
taking orders from people for drinks. No, but for food, yes. Right. Okay. Thank you. And regarding the wooden canopy, uh would that essentially replace the vinyl tent that is there now or would it be a larger structure? Uh
the same size 20 by 20. Okay. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thanks Owen. Um Palo Vinuka and then Mr. Cohen Oliver. Sorry, I couldn't go. Okay, I couldn't unmute.
Uh, so thank you for uh presenting the plan. Um, you know, I really think that the outdoor area has been such a benefit to the community at the IVN. Um, and I really like the idea of um, installing
the planters and the laurel hedge. I just had one question uh which is why that you placed the tent on the driveway side rather than the wall side and I'm wondering if that affects visibility at all. I never really thought of it but looking
at it I think I tried to mimic the A-frame of the building. Okay. Um, I I guess my concern would be if visibility could be u an issue with the driveway um in the future, would a
permanent structure affect visibility at all? Um, I don't know if uh staff have considered that or if um there's any assessment of whether the current tent placement affects visibility. If you're asking me, I don't I don't
think the the height portion of the tent would be a problem. If anything, it would be the hedges, which I think they discussed earlier lower on that corner of the of the plant,
the first like where the driveway is. Okay. I think Yeah. Okay. I think that um All right. Thank you. Thank you. Good questions. Uh, David Cohen.
Yeah, I uh apologize for being nitpicky, but I believe your testimony was eight or 10 tables under the tent and eight or 10 tables in the uncovered area when you were discussing seating. This plan shows six tables under the tent and I believe
14 uh in the open area. I'm guessing that this plan is similar to what's there currently and I just want to give you an opportunity to correct your testimony. Yes. So six and 14 as opposed to 10 and
10. You're correct. All right. Thanks, David. Um Mr. Weissman, thank you. um the waste storage area located towards the rear of the the the building. Um my
understanding based off of the site plan is that the building is actually on the lot line. Um so I'm just wondering if you have an agreement with the neighboring lot for the storage of of those waste containers. Yes. Okay.
That is all. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions from board members or staff for Mr. Mr. Ryan. Okay. If not, um, Mr. Kennedy, uh, you have I'm look I'm
furiously looking across my screen and apologies that I've taken it all up. It's hard to find. Mr. Perry is next up. Is that right? That is correct. Yes. Okay. Thank you. So, we'll need to qualify him. Uh Brian, if you could um I know you've testified before this board uh many times um but
if you could just give the board a brief benefit of your credentials um uh and firm and your expertise here, so I have you accepted as an expert here this evening. Sure. And thank you. Good evening. Um my name is Brian Perry. I am the managing director of New Jersey operations for
VHB. I'm also the civil engineer of record for this application. Um, I've got 25 years of engineering experience, bachelor's degree of civil engineering, master's degree, water resources, environmental engineering, um, New Jersey licensed professional engineer
and certified municipal engineer. And again, as Mr. uh, Kennedy mentioned, I've appeared before this board on several occasions as well as other other adjacent municipalities and other municipalities uh, throughout New Jersey. Um, thank you. We accept your
qualifications. Um, you know, Mr. Cohen asked earlier about and Mr. um, Kennedy responded that you would be speaking to the planning proofs as well. I is that correct? I mean, I I don't I'm
don't mean to put you on the spot. I just want to know whether or not um if you're testifying as to planning proofs whether um I guess this is really a question for Mr. Mueller or for Mr. Leco. Do we
do we require um a planning um license of some kind for for individuals? No. In testifying to planning issues. Okay. All right. We do not. Okay.
Thanks, Mr. Perry. We accept your qualifications. Go right ahead. Right. Um Brian, if you could just start with, you know, your your um uh how you came into this project and while we have um slide seven up here, we can start going through the uh proposed improvements and the uh the site plan.
Sure. Sure. Um so yeah, we were asked to formalize kind of the outdoor seating area that that we've heard um so since 2020. Um as we've heard in prior testimony here is the front parking area has been used for outdoor dining under a temporary state authorization. So that
included the installation of picnic tables, a 20x 20 vinyl canopy tent, which is there now, and a uh serving station, serving uh station structure. Um and that use is continued under the public law, as you heard, which allowed for permanent dining, outdoor dining
through annual ABC permits. Uh the current application seeks to formalize uh this outdoor dining use. Um and so what I'm going to call the proposed improvements which are there now uh they include maintaining the 20x20 canopy as the existing vinyl tent in the near term
and then eventually a future woodframe structure um it was discussed and is shown in the image on the screen or similar to um as you heard from Mr. Ryan uh along with 20 picnic tables uh four hightop tables and a server station. Um
that outdoor area that you're looking at on the screen here uh will be enclosed with 18 concrete planter boxes um planted with skip laurel hedges to replace uh and that that barrier or that perimeter will um replace existing
wooden fence that's there. Now uh the hedges uh as was discussed earlier by the engineer will be maintained at a 30-in height within 15 ft of the intersection of the sidewalk and the access driveway. Um that's for visibility for for um vehicles coming
out of the driveway or coming into the driveway for pedestrians walking on the sidewalk. Um so again that'll be maintained at that height um within 15 ft of the intersection of the sidewalk and the access driveway. Um and and the plans will be revised uh to reflect
same. Um, there will also be a a four to six foot wide opening between two of the planter boxes um along Nasso Street to allow for pedestrian access from the sidewalk into the outdoor seating area. You can see it uh on the graphic on the screen. It was also the excerpt from the
site plan. It's right at the center um of the uh of the array of planter boxes along Nassau Street. Um, in addition, uh, we'll be adding a, uh, bike rack, a black bike rack accommodating 10 bicycles, um, along the
sidewalk, uh, which exceeds the zoning requirement, uh, for three spaces for this, uh, application for the the square footage here. So, yeah, under the basic the square footage, three bicycle parking or bicycle bike rack spaces are required, and we're providing 10. Um the
front outdoor seating will yield an additional 128 seats uh for a total establishment seating capacity of 210 seats which typically would require 42 parking spaces at one space per five seats. Um and again under this
application we're uh looking to eliminate um that front parking eliminating the parking on the site currently. Um, from a zoning perspective, uh, we're requesting variances for the front yard setback of the canopy structure at 3 ft versus the
15 ft required and for the elimination of the on-site parking. There's also an existing variance uh for the rear yard building setback, which is zero and and that remains unchanged. All other zoning and bulk standards um are met. uh regarding the parking
just just just to know for the record. We while you were talking I just moved to slide eight that shows where those Yes, sorry about that. I should have should have had you advance. Uh yeah, so here's the this is noting the uh 210 seats that I referenced that I just mentioned. Um and then as I was
mentioning regarding the parking, I had prepared a memo um in support of the application summarizing that the combination of on street parking, bicycle accommodations and pedestrian access uh supports the continued elimination of on-site parking. Um the
IVN has operated successfully in this configuration for the past five years which we um heard about or discussed and similar and it's operating similar to other established eeries um in the downtown area that rely on publicly available parking is they also do not
have a dedicated parking lot. Um I would also add importantly from a storm water perspective there's no increase in impervious surface with this application and the conversion of the parking area um a motor vehicle surface to outdoor seating reduces the potential for
pollutant laden storm water runoff. So another positive benefit with that um in addition to the you know the planter boxes will be added. um there's no land disturbance associated with this project, it would trigger any other outside um agency land use approvals. Um
and then finally, should this application be approved, uh it was discussed, you know, mentioned by the engineer, we understand that we would need to coordinate with the NJ DOT to close the existing depressed curb along Nassau Street and install a full face curb and the bike rack within the state
rightway. um that would that'll generally involve obtaining a letter of no interest for closing down that um uh existing uh depressed curb or access point and a highway occupancy permit. Um and I can I can speak a little bit
more detail to the uh the variances um if you'd like. Yeah, if you could just before we do that and with apolog I do I'm Jerry I do see Mr. Cohen's hand up. I didn't want to let him linger too long. Go ahead David. Yeah. Yeah. I just wanted to ask in terms of
your parking calculation. I know that uh I think in our staff report it talks about you know the state regulations which allow this outdoor seating and you know that there the only real parking requirement on-site parking requirement
is the one handicapped. Uh, so I I'm questioning why you're discussing the 42 spaces that would be required under our local ordinances if those are over if that ordinance is overridden by the state uh statute. And
I just think for the record, it sounds a lot better if we're giving you a variance for one parking space than for 42. Agreed. With with with much agreement, I will join in there. Um, our understanding though is just out of an abundance of
caution from from the proof perspective is that because this is not technically an as of right application or even just use under the now permanent outdoor dining rules that because we don't hit
almost I'll use the analogy of a conditional use without it being a use variance board but because we don't hit those conditions we then look at while we can very I don't mean to say easily but understand the requirements what we could do and we talked a little about
well could we squeeze an ADA space here and just comply and we thought that this design made more sense particularly since we actually get two spaces out of it instead of the the one and then the awkward pedestrian interchange but we I'll just say from a from our legal
perspective agree with you um but wanted to show under technically the variance we believe we need is from the town's ordinance because unless we meet all the conditions of outdoor dining, this part is not necessarily superseded by this
state provision. If it was, we would, you know, happily not be here. And it was honestly a lot of thinking about whether we should just try to redesign the site in a less positive way and and not come back and go through the expense of it or or really go with what has been
working and what we thought was the best use of the property. And that's that's why we're here and and again full agreement that um particularly with the prior variances that were granted you know we're really talking about the five spaces that was you know down space but
if you do add up the seats technically that is the number and we just wanted to make sure that we were full in explaining the relief that might be needed. Understood. Yeah. Got it. Thank you Brian. And now I would like Brian to
address the variances. Thanks. Sure. So on the subject of the um um the uh the the parking um the from a
positive criteria perspective, you know, the benefits of that deviation um uh to promote the outdoor dining uh area. That outdoor dining area enhances the streetscape. It supports the local businesses. Um it promotes walkability.
Um so from a sustain uh so which substantially outweighs any of the detriments. Um I would say it proposes uh the proposal advantages one or more purposes um of zoning um such as the promoting the general welfare public
encouraging appropriate use of the land and um creating a desirable visual environment. um we're talking about is C2 is that C2 yes correct and then you know under from a negative
criteria perspective I would say the variance in eliminate the park will not cause substantial detriment to the public good in other words you know surrounding properties won't be negative negatively impacted by the reduced parking um it won't substantially impair the intent and purpose of the zoning
ordinance or the master plan as And um you know this is supported by uh the shared parking arrangements um that with adjacent and surrounding establishments um the fact that the area is walkable and served by public transit
which we heard earlier and also the seasonal and kind of temporary nature uh from a seasonal perspective of the outdoor seating. Um, in other words, it's not necessarily um maybe at full capacity all year round, but u on the on the elimination of the parking, those
are uh I would say the proofs, right? would you also speak to the um and it's this is an interesting one here the the front yard setback variance because this this site and I I I'll agree with you that the C2 is is appropriate um analysis for the front
yard setback variance as well but um and if it's helpful for me to go back to a slide with streetscape but this this site is unique in how far recessed it is and while we are going closer it actually uh um these improvements while also not building
um are further back uh perhaps recessed than the rest of the the neighborhood in most cases. Uh yeah. So for the subject of the tent um I would say I mean it similarly I mean
it supports the uh uh um economic vitality enhancing public enjoyment. Um I guess under those those categories those those areas you know from the category of a C2 benefiting benefiting and the benefits outweighing
the detriments. Um, I would say there is kind of an irregular shape to the property from a standpoint of there's not a lot of places to put it. If you put it too close to the building, you've got uh other issues with perhaps drainage up against the building, um, things like that, topography getting in
away. Um, we talked about the um, visual um, aspect as far as visibility. Um I think because it's an open um canopy, whether it be the the temporary one that's or the um a vinyl one that's there now or a future one, um there are
no um impacts from a visual standpoint. Um Mr. It's fair. Is it also fair to say just from a balancing of positive and negatives that by um replacing what was approved as a variance condition of front yard parking with um um structures
that could be used, it actually restores a um removes a non-conforming ad, albeit one that was proved by the board as a variance in the site plan, but removes that non-conforming front yard parking condition while actually gaining more parking than would otherwise be allowed
as of right with the one case. Yeah. So, in other words, yes, the um um which the um uh exception yes for allowing parking there, this outweighs that. Correct. This this exception outweighs the exception for parking in the front of the building. Correct.
Um, and as we continue, I'm I'll move to the the next slide, but um, perhaps this would have been a good one to have up while we were talking about the parking, but uh, this shows essentially the I'll just say kind of penned in hypothetically the spaces that the applicant will work with municipality on
restoring uh, potentially as as usable in in some way um, uh, for the community uh, rather than where the curb cut is now. Uh, I'm sorry. Could you repeat that last part? No, this this visual shows where um potentially two compliant on street
parking spaces would be rather than the curb cut or the the one that we would be required to have. Yes. Yep. Absolutely. Um um Paula Vinuka uh has a question.
Hi. Uh so I do have a question. This is uh kind of going back to the the hedges and the visibility again. Um so I I just saw in the staff memo that the planters are supposed to be 30 in high and then the the shrubs planted in there will be
another 30 to 36 in high. So is does that imply that the the barrier there will be 60 to 66 in high? So within the zone of the um the the sight triangle that was described by Mr. Weisman, the 15 foot within pretty much
where that arrow is pointing 15t in either direction where that arrow is pointing would be limited to the 30-inch height. Everywhere else um is so is that 30 in absolute or is that 30 for the hedge plus 30 for the planter? 30 inch uh I believe that would be
absolute for visibility for vehicular visibility. Yes. Okay. Thank you for the clarification. Yep. Another quick note about the the planters you've um suggested um skip laurel or cherry laurel. Um those are
very rapidly growing uh and they tend to get really tall uh and they are non-native. So you might think of, you know, replacing or substituting um inkberry
ux galabra. They make u sort of short versions of those and uh it's a native shrub. Mr. Cohen, uh I just had a question about the bike parking. I believe that's shown in the
public right of way rather than on the applicant's property. and I'm just I just want to make sure that that doesn't require any kind of relief. Uh I'm sure we're grateful to have it. Um but I I don't know whether our ordinance
requires it to, you know, any special permission to put it in the public right of way. I could speak to that. Uh the ordinance does uh allow uh bicycle parking, short-term bicycle parking to be placed in the right of way uh subject to the
the owner of the rightway approval. Um but that would only apply to the short-term parking which which is required uh for this application. Thanks Dan. Mhm. Miss Wilson Anderson, as it relates to the tent structure and
rain, is there any requirement as um as going forward as to um gutters or rain diversion um off of the tent? Brian, you perhaps want to talk about
the existing condition and perhaps the how it works now and I mean obviously well not obviously but this um would be a a similar condition that there is now where it's not necessarily channeled and kind of replaces surface but if you could kind of take us
through that. Yeah. So there's the the existing structure that's there now, the canopy um uh currently um functions in uh um a manner in which the rain falls on it. It's a relatively small area, so you do get some runoff off the edges of the of the uh canopy, but it's such a
small area that it's not, I would say, anything that's of of a nuisance um would impact anything. In fact, if if positioned properly with this new configuration or with this new plan with the planter boxes, some of that actually would can be positioned to drip into the planter boxes um at least on the uh the
parking lot side. Um it is a relatively small area. I would say um if actually if anything it does help shield a little bit some of the runoff that's um you know direct impacting or directly hitting on the pavement and putting on on a vehicular surf otherwise vehicular surface and pushing it out to the uh to
the street. But um there's no plans for a gutter on it. Um again the the 20x 20 area is relatively small and it would be partitioned in such a way that it would be broken up into quadrants where um if you look at the um current configuration
but also the proposed future wooden canopy the roof would be split in such a fashion where at the very least it would be half but it would be more likely in four quadrants. So you'd have smaller areas running off on each side. So little impact from the runoff. But is that consistent at this point? I
understand we're going from what was a temporary situation to something that's more permanent. Is there anything required in our ordinance to address the water runoff from either this or I guess at some point when there's a wooden structure or does the wooden structure
get addressed later for its own approval? So, I guess it's two parts of the question. Is anything we need to do now? And on the wooden structure, would that have to be subject to review later on? I'll say as proposed, we're looking to have those um that structure. Um our
request is to have it be approved now subject to uh construction and staff approval um that it meets the requirements of what we've um you know explained and specified as part of the uh approval. Um Brian, I'll let you speak to if there's
a requirement for that. Ultimately, my understanding is that the we're essentially replacing the existing pvious exc um uh impervious, excuse me, the opposite of what I said, um area um with one with a similar material that it
wouldn't necessarily trigger um either the need to redirect or to treat storm water. But maybe you can speak to that bit. I I'll be honest, I'm not aware that there is a requirement um uh to to collect it otherwise. Um,
Mr. Weissman or Mr. Bridger, can you speak to any ordinance requirements we have for that that address um, Claudia's question? I I don't think that would require, but please go ahead. I'd be happy to. So, the ordinance uh only speaks to an increase of impervious
surface, not necessarily changing from one imperous surface to another. So, from an ordinance standpoint, um, it's considered impervious. There is no change. if if the placement of the tent structure had a negative impact on an adjoining property, um that's certainly
something that we would look at. Um but just from an ordinance enforcement standpoint, it's it's an even swap. Okay, Mr. Cohen? Yeah, I just would like to offer a comment on this and I praise Claudia for
raising the the question. Um I don't think this is an issue from stormwater management perspective but it is an issue for customers who uh even though this is not that large a structure with the with the um heaviness of rains that
we see these days it could be really drenching for somebody walking under the canopy. Uh, and I say this from personal experience because we had porches on our house without gutters and uh during a
heavy rain, you really got soaked going uh under the edge of the porch. So I it may not be code required but I would recommend when the permanent structure gets con gets built that at least on
sides where uh customers are likely to be passing uh in and out of the tent especially on the side facing the building where they have to go in and out to get drinks. Uh, I would think it would make a lot of sense
to put a gutter on that side uh for that convenience factor, not a storm water factor. Excellent. Excellent thought there. Um, and uh, Claudia Wilson Anderson, did that did were your questions answered to
your satisfaction? I think so. I I guess the question I had when we're talking about increase in impervious coverage or existing imperous coverage, this was a temporary structure. So, I don't know if we look at as a continuation of a temporary
structure or now that we're formalizing this as a more permanent situation, are there more permanent uh views that we have toward it and changes that we might want to request um as it becomes permanent rather than again it was temporary so we didn't deal
with some of these issues. I would view this as an increase in impervious coverage as it related to the nontemporary situation. So the but it's but it's but it sits on top of a completely imperous it's on a parking lot.
Yes. Okay. There's no there's no increase in impervious surface. If the wasn't there changes it from from pavement to rooftop. Sorry. Understood. Yes. Thank you. Perhaps I suggest um because I think that is a good point. Well, perhaps not
required, but that at that time we would work with staff on that final administrative construction approval to see if it made sense to channel in a certain way. My my suspicion is that there may be some downsides to that. You obviously and there are restrictions on channeling water on other people's
properties, other um perhaps um negative impacts, but that we would look at that at that point and if it made sense to catch it and and and um kind of direct it in an area or or treat it in some way that we will work with staff on that at at that time. That's actually excellent thought.
Yeah, thank you. My questions answered. Thank you. Um, anything else, Mayor Freda? I Yeah, I I think we're overthinking the water coming off the top of this proposed structure. The tent is there. It's been
there for years. Patrons do not that I know of come in and complain about water dripping off the tent. And if it's raining that hard, they're going to be inside the building and not that many are going to be under the tent. So, I I
just think we're we're overthinking this more than it needs to be, but enough said. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you. Um so, uh we've interrupted you many times, Mr. Perry.
Why don't you continue with your with your testimony? I think you might have um perhaps not interrupted and and just ultimately sense approaching the end. Yeah, exactly. Um um Brad, just one clean up. Um um Brian, while I as as as I love to do put a slide up that says thank you.
Um uh if you could, you know, we did get two memos here, one from Mr. Leco and and a joint one from um um our zoning officer and land use engineer. Um I believe we hit all of the suggestions or or or comments that they made. um and
are willing to able to accommodate them. Any other ones you want to highlight or or of concern? I believe that we're able to accommodate essentially everything that they've discussed um and and have addressed. But if there's anything left as a uh cleanup item, maybe now is the time. But I believe we're able to
confirm that we can comply with all of their suggestions and and comments. Agreed by me. Yeah. I think the question uh Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Wiseman. Were you going to say uh I just just there was one staff comment uh just asking the applicant if
they can advise if there are any agreements in place with neighboring properties for the use of parking spaces for patrons or staff. Um I don't know if I heard uh if there are any. Um there's uh nothing necessarily in
place. There are uh agreements for um uh uh for I'll just say um neighborly um conduct and making sure that things are are done um appropriately um I suppose um uh in in conjunction with our
neighbors. But as of as of right now there's there's nothing um you know in that would in writing that would allow you know something to uh um staff to park. They they park elsewhere. Okay. Thank you. Um that was that was the only outstanding comment I had uh other than
the the two procedural additional staff comments at the end of of the report. Okay. Thank you. Um I am uh wondering if um or the I guess I need to be reminded
what kind of um latitude there is for um designating the area that um your one of your later slides showed as two parking spaces on
Nassau Street might be instead a pickup and drop off for um ride share and I feel like that's might be a great location in town for for that use and uh
I wonder what what other board members think about that and what the applicant thinks. Madam Chair, just before um you start, I'll just say from the applicant's perspective, our understanding is while we'd love to have a a solid say on that, I believe the
best we can really do is um agree to, you know, participate and assist in closing it off and then kind of yielding that space back to the town for uh its uh determination. So, you know, if while we would perhaps love to have it be dedicated to Mr. Ryan to personal use or
or or something for the uh for the um for the inn. Ultimately, our understanding is that once we are we would be cooperating in restoring them um and that it would be the town's um as they would with any other street um closing I suppose in deciding what's
best in how to use them. But we certainly do agree um some combination u particularly if it is required of an ADA space. Uh but you know I I we believe that the you know de facto use of the semi-closed off has been you know for ride sharing being able to have a kiss
and ride spot. Those themes seem to be successful and perhaps the the the municipality would would do something like that. Um and we would certainly be supportive of it but I my understanding is that for the purpose of the application you know we would certainly agree to help. Got I got it.
Um, so, uh, so do we need DO's approval as well? Does, um, Dan or Derek, do you know? We have to work with DOT about whether there's parking spaces or a or a um, ride share
stop there. DOT has already uh, deem that area acceptable for parking. Um, so if it were to go to parking spaces, it would essentially be a permit from the D or a letter of no interest from, sorry, not
D, DOT, um, to to allow those parking spaces to go in. Um, if it were to switch to a loading zone, um, that would need full DOT approval. Now, is a loading zone does that apply to um deliveries of
food and um packages and people? I mean, is that just a loading of loading and unloading of whatever or can it be restricted to um multimodal transit somehow?
I don't know the specifics to that question. and I'd certainly be happy to look into it. I I think the town the town can deal with the details on the loading zone. You're right. You're right. This is not a not not an application thing. You're right. You're right, Mayor. Thanks. Um
Okay. So, other questions for um any of uh for Mr. Kennedy or any of his witnesses, either of his witnesses, I should say, from board members or staff. If not, I will
open the meeting up now for public comment. We have um 71 members of the public who are attending tonight. Two people have had their hand up since the very beginning. Um, and so, um, I I will let all of you
know in the attendees area that if you would like to, um, uh, address the board, uh, have comments or questions about this matter, now is the time to virtually raise your hand um, by clicking on the raise hand icon uh, at
the bottom of your Zoom screen screen or if you're on the phone by pressing star9 and we will um, as we take comment, we will um pull you over from the attendees room into the panelist's room and then
Mr. Mueller, our attorney, will swear you in each of you and we'll ask you to spell your last name um you know tell us what street you live on uh and um we'll take u comments in the order in which
hands were raised. So I see that we've um brought one or two folks over already. Um, better than you may. No, I'm going to talk soon. Julie Zimmerman. Hi. Uh, welcome. Thank you.
We need to uh Mr. Mueller needs to swear you in for starters. Okay. You can raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony about to give be the truth? Yes. Just want to affirm. Please state your full name, spell your last name, and state the street you live on. Julie Zimmerman. Zim M R M. I live at 87
Cedar Lane in the Riverside. neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Go right ahead. Oh, I just wanted to say um I pretty much concur with everything Justin said at the beginning of this meeting. This is very interesting lens into the
planning board. Um uh and I also just want to say my two favorite places in Princeton are probably the public library and the Ivy. And they share similar attributes. It's where you see your neighbors, you see
young kids with their parents, you see older people, which I'm now falling into that demographic, you see everyone, you see grad students. Um, it's a great place to be and uh it's it's about as diverse as Princeton can get. I was
going to say it gets us out of our bubble, but nothing really gets us out of our bubble. But it's as close to getting out of the Princeton bubble as one can get. Um, when it comes to parking, I just want to say a lot of times I walk, by the way, and I love walking to the Ivy because then I don't have to worry about anything I eat or
drink there and I get a little exercise. May see some people along the way. I might bring my dog to the front yard. Um, but when it's raining, I can park in the university parking which is behind the post office that's at night or on
the weekends, you know. So, that's what I do. and it doesn't take parking from anyone else. I don't even have to drive on Nassau Street to get there. Um, and just my last point is that our town has been prioritizing and it's important to prioritize affordable housing, but this
is sort of one of the lone affordable places to congregate and eat and drink in town. We don't really have that. Um, any place else you're going to spend $50 to $100 a person to go out in Princeton to have a drink and a meal. Um, so I
would I love going to the Ivy. So that's it. Thank you. Oh, and I just like to say I wish this type of vetting had been done to the McMansion next to me at 161 Patton Avenue. I can't believe the level of detail. Good for you guys. I credit
you, but it's I wish. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks very much, Miss Zimmerman. Thank you. Um, next up we have Alexandria's iPhone.
I know iPhone is not Alexandria, if you could raise your right hand. Sorry about that. If you could raise your right hand, do you swear or affirm the testimony about to give be the truth? Yes. Just want to affirm. Please state your
full name, spell by your last name, and state your address. Yep. Alexandria Seca Heck. H E C HT I live at 179 Hamilton Avenue. Um want to just echo exactly what has been said in the previous speaker. Um
and I'll just add like a couple more details. This is the kind of small business that I think every um place should be dying to have and we're so grateful that they exist. Uh, I run a fundraiser every year for the Little
Brook PTA. Um, at the Ivy, they make it so easy. It's a wonderful gathering spot. Um, and yeah, the affordability could not be um should not be understated for the entire community. Um, as well as just the livelihood and
that it brings I mean, sorry, the liveless that it brings to the street in that uh in that business. It really helps create like a second central business district right in that little cluster. Um, and people come to that
outdoor seating, have a drink, and then they'll go to the restaurants next door. I mean, it really is um like an anchor tenant of our side of that that community. Um, and thanks for hearing and the thoughtfulness of the board on this.
Could you also Sorry. Yes. Can I add one more thing which is I was so happy to see uh the 10 bike the 10 bike parking spots is awesome because we love to bike down to uh the Ivy and that's awesome. Could you spell your last name again if
you don't mind? H E C H T H E C HTT Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Heck. Um Carrie, who's up next? I know you've brought over a couple of people. I don't
know um the order in which you brought them over. Is it is he Casten next or Nicholas? I believe so. Yeah, it's Mr. Kasen. Thank you. Oh, okay. Hello. If you could raise your right hand, do
you swear or affirm the testimony about to give be the truth? Yes. So, one firm, please state your full name, spell your last name, uh and your street address. Uh and just your street. Uh, my name is Isabelle Casden. My last name is spelled K A S as in Sam, D as in
David, I N as in Nancy. Um, I was a longtime resident of Princeton. I'm now resident of West Windsor. So, I don't know if that precludes me from making a comment, but No, you're welcome to make a comment. And we don't know, we don't need to know your exact address. We just sort of like to have a street address in West Windsor is on
Scott Avenue. Um, but yes, my name is Izzy Casden. I'm a former longtime resident of Princeton. Um, I now live in West Windsor, but I've been a regular attendee at the Ivy Inns Tuesday trivia nights for almost a decade. I started going when I first
moved back to Princeton as a young professional, and it helped me build a community. I actually met my husband as part of the group with which I got connected through Ivy and trivia nights. And I can't overstate the extent to which the Ivy felt like cheers to me in
those years of my life where everybody knows my name. The staff got to know all of us. And even if I was too busy uh or you know overwhelmed to do anything social all week going to trivia on Tuesdays as the one thing I did and
feeling known and recognized at this bar made me feel like a part of a true community which does so much for one's well-being. So, I'm so grateful for that. And as other people have said, I just think that these are the kinds of establishments that Princeton needs,
ones that feel accessible, that build a sense of belonging for everyone, especially young people and people who might not be able to afford the cost of drinks or a meal at other bars in town. And I would agree that the outdoor seating is a better use of the land than
the parking spaces were before. I went to the Ivy for many years when it was parking spaces. And I just think that the outdoor dining lends a sense of vibrancy to Nassau Street and it has significantly enhanced my experience of going there. There were times on trivia nights before the Ivy had that outdoor
space where there was just absolutely no room to breathe. There was nowhere to sit because there just wasn't enough space indoors for all the attendees and that really hasn't been a problem in recent years. So, this space has helped considerably. Um, and there's plenty of parking nearby. As another commenter
said, I myself park in the Princeton University lot behind the Equad when I attend trivia nights and it's a very close walk to the Ivy Inn from there and there are always dozens of available spots to park when to park there. It's actually one of the easier places to park nearby in terms of going out for a
drink or a meal in Princeton. Um, so I just wanted to conclude by saying that the Ivy fills an important niche in our community as a business. It's something Princeton needs and that Princetonians love. It's a true asset to our community and I would hope that the board would
consider enabling them to maintain their outdoor space which clearly sustains their business. So, thank you. Thank you. Um, Mr. Kikis, I believe you're next. And I'm sorry if I'm mispronouncing your name. That was pretty good. Thank you.
Mr. Mueller will swear you in. Wait, if you could raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give me the truth? I do. Just want to confirm. Please state your full names by your last name and give your street. My name is Nicholas Kikis. Ki Kis. I
live at 43 Woodland Drive here in Princeton. Thank you. I just uh first I just wanted to to thank everyone for the opportunity to uh speak and provide these comments. It was a great presentation from Mr. Ryan and his team. Um and I'd like to commend the planning board for kind of
the detailed questions. Um I feel almost my testimony is redundant given the the comments that that preceded me. Um, I really wanted to make sure that, you know, the the the feedback of the community that the IBN is a Princeton institution and I really wanted to provide that expression of support for
maintaining the outdoor space that they currently have. I think converting um private, you know, off streetet parking into a dynamic and family-friendly space, the exact type of uh land use that that Princeton should be promoting. Um and I think it's it's great that that you know this is uh this is happening
and and the investment that is being made um you know is uh is you know able to move forward uh with your permission. So with that I just really wanted to express the strong support you know for the the project. Um as it pertains to parking I think the concerns um are
really non-existent as as you know the testimony has shown people this has been in place for 5 years. um parking is is ample on Nassau Street um especially in that area and uh you know there there's been no uh detrimental impact by having it as in the use that it currently is
and maintaining it that way I think would be an absolute benefit to the town um and is the exact type of thing that we'd like to see uh more of in Princeton. So with that I just wanted to express my support for the project and and hope you approve it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Mr. Henderson. Who's next? Uh, excuse me. Wasserman. Susie Suki. Excuse me. Suki Wasserman. Welcome. Hi. Thank you. My legal name is Susan Wasserman. I live at 160 Meadow Brook Drive in Princeton. And I'm
Mr. Mr. Mueller needs to swear you. Raise your right hand. You swear my testimony about to give me the truth. I do. Okay. So, one friend. Okay. I live at 160 Metobrook Drive. I'm on the board of Housing Initiatives of Princeton at
Ust. Yeah, I believe we um we completely lost Miss Wasserman. Well, I hope she dials back in. Um, and I hope she doesn't talk for three minutes and not realize that she that
she got cut off. Um, she's she's back in already, actually. Oh. Oh, good. Okay. Um, back into the Okay. Can you bring her over, Mr. Mr. Henderson? Bring Suki. Yep. Should be rejoining shortly.
Okay, great. Okay, Miss Wasserman, you're still up. Sorry about that. Technical difficulties, I guess. I'm on the board of Housing Initiatives of Princeton and um we envision a welcoming and inclusive community where all people
can afford to live and thrive. And part of that are the third spaces that uh Justin mentioned. And we believe that Ivy is one of the places, one of the few places in addition to the library, the pool, some public spaces where it is
very accessible to our clients as they become part of the community. We also have been invited in years past and this year to do fundraisers at this public space outside the Ivy. We're very grateful for this. We believe the being
outside enables us one to have community members meet and talk to each other. That wouldn't happen inside because it's very easy when you're standing next to a table. It wouldn't be as comfortable walking up to someone you don't know um inside the bar. It also encourages
people to stop in from the street that see there's a gathering and sees that a nonprofit is there. And so often people will come in and join and learn more about the work we do which benefits the whole community. Um and we're just so
grateful for this space. We we believe over it really helps us bring in a lot of new people to our work and like I said is a place that both the families we serve as well as the people who support us can all be there together. So I I hope that the outdoor area is voted
in. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, do we have uh Amelia Emerson? Is that correct? Uh Ian, correct? Okay. Yes, that's correct. Um
I'll be sworn in. Yep. If you can raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony about to give you the truth? Yes. Just want to affirm. Please state your set your full name, spell your last name, and give your address.
My name is Amelia Eison, E M I S O N, and my address is 127 Metobrook Drive. I'm actually here to represent my entire family. um they're unable to come and speak currently, but um I wanted to just
say that I think that the Ivy is like really a pillar of our community and I really wanted to echo what Julie Zimmerman and what Suki Wasserman have shared about the accessibility and the affordability of the IV and just how
important it is as a third space and as a gathering space um for people to meet. I actually had my first drink at the IV. I'm 22 years old. Um, so that was really a privilege for me. Um, my parents were
so pleased to be able to bring me into the outdoor space and not the indoor space. Um, no offense, but uh, just as a consideration that it really brings um, a new light to our community and is a
place for, you know, parents to bring their younger children and for the university and for other people to aspire towards generativity and so many other things. I think that's really what we're lacking in Princeton.
I know a lot of our residents are getting older. Um, but generativity and like the start of new beginnings is really what um I think makes Princeton Princeton. Um, my family grew up here. We're really we started here as a young
family. I went K through 12 in the Princeton public schools and it was such a great experience and I really want other families to have that experience and you know without date night is that really going to happen? Um, so just to
bring like a younger perspective to the crowd, I think the Ivy is really doing something unique and with that outdoor space, they can really continue to contribute something unique um to the to the town and to the atmosphere of
Princeton. Thank you to the board for your time and thank you for all of your excellent research. I thought the questions that you brought were so excellent and I will yield to the next person. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Emerson.
Uh, so I think next we have Mr. Shear and then after that, um, Mr. Hill. Uh, and then we'll bring over John and his phone and Brian Rosner. So, and as
of right now, there are no other hands up. So, if you wish to address the board, um especially if you have, you know, something to say that has not yet been said, um now is the time to to raise your hand. Mr. Shear, welcome. Thank you. Thank you. I guess I'll raise
my hand. You swear or affirm the testimony about to give will be the truth. I affirm affirm. Please say your full names by your last name and give you your Sure. I'm Adam Sheer. uh s ceer. I live at 20 Gordon Way. Uh my family's been
privileged to uh lived in Princeton uh since 2005. And since then, the Ivy's played an important role in our lives. My wife and I have celebrated our 40th anniversary at the Ivy as well as our 50th. Our 50th was held during COVID and
the Ivy was the only place that we could find to host our gathering uh because it had the that outdoor space and we're very grateful that we didn't miss that milestone thanks to Richie and the team. Uh in uh my uh uh volunteer life, I've
led the Williams College Alumni Association uh for the uh greater Princeton area, central New Jersey. And uh it's very as as the leader of a local volunteer organization, it's extraordinarily
difficult to find places to gather in Princeton. They're either quite expensive as number of other folks have testified or they're inaccessible or they're inflexible. The Ivy's been unique as as as a as as a third place
that has opened its doors to us consistently. Uh we have a very diverse range of of of alumni and uh other stakeholders in the community. Uh and uh it's critical to have have a place
that's both welcoming and affordable. Uh often times uh we don't incur any incremental cost except for what we spend ordering food. Uh which is a deal that quite frankly nobody else will give us in in town. And uh the uh outdoor
space is exceptionally welcoming. Uh we've been able to decorate the outdoor space with our colors, purple and gold, and bring in signage to uh customize the outdoor space for for our group. Again,
it's very un that's very those are very unusual accommodations and it's a testimony to the sense of commitment to the community and uh the openness that Richie and the team have consistently demonstrated. So, I just wanted to express my support for the outdoor
space. note the special uh uh the the special contributions that outdoor space makes to our community and to express appreciation to the team at the Ivy, including Griie and the others and as well as this board for considering this
very important uh accommodation for our town. Thank you. Thank you very much. Um next up we have Mr. Hill. Yes. Andrew Hill. Yes. if you could. Okay, Mr. Muller will swear you in.
Raise your right hand. Oh, one second. Do you swear or affirm the testimony about to kill be the truth? I do. Want to please your full names by your last name and give your street? Yes. My full name is Andrew Hill. Last
name spelled H I L L. My street is Foxrun Drive and that's in Plainsboro. Thank you. Thank you. Um, so I I'd like to speak from from a personal level. I am actually currently at the Ivy Inn right
now as as luck may have it. Um, and I've been from this area, the the adjacent areas since childhood. Um, the Montgomery area and, you know, the Plainsboro area and I've enjoyed the luxuries and the benefits of Princeton and that you guys have put together over the many years. So, first of all, thank
you for that. Um, I I'm part of a running group in the area that meets every Thursday. um a rather large running group. Um and we've enjoyed some of the liveless and the vibrancy that this outdoor seating has given us, whether that be uh my personal story of
meeting my girlfriend at this group, uh the ability to celebrate birthdays at the IVN's uh you know, outdoor area and have that strong sense of community that we've been able to build. Um from from my personal statement, uh two and a half years worth of that. Um, and it feels
like a true community atmosphere. Uh, from the standpoint of, you know, the parking question, right? It definitely adds to the walkable downtown that has been curated. Um, it is seen when you're there as I am right now. Um, they've got
an amazing staff. It's and it's a true small business that really represents their community well. Adds to that feeling of community that Princeton provides and and that we love so much. Um, and so I really just want to speak to that and just echo the support that it's gotten before with its
affordability and its accommodation as an organization, as a business. Uh, they allow a group of sweaty runners to, you know, mingle outside and enjoy, you know, their every Thursday or other days that we may want to come here and participate in the activities. So,
they've done a truly tremendous job with that outdoor area. and it is my personal statement to say that we echo strong support for the continuation of that outdoor seating. So, um, thank you for giving me this platform. Um, I'd like to thank the mayor for his advocacy as
well. Um, and with that, I will yield the rest of my time. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Hill. Um, and then next we have or had I'm not seeing him on the screen right now.
John, who's on an iPhone. John's iPhone I'm not seeing anymore. Um, so we'll go ahead to um Brian Rosener. Rosener. Um, if you would activate your camera and unmute yourself, Mr. Rosener. Um,
Mr. Mhler will swear you in. All right. Apologies if I mispronounced your name. Hi. Uh, you're hearing me? Okay. Yes, we are. Um, so you need to be sworn I need to be sworn in. Sorry. Yes, sir. Yeah. Thanks.
You're about to give me the truth. Do I Oh, sorry. I can't hear anything. One second. Now I hear you. Hands up. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth? Yes. Warner firm. Please state your full
names, spell your last name, and give you street. Brian Rosner, R O Ner 35 Moran of Princeton, New Jersey. Thank you. So, as luck would have it, I am also at the IVN right now as part of the running
group that Andrew referenced earlier. And I can also say that as a 15-year resident of Princeton, I was a member of Izzy's trivia team when she met her husband Dave. Um, so being somebody who lives in the neighborhood here two
blocks away from the Ivy, I can say that since the outdoor space went in, it has transformed this stretch of Nassau Street for the better. Um, what used to be kind of a drab outdoor
space that was just for parking is now vibrant and lively. Um, I feel like I am home every night when I get home from work and I drive past those lights before I turn onto my street. Um, I now can't imagine Princeton or the town
without the IV outdoor seating. So, I echo all the other positive comments that have been made. I want to respect everyone's time, but I can't speak high more. I I can't speak highly enough about how great this has been since it's been here. So, thank you for the time.
I'll yield the rest of my time. Thank you, Mr. Prisoner. Um, any other members of the public um wish to address the board? Right now is the time to virtually raise your hand or press star 9 if you're on your phone.
I am seeing none and so I will close the public comment portion of the me of the meeting. Um, wow. Mr. Ryan, I Miss Wilson, I hope that you um, excuse me, Louise
had a great time hearing everything you just heard. Yes, there's an M Sheer who's on here. I'm sorry, that's that that's Adam Shear. I was just using my wife's account, so I reverted back to her name. Sorry. Yeah, he's already Yes, he already
Okay, thank you. Yeah, thank thank you. Sharp eyes. Um anyway, yes, we we uh we we do not often have um a lot of people coming to say the kinds of things that people said
about you and your business tonight. And um it really speaks volumes. uh uh to the the vibe you have created and that you sustain and the sense of community that um that people feel at your establishment. So
well I can't thank you all props to you for all of that. You guys thank you so much. So are there um further questions from board members um things you want to discuss? Um,
now is our time to um to deliberate and address any final questions people have. Um, and if there are no Mr. Cohen, I I just want to really quickly state that I think the the most compelling
planning proofs, the reasons to grant these variances is that by closing this curb cut, we actually end up with more parking than we would end up with if we had put the accessible parking space on the site. So, I think that's that's a
win-win. And uh in terms of the setback, because all of the neighboring structures are right up against the sidewalk, I I'm I'm shocked that we don't have a prevailing setback uh rule in place in this zone. We do in
some of our other zones, which would automatically make this three-foot setback complying compliant because everybody else has set back that or less. But I just wanted to uh hammer in those two really salient uh
justifications for the variances. Yes. And thank you. That those are important things to put on the record. I couldn't agree more. Um other comments. Uh do we want to then um uh move and second this and then talk
about conditions or do that um going going over conditions first? Madam Chair, I'm happy to move it to keep this going. Thanks, Mayor Freda. Um is there a second?
Second. Thanks, Nat. Nat jumped in first. Nat Bodheimer. Okay, Mr. Mueller, you you can um we we we talked about um uh a number of things. I I know you were taking lots of notes, so why don't we go
through Yeah. through those. Okay. So, so this is what they're seeking uh and what the motion will be is minor site plan approval, the two variances which been discussed at some length um and the conditions. I'm not going to go through the conditions which
are in the memos as recommendations suggestions. They've agreed to all of them. The only additional ones uh that the board might want to consider and I want clarification on one is um to work with staff to determine if roof
roof drainage should be channeled and how. That was something that was raised by Mr. Cohen. That's correct. The may the mayor commented on that. It's not part of my motion. I'm not including not part of your motion. Okay. Um
access the plans to show access routes within the outdoor signing area and from the streets and adjacent parking lots. Um and then the only other one actually um relates to the planters
um between the the planters themselves and the vegetation in it. Are we talking about um 30 in between the two or is it that just wasn't clear to me 30 and 30? My my understanding is that within the
sight triangle which is 15 feet in both directions from the corner it is a maximum height of 30 inches planter and vegetation combined. Okay. And that beyond that it's a maximum of
um 60 in when you count the planters and the vegetation. Is that correct Mr. Weisman or or is it a different thing beyond the site triangle? beyond the psych triangle. I believe it it uh could be I believe what they're proposing is
up to 90 in. So it' be a 30-inch tall concrete planter with possibly 60 in uh along the driveway entrance. Um and it would be possibly 30 in plus 36 in along Nassau Street and
which I think it I mean I think that sounds personally I think that's good. gives a, you know, a little bit of a sense of enclosure and of course separates people from cars on the on the driveway. Um, I I did uh I would like for the um for the
applicant to um to use uh native shrubs instead of the instead of what they have in their um or what they're contemplating. I mean, I think you could switch those out very easily. They're both evergreen. One is native, one is non-native. One grows
way higher than the other. And boxwoods would be more difficult to um boxwoods aren't native. They are not. Okay. I like them. But they also survive anything. We have to I don't have to think we have
to decide what they should. No, we don't have to decide right now. and and let them be skip Laurel and then it'll be up to the um the staff um the landscape architect and the rest of the staff to determine what they should be. Okay, Jerry, just a question. On the
height, are we saying up to out of the sight triangle for the rest of the height? Are we saying up to 90 in? The only reason I say that is I think once these things start to grow and they have to keep them at a certain height, they're probably going to want them a little lower because at that height, somebody's got to get on a ladder to
trim them. I think after they do that two or three times in a row, they're going to lower them. But anyway, I just want to make sure we don't tell them it has to be 90 in. Okay. Yeah, agreed. Yeah. But I think it's a very good point. I think what the motion is is that it the
planting outside of the triangle site triangle be consistent with the application which had those two different heights one along Nassau Street one along the driveway but that this and the condition that we're talking about is uh native
planting instead of what there's proposed. Yeah. Thanks David. Yeah. Okay. And and and that's it Madam Chair. Okay. Um, then we have a motion and a second.
We've laid out conditions. Um, Carrie, would you call the role, please? Mr. Bakimer, yes. Miss Capazolei, yes. Mr. Cohen, yes. Mayor Freda, yes. Mr. McGowan,
yes. Perry. Yes. Mr. O'Donnell. Yes. Miss Pearl Mutter. Yes. And Mrs. Wilson. Yes. Motion carries. Right.
Yes. You're you're sort of cutting in and out, Carrie. Um great. Thank you. Um thanks again to the applicant. Um and uh good luck. Um
again, congratulations. You have um some adoring and very loyal customers, which is really something to be proud of, obviously. Thank you all so much. It means a lot. Okay. And and thank you. Did Claudia vote on that? I wasn't sure.
She's alternative. We have a we have a quorum without her more than quum. Did Matt did not vote on it? Did not did not Matt did vote. Matt did. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay.
All right. Thank you, Mr. Perry. Thank you, Mr. Ryan. Thanks, Mr. Kennedy. Thanks everybody. Thanks so much. Okay. Take care. You too. All right. Moving on. The next item on the agenda is uh an application to be carried to
October. This is for King Interests LLC. This is preliminary and finer m final major site plan with variances at 338 and 342 Nassau Street block 34.01 lots 14 and 32. And this is file number
P2424-473P. And madam madame chair um they have renoticed the notice is proper and the board has jurisdiction and then as you've indicated and as uh Justin indicated is going to be carried to the uh to that date um at this point
October 9th. Yeah. And I assume no further notice is required right? No further notice of the applicant. Yes. Okay. Um good. Next up, we have um applications for
extensions of time. This is five different applications um all seeking an extension of time to hear their application. And um my understanding is that there are no issues uh with jurisdiction or with notice on any of
the following. So I I won't ask about that for each of these. Is that is that appropriate, Mr. Mueller? Yes, it is appropriate. Just just to clarify, four of the five an extension of time to file they're all minor subdivisions subdivision plat or deeds
that hasn't been done. They're out of the time period to do that. Justin will explain in more detail although he did in in the for all of the memos and the fifth that's 271 witherspoon that's just to extend the uh the protection period.
Um, and that would be for uh what are they what are they asking for? For a one year one year extension, Justin, that's correct. Yes. Okay. Okay.
Okay. So, first up to 217 Witherspoon LLC. This is a major site plan. Uh, as Mr. Mueller was saying, an extension of vesting rights. It's file P2222-244P. Approval was granted in uh June 15 of
2023. Expires um June 15, 2025. So I guess well maybe Justin you can explain since these
are already expired and they're anyway. No, they're not. This one mentioned an expiration date. The other ones don't. Um, at 217 Weatherspoon Street, uh, file P2522-2440th. Justin,
Madam Chair, I I I think it would be advisable swearing people in. Okay. Yes. Thanks. Okay. Justin, if you could raise your right hand. Yes. Any of our other staff who's going to be participating? Um,
I'm not sure if they will for each. Okay, I'll swear anyway. Sure. Do you swear or affirm that testimony about to give me the truth? I do. I do. So, want to affirm that would be Justin, Derek, and Dan? Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I'm going to repeat a lot of what was just said. Um but but for a point uh so we have those we now have five extension requests from applicants like Mr. Muller said the first one is for a major site plan application and the remaining four are
for minor subdivision applications and that's very significant tonight. Um there are significant differences of what is being asked for as well as the basis that the board has to grant those requests based on those two types of applications and that's all found in the
municipal land use law. So this first one is the major site plan one. Um you may remember a similar extension request uh most recently uh back in January for a major site plan at 21 Wiggins, the old hightops building. Uh just to kind of to
summarize, when the board approves a major site plan application, the application then has a period of protection from zoning changes for 2 years from the adoption of the findings of fact. Under the MLUL, the board then has the discretion to extend that period
of protection for one year up to three times. Uh the extension request before you is at 217 Witherspoon Street. A commercial building is on the site um fronting NAS uh fronting Witherspoon Street, excuse me, um with a parking lot in the rear. Uh the building's probably
most known for the Hilton's clothing store and the the wireless tower above it, too. if you look up um the the application and I'm not going to go fully into what the application was because that that's it's been approved by the board. Um the application the
board approved in April 2023 was for a 4unit residential building in the rear of the site on part of that parking lot. Uh the board approved the findings of fact on June 15, 2023. So that period of protection expired on June 15th uh 2025
about a month ago. Um, one thing that's commonly misunderstood is that site plan approvals don't necessarily expire. They just protect from zoning changes for 2 years. Uh, so for for this
application specifically, the one before us, there have not been any zoning changes that would affect the approval to date. U, meaning the applicant could still go through compliance and get their plan signed off on um, and then go over and get building permits and and build. Now, that'd be a bit risky
because they don't have that protection um because a zoning change could occur, you know, with the the council introduction, board review, and then uh council uh hearing, and then then they would not be protected anymore from that hypothetical change. Um so, they're
asking for another year to protect against that. Basically, uh it would run to June 15, 2026. So, it goes retroactive um to that first approval. Uh the applicant has stated that they pursued completion of the project, but quote, "Economic uncertainty and
construction costs make the project challenging at this time." End quote. Um the applicant is here obviously, Madam Chair, represented by Mr. Kennedy. Um if you or the board have any questions for them, and I'm happy to take any questions as well.
Okay. Thank you, Justin. Any questions for Mr. Kennedy or for Justin? And seeing none, would someone like to make a motion on this um extension of time? Mr. Cohen
is moving it, I assume. Thank you. And is there seconded by Mr. O'Donnell? Um Carrie, would you call the role, please? Mr. Bodakimer. Yes. Miss Capazolei.
Yes. Mr. Cohen. Yes, Mayor Freda. Yes, Mr. McGowan. Yes, Miss Na. Yes, Mr. O'Donnell. Yes, Miss Pearl Mutter. Yes, Mrs. Wilson. Yes.
Motion carried. And that Thank you. And that runs from um what what date, Justin? For retroactive to June 15 of 2025 to June 15th of next year. Good. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we
have a state shore. This was a minor subdivision um seeking an extension of time. Approval was granted September 19, 2024. This at 479 Jefferson Road, file number P2323-43MS.
Mr. Leco, Jerry, do I need to be sworn in again? Yes. Raise your right hand. Do you swear to swear affirmed testimony about be the truth? Yes, I do. Also want affirmed. Thank you. Uh so that was the easy one. Um and forget everything I just said
because now we're talking about the minor subdivision application and and they're different under the MLUL. Um minor subdivisions are defined as subdivisions of not more than two lots. Um the board approves a subdivision, then approves the findings of fact, as
you know. Um then the applicant goes through their compliance period leading to getting uh their plat or deeds signed off on and then they must file it with the county within 190 days uh of the
approved findings of fact. Uh after that they then get a period of protection. But we're not talking about that tonight um with any of these four applications. We're just talking about basically the timeline uh to file the deed or the plat with the county. Um for an extension of
that 190day period, here is what the municipal land use law says the board has to consider. Quote, uh one, that the developer was barred or prevented directly or indirectly from filing because of delays in obtaining legally required approvals from other
governmental or quasi governmental entities. and two that the developer applied promptly for and diligently pursued the required approvals. Uh end quote. So if the developer proves that they applied promptly and diligently for
the approvals and that they were held up by a governmental or non-governmental or a quasi governmental entity, um the MLUL states that quote the length of the extension shall be equal to the period of delay caused by the wait for the required approvals as determined by the
planning board. End quote. Um, and I I'd just like to note that we've advised the attorney and the applicants professionals that we were going to include these requirements in our reports and to the board um uh after uh and to the applicants um after we
received some of the first requests and then throughout the process. Um some of the requests you'll see if you look back at the documents were delayed from going on an agenda until we received es escrow uh fulfillment either for outstanding bills from the application or for the
review of the extension you know basically paying the professionals tonight. Um so that's why you might see a request from March. Uh but it's obviously July right now when we're hearing it. Uh, one other thing I want to note is that if ex these subdivision
minor subdivision extensions are not granted tonight and the time period to file has lapsed, essentially voiding the approval, uh, the applicant could come back to the board with the same application. Uh, that doctrine of res judicada that doesn't allow an applicant
that was denied to come back with the same thing. um that does not apply as technically these applications were not denied or or the the approval was not denied of the application. Uh we would just then start from square one with the review.
So all that being said, um I'm about to get into the case at 479 Jefferson Road. Are there any questions from board members at this time? Excellent. Go ahead. Uh so the first application is um uh the applicant of State Shore at
479 Jefferson Road. The the board approved a one lot to two lot minor subdivision on June 25th, 2024 last summer. Uh variances were approved to allow 2.23 acre lots where 0.25 acres is
the minimum lot size in the R six zone. Uh a front yard setback variance was denied on Kyler Road. Um and 17 conditions were imposed by the board uh including limiting the maximum floor area ratio and maximum impervious coverage. Um as I said earlier, we're
not relitigating any of that. I just wanted to uh you know inform the board of of the application and uh uh just give you background so you understand which one it was. Um, the deadline to file the subdivision was March 28th,
2025, and we received a request for an extension on March 26th, 2025. Uh, the only other governmental approval was from the Mercer County Planning Board, and the applicant received that on December 11th, 2024. Um, and they've
requested a 180day extension to file the subdivision. Uh, with that said, that's all the background I have. Um, I will turn it back to you, Madam Chair, or to the applicant. Okay. Um, you have anything you to add,
Mr. Kennedy, that that the board needs to know, you think? AB: Absolutely. And and and briefly, uh, first, thank Justin for for the synopsis um, and the explanation of of the standard here. Just a few things to add. um in addition to what he uh went
through from a timeline perspective. Uh yes, the the one outside approval was obtained uh kind of at the December time period. So it was promptly applied for there was about a 45day gap period between applying for it and receiving it um and then following which the
applicant proceeded to uh complete their compliance plans. I will say that we in this case um came very close you know and and while we put in our request the 180 to 90 days and obviously we're beyond that now because of the the time to get scheduled to discuss this but uh
in reality it was the period during that um planning board um from the county um review uh because we actually did get the compliance in this case materials in um uh before the end of that period from our engineer to start the review, but it
was not enough time to uh get the review completed um have or get deeds backed and signed by that time period. So, when we realized that, we put the request in. But ultimately, if you were to take that time period um that the county took uh and that we were pursuing that and uh
actually did have our our engineer um provide the compliance materials about two weeks um before the end of that period. uh that if if that intervening middle part had been shorter, we would likely have had the the time and ultimately that would be respectfully
ultimately the request. Uh the compliance materials are done. Um, and if the board was so declined, rather than having us come back, or likely in this case, it would be the applicant um I don't say abandoning the but doing something different um rather than uh um
this particular project because of the the time involved. But but ultimately um that shorter period if it were to be as as Mr. Leco said kind of concatenated with the time to get to you here uh tonight is really what the request is. the compliance materials are uh had been
prepared uh and and ready to go. Uh it should be a very limited time to finalize the review of that so they can be signed and then recorded. Okay. Uh Mr. Cohen has a question. Yeah. So I I sort of feel like Ryan did answer my question, but I want to
confirm that I understood him correctly. So, just referring back to what Justin told us, the length of the extension we're allowed to grant has to coincide with the delays that the applicant experienced. And what I'm hearing is
that there was a 45 day or so delay with the county and then the rest of the delay is the delay with Princeton getting you guys onto an agenda between
when the application was received, say March 26th until today. So the it's 45 days plus whatever the distance is between March 26th and today. Is that extension that you're asking for?
It is. I'll say that our our initial request, you know, kind of oversimplified and many other towns treat these differently than this. Um uh and but yes, that is that is the amount of time needed and essentially the justification that could be made for this extension. Okay. And then that extension whatever
that number of days is would be from the 25th of March uh not from today. That's how that it would be calculated assuming assuming if that extension
period was the that initial delay period plus this time between the request and now. Yes, that would be the request. Yeah. Thank you go ahead Justin. Yeah. I'd just like to respond to that. Um, we received the qu the request for the extension on March
26th and the filing deadline was March 28th. So, it was never going to get on an agenda before it expired, you know, and then the holdup from March 28th to now,
we were asking for escrow and there were periods where we didn't have any responses back and you know it unfortunately this I don't think this was the intention but if with those dates and those time frames the applicant ends up getting you know an
extra uh 4 months for something that they were supposed to do within 190 days. I mean I I it it pains me from a self-interest side to say this because I don't think it necessarily you know a
lot of work went into these applications um as you all remember the multiple meetings and all that. I I don't want to relive that, you know, from a self-interest side, but from a MLUL side and a a you know, legal side and a
fairness to to everyone else, um you know, this just does not seem like a a timeline um that we necessarily want to to start, you know, making a precedent. And that's just my opinion. If I just
add briefly to that, um, prior to requesting the extension, we did ask what the process was. The the request for an escrow is new to the process. It wasn't necessarily part um um of what we explored and and um I'll also say it was
a difficult decision rather to even pursue the extension to be honest with you. Um and a lot of thought went into uh both in the scheduling and whether that money really made sense to even put out uh to to try. Ultimately the
applicant decided to do that. Um but but um is a challenging question particularly in a situation where like this one where um it was right at the end and and ready to go and and you know maybe shame on us for not pushing
harder on those last couple days. Justin, I do appreciate you. you were very helpful in attempts to, you know, get something to the the county at that last period. Um, but ultimately it it it didn't happen and then the applicant has a very tough choice to make whether to
sink money further into it or um and and ultimately to kind of wait for this to to ask. So, um um All right. Thank you for that. Thank you both. Um, Mark Freda. So, I'm just curious when did the
applicant apply to the county planning board? When was the county hearing and how long after the hearing was there approval or was there approval that same night?
Uh, I I' I'd have to pull up the exact dates, u mayor, but uh early um early November. Uh and then mid December um the the way they do their approvals um is uh I don't mean to say in secret
they're public meetings but ultimately they're not like this and then you get a letter back ultimately. So uh approximately 45 days um I I would so the so the applicant waited about 8 months after our approval to apply to
the county. No, no, no. Um the the the resolution was uh in um March, September. Um so our res the count our resolution was in September. It it was there was a quite a bit of
time um unfortunately between Okay. the approval and the resolution. Okay. Thank you. I just want to interject. It was scheduled for the uh December 11th meeting before the county planning board.
My member was close. Thank you. Okay. Thanks, Gary. Um, Jack Taylor. Yeah, Mr. Ryan, I'm confused. On three occasions, we've talked about the extension. And in each and every one I had the
impression that there was if not ambivalence that it was a very difficult decision and that there had not been an extension then the process would have changed and the program wouldn't have gone forward. In other words, from my
perspective, I don't understand the nature of expens extension, your reaction to it and whether it matters what decision we're taking here or not to the applicant. That that very fair question and and um
essentially um with an extension like this, the applicant would proceed as approved by this board. Um if not um they had have the option to reapply and and there might be uh uh some reverse resto and ultimately this board approved
it and you know if the board were to be presented with the same application without any changes in zoning to the master plan. I would have some concerns about it being denied. Um but but ultimately in this particular case I would represent though that um the time to do that is is is one that's just not
um doesn't fit this applicant and and he would proceed to do something else. Um he would build I don't want to get into the details of the original debate or discussion about this application but it was a um minor subdivision with variances to allow two smaller homes to
be built versus the as of right much larger home. And I'm not here to suggest, you know, um, revisiting which the board thinks is better, but ultimately that would likely be the outcome that they would not invest more in in another, say, 6 months in pursuing
that original application to be re-approved and and go with an as of right option. That's the reality of what would happen in this one. So, in other words, it really is up to the board to decide whether the applicant goes forward.
It's up to us to decide whether they um get an extension. Yeah. Yes. And then they can and then they can what they want still do either plan. But if we don't give the extension then they have to reapply and go through the all the whole
process all over again which clearly um you know not many people would want to do. Uh yeah. Does that answer your question, Jack? Yeah, I understand. Thank you, Louise. Um, David Cohen.
Yeah, I um the the nature of my question before when I was asking for the length of the extension, you know, I did not mean to suggest in any way that our staff was
uh remiss in allowing time to pass between when the extension application was received and when we as a board are hearing this. rather what I think the applicant is
asking for is just as a matter of practicality um that time period between March 26th and today must be added to the extension in order for them to be able to file the
the paperwork that was almost ready. Uh but but in reality, the only extension they're really asking for is the length of time it took for the county planning board to process their application.
Now, there may be a legitimate argument that the 90day time period allowed for plenty of time for the planning board to do their the county planning board to do their work and for the applicant to file
the plat and Mr. Kenny is representing that they did almost complete it. So, you know, he actually, you know, he might only be asking for the period of time between March 26th
and today plus a week. You know, I mean, we don't know exactly how long it'll take them to submit the plat at this point. But the the question that I'm asking I guess is we do not want to be in a situation
where we grant the extension and are challenged in court as having done so improperly. And so I was asking how do you calculate the extension and is a delay
by Princeton's planning staff in processing the application a legitimate delay. Not again not casting blame or aspersions but just saying if we wanted to grant this
would we be safe in granting it uh from from legal challenge. Maybe this is a question for Jerry. It is a question, Jerry. I think um and and thanks for asking it, Jerry. I think granting it would be highly problematic.
Um the Did you Did you I I usually try to read your lips and I can't see them. So, did you say highly problematic? Yeah. Um Okay. It's the way I see it. Uh give us give
us your legal reason. Explain. Yeah. Well, what what what was the delay? I I during this 190day period, they had plenty of time to get it in to the county planning board. The county
planning board acted within a couple of months and um then all they had to do was file a plat or they didn't have to get compliance stuff before approved by this by the staff. uh then they just file a plat or
deeds and what does it take to to prepare the deeds? How much just just to we would not have been able to file the deed. They need to be approved by staff and and and signed um before they can be approved. So we we did have to go
through that compliance process. I don't I don't agree with that. We could we could have filed deeds without the No, no, but I the rest of compliance in terms of satisfaction of conditions, modifications of of the plan, etc.
I I'll I'll I'll defer to to staff here if they would have released them um prior to uh the other conditions being satisfied. I I would love that. I I don't I don't believe that's the case, but I'll
Well, that that seems like a bit of a kind of redirect um right now to be honest with you. I think the real question is could you have filed a plat between December 11th or or can you could you have filed all those compliance
materials between December 11th and then gotten it uh uh prepared and ready to go to file it completely with the county by March 20 uh 28th. And I mean that's two
and a half months there. That that seems realistic. 3 and 1/2 months. And I interject here. I'm sorry. Uh we received the deed descriptions and the revised plans on March 21st.
Then we got the formal request in writing on the 26th. That's all. Okay. Thanks, Carrie. Carrie, do you need to swear Carrie in for this? Uh, you're suddenly got difficult to hear, Justin.
Yes, it is want to do. Sorry about that. I was just I was just asking if Jerry, do you need to retroactively swear Carrie in for that uh information or is that not testimony? Yeah. No, it's I it's not testimony. Thank you. Thanks.
Um, can I ask a question, Jerry? Yes. Please just clarify. What is the the legal issue with granting the extension or what where's where does the legal liability lie for the board if we were to grant the extension?
Well, the applicant has 190 days. If they don't do it within 190 days, they're gonna have to explain why they didn't do it, why there was a delay, caused the delay, the length of the the delay, and there would be entitled in
that case if that was if that was all legitimate for an extension during the time period of the delay. And I just don't see the proofs on that. Okay. But the fact is that they were delayed.
So where were they delayed? Well, it was approval by the county planning board in mid December that they could have prepared a plat or or deans. In fact, they uh So is it up to us to question the reason why they were delayed?
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, that's what the that's what the municipal land use law says that the Yeah. There has to be a direct correlation between the um
the amount of uh the the time that they were delayed and the um ex and that the any extension we uh grant needs to equal the delay. and what and I I have to say I'm I'm
still a little confused. Yeah. Um also about um uh you know if that I mean if you were delayed by the county but they but but they gave their approval in mid December then you had until mid-Marchch. Is that
is that correct? And your your testimony is that or your it's not sworn because you don't get sworn but um is that there was no way for you to to file your you know the the required documents in
those four months. The the representation was that it was done um first by by email to the board and manage the the the engineer for doing that and then directly to staff prior to the to the deadline. Um, could it have been done faster? Of course. Do
I wish it had been? Yes. Do I Did we do everything we could to to have things line up? Yes. Um, ultimately that's the reality of of um trying to get these things uh completed uh in in time. Um
and and the the necessity to tie it to a period um is is or or to a period of of an outside approval is is is the task here. Um I I I understand what some of you are saying. Um um and it's it's it's
our job to to try to avoid the duplication of another application and the repercussions of this by by you know explaining it. Um as I am I I don't disagree with what some of the board members are saying necessarily. In the regular course um on many of these types
of applications they can be done. Um, I'll say it it is getting harder and harder um uh to to do so on a on a general basis. Um and uh ultimately um in this case uh it came quite close and
if you were to add up the time uh between that last submission um um and which you know could I don't think it was I I'll be totally honest it would not be fair to expect um staff to turn around in 3 days or 5 days or even a
week. That's that's um it's not. But if you were to add those periods up with the the time for the the county, that that is um um something that the MUL at least recognizes and that's what we're that's what we're we're asking for. Um and certainly, you know, understand.
Okay. Uh David, so one question I have is whether there is such a thing as a minor subdivision that would not have to be reviewed by the county planning board. Because one
of the key factors here seems to be whether the 45 days that the county took to process this application should count toward an extension. And if the 190 days that's contemplated in the MLUL for
filing the plat uh just you know wouldn't necessarily include county planning board review because that only happens in some cases then I would think it's reasonable to
give an extension for the amount of time it took for the county to process it even if the applicant could have completed the application in the remaining three months, three and a half months or
whatever. But if every single minor site plan and minor um subdivision has to go to the county planning board, then I would think that the 190 days
would would contemplate that process of going to the county planning board as part of the 190 days. And therefore, unless the county took an inordinate amount of time, then the to the time that the county took would not be
grounds for an extension, if I'm being clear. So, yeah. No, that that is surprisingly clear. Um, so does anyone know Jerry, do you know the answer to that? Yeah. Yeah. I believe every subdivision of
land goes to the county planning board. Only some site plans do. And Jerry, you could correct me if I'm wrong on that, but that's my belief. I don't You said not every uh No, every subdivision, but not every site plan. Dan,
every subdivision, but not every site plan. Okay. Yeah. Jerry and then Dan Weissman. Well, I'll defer to Dan. Sure. I I don't think I've been sworn in uh for this. Swear or affirm testimony about to give you the truth. I do. Yes, one
uh the Mercer County land uh development ordinance requires that any subdivision of land within Mercer County go to the Mercer County Planning Board. Okay. But this 190 days is established by the state, not by the county.
Correct. Yeah. And we don't know whether that's true in every county. Correct. I can't speak to other counties. I can I I am only familiar with the Mercer County uh land development ordinance. Thanks,
Mr. O'Donnell. My issue is though that we still don't know what the reason was for the delay. Yeah. from the county planning board's approval to the March 26 date where they asked
for an extension. Yeah, I think that's the key factual question. I I agree Owen that that's the question. I'll just represent that once it's approved then then the materials are updated uh in conformance with that uh
to to be resubmitted as a a final compliance package. Um so there's there's work to be done. Uh I I don't have our engineer for this case on here tonight so I can be more specific than that but I will say you know can it can it and often is it done in that
period of time? Yes, it can. Um uh is it in the normal course for it to to take that long out. Unfortunately, that's become my experience. Um but but uh to your point that there's no specific other than uh it taking longer for the engineer to get that um to explain that
additional period beyond the part where it was in the county's hands. Well, um I you know, I'm hearing as others have Mr. Mueller say that under these circumstances um granting an extension
uh would be very problematic and would and would um expose the board in the town to you know some jeopardy. And it pains me to say that because I would prefer to see two two smaller houses on
smaller lots that even though they're you know just a little smaller than is allowed in the zone uh than than a gigantic uh you know truly truly large house right on a
corner there. Um but that's not the question that's before us. the you know it's a much more technical question kind of question that um and and I think it's our responsibility to avoid that
jeopardy on behalf of the town unfortunately or I mean I don't mean unfortunately I mean unfortunately for the applicant I guess is what I mean um I don't know do other other folks want to weigh in with some thoughts about this um Freddy Pearl
Mutter and and David Cohen. Um, I have a question for Jerry. If if this were an illegal act, etc. or whatever, who would be the likely plaintiff in that? Who would go after, you know, is is it another landowner? Is
it who are we worried about being sued by if we are really worried about being sued? If we if we granted it, yeah, it would be neighboring property owner to expect. And just to just to add to that, I mean, the first thing that we see in every
lawsuit is a process argument, whether it's there or not. Yeah. Uh David, did you have something else? Yeah. I just want to um make one last um observation in the
applicant's favor which is that the approval that we did grant was quite complicated. We heard there were 17 conditions I think. Yeah. Um there was a fair amount of compliance work for the engineer to do
to update their plans and I don't think the standard here is was the filing of the plant pursued with all possible haste. you know, it was wasn't done with
due diligence and you know, it feels to me like, you know, they were trying reasonably hard. You know, I don't know how busy the engineer was, how many other projects he had going on, how many staff
he had available. you know, there as a design professional myself, I have some sympathy for um you know, an inability to turn around documents very quickly, but um I'm not going to I'm not going to push it. Uh but I just wanted to put
that out there. Um Mr. Mueller, um given what Mr. Cohen just said, "Do you does that give you any any higher comfort level with um uh because I I find, you know, I'm
sympathetic to that argument as well? Um I just, you know, I want to know what you think about it." Yeah. Not to tell you the truth, not really. Uh it seems to me that the if you don't want to do a plot, you can do it by deeds. The deeds can be prepared. It
doesn't take much time. And I'm not sure what sign off the the staff has to give with respect to the deed deeds. They could be prepared. It's a deed from the applicant to the applicant. Um and uh they could be filed. They could be
prepared days. Okay. Okay. Um Justin, do you have any comments? No. No, I don't. If if I may just just ask one question though and and this is perhaps my misunderstanding is to to
confirm at Princeton's process but when these packages are submitted um would the deeds be released with signatures um to to um to the chair and secretary to sign without those um
compliance items being approved um by staff. It was my understanding that they don't um and that those the compliance items need to be completed and I guess we'll just like clarification on that. Yeah. Well, yes. And I see Dan putting his
camera on because he oversees these. Um so I'll I'll defer to Dan. Sure. Thank you. Um so if when it comes to filing by plat, we would ensure that all compliance items uh would be met. If it's filing by deed, the only thing that we would uh call for compliance on is
that the deed documents be reviewed by Mr. Mueller and the deed descriptions of the lot be reviewed by our um land surveying consultant uh to ensure that the deed descriptions match what what the subdivision plan uh indicated the subdivision was for. So those would
really be the two compliance items of filing by by deed. I'll I'll speak as a practitioner that I'm I'm from a going forward basis delighted to hear that. Um I um
my experience had been that these are all put together and that there would not be a a deed released to absence compliance. So I'm I'm glad to hear that that's the case and we'll be in the future sending you deeds uh you know immediately since as Mr. Mr. Muller said those are quite simple to put together.
It is the remaining parts of these projects that are quite complicated. Um, and I I'm I'm surprised to hear that we would receive a deed with legal descriptions if the other notes on the subdivision plan had not been adjusted
to staff's compliance um or satisfaction before those could be released. But I guess happy to hear that on a going forward basis. I'm sorry. Are you suggesting that we review it and then if you don't make the changes that that the two that either Jerry or the
land surveyor have then you'd still be able to file because I don't think that's what we're saying. It's, you know, there's the normal compliance for a plat that we we always have and the compliance for a deed is is it's still
being reviewed as Dan just mentioned, but reviewed as to the text of the deed and the uh meets and bounds description is what I'm hearing. and that the other items that take a significant period of time, you know, the the uh the you know, I'll call it it's not filed as a map,
but it's still required and and reviewed that those are not necessary and that those deeds would be released if upon submission of a a form deed and descriptions um for review. Um so I I I wasn't aware of that that would work
that way. I I'm I'm I'm doubtful that honestly that that it does. But if it if it does then that that's a lot of things to shortcut and I guess at some other point the other documents would be reviewed for condition compliance I suppose. But I I don't think it obiates the need
to submit a a comp whatever compliance materials need to be submitted. But that the subdivision could be perfected prior to that occurring. Yeah. And Dan, you agree? Okay, let's um I mean I think that
that's a simple yes. Um Paulie um thanks. So I I mean this exchange is kind of clarifying the reason for the delay which is deep and profound confusion about the process. Um and we have two lawyers who have both been
working in the field and they seem to have had different understandings. Um, so I mean in all fairness to the applicant, we spent so much time working with them um in reviewing these plans. Um, and I, you know, as a planning board
member, this is a project that we definitely, um, want to see going forward. Um, I'm wondering if Jerry, the uh, you would accept a reason for delay as as misunderstanding um, or of the process.
Is that allowed? It's a good question. Um, I think it's tenuous, but uh if that's the board's pleasure, I um I think it can go ahead with that. But,
um, another point is also this is the first project of this kind we've seen in town. Um and it's a learning experience um for both the applicant and for the administration um and for our board.
Uh is it the first it's not project of its kind? I mean it's not David. Yeah. I I I don't mean to um respect I think the board may be thinking of the next one we'll be discussing to be honest with you that that may be okay.
Yeah. The next one Yeah. The next one was sort of a one-of-a-kind uh kind of thing. Um but Justin, prior prior to what before the board tonight, um they there were minor subdivisions that were approved by the uh by the board. Correct.
Yeah. Yeah. I mean, frankly, they're minor. I don't think we notice them too much because it's one lots, two lots or two lot lot line adjustments. Yeah. And you know, no one's ever come in, I I don't think, for an extension of the time for filing
the deeds of plat, have they? Not that I can recall in the couple years I've been here. Me, too. Uh, Mayor Freda, I would say lack of confus lack of or confusion as to what the proper process
is isn't really a legal excuse. But anyway, I make a motion to deny. Is uh there's a motion on the floor, so to speak. Is there a second? Second. Was that you, Mr. McGawan?
It was. Two people spoke at once, so my screen freaked out. Um, okay then. Let's uh call the role. Carrie uh Mr. Bodakimer
deny Miss So that's a yes. If you're voting yes, it's to say no. Yeah. Um yes. Carrie, we're not hearing you right now. Are you
I'm sorry. I had my mic in the wrong position. Okay. Okay. We got Jul Nat and Julie voted. Mr. Cohen, no. Mayor Freda, yes. Mr. McGawan,
yes. Miss Na, no. Mr. O'Donnell, yes. Miss Pearlmutter, yes. And Mrs. Wilson, reluctantly. Yes.
Okay. The motion to to deny has been, uh, carried. Okay. Thank you. So, um, this is much later than we most usually go without a break. Um, I'm going to ask if the remaining three items, if there's any
reason to think that any of them will take as long as the discussion that we just had. If they will, and I I'm asking this question not of you, Mr. Kennedy, with respect, uh, but of Mr. Leco um then then I would like to take a break
now and if you think they're they were are likely to go more quickly then I am willing to uh forge ahead. Uh because there are three I wouldn't imagine cumulatively it'd be less than a half hour. So I I could use a bathroom
break. Okay, let's make it a let's make it a brief one though. It's 9:48. Let's be back by say 5 minutes to to 10. So 7 minute break. Thanks. Well, six minutes
now. Okay. Okay. Welcome back everybody. If you are within hearing, please uh turn your cameras back on. Thank you board members. Anyway, we'll wait a minute for David
and for Jack and Freddy. There's David. Oh, and Pauly, too. Okay, I think we're all here. So, we'll um reconvene the
I'm sorry. That's all right. The next item on the agenda is um 8C. This is Princeton Developers, formerly Iodelli. This was a minor subdivision. They're asking for an extension of time. The approval was
granted September 19, 2024. This is at 469 Euing Street, file number P 2322-255m. Um Justin, thank you, Madam Chair. Justin, if you raise your right hand, do you swear or affirm that the testimony about to go be the truth?
Yes, I do. Affirmed. Thank you. Uh the next request to extend the period to file a subdivision is at 469 Euing Street. Uh you may know this application as the Aadelli one. Um that applicant has since sold the lot to the
applicant that the chair just mentioned, 469 Ewing Street Property Developers LLC, who are bringing this uh forth tonight. The original the approved application I should say was for a one lot to two lot subdivision. Variances were approved to allow for 2.22 22 acre
lots where 0.25 acres is the minimum lot size of the R six zone. Additional approved variances on the subdivision included those for lot width and lot frontage. Um an associated site plan was approved alongside the subdivision application to allow for a primary
dwelling and an accessory dwelling unit on each lot uh sharing a driveway. The deadline to file the subdivision was March 28, 2025, and we received a request for an extension on March 26, 2025. Uh the only other governmental approval for the subdivision was from
the Mercer County Planning Board, and the applicant received that on June 11th, 2025. Uh the applicant, and these are the comments from from my memo, the applicant should advise when they applied for county planning board approval and if it created a delay in
filing the subdivision. Uh the applicant also stated that this is a project due to the site plan approval. Um they should elaborate on how that affects the filing of the minor subdivision plat or deed. Uh you may remember a condition was specifically crafted to allow the
applicant to perfect the subdivision while the existing house was still there as long as they demolished that house prior to the two lots being sold separately. Um, I do also want to note that the applicant provided some compliance documents for both the site
plan and subdivision earlier this month. Uh, some of the documents related to the subdivision are dated May 12th, 2025, uh, which is obviously after the March 28th deadline. Um, and just lastly, the applicant has requested in their letter
aday extension to file the subdivision. Uh, with that said, I will turn it back to you, Madam Chair, or to the applicant. Um, I'll turn to Mr. Kennedy. Thank you. Um, if it's possible, I I do have our engineer, um, Jim Camalik in the audience. We could bring him over
just to to assist with with going through some of the timeline um, um, of of this one as it as it was quite, I'll say, complicated. as he's coming over, I'll I'll I'll start by saying, you know, not to rehash the the same
discussion arguments we had before, but to kind of pick up on a couple of the themes that we discussed that makes this one particularly different. Um uh piece one um uh and this a bit goes to the um uh the the process here, but is
additionally a site plan. uh site plans have two years as you heard with the the extension before uh of of vesting and uh uh orders of magnitude more complexity of of preparation and compliance to go through. Um uh but actually before I
continue I mean I don't should I should we have Jim sworn in we'll be providing some testimony? Yeah Jim if you could raise your right hand. Sure. Do you swear or affirm the testimony about to give you the truth? Yes I do. also want our firms. Please state your full names by your last name
and give that's that's sufficient. James Kamalac, ch H I E L A K. Thank you. Thank you. So um Jim, couple of things just to start. So um not only that this
compliance materials been submitted, but all the outside agency um approvals have been obtained on this one. Is that correct? Including the D. Yes, we have received those approvals. All right. And uh again, I guess different than the last one, but could we focus a bit on
the the types of things that needed to happen before um county approval could be sought and why this was so much more complicated than a standard minor subdivision? Well, I think if everybody remembers um
this was a site plan application and I think the prominent driver of this approval was driven by the fact that um they were two residential lots with a shared driveway as well as a shared corridor for utilities and then also the
trees were of subsequent interest. um buffering from ne uh neighboring properties. So the site from a landscaping perspective um to respect the the adjacent properties and local neighborhood really weighed heavily in
on that site plan as well. Um and then we also had some uh storm water management component which was part of this approval um which was also serving to address the increase um in imperous
area on the site but also handled um for the overall site plan or the two lots as a whole. So, um, where typically for a minor subdivision, uh, you may have two individual lots, um, where you don't have a final design and a site plan
component and you can simply go into the county, get your approval rather quickly, um, because of the the lack of detail here. We did have a site plan component um which we had you know other significant issues that we addressed
with the board um which manifested itself in approximately 25 conditions in that resolution of approval um that we worked to satisfy. Um and then as part of our
application to the outside agencies, um our approach was to submit those compliance plans which included the final site plan as well in addition to the minor subdivision plan as a complete package in its final form to all of the
outside agencies. So they were approving the final thing. Um and we we did you know make those submissions uh and we also followed up with that submission simultaneously to the municipality as well. Um for their
approval of those resolutions um resolution compliance phase of which we we um actually that was that was after the fact because we received those approvals from those agencies. But we have all of the approvals in hand at
this point in time. the compliance documents are are complete and you know satisfactory from our standpoint with working through the issues of as I explained the the easements on both lots for the share driveway for the share drainage the storm water maintenance
plan. We also um had to go down a path relative to preparing a sightspecific landscaping plan um relative to this property which is somewhat unique for two residential lots which you typically would not have. Um, and that was a
unique component of sort of the the tree removal uh component and the tree buffering relative to the sensitivities of the neighboring property owners which we did had. We memorialized those concepts on our site plan. Um, but have since retained a landscape architect to
prepare that sight specific plan which has been submitted, you know, to the town as one of those components of the resolution of approval. So, um I know that's a lot, but you know, just to refresh your memory, I think a lot of us remember this application. It was it was
rather unique. Um we also held that impervious coverage to that 36% not that 49.5 relative to the zoning. So, we kept it on the lower side if you remember. But all these different facets
um you know drove us to to sort of managing the overall time frame with other complexities of you know the prior owner and now the current owner which also played into this um in terms of you know the sequencing of our timing uh
with where we're at today. But I guess just to summarize we have everything we need um you know and if there are no further comments on municipal review we should be able to take this right to the next step. If the board were to grant this, you know, approval um for time
tonight, Jim, one one followup question. Um this was a complex project. It happened to slide in as a minor subdivision. It was also a site plan. If it were major and had a different fee, would that 190 days
be um an issue here? No, I think the one 190 days is really limited to that minor site plan. So we would have obviously the site plan has not expired. That's still valid but we are hamstrung because of this
classification of a a minor subdivision as you pointed out. Thank you. Uh Mr. Cohen. Thanks m Mr. Cameic. Um yeah, I I just want to say I find it very
convincing that the applicant has been working diligently ever since they you know received the approvals and that there was just I mean maybe it was possible for them to file the plat before they did all the other
compliance stuff, but it sounds like uh not only the letter but the spirit of the MLUL well is that they need needed to be working diligently towards it and it sounds like they have been doing that and that that there were a lot of other
governmental approvals that contributed to the delay u not you know not just the county planning board so I think that it fits right you know comfortably into the MLUL uh requirements for the extension
yep thank you for thank you for that other um other comments or thoughts from board members. Would someone like to make a motion? Mr. Cohen, I move to grant the extension.
Uh we'll just also need to we'll need to know the amount of time as well based on the delays. So since they're representing that they're just about ready at this point, uh I think from March 25th till July
25th, that's four months would be about 120 days. Um so I would give a little bit of uh wiggle room. So maybe a 150day extension would be what I would move.
Is there a second? I'll second it. Thanks, Miss Kenny. Um, Mr. Kennedy, you have a question. Just a point of order. Um uh since I know it's it's um not the regular practice um uh these are not common in
in Princeton or as common as they are in other municipalities. Just want to add just a procedural question here. If we were to expect a resolution um that might be necessary to include with the deed um is it necessary to to include that time in now if if this is approved
on the record. Um good question. I'm comfortable with that. But if we were to expect this to be memorialized, I just want to I'll say in other municipalities, I would include um the extension resolution in with the deeds when they're recorded so that the county clerk understands that it's been uh why
there's been more than 190 days. Yeah. Fair. Um Mr. Mueller, or or are you the right person to address that question? Is Ryan is the thought add an additional
period of time? Just yes. If if if Mr. Con's motion is I believe another 30 or so days to complete to get the deed signed and and filed, my concern would be that as a practice in some other municipalities and their extensions, it'd be accompanied by a resolution. Um and um I
I it's ultimately a county issue to look at the timing of the resolution in the 190 days. Yeah, we would not have a resolution until, you know, um at the earliest our September our our first September meeting. So, an additional 30
days would not be enough. So, if if possible, it may be legally permissible to do that. It hasn't been my practice. I've always used uh a resolution in with the deed. That may not be necessary, but I would just ask if it's possible to get to that um resolution date as well if if that is
necessary to have this memorialized. Do you know whether it's necessary, Mr. Muller, or is that a county bycounty decision? I think it's county by county, but I I I think Ryan's point is a good one. And I could see a a lot that a lot of these kind of recording officers, they're very
piggy. Um, and I think having that would if if I were in his shoes, I would want it. Yeah. So, um, grab the requested 180 days then. which takes it through to September what
do we call the original deadline was the 26th March 26th the 28th 28th 28th would take it to September 24th okay that works
thank you much Much appreciated. Just that clarification. I mean, that gives us both both September meetings. I think that's fair. More than fair. Okay. Um,
so Mr. Cohen, you're amending your motion. 180 days. Yeah. And um, Mr. O'Donnell, you seconded. Is that correct? I think Julie did. Oh, I'm sorry. Sorry, Julie.
I amend my second. Okay. Um, Carrie, call the role, please. Mr. Bodakimer, yes. Miss Capolei, yes. Mr. Cohen, yes. Mayor Freda, yes.
Mr. McGawan, yes. Miss Na, yes. Mr. O'Donnell, yes. Miss Pearl Mutter, yes. Mrs. Wilson, yes. Motion carried. Um, next item is 8D. This is Steven
Wasco, minor subdivision, extension of time. Approval was granted December 19, 2024. This is at 561 and 537 Stockton Street, file number P20 2323-
3688MS. Um, Mr. Leco, he's got his hand up. Go ahead, Jerry. We swear our firm testimony about to give will be the truth. Yes, I do. That's one in front. Thank you. Uh, thank you, Madam Chair. The next two requests are going to be slightly different than the two that you
just saw because they're both on state roads. So, they do require permissions from the New Jersey Department of Transportation in addition to their county planning board approval. Uh this request before you is for a lot line adjustment between two neighbors at 537
and 561 Stockton Street, which is of course also Route 206. Uh each lot contains a a house that that was built in the early 18th century. And this lot line adjustment was approved to allow for the one at 561 Stockton Street to be
moved further away from the Stonybrook so it does not flood. Again, uh just as a reminder of this one, several variances were requested and granted by the board. Uh the deadline to file the subdivision was June 19th, 2025, and the applicant sent in their extension
request prior to that date on May 30th, 2025. Uh the applicant states that the state DOT is still reviewing the project for consistency with its highway access code and right-of-way dedication standards. Uh again, comments from the report. The
applicant should state if that review has been uh completed uh since they sent the letter and if so, how long the delay was. Um it should be noted that the applicant did provide many additional documents since the board's approval, including deeds, easement agreements,
legal descriptions, all those compliance materials that we would normally uh receive. Um, and again, the applicant requested a blanket 180day extension to file the subdivision. All right. Thank you, Ryan Kennedy. Just um um I'll I'll be brief on this
one. Um it it has both the complexity of the prior one and unfortunately we are still waiting for these outside approvals on Friday. We did get comments back. they were not the type of comments that um I'd like to speak about publicly
um the state um in that um uh more I say more work that I don't think is necessary needs to be done. Um we actually did already resubmit um to the state. Uh the concern I have with this one, you know, there are two options um
under the MLO for extensions. One is to ask, you know, before you're over and one is to ask after you get your final approvals. I'm I'm almost hesitant to ask. I mean, I guess we'd have to come back if they continue to take an in order amount of time. I would reiterate, I suppose our initial request, you know,
of 180 days and hope that's enough. Um, I'm I'm afraid that, you know, their process does restart their own clock. Um, when we submitted all of our compliance materials, they were already past the time when they were supposed to have looked at it. Um, and this this is
I think your your classic I'm you know that we just waiting for the the state unfortunately. Um, so with that I guess I I I'd reiterate I guess our original 180 days and hope that I'm not back here again asking for another one. Okay.
Um, any follow-up questions from board members? And if there are none, would someone like to make a motion? Well, I will. I feel so bad for Steve. He's in a really tough spot and you know
we should do whatever we can to help. Um this is climate change. It's rough. Yeah. So we should be grateful to the state. They're making us look good. To second the motion. Thank you Julie and uh and Owen for
seconding. Seconded. Yeah, they could they could put that on the side of their building, I think. Um, uh, Carrie, would you call the role, please? Mr. Bodakimer? Yes. Miss Capazolei? Yes. Mr. Cohen?
Yes. Mayor Freda? Yes. Mr. McGawan? Yes. Miss Na? Yes. Mr. O'Donnell? Yes. Miss Pearlmutter? Yes. Mrs. Wilson? Yes. Motion carried. Thank you. Next up, we have Alka Patel
Penu. This is a minor subdivision um request for an extension of time. This is an approve the approval for this was granted uh September 19, 2024. This is at 1082 Princeton Kingston Road
file P2323 369MS. Mr. Leco, Jerry, would you do the honors? Do you swear affirm testimony about to give will be the truth? Yes, I do. Yes, affirmed. Thank you. Uh, this last request is at
1082 Princeton Kingston Road, which is also Route 27. Uh, this is also for a lot line adjustment between neighbors. Uh, the approval made the applicant's lot a complying flag lot when it previously was not complying. No
variances were needed. Uh at the time the deadline to file the subdivision was March 28, 2025 and we received a request for an extension on July 2nd, 2025. Uh similar to the last one, the applicant states that the state DOT is still reviewing the project for consistency
with the highway access code and right-of-way dedication standards. Um and again, the applicant should state if that review has been completed and if so, how long the delay was. Um, and the applicant has requested a blanket 180day extension to file the subdivision. Thank
you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Kennedy. I'll be quick. Very similar to the last application. It's the same set of engineers. Um, I'll just add, um, we have not I don't have comments on this one yet, but we've decided because the types of submission from the same engineers were the same and we received
comments on the other application that we're going to be submitting revised just proactively um because we're expect we don't want to wait for more comments that unfortunately um that we the same forms that our other engineer our engineer same engineer did on the the
Wasco project. So, I this one was was requested later because again, we weren't um I'm still not sure when we're going to get it. Um and um I'm hesitant to suggest that we won't be back. I I really hope I'll just other one other addition here. I know um we're all and I
appreciate the comments on Mr. Wesco's situation. I'll I'll note this one um is is kind of a joint effort. I say the town is not assisting with this, but there's a um a uh a historic property here that um everyone will be very happy when we can close and um
uh uh fund a restoration that is part of this um application on behalf of the municipality. But that though it's it's essentially the same as the what we just heard with Westco. Okay. Thank you for that. Um any other questions, comments about
this? And if not, would someone like to move? hand up. There's a hand up in the the Oh, I'm sorry. Well, um, we, um, this is not a public hearing,
per se. Um uh but I have no objection to um bringing the person identified as Jones over for um you know maybe they have a quick question or a quick comment.
Mr. Henderson, um could you bring over the person identified as Jones? There we go. Hello. Um, we just had a quick question. You need to be sworn in. Um, if you're going to address the board, sorry, Mr. Mueller, you swear affirmative testimony about to
give will be the truth. I do. Please say your full name and give your give your street. Uh, Michael Jones, uh, 1091 Princeton Kingston Road. Hi, Mr. Jones. Go ahead. Hey, uh you had
mentioned there's a historical, you know, uh component to it. Um we live across the street. We're in the Kingston Mill historic property district. And I was just kind of curious what the component part of the
uh sure subdivision was. So, um I'll I'm being I'm choosing my words carefully here, but but ultimately this um the parcel that we're talking about was an existing
lot um that was part of a uh preserved farm with a historic um built historic home on it as an overall uh arrangement with the municipality. when this lot is sold to to my client, uh the funds will become available to continue the uh historic
restoration of that building. So, there's actually nothing on the lot that we're talking about. uh my client's going to build a house that will be subject to historic review in the district, but the with by an arrangement with the municipality, the funds from this sale um uh are part of an
arrangement uh with Princeton to fund and complete a historic restoration of of a farmstead um essentially next door to the lot that we're talking about. Right. So, the Gulich property has been going under those
restorations for over two decades, and I'm just kind of curious as to how those funds are going to be allocated to making that happen because the I'm sorry to interrupt, but can can you all have this conversation offline?
maybe you can um contact each other, you know, Google him or something because th this is a this falls under the category of a matter that is not what's before us right now. We have to, you know, our our
decision has to do with whether they've made a certain compelling argument based on a time frame that they can prove. And I'm not trying to um No, no, put down the conversation. I just don't want the to, you know, to take up the
board's time with something that is just not not part of what's in front of us right here right now. I I've been on the call for over three hours waiting for this. So, I just wanted to have a better understanding of what those funds were
going to incorporate. I mean, and it's it's associated with what you guys are doing from a board perspective, but you know, that's fine. I'm happy to have that conversation offline. I mean, among other things, I don't
think anybody on the call actually has the information you're looking for. Okay. um you know I think if you contact HBC the historic preservation office okay that the preservation officer might be able to answer your question.
Yeah and just to follow up what David said this really isn't within this is not something the planning board is responsible for it would be the township and a a good place to start is uh with historic preservation officer as well as well as with Ryan and that's fine
I can Mr. Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, Julie is the chair of the Historic Preservation Commission. Go ahead, Julie. Hey, Julie. I can say hi. I could just say that um this is after uh years of the non-compliance.
Then there's Oh, yeah. There's um way So, they're they're going to be paying money back to the town. So, okay. All right. That that makes sense. Yes.
So So yeah, that's part of this whole deal. Okay. All right. Thank you. I I know that not every question was answered, but and I um I know hanging in there for this long is um was bound to be Thank you for your patience.
Yeah. Yeah. No worries. Thank you. Um you're welcome. So um let's see. board members. Um would someone like to make a motion on u
on this application for an extension? Mr. O uh O'Donnell. Yeah, I'll make a motion to grant the 180day extension. Okay. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Um I I saw Mr. Cohen's hand first.
Um, uh, Mr. Cohen seconds. Okay. Um, sorry everybody. Carrie, would you call the role please? Mr. Bodakimer? Yes. Miss Capazolei? Yes. Mr. Cohen? Yes.
Mayor Freda? Yes. Mr. McGawan? Yes. Miss Na? Yes. Mr. O'Donnell? Yes. Miss Pearlmutter? Yes. Mrs. Wilson? Yes. Wonderful. Motion carried.
Thank you. Wonderful. Um, great. Any further business? Seeing none, Mr. Cohen, that we adjourn. Yay. I'll second. All in favor?
I Carrie, it was your last meeting. I I tip my hat to you for many many years of service. I'm looking forward to your uh party. I'll be there with bells on. Thanks a million. We're going to
bring you back and um and uh make you Thank you. Thank you very much. We'll see you, Carrie. Okay. Good night. Good night. Good night, everybody. Have a good night. Good night.