I can sir. >> Good evening. >> Good evening. The Rarent Township Planning Board is now in session. >> Call to order the notice requirements of the open public meetings act have been satisfied by the placing of a notice this meeting on the bulletin board of the municipal building. Filing the
notice with the township clerk and transmitting the notice to the Courier News and the Trenton Times. May I have a roll call, please? >> Oh, okay. Okay. Chairman, Miss Edward Gettings, >> here. Vice Chairwoman Miss Donna Drews >> here.
>> Yeah, this going to be a pain. Miss Robin Fatu here. >> Mr. Bob Kang >> here. >> Miss Michelle Cavakiri, she's asked to be excused. Mr. Dennis Clinkan >> here. >> Mr. James Miller, he's asked to be excused. Mr. Joseph Lane >> here.
>> Board professionals, board attorney, Mr. Joe Toriello >> here. >> Township planner, Mr. Jeffrey Varella >> here. >> We have Mr. Ryan McCarthy on behalf of township engineer Mr. Cesh Dargy >> here. >> Township landscape architect Mr. John Morgan Thomas has asked to be excused.
Conflict board traffic consultant Mr. Maurice Brchette >> here. >> And we have Miss Allison Cops on behalf of board planner Miss Jessica Caldwell >> here. >> Okay. Thank you. I would like to ask everybody to please rise for the pledge
of allegiance and a moment of silence to the men and women serving. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the fory and justice. >> Thank you everyone.
First up this evening we have comments and reports. I don't have any reports this evening. Anyone on the board have any comments they want to address to the other members? Well, there's an echo with this, isn't there, John? >> I don't know if you talk closer.
>> We can't do anything, man. Um, let's see. >> No, we'll deal with it. >> Anybody on the board have any comments this evening? I don't know if I ever clarified and just confirmed that all of the affordable housing fourth round has been final final final approved by the
judge etc. So um again I thank the planning board's work on that fourth round um was quite the uh lift. So thank you our professionals and to the planning board members here as a day as um we are official. It's all been approved. So thank you. >> That's good news. Good news. Very good
news. >> Okay. Engineers comments. Ryan, I'll put you on the spot. got anything for us? Any planners, comments, Jeff? >> No comments? No. >> Okay. Attorney's comments, Joseph? >> None. Well, that was easy to move through. Okay. What we do have this
evening as uh under correspondence, discussions, and recommendations is a discussion of a data center ordinance and uh we were all provided a document ahead of time. And I just want to take a minute to explain what that is. The the
document we were all provided for the discussion of the data center ordinance this evening is a proforma. It's not an ordinance for planning board review forwarded from the township committee as we frequently see. Rather, this isformational to generate discussion on
a possible data center ordinance to be considered by the township committee. The sample ordinance shared is merely an example of what other towns are doing. Routon Township may not need a formal ordinance as we don't believe data centers are permitted a permitted use in
our current land use chapter 296. And this afternoon Robin raised that question and thank you and Joe you confirmed it's not yet a permitted use. >> It it it's not but there are towns who are adopting this notwithstanding the
New Jersey law that if it's not an expressly permitted use, it's a prohibited use. it it um to the extent that the township wants to prohibit this in all zones, it it would be I think particularly
instructive in a D1 application in terms of somebody making the argument that it's consistent or inconsistent with the vision of the township and uh also would prohibit somebody from I think it's the
argument dies before it starts but someone might say Well, it's a warehouse. It's a this. It's a that. You know, it's a permitted use. And and it's like no data center, prohibited use. It just it keeps it clean if that's the direction the township wants to go in.
So there's there's no harm in making something a prohibited use, notwithstanding the general rule that if it's not called out as a permitted use, it's prohibited. >> Thank you. So that being said, with the benefit of our discussions and inputs this evening, the township committee
will take this and other inputs into consideration as they evaluate next steps, if any, on this important subject. With that, I'd like to open it up to discussion on the document that uh Taylor was so kind to send direct.
I have a few questions. I can jump in first. Or Donna, did you want to jump in? >> Sure. you know, I I guess uh hopefully you can hear me. Um I'd like to reinforce Joe's recommendation
that um the township committee consider moving forward with adopting an ordinance that ex, you know, ex expresses the township's intent clearly. um that you know data centers are probably not the most appropriate use in
our municipality especially given our reliance the overwhelming majority of our our residents rely and businesses rely on groundwater currently um and the environmental impacts from the water use from data centers is a well doumented
fact um one of the things I would just um put forth and I'll follow up after our meeting is as a suggestion the model ordinance that we were were provided with um goes for it
was obviously developed for a municipality that um had prohibited uses clearly put out put forth in their ordinance. Um because our position is going to be that it's not a permitted use. Um you know we probably want to
take another tact um to develop an ordinance for consideration. One of them that I found was Mannington Township in Salem County. So already they um consider that data centers would not be
a permitted use. But they went on to say that you know we just want to make sure everybody knows that it isn't a permitted use and you can't come in and call it like for example we have something in our ordinances that say um public uses. We do have warehouses as
permitted uses in some areas. So, we want to be really clear that uh you can't come in and call it a a horse when it's really a cow. Um, you know, so I think that's where it would be, you know, benefit the community to go ahead and and adopt an ordinance. Um, you
know, for all the the really good important environmental and and you know, I don't I don't know that the township committee would want to look at the residents with our pro current problems with our grid and the power outages. we already experience in the
township um and have an energy intensive use put in. So that would be my suggestion and and it's Mannington Township ordinance um in S County and it was just recently adopted actually um March 5th of 2026.
>> Okay, thank you Donna. That's good information. uh in paragraph two this correctly po uh questions posing significant challenges related to electricity consumption noise quality water use and certainly community
character and long-term planning what I thought it didn't point out was environmental which is batteries and Dennis and Joe that jumps out as at me I have a fair amount of experience with data centers a lot of them do use batteries for backup power what does
that do for for you guys having to be prepared to fight fires when a battery doesn't do what it's supposed to? >> Yeah. So, a building like this, this type of use really complicates a fire department response, you know, just from
the size of the buildings being particularly large makes that response more difficult. the electricity that's being used, the computer equipment, and then of course the battery backup systems are largely uh lithium type variety batteries
uh suppression systems that go along with it. It just becomes very difficult to deal with from a response perspective. >> We have the U power storage facility. It's actually power stabilizer over on Walter Fan. And I recall when they
opened up that facility and doing a tour, if it were to catch fire, their response is let it burn. >> Whatever the suppression system inside, each one is in a metal container and their response is if if that doesn't work, let it burn. >> They didn't want to risk any lives of
going in because they said you're not going to you're not going to solve that problem. >> Interesting. Okay. >> Is it a lot like an EV car? I know there's special training. You don't use water on an electric car to put it out. The batteries are the same. Is the concept the same, just magnitudes
larger? >> Pretty much. Yes. >> Those don't just burn down like a typical fire. They keep burning for >> correct. Yeah. They keep burning until all the fuel is has been exhausted essentially, >> which could be much longer than a
typical non battery lithium based fire. >> Absolutely. And that's one of the reasons like with an electric car fire, one of the stand generally the standard operating procedure is just to let it burn. Um you know in firefighting or in hazmat response it's offensive,
defensive and effectively do nothing. Yeah. >> Um just control exposures and in that type of hazard and that's what you're doing with an electric fire like that. >> Um chairman, I've also asked the environmental commission since I sit on that uh this year. I've asked them to
submit their uh perspective to from environmental impact. So that'll be forthcoming to this partnership. >> That's important. You know, one of the things that jumped out at me, it talks about the impact on the water table, water consumption, all very important things, but there's also a potential
environmental input impact of heated water being introduced back into the environment. Where is that heated water going? Is it going to be retained someplace where it cools off or does it get put someplace that it's going to do further damage?
There's there's a lot to it. There's more to it than what's clearly in this document. >> Y I like the definition they used. What what is inside? I don't know if it needs to be a little bit more open-ended. We don't know what's in what in the future in terms of what's considered part of a
data center. So, um, some some thoughts there. >> Well, I think you had commented earlier, Bob, in early conversations that we've all had on it. The energy environment around here, I'm sure our vendor, >> I looked at what's written here, and I
was actually going to reach out to Amy Almer and I built a relationship with her and just to find out >> what kind of available power is in our area. Just I'm curious. I look at how many megawatts and hundreds of megawatts and then I equate that to how many
houses that is equivalent to. We don't even come close to that many houses here. Not even close, right? So, I don't even know. Do do they plan on this? Do they have they may have the transmission facilities to support this, but they where is it being generated from and how is it getting from point A
to point B? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. And I think that's part of the reason in some of the state legislation that's being proposed, they're going to mandate that data centers come up with their own on-site generation or
purchasing new generation resources. So, you know, I think that's in recognition, Bob, to your comment that the grid, you know, we don't probably don't have enough for every data center that would like to come into New Jersey.
Yeah. And data centers being a 24 by7 operation, they're not going to rely on solar power, which is less reliable. >> And certainly not wind power out here. >> Not even a spit in the wind. Sorry. >> Exactly. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. I don't want to monopolize the comments. Anybody else? >> Overall, it's a good starting document, but it's missing some important details that we've been talking about. you know, and I I will go ahead and um the Mannington Township ordinance in
Salem County that I found it it's they the way they dealt with the warehouses and all that type of thing, they actually lumped a lot of of um the issues together in large longer paragraphs that strung together thoughts
I thought a little bit easier. Um, so I think, you know, that might be instructive for um the township committee as they're considering the ordinance and you know to just see if there's some things they might want to borrow from that one.
>> I think what would be helpful to the township committee is a memo from the planning board with a summarization of the recommendation of the planning board. It doesn't need to comment specifically on this example ordinance. that was merely a prompt for discussion and education. Um, but I think that
would be enough for the township committee to take consideration of any potential action. Okay. >> Be happy to draft that and I can circulate it to the other members of the board and then we can ship that off. Is there timing?
>> Do you know if there's timing yet when this is going to be looked at? >> Okay. So be happy to draft that up and get other get other eyeballs on it and finalize it and ship it off to you. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> It's like a planning. >> All right. Unless it's anybody has
something else on this topic, I think we can we can move on. Okay. Next up, we have minutes from the February 25th, 2026 meeting. Uh those are distributed by Taylor as she always does. I was not at that meeting so I
need to abstain myself from it. >> I abstain as well. >> Hold up. Hold up. >> Does anybody have any comments or questions? >> So those those eligible to make a motion andor vote is Donna, Bob, and Dennis.
>> I have no comment. >> Yeah. Yeah. No comments. All right. I I guess I'll I'll make a motion to approve the minutes. >> Second. >> Okay. Yeah. >> Vice Chair, Miss Donna Drews.
>> Yes. >> For a vote. >> Mr. Bob King. >> Yes. >> And Mr. Dennis Clankan. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. Next up are the minutes from the March 25th, 2026 meeting. Uh same question there. Does anybody have
any comments or questions regarding that they'd like to raise? No. >> Okay. With that, I'll make a motion to approve the minutes from the March 25th, 2026 meeting. >> And all we got is Robin or Bob? >> Second. >> Okay.
Chairman, Mr. Edward Gettings. >> Yes. >> Miss Robin Fu. >> Yes. >> Mr. Bob King. >> Yes. >> And that's it. And last on the minutes, we have the minutes from the executive closed session that we have pretty short discussion that evening and
certainly a short summary of it. I would just like to point out in the second paragraph, I think that in addition to the attorney, it's saying that the attorney representing both township land use boards should also include the township. >> It's closed session. Don't
>> Okay. Yeah. >> All right. >> You could just pass it to me. >> I'll pass you the changes. >> Yeah. >> Sorry. >> Do it old school. Passing >> my mistake. >> Back to back to paper. >> Dramatic changes. >> No, that was my only comment. So,
>> so I'll ship that off to Taylor. >> Okay. There are no resolutions this evening. >> Wait, we got to vote on it. We still have to vote on the minutes. >> If he's got changes, how do we vote? Oh, that's true. That's true. >> So, we'll table >> table it.
>> Okay. There are no resolutions this evening. Citizens privilege. If anybody is in the room this evening from the community who would like to address the board on any item other than what comes further down the agenda, now would be the time to do that. You can come on up to the microphone.
There being nobody, we can move on. In we have three applications tonight. And it and as you can see on the agenda in an A, B, and C order, I'm going to move the 100 and medical office association associates up because we anticipate,
don't disappoint us. This is only going to take a few minutes. All right. The other application is more involved. Take longer than that. So rather than you sit here and be entertained by that, why don't you come on up and address this
application? Looks like the stock market. >> Yeah, that's just Thank you members of the board. Uh my name is Vidat Fatathi from the law firm Hill Wallik. I'm here on behalf of the applicant and medical office associates. Um here today sitting over there is Les
Geese. He's the principal of the applicant and he can testify to any background questions regarding the property or building if that's necessary or And we also have Jason Angelhart who's our engineer from Langan Engineering and he'll testify regarding the proposed construction and any impact
to existing landscaping or improvements. Uh so we're before the board today on a relatively straightforward application. Uh specifically, we're seeking a waiver of site plan review pursuant to section 296-45 of the township code for the construction of a water lateral on the
applicant's property to connect to an existing on-site water man from the larger 100 medical center hospital property. And just a just a little background for the board. Uh the medical office associates was created as a partnership between the hospital and its
doctors for the satellite office building space down on WCOT drive. Uh and as a result, the applicant obtained a 75-year ground lease from Hunter Medical Center back in 1986 for the subject property. And pursuant to the terms of that ground lease, the applicant is responsible for the cost,
insulation, repair, and maintenance of any utilities on the lot. So this application became necessary uh as the applicant was recently informed by the fire marshall that the the building required additional water capacity for its fire suppression system. So in order to comply with those requirements, the
applicant has to construct this water lateral on the site to connect to that existing water man. And the specifics of the proposed construction, we set set those forth in the plans. But um our engineer Mr. Anglehart will testify to more of the specifics. Uh but once the
board is able to hear from Mr. trianglehart. Uh as well as considering all our other application materials, uh the applicant will just submit that it does satisfy the requirements set forth in section 296-45. Uh specifically as the the property subject building has previously been
approved, it's uh constructed and currently operating as a doctor's office building. Uh the proposed construction uh constitutes formal maintenance for the building as it's been required by the fire marshall and it's specifically for fire suppression purposes. And finally, as our engineer will detail,
the proposed construction doesn't affect existing circulation, drainage, building arrangements, landscape buffering, lighting, uh but to any minimal extent that it does, those affected improvements would be temporary and then restored. >> Okay. Going to testify. >> Yeah. Just before we get going, is this
gentleman who I can't see behind the board. He going to offer any testimony. >> Uh if there's any questions from the board, >> why don't you both step up? I'm going to swear everybody in at once. We're going to do it once. save time, including board professionals. Raise your raise your uh right hand. Do
you swear affirm that the testimony you're going to give in this hearing is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. from left uh from council's left to right, state your name and spell it for the record, please. It's >> Jason Engelhart
L H A R E D I guess who is this going to be you? >> Yeah, Jeff Bearella Township Planning. Go ahead, >> council. >> Good evening. Uh, again, my name is Jason Inglehart. I'm a partner and a principal with Langan Engineering and
Environmental Services, and I prepared the the plan that's on the board this evening. Um, again, this is a as was described before, it's a fairly simple application. Really, we're just building a water lateral. >> Yeah. >> From a New Jersey American water line
that runs along the rear of the property to supply a dedicated water line. Uh, I think the existing water line that's behind the property is about 12 in. We're running an 8 in water line to to service the fire service to the building. Uh it's about a 700 foot
length that we're running that line. Um we did review all the existing utilities had a utility location service out there to make sure we found the best route we could possibly find to to route that line to the building. Um as was
described, it's really a maintenance activity. We need a dedicated fire line. The uh the improvements will involve a four to five foot wide trench mostly in paved area, the small area of green space. Uh and that'll be repaired both
pavement and the in the green space in kind when we're complete. Um the there is backflow prevent there's all the normal requirements associated with a water line installation. there aren't any any uh improvements that you would
typically see associated with with the site plan and and generally as was described in your ordinance section. Um it would seem that we meet the requirements associated with a a site plan. >> Okay. You have the benefit of the report
dated April 17th, 2026 from Mr. Vakarella. We always like people to go through that just to >> Yes. and and and we are at receipt of that report. Um would you like you'd like me to go one by one? >> Yes, sir, please.
>> Okay. So, item one um just notes the applicant is requesting a site plan waiver from section 29-45 to construct a new water man. Effectively, it's a water lateral um to the existing Huttering Medical Office facility.
Uh that's just a statement. Um number two, the applicant shall provide the extent of the project and confirm existing landscaping and improvements will not be affected by the proposed project. So the first part of that is um that that's correct. The uh the well we went
through the the extent of the project which is about a 700 ft of water lateral and we will basically replace in kind when we're after we complete the the installation of the lateral. >> So any any landscaping would be replaced at kind. Yes. >> Would be replacing client as as part of
the project. >> That's correct. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> We did our best to avoid any landscaping where we do. >> Um the water line will be near oxygen tank existing landscape areas and the existing patio seating area. It does
stay outside of the patio seating area and um the best way to cross uh was to cross relative to the oxygen tank was to the rear of that tank. all the utilities associated with that. The connections are any front and we did identify those locations.
Um item three is zoning construction permits will be required and we certainly understand that. Um item four is just about exhibits being submitted in PDF format but haven't been submitted and it's hard copy here at
the last is just an item about a Jeff, I know you >> I have no other questions. It was presented very clear clearly. Okay, >> Jeff promised 15 minutes and you almost Okay, any questions from the board?
>> No, I'm certainly in favor of this. Uh >> that way we can abate these violations. Um get this building back up to speed and we can all move on. >> Okay. I appreciate the project given that it provides additional assurance to our volunteer fire department should
they have to in the event of an emergency and also obviously so appreciate the work. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> I don't think we have anybody from the community here but I have to offer if anybody is here who would like to ask
any questions of Mr. Angelhart based upon this now is the time to do so. There being none we'll move on. And I'd like to have a motion to approve. >> So moved. >> Second. Hold up. Hold up.
>> Chairman, Mr. Edward Getting. >> Yes. >> Vice Chair Miss Donna Drews. >> Yes. >> Miss Robin Fatu. >> Yes. >> Mr. Bob King. >> Yes. >> Mr. Dennis Concan. >> Yes. >> And Mr. Joseph Lane. >> Yes. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Dennis already >> crazy. >> Thank you. >> But it's better for you. You have to show up. >> Okay. And next up, we have two applications. One Diamond Nation LLC.
The second Diamond Nation ballpark. The first is preliminary and final site plan construction of 126,672 foot self-s storage warehouse. Um and then the other is amended preliminary and then final site plan with bulk
variance for one-story addition and playground installation. >> And Mr. Chairman, I did have a conversation with Mr. Grubberg yesterday. I just want to place on the record while there's two applications there is one consolidated hearing. So there is one hearing for both
applications. So the board can feel free to discuss both simultaneously because the parking is inextricably connected. Uh you can't really decide one without the other. So um you know while there would be two separate
resolutions and two separate roll calls there is one and one hearing only for both applications. Well, before we go any further, everybody just don't go too close, but speak with your chest at that point. Like,
>> you didn't hear me. >> Yeah. >> The only people that are fine to >> Yeah. The only people that are fine is Joe and Dennis. >> Well, I can be loud. >> Say it with your chest. Okay. >> Sounds like challenge accepted.
Yeah. >> Next time, Tina. Next, please. >> So, good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Steven Gruinberg on behalf of the two applicants, Diamond Nation Properties LLC and Diamond Nation LLC.
I'm probably going to refer to them as the self-s storage application and the Ballpark application just to make things hopefully easier. Um, I'd like to take a few moments just to talk about the chronology here and how we got here. But before I do that, I did provide proof of
service and publication of the notice of hearing in advance uh for both applications. And I ask that Mr. Toriello kindly confirm that we have jurisdiction to >> jurisdiction confirmed, counselor. >> Thanks. So with respect to the self- storage
application, we actually um filed that application in May of 2023 and the hearing was started on that application on December 13th, 2023. And that application actually had the self
storage as well as the overflow parking that existed to be um developed and to include the overflow parking as part of the a preliminary and final site plan application. The board raised concerns
about issues such as what that overflow parking was going to be in terms of imperous coverage. And we got had a long meeting that night and we were kind of charged to go back and work with the board's professionals to deal with uh
how we were going to deal with imperous coverage. And what we had decided to do was to amend our application after meeting with the board's professionals to just ask for preliminary site plan approval only for the self storage and
um recognizing that the overflow parking would have to be um found someplace else which we were in the works of doing and are still in the works of doing. um so that nothing with respect to the self storage building would actually be
constructed until the issue of the overflow parking in the location had been resolved. Um we had actually um started were scheduled to start that application in July of 2025
and um Mr. Troutman had issued his second report raising a concern about the overflow parking and wanted to do a study and the board thought that was a good idea that Mr. Troutman should review the uh information regarding
overflow parking a little bit closer. So we didn't proceed in September. We allowed him to do the report and then we had a hearing in September and at that hearing we presented our testimony with respect to the application and the board granted the
application um specifically conditioning it upon us um providing an overall parking of 533 spaces. Um Mr. Troutman had recommended that the number be 525.
Um, Mr. Corello and I got involved in a dialogue and he indicated that notwithstanding the fact that Mr. Troutton indicated 525, the number should be 533 based upon prior approvals. And we agreed to that and we agreed um as a condition of that
approval to deal with the overflow parking once self storage get constructed. We can't do anything until self storage is constructed. Um that resolution was scheduled to be adopted in December and the board um based upon activities that
happened on site in November decided you didn't want to adopt that resolution. You um wanted to reopen the hearing. Um I found out that day that the resolution was going to be adopted. I asked that the board not take that action until I had an opportunity to speak to you about
it. And in January 14th, I think it was, we were here for um discussion about the completeness on the ballpark application and the issue of whether you were going to reopen that hearing. And the board
deemed our um ballpark application complete that night. And you also reopened the hearing to deal primarily with the overflow parking issue. Um, and you also wanted to have a site visit.
So, we did that on February 21st, 2026. Um, and appreciate the board members who came out that evening, uh, that day. Um, we had a nice sight walk of the site and, um, we scheduled to be on a public
hearing the end of February. Um, that got adjourned to the end of March. Um, and then we were informed that the the board had retained a new traffic consultant to look at the issue. And originally the application was scheduled
for May 25th and then you uh agreed to move it to April 22nd. That's how we got here procedurally and chronologically just to bring everybody up to speed. Um
again, we were deemed complete January 14th. Um we did receive the board's professionals report. Uh we received Mr. Rashett's report um on Friday. I received Mr. Vakarella's report on Monday. Uh we received a report from
Jessica Caldwell on Monday and we've received Mr. Dargy's report and Mr. Don Morgan Thomas's report today. Um so in having a conversation with uh Mr. Toriel, I understand that his preference
is for the board members to um be invited to put whatever statements that they want based upon their >> Yeah, I was going to get to that when you when you I didn't want to interrupt you, but yes. Uh what what if >> I just wanted I'll let you
>> Okay. I would just I would like to give them the instruction. >> So that that he'll instruct you with respect to that, but that's procedurally where we and then I would have four witnesses this evening after that. And those witnesses will be Mr. Gary Dean, Mr. John Hansen, I'm sorry, Gary Dean
will provide present traffic and parking testimony. Uh Mr. Hansen will present engineering testimony. Then I'd like to call Mr. Manino to prov present the architectural testimony. And then I'm going to recall Mr. Hansen to provide the planning testimony in support of the
variances. That's procedurally where I see we're going and I will leave it up to Mr. Toriello to talk about what you wanted to do. >> Yeah. If you recall in February when we had the site visit, I had indicated to
to you all not to take notes, not to discuss anything um uh between yourselves because that should be done on the day at the appropriate time. But what I do think is
helpful for the record and there's no obligation to do so. But to the extent that any board member who was at the site visit wants to place their observations on the record, now is the time to do so. But I want to give an
example. Observations are different than deliberations. I don't want somebody to say, "I observed a swale on the northeast corner of the property and I have a concern about that swale." That's exactly what you should not do. You can
state whatever observations you have without analysis. You place your observations on the record and leave it there to the extent that you want to do that. Now would be the time to do it or we move on. Well, having said that, I was there.
It's a very professional operation. Wasn't much going on in February was there. It was cold. Uh we walked around. It's a professional operation. And thank you for allowing us to do that with the Diamond Nation team because it gave us
it gave me excuse me it gave me a better understanding of this application what's there because I had never been to the facility. I've only driven by it 10 million times. I had never been in there before. And it gave me a better understanding of the application for the
one-story edition and the playground installation. >> It gave me a better understanding of >> of the application for the one-story edition and the playground installation. I'll get closer to the mic. Play with your chest. Say we chest.
That's all I have to offer. >> I guess I'll go um some of my observations um from the site visit. Again, it is a a well-maintained property generally. Um you know, seeing the internal parts of
the the site were was were very helpful. Um, it gave me perspective on the addition proposed and the photo booth. Um, it did also give me some insights on issues related to
um, pedestrian safety and crossing issues. Um, I was able to basically stand out by the umpire's parking area in the road and look both directions and kind of look at what
sight distances were and get a feel for that. Um, you know, and the the speeds of the traffic on the road. So I think that was really really helpful to me to kind of visually stand there and look at that and look at some of the sight distance issues um
you know as it relates to pedestrian safety and traffic concerns. Um, it also gave uh the ability to take a look more at the relationship of the off-site parking um and how that relates to um the
facility as it currently exists and the use currently exists. Um, one other observation, um, there were some smaller
outbuilding kind of I don't know how to accessory little buildings that were used as concession air things um that I didn't recall seeing on the plans. So that was just an observation that
that you know warrant some additional clarification. So anyone else go >> we good to go? >> We're good to go. Um my introduction will just conclude with we understand
that the board had um concerns with respect to the parking that occurred on site and offsite and we had submitted a detailed parking plan that substantially has been implemented and if you drive by
the site you'll see it in terms of the roping off of the areas. Um and it's our position that that has been extremely successful in limiting the um the parking in the umpire parking area that was a concern in eliminating the parking
along um the river road which was a concern and we um we appreciate the board's concerns on those issues. We appreciate the fact that it's been raised in the past and you had concerns that it hadn't been
addressed and we think that we've addressed it um through a detailed parking plan that I submitted back in February. Um we also uh >> and I'm sorry to interrupt you, but you're you're referencing the February 17th letter from Mr. Misari.
>> Yes. Which correct? The February 17th I think I >> just want to make sure we're on the same page. I submitted it on the 19th, I think, but it was his his letter dated se February 17th and also the updated plan parking that was submitted by um
Vincent and Helio such which detailed those issues as well. Um so with that, you know, we we've been working on this for a long time. We're anxious to actually get the the resolution for the
self storage resolved um and adopted and we're very anxious to move forward on the um the ballpark minor approvals and we want to present that testimony for you this evening first through Gary Dean's testimony regarding the parking
issues and then through um Mr. Hansen and Mr. Manino with respect to the ballpark is okay. So, if you want to swear all four of you all four of them in. >> Yes. Same. >> Yes, please. And the board professional. We're going
to do everybody at once. Raise your right hand. If you swear, affirm that the testimony you're given in this hearing is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing true. >> Yes. Yes. >> Starting with you, Mr. Jean. >> John Hansen. >> Oh, Hansen. I'm sorry. >> Hen
business address 140 West Main Street, Clinton, New Jersey. John Manino MN IO 224 Courtyard Drive Hillsboro, New Jersey. Gary Dean, EN Dolan and Dean Consulting
Engineers, 181 West High Street in Somerville. >> Fantastic. >> First, Ryan McCarthy on behalf of Star the board. >> Jeff Aarella, Township Planner. >> Okay. Maurice Farad R A C H E D from
Cario's engineering design. >> Thank you. Let me jump in here for a second. It's just come to my knowledge that the parking and traffic operations improvement plan that you just referenced >> Yes. >> was not circulated to the board. >> Wait. was
>> was not familiar >> was not circulated to the board. So that being the case, Taylor is going to take care of that right now. So we have it as a reference for that testimony. >> Okay. >> Okay. I don't know.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. There was a letter that was sent that was going to be exhibit to be discussed at the hearing by Steve Gerber. So that's why it hasn't been passed out. Um, I think we were we submitted it as an exhibit and then told that it needed
to be submitted as a separate plan, a separate sheet, which is what we did in February. >> Can you just give me five minutes to take a look at this please? >> Sure. >> Thank you. just Yeah.
Yes, that is. Thank you. >> Just for the record, we're pausing on the reporting >> as well. while the board members who were just provided with the parking and traffic operations improvement plan have an opportunity to look at it
>> rather than us going offline. >> Donna, for the record, you have this correct? >> Yes. Taylor sent it to me. >> Okay, good. And I have it. I had it, too. Wait There's a good
Perfect. That's It's good. You didn't give me that down. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Bob, Dennis, uh, are you good to go or? Yeah, we are. Okay, good.
>> Hey, Gary, >> I apologize for that. >> Just have that. >> Appreciate it. >> Thank you. There you go. >> So, Mr. Dean, can you please give the board the benefit of your qualifications? >> Uh, certainly. I'm a licensed professional engineer in New Jersey, uh, a graduate of Lehigh University with a
bachelor of science and civil engineering. Um, and I've appeared in this community for, I dare say, most every significant development in this community over the past 42 years. that I appeared before this board in September
to discuss the findings relative to self storage. >> He's been here any number of >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you. Um, so you're aware of the prior history and have reviewed the uh prior um expert reports pertaining to
both the uh self storage application and the um the ballpark application. >> Yes, I have. And um as a result of the self- storage application uh did you
review Mr. Troutman's September 17th 2025 report? Correct. And and prior to those hearings, the board had retained Mr. Troutman. He had prepared actually several review memorandum. Um, and as it relates to the matter we're discussing
this evening, um, I I think the bottom line of those findings memorialized in his September 17th, 2025 memorandum was, uh, a recommendation to provide 525 spaces for the Diamond
Nation facility. and and that was an important number in the context of how many fixed parking spaces, the paved parking spaces that are on uh the baseball complex side of River Road and then another 233
field spaces on the property contiguous to the self-s storage building. Um, since that time, my understanding is that there was an event in November as the board was considering memorializing
the resolution that drew some unwanted attention to a very limited parking circumstance associated not with the operation of Diamond Nation as a baseball facility, but its use for uh an
outside tournament uh featuring lacrosse And for reasons that we can discuss if they're even relevant, um that triggered a revisit of the parking conditions on both properties. Um Mr. Troutman was
replaced by Mr. Rashed uh to re-examine the overall parking. Um and since that time what you've seen the applicant has put forth um and I worked with him specifically Mr. Msari to prepare a
parking and traffic management plan that was memorialized in a letter to the board on February 17th of this year. And uh this is a plan that um I drafted
with background in other I'll say unusual largescale events such as things like the former New Jersey Festival Festival of Ballooning in Readington, the Big Apple Circus in Somerset County at Patriots Ballpark, the Far Hills Race
Meeting Association, among others. And and what we thought it was important for the board to understand is that these events are not day-to-day activities at Diamond Nation. This was a 5-day, 3-w weekend
event that possibly overburdened both parking areas and and it was again the reasons I think are somewhat unimportant, but lack of oversight, lack of clear pedestrian directions, people were crossing River Road at random
midblock locations, and it wasn't as well organized as it needed to be. So the the applicant wi with with our office, we put together a specific series of uh recommendations and protocols, many of which have already
been implemented, just so that the board is aware. Um and and and even though that was written in text, the plan you have on the exhibit that the board just reviewed in essence puts that into a graphic representation.
uh to help understand the different protocols and practices that have been developed. And I think the most important element is clear and defined pedestrian walking areas affffectuated through uh ropes, stansions posted along
river to be posted along Bartles's Corner Road that will guide pedestrians in the self- storage lot to the Diamond Nation property so that they properly use the traffic signal at River Road and and uh Bartle's Corner Road
and it eliminates that random crossing to to the to the best extent we can. Um it would be effectuated through the placement of no parking signs along River Road. Now that would be subject to Hunan County Planning Board approval. We
don't it's their road um with an underlying ordinance presumably adopted by the governing body. If one already doesn't exist, those signs would be put in place by the applicant so that people clearly see that parking along the edge
of the road is is not going to be permitted. Um, in addition, there will be substantial additional, we call it wayfinding signs so that uh visitors unfamiliar with the area will be directed to the appropriate overflow lot
on the self-s storage side of the property. Um, and there will also be other enhanced signage or umpire parking and so that it is very clear to visitors where they can and cannot enter and exit the premises. Um, I believe you would
have seen on your fieldwalk that there is a paved driveway opening on River Road that was previously used uh for access to the uh overflow lot. um that would be closed off and barricaded to
eliminate the temptation of that driveway use that there would be all traffic would be directed to the far southerntherly end of the property um to provide access to the self-s storage property. I I I think and I know uh Mr.
Rashed's uh memorandum provided additional insight, but we left the hearing in September with what we thought was the understanding among all of us is that the self- storage approval
was preliminary only. And the reason for that is because of what Mr. Gruinberg described as the impervious coverage. that self-s storage building can't be built until we have a suitable replacement for the 233 parking spaces
that are currently being used. So I I just want that to be clear given a little bit of uh inconsistency in the review memorandums, but there none of that overflow parking is going away until there is a replacement. Um, in
addition there there is uh an opening on the westerly I'll call it the northwesterly corner of the paved parking lot on Diamond Nation. There is an entrance again to eliminate the temptation. Portable uh pedestrians,
anyone that's been to event, you know, they're aluminum barricades six to eight feet long. They would be placed in the way so that people can't drive onto the property and we'll say create their own parking. So we we are trying to appropriately the herd the cats into the
one or two designated access points where they should be parking. Um the parking management plan as we move into these special events. Um we recognize and the sensitivity
expressed by those board members that did so that this lacrosse event was an anomaly. Um, but we can't ever replicate that experience. And as a result, the applicant has arranged for additional
overflow parking on weekends that are not used by any other businesses or institutions in the area. Uh, that are the subject of an agreement between those parties for insurance and all of those things. That would be three locations. And I'm and I'm going to
mispronounce the one. I believe it's called the Demar School or Demar. >> Jar. Thank you. I knew I'd mess it up. Um the Hunter County Polytech lot which is just to the west of the property and then the Wisten Company parking lot um
just just I'll say east of uh the intersection with Route 31. That brings us a total of 450 parking spaces. So if we include the 300 on the baseball site,
the 233 that will remain only until there is a replacement. And the offsite spots, we have 983 parking spaces available for this property, which is three times the
amount paved on the Diamond Nation site. um if and when the self- storage application goes away uh we would still be left with 683 but but that that's not what we're asking for that that is a separate
agreement. The parking management plan also includes again for what we're calling special events. Uh we would use a shuttle service to provide patrons and visitors access to those remote lots. Um that was done very successfully. For
example, at the balloon festival where off- premises parking was used and shuttle buses uh brought patrons directly to Soulberg airport. Um they would have clearly marked shuttle loading zones and the like to bring those patrons to the site.
Staff would be assigned to monitor and manage that shuttle operation. Uh in addition, township police um you know would be uh retained to assist in uh crowd control, directing traffic and as
needed um and particularly during peak entry and exit times. Now again this is not for regular diamondation activity. I I I believe and I feel very confident having been involved with diamondation since its inception. Um, there's never
been overflow parking for regular baseball events. We are aware and we during the TRC meeting, we did discuss that the Jenny Finch Softball Academy was a major draw. I don't recall what year that happened, but that activity
has ceased on the property. So, we are aware that the there are these few and select instances that may have driven that number up. But I believe in in both Mr. Troutman's and Mr. Rashed's memoranda that the requirement for this
site of 525 spaces for for regular baseball diamond nation events is sufficient. Um and we are committed to retain that. In fact, we have 533 spaces. Um, we have also addressed some
other minor operational issues where umpires were were not having sufficient parking close to where they needed to be and they carry a fair amount of gear. So, the applicant has designated the very northeast corner of the paved
parking area to be used for umpires only with signage to that effect to manage it. those umpires will be shuttled using a gator or you know some golf cart to to get them and their equipment to the appropriate field. Um and I believe that
covers the main operational points of the parking management plan both for day-to-day regular activity as well as these special events. But I I believe with and again depending on how we want to
count the numbers upwards of 983 parking spaces I I trust that the board would feel that that is more than abundant parking um to allow this facility to continue to be the asset that it is to the community. >> Mr. Dean, I want to ask you a question.
Uh Mr. Gruinberg asked you uh as part of soliciting your testimony if you were aware of the prior history of the site. Do you recall that question? >> Yes, I do. >> What is what does that mean to you? What is your understanding of the prior history of of this site? I >> I was the traffic engineer when Diamond
Nation was the application was first presented to the board. I I >> and that was back in when 2006. >> Too many too many hearings, too many years. I don't recall the exact date. But that testimony includes when you said back in 2006 that 300 parking spaces would be more than sufficient. Do
you recall that? >> I do not know. >> Okay. Well, if I told you that that was in the approving resolution, you would have no reason to disagree with me on that, would you? >> I would not. >> Okay. It turns out that that your analysis back then saying that 300 parking spaces was more than sufficient. You would agree with me that that was
not correct. Well, the facility statement >> the facility has also expanded and as part of those expansions, the applicant has uh recognized that 300 wasn't enough and it obviously provided more parking. >> Right. Recognize it so much that you made an application to the board of
adjustment for relief recognizing that the 300 spaces was not enough. >> I I don't recall the process we followed. But it but when you say you're familiar with the prior history, it would be fair to say that what you mean by that is that the parking has been a
problem at this site for some time. Is that a fair statement? I >> I actually disagree with that. I would say the parking >> So is it so so the board can so the board can judge your credibility? >> Finish responding to your question because he he wasn't done responding question. >> Go ahead. The parking was sufficient for
Diamond Nation operations but for the select limited events that I disclosed. >> Okay. So, in order for the board to judge your credibility, is it your testimony before this board that except for special events, there's no parking issues at Diamond Nation? Is that your
testimony? >> Is that your professional opinion? >> Yes, it is. >> Okay. And when you said to Mr. Gruinberg that when you made a reference to these special events is whether they're even relevant. What do you mean by that? Whether they're even relevant. >> The these special events and we
discussed this at the TRC much like any special event could be could follow a different process. >> Okay. But you would agree that an event that actually takes place on the site would be relevant, right? >> An event that actually occurs on a site, you wouldn't it would it's not your
testimony that that's not relevant to the consideration. Or is that your testimony? My >> my testimony for the regular routine operations of >> That's not my question. My question is, is it your testimony that when an event actually occurs on the site that that's not relevant? Is that what you're
telling this board? >> It needs to be put into context. >> It's either relevant or not relevant. Is it relevant or not relevant? >> I would say for the date. >> I didn't ask the degree. Can I finish at some point? >> I just want an answer to my question.
for regular day-to-day routine operations of Diamond Nation. All of the data by not only my findings, but the board's two consultants have both concurred that there is adequate parking for Diamond Nation. >> Okay. Now that you've answered your
question, I want you to answer mine. My question is with respect to the events that occur on occasion, whether it's one time a year or five times a year, my question is simple. When an event actually occurs on a site, is it relevant or not relevant?
>> I I want to answer. We had no issue with this site and its operation in September when the board voted to approve. There was an event in November that put this under the magnifying glass. That's has culminated
in this appearance tonight. >> Sir, I'm going to ask you again. Is an event that happens one time on a site relevant or not relevant? I didn't ask for a history of what occurred. If an event happens one time on a site, is that event that occurs one time on a
site relevant or not relevant? It's a yes or no question. >> It needs to be put into context as to what the board is considering. I think it was also, if I may, as a community member driving around town, it wasn't the one event in November post
September. It was observations over several years. The one that occurred in November happened to be exceptional in nature because again, it's a successful business and these events have become quite popular, which is a good thing. But I think many board members had
feelings that it wasn't just a November 2025 event that there were observations in the past that merely amplified a deliberation and where we ended up today. So it wasn't a November 2025
single event. It was actually observations over time. >> And and I understand that. Unfortunately, none of that was articulated in September when the board voted to approve the self- storage application and we all landed on 525
as the appropriate parking number. The analogy I draw is >> the analogy I draw is we we all have been through I assume most of us have been through back to school night. That is parking mayhem. There are cars on lawns. It happens at every school
district we've represented and that I've personally attended. We know it's an anomaly and the question is is that the exception or is that the rule for diamond nation? In my opinion, it was the exception which is why we've gone through the effort to give you I believe
a very comprehensive traffic and parking management plan because we are sensitive to those concerns and we we don't want to repeat that. So in in in fact in in November December when we first had these concerns raised by the board um
they raised concerns about the operation and and not just these special events but additional uh times during the year that they made observations of people um perhaps parking along uh the road and on uh the umpire area that expanded what
had previously been done. And is it fair to say that after that and in relationship to what the board in opening it up, we tried to take come up with a plan that addressed operationally
those concerns to try and uh to alleviate that situation. even if it's within the 525 that we think is acceptable that it's an operational issue that was causing some violations within the roadway.
>> Violations means a lot of different things, but people randomly crossing River Road in the middle of the road is an issue. We wanted to address that >> and that's why we came up with the specific plan dealing with the ropes, the signage, the limitation of the
umpire parking, the relocation of the umpire parking, the temporary gates to address the board's concerns from an operational standpoint uh about what was going on on site that they observed over the years. Correct. >> Understood. Yes.
>> But in your analysis and going to what Mr. Toriel was saying is is the special event relevant? We also understand that it's relevant to the circumstance of those five days out of the year that um
was was a big problem for the township and and and it was a big event. Correct. >> A a big event that had issues. We're they're not disguising that. >> We plan to address that by coming up with a parking plan to provide for the
outside sites that there would provide for a significant number that would be identified that it would be located that there would be supervision that there would be police involvement there would be shuttles. And that was to address the
board's concerns with respect to those five or six days that we have an issue. Correct. >> Absolutely correct. And in fact, we came up with draft uh parking lot agreements, special event parking lot agreements. Uh
one of which has already been executed to provide to the board, which I'd like to uh introduce exhibit A1 since it's the first one. >> And and which agreement is this? This is an agreement from Diamond Nation uh LLC
to Creek Realy LLC. >> Oh, good. >> Only keep one. >> Clearly, there isn't going to be an agreement with the WHIS property. Mr. Cust owns that. The the Demar property and the Polytech. Is that the Creek View?
>> I'm trying to connect the dots. >> Property. >> Oh, okay. Oh, it is the whisper and that's the one that >> I apologize. I >> And ra quite honestly, rather than going to everybody else and having them sign it and and and if there's any changes that are required, we're showing them
here's a signed one that's giving you 50 on top of it, right? He's challenged. >> Um, and it's already in place and it provides for um insurance, event days and hours and the ability to have fitting cards there,
park there, double service, staffing, restoration if anything could happen. It's a detailed agreement. But >> the term is only for one year, correct? >> Renewable, >> right? But it doesn't have to be renewed. >> It could be terminated, right?
But it could be termin right. >> But that's why it's a special event. >> Can I >> So this is a this is from a legal standpoint. This is a temporary solution. It's not a permanent solution by its very nature because of the legal terms.
>> Well, you can put it as a condition of approval that the the special event uh plan that's you're getting a plan showing the special event. So that would be a condition of approval that the special events have to take place in
accordance with the parking uh plan and special event plan which identifies these three sites. >> Can we if I may can I >> I got to jump here. I'm I'm gonna ex may I Mr. Dean with your familiarity with
the site how many years has the Diamond Nation property been used for lacrosse tournaments? I I'm not the right person to answer that question. >> Okay. I I think that's really important for the board to understand because this hasn't just happened one or two years.
It's been multiple years. So when a business creates a model that relies on income and brings great tourism to our community um but concurrently some pretty significant parking problems
um and traffic safety and pedestrian issues um that's that's part of their business operation. Would you agree they rely on that for their business income? >> Well, they're a business. Yes. I mean, that's what supports the business. So,
it's >> I'm not sure what your question is. >> My question is you you're treating this as it's a an anomaly and not part of their business and operational model to host these events as a form of income. And concurrent with that decision to
host these events, they generate significant traffic beyond what the site can can maintain or safely The reason I characterized it as an anomaly is that I sat in this chair six
months ago um when when and I don't know who here tonight was part of that proceeding, but we we walked away with an understanding and more importantly an approval that night when the board voted that Diamond Nation was doing a good job
and you granted your approval for the self-s storage building with the understanding that there would be a a continuous parking supply of 233 spaces. Then November happened. So I I call it an anomaly because 6 months ago I didn't hear
these other concerns. >> Well, I I think here Go ahead, Donna. >> No, I guess one other thing um you know uh you say you have significant history with this site. Have you read any of the previous resolutions of approval?
Um and specifically I would just point to previous resolutions which have already c already called for police to be present on the site for parking attendants to be on the site for the
roping to occur because of the problems with the overflow parking. um significant um testimony was presented where these problems have been ongoing since you
know if you look at the December 12th December 2012 resolution even prior to that where this has been an issue. So, I guess as a traffic consultant, how have you advised your
your client to comply with the previous resolutions and then also to make sure these things don't happen again? >> I I present my testimony the the and and we move on. What happens when a resolution
is drafted and the site operates? I'm not involved with that. So, I >> Oh, okay. I know what I know. >> And I think that answers the concern of the board because the problem is there could be proverbial lip service where you promise your promise and then at the
end it's clean up an aisle six for Ratton Township and we're holding a mop because things are not done what they need to be done. So, I could tell you this, it's up to the board, but my strong suggestion is whatever conditions there are, I could tell you as a 33-year
litigator, you don't want me going to court to enforce them. The the whatever conditions there are, they need to be selfexecuting and self- enforcing. That means without regard to the need for the applicant to lift a finger, whatever it
is, it needs to on its face implacably and in perpetuity address whatever your issues are. If you're relying on people to do things, I would respectfully suggest that's an illusory condition. It it's it's you're gonna as just what Mr.
Dean says, all I could do is come in and say what happens afterwards happens. Exactly what Mr. Dean said is what the concern is. That's the problem. >> And that is why in February to address the board's concerns, we
provided you with a detailed parking and management plan, we provided you with an exhibit that gives you what um we think would alleviate those operational concerns of the board. And those have
been submitted as exhibits to the board as part of our application document. And you can make compliance with th that submission, a condition of approval so that you have something that you can point to that you you can say that these
ropes aren't there and they're supposed to be here on a plan and zoning officer enforce it. >> So >> the zoning officer, that's you. >> Yes. Well, >> we we can go quite into the late night. That's that's >> so
weekends I'm going to be out of there. >> What else are we supposed to do, Jeff? Other than give you a detailed plan showing how we deal with it. I can't help that that if somebody points out and takes a picture to you as a zoning officer and says they're violating it on Monday morning and and you get it. If
you don't want to be there on a Saturday or a Sunday, that's how you enforce it. So, I think we have a couple things we're trying to address. >> I'm sorry. >> The board would likely need to come to what is the number of permanent parking
spaces required for the normal daily operations of Diamond Nation. What is that number? I think the board has to feel comfortable with what that number is >> and include the perspective provided of
operational mitigations on those daily operations. So that the roping or fencing or signage and the county assisting all of that >> get wrapped into the approval of this applications such that the daily
operations of Diner Nation are comfortable to the board and amendable with the right number of spaces and the right operational approach. Secondly, because I also sit on township committee as does Mr. King were very familiar with
reviewing special event plans. In such case, whether it's a school or other entity holding a special event, we have an ordinance that we are frequently reviewing ahead of time wellthoughtout plan coordinated with police etc. the
knowledge that there is a special event occurring. that special event plan includes all the mitigation to address that particular date and event at a particular site. I know our professionals are also involved in in reviewing that too. It might be for the
board's consideration that we look at a plan that is inclusive of when these special events occur as long as we're comfortable with the main daily operation aspect. That secondly, we acknowledge that there are special
events held on site and that we do the normal requirement of submitting that special event plan with plenty of time for review, with plenty of time for adjusting it as needed, etc. coordination with police and all other services so that we can look at
addressing this because I recognize that the five or 10 or however many days out of 365 that this occurs, it's not the norm daily operation, but we do need to do our due diligence to ensure that there's safety in play, etc. for our
concerns when those special events occur. So, I'm kind of proposing that that be the way that we move forward. Otherwise, I don't feel as though we're going to move forward. >> Yeah, >> I appreciate those comments. I appreciate those comments. I'd just like to point out that in September, um, when
the board reviewed the issue and the number, what's the number that Mr. Troutman came up with? He said 525. And the transcript reads, "When I said we'll provide the 525, um, Mr. Florella said uh and I wanted to
wait until the appropriate time to jump in and I said okay. He said we're close and I spoke with the board profession and as you know there's a board of adjustment resolution and in that resolution they've returned jurisdiction on the parking issue and if you total
the parking spaces in the 50 bank spaces so that leads to a number of 533. So, while we may have a board professional report of 525, it's my legal opinion that the number has to be 533 to avoid you having to go back before the relief from the board of
adjustment. So, we're close, but and I said, "So, that's fine." I didn't and you said, "I didn't think that that would be an issue, but I just wanted to put it at least put it on the record." I said, "No, I appreciate that, and we'll agree to those those things." So the
number in September before the November lacrosse thing was 533 that we agreed to. The your most updated report from Mr. Rashad says 525. We're agreeing to
the 533. Um with respect to the special event issue, I had actually raised that that that was the >> you did. And for the record, I said it was my legal opinion that that's not appropriate. >> Right. the board can reject my legal opinion and they can proceed that way,
but from a matter of law, it's not appropriate and it's not legal, but they can do it if they want to do it that way. >> Okay. >> They can do whatever they want. >> All right. >> Right. Yeah. That's what I'm saying. >> And and I agreed to the 533 before we found out about all of this stuff. So, I
don't want the record to reflect that there was an agreement of 533 and a and a a change of mind or heart without new facts coming to light. And I gave the legal opinion and you disagreed with it,
but I gave the legal opinion that because there was a voice vote, the board was not obligated to make the adoption because new information came to light which deals with all of these additional events you have. Even even while you're talking about the lacrosse,
you're talking about a softball tournament that you don't do anymore. So, I don't know how many special events there are, but just based upon tonight, you have a lot of them. And it seems often, it seems every month. And as Donna said, it's clearly part of your business plan, which is why this board
has jurisdiction holistically over every event and all parking. It's part of this board's jurisdiction. Period. Plain and simple. As a matter of >> Do you have something to say? Yeah, I guess you know, Robin, to your your straw proposal, I I I have a a
significant problem because you can't parse out if there's a park if an applicant comes in for parking. You can't say, "Well, we'll just look at that part of your business and not that part." Because it is part and parial. Um
the applicants making the big business decision to host those events. Um therefore it's it's it's intrinsic on us to make sure that there's parking significant for it. This this project faces some unique challenges that we may
need to come up with an interim solution until the final parking is available location is available. But what we're talking about now is is that number. The other thing that I would, you know, I
I'm getting severe heartburn over um the while while Mr. Troutman did provide the board with a recommendation, it was based on the number of fields
being seven fields. Now, physically, this site has seven fields. But operationally, when they host tournaments, I'd like them to tell us what number of
of of fields are in fact used because we could tell when we were out on the site that some of those had, you know, dugouts or, you know, diamonds at both ends. So there's, if you look at their fields
and their maps, they could have 12 fields in use at one time during tournaments, baseball tournaments. And so if you did 12 fields times our former consultants
recommendation of 75 spots, I can't do that math quickly, but it's close to a thousand, you know, parking spots. Even if you did 10 fields, that's 750 based on baseball operations. >> And so that's that's significantly
different. And I guess that's where I feel we didn't get accurate information around the intensity of the use and the parking that's needed. >> Mr. Cus would like to be sworn in to present testify with us. >> Sure.
>> Uh Mr. Cus, >> do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're going to give in this hearing is the truth? The whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> I have no idea what he's going to say, but I'm just going to let him say it. I'm just gonna wait. >> You need to be at a mic. Why don't you just microphone mic?
>> Sit down or you can Yeah, go to that one. >> Can you hear me? Is it on? >> It's on, but it's >> Can you hear me? >> Yeah. >> Yeah, we can hear you. >> Better. >> Can you hear me? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Loud and clear. So, I just I just
want I was listening to this dialogue and I was getting a headache. I'm sure all of you are, too. Um, I just want to keep this in perspective a little bit. The reason why we're here, first of all, we've been operating for five weeks with
this new implemented plan and it's working perfectly. If you've driven by the site over the last weekend, any weekend, there are absolutely no issues. There are people on the site. The 525
parking spot number is a beautiful number. It's never going to be a problem. And the analysis of because we convert the fields to more fields to use is not a correct assumption because the
60 cars per field that were used in the initial calculation assumed that they were going to be divided. So there's not any issue with any of this parking at all. Now, when I when I was here the last time, we said that we had an
operations problem and a management problem, that we weren't managing our prop property, our parking, right, which we have corrected. We've gone to great lengths to take care of this parking. I have the same concern with parking and
security and safety as everyone in this room. I don't need somebody getting hit. I don't need somebody getting injured. I'm a major taxpayer in Ron Township and my concern is the same concern that all of you have. Yeah. I really believe that you're blowing this all out of
proportion. This is a pretty simple situation where we have five times a year people on the property that have require more parking and we're dealing with it. Other than that, there's absolutely no problem with Diamond Nation. the value it has to Ronin
Township, the taxes it pays, the people we employ, and I would really appreciate it if you would look at this for what we bring to the table because it's not an issue anymore. That's all I have to say. Thank you. I think we can take the parking plan,
the parking management plan and the exhibit and you make that and condition of approval very detailed and um enforceable and it deals with both the operational issues and the special event
issues and the stealth storage application is preliminary only. So until such time as we get additional overflow parking elsewhere, we can't change anything in terms of it, but the 533 number is the appropriate number.
Is it fair to say that the operational issues and we appreciate the actions that you've taken that you've appreciate that I in my opinion the rest of the board can disagree that is resolved. What's not resolved in my
opinion is what do we do for those lacrosse events because we really haven't gone through other than what Nick you wrote then this is all we have for that can we understand that this is a start by having an agreement do you have an
agreement with the polytech will you have an agreement with the I guess it's our school district they are >> uh yeah the I'm trying to parse this because I think we're getting hung up on some operational issues, but at least in
my mind, those have been successfully dealt with. Let's deal with the extraordinary parking requirements that may come up certainly for the lacrosse events. >> Yeah. And for the lacrosse events. >> Yeah. And chairman, can I clarify that the number of spaces? Are we trying to
solve for a number of spaces no matter what day out of 365 or what's going on? Or are we trying to solve for a number of spaces for normal daily operations and then a different number for special event? I just want to make sure we're all clear what what kinds of numbers
we're trying to come up with for parking. I think that's a fair question >> and and we would agree that the the number for everyday events is the 533 number that part of it was 533. Um, and with respect to special events, we've
identified those three locations that we've already had verbal agreements with those entities in order to be able to provide those special event offsite parking with shuttles and um that
assures the board that we have a plan in place that can be enforced by way of a condition that you we would have to give you copies of those agreements. I gave you the one that we could sign today so you could see what it is. >> Well, I think it's important that the board get copies of those agreements.
>> Can we on the record? My concern is that the agreement is one year. >> Okay. Well, that's fair. >> That does that's that is a temporary solution. The legal agreement is one year. There's no there's not a single parking space provided beyond 12 months
as a matter of course under the law. It could be terminated by either party. >> So what if the township committee heard a special event and we denied it because they weren't able to provide validation of an agreement to the township that those parking leases were >> contracted. They do
>> we could deny >> because they did provide the contracts that provide the parking. We'd have I don't know how you define legally what is a special event and what isn't a special event so that Diamond Nation has clarity of when they need to provide that package. But wouldn't they provide
in that package the contract so that the expiry becomes no? >> Yes. >> And and it would have to be done far enough in advance. >> I'm sorry. >> I love this thing. It would have to be done far enough in advance so that
agreements were in place, right? Because the lacrosse organization is taking reservations months in advance. I'm sure this doesn't happen three weeks before. >> Donna, I know you want to weigh in. Go ahead. >> Yeah. No, they um
Yeah. Um I I do believe that the lacrosse tournament is already advertising for Diamond Nation as a location. So um you know these these are these are reoccurring things that are part of their operation. So when we
say that the township committee deal with it as a step special event couldn't we as planning board say >> this site needs x number of of spaces some of them are permanent >> this mean we need to define what those numbers are now >> I think you've done that with the 525.
No, the 525 is just deals with uh I'm not I'm not conceding 525 is correct yet, but the applicants confirm contending that the 533 525 is the operational number. Um, >> we don't have a good handle on what the
they're they're proposing 400 and some spaces for the lacrosse tournament situation. Um, I believe that there was a reference during the TRC meeting that there's other baseball big events that are
statewide draws where the parking is insufficient. Um, so that's where again, you know, numbers for what what's a special event, you know, >> and that's where I got stuck. >> And I think it causes causes it causes confusion because
>> it causes confusion because it is clearly we know it's not special. They may call it a special event, but it is part of their business plan. It's part of their operation, which this board has jurisdiction over. The problem is then it the m the water the waters get m on
well this is regular operation. This is a special event. The approval is for this not for that. It it's it's this board is here to address everything that goes on on that site and in order for them to get approval they need to
satiate whatever the concerns of this board is and this board grants the approval. That's it. If there was one thing that they did once every 10 years, and it clearly by those facts alone makes it fall outside of the regular operations, but
that lacrosse tournament is absolutely part of their operation in my opinion. As Donna said, they advertise for it. They do it. It's part of their business. It's not a oneoff >> exception. >> It's not an exception. It's not. They do it every year. >> Okay?
>> It's part of their operation and part of their business. All right, micro just >> so I sitting on the committee and we've seen it time and time again. We get the same annual special event permit, the color run for school for every
that's appropriate for you. That doesn't belong before this board. It's not a land use application. It's not part of development. >> This is this is a this is development jurisdictionally. It's this board. But the color run is exactly that's a perfect example of where the township
committee should be part of its special event. I don't think it should be on an application for development within the township. I my legal opinion is and again you can you have the right to disagree would be the first client to say to say shut up but it's my legal
opinion that the township committee does not have jurisdiction over Diamond Nation. That's my legal opinion. >> Okay. I I I need to weigh in on that. >> I know you can you can disagree and you but you got to let me disagree my recommendation. You're my client. >> I know. But you got to let me give the
other contrary legal opinion then on that. Okay. Because because what we're here for is a site plan application for the diamond nation application for the ballpark. We recognize that six days out
of the year we have a recurring special event where the lacrosse has a tournament there that that goes way beyond what the requirements for parking are for the 533
and that we need to come up with a plan and that is that because of that's only a six day a year thing. You don't come before this board on a site plan application for a thousand parking spaces when um it's for a six day a year
type thing. You need got let me you got to let me you got to let me finish. Okay. Um what what the appropriate avenue is what the township ordinances actually provide where you have a
special event uh application that goes before the township committee and you have to show how are you going to get these people there on that site? Are you going to have shuttles? What's your application fee? What's your plan? When we discussed this before, you wanted to
see it. So, we gave it to you because I wasn't going anywhere on this argument before, but we're agreeing. We would agree to a condition subject to me turning around and and confirming it that we we would need to apply for the special event permit application for the
lacrosse events and that they can't be held unless we do that before the township committee. That is the appropriate avenue. That is what the ordinance provides. And I would really like and I would really like you to read the ordinance, Mr. Toriella, because
>> I like you to read the municipal land use law. This is you you're here on an application. The sole and exclusive jurisdiction is this board. >> Period. Period. You're you're incorrect. >> It's not even gray in white as my my
practice could ever be. If I had any doubt, if I even had a cintilla of doubt would back off plus spoken to. >> So, so on the balloonfest, they have to provide for a site plan application. >> I don't know anything about the balloon.
>> Well, that's giving you a hypothetical under >> on the municipal land use law on a balloonfest, they would have to provide a site plan application for shuttles music fest in Bethlehem. So, am I if I'm understanding your legal
opinion for our benefit and trying to put it in layman's terms, but you're not interpreting these as special events. And because it's not a special event falling under that, then it's more like a part of their normal business
operation. In which case it's our obligation to ensure as a planning board that this is this is a fre frequent enough or recurring or whatever that it's not special event. >> That's correct. >> That's what's happening here. >> Yeah. It's a it's SOP for them
>> a bit like how Donna described >> SOP standard operating procedures. Standard business standard business operating procedure. It's part of what they do >> which is kind of what Donna had said. I'm just hearing it in different ways of >> and that's the problem. It's not
standard. It's a special event that happens six days a year. It's not something that happens 365 days a year. >> So would the way forward with this application kind of there's there's just like we sometimes with applications
require reserve parking or overflow parking. um we address it in different ways to acknowledge there's a variable use or potential for variable use uh parking on or need on a property. you
know, could we go forth and establish what are the prop appropriate numbers for this site when these additional when um activities
that go beyond um >> you know I I you know there's I in our heart in my heart of hearts I know there's baseball activities that exceed their capacity cuz Like you said, Robin, we've all driven by the site.
>> Hey, that's not happening in this hearing. If you do it again, >> you're going to be asked to leave. >> So So So we've gone by the site and seen >> parking kind of all over the place and in and on the DOT lot. So, you know, I
think we just need to understand, you know, let's figure out what numbers there are that goes in the resolution and they're required to demonstrate that they have access to those additional parking. We get copies of agreements. We retain jurisdiction. It's not kicked to
the planning to the township committee. It's part of their resolution. Um, >> here's Can I offer an alternative? >> Sure. just trying to find a a business solution here >> that the applicant may during the season
identify certain events that will require parking in excess of 533 spaces. When that is anticipated, I'm holding up next thing. It It's not all of this. It's just pieces of it. These steps will apply
and these steps will be documented and maybe presented to the township committee. I don't know if it's for approval but for a headnodon, but at least it's something Jenny Bench shows up one day, right? And it's like you
said, Mr. Cousins, like Michael Jordan showed up. You know what's going to happen. Crap. 533 spots isn't going to do it. you now kick into Nick's plan. Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom. This is what we do and it's documented. Whether it goes to the committee or not,
I'll defer to >> No, it wouldn't go to the committee and I don't know. I'd have to I'm looking at Jeff whether it's the code enforcement official, zoning officer, I don't know who it would be. >> Well, uh, but it it wouldn't be the township committee, but I I I I also we haven't heard from the board's traffic
expert yet. We haven't heard from any of our experts yet, and we're all talking that 533 is the number. I know Mr. Gruinberg said that's the number and it was the number before the special events. I don't know that that's the number and if that's the number that's fine but I I would like the board
professionals to have a conversation with the board members and the applicant uh at least with respect to that and then to to your point earlier when you said we need to find out the regular number and then we can talk about
>> the exceptional >> the exceptional right >> what is a characterization that's not a special event what's it I would say I would say any event that requires overflow parking >> variable what was the turned on I used >> extraordinary extraordinary event
>> I I don't know that that m I think any any event that requires overflow parking or excess parking whatever that is that will be a separate process I understand that okay but it's two there's two prongs >> and I haven't heard from any of the
board professionals all on this subject >> actually Mr. I do have >> which I think is like they're an important part. >> Need your opinions. >> I do have uh some questions first and I do have a lot of opinions also and whenever it's my turn I'd like to ask
some questions. >> Well, you have the microphone so ask the question. >> Okay. >> We're trying to get to a conclusion here. >> Um and I think the best person to answer my questions at this point is Mr. Cust if you don't mind. >> Sure. Um, how long have you been leasing or
renting the property to the Lacrosse operations? >> Approximately 10 years. >> 10 years. And uh, have you leased or rented the property to any other uh, entity other than than Lacrosse? >> No.
>> And how many u agreement per year you have with Lacrosse? Is it one agreement per year or multiple agreement? >> It's an annual agreement. Annual agreement. For 2026,
I could see that they're advertising a major regional tournament on November 21 and November 22. And then they have a five-star elite uh event on November 1st. >> Okay. >> Will these events happen
>> at Diamond Hill at Diamond Nation? >> Are they the same event? It's well and that's just a swear question. >> If you want to be sworn in, you can. So, can you swear this gentleman in so he can answer? >> You raise your right hand. You swear
affirm the testimony you're given this hearing is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Can you state spell your name for the >> I'm going to help with the operational challenges or issues here that you were talking about. I'm gonna I'm going to help with the operational questions.
>> Can you restate the question for >> Do you want to add any information to the questions I asked in terms of uh how many times a year in terms of how many years have been uh >> Yeah. No, he's correct. 10 about 10 years, five times a year. >> Okay. When did you start noticing the
overflow parking not being sufficient for the lacrosse operation? I can't I can't I can't answer that one. Um they've grown throughout those 10 years obviously, but I can give you a a date or a time on when it actually was overflowing.
And again, I want to confirm the answer I got. The lacrosse operation is the only operation that is involved on your site other than your own operation. That's correct. Okay. Uh these are all the questions I have for now, but I do
have some opinions. Um, and at the right time I will give you my opinions. >> Can I make one more statement that might be helpful? You're concerned about the permanency of the off-site barking to eliminate the concern for the
baseball operations. Be assured I own Creek View Realy, which is the agreement you have. That can be a permanent agreement. That's 50 spaces that are available to increase from 533
to 583. So that we're never going to have a problem with a baseball or softball operation. I just want to put that side of it to bed because that affects the little retail expansion that you're talking about and it affects what's happening with the self- storage
application. These other events we could continue to talk about. I think the chairman had a great recommendation uh in terms of making an outline and and uh creating a situation where the township committee could could uh opine on it. So I just wanted to make you understand
that there's an extra 50 spaces that are always there. I own them. >> Thank you. >> So regardless of a special event that's those those 50 spaces are are available. >> Thank you. Uh, Mr. Chairman, you let me know when uh you'd like me to speak as far as
opinion and analysis. >> Ready? >> Why don't you start with the analysis and go to the opinion? >> So, uh first of all, just a matter of clarification. In my report, I did indicate uh that
there is a uh number that's out there that is 300 uh 525. But let me put that in context and let me read that section of my report and I and I'm reading now from my report. The board's professionals have estimated
peak demand at approximately 420 vehicles and recommended a planning standard of 525 spaces. So what I'm doing here, I'm stating the facts, the prior uh
determinations and the prior discussions that happened in this room. >> I'm sorry. I you know, I was in business for a very long time. When you take the hill, you don't get off the hill. We're already at 533 to discuss 525. >> I'm I'm just trying to tell the board
I'm not saying that 525 is the number that I want. The 525 in my report. I'm indicating it was a planning number that was discussed before the board prior to my engagement. So that's where the 525 comes from. >> In other words, it's history. >> Mhm.
>> Okay. So having said that, so I took a different approach on this application uh than Mr. Troutman. Mr. Troutman looked at the need for uh every u field multiplied by seven and came up with
525. I took a different approach. I have access to a variety of u uh resources uh that um uh gave me a lot of areas and I compiled many areas of uh Sundays and
Saturdays in um 2018 to 2025. And I compiled a set of numbers of uh parking needs on these days based on the arrows. And here's what I found. 520 vehicles on I'm giving you the high
numbers and the low ones. 520 on Sunday, March 24. 515 on Saturday, February 24. on the low end. 290 on Saturday, October
4th, 22, 2025, 260 on Saturday, October 5th, 2024. So based on these numbers, I could see that the highest number was 520,
which makes the 533 kind of adequate, but not quite. And the reason I'm saying that because we don't know if that's the absolute maximum that is the maximum I found. So now I'm very pleased to see that Mr. Kust is adding
50 in a permanent capacity to the 533. So now we have 583. 583 for me is a good number for the Diamond Nation operation based on all the studies I've done and the
observations I've made. um over the last 10 years uh in terms of history available online. Now let's move to the um uh special operation let's call it.
Uh that's when u they rent the facility to the lacrosse u teams and that is a little bit more difficult to quantify but here's what I did. We have one example which is November um 2025.
On that day, we know for a fact we had about 300 vehicles in the permanent parking spaces. Um I'm estimating in addition to the 300 that there were
350 vehicles parked across river road in the grassy area. So that brings us to 650. I'm estimating that there were approximately 30 vehicles parked on the
street on River Road. And my estimates are from pictures I looked at uh uh primarily and also looking at the road and trying to estimate how many cars would be on river road. So if you add them up, you have 300
plus 350 that's 650. plus 30 to 680. So I think that's one number we need to work from upward. Now if we look at the uh traffic management plan that has been submitted,
I have a question regarding that plan. The plan calls for 450 offsite spaces. That's obviously in addition to the 300, but is it also in addition to the two 233? >> Yes.
>> So, we have, just to be clear, 300 in the permanent parking lot, 233 across the street, and 450 offsite. Well, if that's the case and if the applicant can provide the board with the proper documents supporting that type of
uh uh availability of parking, I'm very comfortable with 300 plus 233 plus 450. >> I think that's where this is, right? >> That's that's what our application is. So for clarity, the we have the 300 in
the parking lot today, the 233 that are in overflow that would no longer exist at all once that project were built. >> There is still some plan to create like where are those 233? We don't need to know exactly where, but confirmed for me
that there are still plans to create more permanent parking. That would be the 233 somewhere there. >> That that is correct. And we would not be able to do to remove the overflow parking on the self storage lot until
such time as we secure that additional overflow parking replacement >> that we provided in in where we landed. it. Alternatively, the the 233 that would be replaced
so that you could develop would be 233 spaces different from the 450. >> I think it's actually 218 is the way the resolution was. Okay. >> It was because there's 315 >> the actual number is 315 and we agreed
to provide 218. >> Okay. So that number would be we would not be using whatever the off sites are for the 450. It would be a different site. It would not be the 50 that was already offered or the 450. It
would be a new location. >> Correct. >> Now the company the 50 >> how would people get from there if that's a daily operation or are we saying it's part of the 450 that's when you need it? If if that was needed, it would have to be by the shuttle plan
that we've already provided. >> Okay. >> You said it could be available daily. >> Just clarification. >> Somebody get there because the street that we probably have employees >> and then how did they get there once
they parked shut? >> Donna. Yeah. Um, Maurice, I guess with your the number when you got to the 680, did that include the parking that was occurring on the DOT property,
the the approximately 200 cars? >> It it did not, but even if you add that um the numbers they're providing and let's let's add the numbers up so the record is clear. So, we have uh 300
plus 233 + 450. So that's 983 parking spaces. >> A thousand. Close to a thousand. >> It's close to a thousand. So even if we add 100 or two or or even close to 300,
we're covered with that number. I do have one question. Um it reviewing the parking management plan item two under existing parking conditions. Um it you note that uh the auxiliary parking lot that 233 spaces of the storage facil
self storage uh facility it provides additional capacity during typical weekend events. So that those spaces are needed outside of special events or should the parking management plan be
updated? I'm I'm not understanding the question. They're they're part of the day-to-day operation for Diamond Nation and that's why the self storage cannot proceed until there is I think Mr. Grubberg corrected me. It's a 218
space replacement, >> right? And those 218 spaces were they satisfied the typical operations. >> Correct. >> So the parking management plan provides for these off-site spaces that are for
special events only. >> Correct. >> So it I don't know if I'm the there's 533 spots for normal everyday operation. 983 five special events up here.
Clear clear is that? >> Okay. And when and if the self- storage facility is >> they have to build the 233 somewhere else before they build the self. >> Okay. >> So, so Mr. Mr. Chairman, what I would
recommend here to protect the board is to place a condition that says something like anytime they rent or lease a facility to a non um diamond nation operation that should
trigger the provision of additional parking and the special application. >> Well, this way >> that's what I said before. Yeah, that would be great ch because this way because we can there's there is going to be very hard to quantify or to develop a
trigger point >> for that special parking need unless the applicant can tell us a good way to do it. >> Well, I I think that's okay except if there should become a business situation where somebody wants I'm I haven't even
said anything like this. What if somebody wants to rent a baseball field for a birthday party? Yeah. Okay. I don't They probably don't even do that, but in the future they want to rent a That would require a thousand parking. So, if needed
>> Good question. But I mean, that could be negotiated in the language. There could be some exceptions in that condition or some provisions to it >> if needed. >> Yeah. For overflow parking purpose, >> but the 50 spaces were already testified that that would be used. Right. >> Right. it
>> if 583 with the 50 whis right it we all agree that that is more than that that is sufficient for baseball operations done if some other event comes up medical center wants to have meet Joe
Tory day at Diamond Nation I mean it'll be a a storm >> right you're going to know that ahead of time then this triggers deb these things are going to happen and
you're going to take these steps to make sure that that off-site parking can be define the trigger though as another entity separate from Diamond Nation I mean >> it if Diamond Nation itself if the trigger is a separate entity using or
whatever creating the event then you know Diamond Nation may want to have a special a larger tournament because they're doing so Well, like then the trigger doesn't get like how do we define the trigger? >> I I think we we we incorporate language
about need. We but we will specifically incorporate lacrosse tournaments because we know that that is >> so there's no ambiguity there or any other event that requires overflow parking I think is probably the way to do it. My question to the board's
professionals is Mr. Gruinberg suggested that this parking and traffic management plan be a condition to the approval. Are you guys okay with this traffic and plan the way that the way that it is?
>> If I'm writing a resolution and I'm copying from this, you're okay with that? I my answer to your question would be uh once my comments are addressed to the satisfaction of the board I will be okay with that document. >> Okay.
>> And I think just just for me from a just a stormwater management perspective um an event that's going to occur more than once a year to me would justify as new motor vehicle surface if it's going to go on some motor vehicle surface.
Sure. Is this one a little bit better? I'll just talk about it. >> So, basically, basically, if we're going to be doing off-site parking, whatever agreement is put into place, wherever the location may be, it has to be a motor vehicle service that's already
been disturbed. Because the problem is is that if we're going to start getting into multiple times a year in a grass field, that becomes a motor vehicle. and from D then that that triggers all kinds of requirements with green infrastructure and water quality and water management.
>> They're not Ryan they're not talking about anything other than a mo in your words a motor vehicle >> and I think parking lot >> existing and that's that would just be the language >> you want us to include if the locations changed in any future state that it doesn't become a
>> yes >> yeah that makes sense >> the the other the other general question afterwards. I don't >> um it almost seems like this plan is two things. It's one that and so that's where I
would suggest that we have >> um those items which are conditions that will be required to be complied with under general operations and then those items which apply to
special events and that they be separate >> documents because having them in one >> um >> a It'll be a separate paragraph, but it'll be in the condition of approval. But I think I can parse those out and
I'll circulate a draft and if I make a mistake, Mr. Grubenberg will let me know. >> Yeah. Yeah. I guess um there were some I had some concerns about the the ongoing use of ropes.
Um because ropes have been in this application since almost day one or at least since the last two resolutions when they expanded the umpire parking lot and when they did the green monster fields and ropes come up and ropes come
down. Um, and while the applicant has promised once again to put keep the ropes there, um, should we be from a I'll ask our professionals or engineering and traffic professionals, would it be more appropriate to get a more physical barrier
um, along River Road on the applicant's property, not on the county right away to keep the cars from parking along the area. So, a more you know, because
>> I don't know which which I mean there are things like construction fencing that I don't think is something the community wants to see on a permanent basis. Fences require their own permits. Then you get into snow, but wooden ones
like dune fences, that sort of thing. Again, we have overlapping jurisdictions between this board, um, public works and and county because it's their rightway. So, we we we we can >> No. Would the applicant be willing to
consider putting on their right away on the properties that they own? Um cuz this would apply to both applications. You know, a a more permanent solution to block the traffic cuz I know in previous
applications we had thought, oh, we're getting this enhanced landscaping, but now they're planting there. Anyway, >> Donna, with all due respect, I I think you keep going back to this perception that you have that when the baseball was
operating, the cars were all over the place. I've testified that we resolved that. We have a parking plan. It's working beautifully and I stand by that. So, I don't think it's necessary. I don't think we want snow fences. I don't think
it looks appropriate at Diamond Nation. I think it's a beautiful amenity the way it is. The ropes are working beautifully and we will continue to ensure that we watch them and make sure that they continue to work. >> I don't think any, for the record, I
don't think anybody suggested a snow pen. >> Yeah, just for consult. >> I don't I don't I Yeah, I don't know why I don't know why you went there because that wasn't suggested. People aren't supposed to park along the roads, but honestly, because we've dealt with this in other roads within the township
unless there's a sign, our police officers are not allowed to enforce it. There's nothing for them to enforce. So, I would love to hear that you are working with the county to get those road signage up. >> Yeah, we would we would agree. >> Then they can enforce it. They do anything without the sign. we would
agree to um put the no parking signage up to the extent that the county would allow us to and we would make that effort to do that >> and the towway zone. >> Correct. >> If >> I think that's critical because again that goes to that goes to my suggestion
earlier about self- enforcement because if it's a towway zone and and the tow companies get to make that's a that's a cash register for them. They will tow the cars because they will make money and that will guarantee I mean guarantee
that people will not park. >> Yeah. If the county would allow us to do that, we would do that >> overtime to spend his weekends enforcing zoning. Right. >> Jeff has nothing else to do on the weekends. >> That's right. On the weekends to do that on our behalf. So, um yeah, if we could have
formal enforcement where our officers can occur, that would mitigate a lot. And the scoring plan too was got over there is there is an attendant at the umpire lot but also watching the street now. So >> I just don't want to put a kid making 20
bucks an hour in the way of an girl saying I got to park my truck anyway. Like that poor kid doesn't need to be dealing with that. >> Yep. You're right. I I think if I could ask Maurice in terms of your recommendations, I I on
behalf of the applicant, I'd say we we agree with all of them with the exception of two, which is the self- storage lot is to to have it uh encumbered by a deed restriction, not appropriate. The board has already deliberated on that in terms of that
parking. >> I understand. And I gave that as an option. I said or the restriction. Yeah. and and and the last thing is provide the board with an update regarding coordination with Hunter and County or NJ do anything that's affects that property
would presumably come before this board for review and approval or through the appropriate jurisdiction whether it's the county or whatnot but at this point unless Mr. Kusta has something to add. I there are discussions, but I don't believe anything has been solidified today.
>> I have no issue with what you just said, but I'll let the board make the decision in terms of what they want to hear or not hear. >> Thank you. Yeah. >> Yeah. I I believe that it was already a condition that there would be signage that the parking lot and the self
storage wouldn't be allowed for Diamond Nation. I remember we had >> Yeah, that's >> it's a locked gate. I don't think they could, Donna, if I remember the plans. >> That's that's part of once self storage is developed, there wouldn't be signage for Diamond Nation on it, and that was a condition.
>> Right. But that parking would be prohibited, so they wouldn't come into your lot. >> Correct. >> Are we done with parking perhaps? >> I think so. There were I thought there were some other >> conversations. What was
>> professionals? >> Well, I I was just talking about parking. If if we're done with the parking issue with I can let Mr. Dean go and then I can call my next whis w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w with respect to ballpark. >> I'm not going to suggest this. Somebody else has whispered in my ear to suggest
that we take a fivem minute break. >> Okay, >> give you a chance. Thanks. You can stay for the >> Okay, we're back in session. Dr. Groomberg, I'm going to throw it back to you. Is there anything else that
you needed to cover on with respect to testimony? >> Well, we have to do the site plan for the ballpark. >> Um, I can present Mr. Hansen and my my idea was to present Mr. Hansen to give
you the what those improvements are. then Mr. Manino to show what the architect >> short shrift we've all been talking about it >> y >> so but we need the testimony you're correct >> okay we'll we'll do it as quickly as possible um so um Mr. Hansen, you're a
licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey and a licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey. Correct. >> That's correct. >> And you've appeared before this board previously, correct? >> I have. Yes. I I was involved in the original site design for this almost 20 years ago and subsequently.
>> And I offer him as an expert as both an engineer and a planner also. >> Thank you. >> And and John, why don't you take it away? >> Sure. So, um, can you hear me? All right. >> Yes. >> Okay. John Hansen uh for AKRF vice president localized office in Hybridge.
So just to to get the record a little um for the record this block 16 lot 14.06 one tax acre tax lot. It's approximately 34 acres in size in the O outdoor recreation zone. We all know it as the
Diamond Nation facility. Um, it's been in existence about, you know, 17 18 years. And, uh, it's a it's a property that's essentially a very developable piece of property. It's flat. There's no wetlands, no wetlands transition areas, flood planes, steep slopes, or anything
like that. So, what we're here tonight for is a very simple proposal. We split it up on our site plans. The site plans here are last revised October 8th, 2025. They're the plans that I have up before you tonight. the ones that were
submitted with the application. So I don't think there's a necessary to mark them. We've split this uh M we call it a minor project. We split it up into two pieces. We call it project area one. Project area one is the uh what we call
the west side of the property. Uh as you enter the facility from the main parking lot as a pedestrian, you come into the facility, you see the building there. We call it uh the retail uh building. So that building um exists with indoor
batting cage and so forth. And that building what we're proposing as part of project area one is an addition to the east side of it. It's 1,484 square ft. Um that also in addition to that on the south side of that building
will be uh what we call a tot lot. And then to the south of that, the existing outdoor batting cage area uh currently has a natural turf surface that's been a maintenance problem for quite some time.
And so what we're proposing as part of the project is to remove that surface and to construct a pvious concrete surface so that we eliminate that mess over there and create a consistent surface throughout that that area. And
then there'll be some other uh you know fencing and um you know walkway adjustments to make that all happen. But the architect can tell you a little bit more. That's what we call project area one. So, as part of that project area, there'll be the pvious concrete.
There'll be an underground storm water management system that'll connect to the existing extensive underground system on the site. Um, that's all been reviewed by your engineer. He's got some comments on that. But in totality, what I can say with confidence is that uh we meet the
regs uh through uh the major development regs, which is what this is, and there'll be no adverse uh impacts to the stormwater system or any downstream neighbors. So for that's project area one in its uh summary. Project area two
really if you uh look at the property you'll know that you have the six main fields uh that kind of are in the body of the uh facility. There is a sidewalk pedestrian viewing area made of concrete that runs in an east west direction. So
in the center of that are two landscape areas that were part of the original design. Um, it's turned out that really over time they just haven't worked out as as we hoped they would with landscaping and it become more of a nuisance and so forth for for children
to uh play on them. So what we're proposing to do is to remove those. Each of those would be replaced with a pvious concrete system on the easterly side of the the one the easterly portion that's going to be replaced with the pvious
system. We would put a pre-fabricated shed of 504 square ft on top of that. No footings, no foundation. It'll be a movable shed that will sit up a certain distance above the pvious concrete surface. That way, it can be adjusted if
necessary, moved a little bit. But most importantly is that it'll have le leaf g it'll have um gutters and downspouts that'll then discharge into the porous concrete system. So there again won't be any net increase in impervious system
impervious from the roof. So both of those uh project areas there'll be no increase in lighting as far as like building mounted lighting on the surface or facade of the building. There'll be no increase in lighting at the project
area 2. There will be some minor recess lighting under the canopy of the addition in project area one and Mr. Manino will talk about that. Um but in a nutshell really that is the uh that is our proposal. It's a it's a very
straightforward and a very simple proposal. >> Okay. Do you want to identify the variances now? >> Sure. So, we have um we have an existing condition where we
have an HDAC unit that exists on the west side of what I'll call the I've been calling the retail building. It's 15.1 ft from the sideline, the westerly sideline where 25 ft is required.
um that's been there from the aerial photos that I've looked at for approximately the duration of the in of the of the facility. So almost 20 years. Um it's surrounded on on the left hand side. It's buffered by evergreen trees. Um it's set back a certain distance from
the principal structure because it needs to be to be able to serve it appropriately and have sufficient um air and and uh open space between it. So, uh, in long and short, um, that's an existing condition, but it's now been
observed. We're asking for relief to clean it up and and get it on the record. Uh, it's what I would call a C1 type hardship u because it's, uh, located where it is because of the existing legally located principal
structure. So, that's the what I would call the the C1. There's two two other variances that are involved here. Um, one is for the hard surface. Uh, 60% maximum is permitted or was permitted by
variance in 2008. So, that sets the bar for what's permitted on the property. Um, we're proposing 60.6%. So, it's a 6% increase. Uh, that's 10,32 square ft.
And then finally, um, we have an existing, uh, signage, uh, building mounted signage on the retail building that comes to 169.5 square ft. Um we are removing one sign
and we would like to put two more signs at one of the north south entrance and the south entrance of the building addition so that the total after the ones removed and the two uh go on would be 192 square ft.
Um so those um we can talk about after Mr. Manino gives his architecture testimony. >> Mr. Argie did a report of April 22nd, 2026. >> Correct. >> Um and we're agreeing to do everything in that
report. Is there any issues that um would not have been? >> The the only issue that I don't think is necessary is there's a comment about doing underground television TVing of the storm water system, the existing storm water system. And the reason that
I don't think it's necessary is because this project was done under the post204 stormwater rules. There's an operation and maintenance manual already in place uh and a procedure for this property. So
the or the owner has to actually inspect the system every year. He's got to make sure it's working. He's got to submit annual reports to the township. And so really to go and do another level of pving the lines to me I think is really
is excessive. I think this will all be covered. He's already has to to maintain the property >> as >> Ryan. What do you think? I'm sorry. >> Have those inspections been conducted? >> As far as I know. >> Are there reports to to back it up? And I only asked that because I know generally while this may have been
required in the past, it's been my experience that most towns even though it's it's restricted, it's in the requirement, we never actually get. So, um, I mean, for me, we put the recommendation in there because that's what I'd be comfortable with seeing. I
know it's only roughly 20 years old. Um, but it's an HDP system, which is also not necessarily a bad thing, but it's certainly not as robust as like a reinforced concrete pipe. Um, I would feel more comfortable knowing what the condition is. We're not asking
for a whole lot. I think we also want to know on the plan exactly where it's going to be going and going out and televising the would actually kind of help show exactly where it goes. Um, that would be my thought, but you know, obviously I defer to you guys. >> Would the normal report they're supposed
to do and turn in show the same thing? >> Not not necessarily. So that's that's a great point. So, they're supposed to maintain the storm water system on site, but I don't believe I I haven't seen the document or what was deedestricted before, but I don't imagine that would include televising the system on any
kind of regular basis to determine what the the condition of the pipe is. >> And for me, Donna, you mean? >> Yeah. So, sorry. So this would be >> very similar Ryan to where we've asked
>> other applicants to televise. >> Yeah, I feel like this is a pretty standard comment that we have. We're tying into an existing storm water system just because we don't know what the condition of it is. We're adding new area that wasn't originally accounted for it. While the storm water report may
indicate that it can accept that, we just want to make sure that there's not, >> you know, root penetration that's that's blocking the system or causing anything. So, we don't want it to, you know, back up into the system and cause any adverse flooding. So, I feel like it's a pretty generic normal request. Um, I would
certainly recommend it, but again, I defer to you guys on the quality is with the >> I believe we did that. We had the hospital do it. We had Woodmont do it for their storm water systems. >> So, it I think it's kind of an important
thing to make sure the system's functioning. properly. >> Maybe if we um >> Yeah. So, it's not Okay, I that's a that's a good point. I'm not looking to to televise the entire property. It's
just what we're tying into. So, if your system is tying into the inlet and then there's two pipes that exit that inlet that say terminus on, >> I want to know where they go. I want to know what the condition of those pipes are just to make sure that the water that you're going to be putting into it doesn't negative
>> we understood it to be 40 acres so >> no and I I apologize for not yet I'm just talking about just the area that we're going to be more or less disturbing or >> impacting we can agree to that >> that's fine uh and the I think the only other thing in the report was to discuss
testimony regarding uh construction or accessing safety secure Yeah. So, you know, there's going to be some uh construction overlap with operations, but typically what we do here, we think the best thing is to have a pre-construction meeting with the township engineer. And at that point,
we'll then discuss exactly how we're going to do it, the hours of construction. I would anticipate that a lot of this construction will try to be done out off peak hours, you know, so that the ADA spaces can remain and there'll be no overlap of trucks coming in and over that. But, um, that's
really, in my opinion, the best way to do it. And I I think there's uh nothing else in the report unless you have that for us to address. >> Yeah, give me one second. Went through that pretty quick, so I just want to make sure we address everything.
>> Okay. While Ryan's looking at that, does any of the board members have any questions for Mr. Hansen? >> I guess item number 33 on Ryan's report. um if you could address that. >> Yeah. And John, that's that's specifically kind of where the the
scoreboard is shown. Your your plan shows that those footings and the poles are going to remain. Um and then the the porch concrete or or whatever the surface is. Yeah. The porch concrete's going to be installed around that. just kind of what your plan was because I know it's supposed to is the idea that
the the area of the pole is not going to have stone underneath of it or what what was the the intention there? >> Yeah. So, you have anything that you have an existing structure such as, you know, the batting cage itself, the existing pole and the footing, you'd basically just construct the porest
concrete system around it. So the porest concrete system is really between a foot and a half to two and a half feet deep from the finished surface down to the bottom of the excavation no matter where you are. And so you would just modify it horizontally to accommodate those poles.
We're not going to impact the integrity of the poles or or any of those improvements. >> The think only other thing in Mr. Vakarella's report. Well, if we could just pull up on that for >> Hold on. Sorry. Uh, so let me see here.
Uh, I had comment number 13 on page three. We're just confirming. I believe it's just I'm looking now that the hatching is slightly different. And this is on sheet number. >> Yeah, that was a good catch. So, we're going to blame that on the draftsman. He
he hatched the uh building. That's the twostory um observation building. It to be removed. We used the wrong uh hatch on there. So that that'll be corrected. That building is not to be removed. Comment number 24 because the way I
worded it is more for testimony. The storm water report references inlet screening is going to be provided um so that no debris is conveyed into the system. Is that a permanent solution? Is that just a temporary sediment controls?
>> I think that's a carryover because you know what we had the way we had designed this is that the outlet structure has an interior weird wall. So the stone from the porous pavement section will butt up against the solid wall of the inlet and
then you so no stone will be able to en encroach into the inlet. the it'll be the u the lowflow uh pipe will actually >> be entering and then you'll have a open space in there where you have the weir and the orifice. So there's no intrusion from the stone based on the design
>> where you have the >> we have the >> uh where we have the orphice and the weir u it's the in the intern >> yes the in call it an internal weir wall. Okay.
>> So, do you need more construction details then, Ryan? >> No. So, is it your testimony that that was just a incorrectly carried over and that'll be removed in a revised report? >> Correct. Yeah. It's not not necessary for this system as designed. >> Okay. Um, one of the other questions I
had and I just just want to clarify and it's only slightly about parking. I promise. Uh, so the three ADA spaces that are called for to be removed temporarily. Um, I just want to make sure my count shows that the it appears based off of 300 spaces on the paved
parking surface that the ADA um only requires I believe the number is nine. I I can double check, but I just want to make sure. So, the three spaces that are being removed, are you still going to provide adequate ADA parking? Well, let's just back up
for a second. 38 spaces. Are you talking about the ones that are in front of the >> or are they just and I guess that's where some of the disconnect is. Is it just reserved parking? >> Well, it's reserved. It's 88 parking and then you have the uh soil erosion stabilized construction entrance going through there. But those parking spaces
aren't going to be eliminated. They just won't be used at the time that trucks are going in and out of sight. So, it'll be Yes. will be moderate and that'll be part of the pre-construction meeting to say like, okay, we're going to make sure that we're only having trucks coming in and out of that stabilized construction area when you those those spaces are not
in use. >> So the the ADA So those spaces will still be used for parking on the site during construction. Is that >> Yeah, they can be. Sure. >> Okay. Yeah, because I just want to make sure whatever whatever so if the business is going to stay open during
construction, I just want to make sure that we're not getting into any issues with ADA access, things of that nature. So, um I guess yeah, we can certainly work that out during the pre-construction meeting. Similar to that same comment regarding the site lighting, it also on your on your plan here, it says that the light is going to
be removed again for that temporary access. Um, would it then be your testimony that some type of temporary site lighting, if deemed necessary, will be provided during the course of construction? Absolutely. >> Great. Okay. Uh,
let me just make sure I got everything here. Uh, again, similar kind of question. This is some of just the new comments that we had. There's a lot of areas where it says that the areas are going to be protected during construction. Um, is are we going to use some kind of temporary fencing or just being extra
careful? I just wasn't sure what the the intention was. >> Well, you know, we typically put that on a plan to give the contractor notice that it's the contractor's responsibility to protect those areas because if he doesn't or she doesn't, then they're going to be liable for that
stuff. So the actual measures of how they do it, fencing, um, you know, other hay bales or whatever they do it, we we leave it up to them, but we just want to make it clear on the plans that those areas are be backed. >> Okay, let's go.
>> Hey, I should have noted this before. There is nobody from the community who was in the room with us this evening. I should have done this after Mr. Dean's testimony. There was nobody here then either. >> Um, so good catch. I'm not going to offer it to the community. Okay.
>> Thank you. The only thing I saw in Mr. Bacharella's report is he attached the environmental commission suggestion rain. >> Yeah, actually could you go back and I have uh comment number 10, 12, 13, and
14 if you just want to quickly address those. Number 10, I think we dealt with as part of the self storage application that that the overflow parking is within 1400 ft
>> and all the other parking uh locations are >> all the other parking locations are as well >> on site yet. Are you talking about um the special event parking? >> Correct. >> No.
>> Okay. >> But that's special event parking and it's not part of the overflow parking. The overflow parking is within that. That's 10. Uh number 12, Jeff. That's the other one. This is part of
the shed that used to read as ice cream. I can't I'm not familiar with with the with the shed, so I can't give anything on that. So if if the use is for redes for for a food stand and we just if you could just
note it on the plan or if there's some sort of confirmation of what that use is so then it goes through um the right way because if we can we can show the it's a it's a movable shed I think that was used by Vas Ice Cream and
we can indicate that there's a shed. >> Absolutely. So there's there's two sheds, right? Shown in the plans. >> We're proposing we're proposing one 504
square ft shed in addition to it. >> Existing. >> There's two existing adjac. So >> yeah, I think that's the bat vendor. >> Yeah, >> we learned that at the >> plans. And then the other one is used for food or something,
>> right? >> Rita. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> You show them. You show them. >> Yeah. We'll we'll reflect them on the >> but they're shown. The issue is did they get permits and approvals and >> right >> you know electrical permits and things
like that. So a a condition would be that evidence that those permits were received and approved. Correct Jeff? >> Yes. That's the proper procedure. Okay. 13 reads, "Directional signs are
proposed." >> I'm sorry. Do you do you agree with that? So, you have a >> correct? >> He nodded. So, >> Oh, he nodded. >> You're right. >> Uh, directional signs are proposed by the applicant. Please confirm installation and size. Directional signage is limited to three square feet.
Variance will be required if signs exceed three square feet. Um the the signs that that I've testified to are just for the building. Um any directional signs, I guess we're going to have to live with three square ft or less, >> right? >> So that includes all the directional
signs for the lot 14.03 or 16.03 >> for the overflow parking. There we go. Go ahead. Yeah. They go, "Oh, yeah." >> Directional signage though is the kind that you put in the ground and saying park here, don't park there. Like that
kind of usually >> on the like what when you say that, what are you commenting on versus what they might be thinking? >> There's they're usually entrance exit signs that are three square feet or less. Those are ones that don't really require variances, but then the ones that they show in the exhibit, it shows
a directional arrow and it says additional parking here. That's that's considered a directional sign. and they're they're regulated at three square ft upwards to 16 square ft if the planning board uh grants the relief.
>> Then we would ask for up to 16 square feet. >> Okay. As a variance for up to 16 feet, I guess. Yeah. >> Yeah. I guess we would need to have a signage package that shows the
location and sign, you know, for for all the proposed new signs. Correct. >> We can provide it. >> How do we, you know, how >> do we approve it? We can provide that. >> Yeah. Yeah.
So, but we don't know how many up to 16 feet we're approving. satisfaction that the township sign. >> Okay. >> Yeah. They're the satisfaction of the township planner. They'll submit the package and they'll work with Jeff. >> That's fine. >> That would be the condition. >> Okay.
>> Yeah, I'm comfortable with that. They have the number of signs on the plan and they testify to the dimensions of it. So, that's I'm I'm comfortable with the court is >> Okay. >> Thanks, Jeff. >> Just one more >> one more thing for me. I just noticed I missed it.
>> Um for under my general comments on page two, I was looking for testimony about number of employees hours or that stuff. I think just to wrap it all up into one neat little package with your expanded use with the addition is there going to be any change to the existing operations
for number of employees, hours of operation, trash and recycling operations or types and timing of deliveries. Is there's going to be no intensity increase of the business? There's no increase in water or sewer. No increase operations, patrons,
visitors, employees. >> And and just real quick, there was just one more. The um the temporary gate on lot 14. The temporary gate on lot 14.03. >> I'm sorry. Can you I didn't know what I didn't hear what you said.
>> Echo >> number 14 on his report on 14.03. The next >> report number 14. >> Okay. I have it right in front of me >> right there. >> The applicant shall testify to the temporary gate.
>> Testify. Is it Is it remaining? Is it Is it being removed? What's the What's the operation for it? >> So, it's going to remain as a temporary. It's a temporary b gate as a as a structure, but it's going to remain. >> Yes.
Okay. Thank you. >> So, it I'm sorry, just just to clarify, is that the gate on the DOT property you're talking about, Jeff? >> Yes. >> And that'll remain there. >> So, the applicant's putting a gate on a
DOT property. I mean, the access looks like it's on the other property. >> I'm sorry. >> The access on the on the plan looks like it's on NJ dot property, but I'm not unless it's shown on a survey. that book. This is your
access. >> What would you like to see there? >> Well, I think the problem is that it's not property. So what we have >> we have uh through the farmer farming plan be told us we are allowed
to gate that off. Now if you you don't want us to gate off that's that's fine I'll take it out of the management plan but it's just >> it was more of a just testifying to it. It it really wasn't discussed. >> It's a temporary gate. So we can remove it or we can keep it.
>> We want it we want that. Do you have a recommendation? >> I mean, it makes sense for it's there, but it's just more of what um if it's temporary as in >> and and you're going to remove it at some point or if it's going to remain there.
>> The building3, we'll remove it. >> Sounds like a plan. >> Makes good answer. >> I think we all want their >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yeah. and and you'll make sure it's
closed during weekends, Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays cuz I did drive by and the gate was open in the last couple weeks. We have some HVAC that we will be doing back there so that sometimes trucks do have to get in to get into our property,
but yes, it'll be closed. >> And then the environmental commission >> suggestion. So the environmental commission asked for a rain garden. Well, we proposed it far exceeds a rain garden. You know, this is meets the water quality requirements even though we don't need to. The porest pavement is
sufficient. Plus, there are two giant actually three giant rain gardens already on the site. Those bio retention systems that you see in the river. Those are those are rain gardens. >> I think that's it. I don't think there was anything in Miss Caldwell's report.
So, I would like to call unless you have other questions of that. >> Um, Mr. Hansen, >> there's really nothing there. >> But hold on a sec. >> With respect to the landscape report, it's really straightforward. >> That's fine. >> Okay. Yeah, I did
>> except what's in there. >> Yeah. >> Okay. I'm sorry that that's a Okay. >> I didn't mean to I figured that he wasn't here. I didn't say that. Was it that was the shortest John Morgan Thomas report I ever thought. Yeah, >> it was.
>> And John pretty much said there's really nothing >> but one of our longest planning. >> I'm sorry. >> But one of our longest planning word. >> Yes. Though I'd like to call Mr. Manino just to show you what the improvements are, then recall Mr. Hansen just to talk about the variances. It shouldn't take
long at all. >> Sure. >> And once again, for the record, Mr. Hansen's testimony, there's nobody here from the public. So, Mr. Manino, you are a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey and your license is in good standing >> and you appeared before this board
before, too. >> So, you're going to have much much louder. >> Right. >> Oh, okay. Okay. Well, I'll use I'll use the mic up there. Okay. I offer him as a licensed architect. And can you please
briefly show the board the pretty pictures? >> I couldn't hear you. >> I said briefly show the board the pretty pictures. Sorry. >> The echoes are killing. >> Yeah, maybe I'm too close. >> We're gonna fix it.
>> Luckily, I don't hear any echoes. >> And you're not echoing. >> Okay. So, I'll keep it short and sweet. if they don't all want to go home. Um John really touched on the uh expansion itself. Um it's approximately 1500
square ft. The intent of the expansion really kind of solves four key components for the applicant. One is to put a face on the building. Building is really kind of you really has no face to how people enter into the complex. So um
the addition is oriented in a way where it's perpendicular to the entrance pathway. So it focuses everybody to a ticket booth window where currently the tickets are being dispensed through a mobile shed. Um so ticketing and control and security is now integrated into the
main building at the entrance point. Uh which is a big big key item for for the applicant. Um two expansion of the merchandise space really is it it's it's and the merchandise space is primarily for those that are attending the complex. you're in the complex and this
gives another amenity for people to see merchandise for the tournament andor domination branded elements and so on. Um, and additionally there's a uh a vestibule on the lefth hand side that you'll see on the rendering that is the main access point for people to go into
the public restrooms. It's a relatively small vestibule when you think about the number of people and uh baseball players and so on that are going in and out of that area. So we've enlarged that vestibule to provide for better usability and access to those facilities as well. Um as you can see in the
rendering we we've tried to keep with the same color materials that are already uh evident in the in the complex. So uh brick veneer uh drive it finish and blue accents all ties into existing color scheme that is in the uh
um in the complex. I just recall that we did not bring these in as an exhibit. I I was just I was just um whispering to uh but we you introduced the le uh the lease agreement is A1 already. Correct. Correct. >> So this should be A2. >> A2
>> and then the one below it will be A3. >> Yeah. I I don't know if we submitted we did submit these as part of our application. >> Oh, you submitted this part of your application. Okay. So then we're not going to >> There's no change in this from what we submitted to the board as part of our application. I don't
>> I gave it to you as a potential for exhibits, but they had already been submitted. >> We can identify them, but I was just making sure >> they're blown up, but no change. Is that is that the Okay, let's just mark him as A2 and A3. Just
>> that's fine. >> Entry and April 22nd. technically doesn't have two weeks entry also dated. >> Thank you. >> I just touch on the signage real quick just to reiterate what John had mentioned. The building currently has
four signs on it. Um three signs will remain that they are the volcano signs that you've seen in the lower rendering um that are on the existing building. Uh, a fourth sign is over the current entry vestibule that we are removing and we'll be replacing it with new
diamondation signs as you can see on the other rendering. One over the uh new entry to the merchandise retail and one over the new ticket booth windows just to help anchor and provide some. >> Any questions of the board? Could you
put rendering V up on the >> Sure. >> Well, Taylor needs to stick it up for me. >> Having done the onsite really makes a difference. Yeah. >> So, thank you again. >> Access to the ticket booths coming down.
>> He needs to put it up on the screen for uh Muse. It's like three. It's like it's too much. >> So, just to reiterate, this is the view as you come down the main entry path into the complex. Currently, there is no
face. There's no real entry into the complex aside from a chainlink fence and then you have your ticket booth kind of behind that. Now you have a forward- facing ticket booth and entryway that controls um the patrons as they come into the complex. Um and it also defines
an a path in and a dedicated exit path out um just for better control. I have no other questions for Mr. Manino. >> No. Donna, you are you good? >> I'm good. >> Okay. Very good. And Mr. Hansen, come
back and tell us about the variances. >> Okay. So, I identified three variances and then we discussed the last which is the way finding signage for the parking. So, we really have a total of four variances. And so, you know, you I'm sure you've heard this before in many applications, but you know, we have
these are C variances and they can be granted under either the C1 criteria or the C2 criteria. The C1 is what we call the hardship criteria and that's if that's a you a practical difficulty with compliance with the ordinance due to either the shape or the slope of the
property or the legally existing structures thereon. The C2 criteria, also called the flexible C criteria, is whether or not the positive criteria is met if at least one purpose of the emissible land use law is advanced and
that can be shown. The negative criteria for any variance is a three-prong approach and that's shown that there's no substantial detriment to uh the zone plan, the zoning ordinance or the public good. So in this case, if we separate
the four variances, the first variance, which I already alluded to, which was the HVAC unit on the sidey yard, I would call that a hardship variance, and that's due to the location of the existing principal structure, which is legally existing and in the right
location. Um, this is where it is because it is uh it needs to be separated from the structure and it's such a size that it creates a um a setback issue. Um there's in my opinion there's um no detriment there. There's
certainly no substantial detriment. It's um appropriately landscaped and buffered by evergreen trees and I think it's um you could be comfortable granting that variance. Um the variance with the imperous coverage or hard surface uh we have 6% overage uh we are doing that in
order to um provide a more stable surface and a maintainable surface throughout the site. Um eliminate some tripping hazards, eliminate some maintenance problems. Um so in my opinion that speaks to safety and I think that um the that's purpose A and
the board can be comfortable that um they can find the positive criteria is met through granting that uh under purpose A. As far as the signage goes, I think that's combination of purpose A and purpose I. >> Sorry, can you address the negative
criteria with the impervious coverage? You said A for the positive. >> Yes, thank you. So the negative criteria is addressed. There's no substantial detriment to the zone plan or zoning ordinance. It's a very minor deviation. And the as far as the public good goes,
we've designed an extensive underground storm water system. So there'll be absolutely no increase or I'd say no adverse impacts uh for downstream properties. And as far as the visual aspects of it, this is all contained in the existing development facility. So
the traveling public will not have any adverse impacts and you really won't notice uh any change to the facility as you look at the facility. >> Thank you. Um so and then finally um uh with the signage you know the the signage is I said purpose A and purpose
I purpose A is a safety issue and in this case it's really uh more of identifying from a a standpoint of where the access to the building is and even though it doesn't say enter here it visually tells somebody okay I focus on this area this is where I walk this is
where I go um and there's also an element of desirable visual environment ment because just creating a building with no identity on it and and no logo or nothing to support the use really in my opinion is not uh the the best
architectural design. So I think Mr. Menino's um exhibits really explain it well and and really prove that that this is a creating a desirable visual environment. Again, no detriment here. Uh there's a minor detriment. We're talking about a small increase in
signage. It certainly is appropriate. It's uh uh typical for this type of facility and I think the board could be comfortable at that. Finally, uh as far as the signage goes for the uh parking areas, the overflow parking areas, that's again purpose a uh that that goes
to safety. I think that's pretty clear. Um the board can be comfortable with that and the sizes are are limited, the locations are appropriate and uh there's no adverse impacts and certainly uh no substantial impacts from a zone plan,
zoning ordinance or public good standpoint. These are really enhancements. That's all I have >> and I won't belabor the point. I don't have any other questions. Okay. Any board members questions on the variances? Nope. Okay.
Mr. Chairman, that's our testimony in support of this application. I know there's no public here and I'm not going to give a big long speech. I think we've we all know what we're doing and there's two separate uh actions that need to be taken. One with respect to our
application for um preliminary site plan approval and variances for the self- storage lot um to uh adopt that motion. And then the second would be with respect to preliminary and final site plan approval with variances as to the
ballpark lot to >> um we can't do that. >> Yeah, we can't we can't we can't do Diamond Nation LLC tonight. We don't have enough avail. >> Why? because I don't think everybody was here for that. That's what she's saying.
So, she's keep >> Mr. and Mr. Kane were not here for the previous hearings. >> They um they can >> they can read in on it, which they >> it's not a a deep variant. So, they can
abstain and you would be able to do a motion in favor just with the remaining board members who are here >> which is which is three. Yeah. I mean, I guess we could >> It's not like it's a Dvarian where you would have to. So, we could get a motion and a second and they can abstain, but
they it you have a quorum eligible to >> Yeah, that good with that. >> It was three of us. Yeah. Um my my my biggest thing before we vote is and I understand I'd want to recap. I think I have all the conditions
um which I guess would be placed on the with respect to the well there would be two the the conditions for the parking on the um
the Diamond Nation LLC would be the 580 something number. Right. We've got the >> Can we do it ballpark versus uh uh self- storage lot? I don't know which one you're talking about. >> I'm talking about self- storage lot. >> So the self
>> You're right. I You said that in the beginning because they're both time. Yes. So with respect to that, what I heard was and I I'm looking for my I'm looking for my notes. Uh I'm sorry. It's been a It's been a long night. I've heard 583. It's it's the 50 offsite and
the 533 that will be when I say offsite, it's the 50 for Jack's property. The the creek view would be the 50 spaces and the 533 would be the 300 and the
overflow parking >> 233 >> on the self storage lot that number 233. So it would be a total of 583 is is what I heard and I see nods.
>> 583 plus the over the offsite parking for >> well >> that that all gets attributed to this the ballpark. >> Yeah. So we're going to put that on the other one, right? >> Yeah. And I and I think the self storage
resolution would be 533 plus the 50 available uh on the >> Yeah. Yes. The number is 583 but it's it's the 50 offsite and the and yes >> overflow right? >> Yeah. And that's how I was in my mind
that was going to be that number for that application. >> Just makeider website. >> Yeah. Um my my only my only cons and then we're going to get to the other which is which is going to be and I
guess I don't know how I'm going to how we're going to phrase that because that same 300 that is used in the 583 was used as part of the discussion
how 680 came to be. So I'm a little bit I'm a little bit conf plus the 450 offsite for the 983. So there's a little bit of duplicative numbers. >> So at the baseball park Dination there's
315. Correct. So that we're using the correct number. >> Correct. It's 315 >> and 218 or across the street at the overflow. >> Correct. >> Correct. So that is the >> 533. >> Correct. >> Plus 50 uh at the um So we have the
exact numbers and where they are >> 450 at >> when we write this >> and then separately is the 450 which is the offsite shuttle system >> or special that's 400 not 450 >> 400 because
that's correct. >> So it's 400 offsite. Okay doesn't take that's not consistent with the VA group. Well, it it is because that's the way it came the last time. It was where we got
to the 533 number the last time they was >> 183 plus >> 50 which is 2 233. >> The 50 was the bank. >> Yeah, the bank, >> right? Plus 300.
>> Oh, I see. >> Remember the bank? >> The bank. We We forgot the bank. >> Forgetting about the bank. forgetting the 50 for the >> bankul. >> So it's 183 and 50. You're right. There's bank. There's bank. >> So it's 233.
It's 233 plus the 50 is 283 plus 300. That's 583. That's still getting a number. >> Same number.
>> It's the same number. The math is mapping. >> Yeah, it's it's mathing. It's it's still five minutes straight. The debit is equal credits. Okay. So, it's it's 183 on the self storage plus
50 bank, which is 233 plus 315 on the diamondation site on the ballpark side. >> But we're losing Jack's 50 >> and then you're adding the 50 on top of that offsite. >> I'm sorry, what? You're adding the 50 on top of that offsite. >> Yeah.
>> Where do you want to put the Weiss and Company 50? Do you want to put it as a part of the storage as a part of Diamond Nation or as a part of that? >> Based upon based upon our experts
colloqui he said he was comfortable with the 50 >> as part of the everyday not a part. So it need it needs to go on the self- storage number. not special event >> and not on diamond man. >> Yes. >> Based upon what he said he was
comfortable with. So So that >> wait wouldn't it be on both resolutions then? Because the number is the number. >> It's one number that encompasses left side right side of the roads. So again >> and dining
>> expansion testified that the parking across the street is inherent in it. So I I guess to me we need one set of numbers because as this application goes forward, if you're dealing with different sets of
numbers on different sets of plans, we're going to go crazy. >> Yeah. I I wouldn't think you'd want it on a storage facility resolution because once the storage facility is built, those parking spaces are gone, >> right? So we always wanted to solve for
this diamond nation ballpark application should be inclusive of the to the one total number. Now we can specify break it all out 315 in existing across the street which will be you know always available with one day permanently.
>> You are right. So we're tying the total number of 598 parking spaces to the >> the I'm going to just call it the daytoday operation. That's the 315, the 233 >> and Jack's offsite 50 >> that my recommendation is that would be
>> in total broken out specified. >> I will do that. >> Yep. Yep. Yep. Okay. >> Because that allows storage facility to be on its own separate. Never have to deal with this confusing thing ever. >> Okay. And then and then that there's going to be an additional 400 per event,
not 450 because that 50 >> is >> is part of that. Okay. So it's 400 >> offsite for the I'm going to just call it uh special events just for our discussion. I'm going to figure out how I'm going to
phrase that. My concern still that hasn't been addressed and I want to have a conversation is first of all we only have a demonstrative lease for one of them. >> Yeah. >> Um that is that is for So we would need
there's three off-site parking locations, right? >> Yeah. >> So we would need to see leases for all three as a condition. And I'm still concerned with a one-year lease. I don't know how
there could be an approval with a temporary leasing solution where the approval goes for a thousand years and the lease goes for 12 months. What h that that's not I I I don't have an answer for that and I I don't I don't
know. >> Would you be able to give an easement of properties? Well, you Jack could on his property for the 50, but he doesn't own all of them. >> Is not going to give an easement and neither is Cal Poly, you know.
>> Well, it's not Polytech. They actually don't own lease there anymore. >> I know they they moved out of there. I know it's not I don't know what it is, but it's an empty building. >> McDonald's business owner business association. >> I didn't quite hear your concern. I'm
sorry. What was your concern? Uh my my my concern is if there's if there's an approval and that approval is relying on the condition that there's 400 off-site parking spaces, but that approval lasts
in perpetuity, but the lease for those 400 spaces is theoretically only 12 months. They're in congruent. We have a temporary parking solution, but a permanent resolution. That's a problem for me and I can't get I can't think of
what the >> that's not a problem because what we're the condition would be would be compliance with the parking plan that that's what the chairman had indicated compliance with that plan as a condition of approval for special events that
exceed the five that the the numbers are starting >> but that parking plan references three lots that you have based upon a lease that you might not have and those and if we can't if we have to deviate from that
parking plan, we would need to come back before the board for relief from it. But that's that's the parking plan in place for special events. >> Couldn't the language just say that it requires 400?
>> Yeah. >> Blah blah blah. Doesn't matter where they are, they have to comply with providing with 400 >> parking plan needs to be a carve out in the resolution that sites >> No, I I I think I prefer what Steve said
in terms of if the parking plan changes, they have to come back. >> I think we need to, you know, at this point we they haven't demonstrated that they have access to the school um prop. That's the concern I have. Um,
we we really need to see that, you know. So, I I guess that's where we need copies of the leases. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. to to look at them and then you know I think it would be it would
simplify things if they could be at least more than one year you know otherwise we're administratively we're going to have to be chasing them down every year to get their leases >> it's really not it it's not a
requirement to provide it should be a requirement to provide leases on a yearly basis what we're suggesting is here is the special event plan that um if and I'm not going to go there. Here
is the special event plan with the locations of the excess parking and here's how we're going to do the shuttling. If we have to deviate from the plan, then we have to come back before the board. But if it it doesn't require a yearly, hey, the the agreement
is up this year. Um you got to show us the agreement in place again. That would be the requirement is as the chairman had indicated, here's the parking plan. You got to adhere to it. >> What happens if and >> the school says they're you're not going
to be able to lease the parking. >> Then I guess we have to come back before the board because we can't use that facility as a parking part of our parking plan. So, >> but we have verbal agreements right now and I provided you with a sample agreement because I wanted to tell you
this is what it would look like. Um, but you know, it it doesn't require this is why this isn't appropriate for the the planning board and it's more appropriate for a special event township committee. But if you're going to
>> I don't want to have that. I don't want to have that conversation anymore, especially not at 10:30 at night. I I can't make my position any more clear. I don't want to talk about that. >> Joe, I'm done. >> It's not a special event. >> Joe, I'm done. Okay. But that's why if you're going to if you're going to have
that type of condition for these events, that's the way to do it. Here's the parking plan. >> I I thought we had had this resolved a while ago. You know, >> the chairman articulate. Yeah. Can't the parking plan be spelled out in
the resolution? >> It's going to be. It's going to be including including the lots. That's That's not my concern. >> You can attach it as an exhibit to the resolution >> in accordance with the attached parking plan and the
exhibit. Kim, you know, as much as I don't want to do this, but it it seems like we need to wrap our heads around some of the details in order to get the res, you know, the motion to move forward with the app the application.
You know, I think we could we could I mean, >> I would like some time to think on it and to uh maybe prepare a draft. I could put everything together and we can come back and take a look at it and discuss it. >> We We would really, you know,
>> I know it's 10:30 at night. This has been going on since 2006. I don't like making a legal decision in 5 minutes. I'm sorry. It's too important. I want to get it right. You know, >> this has been this has been an issue since 2006 or 2008, and it's 10:30 at
night, and you're the one who created the issue by presenting a one-year lease. I'm sorry, I didn't create the situation. I need time to figure it out. I'm not comfortable in giving my client legal advice at 10:30 at night on how to
handle your inability to prepare more than a 12-month solution when the testimony under oath is you've been doing these events for the last decade. So, I already know based upon your testimony and prior course of dealings,
your solution is literally onetenth of your prior practice. That causes me concern. No, I Okay, I have no idea why. Um, >> it's devolved into this >> because you keep bringing up the special event since last September. And that's
why I'm I that's why you hear it in my voice. >> You should take the cue from me when I say it's not a special event. Let it go. >> You know, why are you yelling? >> That's why you're Why are you yelling enough? I'd like to I'd like to I'd like
to make a motion or a recommendation that we um continue this hearing and come back um with um be provided with a draft resolution which the other resolution needs some additional the the
original resolution needs updating beyond just the the numbers that we're talking about because there the special parking requirements now has to be folded into that and that it It allows us to then move forward with something that's concrete that everyone knows what
we're agreeing to because there's the there are kind of a lot of things. I think the the Diamond Nation retail space expansion, we can do a straw thing. Everybody probably is like it's, you know, we were
we're going to approve that. And given that they said at the TRC meeting they aren't going to start construction until next November. Um I don't think we're holding them up. Um >> and and perhaps that's if if we're not
going to get a formal vote this evening. Perhaps that's the good way to go that you uh do a vote to um ask Mr. Toriello to draft the two resolutions and circulate that with my office. so that
we can hopefully come to a resolution that can be discussed at the next meeting and that the board can formally adopt both resolutions. >> That way we know >> I agree with that.
>> Steve ask them to vote on in retail. >> You can't give the retail can't do the retail because the parking's got to be >> everything. We're not doing anything that >> well while they have their discussion.
Um, I don't know if you want to maybe >> take a quick break or we can discuss another on when when to bring them back. >> I think we're about to He's not going to do it. >> They drafted without the parking.
>> They can't proceed without parking. We don't allow them to risk open. >> What? >> We can give them permits. >> I'm saying is there anything? >> I don't think so. >> Yeah, that's true. >> It's that's why that's why
>> I don't think so. >> I mean, if we have a thumbs up that we're in in agreement with the retail, >> what are they? >> We we need the details on what the what what conditions are we putting in it with the parking. So, that's where
I think if we go forward and and circulate the draft resolution so that the details are clear, then we vote on it at the next meeting. I don't I don't envision additional testimony. It would
be just hopefully voting. >> Yeah, I think that's where we are. Can I have a show of hands on the retail if this was put to a motion? >> A straw vote. Yeah. just a vote. >> Yeah, we appreciate >> get approval. We just need the
definition of the parking solution to be defined and then it's >> I I'd appreciate it if we could have, you know, like we talked about, have the resolutions drafted and circulated in advance so that >> Yeah, like I I always do. I always send it to you. >> Yeah. But we're not having the action
yet to be able to do that. Usually you have the action and then memorialize it, but we're doing it Yes, >> but we've done that before where we've approved an application and the resolution in the same evening. >> So, if we're all board >> Yeah, I I will I will get it to you like
and then just as if it was voted on tonight. I I have to work out what verbiage I think will >> will work and I will send it to you. We're going to have a conversation, you and I. >> Sounds good. >> Next meeting means what?
>> So, our next meeting is May May 6th. special meeting, >> right? That was the Walmart special meeting. >> Yes. >> Can we have it ready for that meeting? >> Yes. >> I'm looking at you. >> The applicant's paying for that meeting though, the other applicant.
>> Yeah, that's that's the issue. And on top of it, just actually making sure that you guys are on both sides, you're good with how it is because we cannot have this long for
a special meeting. >> I'm sorry. >> I'm saying you guys make sure that you work everything out because if you >> wrong, >> what's on for the 13th? >> What's on for May 13th? >> 13th is >> extra space.
That's going to be a big one. >> But we're hopefully just adopting these resolutions and approving it. >> I would say we would do it first beforehand. We could do it in 15 minutes. >> No, it's >> we're pushing the 13. >> Yeah, we could we could do we could do it. We can add >> for like 15 minutes
>> in front of extra space >> just like we did in front of them tonight with the other site plan waiver. >> Let's do that. >> Just to say we could do it for the sixth. >> I understand. >> I think that's asking a lot. Well, everybody >> and since they paid for the extra
meeting, Walmart did >> and Walmart. >> And just in case, Jeffrey, can you please look at the time to decide? Look at the time to decide. It's on the ballpark. >> 14. >> We We extend through May 31st.
>> Thank you. No. >> So, can you make the announcement that the hearing has been? >> The hearing is going to continue without the need to further advertise for May 13th. >> May 13th. >> Thank you all very much. Much appreciated, everybody. >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> Okay. With that, we are ajourned. >> 10:35. >> Thank you, Donna. >> Thank you, Donna. >> Bye. >> Have a good rest of the night. >> Good night, Donna. And we're August 20. >> No, we've been here longer than this. Did you