##VIDEO ID:I-hcVVN0tdU## ready for the recording okay motion to close the Clos session open open and motion to open the open the open second okay do I need we need a vote oh yeah you need someone's got a second I second it okay get a vote chair W missia schaer yes Vice chair Mr DOI yes Mr Randy yes Mr Jim ferero yes Miss lindsy kber gal yes Miss Lor cartina yes Miss Donna Drew yes okay moving on to resolutions uh this is resolution number 2024-25 181 Old croon Road boa 06- 202 four can you both read the caption on the resolution and give us the date and the version number yes [Music] sir okay this is resolution memorializing Grant of a planning variance person to njsa 40-55 d-36 oh John from n njsa 40-55 d-35 and two c variances to allow the construction of a new single family dwelling and Associated improvements on a lot not having Frontage on a fully improved Street and this is version 2024 D12 one version number two okay and I apologize everybody this was from the last meeting but unfortunately they were not able to just the resolution Ted because they hadn't paid the escrow now they paid the escrow so now they should be adopted okay eligible to vote tonight is dy Schaefer block Ferrero Drew ktina anybody wants to make a motion so move I'll sec I'll second okay sorry chairwoman Miss Cynthia schaer yes Vice chair Miss Russell DJI yes Mr Randy block yes Mr Jim ferero yes Miss Donna Drew yes Miss lorett ktina yes okay moving on to the applications for this evening bo8 case number 06- 2022 applicant is Nicholas caracappa location block 37 Lot 24 River Road time extension request to relocate shed as part of a conditional condition of approval could we ask Jeff to please read the the applicable condition in resolution 20235 which they seek to modify to extend and the date he says in his letter that a condition he doesn't say which one required him to move the shed by December 26 2024 and he's completed the removal of the chicken Coupe which is the location the shed's going to be relocated to and he found the professional who's capable of moving it but they need some more time but what is the condition number I apologize I don't have the resolution okay that's all right can you go on the computer and get 20235 it is condition number eight can you just read condition number eight into the record I know it's tell your paragraph okay the applicant shall apply for and obtain a zoning permit and all construction permits for the relocation construction of the shed by August 1st 2024 okay so stop for a second did they get the permits yes yes okay okay keep on reading in parentheses which is in within 6 months of the date the within resolution is adopted if during said six-month period or extension thereof as granted by the board the applicant fails to obtain a zoning permit in all all the approval are going to expire right read the next sentence yeah the applicant shall have six months from the Daye of issuance of the zoning permit to relocate construct the shed and obtain a permanent certificate of occupy for now it makes sense so that's why he says that they have until December 26 2024 to relocate the shed because that's 6 months from the date of the permit which issued on January 26 2024 so he's requesting a 12month extension from December 26 2024 to December 26 2025 so that's what the that's what the request is so the board you have options you can say no but I don't advise that option you can say yes but not a year or you could say yes a year so you guys should talk about it I'm okay with yes year it's a res it's a residential so everyone's fine with yes extended a year to December 26 2025 is that correct yes so someone just make a motion then to modify that condition to extend the time to move the shed to the compliant location to 20 to December 27 2025 so moved I'll second chairwoman Miss schaer yes Vice chair M Russ adami yes Mr Randy block yes Mr Jim ferero yes Miss lindsy Co bral yes Miss L CA yes Miss Donna Drews yes okay thank you moving on to the next application boa case number 08-20 22 and 15- 2023 applicant is Apex temp treatment center location is block 16.01 lot 69.0 3 6A minonin Road application time extension request to obtain certificate of occupy good evening good evening Madam chair members of the board Cara kazinski uh law offices of mcal Yos kazinski in line here this evening representing the app okay um I do want to thank this board for this last minute addition I found out at 10:30 this morning um that there was this extension that was required uh my client via their contractor were of the understanding that everything had been resolved and that there would not be any issue with the issuance of the co by the time period That's outlined in the resolution which will be January 2nd next year um however after receiving uh Mr vella's letter we now learned that was incorrect and that's why we're here tonight requesting the extension um the P the condition number four of the resolution is what we're asking for relief from very similar to the one that um Taylor recently indicated we must obtain the co within one year of the issuance of the first construction permit the first construction permit was granted on January 2nd 2024 so our year is up January 2nd 2025 so we're requesting um a year extension of that time period which I could tell you right now my client will okay that that's not what you asked for you asked for one month February 2 2025 I think what you probably intended was to ask for January 2 2026 or take a look at the the first paragraph in your letter says condition for stated they have until February 2 2020 cop right here 20125 to antain construction permit the first one was issued January 2 so you have till January 2 oh I see you have January 2 2025 you want a year extension to January 2 2026 correct now J Jeff let me ask you something is it as simple as this or not I mean the the condition itself um yes a year it it's simple for a year but there's there's other there was a review done where there's there may be other uh relief that's required as far as put it this way at this point do you know that there's other relief or yes based on based on the based on the as belt and the resolution the relief that was granted there was a washing station that was granted I don't have the numbers in front of me but it was granted as a at a setback there let me just make a suggestion let's assume that Jeff is correct that unless the applicant comes back and requires requests more relief they're not going to get a construction per if the board doesn't modify and extend this their approvals are going to expire on January on January 2 2025 okay that's two weeks away so would seem to me assuming Jeff's correct which we don't know if he is but knowing Jeff he probably is I would think that you that unless the board wants to hear this case all over again you should grant them an extension and the likelihood is they're not going to use it they're going to have to come back to get more relief but at least their approval won't expire right and and I can tell you uh Madam chair and the board I had a lengthy discussion with my client about this today we discussed every item in just letter and we will be prepared to respond um how we're going to respond there's we have a couple ways to deal with it we will figure that out once we get past this Turtle but we're aware of it we will address it and uh hopefully won't be back before the board but if we need to be we will be but we need to get over this hurle first okay anyone have an issue with the extending for one year hearing none can I get a motion so move thank you can I get a vote chairwoman Cynthia Schaefer yes Vice chair Mr R DJI yes Mr Randy Bach yes Mr Jim ferero yes Miss Lindy kber G yes Miss Lor ktina yes Miss Donna Drew yes okay moving on to the next for this evening boa case number 21-2024 applicant Pioneer developers LLC location is block 36 lot 13 180 Pennsylvania Avenue application amended preliminary and final site plan with both variances good evening again Madam chair members of the board Cara kazinski MCN Yos kazinski in line here on behalf of this applicant Pioneer developers Inc uh this is with regard to the property located at 180 Pennsylvania Avenue block 36 lot 13 and this property is located in your I2 Zone we're here this evening requesting amended preliminary and final site plan approval with bulk variances and what this is for as I'm sure you know is uh in connection with a deviation from the prior approval that resulted from additional disturbance that was done in the field to address some issues that had Arisen during the ruction uh specifically we're asking for this relief with regard to uh again amended preliminary and final site plan approval the both variances relate to additional tree canopy removal for a total of 81.9% whereas the previously approved amount was 79.9 6% okay let me get everyone sworn in let's get you have uh looks like just Chris Chris Ness sir so all professionals please stand up raise your right hand does everyone swear or affirm the testimony they're going to give in this proceeding is going to be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes I I do okay can everyone identify themselves for the record starting down with Chris nuser Christopher nuser N SS R the applicants engineer planner okay and um at the at the underlying hearing when the board approved the application and adopted resolution number what 2021 D16 were you qualified as an expert in that proceeding no I was not here for that proceeding Mr Mr Ingram was here for that proceeding all right can you just get him qualified please uh yes can you please give the board benefit of your education experience certainly I graduated from Ruckers University in 2006 with a bachelor's of science and civil engineering uh I am a licensed professional engineer and planner in the state of New Jersey both of those licenses are in good standing I have been practicing land use engineering um since graduating college uh and have appeared before over 70 boards um in those professional capacities and been accepted as an expert including this board many times any questions anyone in the public other than people related to the applicant you guys related to the applicant so there's no one in the public you accept Mr ner as an expert in engineering and planning yes okay now hold it let's get our identifi for the record je okay now Mr Thomas do you agree that what they're seeking because they need is an 81.0 n% tree removal whereas the prior resolution approved 79. 96% or is there some other percent that you believe they [Music] require yeah I guess there's a I I came up with a with a different calculation what's your what's your calculation in why let me no words in your mouth but I read your memo and is it your belief that even though some trees are currently alive because they've um damage the root system that they're going to die and therefore they should be treated as if they're going to die and they're going to be removed because there's no way they're going to live I think correct and we and we prepared and we prepared A A A Sketch showing the tree canopies you have a [Music] percentage your time so we calculated the total area of the root zones for the trees that were Disturbed trees that were in areas that were either filled or regraded at 38,7 31 and I believe the applicant used an aerial photography Uh current aerial photography because it shows the construction of the building in the grading they use that as a way to estimate the well it it it it does illustrate where there are still standing trees and it's my opinion that it's likely that many of those trees will not be standing okay so again is is there any do you have a percentage calculation based on on the area that in your opinion should be treated as the trees are going to be removed because it's your opinion that they those trees are not going to survive and if you don't I don't okay well I thought I did which is why I'm Hing here so while he's testimony can you do some calculations with he's testifying keep on going thank you and and that issue that was just raised by uh Mr Thomas is something that we will be willing and ready to address tonight with a a potential resolution but um for purposes of just continuing with the opening that is the first variance that we're asking for um the second is for a proposed Monument sign which we're proposing to be located 5 feet from the right of way of Royal Road uh which is barbes Drive um whereas 10 feet is required so just to give you a little bit of the history of this matter um as Mr drill indicated this application was previously approved uh via resolution 202 [Music] 21-16 the this board approved the construction of an industrial complex consisting of three industrial buildings along with off-site construction of parking spaces banked parking spaces loading spaces sidewalks and your typical Associated development with that the uh required relief included D1 variances and numerous C1 and C2 variances all of which again were memorialized by way of this resolution when we started construction uh there were some field conditions that were encountered and as a result of that there was some additional disturbance over and above what was what were the field conditions that were encountered I know you can't testify is Mr ner able to testify about what field conditions were encountered that caused all the additional disturbance yeah I didn't think you can be I think you may have to call one of your client Representatives because they're the ones that said they had f conditions I don't think your engineers know what field conditions they encounter well I don't necessarily know that that really matters we're not here for a field change we're just here requesting the amended approval um I don't have my contractor here um and again I that wasn't really meant as evidentiary for the board just more to indicate that this was not a purposeful mechanism whereby we were looking to provide additional square footage of disturb that's what they might want to they might want to make that determination themselves the only way they can make that determination is to hear from the people who did the extra disturbance and ask them why what happened if it was a field condition what was the field condition if it was because you weren't following the plan they might want to ask them did you purposely not follow follow the plan or did was that an accident but that we'll see where the board wants if they want to ask any questions I wanted to know if if you knew or if Mr nesser know but the two of you don't know you just you've been told by your client that the contractor said it was a field condition correct again while things were encountered in the field the there was additional disturbance that resulted from that be it topog be it because of topography issues be because of Tree locations that couldn't be moved but again it was things that were discovered during construction as opposed to again we want this to be larger and that's why we're going so let me ask you this when they encountered these field conditions did they call up the township engineer the township planner to say hey we encountered a John we're here tonight as a May cook we know that we did something improper we understand that's better okay we we apologize it was not purposely done we are trying to be here right now tonight to rectify it as best we can I cannot go back in time I can't do something different I'm not the contractor um but we are here we understand what we need to do we've worked very hard with your professionals with numerous site meetings numerous phone calls we've reviewed every single review letter that they have and we believe that what we're presenting to you tonight is not only an accurate depiction of what was Disturbed and what's going to be returned but also to address what we believe is most important which is the tree canopy issue and some potential concerns of Mr Thomas with regard to trees that may may be also affected by this and we think we have some some very good ways to resolve that not only um for now but also going forward for the township um by way of some Bond proposals that we have uh that will enable you to draw from as necessary uh for what is essentially unknown conditions I mean we know there was additional disturbance we know what that square footage is but the issues with regard to the trees and whether or not they're going to die that's a speculative potential question I'm certainly not doubting Mr Thomas's expertise but we don't know if that's going to happen do you have a landscape uh expert that's going to testify uh we have a landscape report from our landscape yeah but do you have a landscape expert that could testify that Mr Thomas's opinion is incorrect and in fact those additional trees that he thinks are going to die that your landscape expert doesn't think they're going to die again I'm not discounting his statement but I don't even think he's sure they're going to die there's a possib Mr Thomas let me ask you this what is your opinion on the chances of those trees surviving that had their their damage there's going to be a percentage I don't know what ex are they all going to die no 15% it could be 50% I don't I don't know keep on going so again that do you think you could just sit to be closer to the microphone just for the recording sure thank you trying to give respect but yes if that's easier that's totally fine um so anyway that was a solution that we were trying to come up with to address that issue um that is I I just I it makes it hard to um understand what happened I mean we have Jeff's report and everything that's occurred there and it would have just been nice to hear from the other side of what happened because it's just report is pretty uh thorough and it looks like there was a disregard for a lot if there were truly conditions it would have been nice to hear that I understand your position um I just I have concerns I agree with that too and I the report is very detailed here and and by the way just for the record I'm also agreeing with the chairperson about your lscape expert if you want to argue with John Thomas then we need to understand both sides right and I think it's a matter of accurate representation because there was both on-site and as critically offsite impacts and clearing that was not permitted or authorized under the application I think the board has to look at those issues very clearly and in looking at the plans and the documentation submitted we don't have clear acreages for every individual offsite in ex um impact along the driveway along the municipal property along the other properties where clearing was done there's there's General blobs but the The Limited clearing does that include the areas offsite that were cleared or just the areas on within the boundary of the property so is that 4% those areas or is it everything that was cleared IL legally it it represents what's shown on the plan represents the totality of what was what was cleared the limited disturbance irrespective of lot lines so say so total disturbance even if it was over the lot line correct Mr Toms you agree with that that sounds right okay and uh I do have my client here who can testify as to his understanding of what happened in the field by way of the individuals that were involved he's happy to come give you best explanation he can we keep on interrupting your opening why don't you finish it then then if they have questions they'll ask the client okay um so basically those are the variances we're looking for tree canopy the signage um the variance for the monument sign was added because we are here tonight and thought it would be a nice addition to the project however as I'm sure Mr drill will advise you we need uh something in addition to the variance to occur we need Township to either dedicate barbish road to my client or Grant an easement for the proposed location uh we have made a request of the township committee for either one of those two options we have not heard back yet uh presumably because we're here tonight and waiting to possibly see how this is going to go but I can represent to the board that either if you do not Grant the variance of course or we do not get one of those two options from the township committee that we will withdraw uh any potential construction of that sign uh and that will be removed from what we're asking for uh from this board by way of approval um I do have tonight my engineer and planner Chris ner um as I indicated we have reviewed and are prepared to respond to each item within the letters from your board professionals um as well as any questions of the bo one last question and that is so you sent over a letter which we had handed out to everybody December 19th responding to the engineering letter one and responding thought it said responded to the planners yeah and responding to the planning letter one but it doesn't respond to Mr Thomas's so I assume that Mr nesser is going to respond to Mr Thomas's through his testimony correct okay so normally I always say when you go through these reply reviews you know don't talk go through item by item on this one now would you like us to start there or would you like me to call my client up and uh I think you should call your client first because that's luring behind the back think [Music] as can you identify yourself for the record please Richard can you spell your last name r a d i C okay and you're the applicant's managing member or you're a partner you're a president do you mind just speaking to the microphone just speak to the microphone sorry you're not the applicant Bor developers Inc is an Corporation you the president yeah okay so Richard rad and you're the applicant president that's correct okay can you you you can sit I'm okay okay raise right hand you swear or affirm the testimony you're going to give him this matter will be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth 100% okay so can you explain to them how did this happen what field condition did they encounter that caused this to happen and why didn't someone pick up the phone and call up the township engineering office or the planning office to tell them hey this is what's happening we got to do this is it okay well first of all I mean you know we've put a lot of equipment and Manpower on the job to to you know get this project started and um I mean we never kept it a secret I mean everything everything was open U survey marks were there I mean I believe the town was there I wasn't there myself running the job sir I'm just gonna ask that you have it like as close as you can just for the recording just because I'm having trouble hearing you PR you mean for microphone sorry that's okay uh yeah so uh the job has always been open to the public to U um anybody from the town or anybody whenever like hiding anything we just did the work hold up hold up you can't be saying that because the job's open that there's some burden and these guys should have been out there looking to make sure you didn't make a mistake no no but let me finish okay he asked me to talk let me talk okay so there was a tremendous amount of dirt required movement on this job in the order of 20,000 cubic yards of dirt that's 5,000 dump load truckload 5,000 uh on the northeast corner by the DPW they had a limits of disturbance that was I think maybe 10 feet to within the distance of the wall this wall was was is probably about 20 feet tall maybe 18 17 feet and the grades that they originally showed for the bottom of this wall weren't totally accurate it's hard for them to depict exactly to the foot where the base of these grades of these walls are so we have to meet the field conditions and it's not like the surveys were we off but they weren't exact where they were supposed to be at the particular location and when you're moving literally 5,000 trucks of of dirt cutting it from the high side on on by by the Royal Road by uh by roil Road cutting that down 16 feet and transporting all of that dirt to the other side of the mount where we had to build the walls there just wasn't enough room with the truck and the bulldozers and the excavators to do that kind of work so stop right there if that was the case why didn't you call the township engineer or the township planner and say we have a problem because we have to put in a 20 foot wall and we don't have enough room to do it what should we do why didn't they why didn't you call instead of that just doing it and going beyond the disturbance Lin I guess it was a mistake I I didn't think I didn't think there was really a choice in the matter maybe could not be a choice of picking up the phone are not picking up the phone because it's a limits of disturbance it's not like we really went you know so much you know you know encroached on to additional impervious coverage or building coverage or pavment it's just it's really construct there's always a thing called construction means and methods this was the only way that you really could build that that that portion of the job anyway so you did it and you're seeking after the fact proval instead of asking for permission first you figured you might as well do it and then seek permission a mistake well it doesn't sound like a mistake it sounds like you made a calculated decision that you were going to do it and then you ask for permission later if instead of asking for permission before you did it right that's right okay thank you but we didn't have much choice in the matter and unfortunately we didn't call the city we're just trying to get a job done we didn't think it was that big of an impact and I agree I really didn't realize that it was going to be this significant it was this significant trust me I would have never ever done it well can I ask you something if you went from an approval the ordinance says correct me if I'm wrong that you can take down 55% of the trees on a site am I right or wrong corre and the board gave you approval which is unprecedented they don't normally go this high that you can take out almost 80% of the trees on the site and you ended up taking out 81% okay you can say oh it's only 1% more trees how many trees does the 1% more trees constitute I mean I could testify to that because I guarantee it is not more than five trees I can guarantee you that John Mr Thom you have an opinion on how many more trees were taken out then they were supposed to be taken out well right now in the area that was Disturbed there were 81 trees where there was fill placed on the roots of 81 trees well hold on hold on hold on hold on I just want to clarify are we asking how many trees were removed D or are we asking how many trees could have been affected by the addition first I'm asking how many trees were removed and then I'll ask how many are pro are in your opinion negatively affected but how many were removed is he right I I don't know how many were removed that's the answer okay in your opinion 81 trees are impact negatively impacted negative okay do you agree that 81 trees were Nega I don't know that one way or the other Al I just know that the trees removed were not more than five additional trees than were shown on the plant just to clarify I thought were you the the daily job supervisor I'm sorry were you the daily job supervisor because I was not okay but you're the owner's president and you obviously knew what was going on because someone if you said that you guys made a decision to move forward after you hit this field condition of not enough room so you went over the area of disturbance and asked for later that had to be your decision at the highest level 100% so he made the decision yeah I I'm just okay to testify only five trees were made I would prer that he was there and had that experience that that I I I did verify with the field supers I'm very confident that it wasn't more than five trees his testimony is it's five trees your board's expert doesn't know your board expert says 81 were negatively impacted he doesn't know well negatively impact that I'm willing to put up a bond to say that those trees in those areas that he thinks might get Disturbed I'm not saying they won't be or they die they won't die I'm willing to put up an insurance fund that guarantees to the city that if any one of those trees dies we'll replace them in the size and caliber that we need to so that we could meet your requirements okay if if anyone has any questions for him just ask does um when tree roots are dist Disturbed and Phill is placed around the trees it creates a longterm decline of that tree it also impacts storm water management and runoff it it EST it affects the ecological values of that soil so are you saying how do how do we put a value on all that because it's not just the trees it's the whole the whole thing you've created compacted soils and impervious surface so that's that's where a bond replaces a tree but it doesn't deal with all those other factors and and to to your point M Drew I I understand what you're saying and certainly those would be things that would need to be taken into account when determining the amount of the bond well that doesn't again we're not in the solution right now right because I want to hear from John what he recommends to be done listen they're just they're starting you got to hear from Chris but but the I'm not taking a position one way or the other but the fact is that under the change in Bond Law you couldn't require a bond he's offering to post a bond that's what I'm hearing him say yeah I mean whatever damage if it's it's ecological issue if it's a tree planting issue whatever it is you know one thing is we got to say is what we did unfortunately we did do I regret doing it yeah absolutely but we are here where we are I can't change the ecological composition of the soil I can't you know you know prevent these trees from getting damage but I am willing to tell the city that I'm man enough to stand up and say whatever crost fire you think that could be an impact to the site we're willing to put an insurance on that to do that I mean you know what else can I do here I mean you know we we're sorry we apologize I know that doesn't mean anything but we'll put up what we have to from an insurance to give you what you want okay all right anyone have any other questions otherwise you guys don't have have any questions for him oh I just question did you seek um approval from NJ do and the municipality when you did the clearing on their properties did I well I don't know that we needed to seek uh NJ I'm sorry what's your question she's asking did you seek the approval of the property owners of the two other lots that were impacted were you cleared when you were you cleared well we didn't clear any any any any of the trees on the adjacent properties where you put we didn't any trees the answer to that is no no okay why so you mentioned that this was the problem was generated because there was a problem with the height of the wall is that that that's was any of this caused in your was any of this caused by the need to get rid of excess fill on the site I mean the the elevations of the bottom of the walls are what's there now are slightly different than what was proposed because we had we had you know different grades there we had to contend with but it was question yeah I'm sorry that his question was was any of the problem caused due to the fact that you had to export Phil off the site that's what he's asking no it wasn't you know we didn't use these extra areas to to remove Phil from the site and and I and I honestly I rais the question because when I first went out to the site first of all I just like say that we we went out to the site at the start of the job which we always do and we reviewed the limit of disturbance it was St accurately who did you who was there on behalf of the applicant where the applicant it it was your it was your project manager Miss Robert yeah Bob Locker Bob Locker okay so employee of he's an employee of BMR yes okay so we reviewed that I went out the next time I went out was when and that was in I believe it was October of 2023 is when we noticed all the fill that was placed not only below the wall but all around the site and Mr Lowry's respon I said what what's what's happened here and he said we had a lot of still and we didn't want to haul it off site that's what he told me at the time so that's that that's what I heard and I and I just said oh you know we had a problem here and that's that's kind of documented in my first inspection report are you that wasn't my understanding of what happened there but I can't deny whatever he told you that's what he told you and and honestly there was that that was one area the area below the wall but the area on the south side of the site was was also was was also there was excess fill in that area so that really didn't have anything to do with the wall well you notice that the wall on that side of the site is quite a bit different you know in a little bit with compared to the original plan because those grades were significantly different so we had to alter the walls was there was there a field modification for that change yeah you have that in the asil yes well not not in asil so if there's if there's ever change in the grading or if there's any kind of formal change that has to happen other than microphone microphone so it instead of if there's a small change that can be a field change but if there's something significant such as the grading of the site needs to change or there's the elevations of the wall need to change or or you're looking at that the new slopes are going to be significantly different than what was on the plan typically the way that that goes through is there's a field modification that gets submitted either to the township Engineers office to the planner office we look at it and then we see if it can be approved administratively or we get to the position where we are now where we have to come back to the board to seek an amenda right he he already testified that they did not seek a field modification from the township Engineers office he already said that hey John I want to go back to his comment and I'm just going to give my own view personal view sure based on what you told me about fi condition I was buying into it until I heard what he said and those facts so to me The credibility of what you're showing from a field condition I'm not saying it's not accurate it's not complete there's there's more which has happened and I'm just being objective I'm not sure if I follow you but uh the question about the field you didn't even bring it up or were aware of it and that's one of the field conditions which is significant well I I did say that I did go beyond the areas of disturbance I I willingly knew that we went beyond it and most of it was because the extent of the I'm just giving you what I'm hearing okay I don't need to answer to you it's just creating more questions that's what I'm saying about the field conditions listen and again I I don't think there is any question that there was an exceedence and that's what we're trying to resolve um see ultimately I think I'm always trying to think ahead let's assume that you present you know evidence in arent that the board wants to Grant amended preliminary and final site plan and they want to Grant the variance to allow the additional tree removed let's assume that the question is going to be there are a whole bunch of recommendations in the report especially John Thomas's report I think what they're thinking is would they want to approve subject to those things being done or would they want to see them done first and a lot of it is going to be based on what your client representative is saying whether they have confidence that if they granted an approval tonight subject to conditions change this change that do this do that do they trust that they'll get done because if they don't they might say listen if you do this this and this and resubmit come back in January we'll give you an approval I think that's what some of these questions to him are are ultimately going to I'm just reading the te leaves from my point of view that's exactly correct we're very reasonable as you know so we find a way to make things work closer to that Mike the confidence LEL at least based on what I've heard so far okay just throwing it out there understood and and I thank you for your Clarity and and you know honesty and and forth here because that's ultimately where we would like to go correct obviously we're we are here looking to get the amended approval so we can continue right you would like to get the approval tonight and you're going to asked that all these things be made conditions understood why don't we unless anyone has any more questions for him let's get to Mr ner thank you okay Chris do you want to give a quick o well I'll leave it up to the board he was typically going to do a quick little overview as to where we are but we may have had enough of an overview and you may want to hit right to the letters so it's up I think we still need a little more sure okay and one just one one last thing we asked Mr Thomas while he was testifying to do a calculation of what he thinks the tree removal percentage is and again this includes what was actually removed plus what you're concerned with may be impacted right that's what this number just so I understand I'm a little unsure because I I didn't see anything in what came in and maybe I missed it about what was removed actually remove he ask questions once Chris testifies he ask questions where did Chris come to the 8109 because John believes it is 84.9 84.9 but again that in I mean we we have that's that includes all the areas of the trees the canopies that exist within the disturb that are impacted by the all the trees are that are impacted by the soil disturbance okay of those might be in side slightly outside the Disturbed areas are inside but they were all impacted because they impacted the root zones of the trees okay so that's what I wanted to understand so therefore the canopies therefore the trees have been impacted okay so that's 84.9 and that's basically adding 38,700 31 to the total treat canopy removal that was indicated on the original plans that was 35545 just you 389 275 245 if wa wait hold on just so you understand why he's saying that because you're requesting the variance to go to 81.0 n and if these additional trees die it's going to put you into a variance where you going with that that's what I just said to him two seconds ago so if what we are discussing now is the need to have an accurate percentage of a variance that this board is going to hopefully Grant or at least have before you to consider right then I don't have a problem with the 84.9 because that I think helps everybody and gets us to the end game regardless of what may speculatively happen down the road with regard to these trees which we are hopeful as a middle ground can be satisfied or resolved by way of a bond in whatever that amount may be if we sit and consider all the things that uh Miss Drew brought up uh could be drawn from if and as necessary as things happen if that Mak sense okay now Mr ner you said 84.9 correct yes yep that's what Mr okay Thomas says all right give us a little quick [Music] overview that so we're not using these for IND yeah no no I'm sorry it's okay this is just a it's not an exhibit it's just the submitted plan okay in other words that's the board has that in their packet that's just a demonstrative exhibits not getting marked correct correct that's sheet four of the plan set the S grading plan sorry Chris did you say sheet four sheet four yes let's give us the date it's dated September 30 2024 and it's last revised 1119 24 that's me yes sorry I'm playing the dance of how close to B Just Just One Last are you familiar with what percentage of trees they wanted to remove in the initial plan which the board told them no told them to come back and then they came back with the uh they came back with the 7996 do you know what they had proposed before the 79.9 6 no I'm not aware I think it might be in the resolution I'm looking at that I don't know if I put it in there or not John do you recall the uh the percentage that the board told you know that's too much well it it to me it was somewhere around 86 or it was okay and and the plans were the plans were modified the the the the building envelope didn't change the parking didn't change but they added some walls added some height to walls and and that reduced the the the the the fill area which reduced the impact on the trees which lowered the percentage okay so that brought it those plan revisions which the board did approve brought it down to 76 86 to down approximately 86 best of your recollection down to the 79.9 96 that that sounds right sorry if I don't so I have a question where the proposal the plan they have this walls and all that did they Implement those or they didn't Implement those he wants to know are the walls where the walls are shown on the plan the the the large wall on the Eastern side is where it is on the plan on the southern side of the plan the the plan that was approved I believe had a two-tier retaining wall and couple hundred feet long and the one wall a lot of that those walls were eliminated and instead the area was filled which is part of what caused the problem on that side of the C you can see that even what we approved and had a discussion to reduce from 86 this this is for the Benefit of Mr Nest to address in his desal okay you got the point right we understand yes all right start it's loud and clear okay so um obviously there's the big issue to talk about there are a couple of things that are part of this that are part of this um application before you so you know let make sure we we hit everything number one is the proposed Monument sign which you can see located right at the listen propos sign yeah I don't think that's problem I know that's why I said let's just but I want to put it on the record that the I just want to point it out to everybody and actually start with a winner well it's not necessarily starting with the winner it's just start with easy stuff so the monument signs located at the the end of barbish Drive is car already explained um what's being requested as it relates to that the signs proposed at 5 ft from that from the Royal Road right of way um the anticipation is that Barbers Drive will be vacated in favor of this property uh so the request would be to place it at 5T instead of 10 noting it being on the part of the property um in the alternative that it doesn't get vacated that we have it within an easement that the town would have to Grant and the alternative that neither of those happens the sign would be placed where it was originally proposed inside the site as part of the original approval uh the other the other item uh in here that's uh relief is the guide rail itself the guide rail is not for 10 guide rail which is the brown like aged look rusted look guide rail it's just standard galvanized guard rail um for the most part the guard rail is Bel on the wall in the back it's not visible to anybody but on the site I'm sorry could you replete what I um you're coming through mu am I yeah I'm sorry I couldn't hear what the composition of the guardrail so it's so the ordinance requirement is that Core 10 guide rail be installed which is like The Rusted look guide Rail and what was installed is standard galvanized guard rail um as I said in the back of the site uh there's guide rail on top of the wall that is um again it's installed uh and it is um not visible to anybody but those on the site it's facing inward uh and then there's a small section along the entry Drive uh that similarly is tucked into the site um it's it's there we're asking for the relief to let it remain as opposed to pull it out and landfill that material um from a visibility standpoint from an aesthetic standpoint it's uh hidden into the site and not visible from anyone would note that was trying hard to think of where in town there is core1 guide Rail and I think actually on Commerce over by the Home Depot that that the there's a guide rail over there and that's core1 all along Pennsylvania including the the new extension that they built or the realignment that they did when they did um Creekside that's all standard galvanized guardrail so um it's not inconsistent with what's been done elsewhere in the township and it's really just an aesthetic matter uh the ask in in the board professionals reports do you say anything about those guard rails no I didn't see anything in there so so other words you're not recommending as a condition of approval if the board grants an approval that they be removed and replaced you're all right with them remaining like that for for at least for my opinion anyway it serves the same purpose and it is at the rear of the site where nobody's going to see it um I know it's a Township standard and I think the idea was that because it's Township Road coming in it had follow the township standards and now we're kind of in this weird we're not sure what's going to happen so um we wouldn't recommend to rip it out to replace it with core1 which it's mostly just an aesthetic thing and it is at the rear of the site so generally nobody would actually this a good idea go on all the issues that are not going to be controversial first so does that need then a a design waiver I'm not sure where's it at it was it was onone right but being on the plan just means you grant amended approval poof it's approved is it if it's required in an ordinance of say plan or zoning ordinance then you'd have to add a piece of relief to allow it if it's just a thing that it was on the plan you guys wanted it that way and it's not that way now but you don't have a problem with it and it doesn't need an exception or a variance then we don't have to well at least the board professional don't have to worry about it and the board if they're fine with it then we can go on to the next issue I don't know I just know was it's it should be relief from it's a it's a standard so it's either a site plan give me the what's the ordinance that's what I don't have it written down I'll have to look it up for somebody at some we're going to let Jeff look at this as you keep on testifying I just want to find out where it is but there's only I have a feeling at the site plan ordinance requirement so it would require an exception to allow it to remain which the planner and the engineer and the landscape architect don't have a problem with and I have no opinion on that whatsoever you found it what is it it okay so what section are we in 296 29675 29675 is 75 a site plan design standard section yes okay so now we're talking about an exception but it's 29675 what section c circulation and parking two design standards for off street parking areas under K when guard rails are required they shall be constructed of wood rail supported by wood or port0 steel posts as approved by the township engineer utilizing the detail approved for use on the Garden State Parkway okay and what did they put in typical it's a stand it's a standard galvanized steel rail okay and you guys don't have a problem with an ex exception being granted to allow the standard galvanized correct board have any issues with that no great okay next perfect there was some slight uh change where previously there were garage entrances uh areas marked out on the larger building to the South and that's now proposed is just being parking across so there's some additional parking shown on the plan uh which is noted in the okay on that one is it just a change so just an amended site plan or does it have some ordinance standard there there just a change there's no change okay but were the doors not installed in or is the parking conflicting with the doors the the doors are not installed but they could be installed so at the present time the parking is shown as such and will be installed as such but so far as the relief that was previously granted for parking we're asking for no change to that so if they want to use the garage doors in the future they can it was just striping it's a striping change so they would just do a so the relief that you granted before since there's no change in the number of parking spaces covers it yeah typically again this would be a modification send it in we look at it we would say we recommend it to be approved administrator Le because there's no impact of the previous Vari if you asked you would have gotten the approval but here you're at the board have a problem with this one no nope okay next next is the big one next we we should I'm going to flip over here to sheet five start John Thomas pull out the memo that he wants to correct something this was this was from my initial report dated 41221 and this was the review of the original plans that came before the board that were dated well last revised 3 32521 and and on those plans the proposed tree removal was 87.4% okay so instead of you estimated 86 you underestimated it was 87.4% then recollection with the board said note of that come on back they came back with 79.9 6 by adding the retaining on that that correct I think fundamentally yes okay anyway go ahead so as as it relates to the the tree replacement the tree the mitigation here I think the easiest way to do this is to just walk through John report but before you do the mitigation what is the basis that the board should Grant the exception is the basis that because there's nothing you can do about it at this point because what's done is done unfortunately yes I think that's the where we're at so what what you're basically saying is you can't I can't uncut down a tree right and how high were these trees they were mature trees you can't plant the mature tree so really um you're at the point of um mitigation or whatever so Mr Thomas's memo cited this new ordinance that was adopted when loud loud loud it's ordinance number 24-12 June 5th 20 24 so first of all in my opinion because you need an exception this is not covered by your final site plan protection against ordinance changes which off a final approval you have a two-year protection period that if there's an ordinance change it doesn't apply to you and you get up to three oneyear extensions but if they come back and they need additional relief the time of application law says the ordinance in effect at the time of the application applies so 24-12 applies so what Chris what are the that ordinance say is basically if the board grants an exception from the tree replacement requirements they're basically two things that the applicant has to do and it's at at the option of the board correct one is replanting trees either onsite or offsite and one is making a dollar contribution which instead of being a $60 or $100 a tree which was at the time of your approval where you said no no no we're not goingon to take $60 or $100 a tree now it says at market value and Mr Thomas what in your opinion is the market value of the tree replacement that would be required under the new ordinance for the for the trees we use for reforestation 7 to 10 gallon inch and inch to inch and a half um which need to be mulched and staked and so forth we're Market values $300 a tree okay so what your two options are or a combination maybe replanting all these trees that you owe either on site and on and offsite or $300 per tree goes into the countship tree replacement fund or a combination the board's going to have to decide what it wants to do here but what's the applicant's proposal and and my opinion again is this ordinance applies now that you that you need the exception give us a minute we discussed this but we were we're not sure where you were coming down on the old or the new ordinance the new ordinance no question you want to take a five minute recess to talk about it yeah yes yes calling the meeting back to order Carol you know we're gonna stop at 10 right yeah I do I know that's why in the interest of time I kind of figured let us have our conversation and then here's what I'm thinking um guys guys sorry thank you very much um the professionals do have the responses to uh the letters and we have or or at least I think mostly address uh John your last letter of yesterday um we've had obviously a large discussion about tree issue we know we still have some work to do and we I'd like to run a couple things past the board before I do that is there anything else that we need to address I think everything else either pretty much been agreed to so put put it this way I take it that the applicant agrees to any of the suggestions in the board expert reports as being plan revisions they agree to that correct correct basically as outlined in my letter well and John Thomas correct well I mean I think we talked about John's letter do we want to just go through John's letter Point by Point quickly we can do that if we can try and do it quickly just and then and yeah go ahead and do that and then I I guess just to I I I put some notes together before the meeting in addition to the ones I sent out just as kind of a suggestion of definitively here's what my recommendations are move just to you know move for so go through my letter but mind me that I okay so so just so the board can see where I'm looking to go after that um and then I would kind of like an indication um from the board of what we're thinking with regard to the replacement payment offsite replacement treewise and also the plan changes that need to be made that we're agreeing to uh in the professionals letters okay okay so starting on page two of John's report on the replacement trees um just looking through here John and I had a discussion earlier today and I think one of the things that you know we're we're showing 1 in trees as our replacement tree size let's just direct the board to where you are uh second paragraph of of page two page two number two page to thank you uh so it says we're proposing 233 1 in trees and as John and I discussed that the trees really in that size they come as one to one and a half inch caliber trees and what the township and how you've approached it before is you look at that you just take the average and you do one and a quarter inch per tree because they're going to be you know on average that and John is that correct and and and that's correct and and you know quite honestly because of availability and a large number quantity of trees sometimes in the field we make some decisions we make some allowances to allow some trees that are a little smaller in balance that means ask you about and you come out and you make an administrative field change correct okay so Clarity what does these numbers mean like 587 Ines do you agree with that or so yes so what we were proposing on the plan was that 587 caliper inches of trees would be put on site on the basis of the the adjustment here that the trees will be really 1 and a/4 in per tree it will be 645 caliper inches of trees on site okay and let me just I don't want to confuse let me just qualify that by saying I think one of the first things that needs to happen is that the plan needs to be revised to determine exactly how many trees are going to be planted on site because in my letter I've pointed out some places where for example I don't think you'll be able to plant as many trees on the western part of the site because it's a closed it's already a closed canopy so that that needs to be adjusted there's another example is in the in the Southeast corner of the site there's a group of planting which I don't think is on your site that's that's that's off site if you look at the property one and this came up in the prior plans and they were taken off and now they' kind of reappeared so I don't think that's yours so and we don't need to get into the details but I'm just saying we have to take the the the planting plan that you've submitted as part of the amended application and it has to be adjusted and we talked about you know Chris you and I talked about like the you know less Evergreens more deciduous trees come up with the real plan then we'll know positively how many of these replacement trees are going to go on site then we'll know how many trees we have to deal with offsite so that was going to be my first dat understood and certainly as part of the plan changes we do need to do that so we can quantify that um I I think on the basis of the offsite what we would like to do is to have a mix of John has some sites that are municipal Land open space that is available for some reforestation efforts we don't want to be planting in 10 different locations but if there's one two locations where we can put a substantial number of trees and there are a couple of those sites um that he has identified where we can place replacement trees we'd like to be able to do some of the planting ourselves somewhere maybe a quarter to a third uh and then make the contribution for the remaining trees so in your opinion how many trees are we talking here they don't so for what just to clarify what this proposal plant a quarter to a third off site and make payment for the remaining it's 66% to 75% he wants to know what's the total number of trees there're somewhere around 1500 trees depending 1500 or500 trees right at it if it's I was looking at about I obviously the number is going to change a little bit based on what we can plant on site but I was looking at about a little over 1,00 caliper inches of trees yeah I came out with 1979 and this was caliper inches caliper inches which is about 1500 divided by 1 and and that addresses that quantity addresses the original plan stop 1,979 caliber in of tree which equals about 1500 trees from the prior Pro plan right correct now how did that relate to the 587 cali4 that part of it or separate part so the the total required is 2566 ah so the total required right in the top line of page two 20566 what you're saying is what John's saying is 1979 are going to be either planted upsite or paid for and the remainder is going to be planted on site that what we're saying which we need to confirm and and and we need to John we need to confirm that number because that 1979 is based on what's on the amended plan or pretty close to it and we're going to revisit that and it might end up being more or less I don't know I have one more question on that when we started this we said there was a discussion between 81.9 and 84.9 what does this represent it represents the 81 trees where talking about percent the 84.9 because it includes the 81 trees that also include the ones that are impacted and removed by the additional uh limits of disturbance correct no no so that the 8 the 81 is what was what has been cleared the difference the Delta going up to the 84.9 includes the trees that have been impacted those trees are still there yeah right at the still there look for a number whatever this number is does it represent because no okay John does the 2566 caliber include the trees who rooted in damage no but that's no but that's not what he was asking he said the 8 that's exact what I was asking yeah 81.9 did not the years generally I understand what he's asking John Carson with I have I have yes car okay thanks so so then what's the number so well no that's so that's hold on so that's the number for the replacement trees the trees that are so what we were talking about with the trees that are still there that have roots that are to that are damaged uh the applicant had an orbus submit a report uh a plan to John A Five-Year Plan for remediating around them um John has some comments to that and AR and John I'm not trying to put too many words in your mouth John but please stop me if if I'm speaking out of turn I will he will I know I know I'm just saying it anyway um that he will meet with the orb has to meet with him and they need to make some changes to the plant to his satisfaction so those trees would have the opportunity to stay those trees are mature and ideally they they remain if those trees were to not survive if any of those trees were not to survive that's what we discussed earlier with having a bond I thought the bond was not only to cover any trees that die actually cover that 1,900 1500 trees it's all the rep it's the replacement tree it's to cover the replacement trees it's cover the replacement trees and cover for if trees if the trees that are being that have been impacted if they come down they would have to replace those trees or they'd have to replace it pay the pay the amount and in the case that neither of those happened there is a bond in place correct where you can pull and you can do the replacement correct right to cover for all of that so right there's and again there's really I don't know what else we could possibly offer in that regard attempting to save the trees right doing okay the best we can to save those trees as we can and putting a provision in place to to you know putting a provision in place to to Ure that if they if they do not survive that they are replaced okay John can you comment on what CHR said yeah I think I think the important thing here is that is what I understand that and I haven't talked to the arborist yet I I've only seen a report I and my opinion is is that we should do anything we can to save these trees that have been impacted they they have environmental value they have in my opin a really important value because they're screening an adjacent residential right and they're 80 foot trees screening a wall that's 20 feet tall with a building that's 40 feet tall so they're they're they're not replaceable within our lifetime so we whatever needs to be done and and what I saw just in general in the arborist report was and with the preliminary soil reports and we don't have to get into that but but well we don't you know we're going to use a method that injects fertilizer and in short I didn't think it was sufficient and there is a method to deal with this because there's not much you can do after the fact but they use piece of equipment called an airspade there a couple ways to do it they either loosen all the soil with the air under the where it's been impacted and then you're mi in in organic matter or they actually cut radial trenches out from the trunk of the tree is that in your yeah I I I think I talked about yeah it's in an inspection inspection they they take it out they put compost in so that's what I'm thinking needs to happen that's that's like to me you do anything you can to save the trops there got be some sort of notes whatever put on the plans to that effect yes correct well would be the arborist the arborist would update their the arborist had a the arborist Had A Five-Year Plan like we need to do this now we need to do these things every year and I think that's that's an approach to remediating the problem with the tree I think that's also should be the approach with the new tree planting that the tree planting should be maintained over that period of time to get them established as quickly as possible let's assume the four degrees question the who actually does work to hire to do tree planting who is the app hire wait to to physically do the tree planting this to do this method the GNA do it itself I I don't know that we know that now yeah I don't know that we know that I don't know why why do we need to know why do we need you know that I no do we need to know that I didn't know well like this process they're relatively few people to do you know part L Tree Experts has their own process I want understand that this is not something that a landscape contractor is going to be able to do this is not something that a site contractor is going to be able to do they're going to need a specialty contract make they're aware SE my my opinion considering what we have gone through I would want to know well when they come back yeah yeah when you come back it'll be nice to know who you have assigned those things can you summarize okay summarize I we okay all right so I I think the first item it was meet with the arborist and do all these things we we discussed for the remediation plan and it it should end up in addition to his report it should end up on the plan because my sketch has the the area Disturbed and it has the areas of the tree canopy so until now we I mean have to be explicit and we have X number of square feet within those tree canopies so whoever's doing the contract work knows they have to do the treatment for X number of square feet so got it there's some there's some details that we talked about is this going to be I know it's the arborist report he said you know we're going to mulch these areas well how much mulch what kind of mulch all that stuff has to be all the details you need a more detailed report and you need notes added to the plan that also copies those notes so that whoever's doing the work has the plan doesn't have to refer to some separate report correct and and by getting all that existing tree information on the plan then we can do a better planting plan we because we know where the space is where the trees are and where the where we can plant so that's part of it um and one that's item one item two is revise the planting plan based on the remediation areas which is what I just said uh show the canopies a new planting plan and the details which are in my report different species and so forth and also the address the issues of possibly things that are planted or proposed to be planted it offsite no no I'm sorry I'm sorry hold on I'm not there yet hold on no I I misspoke you mean I'm sorry I'm getting tired that are proposed as what we thought was on site but may possibly be offsite that we have do that has to be addressed in the revised planting plan sure yes yeah yep yep because once those two things are done and you have a better planting plan then we will have an absolute number for the replacement trees on site which is actually a com just so the board knows it's a combination of the reforestation trees at the small size as well as larger trees in the kind of open landscaped areas on the site which is fine and they applicants proposed some 3in trees it'll enhance their site their trees that's fine we're we're we might change the species mix but that's part of the that final plan um uh I think the remediation plan as well as the as well as the maintenance of all these reforestation trees that we want to get established as quickly as possible should be part of that Five-Year Plan so there's a five-year maintenance we did this years ago on the planting on Dayton Road we had 99% of the trees take because they had a maintenance contractor somebody was responsible the water somebody was responsible they they mowed the grass between is that plan available I think we could I bet we could we could dig it up and that was a combination of um I can't remember the name of the of of the community uh part of that was done on open on on common open space land in the community and if you go further down Dayton Road toward the railroad track the township parcel on the right that that's where all those trees came from okay and that was could be 20 years ago but that's how that happened you won't find a gap in the trees there again it was just because somebody was responsible to water when it was needed it's not you know maybe they got lucky in Rain lot but that's what you have to do um uh item four was the was is the maintenance contract for the new plant is is the 5year maintenance contract cont for the new planting uh and item five was the basically a discussion of the the offsite replacement trees what's the final quantity and you know is it is it and when I wrote this was it is it a is it a fan L is it replacement trees or is it a combination so instead of talking exact number don't have that yet theal I think we said quarter to a third off S and then 75 66% to 75% paid with the fee of of what doesn't fit on the property one property two properties over I I think between I think both John and I's opinion has been I'll let John gave his opinion well I I think my opin as I said we we prepared some preliminary plans back to to look at different properties and I'd want to look at them again just to come up and and and that way we'll we'll we'll look at a property and say okay it's a concentrated area and they're 400 trees there and I I can't do that right now so I don't know yeah but but but the ideal would be that it'd be not a not a lot of properties not more not a lot of properties yeah yeah I mean and to be Fair hearing what we're hearing now too I think we obviously have not only some work to do with these plans before what I'm hearing from the board you'd like to see these changes we've agreed to and and bring them back right question is TimeWise because we have we figured out we have the reord meeting where I don't know that's give you enough time you want to go as fast as possible yes re meeting on January January 16 but isn't there some like John's report requires some soils testing that's what train of thought I got write this down blah blah blah blah blah that's the earliest date and the second date I think was February 20th correct uh when would the plans need to be into the board I think that's important days can't complain when you get these reports yeah this time we didn't well and and it wasn't the day of it was we got done before so I think everybody everybody did well um just well just the 10 days before is the 6th which is I believe Monday I don't think you're going to be able to pull that's that's like basically impossible considering the holidays three business days then the next day is February 20th February 20th and if not if you guys can't do that I'm sorry you don't have any we don't have anything until second meeting in March actually no I'm sorry I take that back you don't until April to February 20th no further notice well hold on what's going on I'm I'm very we're setting November 20th February 20th yes be impossible it's gonna be impossible for you to get the plan revisions in 10 days before if we give you January 16th 16th okay what January 20th is available too right no no we only we only have one January meeting microphone understand microphone please sir microphone understand the time restrictions here and uh January 16th I guess you mentioned is probably going to be almost an impossible date so realistically speaking probably the February date we can get uh almost everything that you want together and I'm sure we work out the trees the number of the trees we're going to you know plant offsite number onsite the dollars we exchange and we'll get it right we'll get we'll just do it the way we need to do it the only thing I would like to ask you is that anything in the building that relates to like you know whether we got to you know finish up a permit or finish up an inspection or something if you could at least let that go to let us continue with that that's not up to I know but that's kind of you know the biggest thing John you the construction official sometimes what the ask them if they granted an approval before the resolution is adopted they'll ask them if they would release the permit you don't have me I know but I don't want to I'm not ask I'm not asking for or TC just asking I understand can allow us at least continue with some of that building work so at least we're losing time on get everything right for you for for February but at least all the other work is continuing because I'm we're just losing a lot of tenants the building end up being vacant more than it has to be you know it's just and I I just you know if you could work with us in that regard we'll do everything we can to pay for your trees replant trees and get it to your gonna have to consult with the township attorney he's not gonna he's not gonna go out on a limb and have his derri a exposed I don't want any something goes wrong again he's going to have to I don't want anybody to do that this what I'm saying he's going to have to talk to the township attorney about that because the township attorney gives the zoning officer advice on those things I'm just saying that the in my opinion the the board can't direct any the zoning officer do anything the only times the board has asked the zoning officer to do anything like this is when there's been an approval and it's the only question is adopting the resolution there is no approval so in my opinion if you want to ask them you can but in my approval that will be inappropriate that he should be asking the township attorney I don't want that on your back I don't want that on my back and I'm sure Jeff doesn't want it on his back because if something else goes wrong anyone who gave you the okay is going to get in trouble it's not just you he'll get in trouble they'll get in trouble they say if they ask him and something goes wrong they're going to get blamed if Jeff makes the decision to give you that stuff and something goes wrong he's going to get blamed let him ask the township attorney if the town attorney gives them the okay then if something goes wrong the township attorney will get blamed okay okay uh okay thank you so I we're going to go back we're going to make these changes we're going to have these discussions we will be back um 10 we'll submit 10 days before February 20th if not sooner right and you're going to address I'm just I have to put this out here I was this board hasn't historically approved plans when it says say We'll revise and accept as a condition we want to see the plans revised correct that's what you're talking about all so we're not going to get into this circle of let me just ask this I want to make sure are there any storm water issues I was gonna say Don is there stor are there storm water let's ask our town let's ask our board engineer there's nothing so storm water related uh they're okay they're still meeting the requirements that are set forth by the state I did briefly want to while while I have the time um there was two things on I'll give you the report date so that way you have it on our report dated December 13 2024 this is on page three of four item number 13 A and B so it looks like that there was based off of the disturbance they encroached into either a flood Hazard area buffer or limit and then there was a Wetlands buffer um so we would ask that as a as a condition of coming back so now as a condition of approval but they would have to self-report that violation to the d whether D wants them to do a new freshwater wetlands permit however they want to mitigate it that'll be up to the state okay they should C see that self reporting to to you and to the planning office yes okay okay what about go you on stay on page three and go to storm water management so yes so storm water management it looks like from from their previous therm Water Management reports that they had submitted they had an overc capacity in the basins that they had So based the only thing that really changed was the limit of disturbance so they had to account for that disturbance with their new calculations and um and they're still meeting the the reductions that they had before um so at least in according to your ordinance and what the state requires they're still meeting all those but what you're saying is though all these recommended changes yes they still need to be made they still have to be made okay okay so all the changes recommended in er's report dated December 13 any changes that are recommended in Jeff's report dated December 16 and all the changes recommended in John Thomas's report dated December 18 have to be made and submitted and without I don't have my final response in front of me but I think that we agreed to make all of them I don't think there were any clarifications and if there were any clarifications I think we've gone through them tonight so I think we're okay if we have any questions we'll certainly reach out to the professor okay I just want try to say something before we close okay just one last thing that came up um I I don't think there was an ens plan in this revised submission and I spoke with Mike dama at soils last week and he said no I haven't seen anything so I think that needs to be yeah I talked to Mike this morning and uh there is a there is a plan in here and I told him I will get him a copy of it okay so I know he hasn't he hasn't seen it yet at to him to board professional board yeah when we revise the plans we'll send the revised plan to to Mike okay no nope that's that's fine okay Cara you get the last word thank you very much uh so one of the things we'll obviously be considering is what we will want to propose with regard to the trees I know we've talked about we have to find finalize the number we've talked about a third and twoth thirds um we'll be discussing that a little bit more because obviously we have some you know uh additional investigation to do in light of the number uh the market cost that we've been talking about does the board have any insight advice thoughts um hard NOS yeses anything that we need to consider because our goal is to come back on the 20th you've heard my clients say how difficult this is we know that we're here because of ourselves we understand that but I want to try to get everything resolved on the 20th so if there's any only advice you can give us on that is I would say is in that ordinance 247 that talks about market rate for the trees it also changed the relief that you need for more than 55% of the T Woodland tree canab removed it's now a variance not an exception just see1 variance same basis you were applying for the exception but just got the eyes and cross the Fe so you're saying by that I can revise my application to request that variance as an if necessary correct close the te Chris said that you need an exception from ordinance 29675 c2k to the guard rail thing put that in a letter and then say that because you're going to be seeking instead of going from you're going to exceed the 55% limit on the tree removal and you're going from the 79.9 6 that was approved in resolution 20216 to 87.4% even though if the board approved it there'll be some condition saying that you got to try best to not take any more out VAR Pard me 84.9 84.9 I'm sorry any okay no thoughts no plans we're good so any thoughts on anyone have anything in other words what what she's saying is does anyone have anything else that they have on their mind that they want to tell them so they have time to react to I guess the only other thing was the the in the John's report it talks about the soil testing additional soil testing and oh yeah when very good point when's the soil test John needs to see that yeah it's because if the soil testing is not back it will be back in advance of the submission date let's put it that way it should be well in advance of that the expectation is within a week or two but the holidays yeah I understand but that is critical because that is what all three of these experts are facing a lot of what they're asking what they're recommending is based on as soon as possible yeah as soon as it comes in certainly it's and and it has been to date so as soon as one last time Hearing in this matter contines February 20th no need for further notice and you got to make the subm all the revisions 10 days prior to February 20 no and I believe their time right now until mid April do you want a Time extension April 30th yeah okay all right thank you thank you everyone can I get a motion to adjourn want April zero 043 043 yes 043 yeah 2 yes 30 okay motion to adjourn move second second all in favor I Merry Christmas Merry Christmas Happy H happy h