good you calling to order the zoning Board of adjustment R and Township New Jersey regular meeting July 18 2024 the notice requirements of the public open open public meetings act have been satisfied by the placing of a notice of this meeting on the bulletin board at the municipal building filing same with the Township Clerk and transmitting same to the hon County Democrat The Courier News The Star Ledger and the Trenton Times Roll Call please chairwoman Miss Cynthia schaer here Vice chair Mr rul dami here Mr Steve fario has asked to be excused Mr Randy block here Mr Jim Ferrero here miss Lindsay K bral here miss lorett ktina here Miss Donna Drews has has to be excused and Mr James Miller here board professionals board attorney Mr John drill here Township planner Mr Jeffrey Vella here uh board engineer Mr reesh Dari present traffic consultant Mr J Troutman here board planner Miss Jessica Coldwell here Township landscape architect Mr John Morgan Thomas here board sonographer Miss Jackie clap and board secretary Taylor vaugh here can I get a motion to approve the absence of Steve fario and Donna Drews I'll make a motion second roll call please chairwoman Miss Cynthia schaer yes Vice chair Miss Russ dami yes Mr Randy block yes Mr Jim Ferrero yes Miss lindsy K brel yes Miss lorett ktina yes Mr James Miller yes okay moving on to comments announcements distribution correspondence and meeting minutes I do have one announcement I'd like to uh thank we have our pamphlet our Board of adjustment pamphlet Steve you'll be so happy so um I want to thank Taylor and Jeff rasul and Lindsay for their efforts to help us put this together this is a pamphlet basically focusing on the residential area and it says who the board of adjustment is if you're going to reasons coming before the board what would be required if you come before the board what the application process is what the hearing is like and last but not least once you're approved what's next so I think uh everyone did a good job and they are thank you to you too yes thank you they are in front of the desk uh at the zoning department so thank you again okay moving on to this evening's applications I do actually have an announcement I forgot to place on the agenda is our application CE Main Street which is 181 CE Main Street application 181 o Clinton Road or croon Jeffrey cro croon um that application is scheduled for the August 15th meeting and a Time extension was granted by the applicant to October 31st okay okay before we start the applications tonight I see a lot of new faces in the audience so I would like to just take a moment and maybe provide some information of what will happen here so first welcome um so tonight we have a list of applications and each applicant will come up uh their attorney if they have one will present uh the application and we'll go through a series of testimonies from either the applicant and their professionals after each applicant after each individual uh questions are allowed and we usually go to the board professionals first our board members and then anyone that's in the a audience that would like to ask questions of that witness following all the testimony before the attorney closes anyone that wants to make a comment for or against or anything you'd like to say that is when you could come up and say whatever you would like good bad or in between we ask you to please be professional um also we have several applicants tonight so just so you're aware we only go till 10 o'clock and uh we have to split our time so if you are here for one application it may get finished tonight it may not it may run over several meetings just so you're aware also if you're talking we may ask you just step out and finally just to let you know uh the board members are all volunteers putting in their time to reviewing and assessing all the materials in order to assess against our Township ordinances along with our professionals we rely on them and especially our board attorney in order to to do our best job to be fair okay so with that like to move to the applications tonight our first application boa case number 10-22 applicant Esco Precision Inc location block 36.029456 -6 that is 711 and 17 royalroad the applicant is for the application is for a Time extension request would you like me to read this into the it appears the applicant's not here but for an extension request the board could consider this of being here you ask Jeff for input because this I would consider this a minor extension like a technical exension they needed they're so close to get the plan sign so unless any board members have an objection just ask Jeff to that a letter want to read the letter into the [Music] record so it's address to myself microphone to myself from Ryan eeky to whom it may concern this is a formal request for extension on a deadline for the following in regard to the site plan application for 11 roal Road in raron Township New Jersey condition number one resolution 2024 d02 for obtaining final sign off of plans addition number 15 in resolution number two-month extension to be scheduled in front of the board to be scheduled in front of the board on July 18th 2024 should you have any questions I can be reached at such and such thank thanks Brian so resolution 242 says r site plan doc signatur on site by July 524 now he's asking for a two Monon extension that bring him out to September 5 is that correct correct in your opinion is that realistic that that's realr have all revisions been made and it's just a time yes and expired how long you have to sign them that's correct okay and then condition 15 resolution 20242 the resolution that memorialized a second extension they had a first extension had a second extension this is the third extension seing underline resolution 202208 C1 C2 variant exceptions final 15 gave them until January 5 2024 which is long to full permits now they're asking for a two Monon extension on that which doesn't make sense maybe what you interpret that is a two month exension from tonight so if we interpreted it that way they' be look to extend to September 18 to get I believe so based on their schedule AUST Bas on their schedule you might want to the some addal time de again close to the Jeff what would you recommend guys can you just speak a bit more into the microphone while people on Zoom are having trouble hearing you you I suggested a four-month extension from tonight for to obtain zoning and construction permits that be November 18th 2024 correct that's correct so that's Jeff's recommendation extend condition number one of resolution 20242 to September 5 2024 and extend condition number 15 resolution 202208 November 18 2024 anyone want to make that into a motion so moved yeah second chairwoman Miss Cynthia schaer yes Vice chair Miss Russell domj yes Mr Randy block yes Mr Jim frero yes Miss Lindy cool brel yes Miss Lor ktina yes Mr James Miller yes okay moving to the second application board boa case number 10-20 2017 applicant Vicki and Robert Morris location 133 Copper Hill Road applications for a Time extension do you want me to read this in anyone or either of the moris is here you guys should come up they're coming up I'm just going to read their letter this is a letter addressed to the board secretary dated July 11 2024 here m vaugh in regard to the above property the above property by the way is 133 Copper Hill Road to 84 loot 27.1 you guys can come sit down at the table here here yeah you can stand or you can sit up to you um we we needed to sell our farm at 143 Copper Hill Road prior to beginning construction on 133 Copper Hill Road we tried to do this for around two years but we're unsuccessful due to the difficulty of selling large properties this was followed by an additional delay due to the covid-19 pandemic soon began which began soon after the variance expired by the way this variance memorialized in resolution 2017-21 and they had and the condition there were two conditions condition number one required revision of plans by June 7 2018 and condition number four required them to obtain permits and complete construction by December 7 2018 they say this was followed which uh followed by an additional delay due to the covid-19 pandemic which began soon after the variant to F when did the pandemic start didn't it start in 2020 March March 11 2020 yeah so the pandemic was almost two years after the variant expired with all the uncertainty and unknowns associated with covid-19 and following shutdowns and spiraling prices that followed woring of the pandemic we did not go ahead with building on 133 Copper Hill Road we've now decided that we will not and we want to sell this property we've recently placed 133 Copper Hill Road on the market at potential buyers we'd like to know if we can extend condition four transfer this to the new owners once the sale closes so in a minute you can hear from from the um morses but this is a different situ a very different situation than from Esco Esco they they have they made the plan revisions they had they also had delays but they made the plan revisions and the building the construction Department can't sign them unless there's an extension and they're ready to apply for the construction permits but the construction department is not going to review it this extent here this Aran expired in 2018 they want to sell the property the problem is they want to extend the condition number four time to obtain permits and complete construction but they haven't even made the plan division they want to sell the property inevitably in my opinion let's say the board extended the time to obtain the permits they're going to sell to someone and new owner invariably is going to want some changes so you can hear from with but if you ask my advice this is one of the few cases where um my opinion you should deny the extension this variance died by its own death in 2018 and someone should have to reapply for whoever's going to live in the house can reapply for because that's the person who's going to you know want whatever be done there but let's why don't we get two Millers swor in can you both ra my hands sor morrises both of you swear or affirm the testimony you're going given this matter will be the truth the whole truth but truth yes can you both identify yourselves for the rec Vicky Mars into the mic Vicki moris and I'm Richard Morris not Robert moris okay you heard what my advice to the board is explain to them why they should extend this when you haven't even done the plan revisions and if you sell this unless you know that the the potential buyer is going to do exactly what you're going to do that person's going to end up coming back here anyway so why shouldn't they just come back here and apply for the whole thing explain to the board okay um we we we do have a buyer for the property and in talking in sorting everything out for the contract when you knew that we we knew the variance was expired I came to the township to ask what the procedure was for them to apply for a new variance and what had to be done and I was told that it might be easier just to redo this one so that's what we that's why we did it and that's that's what we're [Music] doing I do they spoke to you about it they spoke yes they spoke with me a couple times what did you say I brought to their attention that there was a resolution and that if somebody were to build on this a v a planning variance were requ was required it was one from 2017 it's pass it was past its expiration but it's what she's saying is you told her I didn't say it was going to be rather than reapply come and ask for an extension that's what you said she said there's nothing wrong with that to give it a shot talk to me about it I'm just giving you my he's right that it would be easier for you if they extended this instead of make someone come back for a new one okay so so we probably have an issue with that we've had a lot of residents applications come before the board um it's a little confusing at times to them and um I'm not sure why you would want to sell it and then have them live up to your plan so I am thinking that it's not really I think we we should consider what you originally were saying is that they need to figure out how to apply for new variants when they buy your property okay we were told by the relative that it is a a oh I'm sorry we were told by the real who' spoken to the buyer that it's it's a builder he's going to build he wanted our plans we would give them to him when the property closed and he was going to build a ranch a single story the same as ours now if he really does that I don't know that's just what we were told and that's what we we began this working from that my suggestion is whoever the buyer is tell them that they they need to apply for a new variant and you could make they might want to make a condition of the sales contract right but this thing was like last year or two years ago this thing was this expired in 2018 well and if you look at it we approved it 2017 right but but if they're going to come with a variance a new variant a new request with the same plans it might be right it might I would think it would be a quick um because we've already seen it now some of us are weren't there some of you have seen it yes some some of us have seen it other they came in with the same plan presumably can't make any guarantees I want to make that clear presumably it would be granted and it wouldn't take a real long time to be granted because if if they're not making any changes the board could rely on a lot of the findings that it already made in resolution 2017-21 okay and we have never done this before six years application that um where you didn't Grant an extension and they had to come back normally you try to avoid having to do a doover right but I think there's been one doover this would be probably the second doover probably 20 years well we've never extended we've never had something six years old and then come in and say yes we'll Grant the this right if you did this this would be your first yeah and and and that's what we're a little concerned with I no I understand that and he did didn't say that we would get it he just said that would be the quickest and the easiest way to try MH so okay so so do you want them to vote which probably they're going to deny the extension or you want to withdraw the request and just have someone come in with application I think we should just withdraw it you will just withdraw it and they can begin their secary to note they withdrawn the request the extension okay thank you for that thank you thanks have a good evening okay moving on to oh do we want to go to the fot shop first yes okay okay boa case number 12-2020 applicant is the fud shop Land Group LLC location block 36 lot 65 10 milbrook Place application is for a minor site plan with d variant relief for manufacturing use and residential use in a B3 Zone and we have an letter you want me to read it okay Dear Miss BAU state of July 16 2024 per my email yesterday please be advised that the applicant requests being taken off the calendar for the July 18th meeting the reason for the removal is that the planning review revealed an issue that will requireing an additional D variant it is my understanding that the applicants planner Jim Kyle discuss this issue with the board's attorney Mr drill and both are in agreement that that applicant needs to Ren notice for this additional D variant relief if possible we would like to be put on put this on the agenda for the September 5th meeting please advise thank you lastly the applicant grants the board an extension until November 2024 just the board secretary is that date available yes okay they're gonna this is a notice issue so they're going to have to Reen notice this is not being continued no need for further notice this is not being continued this is being rescheduled new notes okay all right moving on to the next application for this evening boa case number 05-22 applicant is Countryside properties LLP location block 74 lot 5.39 359 Old York Road application preliminary and final site plan with d variance for proposed three multifam residential buildings good evening good evening Madam chairperson members of the board I'm sorry hold on so we have two applicants it's 7:30 so that's give each one an hour and 15 minutes and we'll have a break right about 10 minutes so approximately an hour okay okay and we we're just going to try and break it up and give everybody the same amount of time he's the attorney for both appli any I'm you can talk for the whole time I'm gonna be here with you all night so okay all right thank you uh good evening Steven Gruenberg grinberg law office on behalf of Countryside properties Lop U our application for D1 variance and C variants along with preliminary and final site plan approval do we really have to tell you to down you got to slow down okay how how many you just gave me an hour that's I understand if you don't slow down you're going to cost more than an hour when they ask you she'll throw something at you okay the applicant is the owner of the property uh known as block 74 lot 5.39 and it's 359 Old York Road and the property is um a little over 6 Acres where 3 acres is the minimum required and it's located in the O2 business office zoning district and the applicant's predecessor in title had secured approval for um an office development by way of planning board resolution 29-2 2003 and that had been partially developed with um paved parking Curbing and drainage facilities but no further development occurred on the property and it's been sitting in that condition for a long time the applicant is pleased to present this type of application to actually finally bring this property to development in an an appropriate Way by having senior housing that will include some affordable housing units within it um it'll be three 11,725 SQ foot buildings that'll consist of two and three bedroom town homes with related site improvements um the um there'll be 20 market rate units and four affordable units and we'll have testimony with respect to the breakdown of those units um the uh the use is not a permitted use but and you'll hear planning testimony as to the special reasons why this senior housing with affordable housing is very appropriate for this and particularly suited for this particular piece of property um I have provided the proof of service and publication of the notice of hearing and I think the board had actually found that uh at the last meeting that this was scheduled and continued to this date and I provided the uh original proofs so um I have um a few Witnesses this evening I will have um actually um Wayne Ingram will be both our engineer and planner and Jeff fer will be our architect start what I was going to just say he's going to start with engineering then I will call Mr fer to do the architecture as f l i s he R and then I'll recall Mr uh Ingram for the planning testimony and boy is it hot in here yes feel free to take off your tie and jacket like I yeah I I'll I'll try to wing it for a little while I'm I'm old school man so I'd like to call both Mr I have a very very quick question before we get stuck what was it zoned prior to 2003 what was it zoned yeah was it still office or was it a different I believe it was office but I don't know for sure so do you want to swear both Witnesses in at the same time correct and I also want to swear in all boin that are participating in this application so can Mr Mr fler please stand up andard experts participating please stand up and everyone raise their right hand and does everyone swear or affirm the testimony you're going to give this matter the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth start down there I do I do I I do I do I do so just got their name okay so let's Mr Ingram start off this for the record your name sure uh Wayne Ingram i n g r a m and you're going to be the applicants expert and planning expt correct and you're an RA in the state of Jersey register architect yes I and you're going to be the applicants architectural yes just for the record Jeff let go right around [Music] the broadcast D Ron Township engineer okay Mr Ingram can you please give I know you've been here a gazillion times but can you please please give the board the benefit of your qualifications sure uh I'm a licensed engineer and planner in the state of New Jersey uh I've been practicing engineering for 20 years licensed for about 15 uh appeared before over 75 municipalities in the State uh including many times before this board and uh I've been licensed as a planner for over 10 years and uh again have uh performed in a similar capacity before those boards including this board and your licenses are up to date yes I offer Mr Ingram as an expert in the fields of engineering and planning I think we've all seen Mr Ingram enough to say yes want to ask if any members of the public have any questions about his qualifications does anyone in the audience have any questions about his qualifications or by or online anyone on Zoom have questions on the qualifications okay hearing none we'll move forward you accepting yes thank you Mr Ingram can you please give the board an overview of our proposal on the site sure um and what we've put up on the board uh is our site plan exhibit um that is dated 71024 you want to mark that A1 well is it in the board file uh we submitted it doesn't have to be marked in fact my suggestion is how many people in the public are here in this application so let's put the exhibit over here facing this way anyone who can't see move over there move right down here move it down there Pi one or the other so people the public and the board can see it and the profession exhibit f this is this was emailed in that's not just I just want to confirm the digital copy of this is in the box right that'sa I got it from Jessica Jessica is the diagram on your page six the same did you pull that from this P six appears to be the site plan site yeah it's just the uncolored version okay thanop theop pretty sure we turned in another one I have 15 copies if the board wants of that [Music] one don't you guys Shar sh yeah those two will share Randy and I everyone that is on by Zoom please just give me a couple minutes I will have this available for you to see by soon that basically the same now can you make sure tomorrow if you haven't already A1 which is at the date1 5124 that was 710 I'm I'm almost positive we turned it in but where is it I don't know if you email it in you brought these you didn't bring one the S no I didn't because we have these for last meeting that got got post on is this the same date it this has a a turning template on it that is the only difference Mark Mark one 81 this is submitted to the file that is A1 which is give a description plan exhibit dated 71024 colorized rendering of the site plan you guys have is not exhibit A1 okay you hav't submitted into the file that's exhibit a one and they're going to submit that tomorrow yep okay all right so uh this property has a pretty long history um not just to the town but to myself uh I actually grew up in the southwest corner uh Jason to this property my parents still live there um and it's actually also what inspired me to join the board about 20 years ago um I came to the board when this was being approved for office and then again when the former applicant who anybody knows John Aldrich uh came here to after he had an office approval he came in to try to convert it to a some sort of housing I believe it was uh uh for developmentally disabled people and his meeting lasted about an hour before he got up stormed out and left left Tony Ker's attorney here um sounds like yeah basically uh withdrew the application at that point even though uh some residents actually showed up kind of in favor of the idea because frankly everybody hated the idea of office um this property is an O2 office property uh the O2 Zone basically consisted of this and the the Farmland behind it which was subsequently purchased for preservation by the county and the township so essentially what you have remaining here is the only O2 parcel surrounded by all residential other than for the north which is uh the Sewer Authority so you know the basically this you know this property partially constructed about 20 years ago he built the parking lot the lighting uh the drainage uh never installed the Landscaping which was uh always a point of contention for all the neighbors because no bond was ever called in in my entire life we stared out our back window at a parking lot uh an unfinished parking lot and I can tell you that nothing good ever happened in that parking lot we would have uh people doing burnouts in their cars you'd have parties going on over there nothing good um and a lot of things have been attempted to be done here none of them really ever made it to the board um that one point uh somebody considered using it for a Contractor Yard uh when they had another facility on Old York Road they were getting kicked out of because it was in the residential Zone um one idea has been kicked around was an expansion of the sewer plant um all these always stuck out of me as terrible ideas to put in a residential Zone and that's why we tried to come up with this concept you know this is something an idea I kind of had I brought to the applicant because I thought it would be something that would be far more beneficial than having this continue to stay a vacant parking lot or even worse turn into the office that it's approved for or who knows what other use is going to come along uh along the way yeah what what are the permitted uses in the O2 Zone well uh luckily uh a year ago they removed warehousing uh but up until a year ago that was an approved use that nobody really wanted um what are the permitted uses today I believe what we have are scientific and research Labs uh indoor Recreation facilities motels and hotels offices houses of worship and Child Care Centers so that's that's really what you know this Zone was intended um but we'll get back to the planning uh aspect of it later um you know just in terms of what we've tried to design and the way we Tred to do it um the facility has existing sewer capacity for those Office Buildings uh which again th those buildings were essentially you know basically right up to the setback lines on both the South and the Western and the northern property lines uh so really built out the site uh other than where the drainage systems are today um but again all that was really constructed were these parking lot areas uh that over this 20 years are in complete disrepair um but what we tried to do was hold the existing driveway entrance um and then locate the three structures in a way that we're basically right on top of the uh impervious surface that's already there so you know we're trying to utilize some of what's been done uh we're able to actually keep the drainage system completely intact and this proposal will actually reduce the imperious surface not only of what was approved it's way less than that it it'll also be less than what is actually existing so they were approved with the office buildings for much more we're able to keep this to the point that you know over the impervious that was already built parking lot we're going to stay at about the same point a little bit less than what's already there where is that storm B onib uh there's two of them there's one in the northwest corner and uh which is the top left and then there's another one in the front uh which is the Northeast uh on the top right top right of the uh so from a storm water perspective we analyze this uh for your your a board engineer uh to basically show that there is absolutely no change in the runoff from what it is today to what it is when we're done and again it's a slight reduction in impervious and from a water quality perspective it's a lot better because what you right now all you have is dirty impervious parking lot when we get done you know a little less than half of that will be roof area which is clean uh so you know again that's what we see as a storm water benefit uh of the project another thing we tried to do uh was reposition the buildings to push them further from the residence uh than what was previously approved uh we made a slight tweak since our original submission we were less than a foot deficient in a combined sidey yard we just pushed it back half a foot got the 200 feet so so that meets uh we only have one setback variance we're asking for uh which is uh right around 63 ft uh on the Northern property line uh for the one building and again that was an attempt to make sure we shifted the development further from the residence so yes we're asking for a setback variance but we're talking about something that's adjacent to the sewer plant I don't think what's the setback requirement uh it was 100 foot requirement and the the um the request is to have a setback of 63 feet but that's along the property line with the Sewer Authority that's correct yes the what what was submitted says 62.85 ft and then it shows some kind of structure which is .81 Ft in the upper leftand corner is that accessory structure that's not subject to that's that's an accessory structure it's it's basically our well our well pump house okay does that need a set variant or not I didn't see that listed in the letter no that is that needed or not Jeff said is it is uh but again we tried to locate that in the north Corner as far away from everybody as possible it's basically a shed structure in which the well is going to have a little pump house to make make sure it can supply to the uh to to the units and where does it border the the 50 set back it's now with the Residential Properties right the that's adjacent to the uh the the Sewer Authority correct yes adjacent to the Sewer Authority correct so I take it what you're saying is if you moov the development South you might comply more with there but it would push it closer to the residences exactly when you eventually get to the planning test it's going to be a C2 that is better planning to keep it further from residences in the South and have a setback Varian in the north that's correct yeah so uh one of thing that was installed originally with the development was uh the multiple Wells um they did all the aqua for testing at that time show they had plenty of capacity um so you know what we're proposing is actually less water and less sewer so we approached the MUA um they assigned the edus over to the applicant uh um and what we're proposing will be a reduction in the edus over what was required for the office and that's you know partially how we backed into our number of units is you know we're not looking to increase our capacity over um you know what was already allocated for the site um we are also uh the topic of water um we are proposing a water tank in the front uh I think there's been some fear over this this is not a water tower this is a below ground structure uh 30,000 gallon tank located on the side of the driveway purely for figh firefighting um um requirements so again it's it's it's a buried structure it's nothing you see other than the uh you know the stands for you know for the uh connection of the uh fire department connection of the the 24 units you can see they're broken down into three buildings of eight units um we do have four affordable units that is basically what we're required to have uh you know for a unit or for development of this size so we have a very low a low and two moderate units um you know as and a compliant breakdown and we have a plan basically showing um you know where those units uh will be located all the others will be market rate uh is the intention of the applicant to make uh this uh Community he owns and would be uh renting uh these units uh so there were a lot of questions about homeowners associations and private public ownership we're proposing to keep everything on this property private owned and operated by the applicant um there won't be a homeowners association that needs to you know be reviewed by the board um it'll it'll be at least uh least community so what percentage of the total number of units are affordable uh that's 16.7% or four out of 24 and will the township get credit towards its fourth round obligation those four units I don't see why not they meet the criteria affordable do you know I don't know no um can I ask the applicant someone could contact fair share housing center for the next hearing session and see if they would agree now in the fourth round it's going to be different than the third round there's not going to be these settlement agreements there's a mechanism but fair share is going to have the ability to object in every single affordable housing matter the state so if you could contact fair share I don't know which do you know which of the attorneys at fair share has hon County I don't not and find out if they would not object to having any affordable housing units if the board granted the application count towards the Township's fourth round obligation sure uh other aspects of the site um we front on Old York Road which is a County Road uh the driveway access was previously installed in the last application uh so it received County approval uh that included widening for the shoulder uh drainage uh and it was actually for a much higher traffic uh demand than what we're proposing so obviously you know Office Buildings of the size that were approved had considerably more traffic than you're going to get out of 24 senior uh units yeah also not only that it's for affordable units it's for senior affordable units yes yep um and so you know we've already uh submitted this to the county and uh you know they've as as they previously approved the access they have no objection to uh it basically staying as is so you know once we enter the site you know we're proposing to have a slight curve to the right we have a Central Drive aisle um between the two units and that ends kind of like a in a t at the back uh and the idea there with that configuration was you know it allowed us for larger Vehicles emergency vehicles things like that they can pull in uh you know turn into that rear te back up and reverse out of the site um you know make fairly easy movements getting in and out of the uh of the facility um again each unit will have uh you know their driveway uh uh garage combination for their parking we also have uh a number of outdoor parking stalls uh for visitors uh that meets the requirements uh you know for for this intensity of development uh we're providing the required uh EV charging stations both uh outside as well as uh some units which can be equipped uh inside uh as needed um and we are proposing internal sidewalks to the development though we are not proposing any along the streets that was a waiver that was granted for the office development and I can tell you there's no sidewalks anywhere in any proximity to this property that it would make sense to continue them outside the site um and you know I you can kind of see on the exhibit the you know the surroundings we have Old York Road and residential to the east to the north again the Sewer Authority uh to the South uh is a single family community on Lon Road and again that um uh preserved Farmland uh to to the West uh in terms of lighting we're proposing 12 foot fixtures you know very modest fixtures for the for this development because you know it's residential we really don't have much of a need to you know make this uh you know bright like the you know the current setup of you know of a large parking lot much taller structures much more intense light that's going to be improved in my opinion with this application and in terms of landscaping um you know what we got 20 years ago was a grass berm uh that you could see right into the property if they had planted the trees in landscaping they were supposed to do 20 years ago You' never even know what would be happening here because it would all be monstrous trees unfortunately that didn't happen and so at this point we're proposing to install Landscaping similar to what was approved that time uh along that burm uh to provide a good buffer to the neighbors to the South uh to the neighbors to the east we're going to have Street trees um we're going to have trees lining our entry Drive uh we're going to have some Landscaping uh basically in front of the the nearest houses that are being built us tree rows there and then you know along the foundations we're going to have you know your typical residential Foundation plantings uh and then again some Street trees intermixed uh you know within in the community um I think you know given how much we've reduced the impervious and the the limit of the development um we think it's a pretty you know robust plan that'll uh provide some good coverage um you know for for the surroundings Qui what's up on the screen on on Zoom is that the that's the exhibit A1 that's that oh you took a picture of yeah yeah great okay um so I mean that really describes the uh you know the site that we've uh We've proposed uh I think we've uh hopefully addressed almost all of the uh technical comments for the application um if you if you go through um I've kind of gone through and highlighted the parts of the reports that I think needed to be addressed because um I was sick the last time that this was scheduled so when we rescheduled it we had the benefit of the board's professionals reports and we did plan revisions to try to address those comments as much as possible and it's fun to go through a report and see has complied has complied has complied so I'm going to try and just go through more often get sick more often no thank you whatever works so I'm gonna go through the reports and the professionals can stop me but I've kind of highlighted the ones that I think need needed some type of comment that they've asked for and starting with Mr Bella's report I think just going right to number 15 back's report is dated July 8 2024 corre yes and he requested um testimony regarding the potential for expansion of the patio or decking areas and that the uh impervious coverage uh calculations included these areas yes so obviously include what we show in the plan in terms of uh patio areas and again as a lease Community it's not going to be one where uh you know the tenants are going to you know be expanding their limits because they don't own it um so you know we don't I don't I don't think we you know have a written restriction but you know the plan you're being presented is the one that's you know uh proposed um so we you know we're not really requesting the ability for any of these individual tenants to be able to further expand uh you know their improvements yeah the owner of the property would have to come back before the board for an amended approval to do any type of expansion outside of what is approved part for the site plan correct yes um and 16 the air conditioning units are proposed and the Landscaping plan depicts trees and shrubs on the inside of each unit buffering should be considered I'm not I you know I mean whether a person stares at one AC unit which is their own or or two um you know the nice thing that we think about this is that you know these are residential air conditioning units uh you know what what was previously proposed was you know you're you know with the office building you had your large commercial you know AC units which were significantly noisier less attractive um you know I don't know that I would think any special need attention would need to be done to a you know residential unit but you know we'll concede to any of the board's requests we don't think that's really necessary however we do not but if the board wants it buffer you'll agree to buffer sure 17 7 foot high privacy fence that's consistent throughout correct correct um 18 he's asking for Testimony regarding the possibility of benches and walking paths on site so you know we we put the sidewalks throughout the uh the community and again there should be a relatively low intensity driving uh development you know this is 24 units is relatively small uh as as these types of uh uh developments you know are concerned uh we weren't proposing any you know large walking trails you know through the development um you know we're kind of separated by our landscaping and the and the storm water systems and you know wouldn't wouldn't really lead anywhere I mean if there was a master plan of some sort with the town to have you know have some sort similar feature on the preserved land it might make more sense but I don't know if there would be much advantage to walking on the outside of this property as opposed to the inside frankly the you know the residents of the single family you know may not care for having people walking closer to the perimeters of their property that would be my interpretation we we' prefer to leave it as is correct um I would just like to comment on that because Wayne's correct in the the Assumption of perhaps the open space as as it is there's no planned Pathways or anything it's it's passive Recreation but that doesn't mean in the future the county or Township may have some PL and um walkways and have it more active so the comment just derived from having a connection from this facility to that County Township where is the county open space won't work it won't work on the screen okay gooss uh this is to the West right here this is the county property so so and to the north the North to the north yeah actually yeah there's there is a strip to the north before you get to the Sewer Authority property which is [Music] further so is there the ability to put some sort of extend the sidewalk from where [Music] that the put a sidewalk from the wellhouse to the to the just to the edge of the lot yeah yes that's what you're looking for yeah sure does we can do it does it make sense to do it if there do you want people walking to the county lot if there's no open space that they can use people can use there well if there's no can use you're not going to walk there but his point is if the county does something with it then to get a sidewalk there you're going to have to approach the landlord the board wants it now it'll be in point and and I guess my point is if you want to encourage ja can't hear you my question is do you want we will'll do it but do you want that people encouraging people to walk in that direction if Wayne what's the county open space used for farming they Farm it that's it actively farmed field as long as I recall yeah I mean I don't think I don't think I believe the Western the Western half I don't know about the northern part the Western half suggesting a sidewalk to the West sues sidewalk to the nor what's on the Northern portion I mean it looks like vegetation I don't see any particular Trail or anything to connect to but are they farming the northern portion it doesn't I can't tell they could because it's preserved farmland if you look at my report on page four there's a a land use map that shows CO2 surrounding with an aerial it looks like there's a farm field to the north and to the west and a um Tree Line perhaps I think the undeveloped portion is much further west than the edge of this property is what it looks like but yeah hearing that assuming that yes going to number 19 signage we're not proposing we're not proposing a a community signage um the only thing that was requested was putting some sort of building numbering uh on the street for emergency purposes so we would do that and the sizing and whatever it would be would be you know subject to zoning but really at the request of the you know any of the OEM professionals who want to weigh in on the application there's no ground correct number 20 again we're doing the building numbers correct number 21 Basin responsibility will be the responsibility of the owner of the property correct uh 22 on Ro name Road names uh we provided some options and but again whatever the township 22 uh whatever the township picks whether it's our list or theirs you know that's fine we and we'll coordinate with everybody regarding addresses 24 testimony regarding Landscaping I think we'll get that to that um with uh John Thomas's report uh yeah I mean but we did we did make the changes to avoid any utility conflicts and the I think so [Music] we're not supposed to touch it that's what I've been told if we want to open a door we can open a door we'll let the hot air in that might actually work I want an extra five minutes on my application that's okay the last thing to address I think in Mr Bella's report is just the attachment of the environmental commission uh the majority of the comments basically revolve around our storm water plan uh which again was reviewed um by the board engineer um we did provide an on andm manual was with our original submission for whatever reason it can't be found so we'll we'll resubmit that but uh there's when the original one was developed they didn't have an operations in maintenance manual but we we're going to prepare one anyway uh for the facility moving forward uh we've already done so um you know with regard to you know the rules that we're operating under um you know we are not proposing to modify these basins to meet current standards I think inherently what we're proposing is the benefit to storm water you know less impervious and cleaner impervious I don't think beyond that um you know we we really need to modify something that's already been approved and and you know as far as I know doesn't create any drainage impacts today is there some requ no there's no requirement I have a question the njp regulations that it be upgraded there is not I have question and maybe it's just uh trying to learn they mentioned G1 GI green infrastructure yeah so how is that relevant or not relevant in what I don't know you're an expert so I can only ask sure generally you're using green infrastructure to provide water quality but we have existing dirty impervious and it's going to be basically cut substantially down so because we don't have any new dirty impervious we don't trigger the if you create a quarter acre of dirty impervious you need green infrastructure and water quality but because we're not creating any and we're actually reducing it it's not required okay you guys are okay with that yeah I was speak that but yeah essentially what what what Mr Ingram just said is is is correct the current regulations the actually application as it's uh proposed actually meets the current requirements uh this is one of those situations where they actually benefit from having that existing imperious constructed and having the existing storm water management system constructed the the requirements basically say that you have to if you exceed more than one acre um of disturbance you have to demonstrate that you don't increase runoff at all along the 24-hour hydrograph or you you reduce the peak rate of runoff by certain percentages in thisa uh instance that drainage basin actually attenuates runoff to the point where in the as long as you don't increase impervious the rates are not not going to be increased by uh because the Bas and actually controls the water so so there's no requirement to manage the runoff beyond that they actually don't increase runoff and I totally agree with what you said is based on the current environment correct this is going to be much better oh yeah absolutely cor quality of water and all that yeah and then same thing with water quality because they have existing impervious they have a net decrease in impervious so they don't just just by the fact of decreasing the the motor vehicle surface significantly decreasing the motor vehicle surface they're actually increasing uh improving water quality thank you John did something right not if you ask me depends on your perspective going to Mr dar's report which is dated I just have one one comment and one question uh the Fire Marshall report everything has been satisfied yes and County uh report the latest we have on file is from March 13 2024 and it disapproves the application I I was just wondering if there's been any other Memo from from them no we did have conversations with them though about it to explain they just basically didn't understand why we were doing certain things and not and then we kind of explained to them the history of the project and how it exists we and you know part of what we did was we gave him the storm water report that we subsequently prepared for the board and as far as we know they're satisfied with uh with the responses so you know we're confident that uh we'll get an approval from them without modification board's legally the board has to impose a condition subject to County approval board does not need County approval to gr approval the board can't deny approv don't have okay thank you going to Mr dar's report of July 11th 2024 I'm going to skip right to uh General comment number two on page four and I think we provided that testimony that it's um what improvements can be constructed without return to the board there's none because this is going to be owner uh it's going to be owned it's not going to be a condominium or homeowners association um so there won't be a minum plat for recordation purposes um number skipping then because there's a whole lot of has complied or satisfactorily addressed you guys yes thank you very much for that number five F yeah 5B yes um yeah we are requesting uh the Rel waiver uh with regard to the 4 foot offset um you know again I I think the intent was that you kind of stagger your units if you look at how we've kind of laid it out I mean you know we're creating some relief on those frontages with the inset for the doors so I think we're we're you know maybe requires relief but I think we're kind of complying with the intent um but we'll also let our our architect show you the uh the renderings uh to you know to explain what the visuals are which may uh you know Aid in your anyone know the int behind having that requirement is I mean it's it's intended for architectural Le so you don't have flat the sides um so they do essentially meet it but not at the at the two unit it's it's the joint yeah between the two is not but like we have relief between the garages there's a setback and then there's a further step back so again I think we meet the intent the intent of the of that at least in my opinion the intent of that requirement is met by the fact that you do have recesses in the building so you don't have some a big length side so I think intent that dep is not the actual okay number six we addressed about site signage number seven testimony regarding the mailbox structure and possible obstruction of site distance so I mean we picked a location that we thought we wanted to keep it somewhat centrally located I I don't personally believe there's much where is that can you show us uh I believe you're right uh just as you pass the intersection um was where that was going to be located so you know if you were coming to the te and this was was a full Road I think you'd have more of a concern with you know cars coming by but you know you're you're talking at that point of only four units ped it and they're going to be going like five miles an hour out of their driveway um I don't really see that being a like a sight triangle issue it's walk it down [Music] so again our Our intention was to put it there so that we had uh you know somewhat centrally located for the for the residents we're not trying to not make them uh walk all the way to the edge of the development to get their mail um we don't really think it's much of a conflict but you know we'll move it if the board requires you show it to engineer [Music] I do agree that that because these are really low volume kind of roadways it's it's less of a concern um the in many developments like this a lot of times the mailbox is sort of closer to the front anyway so folks can sort of stop on their way into the development and get their mailbox get their mail idea for location yeah in the in the in the the front of the development as you come into the development us our only concern was with the entry Drive what we didn't want was people parking their car there to and inconveniencing people yeah I was I was thinking those three parking spaces that you have in the front I suppose somebody pull in there yeah if you want to put we can move it there that's we don't object only issue is I don't know if that's a an issue with a structure being in the front yarder that to to Jeff yeah so that would be a variance relief or once is that is that front yard it would be behind the setback right it's behind the front set back but it's it's the location again if the board thinks it's a better planning idea to put it there that see we don't object and your notice your cat all thank you so you have given us the reason for why it's better where you are proposing Rakesh what do you think why do you think that it's better well only because that way there it's it's not there's no chance of it being an obstruction at all if it's if it's where I where I was indicating maybe put putting it it's it's not a u ifree how about the convenience no not not convenience I always go to the worst case scenario somebody breaking in we're not hearing so I would disagree I would say where Wayne has it is better it's in the development um some stranger coming in and breaking into them um point to I I would not up FR to see if so I don't know what they're going to do whether they're going to Grant the application deny the application what I do I need good notes so either way I know what to put in the memorializing resolution so anytime we have an issue like this I'm trying to figure out okay if there's an approval is this going to be a condition or not so you'll hear me at time saying can you straw call people to see what what they think about the mailbox location assuming there's an approval but that doesn't mean there's going to be an approval James U I like your point of having leave it where it leave it where it is yeah leave it where it is further in all right I actually have another thought um I my parents live in a senior uh Independent Living Community and they have benches um outside and they have benches down by where their mail is collected and they are always completely occupied it's like you have to fight for a spot because that's um so important to the quality of life the emotional well-being of the residents to be able to interact with each other and they always sit together and they're always saying hello to each other and they they you know are uh greeting each other because they have take that moment to sit there and do it um so I would like to see um the mailboxes be located in a spot where you can also put a couple of benches that would enable that social ation and I was looking at a different spot actually sort of heading along the sidewalk toward where the wellhouse is where would that be that would the well pump kind of that sidewalk heading toward the well pump can you take this again and show everyone where the wellhouse is we got it yeah we got we got it got it we got it you guys know where the wellhouse is yeah I think we're talking about right here the north top of the can can everyone look Wayne's pointing to where the well yeah yes so you're talking about putting the mailboxes there with some benches yes if um you know that's sort of a a spot where it's it's tucked out of the way but it gives people sidewalk access it might just require um you know a little shaging with how those benches are arranged but I think you need like three I would I would recommend behind the parking spaces on the other side because that unit you would have people in their in that person's backyard so you're saying you see a sidewalk I'm saying the parking spaces that are back there if you put them behind there I love that idea actually because um then you just put a sidewalk along the edge so that people can get to the benches and the mailboxes but I guess what about like the mail person who's doing it they have to go and how are they turning around like at least at this spot it's easier for them to turn around so that they can fill it and leave spot yeah so can you drop all yourselves on just wait before that uh is it possible what bench is where you're proposing right now yes would that suffice what you talking about I think so yes okay okay all right so let's so then the strle would be well let's have a free a free strle not restricting anyone to any particular position okay going back to James what you so this is a St poll on where you want the mailboxes and where do you want benches wherever you want the mailboxes well I don't really care too much where the where the mailboxes are as long as they're somewhat in away from the road but I do want the benches there I agree with James keep in mind these are senior citizens have the hike I live in louder saying that you're a senior citizen I say are you saying that you're a senior citizen yeah barely I came wild back okay um the point is you should be said not near near the back but trying to keep the walking distance from all the units somewhat easy then these are older people who's got a who's got a walker who's got a cave okay can't walk keep that in mind where it's located so you're okay anywhere in the back toward the back of okay and benches Andy I agree with I'm in agreement so I'm going to be more specific based on what I've heard so far you can leave it where you have it and somehow include benches there agreed we have no objection I'm fine leaving it where it is and putting benches wherever it makes sense now let's leave it where it is but add Benes yes or no yes yes yes yes I'm fine with that go we'll leave it where it is and add benches okay good suggestion by the way three benches three frankly think it lends itself to two because it's all the near you want Str pull that you have to keep in mind that's by one person's house too so just make it three benches is a lot thank you two benches two you might want to ask your landscape architectural expert his opinion on this who whoa whoa whoa hold it hold it I think there were two benches facing each other perpendicular to the sidewalk but you created a little space there there's 15 ft between the sidewalk and the building and the mailbox would be there I think it think that would be a nice Amendment okay that great okay thank you going to nine we're proposing private trash pickup um so the idea here is that people you know we're not going to have dumpsters which again talking about benefits of this application we were getting trash enclosures you'd have you know garbage trucks backing up noises like that now we're going to have cans in people's garages they'll bring them to the street they'll get picked up with private hauling um you know so there's no need for a centralized location and that's something that the community or owner will make sure is enforced to all the individuals that live there correct yes and going to page five so number nine is that how you answer number nine yes yes right okay it's private collection no Township you know trash M so there must be there's a requirement that you have trash enclosure so you're seeking a an exception from having the trash enclosure because you're going to have individual trash and recycling in their garages taken out to the street is that correct yes as would be appropriate in a senior development you don't want people having to Pig trash you know we're have to find the ordinance requirements I I didn't see it in a report but I believe there's a requirement for a trash enclosure on a on a site plan application yeah we we didn't see that noted but to the extent that there's an ordinance requirement for it we would ask for a waiver for those reasons let me just get this down can I go to number 12 not yet I don't think you have to if it's a townhouse because it has garages but I could be wrong okay ready item 12 is uh you know did you guys get comment hold on 296 75 J yep number 12 it's going to be private road and we would Grant uh title 39 Authority correct correct and going to um sp6 we will do that site plan six if a street name sign is proposed at the intersection its location should be depicted we will depict the sign correct and site plan number nine uh waiver from the sidewalks I think we've already testified to that reasons why the reason for the waiver not skip ahead but since we're on it is because since there aren't any other sidewalks around just to enforce that requirement for no good purpose is not is impracticable impra correct to be specific that that particular item was discussing sidewalk along the the parking stalls not not external sidewalk um so so it's the that's showing on yeah so I I guess I guess the the point I'm sorry if I misunderstood would be to bring it around to the edge of the parking stalls we just kind of thought it was excess impervious that we really didn't need because you know it's not like you had if you get to the end of the stall that's where you're going you want to get you know if you're parking there you immediately want to turn and go to the residences you're not going to walk forward to walk left yeah we just don't think they're going to be used given given the layout and the size of the development I I wholly agree uh but it is a waiver okay um going to page six the sanitary sewer maintenance issue uh so again it's going to be private um you know everything on site would be our responsibility but you know we'll defer to any requirements the MUA may have for easements but I I don't know if they would require one since it's all part of our private which which item is this what uh 10 under the grading and utility and drainage I think that was I mean I assume that was more related to if we were you know selling these as units out had an HOA which is not the case right um and going to page seven number two the omm manual we did prepare it I I believe it was turned in but we we're happy to provide it again we did prepare it for the site and I think that's it for Mr dar's report I just have one question about sidewalks and just making sure that everything is like handicapped accessible and that there aren't any there aren't going to be any issues with that we can't we can't hear you just making sure that the sidewalks and everything are handicap accessible just not knowing the individuals who will be there but just want to clarify that that yes everything should be uh easily accessible it's a it's a relatively flat site as I said it was you know it's already been graded out to be flat so we don't have any excessive slopes yeah I have one more question too um so if any of the residents are taking advantage of our link service um it's intended that the link van would pull into the driveway to pick up residents if they were using it either that or again with the T intersection we have at the back I mean it's very easy for somebody to make a left back up and pay turn out um in in either way um you know I think we have we we've shown here like a you know basically the the the Township Fire Tru circulating through there so if the fire truck can do it soak in the lake and there won't be any parking on the streets just given the size of them that's correct we we exceed the parking requirements for this development we wanted to make sure that we weren't deficient you know with that with respect to miss Caldwell's report I don't think we need to address it now because all that is planning testimony unless there's anything in particular from a site layout we want to discuss now but she does a really good job of outlining the relief that we need and the standard of law so [Music] great thank you thank you so Steve uh as far as the appendix a of Jessica's report who is going to address that because there's some benefits there of what I see yeah that's that's all the planning arguments that'll be kind of the end of our yeah what I'm going to do we're just actually doing engineering now and then we'll call the architect and then we'll come back on the planning how about septic system who's going to address we the sewer sewer we we had we had edus associated with the office development and we're going to utilize those they've been transferred to the applicant and we're reducing the sewer flow from that's what I wanted to make sure I read it right yeah we have we have all the required capacity s uh senior housing is a lower demand than regular so it it you know allows this to work with a reduction sounds good thank you quick question M talk about a wellhouse these units can someone pull that microphone J I'm sorry no I'd like to know I must have missed but how are you going to provide water Serv water so we have a we have a well there's already been well testing was done for the prior application we're using less water than was approved for the wells that already exist and we're installing a wellhouse which will provide the pressure in the community and then for firefighting water we have an underground tank in the front that meets your your ordinance with regard to size has there any consideration been given J public order we did look into it it's very distant it's in Readington so you would have to bring it across the river and down everyone over here is on well there water service further down no further up north the corner of name Street I I lived in another room development Water Service yeah I mean we we had everything in everything on l Road is Wells everything across the street is Wells I mean if it's in it wasn't there water line comes down all road from that from the south yeah from the south I mean we contacted the utility company they told us where it would come from and how far away it was that was they're the ones that told us it was in Readington across the river that was their line that's what they said tell you what Jim you want them to check it out but irregardless we we have we have the wells we have the capacity and we have the water tank okay taking Wells taking World 24 units could affect the home runers in the surrounding area if you want to argue it out go for it or you could just check it out and see if that's right or wrong if it's wrong it's moo and if it's right you can argue with out next time but if you want to argue this time go ahead argue that that's fine we we'll take a look but the reality is the I I just think it is important to note that there was a full well testing performed with multiple Wells and a draw down for the office development they proved to the board at that time that a much more intense water demand at that time did not impact the neighbors's wells and those Wells were approved they approved to the planning board under your ordinance so none of these guys witnessed that or heard any of the testimony just so you know where he's coming from yep so um we got uh John Morgan Thomas's report uh dated July 18th 2024 and I love all that has complied and the last in uh statement was on plant selection uh for two of the plant substitutions which we're willing to do thank you we'd like to see the here not e a lot of your points do our best um and I think that's it for the uh professionals reports I just have one question Wayne can you provide an um a visual of what the 30,000 gallon tank is going to look like is it I I know it's underground is there a fire hydrant at the top of it I mean I'm sorry I just there a it's like a stand pipe basically with with a hose connection so that they would tap into it and EV vent you know that there's those two pipes that stick up out of the ground other than that it's like it's just a giant plastic septic tank that's 10 times anything you've seen yeah thank you I think those stand pipes only stick up like three four feet correct yeah y seen them okay do the professionals have any other questions I do not does the board members have any other questions anybody in the audience have question for this witness please come up to the microphone please provide your name and your address and you'll need to spell your name and again remember this is questions only of this witness at this point okay can you please spell your name my my name is Don Barnacle spell your last name b a r n i c k l thank you much and I live at three Wells Road Wayne very thorough presentation I I I really enjoyed it but I do have a couple of questions um you say that uh it's going to be the going to be rented and the question I have is is there going to be on-site management one of the units going to be dedicated that's a really good question make sure everyone hears it the the question is is there going to be on-site management of the facility is one of the units going to be dedicated to a site manager or a rental office so yeah no we are not proposing okay so it'll be done it'll be done remotely correct and the question the followup question to that is um if there is no on site how are you going to prevent let's say uh senior citizens from kind of unofficially subletting their uh additional bedrooms yeah that that would be a violation of the lease ter Steve correct he wants to know how would you prevent it not that it would violate the lease how I'm getting to that because it would be in their lease terms and so if there's any type of subletting of um the units the landlord would have the ability toce that either by eviction right he understands that he wants to know how would you know if not I would say what's going to happen in these communities is the neighbor's not going to be happy about it the neighbors is going to call landlord and say I think he's doing something you shouldn't be doing and they're going to resolve it I don't know that having a person there full-time does much of a better job relasing it than not I know I know with my parents they had a homeowners association in a senior development uh and and they did definitely police uh you know what was going on but I just wanted to know what was going to be proposed for this uh site uh another question for you and that is you is it possible to enforce something on that one based on what he's suggesting you guys that's how you process you can only you can only enforce things if you're made aware of an issue I mean you know it's it's like any other zoning ordinance or anything it it you do your best you can well there are certain communities where even if you don't have uh there would be a random check or some process to do it I hate to be invasive into people's homes to Knocking door how are you doing is whatever you have to fill out a form that says like how many people are in your home or whatever it is when you have a HOA but then you have that in a lease agreement okay we wouldn't be able to enforce it in you you have a lease that identifies who the tenants are and who the occupants are okay it's not HOA but it's part of the lease yeah okay the definition of the definition of seniors is that 55 or is that 65 a good another good question believe 55 okay so they you may have some much younger people than you know the board is thought gee they'll be people in Walkers and people with canes and so but you actually may have much more active seniors that location okay thank you and then uh the next question you have uh 12 guest spaces for 24 units parking spaces what happens when people want to come in and visit mom and dad or grandma and grandpa where's the Overflow parking going to go since old York there's no parking on Old York I can either see either Litton or Wells being used as parking places I mean as I said I think what we you know we tried to exceed the parking requirements for housing um so you know we didn't provide just the minimum I mean we we thought again that you know we we meet all the state requirements for housing and how they dictate you break it up so you know you can't just count a garage and a driveway the requirement is that you provide those amount of public spaces you know because inevitably you know people may have those visitors who can't do one of those two so you know based on the state's you know requirements and the town's ordinances we provide the the amount that's been deemed acceptable right and and where will we FL so it's a holiday and everyone's coming in for Thanksgiving or uh Christmas or one of the other the holidays where's the Overflow parking going to be we we don't have I mean we're not allowing street parking um there you know there is no overflow parking here okay I think that's it for me thank you thank you anyone else hi my name is Donna Hart forer I live on TS court and can you spell your last name please yeah it's h a r t i f o e r s d r okay thanks um so my question is um you answered the previous gentleman is the age definitively 55 or you think it's 55 I believe it's 55 I mean she wants to know not believe can you ask your client is it 55 or is it 60 or is it 65 she wants to know 55 55 okay and so these units these 24 units from what I understand are two and three bedroom residences is there a limit to the occupants in each residence it could be done as part of the lease but no we weren't like asking to restrict the number no okay so there's no criteria and what is the criteria for application for these leases that's up to that's up to the owner we haven't come up with you know lease terms it's not really the subject of the board's um you know review well listen if I mean is the proposal for senior housing over 55 or not yes yes okay so it's a legitimate question what's how do you what's the criteria and do you have the application form what who's looking for what to make sure that the people that are renting there are 55 older or more that's what she's really asking well I mean that is the requirement of of the community we're we're coming in saying it's 55 and over that that's part of they're gonna have to prove like any other she so she wants to know what's the mechanism to make sure that the it would be at the application process that they they would have to provide that to the owner he would review the application to make sure they met the criteria all right but you're not telling me what the criteria again is you're saying they're going to have to fill out their name names and their and their ages okay and there's no limit to the number of occupants in each unit uh no okay so I would ask this board I know there's been a few I think misrepresentations it seems like nobody is really aware of what the previous use or the previous application was for I moved here but is that correct or I think we got to do that at comments we're we're GNA wait for you when you're at the end you'll be able to make your comments under Oaths right now it's only questions for this witness okay but I do have I do have questions he referenced the previous meeting with John aldri the owner where multiple homeowners were there in support of a change in application right he he did say that so why don't we ask him what year was that around 2006 no uh 200 probably 2003 based on the resolutions that were referenced okay yeah it could be I thought it was a little bit later what board was that in front of I believe that was the zoning board my point is there's a lot of speculation here there's hold on The Office application was earlier that was planning board then he came in to make it some sort of a Housing Development which was not a permitted use he was asking for a use VAR I was here and the board adopted a resolution in 2006 resolution 20065 which dismissed yes the bifurcated D1 variants for residential units yes which board this board thank you yeah which is exactly what he testified what so what your what is your so my question is I I don't I'm sure I could ask for it but he insinuated that there were a lot of residents here in support of that and I would yeah Wayne you did test just so you know you testified I said some were in support and I know that because my parents were in support and I was in support but I'm not I don't I can't speak to everyone in the room in their feeling can I can I weigh in here yeah it's my advice to the board is totally irrelevant on whether residents were in favor or not in favor back in 2006 and you shouldn't have even mentioned it Wayne because by mentioning it you opened the door to get asked questions about it but it's irrelevant irrelevant all right I also have a question regarding the acreage you stated that it's a six acreage property and it meets the 3 Acre requirement is that does it meet the 3 Acre requirement for the what was originally proposed for that space or the new requirement for 24 homes okay so hold on hold on hold on what's relevant my opinion to the board is what is the minimum lot size requirement today three acres 424 residential unit it's three acres it's it's not tied to how many oh it's not okay it's not tied to how many units now is there a density requirement in the ordinance no the answer is because residential is not allowed in the zone that's why they need a a D1 use variance okay because what they're proposing is not allowed in the zone that's why there's not going to be anything in the ordinance about how many units you can have on what's the acreage of the six so there's going to be nothing in the ordinance about how many units you can have on this six acre lot because the units aren't allowed in the first place okay um I have another question regarding I'm not testifying that's my legal opinion okay I have another question you also made a statement saying that um what was originally proposed was much for a much higher traffic Demand yet do you know what it was originally approved for when I moved here in 25 2005 through the open public records act I reviewed as much as I could regarding lighting Air Handlers Etc at that time and I this I'm asking this committee to verify this it was for business use business hours only Monday through Friday nothing at night no traffic on weekends so my question to him is you made a statement saying the proposal for the previous application was for a much higher traffic demand is that true yes okay okay can you just even though we're going out of order a little take the microphone identify yourself the date on your memo and can you please read it even though I know you're cross-examining Wayne but this is the board's traffic engineering expert and I'm not taking anything away from Wayne he's a civil engineer expert and he's a planning expert but Mr Troutman is a traffic engineering expert yes uh Jay Troutman I'm the board's traffic consultant and part of my review was to calculate the peak hourly trip generation for the residential units which is 13 in the morning peak hour 8 in the afternoon peak hour and nine on a weekend peak hour uh the next thing I did was I calculated the trip generation for the previously approved office space 75 trips in the AM peak hour 71 trips in the afternoon peak hour and 26 trips on a weekend peak hour okay so when you did that what conclusion do you draw from that uh the conclusion is that uh the proposed application is a much lower traffic generator okay I guess my point is this gentleman inferred that it was approved for hotels and and things like that where I I don't think he did I believe what he was referring could have been a much higher traffic Demand right because I believe he was saying it some permitted uses might have a higher traffic demand you might want to ask him which permitted uses would have a higher traffic demand he did he did say some permitted uses would have a higher traffic demand but he didn't say which ones I asked him separately what are the permitted uses in the zone and he answered my question research Labs indoor Recreation hotels and motels offices and child care so why don't you asking which of those permitted uses would have higher traffic generation than proposed if you built out any of those to what's permitted in the ordinance every single one of those would have a substantially higher traffic demand we're our the floor area ratio in this zone is 75% we're at 13.3 if you covered you know 75 you know what is it essentially uh you know four acres of of you know usable occupiable space in any of those uses traffic would be intense and I guess my question would be would that even be more this is less traffic than if it was in 9 to5 Medical Offices Monday through Friday even having 24 units with no limit on occupants the key is is is really as uh you know the traffic engineer testified is the is the peak hours so you don't generally have sen you know 24 senior units are not all heading out during rush hour if you have Office Buildings your your morning Rush your afternoon Rush are going to be very impactful compared to you know the fewer trips a day generated by you know retired people who generally don't leave in the middle you know or during those peak hours to avoid that the occupants are 55 and above would you think that they what is the limit for children there's there's retirement places in the township across from Aspen I I don't remember the name of them but there's I'm sorry um I guess in in addition to what I was asking before is what are the requirements for the applicants that are there are they going to have small children is there a guideline in regards to having older children teenagers more when you guys come back can you bring information about the expected tenants and occupants yeah especially if there's like anything regarding schooling anything regarding schooling to like if someone were to be there I think there is a limitation that they can only be there for a certain period of time but if they're following the 55 and older guidelines there are guidelines I understand so I but rather than board members telling them what the guidelines are put it on the applicant to look it up and Report that's fine we'll come back with that you also stated that the sewage is less of a demand because of elderly people um and this is a question I guess for the board too not a question for the board okay it's a question for the guy who testified and then later you make comments to the board when it's that part of the hearing so then when you made the assessment regarding the public sewers whether they could accommodate the residents in 24 units what number of people did you it on it's not based on the number of people it's based on the number of units so and it's this is State prescribed requirements and that's how edus are calculated so different uses have different what is an edu uh equivalent dwelling unit so that's how sewerage is is given capacity within the township you know you have a certain amount office is based on the square footage units is based not there's a you know um if you're in a regular apartment there's a there's a number and if there's a senior apartment it's a different number that's lower so just you know as as our capacity goes this this project requires less edus from the sewer and and that was confirmed by the RTM that's correct that's correct just just as didn't hear you that's correct I have another question regarding building this much on such a small prop I know it's 68 but between the footprint of the buildings the parking lot Etc has it been evaluated the runoff to the homes in that area because a lot of the homes do flood and I would have to go take a consensus to state but there are homes in that neighborhood that flood and is this going to make so do this flood worse put it in terms of a question are you aware that there's some homes in the area that flood first of all yes my basement flooded when I lived next door 10 times we lost everything we own but hold it hold it then her next question is so what is being proposed here so that doesn't increase flooding on the neighboring home the the issue a lot of the issue of flooding is the poor permeability of the soils but I mean the reality here is that we had a fully designed storm water system that's been built for the site for the impervious that's already there we are reducing the impervious from what already exists so you're not going to have any drainage impacts from the project because we're actually making it better so I guess my last question is you said you live next door to this property looked out your window seeing the black top where was that because the people whose backyards are directly looking at this property are here and online I I'll show you I live right my parents still live right there our the sewer EAS of this property runs through their property you're saying Wayne that from there you can see the black up on the site sure could good it again this is Steve he was my neighbor right here no that's my other neighbor are you saying this sounds correct is sorry 5.35 yes so Mr Ingram what's the lot and block your parents houses block 74 lot 5.35 and your test testimony is from that house you can see the black top yes if it's questions only I can't comment that's testimony not being captured okay what that's his testimony and when it's time for you guys to make your comments I'm going to swear you guys in and you'll testify okay thank you okay any more questions from the public and um we're getting close to we're going to need a break uh hold on hold on please yeah okay so we're gonna take a break for and why don't we also Mr gromberg can you consult with your other client and what figure out what time you want to knock off to give your other client well we were supposed to knock off 10 minutes ago so I know yeah we're ready to switch now okay so how many more we have two more individuals how many more questions for this witness three and and there are members on zoom four is there anybody on Zoom that has questions just let me know there's about at least three you have questions okay so this would be the appropriate time in my opinion to knock off take a break for our Bo sonographer continue this hearing everyone's going to get the question Mr Ingram at the continued hearing which would be when [Music] Steve I could put you on for September 5th so now do you guys can you guys do September 5th I can do September 5th how about Mr Ingram yep so we'll continue when is the time to decide this application up I think I gave an extension through October 31st so we're so how about you extend to November 30th and the board continue the hearing on this application to September 5 with no need for further notice how's that sound the extension can't hear you the extension's granted that's fine thank you so for all the individuals in the audience that means that there'll be no notice that the next meeting will be September 5th and we'll get your questions in first and I believe there's three or four here and I believe about three there's three people online that want question question that I know of okay so we have quite a bit of questions okay time right thank you done calling the meeting back to order um just to let everyone know that this is recorded and tayor I think if anyone wants to listen to the recording it's on YouTube YouTu yes the recording will be posted on our YouTube page you can find it um when you go to the township websites rn-t.com under the board's page you'll click on the board of adjustment and to the end of the page there's a frequently Asked question section and you'll see recordings and there's a little blue link that says click here and it'll bring you to the um board's meetings page and both the planning board and board of adjustment meetings are recorded and posted hopefully the following day so yeah and just so everyone knows the board stenographer is for the board and if someone wants to order a transcript Bo this is not like a deposition where someone go up there and say oh can you give me a readback that doesn't happen she's taking down a transcript in case someone wants to order it which mean they have to pay for it that that's things are posted on up on YouTube so everyone if you want to hear what was said to refresh your collection or whatever you just go on your computer click and you can watch and here hopefully that will help anybody that has any questions thank you so much okay okay you ready I'm ready I'm not okay boa case number oh I'm sorry um Lind just just say it and then and then I'll the announcement boa case number 04202 24 applicant 207 Everett Monsanto properties LLP location block 86 Lots 3 and four 207 Everett Road applications for a minor subdivision with preliminary and final ma major site plan D variance and C variance for a proposed contractor's yard and please note on the record that Lindsay cool BR gel has recused herself from this application okay thank you good evening madam chairperson stepen Gruenberg Gruenberg law office on behalf of the applicant last year on May 16th and um we presented a testimony of Mr Penta and Mr Ingram we got through a lot of Mr Ingram's testimony and some questions had been raised by the board um that we wanted to address so on May 20th 2024 I sent a letter to the board providing you with the information regarding the Rao um uh with respect to the environmental cleanup and the satisfactory cleanup on the 100 and concrete site I also provided you with the information you requested pertaining to the jcpnl easements indicating that we are not prohibited from using the property as that portion of the property as proposed um Mr Ingram's office also submitted directly to the board information with respect to the septic and the County Health Department's approval of our permit with which he'll go into a little bit more detail on and I know the questions had been asked with respect to impervious coverage drainage and the existing piles on site and Mr Ingram will have some exhibits and we'll provide testimony on that so my intention this evening is to present Mr Ingram's testimony to address those remaining questions of the board from the last meeting and then present yeah go on with the testimony of our traffic expert and planner here who was sworn everybody was sworn last time okay Mr who was the other William William masel our traffic engineer and Henry hinterstein our planner and Mr Ingram okay and all the board professionals at this table you guys were all sworn last time yes okay and actually for the record too I apologize Jim Ferrero was not at the first hearing he has watched the taping of it and he has signed his affidavit so he is eligible vote if there's a vote tonight great thank you thank you for doing that too we appreciate that um so Mr Ingram um we you just heard me talk about the uh issues that we needed to address why don't you talk about the septic issue sure uh so at the board's request uh you know to look at the existing septic and its ability uh to remain uh we did an analysis we provided it to the health department which basically compared what the site was approved at originally to what we're proposing today uh They concluded as we did uh that there's no increase in demand from the use so that you know what was existing is the same as what is proposed therefore there's no requirement to replace the septic the septic was inspected it's a basically a very long lateral uh system uh they put a camera down it it's dry it's operating um so there was no unsatisfactory condition that requires it to be changed the only thing they did ask us to do was if we would um not that there was anything wrong with it but they said you know could you replace the tank with a one that meets current code and get at the right distance from the well and he said yes we we'll do that so that's a repair permit application to just replace the existing tank um but other than that they we provided them the construction referral and they signed off on it to say that the the system is legal and can make um with respect to the impervious coverage and the drainage uh you prepared some exhibits that we presented to the board yes we uh provided the attached exhibit which again I believe was emailed to the board it's can we see can you uh now which one is this Wayne proposed drainage area plan dated okay 62424 and I have hard copies I will be handing them out to you all and for those online I will be putting it on the screen in a couple minutes thank you anyone in the public on this application other than on there are members on Zoom there are members on Zoom so I'm going to [Music] take it doesn't matter in the room and what exib number this would be 82 you're handing out two things so we have a site plan exhibit and we have a proposed drainage area plan so which is which is exhibit A2 and which is A3 this is A2 is the proposed R are we may not even need the other one depending [Music] so the proposed drainage area plan exhibit is dated June 25 20124 correct June 24 24 this says 25 it says June 25 24 okay my bad it's yeah yep okay okay um and the purpose of this exhibit and this was something we did as part of our drainage analysis but really we're just blowing it up to explain to everybody because there was a concern raised about uh you know the flooding that occurs on on never it's road further down so we in our report we documented what the different drainage areas are on our site and you know about 50% of our developed portion basically either goes to the rear where we have the wetlands in the back or uh what you can kind of see on on the map is there's kind of a sweeping Arc uh on the western side of the property uh which is a construed Swale which basically takes a lot of that drainage cuts it off and sends it to the back so we're all feeding the same stream we have a tributary here the larger branch is here but a good portion of our runoff is is heading to the smaller tributary which is not what's causing any of the flooding on everage road we do have a drainage area which goes to the front that area is only going to be smaller impervious than it is today so our proposal was basically to work within the limits of what was already existing in that area and when we were out there we actually also uh uncovered uh which we highlighted in red uh on the North End was just some even additional impervious so when we we started clearing things out you know if you go back historically here the impervious was basically right up to the road they had bins they had you know all the the material storage was all up on the street years ago so the remnants of all that are still there it's it's overgrown but it's still impervious underneath so you know it hasn't changed what we're proposing in terms of where we're going to but as part of what we're doing we're going to take all those structures out and restore the area a exhibit A2 is now being broadcast on Zoom is that correct so again in essence you know the only drainage area that goes to the frontage we are not the major contributor to your flooding on ever Road that's related more to the capacity of the covert and and what goes into the stream but what's coming off our site that goes down ever's road to it is reduced in the app without any further for attenuation I'm sorry Wayne did you say that there was I'm sorry bad day um did you say that there is materials that are bordering ever roow today that you're going to clean up correct if if you look at the the highlighted area here you can kind of see it on the exhibits but there's there's old concrete pads okay show thiss better okay yeah so maybe the plans or yeah go let's go to exhibit let's get exhibit A3 enter yeah that's going to be a site plan exhibit dated June 25 2024 that's the second thing that Taylor handed out 83 yeah okay thank you this is a site Clan exhibit dated 62524 so um St is correct you can kind of see it in the exhibit you know if you go off the edge of uh what we're Paving you can kind of see these these concrete you know structure areas which you know the remains of block walls and concrete pads where they used to put the material storage from the concrete PL okay and you're going to remove those correct and you know again you come out to where our driveway is all that is just halfhazard rvel and impervious we're we're going to just tighten it up and bring it to a defined RVE so it's not a massive change but you know there's going to be less impervious than there is today there was questions by the board about existing piles on the site can't hear you wait too there was questions from the board at the last meeting with respect to existing piles on the property um what did your investigation show and a lot of that is just kind of the confusion over what piles always being referred to because again originally there were piles in the rear area that's currently uh impervious that were stock piles of recycled material those were primarily removed there are two Remnant piles there really what's going to happen is we we're just going to level those out because it's the same material we're going to put down as base for for the for the project so we're going to take these piles which you know I don't know between four and 8 feet in height and they're not large and just spread them out to meet the grades that we have in the plan that's the minor let ask Jeff do you have any pictures or anything of these piles I do I have I'd like to submit as an exhibit and pass out that's okay show it to them yes these are [Music] representative going be one and let's give one to speak one Wayne and the other yes you don't I'll keep talking while while those were getting passed out but uh if you look on the first page um the more relevant piles I think we were concerned about are the ones we highlighted on [Music] pictures on and the most the I again I think the ones we're mainly concerned about are the ones the South highlighted on A3 uh there's two principal piles there's two much smaller ones um but we have highlighted those areas that's what you see in in the first picture of Jeff's report uh like the other piles they're they're basically processed material piles so there's some Stone and then there's some recycled concrete um and you're allowed to recycled concrete it it would be our base but I'll be honest what you have here is more than we're probably going to need maybe so but in any event these piles have been here dating back prior to the PSG application um you know at least 10 years um they actually uh did it with some intent and design because if you go across the back of them where it borders the Wetland there's a super Sil fence built so they put that up along the the you know the concerned area and then they built the pile inside of that can can you explain to the board what super silk fence means it it I mean silk fence is basically you take a you know a wood wood Stak with you know Fabric in it to prevent that super Sil super Sil fence is the same thing with more of like a metal mesh in it it's more fence it's like a stronger verion photo photo represented yep you can see it in photo three so again Our intention you know we would have removed them already if we didn't want to bring it to the to you first because there's really no nothing stopping us from removing it uh the majority of them are not located within the Wetland areas uh there a portion of the one pile does go into the transition area um but again these were there when they approved the LOI in the first place and nothing was raised now the real it is we don't want them there either we're happy to remove them it doesn't require a permit because we're not actually building anything in the web but we will contact the D before we remove them and let them know hey we have a material stockpile here we don't think anything's wrong with it you already looked it but we're telling you that we're going to get it out of there and restore the area so it still is not requiring of a permit but we will contact them so that they're aware of what we're doing um and again at the end of the day the piles will be gone and the area will be restored we not working back there with the with the [Music] project I think that addresses all the remaining questions that the board had at last meeting that I'm aware of yes just a comment thank you so much for doing that flooding thing and your I I'm satisfied with your I'm satisfied with what you said so thank you for that uh can I ask my colleague uh Randy you had issues about the piles was that addressed [Music] I don't know um Randy can you hear me now yes okay uh with the piles um you sure there's no cement underneath that he's saying even if there is he's saying that that material could be used as a base yeah it's a it's a marketable product it was the same type of thing they were creating at the concrete plant so you know it'll probably go to another job site or something like that if we discover something else underneath everything will be properly dealt with but again they were even here when The Rao was issued so the DP is fully aware that they were there now have you checked other areas for maybe cement being um dumped or buried the cement being buried if we find anything we would we would remove it and restore it you know we don't know for I mean nothing seems to indicate that but if we do find it it would be appropriately removed I have a quick question could you clarify what you meant by remove it and restore it I mean basically we we're going to take it down till we hit native material and then we can you know put back like a native you know seed mix so that you know native vegetation grows back up thanks I appreciate that um I guess my concern would be the compaction that would have taken place with that very heavy material sitting on top of that n native soil for so many years um it it's probably pretty substantially compacted is there anything that can be done to um alleviate that yeah we we can till it and and follow the soil conservation standards for making sure that we've decompacted the soil and that that's that's done as part of the overall Soil Conservation plan but we can make it applicable to the area of restoration thank you Jim Jim hear no no put it like one inch from you move your glasses please now go go my question is when you're talking about removing what you doing I don't think that it is on the question I heard is what do we do with the material well he's repeating maybe I didn't need the money what so again it's a processed material the same as would like when you crush concrete and you resell it and use it as base that's exactly what it is so they just for whatever reason they took the material and instead of selling it they just pile it in the back we don't know why was there before we own the property but um you know so it'll basically assuming that's all it is it's just going to be remarketed and used in other construction projects going to leave the site yes yep whatever we don't need for our parking lot will be removed I'm just curious wait um a question how would you know if there's any um cement how would you find out if there was any cement dumped I mean they're going to when they're loading it out they're going to take an excavator they're going to load it buck bu by bucket and if it continues to fall out as you know crushed material it's recycled concrete if they start hitting larger stuff then they're just going to I mean the the applicant has a Class B recycling facility he'll just take it to his own facility crush it and sell it there so if we find it we're processing it okay got an answer for every question I have a question I wanted to find out kind of where we landed on the on the screen buffer issue and and just to refresh so correct we're we're creating a new lot we have an existing and proposed commercial use on the that the applicant is proposing so along that property line the ordinance requires a type a screen buffer and none is currently proposed and and the new lot presumably has a residential use because you're not speaking we're proposing farming not a residential use at this time if we testified to agriculture yeah we said agriculture in the last meeting because we don't because frankly we don't want to install the buffer is it is it res is is it residentially zoned right property what does the ordinance say residential zone or residential use both right so again our our contention is I don't know why we would need to buffer the limits of our property from property that we're going to own if he decides I mean he's going to farm the proper you need an exception we would need an exception we are requesting it and the reason would be that we you know we don't have a plan for over here we're not if if we came back with an application may you know to the board maybe that would be a better time to ask us what buffer is appropriate if he even decided to put a single family house my argument would be if he wants to try to sell a house that doesn't have enough buffer here he's going to do one of two things he's either going to install it so he can actually sell the house because they don't want to look at this you know or you know he doesn't and the lot will sit there so it would be in his interest to do it but because he owns it we don't know why we should have to buffer at this time given that we don't really know the ultimate use here that's I mean we're not trying to hurt anyone else we just don't want to do it because it might not be beneficial for whatever happens here in the Walmart we'd rather Kick the Can down the road to when it becomes appropriate that's that's the reason so an exception is required in this case yes all right and and there was also a requirement for a type B buffer along the road and do I remember that you you did agree to provide supplemental planting as required to meet that requirement yes I I thought given this the intensity of the mature vegetation I thought rather than come up with a plan what we would like to agree to was to work with you on filling in that with what you deem appropriate you know to meet to meet the kind of screening that we believe is necessary I think that's that's the best way is to do it in the field rather than to put things on a plan I I I I agree and then the last item was relative to the buffer is that as the part of the prior approval of the cell phone tower facility there was a buffer installed at the North no it wasn't installed at the tower it's installed at the uh I'm going to call that the northwest corner of the property there there was a An approved plan with a buffer planting that exists and that should be restored maintained I don't know whether that's your responsibility or the responsibility of the so this is the OWN the their problem the board approves this my recommendation legal advice is you you impose the obligation the Le says do it that be and we I mean that is the area that we did propose like a stagger grow of Evergreens I mean that was we were intending to do that to help that homeowner you think there needs to be more understood the the the planting actually wrapped around the entire Corner along Everett's road because the intention was to uh screen the properties on sunflower Lane that that was the issue at the time the and and the decision was made rather than try to put a an evergreen something a planting at the base of the cell phone tower we put something over in that corner to kind of cut down the angle so i' like to kind of see that and that could be a part of your planting I don't sure we don't object I mean if it's a question of putting it back to what was approved which is probably greater then we'll do that instead yeah and we'll work out who's responsible okay and I just had one last question dad with regard to the compaction which I think we're talking about the area adjacent to the Wetland and and so forth it's in the buffer I mean my recommendation would be you're going to have some big equipment there anyway the only thing that's really going to uncap I think tilling would be insufficient you're going to have big equipment there put a rip a ripper on the back of a big machine and break up the compaction that way we agree okay thank you okay anything else for Mr Ingram I have a quick question I was wondering um I was wondering if there was any U possibility and um I know that with this particular kind of use it would be U probably tricky but to integrate some kind of planting Islands maybe to Define your tenant spaces but most importantly to add some shade kind of um an urban heat island effect reduction I would tell you that unfortunately what would happen if you do that in a facility like this number one they're going to die because the heat from everything around them is just going to kill them number two whatever equipment and things are moving around it's not going to be long before they hit and destroy it um you know I think you know we we chose the limit of what we were doing so that we didn't increase anything over what it already was um so you know at the very least what we can say is the effects of any of that are not changing you know we're not we didn't we didn't want to be greedy and say like you know let's cover the whole sight in this we said let's stick to what it already is um and we think that's you know that's probably the best way to do it it's not like it's an office complex yeah we don't I mean because could you know if it was that's fine yep yep okay anything else I have one question can you please address the access sh shed in concrete area that's on the railroad propt well the shed we don't even know whose shed it is it's on the railroad properties and we haven't used it and I don't know so a shed that's not on your property right it's not our property so I'm just going to say it's I'm I'm not going to take any responsibility for it as the applicant because we don't know anything about it it's not on our lot um it's probably more of an issue for the railroad if they want it gone or they we need to address it you know whatever we don't even know if we have ownership to see if there's anything in the sh nope I don't think it's it's off their property so it's not on them if you want to go out there and see if you can peek in and see what's in the shed I was just confirming that it wasn't part of their no it's certainly not part of our operation we we are not aware yeah okay okay anything else from The Stranger like call Mr Mas hold is there anyone on Zoom can't hear you let me just Che now I hear you if anybody online has any questions please ask now for Mr Wayne Ingram it's probably my mother from the last application Susan Susan see don't have any questions mom you really could see that NOP nothing which she's proud of you like to call Mr Mel on M the spelling of your last name one more time yes that's uh m is and Mary as o William would you please give the board the benefit of your qualifications yeah sure uh so I am a graduate of Steph's Institute of Technology with a bachelor's well slow North North Jersey sorry about that um I'm a graduate of Stevens's Institute of Technology in Hoboken New Jersey I have a professional engineering license in the state of New Jersey I've been practicing for about 16 years now with 12 of that being licensed uh my license is good standing I have spent the entirety of my career uh in transportation and Municipal engineering Fields uh I'm currently the municipal engineer in two different townships up in Morris and Warren counties as well and who's your employer I work with French and pillo Associates same as Mr Ingram okay and what's your engineering specialty my engineering specialty is transportation and Municipal engineering so you are the applicant's traffic engineering expert I am yes okay I offer him as an expert in that field we look Che Mr maso can you give the board the benefit of your evaluation of this site and the traffic impacts that might result sure so I prepared a report dated January 11th 2024 which was a traffic impact report for the site um as part of that we compared the pre-existing concrete plant facility to the proposed use by the applicant um the unfortunate typically we would use trip generation rates which are contained in one of two sources the njdot has ones from their Highway access permit system and then the Institute of Transportation engineer which is a National Organization has ones that they publish as well these are all Based on data that has been collected by various Traffic Engineers over decades um what they do is they provide land use codes for different types of land uses and they say well here is either a straight multiplication or a formula to determine you how much traffic that particular land use is going to generate in peak hours and throughout the course course of entire days what we do is we will take the trip generation from the prior approved land use and set that as a Baseline and then take the proposed use and say okay what's the Delta between those two um that's going to be the impact between what was at that site and what is now being proposed uh unfortunately neither NJ doot or it has a specific concrete plant land use code so we had to use what we considered to be the closest land use code to that um that was a specialty trade contractor it's actually the same land use code that the proposed use fits under since the size of the building is not being changed the Delta is zero in that particular instance we also took a look at just thinking about the operations of that former use uh concrete plant it you have trucks coming in uh bringing materials you have trucks coming out pick up concrete so we took a look at an intermodal truck terminal as well thinking that the operations might operate a little more similar to that what it does did is it actually raised that prior existing use trip generation so to be more conservative we stuck with the specialty trade contractor um but in reality that prior approved use might have a little bit of a higher traffic uh generation than what we actually used in our analysis we wanted to be a little more conservative so as I mentioned because the size of the building isn't changing because the land use codes aren't changing um the site the only difference we had in the proposed use is we took a look at that underlying zoning of being single family residential and said all right that separate lot that we are piecing out what's the trip generation associated with that in the AM peak hour that comes out to be two trips in the PM peak hour that comes out to be two trips um over the course of an entire day 12 plus hours 172 trips um on weekends it goes up a little bit but there is some anomalies in both the it and the apps that actually puts your weekend peak hours somehow higher than what they anticipate you generating all day it's a very odd situation when you're dealing with only one home as you increase the number of single family homes you're devel in that rectifies itself but so ultimately what we concluded is that there is a insignificant increase in traffic from this proposed development is this location of this uh property very convenient because it has access to Route uh 20231 just to the east yes I would agree with that and and at a traffic signal controlled intersection correct correct a quick question you've seen J troutman's report dated May 14 2024 correct I have yes look at under his comment number four do you agree with his conclusion that the proposed use will generate higher traffic than a permitted use in the zone but the same or less traffic than the prior concrete plant use yes I would agree with that okay but what you're saying is even though it will generate higher traffic than a permitted use you're saying it's at an insignificant increase that is correct the NJ do actually defines what they consider to be they're at 100 trips a day yeah they're at 100 we're at a quarter of that PE out I understand yeah um there are a couple other things I can address in uh Mr troutman's letter um if you like might as well I think that's the best use of time all right so uh item number three um you know we agreed with the fact that there isn't a good match for that former concrete B i' also encourage the board to take a look at the fact that you know based upon the trips being generated in total by the proposed use even if you said that the existing site was vacant and is zero it still was only about 30 trips in a peak hour um on the weekend Peak I think that UPS a little bit but the um with the proposed hours of operation item five right yes this is item item five um the proposed hours operation he he asked for you know some additional information uh regarding potential tenants um as was testified to at the last meeting um we don't really know what the tenants are going to be exactly yet so the exact operations are hard to analyze that is why we contractor's yard though the the applicant must have some idea of the sort of it's going to be construction trades related tenants like plumbers electricians General Contractors things like that things of that nature yes so can you comment are you aware of in general are you gonna have a snow plowing service out there I that might could be one of the uses I'm because snow plowing service would be sometimes 247 right but if you didn't have a snow plowing service do other than emergencies do most contractors work past you know dark most contractors I know are trying to get out of the site that they're at by 3:30 in the afternoon um so they would be wrapped up usually probably in the mid late the evening hours as the latest I would anticipate um the So based on your years of the experience doing this assuming that there were all different sorts of contractor tenants that's the proposals for a contractor's yard yeah outdoor storage of thing when would you expect I would I would expect the AM and PM peak hours to be in the morning when they have to go out Bring equipment or material and then after they're done with the job putting stuff back correct and that is exactly what was analyzed you know those am and PMP hours um regarding item number six um the site distance condition at the site driveway um as the board is aware ever road kind of curves to the east of the site so there's really not much we can do in that particular location the driveway is located all the way at that East End of the site in theory you could improve that sight distance by moving the driveway to the other end but it would take out all of the trees that are there there's a large Hill there it's really not the best design for the overall site even though it would improve that issue to some extent um once again the size of the trucks that are going to access the site you know I'm sure there'll be some single unit trucks uh you know again size of trucks item seven yes this is item seven um the I would imagine there' be some single unit trucks uh maybe some pickup trucks with trailers things of that nature um the site has been designed with those thoughts in mind um me let me ask you this if if they're proposing I saw somewhere of course I can't find it now I think did they say somewhere about like maybe they're contemplating 10 tenants or am I imagining that it was up to 10 tenants okay so if there were 10 tenants on the site you guys know how many square feet if you whacked it up as evenly as possible in the areas where you can store stuff how many Square fet each of the tenants would have and the reason I'm asking do you think you'd have any Highway construction you know heavy um very large vehicle contractors there or are you're talking basically you know non-highway Construction Construction tenants I think the testimony was that we weren't proposing any snowplow contractors I understand and that and that it was all light Contracting no heavy Contracting light cont what sort of condition could be crafted to make sure that that in fact happens because I don't think there's a thing that light Contracting is not a thing I understand what you're saying but maybe pick some vehicle sizes that are not allowed on the site other than during construction let them hash that one out for the moment yeah might have to review the the testimony from before but I think we did provide testimony that we're going to have excavators and and those type of things but it's yeah but excavator is not I'm not that's not the highway construction vehicles I'm talking about is not an excavator what what types yeah what types of vehicles talking about no cranes yeah nothing like that so I'm asking you to to craft some sort of condition for me that that would take care of the intent of what you're talking about can you give me a moment to uh yeah [Music] use of the word smaller and larger medium [Music] unacceptable yes may maybe like a limitation by weight or if you actually know the numbers on the you know caterpillar Vehicles no greater than a 50 ton vehicle so it wouldn't be a crane or those huge large dump trucks or you know large trucks no greater than 50 can you say that the microphone can't hear you no greater than 50 tons vehicle or equipment no greater than 50 ton vehicles and Equipment correct okay sounds good to me I don't know how it sounds to Jay yes John compaction wise yeah okay I think I have addressed everything else in Mr Troutman report okay anybody have any questions uh I the one item I just wanted to point out for the board which you may have already seen is that they are posting and no left turn restriction going out of there because that narrow road to the West is not where we want them and they're using the good facilities to the East and just I'm sure you'll agree to title title 39 and 4 we agree thank you okay do you have another witness do you want to open it up to the public to ask questions no I always get yell for not doing that he Wonder from the public she's off now okay Wayne's mother stepped away so there's no one on line Wayne you scared your mother away you should be ashamed of yourself no no questions from anyone Mr hter thank you very much first thing how do you spell your last name oh that's a good one uh h n t r s t e i n Henry and if you could please give the board the benefit of your qualifications yes I'm uh Rucker graduate I have a degree in Environmental planning and design uh from Cook College Ruckers University uh I'm a licensed landscape architect and a licensed professional planner I've been a licensed landscape architect for approximately 30 years a licensed professional planner for 20 years my licens are in good standing I also have appeared before approximately 50 to 60 boards throughout the state of New Jersey as an expert on both landscape architecture and professional planning um and that's about it I offer Mr hinterstein as an expert in the field of planning and just planning or also landscape architecture landscape architecture too have a question there's a question both right sure why not yeah we we'll accept um before we move on can we just state that we have 20 minutes and I don't know if you can wrap up in 20 minutes try but um we're coping not to go over he will be efficient in his time and giving the the plenty of time you'll be efficient but slow that's why I said efficient I'm not you know if I go too fast please just tell if you feel you have to just if you feel you have to justify because you're concerned that we may vote uh you know deny then please go on it's more important that you get everything in correct and not only that but if you want to get a seventh member to vote you can always you know just go a little 10 and then even if you finish your testimony you can ask for continuance but Steve can talk to the client about that yeah let's start his testimony and see where we are okay so if you can please give the board benefit of your analysis sure I'm not going to give really a big rundown on the background of the property I think you've heard enough about that agreed uh the proposed application results in the need of uh several D1 use variances along with some Associated bulk variances as noted in the application as outlined uh in the planner review memo of the application uh the D1 use VAR es required for the proposal include uh the use as a contractor's yard uh which is not permitted in the ar5 zone the proposed use of the property for more than one principal use the contractor's yard and the cell tower uh and outside storage of vehicles equipment materials uh is also not permitted in residential zones uh the C bulk varen is required for the proposal include uh a variants for the general design standards for parking areas sorry about that yeah I got it okay I'm up the to permit uh existing hard surface cover located on the proposed lot 3.1 to remain relatively the same although the percentage of covered uh is increasing as a result of the subdivision uh and any other variance which may have been brought up but I don't believe there was any additional variances that came up um in granting relief with D1 use variants obviously we need to uh meet the standard set in the medich vers BPR company any case um that is at the special reasons or finding the site is particularly suitable for the use is needed to meet the positive criteria while both prongs of the negative criteria must be addressed uh the first prong being that the variants can be granted without any substantial detriment to the public good and the second prong being that the variant can be granted without substantial impairment to the intent purpose of the Zone plan and zoning ordinances uh as for the positive criteria uh particular suitability I believe that is particularly suited for the proposed sure uh and slow when you do particular suitability yeah give me a separate particular suitability for the contractor's yard y separate particular suitability for two principal uses on the site separate particular suitability for outdoor storage of vehicles and equipment and material even though you might have the same reasons break them out separate okay to that point the contractor's yard with the outdoor storage of equipment is really the exact same so I would say let me lump those two together and I'll give you the separate analysis for the uh two uses on the one site um so again uh although located in the ar5 zone 100 in concrete and PG used and operated the site for many years without any substantial negative impacts to the neighboring Lots you're going way too fast man even for me I'm taking notes okay no problem uh the 100 in concrete use is of a particular note since this operation is historically much more intense of a use than a contractor's yard uh there's limited activity with the contractor's yard predominantly at the start and end of the workday uh the concrete operation continually produces and ships concrete via trucks all day long resulting in more traffic and noise is this a quickie but the historic concrete use no longer exists right that's correct I'm just making a comparison okay um with the exception of a much larger footprint that was used for that other operation uh including the most entire the entirety of lot three and a portion of lot four and that was for the previous use as the concrete plant and also the PSG storage of equipment uh b or second note is the location the subject property is very close proximity and adjacent to US Route 20231 a major US interstate highway providing access to other major roadways within and outside the state only one commercial property and other vacant land exists between the subject property and the highway uh uh whichever Road directly connects to a very short distance away uh via the signalized intersection on 20231 um this provides easy access again to the highway uh with the least amount of disturbance to the few residential homes that exist to the northwest of the site the property is relatively secluded with Highway 20231 located to the east I'm sorry the property is relatively secluded with the highway located to the east along One commercial property um located um to the north which is really a farm the solar f Farm to the South uh an agricultural use to the north and west and a cluster of single family residential homes located to the northwest corner of the property um and what helps add to the seclusion of this property uh and I think makes it particularly suited for this use is that the grades or the elevations of the existing property are approximately 9 to 20 feet higher than the surrounding properties uh particularly the the properties is located to the northwest of the site which are the residential homes can you repeat that one sure uh so again the what helps add to the seclusion of the lot is the fact that the existing and proposed grades of the contractor's yard are between 9 and 20 feet higher than the adjacent properties to the north and Northwestern Corner respectively uh this helps substantially visually screen the property from ever Road and the residential homes uh located to the northwest of the site uh the site is completely screened from ever Road and home's located on northwest corner of the site with substantial trees and other vegetation which I think was apparent in the in the exhibits and we we agreed to even Argent that correct necessary correct and D finally uh the proposed use as the contractor's yard um and the outside storage also promotes a couple of the purposes of the municipal land use law including a to encourage Municipal action to guide the appropriate use of development of all lands in the state in a manner which will promote the public health safety in morals and general welfare give me specifics how is it promoting the general welfare or the health as a contractor's yard yeah because it's putting a use where uh sort of commercial in nature a contractor's yard which would typically not be a great um compatibility with a resident use but because of the close proximity to the highway and the easy access that's how it's promoting the general welfare by providing easy access to an interstate highway where trucks can get in and out with the least amount of disturbance to the homes to the northwest of the site is that also um a promotion of the general welfare by uh cleaning up the site and the removal of the concrete building that this it is and and I was going to touch on that more so in the negative criteria yeah I I would your this whole thing to me is the negative criteria how about this permitted uses if you wanted to put residential use which is permitted here wouldn't it isn't it true you'd have to to do substantial disturbance of all the existing Services out there but here your proposed contractor's yard use kind of re reusing repurposing pretty much any of the allowed uses on this property uh if we would do that it would require substantial disturbance to the property so wouldn't that that would be a general welfare right prop you know and Pur okay so hold on let me just take it down all right what other purposes keeping in mind um your testimon about most of the permitted uses would have to result in substantial disturbance of the site what other purposes of the would be Advance purpose G which is to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of agricultural residential recreational commercial and Industrial uses and open space both public and private according to their respective environmental requirements in order to meet the needs of all New Jersey citizens so again assume you're going to focus on the environmental part of G exactly it's the same thing that again it's providing a commercial use which again this this this purpose addresses but it's doing it with the least amount of disturbance uh to the environment and to the surrounding Community what else you don't need any others but if I don't I just have one more and that's M to encourage coordination of the various public and private procedures and activities yep to encourage the coordination of the various public and private procedures and activities shape shaping Land Development with a view of lessening the cost of such development and the more efficient use of land again efficient use of land this is repurposing redeveloping a property that is in disrepair that has it's an eyesore it's putting it back to good use with the least amount of disturbance uh bringing it back to a purposeful uh taxable use oh can you provide the board the benefit of the your evaluation of the negative criteria well before he does that go to the special reasons now for the two principal uses two principal uses uh the cell tower has been in existence at the site since approximately the year 2000 while the property was used as both 100 in concrete and subsequent subsequently as a psng storage yard uh the towers received approval from this board previously I'm sorry the tower has received approval from this board previously uh along with several of the service providers that have been collocated on the tower all the use bottom line the tower has had no negative impact netive impact it's coexisted with the existing uses on that property previously and the applicant is proposing to restore the Landscaping that this board imposed when it approved the cell tower in the first place correct correct now go to the negative criteria so the negative criteria for the storage yard and the use as a contractor's yard as far as the first PR I don't feel proving the site as a contractor's yard will cause any substantial detriment to the public good or surrounding area the site has been historically used as a more intense concrete manufacturing and distribution plant and a storage and wow and a storage and sa L for the negative bacterion forget what the concrete plant was doing how this proposal it's we're decreasing the impervious coverage although slightly where redeveloping the site with the least amount of disturbance possible within the existing footprint of the disturbance that exist there today so you're decreasing impervious although it's slly but it is you're decreasing impervious and the traffic impact even though it's technically more than a permitted use it's less than the prev it's insignificant and it's insignificant to the traffic patterns also note is that the site is being cleaned up there's the environmental benefit of the decrepit uh site structures that are being removed the piles of concrete and other uh disturbances are going to be cleaned up and Steve did just remind me from May did we have a limit on how many feet high I think we talked about you were going to come back with a limit on how many feet high could a contractor you know stack stuff for the same reason that you're not going to have a crane there what's the what's your uh whether it's a stack of stone or it's a stack of um block or whatever we agreed to a single stacked containers was the testimony from the past uh meeting and no higher than 20 ft of material material which is the height of the lights how high is a single stack container how high is a a typical container Wayne how high is a container why you need 20 why do you need to go 20 feet to the light fixtures with material we were it was more of everything so like if if the back of a back ho arm hangs up higher as that we picked 20 because 20 was the height of the lights and we had a taller structure in the in the uh in the maintenance building so we were just we're picking that as a reasonable number that is significantly lower than the tower that's out there you know and making sure that anything we reasonably consider would be there would be less how about 20 ft the maximum height for equipment or vehicles but how about how about materials how about 12 feet the same height we agree 12 the height of container y okay so now you're going to take those limitations and right and that would also go towards satisfying the negative Criterion correct yes because we're going to be limiting there's some of the allowed uses Farm agriculture uses that could potentially allow for uh taller outside storage than than even the 20 feet so in that sense it's an improvement and by limiting the visual impact there wouldn't be is it fair to say there wouldn't be be a substantial detriment to the public good which is a standard that's correct there would be no substantial detriment uh one of the reasons is because we're going to be of the existing vegetation that exists there now the vegetation that we done done done okay see variances C variances there's two bulk variances I believe both of these could be justified under the flexible C2 criteria U the general design standards for parking areas I believe are intended for more more traditional parking areas and office retail and other commercial locations the proposed use is sort of unique uh and that the general design standards that followed would actually have I think a detrimental impact to the this type of operation so I think the deviation from the standards uh will allow for the efficient use and circulation of the contractor's yard the most contractors can you think of any contractor's yard in the state of New Jersey that would comply with all the paving Curbing and no no okay about the the as far as the bulk variants for hard service regulation that is a direct correlation to the subdivision that's taking place so the percentage is being increased very slightly um again although the amount of impervious coverage is actually being reduced on the site uh that exists there today so again I think this is a DI Minimus uh negligent what is the hard surface coverage of the entire lot today it's being exceeded to 46.5 n% that's propose what is the current hard surface coverage on the lot today we're looking it up are you asking for the lotas that exist the two lotas they exist now or the entire I want the entire and I want the existing hard surface coverage on the lot as proposed to be subdivided but not with the improvements with the existing hard surface there the existing coverage of lot 301 is 46.87 per okay what I'm just curious what is the lot coverage for the proposed new lot proposed lot is 46.5 n no percentage I'm talking about the vacant lot vacant lot zero and the proposed no the existing yes it's extremely low the only thing is an abandoned house it's it's virtually virtually zero okay so you're going from an existing 46.87 and you're reducing that to 46.5 n and the maximum is 20% and so these benefits of exceeding the 20% I assume are the same special reason it's repurposing yada yada yada right and not disturbing the property to develop something much greater okay I think that was yada yada yada versus South Brunswick Township that the yeah okay and then Jeff has these other uh well I got the C variance for the proposed tenant Dividing Walls in front of the building what is that I don't recall that being in were I believe was there testimony about delineation of the tents whether or not what materials were included we said we were going to provide a baller delineator to delineate the the different tenants and it was going to be put at the limit of the driveway so that the driveway could always remain clear and because we don't know how many spaces a tenant would take it would be determined as a tency was filled out but it would always be delineated along the driveway I think we noticed for that or provided that as a a potential variance just because we wasn't known whether you would call that a structure or not we don't think they need no not okay I have no other questions I think we're done with the positive and the negative yeah just for the record there is testimony regarding no maintenance and repair conducted outside outside correct no need one correct Mr gber do you have a closing statement I do have a closing statement this is an excellent reaped use of this property and we would ask for you to act favorably on our application thank you for that short I saw the look okay anybody have any questions or concerns before we close for deliberation well Cynthia we do have members online I'm sorry if you would like to open it to them yes yes open it to them to the two people online if you have any comments questions on the overall questions ask if you have any comments um I'm going to have to see you to swear you went oh thank you see if they have any questions or if they want to make any comments no sir nothing's going on okay we're closing for deliberation and and just for the record anything in any of the experts reports that you haven't talked about if it requires a revision or there some condition suggested you're agreeing that they should be conditions of approval correct correct and the board's um general rules generally do you need any extra time before you get any construction permits and before you're finished with anything you have to do or not no I think we're hot to the matter okay okay okay all right I go sure go you got two two minutes two minutes I'll do it in one and by the way if you can in your deliberations if you want you can say for the reasons that the planner testified take care of that um so I'm in favor the application I do want to make a couple of comments I did go visit your site on 165 and it's very well run and I'm expecting it will be the same or better yeah and given that I think it's going to make the environment and that area better we talked about the reasons why both the neighborhood as well as the environment is going to get better with this it's very suitable because of accessibility is very easy 202 31 and above all I think there is a need for this kind of application I think in your uh opening statements you had mentioned that and I do believe there is I've done some research I think it's very much needed in our community and it's going to help other things things which are going around so I'm totally in favor of this okay I'll go sorry not a good day okay um first of all thank you for the application and the presentation I think it was very thorough I am in favor of this application I think it's a great Redevelopment um I think it's uh great for the local business I think it's needed um I think cleaning up the site it's a vacant site now it's not in use all positive it's included it's it's included it's in the perfect location so I would be in favor I agree with my colleagues I think that this I like this application is that sweet enough for yes it is perfect thank you I think it's a good use he thinks can't hear you Jim I think it's a good use this particular all the vehicles parked on the property the property licensed and fully functional don't turn it into J actually that's a good point I should have asked right there should be a condition imposed that all vehicles on the site have to be um registered registered and oper yeah I support and agree with this uh project I think I think it's um again not to reiterate but I think it's the right use in the right place and it's needed and I am very grateful that um the work is being done to restore that Wetland and that kind of environmental sensitive area so that it functions more as green infrastructure which I believe is a big plus to the community especially the nearby um neighborhood I'm in favor for all the reasons that were listed before I also appreciate Mr grber comment about adaptive reuse it's something that I like to see going on more in our community because there's a lot of sites in the area that could use adaptive reuse yeah rather than tearing down and doing God knows what I think this is an excellent example of what we should what we can hopefully see more of in the township and I'm in favor thank you okay can I get a motion to approve with all the conditions and please do not list them I will good notes so moved second second can I get the vote chairman Miss Cynthia schaer yes Vice chair Miss Russell dami yes Mr Randy block yes Mr Jim Ferrero yes Miss loret ktina yes Mr James Miller yes thank you all very much for the five minute courtesy as well and for the appr very much appreciated your time thank you to the board professional get those five minutes back from me next time thank you can I get a motion to adjourn all in favor anybody oppos forget it