Hey Mark, are you controlling the meeting? I am. I think Rob Cost is in in the He's He's looks like he's on the as an attendee. He may have to get promoted.
Oh, I'll allow him to talk. Who's David Allen? Uh he is an applicant we heard the last meeting. All right. And uh I'm going to allow my
uh associate George Schneider to talk so I can see him there. And who's Timothy Corston? Uh I believe Mr. Carston is counsel for an adjacent property owner. Okay. All right. So I'm going to allow him to talk too. My preference when I run Zoom meetings is to allow everybody
to talk that wants to talk and let them everybody I don't do use this panelist feature. People get out of line, I will mute them and if they get really out of line, I will state the reason why I'm throwing them out of the meeting and then I will throw them out of um I've only had to do that once for somebody
who was literally drunk and drinking at a fair meeting a few years ago. So hopefully we don't have any issues with that and that way we can all see each other on this. Rob is Rob is a burough engineer. Yeah. Know I know I know Rob. You gota let you got to let me I know I
have a face for radio but I think you got to let me in. You're in. I can see you there. But you didn't turn your camera on which means you're probably not appropriately dressed. No, it shouldn't be. It should be on. No, I think he's got to get promoted to a panelist. Mark, he's at he's an attendee right now.
All right. I haven't see if I can do that. Yes, thank you. Okay. Where is he? I still can't see you, Rob. All right. Now, Steve and I are the only ones wearing ties.
Okay. All right. It looks like we have everybody that we need to get this meeting started. Yep. We got Rob in. Ed, Joe, how are we doing with your uh uh I still can't see anything and you can't see me, but I'm here.
Uh Ed is going to send me another invite and I'm going to try to open it up with that and hopefully that works. I just sent it to you, Joe. Good job. Second of tab back in. Okay, I'll try again. You can go ahead and get started. Yeah, I was going to say if you're
working with him, we're going to get started. Okay. Yeah. Lisa, you all set? I'm ready. I'm ready. Okay. Call the meeting to order. Good evening all. This is the municipalities board of the Bur River Edge meeting for
Wednesday, July 9th, 2025. Time now is 7:36 p.m. This meeting of the municipal land use board of Bur River Edge is being held remotely and recorded via Zoom due to Burough Council chambers on availability and is in compliance with the provisions of the Open Public Meetings Act and associated regulations.
Notice of this remote meeting was published in the Bergen record, posted on the front doors of Burough Hall, and posted on the Burough's website. The notice included the dial in and login information necessary for public participation and access to this meeting remotely. Copy of the agenda for the meeting was made available on the bureau's website near the posting of the
meeting notice and included the dialin and login information during the public comment period of this meeting. If you would like to make a public comment, please press the raise hand button on Zoom or dial star9 on your telephone keypad to raise your hand. The board will address you by name or by the last
four digits of your telephone number. You may mute and unmute yourself by pressing the microphone icon on Zoom or dialing star six on your telephone keypad. You must state your name and address clearly prior to making a public comment. Uh, with that, I will turn it
over to Mr. Leeman to call the role, please. All right. Uh, Mayor Papalo, I think he's absent since we have variances. He's excused for the evening. Yep. Uh, Chairman Kaslin here. Uh Eileen Boland
here. Joseph Gatier. I'm here but I still can't see anything and the other uh link never came through. Okay. Uh Bruce Feffer here. Michael Craig here.
Dario Chaningo. Uh Mr. Kigo is excused for this evening. Uh, Councilman Glass, he's also excused. Ryan Gibbons here. George Salva
here. Uh, zoning officer Deepkin here. Mr. Tom Barren Planner. Sorry. See you. And I and I see Rob Costy and he's on mute. So, we have a quorum and we can proceed.
Okay. Thank you, Mr. Leven. As an initial procedural matter, we're going to hold to a curfew this evening of 10 p.m. With that, we're going to move into our agenda. The first item for the approval of minutes, the minutes are not available
for our June 25th meeting. Uh nor do we have memorializations for uh applicants David Allen 124 Jefferson Avenue or Daniel and Danielle Shapiro Rapaort 726
Center Avenue. Those memorializations will be available at a later meeting. So if you are here for either of those memorializations, um you're welcome to stay, but um your memorializations will take place at a later meeting. That being the case,
we're going to move on quickly into our new business. The application is for IAT Services LLC, 41 Grand Avenue, block 1405, lot 4, seeking proposals for installation of a billboard. Uh, this
application was deemed complete uh at a prior meeting on May the 28th. So, with that, I will turn it over to the applicants council, Mr. Good evening, sir. Good evening, Mr. Chairman and members
of the board and board staff as well as distinguished council who have or are appearing uh in connection with our client's application. Uh first and foremost, I just would like to say it's been a few years since I've
been before this board, but uh I can also say, as I'm sure some of my attorney colleagues on this matter will also say, it's refreshing that you have a staff and professional consultants who
are actually able to generate review letters as well as provide instructions and guidance in a timely matter. Uh some of us are used to going to applications
and public hearings and being handed for the first time a significant review letter. And I'd like to comment Mr. Bogle and uh uh board council uh for their prompt uh release and dissemination of information necessary
for this application. I thank you for that. Secondly, uh I uh would like you to know that I think and I after 53 years again of doing this, I I hope I don't have to uh
eat my words, but I hope we're in for an earlier evening because uh I one of my key witnesses will not be available tonight, and that would be Mr. Hal Simoff of Simoff Engineering. He is
our traffic engineer and as you know from the submissions before this board has submitted a significant report in support of this application. Fortunately he is not only out of state but out of this country
so I don't have the benefit of Hal and as a consequence I typically uh would never call uh our planner uh before his testimony was in the record. So I want that clear and I also want objectives
council to know that because this should not be application by subs. Second, thirdly, uh we do want to point out that we will be and hopefully can uh present uh our engineer tonight, our
site plan engineer who will also be laying the foundation uh for the relief our client is seeking which has been appropriately indicated as use and height variances as well as some bulk variances that are dimensional in nature
which are part of uh the elements that have to be proven by the applicant to sustain his burden. Uh I would like at this point uh because I think we can move along and call my
first witness shortly. I just asking for all council here, whether they're here for or in opposition to formally state their uh representation on the record because I didn't know Mr. Caristan or at
least I didn't have knowledge that that would actually occur that he would be appearing and representing someone. So, I just want to get everybody's uh representation on the record. I agree that's a good idea. Let's let's start um with Mr. Sorrow since we have
correspondence from him first. Uh thank you councelor. Good evening Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Mr. Sini. Uh good evening um colleague councel uh Charles Slo on behalf of the opposition that being in Darkstar
Development LLC who is a property owner at 335 Johnson Avenue which is block 1405 lot 3 uh which is the property uh adjacent to the subject property which is the subject of this application this evening. um also tangentially
representing Let It Grow uh who is um their Let It Grow the owner of Let It Grow and Darkstar Development are common owners and Let It Grow is the proposed tenant for one of the floors um at the proposed office building at 335 Johnson.
Uh Mr. Par. Um Robert Par is Bob Par. I am with Paramson. Uh we are the second floor at 70 Grand Avenue um the 70,000 foot building across the street from the
applicant and I'm here on behalf of them as well as I am a principal in Grand Four Associates which is the owner of our building. It's grand for Associates. Yes sir. Grant numeral for the word for
fo r. That's an LLC I presume. Yes sir. And that's the owner of 70 Grand Avenue. Yes. Thank you. Uh Mr. Corston, are you on the call?
Yes. Hi. How are you? Can you turn on your camera, please? I could if I could find it. I apologize, but I can't find it on there. It's not in the I think you have to. I don't know if someone has Oh, wait. I may have to make you a panelist. Hold on.
All right, try it now. Okay, here we Okay, I'm good. Thank you. Um, Timothy Corston from law firm of Connell Foley. Uh, we represent the estate of E Tambberelli TrustB and Route
4 Main Street LLC. I did send a email to Ed today. He got bounced and I just resent it. Um it's the new bridge bridge landing shopping center. All right. Can you just uh give me the name of the client again, but slow enough that I can type it?
Sure. A state of E period tambberelli t a m b ur l i dash trust b as in boy and route 4 with the number four main
street LLC. Right, Ed, when you get the email from uh Mr. Coron, please uh forward it along to me. Yes, I will. Uh, can you just make sure you sent it to me because I didn't receive it yet. Yeah, it b it got bounced back because I
had um there were quotes, but it's I sent it to Et.- No, wrong. Okay. It's eeredj.org. Okay, I'll I'll send you to the correct address. Thank you. Thank you,
Timothy. Was I was I placed in copy just out of curiosity? You were not. It's just an email, but I'll uh send it to you when I get a chance. Okay. Thank you. I just wanted for our file and our client's knowledge of who is interested in his application. Uh he's been corresponding with my
client and knows that I'm representing them. So, but I will I'll I'll uh I'll also send a formal letter tomorrow to everyone. All right. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. All right. So, uh let's get started. Mr. Shisian, if you want to make an opening
statement. Well, very brief because uh I think that uh this record will uh begin to define and distinguish itself as we move along. But I just wanted to make note of the
fact that I actually called uh Mr. Sarlo and messaged Mr. Picard to let them know that it was a virtual hearing tonight so that there would be no confusion. And uh
while I spoke to Mr. Sarlo uh I did get confirmation Mr. Papar that they were aware and were joining us. Uh, I would have done the same for Timothy if I had that opportunity and and not to say that he
didn't uh attempt to let us know of his appearance, but I would have given him the same courtesy, but I'm see I'm glad to see he's found his way uh uh to this call. That said, Mr. Costa and I'm starting with the
board engineer uh primarily because I think there is a description in his latest review letter of July 3rd 2025
that I think puts as a introduction what this application is about. He indicates on the first page by way of our opening that uh the applicant proposes to construct 60 foot tall double face
static billboard and the word is static billboard at the southwest corner of the property. property is bounded by Route 4, uh, Marginal Road to the west, Grand Avenue to the south, and Johnson Avenue
to the east, as well as vacant land to the north. And the existing improvements um site improvements on this uh property includes a two-story brick office building, McAdam parking lot,
concrete curbing, retaining walls, sight lining, and landscape. But you'll hear more about the the specifics of the property from our first witness. And uh the next thing I'm going
to do because I think it makes abundantly good sense is we have uh and and we'll leave it open too for Mr. uh Cariston to submit whatever he's submitting. But I'd like to mark as A1 my letter to Mr. Leeman which Mr. Leeman
requested regarding uh the issue associated with the ban the banning provision of the billboard signage ordinance. So I would ask that my letter uh dated May 21st, 2025
uh be part of this record as uh A1. I would I would then ask that your response uh that uh appeared on on July 7th, 2025
likewise be marked into the record, but I presume you'd want that to be B1 as the board's exhibit. I I don't think it matters what we mark it as long as the record is clear, but we can call it B1. That's fine. Or A2, either one. Yeah, let's call it
let's call it B1. And do we want to mark Mr. Sarlo's letter? I do. That's exactly. You wanted to get to Mr. Sarlo's letter, which you respond to uh in your uh correspondence. We'll mark Mr. Sarlo's letter as 01.
What's the date of Mr. Charlo's letter? I don't have it right in front of me. Uh Mr. Slo, can you help us out with your letter date? Sure.
June. June 7th, 2025. Thank you. Thank you. And let's leave a space marker if we can just to tidy keep a tidy record for whatever Mr. Coriston will be submitting tomorrow.
and we can all talk at a appropriate time about the specific contents of those letters. We'll be getting to them, I'm sure, uh, during the course of testimony. Uh but I I thought it might
be make for a clean record if we had those all up front because those do implicate legal issues and how those legal issu legal issues may likewise implicate the application is uh is going
to be discussed. So, I did promise and earlier night subject to crossexamination of my witness, I'd like to call at this time and have sworn Mr. William Voit, our project engineer, Mr. Voit, Mr. Vo, can you please raise
your right hand to be sworn? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So, help be God. I do. Please state your name, spell your last name for the record, and give us your business address. Uh, sure. Good evening. Uh, William R.
Vote Jr. um from L2A Land Design LLC. Uh, we are the civil engineer for the project and we are located at 66 Grand Avenue, second floor, Englewood, New Jersey, 07631. Thank you. Go right ahead, Mr.
Thank you, sir. Mr. Devoy, would you please please state your chosen profession? Uh, sure. I am a professional uh engineer in the state of New Jersey and I was hired to prepare the site plans that were submitted as part of this
application for uh the applicant. How long have you practiced engineering? Um, coming up on 25 years. And what is your educational background? I have a bachelor's in science and civil engineer engineering from Sunni Buffalo,
New York. Um, and my license is in good standing. I've also I've also appeared before this board uh on other occasions. And were your qualifications as a civil engineer accepted by the board on those occasions? Yes, it was.
How long have you been licensed in the state of New Jersey? Uh, almost 20 years. And is your license tonight in good standing as you appear before this board and give testimony on behalf of yourself? Yes, it is. Um, do I also understand you're a
licensed professional land surveyor? Uh, no. I I I'm I'm not a professional uh landscape uh sorry surveyor. We we had a survey uh contracted as part of the application by Lakeland surveying
and that was submitted as part of the application. Thank you. Now, have you appeared before land use boards in New Jersey and qualified to serve as an engineer? Uh yes, I have. And how long have you been associated with your firm? And what is your
relationship with that firm? Uh sure. Uh, I'm one of the owners and principles of L2A Land Design. Uh, we were formed in 2006. Um, and I've testified throughout the state of New Jersey.
Have your qualifications, incidentally, ever been rejected? No, they have not. What are some of the comparable kinds of engineering projects you and the firm have worked on? And I use the word comparable meaning to this application.
Uh, sure. I I represent uh not only this applicant for uh this type of billboard uh applications, but I do represent multiple other um nationwide um outdoor advertising
uh applicants uh throughout the state. I've I've probably done in in the realm of 50 applications as far as billboards throughout the state of New Jersey. And those would include static billboards as well as digital billboards.
Yes, both static and digital. Mr. Leeman, I'm going to present Mr. void votes uh credentials as being as being being qualified to testify as a civil engineer and ask that you accept
his qualification. All right. Does the board have any questions um for Mr. Voit regarding his qualifications? Mr. Chairman, is it your practice that the board uh makes the determination of the witness's qualifications or do you defer that to your attorney? Uh unless
there's objection either from the board or from council, we'll proceed. Okay. Great. Thank you. So, just so the record is clear, the board accepts Mr. Voit's qualifications as a professional engineer. Okay. Could you please tell the board and for
the benefit of the accuracy of this record what the scope of your engagement is with respect to this project? What were you asked to do? Uh, sure. We were contracted by the applicant to uh prepare a survey of the subject property and to prepare the site
plans uh that were submitted as part of the application to the land use board um before you this evening and in undertaking your engagement. Am I correct that you physically inspected the property to perform it?
Yes, I have on more than one occasion. Uh I think I was out there twice. Now I'm going to show you well not very easily but um you are
aware that a survey was prepared by William C. Butch Hawks uh a licensed land surveyor consisting of one sheet and dated January 9, 2025 which was submitted with the application. Did this survey assist your
firm with preparing your site plans? Uh yes, that is the base mapping that we used to create the site plans. Mr. Leeman, I'd like to move that as the next thing. Give me one second, Mr. Shen. Just getting some noise interference
over here. Uh, the survey is going to be marked as what? A2. Um, that would be A2. All right. Did you want me to bring it up on the screen? Uh, no. Uh, not unless at some point in
time somebody would like to examine it. It's we're good with it. It was submitted with the application. Okay. Mr. Vote, did you know whether the applicant um right there
are you aware that the applicant has received the state of New Jersey Department of Transportation an outdoor advertising permit? Uh yes, I have and I believe it was submitted as part of the application and
I I believe it was accepted in um uh Mr. Costa's uh latest review letter and thank you for that. I'm going to ask you, sir, uh, as someone who's been to the rodeo and made these applications
before, what is your understanding of the relationship of a to a applicant on the local level seeking billboard approval that this statewide
or state outdoor advertising permit is? What's its relevance? Uh, sure. the the applicant or the billboard uh purveyor has to apply uh for the location to the DOT. That's the
New Jersey Department of Transportation. And they have to um the DOT has to vet out the location. Uh it has to be in a commercial or industrial uh zoned area along a uh a major highway um
within New Jersey. and has to meet the criteria in order for them to issue a uh DOT permit for the outdoor sign whether it's a digital or uh static sign
and then once they once they get that um approval from the DOT then they have to go and apply to uh the local municipality and then any other outside agency approvals that are related to the uh the
permitting for the sign. So, while we we will move this uh permit into the record as the applicant's next exhibit, I'm going to ask you, sir, you agree, do you not, that it does not relieve the applicant of its burdens
from obtaining local approvals where they exist? Is that correct? That's correct. we mark uh the even though went in the applications I like to mark it chronologically.
Yeah, I've marked that as a A3 in my notes. It's in the record. The DOT letter dated December 26, 2004 24 uh DOT permit number 77801. Just one thing if I can. If it's the same permit I have my package. It looks
like the permit expired on May of uh 15th of 25. Yeah. Uh, I'm going to show I believe we submitted have in our possession a status that indicates it's good through
May of 2026 and we will offer that uh document actually just a print out. So, what the uh what the DOT does is
they they basically they don't reissue um that formal uh permit to the to the billboard purveyor. They send an update uh updated list of all of the permit numbers and their um their renewals. So,
and I services permit number is 700462. Is that correct? Correct. Okay. And on page two of that
list of active permits on 20 2025, uh Urggon River Edge Burrow reflects uh the one that is before the board tonight, 30 feet west at Grand Avenue. Is that
correct? That's correct. And that mark is I should say I apologize uh accompanied the uh submission that we provided to you electronically.
Oh, that was in the email that you sent me. Yes, that was uh next to the outdoor permit. Well, I should say my administrators, but it's here and it's attached to my permit.
So, it's it's it's it's been in it's in existence and it's good through May of 2026 as I read the DOT uh active status report. Okay. All right.
And we'll make it a we'll make it available to all if they don't have it. Yeah. I I don't see that attached to the PDF. Uh Mr. Seni, um let me see if it's on attached to one of the other items. It has a lot of blackouts as to all
other statewide permits, but our client's permit we did not black out because we did not want to. Yeah, I only just have the one page um permit. But but we Yeah, we're not going to finish this tonight. You can send that over later. Let's
You seem to have it. I'm sure you're not lying about it. So, let's let's move on. Well, that's what I have from the state. So we'll give it to uh not only you and Mr. Bogle but council of record. Okay. Thank you. For appearing on this.
So based on your testimony and the materials you've examined uh which do I include or should I include the fact that you examined the zoning and signage
ordinances for the uh burrow of river edge to prepare your undertaking? Uh yes we did. So I'm going to show you now a site plan or a set of plans entitled site plan consisting of three sheets and revised
on April 2120. Um did you prepare these plans? Uh I did. Do you do you want me to share my screen and and show the plans? I would. Sure. And we're going to mark that next mark uh as
Uh, I think that'll be A4, but let me just That would be Yeah, that would definitely be A. Hold on. Yeah. Yeah. A4. Okay. Okay. Okay. Can Can everyone see my screen?
Yes. Okay, great. Um, yes. Um, Steve, these are the these are the site plans that were submitted as part of the application. It's a three-page set uh revision one dated for 21205.
Okay. Now, would you be so kind uh as to narrate what is depicted on each sheet of these plans? Uh, sure. Uh, so the first page is the cover sheet. Uh the second the second
page is the site plan C-02 and the third page is the uh sign elevation plan uh with the phototrics uh depicted uh elevation view of the sign.
Okay. Now describe the sign itself. Uh sure. So the um the property is located at 41 Grand Avenue. Uh, it's block 1405, lot 4. It's found on tax map 14 and it's located in the C2 commercial
um zone. Um, what what I'd like to do is can I can I just th This was exhibit A4, correct? The site plans. Yes. Okay. Um, I' I'd like to I have an aerial image uh prepared and we can
label that A5. Uh well that's that that that's fine. Um okay I will just ask that um either immediately now or immediately after the meeting's over if you could email this to Mr. Alter and myself uh
and send it to Mr. Sini so he can share it with the uh the other council just so that we all have a copy of this. Yeah. Before we get to this exhibit I just want to give a little bit of an explanation. It was only as a result of uh certain comments made in the review
correspondence that we recently received and with the knowledge obviously that there are interests uh being expressed uh about this application uh from adjacent property owners that we thought
that we would create an exhibit for tonight which would be an aerial photo uh and it's two sheets s and I'll let uh I'll let Mr. Vote tell us what they represent, but I wanted to be sure. Are
you certainly finished with uh your testimony on the site plan? I don't think you did. No, no, I'm not. I just I wanted to just get the board uh oriented of where the site is located. That's all. Please do.
Okay. Um Okay. So just just back to this aerial uh photograph. This is a Google Earth uh image of uh the subject property and the surrounding properties. Uh the images
usually within the last two to four years um of of current conditions. Um what I did is I outlined the property in red. Uh it's a L-shaped uh property. It has um it's a corner
lot. It has frontage along uh four roadways. Um to the top of the page is is north, to the bottom is south. Uh to the left is west, and to the right is east. Um to the bottom of the page, to
the south, we're bordered by Grand Avenue. That's a municipal roadway. to the to the right or to the east. We're bordered by Johnson Avenue, also a municipal roadway. Could you use your cursor? And and if you're using it, forgive me. That's
retinal macular degeneration at work, but I don't see the cursor moving. Oh, sure. Let me let me zoom in here. So, to the east is Johnson Avenue. Thank you. Uh to the west is Route 4 and
the offramp uh of Route 4 onto Grand Avenue and then directly to the north um we are buted by other commercial properties and then in the foreground it would be Main Street uh farther to the
north. So the subject site is approximately 43 acres. Um access to the site is currently um through a single driveway off of Johnson Avenue. There is
uh atgrade parking uh on the on the site. Uh some of it which is covered by the building that's uh existing on the site. Um parking is provided both underneath the building and outside of
the building in the asphalt lot. Um and our proposed billboard is being located in the um southwest corner uh directly facing New Jersey uh State
Highway Route 4. Um, and with that I will go back to the site plans to C C-02 the site plan to show the board where the sign is being located. So I'm just going to zoom in here. So again,
and while and while you're zooming in, please uh give the explanation or describe the billboard itself when you locate it. Sure. So again the property the L-shaped property is is designated by this uh
dark uh black double dash line that represents the property boundary. The uh the building itself is I'm going to just highlight it for the board. The building itself I just highlighted
in yellow. Um this and the uh access to the site is directly on the right hand side or to the east off of Johnson Avenue. The proposed billboard again is is located on the southwest corner of
the property uh fronting along New Jersey State Highway Route 4. It's a it's a V-shaped double-sided uh static billboard. Uh it measures 14
feet in height. The the sign face measures 14 feet in height by 48 feet in width. And the current um height for the sign is proposed at 60 ft.
the um you can see that the because the sign is a static sign meaning that it's a vinyl uh panel that gets uh installed on each face. There are uh four exterior
um lights that illuminate both faces of the sign. So, I have four up lights that are angled to the face of the sign on on both sides to illuminate the message uh in the evening hours. Those lights are
off during the day. Uh they only turn on in the evening hours uh by use of programming and a photo cell. The proposed sign um is located uh 10.78
feet to the closest vertical sign face uh to the front yard of Route 4 along the sideyard. Um which would be to the left of the page. Um my setback
is 10 ft. And then to the rear uh which would be the property line uh opposite the back of the billboard which would be adjacent to neighboring lot 4. Our setback is
17.86 ft. And then our distance to the other um front yard uh along Johnson Avenue, which would be to the right or to the east, is 139.57
ft. Um before I get into the to the actual uh bulk table, I'd like to switch just to the last page of the of the site plans, the the uh C-03.
And this gives you um an idea of the orientation of the proposed sign. It's what what I call as a a flag shaped sign where it's supported by a monopole
4 foot diameter monopole that is augured into the ground and that is located at the nose uh of the sign which is closest to Route 4 and then the message of the
sign then is canlevered back into the property. um to the west and and slightly overhangs the existing uh twostory commercial building that's that's on the property.
So you can what I did is I transposed some of those dimensions um to the uh or offsets to the property lines um that I just stated before are front yard, sideyard, rear yard. Uh I also depicted
the 60 foot height of the sign which is measured from the ground level at the base of the foundation to the very top of the sign which is 60 ft and then we will have and that height exceeds the maximum
height limitation. Uh it it does have it it does uh the max and therefore and therefore requires ad it it does it does and I I will go back over the other variances required. Um
the the canal levered portion of the sign um has a clearance of 9 ft above the top of the existing building. Um, we do have a three- foot wide apron at the bottom. I'm just going to highlight it
for you. At the bottom of the sign, um, that's where the personnel can access uh, the catwalk for changing the copy on the static sign. Uh, that's also where the lighting is housed. Um, and it
also is the area where the uh billboard owner has their sign number and their name uh which are both required uh per their dot permit. So that that information will go in this yellow area
at the at the very bottom. Could I ask you at this point since working fluidly between the aerial photo exhibit and your site plan? Go to the second page of
the aerial photo exhibit. Sorry, Steve. What What was you What were you looking for? Pull up the second page or second sheet. The aerial photo exhibit you prepared. Okay.
As I'm indicating, you're you're moving fluidly between the site plan location of the billboard and the aerial view of the site and where the billboard would be. What is depicted on sheet two of the
aerial photo exhibit? You Steve, I'm I'm sorry. You lost me a little there. the aerial photo exhibit. The the the one I'm showing right now. Yeah. How many sheets is that? It's it's just one sheet.
Um, did you do or prepare a second sheet that dealt with the location of the properties that we have become aware are uh interested in this application and
their distance from the billboard? Uh, I did. Would you be able to at this stage and I'm not going to ask you to produce a document if you don't have it, but did you study that issue?
I do. I I I did and I do have that. I can I can flip to that aerial image? I think that would be helpful to council for the adjacent property owners to know where and how far from uh the proposed
billboard their client's properties are. Can we can we just slow down a second? So, this this aerial map is a little bit different than the Yes. one. So, let's let's mark this one um into the record separately.
Let me just get my notes up. Is that A6? I think this is this is A6. Okay. So, I actually I actually had them both at one time collectively on my informal list, but we can do it that way.
Yeah. Let's let's call this one A6. And let's refer to this as the colorized aerial. Sure. Thank you, G. Okay. So this is this is the same this is the same aerial image as A5. Um what
all I did was I added the three properties um that are uh in opposition of of the project. Um and I'll I'll just start from the top of the page in in no particular order just from top to
bottom. uh in in the light blue at the very north of the page. Um that is uh lot 3.01 block 1404 and that is uh located at 101- uh91 Main
Street and the ownership is Route 4 Main Street LLC and the site is approximately 3.86 acres. Um these that pro particular property is
uh approximately 200 feet uh property line to property line uh from the subject parcel. Moving on to the the next uh location uh
shown in yellow which is directly behind or to the north of our site uh is 335 Johnson Avenue. That's lot 3, block 1405. The owner is Darkstar Development
LLC. And that property is approximately 0.52 acres. um the that property and the subject property share common uh property lines. Uh so I would I would put them at a zero
uh setback from one another. And then uh lastly to the uh bottom of the p page or to the south in the magenta color uh that is lot one block 1410.
Uh that's 70 Grand Avenue. Uh the ownership is Grand 4 Associates and that property is approximately 1.6 acres. And then the closest property line to property line is approximately 100 ft.
Uh they're they're directly opposite one another um to the to the south or to the north. Thank you. Sure. Um, you had alluded to the fact that after you finished your testimony on the aerial uh, photo
exhibits, we're calling them exhibits is actually you going to return to the uh, zoning schedule on site. Is that correct? Yes. Yes. So, I'm I'm going to flip back to A4, the site plan.
And what I'm going to do is I'm just going to zoom in to our bulk table just so everyone can see that. Um, so we listed we listed all of the um bulk regulations for the site and I
specifically uh highlighted the ones that are specific to the billboard. Uh they're in the bold uh writing. So for the maximum building height for for this uh C2 zone, the maximum height is 35 ft.
Our proposed billboard is at 60 ft. So requiring a variance. Our front yard setback uh as it relates to the billboard, a minimum of 30 feet is required. Um, we're requesting 10.78
ft, uh, which would also be a variance. The minimum sideyard setback, um, would be 15 ft required. Uh, we're asking for 10 ft. The combined sideyard setback, uh, we
only have one side, um, that's that's related to the billboard. So again we are at the 10 ft um proposed where 35 ft is the requirement and then the last is
the minimum rear yard setback uh would be 20 ft and the proposed billboard is at 17.86 ft. Um, again requiring a uh a variance and your table pretty much corresponds
with the table that Mr. Costa's office identified as what was required. That fair to say. Yes, that is that is fair to say. Um, I know we have an expert uh who we will be calling to supplement this
record uh on certain traffic issues and uh studies and reports, but can you tell us from your vantage point as the site plan engineer why 60 ft as opposed to 30?
Uh, sure. the um what what the applicant does is they uh go out to the site and they um they prepare a uh photo exhibit of what the proposed sign would look like.
Um they they they hang a a rod in the air to simulate the uh height of the billboard and then they have a graphic artist render um the billboard
uh on the property and then they take photographs from uh Route 4 and they determine what the um optimal height would be uh for the motorists traveling. uh east and west along Route 4. So for
this particular location, because of the um the high commercial uh and density along Route 4 in the east west directions uh and the building heights that are uh within the corridor of this
this this commercial area, um the 60 ft uh was the optimal height for the billboard uh to be uh viewed in both the east and west directions. Um the the
height of the sign also does not impede on any other um it doesn't block out any other signage um or lighting that is along the corridor. Uh it doesn't block uh any buil any buildings from
viewpoints along um the corridor of uh Route 4. Um and uh you know that that's basically what goes through um for the site location and determining the height
um for this for this application. Thank you. Um, you along with other members of our client's project team have been reviewing various review letters from the board engineer and the board planner
commenting on this application. Have you not? Uh, we have. And with respect to the uh board with respect to the board engineers revised review correspondence of July 3rd, 2025
relating to uh signage at the bottom of page two of his report. Uh he asks, "Two signs are proposed on the billboard, each with uh 672 square feet. Is that correct?
Uh, that's correct. He likewise asks whether two signs are proposed on the billboard with a total area of 1,344 square ft. Is that correct?
That's correct. Would you please confirm based on your knowledge of the site and your work uh whether there are two existing signs uh and two proposed for a total of four signs at this location?
Uh there are there are there are two building mounted um signs on the existing building. Um, and what I'll do is I'm just going to I'm just going to highlight I'm just going to highlight the two
locations. Um, let me just change the color of that for you so you can see that. Please don't call it fuchsia. You've already fooled me with magenta. So there's uh
there's one there's there's one sign facing uh sign one I I I have it indicated on the site plan. Uh that is the building mounted sign that faces Grand Avenue. And then
there is a second there is a second sign that's along the uh western face along the western face of the uh existing building uh facing route four
uh to the west. So those are the two existing uh building mountain signs. Uh on page four, item number two, um the question is asked whether there are any covenants or deed restrictions on this
property. Uh you recall that question? Uh yes, I do. And you recall that with the applicant submissions, a slope easement was identified. uh but that I believe it was the conclusion that it
would have no effect on this particular development application. Am I correct? That's correct. And just I zoomed in on the site plan. uh this the that slope easement to the DOT is uh outlined with
the orange hatched area that's along the frontage of uh both Grand Avenue and uh Route 4 and you can see we we kept the foundation
uh outside of the easement. Now, one of the issues that the engineer appropriately raises in item nine of his report is whether there are any potential
lighting impacts to adjacent properties in the form of light light spillage or light projection uh beyond the sign. And if so, what is your
remedy for that? Uh sure. So the the static sign is uh has exterior lighting um versus a multimessage or a uh a digital billboard would have internal lighting through you
know LED panels uh with a series of dodes. Um so this this is uh this is not the case for the static board. It has exterior lighting. Uh the lights are uh what I'm showing you is the on page C3
uh of the elevation. The four lights are indicated in blue. Um and they're attached to the catwalk at the very bottom of the apron and they are angled uh in such a way to uh illuminate the
face only of the billboard. So, what I'll do is I'm just going to slide over um the I'll just give you a picture of what the lights look like so you can see they have what I would call a houseside shield on the outside
um of the light and then the uh LED fixture is directing light to the face of the sign and the intent is to only illuminate the face of the sign so that the message can be red. Um
what the uh what the lighting manufacturer al also provided were uh illumination levels on the face of the billboard um in a measure of unit called foot candles. Right. So, you can see you've probably had
applications where you you have uh exterior lighting as part of a parking lot. Um and the values are listed as foot candles. This is this is the same um they're just more intense because of
the distance uh proximity of the four lights to the face of the billboard. So you can see they have a um the phototrics show that the the sign is well lit. Um what it does is the the
light is directed only to the face of the board. So there's no direct light that leaves the face of the board. Um but what what you will have um is what I I
call a um a glow along the edge of the sign. So you will uh you will see that there is a light source on um on the face of the sign but there is no direct spillage of the light beyond the face of
the sign. the the lighting is blocked by the by the sign face panel. Um, so if this was the only object uh that was that had uh that had a a luminance in in
the sky, you would tend to see a uh a slight glow around the edge of the board. Um, but being on a commercial corridor where they have uh you have a uh Route 4 corridor is uh fully lit with
Cobra headlights and overhead flood lights um that range at distances or heights off the ground of 25 to 40 feet. Um the the lighting for the billboard um
the any any ambient light far exceeds any of the lighting on the board um that would that would be uh the spillage from the sign. Um, in your professional opinion, having uh
engineered using phrase static billboards, um, do you consider lighting that would be associated with this billboard to create any potential adverse impact to adjacent properties?
Uh, no, I do not. Now, Mr. Costa also asked in uh his review correspondent stated item 11 whether a digital billboard was considered this application. You recall that comment?
Uh I do. Um do you have a response or would you not be aware of what the applicant's initial intentions or initial thoughts were about a billboard at this location? Uh, no, sure. I can I can answer that for
you. Um, as part of the DOT application process, they look at other uh either constructed billboards or billboard permits that are on the same side of the roadway. Um, the minimum spacing
distance from a from a digital billboard to another digital billboard on the same side of the roadway is 3,000 ft. The minimum distance from a digital billboard to a static billboard on the
same side of the street is 300 ft. So if I go back to the aerial image which was uh I believe that's A5 actually uh yes A a5 um there is
in the neighboring uh city of Hackinack to the um to the east along route four or to the bottom of the page um there there is uh a double stack atic V-shaped
billboard that's approximately 1,000 ft from our current location. So, the DOT will only permit a static billboard in this location. So, what what stops the DOT from changing
the regulations next year or five years from now? To my knowledge, this they they will they will not change this separation distance. Do you know how long that that distance has been the rule? And I'm just asking because I don't know.
I I don't know when it was implemented, but it it has not changed in in the 10 plus years that I've been testifying before boards about billboards. All right. And is that like in the New Jersey Administrative Code or is that like
Yes, it is. And I can I can find the section for you um of the code and uh and provide that to you. All right. Yes, there's there's certain uh criteria that the DOT goes through for every application
and basically one of the first ones is what is their proximity on the same side of the roadway to another either billboard permit or a constructed billboard. So, in this case, the the existing uh
digitals that are to the east in Hackinack in Hackinack are within 3,000 ft. So, unless that permit is vacated and those signs are taken down, um this location will will not be allowed to be converted
to a digital billboard. It's only permitted for static. Thank you. Um along the same vein, um the question Mr. Costa then asks is whether it is the applicant's future
intention to convert this static billboard to digital. Are you aware of any such thoughts or intentions to convert the static to a digital? Uh, no. There's no intention to convert this site to a digital.
Turning your attention now as the site plan engineer to item 12 in Mr. Costa's report involving landscaping. Uh, is any landscaping proposed at the base of the billboard? Uh, there there is no uh there's no
landscaping proposed. I'm I'm just going to flip back to the sign elevation. Um there's no there's no uh there's no existing vegetation uh within that landscaped island. Um we didn't propose any um
within that area. Um but again um open to suggestions from the board if uh you know if they had suggestions about landscaping. We we typically uh leave that up to discussion uh with the board
and their professionals. Now, although we're getting into the realm of redundancy, uh we have a board planners review correspondence of May 22nd and he asks in item three to confirm that the
billboard that is proposed is static as opposed to digital. It is, is it not? It is and the question is also asked what is the rationale to the proposed size and
height of and I know Mr. Simoth will certainly be called upon to testify part of that question, but you as the civil site engineer and experienced in uh designing these. Tell us in your
opinion uh why the proposed size and height billboard is as reflected on this. Uh yes, it is. as part of the as part of the DOT permit, uh they will stipulate um the size of the sign that's
permitted. Typically, it's larger than what we present to on the application. Um so the the size of the the message is restricted by the DOT permit. Um
but again we are we are at least the same size if not smaller than what's permitted for this area at 14 by 48. And uh I I did give testimony earlier about uh the height uh that we're
proposing at 60 ft. Item number four in the planners uh review letter asks whether the lighting fixture illumination. Back to illumination now can be reduced or color temperatures adjusted.
Can you answer that? Either one or the other or both? Uh, sure. Um, the uh the existing the four proposed uh exterior lights uh they do not dim. Um, I'm not aware of any
exterior lights um that that dim on any of the static billboard applications that I've presented. Um, the uh the LED color is 5,000 Kelvin. So, it's more of a uh white light um
representing what what daylight. Um, if you've ever, you know, purchased a a light bulb, um, you know, LED bulb, uh, it would be more of the daylight, uh, temperature. Um, so it doesn't impact
the color or message of the sign. It's just a clear light. And I can't certify in this but ask the question if this
community had a look back provision should this application be approved. uh let's say six months like several adjacent municipalities have at the lighting to see if as approved
uh the lighting is either working appropriately uh or creating some sort of a disturbance. It is it your understanding that the applicant is prepared to accept uh as a
condition a look back provision if this application were approved to see what if any adjustments could be made should there be an issue with the lighting that's approved. Uh yes, I think that's I think that's uh
acceptable. And again, if there was any issue with the lighting, um let's say, you know, a light was out or it was flickering, um the DOT does monitor all of these all all the signs that are constructed and
have permits. And that's why the name of the owner and the board and the uh sign number are on the uh apron of the sign so that they can uh contact the owner if they don't know that the light is out or
to issue a violation if there's no uh remedy um by the owner. Thank you. you are not and haven't been qualified as a planner and I'm not going to ask you this question as a planner but as an experienced civil engineer. Do
you have an opinion as to whether or not the site plan you've designed would pose any substantial adverse impacts at the property or to the surrounding properties or to the public good if this
board were to grant this application? uh as in my capacity as a civil engineer um based on you know the commercial uh makeup of the Route 4 corridor and the surrounding commercial zones that
are adjacent along the frontages of Route 4. Um I don't I don't think this sign is out of place. Um, and it is similar to other signs that are currently existing. Um, like I
mentioned, uh, just to the east, uh, in Hackinack, you have, uh, two LED billboards that are on both the east and west side. You have multiple, um, DOT, uh, highway signs that are illuminated
in the same fashion as the proposed static sign along the roof corridor. Uh and you have uh multiple businesses, commercial businesses with either building mounted or pylon signage um
that has uh a similar um similar identification um signage uh as the proposed sign. So I I I don't believe it's it's out of out of uh out
of the ordinary. And I I I think this is this is exactly where uh this type of signage belongs. And with the exception of the uh requested use variance given the billboard ban that is uh the current ordinance. Um, is
it likewise your opinion that the magnitude or uh percentage, if you will, of the deviations from the bulk requirements in the zoning code would likewise, if granted, not
cause uh any adverse or substantial impacts to the surrounding property. Uh yes, I would I would agree with that. Um there there there are no uh regulations currently in the uh uh river edge ordinance uh particular to
billboards. But I'm now also talking similarly about the bulk uh regulation sideyards the setbacks the coverage etc. Is it similarly your opinion having
designed these and as you said familiar with the ordinances that apply that the magnitude quote unquote of the deviation from the requirements or standards would if granted
would the would not have a substantial adverse impact on the property or surrounding uh adjacent properties. Is that your opinion? That is my opinion and in in the in the magnitude of of a civil engineer. Yes.
I have no further questions at this time. Subject to recall after crossexamination. Okay. Who wants to go first? Mr. Maybe since you sent the the first letter in, we'll call you first. Uh thank you councelor. Um does does uh
the board members want to go first before the opposite opposition council? Certainly do that. Mr. Kaslin, whatever your preference is. Obviously I'm unfamiliar with the board's practices. Um I'm fine with with the objectors council asking questions first.
So s the floor is yours. Okay. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, uh, um, councelor. Okay. Um, Mr. Voy, um, good evening. Good evening. You can call me Bill. Okay.
All right. Good to see you again. Same here. Okay. So, I have a few few questions based on your your your testimony and your exhibits. So you you testified with regard to the DOT permit
and you you you stated that they look at certain criteria and I believe that was your testimony. Um the criteria that at least you mentioned there may be others is highway location and has to be in a commercial or
industrial area. Are those the only criteria that is looked at? Uh there there are other criteria that are that are in there. If I can I can just summarize. I don't have the all the criteria in front of me, but they do look at um proximity to uh on and off
ramps uh to other um crossings um on on the highway corridor um and the like. Okay. But the DOT does not look at the um impact adverse adverse impact to the
neighborhood or adjacent properties. They are concerned with the uh commercial uh right of way of their of their DOT right of way. Um that that's correct. That's why you have to uh the
applicant has to apply to the uh municipality and any other outside agencies that have uh jurisdiction over the application. So they're looking at it purely from a uh DOT corridor. So okay. So the the DOT permit really
means nothing as it relates to the impact to the adjacent properties or or the zone plan. I think you had testified to that earlier. It's it's really the like you just said, it's the focus of the the state highway corridor. So looking one way, not looking the other way. Is that a fair statement?
It it is a fair statement, but it I I I must state that the the location of the sign has to be within a commercial zone within the municipality. And um you
know, they they do they do drive the highway. they look at the safety um of it, the the uh the location of it. Um it's it is very uh uh has a lot of review to it before you
can uh be issued a DOT permit. So um just to say that they're focused with with within the corridor of the of the highway is I I would say an understatement. they they do look at all of the off and on ramps uh to the municipal roadways uh and surrounding
properties. Um so it it does go a little bit beyond uh the DOT rightway. Um but yes in in general um that's why we have to present the application to the municipality.
Okay. So, the on and off ramps, is the roadway between Route 4 and the subject property, is that an on and or off ramp or is that a wraparound of Grand Avenue? The only
reason I'm asking is when you showed the aerial image from Google Earth, it had Grand Avenue, I guess, to the uh south, was it? Yeah, Grand Avenue to the south and Grand Avenue to the west. basically be between the highway and that's just
from Google Earth. I'm not sure if it's mislabeled, but I'm looking for your clarification. Yes, sure. I can I'm just pulling back up that area for you. Uh yes, that that is the that's the off-ramp uh of Grand Avenue. Um that is still within the uh
DOT corridor. Okay. So, is is that is that But is it is it Route 4 or is it labeled as Grand? Is it a grand? Is it Grand Avenue or is it Route 4?
The aerial image has it as Grand Avenue, but that is that is the off-ramp of Route 4 to Grand Avenue. Okay. So, what is I'm a little confused when you went through your your the zoning table
in terms of what you were considering as front yard and sideyard and rear yard. So, what what what did you consider to be the front yard? Sure. The front yard. Uh well, there's there's actually there's actually three front
yards uh to the property. Um so the the the the front yard to the Route 4 corridor uh is basically from the from the curvature of the property line that has frontage
along Route 4. Um, and then as you that's to uh that would be to the west and then to the south of the site where we're we're fronting Grand Avenue which is the municipal section of Grand Avenue that is also a front yard and then
directly to the east um Johnson Avenue is the third front yard uh which is also a municipal roadway. Okay. So is is there where is the front yard setback in your variance table? Is
it two is it is to what you said there's three front yards one I guess going to the on offramp and one going to u grand avenue the municipal roadway so which is that for both I mean what so yeah the the
angled piece there what what setback is that is that which front yard setback that is that is the front yard setback to to the highway to route four to route four okay correct Um, okay. And then so there there is none
then to to Grand Avenue. No. Well, it's farther back from Grand Avenue. Um, so I just wanted to put the the most restrictive at the 10.78. Right. But it but is there since there's three front yard set three front yard
setbacks. Is there one to does the setback to what we're calling Grand Avenue Municipal Road is that meet the set front yard setback requirement or is that another variance? Uh if you're considering uh well the Yes, that would
be that would be another variance. Um but it's it's less um I guess it's it's a it's a greater distance than the 10.78 that I've identified as the as the as the closest. Um, but yes, if if you were technically
listing it, you would have two front yard setbacks. Two front yard setbacks, right? So, it doesn't matter that one's less. You only list one, right? So, if you have if you're putting a building on a site, right, and you have two sideyards and they both don't meet the requirement. You don't just list one sideyard as uh
not meeting the requirement. If they both don't, you say you have two sideyards. So, you you agree there's two front yard setbacks here? Uh there would be there would be one to the highway corridor and then one to the municipal corridor. Okay. Municipal quarter is is what's the
distance? Yeah, it would be uh it's give me one second. I got it for you. It's 14.8 ft. So, that would be that would be from that would be from the corner.
I'm just going to uh I'm going to highlight that for you so you can see that. Okay. So, this this distance to the to the front yard is 14.8 ft. Okay. Okay. Okay. And then you also have
a um a rear yard setback. Uh I do. Okay. And that rear yard setback is to uh the adjacent uh property line there of my client 335 Johnson Avenue. Yes, that's correct. You represent lot
four uh to the to the rear and our rear yard setback uh is the 17.86. Okay. So, with regard to um and you may you may want to defer this to um the applicant's
planner um but you had testified that you looked at the zoning code I guess in preparing uh your your zoning table. Um, there is a section uh in the code.
I'm not I'm not going to deal with the prohibition of billboards in all zones. It's a constitutional question that council have written written letters on. But there's a separate section um separate enumerated section that says
it's a prohibition of billboards in required yard setbacks. Did you see that particular code uh section of the code when you reviewed the zoning code? Uh yes. I mean we we did uh we did
notice that uh we're here for a use variance. Well, but for the use variance is for from what perspective? Uh, I I think that's more of a planning um question. I I would agree and I would ask council to
reserve that question and present it to Mr. McD. He will be prepared to answer that. Okay. Would and I'll I'll defer that, but I I just would like a a followup on on this point. Um I'm talking about
section 416-45B that locations prohibited are projections into required yard setbacks and I'm m Bill I'm asking whether and you you're preparing the
zoning table if you're considering that section to be no different than requiring a front yard setback or would that require uh another use variance?
Uh I I I I'm going to excuse me. I'm going to object to the question if you're going to stick with the thesis that it requires quote another use variance. I'm just I'm I'm just asking if that's being
considered that prohibition of the billboard in a setback is being considered by the applicant as a setback variance, a bulk variance. Okay, that's dimensional variance as opposed to reduced variance. Okay, you
can answer that if you would like or defer to the planner if you'd like. Um yeah, I I I think I think the uh majority would be deferred to the planner for that that type of uh testimony, but we did prepare the site
plans based on the bulk standards for the uh C2 zone. Um which was from which was from the schedule. That's correct. Mr. Charlo, can you tell me what the uh ordinance section is that you're referring to? I want to pull it up on
e-code. uh 416-45B locations prohibited. Okay. All right. Thanks. I'll have a look at this. I'm sure we'll be coming back to it. Okay. Um, so, Bill, is this um this is one one
sign that's being proposed? Yes, it's it's one it's one sign uh double-sided in a V-shaped configuration. So, is there any is there any definition in the zoning code as it relates to
signage and one side or double-sided? Um, I I'm I'm sure there are definitions uh that relate to the sign. Um, and I I believe it was uh stated in Mr. Costa's letter um
that that we are proposing four signs. We have the two existing building mounted signs and then since this sign is is double-sided, there is uh two sign faces. So we have a total of four signs for the property.
Well, two sign fa two sign faces is different than two signs. So what's your testimony? Well, the I'm I'm just repeating what was stated in Mr. Bill. I'm asking I'm asking you what your opinion is. I
I read Mr. Costa's letter. Sure. My my opinion is that it's one that it's one sign. um just double-sided. Okay. So, how is I I didn't see a detail of the sign um on your drawing in terms of the connection points. I saw an
aerial, but you don't have a detail of how these that how the your one sign is is is mounted to the pole, but there's a little bit of a detail on on your site plan from from the aerial. Um, so I
guess hypothetically, I could ask you a hypothetical question, right? Um, if you have two pieces of paper and you staple it all the way around the perimeter, you could write on both sides and wave it in the air without it flopping
around. That's double-sided. Would you agree with that hypothetical? Yeah. That you have the you have a signed face on both sides of the paper, right? stapled two pieces of paper stapled all you know m stapled all around the perimeter.
Yes. Okay. If you have take those two two sheets of paper second scenario you take those two sheets of paper and you only staple it along one edge and it opens up like a V. Do you have one sheet of paper or two sheets of paper?
So to answer your question, uh there are other configurations when when I have a straight backto back sign where it's it's not a V-shaped, there are there are occasions where um you will see billboards that when they have the two
sign faces, they are parallel to each other. They are separated uh by the sign structure, by the the uh by the steel structure. Um but they are two separate
panels that are adhered to uh both uh both sides of that uh that steel structure in this configuration. um to get the sign oriented more with
the highway corridor, uh they separate or create a V uh to angle the sign face directly to the motorist uh who the message is intended for. So, I I don't think it matters uh
regardless if it's a straight backtoback or a V-shaped. Um you ha you have the same configuration uh structurally. Okay. Um you talked about when you
talked about the height the proposed height of uh the billboard sign uh you talked about actually how the applicant or the the individuals in this business of billboards actually try and determine the height. And I think what I heard is they go out there with a rod um take
take height measurements and then superimpose it on um you know from the highway corridor to see what you know I think you use the word what's the optimum height for visibility purposes. Is that an accurate summation? Yes.
Okay. So all of that analysis is focused on the benefits to the billboard so that the maximum number of drivers can see the billboard.
Is there any is there any analysis done as it relates to height on the surrounding properties? Uh yes. So on the subject property itself, we uh it has a u what I would call a three-story building. It has a
parking covered parking area on the ground floor and then two vertical stories above that. Uh so based on the the size of the sign um it needs to can lever over the roof of the existing building uh so that um it has proper
clearance above the top of the building. So that is uh the consideration that we took for the sign height on this property in in addition to its its vantage points along uh the roof 4 corridor which was outlined in uh the
traffic engineers um report um and I'm sure there'll be further testimony from uh Mr. Simoff uh at the next hearing. So the again the the considerations were view uh the viewpoint from route four
and how it would fit on the subject property so it clears the existing building. Right? Is that accurate? That that's correct. And it's orientation with the V-shaped for uh directing the message to the route 4
corridor. Okay. So um and that that analysis um did not take into consideration um the impact to uh councelor Picar's property, my client's property or the total wine property, Mr. Car's uh
property. I think you're going to hear uh testimony from our planner um on on that uh on that material. Um, and I I believe our planner would be better uh suited to answer those questions because they
I was just I was just asking I'm sorry, Bill, not to cut you off. I was just asking from when you because you talked about how the height was determined and what considerations were taken for optimal height. I'm just saying was there any or were there any other considerations besides
how to clear the exist the building on the existing site and viewpoint from Route 4? I I think I also testified that we that the height of it um does not block any other buildings or signage along the roof for corridor as well. So that that was another consideration that
we did uh from an engineering standpoint uh for the location and the height of the sign. Okay. And so what what do you mean by or how do you define the roof for coroner? Is it just the buildings that front roof for? Uh it would it would be the DOT uh uh
right ofway and any of the commercial properties that front along Route 4 that have a common boundary with their state highway right away or Yes. Yes. Because I I would say yes because those are the those are the properties that are within either the
subject zoning or other commercial or industrial zones along the corridor. So, if a building is um not uh if a property doesn't abut the route for right away, but happens to be across Grand Avenue, that wasn't a consideration. Or if
there's a a building that is adjacent to your property um that is but it's bounded on on Johnson Avenue, that wasn't a consideration. If there was a property about 200 feet um to the I guess north, that not a consideration as it relates to the optimum height. Well,
I I think you're going to hear testimony from the planner because they they go back into the neighboring properties, both the commercial and properties that are beyond the commercial uh limitations if there's residential or any type of
mixed use. The planner goes through and uh will will provide uh testimony to the board and can better answer these questions for the surrounding neighborhoods. Okay. And the only reason I'm, you know, again, you were talking about the optimum height and then I think the last
question posed by council was your opinion as a civil engineer, was there any detriment, substantial detriment to um I think he said the adjacent properties and you had said in your opinion as a from a civil engineering point there were not. So that's just why
I'm asking about the surrounding property because you kind of your test testimony touched on those issues. Okay, I understood. Um, so you showed the color your colorized um aerial, I think it was uh
exhibit A-6 to show the distance from uh the subject property to um the other properties that are I guess, you know, the other property owners or properties that are opposing uh this application. Um
do you know what's on each of those properties? Uh sure. I can share that screen again. Um, okay. I'm I'm back to A6. Uh, sure. Uh, uh, Charles, which one would you like me to start with?
Um, you can go you go top to bottom. Okay. Sure. So, at the top, that's the light blue um area. Um, that that's a commercial that's a commercial uh center. Uh, the front building is uh
commercial use. It's the tenant is Total Wine. Um then there is a second uh or retail commercial building on the property. Um that's houses several different uh tenants. Uh the the yellow
uh property which is directly behind or to the north of our application is a vacant lot. Um, I I think there was uh testimony or or explanation that there's there's uh a proposed uh multi-story
commercial building for that uh property in yellow located at 335 Johnson. And then the last property to the south in the magenta color is an existing three-story commercial building um
as well. Okay. Um, thank thank you for that, Bill. So, with regard to the Johnson Avenue property, um, you had you had talked about well, I guess for all the properties, you talked
about this the distance from the, uh, I guess your client's property or the billboard to all all three of the properties. With regard to Johnson Avenue, it was um, uh, basically common lot line and you put that at zero feet, you know, lot, property to property or lot to lot. Uh, do you know the distance
between the proposed billboard and what you just referred as the proposed twotory building? It's it's really two stories over parking. So, it's really three stories. Um, but
so where the proposed building will be on 335 Johnson, do you know that distance? I I don't have the site plans for the adjacent lot 4 at 335 Johnson. I um I I I don't have that information. But what
I can what I can tell you, Charles, is um from the from the rearmost uh portion of the vertical sign face to our shared rear property line with lot 4, it's it's 17.86 86 feet where the
existing building uh itself is closer at um 3.27 ft. And I think I also have that in my table as well for the uh rear yard setback.
Just look here. Uh rear yard setback. It's actually 3.1 ft is the existing nonconformity for the uh three-story building. Right. What I was just trying to uh see
if you had information on was the distance from the proposed billboard to the proposed building at 335 Johnson Avenue and if that setback would be within the rear and I know rear yard setback goes from you would go from the
billboard to the property line but from an order of magnitude I'm just wondering if the what the distance is from the billboard to the proposed building and if that would at least meet the rear yard setback or be less than the rear
yard setback. Um I I believe it would. I believe it would because um the the minimum rear yard setback is 20 ft. Um we're at 17.86. So it I only have like two two foot two
inches or two in two foot three inches to to go. Um, and I think if if we're sharing a a common sideyard setback, um, for that lot four, uh, the minimum sideyard is 35 ft uh, and the minimum
rear yard is 20 feet. So yes, I think to answer your question is yes, if you look at it in that uh, frame uh, we would meet the rear yard setback to the proposed building on lot four being more than 20 feet.
Okay. So, if you have this, so the rear yard setback and the sideyard setback requirements are somewhat dramatically different. 20 feet and 35 feet almost double. What what do what are you going to what are you considering the since you have three front yards? What is
what's that area? Um I don't even know how to describe it. Um the yeah that uh where your yeah right there where your c that set back there or you know where your cursor is up there like what to that property line are you going to consider that as a sideyard setback or a rear yard setback?
Okay. So so this is a re so what I'm pointing out that that shared north property line with lot four that that we're considering a a rear yard um to to our property. Um, when you look at lot
four, in my opinion, that would be a sideyard uh of lot four. Um, so I I would I would imagine that the application for lot four for that commercial building would have to follow a sideyard setback
um on on the shared property line. And this the property line that I'm going to highlight on the left hand side. Um that that we're considering a sideyard setback. Um
so I I think that would be a rear yard setback for lot four because it's opposite the front yard on Johnson Avenue. Um but again I I don't have the plans for lot four. I I can I can
certainly if if those were provided to me, I can certainly add that to the site plan. Okay. But so you just said the where you have circled is sorry opposite the front yard from Johnson Avenue, but you also have a front yard
on Brand Avenue. So, how what's the is is there a definition in the zoning code how to determine front yard, a rear yard, and sideyard when you have more than one front yard? Like, it just seems arbitrary that
you're choosing from Johnson, one front yard from Johnson Avenue, you're saying that would be a side a sideyard, but in another front yard from Grand Avenue, you're choosing that to be a rear yard. What's the basis for that decision?
Again, is there something that you could point to in the zoning code? Well, I uh yes, it would be the definitions of of what the of what each yard is, but I I can go through each one. So, along Grand Avenue to the
south, that would be a front yard setback. So, that that's 30 feet. But you Yeah, you you don't need to go through them all in the interest of time. I'm just saying, you know, how how how you're making the determination that that should be considered a rear yard
setback versus a sideyard setback. Well, it's it it's opposite. It's opposite the front yard. Um is the rear yard per the definition. Um but Johnson Avenue is also a you you said Johnson Avenue is a front yard.
Johnson Avenue is a front yard, but then it's opposite side. its opposite side on the corner is also a front yard to Route 4. And then we have a sideyard to uh lot six which is between our property and
the Route 4 corridor. So this the the property line to the west uh adjacent to lot six would be considered uh in my opinion based on the definitions a sideyard. Okay. Okay. Um, and then one last
question I think is I think at the end you made a comment and I'm not sure if I understood it correctly or I heard you correctly. You said something about there's nothing in the or in the ordinance for billboard requirements.
I'm not sure what you meant by that. You were answering a question from council. Okay. Um I I I think I was addressing the setbacks as it pertains to the C2 zone. Um so we we presented the
variances for the billboard as a structure or principal structure uh and applied them uh to the C2 uh bulk requirements. Um my statement was more of in in certain codes in other municipalities
there will be sections that pertain to billboards and they would give uh certain setback uh requirements. Um that that's all I meant by the comment was that there was no uh applicable
standards even though uh whether it be for another zone uh within within the bureau um that I could apply this to as a con comparison that that's all. Oh, for for as a comparison, but correct. You're not saying that.
Okay. But you you use you you are you believe your zoning table's accurate using um because the billboard's a structure use using the um setback requirements from the C2saw. I do. Okay. Okay. Um chairman, council, I have
no further questions at this point in time. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Sarlo. U we've been at this for a bit. Um, I'd like to request the the indulgence that we take a a short break for five minutes. Uh, and I'll look for a motion
from the board to uh have a recess until 9:30. So moved. Thank you. Is there a second? Thank you, Mr. Goier. All in favor? I oppose. Okay. Uh, time now is 9:24. We'll be
back at 9:30. Thank you, everyone. Mark. Hello. Hi there. My kids went out for ice cream without me, but they brought me something back. What? Did you hear the jingle? You heard the jingle when you asked for the for
the five minutes? I had to go to the bathroom, so I asked for five minutes. The kids went to get ice cream like an hour ago. I was wondering where it was. They put it in the fridge for me. Freezer for me. Hopefully that got you a good flavor.
Moose tracks. The econ for the sake of economy of time when we resume. I'm going to ask the permission to reserve my redirect until all the objectives are done so it's concise and
we address everything at one show. Yeah, I think that I think that makes sense, Mark. Unless you No, I agree. Let's um I think let's let Mr. Pard go next and then um Mr. Chorus.
Where is Mr. Cororus? There he is. Folks, you can bring yourselves back up again on camera. We're going to get started. It's 9:30. We still have to open it up to the public, don't we? Do that after we're done with all the
professionals. Yeah. Mr. Chairman, is it your practice to do another roll call uh after a break? Yeah. All right, everybody. Unmute yourself and get ready to tell me that you're here. I
think we're missing a couple. Uh George Bruce. Yeah, I'm here. Okay, turn your cameras on. All right, I'm going to call the role. The time is 9:31. Uh Chairman Kaslin
here. Uh, Eileen Bolan here. Joseph Gater here. Bruce Feffer here. Michael Craig here. Uh, Dario Teneigo. Did I pronounce that
wrong again? Uh, Kenigo. Yeah, he was he he's absent this evening. And he's still not here. Correct. Councilman Glass is out. Uh, Ryan Gibbons here and George Salva. He's he's here but muted. George, unmute
yourself. I hear. Okay. All right. We're ready to proceed. Okay, folks. Thank you for the indulgence. Uh we're going to turn now to Mr. Carr for uh his question of the engineer.
I'm going to be uh very brief because I'm going to limit my questions to your expertise as a civil engineer. uh bill. Um the other questions I'll I'll reserve until we have the planner. Can you tell us what is the shape and the dimension
of the supporting pole? Uh sure. It's a uh let me let me just switch back to let me switch back to the site plan for you. Sure. So, it's a uh it's a 4 foot
diameter uh steel uh steel pole. Same diameter at the base as at the uh at the top. Uh the base they augur a hole that's usually a foot wider uh than the
diameter of the monopole. Um so they can sink the pole into the ground and then they fill it up with concrete. So it'll be slightly larger. probably be anywhere from a five to a six foot diameter base. Okay,
that's the only question I have of you. Thank you very much. Oh, okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mr. Chairman. Uh, now that we're on the record, I neglected to mention what I was asking off the record or stating. I'm reserving my ability to redirect
this witness until all of the objectors uh members of the public or professionals on on the board to save time. That's that's acceptable. Mr. Stacy,
uh Mr. Carsten, do you have any questions for uh the Hopkins engineer? Yes, just a few. Thank you. I'll be brief. Uh Mr. um couple of questions for you. Um you indicated in response to questions from
Mr. Sheni that the sign was not out of out of place and similar to other signs in the area. Correct. Correct. Uh do you know is is that meet a legal standard those type of statements
is that a legal criteria for granting a variance on bulk issues? object to the question. That's improper to ask that question of this witness. You extrapolated it from him. So those are not the legal standards, correct?
Whether it's out of place or similar to other sides. I I I think the question I think the question on my uh that was asked of me on my testimony was how it how it fit in with the surrounding neighborhood. Uh I
wasn't I wasn't using other signs uh as as variance relief. I was simply stating what the what the commercial corridor of Route 4 is and the surrounding uh properties at front Route 4.
All right. All right. Let's talk about the immediate surrounding area. You referenced Mr. Cer's report and that you agreed with his findings in terms of the necessary variances. Uh I did and I'm correct that the
minimum set uh minimum front yard setback uh the proposed 10.7 ft is almost three times less than what's required. Correct. Uh yes based on the C2 bulk
requirements. That's correct. And the minimum sideyard setback of 15 feet to propose is 10. That's 50% less. Correct. Correct. Was that Sorry. Was that to the sideyard? Yes.
Uh the sideyard setback. Um the sideyard. Yes, it's 15 foot is required and we're at 10. So it's about 30% less than required. Correct. Um sure. I I agree. And the combined set yard is again it's
in excess of three times less than what's required. Correct. Are you saying the combined sideyard setback? Yes. Uh we don't we don't have a second side. So I can only rely on that one sideyard of 10 feet. So So yes, in in that
capacity. Yes, I agree. All right. And the um the height the height required is 35 ft and this proposed height is 60 ft. Correct.
That's correct. And that's a significant difference. Correct. Uh we require a variance for the height and it's almost twice. Correct. Uh yes. And it's it's it's
higher higher than the buildings that are adjacent to it. Correct. That's correct. Uh it's it the board the sign will can lever over top of the existing building on the site and clear
the roof by approximately 9 ft. And have you um have you done any studies to see what impact the height of the billboard will have on light and other
type of impacts on the surrounding properties. Uh I I think I provided testimony on the exterior lighting uh for each sign face. Um let me clarify my testimony. I'm talking
about what it does to the light that the other properties receive, the impact on on those. Tall buildings create shadows, right? Tall buildings create shadows. Um, have you ever been to New York City?
Well, I'm just going to answer your first question. Uh, you're saying buildings create shadows. Um, I'm I'm sure buildings do create shadows. And the taller the the taller the structure in this case the more significant the shadow on the surrounding buildings.
Correct. Uh you would have to do what's called the shadow study um to understand that um which um we we have not presented. Okay. Let's talk about um I was a little
um confused by the the V-shaped signs and whether it's one sign or two signs. What's your position? Is it two signs or one sign? Uh my position is that it's one it's one sign structure uh with two faces to it.
And am I correct that you could have two different faces on each of those uh each portion of the B? Yes, you could you could have the same uh static sign on both sides if if that uh customer purchased
uh ad, you know, a same ad on on both the east and westbound direction. Or you could have two separate customers uh one on each side, one facing eastbound traffic and one facing westbound traffic. That's all I have. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Carson. Uh let's go to our engineer for follow-up questions. Mr. Costa, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, good evening. Just just a few based on the
testimony. So, I guess first thing quickly, the illumination, and I think um you're going to have to just saying it's not going to affect anything, I don't think is going to work. I think you need to get the the lighting expert and show what the spillage is because it
just doesn't go to zero at the borders of the of the actual sign. Um I don't remember exactly verbatim what you said, but you said it it doesn't and I find that highly improbable that it stops
right at that border. So there has to be some spillage going either way. And then the ordinance is pretty specific that you can't have spillage over the property lines and you're very close to the property lines. Um, also
I think there's a question of where where are the actual property lines? Maybe you can put your site plan up again, Bill. Sure. All right. because you have an adjacent property, lot six, and it has a dashed line that looks like
it runs in the middle of Route 4. So, obviously, that can't be correct. Sorry, Bob. Um, Rob, are you talking the the property line itself is is is this line here,
right? That's your property. That's my property line. Correct. Right. You you you you said you testified that you're adjacent to lot six. Yes. Lot So where where is their property? Lot lot six is Let me just go to the cover sheet so I can show you.
I think it's lot six, right? Yeah, I I agree. Lot six. So I'm I'm just on the cover sheet so you can see that portion of lot six. So that property line doesn't match what what you have there, what you have on
your site plan. I just don't show the opposite. I I don't show the front property line of Route six of of lot six. Well, no, it's the right of way for for Route 4, isn't it? Uh, it is. it.
Okay. So, go back go back to the key map because I think this is pretty important. Okay. So, based on that, the only frontage then you have possibly on route 4 is where it says 30 ft. Correct.
Uh that would be directly adjacent to to roof 4 corridor. Correct. I'm saying is that that's the only frontage you have on Route 4 possibly or or the the marginal road, but the other once
you come around the point of uh tangency, it's going to be Grand Avenue according to this. I don't know if that's correct or not. I don't know if you have the jurisdictional maps for DOT to see where their rideways are. I think looking back at your survey or I'm I'm
sorry, I know you didn't prepare who you took the survey information from. They refer back to a to a DOT map, but I think you need to to clearly show that so you know exactly what you have because the statement you said it's not going to
have any impacts on any of the properties, right? Here's my question. Adverse impacts. How do you build it first? And then as time goes on, how do you operate it? How do you change
the signage? How do you physically do it? The uh Sure. So the uh the technicians uh just they they climb up the there there's going to be
rungs on the monopole. Uh, so they would use an extension ladder to get to the to the rungs and then they Where do they where do they physically park though? Where how do they they park on the site? But how do they according to your go to
your third page? The distance that the clearance you have underneath the building, the only place you can get into that property is under the building. Correct. Uh, that's correct. But, um, Rob, they they just come in in a in a regular
standard vehicle, uh, a car or or or pickup truck. They park and then they bring up the new vinyl. Uh, there there'll be two between two and four operators that you're you're sure you're 100% maybe
you're not the person to answer this correctly, but you're you're positive on that. You've seen this and you've seen this. Yes. Okay. They pull up in a car and they get out with equipment, scale it, and change the vial. That's correct.
In a car. It It will be a vehicle that can fit underneath that building. All right. Mi, maybe you need somebody the who's going to be maintaining this or or if that's actually if that's accurate.
Well, I I I think I'm Rob, I think I'm answering the question that I I know that's how they change the vinyl on the sign. They they I I have signs that are not accessible by roadways where the operators have to walk the equipment
into the property and then they scale the sign to change the static sign. So, I I know firsthand that this is how they do it. They they're not coming to the site with a large vehicle. Um, I've never seen them do that on any of my applications.
So, okay, constructibility. How do you construct it? So, they'll they'll come in from the route they'll come in from the Route 4 corridor onto the property. H how would they get how would they get on the property?
They would come in. They would come in through They would come in through the um through the cur the the island uh at the corner here and access into the property. So, they're going to they're going to
pull in from there and access into the property, jump over the curbs and come into the property. The only reason I'm saying this, I I brought this up when when you had the Dunkin Donuts and the wall and the constructibility of the wall, which turned into a circus.
So, I I don't maybe you can't answer this tonight, but I think you need to absolutely figure it out because you made a comment saying it's not going to affect anybody. And I I gave you two scenarios where quite frankly, you don't own the
property next door. You don't show it the property line correctly on on the site plan. So, that needs to get straightened out. And then I think you really need to look focus on those two things because that will affect or the three things will affect property surrounding you.
Uh I can certainly update the survey with the DOT mapping and we can get you uh a better outline on how the sign the logistics of how the sign is being constructed and an outline verifying the
change of vinyl copy in the future. that's that's not an issue. And again, maybe maybe I'm beating this horse. Um, you are not the person that's physically doing this. So, I think that you need that that individual that actually does the work. How do they do
it? Where do they do it? How often do they do it? And I think that's important. We'll work on it. Uh just keep in mind, Bill, um we may be committing tonight to a January 23rd return. Tonight's
tonight. Uh can you assess from Mr. Costa's requests for further information that that can be accomplished by that date? Sorry, Steve. What was that date?
Uh the date would be J July 23. July 23. I can try to get as much information as possible uh by that date. Okay. All right. We'll do Bob. Bob will do our best.
Thank you, Mr. Um I think that's pretty much it based on the testimony. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Cost. Uh Mr. Barren, questions from you. Sure. Good evening. I'm just looking at the time. I see we have about 10 minutes, so um may need more than that, but we'll get started. So, um good
evening everyone. Uh, Mr. Vo, Mr. Sissi, um, just going to start off by, uh, going referring to my memo dated uh, May 22nd, 2025. You touched on some of my commentary, but I wanted to get clarification on a few other points. So,
um, maybe obvious, but just to clarify, the illumination would be from dusk to dawn. Is that accurate? Uh, yes, it would be. Okay. So, it wouldn't turn off at any point in the night. We we uh we're we're not presenting any
uh restrictions on the operation of the board at this point other than your own municipal ordinances. Can you clarify what you mean by that, Mr. Sneesi? Well, for example, if you had a all
lights out by midnight and all commercial activities must abide by that except for emergency lighting like for example uh medical urgent care uh
veterinary hospitals I put in uh which has emergency components and they're allowed to keep lighting on to guide people there. Uh the answer is if you have a hard stop for all commercial enterprises as an ordinance in your
community, we would be bound by that or we would have to ask for relief. So it may not be dust to dawn. Understood. I I do think that ordinance provision is something we should check on. I I don't have the answer. Um so thank you for that.
Um this question for Mr. VO uh going uh to the issue of the sign dimensions. It's the proposed faces I believe are 14 ft by 48 ft and you mentioned that those
are permitted by NJ DOT. Does their permit pertain to maximums maximum sign size meaning would they allow smaller standard billboard sizes to be permitted along the roadway?
Sure. the the DOT permit. Um I don't I don't have the language in the DOT permit. Um I just have the renewal, but it it states in the actual permit the maximum size the sign is permitted to
be. And uh not having it in front of me, um it is it is likely larger than the 14x 48. It's it's probably the maximum size uh the 16x60. Um but typically
uh the signed copies are uh a smaller size uh the standard sizes and one being 14 by 48. Okay. But so to that point though would they being that that's a maximum would they allow for smaller standard
billboard sizes such as and I've ticked off a few of them on page three of my memo. So for instance, there's 14x 48, there's 10x 40, there's 10 1.5x 36, etc. And they I believe there's even smaller sizes. So is it your understanding that
DOT would allow for smaller billboard sizes? Uh yes, you just can't go larger. Okay. Do you are you do you know whether or not your client considered whether or not to uh propose smaller billboard sizes?
uh they considered uh the the 14 by 48 uh as being a smaller sign than than the maximum that was uh permitted by the DOT permit. So uh and that that is a standard size, the 14 by 48. I would say
it's probably the most common size, but to answer your question, there are smaller size panels. Uh we didn't consider any of those or I didn't consider any of those for this particular application. All right. Thank you. Moving on to
lighting. So you touched on the color temperature of 5,000 Kelvin. Are there billboard industry standards for static signs as far as lighting color temperature? Are they all 5,000 Kelvin? Uh yes, typically they are.
Okay. So there's not a range let's say 3,000 to 6,000 or something like that. Um is is there a range? I mean there there is an industry standard. There's a there's a trade industry. It's out ofome
advertising of America. Okay. Which which uh really stipulates a lot of the industry standards uh throughout the country and and and the world. um that that these uh outdoor advertisers
um abide by as a guideline. Um but typically for the static signs, this is the LED uh lights that we install on them. All right. Thank you. Um moving along, page four of my memo touching on uh I
guess landscaping and site conditions. What is currently located in the location of the billboard? um foundation. Uh it's just a landscaped island uh with
uh low shrubbery um and grass. Okay. And are you aware that as recently as August 2023, there had been three trees in that location of the site? I I did look through some um I think
when that comment came up, I I did look through some street views uh back uh back on previous years and I I did see uh some trees in that area. I did. So they they were removed at some point, right? They were removed. And so
I guess if a billboard were to be placed there, then there'd be no opportunity to rem to replace the trees in that location of the site. Um I I I think we can I think we can accommodate some screening of vegetation
in that area. uh as long as it doesn't impede on the um on the uh on the sign itself or any of the um uh this the site triangles for that intersection.
What is the existing imperous coverage of the site? Uh sure. Just gonna I'm just going to flip back to the site plan. Okay. Okay. So, the the maximum lot coverage, I'm just gonna
lot coverage, right? Yeah. The the lot coverage. I'm just gonna I'm just going to highlight that for you. It's just to make it easier. Lot coverage. Here we go. Okay. So the maximum lot coverage for the C2 zone is 80%. Uh currently the
site is in an existing nonconformity at 95.4%. And with the addition of that um concrete base foundation that the monopole is set into um I'm increasing the square footage by approximately 28
square feet. Uh so it it raises that or exacerbates that existing nonconformity to 95.55%. Okay. And what is the existing imperous coverage or or lock coverage a function of would you say? So the existing 95.4%.
What are the aspects of the current site development that result in that figure? Uh basically that uh any areas that aren't uh green space. Okay. So that would include the three-story building and paved parking areas.
That's correct. There there is a separate just above the bu the lot coverage is the building coverage um at 40.61%. Okay. Thank you. U moving off memo now. So, we touched on the issue of the
site's frontage on uh potentially on on the Route 4 ramp. How does DOT distinguish between the actual highway and ramps like this? We'll call it the marginal road. Uh well, it it's all within if you if I
just flip back to the tax map, um there the DOT corridor um goes all the way up to that shared property line of of lot six and our subject lot 4. Right. But but from a road
classification standpoint, how does it differentiate a ramp from the actual highway? uh like an off and an on-ramp, right? Right. And well, like this ramp that's, you know, adjacent to the subject property.
Um, sure. It's that's probably a better question for the traffic engineer, but uh typically typically it's measured from the gore um of of the either the on-ramp or the off-ramp.
Excuse me. I'm trying to be helpful. I'm not trying to interrupt your flow here, but uh I understand that question and I also having done uh two of them in Pamis on Route 4, not too far from this area,
we had a situation on Spring Valley Road uh with anam issue and group four east and I I believe the answer that you're looking for can be found and I can't give it to you tonight, but it can found
in the DOT regulations as to that definition and what it includes. And I'll make sure Mr. Simoff can uh articulate that and define that area for you. All right, that would be great. Thank you. You're welcome.
Um it's my understanding that Bergen County may be installing a new pedestrian path in the general vicinity of the existing one that goes over Route 4. Um, is that something your team is aware of?
Um, I had a Do you know where? I know I don't. That's why I'm asking. I don't know where in the general vicinity of the existing path overpass is my the only thing I know. Uh there is there is an existing
overpass um over Route 4. I I did contact uh the Bergen County uh planning department. Um, I believe I spoke to uh Mr. Timac. Um, and since we do not front on any county roadways, uh, we're exempt
from their review. Um, so they they didn't have they they basically don't have jurisdiction over the property. But is there a technical distance requirement where a billboard must be set back so many feet from a pedestrian
overpass? uh if it if it is in their criteria, it would be listed in that uh NJAC code that the DOT uh goes through and that's part of their vetting process for issuing the permit.
Okay. Um next is is just going to be a general comment. So, you've uh submitted renderings of the billboard as viewed from Route 4. And what I think would be helpful based on a lot of the commentary we've heard is to have renderings from other vantage points of areas both
within the burrow but also surrounding municipalities given that we're near the adjacent the borders of uh Hackinac and Pamis you know to arrive at the determination of whether or not there would be any off-site impacts u and in particular to residential development in
those locations. Um, bear with me. I know we're we're at 10:01. So, um, just keep in mind keep in mind that the buffet closes at the Sunrise Assisted
Living where I have to be in before 11. I I wouldn't want to deprive you of that. So, um, Mr. Chairman, I might have a few more. Would you prefer that I keep going or what? Let's let's let's get your get your questions in tonight, Tom. Bear with me. Okay,
almost there. And uh most of which were answered already. I guess my last question will just be confirmation about the height. If you were to reduce the height or I guess let me rephrase that. Is there any opportunity to reduce the height given
the existence of the three-story building on the property? Could you reduce it if you wanted to? Uh just going back to the elevation that's CO3. Um I I have nine feet of clearance from
the bottommost portion um of the sign to the to the roof. Um I would say the the only way I could reduce the height would be to implement a smaller sign face. I I would want to I would want to keep um I
you know I I would have to you know I I would like to keep a safe distance from the top of the roof to the bottom of the structure. Right. So So is it fair to say that part of the the reason that the height is what it is is it a function of there
already being an existing principal structure and use on the property? Uh yes that is one of the governing factors. Correct. Okay. And the billboard constitutes a second principal structure and use on the property. From a from a planning perspective, uh I
would agree with you. Okay, that's it for this evening. Um so thank you for uh entertaining my questions. Appreciate it. Sure, chairman. Uh I will be back to uh your administrator
to confirm that July 23rd is in play uh even if it is only a benchmark uh to segue into a later date in August. But I'd like to try to keep this moving along. Um and uh July 23rd was the date
that is shared with us as a possible date. Right. Uh I also have to make sure that my traffic engineer is back and will be ready. Right. So let me just jump in. I'm not available on the 23rd. Nor am I. So
nor am I. Nor am I. We're we're we're going to run into some diff difficulty with scheduling. Mr. Seni, as you can appreciate, we're in the summer months. So let me turn to these Mr. Alters, the keeper of the calendar. You're muted, Ed.
The next available date would be August 27th. There it is. That works for me. All right. So, let's while we let's go down the the roster here. Uh, Mr. Costa, does that date work for you?
Yeah, that should be fine. Y. Okay. Uh, Mr. Barrens, I I'm not 100% sure to be honest. Um I think I was supposed to be away that Wednesday. I can maybe accommodate a virtual appearance if necessary. Okay. Why don't you check that and
confirm that with that and we'll figure that out. Um any members of the board have a conflict on that day? Uh I will be away actually on the 20 August 27th. Yes, Mr. Cody is not I will be away as well. Mr. S was not
available. Okay. Believe I'm in town. I believe I should be fine. All right. Um, if you can, can you confirm to Mr. Alter in the next couple of days your schedule? Mr. Deppkin, you as well. Sorry, I missed you. Um, and that way we can
coordinate scheduling. We would not have a quorum if they did not go up because remember the mayor and councilman are excused as well, right? We need a super majority. So, so if you can't see August 27th, the
next date is September 10th. That works for me and certainly doesn't work for my client. And this Charles Slo is September 10th. It will not be I'm not available. With all due respect to objectives
council schedules, I think the applicant uh has to weigh in first and I think we're telling you or we're asking you if possible upon that September date. Do you entertain specials? I mean, I'm obviously happy to
accommodate a special meeting since I'm conflict counsel. It's very easy for me to do that. Um, it may make sense, Mr. Chairman, to to do to do it that way, especially if we're going to use the Zoom platform. It's just easier for me to do it that way.
Yeah, I think it's just going to be a function of making sure that we've got all the uh necessary parties in even for that even for the special meeting. Um, and I think can I make a suggestion that I think will be helpful? Sure. Why don't we put this down for
July 23rd and then we can select on that night so we keep our notices alive and well. Uh we can then determine whether a special is in order and and know what that date would be.
Well, September 10th is just too far out really. be recycling all of the testimony again because memories do fade. Well, the 23rd is is a challenge right now because both myself and Mr. Leman are not available that day. Um, so I
think you're looking at the first August. I wouldn't be available that day either. So I think you're looking at an August meeting anyway. Okay. So the next meeting for the purposes of carrying the notices is August 27th.
will extend the board's time to act so that no one thinks anybody is contemplating a default approval. I've never done one in my life. I won't ever. Uh I have that problem with the act, but that's another story. Uh I want to talk
about then using October 27th either as the date if possible or a special meeting date in close proximity to that date. Did you say October 27th? I said I said did I I I meant to say
August 27th. You said you said October, but I think Yeah. Apologize. All right. So, why don't we schedule then for for August then we can figure out scheduling from at least we have a date to put on the put it on the
calendar. All right. So So are we going to go forward August 27th? I think there is I certainly can and Mr. Pope will be available for crossexamination by the public quote
unquote and possible redirect from me. I just don't know if we'll have a quarum. Well, that's I get it. That's the time of year we have to deal with and we'll deal with it. If that happens, it
happens. Is Is that meeting going to be in person or on Zoom? It's only going to be on Zoom. Yeah, we're going to be on Zoom for the foreseeable future. So, um just trying to think if there's a good way to do this.
Mark, can I ask this question, please? Does does the board use any of the uh programs that are available for scheduling when you have this many people with important schedules where you can pull and it determines the dates when everybody can do it?
Um I have not yet seen a board do that uh Mr. Pard and I've been doing this work for not as long as Mr. Cinei but not a short amount of time either. Uh, usually it falls on the board secretary to call everybody or send out a gajillion emails and figure out their calendar, which is why I really like to
schedule these meetings um, like right now as the meeting is coming to an end because we have everybody in the room and everybody has their calendar and I don't think there's any reason why we can't pick a date to have a Zoom meeting. Um, and and I'd really like to pick a date
before we break tonight. What What about a special in September? Yeah, I mean that's fine for me. Tell me what works for you and I'll look at my calendar. Well, we have we had two meetings available in September, September 10th
and September 24th. Could we be the exclusive applicant on the 10th so that it would in essence be a special meeting even though it's a regularly scheduled meeting. Correct. Do we have anything on for the 10th at
this point? Probably not. No, nothing. He would be the only one. All right. So, I believe Charles mentioned that he's not going to be there. He's not capable of being there. Yeah. Well, you have vacation or you gonna like do
you have another meeting that night? Uh, I have a uh e afternoon commitment that will probably go into the evening. All right. And I'd also like to I'd also like to add that we are planning on bringing our our architect and possibly a planner to
the next meeting or to work with Charles. Very difficult to get everybody on the same page. Maybe you can send a substitute, Mr. Solo. Yeah. And I don't think we're going to finish this in another another meeting either. Um I agree. All right. I I hate to to tell
anybody that, you know, their schedule is not important, but this is just very tricky to schedule this. What's the other September date that we had? September 2. September 10th and September 24th. Does September 24th work for everybody that's on the call? That works for May.
Yes. I would just I would just caution. I know there's a religious holiday that week that we need to be careful about. I mean, it's it's fine. When is that? I know December 24th is fine for me, but I
think that uh according to my calendar, it's the uh Rashana holiday on on September 23rd, but sometimes some people observe two days. So, I'm just throwing that out there, but the 24th would work for me.
Yeah, Russ ends on Sunday sundown on Wednesday the 24th. So, right. So, I think we're good to go at 7:30. Okay. Either dates for me would be fine. 10th or 24th? Yeah. Same here.
Same here. Same here. All right. Good. Do we do we have it from our board, which is I guess the more is most important part of this equation. I've not heard anybody say they can't asking everyone else's, but do we have a 24th is fine?
I'm I'm assuming we get all nations chiming in. All right. It's It seems like September 24th at 7:30 p.m. on the Zoom platform. Uh Mr. Alter, is it the same link that we're going to use or is it a different link?
I'm sorry. Is it a different one? Is it a different different Zoom link or the same Zoom link? It's a different link. I'll have to send the link to him. All right. I just want to make I'll send out Zoom invites like I did for tonight's meeting. All right. I just want to make an
announcement to preserve the open public meetings notice then. So, this meeting is going to be continued to 7:30 p.m. on September 24th on the Zoom platform. The link will be posted on the burough website at least 10 days in advance.
There will be no further notice. There won't be anything in the newspaper. There won't be anything mailed to anybody's homes. There won't be any notices published on the bulletin board of burrow hall. This is the only continued notice. So, anyone from the public who wants to be heard
needs to appear at that time either in person or through council to ask questions and make their statements now. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Leven. With that, I will look for a motion to adjurnn.
So moved. Thank you, Mr. Fler and Mr. Gibbons. All in favor? I. Any oppose? Any abstain? Thank you, everyone. We're adjourned. 10:15 p.m. Enjoy the evening. Have a great summer, everyone.
Good night, everyone. And Chris, um, just I'm not going to be at the next meeting. Just thrown out there again. Thank you. Got it. Thanks. Okay. Have a great night everybody. Bye.