Good evening everyone. This is the regular meeting of the municipal land use board the river edge. Today's Wednesday, June 10th, 2026. Time now is 7:30 p.m. This meeting of the municipal land use board of the Burough River Edge is being held both in person and remotely via Zoom in compliance with the
provisions of the Open Public Meetings Act and associated regulations. Notice of this hybrid meeting was published in the Bergen record, posted at Burough Hall, and posted on the Burough's website. The notice included the dialin and login information necessary for public participation and access to this
meeting remotely. Copy of the agenda for this meeting was made available on the bureau's website near the posting of the meeting notice and included the dialin and login information. At this time, I ask you kindly silence all cell phones. During the public comment period of this
meeting, if you would like to make a public comment, you may step up to the microphone and wait to be recognized. You may press the raise hand button on Zoom or dial star9 on your telephone keypad to raise your hand. 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. At this time, um, ask everybody to please rise. Salute the flag.
>> Mr. Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you everyone. At this time, I'll
ask uh our council, Miss Brown, to call the role. >> Thank you. Mr. Mayor, >> here. >> Mr. Kaslin >> here. >> Mr. Craig >> here. >> Miss Bolan >> here. >> Mr. Gibbons >> here. >> Mr. Kigo, Mr. Sava, Mr. Goier are excused tonight. Councilman Glass
>> here, >> and Miss Lavine >> here. >> Also present, we have our zoning officer, Mr. Dupkin, on Zoom, our board planner, Mr. Barren, our board engineer, Mr. Costa and our recording secretary Lisa is on Zoom.
>> Okay, thank you very much. One housekeeping item before we get started. Uh we will have a curfew of 10:00 this evening. Uh first item on our agenda this evening is under the approval of minutes. We have a set of minutes from our May
13, 2026 meeting. A draft set of the minutes were circulated for review prior to this evening's meeting and I open it to the board for comments and or questions. I did have a couple revisions. >> Um
there was a a a couple recesses at that meeting. So So I um Uh >> oh. Not sure why there's feedback. Okay. Um I just included a note that there was a recess taken due to audio difficulties
at 7:41. Um and noted who was present when the recess ended and put in a note about technical difficulties. Um mainly just rearranging that. Um, and then also noting that there was a second
recess at 7:55. Um, and then a few there was a a note on page five that the applicant was inaudible, but I looked at my notes and I included that the put in
a a sentence that the applicant was not intending to replace the fence um because it was previously approved by the bureau. That's at the the second to last sentence of the long paragraph on par p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p page five
and then just revising the par the second to last paragraph on page five. There were a bunch of numbers that were thrown around, but I just revised it to be the the final square footage numbers. So just to make it clear in the minutes.
>> Okay. And I I have one clarifying uh edit on third line under IAT. Uh just to make clear that the the comments that were given there were were from me and not from Mr. Leeman. >> Which page was that? >> Page two in the IA.
>> Oh, okay. >> Yeah. just clarify that was it was my comments because it reads as if Mark Leeman made the application and was changes. >> So just a clarifying change. >> All right.
>> All right. So with those revisions, I'll look for a motion to approve the minutes. >> So moved. >> Thank you, Mr. Gibbons. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Thank you, Miss Bolan. everybody >> and everyone is eligible except for the mayor and councilman.
>> Okay, with those uh those two exclusions, I'll look for all in favor. >> I any opposed? >> Okay, thank you. Okay, we'll now move to the completeness review section of our
agenda for this evening. The first application is for Michael and Melanie Schwiger. The property address is 265 Adams Avenue, block 506, lot 3. Application seeking approval for construction of an outdoor
living space. Miss Brown. >> Yes. Thank you. Prior to this meeting, I reviewed the proofs submitted by the applicant and found them to be sufficient for the board to hear the application tonight. >> Okay, Mr. Costa,
excuse me. >> Okay. Thank you, sir. Mr. Deppkin. Uh, >> yes. Good evening. Uh I feel it's deemed complete to be heard. >> Okay. Questions from the board as to completeness on the application. >> Okay. And being none, I'll look for a motion to deem the application complete.
So move. >> Thank you, Mr. C. Is there a second? >> Second. Thank you, Mr. Gibbons. >> All right, Mr. Mayor. >> Yes. >> Mr. Kaslin, >> yes. >> Mr. Cray, >> yes. >> Miss Boland, >> yes. >> Mr. Gibbons, >> yes. >> Councilman Glass,
>> yes. >> And Miss Leavine, >> yes. Okay, the motion passes. >> Okay, thank you. Our our second item under completeness review this evening is applicant is Melo Bagels and Cafe LLC. Property is 101 Midland Avenue,
block 206, lot 3. This is an application for a food handlers license contemplating no exterior improvements other than changing the name on existing signage. Miss Brown. >> Yes, thank you. The the proofs are
acceptable. I reviewed them prior to this meeting. Um, there was a slight typo in the Zoom information, but the details of the notice provided sufficient information about how to access and participate in the meeting. So, I found that to be acceptable. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Costa.
>> Same thing, Mr. Chairman. Um, they submitted, excuse me, again, they submitted plans application. My opinion again, it's for just a a change of uh use for the food handlers license. that's required under the ordinance. So, they can certainly proceed this evening. >> Okay. Thank you, sir. Mr. Deepkin.
>> Uh, yes. Uh, I still feel it's uh complete to be heard. >> Okay. Questions from the board as to completeness on the application. >> There being none, I'll look for a motion to deem the application complete. >> So moved. >> Thank you, Miss Bolan. Is there a second?
>> Second. >> Thank you, Mr. Gray. >> Right, Mr. Mayor? >> Yes. >> Mr. Kaslin. >> Yes. >> Mr. Craig? >> Yes. >> Miss Bolan? >> Yes. Mr. Gibbons, >> yes. >> Miss uh Councilman Glass, >> yes. >> And Miss Leavine, >> yes. >> Okay, the motion passes.
>> Okay, thank you. We're now going to move to the new business section of our agenda for the evening. Excuse me. First application is for Michael and Melanie Schweiser. Property is 265 Adams Avenue, block 506, lot three, application
seeking approval for construction of an outdoor living space. Um the applicant is here. >> Kindly step up. >> Just kid. There's a button on the mic. Yeah. >> Push a little harder. >> There you go.
>> There we go. >> So, if you need We're going to have our attorney swear you in. >> All right. Uh, everyone who's going to be giving testimony, please raise your right hand. Do you swear? Affirm that that the testimony that you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> All right. And we'll start with the applicants. If you just state your name,
last name, and address um for the record. >> Sure. Melanie Schwagger, 265 Adams, River, New Jersey. >> Michael Schwagger, 265 Adams AB, River, New Jersey. >> Sean Scott, Escott Construction, 530
Commerce Street, Franklin. And Mr. Scott, could you provide your background in lensure to the board and just point You have to share the microphone. I'm sorry. >> Uh, licensed contractor in the state of New Jersey since 2008.
>> Okay. Your license is in good standing. >> Correct. Yes. >> Have you appeared before this board or any other board? >> Many other boards. Never. this board. >> Can you just give us a quick rundown of your experience? >> Um, I've been in the construction business since 2002.
Uh, Escott Construction was formed in 2008. Um, I have two degrees in architecture from the New Jersey Institute of Technology. >> That's about it. >> Are you a licensed architect in New Jersey? >> No. Okay. >> Okay. So, your testimony is just
strictly as a contractor, not >> Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. Okay. Um, floor is yours. >> Sure. >> Josh, you can go first. Yeah. >> Um, good evening everyone. Um, so my husband and I are looking to um request for approval for a cover deck at the
rear of our home. Um, just a little background on us. You know, Michael and I are both um Riverdale graduates. Michael grew up in River Edge and I grew up in Orell right next door. Um, we chose to build our life together and raise our family in River Edge. Um, so after purchasing our first home in River
Edge in 2014, um, we moved to Adams Aav this past September. Um, we appreciate the board's consideration of our application and would like to just provide a little bit of context as to why we believe this is a reasonable improvement to our property. Um, and really the purpose of this project is to
create a functional outdoor space for our family. Um, the backyard receives full southern exposure and the cover deck would provide shade as well as weather protection needed for us to comfortably use the space throughout much of the year. Um, the proposed deck
um will be entirely in the rear of the yard. Um, and it will not um alter the character of the neighborhood. You will not be able to see it from the front of the house and it will simply create a safe, functional outdoor space for our family to enjoy. Um lastly, we do
understand the importance of managing the storm weather responsibility. I know we got some information from the engineer on Monday. Um and certainly that will be a priority for us to comply um with those requirements. Um so in closing and we respectfully request the board's approval for application and you know thank you for your time and we're
open for questions or there's more to >> uh just a couple technical things related to it. Uh they're in R1. They're 6,000 ft lot, 7,500 ft² required for R1. Just looking at the surrounding streets, it is one of the smallest lots on the
block and in R1, putting them at a slight disadvantage. Um also, the Schwaggers purchased the home, I believe, in September last year. Uh it's a new construction. Believe they were under the impression that they had the room to do this at the time of the purchase. they were
surprised to kind of see some of the existing nonconformities that were there. Um but again due to the size of the lot um the full southern exposure in the back this is uh really the path forward that makes the most sense for them.
>> Okay. Thank you. Um let's start with excuse me start with our professionals. Mr. Deppkin. >> Uh yes, good evening. Um the lot uh I agree is a small lot. Um the I think the big issue is the fact that uh the deck
is enclosed which would include or be calculated as building coverage and lot coverage. Um so those are the main main issues. The fact that it's uh you know 12.5 ft uh encroaching into the rear
yard setback uh is an issue also. Um, I I would like to ask the applicants, have they just have they looked at possibly putting uh this porch uh or deck uh on the um south east side of the building
where it's sort of notched out you see on the survey. Um, we did explore that, but there is a garage access there and it's also slanted on the hill, >> heavily slanted, >> which
this is really the flat rectangular spot. So, getting some uh drawings ready. >> I'm sorry. Could you just speak a little bit louder? It's Yeah. >> Yeah. I was just saying that the way the house obviously you're not looking at it now, but there's a garage the house is on a hill. So, there's a garage door
that opens to the back there. So, we'd have probably have to close that door in or I'm I'm not even sure what would happen. There's not really any space there because it's a it's a unique uh area back there with some cutouts and an entryway to the garage. >> We've evaluated a bunch of different options of where the deck could
potentially be covered, uncovered, screened, unscreened, but we really found that, you know, after lots of discussion and analysis that this really was worked best for us. And I get that covered is a little bit um more of a of an ask for us, but like that's what solves the problem is this southern exposure and having two young children trying to get kids to wear hats and
sunscreen. It's like I'd rather stay inside, but it's like so it's for us it's important to have that enclosure. So it's a good place for the family to be outside for um family fun and for um for eating. >> Believe there are also a number of mechanical things happening in that area
cost prohibitive to move to kind of create the in that space as well as the access to the garage and the changing topography to the neighboring yard. And don't quote me on this, but I do believe that there's existing storm water management system in that location
based on what we looked at before that also >> Excuse me, chairman, I'm having difficulty hearing him. >> Move the microphone. believe there's a possibility that there's an existing storm water chamber in that area in particular that would make it difficult
to to put anything in that space. >> So, Mr. Depp, I don't know if you heard the there there's a there's a a grade issue there and mechanicals is is what the response was to your question. >> Um, did they consider a deck with a
rollout uh awning? That's uh would eliminate um your um some coverages. >> Uh they'd still be over on building. >> Correct. >> No, we didn't really consider that because we we had a a louvered roof in
our last home and if you get any type of rain, you're still can't be out there. So we were hoping to get the full coverage so you actually with any little drizzle you don't have to run back inside. So that was kind of the goal. >> That's all I have. Chairman.
>> Okay. Thank you. Mr. Cost basically >> Oh, you have to turn your mic. >> It's such a Someday I'll be trained with this. I apologize. Um, again, I think you heard what it basically they're they're building a deck and they're putting a roof on top. And I think Steve
uh said it once you put the roof on top, it's considered a structure. It's considered a building. And then that's why you're getting into all the variances. If you put a patio and then you put pavers, you get the 50% reduction and it doesn't count towards that.
But again, this is the proposal in front of you. And I know the councilman is probably going to look at me and say they're going to start doing arithmetic again and um >> never. >> Okay. Thank you, Councilman. But that that's basically it. So it's really that's the application in front of you.
The board has to decide whether or not they meet any criteria for the C variances that they require. And if they don't, then the board would have to uh vote as it should. That's really all it is. Everything else
is it's really not an engineering it's really I should hand it off to uh Tom because it's it's more of a planning issue. >> Uh kind of jumping in here as we don't do the residential so much here. Um I it's a balance certainly. you have a
homeowner. Um I think they currently don't have a rear yard amenity space and you know in River Edge you expect to have some way to enjoy the the the backyard. Uh we heard the applicant's testimony that it's an undersized lot. Um and so I I think you heard Mr. Costa
mention the reasons, right? There there's reasons that the board can approve um variances. The first reason is what's called the C1 or hardship test. You you have to demonstrate whether or not there's any hardships impacting your property. I think you talked about the undersized lot issue. Um, obviously the the house is there and
the configuration that it's in. Um, and then you have the public benefit one which and it's not in, you know, an or proposition. It could be both. Um, the public benefit is will the granting of the relief generate any public benefits that way outweigh any detriments. Um, so
uh the variances that are being sought are the rear yard setback variance. Um, there's a building coverage variance and a lot coverage variance. So that's what's being requested at at present. Um, it sounds like you guys explored other options as far as trying to come into compliance. Um, as far as the size
of the deck, is that something you've thought about? Um, I think it's at what 228 by >> 15 or so. >> It's about 15 by 20. >> Okay. And is that kind of is there any wiggle room there? I I think for the way they intend to use
it, I mean, basically they want to create a living area for the family, like a fireplace with a TV in it, so they can kind of create that extra outdoor living space and use the yard uh for most of the season. >> It's a pretty modest size considering furniture layout by today's standards. So,
>> yeah, >> you know, >> all right. I I mean, as as far as location, um the house is where it is, it's at the 25 foot setback. So whether it was a patio or a deck, you'd probably end up with something that sticks into the yard by some amount. Um, and the
coverages are, you know, what they are in some respect. Uh, that the property is currently built with the house. A driveway. Do you know about how wide the driveway is? >> Um, what's it? It's a twocar driveway. >> It's a two two car. Okay. Anyway, so um
and it looks like they're currently I don't know a bit over the coverage as it with the house and the driveway. So um you know again to have something >> excuse me the driveway I believe was a permeable installation.
>> Okay. Oh, so that would have perhaps then there was a miscalculation in the coverage uh assessment not knowing that permeability uh requirement. Basically depending on the the type of material you use, you can get credits for that. So for like pavers or impervious
coverage. So um those are sort of the the planning issues I guess uh that the board has to consider. >> Thank you. Keep going around Mr. Cray. Um yeah, just to be clear, the driveway
is or is not made of the permeables? >> It is not. >> It's not. Is that something you'd consider? >> No, I'm Excuse me. I'm almost certain that it's permeable pavers. >> Okay.
>> Okay. Has and that has not been entered into the calculation. >> It's been treated as 100%. So that would help the uh the application. So, the driveway is 764 square ft.
So, >> yeah, I mean that would certainly help. >> See what 50% on that >> 50%. >> Right. So, uh, if it it sounds like there's some maybe disagreement about what this frame
is made from, if it is not permeable, would you consider changing it, making it with permeable materials? >> Um, I mean, we would consider everything to We literally walked to this open house in August and we liked it and we
put an offer in in two days and I didn't even think about the driveway material at all. So >> I mean it it looks >> looks like a brand new driveway. I think >> so. >> I just mean as far as ripping it out, putting in a new one, it's probably >> painful, >> cumbersome. Yeah.
>> Um I guess the other thing I just want to understand the use of the the new enclosed patio um fireplace. You know, you talked about you want it to be effectively weatherproof because you don't want to use an awning because
it'll get wet. Um, help me understand the difference between that and putting another room on the house. >> So, the walls are a screen material. So, it's a system called screens. It's basically just a heavy duty screen
materials out. >> So, um, transparency to the walls. It's still an outside structure. It's not really a >> threeseason still just kind of give you a little bit of protection from bugs like that.
>> Okay, >> that's all I have. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Uh, couple of questions. Um, uh, first of all, uh, I don't know who I addressed this to. Was this house built before the ordinance change?
because in the ordinance change there has to be a reserve for outdoor amenities and I'm assuming that since it doesn't exist that that's not that that was the case. Mr. >> What? >> It wasn't >> it wasn't built before built after the ordinance.
>> Mr. Jen, can can you elaborate on how this building was was approved when without the outdoor space? Uh >> um I think what happened was the when they were uh this house was being flipped um and when they were trying to
um get uh coverages. I think I think that's why I remember the driveway being permeable uh because they took that into consideration. As far as the amenities in the back I don't have an answer for that >> there. there. This is uh Councilman
Glass and I there should have been multiple variances. I I mean we changed the ordinance so that we would not have a situation where homeowner would be coming forward with no backyard and looking to do this. So, um I expect a
full investigation, Mr. Dempkin, of who approved um this and how it could possibly have gotten u through given the current ordinance. Having said that, um this is essentially
um a one season or season and a half space. Correct. >> Yeah. >> And it's as an outdoor fireplace. I get it. So that can you can keep it warm, but during the summer and it has southern exposure, right?
>> Which means um it's even with a roof, it's going to be somewhat warm. Is there an air conditioning unit being put in or planned? >> Ceiling fan. >> Ceiling fan because it's going to be 101
tomorrow with uh and so I mean this is a lot to ask of this board uh to push something all the way to 12 ft uh from the property to your neighbors and a lot of space. And I don't know how this
building was built. It's not your fault. You bought it as is. Um, but it certainly seems that uh uh whoever approved all this needs to explain to this board and to the council, I would think how that
>> excuse mayor, excuse me, that would be me. Uh, I did the zoning review and I would have to research it. I don't know what the existing structure looked like. The problem is uh with new construction and renovations um they leave the foundation uh and they
build upon that. Um if there was an addition uh that's what I would have to look into. >> All right. That that would be good. Um but I mean uh I I understand that it's an undersized lot and everything else, but it's just a lot to ask. I I I don't
know if I can vote yes in its current configuration. And I get where you're coming from, but we have to be concerned about the neighbors. We have to be concerned about permittable coverage, putting a roof on, which um and you're already you've testified that there's
already some sort of water management system in the ground. And Mr. Costa, if they if we approve this, they're going to have to put another water management system in the ground. Right. >> That is correct. And if we don't know where the old water management system
is, then I begin to wonder uh the whether it's a good idea. I I just have a lot of concerns and I don't know how to address it other than that. >> Yeah. Have to be improved if there's going to be more coverage. >> Yeah. >> So, we're waiting on a request from the
town to see what system was installed relative to what issue was. assuming they had to put in something to get approval for for the construction that's there. >> What I can do tomorrow I can certainly pull this in our office. I'm sure it went for a soil moving permit. Um and
let's see what we have in on record in our office. >> Well, again, you're correct, mayor. >> Yeah, I might suggest that you want to hold over. I mean, I think the rest of the I I cannot vote yes for this at this time because there are just too many
things I don't understand. Uh but uh undersized lots we we try to be accommodating but I I there are a lot of questions here I just don't understand and maybe there needs to be further research and needs to be held over because you wouldn't want to be voted
down and then you can't come back. But that's I'm not trying to offer you advice. I'm just reacting to what I'm seeing >> suggesting. That's it. Thank you. Councilman, >> I agree with everything the mayor just uh communicated. Yeah, it looks to me
like for the existing construction, there would have had to be multiple variances. So, it'd be good to understand the record. With respect to that, um I like the mayor, I'm concerned about the
lot coverage. It's not like in the ballpark of what we typically approve when we do approve variances. Um, one um redeeming thing I I I I am
concerned about the rear yard setback. Um, it's going to be pretty small, right? If I understand um the Yeah, 13 feet we're going to
from 26.7. But I I did note >> there it looks like pretty high vegetation. >> I was going to say this. I've never seen my back door neighbor's house. I don't even know what color it is. >> And also I will tell you Yeah, I know. I was just going to say that when I look
at the aerial, the people behind you that would be most affected by the rear yard setback doesn't look like they're more than 12 ft from the property line either with their patio or whatever they have back there.
>> So, you know, it's fair. It's fair there, I guess. >> Oh, yeah. Agree. >> You know what I'm saying? >> But, um, other than that, I'd like to understand the record better regarding the variance. And I think >> I I I like the concept, you know, I get the outdoor space and how that's not an
indoor space and it provides kind of a diff whole different um vibe and ambiance. Um but again, I'm concerned about the lack coverage. Thank you, Chair. >> Okay. >> Mr. Gib, >> um that was one of the things I was
going to point out. It doesn't look like you would see it from your rear yard neighbor's house, right? You can't really see through >> no >> that property. >> Um, and there is a pretty tall fence between you and uphill. >> Can only see the second floor at the top
of the window. So, >> did you did you consider making it wider and less deep? I know I know furniture and all that makes a difference. Um, and the location I get it is where it is, but could you go a
little bit wider? Or I guess this is the this rectangle is the right configuration. >> There's a couple different issues. Many of these house attach pavilions roof pitch relin. >> Okay. Um, and just I don't know if this
is for Mr. Costa who So I know that the roof makes a difference. So if they did some sort of awning and you know if this does have to get pushed back a little bit, then it it could potentially be 75%
credit by doing the deck with the >> When I was younger, I I could memorize these codes, but that that day is over. Um, if they put a patio, you could get 50% reduction with with environmental papers. If it's on the
ground, I don't think, and I'm I don't know where Steve went. >> I think you can go five feet from the property line with that. >> And I think I asked Tom and he wasn't sure. I'm not sure. And that's why we're going towards you.
>> But not covered. >> Not covered. But if they stick to the deck, if you have an awning or a chenzano umbrella, let's say, I don't think that would raise to that that >> No, but if they but if they do the deck with the spacing, then 75% correct. >> 75%. >> So, just kind of giving
>> But then the coverage then I believe the rear yard setback. >> Yeah. If if if it's a deck uncovered, it still would need a rear yard setback variance. >> Yeah. >> Right. But if it's a I guess so with the building coverage, it doesn't help at
all. which I still don't understand. Someone's going to have to explain to me why that is. >> Um, >> no, it helps the coverage. >> It helps the the improved coverage, but not the building coverage coverage. >> The building, if I'm Am I correct on that? >> I could answer. >> You are 100% correct.
>> I love when people say that. >> You are 100% correct. >> Okay. So, so they're still going to have >> says he can explain it. >> Please. >> Uh, building coverage is any type of structure is calculated in building coverage. So, the deck is a structure.
>> Why is that a structure and not a patio? That's the thing. >> Patio would be at grade level. >> Um, and if you had say a deck flooring at grade grade level, that would be considered a patio. But if you're
building it up, you know, um, to um, um, above grade, then it's considered a structure. is and then we don't need to get into a conversation but is that something that could be changed but by ordinance or is that just code >> that that's code >> so we couldn't change that as an
ordinance >> we can change the code by >> okay >> no I think Mr. Uh Ryan's asking is is that something the state establishes or is that something municipality establishes? >> It's the uniform construction code and a
deck is considered a structure. >> State. >> Okay. Not to get into a bigger topic, but this is something I never said. >> So what building coverage is versus what lot coverage is. >> Change. We don't need to get into all it. I just was asking that question. Um,
just something I guess if we if it does get pushed off, something to consider that it might be more palatable for some if it's doesn't have the roof and it's some sort of retractable awning or whatever. I don't know how everyone's going to react, but um, that's all I had. Thank you,
>> Miss. >> Yep. I have nothing to add to everybody's comments. I agree with them. >> Okay, Miss Levine, >> same. Okay. Um, I think you've heard the sentiment of the board at this time. Um, it's
leave you at the option of, you know, it's your discretion. As the mayor alluded to, you know, you can take action on it this evening, which may or may not be favorable, or you can have the option of coming back after doing some further evaluation
and due diligence based on what you find in the Oak River returns. And and if you asked for a new date today, you wouldn't have to renotice. We would just put the notice on the record tonight for another day. >> So just to be clear, is the due
diligence relative to storm water management or lot coverage? >> I mean based on what the board described, my understanding is we need to the board would like to know more about what is the existing storm water
management on the site. what would you propose? Um, and then more support for the requested relief or and any changes that you want to make based on what you've heard tonight. >> Would the board be able to contention based on storm water management approval
or I don't know how you guys >> it's all part of the analysis. So, you know, we can't both you know discreet all part of the same application. So, but And just one last thing, the mayor, I believe you said that there's something
in place for a 5%. >> Yes, we changed the ordinance so that you would ha so that villagers could not build in such a way that you'd be deprived of an outdoor amenity. >> Exactly what happened to us, right? >> Yeah, it should. That's exactly the situation we're in right now. >> To be honest with you, if if something
happened that was not that uh so Mr. Dempington's going to research that and hopefully he'll have if we if we um >> what would you call it? Um hold over. >> If we if if we decide if you decide to ask for a hold over then hopefully we'll
have some answers for that and I would think those answers would be somewhat in your favor because I don't think you're responsible for this. But right now, you know, if if we if we were to prove it right now, my serious concern would be order
management. And you're on a hill, too, right? And the property next to you is above, which means the property on the other side is below. And this is one of our responsibilities is to make sure that we're not moving water into someone else's property because we need to
protect all the residents as we try to be accommodating to the applicants. at least from my point of view. Um there's no obligation for the board to feel that way. But um so for me uh one of the things I would really want to know is
how much of that backyard already has a water management system? How much can it handle? And is approving this application going to be feasible as as currently written with a roof if there is not enough space in the backyard to
properly manage the water. And I have serious doubts about that right now. I don't know how the the rest of the board feels. So we have a dual responsibility to the town and to the applicant. And I just don't I cannot see how I could
vote. Yes. Given the what I know now or what I don't know. >> Yeah. Yeah. And just full disclosure about the engineering comments yesterday I believe relative to motor management. So full intention to to make that work for whatever it needs to be. I believe
the understanding is that whatever was put in was oversized slightly. However, that may not be the case. Whatever it is, we fully intend to look at that and address it however it needs to be addressed. Um, I would just note that the increase in impervious coverage or lock coverage
is under 5%. versus the existing, which I would think would help your guys's case. if that was supposed to be a mechanism that was put in place for you. >> If it's a 3,000 foot house and we're adding a slightly more roof, maybe 300
square feet, I don't know if it's going to be we'll do the calculation of course the proper way, but I just can't >> before you make any determination, let's just open to the public for for comments. I have a motion that
>> Okay, Mr. Gibbons and council. All in favor? Any >> opposed? Is there anybody in the public attendance here this evening or on Zoom wishes to be heard on this application and this application alone?
>> If you're on Zoom, you can press the raise hand button. >> Okay. Uh we will >> Okay. Uh there being no one in the public wishing heard, I'll take a motion to close. >> So moved. >> M given. >> Second.
>> Men. All in favor? >> I >> I. >> Um so at this time, I leave it to you as to what how you want to proceed. If you'd like us to carry your your application for you to uh do some further
evaluation. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Correct. >> Yes, that's correct. So >> the next meeting date is June 24th and we don't have anything scheduled. So >> that will give will that give you enough
time to >> do your >> Yeah, we filed an OPER request earlier in the week. So, you should have the answers as to what was approved for this whole new construction in terms of storm water management and according to
>> tomorrow morning when I get in, I'm not going to say early, but when I get in, um I'll uh I'm teasing. I'll I'll pull the file and I'll I'll ask Greg. I'm sure it's on the side of his desk. Again, when I walked out, he gave me something, but I I I didn't see it in
here. So, I would say you'll have an answer if you call my office sometime in the morning. you'll have an answer. I know we got a 10 o'clock meeting in the morning, but other than that, either hit me before or after. >> I have that answer. >> Thanks for your time. We'll just >> ask for a motion and a second
>> to carry to the June 24th meeting. >> So moved. Second >> and all in favor. >> We have a motion from the mayor, a second. All in favor? >> Oppos same. >> All right. And I'll just make a notice
on the record. I think somebody else has their zoom on, so if you could just mute. Okay. Um, the application for Michael and Melanie Swagger, 265 Adams Avenue, block 506 lot 3 will be carried to the June 24th meeting of the
municipal land use board without further notice. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. I wish there was a way we could make people aware of some of the zoning requirements when they buy a house. >> Yeah.
>> No, >> some towns have like a handout or like a FAQ kind of like welcome the river. >> Okay, we're going to continue on our agenda for the evening. We are still under new business. Next item is
for applicant Melo Bagels and Cafe LLC. The property is 101 Midland Avenue, block 206, lot 3. Application for a food handlers license. No exterior improvements are complicated other than
a change to the existing signage or the name of the signage for the business at that location. Believe we have the applicant and council. Mr. Barrett, good evening. >> Good evening, Mr. Kas, members of the board.
for the African. I have two witnesses tonight, a principal of and the architect. Um, and as as been described really uh simple change, change the name on the building
uh the same size as previously approved by the board. Uh, and then there's internally there's going to be added a uh griddle uh with a hood and then a gas stove that's going to have a second one
there already. But uh the tell you what it is that he wants to do. So at this juncture >> yes and just you have to share the microphone. Sorry Tom. Okay. If you please raise your right hand, both whoever is going to be providing testimony, just please raise your right
hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I swear. >> All right. And please state your name and provide your address for the record. >> Okay. My name is Husam Kelli. And my living address is 92 Daro Drive in North
Held in, New Jersey. >> Could you spell your name, please? >> H O U S A M. And the last name K A Y A L I. All right. And if you could just share the microphone. >> Yeah. My name is Christopher Lee. My
location is 111 Grand Avenue, Palace Park. Uh, okay. I've been uh I think I did some testimony at this uh board around 2002. But in the pandemic pandemic area
I I was in the gym meeting. Yeah. That that was my experience on this board. >> Okay. And what is your lensure and is >> I'm the architect you use? >> Yep. >> And your license is current and in good standing in New Jersey.
>> Any questions from the qualifications? Okay. >> Mr. Barrett. >> Thank you. Um, why don't you tell tell what it is that you uh get an approval? What are we going to find at the location? >> So, basically I mean we came to River
Edge um we acquired this location and you know we like it. Um we are not going to do that much changes in this location. We are just adding as Mr. Parrot said only the griddle and the stove. The hoods are already existing. So we are just trying to bring you know
a fresh food that's you know made in the store in the in the in the location itself instead of the frozen one that used to be uh served. We have experience in this business. Um basically me myself I'm like from a healthcare background but I like you know the bagels thing. So
we own like two two uh two other locations one in Paripony and one in Dont New Jersey. So uh we are seeking the approval now. I mean just to just change the name and add the griddle and the stove. Other than that everything is going to be the same. We have the
architect plan and uh just we are seeking the approval for this one. >> So what what what will be uh what will be your hours of operation? >> So the hours of of operation right now we are trying to make it like you know a bagel ant cafe. So that's why it's going to be like early in the morning since
like 5:00 a.m. and we are aiming to stay like till 1000 p.m. Of course, we will do I mean maybe we can adjust it according to the you know business requirements. >> And how many employees will we have >> right now? We have like in a plan like four employees the my partner will be
there and um uh another like three employees. So total and poor >> and how how do how do you get the uh food products you know how are they how are they delivered? >> Okay so we have a contract with a couple of uh our wholesalers and they usually deliver with the regular pickup trucks
and um you know maybe like a small trucks. >> When when do the deliveries normally take place? Like what hours of the day? >> Usually between like 9 to 100 p.m. >> And
uh In terms of trash and and recycling removal, what what are you what arrangements have you made? >> Yeah, we already contracted with a garbage company which comes twice a week. Once for the regular garbage and the other day for the recycling items that
lighting and things of that nature >> again for through the chair from the testimony I You're not changing really. The only thing you're changing is the is the signage outside. >> Correct. >> Everything stays the same. >> Colors, paint, striping, parking lot, nothing changes >> except the sign.
>> Put in a griddle and a hood. >> Yes. >> Which really again, I guess the the board has to think about that. But other than that, it wouldn't there would be no variances or anything. So strictly it's a change of use. And I guess from I I never
walked into the other place. So I obviously I went there when it was Dunkin Donuts. I never went there after. So I'm not sure what they did there or did or didn't do. >> Uh good evening. I don't have uh much to add to that. Just with respect to the uh equipment, will there be any new rooftop
equipment for the hood? So nothing new that needs to be screened. >> Everything. Everything existing. >> Everything. >> Existing. Okay. So I no changes to the exterior of the lot. I have nothing to add. It'll be constructed. So thank you, >> Mr. Deepkin. >> Uh yes, thank you. Um I I feel this is
an expansion of the uh prior prior use. Um you're doing a griddle. Are you going to be doing uh breakfast sandwiches and things of that nature with the bagels? >> Yes.
Um the hood system itself, it depends upon the type of appliances you're installing, depends upon whether the hood needs to be resized or not. Um so that might be an issue um you want to look at. Um there was been uh concern in
the past uh we've gotten calls in the office about um parking uh oh excessive parking uh in other on other properties. Um do you have any um information on that? >> Uh I don't.
>> I think Mr. Jeffy if I may um at the last application uh few years ago uh after after Dunkin Donuts had moved and the uh property owners came in and got approval for the uh >> human beings.
>> Human beings. Thank you. Um there was a concern that same concern was raised and there had previously there had been steps from this property down to what is now the uh music school and the bank.
Those steps were removed and there was a sign put up. I'm not sure if it's still there advising patrons that they were not to use the adjoining lot. >> Okay. Um, okay. Um, I have no other questions.
>> Okay. All right. Main >> right now. >> Okay. Men, >> um, you mentioned so there'll be four employees of yourself and three other employees. >> I mean, right now that's the plan and of course it depends on how how the
business is going to be. So well my question is as far as relates to parking. So that's four of the nine spaces or will they use public transportation? >> Um I mean to be honest we we don't know I mean exactly right now. We didn't I mean have the hiring yet because we are
still we are going to work on the place but we will figure it out. I mean uh of course it depends on on how it's going to be. Yeah. I mean if we have to use our parking then we have to we don't have any other choice. Yeah. But if there's an issue is do you have any any other options?
>> Um I mean we will we will we will see I mean down the road how it's going to be and um we will act accordingly you know >> and um obviously the signage was all approved but from your plan there's a big soft ice cream sign on the building
that I'm sure was not >> take it up. >> Okay. >> Good. >> When when I take the pictures it was there. >> Okay. >> But that's not >> that's not staying. Good. That's it. >> Previous business. Okay. Thank you, M. Paul. Mr. G. >> Uh, just to confirm, the seating is the
same as it is now. Same amount of seats. >> Exactly the same. >> Exactly the same. No more seats that are going. >> Yeah, I know. Okay. >> Otherwise, it looks like it's the same place last time, too. >> Same as that. >> That's it. >> Okay. Thank you, Councilman.
>> I don't have anything. Thank you, Chap. Mr. Mayor, >> just a couple of questions. Um, you probably said this and I didn't catch it. Uh around what time do you expect supplies to be coming and going? Uh >> sorry during the normal hours like you know in the morning usually I mean from
our experience from previous stores I mean they usually deliver it between like you know 9:30 10 till 1. >> Um and um you said the recycling and garbage you've contracted that. What time would they be coming? >> I don't know exactly but our store in
Dumod they come uh Tuesday and Wednesday. I mean, is it going to be earlier in the morning or is it >> No, no, they usually come afternoon. >> Okay. And the last thing is um adding the new griddle, is the current uh air handler or or is is going to be able to
filter out the smells so that it won't be uh oppressive to the apartments or to the residents nearby? I mean, in other words, you're now cooking, which so is is the system that is currently there going to be able to handle that? >> Yes. So we are using the existing hood
that's right now we are just going to upgrade it change it with something like you know a newure but it's exactly the same the same location. >> So I guess my question is is will the public be smelling your cooking? >> No no no >> so the system is designed to filter that out.
>> Yes. >> Okay. Those were those were my concerns. Thank you. >> That's great. >> Yeah. I just I just want to get clarity on the grill and the and the new oven. So there is currently no griddle there. There's currently no oven there.
>> So they you the the old place they used to have like an oven in the back and it has hood uh also above it. So we are just going to replace that oven with the specific oven for the bagel. >> Okay. So this is where I'm confused cuz
I thought that the previous tenant or business wasn't doing any food preparation. Uh my recollection is that was what we approved was there was no food preparation on premise and now maybe they were doing it and
they shouldn't have been doing it. I don't know. Um but is this a change in use? I guess you mentioned that Mr. Deppkin had. Um, I guess that's the question that runs through my mind is if the previous owner was a coffee shop
with no food preparation on premise and now we're talking about running a griddle, doing all these different things, do we have to approve a new use? >> Uh, I'm sorry. >> Well, you're the one who's implementing use under the
>> but do we need to address it? If we don't, you know, we end up in the situation next time where, okay, there's a riddle there. Was that okay? I mean, don't we have to approve that since it has not been approved in the past?
>> Well, I well, Marina's looking furiously for the answer to that. I can address at least what the ordinance provides currently. Um, and so that there's sort of a hierarchy of things that what we look at. One, you'd start with the definitions. We don't define restaurants or different types of restaurants. We
define I think it's retail food establishments which is sort of a general description. Um the parking requirements get a little more specific where I'll give you the different categories. One is restaurants, eating and drinking establishments and on-site catering. That's one category. Second
category is restaurants caf cafeteria style comma fast food. Um actually it's really just a tip. So um the question would be does this use depart from you know so drastically from what had been there u and whether or not it's
drastically is not really the test but does it is it a different type of restaurant than than had previously existed that would warrant you know begs the question you know what would be the be the impact you know right and and from an ordinance perspective the only thing could be potentially I think a
parking thing but but again it's is it really a different type of establishment at at this juncture. >> And and just to add to that, the prior resolution was a proposal to operate a coffee shop on the property and the board determined
that that was a um a permitted use in the zone. And the testimony that was provided back then was that the coffee shop would sell uh custom coffee, smoothie, and baked goods. the baked goods were delivered or were
prepared offsite, but I don't know if they were heated up or something. >> Why don't you help us explain your business? You know, what are you providing? What hours of day? I mean, what are you making on site? What's coming in? Just could you be a little more descriptive? >> So, basically, it's like, you know, what we serve. It's like, you know, a bagel
shop products like breakfast sandwiches and lunch sandwiches plus the cafe and the shakes. So it's that's that's basically it. It's not like a kind of restaurants where people can sit you know and have their meals and you know with you know it's like only a couple of
seated in in in a premises and most probably the the foods that's going to be be served is the breakfast sandwiches and lunch sandwiches. >> You're making the bagels on premises. >> Yes. >> I'm I'm getting very hungry here. >> Okay. So, so you're baking the bagels on
premises >> and you're also as a as a ancillary use, you have a separate griddle where you're going to use those bagels >> for the eggs, you know, the eggs and the bacon and the stuff. Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> What's eating? >> Yeah. Yeah, there's another bagel place like right across the street almost like literally across the street where you're >> Yes, that's right. >> that that's why we're trying to you know also provides you know the cafes the protein shakes you know the the kind of drinks that's kind
>> going to like you know >> we're trying to make it like a little bit fancier. >> So Mr. C hijack your question so I don't >> No, this is good. >> I'm I'm happy. >> Okay. >> Okay. So just for just to clarify, so the only thing that you're actually
baking on premises are the bagels, >> correct? >> Is there anything else that you're bringing in that's already prepared that you're also going to be serving or offering to to customers? >> No, basically that's it. >> Okay. >> All right. Um the only question I had is just in terms of deliveries, could you
just I think you mentioned it, but just elaborate again how what size vehicles are making most of your deliveries. >> So basically it's like a size of a pickup truck, a regular pickup truck. Okay. >> Some of, you know, other wholesalers, they use like a little bit bigger, but it's not like, you know, the 18-wheelers
or or the big ones. >> Okay. Cuz I know in the past, this is not here, but the because of the nature of where the deliveries go in the side of the building, >> correct, >> box trucks have parked in the driveway there and access for people coming in and out has been made difficult. And I
think that's probably what led to some of the parking challenges that Mr. Deppkin was alluding to earlier because people could not get into the parking area. to the parking in the adjacent property. >> So just be just make you aware of that. >> Yeah, I mean I'm totally aware of that and as I as I mentioned from our
experience from our other stores uh we don't have like you know deliveries with the big box trucks. It's reg basically it's like a regular size pick truck they deliver and the the other stuff you know we bring it from you know restaurant depot or the other stuff it's like a regular pickup pickup truck.
>> Okay. Um this time I would >> I did have one question. Um, are you going to be having are you going to be doing delivery to customers? Like somebody could call and say, "I want my bacon, egg, and cheese." >> Uh, not right now. We are not going to
deliver oursel right now, but of course we are going to use the, you know, the apps like Door Dash, GrubHub, Uber Eats, those those apps. >> Thanks. >> Uh, I will there no further questions from the board of professionals. I'll look for a motion to open the public. So
move. All in favor? >> I in the public wishing to be heard on this application either in person with us or on Zoom. >> All right. Silence is Golden. I will take a motion to close the public. So
move. >> Thank you, Councilman. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Thank you, Miss Bolan. All in favor? >> I posted. All right. We now close the public. Any final comments, questions from from board members or professionals >> there? >> Uh just that you would agree to comply
with any of the comments in the board engineer or board planners reports. Okay. And that if there's any issues regarding odors that you would work with the bureau to correct that. Yes. >> Um and make sure that delivery trucks
don't impede the driveway. >> Yes. >> Okay. And you Oh, and that you'd comply with all the other the conditions of the prior approval that aren't by uh changed by this correct resolution. Okay.
>> All right. With that, I'll look for motion on the application. >> So, move it's tip off time. >> Be a little bit more reserved. >> Well, inhibitive. >> I'd like more discussion. >> All right. So, so, so
the councilman for purposes of expediency and administrative efficiency has no amount of time. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Thank you, Mr. >> And the motion is with the conditions that we discussed.
>> Yes. Thank you. >> All right. Mr. Mayor, >> yes. >> Mr. Kaslin, >> yes. >> Mr. Craig, >> yes. >> Mr. Ms. Bolan, >> yes. >> Mr. Gibbons, >> yes. >> Uh, Councilman Glass, >> yes. >> And Miss Leavine, >> yes. >> Okay, the motion passes.
>> Thank you very much. >> Welcome to River Chief. When are you when are you looking to open? >> Uh once we finish. I mean very soon. >> Soon. >> Yeah. We're looking forward to see everybody there. >> Thank you guys. >> Thank you. >> Thank you all.
>> Thank you, Mr. Barrett. >> Me, too. All right. Uh >> put one in the mix on. >> All right. At this time, um we're going to uh move on to our next application. But before we do, we're going to excuse
uh the mayor and councilman because of the uh elements of the next application >> having a D3 component. So gentlemen, we will >> thank you. Good evening. >> Good night everyone.
>> Good night. >> Good night. I know I'm going to throw them. >> Yeah. >> Well, >> and in terms of presenting, um so I have the Zoom up. >> Oh, one second. Oh, sorry. >> Next on our agenda this evening under new business is the applicant Sweet Spot
River Edge LLC. The property is 75 Route 4 East. It's block 1415 lot 1.01. Application seeking a variance for square footage of main and secondary signage to improve visibility.
Um gentlemen, good evening. >> Good evening. your name and address for the record, please. >> Sure. Uh Ivan Tuckton, uh general counsel for Sweet Spot, uh 1012 Tisley Place, Raron, New Jersey, 08869.
>> Ben Herbs, uh one of the managing members of Sweet Spot, uh 151 Cascade Road, Stanford, Connecticut. >> And then if needed, we also have the property owner, Mr. Philip White, with us as well. >> So, >> and Mr. Herps, if you please raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm that the
testimony that you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes. >> All right. Um, and I'm sorry I didn't catch your name, the attorney, >> Ivan. >> Okay. >> Last name tucked in T U K H T I N. >> Thank you. >> Yep.
>> So, I'm on the Zoom. >> Um, Jessica, if you could just um promote Mr. Herp's screen or to a panelist if you There we go. You'll have to join as a panelist. >> Make sure that your computer's still
muted >> and the volume down. Um >> uh while he figures out his technical issues, I'll just give you a brief overview of uh the uh application and what we are requesting. Um so applicant is requesting a handful of variances. We are essentially looking to increase the
square footage of signage and also add more signage to the existing location. The original approval by the town said that any sign changes have to come before the board regardless. So whether variance is needed or not, we have to come before you. But essentially, we are looking to add signs to the existing building, which is now a corner lot on
Route 4. So depending on which side of the highway you're coming from, you'll catch a different side of the building with the main signage being along the frontage of uh Route 4. We're looking to make that a 50 ft sign on each side of the building on either end to make a 25
ft sign. And then also we currently have existing wayfinding signs that have been approved. The four that are in um I don't know if you're familiar with this trip coming up. It's uh there's three buildings on the shopping center. One being Regency Ethan Allen. We are the last one and we're kind of egressed. So
there is wayfinding signs after the first driveway entrance to tell you to make a right because the last entrance into the plaza is an exit. So we want to avoid people making a right into there. So, we are looking for a variance to allow us to have a freestanding sign, which can cannabis ordinance right now
does not allow. Uh to add that to the existing uh freestanding pylon sign at the very beginning of the shopping plaza. As soon as you see it, it's where the existing Regency me um memory center sign is. So, we are looking to place an, as um Ben just showed, a sign underneath
the existing Regency sign um just to show wayfinding that's even more clear than the existing signs, which are really hard to glance at is given the size of the font and their proximity to the ground when you're going the highway speeds. Um and um this sign also leaves
about 8 and 1/2 ft of visibility still underneath it, so it doesn't block anything. And the last thing that I'll add, each uh building on this uh lot that can the shopping center that has the three buildings has a pylon sign, Ethan Allen and Regency. And our
building is the only one that does not. So um us adding to the existing sign all the way in the front is really the le the path of least resistance. And it makes the most sense since it's the first sign you see. So you'll know to turn right away and not all the way down. Um so that's kind of the 500 foot overview.
>> Yes. And I'll just add a few things. I'm I'm sorry to interrupt, but the document that's being displayed on the screen, was that previously pro provided to the board? >> This the visuals were I just had it done in a presentation? >> Oh, okay. All right. Just checking.
>> No worries. >> All right. Thank you. >> And I just wanted to mention the reason why we're doing this is primary uh primary driven by public safety and traffic management concerns. Every day we get customers that say to us they didn't realize our business
operates here. They couldn't identify the correct entrance to come into. They missed the entrance entirely and they have to wrap around into the city and come around. And obviously the reason why the municipality put the cannabis overlay zone on Route 4 is to not have
traffic within the municipality. So signage and making that prominent will help lessen the amount of traffic going within the town itself. I also want to reiterate that we are not adding a pylon sign. This is one that's already
existing. Um and we would just be adding on to that. Um and then in terms of our building signage that we are requesting, um we are just have this 24 square foot sign here. 20, excuse me, 16 square ft
sign. We are requesting three, one larger one in the front and two on the sides. The reasoning why this is so important is because obviously people are driving 50 mph and having a sign that's 16 ft is really small. In addition to that, Ethan Allen has a
massive pylon sign that blocks the viewage of if you're driving down Route 4, you just see the Ethan Allen sign, you don't see our building in general, which causes a major issue. Most businesses you see the building where the business is and the entrance at the
same time. We are one of those situations where it's not like that. So having additional signage will not only make it easier for our customers, but it will stop people from, you know, hard breaking on the highway to get across to the exit. The other thing is we have to
use the center entrance and our current wayfinding signs are 2T by 3 ft that are directly on the ground. it's very hard to see. So, this signage we are asking for, you know, basically four signs. Um,
and this is purely to help highway traffic and to ensure that there won't be any additional issues. Um, we've spoken with Regency, we've met with them, they are totally fine with this. That's not going to be a problem. In addition, I'll just mention there was a
few things regarding lighting on um from I think Tom and and Mr. Kasus. So, the lighting will be shielded. It'll be directly pointed at the signs that are on the building itself. There would be no light coming onto the street. And
yes, like I will put these lights on the same timers that we currently have that turn off at 11:00, which I believe was um a question that you guys had. >> Yeah. And they're they are they can be dimmable. So, if that needs to be reassessed, we can. I saw there was a comment about that. And then uh they are
30,000 Kelvin. So they are in line with everything. And one other thing to add just to put it into perspective. Mr. White brought it with it, but just to show you what property used to look like with signage. So we're asking for less.
>> I I cannot hear him. Can you please speak into the microphone? >> The existing uh building used to look I don't know if you remember with Liberty Travel, but the signage that was on there was, you know, something that previously approved. So, we're just asking for the front sign, the side sign, and over here we have an existing
16T sign that you you can't really see when you're in the car moving fast. >> And and another example is just total wines across the street with four massive signs that you can prominently see on both sides of the highway where we nobody can see. If you're going westbound, you'll never be able to see our sign right now. So all those things
we think not only would you know help our customers understand what's going on but truly affect safety on that highway because it is a very quick turn driving 50 mph. Um and obviously I'm open to
answer any questions the board has. >> Just a quick question. >> Sure. When Liberty Travel was there, did they use your exit as an entrance? >> They had no there was >> there was no dedicated situation at that
at that point >> cuz chairman, I don't know if you remember when they when you guys came in last year, the traffic and the patterns and the stop and go around the back and it was discussed for >> it felt like >> hours.
>> I agree. Not that I want to jump into that parade again, but I always I think and I don't want to put words in Tom's mouth, but I never thought it was going to work in the first place because like you said,
>> you have to enter the property 500 ft away from where you are. By the time somebody figures out where you are, >> they're in hackath. Yes. >> And then they're trying to do a U-turn to get back to whatever. It's it's >> so you really
want to get those gummies to get back to you. I would think I'm just saying I'm not that person. But I I I don't know even know if this sign again is going to help you. Um I I think you need to go maybe also back to the to the chief possibly and said
because I know a lot of it had to do with Chief Walker and the patterns. I don't remember it was the DOT that got involved. >> There's a little bit of everything involved in that. We are I am trying to work on that process, but it is a much bigger process dealing with DOT as you can imagine. Right. So,
>> but I don't know if DOT was ever involved. Did you submit to DOT back then? >> We had to. We got a letter of no >> no interest. >> No interest >> because you didn't change the the driveway. >> We didn't change it because that's what it was initially. So, we're trying to get it to change that as an entrance.
>> Yeah. Because the curb cut is for an entrance still. >> That's what I'm saying. So, >> I think Liberty Travel always had that as an entry. >> So, are you telling me that I could do that? Because that would make things >> I'm not telling you anything because the chief carries a gun and I don't. Um,
>> if you're telling me to go what I'm what I'm trying to do, look, the bottom line is it's approved. You're there and there's obviously there's an issue and quite frankly, I even know you're there. Not that I I've gone to your your store. It's it's not my my thing, so to speak.
But it's difficult to to to see it. I agree. There's no question. >> Yeah. >> You know, I think I'm not a voting member, but I I understand your pain, but I don't even know if this gets approved tonight whether that's going to
solve ultimately your pain. >> I think it's a one-two punch. It's a combination of signage so people can see it and also fixing the traffic pattern. that >> this for for lack of a better term is a is the quicker path of least resistance to get signage while we work through the
curb cutting the entrance. So it's kind of like a train that's on two track >> Mr. Casa if I misunderstood in any way and you're telling me that I only have to go to the police chief to get the change in my building. >> No,
>> because I that you got approved at this board for those traffic patterns and those go through >> you would have to come back in my opinion to this board >> and amend your application. >> Well, and I guess in >> and get some sort of
>> traffic something to show that that's not going to be a problem with >> DOT. So, we have to get another letter of no contact. >> I mean, you might want to go to them and say we're we want to do this and see what they say and then if >> So, I have already started that process
with DOT to get that to change that into an entrance. So, I've already started that, but anytime you deal with DOT, it could be months and months. >> And regardless, the the signage is an issue, especially if you see us from across the street. And we only have one sign on the building now. And the
building is kind of tilted. So, when you're coming down, you don't see the main sign on the side. You'd only see it from coming across. Um, coming down, it's the sign that we're asking to be 25 square foot that faces you because the building is it's tilted at the 11. So,
Could you show that photo again of which >> of the proposed sign? >> Um the building sign or this? >> No, not that one. The one on the actual building. >> Sure. >> So, this is the one that's currently here, the 16 ft one. So, we're getting on the bigger side, this larger one. But
again, this is 2 ft high. So, it's just going wide. And then the side ones, if you're going westbound, that's the only side you really see when you're coming past our building, you know, on the other direction. And if you're coming eastbound, because of where the Ethan
Allen post sign is, you can't see the front of our building. The only thing you can see is that side. So that's why I want to have that side sign there. And those signs were there with Liberty Travel previously. >> I mean, >> I think if we break this down, it might
help us just expedite the the thought process here. But just a question relative to the um that driveway that's currently an egress driveway. I mean how many customers you getting per hour, let's say like your pe >> I'm not sure. I mean we're probably
getting 150 200 but I can get >> I'm just trying to understand like the you know the traffic safety issue and I'm I'm just a planner so I'm delving into >> How many times were you here last week? >> I I lost count. Tom, I would I if you don't mind, I can
call you directly and I would love to chat with you about this because I'm trying to I want to do this. >> I'm I'm not the guy respectfully. We could chat all day, but I'm not the I'm just the planner. Um >> here's again, Mr. Chairman, >> there's no question. Microphone.
>> Oh, I'm sorry. >> There's no question it's difficult to see your location. Again, the signs, the directional signs that are west, you >> can't see it. You can't see them. So maybe what you want to do is, and Tom
just whispered in my ear, two-step, if you put a sign further west, uh, the monument sign or whatever you're saying hang where the, um, daycare is. >> Yeah. >> Maybe you put that on some sort of a temporary basis, but then try to get
your your driveways changed and then put a real sign at that location so you know where the entry is. The issue with putting a temporary sign because I was trying to look at that is that there's like I mean I could do I could I will
try anything to help our business. So like let's just put that out there. But I think the issue is that one I don't know if you know this but there's like this like cage electrical thing that's kind of right off of the highway barrier
that blocks some of it. I wanted to put something there, but we need to have a certain amount of setback from the highway, >> right? >> And then there's a water basin thing that goes down that way, which may it's not flat. It's like goes down like this.
And if you look at the site plan, this thing, you know, obviously I'm not a planner, so I don't know the technical thing, but there's like a waterway here. >> Cole's >> Oh, Cole's pro is behind you. Yeah. >> So that so it goes very
>> So I mean I understand what you're saying. >> We could I would if you guys would approve I would obviously love to be able to have this post sign and then if we're able to have the directional entrance changed. I can get this sign
done in two phases or two frames. The sweet spot dispensary and then the right in 100 ft. And I could just change that 100 foot sign to at the entrance in the front or something like that. We we I can figure that out to ensure that it
won't cause confusion. Um I just want to address this. >> I'm just trying to help you. I don't vote, but I can tell you this and I'll put this on the record. There's no question. It's where you are and the traffic pattern. >> It it's extremely difficult. >> We're trying to get the commuters enough
time to see it to merge because then there's the lane split that takes you under the bridge. So, we feel Regency is the first thing you see once you pass the station, the the gas station. Then there's like the creek and a little bit of bushes. And the >> Why do you keep looking at me when you talk about the adult daycare?
>> As uh um I lost my train thought. Oh, so as you come through and the gas station, the billboard in the bush, the first thing you see is this pylon sign that exists. So, this would be the easiest because it's also at your lineup site without blocking it. Whereas the signage that was approved as wayfinding before, you you really have to look for it. And
I did mention um temporary wayfinding sign. I I speak to uh Chief Walker consistently. I did mention the temporary sign. His concern was that if somebody was leaving out of this entrance, excuse me, this this is an
entrance, but if somebody was illegally leaving out of it, that a temporary sign that's not have the same height would might cover their eye line of sight. even though they were doing it illegally, they're going out of an entrance. He was concerned about that.
So my thought was >> got you can't impact sight, >> right? >> So that goes without saying. >> Say that again. >> You can't impact the sight of course of a driver, >> right? But this would be somebody leaving an entrance. >> That's what he was concerned about.
>> Regardless, you can't block. >> I I got you. >> Mostly pulling out onto a highway. But >> agreed. So that's why this having it an 8 foot 6 9 ft clearance addresses that. >> My my question would be is this the
right spot? Meaning you have the two ingress driveways and you have the one wayfinding sign closer to Ethan Allen. Granted it's a tiny little sign, right? Nobody sees it. But >> this gives the I guess customers a little bit of warning, right? I'm just wondering what the best location. >> Yeah, we're trying to avoid the I
calling it the Jersey swoosh on turnpike left lane to right lane. No, it's it's just giving that warning because once you pass that sign and with the 25 foot sign, you will be you can't miss the free roof after after you blow the second. >> And this is exactly as Ivan said, just to let people know to go into the right
lane because that's been the biggest problem. That's what people are complaining to us about and it's kind of scary for people if they're in the wrong lane, they have to immediately go into this other one and they have to go around Ethan Allen and everything else. So, the thought is, you know, to be frank with you, the entrance is actually
150 ft away from this sign, but I'm saying 100 ft just to get them into that lane so that they don't rush over, right? Cuz that's that's the main thing that we're trying to do is for public safety and for our customers not to feel, you know, rushed coming into our space.
>> Can you go back to your site plan for a second? You sure there's there's two proposed wayfinding signage at the entrance. So it's so there's >> there's one sign. This is the way finding sign that's here. That's all the
way it you know this is where Regency is and this >> it's ex existing. >> It says proposed. That's what I was >> I apologize that I should have >> this was from the original site plan. I apologize. So I just I just added on to that some of these other lines and things but I apologize.
>> Okay. >> Just one other clarification. So, in in one of your diagram, not diagrams, but your signage U specifications, it shows four wall signs. >> So, there's one existing. >> There's one existing. We're adding three. >> So, four total. Correct. Four total.
>> Two. Two on the front. >> Correct. >> One on each side. >> Correct. >> And if you notice, >> it's not right. >> It's not flat. It there's an indention. So, if anybody's coming west, you're never going to see the current sign. And if you're coming east, you're never going to see it because this the only
area you'd be able to see our signage if you're coming down the road is on the side of the building because the Ethan Allen has a massive post sign that covers up our building. >> Do you need the existing 16 square foot
sign if you have the bigger 50 square foot sign in the front? Um, I'd prefer to have it just to have as much signage as possible. If you're telling me that I have to make a decision between the 16T and the 50 foot, I'll take the 50ft, but
>> I'd rather >> Yeah. And for sake of symmetry, the entrance is located on the little indent, right? So, it's right underneath. um >> right the west elevation
if you're coming east on four right the right hand side of that you're not never going to see until you're right on top of it anyway >> right >> so if anything could be sacrificed that could >> yeah it's certainly you know not something we're willing to dionic over
that sign the the main sign on the front being large is really the whole point of uh >> all right but but again I think if we break it down like wall signs board deliberate you know think about that pylon sign and then recommendation to figure out the driveway which we're not
going to deal with tonight >> that's a process >> okay >> and to be clear like you need all five affirmative votes I I mean >> just to be clear >> yes yeah so because that there this would be considered >> a D3 variance
for the is it for the pylon sign only or >> be for public public convenience or whatever >> wouldn't it >> well that that could be just the ordinance is technically structured where we created this zone right the bureau created the zone to allow this use in that zone and it created certain conditions correct
>> if you don't meet all those conditions you need a conditional use variance it's a certain type of variance that requires five affirmative votes majority of the board um which is different than other types of variances with different criteria >> and that's surely because this is in the cannabis overlay zone.
>> It's because of the specific conditions that were created for this use. One of which is no freestanding sign. So now you're introducing a freestanding sign, >> right? More than two, right? So there's two two technical issues. >> Yep. >> So there's only four voting members I
mean five voting members here today. You would need all five of them to affirmatively vote in favor of the application. Um or you could ask for to carry until we have the full seven members. Um but it's that's your >> feel the board out maybe and yep
>> or if anyone has any issues. Um >> you know it's a balancing act, right? Because the board this was kind of a new use. >> Wanted it to be sort of discreet. We also wanted it to work. There's no point of doing going through the exercise of allowing the use if it doesn't work. >> You know we're if anyone's been inside, you've seen our
aesthetic. We are not some crazy cannabis dispensary having crazy designs. Our our naming and our branding is very minimal. That's why our sign is just block lettering. Nothing crazy, no crazy designs, very earthy aesthetics.
So, we feel it's in line with, you know, corridor and what you see around. I mean, I personally think it's less aggressive than Liberty Travel, but what am I a judge? Um, and then just also, you know, total wine is like 110 square foot sign. So I'm asking >> with it.
>> Put put up the proposed signs again. Just look through them. Show the wall signs real quick. So that's what you're asking for the wall sign. >> Correct. These three the 50 and the two sides >> two foot tall. Basically the the bigger ones, right? >> Everything is Yeah.
>> basically uh 2 ft tall. >> And the pylon sign >> the pylon sign is 5 by 14 and it would have an 8 foot 6 in clearance. And it would be um box lit just like the Regency sign. The same thing be 11:00 it
would be on. >> And I'm talking with them. We would upgrade the interior to make it LED lighting to make it more energy efficient. >> If you got the driveway configuration in the future, would you still need that?
>> Yes, I would like to have that. And I would just adjust the verbiage on the bottom portion cuz still if you're in the all the way in the left lane and you pass that lip, even if you're going right turn, you can't you have to be closer
>> and we are the only building on that block out of the three retail establishment that doesn't have its own. >> You're in Bloomington's house. >> Stadium. Yeah, >> you're in Blooming or used this >> by the time you figure it out. >> Right. Right. Okay. Now I got you. >> The good news is they're taking the
bridge doing that bridge. So that should help your business even more down the road bridge be updated. I don't know if you know that. >> I didn't. >> So that's a little more aggravation to
your business. >> Great. So, let me just go around. So, Mr. Craig, >> uh, I mean, we got to solve the problems, right? Um,
but I the one thing that I'm concerned about is we get lots of people who want lots of signage and we tend to be pretty strict about it. And then, you know, we've got a conditional use here where we make an exception that's pretty large and and I'm I'm just
concerned about the message there. Um, so I' I'd like to see as minimal impact as possible. And I think, you know, the the the west elevation, that right hand sign, I honestly don't see how it serves the purpose because you can't see it till
you're right next to it. >> Which side are you talking? If you look at the west elevation from coming. >> Oh, this one. Yeah. Okay. I mean, that's fine. We could take that off if that's something that, >> as Ivan said, that's right where the entrance is to the space. So, >> but I understand what you're saying.
That's You're not talking about the 16 square foot one. You're talking about the the west >> side. We're talking about the 16. >> Oh, it is. Okay. >> The other one you can you'll see a little earlier, >> right? If if you see the the 16 foot, you've already seen the 25 foot or 50
foot, right? >> Yeah, that's that's fine. That's okay. >> So, if you take that off, >> Yeah. again, I I I I hate being in a situation where we make pretty large exceptions and we're you were accepting the number of signs, the square footage of signs, the uh pedestal signs. I mean,
we're we're basically breaking every rule we got here. >> I totally get what you're saying, but as uh Mr. Baron said this was a new use and you guys had a pretty aggressive signage ordinance on us and we're in a space where it's very difficult to see us.
>> No, I understand. That's why I said we got to solve problem >> and I appreciate it. I really do and I appreciate you understanding. >> Yeah, but I don't think the restrictions or or the allowances we get are other commercial tenants have less
signage than you have. I'm not sure. I mean, if you talk about the buildings in our complex, >> Ethan Allen has probably a 50 by 50 sign >> and Regency that's not a retail business has two pylon signs. >> Yeah. I'm talking about the stuff that
comes to us for our approval exist in the town itself. >> Well, the I mean the one thing you have to take in into consideration is that people are driving 50 m hour. This is not in the street and it's not like, you know, a Dunkin Donuts where you see it and you turn in. you have time to do it.
This is we need to get people before so it doesn't cause traffic incidences. And honestly, we've had a couple of traffic incidences right in front because people were trying to go across and then they went into the side road that goes behind into Hackinack and you know, so I just
we're just trying to you know, our main thing is public safety and highway traffic and then obviously letting our customers know where we are. >> No, that's a good point. It is happening at a faster rate of speed than the rest of the township, the burrow. So, >> okay.
>> Okay, good. >> So, I'm not thoroughly convinced that the post sign in front of Regency I actually drove through your site twice today. >> Um, and I don't know that I noticed the
Regency sign coming up to it. Now, I know where to go in. >> Yeah. I'm not sure that I'm not sure that sign really helps you. Um, and I don't know, you know, you wouldn't want it here, but I I would think that a sign would be
better more between Regency and Ethan Allen because as you're driving, that sign comes up pretty quick. you know, you're driving, you hit that gas station, you've got a lot of woods, and then
there's that Regency sign, right? And then your proposed sign there. So, I'm not sure that that how much that helps you because it's it's it's tough getting in there, you know, and and knowing where to go, you know, and then I've
never really understood why we send around the back of Ethan Allen. And I did that the first time, and I thought I was driving into the woods, you know, like it's it's odd. And I would have to say probably 99% of your people drive right through >> Ethan, >> but I'm sure 99% of the people pull in
front of Ethan Allen and come down to you. >> Um I I completely understand you need you need signage. You're in a unique spot. It's, you know, the Ethan Allen sign is not helping you at all. Um but I'm just I and I don't even know if it
could be put up where I'm saying it would be best. Um, >> so unp so okay you're saying >> so there's so there's so there's a grass I'm I'm looking at Google maps as I'm talking here >> look at the site plan up top
>> there's so yeah in in that area I don't know where this where >> the issue is this is the regency this is the um uh excuse me the Ethan Allen signs like I think >> it's in front of their building right >> yeah so it's like right here >> so you've got you're driving down you
have the entrance to Regency right here. Yeah. >> And then you drive down and there's an island, a grass island for a while and then there's the entrance and exit between Regency and Ethan Allen. >> And that's where we're expecting people to go in for your business.
>> Correct. >> That's logically where a sign should be, but I don't know. I don't want to be proposing more signs, but that's that would be the most advantageous spot would >> to have anything I would think. >> Sorry, just for sake of discussion.
technically right, we're not allowed to have a freestanding sign. So, we are look, the reason we pitch this is it's arguably the first one you see. It's also existing, so it's the path of least resistance because the Ethan Allen's facing a little bit differently. We are certainly open to any other suggestions to putting it if you're saying we are
allowed to have a freestanding sign, just not in that location. Like, we're speak we're open to have that discussion. It's just this is what we came up with. the ordinance it doesn't allow a freestanding sign. >> Right. Correct.
>> Because of the cannabis. >> Correct. >> So that use which is an overlay zone on top of the >> the existing zoning. And again, I don't want to take your thunder away, but that that's basically it. >> So if you don't meet every single condition,
>> it raises the bar to a D3. So anything they do, they don't meet the condition, it's a devariance. So the bar what you just heard earlier. >> So everything gets >> you need five out of seven votes. The issue tonight is you only have five people. So you need five out of five.
>> Yeah. And >> otherwise pack up pack up your stuff go home >> and then you can't take two bites at the at the apple. >> Correct. >> Yes. >> Yeah. I just >> unless it's substantially different and then it's up to the board to make a decision if they come back. Is it
substantially different? Otherwise, you don't have to hear the application under race judicata. I don't want to play attorney, but that's that. >> You know what I'm saying? Yeah. >> The reality the reality is, >> and you were there today, you said twice.
>> Yeah. >> When you come down Route 4, you're right. You have it's trees because I I believe that's where the uh >> there's there's the gas station, trees, >> and then there you are. And so, I don't know. I agree with you. I don't know if you're going to be able to see that sign.
>> Um, >> and then figure out 100 ft down the road. I got to make a right, go in a little bit more, and then go around the back of the building and then come around the front. >> Yeah. >> And again, I don't want to get into a, you know, a fight with the chief and every But >> when this was before the board, I
question that. And I'm saying like you said earlier, I doubt people do that. I I I question it when it happened. and and driving it today. I I it it it doesn't make any sense. And I'm sure 99 again 90 99% of your people are going through the front of Ethan Allen. We
can't control that. They're going to do what they're going to do. >> I would have loved to be able to put that as our entrance from the first place, but we were told >> Why don't you do this? >> Can I make a suggestion because I want to watch the net game tonight. >> I would love to watch it, too. >> Why don't you forget about the the sign
on uh >> pylon >> on the the pylon sign or whatever. forget it. Get the other sign if there if the board is agreeable. Put that up. See if it changes and then come back and then hopefully you come back with a different traffic pattern that I think is really going to help you.
>> My I I understand that and I appreciate that, but I we need more signage like our business needs it and um if you guys are saying you are open to a pylon sign in front of Ethan Allen, then I can come back and do that. But my
concern >> Well, here's here's the thing with that. You don't even know if you're allowed to do it. Ethan Allen might have I know the owner is in the audience. They might have restrictions under their lease, >> but again, you control your destiny as far as your building. Correct.
And I think I'm not a betting man. We're not on poly market here, but um Mr. Craig basically said take remove one and get the other. I think I heard that. Yeah, >> he was talking about the building signage >> almost. Almost. I think that's what he
said. >> And and on and on that front, I mean, personally, I I know you want more signage and we want you to do well and all. I don't personally see with the one facing east, which I guess can you just bring up the the signs, >> the wall sign?
>> Yeah. So, >> I don't even know which one exactly the right elevation. So, I'm looking the wrong way down your side of the road, right? I'm looking towards traffic coming at me. >> I don't see how that sign helps you >> because
when you're passing by Ethan Allen, Ethan Allen blocks our entire building, the front of it, except the city. >> I'm looking I'm coming from the city. >> You're talking about west. >> I'm coming from the city. I'm driving west. The front one I can see helps you. >> You pass it. I mean, it's just adding, you know, people driving by don't see
our side of the building until you're directly in front of it. So, you would be driving, you had to look this way. If you were driving 50 ft behind it and you're looking, you would see that sign there, >> but I can't turn into you anyway. >> Agreed. >> So, so I'm driving, I look over and I see the the 50ft sign that you're
proposing. >> That one I think I'm going to see. >> I don't think I'm seeing the one for that reason. I'm I'm driving. >> You can't turn. You're >> so I still have more turn. >> It's more about seeing it, viewing it, and knowing that our business is here because that's what our customers are
saying. They don't even know that we're operating here. Oh, we're surprised this is here. >> So, if you're if if you're getting a bigger sign, if we're doing if we're going to approve 50 ft in the front, I think that helps that personally. And honestly, you're going to get a
better visual of someone pulling into Total Wine and saying, "Oh, there's sweet spot across the street." like as you're pulling down Main Street, you're going to see that sign and you see it now. >> Uh I just don't personally see how that sign helps you. >> And if we're, you know, if we're horse
trading here, you know, and add a sign here, take a sign there. Personally, I don't see that helping you. Um, you know, I I and I don't I don't know if I'm necessarily proposing to put one in front of Ethan Allen and the Regency Center, but personally, I think that's
going to help you. Um, because I I would have to imagine a lot of people are pulling in the wrong way into your business, no matter what that do not sign, do not enter sign says. I'm sure people pulling in there. Um, and unfortunately, I did look at Google Maps back to 2008 and it was always an in or
always an out. There was not a sign pointing in whether people >> It wasn't right. It was directed as an out. >> Yeah. >> But how the curb cut is is always been an in because if you look at the curb cut, it it goes like this. >> It looks like you can pull in.
>> Yeah. Yeah. And and that was that was my concern from the get-go that people are are going to pull in there. No matter what you say, people >> people haven't been truly pulling in there, but >> Yeah. I mean, sorry. Um the owner just said he's been there for 30 something years. So he's if he wants to testify the use of it as an egressor.
>> No, I'm just looking back. I mean, you know, personally, I think it would make sense to have it as an in um it make everything a whole lot easier. Um but I just >> letter of no contest. I will be in front of the board asking for that and and we'll hopefully get the same response
from you guys at that time. >> Yeah, I I think that makes more sense and I thought that when you came for your original application. you know, the way we're doing it now >> to me, I don't don't make sense. But >> to answer your question why that was originally proposed there is technically it's a corner lot. So that's why because there's a road that runs this way. So
people that are turning that way that maybe didn't notice the front could notice it then. So that was the reason. And part of it is because similar to how Total Wine is kind of pivoted, they have a sign on this side, a sign on the other side, and they have their main sign on the front of the plaza. So, um, if
removing the 16th square foot sign, which Mr. Craig, you said gives us three signs, similar layout to Total Wine, each corner and a main, that's kind of the intent behind. >> Yeah. And again, I I get it all. You know, Total Wine does also have >> easier entrance and exit and
>> those signs make a little more sense and you can actually pull in, right? >> So, again, you guys have a tough spot. I get it. Um, >> and then >> I just to consider if we if we get to the point where we're talking about putting a sign where I said it could possibly go. >> It may be something we might have to ask
to take something off to add that. >> Yeah, for sure. I'm a little cons. I would love to have a sign where you're proposing. I think we would have a lot of push back from Ethan Allen that would cause a problem. So, the reason why we chose the Regency is just like passive
path of least resistance. It's there. We can add on to it. Regency people were very accommodating and had no issue with it. Um, so that's kind of the thought process with that and we believe it will help to get people into the middle from
the left and middle lane to the right lane. That's the only thing that we need to do >> mostly because it's it's more eye level than our existing. >> No, and I get it. I just I'm just not sure it's going to get the intended result that you want. >> I understand. >> Yeah. It's just it's a tough like this whole situation. situation is it's it's
tough regardless and like I I don't I'm between a rock and a hard place cuz I agree with you. I would love to go to that place, but I've been dealing with the Ethan Allen owner for quite some time now. He's I wouldn't say the most the easiest person to deal with. So, I want to just make like I don't want to
like ruffle my neighbor's feathers too much and cause bigger problems. >> And technically what I'm saying could be I'm not going to say I'm proposing it because I don't know if I'm actually proposing it, but it would be in front of Regency, not in front of you now. I I would also have to I would have to
talk to him. I understand that. >> Just throwing stuff out there. >> No, I appreciate it. >> That's it. Let's bowling. >> I I know all the talk about uh pylon, but you know, we do it's they're not permitted at all. So, if you if if there's a question, it might not be of
any use. I would rather not have it if it's if no one's going to see it. I I understand what you're saying and I appreciate what Mr. Gibbons is saying, but I drive down that road all the time and I believe that if that sign is
illuminated and it has our colors and people are googling and using Google Maps to go to a sweet spot and they see that sign, they'll know what entrance to going into. I understand that it's not the most visible and the best thing, but it's sure a hell of a lot better than
our 2x3 signs that are on the ground that nobody sees. Um, so we're just trying to make it easier for customers to get into the correct lane to not cause major traffic incidents. >> So if you come back with a new entrance,
I wouldn't even consider a second pylon sign if you had this. So you you want to be prepared for that at least if if you want this. You can't have two when you're not even allowed to have one pylon sign. So you might want to wait and decide after you look into it a
little bit more. >> Yeah. I mean um I I understand what you're saying. I'm just >> Okay. um how I I'm not sure how long NJ do DOT process is going to be and what their
decision is. So are we saying that I understand what you're saying that if NJ do says that at the same time I could still change that sign to say right in in 100 ft or in front of our business or just take out the right in certain
amount of feet just having sweet spot. I'm just saying you couldn't ask for a second one. Correct. That's my point. >> Ah, I understand. >> You know, you It's one thing to even This is a big ask for one. >> I understand. >> Would you be open to just saying that if
you do get approval from DOT and you come back to to amend the application, you'll take down this >> line? I would absolutely do that. And also if we somehow we've sent in this thing to do DOT let's say a month and a
half ago, two months ago, >> probably longer at this point. >> Yeah, maybe three months ago at this point, but it could be another six months till I hear back from them. So um if for some reason they come back to me in two weeks and say you're good, then I'm not going to even do this. >> Okay. But if this is taking longer and
longer and our business is suffering because nobody knows where to go or they're going the wrong lane and then they're just like screw it. I'm going to go to the store down Route 4 to the next one. >> So that's that's kind of what we're fighting against. But I totally understand what you're saying and I would absolutely take it down and redo it. That would not be a problem. I'm
just trying to solve immediate issues right now for our business. >> And that makes further sense because it's an existing sign. So for us to be removed from it or to add to it that we're not really changing much of the ex existing structure there. So >> okay >> that's it
>> Mr. B. >> Nothing right now. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I think I mean I pretty much concur with the sentiments you've heard from the board. So, um, you know, I think at this point, um,
you know, again, we're a little short-handed tonight. So, if I'll leave it to your discretion if you'd like to, um, ask to carry it or if you want us to. >> That would be to the 24th. >> Yeah, that would be the 24th.
>> We do have a meeting on the 24th. >> I'm gonna say right now, I'm not here on the 24th. Um if so right now the application as it stands you've agreed to remove the 16 square foot >> wall sign. So now it'll be a total of
three wall signs. Um, and then if you get NJ DOT approval to change that driveway, the current exiton driveway, um, and you come back for additional approval from the board, you'll remove
the pylon signage on the Regency pole, um, that's what you're proposing. Now, if the board would like, there could tonight we could
break up the the variances and vote on the C variances separate from the D variance just because I think there's some consensus on the the C variances for the wall signs. Um or if you'd like to just take a beat, come back on the
24th, see if you get any information or if you have a different proposal based on what you heard or if you want to wait till you have everybody here or six people here most likely. Um up to you. >> Okay.
Well, I I think we should see that. >> Yeah. I think so for sake of expediency for for us I think if we bifurcate and push the pylon 24 right is that what we were >> well I definitely think it makes sense for us to split the vote up to doing the
building sign and then the the wayfinding um I I don't know how so this is basically it's you guys decide now and then I could never come back for a way if I had to change if you guys said no I could change the design of it and that would
be okay and come back or >> there would have to be a significant change like it couldn't it probably couldn't just be a smaller sign on the regency poll. >> It would have to be like a whole new structure proposed. >> Um
>> playing poker right now. >> Yeah. And and Tom can go over what the relief is because it's not just number of signs, there's also area, >> right? So we get what you you know practically what you're asking from a variance standpoint. Again, there's the two conditional aspects that you
deviate. One is the freestanding sign, one is the maximum number of building signs, right? So, even if you separate them, you still have the de you need the five votes for the >> maybe there's flex, you know, again, you need all five votes. >> Then just focusing on the wall signs for a minute. Um there's the maximum sign
area provision too where you're allowed depending 20 square feet for a main sign, you have 50, 25, and 25. >> Yeah. >> Um arguably, you you have more if it's a corner lot. I mean, it's right on the cusp. >> Just a question for you. Um, does this site technically count as a shopping
center since there's communal parking three properties? Because that bumps >> I don't think they're managed by the same entity though, right? There's some criteria about >> you own the whole site. >> Yes. >> And you manage the whole site. >> So, that bumps us to >> I don't know if that helps you. >> That bumps us to just the variance
request is smaller because the main sign on shopping center is 35 foot, not 20. >> Okay. If that helps and if it meets the criteria then so right and so the proposed >> square footage is 100 square f feet right 50 plus 25 plus 25 right we agree so
>> whether it's 20 or 35 will you go with the higher standard right that that's the ask >> that's one set you know if we separate the pylon sign it's the that again the D3 conditional because freestanding is not allowed right >> um there's a separate provision of the
ordinance that prohibits freestanding it's kind of the same thing >> and then there's projecting into a required yard is a C variance where granted it's an existing sign um talks about can't be um I think less than 30 ft can't project into a required yard. So in this case there's the front yard
distance between the building and the street supposed to be 30 ft. It's about a foot from the front line >> but it's not facing the street. >> It's it's the proximity. So >> where the where the sign exists relative to the lot line it it's just a technical I'm just separating that's that's what
the board's actually voting. >> Understood. I I apologize. >> No, no, that's fair. It's convoluted, I guess. Um, >> so if the board says my point is in either case, wall signs or freestanding, you still need a D for either one. So, you need all five books. >> Yeah.
>> Um, I I you've gotten the board's level of interest, I think. I don't know if we're beyond a stroll poll at this point or if that's even appropriate or if it's just better to regroup and come back with a package. As far as that,
>> I mean, it's up to the applicant whether you want to ask the board to just pull out the freestanding sign as a separate vote and everything else would still require the five votes. >> That's fine. Um, >> so we could So, what you're basically saying is we're going to have a vote now
just for the three building signs, which needs five people to agree. >> You can ask for the board to vote and then somebody would have to make a motion, some type of motion. All right. >> If I may, just for clarity of the Rick.
>> No, you had it on. Put it on. >> Yeah. Use the candy to train them. >> No, that's okay. Kell, just for for clarity. >> What are you amending to? Because some people think I'm pretty good at this land use stuff, but I got to be I'm I'm
confused. >> Basically, Mr. Cray asked us to take away our existing 16 ft sign, right? So basically what we're asking >> So you're down to three sides. >> We're down to three signs. This big one 50. Yeah, exactly. >> Okay. And what are the dimensions of those signs? They haven't changed.
>> 2x 12. >> Total square footage of 25. So it's 2x 12 and 2 by >> 25 75. >> No, 2550 main sign. >> Okay. So 100 square feet where possibly.
>> Okay. Just so the board knows and >> and if it is approved or not, this young lady has to write a resolution. >> Understood? Yeah. >> Because the plans, you can't approve the plans because the plans are not as right. I understand that we can update
that and do whatever you guys need us. Yeah. >> Not to prolong this, but the the >> application would still continue. They'd still be coming back. So, can they vote on the one part now? Are we going to >> You got to application. >> You a They're not coming. They're asking
for the votes on both of them tonight. >> Oh, you're asking for the pylon tonight. >> No, I Well, I guess with him, but I was >> My understanding is we're pushing the pylon to >> That's okay. This is why this is jump. >> Okay. So, >> from my understanding, you're going to
amend the application and only ask for three wall signs. >> Yeah. And then we're >> 25 on the east, 25 on the west, 50 facing north, >> and then we'll come back. >> Forget about coming back. That's that's
the amendment. >> That's the amendment for >> if this if this board says yes prior to the adoption of the final resolution, you will revise the plan to show what what the board actually >> understood >> approved or denied.
>> And Miss Brown, can I ask one question? Mhm. >> If we say we're going to pass on the vote for the wayfindings, the post sign today and we want to go for the 25th when there's more people here. >> Do I have to renotice?
>> No. No. >> Okay. >> Is it just a continuation? >> Okay. But then we >> technically they're amending the application. >> That's their application tonight. They would have to put in a new application to renose >> for the pilot. Yeah.
We're we're bifrocating. >> You're amending You're not bifrocating. You're amending the application >> to vote on >> 25 ft easterly sign, 25 ft westerly sign, 50 ft norly sign, >> but they still want the pylon sign. So
they're asking for >> No, they're they're not amending it to get rid of the pylon sign. They're just asking, they're making the amendment to eliminate the fourth the existing 16 square ft wall sign. They want the board to then
only vote on the wall signs tonight and then at the next meeting consider the pylon sign. >> Take no action on the other. So, how do you take no how do you take no action? >> That's what I'm wondering. I think you need I think you got to vote. I think I think you got to you got you can't
bifrocate. You have to amend the application to just deal with that. Period. Then once they figure out what they're going to do with the pylon sign, they got to make a new application. That's my opinion. >> My my goal is not to do anything more
with the pylon sign. It's just to have more people to vote on it. So, >> right. >> So, my question is that >> just keep in mind you're going to have one more person >> at best. >> At best. >> Yeah. Yeah, >> cuz I'm out of the country and we don't
know I'm not trying to convince you to do either either one, >> but do you feel like you like >> I I like I said before, I don't know that it necessarily helps you. I don't think I have an issue with you having it on that side. I just don't know that
it's going to help. And we understand and that's where >> so that's my answer for it >> and M. Brown suggested having it with the condition that if we do get the entrance change that makes that sign for our intents and purposes. >> I I would think it it would have to have that because if
>> if you have a better way of doing it and then people are going to be able to pull right in then yeah you don't then you definitely don't need it. >> So my so I'm sorry. Go ahead. No, >> I was just going to say if my proposal is that the votes happen
either tonight or everything gets carried to the next meeting to have a vote on everything then. >> Gotcha. >> It's too Yeah. So, >> but um you said it's going to be six versus five. So, that's the >> Well, hopefully we'll have seven. of a
couple others >> because I'm always aware of that >> that individual >> you don't have your mic on >> doesn't listen >> to the transcript they're not eligible to vote anyway >> or listen to the tape rather or we I don't know if there is a transcript
>> I just confirmed I'm not here >> um I have a question about the pylon sign they're allowed on route four but not for >> this use the the ordinance prohibits them outright >> the cannabis Regardless of I just mean
in river edge freestanding signs are prohibited throughout the land. >> I thought it was cannabis only. Sorry cuz in the cannabis ordinance it said no freestanding sign freeand >> I mean they exist. >> That's a shopping center. >> They got an approval whenever they got
an approval. >> Um that's my reading of the the ordinance. Um >> so there's so there's not an an extra prohibition because of the zone. It's explicit as a condition which
elevates it from a C variance to a a D variance. I'll u give me I'll just that's my understanding of the ordinance without >> but obviously at some point freestanding signs were allowed because our whole
complex is covered by them except our students >> or they got variances way back which is also right. Right. Um, >> so Mr. Craig, did you say that you're not going to be here? >> I will be south.
>> Okay. So then I guess we'll just vote for the vote right now because it seems like either way we're going to have five people this >> and and the vote is the three signs, side, front, side. >> Yes, sir. pylon sign
>> only if you don't I mean you can put it up only if you don't get the driveway if you do get the driveway we'll take it >> right that's your proposal so then a board member can make a condition that accepts all that some of that none of that >> I would like to have two separate things
if that's possible so one reason there's only one that was approved we can still That's um need a motion to open to the public for comment. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All in favor?
>> I anyone in the public who wishes to be heard on this application either with >> there's nobody on Zoom actually. >> Sure. >> Yep. >> Okay. All right. Take a motion to close the public. >> So moved. Second. All >> in favor? I >> Okay.
That's out of the way. All right. Um, no further questions or comments um for a motion on the application for >> just is it a motion for two? Yeah.
>> The the applicant is asking that we do have two votes. Both would require five affirmative votes. One would be for all of the the building wall signs and then one is for and the those the
other related variances and then the other vote would be for the pylon sign the signage on the regency's pylon. >> We agreed that we will take down if we get approved from NJ and we'll work with the municipality on
any aspects of those things. Is there any preference on which one we vote on first? >> So, >> let's do the building signage first. >> So, I'll make a motion to uh allow the building signs as discussed
and as stipulated in conversation this evening. >> Okay. Motion for Mr. Kim. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Second, Mr. Craig. All right. >> Just want to make sure that the condition of two beings and 16.
>> Yes. >> Yep. Without the So, it's only three wall signs. No 16 square foot sign. Um there's a variance a conditional variance that is required for the number
of signs for um the signage area and for the projection into the required yard. Okay. So a motion from Mr. Gibbons, second from Mr. Cray. >> Mr. Klant, >> yes.
>> Mr. Craig, >> yes. >> Miss Bolan, >> yes. >> Mr. Given >> yes. >> Miss Leavine, >> yes. >> Okay, that motion passes. And the second motion would be on the
freestanding sign. >> It's a one clarification on that. It's just for the one panel, not two, correct? Or >> Yeah, it's technically one one panel. >> Just the one panel. >> It's just it's like screen printed, so it looks like two, but it's one box panel with those dimensions.
So this is for the pylon signage with the condition that uh if NJ do DOT provided approval for the driveway and an a new uh site plan was submitted then that signage would be removed.
>> Yes. >> With a traffic study also. >> Yeah. You would have to submit a new application. >> Yep. You got it. Did anyone want to make that motion? >> Make a motion that we approve the variance for the violin sign with the
conditions listed. >> First, Mr. Cra, is there a second? >> I'll second. Mr. Second. >> All right. Mr. Kaslin. Yes, >> Mr. Craig. >> Yes, >> Miss Bolan. >> Yes,
>> Mr. Given. >> Yes. >> And Miss Leavine. >> Yes. >> Okay, the motion passes. >> Thank you very much. >> Now you can read. >> For anyone interested, >> hold on one second. >> For anyone interested, the Knicks are
losing 59 to 35. >> 59 to what? >> We need 35. >> So, we don't need to go. That's nope. We're done. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. >> All right. At this time, we've reached the end of our agenda. If there's
nothing new, the bad news Mr. Craig just delivered for a motion to adjourn. >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I 9:36. Now all of us going to now watch it is going to be the good juju that
they need because we're not watching.