good the meeting of the planning board burough Somerville for March 12 2025 will please come to order this meeting is called to order pursu pursuant to the provisions of the open public meeting acts both adequate and electronic notice of this virtual of this meeting has been provided by way of publication in The
Courier news on December 24th 20 2024 in addition notice of the meeting was posted on the bulletin board outside of the bough Hall located at 25 West End Avenue posted on the municipal website provided to the municipal clerk and distributed to all persons if any requesting copies of the same this
meeting is being recorded in both audio and video with both audio and video and may be rebroadcast this meeting is a Judicial proceeding any questions or comments must be limited to the issues that are relevant to what the board May legally consider in reaching a decision and decorum appropriate to a Judicial
hearing must be maintained at all times roll call Andrea D here Chris addex not here R ens is excused Larry Cleveland here Jason kosa here John manilo here Barry Van Horn here mayor Gallagher here council member of room
here chairperson Warner here please stand for the pledge I pledge allegiance to of the United States of America stands Indy andice for
all uh approval from the minutes for from February 26 2025 there is one change that will be made um so the approval will be with this change pending um under Prof professionals present we need to swap out Mike Cole
for who was uh I think it was Chris barinsky um cha so with that change that's what we're going to go for an approval for and then just a a correction on the spelling of Robeson for uh the public speaker Claire himz r o n a good catch we'll do thank
you for that so moved second Larry Cleveland yes Jason kosa yes John manelo yes Barry Van Horn yes mayor Gallagher yes council member of room yes chairperson Warner yes all right next up we have our
hearing final approval for Foundry urban renewal LLC is that yeah I don't think that's no can you yeah can you turn button should be a red red good there you go you're good it's
going off sounds like the connection's off there you go again good evening ladies and gentlemen of the board my name is John Kaplan from Herald law in Warren Township New Jersey here on behalf of Foundry Holdings LLC the board will recall about a year ago Foundry Holdings
received preliminary approval for development at 50 James Street in Somerville it's also 82 Fairview Avenue we're here this evening final approval of this application I have with me this evening our engineer David Styers he's going to go through the uh engineering
letter from the board and the compliance thus far for final approval David and do I need to re-qualify Mr Styers does he remain sworn in uh we'll swear him in again it's up to the board whether or not he should be re-qualify I think qualification is fine but we'll rewear
okay uh you the testimony about to give this Bo is the truth the whole truth nothing about the CH I do thank you and he has accepted continuously accepted as an expert thank you so um like uh John had indicated we were before the board last year for
preliminary approval can you just pull your mic towards you a little bit sure and um we had a few outstanding uh permits and items that needed to be addressed so the board considered uh pulling the final and asking us to kind
of get this matter cleaned up uh we secured all of the outstanding permits uh for the project uh worked with the utility companies have agreements with the utility companies and um in looking through Mike Cole's uh latest report
really there's only a couple items that we need to talk about um and the first being the uh dimmable lights um there was a discussion about preparing an a a uh additional
plan uh where dimmable lights would be uh added to the plan set and uh in Le of that what we would like to do is post construction have a site meeting uh with a buau representative uh during nighttime uh
while the lights are on and adjust they will be uh installed as dimmable and adjust them accordingly uh to make sure that we are uh keeping our neighbors happy and and minimizing any intrusion
uh off the subject property um one of our concerns relative to that dimable proposal is the fact that you know you do have shift uh workers Etc and we want to make sure that we do um continue to have adequate Lighting
in those parking areas for safety purposes so that's that's one of our main objectives uh with that so if the board is so inclined we'd like to kind of Kick the Can down the road and uh address that during post uh
construction yeah as long as I think as you're installing them as dimable so we can adjust as needed afterwards yes yeah and bring a light meter at Dave that works right and I think most of the areas of concerned uh do not have uh heavy duty lighting adjacent you know
the residential neighbors are not adjacent to the parking lot and the and the light sources so I think I think this is going to be a rather uh easy uh ask to to make everybody happy so essentially just so I I'm sorry uh item
14 on um Mr Cole's letter which by the way let's just uh Mark everything we can mark the application supporting documentation as A1 and we'll mark as pb1 uh Mr Cole's letter of March 4 2025 um the item we're discussing right
now now are we talking about item 14 on page 11 being a post construction item essentially yes okay and then the the other item is relative to the uh fees for
srva I believe u the the burrow is requesting them prior to building permit and um the applicant is asking if we can pay those fees prior to certificate of occupancy that's saves us uh you know in
excess of 6 months maybe closer to a year uh to pay those fees and you know they would be paid before you know any usage any sewer usage and I and I think that's that is the requirement from srvs
so it's a burough standard that um you know you you you want us to pay a little bit earlier than srva actually requires it Mike what is our internal isn't it an ordinance yeah it is an ordinance and Dave the concern is and you know this
that if the building's ready for a TCO from a UCC perspective it can't be held up for not paying the fees that's the problem with doing what you're proposing it puts everybody in I I understand the SRV has said that but if
you look at the UCC what's required for a TCO you can't hold it up for not paying fees so it puts everybody in a very potentially bad situation being the TCO from a UCC perspective has to be issued
that's if you ask my opinion why the ordinance says to pay it prior to issuance of construction permits and if it's it says in the ordinance that yes and I don't know that there's wiggle room I if it's in the ordinance this this body doesn't have
the ability to wave that well hold on we if we going to testify and give information I just want to know who you are and put you on record s in uh can I have your name uh Ryan storms srms great okay you swear the
testimony you're about to give this boards the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do great thank you so the way I my interpretation of the ordinance I've read it times it says the permit shall be secured prior and we've done that but it fails it falls short of saying that uh it should be
paid so I believe that's how it it reads I I do disre mik on that so and Mr storms you spoke to the SV the soil the sorry SV sa and they
said you have to pay prior to connection correct they have their own resolution they're their own governing body and they uh in their resolution of approval they have stated that they want us to pay prior to connection um and that's I guess how they determined it to satisfy
that well then I have a question so you're gonna build the building not use any Plumbing any water anything and then at the last minute after you already check to the RS to the Rd then you're going to put it's middle of the road Larry so it's about six to eight months
down the road is when you typically connect to a sewer the beginning is that how we do it in the rest of the town we require this ahead of time you always require it ahead of time yeah yeah I'm not yeah the past practice how it reads
yeah the past practice has been uh it there's no deviation that that um this board uh has done as far as I I can recall I've never heard anybody walk at that yeah doing this for a long time the
problem with doing it that way is exactly what I say you get into an issue with issuing a TCO with the fees not being paid I don't think svsa would accept the connection and and you know approve service for us without the fees being paid as part of the resolution of approval for us which
is Ryan how would they stop it UC say be aware I'm sure there's some mechanism by which they've seen it before I don't know if it's a burrow issue is my only my only concern again I'm not trying to cause issues where there aren't any I'm just kind of trying to objectively say what and I'm saying to you from a uccc
perspective how is the svsa going to stop the building from I I'm not qualified to answer that I'm just saying what the or says versus the resolution of approval from the right and I'm saying why it's always paid up front exactly why I'm not going to get into an argument about I'm just saying what the ORD says right and I'm telling you
exactly why it's paid up front and you you're saying that's wrong or the rationale doesn't work your sighting does not reflect that to be accurate it says permitting it does not say payment it's in the source connection the Ordinance do you have the ordinance section Ryan um I can look it up give me
a minute if but not off the top of my head well I don't I don't even know I mean we this is it's it's a practice that this this body has had I've been involved now for 20 years uh minus a couple um and I don't ever recall us
deviating from that process understand I don't know that we would at this point and this isn't there's no reason to set a precedent here when we don't have to and that's something we try not to do here same for everybody across the board could ask a quick question in order to get the temporary ific of occupancy it
must be connected to the Sewer correct correct and it cannot connect to the Sewer unless they pay the permit fee correct where does it say that in the resolution from from the svsa their resolution says explicitly we are to pay the connection fee at time of connection
so I I think I'm going to I'm G to well if I may chair you have to copy this I I you know this is a road that this board has not gone down in the past and and for us to begin to entertain this I don't know that um it's going to get anybody anywhere sure and I just wanted
to you know give an opinion that's all I'm not looking for any relief from something that's not already hey Mike does the uh building department require receipt of payment prior to issuing Plumbing um permits uh during compliance you have to
get a receipt from the svsa that's been paid that's proof of payment is what's required okay that's really all we have okay unless there's any questions questions from the board so on
the the variances and such um Mike on your summary has the flat roofs is still listed it's there on the prelimary but the board's already we already yeah we there okay everything that the application requires there as far as I'm
aware the board has approved all the relief and fimy approval yeah those were the only two wi one items okay y anybody else where did where did we land with the um hydrant I know it's
referenced in here we talked about not having a loop system with the what I'm sorry hydrants it's uh Roger it's one hydrant and because it's one it doesn't have to be looped yeah so it's a it's a dead end it's a dead end but one hydrant if it
was two we drill down on this would have to be looped because it's one it's taking all the flow it's it's a te off the existing uh main I understand your concern we actually drilled down on that on looping
and if you had two then you would have one potentially stealing the water on a dead end from the second one and that's where the loop would come in but since only one hydrant and Ryan is that correct Dave that's correct New Jersey American Water would not allow two without a loop and they don't Loop their
service off you know because you can't have flow meters on on a loop system you it just didn't work so uh we you know we corresponded with them and then we talked to the Fire official and the Fire official we finally had a settlement and
an approval letter from fire in Summerville yeah okay okay anybody else all right I'm going to open it up to the public for anybody uh comments hearing
none go ahead a clarification they're GNA put the dimable lights in it will be installed with the the yes and then it'll finalize on the back end yes y so this board is considering final site plan approval and subject to all of the
comments and um issues raised in Mr Cole's report dated March 4th but for item number 14 on page 11 which will be addressed uh post construction uh post yeah yeah uh post construction so move
second Andrea D yes Larry Cleveland no J Jason Cara yes John manelo yes mayor Gallagher yes council member V yes chairperson Warner yes thank you thank you gentlemen thank
you all right next up we had this is just for the awareness of the board we uh went through an ARB approval for 25 Maple Street it was just sign improvements do you need to be present for a preliminary to vote on the final I didn't hear the question I'm
sorry do you need to be present for the preliminary to vote on a final no I'll [Laughter] abstain all right uh so ARB approval we had one that went through 25 Maple Street was just some sign improvements
and again that's just for your awareness of uh knowing what ARB is looking at pending business um where do we stand with the Improvement coverage ordinance so um the ordinance was introduced um there is weighty discussion going on at
the uh at the council and this was I'm sorry the decks and the pool uh yes okay and uh we were going to have it at a public hearing uh and adoption vote at at our last meeting and uh it was decided that we would pull it to have
further discussion uh so that we can make sure that all parties concerned uh have had their voices heard so I'm actually organizing a meeting between representatives of planning board burrow counsel uh environmental
commission uh and myself and we will have a good thorough discussion and uh more to follow okay all right um on the other items as the committee continues to meet have we moved forward on anything else uh not yet so we I was trying to coordinate with Kevin last week I know
it was a busy week so we're still trying to schedule another meeting um I don't think we have any update on the EV charging stations I'm coming up with the goose egg the APA I can't see anything on the state level of the APA I will look at National APA level uh but
it appears that we're Forefront again here we go Cutting Edge on I'm referring to best practices again for where to put the EV Chargers in case there is a fire so that it can be contained doesn't
spread right that's the public safety issues Public Safety um I was going to say this is coming up so I had actually two applications in two other towns in the last two weeks and it came up in planfield uh very similar uh to where the you put the EV uh and North Bergen
as well so it's it's it's coming and their boards are having the same discussion we are discussions about where to put them not in the garages if it's in a garage is it on the Upper Floor lower floor um interesting it's it's it's going to come to AE pretty soon unintended consequences exactly if
you can't be contained I think Jason had it right being make it on uh surface parking somewhere not in the structure yeah I I know it's you could argue it's a bad use of land but it it appears that you can't really contain put this out
the the hazards unbelievable how do you put them in the structure that's boiling down to when Jason said you don't you carve out some space for some surface parking lot uh with some buffers with a fire rating so you don't impact anything else other other buildings I mean I
think Jason unfortunately had it right from three months ago yeah it it hurts Mike to say I had you sense that too all right so we will continue to I think at some point though we're going to have to look at all right we're going
to have to create something and you know make the recommendation to council I don't think we're really that far off if not already there um yes some Miss Pal's what John brought up I'm just saying you can't it's prohibited in structures but how that interplays with the state
statute um I don't think that really addresses the issue so I agree well and I think that's why you know to your point when we came up with we're not restricting it we still want to what here you just can't have it inside right yeah so you have to figure out on your overall site plan what you're doing with it well and and the other side of that
is trying to figure out is there a way that um off-site yeah yeah uh charging can be utilized with within a site plan um that may not be exactly contiguous to that block and lock and and you know it
it makes sense it makes logical sense but I don't again once again the the legislation got ahead of itself uh in terms of EV mandates and from what I'm seeing I forget what the word is I thought I had it here whether it was reasonable distance or some there's some
some sort of reasonableness that is in the requirements so certainly to me reasonable could be off site yes you know I don't necessarily know if somebody's going to be the test case on this but in my opinion reasonably certainly could be outside the deck on
that s to is a given reasonable is open to interpretation yes all very buy exactly especially Larry not all right more to come on that um one one other thing too if we're going to be drafting a package about EV
charging stations there's other issues that are coming up in in near immediately adjacent municipality where the charging stations they're putting LED signs on the charging station where by all intents and purposes it's a sign
but the board and the municipality have no jurisdiction and no say over what the contents of the sign are and they're using it for advertisements but they're very bright at night and a nearby town is having problems with them now and starting to codify it and calling it a
sign and putting regulations on that so if we're going to be doing a package ordinance that might be something we might want to look out before it good information yeah we get ahead of that excellent Barry yeah all right I have no other comments I will open up the meeting to the public
for anything that was not on tonight's agenda hearing none from our two public um and now we are going to have to go into uh executive session okay so we're going into executive
session um to discuss affordable housing yes affordable housing thank you uh we will or will not be coming back to we we'll come back out uh just to adjourn uh with the caveat that no action will be taken
whatsoever once we come out of executive it will only be to adjourn the meeting um and that's it and no action will be taken during executive session noal coming back out yeah okay motion motion to go into
executive second Andrea D yes Larry Cleveland yes Jason crosa yes John manilo yes Barry Van Horn yes mayor Gallagher yes council member V yes chairperson Warner yes okay all right just so we're all clear are we
killing the video feed because because we're not voting so you can kill it and okay thank you