Okay, you guys Okay, good. The meeting of the board of adjustment for the bureau of Somerville, please come to order. Adequate notice of this meeting as required by the open public meeting act has been that on January 21st, 2026, a copy of the notice specify the date, time, and location was posted on the
Bolton board outside of Burough Hall, given to the clerk administrator, mail facts are emailed to the courier news, and posted on the burough website. If any member believes that this meeting is being held in violation of the Open Public Meeting Act, please state your views at this time. These proceedings
are of a judicial nature. Only those items on the agenda will be commented on or questions uh responded to. Next item, roll call, please. >> Chairman Ardair, >> here. Ed Alllet here. >> Robera Carpinets, >> here.
>> Morgan McLaclin, >> here. >> Rich O'Neal here. >> Brian Viddimky here. John Flores, >> Eric Alvarez >> here, >> Stewart Daniels >> here. Would >> someone like to move that um his absence be reported as excused? >> I'll move.
>> Second. >> Move in. Second. All in favor? >> I. >> Okay. Next item. Pledge >> flag of the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with
liberty and justice for all. >> Okay, Jason. >> Uh, next up we have minutes. >> Someone like to approve the minutes of the last meeting? >> I'll move them. >> Move the second. All in favor? >> I >> opposed. Carry.
>> Resolutions. >> Uh, first resolution we have is 2025 002Z. uh to Fair View Avenue, block 51, lot 24. >> I'll move it. >> Moved. >> Second.
>> Second. Any discussion? >> Roll call, please. >> Uh not everyone was eligible for this one. Right. >> So, if uh Ardair, >> yes. >> Morgan McLaclin. >> Uh for the minutes.
Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah, it's I have it on here. Sorry. >> Um Rich O'Neal. >> Approved. Yes. >> Uh Eric Alvarez. >> Yes. >> Okay. Gary. Next resolution.
>> Next we have 2025 020Z 15 Van Doran Street, block 5, lot 11.01. >> I move it. >> Second. >> Move a second. Any discussion? Roll call, please. >> Chairman Ardair, >> yes. >> Morgan McLaclin,
>> yes. >> Rich O'Neal, >> yes. >> Eric Alvarez, >> yes. >> I think part of the problem is we've been meeting so frequently, forget. >> Yeah. >> Well, that was an amended resolution, too, >> right? >> But we're getting to the point where we're going be going back to one meeting
a month, >> hopefully. >> Okay. Next item. >> Can we proceed without having an attorney? >> We're not. He's in the parking lot. >> Okay, we'll take two. >> He's tiptoeing through the raindrops. >> He's
waiting for the next al Julius Irving. Will Chamberlain And my favorite AI >> artificial intelligence. >> Yeah. Alan Iverson. >> I think that should change that name because we've been functioning around
this world with artificial intelligence for years, >> decades. >> I just keep going back to that movie in the 70s, Colossus, the Forman Project. Russian super computer, an American super computer linked up. Oh god.
We're just waiting for our attorney. But we can start. First is our um who's on who's on the agenda tonight? >> Uh for we have the hearing for 2025 018Z
Nan Realy Holdings LLC uh 79 Route 206 block 124 lot 1.01. >> Well, he can make his appearance. Cliff Cliff has >> Yeah, we're >> close by, right? Oh,
>> I hate to say we're going to be discussing another piece of property that I remember the cows being on >> going under the highway. >> Well, yeah. >> In a minute, man. For those that don't know that piece of property, it was a a restaurant there um
called the Minute Man. And before that there was cow pasture and the cows would literally go under the there's a tunnel under the under 206 and they would go under 206 to the other side where the uh the pasture was. And then as we got
older and discovered that that's how we would go over to the minute man go under the highway. The good old days. No, there's no new testimony after 10 o'clock. And there's a break at 8:30. Right,
Mike? You going to let me up? No. I learned a long time ago these long meetings the mind only absorb as much as the behind get indoor. You're sitting in these chairs for five or six hours.
You're not you're not getting it. My >> no problem on the way to my car. And I had people around. >> No problem. All right. >> Okay.
Okay. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Good to see everybody again. Jason Tuvel, um attorney for the applicant. This is an application for 79 Route 206, block 124, lot 1.01. Property is currently, um
vacant, um in desperate need of an upgrade. It's a former diner location. Um the property is located at the border of the burough of Raridan and the burough of Somerville. It's literally um on the border. The property is located in the B6 zone.
The applicant is proposing a self- storage facility that is not permitted within the B6 zone. However, other uses of a commercial nature which are much more intensive from a traffic and um parking perspective are permitted within
the zone. The zone also permits 15 stories and 160 ft. Um so the zone contemplates development um uh on these properties that is of a commercial nature to uh promote commerce in the
area. Our project is a fivestory 72 foot self- storage facility. It's 86,000 square feet climate controlled facility um where you would have uh store your personal items. Maybe a small business would use it. Um operationally
it would be um open from 6:00 a.m. to 10 p.m. for um anybody who was a customer. Um the office where you would either sign up or buy some packages would be open from 8:00 a.m. to 6 p.m. Um and they usually have one to two employees um per shift. Just some things worth
noting about the project that you'll hear during testimony. The allowable coverage in the zone is 70%. The application is is proposing a little bit over um 31%. Like I said again, the height permitted
in the zone is um relatively high at well over 100 ft. The applicant is proposing um 72 feet and five stories. and the rear yard setback um which is which is required is 64 feet. We're at 80 feet. Another thing worth noting that
are I think is critical to the application and our engineer and planner later on in the process will will talk about this. If you were to build pursuant to the ordinance in conjunction with the wetlands that are adjacent to
the property, the property is not buildable without variance relief. So there needs to be variance relief to build on this property based on its size, shape, the current zoning, and the constraints that are on the property. So
you'll hear a little bit more testimony on that than you might normally. Like normally I don't go with hardship when I justify variances very often, but in this situation, you'll hear testimony about how the the site and the surrounding area does present a hardship
for the applicant with respect to just any buildable lot on or footprint on the property. So I have um three witnesses here. The first witness I'll call, Mr. Chairman, is Paul Mutch from Stonefield Engineering and Design. He's our project
engineer, civil engineer. I also have our project architect here, Paul Schwarz, and I also have our traffic engineer and professional planner, Matt Seckler, from Stonefield Engineering and Design. But let me just kind of preview the the the order, the batting order, so
to speak. Um, I was going to have Paul start at doing civil engineering, go through the site and the site plan. Um, then I was going to have Mr. Secular testify on traffic only, have the architect come up, you obviously depending on how far we we
get, and then I would have Matt come back as the traffic as the planner later because the planner should really testify after all the evidence and the other um testimony has been put in. But Mr. Seckler will be wearing two hats as it relates uh to this project. So um
with your permission, Mr. Chairman, I would uh respectfully request if I can call uh my first witness Paul Mutch from Stonefield Engineering and Design who will uh qualify as a civil engineer. >> Mr. Chairman, I just would like to I wanted to indicate that I have you know there had been some confusion about
this. I have reviewed the notice that was provided for this application and have reviewed it and it is acceptable as the Ford and content and the board can exercise jurisdiction over this application. >> Thank you. Okay. Do we want to swear in the first
witness? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> I swear the witnesses. >> Sure. Go ahead. >> Uh, please raise your right hand. You solemnly swear the testimony you're about to give in this matter will be the truth. So, I'll help you God. >> I do. >> Please state your name and spell your last name for the record. >> Paul M is in UT.
>> Mr. Tuvel, your witness. Please qualify him. >> Sure. No problem. Paul, if you could give the board the benefit of your qualifications, educational background, licenses held, and experience testifying as a civil engineer in the state of New Jersey. >> Certainly, I am a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey. Uh,
my license is current and in good standing. I've graduated from Rowan University with a bachelor's degree in civil engineering. I've been practicing the field for roughly 14 years with specific experience on applications similar to the one you'll see this evening. I've been accepted by more than a hundred land use boards in the state
of New Jersey. And >> name three. >> What was that? >> Can you name three locally? >> This board. I've been accepted by Tom's River as well as Hillsboro. >> Um I can go. >> So if we accepted you before, we accept you again. >> Excellent. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So
Paul, why don't we just get started by going over the existing conditions um and some of the unique features of the property that drove the design that you prepared for this evening? >> Yeah, certainly. And and how do I get this computer to share the the exhibits on the screen or is somebody else controlling that?
>> I always for teenagers. >> Uh >> somebody under the age of 35 always has to run the technology. >> Yeah. So the uh the exhibit that is on the screen currently is an aerial exhibit prepared by my office dated May 20th, 2026. >> So we should mark this as as A1.
>> That's correct. >> That works. So I'll echo what um Jason had provided on the record. Um, we're looking to revitalize a long underutilized lot. Um, and something that is certainly in desperate need of redevelopment. U many attempts over the years have been made. Many ideas
including my office is has made a couple of attempts to find something that would fit this site as well as the uh is what the board may be looking for. Um, we think this might be the answer to the question of how to develop this very very unique lot. So, as you'll see on the aerial, we'll go from a macro
standpoint at first. And just to note all of the exhibits this evening, north is going to be on the left side of your page rather than due north. So as I refer to things in north and west, I'll try to keep everybody organized from from that perspective. But from our northern side or left hand side of the
page as well as to the west or the or the bottom of the page, the site is in is entirely encompassed within commercial development, shopping centers, commercial developments in general. We have the ramp to our south or page right. And then there's essentially a permanent undevelopable
buffer to the north and east of the site which you see in the wooded area which is encumbered by wetlands, flood hazard areas, streams and things of the like. So as you look at the existing footprint of development that you see on the screen here, that is essentially all that can be done on the property. um
everything else is encumbered by D regulations and several D permits will need to be secured to develop the lot even within the existing footprint and I'll get into the reasoning for that as we go. So if you look at the center of the site there's sort of a rectangular
area that is where the old diner stood. We just have sort of the remnants of that development existing on the site today. There are substantial wetland DP flood hazard areas that impact the site. the wetlands kind of encompass the edges
of that existing footprint. And since the changes in the DP flood hazard area rules that increased the flood elevations in New Jersey, the entire site went from being just on the fringes of the flood to fully within the flood. So, we had to take that into consideration as we as we looked at this
development. It actually changes from developments that you've seen on this before. those developments are no longer really feasible here um because of those new D regulations. So, you have to find that balance of a unique site and a unique use. And I think we've done that
this evening. Um and with that, I'll I'll go to the next the next um exhibit that I have prepared. We'll label this exhibit A2. >> Yeah. And just mark just identify and who prepared it, Paul? >> Yeah. So, it is it is a colorized site
plan rendering. It is simply a color version of the plan that was submitted as part of this package. We've taken the liberty of adding color as well as some of the landscaping to give the board, at least in a 2D sense, what we're trying to do. And then you'll see some really
excellent 3D renderings from our architect as we move through the application this evening. So, the first thing you'll notice is that this is a very unique lot and a very unique development. And I'll try to kind of unwind that uniqueness as we move through. So, I just want to highlight and talk about at first um that
developable footprint that Jason alluded to in his opening. Um, if you take into all of the setbacks associated with this lot, which you can see briefly with the blue outline, the setbacks that are permitted by the code include 150 foot setbacks off the front edges of the two
roadways, as well as side and rear yard setbacks that make this very small triangle you can faintly see as the only developable footprint on the lot due to the zoning code and just the uniqueness of this lot. >> Just just outline that again, Paul, just >> Yeah. It's it's in the rear and it's and
it's in this area here. This triangle is the only building footprint that you could build within without a variance. And it's unique here as well. The vast majority of that footprint is actually in the wetlands and you wouldn't be able to develop it anyway. But from a zoning perspective, the only developable footprint without variances is that very
small triangle. So that's why um you'll hear our planner get into the discussion of that as we move through the application. In addition to the zoning code limiting the property, the DP restrictions also limit what we're able to do. Like I mentioned at the beginning in the aerial view, you really can't go
outside the existing footprint of the development, which is why you see the unique shape and size of this building. >> And Paul, when you say the development, just to be clear, the area that's already improved with pavement. Is that fair to say? >> Yes, that's correct. So essentially the the the the extents of the development
that you see along the wooded portions align with the existing pavement line plus or minus in here. There'll be some minor D permitting and negotiation for the development, but we've essentially stayed within the footprint of the existing development and we'll secure
permits for that. Um there's no other developable land. anything outside of what we're showing here is entirely encumbered by D restrictions that there are no permits to go further into the woods um or build anything further into the wooded area.
Um what you'll see is is as we move through is that there is a darker rectangle that represents what's going to be on the ground floor of this development. That ground floor piece is 5,040 square ft which mimics the size of
what was the former diner and that is intentional and that is as large as you can be on the first floor to comply with D flood volume requirements. We're essentially allowed to replace the flood displacement of the old building with the new building on the ground floor.
So, you'll have office area, a few roll up um self- storage areas, as well as the elevators and things of that nature to get to the top. There's not a lot going on in that footprint at the bottom because we are encumbered by the flood. Those new flood regulations put the
entire site between zero and two and a half feet of floods with the uh with the new regulations. So then above that and the uniqueness of the of this lot continues is that all of the operations will occur under the building and essentially like you see in some of the
parking garages in the area. Um above that is that unique trapezoid shape that totals 20,175 square ft. Um and that encompasses floors two through five. You heard that we're allowed to have 15 stories. It's not how high we're looking to go here.
We have five stories um four above the ground and the operations of the site occur below the building. So we have a gross square footage of 85,740 square ft when you add all the floors as well as kind of that office area at the bottom together. Now I already mentioned
that the the shape of the building was dictated by the D, but we also obviously had to take into account and and strategically position the building as well. There's only so much area here that you can build a building. So, what the front line of that building
essentially does is it mimics where the diner is plus or minus a few feet. And what we've done with it is as we looked at the corridor, obviously when you have a front yard setback, you want to ensure you're not impacting that corridor. I think on Route 206, we are not with the some of the landscaping I'll discuss.
And then we also looked at the property to the north. and we wanted to make sure that we weren't limiting the visibility in a way that would deg degrade the safety of the corridor. What we're fortunate to have is that that shopping center to the north has an ingresson driveway at the very north end or page
left and their egress is at the bottom. So visibility safety of those driveways aren't impacted by our building having the the requirement to be closer to the road due to the restrictions on the site. and our traffic engineer as well as our planner who are is wearing two
hats this evening will get into that as well as we move forward. Um access for the site is we are essentially reusing the existing access that exists today. We're just visually restricting and adding in landscaping to kind of channelize those driveways a
little bit more. So, there'll be a full movement driveway at the southernmost corner or that kind of page right on the development that will give the main access to that customer area. There's six parking spaces on the right that are intended for those customers that may need to pick up a box or two or sign up
for a unit. Um, and then as you move around the building in a counterclockwise motion, there is there is also maneuverability area back there for trucks, loading vehicles, anything that you would bring on a U-Haul truck, things of that nature. And those eight
spaces behind the building are directly associated with those rollup type door units that you see at some of sometimes you can see them from the roadway on other self- storage developments, but on this one it'll be tucked away under the building. They're kind of just direct access units. It's a it's a key feature
of self storage developments um throughout New Jersey. >> And and Paul, just to be clear, every everything that's in the darker I'll say orange, that's the square, that's the first floor, which is the 5,000 square ft. Correct. And then the trapezoid, which
is in the lighter tan, that is all still the building, but the parking area and drive aisles are are all underneath a ceiling, which is that building. Correct. >> Yeah, that's correct. If you just in your mind transferred that lighter orange to gray, it's pavement under
there. If you got rid of the building above, that's simply a parking lot. And the maneuverability in the rear is important. Um, and then customers are able to load in at those near the the the office entrance, which is essentially where that ADA crosswalk
comes across the drive aisle. They're also able to access the elevators from the lefthand side of the building in that striped area where you can either pull down or back down your vehicle and access um access the elevators from that location as well. And again, everything
is kind of housed under the building. As you move through the site and you kind of come out, there's there's a there's a there's a exit only driveway on the left most side. You can you see that in the gray on the left side of the site that allows for that option that if you want
to egress that way um you know passenger vehicles can make that movement, but you also have the option to go back to the main um full movement driveway on the right um to exit the site in the same manner. So providing options for people as they navigate underneath the building. And then our trash is located
at the northwest corner or that I guess the top left corner of the page. Um it's our intention for the trash truck to access that and then leave via the egresson driveway on that side of the building. All of this will be subject the access at least will be subject to
DOT approval. We've had those discussions with them already. Um and our our traffic engineer will get more into that as we move through the application. a focus of the application in addition to just the physical engineering was the aesthetics and look of the site from
that Route 206 corridor. Um, and the intention of the landscaping plan is to provide an aesthetic planting to complement some of the architecture that you'll see 3D renderings of as we move through the application and also enhance and replant the rear. It's not shown on this property, but there's plants
proposed in the rear as well, um, that will be subject to some DP permitting and regulations in the rear. So, what we're looking for is to really have a highly aesthetic building and landscaping plan along the route 206 corridor to just increase that. If you drive past the site today, the site is
in rough shape, and we're looking to bring kind of a really, really nice looking site, um, a nice looking aesthetic to that. So the intention is to provide year round visual interest at the front with different colors and things like that um to make sure that we're enhancing that frontage and then
obviously we have the permanent buffer um that you see in the aerial and the wooded area to the top right of the page. We discussed the storm water management plan with your engineer today. He would look he is looking for us to upgrade that storm water
management plan to go above what the D requires but comply with the burough ordinance which has more strict restrictions on the difference between a minor and major development. So, we intend to fully comply with those comments as well as all of the comments in the engineering letter, but there'll
be some upgrades made to the storm water management system to better detain water on site before we release it to the rear of the site, which currently we were we were just um we were just collecting and releasing it. We'll hold some water on site in the future to comply with the burrow regulations for storm water
management. Lighting on the site is also unique here. It's it's one of those sites that probably is has the minimal impact on adjacent on adjacent neighbors. Fortunately, we're in a commercial area. We don't have to worry about residences, but all of the lighting is proposed under the building or some minor wall
lights on the exterior. No area lights. You won't get that kind of glow from a commercial development you would normally see. Everything is going to be focused underneath this building and screened. And you'll see the architectural elevations and how that screening is handled. So, it'll be a
very very low impact site from a lighting perspective and those lights will turn off in non- business hours other than security lighting um as we negotiate and kind of work through that piece as well. The utilities for the site are mostly straightforward. We have
water, electric, and gas at the front of the site that we intend to connect to. Um the unique aspect where it continues for this site is that the so the the sewer service for this is not located in Route 206. The former diner was utilizing a pipe that's through an
easement on the on the adjacent owner's lot. Um that pipe has been cut in cap today, but we intend to reuse that direction um and connect into that pipe that then continues on beyond our site and moves to the I guess we'll call it the east or the top of the page. Um
we've had discussions with that neighbor. We actually have their grading utility plan so we can see exactly where the manhole is that we'll be connecting to. And what we've discussed with them is we're not looking to make the connection in a way that will disturb um their construction. You can see that we
got a pretty recent aerial where the construction is in progress on the Dunkin Donuts. Our intention is to not run a sanitary sewer line after they have everything in place and and tear up any of that construction. So, we're going to work on that with the neighbor and make sure um that we're connecting in the right space. And we'll also be
discussing with the MUA on the best place to connect to ensure minimal impact to reestablish that connection for the site. There's no other connection that we can provide. The fortunate piece of a self- storage use, and it kind of leans a little bit into the engineering letter, is that this is
an extremely low um producer and load on both sewer and water. This is not an a building that will have public bathrooms. These bathrooms will be used by employees. Um, I think the engineering letter referenced something over 8,000 gallons per day. What we have seen with these and and what we what is
the typical is roughly a 100 gallons per day for employee use of the bathrooms is the load that it has. So very low producer as far as load on the public utilities. Um, so it's going to be, you know, it's something that we can certainly solve on the sanitary sewer
side of this. Um, and with that, that's if there's anything else you'd like me to cover. >> Yeah. On the storm water. Yeah. Um, so in your professional opinion, based on the design that you've provided and also the comments that you'll comply with from Mr. Cole, is there going to be a
significant upgrade of in storm water management on the site that would also be a benefit to the surrounding area? >> There already is with the current plan. So our current plan is designed to comply with all D regulations and it's considered from a D perspective a minor development. Current site has sheet flow
off the pavement into the woods. um it's not something that we're looking to do here. In the replacement, we were collecting all of the water and underground pipes, but the vast majority of the site is the building, which is a much which is considered clean by the D and a much much um cleaner effluent from
the site into the rear wooded area. So, there was already just a natural upgrade of the storm water management on site. We're in addition to that to comply with the burrow ordinance, we're going to be incorporating some features that retain and infiltrate some water on site and that will further benefit the volumes
and the speed at which the water enters into the wetlands at the rear of the site. So, currently there's a significant benefit. It's only going to get better from here. Certainly better than what the historic use and the current use is. So there'll be a water um that the quantity will be reduced, the the rate that that the water leaves
the site will be reduced and there'll also be some quality aspects to it as well. >> Yes. Yes. Naturally, the building provides a substantial upgrade in the quality of water leaving the site. You're not getting motor vehicle surface flowing into the woods. You're getting clean roof, leaf guards, the whole nine. >> Okay. And then from a from a lighting
perspective, again, I know there's no residential properties that directly above where lighting is proposed, but no negative impacts on the surrounding properties. >> No, there's no light spill and certainly no light spill onto any adjacent neighbors that would notice it. >> Okay. And this design, you talked about all the constraints that the property
has respects all of the D flood hazard rules, wetlands rules, and we're we're building within within the confines of those parameters. >> Yes, that's correct. And it's it's an important thing to note on um as well as far as the D regulations. We had some discussions with your engineer um today
on this. So what's with the requirement in addition to the flood storage volume, the applicant will also have to provide some sort of flood proofing for those units at the ground as well as the office. This goes for any commercial development in the flood hazard area in New Jersey. I just did a wild awa down
in Wildwood. They're incorporating floodgates where they're they're essentially like builder blocks that you put in front of the door in a flood event. It keeps the water out from those areas. So that's what we plan to incorporate as part of our D application are essentially flood barriers for those
eight rollup doors as well as the entrance to the office and the lobby area. Um and then everything on the from a perspective of the walls of that physical office space will be designed in accordance with D regulations. And then you'll also see as we move through the screening on the outside has to have
substantial openings to if there were an emergency flood event allow that water to flow in and out freely. There may be some negotiation there with maybe incorporating some additional flood vents along the bottom of the walls, but the design that we have today I've seen be endorsed by the D and you'll see kind
of the openings as you go that are aesthetic but also functional from a D standpoint. >> All right. And there were some comments about landscaping and screening um in the uh in Mr. Cole's letter. Um we're we're providing what you have there, which is a you know significant lands
landscaping upgrade, but you'll comply with his comments set forth in his letter. >> Yes, that's correct. I discussed his comments with our landscape architect. He had no issues with those comments. >> Okay. Um Oh, going back to the lighting. Mr. Cole also had a recommendation regarding um the the temperature. We'll
agree. >> Yes. Any temperature that the board prefers, we can provide. >> Okay. Um All right. I think that's all that's all I have. Um I know I talked about the operations at the beginning very briefly, but it's your understanding the
the um it would be open from 6:00 a.m. to 10 p.m. for customers. >> Yes, that's correct. >> The um the retail component would be from 8:00 am to 6 pm. >> Yes. >> Uh about one to two employees per shift. >> Yes. And four total, plus or minus. Yes.
>> Yeah. and that the um the garbage pickup would be once to twice per week. Correct. >> Yeah. And I believe that there was a restriction um in that letter that the applicant's agreeable to that as well as far as the hours of operation. >> Okay. >> Mr. Tuval, uh would your would your applicant be amendable to stipulating to
compliance with Mr. Cole's report as a condition of approval with the board were so inclined? >> Yes. As it relates to Mr. Mutch's testimony. Yes. and then I'll have each witness kind of speak to their their discipline. But as to your testimony, >> yes, absolutely. >> Great. Okay. >> Yeah. Thank you.
>> Okay. >> All right. That concludes, Mr. Chairman, my directive, Mr. M. >> Anyone from the board have any questions of the uh testimony just given by by Mr. Mch. >> As always, I do. >> Of course. >> What's the the elevation? You, if I understand that right, the darker I'm
going to call tan color is your office structure. >> Yes. >> The lighter tan is the building. that goes above. >> Okay. >> Yes, that's correct. >> So, it's a drive under building. >> Yes. >> What's the height, the elevation inside the building? What size vehicle could
drive in there, turn around, move around, all that? >> I would like to leave that to the architect. I don't have the exact figure in front of me, but our architect will go through that. >> Okay. Next question. You're talking about lighting. We've got a street back there, Washington Place. Are you familiar with that? It's the residential
street behind the building. >> Behind Yeah. through the woods, correct? >> Yep. Your lighting is that going to affect them? >> No. No. Our lighting falls to zero nearly at the edge of where our physical building is because those lights are underneath. >> Why don't you just show it on the on the plan if you can move the screen so you could show everybody?
>> Yeah. Do you um So, >> use your cursor. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, the our lighting because it's under the building. We don't have any any area lights or wall lights pointing towards the rear. >> Right. >> So, it's all downlighted. It's screened. Our lighting plan that you'll see in our set of civil plans doesn't even factor
in the screen. We're essentially that building's essentially floating in our design to be extremely conservative and the light spill only comes a few feet outside of the footprint of the building in behind that you have a healthy and mature forest before you ever get back to the residences. So honestly any
commercial development that you did here that wasn't under the building you would get that kind of sky glow from the area lights. You will not have that with this development. >> Okay. probably an architect's question, but as the building goes up 70 or 75 ft, are the windows and lighting coming out of there?
>> Yeah, you're um you'll you'll see all of that in his elevations and he'll go through it. Absolutely. >> Okay. Now, the water I know they do all kinds of studies, but uh I live in this town. You get water there. I mean, it's inevitable you're going to get water in that building.
>> And you think your flood control methods are going to be make your building safe? >> Yes. Yes. So the flood control that we're providing as part of this will be fully compliant with all D regulations. It's a requirement of this approval that the D has to endorse the controls that we're doing. And then obviously we
understand that this this site and our applicant understands that this site's in a flood zone. So anything that goes on at that ground floor that the the um applicant is going in eyes wide open of the risk of flood events and and what could occur there. >> Okay. Now probably not an appropriate
question, but are you there'll be no basement? No, there will be no basement. >> Are you going to be digging? You're going to do a foundation of footings? >> Yes, certainly. >> Are you aware that there's piles in there? >> Um, I'm not I'm not directly aware of piles, but there will be a full geotechnical investigation as well as an
on-site geotechnical consultant as we build the building. >> Okay, you're going to find them. >> Okay, good to know. >> I'm good. Michael, will the um will they be in compliance with the storm water management um ordinance that we've been
working on? >> Well, but based on the burrows ordinance, the D allows municipalities to tighten the restrictions down to what's defined as a major development. Uh based on the burrow's ordinance, it's
defined as a major development. So he has to the applicant has to address essentially the D regulations uh even though the model ordinance uh doesn't from D it would not be considered a major development but the
burrow instead of being one acre of disturbance restricted it to a half acre of disturbance instead of being a quarter acre of motor vehicle said 5,000 square feet. So under the burrow's ordinance it's a major development. So the applicant's going to have to address
the uh basically it's a on this application I see it's more retention. Uh the water quality is for uh motor surfaces and I don't know if he meets the threshold here. Technically there's a motor surface but it's covered. So
we'll have to look at that from a water quality. But the bottom line is he's going to have to meet the D regs that's applicable to Somerville on ordinance. Art, I'm not sure if I asked who I asked right now because of that answer,
whether it's Mike or Mr. Mut. The building the building right now or that spot right now, as far as I can tell, is 100% covered. You've been a parking lot there since late 50s. >> Yeah. >> Are we essentially changing that or is it just going to be building same same
and same as far as coverage goes? What the applicant is doing is using the the limit existing asphalt in uh the old pad for the diner as a limit saying they're not filling they're not going to I
looked at the the the grading and they're matching grading so they're not putting volume they're not putting fill in the site so therefore they're not impacting the volume calculations to comply with D. I had a question on the
5,000 square foot of the the ground floor. It's being moved from where the diner was and what Paul is saying is he can move it uh and get an individual permit from D regarding that. So, uh the question is he the applicant has to
comply with the D rules that will uh address the flood proofing. Uh, obviously we generally put everything in the air because I'm not a fan of flood proofing, but I know Paul is. So, and again, that's between the applicant and
the and the D should the board approve it. >> Yeah. I honestly don't care if their shoes get wet. Are we making more water runoff or are we not? That's really what I'm asking. >> Yeah. So, I can I can answer that. So, from a there's like there's two ways to answer that question. From a storm water
management standpoint, we are not going to be making more water. Um, we're essentially when we meet the with your engineer and and discuss the storm water. We're going to retain water on site, reduce the overall storm water load. In addition to that, the from the flood from an emergency flood hazard
standpoint, we are not permitted to increase the flood volume that leaves the site. So, we have to maintain the storage on the site, which is in part why we can't raise the building. If you raise the site, you push flood waters onto other properties. We are not permitted to do that. So Mike, your opinion, are we aggravating
the situation or is it staying the same? >> It's staying the same. >> Okay. >> Uh the water quality, they're not increasing back to Mr. O'Neal's question, they're not increasing the impervious coverage on the site. >> So the the argument I'm saying is that
if you're not increasing the impervious coverage, I don't think you have to comply with water quality. >> Yeah. So it's it is a reduction of overall impervious coverage, >> right? So he's reducing it and it's the it's under the building. So it's not
>> what's running off the site for the most part almost all of it is not subject to water quality in my opinion. >> It's roof water. >> It's roof water. >> Yeah. Okay. >> So the answer to the question on that he he needs to get the applicant needs
to get D permits. Uh there's questions whether wetland delineation still valid buffers and that's all going to be addressed because the storm water outfall structures in the buffer which is going to require D approvals and uh should the board grant approval we have
to look at this because the D may be looking at the storm water management with the outfall structure. D sometimes does the storm water management along with the outfall structure. And so the question is uh and should the
board approve this is it if the D is going to be removing the storm water then maybe the bureau should not be doing it should be allowing the D but the ordinance is what kicks it to the burrow. So it's a little bit of a >> the D might take the position as far as
we're concerned it's not a major development therefore allowed the burough engineer or the planning board engineer to look at it. I'm just spitballing here and on how the alphaall structure is and is when the alfall structure gets approved they're going to de facto approve the wetland line and
the buffer and that's going to be wrapped into the flood hazard permit that's a different agency of D but he needs to get an individual permit for the flood hazing >> but bottom line I'm concerned not not about the western part of Washington place but the eastern parts been getting
wetter and wetter over the years you know we're not making that worse No, we're not making it worse. >> What I'm asking? >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> Anybody else from the from the board have any questions of the testimony? >> Just curious, where are you going to store them? Where's the storm water
being stored? Underneath the structure or >> currently we just have conveyance, but to meet the burough ordinance, we'll have to we'll do some underground structures and that will occur and likely that driveway on the lefthand side, but if if some of it has to be under the under the physical frame of the building, that's a potential as
well. Anyone else? >> Yeah. So, go back to the 5,000 square feet on the first floor and our most recent flood that devastated the town. How much water was on that property
heightwise? I don't know um what that flood elevation was. Um, so the current flow, well, let's So the site is graded and I can pull out my grading plan real quick so I can be really clear about this.
So the the right hand portion of the site is is lower than the leftand portion. So in the old flood rules, the flood hazard area just just touched um the this parking area. >> You're on A1, right? >> Yeah, this is exhibit A1. Um and the the
old flood haters area just touched this side of the site because it's below the flood elevation for the site is is verified at elevation 51 and a half. And basically that bisects the the existing developed footprint in half. So everything to the right of my cursor is
below that 51 and a half. Everything to the left is above. Now the new D rules increase those flood elevations by two feet. So when we do flood volume calculations or if this was a multif family building, we would have to lift those residences above that. Now the
entire site is in the flood. So depending on what kind of storm we had, like I'm thinking back to Ida, I'm not sure how that hit here, but in a lot of places in the state, um Ida hit where the new rules are set. Um but in your traditional flood, um flood hazard area,
it would it would only impact a small portion of the site. So during Ida, your uh flood was up to your property line to the north. >> Yeah. So that's and that's pretty consistent is that um the D increased the flood design elevations to basically match what IDA did to the state.
>> So now all of our calculations and our considerations factor in that larger flood. So, we understand that if we get another IDA, this site is going to flood and the applicant is eyes wide open on the impacts of that and their responsibility to protect their tenants with the flood prevention measures that
we'll provide as part of the D application. >> So, will that first floor, that 5,000 square foot area, that'll be floodproof? >> Yes. So, that'll be dry floodproofed. The applicant has the option to wet floodproof it. We'll have those discussions. It's my intention for dry because there's only like there's only
10, let's call it, um, entry points into the building. Um, so you would put these flood barriers that you can essentially, they're like Lincoln logs you stack up in a flood emergency. Um, that would prevent the water from entering those rollup doors as well as the two entrances to the lobby in a flood
emergency. And typically, this is not your typical rainstorm. A flood emergency, you know, is coming and you can prepare for it. >> And what's is there like a commercial contractor that comes in that does that? Yes, that's correct. >> Morgan, it's quite exhaustive. There's
also in the building code uh requirements that and the certification has to be done by either the engineer, the architect that the work was done to make it floodproof. And then you have the issue of the maintenance of these structures and whether they actually work. But as uh I had a discussion with
Paul, that's not really an engineering point of view. That's a maintenance issue. >> Yeah. Yeah. And so Paul, just to be clear, we're we're going to have to comply with the D flood rules. >> Yes. >> The the zone from a zoning perspective allows 70% lock coverage. We're well under that at 31.2%.
>> Yep, that's correct. >> And we're actually reducing the the impervious coverage on site over what exists today. >> Yes. >> And all the other storm water measurements measures, excuse me, that you've described will alleviate um runoff to the surrounding areas. >> Yes. It's a It's an improvement overall
from quality and quantity. It's an improvement. >> Good. Thank you. >> Anyone else in the >> Yeah, me again. The the mechanicals of the elevators, where where's that equipment going to be? >> That you'll see that on the footprint as the architect gets in, but it's located
um I can point to >> looking at it. I just go back to A2. >> Yeah, we're back at A2 and we're it's it's located kind of centrally to the building is where everything will be will be. >> It's at grade level, though. Yeah, the the the first elevator will be at grade level. That's correct. >> Mechanical is going to be up or
>> um they'll have to comply with all the code. I'm not 100% um sure what that is from an architectural standpoint, but they'll have to comply with D regulations. >> Rich, the HVAC's are shown on the roof with screening. >> Yeah. >> But you're saying the mechanicals, whether it's a pit
>> and whether it's a run it >> you're saying traction control, what kind of elevators they are, >> that's what they're going to have. But then the The electrical room is where are they going to be? >> Everything will have to the mechanical room is in the what we'll call the northeast corner of the building. Again, my architect I'm I'm a civil engineer,
but my architect will show you. But all of those mechanicals will also be required to comply with D regulations pursuant to the flood. >> Well, we'll probably talk to the architect about putting that upstairs. >> Yeah, Rich, it came up that I I don't know if New Jersey Americans requiring a
hot box. It might be close enough there's no hot box, but there is. uh that have to be shown but the PS the padmount transformer is shown in the flood hazard zone because the whole site is in the flood hazard zone so I don't know if PSCG is going to have to raise
that obviously you don't put a transformer in my opinion below the flood hazard baseline but those things are not really in the applicant's control PSAG is going to >> well the interior electrical room is >> absolutely >> I I just don't want to have guys have to respond to a building with all kinds of
things going wrong >> and we'll talk about it Anyone else on the board have any questions? Mr. Be >> Oh, I have a couple for you. Um, I don't know if this is the architect, but the stair towers
are in the four corners. The three corners. I'm sorry for this triangle. Some of the stairs aren't showing the site plan degrade. >> Yeah, we'll have to oversight. The stair tires all >> Yeah, that's that's just something we have to incorporate. >> It's within the footprint of the triangle. You're going to have the stair tires going. >> That's correct.
And uh the dumpster enclosure, this came up similar application. If you have one or two employees, do you need a dumpster? That's probably not your question. It's probably an architectural question. And then the question more might be in your line is does the dumpster enclosure have could it be
under the building? Do you need it outside the building? The reason I bring that up is you're going to have to anchor that. And if it's in the building, you could make an argument to DP. It's not going anywhere because of the masonary block. >> Yeah. So, I would I would say that yes, it could be under the building if that's
the preference. We could we can locate it. We have some maneuverability under there to allow that to happen just to make sure it'll work um with if the truck is going to go overhead with it. That was really the consideration. If it does, it's probably too high for the ceiling, but we can work all of that out. But just to on some more
operational testimony, um the the trash enclosure is not used by the customers. You're not, you know, you're not unloading and loading boxes and throwing everything in that dumpster. It is just for office use in general. So it's a it's a you know, it's it's um rarely used in general.
>> And based on the fire marshals corresponds, I don't think uh fire trucks or OEM trucks are planned to be going through the building. There was a comments I had on circulation showing the turning movements through the building. Right now, if the trucks and
box trucks, whoever delivers has to go through the building to exit onto the one-way circulation that goes out to 206. Uh, and concern I have is whether the fire trucks will be using that and can make the turns, but I don't think
the fire marshall has indicated that the OEM vehicles are be going through the building if there's emergency. >> Yeah, certainly not. And in the design, we're going to provide the remote fire department connection that they're looking for. And there's also a fire hydrant directly in front of our
building on Route 206. So, you know, that that is kind of an ideal scenario for the firefighter. I don't have any reason why they would go into the building if it was on fire. >> So, leave the traffic comments to the traffic engineer. >> Certainly.
>> Uh, regarding this the treatment works, what what the what the rules are if it's over 8,000 gallons treatment works approval. The the challenge with this is there's D has tables that we can calculate engineers to determine whether it meets the threshold. There's no
tables for a warehouse. So, we just need some documentation. I don't disagree with the testimony saying we're not anywhere be anywhere close to 8,000 gallons based on two employees, but the square footage, if you use a general office building, it's 0.1 gallons. >> You're over 8,000. But obviously, this
isn't an office building. So, should the board grant approval, would you have to get some documentation on how uh that whatever it's 200 gallons, 500 gallons, whatever it is, so that they will that's fine. that a uh a treatment works approval would not be
required. >> Okay. >> Anybody else have any questions? >> Anyone from the audience have any questions of the testimony just given? Please come up to the mic, identify yourself.
Start. Uh Mike Pro 85 Washington Place P R O T H E R O um yeah I was seeing think of questions here there is a neighborhood behind there just for your information I heard
a few comments of no residential and I think the board clarified that there is George Washington knew it well um >> one one question I had was about security you had mentioned your hours of operation >> could you just speak up a little bit into the microphone phone. >> Sure. Maybe I'm not close enough.
>> Thank you. >> You said there'd be security lighting and um you have certain hours that it's open. When it's not open, is there any kind of fencing security to prevent people from going around behind because
it seems like an ideal place for people to gather? The neighborhood is directly behind that building. I I know this is kind of snipped off to not see how close it is and a lot of those trees are actually in neighbors yards is a very short distance. Um
and we would have a direct view of where all those rollup doors are and the um trucks or cars or whatever comes in there to load and unload. So I'm concerned kind of not only during the day but also during off hours. How
do you prevent um people coming and going into those areas? Is there that part of the plan? >> Yeah. So, there'll be there'll be security lighting that's provided on the building. It won't be fully lit overnight. Um so, you know, it's an it's an enforcement issue if people are
gathering on the site. It's certainly something that the applicant could consider if if it ever became an issue. You know, some sort of gate system that would would prevent people from entering and exiting the site after hours. It's not currently formulated just because of the uniqueness. don't want to block cars
coming into the site, but if if issues arose, um, we could we could certainly address it. And then as far as the the comment and the question about being able to see vehicles, you'll see through the architectural testimony that the underneath the building is is well screened. So, the visual impact of the
ground floor operations is extremely minimal, but I'll let my architect get into that. >> And and the setback, the rear yard setback is more uh is more substantial than what's required. Correct. >> Yeah, that's correct. I don't also don't see I see a lot of trees out on the 206 side. What is the
barrier between this building and the neighborhood behind mainly for for noise? Uh your neighbor to the north has a a very solid double wall that creates a viewing and and does some noise reduction.
>> Yes. >> You've got a lot of action going on on the first floor and um we wanted to see what what the plan is there. Yeah, there's then there's there this this site and this development has a lot of just innate benefits for that. So, first and foremost, we can't take down the
existing trees as part of this. So, that kind of that green forested area, that's a permanent buffer that can never leave. So, in addition to the screening of the architecture, there's also just natural screening between the building um and and the wooded area and the residences
that are that are to the rear. In addition to that, the building itself is actually going to act as a sound wall in this scenario where it's actually going to block noise from Route 206. So that in conjunction with the fact that a self-s storage use is one of the lowest and you'll hear this from our traffic
engineer. I don't want to step on his toes, but low traffic generation, you know, it's a what I like to call a lazy use. Certainly has a far less of an impact than any of the permitted commercial uses that you could look to do and that's been contemplated at this
site. So I think this development specifically is is as minimal an impact from a noise and an activity standpoint as as you could formulate here >> except when people are loading and unloading right from there box trucks
backing up. >> Well, you could have a you could have a >> I think that's what we would be >> you could have you could have a retail you could have a retail facility that would also have loading and unloading. A lot of the permitted uses all have all have loading and unloading features. And I think that's why Paul was saying the fact that it's located a far distance
from the rear yard. It's screened underneath the building that it's it's just the the parameters of the site lend itself well to mitigate against the issues that you're you're you're bringing up. >> Yeah. And our our traffic engineer will certainly get into it, but you know, we're going to we're we're looking at an
occasional box truck for loading operations here. the occasional trash truck as compared to any other use. You'd have daily tractor trailers and things of that nature. So, the loading operations here, and you'll hear from our architect on the on how the breakdown is, it's it's it's minimal for
for a use on any site, but specifically this one. >> What about I think we haven't talked about what's allowed to be stored in that bottom level. We got a lot into the floods, which um actually I was going to one of my questions was is 79
206. Is that the correct address? I did bring a picture. This I think some of you are familiar. This is from one of one of the many hurricanes that occurred, but this gives you some idea of the property you're developing. >> Are you submitting that as an exhibit? >> I'd be happy to. Um, it's a photograph
of the of the site probably a day after. I'm not sure if this was Ida. believe this was Ida, but I've lived there for a couple decades, so I've seen Floyd, Irene, Sandy, Ida. So, I've got a couple pictures like this. Um, here's what Route 206 looks like.
>> Well, I just >> This will give you some idea and I can I can submit that. Whoever The only hard the only hard part about those types of um exhibits are >> um Okay. Where did you get them from? >> I took these photos. >> Okay. So, did you took them personally?
>> I took them personally. >> Okay. Um, what were the what were the dates that they were taken? We just have to authenticate things. So, when did you take them? >> I can probably look up I can look up from the file. >> Okay. So then, Cliff, if he's going to authenticate it, that should probably be through testimony, right? Not necess
because he's just questioning the witness now, >> right? >> So, it should probably be through like being sworn in and >> you know that you're tell just to give you information on what it looks like after a flood. That's >> We'll do that later. That's all. >> Yeah. No, I know you were well intended by by the pictures. Right now we just go
with the questions of the test. >> My related question to that was what's allowed to be stored in those first floor level cuz when you do get two or three feet of water I know you want to prevent it coming in there but these storms are relentless. It's going to come in there and are there going to be
contaminated things? There going to be >> is that a question or is that testimony? I guess my question is what could be stored in there? Because whatever gets stored in there in a bad flood could end up being washed away in the water end up in people's basement, in businesses, in
the wetlands. Um, >> yeah. And I I don't have the full scope of the leases that are signed with these these self- storage units, but you know, in in lending to your your board professionals letters, there's no hazardous materials. There's no flammable materials. So, this is all
anticipated to be household materials. Maybe a contractor or some business owner uses it for some storage as well. Um, again, we're going to flood proof the building. I understand there's concerns that it could fail. Um, you know, it has to comply with D and anything that would be coming in and out of that building would be, you know,
things that would that are conjunctive to this use. >> Okay. >> I'd like it might be best to wait for the architect on the uses. I had covered it and the fire marshall covered it about EV car storage and so forth,
>> but I at least from my mind I thought that was a more architectural comment than Okay. >> Like I could >> Yeah. I'm not sure who Yeah. who covers which portion of their testimony. So >> I I just like to make a couple comments. First of all, uh if you at some point in
this proceeding and and we're going to I wouldn't submit them now. you need to do what you need to do to authenticate that and that would be providing full information as to when you took it and you know you took it that and when you
did you know that's that's essentially testimony on your part. Secondly, just with respect to any members of the interested public, this is the the questions are with respect to the testimony. Independent statements as to
your approval or nonapproval of the application are not appropriate at this time. There will be a time later in the hearing after the applicant has completed its case and chief that you will have the opportunity to make such statements. if you're going to make such
statements. So during the question section, I'm gonna interpose an objection every time. Um and uh you know the the the chairman will rule on it, but I mean I would appreciate if you didn't do that because it's essentially out of order.
>> That's fair. All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I guess the only one last question was I think on that drawing there was a dotted line that goes right through the parking lot. What What is that dotted line? Yeah. So that that dotted line is the
existing um transition area associated with the wetland. So that's to identify exactly where the not that's not the wetlands. That's the the 50 foot transition area that's required to buffer from there. And just to get ahead of the question, um the the limits of
disturbance are permittable with the D. We're redeveloping some areas of pavement. we're buffer averaging and others to ensure we're fully compliant with the D from a wetland perspective in addition to the extensive um discussion on flood. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Sure. Anyone else in the audience have any questions on the testimony just given? Hi everybody. My name is Mara Samsky. I'm a resident at 105 Washington Place and have resided there for many many years. So we've seen the floods and all
that good stuff. Now I have You said we can ask questions at this point. >> Questions of the testimony just given >> questions about the testimony. >> Exactly. >> Could you maybe move the mic a little down a little bit because Okay, that that's great. >> Okay, thank you. Um, I do have a
question and it is in regard to the size of this building, this fivetory building. My question would be how did anyone arrive at the size of the building that it should be
five stories high because it's it will be an a visual a negative from all of our houses there on Washington place to see this giant thing. So I'd like to know how they arrived at five stories. Well, the developer obviously instructs
its project team to to build a building at the height that it wants, but the the zone itself permits up to 15 stories at60. >> Yeah, I heard you say that. Yeah. >> So, so so so the so we so when the the applicant is looking at the site with
the the project team, you look at the parameters. That's why if you heard me at the beginning, I kind of talked about the parameters and how based on what the code permits, we actually don't have a built really buildable lot. But from a height perspective, which I think was your question, >> yes,
>> a obviously the developer has to look at a at a project that works for them. So that obviously that's clear. But the second one was you looked at the height permitted in the zone and it allows 15 stories, 160 feet or something along those lines. I think it's in Michael's
report, but way well more than what's we're proposing. >> Okay. When we have there's a portion where you can make comments on it, right? So, >> I'd like to just show this slight where you can see our particular houses on Washington Place. I think that would be
helpful to you. >> Okay. >> So, we'll do it for that. >> That's fine. And ma'am, if you go to >> Could you >> Miss Samsky? If you're going to present that, you're going to have to >> Could you identify what it is? >> No. She She said she would do it later as you instructed as you instructed earlier. >> CL. >> All right, you're going to defer. That's
fine. Thank you. Appreciate you clarifying that. >> Anyone else? >> Hello. >> Hi, Joe Palomar. I'm a 77 Washington Place and um yeah, I just
wanted to um I understand that we're going to be permitted to question >> Yes. >> the witness here today. Um wanted to just raise a point for Chairman Adair, just so you know, we received notice of
this hearing uh a week ago, Monday. Um, so we the public are at a little bit of a disadvantage. You guys have have had the engineers had, you know, presumably many days to go over this stuff. So, we
do request a little bit of patience because as Mike's done a nice review of the plans, looked at it, we've talked amongst ourselves. It's difficult for us to then take our commentary, turn those into questions. We're doing the best we can with that. So, understand we're at a
little disadvantage. You Paul's done a great job with his drawings and his analysis and stuff like that, but you guys have had weeks uh to probably look at it and review. We've had a few days. I strolled over to the office, took a
look at the site plan. Um, but basically, I guess one question I would have is, do you feel it's fair to say you could build 15 stories on this site? um particularly since you were admitted your your drawing there shows a small
triangle at the center of the site and you yourself describe it as an unbuilt site. So is it really fair to say that you could build a 15story uh structure on on that little triangular footprint which is as you
mentioned you know where you happen to be backed into based on the on the the regulations. I guess it would be the D regulations. So that would be really my first question. >> Well, they're not asking to build the 15 story. No,
>> but it would be allowed in that in that zone >> if they met all the criteria for having the right uh the uh the square footage, >> right, >> and the uh configuration. >> Yeah. We we made two points, Mr. Pomeary. One was the restrictive nature
of the site and which we talked about which which you've caught on to obviously. Yeah. >> And then also just the fact of what the zone permits in that area. So those those were the two points that we were making as a as it relates to the project. >> Right. Right. And and my point was
simply really to put on the record that it's really it's sort of an illusion to say you could build 15 stories there. >> We could argue if I I understand. Yeah. And the prior um >> the prior member of the public also raised the height issue. The bottom line
is we don't need a variance for the height. >> Okay. >> I mean that there's other considerations obviously that the board has to consider. There's no doubt about that. But from a height perspective, we're compliant. >> Right. Okay. So let you know how did you determine that for instance you were not
going to obscure visually the new Dunkin Donuts drive-thru that's there with a five-story structure right there. Currently, we have, you know, 18 wheelers that park on the shoulder there out in front of that. And there is uh I
think Paul mentioned that the egress from the new Dunkin Donuts drive-thru comes out at the south end of that site. >> So, if you're driving up 206, you you know, if you build a five-story building right there, wouldn't you fly right past Dunkin Donuts before you realized there
was an opportunity to drive into that? So, how did you kind of work work that out? You you mentioned that you didn't feel it visually obstructed. >> Yeah. And again, when we're when we're developing a lot with the challenges that you've referenced, you know, we have to find the best engineering
alternative to to develop the lot. When we looked at the setback and the visual impacts to the development of the north, I look at it from a civil engineering and a safety perspective. From that perspective, the ingress driveway that would that's afforded that lot is
several hundred feet to the north >> um as far from our property as it could be. So from an a civil engineering perspective, people traveling in the Route 206 corridor will have um sufficient time and our traffic engineer can testify this in more detail, sufficient time to identify the
development, make an approach to the driveway and enter the site. It's actually ideally located for that driveway to allow regardless of the development just in general along the route 206 corridor. It's the safest point for egress on that shopping center lot. So that's how we looked at it. We we had to find an engineering alternative here and our building
certainly does not obstruct from a safety and sight distance standpoint, the ability to enter that site because of the location of the driveway, but also just visually there's several hundred feet of driving that occurs past our building before you have to make a movement into that site. Is it several hundred feet?
>> I don't have the exact figure in mind. I just know there's a full shopping center, right? You have to drive across the entire frontage of the shopping center before you get to the ingress driveway. >> Right. Have you um spoken to the adjoining um retail neighbor there about the what you're proposing here?
>> Yes. >> And gotten feedback? Specifically, I I spoke with the adjacent developer about the connection to sanitary as far as the regards to had, you know, the impacts and the developments, the two developments and how they're synergy. We did not discuss. >> Right. Okay. And the um you know, the
idea I think Mike raised it. So, so people will be entering your property, driving under there, and then exiting potentially out the north end of the site onto 206, right? which is which is where the egress for the Dunkin Donuts
will be one one notch over basically there. But we have um I I think one of the gentle your your colleague here mentioned you know that in the retail use there are truck deliveries there are things doing so airgo there was a
non-issue visav with truck traffic on your property in fact with with the same board here we had long discussions about how the deliveries to the Duncan site would not impinge on the neighborhood behind it. Um, and so, you know, I would
just sort of, um, raise the point that we've already been through this with your neighboring property owner. Um, the idea and, you know, there is the potential that people could be driving in there many, many times with box trucks to to access your facility there.
>> Yeah. And you'll certainly be hearing extensive testimony from our traffic engineer on on the trips generated by a self- storage use. and and I'll just state on the record it's substantially less than what a Dunkin Donuts produces and you'll hear specific testimony on that shortly.
>> Okay. So, are you aware, Paul, that um you said there's there's not a residential neighborhood, but I'm looking at your site plan here and it's 200 it's within a 200 feet radius of your self- storage facility. Yeah, I probably overspoke. When I look at this from a civil engineering perspective,
having a robust wooded buffer that's permanent that I'm not touching. When I look at that, it's like an ideal scenario for me when I'm designing because I know that especially with the lighting and the operations of the self storage being under the building and infrequent that the impact to the
residential from the site development on its own is very minimal and then also buffered with a mature forest. That's an ideal scenario when I'm looking at redeveloping an existing commercial site. >> But the um so 200 feet basically within
a 200 foot radius and the the historic Wallace house is within 500 ft of this site. Um so I think um I mean I'll just raise the make the statement that in fact there is a you know it's going to
be in proximity to a neighborhood in the uh Somerville um development um philosophy. >> That's that's commentary question. >> Okay. So the other question I would have is it's been referred to as a hardship
development here. The lot has been referred to as being unbuildable. So Paul and also I apologize. >> Oh Jason. >> Jason. So my question to you is you know isn't this really a form of a bailout by
the by the by the town of Somerville for a commercial property. And this bailout in the sense as you said it's an unbuildable lot. So we need to, you know, get a bunch of variances to build this structure. So my question to you is
we're building at a great height here in within 200 ft of existing residential homes. Is that something you know? >> So I would say that's more of a planning question, but I would also just tell you that highway commercial development was
contemplated in this corridor by the zone. So I I don't know if it's just you don't want there to be development here. That might be your preference. But and also it bailout. No, I would say this is exactly why the municipal land use law was created. This is exactly why a board
of adjustment was created. We come to a board. >> We say that there are constraints. There are potentially unique aspects of the property. Our use is somewhat, you know, suitable for the site. We make our arguments and that's why you have a board like this. Right? So, I would not
say it's a bailout at all. I would say that this is the process, >> but it requires changes to build it. >> Of course, that's why you have a board of adjustment and it's our job and it's going to be up to the board to do their job to weigh the facts and the evidence that we present an argument that we're
proposing a site a a project that's suitable for this location. But I wouldn't call it a bailout. I would call it the fact that that we're follow this is this scenario here is exactly why the MLO was created. >> Okay. Yes. and and you know just I appreciate that we have the opportunity
to have this dialogue. >> Yeah. And No, of course. And it's very respectful and it's it's productive. And what I would say is if you if there are comments that you said before and I think your other neighbor did about the circulation and about buffering in the back, we're taking that under advisement and we'll see if we can accommodate some
of those comments that you're making. >> Right. Thanks. I appreciate that. Are you aware that in in the past there's been dumping off the backside of this property into the stream? >> Our client, just so you're aware, is not the owner or the contract purchase. >> So, um, you know, I can ask my client if
he's if he can speak to the owner about that, >> right? So, how will you prevent, you know, say say some say I go, you know, I'm behind on my rent with my storage unit. >> How do you prevent me from tossing stuff off the back? So, so, so, so Paul, I,
you know, it's hard to contemplate every scenario that you're going to ask, but Paul did indicate the um the rules of the self-s storage facility don't allow you to use the dumpster. And then also, when um when people at these types of facilities don't pay their rent, their unit gets locked. And then, um, if you
see online, they have um they they get they they have a there's actually a statutory legal method to dispose of people's property. You could I think they could sell it and then once they sell they can't sell it then they take it away. So right there's like a legal method of how you get rid of property in your scenario.
>> Okay. Yeah. And and the last thing >> and you can't throw it in the woods. >> Right. Right. But in the past people >> No, I don't Well, again to to the point that we're trying to make and I know this is just dialogue back and forth. >> This this is >> constructive >> composed to a diner. It's a lot it's a lot less activity,
>> right? But the diner was actually a smaller footprint, right? And so that's uh Anyway, last question for Paul, I guess. How did you uh how did you arrive at putting the that egress driveway with the dumpster
at the north end of the site closer to the houses as opposed to at the south end kind of overlooking that jug handle? Uh, it was really just a function of how the site laid out and how we could get a trash truck. I think we heard um a
positive feedback from your from the board engineer that, you know, it could be moved under the building to further limit the impact. Again, it's not used by customers, so it's once maybe twice a week it's serviced um if that much. And maybe potentially if we work with your engineer and we move it under the
building that, you know, further mitigates any kind of impact from the trash. >> Okay. Yeah, >> I have to confirm it's possible, but >> that's where I was going. Uh, and the architect gives the comments. There's no door shown on the >> in or out. Now, if it's gated with doors
and the dumpster enclosures inside, then all loading unloading is an enclosed space, >> right? >> So, I I can't imagine any noise generated from the facility if everything's inside. Uh, I didn't ask the Paul about the the entrances and
exits because that's really an architectural building elevation question. The building elevations just don't show when you're leaving right >> to the oneway. Are you just an open space or is it some kind of roll up door? I don't, you know, we'll get to the architect on this,
>> but okay, that was where I was going with the question of how the the noise generation. Obviously, if everything's inside, >> right? >> I can't imagine a different a better use than that. >> Yeah, because we're we are 200 feet from the Duncan
>> and trust me, I can hear it when they boom that that dumpster. >> Uh, you know, it's a resounding uh noise. But anyway, I do appreciate it. I want to emphasize that for us, the public, this is really our first view of all all the work that you guys have put
in here. And uh it's difficult just sitting here to come up with a full set of questions. >> Okay. >> No, I understand. >> Okay. >> Anyone else from the audience? >> Good evening. My name is Gregori Verb. I am the uh neighbor to the north. Um I
have two >> Can you give your address, please? >> Uh the neighbor to the north being 89 Route 206. >> Thank you. Um, I have a minor concern over the sewer easement. The language for this is somewhat murky
after the line was uh capped and grouted eight years ago. Uh, that would need to be sorted out as to avoid disruption to my site. I would prefer they uh abandon the manhole in the dumpster pad existing and redo the lateral or retap into uh
the lateral um right behind the dumpster pad. That way we don't have to impact my brand new site by the time they get uh moving here. Uh my second concern is the 28 >> What kind of question is that? >> Sorry
>> questions. Uh, >> is there any alternative to utilizing that sewage easement? >> Yeah, I I think we have to look at I don't think it's something for the board to decipher the easement, but I do agree with you that we have to figure out, are we going to use that easement or are we going to have an alternative? I don't
dispute that that's an issue. Right. >> We're going to have to >> not so much a question, but commentary upon their statements. >> We'll have a time for commentary. >> Fair enough. Uh, second is I uh question the testimony on visual impact.
uh regarding uh seeing the uh retail center to the north and the seven small businesses there. Um when someone is driving down 206, forcing their head to a hard right after a imposing structure
uh 28 ft off the curb um is not ideal. Um I'm curious uh to see to to understand uh why that 28 foot uh frontage variance uh is the magic number for you.
>> Yeah. With with regards to the setback and I I I sort of spoke to it is that you know when when we have a site that's constrained like this one we have to find the best engineering alternative. Um we looked to establish a green a green corridor a green buffer along the
road and then also provide a building that was you know suitable and large enough to support the development overall. So the the 28 foot number is not a magic number but it's something that we worked extensively with our applicant to size and facilitate this
very unique building to provide for the development. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else? Paul, just not to be a point, but on on the lighting, there was very little lighting on the ingress in ingress, but
there's I know your foot candles did not account for the existing lighting on the road. So, when you say we'll comply, you'll get full candles and show that there's adequate lighting on the entrances and exits on the 20. >> Yeah. And we can even we can even walk it at night and get the true light levels that are out there. Yeah,
absolutely. You just did your your foot candles were based on the lighting proposed, not the ambient, the existing lighting. >> Exactly. Yeah. We were looking to show the impact of our development. We did not factor in um but we can certainly get those those light levels along the frontage. >> Right. And one comment towards Greg uh
from a site engineering, the building's not in the sight line. So the site engineer is going to say it's safe because you could see you're bringing up an aesthetic comment that I think is best served by the architect on your concern. No one else feel public with any
questions. >> Mr. Mr. Chairman, it was your rule at the beginning of the meeting 8:30 for the court reporter. Did you want to do that now or? >> It was just not the court reporter. It's been an hour and a half. We have another hour and a half to go.
>> Well, let's take five. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Mr. Trump. >> Yeah. I was coming over and I was coming through >> Hillsboro meme Hills Hillsboro and the road the
road the >> got okay so I wasn't alone I just wanted >> the uh railroad crossing was also >> baby come on happens. >> Oh my god. I was coming up, you know.
I'm running around. >> And then Jason, you're almost Oh, I I went out I got caught and I basically my my my suit top my suit jacket was like drowned. So that's why I'm I'm doing my Jim Jordan uh
invitation tonight. shirt and tie. >> Oh, god damn. Come on, baby. >> Every decade only see once every 10 years. I see him a lot. He comes all the time. It's true. I would say
question. Remember? What do you give up? Oh, really? Wow. I mean, there were a lot of It's hard to pull together. Good night.
I know I'm Just make that part. make a turn. >> Oh, wow. That won't help. my baby soon. >> I stopped by
Good job. That's right. Let me take a picture. >> Bundle up. Oh, that's He has another guy doing that. >> Yeah, it's all good, man. >> Yeah, he had the Chick-fil-A. He was like He said he was he was shocked that
he got it approved. >> They I think they were going to vote against it and then he like delayed it and then I don't know. Must have been a while ago, right? Cuz that kind of got the night. >> As long as you're not doing a data set.
>> Oh. Oh, is he? >> I know. >> I know. I know. He was at Vogle cheat, right? I'm going to make a comment. I need to know. Everything's inside.
Some some designer some designer thought the AMC Gremlin was good looking. >> Yeah, that's >> and the answer. >> I sat I sat there for the paid money. >> Too bad nobody would have paid money to
buy the damn thing. Let's reconvene this hostile witness. >> Yeah. Okay. You ready? Oh, there. >> Ready, Mr. Chairman? >> I'm soon as our attorney gets here.
Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it. >> Okay. Okay. All right, Mr. Chairman. Our next witness is our traffic engineer, uh, Matt Seckler from Stonefield Engineering and Design. So, we should swear him in. >> Uh, good evening, sir. You so worth the
testimony you're about to give will be the truth. So help you God. >> Yes, I do. >> Please state your name and spell your last name for the record. >> Certainly. My name is Matthew Seckler. That's S E C K L E R. I'm with Stonefield Engineering Design. Address is 92 Park Avenue in Rutherford, New
Jersey. >> Very good. Mr. Tuval, your witness. >> Sir. All right, Matt. Just like Paul did, if you could give the board the benefit of your credentials, educational background, licenses held, and experience testifying as a traffic engineer in the state of New Jersey will qualify you as a planner uh at a later time.
>> Certainly a bachelor of science in civil engineering from Union College in Connecting, New York, a masters in city regional planning from Ruckers University, a licensed professional engineer and professional planner in the state. Also recognized professional traffic operations engineer by the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
accepted for over 150 boards as a traffic engineer, including your planning board >> and our planning board. >> Definitely your planning board. I don't know if I've been before this zoning board >> who stipulates to his qualifications. >> Great. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. All right. So, Matt, why don't you um get started by explaining the scope of your analysis of this project, and then we
could talk about chip generation, parking, and on-site circulation. >> Yes. As part of this project, we did prepare a traffic and parking assessment report. It was dated June 26, 2025. Uh essentially that summarizes what we've done as part of our traffic and
parking and circulation review. Um what we have done we visited the site uh during peak hours. We've also looked at the uh application in terms of the amount of traffic trips that would be generated from the site. We looked at the parking demand. We've uh undergone our NJ DOT permitting which I'll explain
where we are in that process and also reviewed the site in terms of the circulation patterns making sure working with uh Paul's group uh at our company uh that the circulation patterns for any of the vehicles that be utilizing this site could properly drive around the building and under the building as well.
Um so overall just kind of starting off uh you guys have obviously seen this site. I think everyone here is well familiar with this site being located on northbound side of Route 206. 206 in this area carries about 30 to 35,000 vehicles per day. Um obviously one
direction than the other. Um generally uh it's a northbound uh AM morning peak flow. You have more cars that travel northbound in this area in the morning. In the evening it's uh generally the the reverse. Um this site currently obviously previously operated as a diner
had two access points onto Route 206. And we're basically essentially looking to reutilize those general locations uh for this development. You saw Mr. Mut's um um plans. Uh these coloride rendering exhibit does show uh the in andout driveway. Again, that will be right in
right out. You have a divided uh highway there, so only right turns. And then at the um uh northerly most driveway, that'll be the right out only driveway that you saw the circulation patterns previously. Um which will allow for again another access point onto Route 206.
Um in terms of the um the trip generation, what we utilize is the Institute of Transportation Engineers trip generation manual with engineers like myself. We've sat and counted the number of cars that go in and out of many different types of buildings including self- storage buildings which
what we are uh proposing here. And that uh data is sent to the IT. the IT compiles it and publishes it in the report in a in a book which we could utilize and the DOT utilizes to determine projected traffic. The self-s storage building is one of the two
lowest generators of traffic on a per square foot basis in the entire book. So, when you go through the whole book and you've got daycare, fast food, office building, uh, colleges, you go through that whole book, the one that has the least amount of traffic per or one of the two lowest amount of traffic
per square foot is a self-s storage building. As Paul said, I don't remember if he said it was sleepy or quiet, but that is basically the type of traffic that you would see going in and out of this type of site. So when we look to the book uh for the type of traffic or volume that we generated, the book says
that the traffic volume in a peak hour in the morning would be 17 trips. Again, a there's a trip going in and a trip going out. So if a car comes in and out the same hour, they're actually counted twice. 17 in the morning, 17 in the evening, peak hours, and then 27 on a Saturday where you have a little bit
more activity going in and out. >> So like you said, that could be 17 could be just nine people coming to see coming to their unit. >> Yep. And eight eight leaving. Some people could be there for 10 minutes. Some people maybe move it in, they're in there for uh, you know, an hour or so. I would state though, the IT has data that
goes back to 1993 for this use. And what we've actually seen is a trend uh over the last few years that the amount of traffic at these uh uses is actually significantly less. More recently, when I look at data from 2010 to today in the IT, the number drops um almost about a
third. Uh, so again, instead of 17 trips, I'd have to do the math in my head, but it's probably about 13 or 14. And we actually have done some recent counts at um some operating sites in the general area, um, we did a count of an existing self- storage building in Bridgewater on Route 28 and an existing
self-s storage building on Route 206 in Hillsboro. And again, what we saw at those sites, um, specifically the Hillsboro site, which is 140,000 square feet, so significantly larger than this one, that one only generated 17 trips, sorry, 10 trips in the morning, 11 in
the evening, and 17 on the Saturday. So again, it does show these sites in operation, even a bigger site generates less than even what the it says. And again, I think that is related to the, you know, the the way these buildings are being used nowadays as opposed to 20, 30 years ago where maybe they were
used a little more often. Now it's almost a set it and forget it. You got a nice uh, you know, um, uh, climate controlled building, you put whether it's your old albums in there or old furniture and you leave it in there and you pay that bill, you know, constant every month and then maybe five years
later you remember that there was something in there you wanted to get or some business record you were audited on. So again very very low trip generation. In our uh our assessment what we included was also a comparison to the previous use which was the diner. Obviously diner has not been operation
for at least 10 years now. So I'm not saying that you know all those trips are being generated on the roadway. They're not but a similar you similar permitted use which again would be the diner here uh would generate significantly more traffic than what we are proposing. Again, I think uh the diner based on the
IT of that size would have generated 73 trips in the morning instead of the 17 we're proposing on a Saturday. It's 96 trips, you know, about 45 customers in and out uh instead of the 27 that we have. So again, permitted use previously there, if someone wanted to reopen or
rebuild a building for that use, we're significantly less traffic than that type of use. Same thing with other permitted uses here. Daycare is permitted. Daycarees, you know, a typical daycare would generate about a hundred trips in a peak hour. You know, those children going in and out. Um, you
know, a medical office building also permitted here. A restaurant, if Tommy's Tap House goes in this location, you're talking about, you know, some Friday, Saturday nights of, you know, 90 trips going in and out. Again, we're clearly less than that. So, from a traffic perspective, in terms of trips going in
and out, significantly less than permitted uses. And really again on that low end of the scale, we have driveways that, you know, will will operate perfectly fine being located, you know, nice between two signalized intersections. Uh in terms of the DOT review, we did file for a letter of no
interest and we did receive uh DOT approving that letter of no interest from August. We could provide that correspondence to your board's professionals uh so that they could have that for their records as well. Um so again the DOT has has blessed the access management plan that we have proposed and again they agreed that this is not a
significant increase in traffic. In fact it's a reduction in traffic. Uh in terms of parking again this is uh the type of use that uh having low traffic you would also have a low need for parking. People are not hanging out on this type of site and it has very low employee rates. Uh again typically you
would have one or two employees at any one time. you know, when you're kind of leasing up maybe two and then once you're you hit kind of normal normal operations, you'd have one on the site at any one time. What we are showing here is a total of uh I would say 14 parking stalls. Eight of them are in
front of the eight rollup units. Again, there's nothing that precludes someone from utilizing one of those spaces that don't have one of those rollup units. They're not drive-in units. It's just convenient for those eight people. Uh so again, anyone would be able to park in any of those 14 parking spaces. And then
on the where we're looking at the plan, the left side of the building is where we have for the any type of larger vehicles. Um I know there were some questions regarding the clearance under the building. I believe you hear from the architect that the clearance is anywhere between 13 and 14t clear. Uh your 20 foot U-Haul truck, which is your
standard U-Haul truck, that's 11 foot clearance it needs. So clearly could drive under the building. Even if you have a 26 foot U-Haul, which you know they advertise as that's for like a three to five bedroomedroom house, uh you could fit that under that as a 12- foot clearance. So again, any of those type of vehicles would have no problem
circulating the site. And again, they would basically park in the lefthand side uh in that hatched area. And then there's an entrance door. You'll hear from the architect in terms of internal circulation within the building, but you could basically access the elevators to the internal units from either the I'm
going to say the parking lot side or I'm going to say the loading area side. Uh and again that circulation um is more than sufficient. Um we did counts at um those sites in Bridgewater and Hillsboro again and found that the parking ratios that we have here, it would be able to
fit their max parking demand at those again two nearby sites. So the parking that we have on this site uh is sufficient for uh the expected parking demand. Uh so overall again in reviewing the site from a traffic perspective the big key here is very low amount of traffic
coming in and out of the driveways. The circulation pattern has been designed sufficiently. DOT has given us a letter of no interest. Uh and again the parking does meet uh what we see in the nearby sites uh in Hillsboro and Bridgewater for expected parking demand. >> Okay. All site distances are safe at the driveways.
>> Yes. coming out of the driveways. Again, this building is set I know it's doesn't meet the setback, but there, you know, it's set far enough back that if you're waiting at the stop bar to get on to Route 206, the building is essentially behind you. You have clear sight lines. I would mention I want to put on the record and talking to the applicant, um,
and hearing some concerns from some of the members of the public, uh, since it relates to access, we have no problems putting up a gate that would close in after hours, um, at the entrance driveway to the site. So again, that would be a gate that would prevent anyone from coming into the site when
the site is closed. So I know there was some concerns about security. I just want to hit that as part of the kind of access to the site that they would not have open access when the site is closed. >> And on Matt, all the parking spaces are proper are appropriately sized in your opinion. >> Correct. They're appropriately sized. Um
again, the standard spaces are and then we have that loading area along the lefthand side of the building. uh we should be able to fit, you know, anywhere between one or two of those larger U-Haul trucks if two people arrived with them at any one time. >> All right. And the application complies with ADA requirements for parking. >> Yes.
>> Okay. All right. That's all I have for Mr. Seckler. >> Anyone from the board have any questions on Mr. Steckler's testimony? >> I just have one one about the gate. >> Y >> the only I I think a gate makes a lot of sense. My only concern is if someone
comes and the gates down, are they going to have to back out onto the highway? This is I'm trying. How do they internally turn around? So, we don't have a backout or K turn onto the highway. >> Yeah. Again, we would only close it when the site is closed, which I think is 10
p.m. Obviously, backing on the route 206 is never easy, even at 10 p.m. >> Um, we would have to look to see if we could create a a turnaround spot in front of where a gate would be. K turn the K turn spot or something wider a little wider cutout so the vehicle
>> So Chuck pulls up he's on the site the gate's down now he's got to get out the facility's closed I make it I think the gate makes a lot of sense but >> I mean luckily there's an egress uh drive uh lane there also right now correct >> correct >> yeah so we like you said we could just
provide like that hammerhead turnaround or something like that >> yeah we're designing on the fly here just because the comment but it's something that we'll we'll obviously have to show you how that maneuver would work, but we would put a hammerhead or some way to turn around. >> Yeah, I >> for the traffic light.
>> Yeah, traffic is right there. >> You're talking about the uh >> Orlando Drive. >> Not that far. >> Right. The concern is anybody pulling on the site that it's that how do you get out of the site without backing on the
road? That's right. what we're trying to accomplish on the hammerhead's a nice way of saying just a space to do a K turn. >> Yeah. And again, it may just need to be a little five foot indentation that you would basically use to kind of turn around to come back out. And again, we'll have to engineer it, you know, uh
you know, it'll be we'll try to have to move some vegetation or proposed vegetation to make it fit. Yeah, it's a concern of the the entrances to this I'll call it a garage is open all the time then you might have noise but if
the gates come down I don't we'll hear from the architect and then you don't have the noise everything's self-contained so from a noise pollution standpoint it makes a lot of sense from my opinion to have the gates down >> so you don't have it open all the time
>> but that has an operational I understand that From a traffic perspective, I would only want to have the gate when we're down when we're closed because if it's down all the time and you have to, let's say, do a fob, which you see at some sites where we're located on 206. My thing that I'd be nervous about would be if someone's waiting
>> fumbling to get the keypad and someone else comes behind, all of a sudden they're on 206. So, that's my concern with this site for it all the time down. But again, for the after 10 p.m. just to prevent, you know, hooligans from hanging out at the site, I I think that's an appropriate measure. What
about the egress from the facility onto the one way? Could that be down all the time? Because that's one way out only. It >> to me that's egress only. So I I wouldn't think anyone would use it, >> right? >> And again, that doesn't go right under the building, which would lend itself to an easy gate location. So I would rather
not put one on that side of the building. Um but again, obviously we we've heard the concerns and something that, you know, sounds like we're going to be working together to to make a a change. I'm just suggesting negate from a noise. So purely a impact on the
surrounding area from if you look at light light we address the light now it's noise obviously it's enclosed so yeah >> okay anyone else have any questions of Mr. Steckler's testimony? Anyone from the audience have any
questions of Mr. Steckler's testimony? Uh Joe Pomar, 77 Washington Place and uh thanks for your testimony, Mr. Stackler. Question for you. Um so we've talked about the proximity to the delight at Orlando Drive. So what if you were to
flip the floor plan? Would you as a traffic engineer have see anything, you know, um that would make it imp, you know, hard to do or or of a poor design
to flip it. So that what that open drive at the north end of the property right now moves to the south side and the ingress egress would move further north on your site plan. So essentially flipping it. So, you're saying building essentially stays the same, just the driveways correct change in terms of
their >> correct. And and the reason I say that is because people come in there, they're going to be egressing probably with an empty box truck and then you have your garbage truck coming in and out. We we don't know how often that's going to be.
Um that's at the north end closest to the residential neighborhood. If it were on the south side, I'm guessing those box trucks get a little a little loud when they're empty and they kind of bounce off the property. Um, so that
might be a solution. It also push pushes your entrance where you're going to have the gate and the and the K turn or the hammer turn uh a little further from the traffic light at Orlando Drive. I >> I don't see an issue with the way the site is designed currently. I also again
your option of flipping it I also don't see as being again on the fly uh any specific detriment but again the >> the al you know a U-Haul coming to the site I would say they're I don't say just as likely to come and leave empty
and come and leave full someone who is you know leaving some had left something in the building and now moving to their new house maybe leaving with all their their equipment but again >> right >> I I think when we get into the further discussion in terms of where that activity is in terms of up along Route
206. It is significantly far from where the residential developments are in the rear of the site. Um, if the building was, let's say, where the where that parking area is was more pushed back, I I could see there being more of, let's say, a noise concern, but again, all
that activity is up, you know, uh, you know, you know, 50 within 50 feet of the front property line and nowhere near the rear. And I do think the dumpster again, we're going to talk about bringing that >> instead of putting it all the way back to the front as well. So, >> but that north drive is actually
according to your your the site plan we looked at earlier 200 ft which is approximately less than 70 yards from from the houses. >> Right. But when we when we eliminate the dumpster, I think that the
>> length that it goes back to the site likely can be limited as well. So, in terms of where that end of pavement will be, we'll likely be moved closer to 206 if the dumpster moves closer to the building. >> Okay. I I acknowledge we're kind of designing on the fly here.
>> So, but I thought I would throw that out. >> Yep. >> Anyone else from the audience have any questions of the testimony given by Mr. Stack order? >> Just I just got one thing, Art. >> Yeah. >> If they were if you were to reverse that, would you get more light pollution from headlights going down that one driveway into the neighborhood? Yeah, I
do prefer having the headlights facing 206 in that area versus going heading into the residential area. Again, we I will state because we're going to talk later on about the vegetative buffer. There is existing buffer there. But again, the white lights going towards
the residence would be the case if that was one way going in versus one way going out. You just came the the tail lights. >> Correct. >> That's a good point. >> Anyone else? Yes.
>> Okay. All right. Next witness, Mr. Chairman, is our architect, Paul Schwarz. >> Thanks. Eating, Mr. Schwarz, would you please raise your right hand? >> Do you solemnly sort of the testimony you're about to give in this matter will be the truth? So, have you got?
>> I do. >> Please state your name and spell your last name for the record. >> My name is Paul Schwarz, S WZ. I'm the senior partner of US Architects which is at 20 North Audi Avenue in Somerville. Been there for 40 years. >> Will your colleague be testifying?
>> No, just myself. >> Okay. Very good. >> All right. >> Uh M Mr. Toull, your witness, sir. >> All right. Paul, do you just want to give your credentials for the board? I know you've testified here before, but if you could just do that briefly. >> Yeah. >> Mr. Schwarz is well known. We'll stipulate to his >> Great. Thank you very much. All right.
>> As a matter of transparency, Mr. Schwarz and I served on the ARB committee for about >> 10 years. >> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. Perfect. So, Paul, why don't you get started? I don't know if you want to start with the elevations of the floor plans first, but I leave it up
to you on where you want to start plans. >> So, um previous testimony um basically talked about the building roughly about 87,000 square feet. It is a fivetory building. First floor is about a little over 5,000 square feet. The other uh floors, floors two through five are each
about 20,700 square feet, giving that total of uh of 87,000 square feet. Um the building will need to be designed to code um total building code. Um and the one of the things that we've looked at
since and maybe we want to mark this as exhibit. >> So this is a little bit different than what you had in the packet. >> Correct. >> All right. So we're up to A3. So let's mark it three and Paul just identify for the record and who prepared it. >> This is a this is a a first floor plan
uh was prepared by by my firm. Um and the major change here is after uh since we've submitted and looking at this um the applicant has basically said that we we really only need one elevator and not three elevators. So this plan will
reflect that. It will also reflect bathrooms on the uh uh on the first floor here. Now, the code basically stipulates that a building like this, you can actually have bathrooms every other floor. Um I think right for the for the time being, we're probably going
to be doing that. So, it'll be floors one, three, and five. So, that that will meet the New Jersey Uniform uh construction code. Um uh we are also based. Now one of the things that's really kind of interesting is that right now our we have a total of
445 units on all floors. That's a bit of a placeholder because what happens there's an algorithm that's developed in the f in the future once we get approval to say okay how much what do we need? What size units do we need? So that they arrange in different sizes.
Um but that ultimately will be determined uh once the final need is is looked at. But for the for the time being, we've got 445 units that are placed in all four all five floors. Um the in terms of some of the may want to
go to the second floor. So you can see on the first floor basically the uh we were we were looking at the the back of what Matt just testified to is the the units that are right on grade parking right behind it that would open up into
the area and then other units we've got the again the uh the elevator and the bathroom the toilet the office for the front office the main lobby is on the right hand side here in the main entrance into the lobby um and then uh the rest of it has been previously
testified is that we've got a parking area in the back along with turning radiuses for all the different trucks that would be coming here. And if we move if we end up moving the uh the dumpster inside, it'll be plenty enough room for any kind of maneuvering from any kind of truck that's that'll be
there. One of the things that we've talked about and I think you know from a security perspective and I believe the applicant Mr. Natali is okay with this is that we could provide gates on both this exit in this point as well as the main entrance here. Now, they would be
slotted gates in order to meet the the storm water regulations, but at least they could come down especially at 10:00 or you know they'd open up at six o'clock in the morning and they would just you know be in place at night so no one could get into the building. It is,
as you noted, the the the entire perimeter does have a wall that comes down all the way to the grave. So, there will not be any perpetrators that should be able to come into the building after hours. Next floors, you you can kind of see again, typically, >> again, this is a typical >> Oh, just indicate what sheet this is.
I'm sorry. >> This is uh this is floor typical floors two through five. >> Got it. Okay. >> Okay. And and again, in this case here, um we've got as I um uh uh it was noted
earlier the one stair tower on the back corner was not indicated on the site plan. It will be it obviously has to come to grade. All the all the floor all the stairs have to come down to grade. >> Just want to confirm those are these are essentially what you submitted to the board. Correct.
>> Yes. Except for the exception uh that we're now going with only one elevator and not three elevators. But but for the most part it's been it's basically the same. >> Yeah. So this this um this uh set is how many sheets?
>> How many know how many sheets is? You did the first one. Now this one. >> Yeah. The same. >> All right. So A So just to be clear, Cliff, I don't know if this is where you're going. A3 consists of five sheets that that that >> Right. Okay. >> Just want to clarify that. Thank you. No problem. >> You got it. >> So again, one elevator is all that's
necessary. Again, the toilet core is shown on on the typical plan as we noted. It'll be on floors 1, three, and five, and that'll meet the code. Um, one of the comments that was made in by Michael was the fact is, do we have
enough clearance? So, right now the the Florida floor heights maybe go to the elevations. Um, and I'm not a big fan of elevations before board. I like the renderings better because this looks more architectural and a lot of people have maybe a little problem with maybe
reading it. But you can the the important takeaway on this is that first floor or from grade to to the top of the second floor is 16 feet. >> We we were expecting we'll get at least 14 feet of clearance. That'll include everything. It'll include the storage
units. It'll include uh space for structure for for any kind of duck work that'll be in there and enough room in order to allow our sprinkler heads to come down um inside that space uh not only on the 16 ft but also the other floors which
were at 12 feet. So, one of my one of my key staff members is a licensed uh uh code uh licensed class one code official. So, she reviewed the plans with me prior to this uh prior to tonight's meeting and we'll definitely
fully comply with that. In fact, the top of the storage units have a mesh. So, in the event of there's a fire, god forbid, that the sprinklers will be able to penetrate into the into the various uh storage units. Um when we go to the next next page, one
of the things I maybe go to to the elevations. One of the things I really liked this building, Dylan um was the designer of it. I happen to like this architecture or art is kind of like beauty in the eyes of the beholder.
Um but one of the things I think this this building's got is great street presence. Essentially, it's going to be in fact maybe we can show the materials. Um it'll be a split face uh block at the at the lower level and then it's going to be a vertical metal panel as was
noted in Michael's report. Um and then um so the idea would that we would it begins to create sort of a nice fivetory 70 to 72 foot um presence along 2006. So for me it has a nice sense of presence
along the street there. It's going to be a really nice looking building. Um I have to give kudos to our applicant because he's, you know, he he's willing to spend money. I think this looks better than any other public or any storage facility I've seen around the country. Um, and again, as you note, uh,
metal panels, one of the things that is that we probably need to clean up for the uh, uh, the final submission is that it the intention is not to be able to see into the into the the building. So, maybe go to the the night shot. So,
right now we are actually showing that you're able to see through it. But the idea is to have a carpet or some kind of reflective or some kind of glass and we'll come back with a sample of that of what it might look like. But I like the sense of that sort of that middle piece be is being vertical. Um, and then
you've got some slit windows that kind of that are either either either in a stair tower or into the actual storage areas themselves. But nicely lit, I think done very sensitively. We'll highlight the building um and um but
again it's not overbearing and won't be uh overly overly done. >> Um other comments um let me see >> um just go ahead. Yeah, just Paul just on the screening. Can you just speak to the screening of any mechanicals or
anything? >> Yeah, so as you note in the on the renaries here the the height of the parapit sort of varies a little bit. So in the south uh corner on the south um sort of middle corner there the par is slightly raised. Now let's go back to
the to this to the uh roof plan real quick. So the roof one of the requirements or one of the things we did was create a roof plan um just to show you where the mechanical equipment might be. These are not these are condensing units. They're not real
big. Um I believe that the parapit is in fact you know this is modeled and computerenerated stuff. As you can note from the renderings, there's no you don't see any mechanical equipment. We don't intend to do it. We don't think it's necessary because they're set back far enough and the parapit's about a 5
foot high parapit. So you it'll basically conceal it >> and and also Paul that's the furthest area away from the residential property. >> That's correct. Yes. >> Okay. So I again the mechanic equipment it it it should not be that that large um uh
based on the loads that we're anticipating. So I I don't we're not going to see it from especially from 206 or from the from the the adjacent neighbors. >> And to Michael's question earlier, I know Paul answered it, but you don't see an issue relocating the trash enclosures underneath the >> Not at all. Okay. >> Not at all.
>> Okay. and then provide the gates which will provide that again that sort of level of security as well as uh reducing the noise okay that the noise transmission in the area. >> Okay. And as it relates to the fire officials comments can can you speak to those? >> Yeah. Yeah. I I I have no problem
whatsoever with every comment except for one and I'd be glad to to speak with them directly. I don't believe we need exhaust fans in the the stair towers, but something I'll be glad because based on my interpretation like from tariff um you know it it doesn't seem to be
required. >> Okay. >> But other than that, what you're happy to engage with him on. >> Oh, absolutely. >> The rest of them were fine. >> Everything's fine. The uh fire suppress fully fully suppressed um throughout. So the building should be as as safe as possible. I >> I think he was saying since it was a use
variance that it's The assumption was a hazard use even though the UCCC code probably doesn't call it a hazard use. >> No, it's S1, >> right? So that's where the exhaust fan is an abundance of caution. Right. >> So it's not I understand your comment completely. So some of his comments I do
believe are code plus because of the Dvariance in this for the heightened sense of sight safety and to protect first responders. That's where that's coming. >> I'd be glad to have a discussion. It's, you know, it's I'm sure the applicant would have no problem with it. I um
again >> I we thought maybe he thought it was a high-rise and in that case it would have been but it would because it's close and 75 ft becomes a highrise. So we're you know it's not too far away from that. So um I'd be glad to have a conversation with them on that. >> Okay.
>> Regarding uh let me see if there's anything else I missed on Michael's comments. Again, obviously um um we talked about the the sprinter system and and the sufficient clearance. I have no problem with the fire marshall's uh uh uh questions. A stair tower that Michael
brought up absolutely needs to be shown. Um the entrances on the the elevations be glad to show that as a curb cut of some sort. Um be glad to comply with that. Um, >> so the one elevator is going to be can
accommodate a stretcher. >> That's correct. >> And to answer Mr. O'Neal's comment, it's going to be the mechanicals for the elevator are going to be a traction elevator or it's not a pit. >> It won't be a pit. It'll either be a pitless or we'll have to figure out what what makes sense for this. It's a fivetory building. We'll have to figure
out what that might what it might be. >> The point being you're not digging. You're not putting a a pit in the ground. Back to Mr. O'Neal's question. >> Correct. Um, >> and you don't anticipate any noise issues from the compressors on the roof
because of this parapit and for the location >> parapit and it's it's it's close closer towards 206, so it shouldn't have any impact to the neighborhood. >> I don't know. I don't know, Michael. Did I miss anything that um terms of your comments? I don't think so. But
>> I had a comment about the window the story, but if it's going to be frey sprinklered and that goes back to an aesthetic question that the board certainly uh >> y >> the metal panels whether I understand your comments and >> uh regarding the the style of the
building given its location. >> Okay. And other way that that's all I have for for Paul. I've got a question as usual. How it looks from the highway is fine. I'm still not sure how it will look from Washington Place the the back the back
street there. You know, you've got directional. It's it's an irregularly shaped building. So, what are they looking at? Which piece of this building are they looking at? >> A good question. So, if you look at the elevations here, this is basically what they would be looking at. Again,
obviously, there's a, you know, very sympathetic to the neighborhood. Um, again, we're we're beginning to show it in its context. here. Um, the only thing I could suggest, Mr. O'Neal, is is that if we have to, maybe we would go over take a photograph of one of my and then show it
what it looks like. Um, >> because quite frankly, I was in East Berlin some time ago. It looks very familiar. You know, the front looks fine. We go around back and it's like old Tucson. I mean, it appears to me if I think I think what they're going to
see, I think you can do better because I know you're firm. >> Okay. Okay. We'll we'll look at that. Yeah, be glad to I I would like to make a comment if I may with regard to Mr. Palmier's uh com uh wonderful comments.
>> Let's go back to the site play real quick. I looked at this. I love the fact that it's trapezoidal from an architect. It's like this is a cool shape. You know, we get to do something that's interesting, right? But if the applicant wanted to build a mixeduse project, whether it was NI church allowable or an
office building, we could go five stories or 15 stories >> by essentially providing we' have to provide parking a deck garage say four or five stories to whatever is required and then build on top of that. >> I'm not talking about stories.
>> No, I know what you're talking about. >> Yeah, you know exactly where I'm coming from. You just want to make sure that what the view what they're viewing has the same quality materials as what's everybody else is viewing. >> Yeah, I think I know he could do better. I know he can. >> Okay. I'm open to I'm open to discussion
on that. I'd be glad to, you know, come up with some other ideas for the other facades. Um right now it's you're right. It's it's a metal, you know, metal building with glass on the backside. We don't have that, but but um yeah, I mean be glad to take a look at it. The other part
>> I'm I'm totally an open book with regard to you guys have any good I ladies have some suggestions. I'm >> the other part to that is the although there's a lot of greenery behind it that's only half the year. I mean once those trees drop everybody from Washington plays got a full view.
>> Okay. Yeah. We we'll take we we understand the comment. We'll look at that. >> Anybody else from the board have any questions? >> Anybody have anybody anybody The audience have any questions of the testimony just given?
>> Members of the interested public >> uh Joe Pomar. Uh everybody's everybody's calling me Palmier but Pomar. I like Palmier's good though. Uh 77 Washington Place. Um thanks for for everything. It's great presentation. Um couple of
things just um visav the mechanicals. What is the enclosure on the roof? What is it made out of? >> The well right now we're not showing you the enclosure because right now the metal the parapit is higher than the roof. >> Right.
>> So that five foot parapit should be should conceal those units. >> Right. >> They're not huge units. They're not like you see you ever see the one across the street on 206. >> Uh >> building the taller building off on the opposite side. >> Yeah.
>> It's not going to be those. >> Okay. So if it's I'm just wondering about noise abatement if there's a possibility of a block enclosure >> up there. >> We couldn't put block up there, but we could put a metal some kind of metal enclosure.
>> Right. And then another little detail and you know the I I understand the facade question that Mr. O'Neal raised or uh and be perfectly honest with you, I almost prefer a a blank wall without
significant lighting, you know, looking over our our neighborhood there. But um one thought I had was first of all for the for the lighting that's on the non 206 side, could that be shielded and facing down?
I noticed you had accent lights. >> Yes. >> Kind of washing up the walls. >> That was on 206. I don't know what >> Yeah. >> But yeah, I mean we will definitely I mean we don't Do you have the elevations on the back? I don't think so. Right. Or render. We don't show a rendering
necessarily, but yeah, we'll be very sensitive. So the vertical strip there, what is that material? Is that is that a fenestration? >> It Yeah. >> So that potentially could be lit 24/7. >> Well, again, the idea with a
fenestration is that you won't be able to see through it, >> right, >> into the building. >> But would there be light coming through there? >> No. >> Okay. >> So it wouldn't it wouldn't be illuminated overnight. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> And again, at 10:00, it's been turned
off. And then the uh the last thing at the risk of uh designing on the fly one more time here >> as I look at the um 206 elevation. >> So Paul was there any consideration
and it's a little bit of a pet peeve of mine. So often when we do developments we have the massing which is five stories throughout the entire footprint. But was there any consideration given to going two say two stories or three
stories on the north end of the the property? In other words, basically a lower as it adjoins Washington Place neighborhood, a lower structure that would kind of have the the tallest part
of it down by the jug handle the Orlando Place. So I know that >> you speak into the mic, please. I'm literally designing on the fly here, but I'm thinking about solving some of the problems of of the encroachment on the neighborhood by reducing the massing to
the north of the pro on this. >> Paul, you're suggesting that the building be stepped. >> Yes, correct. >> Stepping the building to soften the look up from the residential area. >> Exactly. Right. So stepping up and away from the residential area highest at the
jug handle which is basically a a highway. >> Yeah. >> We could look at it again right I know that the you know when u these are developed as a a proforma you know is there's a certain thing that needs to
work financially so again I don't think we can reduce the overall >> square footage to accommodate the units but I I don't know. We'll have to take a look at it. Whether or not we have to go higher along 206 and then go less on the back. I mean,
don't know if that makes sense from a from a use perspective, >> right? But you understand the point, right? Yeah. So, at the risk of designing on the fly here, okay, >> I thought I'd suggest it because there is a requirement for the board to sign off on this whole thing. So,
>> in the spirit of trying to find a compromise, I wanted to throw that out for everybody. >> So, noted. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Anyone else have any questions? >> Mike Pro. >> Mike Prothro, 85 Washington Place.
>> Um, I guess first question is down on the south side, the side that faces Washington Place, can you show us again what that first floor would look like? It looked like there was some metal grading there in between the cinder block.
Is Yeah. What is it? Said vertical grills. What What exactly does that mean? Is that like light comes through that sound comes through that? >> You've seen like a decorative metal grill. >> Okay. >> So, it might be a horizontal or it could be vertical. I think we're showing horizontal, right?
A vertical grill. So, it' be more of a decorative kind of thing to break up the mass a little bit. That's one of the things we're trying to do. >> Yeah. I mean, I guess to our interest would be blocking light and sound. So, >> like we're not so concerned like at that
level it's yeah, light and sound coming through if that were a solid block. I understand the architectural benefit and and it is a you know a nice looking building from the front. Um but on the back side we don't no one's really
looking at that except the neighbors in their backyard. So the preference really would be and I don't what would be the downside to having that being solid on the back on the back side as a >> different okay >> we could go with a a stucco product or
something different you know that's for that whole back to Yeah, I understand it. Down on the lower level, but above I think they're talking about the main facade. >> I'm talking about the lower level. >> The lower >> the lower level because that that's really where all the vehicles are coming
and going. >> I thought referring to the Yeah. >> No, no, the upper portion was fine. I mean, I had the same question that that Joe did about the windows that are there and if there's lighting that's on internally >> and what time I think you answered that question that those shut off by 10:00,
>> right? and we want assurance that like the building goes dark at that time. >> Yeah, >> we have to we we're working with the civil engine figure out what we need for for to deal with some of the flood pl flood issues. So, but we can we'll definitely >> Yeah, some of those items have to be
open because of the flooding, but we'll take a look at your comment. >> Okay. I mean, because there is a big opening on that right side, right, for the >> Okay. >> for the ex exit >> from that parking lot. We're proposing that we provide coily grills that would close off after hours.
>> My understanding that the garage is going to be open garage all sides only certain sides, >> right? >> There might be there. I had suggested the board detailing
show aesthetics perspective and perspective, >> right? There's probably a solution that would work there that where this it's kind of an arrow shape, but the arrow part that's towards the Orlando Drive jug handle, no one's living there. if
that if if water whatever can come in that way and then you do have an opening on the other side. It's really the side that's facing the neighborhood if that can be cleaned up. Um the other thing you mentioned the fire marshall and we're not privy to what those discussions were but um I guess our
thought was how is the fire department going to deal with the in the event of a fire. I don't see any lane around the outside of this building. It goes way deep. I know it's it's going to have all kinds of fire protection, I'm sure, is required by law in there, but where does the fire truck go? And do we have fire
equipment that can >> deal with providing something a memo as to what they required? >> And that's what uh Paul was saying we would comply with. >> Yeah. >> You can get that from the board. >> We can get that from the board. All that information is available in >> the file. It's rather detailed.
>> It's in the file. Well done. >> Okay. Yeah. It just it just looks like something that's very inaccessible from a fire truck cuz you got trees all around it. I don't know if a fire truck no one's going to drive underneath that in a firetruck if it's on fire. Um the other part and and I guess I'm thinking of those ones at the bottom. They're 9
ft by 20 feet I believe from my drawing. That's big enough for someone to stick a car in there. I'm sure the rules are going to not allow it, but who's there watching people put stuff in there? Um, you know, god forbid if someone parks a Tesla in there and it catches on fire,
this whole building's done. >> It's it's specifically prohibited based on the fact I mean, it's >> and nobody puts anything that's prohibited in these lockers, right? >> Well, no, but the the doors are not 9 ft wide. Like, you can't get through the door. The door is like six feet wide. >> Yeah.
>> So, you can't get a car. >> You can't get a >> Is there a way to make it so that Yeah. Something like that couldn't >> No, you can't put cars in there. >> Okay. >> I promise you. Okay, >> they've covered some of that
fire response FDC so they can apparcilation Okay. to to address this and back to the comments. I think the applicants agreed to go back.
>> Yes, that's correct. That's correct. >> And let you know I in my report to get more details I grants one final of course that's the board's decision there's a lot of not a lot but
there's some critical unanswered questions that you raised and others have raised about the details of how this all is going to work together >> okay >> Michael I I have one >> thank you very much >> I have one question I mean have we stipulated or have you stipulated in
terms of hours of operation as a condition of approval because I know there's been discussion about different different hours of operation. >> I think you said 6:00 am to 10 p.m. >> 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. was is that okay
my suggestion would be though that's certainly up to the board would be that that be made a condition of approval just because you may not always own this place. >> Sure. I understand. >> What was the 8 a.m. to 6 pm? That was the office. >> The office.
>> That was the office. Yeah. >> Okay. So, when the office closes, what happens between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 10 p.m.? Does that mean there's nobody on site? >> But 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., isn't it? >> Yeah. He means the >> I read written down earlier, somebody had mentioned 8 a.m. to 6. Let's let's
not confuse it. >> Yeah. During those four hours. Yeah. >> The building has full security cameras. You can only get in with a key fob. >> It's fully alarmed. >> So now, yeah, we did agree. I think you guys had already uh said that there were going to be some gates there. Would they be automatic that with a key fob?
>> Right. That's what that's what we talked about. We I think we'll get to this when we conclude tonight, but I think what we would do is we would add those to the plans, come back, show them to the board so you could see what they look like. >> So that that covers >> the K. Yeah. Yeah. I I'll go through
I'll go through all that one. >> Yeah. So that that would be in effect as soon as the office closes at 6 PM. So if someone wants to get in between 6 and 10, they would have a key fob or something to get in there. Exactly. Okay. Yeah. That wasn't too fair before. >> Thank you.
>> Anyone else in the audience? >> One more time. >> Thanks. Vera Samsky 105 Washington Place. I know I had a map earlier, but I just wanted to make a comment. Um, >> questions. >> Oh, question. Uh, I thought we could
also just make a comment. No, >> there'll be time for that. >> Mine was just informal to say that we made a little informal progress with the applicant and his assistant. Your is in the back. Um when we had the break
before talking about shielding for the Washington place residences shielding the view of the tall building and there's encouragement there that they're willing to talk about fencing and mature trees being planted. So I just wanted to
share that that if we go in that direction that's a good thing. >> Sorry it wasn't a question. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for saying that. Thank you. Just one other question. Joe Pomar, 77 Washington Place. And uh so Paul, one
one other thing talking about the fire firefighting, fire suppression at the site. Um just wanted to throw out one other thing again designing on the fly, but if you did reduce the height of the north end of this property, it might might make it easier actually to fight a
fire at the structure. if for instance there was a lower portion of the building connected to a higher portion. So not sure I'll refer to the chief on that whether whether that would make it actually easier to fight a fire, but you
could certainly get a ladder up onto a lower portion of a building and then kind of address a higher portion. So there could be, you know, as you guys um talk about it, another another advantage of doing that. Anyone else have any questions of the
testimony? >> Another question. Oh, you want to go over uh the materials you're using to build this building, combustible, non-combustible? >> Kind of run through. >> Yeah. >> Thematic portion of that. >> Yep. So, essentially the building as designed is got the split face block as
you can note here uh in some range of color there. We we can come back with finals once we review with the applicant, but that'll be the base and then the metal panel um is right here. So that would essentially be the the
major materials there. Um and then you have the other Yeah. And that the fiber cement is sort of that greenish color. Go back to the there. So again, the idea is to try to give some articulation to the side so
that it's not so solid. Right. So, so you can see on the rendering here that we've got the fiber cement product that is highlighted on the green areas here and then you've got the glass, right? And the glass would be that sort of center area along with some of the
vertical fenestration that we're showing. And again, the intent is not to be able to see into the building, especially like at night. >> So, >> and the interior is steel framed. >> Yes. >> Uh concrete poured floors. Yes. Yes, you're decking under the floors. >> Yeah, it'll be probably a composite deck with steel with with some kind of steel
structure. >> So, all non-combustible. >> Correct. Yeah, it's a >> pretty much the only thing that could probably burn in there is stuff that's actually stored in the units. >> That's correct. Yeah, we're probably looking at 2A construction. You know, it's an S1U, so it's it'll that's Yeah,
it'll definitely be non-combustionable. >> So, right. Go ahead. I'm sorry. >> You finished? Well, you said uh currently it's going to be designed 455 units. >> Right now the placeholder is for 445
units >> per floor. >> No, that's the that's the total total. >> Correct. >> And these are modular. >> They're modular. That's correct. >> What would be the max that you could put in there? >> I can't answer that question. I'd have to defer to the applicant. But um
depending on again once the algorithm is sort of uh figure it out. You know, it could be much smaller units, could be bigger units. Again, it depends on a lot of uh information from this particular area. So, >> Paul, it really depends on market
demand, right? >> That's correct. That's correct. >> What do you think is driving the market? >> I'm not >> Yeah, the applicant would really be working with like an expert in that self- storage field to figure that out at the time.
But but the box would not change and the traffic numbers and nothing. It was it's all based on square footage, right? >> If you had 18 fewer units, would it make a difference? >> Tra in what? In what? >> Just 18 fewer storage units, would it make a difference in your algorithm?
>> Probably one. >> I I I I think it's all based on square footage. >> All right. The only reason I'm answering that, if you reduce the ones that are depicted on the first floor, you mitigate the flood damage to anybody's potential contents. and all that water stuff goes away. Just
just throw it out there. >> Okay. >> It's almost like store at your own risk. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Paul, we didn't touch this. It wasn't in the application. Signage.
>> Freestanding wall signs. There's nothing on this. I would in my I would prefer to see signage on the final rendering. >> That's fine. just because it's a use variance. Should the board approve it, if you don't show signage, you're going to have to come back because it's a use
variance, >> right? >> So, if you're going to coming back, should the board be inclined to go preliminary approval for final if we can address the signage >> and hopefully not a box sign because the box signs are problematic. >> Okay. Sorry. We'll finish up with with
Paul and then we could talk about like >> I didn't know that was Paul. I don't know if it's on the building or it's going to be free. >> That's fine. That's fine. Have you guys engaged an operator? I No, >> not yet. >> Not yet. Okay. >> No, I understand. >> The idea is we probably will have a
pylon sign and then we will have some signage on but it'll comply to your to the ordinance. >> Right. I for final should the go preliminary. It would be nice to see the aesthetics, the signage, everything. So, >> right. No one else has any uh questions.
>> This is this is my thought based on where we are now and this is to answer to address your question about preliminary versus final. I think based on the some of the public comment and board comment, there's about there's there's about a handful of high
level items that we everybody wanted us to look at and I'd rather come back uh fix clean those up include and I I'll I'll go over what those are to make sure we're all on the same page and then we could get preliminary and final if we really you know uh get into the details
of those. So, what I had was um moving the dumpster under the building. Um adding looking at what what the last um what the uh one of the residents said, having some additional buffering along the residential property line there. Um adding the gate and the K
turn um on on the sides. Um Paul uh the architect Paul versus engineering Paul uh making sure that the glass was uh was was opaque or you couldn't see >> translucent. >> Yeah. Translucent so you couldn't see through it. Um the view from I think Mr.
O'Neal's question about softening the look on the residential side. We would look we would look at that. What um what Michael just said about the signage um the lighting on that residential side making sure it was it was cut off. Um
and then um yeah, so those were the main if anyone has anything else, let me know. But those were the main items that I think the board and the public wanted us to look at. So if we could carry now come back, show those I think everybody would feel a lot more comfortable voting on the application and then I could also
have the planner testify with those changes being made and that'll go to the positive and negative criteria and I think assist in the in in all the testimony coming together. Yeah, that's that's at the time we'll have the comments from the public. >> Sure. >> Jason, stormwater management too. If we
could show the storm water management lighting if we can clean up the plan. >> Yeah. I just have to ask Paul if that I can ask him now how long that takes versus the other. >> Okay. All right. So, yeah, I just thought that would be the longest lead item typically is the is those technical engineering comments. But, um, let's
talk about what the next available date is and then we can figure that out. Uh June is taken. >> So it would be July. >> Okay. What date in July? >> 1st, 15th or 29th? >> It would be the the third, not the first.
>> Okay. No, no. I'm just I I always have them try to have them available. >> Are you? >> Yeah. >> Well, I I guess it would be the then it's I'm both dates are open. Whatever the board's pleasure is. >> Is July 1. >> We're talking about July. >> Is July 1st okay for everybody?
>> Did that give you enough time? for me. >> Okay, very good. Paul, you're good. >> I prefer later, but that's kind of a way that Well, yeah, >> as well later. >> Okay. >> 15th and
>> Yeah, the I can't do the 15th. Um, can we can we just carry to the first now and we'll try to figure it out. Is that okay? >> Okay. >> You want to carry to the first? >> Yes. July 1st. >> July. >> Okay. >> Okay. So this will continue on the 1 of
July, >> right? There will be no further public notice and on July 1st uh the application will resume uh at this, you know, at 7:00 in this location. >> Okay. With no further So just to be
clear, applications being carried, no further notice. July 1st, 2026, 7 p.m. in this room. >> We're good on time. >> All right. Sounds good. >> No, that's a good question. What was your question? I'm sorry. >> Sorry. >> Please come forward and ask it.
>> Sure, I will. Sorry about that. >> But in terms of the list of uh of items to address for the next meeting, we did talk about possibly looking at the massing of the building. Um can we add that to the list? >> Okay.
>> Thank you. >> Thanks. Sorry about that. >> Yeah, >> Jason. The time to act. >> Oh, yeah. We would extend that through uh Yeah, through July. Uh, so just send me like a if you want me to sign, >> I'll have Ryan send you an email and you can respond to it or something. Okay.
>> All right. So 7 p.m. on that date in this room. We'll see you there. >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you very much. >> And as much time as you can give me >> to review the plans. >> Everybody's in favor of uh carrying this through July.
>> Okay. Great. Thanks everybody. >> Thank you very much. Jason, anything? Jason, >> uh, that was the last hearing. It's on the discussion now.
>> Jason, if you have if you have any other questions or any concerns, you know, give me a yell. Thank you. Next meeting. >> How's your neighbor? Right. But >> okay. Is there anything else to come before the board? >> You should be here in person. I mean written comments.
>> Someone like to move for adjournment. >> Well, can you find another move? >> Second. All in favor I >> represented by council or something like this because just submitting comments doesn't mean first of all I mean you of course the board will read them but it is preferable and it's also preferable
under the law that you're here you are here to articulate