public. We are live. Okay. Good evening. On behalf of the members of the planning board and our professionals, I would like to welcome you to tonight's meeting of the Sparta Township Planning Board. This meeting is being held on May 21st, 2025 at the
Sparta Township Municipal Building located at 65 Main Street, Sparta. Proceedings of the meeting are being livereamed on YouTube at ww.youtube.com a forward slashsparta TWWP. The time is 6:04 and this meeting
is called to order. Please note that no new business will be conducted after 9:30 and the meeting will end at 10. Please stand and join the board as we proudly pledge our nation's flag to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it
stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Okay. May we have a roll call, please? Janette Burke, here. Ernie Ragstead here. Brian Zimmerman here. Ron Day here. Chairwoman Joan Ferman here.
Councilman Mark Scott here, Robert Bllegley here, Vice Chairman Robert Otto present. Celeste Luciano here, and Christine Dunar here. Thank you. And uh at this time we're going to go into executive session. If you could please read the resolution that allows us to do
so. We'll take a vote. Resolution of the planning board of the township of Sparta authorized a closed or executive session. Executive session resolution 2025-6 decided and adopted May 21st, 2025. Whereas section 8 of the open
public meetings act chapter 231 PL 1975 permits the exclusion of the public from a meeting in certain circumstances and whereas this public body is of the opinion that such circumstances presently exist. Now therefore be it resolved by the planning board of the
township of Sparta uh county of Sussex state of New Jersey as follows. The public shall be excluded from discussions of an action upon the here and after specific subject matters. The general nature of the subject matter to be discussed is as follows. Housing element and fair share plan attorney
client privilege communication. It is anticipated at this time that the above stated subject matter will be public will be made public upon the comm completion of all litigation and appeals and when deemed appropriate. This resolution shall take effect immediately.
Okay. Thank you. May I have a resolution to go into executive session? So move. I'll second. Okay, let the record show that Mark Scott uh made the motion and Celeste Luciano seconded it. And just for the board, the reason I'm doing that is um it's very difficult for
someone who is taking the minutes to understand who is speaking and the last time everything went blank and so they couldn't match the faces with that. So going forward, this will be the practice that I'll just repeat that. Okay. Um all
right. So we had a couple things on executive session. The first and the major thing is of course the affordable housing. Be a roll call. Yeah, we have a roll call. I'm sorry. I thought we did that. We did. So, you have to do a second and then you have to do an all the vote.
Yes, you're right. I'm sorry. Go ahead. Are we Do you want to do an all in favor or a roll call? Everybody in favor of uh executive session say I. I. I. We just had some things we needed to wind up place next door to a good
support system. They probably better. Okay. Same problem. Yeah. All right. Thanks. Um, the next thing we have are the approval of minutes from April 2nd, 2025. The April 16th minutes need to be
carried to June 4th. But if you could uh please uh review the April 2nd minutes, um hopefully you had a chance to do that prior to now. And if you ready, if you would, somebody would like to make a motion. I'll make a motion. Janette,
anybody second? Chris will second. Thank you. Okay. All those in favor, we do a roll call, please. Are there any comments? Okay. Roll call. Burke. Yes. Ernie Ragstead, yes. Ronda, yes.
Chairwoman Joan Ferman, yes. Councilman Mark Scott, yes. Robert Blakeley, yes. Vice Chairman Robert Otto, yes. Les Luciano, yes. And Christine Dunar, yes. Can I make a comment to the com comment? Um on this on the third page in the
third paragraph, it said Mr. Scott commented about the status of the Ocean Trap Law sign. And uh at that point, we were all under the assumption Stop and Shop still owned it, but that's not true. They conveyed it to Ocean Ocean State back in uh like like three years
ago. So uh my question really wasn't applicable at the time, but stay in there. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Um we're going to be moving on to um I'd like to do some of the other board business which is
planning board 700 BWB Holdings uh requesting an extension of time and um Miss Hooker is here to give us some of the rationale for that extension. Yes. as she's walking up the uh New Jersey statute provides for extension of
preliminary and site plan approval. Um I'm looking in the Cox book at page 763 uh the land use treatise. It says u that a planning board may extend the period of protection uh which is two years uh
for an extension of one-year extensions but not to exceed three extensions. What that means is you have the two-year primary and you can extend it three more times, one year each, for a total of five years. Council,
I don't think so. This is the first extension, correct? Yeah. Yes. Okay. Good evening, members of the board. My name is Madison Hooker. I'm from the law firm Price Smith and King. I'm sorry. Oh, they can't transcribe anything if they can't hear it. Okay. I represent
the applicant BWB Holdings. Again, my name is Madison Hooker. Um, this is an application for extension of approvals uh that were granted. It was a preliminary and final site plan application that was approved on
December 7th, 2022 and memorialized on March 15, 2023. Uh the property is located at 55 Main Street and the application was um the applicant was proposing to extend the parking area of
the Premier Health Building. Um and an a condition of the approval was that the applicant obtain a new letter of interpretation from the NJD. That application was submitted in October of 2023 and we it is still making its way
through the D's um review. So the applicant has only been able to occupy the or the tenants have only been able to occupy the first floor space and not the second floor because of the lack of parking. They haven't been able to start
any of the the proposed work um due to the the lack of the LOI. So, the applicant is requesting a two-year extension of approval. So, the statute talks about uh extension
of one year and and I I'd love to be able to say give her uh give the applicant a two-year, but I believe uh council and you can correct me if I'm wrong. It says under uh 40 col
55D-54 that the planning board may extend the protections for one year but not exceed three extensions as I understand that it's one year periods. I I think that's the way it is. Okay. Katherine, do you know where on the
extensions is it can give two years? You don't know. That's okay. It's one. Yeah, I think it's one too, but good news is you can get three one years, right? It's within a fiveyear period, isn't it? So, that would explain a maximum of five years. There's the two-year primary and
then you can extend it one year three more times at a time. I mean, I've been before this board and we had I was granted we were granted a a three-year extension because they can be it was my understanding that they can be done all at once. But the board uh is only
willing to consider a one-year extension, then the that's fine with us. Okay. It just says extensions of one year, but not to exceed three extensions. It say extension of one year and let's stick to that. Yeah. And I
could be wrong. If if you find I'd welcome if you see anything case law on it uh for the future. That's fine. We can we will be requesting the one year. Then does anybody have any questions? Yes, Mr. Pora. Yes. Is it true that uh
is it true that while we extend for one year here there there is no zoning uh protection right there there could be a change in zoning well they're protect that their resolution yes is what they're extending so they are vested and protected on that resolution okay all
right well I misunderstood okay thank you so board you have before you a request for extension it's my understanding it has to be one-year period periods and uh thereby the resolution of u application number 70 uh
which memorialized on March 15, 2023 would be extended for a period of one year uh has already the two years and one additional year that would bring them to uh March 15, 2026. So uh I'll put together a simple
resolution that reflects that. I just had one other question. Um the prior resolution had uh some additional things in there that were requested like one of which was would you consider a third handicap spot? Um has that been
addressed in this time period? And the lighting I think was another thing. Um not that I'm aware of. They haven't been able to even do any work because they they haven't been able to No, I know that. But was it even um because I
think at that point it was in transition and they were asking if the buyer would do that the previous board was asking. So maybe that's something that you might still bring back and look at the original resolution and try to come back with an answer next year. Yes,
definitely we can come back with that. So you need someone to move that. Yeah. So would somebody um like to I'll make a motion that we extend Pete uh planning board application 700 for a one-year period. I'll second. All right. Ron made the motion and
Janette seconded. Mr. Burke. Yes. Um, my company ensures that property and I've worked on that. So, I should stay for that. I'm staying. All right. You know something, you should really recuse yourself and I'm going to ask you to step down off the deis for the vote.
Sorry. That's good. And for the record, that's Ernie Ragstat stepping down due to uh recusal. So an abstension is that you you may have a a conflict in that Ernie may have a pecunary interest doing business.
That's where the recusal comes in. So that's why he's stepping down. Thank you. Continue. Waiting for him to leave. He can send that down. Oh, okay. Dory, would you do a roll call, please? Robert Blakeley, yes. Janette Burke, yes. Ron
Day, yes. Celeste Luciano, yes. Councilman Mark Scott, yes. Brian Zimmerman, yes. Christine Dunbar, yes. Vice Chairman Robert Otto, yes. And Chairwoman Joan Ferman, yes. All right. See you next year. Thank you. Unless you're done. See you next week.
Thank you. Byebye. All right. I'd like to return to the public portion of the um agenda, the public hearing, and invite planning boards 25-730, Sussex County Charter School of Technology up to the day, up to the
um table. Welcome. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, when you're ready, if you please state your name and you'll get sworn in. Thank you. I'm Richard Valente of the law firm of Morris Downing and Sherid and Newton on behalf of the applicant Sussex Charter School for Technology. And to my
left is Norin Lazar. Sorry. Lazerick uh on behalf of the Charter School. Can you just spell your name for me, please? I have counsel. Oh, just like Valentine, but stop at the letter I. V A L E N T I.
Great. Thank you. Um, Norin Lazerich. N O R E N L A Z A R I U K. Superintendent of the charter school.
Uh, Norin, I'm sorry. Yes. Darin, do you saw me swear to tell the truth, hold truth, and nothing but the truth shall be God? I do. and you've stated your name and your business address if you could for the record. 385 North Church Road, Sparta.
Okay, council. Thank you. Thank you. First of all, I wanted to thank the board. Uh originally we weren't on the agenda for this evening and I appreciate the fact that uh you reconsidered that and allow us to be on it. There is somewhat of a time constraint involved in this request. So,
we greatly appreciate you're hearing the application this evening. Uh, we have one professional witness, Justin Provenure. Uh, would you like to swear him in at this time as well, please? Sign to tell the truth, hold truth, and not the truth. Help you God. I do. Uh,
name and professional address for the record, please. Justin Provenure. Provinure is spelled P R O V E N C H E R. Professional address is 445 Godwin A
Sweet 9 in Midland Park, New Jersey 07432. And you work with Lan Associates? I do. And you're a professional uh engineer licensed in the state of New Jersey? Correct. And your license in good standing? Yes, it Have you ever
testified before a board before? Yes. And you've been accepted as an expert in civil engineering? I have. Board, I recommend you accept them as an expert in the area of civil engineering. So accepted. Uh council, just to move things along, uh you are at the planning board, which
is a good thing. So you're permitted use. Amen. And uh the board acknowledges you have the superintendent here. Uh have you had the opportunity to look at the engineering letter uh on the review of this application? If you can focus on that, that may be helpful. We will.
Thank you. Will um would would the board like me to explain what the charter school is first? I know we were here back in 2016, but I suspect that different board composition at this point. So, with the board's permission, we'll quickly run through through testimony of Norine about the charter
school. May we be seated? Whenever you're comfortable. Yes, please. Norin, where is the school located? 385 North Church Road. How close to that? That's on Route 94, correct? And how
close to that is the hard to the hardest border? It's close. I don't know. Yes. Uh and and the charter school is a public school of choice. Is that correct? Correct. What does that mean as far as first the public school? Well, we
are a public school. We just have all of our students are choice students. So we have all the regulations. We follow all everything that a public school would follow. We just have the privilege of having a school of choice. So we draw
from 17 towns in Sussex County and we can actually take students from other counties also. But right now we have some students from Jefferson, but everyone else is from Sussex County. So there's no tuition.
Um and the applications are not uh they're basically first come first serve. Sparta residents have preference and uh after that it's first come first serve. Uh there's no interviews or criteria for the
applicants to the charter school. And is the school one of only two charter schools designated by New Jersey for rural areas? Uh that's correct. We there's 89 charter schools in New Jersey and um Sussex Charter and Origin Valley
in Blairestown are the only two rural charter schools. What grade levels are served by the school? We have sixth, seventh, and eighth grade. With respect to the proposed cafeteria addition, will there be any increase in
the student population resulting from the cafeteria addition? No. Will there be any increase in the number of employees resulting from the cafeteria edition? No. Any any increase in number of uh parents?
No. Will there be any increase in the number of bus traffic uh at the school by virtue of the cafeteria edition? No. Let's talk about how the school currently serves lunch for its students. Where do the students have lunch now?
Currently, we use our gymnasium for lunch. How does that limit the use of the gym during the school day, 50% of the school day, um the gym is used to for for lunch because we have three lunches and we have a period to
set up for lunch and a period to clean up after lunch. So, it's approximately 50% of the day that we can't use the gymnasium for anything other than lunch. May I just interrupt for a minute, Mr. Valente? Would you mind using the other microphone just so everything is picked
up? Oh, absolutely. That'd be great. Okay, I'll stand there then. No, no, you can bring it over to you. Oh, okay. You could take it off the stand, too. That'd be helpful. Thank you. Thank you. With respect to how students are currently uh served lunch at the school,
how does that work? We use um the food service company that Sussex Votech uses. Uh they deliver the lunches in boxes and uh we just serve them, right? Every student gets a little
box that has every their lunch in it. So it's a hot lunch, but it comes in an insulated truck. Well, the it's a it's a food truck and then we have um the lunch uh individual boxes are in insulated
um containers that roll into the gym and the students can brown bag as well as an option. Correct. And um is there any change proposed with respect to the cafeteria edition with respect to serving lunch for the
students? We would do it exactly the way we do it now. So the cafeteria edition uh will not have any food preparation in it. Is that correct? That's correct. No ovens in it. Correct. No bathrooms in
it. Correct. No dishwashers in it. Correct. Uh the only thing you're proposing as far as a facility with respect to plumbing uh or cooking is a slop sink. Is that correct? Correct. And is that primarily for the the custodians use for cleaning
the uh cafeteria? Yes. Would you describe for the board the benefits to the school of having this cap modular cafeteria on the site? The benefit would be that our um gym classes would be reduced. The size of our gym classes
will be reduced and we'll have more flexibility with our schedule. So, it's just going to enhance the educational um capacity of the school. As far as your goals uh with respect to the delivery and installation and use of
the cafeteria, what are your goals? timing. We're gonna serve the lunch the way we do now. No, in terms of installation of the delivery of the modular cafeteria itself. Well, we would like to have it
for next year. Meaning the beginning of the school year. Correct. For September. Yes. Those are the questions I had for Norine with respect to the modular cafeteria. Um Mr. Preventure can then go on to the
engineer items. However, if the board members or the members of the public have any questions, uh, she can feel those as well. Door professionals have any questions. Witness, I personally do not. My question is going to be for the
engineer. I just have some operational weapons. Um, do you anticipate the uh cafeteria to be used outside of school hours? Um, we could that would it would be another space, but um I I don't it was
it's primarily for the for the lunches, but it would be an additional space if we had a club that wanted to maybe use the space for like an engineering club. They can do different things with the open space or even
um a class that's meeting that's not during lunch that needs some space. like let's say they're, you know, doing CO2 cars or airplanes or something. It's just an open space if it's raining that they could use. Got it. So, not
necessarily outside of the standard hours of the school day, though. Correct. Got it. Thank you. Just real quick, uh, and you're authorized to speak on behalf of the applicant. You're the superintendent? Yes. And are you superintendent of any other schools
besides this one? No. And as far as um if you would just pay attention to uh what's going to be asked of the engineer, it's customary that the board would say that have compliance what our board engineers comments. So I'll ask you through your council that after you
hear any conditions the board may put on they're not going to be unreasonable, you know, public health safety issues that uh you would acknowledge that on the record. So thank you. Okay. Thank you council. Do any other members of the board have questions? I just have one. You mentioned um no
ovens and other things. How about a microwave? No. Thank you. All right. Well, I guess hear from your ne next witness, Justin. These are just the site plans that were approved or that were um submitted most
recently to the engineer. Justin, would you briefly describe the size and location of the proposed cafeteria addition? Sure. Uh the proposed cafeteria is approximately 66x 24 ft which comes out to 15
uh540 square ft. And it's located at you know the farthest rear yard area of the um of the school which is back here which is the southwest corner of the property. And would you describe the reasons for
why the cafeteria will be located where it is and any other options that you considered? Sure. Um, this location is the farthest from any other neighboring buildings. And there's another potential green space on the opposite side of the
property that's on the southeast side over here. Um, but currently there's a storm water detention basin in that location. So it would have to be slid farther away from the school. Um, which would obviously not be ideal as
far as getting students from their classrooms into the cafeteria itself. So this had the best balance of being close to the school and far away from neighbors and um still in close proximity to uh where the students have to access it. As far as uh additional
lighting, uh would you describe if any uh additional lighting associated with the cafeteria addition? Um, there's two entrances to the classroom. There's one ramp that goes up to a front entrance and then a uh set of steps that goes up to a side entrance. And we expect to
have just one light over top of each door, which is fairly standard for just basic egress and security purposes at those entrances. As far as there are two uh what I'll call bulk variances required with respect to the placement of the
cafeteria edition. uh would you uh indicate what those variance requests are and the justification that you feel are for those variances? Sure. Uh the two variances are a rear yard setback where 60 ft is required and we are about 44 ft away from the rear
yard and the other setback is um between two buildings that 15 ft is required and we're providing 10 ft uh which is the required fire protection separation. Um go ahead. I'm sorry. Yeah. So, I'll I'll rotate I'll rotate
the plan actually to show an aerial photograph of the surrounding area. This has not been submitted at all. Alo could be exhibit A1 if that seems necessary as again just an aerial photo showing the surrounding area. Yeah, why don't we mark it as A2? And uh
even though you submitted the plan um the last revision of January 21st, 2025, I'm going to mark your uh site plan as A1 and the aerial A2. Sounds good. If you can mark it A2 and put your initials
on it with today's date, please. Ju just for clarity, did you submit a revised plan since January? Just to uh Yes, we the May one. Yes, the May May revision. I I am looking at one that is stamped May 13,
2025. Thank you for the clarification. Yeah, the May 16, 2025 is the date that we have on here. Oh, we have April 11, 2025 as the latest revision.
Yes. um title block on mine says January 21st, but the revision says uh April 11th, 2025. Yes. The the revision that I actually have here, I'm realizing we we resubmitted to soil conservation. So, we have to since we're disturbing more than
5,000 square feet, we had to resubmit to soil conservation. They had very minor comments for us. So, I made those um updates and then we printed that one out instead of the the April 28th. So the the one that the board and the engineer reviewed which is fine the uh is the
April 11th. Sure. 2025. And then you're saying the additional revisions were more because of other governmental filings of soil and the like. Correct. Okay. Can I ask just so I'm clear here? Um so the plans that you have on this
board today, what's the date of those? May 16th. Okay. So that's exhibit number one. May 16th. And what is different from the plans that we have in front of us dated April 11th? Um just changes for soil
conservation. Um that every page or certain pages just the soil conservation page C8.01. Correct. Could you make sure we all get copies of those? Absolutely.
So, sorry, I'm trying to you see 801 Z801, which is the soil conservation sheet. I think there was just a comment about the this vast block of notes that they
wanted another note added to it. So on the title, I'm just trying to figure out if that sheet's different. Mine says January 21st, 2025, but the revision has 411 2025 for E801.
So then this is Yeah. the May 16th. I think the plans you have in front of you, the same ones that we reviewed that are dated April 11th. um during their submission during the soil conservation review they they made an update but mine is no I get that but mine is dated
January maybe a drafter forgot to update the date in the upper right above the seal that's the date that the they were drawn that's the drawn date and the revision date is in the title okay thank you way of doing it you keep the original date that you prepared the map and then you
do the revision date and you add So the variances, we have a rear yard setback and a separation between buildings variance. Um this rectangle represents the approximate location of the new proposed uh cafeteria building. So the
rear yard setback is this setback right between here that we currently have about 44 feet which is 60 ft is required. And as you can see behind this vast green space is the rear yard. Um and so we believe that this um
difference between the required and provided setback is to no detriment to any of the neighboring properties or community around there and as much to the benefit of the school which as noted before is a public school that is a benefit to the community um in general especially being one of only two for uh
rural areas. Um, the other variance is a separation between two buildings. And of course, we were about 10 feet away. And if we were to slide that 10 to be 15 instead of 10, we would be scooting closer to the rear
yard. Um, and making that a larger variance. Um, the grade also begins to drop off in that location. So, from an engineering design standpoint, it is beneficial to have that 10 ft rather than 15. Uh and again we believe there's no detriment to any of the neighboring
properties. Um the grade between this sort of sideyard area begins to go upward so that the building itself is somewhat recessed compared to the um grade directly adjacent to it at the front. Did you mention that uh the building
code has 10 ft or Yeah, just basic uh architectural fire code. Um, yeah, requiring that two buildings, you know, they don't contain any volatile materials or anything along those lines. So, it's a standard 10-ft uh separation requirement. Thank you.
With the board's permission, we'll we'll go through Mr. Stoner's report. Justin would testify regarding that. Yes, please. So it looks like on page uh one he's just talking about what he reviewed. We look on page two summarize the zoning
comments which you've already given testimony on. Uh if we look to page uh three and four it's pretty uh self-conf uh Cy do you want to address your own report you think? Yeah that's that's
fine. Thanks. I've done it different ways. We can do it that way. Um the report I did uh was dated May 2nd, 2025, which is my my second memo. This is based on the uh the updated plans as we all discussed, the April 11th, 2025
plans. Um you're as you stated, it went through and if I'm going to jump through to item number four, my talked about the zoning comments and the variances that are being needed. Um item number five regarding improvements uh will include um include a construction of brick pa
patio utility connections and minor site grading. Um I can you go through the actual construction activities that are going to occur in that area of the building. Did you say May 2nd was the date of your report? April my my report.
Yes. Yeah. Mine's March 28th. I saw that that was sitting on the desk. That's my initial report. Okay. I had a um the new one I know is was posted online but we don't have a physical copy of it here.
It's basically the same report except for the section they uh modified a section where they address the uh one side drainage. Okay. Issues storm water. Yeah. Yeah. And I I had some completeness items in the first page which they've addressed
the checklist items. Um, other than the checklist items and the condition about the storm water, it's essently the same the same report. Sorry. Thanks. Essentially the same report. May I interrupt for a moment? I apologize. I think you have to make a
completeness motion. We we kind of unless you may have done that already. Uh, deem the application complete. I know we've taken testimony. Perhaps you already voted to deem it complete. Uh it's my understanding based upon the representations of the applicant that uh provided to the land use that the
notices is within 200 ft and the filings are in compliance. So u I have not personally reviewed every uh notice but I believe you gave a certification of of your parallegal but I'm referring to completeness of the application uh
checklist items and a complete I see Cory has recommended it be deemed complete. Yes. But I don't know if this board typically then makes a motion to deem it complete. Typically Oh, you don't? Okay. I apologize. Oh, good question. David explained to me by the time it gets to the board, it is
considered complete. It was deemed complete. Thank you. Your last Every board's different, but thank you. Council's correct. Some other boards will not even uh will have a deemed complete hearing. Uh so, good question.
Thank you. Go back to item number five. If you can explain the brick paper patio, the utility connections. Sure. The grading, you know, maybe a little bit more detail for the board, please. Absolutely. Uh, I'll flip to page 2011, which is just
the basic site plan. So the project um essentially is the installation of the cafeteria which is a modular building that'll be placed on footings which are essentially concrete footings with masonry block. Um so those will be installed. Then the module building will be brought in and
installed on top of those. There's also a PA patio that is will be I assume standard concrete pavers. Um, and we'll we also have um some grading associated with that, you know, to sort of flatten out the area a little bit around and
underneath the modular building and to smooth out the patio a little bit that we flatten the grade a little bit and then bring the grade down to meet existing. Um, and we're also proposing um a short row of storm water um chambers which essentially collect the
storm water runoff from these improvements. um and they're directed um through some catch basins and piping into the chambers. The water goes into those chambers before it overflows to its current storm water path which is essentially um away from the rear yard.
Um so that's essentially the summary of the um improvements again the pavers the classroom and some grading associated with it. Oh the sorry the utilities um there's three different utilities going to it. Um there's electrical which is all three utilities are coming uh from the building. There's electrical that
we're making a connection um obviously for lights and things and then there is water and sanitary. So there's water coming in from the school um which is just to allow um one small sink so that they can clean up the cafeteria after um the kids use it. And then a sanitary
line that is connecting into our existing um septic system. And so that just goes water in, septic water out. and electrical for the lights. And the flag pole that's there now will be temporarily temporarily taken out but
put back after the classroom cafeteria is put in place. Correct. That's should we move on to comment six? Yeah. The so comment six is about the the existing structures that are sort of in between the driveway and the proposed classroom
location which is right about here between the driveway here and the location here. Um and we expect that there'll be some vegetation and the flag pole that will have to be removed and replaced um for the project. The school has every intention of
bringing the the area in front back to how it is now um with vegetation and reinstalling the flag pole. But for the sake of bringing the uh modular classroom back or the modular cafeteria back, they essentially will just have to remove and replace those. And that was the purpose of my comment
number six is they're bringing this modular structure into the rear of the building. How they actually going to get it there? Because they have the flag pole, there's a well, you got your septic system. So great care is going to be taken to not disturb anything that's uh permanent in nature but you will take
down the flag pole in order to make that happen. Correct. Can you state how this occurs? Does it come in a flatbed? It's a crane. What how is this actually placed? Uh it's typically brought in on wheels. I I don't know the exact procedure, but that's typically how it's brought in so that it's sort of balanced
there to be placed onto the um uh onto the footings themselves, but the footings I think are installed um after it is rolled into place that you prepare the footings as much as you can to be sort of infilled with the underneath the classroom once it's brought in. Uh, so I
don't I don't my understanding is it does not require some sort of large crane or heavy machinery to bring it in. Just a vehicle to to drive it sort of like a a pickup truck towing a boat or something along those lines is to bring it into the site. And due to those reasons, that's why I'm
a little concerned about everything in that area. Of course, the septic system for the building, the well, those are two items you can't move or you'll take the proper precautions to protect them during construction. Yeah. with plywood or steel plates or whatever is necessary to sort of bridge those spaces to
distribute loads that may be brought on from by the uh by the truck dropping it off. Um item number seven report uh just talks about the fact that the cafeteria is not located very close to the parking areas. Is there any testimony regarding
food deliveries uh um in the actual delivery uh delivery of foods and supplies to new building? Are they going to be parking in a parking lot? Are they going to drive across the patio to get to those locations? So they would just pull right now they just pull up to the curb and then um the
insulated containers are on wheels. So this would just pull up to the curb and they would push the insulated um containers on the sidewalk. The sidewalk does not have to be traffic loaded for vehicles. No, we don't I don't want to bring the uh the van back
there. No, it's a van as opposed to a truck that delivers the food. Correct. Item number eight has to do with utilities. Again, I believe there's discussion on water and sewer. Um I believe that item has been addressed.
Item number nine has to do with the fact that the existing septic system uh the the addition of this cafeteria uh and the all the construction near the septic system. I believe it needs Sussex County Health Department approval be any if this board decides to approve this
application be a condition of approval. We understand. Yeah, I spoke with the the Sussex County Department of Health yesterday and a little bit today um and explained the situation that they they obviously want me to resubmit an uh an update that expresses the septic uh
impact, but they essentially agree from the description that it is students that are currently in the school being brought to a separate room for specific use of the gym and the gym that was previously cleaned and now that the cafeteria that'll be cleaned instead. that it should not have any impact on
the septic system and should not require any sort of design or uh extra tank or anything along those lines that it's the same number of students and impact the septic system. Um so again they obviously asked for proof of that that we'll update the plans and provide that information to them but as uh from our
initial discussion they don't expect that any sort of modifications are required. Their letter initially said that we would need to submit calculations as a sort of cafeteria um re I forget exactly like a commercial establishment. Um but after our
discussions they they said that that they did not expect that to be necessary. That's just a slop sync. Yes. Yeah. That single input to the Okay. Correct. And and the health department did request information on that. So in our update to them, we'll certainly note
that it is a a standard faucet into a standard slop slop sink and there's not much more function than that. So comment number 10 had it regarded the increase in impervious cover uh coverage on the property. It's uh by approximately 4,000 square ft. uh is not
considered a major project according to our storm water control ordinances, but we do have a section of the code that requires anything over 500 square f feet um be uh to include means of addressing storm water storm water management. It's mostly for smaller design storms and the
and the new set of plans April 11th plans did include that discharge. Um the basically they gathered the uh the storm water that runs across the uh the brick paper island area and they collected that and put it in into those drains. Um
I'm satisfied that they have addressed the uh the storm water according to section 18 18-5.3C. My only comment regarding that is item number 11. I'm not uh maybe the applicant can can tell us a little bit about the agreements between properties because the impervious coverage
increases on lot 19, but the the chamber is going to be on a lot 11. How typically if you're going to go on another property, we'll be looking for some kind of drain easement unless you have some other um agreements in place or deeds in place of the shared uses of
the two lots. Maybe you can discuss that. Yes. Uh we absolutely will provide an easement uh that clarifies that the drainage from that lot will be permitted to be uh put onto the other lot. We'll provide a drainage easement acceptable
to uh Mr. Stoner as well as m Mr. Borrow. Thank you. Number 12 had to deal with um landscaping. Uh there's landscaping on the uh north and east side of the new building, but there's no listing of a
plants or what is proposed. Can you talk about that? Yeah, we we anticipate putting um similar plantings to the rest of the site that they currently have some landscaping around their um existing buildings and we intend to to mirror those um existing plantings. We just have to go out to the site to
identify what was uh planted in those locations. But we have no issues um providing an updated plan that calls out the specifics of those plantings. Is the purpose of those plants to screen the the uh the the underneath of the portion of this uh this a little bit? Yeah.
Yeah. We we know that we technically need a rear yard setback. So, we figured a couple plants over there wouldn't uh would could only help. Um and of course to to put plantings around those locations for the students who may be sitting outside there. So,
number 13's regarding lighting. I believe you've made some kind of reference to very minimal lighting. Can you comment on comment on that again? What lights will be proposed? Sure. Just a single light above each of the uh entrances to the building. There's one
for the front entrance here. We'll call it the front entrance, the east entrance, and then one for the side entrance uh that has steps up to it. And again, that's just a a typical light for uh egress and security purposes.
Item number 14 would be regarding the request for a has survey the condition of any co since a larger property might not be as concerned but you're getting a specific variance for setbacks I think it's important that we have a a build at the
end of the project that's good condition and then number 15 just had to do outside agency approvals you'll need upper Delaware so for conservation part of construction fire sub code official and Susan health department
understood my thank you Lindsay my only question is regarding the outdoor seating area um how many do you anticipate putting chairs tables benches how many do you anticipate putting out there um do you want we have um picnic tables there now and some
benches and we're just going to redistribute Got it. Thank you. No increase in number. Well, we always like to have more picnic benches, but um no
council, just real quick, um uh again, the superintendent, you've had the opportunity here to testimony of the planner and of our board engineer. is um you have any concern that you can uh can you kindly affirm uh that you can comply with their requests and requirements?
Affirmed. Thank you. Thank you. Uh one last thing uh there was that discussion of the uh modular delivery. Council, if you could just uh advise the police traffic when it's being delivered if possible. I'll put that in the resolution as a uh anticipated delivery
date just to advise the police whether they take any action or not. That's fine. We'll do. Thank you. I have nothing further. All right. We'll open it up to members of the board. Janette, do you want to start?
I have no questions. Thank you. Ernie, my only comment was probably 10 foot distance as opposed to 15 is advantageous in the rain. The students um but other than that, have I don't
have any questions. Just a comment. Thank you. I have no questions. I do want to make a comment. I think that this is a great addition to your school and um I wish you the best. I hope we look at it favorably. Ron. Yeah, just one quick question. So,
um I didn't see it in the drawings. It might have been in the application. I missed it. But all the adjacent property notifications were made in terms of the setbacks and Okay. Thank you. 200 foot list. Yes. Okay. Thank you, Mark. Are you going to have any awning or or
rain protection for these children go between the buildings? Uh we don't. No. Okay. Um I just had a question on Well, the I guess I should question the lighting. Uh I think you said one light
over each door, but uh the facade detail shows a couple lights over a couple doors. So, I was just wondering if the facade detail is just just a rendering and yeah, it's it's a it's a typical layout of, you know, that you get from
the modular um produc or the supplier. Um they're not exact, you know, that's kind of goes in when the order does um when the order goes in. We're we're happy to provide any information we get from the supplier if necessary. No, just Yeah, it was it was different from from
uh the plan view and from what you were saying. So, that makes sense. Understandable. Um, I'm not going to ask I normally would ask about uh temperature, but I understand that these are bought as modular, so the lighting is probably intrinsic and all right. Um,
and then I had a question on your on your storm water for the patio. It looked like it was like drains in series that you talked about. So, one goes to another goes to the subsequent one and eventually exits and kind of a Is there
a maintenance plan with that? like is there required maintenance for sediment or um typically maintenance plans go along with the major storm water developments. Um we we have it set up to allow fairly easy maintenance. Um having you can kind of see having the
manhole directly adjacent to the chambers whereas at times people direct connect directly into the chambers. So having the manhole there does allow easy access to pop open the manhole um from there um to access it. Um, so that's at least how the maintenance is planned for
it. Um, I don't know if there's a requirement for a maintenance a specific maintenance plan being, you know. Yeah. I mean, like once once construction's done, it's not like there's going to be the condition of the drainage. Okay. But typically for
these minor to smaller project, we don't require a maintenance manual. I'm sure you've seen David request a maint. I'm just practicing for bigger things. Sure. Thanks, Celeste.
Just one quick um item of note. You had said that for landscaping you were going to be looking to it was going to be similar to existing plings. Um, the only thing that I would say is that if your existing plantings are not native, if you could potentially look toward more native plantings. Sure thing. They're also low maintenance, so people tend to
prefer those anyways. But yes, we of course No, it's okay. We have a butterfly we have like a butterfly garden there, and we have some milkweed and things, so we'll just do more of that. We're we're we like that.
Yeah, this will be great when it's done. Um, what is there now in this area? Nothing. Uh, there's no there's soil conceivably grass. I have a photo of the area if you want to see. Okay. There's grass. Thank you. I'd like to I'd like
to see that. That's that would be great. Um, so I was also wondering um so the the storm water is going to go into the drain through chambers you mentioned. Just for the record, uh we'll mark the
photo as a three three copies of the same photo. Perfect. Mark that. Yeah. Makes a difference. Just a uh with your initials in today's date, please. Beautiful. Thank
you. It's grass. Okay. Um onward. Um so the storm water's going into the chambers, right? So where is it all in general? Um I'm sure our engineer could answer this for us as well as you. Where is it going? All of the storm water from
this property. All of it. Well, I'm assuming it's all going channeled together and going out of the outflow area. So, for this specific project, it'll go to this manhole here into this
set of chambers. Um, during a typical storm that will fill up and it'll through this, you know, timeline of the storm and after the storm, it'll infiltrate into the ground. If there's a large enough storm that um it fills up, it'll essentially bubble out. They call them a bubbler type system where it just
bubbles out of the system and continues flowing down to the large green space that the aerial showed. In general, the the storm water on the site, there's three different parts of the system. um from the initial development which Alan Associates did
back in 2009. Um there is a two sets of chambers underneath the um parking lot and then there's an infiltration basin. Um so one is I believe over here we do have the the old plans on file if that's if another copy
of that is necessary. But there's two different sections of a lot of chambers underneath there. Um, and that goes to an infiltration basin. So, essentially there's chambers around here, chambers around here, and then an infiltration basin sort of in
this vegetated space right here. And so, both sets of chambers make their way to this infiltration basin that infiltrates water to improve water quality. and then uh any overflow from there continues to the green space. Um that was a major
development at that point. Um and it was designed as such and approved and it's been there functioning since then. Thank you. I just have one other uh comment. Um, conceivably you're going to have uh gray water coming off of the roof,
right? When it rains, the the water's going to Is that going to be fed into the same system or is there any opportunity for you to to intercept it with a rain garden?
Um, gray water typically refers to like shower and sink water. Um, I've also often heard it referred to as water coming off of the roof. Um, water sheet flowing off of the roof will essentially be directed or at least I think half of
what will be directed into the the system as well um to be infiltrated. I don't think there's any plan or a requirement for a sort of a rain garden. Um, there is and it's just best management practices, you know, to do that. That would be a great project for
the kids. Um, you know, if if it were possible to do that or a rain barrel um, you know, at at a corner or two. Is it a gutterless? The modular is it guttered or gutterless? I have to coordinate that. I think it can be guttered, which
would be preferred to go into the system. I think that would be kind of related to your question. If it if it had gutters, then you could just put in a rain barrel and do a catchment system. And so I think that's what Christine's getting at, right? If it's gutterless, then you don't have that option at cheap
flows. It ends up half of it on the brick paver area and it goes to the subsequent drains and Okay. Correct. Just I was just suggesting that as a possible project and a great idea, you know, um for the kids possibly. Yeah,
they like that kind of stuff. Thank you. Um and I have no other questions. Thank you. Okay, I have two. I just want to echo suggestion that would be a great eighth grade environmental science project. So, um something to consider. Um I had a
question about heating for the modular. How's it going to be heated? Uh again, the specifics of that will be detailed with the modular classroom um company, the supplier rather. Um typically they are um like sort of a
duckless heating system. if you ever seen those with the sort of small HVAC units um with the units in there that do both heat pumping and uh removal for air conditioning. Um that is typical what we've seen in these um classrooms um though I don't know if you've had any
coordination with them for that so far. Yeah, I'm not currently we have electric and we have propane but I'm assuming it would be electrical. I was wondering about propane. So, no. Yeah, we Yeah, much easier to do a a duckless system um for a heat pump or something along those
lines, but the specifics of that, you know, we could follow up with that. I'm sure it'll be part of the, you know, building permit um application. But so, will it be wall hung then on the modular system? I would expect so. Yes. Yeah.
Okay. Um, and the other question is you mentioned there would not be an overhang, but what about really terrible inclement weather, thunder, lightning, and all kids going out in it? Is there a reason there can't be an overhang? Well, we did um add overhangs to the other
buildings. Um, but we were not allowed to connect them because of the fire code, but what we do if it's really heavy rain, we hold the students. We just hold the bells. Yeah. Like that happens now. Um, they like getting wet,
but yeah. Okay. All right. That's all I had. Anybody have anything further public? I know. I'm just seeing anything here further. No. Okay. Members of the public, would anybody like to comment?
Okay. Um, could we give the microphone back to Oh, I'm sorry. Just one second. Sir, are you giving testimony or just a statement? Oh, I see it. We'll probably
sir. Your name and just what town you live in? Hi, William Wilms. Live in Sparta. And Mr. Williams, are you Mr. Wells? I don't have to swear you in if you're just making a statement. If you're giving testimony, I have to swear you in. Are you giving factual
testimony? No. Go ahead and make your statement. Uh, I'm I'm basically okay with this whole thing going in. I live at 389, so I'm right there and most of you have
asked a lot of the questions that I had. So, uh, I guess some of the biggest things I'm okay with it and I know you need it cuz I know you the kids have all been in the gym for all these years. So,
uh, it's good. There's there's no cooking going to go on there. This whole septic thing is, uh, you know, this isn't going to bother me, but it will, uh, for you folks if But it's good. There's no ovens. There's
no uh dishwashing cuz introducing all that stuff uh food and beverage places already know uh the heavy fats and oils. You want to introduce it to the septic system will cause a
problem. Uh the only thing I have on the septic is the proximity to the building. I don't know. It's close, real close. And I do understand the setback. Hopefully all of that I know it's it's close to the other property lines. Has
nothing to do with me. U the patio clean out. I wish you luck with all of that. You're building the patio right over the clean out and I guess the uh I don't know the runoff from the
patio and stuff. Uh the retention basin and and the three pieces that's going to be new. We're adding because basically it looks like a retention basin. Oh, what we're adding is a small row of chambers. Yeah.
Underground chambers. Okay. I won't have a problem uh you know if it's really bad and there's overflow, but I know the folks on Old Prospect School Road that piece of property, you know, it'll flow down there. So, my uh my big thing and you know
already is I just want to comment about lighting and it should be included here. Uh I'm good. The lighting over the doors, we'll consider it security. Stay on all night. Shouldn't shouldn't affect
my my uh house. So, I have problems with those those highintensity LEDs that are put on the side of the gym and then the front. Uh, that stuff lights me up all night long.
But the lighting on the cafeteria, as long as there there's no rooftop lighting later added and really nothing above 16 ft off the ground back there, that's going to be shining all over.
uh you know some kind of shielding if it's going to be if you're later going to be asking about it. The uh the height of the the module building itself is only about 11 ft high. The building height calculation is I think it was 13.7 I think is the
building height technical calculation. Um and then the light would be you know to not be part of the roof is another two or so feet level. Not rooftop lighting. No somewhere above six. And the only other thing you might consider, but you know, this will be fire inspections. This is sprinkler
connections there. The rest of it is really all about the proximity to the septic system and the patio over the cleanout. Otherwise, I am good. I thank for the the commentary and uh the
cafeteria is a great addition and great studies and rainwater barrels. Thanks for your time, audience. Maybe I've got some other ideas in your head to look closer at that whole septic system. The
building proximity is right at the edge of the field. If it was me, I wouldn't be allowed to do any of that. But we we are maintaining the state required separations for the septic between the the building and the the septic system itself.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Can I Is there anybody else from the public who wishes to speak? Sir, can you comment on that lighting issue that you have with the you said the le the high LED lighting off the off the gym currently? Is is that is that an
issue for you? It is. Uh and I brought this up in 2016. I I asked about, you know, having the parking lot lights put off, but uh at night after 9 uh p.m., which we did for a
while, and I don't object to parking lot lights because I do know I live right there. Uh there's plenty of nights. There's different activity nights throughout the school year. You obviously need the parking lot by this time, but there are recently and just uh
late last year, new lighting was installed up high on the gym and they're above 16 ft. It's one on the west side of the gym and you have the north side of the gym and then a little
further down on the one building. Those things are intention. They're part of a package I I do believe are uh provided by JCPNL and the tech school got uh you know cases of
those babies and a few of them showed up here at the chart since those were put up. Those are unbelievable. I don't have to put my bedroom lights on at night. I need to
close the shades. those that new heavyduty LED lights, the other lights above the doors are not a problem. Uh, which was the original 2009 site plan that those lights would remain
on throughout the night as security above doors, not feet above Obama building walls. They're over the they at the moment shine over the trees. board. May I That's the best of my abs.
All right. May I suggest the council, is it possible that uh on the application we just put as to uh site lighting that the applicant shall uh look to uh minimize and shield the pro uh the lighting to the property, not stemming onto the the neighboring properties. Is
that something you look into? All right. Can I can I offer just some best practices? Uh, and Corey, if you want to jump in, Mr. Stoner, sorry. Um, so it sounds like there's a light spill
issue, right? And so what you guys are proposing was just the modular cafeteria. So, I wasn't going to say my usual spiel, which um there's there's an opportunity to
curtail some of that and uh we can look into just shading uh some of that spill offsite of your property just while you're doing this. Is it something that we can explore? I don't know if this is appropriate, council. Well, they're here for a site plan
approval. If uh uh you know, in good faith that property that causes a nuisance, again, you've got a good application, good uh Corey, the engineer. Any suggestions? I'm suggesting that the resolution just say that the applicant use best efforts to
shield uh the property lighting and not to uh cause spilling or stemming onto the neighborhood areas. So, so just we're not trying to encumber your application, but uh it sounds like there's there's some issues that you
could probably easily resolve with some shades. Uh we did we didn't add lights. We got new bulbs and they were more energy efficient bulbs. Okay. Maybe a lower wattage. I can well
so so normally and and again I could leave this to the engineer but um you could do shades for if if they're going beyond the property just passive shading um is there an opportunity to kind of
curtail the use of them when there's not activities going on? We can do that. Okay. Um, and you've just gotten the bulbs, so I probably can't ask for 3,000 Kelvin, but that's like the warmer uh light versus the bluish light that tends
to really interrupt people's sleep um if it is on after sleep and it affects wildlife. So, I would just it's it I don't think would be cumbersome if you could just take a look at it while you're prepping for the rest of this uh
introducing shading to kind of be the good neighbor that sounds like you already are. Um to to look into when you're operating your lights, it sounds like you're getting more energy efficient bulbs anyway. So, it would make sense to just curtail the use of
those lights if they're, you know, not on for any specific reason. Um, and then if there's an opportunity, I would say in the future for replacing any fixtures or lights to try to choose a 30,000 Kelvin. So, that's just the temperature. It's like more of like a candle flame
versus that bright blue bl blueish blinding light that um interrupts wildlife and and human activity. All right. Um, I have a suggestion, although not related 100% to the light levels, but
um, in my experience, when there are issues with neighbors with lights, sometimes just exchanging contact information and him having someone to reach out to when there is an issue, just explaining it or having photos to show you and you guys can maybe work together to come to a conclusion. I think that would be probably pretty
pretty easy to do as well. I I would agree to that. Yeah. And and again I council I'll just use best efforts. Uh it's not a particular requirement but uh again applicant use best efforts to shield uh it's property lighting that it
will uh preventing it from stemming or spilling onto the neighborhood area turning off the lights when uh not necessary uh after school hours and school functions and a recommendation of a 3000 Kelvin uh bulb for replacement. I
would just put that as a general re uh recommendation, not a mandate. And and the lights are also security, too. That's Yes. Do you maybe have a business card you could give him just or a card or an email address maybe so that he could have someone to reach out to? I think
that would be Okay. And just a follow-up question with regard to the modular and lighting. Is there anything that would um not allow a motion light as opposed to a light that's on all the time? Uh actually I I understand the exact
placement of the cafeteria. Uh there's any lighting there as long as it's not on the roof above 16 ft. There's probably no lighting. There's nothing that far back that bothers me. It's mostly the
lighting on the the side of the gym. And they are newer lights that were installed, not replacement bulbs. Okay. Used to deal with just above the doors was considered security. But so
are those wall pack lights like that's that's well getting a fixture replacement. But anyway um so so rather than best efforts, why can't we uh make sure that the applicant
does not have their lighting lighting up this this gentleman's yard or this gentleman's bedroom? I could just change it to the uh site lighting shall not uh stem or spill onto the uh neighboring properties. And I can say could use best
efforts as to turning off the lights uh after school hours or school events. Best efforts to use 30,000 Kelvin bulbs on replacement. And best efforts to use motion lighting if practical. And security lighting with most places
is usually less than 50% of normal lighting. Yeah. You know, there should be a, you know, for security purposes, you don't need the lighting you need when you have patrons on site. You need about less than 50% of the lighting. You just need enough to be able to because
the police are driving through the lot they can see, you know. Yeah. I It's not lit up the like it's daylight. I'm I mean if you want to drive through I'm willing to work with our neighbors on this. All right. So I think the compromise is
that the site lighting shall be shielded onto the property and not stemming or spilling onto the neighboring uh properties. And then I I'll use the best effort language to the other issues such as the hours and replacement and motion
lighting and uh calman bulbs if if uh applicable. Can Mr. Stoner uh it looks like he wants to say something. I was just waiting my time. Um just my question that or statement here and a question that this site was the other
the lighting they're talking about is from the parking lot to the you know to the gymnasium that was part of another site plan. All right. So that that site plan should have had a lighting plan and they should be in conformance with that plan. we can do an inspection to make sure that they're in full compliance with that plan and if they're and then
you know assure that they're in compliance with that plan and also possibly address this new light that might be on the cap on the higher gymnasium whether or not that's changed to a light with a shield or something of that nature. Um, but they they you should be in complian with an approved
site plan, which based on a testimony, I'm not sure if they 100% are. They might be very close, but it's, you know, there might have been modifications over time. They might be a little brighter. There might be things that, you know, things that may have changed. So, we can do an inspection on that to make sure they're in compliance with that approval because my problem with this, we're
talking about this, all that lighting in this application and we have no information on that. So, it sounds like we're just adding to uh council's uh best practices. We're going to ask that the engineer do a site visit and just apply best practices, take a look and
see what's set up. I think I'd like to do a resolution compliance of of what they already have approved. And then if the and if there's issue with the gymnasium light is the main light light item, that's concern. Yep. And that the applicant work with their office to address that issue. We we have the the
lighting plan that was approved back from 2009 or so which does show lights on the gymnasium. But again, if there's a bulb issue now that brings it out of resolution compliance that that can be addressed to like you like Mr. Stoker
said, Stoner said to bring it back to resolution compliance to what was approved. Thanks. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Any other members of the public? All right. Are we ready to prepare a
motion? Yes. You have before you a application of uh PB Planning Board number 25-730 uh Sussex County Charter School of Technology 383-385 North Church Road, block 15002,
lots 11 and 19 in the C-1H zone. Uh you had before you the applicant superintendent as uh witness as to the operation that there'd be uh
uh no ovens or stove and the limitations on the uh building itself and the installation of the cleanout uh sink uh purposes. Also you heard testimony from the applicant from their engineer as to the site plan and the operation
especially with drainage and the like. We have exhibits A1 is the site plan. A2 is the aerial and A3 is the photo of the current uh grass area. Uh there was discussion uh from the public as to concerns as to uh lighting, drainage and
the like. Uh also the applicant had agreed uh and acknowledged the issues raised by the board engineer and board planner for satisfaction. I specifically noted that the uh construction will be pursuant to the plans and
testimony. Uh the police will be advised uh the traffic bureau as the anticipated delivery of the modular home. Uh there will be a drainage e easement provided to the board engineer and board attorney as to the interplay between lots uh 11
and 19. There will also be um um landscaping by way of uh native planting is encouraged uh along with the landscaping that a rain barrel or water catch basin for academic purposes is
encouraged. Uh as far as uh lighting on the site, we talked about lighting shall be uh shielded or limited to the property and not stemming or spilling onto the neighboring area. and the board engineer recommended uh with the
compliance plan. So therefore there would be uh the prior approval resolution would be looked to as far as those prior uh approvals and construction and um as the applicants engineer acknowledged there is a lighting plan in place. As far as
lighting also best efforts between the neighbors uh to turn off unnecessary lighting after school events and school functions uh best efforts I would just also add as to 3,000 calvage bulbs on replacement motion lighting if
appropriate and again we already talked about the prior approval. Uh that are the those are the conditions that I have written down. Uh again here for a site plan with two variances. The two variances are the
rear yard setback uh required 60 ft. They're proposing 44 and the distance between the two buildings. 15 is required. Uh 10 is proposed which complies with fire sub code. I have nothing further. Okay. With that would somebody make a
motion? I Celeste Luciano will make a motion to approve the application as read by Mr. Kenoro. Thank you. Second make one request. Uh we are actually hoping to get preliminary and final site plan so that we can provide an asbuilt uh instead of actually coming back
before the board once the classroom is installed. That's a good idea, council. And clarify the uh preliminary and final and uh we will accept the uh the board engineer in his plan did ask for a final site plan even though I didn't specifically sound out that was in the
requirements that the board engineer had that we placed on the record. Thank you. Thank you. Do amend your motion. So I amend my motion to approve the uh the application as read and amended by Mr. Kenport.
Thank you. Second, Janette Burke. You um roll call, please. Robert Bleley, yes. Janette Burke, yes. Ron Day, yes. Celeste Luciano, yes. Ernie Ragstead, yes. Councilman Mark Scott, yes. Brian Zimmerman, yes. Vice Chairman Robert
Otto, yes. And Chairwoman Joan Ferman. Yes. Thank you very much. Uh and I apologize, but one more request. We ask that we can wave the requirement of a written resolution so that we can apply for building permits. Again, our goal, it may not be realistic, we'll
see, but our goal is to have the uh cafeteria up and running before students, which I think this year is September 1st. Board, that's not an uncommon request. Council, you would acknowledge that you're proceeding at your own risk and recognizing that if uh the unlikely event that someone was to
file an appeal, again, you're proceeding at your own risk. We do confirm that. We understand that it is at our own risk. Thank you. And we do all in favor say I. I. I. Anybody opposed. Thank you for your time and attention. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Nice
presentation. Thank you. Thank you. We do one more break. Yes. Okay. Five minute break, please. Okay. Okay. Uh we are going to continue with uh some of our other board business. Uh on the agenda, you could
see that we have some suggested or suggested suggested ordinance revisions and there's one that is not on here. So we'd like to discuss three things. One are is the fitness centers in the TCC zone and uh new ordinance for the minor
site plan subcommittee and um a discussion of the C1H zone and bringing that back. So first would be the fitness centers. Uh we did discuss this at our last meeting, you know, at good length and uh there was a consensus of the
group that it be added to the TCC uh zone. Um Mr. Porro is here with us today and we have a suggestion of where we can put it and uh how we'll get this done. Yes. Uh we've discussed this and uh the
u TCC zone if you I think it's number eight talks about bowling alleys and uh sports centers being permitted. We would merely take that section and say bowling alleys, sports centers uh and fitness
centers. So we would add to the TCC zone under uh paragraph section number eight adding fitness there. and I can do a resolution in support of that for your next meeting. Okay. And while you're doing that, the only other thing is where for sports centers, we really
don't have a definition. So, that should be added to um I think it's under general provisions or somewhere with where they have all the definitions. We need to provide one for sports centers. Do you have a definition for fitness center? Yes. All right. So, why don't we just take out sports center and just say
um bowling alleys and fitness centers? All right. I think that's easier for this purpose, but we still when we um go back and look at ordinances again, we will have to provide something a definition for sports centers because that's left hanging and comes up every now and then. Okay. Are we going to put
a limit on the size of this fitness center? I mean, what if LA fitness comes in with a 80,000 foot building? Is that a bad thing? I don't know. I don't know. the planner way in because one one place where you do get the limit is with the
the parking lot the parking space so so you couldn't put an LA fitness on Main Street because the parking those buildings won't support it you may want to put one up by the post office you may want to put one up in up by the theater I don't know I made the example last
time of if CVS said we're we're leaving and that's a that's a big area with lots of parking that maybe the one and only place it could go, you know, but everywhere else limits is limited by parking. Yeah. You know,
and it'd be better than having an empty building, right? Yes. Our dream, but we would have to kind of figure out all of the tenants in that area of theater center to make sure that there's adequate parking. So, we'd have to break it down based on current tenant and the
use of the building. That shopping center has three different owners. So it depends on the sections of buildings, but it's all 81 goes to the whole thing. So we'd have to look at it. Is there a place is there a somewhere
where we can see what a property is um allocated in terms of parking spots allocated to a particular property. They didn't do it back then. So, yeah, it's something that uh if they want it, then they would have to be Well, what if it was done providing
that? What if they had tenants in there within the last 10 years? What do you mean? So, so there's a property for example on Main Street and I know that it's it's changing. It will be changing owners at
some Oh, so if a if a property is changing owners at some point, how is there's no way to find out how many uh parking spots are allocated to that particular property? Oh yeah, it's a commercial freestanding property and
it depends on the use. There are parking standards that get applied, right? And they come in and they tell us how many they have and we look at it. If it's multi-tenant, sometimes if you're changing the use, then the standards change. Yeah. No, all I So, I think what you're saying is let's say I'm looking
to buy that property, right? Uh I would go to town hall, ask for the certificate of occupancy to see what uh the load of the building would be. You'd also research whether Oprah, Open Public Records Act, are there any resolutions of approval? What was the site plan
approval? What was the layout of the lot? Okay. So, just an Oprah Oprah should give you that information and that's what uh the board engineer was saying on the other application, a compliance hearing. You have these approvals, but you want to make sure that's the asbuild plan. If you had the
ASB build plan at that particular property, that's very helpful. Okay. Now, what you're doing now in a lot of the applications, which is positive, is you have multiple tenants. The tenant comes in and you say, "All right, how is the parking being allocated? Are you
taking all are there assigned parking spaces? Those are all fair questions of the board on the public health safety and welfare. But again, remember if it's a permitted use, you can't deny the permitted use if the site is already built out. You can
talk about allocations. You can talk about practical uh you know uh restriping the lot, making it safer, assigning particular parking spaces, but you have to be uh reasonable with regard to what the existing structure is.
And one point if I could and you know maybe I'm going a level deeper than I should but um you know when when I look at the um the town center master plan amendment that uses words under the professional business commercial category it to permit health and indoor
athletic facilities. So I think it's already there. I I think the clarification is good. I guess where where I'm where I'm trying to draw a difference is this is not new. We're clarifying it. Got it. Got it. And just for the record,
I'm going to read the definition of a fitness studio um shall mean indoor fitness business with services limited solely to offering instructor or coachled fitness or recreation classes which may include activities such as karate and martial arts, wrestling,
yoga, zumba, private skill and sports lessons and similar. This does not include tournaments, competition, demonstrations, or events with anticipated spectators. And that last line of what it does not include to me almost sounds like the definition of a
sports center. Good. I I agree with that. But the one thing to just again keep it in mind is the definition you just read was created in 2023 as part of as part of a parking ordinance standard for the economic
development zone. So to to say because it wasn't here when they wrote this doesn't No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying if we take that last sentence which says this shall not include tournaments, competitions, demonstrations or events with anticipated spectators. We can use that
last sentence for a separate definition or sports centers. In that definition, does it include gyms where because it says classes with instructors, but it never really says anything about a gym where someone can just go in with a membership and
building fitness. That's not an instructorled gym. That's So that that's that piece is kind of missing. If you look at that that the parking ordinance we did in 2023, there were three definitions. One was for a small fitness studio. One was for the the you know the
type of things they're talking about now and the other one was for like a big fieldhouse type thing. So maybe we need to break it out into three things. Yeah. I mean the definitions are there in in that ordinance. Um I can get you the ordinance number. I don't I don't have it off the top of my head, but it there
was there we spent probably months going back and forth on this one. I didn't think there was anything for sports centers there. Uh keep talking. I I'll find it. Well, let's I'll find it later. Yeah, why don't we I'll take a look at that when I'm doing the I can very
easily make the recommendation for the next meeting with regard to fitness center and u then if uh Ron you could circulate that ordinance, we can take a look at that also. Okay. Okay. And then what Brian is saying about breaking it up into maybe into three different
things just so well said just off the top of my head it says instructorled it does but it never says anything about well if I have a gym membership and I can just walk in and work out on my own. So just trying to make that like a little more broad and not would that be health club broad range of facilities
and services to promotion and maintenance for the health and well-being of people blah blah blah who maybe offer membership or subscription based it's there under health club. Okay, there you go. Okay, so we do have that. So it would just be sports center that's uh missing.
So I have an issue with this this not being having a a size limit on it. I mean, are we talking about are are we are we making Sparta into Wayne, New Jersey, or or are we going to keep it a village? Are we going to keep it are we
going to allow Planet Fitness? Are we going to allow LA Fitness? Are we going to allow these behemoth gyms in here? Okay, so they fit in the CVS, but is is do the sins of the past have to continue
on with with uh the next gym? I mean, or the next the next use of that building. Why can't it be a building that's, you know, a gym that's the size of Black Bear Fitness or something that's, you know, 8,000 ft,
uh, 10,000 ft, whatever it is, even like that? Why do we have to make our village into Totoa? So I have a problem with uh yeah it's it I think the uses are not the uses that
they were right. We have bigger things. Um, and so I guess I'm wondering from the planner and from the lawyer, uh, is there is there an easy way to to keep
the uses broad enough but maintain controls on size? Because I think ultimately we're not trying to do this whole create this whole Byzantine structure that we have to make applicants jump through. Uh we're not trying to shut out businesses. We're
just trying to make common sense guard rails to ensure the community fabric is preserved. Right, Mark? Would you agree? And um and can we do that by defining size or somehow putting in a little hook
to to control intensity in a zone? Like that's ultimately what we're trying to do, right? We're saying we we know we know a gym a normal gym is this, but we're we want to make sure that we're protected against a
future mega gym. So you so you put one category under permitted use and the other that other category, you know, under the uh footage size. Yeah. Well, or the um well for Yeah. I don't want to get
ahead of the minor site plan stuff, but there's a size aspect. Size standard size always. You can always say that it's you could just put fitness centers not to exceed x amount of square feet. Yeah. Yeah. For the permitted use, fitness
centers not to exceed 10,000 feet or we can look at what that threshold. We can look at whatever that threshold is where it goes into a larger footprint. But then should that be limited just to the sport center or should we just say in this
zone, you know, and you can still condition it to allow someone to come in that says, you know, I've got I've got the CVS that's open and I want to put this in and I have the parking for it. They would just have to get a variance. Then instead of a permitted use, have a conditional use for sports and then we
get to decide whether it's yeah too big, you know, or or doesn't conform. It's it's a conditional use. There's a lot of conditions, but you'd have to give some kind of square footage. So, you allow the yoga and the pilates and all that to come in. Yeah. And my concern would be a bowling
alley maybe x square ft versus the fitness center versus so the the task that I can do very easily is the resolution suggesting the that section number eight bowling alleys fitness center let's say indoor commercial
recreation uh not to exceed x square feet but again the bowling alley I think would be your challenge I think that takes the most but that's grandfathered right That's sort of Well, I'm putting it in that section, though. Couldn't you put them
all as separate bullet points? So, like LA Fitness, Crunch, right? They all those kinds of franchises have a threshold of how big the footprint and the space needs to be where like a smaller boutique fitness, it's like 2500 square feet. You need to have that much square footage. So I think maybe looking at trying to figure out what that
threshold is and then saying not to exceed 2500 square feet or because then it'll fall in because I think this all kind of started over a Pilates Pilates studios, right? And those are typically going to be boutique fitness. So instead of just saying boutique fitness because that term could probably change over
time, fitness centers not to exceed 3,000 square feet or something of that nature. How big is the CVS? And then if somebody comes in with something bigger than that, they'll require a variance and they'll have to come and explain it and then potentially the variance could be granted. All right. So the Brian's just saying, do we say not to exceed
5,000 square feet? 5,000 square feet. Pretty big. That's the size of my warehouse. It's like you could put a fitness center there now. Yeah. Are you trying to do you have a vested interest in turning your warehouse your warehouse into a fitness center? No, but it was proposed to me once. Pilates studio. All
right, gang. So, I'm going to uh come up with some language for that TCZ zone uh incorporating the fitness center. And as of now, I'm going to put not to exceed 5,000 square ft, but if it gets to the next meeting, if there's a sentiment to
change that, uh we can do it at that time if that's okay. Okay, Mr. Po, one more thing if I could. Um so, the parking standard for these type of things, typically retail is like one one space for every 200 square feet. For these, it's one one space for every one
100 square feet at least area. So it's it's double it's you know half twice the amount of what you get for normal retail. Yeah. And that's that's in the parking ordinance. We just got to tie it to the 1853 standard. So the parking it's in the TCC zone parking. No, it's
an 1853 under the parking standard. You you'll see 53. It could be like not to exceed 5,000 square feet and in compliance with and then refer to the parking ordinance. All right. Very good. I I can do that. One more thing. And Ron, this might be what you were talking
about. There's a definition here for indoor commercial recreation, which which is sports center. It says shall mean shall mean privatelyowned and operated indoor recreational facilities functioning within a building as a business. This use includes facilities
accommodating training and the playing of indoor sports that are conducted within an indoor gymnasium, court, rink, field, or in a pool. This may include showers or spectators in a gathering area limited to an occupancy for more than 50
spectators. So maybe we just combine that. Can you explain the privately owned aspect of that? Can I? Well, no. No. Planner or lawyer? It's almost nine. We we have a gentleman in the audience on the stop and shop. Yeah, we're going to I know what I have to do on this and
I'll get You said You said we could work on it, right? I'll get some. So, let's do that. Yeah. So, let's split. We didn't realize at first you were back there for this. Very quiet. You were behaving. So, let's go. We'll go back to our
things. Let's go to the um under resolutions. Resolution 2025-12 amended planning board application 25-728 stop and shop. Council would just introduce yourself please. I'm AJ Morgan. I'm appearing on behalf of Stop
and Shop this evening. I'm sure you guys have the resolution before you. I'm sure you know the history from Ken. If you want me to explain any of it quickly. Yeah. So, we had a witness testify as to the uh lighting the monument sign
specifically and It's actually a very unique circumstance where we have a situation where the applicant did nothing and the board is getting exactly what they had asked for. I believe Mr. Otto had made a comment at the time that um he wished the lighting for monument
sign one and two would be down lighting. Turns out that is the case. Monument sign one and two does have down lighting. That's what exists today. Monument sign two was labeled on the plans as having um existing uplighting. There is no lighting for monument sign
two. So the resolution that you guys approved previously the only changes that are happening or there is no change the we just wanted to correct the inaccurate testimony so that it represents the factual circumstances that exist today which is that monument
sign one has down lighting. Monument sign two has no lighting and monument sign three has down lighting and the lighting is going to stay that way. So, what's the monument right across the street? Which one are you referring to?
Uh, the the monument for Stop and Shop. I believe that's three. So, that one has ground lighting. So, you're saying it has a a light above as well. And that was the one I was thinking of that I was like, I wish I
would have asked because it had flowers at the base. It looked great, but then it had this expert go out and check. I didn't mean to interrupt interrupt. No, that's fine. What we're told is that it has down lighting or hood lighting. Maybe it has maybe the ground lighting was supplemental.
But the long and the short is that the uh the applicant has provided the uh revised information. The resolution has been revised. It's so noted and that is what's before you. Uh there's no new variances. It's the same application and
uh it's just clarifying as council said the testimony and the factual situation. So I have no objection to the amended resolution as proposed. But so if monument 3 does not have down lighting, you will be putting the down lighting
in. The down lighting exists today at monument sign 3. It's hardly ever lit. I think Ernie, you made a comment about not being able to see that. So can I just you pay well Oh, somebody in the audience. Yeah. So, page five and six.
Page five, number nine. Um, you this is this is pretty much it. So, yeah. So, all I I would just say I don't know if we if I can make a request. Last time I waited until after we voted and then I was kicking myself. So, it seems like whatever the case, there's three
monuments, right? Two of them you're saying are down lit, which would be the preference and best management practices, correct? Or best practices. um hood lighting, down lighting, whatever. Um and there's monument 2 is not illuminated. It was approved for
ground lighting. Uh if I could ask, but I don't know if engineering wise you're willing to do it, I would love to see that one, if you're going to light it to light it the same exact way so that everything's consistent. I think it'll just look better. And then I don't know
if you captured the 3000 Kelvin ask that I had uh but um we did bring that to our client's attention. Okay. I mean I think that's not a burdensome thing. Um but I would just check because whatever monument this is and I don't have your
plans. Um but the one across the street right Mark have you seen that or no? Oh look tonight. Yeah, it at least when the daffodils were blooming, it had uh this flood light just stuck in the bottom and I was like, "Oh, what a shame." Because
it looked awesome. Uh it had the plantings and everything, but then there's this big black flood light in the bottom. So, if it if it can be lit from above, I would just say, but as I said to you last time, I will certainly advise our client. Yeah. All right. Thank you. But I would recommend
board this does reflect the uh uh current situation testimony is by the applicant. So I would recommend you pass the amended ordinance as proposed uh resolution as proposed. Okay. Somebody like to make a motion? I'll make a motion. Okay. And that's
Ernie and a second. I'll second it. Whoa. Robot. That poor transcriber has to put up with Robato second. I I give my name. So all right. Roll call, please. Robert Bley, yes. Burke, yes. Ron Day, yes.
Celesteiano, yes. Ernie Ragstad, yes. Councilman Mark Scott, yes. Christine Dunar, yes. Vice Chairman Robotto, yes. And Chairwoman Joan Farman, yes. Thank you very much for waiting. Thanks so much for your patience. All right.
Okay. Two more ordinance revisions to speak of. Um, no, we could do just while we're talking about uh resolutions. Uh, I did provide the uh subdivision resolution on uh uh Parisella. Uh there
was a comment by the the engineer uh with regard to uh uh the testimony and and the I did make a screenshot on it to revise. Uh I know it only went out today. I have not heard from the applicant uh attorney on this. So, I'm
just going to ask that Parisella be carried to the next meeting. That way, we can have a a fruitful review of it if that's okay. That's my recommendation. We don't have to vote on that, do we? No. You as the chair. Okay. All those in
favor? I I Okay, thank you. Okay, back to the resolutions. Um last time we also spoke, you know, at length about uh the minor site plan
subcommittee and many of the comments that were made um that we felt were unjustified against the minor site plan subcommittee. Um and we've just been looking to really organize and the process a little bit better. So one of
the first things we did as mentioned before is we put uh a new application together uh and that is being used now. So hopefully that will be fruitful. We also took the all the design standards which are all over the place um reorganized them and now when an
applicant comes in if they're in a particular zone they get a sheet and it says if you're in this zone you do design standards and you do also something else related to that zone which may be as I said in different ordinances. Um so now they know where to
go. So that starts to improve the process. Um the next kind of improvement we wanted to make, we did that use improvement too. The what? We just did the use dealing with the sports talking about those. Yeah. Yep. Um because that kept coming up,
right? That was we did have an issue with different use. So now we just addressed that that u we'll have be proposing uh an ordinance to town council on that. Um and the last thing that um well maybe not the last but we
wanted to uh amend the ordinance um for a couple of reasons. Um we needed to clarify some of the things that we are getting. One of which was just uh told to us by town council
that we should be looking at everything in the ED zone. Well, we felt uncomfortable with that because uh we discussed this last time with all of the 87 different hazardous chemicals uh etc. So, we did apply a
intensity of use clause in here for 25,000 square feet. So, you know, and we'll go through this, but that was one of the things that we wanted to look at things we would look at if it's under 25,000 square feet, does not involve hazardous materials because we've been
getting people fill out applications and it comes to us and the last couple applications we've been getting, we say, "Wait a minute, we can't approve this. This doesn't belong here." Um, one that just came in was for a concrete pad 15 feet by 13 feet in the ED zone. Well,
that's changing impervious coverage and that's really outside the scope of the minor site plan subcommittee, which would just be looking at um minor alterations to the exteriors of existing in forming non-residential building structures. So, that's way
beyond. And so, we just want to make it clear what we're going to be looking at, what we're not going to be looking at. Um, and the other piece was application procedure. Last time we brought forth a resolution for the zoning office to help
look at some of the applications and it turned out that well, that resolution wasn't passed. We um and it kind of got into limbo. So we're still sitting here and we the way we want to move it along is by incorporating that into this
resolution as well. So if you have it in front of you um nothing changes in the first paragraph from the existing resolution. Nothing change well there's one change in number one where it talks about committee composition. It
originally said that it had to be at least the mayor or council member of the planning board. We're adding mayor or mayor's design, which is the way it has been in practice. So, Rob Lee is serving as the mayor's design on the
subcommittee this year. I served at as it last year. So, we're just um making it clear in the or in the uh ordinance. The next thing here is how the application will be processed. So, this is the big change. applicants must
first obtain what we're terming a certificate of zoning from the zoning office that confirms that the zoning district um in which the property is located. So, we want to make sure if they're saying that it is in the TCC
zone or the whatever zone it is that it is accurate that the approved uses of the land are accurate and there if there are any restrictions or variances that may apply. The approved certificate must be attached to a fully completed minor site plan application prior to the
acceptance of the application by the subcommittee. The applicant is responsible for submitting all prior site plans, resolutions, or other documentation that may assist in rendering a decision in a prompt manner because many times we have to turn it back or there's, you know, not a
resolution that's attached. The applicant doesn't know where it is. But these are some of the things that are holding up the process and we're getting all kinds of comments from the business community. Um so if this is done, you know, we'll accept it after everything
is complete and it will have a preliminary review by the zoning office. Um I've attached a certificate of zoning draft for all of you to look at. Mr. Porro's already looked at it. Yes. And
um can I just on two can we just make a point that because to the public hearing that they or people that are not familiar with the process they might it might sound cumbersome but I just want to po put a point in there that the
normal practice would be good to go for the applicant to go to the planning board or the zoning board right to have their application heard. They they would have to hire professionals at significant cost and present their application and those professionals
would assemble paperwork, variances, prior approvals, etc. and they would, you know, put them forth and then they would be heard by this body or the zoning board. um this pathway is actually a benefit to the business community and I wish that they would see
that because it allows them to um avoid that expensive, cumbersome, time consuming process and be heard by uh not a quorum of this body but four people. And so what we're asking is to be
provided simply with uh the the paperwork and um the prior approvals so that we can we can speedily uh make a decision um that comports with our local code um
and our local ordinances. So that's all it is. If it takes a lot of time, it's sometimes, as the chair is is alluding to, we've spent significant time, the office has spent significant time trying
to find uh prior resolutions, trying to find proofs that things were approved in the past um because we weren't provided them. So anyway, I just wanted to say that. Thank you. This actually goes to Janette's question earlier. How do I find out? Well, you get an Oprah. you go go look at previous certificates of
occupancy so the office can direct them to do that and it's really up to them to do it and to find it and to come in with a complete application not an incomplete application so um that's the purpose there and in the certificate of zoning form it would just um the zoning officer
would sign it and says that just everything that I just read I confirm the property is located in the zoning district listed above that the intended use of the application is a permitted use in that zone. Uh that it conforms to the design standards and parking standards in that zone. No variances or
waivers are required. Um because we cannot grant variances or waivers uh that it's filled out completely. And if uh so what happens is sometimes uh application will come in and say well I had a prior variance. I don't meet these standards but I had a prior variance.
We'll provide it. Okay. That's what they have to do. Well, that's the only time they really have to do it is if it there's some kind of waiver associated with it. Um, and the last one is they're alleging that, you know, the rights are not um grandfathered rights. Okay. Um,
and maybe Ken, you can speak a little more to that one. Yeah, this this one I'm going to we're this is my language and I'm reading it and I I do want to revise to make it a little friendlier. So let's say for example um someone says they go to a realtor and they say this
house has been a three family for 30 years. I pay taxes on it and um I want to sell it as a three family but it's in a two family zone or it's in a one family zone. So uh and they want to do certain improvements on the property
that would not be proper uh to go to the minor site plan because they're arguing about grandfathered rights. There is a whole other area in the municipal land use act. You can go to the board of adjustment for an interpretation. Uh you know the I use the word vested. If you
have an formal easement that's a vested right. If you have a use that is not necessarily memorialized. That's known as a grandfathered rights. And grandfathered rights are on the applicant. So I'm going to work uh a little more for the next meeting on that
last paragraph. But that's the theme here. you're not seeking a variance, uh, a waiver, and you're not arguing, I'm grandfathered to some use that is contrary to the existing zone. So, they come before you, it's a restaurant that's permitted. It's a operation
that's permitted, not they're saying, well, I was here for 30 years and it's no longer permitted in the zone. That's something that uh is not really the minor site plan uh committee. That's that and but also just I for my own
clarification. So um if a building owner has a prior resolution of variance the building that's okay but if a tenant got the variance and the tenant
leaves that variance does not stay with the property. It leaves with the tenant. That's how uh why we have over 65,000 lawyers because there's a different interpretation by different lawyers that some may say that's a vested
grandfathered right. I believe that if it runs with the property and initial approvals in the resolution, that's a vested right. If a tenant has a sign that's uh 10,000 square feet and now wants a sign that's 15,000 square feet
uh and there's a new variance that is involved that is uh that is they can't just say well it's the same location as the own the old sign. If the tenant uh got if the tenant went through a formal approval process and there's a formal
resolution that provides guidance. If a tenant is just there and has been there for a long time and again has a signage or some type of parking situation that is now uh uh non-conforming that should not that
grandfathered use is to me not vested. If again if it's in a resolution and a site plan those are vested rights. the tenant who is a part of a strip center who's changing his sign maybe is changing delivery that's something that
is uh a little different. So I want to say something again um because I hear this maybe I'm hearing it wrong but the public might be hearing this and uh I'm in it so I'm close to it so it makes sense to me but I wasn't in it before
and it would sound Byzantine to me. So I just want to point out again minor site plan is very purposefully not a quorum of this body. It's four people very specifically not five. And so what the intent I think as a lay person
essentially um but with some training is that we're trying to um do a little extra handholding for the applicant. Try to shepherd them through the process. Try to make it easier. But at the point where a lot of these things
come into play that add complexity, I'm more comfortable having eight other people to weigh in. And and the reason for this again is because we all care about this town. That's why we're spending again our volunteer hours
doing this. Um so we want to make the best decision for the benefit of the town, for the benefit of the the future of this town. And so we don't take that lightly. So, you know, again, if anyone from the chamber wants to criticize, go right ahead. But that's that's the the
intent. That's my intent. I think it's the intent for everyone else here. But and then anyone who's on planning who hasn't been on minor site plan and doesn't understand what what are these minor site plan people doing? Um, pulling our hair out. Yeah, we're pulling our hair out trying to trying to
make applicants uh applications complete so that we can make the correct decision to the best of our ability. And we're doing that with help from the planning and zoning office and from the professionals um for a a pretty uh small amount of
money. So anyway, just wanted to say that I think probably say it is I mean the idea of the minor safe plan is to say all right Bill's barber shop wants to change over to Jim's barber shop and he wants to change the name on the sign. That's that belongs there. You know want
to change your pink awning to a green one you know in front of your store. you know, it we're trying to avoid the people have those minor minor things, but as soon as other things get complicated in there, it has to go to the full board, you know, and that's that that's really as simple as it is. Yeah. And I don't want to have barber
shops out the door. We we won't hear anything else. So, yeah, it should be, you know, easy, but um the, as I said, some of the issues are that we're missing some of the information and they're not filling it out properly because the lawyer's not filling it out. it's just the applicant
and mostly the tenant and they don't have the right information or there are applications that maybe you know we shouldn't have had initially. So is that an intake issue? I mean well this that's what this is going
addressing do is we're trying to create efficiencies. Right. Okay. But to Mark's point because I want to make clear that it's not pointing a finger. uh if you're talking about what I think you might be talking about and I know you're not, but
we are leaning more on uh our local professionals um professional expertise and professional discretion to um help the applicants, which is the same thing we're doing, but we're just formalizing
it beforehand. And Dory, you know, I invite you into this conversation, too, because beforehand, you know, what we were told is when somebody submits a minor site plan application, the office doesn't look at it, it goes straight to the to the minor site plan because they
filled it out without any oversight. And that's where some of the issues are. If the office looked at it, they they looked at it and they say, "Geez, it doesn't belong here. This maybe goes to zoning." We've had a couple of those. you know, particular with Pilates and some of the others, you know, that can
all be screened, but right now it's not being done. So, this will allow um Dory and her team to do this, which is going to benefit everybody. Yes. And you can see on the form, it's based on the applicant's
representations. It's the building department, the zoning officer cannot be responsible for what an applicant puts on the form. That is their statement. But if they check off these numbers that the property is conformed in the use, it's an intended use. Uh they comply
with design standards. It's clear here and I think at the end I'm just going to change it to say uh I confirm that the applicant is not alleging grandfathered rights. I'm going to take out vested also known
as so it's not alleging grandfathered rights which are contrary to the existing uh zoning comma nor a new tenant seeking prior tenant non-conforming existing land use deviations and we can all think about
that we'll recirculate that and uh so you're doing deviations instead of variances and waiverss yes I because we've always said we don't grant waiverss. Well, because it's a if they're saying it's grandfathered and the new tenant is uh seeking prior and
is not seeking the prior tenants nonconforming existing land use. It may be variance, maybe waiverss, but I think deviations uh why don't we all think about that and uh that last paragraph needs to be a
little tighter. All right, maybe you can tighten it up. And this is just the form. So I don't think this is anything that the board itself has to approve. We're going to maybe take a look at the ordinance more. Good. Just so we can send this on because um quite frankly um
I mentioned to the mayor, the c the town attorney, and Mr. Zep that we were considering uh suspending the minor site plan subcommittee until we make some of these fixes because it just keeps coming at us
and coming at us and coming at us and I had a second thought about that that if they are willing to address this and put it on their agenda maybe we you know go along with that. If it's going to be
held up, then I think maybe we come back and consider suspending. So, so what about like I confirmed that. Sorry. But yeah, so we're Yeah. You know, I'm just trying to That was the initial thing because I think we were kind of upset with everything and nobody wanted to get
blamed anymore. We were just going to say let's hold it until this moves along because it was stalled and stalled and stalled. So, we want to push it along, but if they're willing to do it, then I'd kind of backtrack on that a little. So, what you're saying is just we're we're hoping to keep some speed on this
uh for council. You don't want uh to be delayed on moving this forward, I think, is where you're coming. So, I was just rereading what he wrote and sometime I confirm the applicant is um not alleging, you know, grandfather rights.
I think what you're saying, but maybe maybe not. Uh you're you're not alleging uh rights or uses contrary to existing ordinance. Yeah, I think the if you look at my notes now, I'm keeping it simpler.
Um I confirmed that the applicant is not alleging grandfathered rights, which are contrary to the existing zoning. Period. Done. Finished. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. I think that works. Okay, that's that's
cleaner. Okay, so that's done. Um, so going back. So that was number two, the application procedure. Then we have the authority for decisions. Uh, so it's new or modified signs that
do not require a new waiver. As I said, if they had a previous waiver, they would have to prove to us that they had a resolution or some kind of documentation for it. Um, the second one has not changed. It's just minor alterations to exterior of existing
conforming non-residential building structures. Um the third one it uh did change new tenant same permitted use for facilities under 25,000 square feet that do not involve hazardous or other materials
regulated under NJAC da da da da. Um and that was the list Rob pulled up that the last meeting of 87 different regulated hazardous materials. Um, we of course aren't comfortable with doing that. And if it's under 25,000 square feet, it's,
you know, light industrial or some type of warehouse, but not the uh big warehouses that again we're not comfortable doing in the ED zone. Um, but well, wait, that's we took out ED zone, right? We took out ED zone. This
is for all zones at this point. So because because uses seem to change or evolve and because zones are changing, we're instead trying to kind of step back big picture and just say
uh facilities 25,000 square feet hitting that intensity that I think we're worried about. And then there's no reason hazardous or other materials in any zone. But that's a little bit our discretion because obviously we
understand smaller amounts of thing that list is extensive. There's plenty of things on that list. So the intent is not to hang up any application but just to ensure that we don't make a mistake and uh advance an
application that doesn't fit in the zone or the community. Yeah. When it's that big it comes to planning board. Okay. Where we have professionals who can look at it. Um, and the second one about the parking standards, that's exactly the same as it
is in the current regulation. If it's based on something other than square footage, you know, like a restaurant that's based on seats or um, you know, trucks or employees, that also will come to minor site plan. Um, if it's a new tenant with a new permitted use, again,
it should be for facilities under 25,000 square feet as long as it's permitted in the zone and as long as the parking and traffic circulation conditions conform to the parking standard requirements. So, um, you know, they're not big changes, but they're ch changes
that really clarify it. Um, but the application procedure is going to, I think, make a huge difference in the efficiency. So, we would like to propose this to the town council for consideration um for introduction of an ordinance. But
Joan, sorry, I saw something in the last the last bullet. Yeah. New tenant, new permitted use. Yeah. And we have the hook for the facility size. Is there a way for us to um put put your last
bullet in the upper bullet with new tenant same permitted use? I mean you have one is same permitted use and one is a new permitted use. Right. But if a new permitted use has hazardous or other materials if a new permitted use has parking standards
that are you know Yeah. wants to incorporate both. Okay. Okay. Conditions. I don't know if it's possible. Just change it to new tenant. Same permitted use and new tenant. Right.
Okay. Okay. All right. Good. That makes sense. Okay. I can change that easily. I got a couple when when you're done. Let me let you finish. I got a couple things I just want to throw out there. you're on. Okay.
Um, you know, when I look at this, there's two things going on to me. The first is that we're we're trying to make sure that when when the minor site plan subcommittee gets an application, it's been prevetted to make so we think the data is there
and I think that's a good thing and and that, you know, and that's that's what this certificate will will help do. Um, then the other thing is I it sounds like we're trying to put
more applications into the minor site plan subcommittee than than are there now, which I'm not sure is a good thing. And the reason I say that is at least right now is I I think it's perceived right now that we're having trouble handling what
we have. And so we're going to put more. I I'll give you an example. Um, so the way the ordinance works now in in the ED zone, this is one of the things that's changed is um, any new tenant in the ED zone has to go to the
full board. Well, they don't interpret it that way. That's how we always interpreted it. Who doesn't interpret that way? Town council. Okay. So, so we we get to interpret our way. They get to interpret that way. So, let's let's have the discussion. Recognize there's that difference. Okay. I think the way we've interpreted it as a board yes up to now
is that any new tenant has to in that zone has to go to the full board and the reasons for that was there was you know a lot of past history that says and and and you know and that that provision has been in there for a long time but the history is related to it's a sensitive
area the ED zone because because of the aquifer and everything there so we want to make sure that something doesn't get in there accidentally which is why it came to the whole board which is not just us but our professionals as well. So it was kind of a you know putting up
guard rails that says something doesn't slip in automatically. So so now what we're saying is that doesn't has to happen that does not have to happen. Um which I'm I'm still kicking in my mind if that's a good thing or not. what
one you know what could happen is somebody says well I'm a warehouse permitted use um but prove once they're approved it turns out well they're not really a warehouse you know they're they're more of of a parcel hub or uh I'll use
trucking terminal it's probably not the best thing or something something other than a pure warehouse fulfillment fulfillment center which could be under 25,000 square feet so I'm still not there to says we want to give that up and in those zones. And it's not just the ED zone. It's it's also in the PDR1,
PDRM1, and PDRM2. Um, it's not in this particular ordinance, but there was a there was an ordinance that came after this one, which was 2221 that added those zones to needed to go to the full board. And there's a repeal
of code in there says that if if conflict, this takes presidents. So even though they're not here, they're there. So I I just think we want to be careful. You know, there was a big uproar in terms of warehouses at least that says let's make sure we're get we're letting the right thing in there. I I definitely
agree it doesn't have to be everything. You know, uh I think there's some medical centers down down in some of these zones. There's um you know the you all the you can go through all the permitted uses. I think the one that the two that scare me the most or concern me
the most would be warehouses and light industrial and light industrial I'm I'm still not sure because that that you start getting to how many employees you have and that kind of stuff and they can use that for a warehouse you know
it my my gut's telling me we don't want to give up the full board review of a warehouse regardless any size I think the rest of the things. I'd be okay. I'm I'm comfortable with the with the 25,000 square feet.
Um yeah, that's what we originally had in here. So, we're going back to that. I have a quick question. Um do you have a budget for professionals for for minor study plan currently? No. Okay. because that I think to to Ron's point that was
one of the big ticket issues because there was no budget for professionals available to be capable of reviewing those things in detail and and vetting that nuance. That was one of the reasons why the logic was put in there to would to bring those things to to the full
board. Um, I mean, I guess it would be different if if you know things were capable of changing and budget was was available to minor site plan so that that type of review could happen on a smaller scale. But that's that was one of the that was one of the points of
logic to to Ron's point and we were operating that way and we were not looking at anything in the ED zone until um town hat need to say town council but I guess it was the attorney for town council said no that's not what the ordinance says you have to be looking at
EDS and we are not comfortable with that. If the council is if the council is comfortable providing budget for professionals to be capable of doing that review suspended fix this well
sorry I all right Mark's here business development right so um but I think budget is one thing but I think also it wouldn't for me it wouldn't just be budget because even if we had the
budget then we're kind of confusing the process of the minor site plan. The whole process, the whole beauty of it is that a hopeful business owner um is is looking to put down roots in Sparta and they have this pathway that they can
proceed along. Uh we we do have something in here that says that our at our discretion we can send it up to the planning board. I I don't disagree with you, Ron, um about, you know, warehouses, whatever, but I feel like
definitions are so easily twisted. Um, but we get to make our interpretation as we get to have you can disagree with us, right? How we want to interpret, right? And we get to have our discretion, too. So if it if it were me, I mean, I guess the concern is we're we are trying to
put a system in place that we can pass off to future members. So there's that at play, too. But then to Celeste's point, um I don't think minor minor site plan needs to be charging more than $50
for an application. So that's part of the problem. The the the price is just too low. um roll the dice and maybe minor site plan will fall asleep at the wheel and approve this thing. But um it it needs to be a little bit more
realistic uh with the amount of time spent on it. But if we go to an escrow type thing at that point, I'd feel like this needs to be heard by the full board. If if it's if it's reached that threshold that we need to engage professionals, full board, if I could
because it's it's 10 to 10 now. If we were to uh use the idea that the planner had before is the 25,000 square feet if we reduce that Ron is that you know let's say we say 10,000 square ft uh
does that help on your concern on the warehouse? Not really and and I think that doesn't going to buy won't buy us a lot. The reason I think 25,000 square ft probably makes sense in my mind is when I looked at at the buildings on Wilson Drive and Gail Court and those
buildings, they're all roughly, you know, usually 15 to 20,000 ft. There might be one or two that are that are larger than 25,000. So, so that said, anyone that wants to go and throw those as a new tenant, we're okay. Okay. But, but but the the concern is really warehouses. And let me give you one more
reason why, and I know it's late, but this is important to me. Um, one of the things we did in the 2221 ordinance to make sure that we're we're we're someone calls it a warehouse, we agree is we put in some required impact
statements, traffic study, um um let's see, traffic study, environmental concerns that are that are mandatory for any warehouse because that that's the the kind of data that's going to help us determine is this what they're really
saying it is without that, you're taking someone's word. And I I just the the warehouse has scared me. So, I'm okay with with letting down the guard rails on maybe things other than warehouses. And I'm still kicking around industrial um light industrial
uses. And I could probably probably back off on that one, but you all have to decide what right right for you. I'm not trying to tell you. Um then why don't we But the warehouses just add that as a bullet. Yeah, that's what I was just going to say. So, new tenant, same permitted use and new tenant, new
permitted use um bullet that are not warehouse or light industrial facilities, buildings, sites. We just exclude warehouse and light industrial. What What's everyone else's thought on that? I mean, don't I
agree with agree I agree with that because Ron, I'm I'm okay with that. But I I think this came from the business community, which I I heard the business community is frustrated. If they're trying to do any small changes in the ED zone, then they're automatically pushed
onto that more expensive pathway. So, I do want to be sensitive to that, but I think we could easily do it with a bullet. Warehouse, light, industrial, whatever else you think is being twisted into something that could be concerning now or in the future. Yeah. and and and
doesn't mean we can't change it down the road, but if you want to get something quick, start slow. Let's go slow. And and I'm going to ask everyone go back over the last year or two and look at the at the warehouse applications that came before this board. And I think every one of those had a good review. Um
and and I I was glad it came here in the end. Yeah. Um and I think the public was glad that I think that they would say we did a good job there, too. Mhm. So there's always going to be a a balance and and we got So I I think if we find a way number one get [Music]
the get the applications vetted a little bit little bit closer before they come to us. That's going to speed things up. So the business community is going to be happy. If we still protect the concerns of the environmental uh sensitivities in in the
EG zone, I think the community is going to be happy. So, it's it's it's a balancing act to me. All right. What I would recommend then is uh rather than a bullet point, uh I would put number four and then put the category uh MSPS prohibited uses uh colon and then we
just put the MSPS uh uh shall not hear warehouse or light industrial use matters. Just make it very clear. Number four, it's uh prohibited use. Okay? rather than put it as a bullet head because then it may get confusing on some of the other issues and and
and under three the cons one of the concerns I have there you know and it just sent me you know looking at that a little bit closer new tenants same permitted use so right now other than the zones that
required to come to the full board um zoning can can approve and I think it's the right answer um any uh new tenant for a same use as previously approved because the site plan's not changing. So I think this is
saying that now it has to go to the minor site plan subcommittee. Is that what we want? Is that what we want? No. Um I I understand. Um
here's my question. You got a a warehouse, you know, you know, like you said, you know, we don't want to have warehouses go the better site plan, but what if you got a warehouse that says, I just want to change the color of the awning on my building. I mean, that we shouldn't be making them go to a full
full board for that. Agree to the miter safe plan. I mean, for you know, maybe it's but but for is a new tenant, right? Well, when we have I guess changes, too. You're right, Ernie. I get it. I mean like you know so maybe saying you know
um you know existing tenants that that's fine they can they can go to the they can go to the board for minor for minor change to the minor subcommittee for changes. New tenant has to go to the full board. May maybe that's the way to do it because you know sometimes they just want to change something really
small. Yeah. You know and and we don't want to hold them up on that. They that's you know they want to change the the door color you know. I mean that's exactly what I think Yeah. we're getting pushed back on. So, I'm glad you said that. Thank you. Yeah. And I would I agree that we don't we don't want that going to Yeah. If it's same tenant and
they just want have something minor they want done. We know there's no change, you know, they're going to give us the change or give the uh chairperson, I know that the board engineering board planner, I don't know if we need them on this. Yeah. You guys want to go home? Can I can I ask one quick question here?
Um, under number three, you the bullet point number three and four, you're talking new test, new tenants, same permitted use and new tenant new permitted use. I don't quite understand the parking standard uh part of number three. Um, where basically all you're going to look at is restaurants. Um, you
know, there when you look at the all the other uses, industrial, commercial, they're all by square footage of building. The only thing it's not is restaurants and the hospital beds but hotel beds but also warehouses have have or a number of employees. Uh industrial
workers industrial uses have number of employees. So some have a number of employees. So it's not just based on square footage. Okay. So so when it's not just based on that we got to look at everything. But you're but you're going to still do those calculations. So So by
the number of employees and the number of trucks. Yeah. I Well go ahead. Here's the pro here's the issue and I was getting to what you said and why this was separated to begin with and the new tenant new permitted use was out. Um if you do new tenants same permitted use
for facilities under and we can decide how many square feet that do not involve these things hazardous materials or parking standards otherwise zoning can approve them and that's I think what we have to put in here
except in the ED Peter on whatever those Right. Right. Right. Right. But I think I think we may want to put those zones back in there and then have a category. Everything else can can go to zoning. Make make it easy for everybody, you know, and I think that's how it's done
in a lot of other towns is, you know, it's not you're not changing anything on a site plane. You're just putting a new tenant in there. The building's not changes. You know, retail is retail same parking. I guess my my comment about that is the parking between the bullet point number
three and four. I think it's probably a little bit consistent how you're going to review the parking and I understand the employees but it says employees or one per 500 square feet. So I think you normally look at both of them to kind of see what kind of number you're looking at. Yes. Right. And that that would come
to the minor site plan subcommittee. And if it were just a new tenant, same uh permitted use for retail or fitness center or whatever it may be, zoning can approve it without coming to the minor site plan subcommittee. All right. So
one way on that we can put uh nothing nothing herein shall prohibit the Sparta zoning board from issuing new tenant change of use. You know something of that extent same same use same use except for these
zones except for ED PDRM1 and PDRM looking at you guys as well. Oh I just I just worry about I mean
PCED could we do it the other way? Could we say like there's certain zones that we're not worried at all? Yes, I agree. So then if there's future zones and future, you know, uh, splitting up of the ED area and the undeveloped area, I'd be more comfortable saying, you
know, TCC, I'm not worried about C1 C1H, you know, I'm not worried about that. And then then it then it's a little more futurep proofed, if that makes sense. And C1H, are you worried about that exterior changes? You want that as a minor site
plane subcommittee? Uh, well, historic some of this historic stuff's been I mean, I'm not worried about it from We got to do something. I'm not worried about from like a hazardous material. What we do, we don't want to rush in into this. That's my concern.
But we we we do want to make it easier what we can. I think everyone up here would agree with that. I think everybody's got a good grasp of the Yeah. problem. And maybe we we sit on this till the next meeting. Yeah. Brainstorm and everyone come back again with
You know, I'd like to think about it. Yeah. Yeah. Special data logic report included with the the spatial data the spatial data report. Okay. Have that included with the the
application that that comes to us. But does that go in the be more in the other the Yeah, the application thing. Yeah. Well, it's actually both. We could do both. Well, I mean, do you want to again, do you want to keep it future proof? I
don't know how you really want to say. No, I'm saying that's just an attachment. That's not a Yeah, it's part of the application process. So, in in paragraph two, you have the Okay. No, no, I I know that. I'm just saying and
and anything uh maintained by the town's internal instructions, whatever. You know, I was just trying to keep it because I don't know if SDL will be a thing in five years. Maybe it will be, but people might look at this in the
future and say, "What's SDL?" I would leave it out. We can just, you know, ask for it. Should be automatic every time. Should be automatic every time. It's helped us so much since we started getting it. Yeah. All right, we'll put it in. Well, and
the zoning officer, we can always go back and change it or something. We'll leave it in. All right. U All right. I'll I'll kind of rework this, run it through the minor site plan subcommittee and Ken and shoot it out to
all of you again. And good and I give you guys a lot of credit for doing this because you know people are saying it's too hard and we got to find a way to make it easier and I think you guys have really well really good first bite the apple. I think we'll drive something across the line. So
thank you for doing that. I I think the problem what we're trying to do is stop the people that are trying to use the system in the wrong way, you know, and what we want to do is make sure that the people that need this to to do something really silly easy, right? You know, to
to have this mechanism to do it and not get it bogged down by by things that don't belong there, right, in a nutshell. So, yeah. Well, so find a way to do that. Yeah, we're trying to keep the honest people honest, but we're also I think we're also trying to guide people in what can be a confusing process. But
yeah, I don't think it's as much honest as it is just having a clear knowledge of what the subcommittee can can and can't do for you, you know. Uh so um you know I
mean like I said it's great for the guy that wants to change Bob's barber shop to Jim's barber shop and you know I mean that's a simple one or change the color of their awning but you know those we don't want to we want to pull people for the ringer. We want to make we want to
make it easy right and be able to and for those kind of things um if it's the same barberh shop to barberh shop and they're not doing anything else and not Just a new tenant, right? Then it's zoning. It's a new sign. It's us. Yeah.
Yeah. Okay. All right. We won't belabor this much longer. I just I'm looking at Cory. I think is there something that we're missing? I I'm looking at your face and I'm just sensing that we're missing something. No, I'm just listening where this is all going to go.
Fig out the you know the uh process. The process. Okay. This is a little different. Most don't don't have even have the minor site type review. They put it on the the zoning officer zoning review. If they if they can't interpret it, it goes to the board. I have some towns that you want to get into the part
where the zoning officer has questions about the parking or something they think then they'll they'll have a provision to put in like an escro in place and then they put the escro in place and then I become involved in the engineering side and do the review, you know, with the zoning permit, you know, assisting with that. But that's something we're going to look at down
the road, too. That's a different avenue. But you know, you know, I think there and I haven't been involved, you know, with the with the minor plan. David, you know, works with working with counter blessings. I haven't really been, you know, been
involved with it, but I I see what goes through, you know, through the planning office. I know they do, you know, a good job and everything they do, I believe. And it's just, um, you know, it's it's a process. I know you're trying to help, making it easier, and it's
you're going to the steps. Just want to make sure we got the right guardrails in place where where they're needed. Well, when we send it out, my my aspect of the parking and how you're tackling determining this goes and this doesn't. I still think that's a little confusing, you know, just trying to figure out
what's going to go, what's not. And the multi-tenant buildings gets confusing. We'll rework it and I'm going to include you as well as Dave on the um distribution list. So, please provide any comments if there's still I was going to say if the planner has anything because you're coming from a zoning background on it as well. Do you you
have anything to say now or you want to look at it? Um, I'll look at it. I think um should multi-tenant I think like this may seem like a really simple solution, but even just having like an FAQ page on your website.
I'm coming to the board for this and like yes, no. Yes. and like just kind of maybe something like a flowchart or choose your adventure. Yeah. If you if you have time, I do um one day a week where I work in office for the city of summit and they have like a very
extensive um website where a lot of information is on there and I think it's beneficial. They also do um pre-application meetings and I think that also helps quite a bit. But once again, it goes back to what Celeste was saying that's like an escaro situation.
But for those pre-application meetings, they do there is a fee for it. Um, so it's where we meet with the applicant, we talk to them and we help them determine what variances they need, what boards they go to and kind of give them that guidance. So it's a I think it's
like a $200 fee and you meet with the professionals, you sit down, you you see everything, they kind of plead their case and then that kind of gives them direction as well. For a minor site plan or just not minor site plan, it's a pre-application meeting. Yeah. So before they go, they know exactly what they need to do.
Yes. So, we're not having people come here three times and every time they're paying, you know, their attorneys. Yeah. And what's nice about that, you can do it on Zoom. You don't need to, you know, you don't have to have everyone in one room because with Zoom, you can send the files and everything. So, it makes it a little more accessible as well.
We'll do that down the road. That's why I want to sit down with it and see if there's um All right. I know it's getting late, so um we'll rework this and circulate it. There are two two quick things.
Um, one is the C1H zone, and we just wanted to bring it up and get the board's consensus as to whether we should be looking at this now. Uh, we brought it up several months ago. Um, there's a lot of discussion about it,
but we would like to sit down and, uh, propose a draft ordinance to send to town council on this one as well. I know Lake Mohawk has been looking at it, but you know, quite frankly, I think it really should be coming from this board or, you know, somebody within the town
and not from the outside. Um, they've missed some things like they did miss the fact that this other applicant we just had today was in a C1H zone. So there were some um questions about it, but I think you know we as a group should take a look at it and you know
work with Lindsay to um help develop uh that ordinance and the ordinance is still on the books. So it's not a difficult thing to do. Um but we just need to look at how we should be updating it. Yeah, I think it's more
proper to come from planning because we're the ones that ultimately have to decide on the minor site plans and and the application. So, it's all well and good, but I that's why I I asked why it was missing from White Dear Plaza. So,
yeah, that's how it came up. We're looking at the signs and we can't apply the C1H to it because now it's TCC and they have different standards. Y so we want to kind of bring some of that back. Um I would I would make a motion that
uh that the planning board um starts working on the C1H revision and re-implementation to protect the historic resources of White Dear Plaza and surrounds.
Do I have a second? I'll second Celeste Louisiana Robato can I any other comments on it now council no I think we should review it I think we should go over it and have some input
and figure it out what we want to do right because our next um we have to go back into executive session just for a little bit but it's gonna you'll see how it segus okay okay um all right so motion is on the table can we have a roll Robert Bleley, yes. Janette Burke, yes.
Ron Day, yes. Celeste Luciano, yes. Ernie Ragf, yes. Councilman Mark Scott, yes. Brian Zimmerman, yes. Uh, Vice Chairman Robert Otto, yes. And Chairwoman Joan Ferman, yes. All right. Um, can we skip some of the
updates today? Sure. Yes. Okay. We'll discover them next time. And if we could just briefly go into executive session again. Um, and you guys, I don't think have to stay. Hit the road. We have to officially unofficially open
it to the public. So, anybody from the public? Yes. The record to reflect there's no one here in the public. It's now 10 p.m. And if we can have a motion to go back into executive session, I'll make that
motion. Second, B. Robert Otto. Okay. All those in favor? I I And even though there's no one in the public, um after we come out of sess close session, we may be making a determination or an action uh in the close session. So in
theory, if there was someone here and they wanted to wait for your determination, so you may or may not make a determination. And if we do make one, it'll be on the record. We'll come back out and we'll make it on the record. Yes. Okay. Thank you.
Oh, no problem. Okay, start over. Thank you. Uh, just for the record, Ken Porro, we came out of close session and there was no determination made u that requires board action and it is now 10:35.
Chair, and may we have a motion to adjourn the meeting? I'll make that motion. Robot, I'll second it. All in favor?